COMMENTS: 136
Prosperity in George Bush's Economy
Sign up to stay up to date on the latest headlines via email.
But that's an economic picture you won't find hanging on the wall in any normal American house. Most of us know that we're not doing as well today as we were a few years ago. According to a recent Gallup Poll, almost two-thirds of those asked said the economy was "fair" or "poor," and almost six in 10 thought it was getting worse.
That disconnect has left many commentators -- especially on the right -- either scratching their heads with befuddlement or raging apoplectically at the bias of the "liberal media."
National Review author Victor Davis Hanson scolded those who read the New York Times for living "in an alternate universe where everything is supposedly going to hell." In "the real adult world," Hanson wrote, "the economy is red-hot, not mired in joblessness or relegating millions to poverty." But in fact, there are 5 million more Americans living in poverty today than there were four years ago.
Gerard Baker, the U.S. editor for Rupert Murdoch's Times of London wrote, "when it comes to economics, all but America's most fervent critics can still only marvel."
"Everything in the American garden is lovely," Baker continued, "So why the long face, buddy?"
I'll tell you why the long face: The economy most of us experience from day to day has been nothing short of painful over the past five years.
Consider these numbers from the Economic Policy Institute -- a left-leaning think-tank (this essay leans heavily on EPI's excellent research):
- Salaries are still below where they were at the start of the recovery in November 2001. That, while productivity -- the growth of the economic pie -- is up by almost 15 percent. Meaning we're working harder, producing more, for the same money as five years ago.
- Since the recession ended in 2001, 50 percent more of the growth in corporate income was sucked up as profits than after past recessions. That's left less for those of us who work for a living.
- As a result, median household income has now fallen for five years in a row. It was 4 percent, or $2,000, lower in 2004 than it was in 1999.
That last figure means that Joe and Jane Average American -- the household smack in the middle of the booming go-go American economy -- have gotten a pay cut for five years in a row. Small wonder they're sporting long faces.
And that hasn't occurred in a bubble; health care costs for that same family (with kids) rose over 40 percent -- yeah, 40 percent --between 2000 and 2003.
Here's a brief guide for sorting out the economy we live in versus the one we're supposed to feel fuzzy and warm about.
Go-go GDP
It's not just that the growth in GDP over the past four years has been skewed towards investors -- it has -- it's that much of it is a chimera. Defense spending, consumer spending -- financed largely by debt -- and rising home values have been the growth engines for the current recovery. Author James Howard Kunstler estimates that from "2001 through 2005, consumer spending and residential construction had together accounted for 90 percent of the total growth in GDP." [italics mine]
That growth hasn't been free and isn't sustainable. U.S. household debt, adjusted for inflation, rose by more than a third over the last four years. Mortgage and consumer debt equals 115 percent of after-tax income, and the amount American families spend paying off those debts is at an all-time high of almost 14 percent of their paychecks. In other words Americans are all paying a hefty monthly debt tax to banks and creditors on top of what we already pay the government.
Wealth, wealth everywhere
The National Review's Jerry Bowyer blames the "mainstream media" for "obsessing over the level of debt of the average American family, which they only look at in a vacuum, [and] completely ignoring the growth of family net worth." If they were honest, he argues, they'd have to acknowledge "the highest level of household wealth in our nation's history."
But much of that newfound wealth is in our homes, and all signs point to a bubble in the sky-high housing market (although it varies widely by region). According to the Center for Economic Policy Research [PDF] -- a progressive think tank -- the current market "has created more than $5 trillion in bubble wealth, the equivalent of $70,000 per average family of four." Housing prices are way above their historic pattern when you look at demand, population and earnings. What's more, the price for home sales has been way out of step with the rental market -- something one wouldn't expect to see if the high prices were based on economic fundamentals. The estate might be real, but its value isn't.
Unemployment
The headline is that the unemployment rate is low and holding steady at around 5 percent. But it's a tricky statistic: people who give up trying to find a job aren't counted, nor are people who are underemployed. Private sector jobs have increased by only about 1 percent since the start of the current economic recovery. Four years into previous recoveries, private sector job growth had averaged almost 9 percent and it's never been less than 6 percent. According to EPI, "The percent of the population that has a job has never recovered since the recession and is still 1.3 percent lower than in March 2001."
The data tell the tale. While one can spin all day long according to his or her worldview and offer up grand theories about Americans' pessimism, the truth is that for about eight out of 10 people on American payrolls, the economy sucks.
Add in high fuel costs and large, highly visible rounds of layoffs in some of America's leading firms, especially in the auto industry. Then consider the latest tactic sweeping across corporate America: using bankruptcy to "seek relief" from pension and health care obligations. As the Wall Street Journal reported:
Whether an assembly-line worker or middle manager, an employee can no longer assume that promises made earlier -- health benefits or fully funded pensions -- will be there when he or she retires. The loss of security arising from Chapter 11 reorganizations has introduced a new element of anxiety into the lives of baby boomers who are approaching 60, not to mention younger workers just starting out in their careers.That's just part of a growing trend. Of course, last year's bankruptcy reform bill will prevent most working families from enjoying similar "relief."
None of these issues are of any concern to people earning a couple of hundred grand to discuss the economy on Fox or MSNBC. Contra the right's liberal media conspiracy theories, the major media from across the spectrum are reporting the good news about America's booming economy with zeal.
That endless drumbeat comes with social costs.
First, it fuels the bubble mentality. If the economy's going gangbusters but you're struggling, of course you want to get in on the latest billionaire-creating wealth machine. That mentality infected anyone who bought tech stocks in 1999 hoping to become a "dot-com millionaire," just as it has them running around today buying houses at any price with the expectation that they'll get a 10 percent annual return. Alan Greenspan characterized the mindset as being one of "irrational exuberance." But what could be more rational than piling onto the latest bandwagon after watching a half-hour of CNBC's economic triumphalism?
Less easy to quantify is the psychic cost this has on us. The message we get all the time is that our unrivalled, dynamic economy affords opportunities for us all. So, if you're one of the majority who is not doing so well, it must be your fault. It is you, and not any external economic factor, that is keeping you from profiting from the Ownership Society. You are a loser.
A while back, I wrote an article about how the job outsourcing trend has happened at the same time, as deep cuts in transitional training and assistance came down from Washington. A reader sent me an email about how her middle-aged brother had been laid off by the aircraft parts manufacturer where he had worked for 20 years. "You know the hardest part," she wrote, "has been how he's internalized everything. He has such a low sense of self-worth."
Despite our great wealth, we're an unhappy people; we lead the world in mental health problems year in and year out. It's impossible to know to what degree that results from failing to live up to the economic expectations drummed into our heads every time we hear about the wonders of the American economy. But the message to all those families struggling to get by should be: You're not alone, it's all of us.
Stay up to date with the latest AlterNet headlines via email
Comments are closed-
Posted by: ian_m64 on Jan 6, 2006 1:52 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: as well as!!
Posted by: technocrat
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Armafied on Jan 6, 2006 3:49 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We are such an advanced civilization.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: The Most Telling Part of the Article...
Posted by: judiem
Comments are closed-
Posted by: the republic on Jan 6, 2006 4:57 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Dow is where it was in early 2001. Other indices are down over the same time period. Progress? Not so much.
And when they tout GDP growth, I liken it to this scenario.
Assume Bill Gates and I are the entire economy. Assume last year, he was worth 1 billion dollars and I was worth 100,000.
Assume this year, Bill is worth 1.5 bil and a health issue put me in BK. GDP went up - like I would care.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: the republic
Posted by: JoshuaHolland
» RE: the republic
Posted by: Krotos
» RE: the republic
Posted by: A. James
Comments are closed-
Posted by: DCH on Jan 6, 2006 5:28 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: tcx2 on Jan 6, 2006 6:02 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This whole service economy is looking better by the day, I tell ya. A nation of minimum wage slaves.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: The Economy is GREAT!
Posted by: cyclone
» RE: The Economy is GREAT!
Posted by: ALANHESTER
» RE: The Economy is GREAT!
Posted by: cyclone
Comments are closed-
Posted by: jeffrey7 on Jan 6, 2006 6:21 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You know there reallyare folks that make 25,000 a yaer,live modestly and still scrimp on the food budget just to get by. That means no nights out,resturants,or any 'fun' that's not made at home. If you buy what T.V. shovels down our throats,you did'nt give a good enough gift this season if you did'nt gift someone with a Lexus. Get Real!!!
Most folks,even the ones that think they're doing alright, have to watch their money pretty closely. Maybe the food budget is the only thing that gets tight to make all the bills balance,but could you take a $100 increase in your rent? How
about if your car needs a tune-up,a new waterheater for the house,all the kids need new shoes,your new suit got shredded by the dry cleaners and you need it for today's meeting and your spouse chipped a tooth doing God know's what,but won't come out in public until it's fixed and the all need paying TODAY. Not on 25K. Or 45 or 95K, I know folks in all these incomes and not one of them could stand that kind of economic 'hit'. America is over priced and over valued. The products offered are of poor quality and low reliability. Most folks money is sucked out from under them by compound intrest rates. The biggest income scam ever perpitrated on the People. The 60% increase in you utility bills reflects the FINES your utility company has gotten the previous year for over polluting. Try telling your boss you need a fat raise to pay a fine see how far you get.
The problem is numbers. Numbers like 5%. 5% of the people are loving the Bush economic lifestyle.5% have the control.5% think they know what's best for you,me and everyone else.5% think it's perfectly fine to poison your whole family for generations to come so they can keep their fine lifestyles. As for the 95%,we're all kicking and scratching for their 'trickled on' economics entertainment. We all need a kick in the ass!!! We are not the land of 'Richest is Rightest'.
We are a land 'OF THE PEOPLE' We MUST right this nightmare
of economic averice by bringing back the 90% tax bracket for wealthy people and businesses. Greed is a social disease,worse than Herpies, Taxing it is the cure.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: It's Boom Boom if you're rich
Posted by: LPB
» RE: It's Boom Boom if you're rich
Posted by: JCS
» RE: It's Boom Boom if you're rich
Posted by: crusty
» RE: It's Boom Boom if you're rich,what good are the wealthy?
Posted by: jeffrey7
» RE: It's Boom Boom if you're rich,what good are the wealthy?
Posted by: andrewgirma
» RE: It's Boom Boom if you're rich,what good are the wealthy?
Posted by: crusty
» RE: It's Boom Boom if you're rich,what good are the wealthy?
Posted by: kelly.nickell
» RE: It's Boom Boom if you're rich,what good are the wealthy?
Posted by: crusty
» I knew you were single...
Posted by: paulaH
» RE: It's Boom Boom if you're rich
Posted by: paulaH
» RE: It's Boom Boom if you're rich
Posted by: crusty
» RE: It's Boom Boom if you're rich.or think you are
Posted by: jeffrey7
» RE: It's Boom Boom if you're rich.or think you are
Posted by: crusty
» RE: It's Boom Boom if you're rich.or think you are
Posted by: jeffrey7
Comments are closed-
Posted by: lamar on Jan 6, 2006 7:07 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Boom isn't for all
Posted by: ALANHESTER
Comments are closed-
Posted by: redstarwraith on Jan 6, 2006 7:14 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If anyone is interested in the psychological side of internalizing that the author talks about at the article's end, I encourage them to read "The Sane Society" by Erich Fromm.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: esactun on Jan 6, 2006 7:29 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
(They're too busy being scared of the terrorist behind every bush, the pinko commie liberals tearing down their churches, the scientists murdering God, the hippies burning their flag, the Mexicans stealing their jobs, the black men marrying their women, and all the other BS red-herring hot buttons the power elites distract them with. Then they proudly go to Wal*Mart to patriotically overextend their credit on cheap junk made in Red China.)
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Kudos, Mr Holland.
Posted by: dagoski
» RE: Kudos, Mr Holland.
Posted by: goleft
Comments are closed-
Posted by: maxpayne on Jan 6, 2006 7:41 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Besides, back in early 2004, it was already being reported that U.S. Labor Department pulled an Enron to fabricate phony March job figures
By Jackson Thoreau
The trick to dealing with this fake rosy scenario is to take it and use it as a weapon. For example, take the statistics on supposedly higher wages and use it against your employer to fight tooth and nail for the pay you know you deserve for all your diligence and conscientous work and never let them force you into the race to the bottom just to help them win their race to the bottom-line. And mind you, you don't have to join the army to muster this kind of courage.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: JoshuaHolland on Jan 6, 2006 8:11 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Big Lie that drops so easily from the lips of every economic cheerleader is that the five major tax cuts enacted by George Bush is responsible for the growth we’ve seen since the end of the recession in 2001. That assertion is, simply, nonsense – economic mumbo-jumbo to support the right’s ideological preferences.
The idea takes a sound economic principle -- that targeted tax cuts can spur growth -- and twists it into the harebrained idea that all tax cuts always do. Cutting taxes has become a religion, not a policy tool.
Except for the rebate checks in 2001, the cuts haven’t been designed for their potential stimulus; they’re give-aways to investors paid for by long-term public debt. The proof is in the pudding: $860 billion dollars worth have bought us an economic recovery that by almost every measure is slower and less robust than those in past business cycles. Certainly it has paled next to the recovery in the mid 1990s under Clinton’s watch, after he raised taxes. As economist Lee Price points out [PDF], when $60 billion dollars a year in business tax cuts expired at the end of 2004, it had virtually no effect on investment.
Those cuts were sold by another article of economic faith: that they would stimulate enough growth that the government’s overall revenues wouldn’t be touched. But an analysis by the Congressional Budget Office found that even using the most generous assumptions, only a bit more than a quarter of lost tax revenue might be recouped over the next ten years. Personal income tax receipts, at $802 billion in 2004, were almost twenty percent lower than they were in 2001 ($994 billion). Voo-doo economics, indeed.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: One more thing ...
Posted by: JoshuaHolland
» RE: One more thing ...
Posted by: badkitty53
» RE: One more thing ...
Posted by: JoshuaHolland
» RE: One more thing ...
Posted by: brunowe
» RE: One more thing ...
Posted by: JoshuaHolland
» RE: One more thing ...
Posted by: Againstthewindwalking
» RE: One more thing ...
Posted by: jeffrey7
» RE: One more thing ...
Posted by: cyclone
Comments are closed-
Posted by: benzene on Jan 6, 2006 8:38 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Confusing
Posted by: cyclone
» RE: Confusing
Posted by: tdicks
» RE: Confusing
Posted by: Lizmv
» RE: Confusing
Posted by: benzene
» RE: Confusing
Posted by: JustinObodie
Comments are closed-
Posted by: benzene on Jan 6, 2006 8:38 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Confusing
Posted by: corylus
Comments are closed-
Posted by: benzene on Jan 6, 2006 8:38 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Confusing
Posted by: JoshuaHolland
» RE: Confusing
Posted by: kmeyer
Comments are closed-
Posted by: krose on Jan 6, 2006 8:46 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: saywhat? on Jan 6, 2006 8:53 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
i don't really know anyone doing better in my circle except for the wealthy , and their charitable enterprises are suppose to be helped by corporations, which previously were funded by the federal government, and corporations are not stepping up to the plate...
i think i last heard a 1.9 trillion deficit? and i am suppose to help the economy by buying cheap stuff at walmart? and we owe the saudis and the chinese $$? sounds to me like we will all be owing the corporate ethos alot of money soon through our personal debt...communists will be capitalists, capitalists will become wahabis, and will be put in prison for what we can't pay back....
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: eringhorm on Jan 6, 2006 9:08 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Human Devlopment Index (wiki article here) - Used by the UN Development Programme in it's annual report, this index includes life expectancy and education and links GDP to purchasing power parity.
Genuine Progress Indicator (wiki article here) - A more direct replacement for GDP that attempts to factor in environmental and social costs when determining how a country progresses. For example the Exxon Valdez disaster would actually have produced an increase in GDP because of the money spent on clean-up. The GPI more accurately shows this as a net loss however, since it subtracts the environmental damage from any monetary gain.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: GDP alternatives
Posted by: JoshuaHolland
» RE: GDP alternatives
Posted by: eringhorm
Comments are closed-
Posted by: kabac55 on Jan 6, 2006 9:12 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I really have to wonder what planet some of these government experts are living on. Granted living in Michigan right now with Delphi in big financial trouble and GM and Ford not so far behind them, my perspective is clouded by the reality of hundreds of people losing their jobs and/or pensions. Along with these large employers, at least 2 smaller manufacturing companies have folded in my current home town in the last 18 months, and several locally owned stores have gone out of business. The local papers are regularly full of pages of mortgage foreclosure notices.
My grocery bill is up with some regular staples rising in price as much as $1.00 since last summer. Utilities are up including city water and sewage and trash collection. If I could afford cable, my rates would be jumping another $5.00/month for basic plus service.
Unemployment is a big problem in MI. And when people are unemployed, they often become involved in other activities--drugs, alcohol, and crime. In Saginaw and Flint, there is often at least one murder or shooting every night of late. Recently there's been a rash of drive-by shootings with people being shot inside their homes.
So much for a booming economy. So much for trickle down economics.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: jwg on Jan 6, 2006 9:13 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: where is the trickle down?
Posted by: Falang
» RE: where is the trickle down?
Posted by: Edward George
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Ras3hilton on Jan 6, 2006 10:07 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I mean no offense to those crazed Bush supporters, I'm just really sad for them, because you know they can't all be Cheney-wealthy.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Now...that's suprising!
Posted by: JoshuaHolland
» RE: Now...that's suprising!
Posted by: saywhat?
Comments are closed-
Posted by: onthewall on Jan 6, 2006 10:35 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Of the 96 counties in Idaho, Utah and Wyoming, only two, Blaine County (aka Sun Valley) and Teton County (aka Jackson Hole) voted for the Democrat Party presidential candidate in the last election. Supposedly, the well-to-do in these counties had more to lose if Kerry won and taxes were raised. But on a different level, it’s the well-to-do who stand at ease in this world of fast change and relaxed social mores, because it is precisely in this world of globalization and urban prosperity that they succeed.
Whereas for others, the working and rural poor, who feel powerless and are falling ever further behind, it was Bush who managed to run as the outsider who’s angry about the elites, in touch with heartland values, and ready to lead us grimly into the tough new world of deprivation and ugly tradeoffs that are reflected in the everyday situations that his middle and working class supporters face.
This president, who always feels ridiculed and at a loss for words, perfectly embodies the frustrations that so many of his supporters feel and like them he holds for dear life onto a slate of threadbare truths about America’s innate virtue.
When people feel beaten down, they’re drawn to leaders who “have the courage” to “say it like it is.” In other words, while wealth is shoveled into the pockets of shareholders and the executives who do their bidding, the folks who feel baffled and defeated by their own failure take solace in the idea that America “owes no one an apology.”
On global warming, for instance, Bush seems courageous when he says, “I will explain as clearly as I can, today and every other chance I get, that we will not do anything that harms our economy... That’s my priority. I’m worried about the economy.”
Wow!
For the time being, most Americans seem reluctant to question what’s happening because to do so requires an embrace rather than a rejection of governmental actions that would redistribute wealth and more forthrightly address the complex problems that are bearing down on us.
Until people actually begin to question and challenge the social value of the wealth that piles up in enclaves like Jackson Hole and Sun Valley, we’re “lookin’ in all the wrong places.”
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: onthewall
Posted by: veive
» RE: onthewall
Posted by: A. James
Comments are closed-
Posted by: mythbuster on Jan 6, 2006 10:50 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Iconoclast421 on Jan 6, 2006 11:50 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: liberalibrarian on Jan 6, 2006 12:08 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: bush trumpeting economy
Posted by: JoshuaHolland
» RE: bush trumpeting economy
Posted by: overabarrel
» RE: bush trumpeting economy
Posted by: mythbuster
» RE: bush trumpeting economy
Posted by: branchdavian1
Comments are closed-
Posted by: chaoslegs on Jan 6, 2006 1:18 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have been saying many of the same things.
I do find the high ranking of mental health problems to be interesting, our health care cost have been soaring, but mental health coverage is a joke.
A few years ago Metro Transit (bus system in the Twin Cities, MN) went on strike based on increased employee contributions to the health insurance. Letter after letter to the editor talked about how the union should quit whining because they didn't get that good of a benefit.
It was a enough to make you want to scream. Here we were as fellow citizens, trying to drag the union employees down to our crappy level in benefits, when instead we should have turned around and asked why our employers benefits were so inadequate in comparison?
Why is that the uber rich get to whine about the jealousy of the poor and middle class when we want proportional taxation (all taxes as a percent of income), but on something like this the conservative talking heads never mention the jealousy of decent benefits in the same way? Because Dems are not doing enough to fight for economic justice, with the exception to holding fast on social security.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: bdcbryan@hotmail.com on Jan 6, 2006 2:12 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So if you are a liberal just wait until your party gets control and everything in the world will be restored to perfection! They will even fix the booming economy for you!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Sour Grapes
Posted by: JoshuaHolland
» RE: Sour Grapes
Posted by: bdcbryan@hotmail.com
» RE: Sour Grapes
Posted by: antoniomo
» RE: Sour Grapes
Posted by: mizerock
» RE: Sour Grapes
Posted by: tcx2
» RE: Sour Grapes
Posted by: dogwhisperer
» RE: Sour Grapes
Posted by: Ras3hilton
» RE: Sour Grapes
Posted by: bdcbryan@hotmail.com
» RE: Sour Grapes
Posted by: JoshuaHolland
» RE: Sour Grapes
Posted by: tcx2
Comments are closed-
Posted by: BlueTex on Jan 6, 2006 2:15 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
From here on out, let's no use the terms: "left, right, liberal, conservative, democrat or republican" unless restating what someone has dubbed themselves or their policy positions. We don't need these implications to determine how to "interpret" the quotes that are supplied. These gratuitous descriptions do nothing to improve the reader's understanding.
For example, why did the author refer to EPI (Economic Policy Institute) as a "LEFTIST" think tank. EPI is pro-labor, but that is not the same as leftist. Leftist is a term created to refer to "communists" theory devotees. EPI DOES NOT ADVOCATE THAT WORKERS OWN THE MEANS OF PRODUCTION OR THAT CAPITALISTS ARE BAD.
Now, on to my real comments: All this crap about getting products made overseas to be MORE COMPETITIVE is crap. AMERICANS WERE CONSUMING ABOUT 86 TO 90 PERCENT OF WHAT WE MADE in our domestic market. We export about 10 to 14 percent.
SECONDLY, we tried this same screwed up version of FREE MARKET before. If you remember, during World War I, one of the most devastating developments was the invention of the submarine that the Germans used to "CUT THE SUPPLY ROUTES" to the United States.
During the time that the very wealthy and big business had everything that they wanted: practically no regulations, effectively free markets (i.e. cheap labor) and control over the US government, they owned 85 percent of U.S. wealth while their workers starved. Along came the Great Depression largely caused by bad, pro-wealthy, pro-big business policy caused these problems.
When workers are paid better, the economy does better. CEOs will not be able to pay themselves grandiose salaries that they have not earned, but in the long run, the savings rate will go up; bankruptcies will go down and STOCKHOLDERS will see their investments grow more consistently than those investments do now.
Texas Grrrl
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Let's Not Let History Repeat Itself
Posted by: JoshuaHolland
Comments are closed-
Posted by: mizerock on Jan 6, 2006 3:08 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: owlsliveintrees on Jan 6, 2006 3:31 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is typical liberal garbage. The property owners (we'll call them elites, because it's funny) are sitting on an investment that keeps making money and those who apparently speak in their best interest (alternet maybe? maybe not) are trying to talk down a housing market that liberals have been trying to talk down for the last 3 years.
Why? Because return on investment is the antithesis of modern liberal thought. People buy houses, raise their living standard, but no it's all wrong, right? Because it's unfair for people to make money off investments. That's why liberals love capital gains taxes. Because it punishes people for raising their living standard on their own as opposed to waiting for the government.
Wow, this Josh Holland fellow is a real winner. His cutting edge economic ideas (supply and demand) are what this country needs. It's a good thing alternet gives college kids without any economic expertise a forum, because I can't imagine what I'd do without it. Oh wait, i'll just watch my house go up in value. That'll pass the time.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: I'll take a shot at this idiocy
Posted by: tcx2
» RE: I'll take a shot at this idiocy
Posted by: owlsliveintrees
» owlsliveintrees
Posted by: cyclone
» RE: owlsliveintrees
Posted by: kelly.nickell
» RE: owlsliveintrees
Posted by: cyclone
» RE: I'll take a shot at this idiocy
Posted by: BriMan
» RE: I'll take a shot at this idiocy
Posted by: tcx2
» RE: I'll take a shot at this idiocy
Posted by: tcx2
» RE: I'll take a shot at this idiocy
Posted by: memary10
» Hey, prick...
Posted by: JoshuaHolland
» RE: Hey, prick...
Posted by: manxome
» RE: I'll take a shot at this idiocy
Posted by: mizerock
» RE: I'll take a shot at this idiocy
Posted by: saywhat?
» RE: I'll take a shot at this idiocy
Posted by: dogwhisperer
» RE: I'll take a shot at this idiocy
Posted by: yellow
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Rod in 83706 on Jan 6, 2006 7:00 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have a decent job with health insurance and a pension plan and I'm pissed. Imagine how pissed I would be if I were like most Americans and had a low paying job with no benefits.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: bdcbryan@hotmail.com on Jan 6, 2006 8:21 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: ude!
Posted by: drone
» RE: ude!
Posted by: JoshuaHolland
» RE: ude!
Posted by: bdcbryan@hotmail.com
» RE: ude!
Posted by: JoshuaHolland
» RE: ude!
Posted by: BriMan
» RE: ude!
Posted by: Ratskii
Comments are closed-
Posted by: benzene on Jan 6, 2006 9:58 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Is it possible for the economy to continue growing when the population is shrinking?
I know that this is the case of some countries such as Sweden and Italy, but I don't have any economic data from these countries handy. Could someone please enlighten me as to their situations?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: cheesemissile on Jan 7, 2006 12:50 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: wrogal on Jan 7, 2006 11:52 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In essence, those Americans who think that the economy is "on the right track" and that George Bush and the Republicans are the best thing to come along since sliced bread, must obviously, believe in Santa Claus, the tooth fairy, and that the government is always right no matter what it does, and runs efficiently, is honest, and listens to the people!!! Its nice to escape to a dream world once in a while, but its very dangerous to actually think you are living in it
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: walt
Posted by: Nofear
Comments are closed-
Posted by: yellow on Jan 7, 2006 5:25 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: magistre on Jan 7, 2006 9:42 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Because the 90% of citizens have been F*CKED OVER by the Bushzis & Multi-nationalizedBusiness
Posted by: branchdavian1
Comments are closed-
Posted by: diof09 on Jan 8, 2006 3:54 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Edward George on Jan 10, 2006 2:09 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Nofear on Jan 11, 2006 12:04 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: manxome on Jan 11, 2006 10:17 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So, I sell for $350, and hit the jackpot. But, I have a mortgage to pay off. Subtract 125. Subtract 50 for repairs and minor improvements that I cannot take with me when I sell. Subtract 10 for the free labor I provided making the improvements. Subtract 60 or so for all the interest, etc paid, minus the tax deductions, for the privilege of having a mortgagte. Subtract 25 for commission, lawyers fees, title fees, HO warranty, blah blah blah, for the priviledge of selling.
Wow! After all is said and done, I have made a PROFIT of 80 thousand dollars! It's like hitting the lottery! Woohoo!
Except, I have no place to live now. I am sure I can get a home similar to the $350,000 one I just sold for the $80,000 cash I now have, right? Heck, even if I use it as a down payment on another $350,000 house (since everyone else's house went up in value, too) I now need to get a $270,000 mortgage, which is twice my original mortgage.
At 3% a year, I'm sure my pay raises caused my income to double in 6 years, easily covering the the doubling of my mortgage cost! What a windfall!
Or, put simply, I cannot afford to buy my own home. Or move. So that big windfall is there only if I don't try to get at it.
Wow, my house feels 2.5 times bigger already.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Genius!
Posted by: manxome
Comments are closed-
Posted by: 092098jvm on Jan 11, 2006 7:23 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: The OttO Show on Jan 16, 2006 10:18 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It does however indirectly point out what I have always said: the President of the United States has little effect on the US economy beyond affecting consumer confidence. There have been a lot of things going on since 2000: the dot-com bubble crash, the corporate stock scandals, 911, the invasion of two countries, hurricanes, floods etc that should have each caused pessimism in consumer confidence. I am not sure we can blame this on any one person, as the article does. After all, tsunamis are not George Bush’s fault.
More importantly the consumer portion of the economy is only one of three sections, the other two being business and government. And as we know, as consumer spending decreased, causing a recession. Bush spent to make up for it. That is a little something we economists call 'economic stimulus'. If you really want to learn the rationale behind it, I suggest that you look up John M Keynes. Non-economists just call it deficit spending and then support that stance by calling the president names.
Also, the bullet points were a source of great amusement for me:
"Salaries are still below where they were at the start of the recovery in November 2001. That, while productivity -- the growth of the economic pie -- is up by almost 15 percent. Meaning we're working harder, producing more, for the same money as five years ago."
Their conclusion is bull! The labor force was bloated in 2001. There were people hired in the dot-com boom who produced nothing and were paid extravagantly, in some cases millions of dollars for projects and companies that never produced anything of value at all. That would be considered inefficient; i.e. output/wages would be a smaller number. In order to come to the conclusion they do, the labor force of pre-911 and today world have to be static, there would have to have been no tech bubble and no reshuffling of labor resources.
But of course there was, so the assumption is wrong.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: The Despair Of Alternet's Economy
Posted by: The OttO Show
» RE: The Despair Of Alternet's Economy and Yours
Posted by: cbishopp
» RE: The Despair Of Alternet's Economy and Yours
Posted by: The OttO Show
Comments are closed-
Posted by: reno on Feb 27, 2006 11:35 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: ian_m64 on Jan 6, 2006 1:52 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: as well as!!
Posted by: technocrat
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Armafied on Jan 6, 2006 3:49 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We are such an advanced civilization.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: The Most Telling Part of the Article...
Posted by: judiem
Comments are closed-
Posted by: the republic on Jan 6, 2006 4:57 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Dow is where it was in early 2001. Other indices are down over the same time period. Progress? Not so much.
And when they tout GDP growth, I liken it to this scenario.
Assume Bill Gates and I are the entire economy. Assume last year, he was worth 1 billion dollars and I was worth 100,000.
Assume this year, Bill is worth 1.5 bil and a health issue put me in BK. GDP went up - like I would care.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: the republic
Posted by: JoshuaHolland
» RE: the republic
Posted by: Krotos
» RE: the republic
Posted by: A. James
Comments are closed-
Posted by: DCH on Jan 6, 2006 5:28 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: tcx2 on Jan 6, 2006 6:02 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This whole service economy is looking better by the day, I tell ya. A nation of minimum wage slaves.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: The Economy is GREAT!
Posted by: cyclone
» RE: The Economy is GREAT!
Posted by: ALANHESTER
» RE: The Economy is GREAT!
Posted by: cyclone
Comments are closed-
Posted by: jeffrey7 on Jan 6, 2006 6:21 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You know there reallyare folks that make 25,000 a yaer,live modestly and still scrimp on the food budget just to get by. That means no nights out,resturants,or any 'fun' that's not made at home. If you buy what T.V. shovels down our throats,you did'nt give a good enough gift this season if you did'nt gift someone with a Lexus. Get Real!!!
Most folks,even the ones that think they're doing alright, have to watch their money pretty closely. Maybe the food budget is the only thing that gets tight to make all the bills balance,but could you take a $100 increase in your rent? How
about if your car needs a tune-up,a new waterheater for the house,all the kids need new shoes,your new suit got shredded by the dry cleaners and you need it for today's meeting and your spouse chipped a tooth doing God know's what,but won't come out in public until it's fixed and the all need paying TODAY. Not on 25K. Or 45 or 95K, I know folks in all these incomes and not one of them could stand that kind of economic 'hit'. America is over priced and over valued. The products offered are of poor quality and low reliability. Most folks money is sucked out from under them by compound intrest rates. The biggest income scam ever perpitrated on the People. The 60% increase in you utility bills reflects the FINES your utility company has gotten the previous year for over polluting. Try telling your boss you need a fat raise to pay a fine see how far you get.
The problem is numbers. Numbers like 5%. 5% of the people are loving the Bush economic lifestyle.5% have the control.5% think they know what's best for you,me and everyone else.5% think it's perfectly fine to poison your whole family for generations to come so they can keep their fine lifestyles. As for the 95%,we're all kicking and scratching for their 'trickled on' economics entertainment. We all need a kick in the ass!!! We are not the land of 'Richest is Rightest'.
We are a land 'OF THE PEOPLE' We MUST right this nightmare
of economic averice by bringing back the 90% tax bracket for wealthy people and businesses. Greed is a social disease,worse than Herpies, Taxing it is the cure.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: It's Boom Boom if you're rich
Posted by: LPB
» RE: It's Boom Boom if you're rich
Posted by: JCS
» RE: It's Boom Boom if you're rich
Posted by: crusty
» RE: It's Boom Boom if you're rich,what good are the wealthy?
Posted by: jeffrey7
» RE: It's Boom Boom if you're rich,what good are the wealthy?
Posted by: andrewgirma
» RE: It's Boom Boom if you're rich,what good are the wealthy?
Posted by: crusty
» RE: It's Boom Boom if you're rich,what good are the wealthy?
Posted by: kelly.nickell
» RE: It's Boom Boom if you're rich,what good are the wealthy?
Posted by: crusty
» I knew you were single...
Posted by: paulaH
» RE: It's Boom Boom if you're rich
Posted by: paulaH
» RE: It's Boom Boom if you're rich
Posted by: crusty
» RE: It's Boom Boom if you're rich.or think you are
Posted by: jeffrey7
» RE: It's Boom Boom if you're rich.or think you are
Posted by: crusty
» RE: It's Boom Boom if you're rich.or think you are
Posted by: jeffrey7
Comments are closed-
Posted by: lamar on Jan 6, 2006 7:07 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Boom isn't for all
Posted by: ALANHESTER
Comments are closed-
Posted by: redstarwraith on Jan 6, 2006 7:14 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If anyone is interested in the psychological side of internalizing that the author talks about at the article's end, I encourage them to read "The Sane Society" by Erich Fromm.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: esactun on Jan 6, 2006 7:29 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
(They're too busy being scared of the terrorist behind every bush, the pinko commie liberals tearing down their churches, the scientists murdering God, the hippies burning their flag, the Mexicans stealing their jobs, the black men marrying their women, and all the other BS red-herring hot buttons the power elites distract them with. Then they proudly go to Wal*Mart to patriotically overextend their credit on cheap junk made in Red China.)
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Kudos, Mr Holland.
Posted by: dagoski
» RE: Kudos, Mr Holland.
Posted by: goleft
Comments are closed-
Posted by: maxpayne on Jan 6, 2006 7:41 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Besides, back in early 2004, it was already being reported that U.S. Labor Department pulled an Enron to fabricate phony March job figures
By Jackson Thoreau
The trick to dealing with this fake rosy scenario is to take it and use it as a weapon. For example, take the statistics on supposedly higher wages and use it against your employer to fight tooth and nail for the pay you know you deserve for all your diligence and conscientous work and never let them force you into the race to the bottom just to help them win their race to the bottom-line. And mind you, you don't have to join the army to muster this kind of courage.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: JoshuaHolland on Jan 6, 2006 8:11 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Big Lie that drops so easily from the lips of every economic cheerleader is that the five major tax cuts enacted by George Bush is responsible for the growth we’ve seen since the end of the recession in 2001. That assertion is, simply, nonsense – economic mumbo-jumbo to support the right’s ideological preferences.
The idea takes a sound economic principle -- that targeted tax cuts can spur growth -- and twists it into the harebrained idea that all tax cuts always do. Cutting taxes has become a religion, not a policy tool.
Except for the rebate checks in 2001, the cuts haven’t been designed for their potential stimulus; they’re give-aways to investors paid for by long-term public debt. The proof is in the pudding: $860 billion dollars worth have bought us an economic recovery that by almost every measure is slower and less robust than those in past business cycles. Certainly it has paled next to the recovery in the mid 1990s under Clinton’s watch, after he raised taxes. As economist Lee Price points out [PDF], when $60 billion dollars a year in business tax cuts expired at the end of 2004, it had virtually no effect on investment.
Those cuts were sold by another article of economic faith: that they would stimulate enough growth that the government’s overall revenues wouldn’t be touched. But an analysis by the Congressional Budget Office found that even using the most generous assumptions, only a bit more than a quarter of lost tax revenue might be recouped over the next ten years. Personal income tax receipts, at $802 billion in 2004, were almost twenty percent lower than they were in 2001 ($994 billion). Voo-doo economics, indeed.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: One more thing ...
Posted by: JoshuaHolland
» RE: One more thing ...
Posted by: badkitty53
» RE: One more thing ...
Posted by: JoshuaHolland
» RE: One more thing ...
Posted by: brunowe
» RE: One more thing ...
Posted by: JoshuaHolland
» RE: One more thing ...
Posted by: Againstthewindwalking
» RE: One more thing ...
Posted by: jeffrey7
» RE: One more thing ...
Posted by: cyclone
Comments are closed-
Posted by: benzene on Jan 6, 2006 8:38 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Confusing
Posted by: cyclone
» RE: Confusing
Posted by: tdicks
» RE: Confusing
Posted by: Lizmv
» RE: Confusing
Posted by: benzene
» RE: Confusing
Posted by: JustinObodie
Comments are closed-
Posted by: benzene on Jan 6, 2006 8:38 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Confusing
Posted by: corylus
Comments are closed-
Posted by: benzene on Jan 6, 2006 8:38 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Confusing
Posted by: JoshuaHolland
» RE: Confusing
Posted by: kmeyer
Comments are closed-
Posted by: krose on Jan 6, 2006 8:46 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: saywhat? on Jan 6, 2006 8:53 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
i don't really know anyone doing better in my circle except for the wealthy , and their charitable enterprises are suppose to be helped by corporations, which previously were funded by the federal government, and corporations are not stepping up to the plate...
i think i last heard a 1.9 trillion deficit? and i am suppose to help the economy by buying cheap stuff at walmart? and we owe the saudis and the chinese $$? sounds to me like we will all be owing the corporate ethos alot of money soon through our personal debt...communists will be capitalists, capitalists will become wahabis, and will be put in prison for what we can't pay back....
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: eringhorm on Jan 6, 2006 9:08 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Human Devlopment Index (wiki article here) - Used by the UN Development Programme in it's annual report, this index includes life expectancy and education and links GDP to purchasing power parity.
Genuine Progress Indicator (wiki article here) - A more direct replacement for GDP that attempts to factor in environmental and social costs when determining how a country progresses. For example the Exxon Valdez disaster would actually have produced an increase in GDP because of the money spent on clean-up. The GPI more accurately shows this as a net loss however, since it subtracts the environmental damage from any monetary gain.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: GDP alternatives
Posted by: JoshuaHolland
» RE: GDP alternatives
Posted by: eringhorm
Comments are closed-
Posted by: kabac55 on Jan 6, 2006 9:12 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I really have to wonder what planet some of these government experts are living on. Granted living in Michigan right now with Delphi in big financial trouble and GM and Ford not so far behind them, my perspective is clouded by the reality of hundreds of people losing their jobs and/or pensions. Along with these large employers, at least 2 smaller manufacturing companies have folded in my current home town in the last 18 months, and several locally owned stores have gone out of business. The local papers are regularly full of pages of mortgage foreclosure notices.
My grocery bill is up with some regular staples rising in price as much as $1.00 since last summer. Utilities are up including city water and sewage and trash collection. If I could afford cable, my rates would be jumping another $5.00/month for basic plus service.
Unemployment is a big problem in MI. And when people are unemployed, they often become involved in other activities--drugs, alcohol, and crime. In Saginaw and Flint, there is often at least one murder or shooting every night of late. Recently there's been a rash of drive-by shootings with people being shot inside their homes.
So much for a booming economy. So much for trickle down economics.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: jwg on Jan 6, 2006 9:13 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: where is the trickle down?
Posted by: Falang
» RE: where is the trickle down?
Posted by: Edward George
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Ras3hilton on Jan 6, 2006 10:07 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I mean no offense to those crazed Bush supporters, I'm just really sad for them, because you know they can't all be Cheney-wealthy.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Now...that's suprising!
Posted by: JoshuaHolland
» RE: Now...that's suprising!
Posted by: saywhat?
Comments are closed-
Posted by: onthewall on Jan 6, 2006 10:35 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Of the 96 counties in Idaho, Utah and Wyoming, only two, Blaine County (aka Sun Valley) and Teton County (aka Jackson Hole) voted for the Democrat Party presidential candidate in the last election. Supposedly, the well-to-do in these counties had more to lose if Kerry won and taxes were raised. But on a different level, it’s the well-to-do who stand at ease in this world of fast change and relaxed social mores, because it is precisely in this world of globalization and urban prosperity that they succeed.
Whereas for others, the working and rural poor, who feel powerless and are falling ever further behind, it was Bush who managed to run as the outsider who’s angry about the elites, in touch with heartland values, and ready to lead us grimly into the tough new world of deprivation and ugly tradeoffs that are reflected in the everyday situations that his middle and working class supporters face.
This president, who always feels ridiculed and at a loss for words, perfectly embodies the frustrations that so many of his supporters feel and like them he holds for dear life onto a slate of threadbare truths about America’s innate virtue.
When people feel beaten down, they’re drawn to leaders who “have the courage” to “say it like it is.” In other words, while wealth is shoveled into the pockets of shareholders and the executives who do their bidding, the folks who feel baffled and defeated by their own failure take solace in the idea that America “owes no one an apology.”
On global warming, for instance, Bush seems courageous when he says, “I will explain as clearly as I can, today and every other chance I get, that we will not do anything that harms our economy... That’s my priority. I’m worried about the economy.”
Wow!
For the time being, most Americans seem reluctant to question what’s happening because to do so requires an embrace rather than a rejection of governmental actions that would redistribute wealth and more forthrightly address the complex problems that are bearing down on us.
Until people actually begin to question and challenge the social value of the wealth that piles up in enclaves like Jackson Hole and Sun Valley, we’re “lookin’ in all the wrong places.”
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: onthewall
Posted by: veive
» RE: onthewall
Posted by: A. James
Comments are closed-
Posted by: mythbuster on Jan 6, 2006 10:50 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Iconoclast421 on Jan 6, 2006 11:50 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: liberalibrarian on Jan 6, 2006 12:08 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: bush trumpeting economy
Posted by: JoshuaHolland
» RE: bush trumpeting economy
Posted by: overabarrel
» RE: bush trumpeting economy
Posted by: mythbuster
» RE: bush trumpeting economy
Posted by: branchdavian1
Comments are closed-
Posted by: chaoslegs on Jan 6, 2006 1:18 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have been saying many of the same things.
I do find the high ranking of mental health problems to be interesting, our health care cost have been soaring, but mental health coverage is a joke.
A few years ago Metro Transit (bus system in the Twin Cities, MN) went on strike based on increased employee contributions to the health insurance. Letter after letter to the editor talked about how the union should quit whining because they didn't get that good of a benefit.
It was a enough to make you want to scream. Here we were as fellow citizens, trying to drag the union employees down to our crappy level in benefits, when instead we should have turned around and asked why our employers benefits were so inadequate in comparison?
Why is that the uber rich get to whine about the jealousy of the poor and middle class when we want proportional taxation (all taxes as a percent of income), but on something like this the conservative talking heads never mention the jealousy of decent benefits in the same way? Because Dems are not doing enough to fight for economic justice, with the exception to holding fast on social security.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: bdcbryan@hotmail.com on Jan 6, 2006 2:12 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So if you are a liberal just wait until your party gets control and everything in the world will be restored to perfection! They will even fix the booming economy for you!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Sour Grapes
Posted by: JoshuaHolland
» RE: Sour Grapes
Posted by: bdcbryan@hotmail.com
» RE: Sour Grapes
Posted by: antoniomo
» RE: Sour Grapes
Posted by: mizerock
» RE: Sour Grapes
Posted by: tcx2
» RE: Sour Grapes
Posted by: dogwhisperer
» RE: Sour Grapes
Posted by: Ras3hilton
» RE: Sour Grapes
Posted by: bdcbryan@hotmail.com
» RE: Sour Grapes
Posted by: JoshuaHolland
» RE: Sour Grapes
Posted by: tcx2
Comments are closed-
Posted by: BlueTex on Jan 6, 2006 2:15 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
From here on out, let's no use the terms: "left, right, liberal, conservative, democrat or republican" unless restating what someone has dubbed themselves or their policy positions. We don't need these implications to determine how to "interpret" the quotes that are supplied. These gratuitous descriptions do nothing to improve the reader's understanding.
For example, why did the author refer to EPI (Economic Policy Institute) as a "LEFTIST" think tank. EPI is pro-labor, but that is not the same as leftist. Leftist is a term created to refer to "communists" theory devotees. EPI DOES NOT ADVOCATE THAT WORKERS OWN THE MEANS OF PRODUCTION OR THAT CAPITALISTS ARE BAD.
Now, on to my real comments: All this crap about getting products made overseas to be MORE COMPETITIVE is crap. AMERICANS WERE CONSUMING ABOUT 86 TO 90 PERCENT OF WHAT WE MADE in our domestic market. We export about 10 to 14 percent.
SECONDLY, we tried this same screwed up version of FREE MARKET before. If you remember, during World War I, one of the most devastating developments was the invention of the submarine that the Germans used to "CUT THE SUPPLY ROUTES" to the United States.
During the time that the very wealthy and big business had everything that they wanted: practically no regulations, effectively free markets (i.e. cheap labor) and control over the US government, they owned 85 percent of U.S. wealth while their workers starved. Along came the Great Depression largely caused by bad, pro-wealthy, pro-big business policy caused these problems.
When workers are paid better, the economy does better. CEOs will not be able to pay themselves grandiose salaries that they have not earned, but in the long run, the savings rate will go up; bankruptcies will go down and STOCKHOLDERS will see their investments grow more consistently than those investments do now.
Texas Grrrl
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Let's Not Let History Repeat Itself
Posted by: JoshuaHolland
Comments are closed-
Posted by: mizerock on Jan 6, 2006 3:08 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: owlsliveintrees on Jan 6, 2006 3:31 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is typical liberal garbage. The property owners (we'll call them elites, because it's funny) are sitting on an investment that keeps making money and those who apparently speak in their best interest (alternet maybe? maybe not) are trying to talk down a housing market that liberals have been trying to talk down for the last 3 years.
Why? Because return on investment is the antithesis of modern liberal thought. People buy houses, raise their living standard, but no it's all wrong, right? Because it's unfair for people to make money off investments. That's why liberals love capital gains taxes. Because it punishes people for raising their living standard on their own as opposed to waiting for the government.
Wow, this Josh Holland fellow is a real winner. His cutting edge economic ideas (supply and demand) are what this country needs. It's a good thing alternet gives college kids without any economic expertise a forum, because I can't imagine what I'd do without it. Oh wait, i'll just watch my house go up in value. That'll pass the time.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: I'll take a shot at this idiocy
Posted by: tcx2
» RE: I'll take a shot at this idiocy
Posted by: owlsliveintrees
» owlsliveintrees
Posted by: cyclone
» RE: owlsliveintrees
Posted by: kelly.nickell
» RE: owlsliveintrees
Posted by: cyclone
» RE: I'll take a shot at this idiocy
Posted by: BriMan
» RE: I'll take a shot at this idiocy
Posted by: tcx2
» RE: I'll take a shot at this idiocy
Posted by: tcx2
» RE: I'll take a shot at this idiocy
Posted by: memary10
» Hey, prick...
Posted by: JoshuaHolland
» RE: Hey, prick...
Posted by: manxome
» RE: I'll take a shot at this idiocy
Posted by: mizerock
» RE: I'll take a shot at this idiocy
Posted by: saywhat?
» RE: I'll take a shot at this idiocy
Posted by: dogwhisperer
» RE: I'll take a shot at this idiocy
Posted by: yellow
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Rod in 83706 on Jan 6, 2006 7:00 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have a decent job with health insurance and a pension plan and I'm pissed. Imagine how pissed I would be if I were like most Americans and had a low paying job with no benefits.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: bdcbryan@hotmail.com on Jan 6, 2006 8:21 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: ude!
Posted by: drone
» RE: ude!
Posted by: JoshuaHolland
» RE: ude!
Posted by: bdcbryan@hotmail.com
» RE: ude!
Posted by: JoshuaHolland
» RE: ude!
Posted by: BriMan
» RE: ude!
Posted by: Ratskii
Comments are closed-
Posted by: benzene on Jan 6, 2006 9:58 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Is it possible for the economy to continue growing when the population is shrinking?
I know that this is the case of some countries such as Sweden and Italy, but I don't have any economic data from these countries handy. Could someone please enlighten me as to their situations?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: cheesemissile on Jan 7, 2006 12:50 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: wrogal on Jan 7, 2006 11:52 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In essence, those Americans who think that the economy is "on the right track" and that George Bush and the Republicans are the best thing to come along since sliced bread, must obviously, believe in Santa Claus, the tooth fairy, and that the government is always right no matter what it does, and runs efficiently, is honest, and listens to the people!!! Its nice to escape to a dream world once in a while, but its very dangerous to actually think you are living in it
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: walt
Posted by: Nofear
Comments are closed-
Posted by: yellow on Jan 7, 2006 5:25 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: magistre on Jan 7, 2006 9:42 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Because the 90% of citizens have been F*CKED OVER by the Bushzis & Multi-nationalizedBusiness
Posted by: branchdavian1
Comments are closed-
Posted by: diof09 on Jan 8, 2006 3:54 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Edward George on Jan 10, 2006 2:09 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Nofear on Jan 11, 2006 12:04 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: manxome on Jan 11, 2006 10:17 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So, I sell for $350, and hit the jackpot. But, I have a mortgage to pay off. Subtract 125. Subtract 50 for repairs and minor improvements that I cannot take with me when I sell. Subtract 10 for the free labor I provided making the improvements. Subtract 60 or so for all the interest, etc paid, minus the tax deductions, for the privilege of having a mortgagte. Subtract 25 for commission, lawyers fees, title fees, HO warranty, blah blah blah, for the priviledge of selling.
Wow! After all is said and done, I have made a PROFIT of 80 thousand dollars! It's like hitting the lottery! Woohoo!
Except, I have no place to live now. I am sure I can get a home similar to the $350,000 one I just sold for the $80,000 cash I now have, right? Heck, even if I use it as a down payment on another $350,000 house (since everyone else's house went up in value, too) I now need to get a $270,000 mortgage, which is twice my original mortgage.
At 3% a year, I'm sure my pay raises caused my income to double in 6 years, easily covering the the doubling of my mortgage cost! What a windfall!
Or, put simply, I cannot afford to buy my own home. Or move. So that big windfall is there only if I don't try to get at it.
Wow, my house feels 2.5 times bigger already.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Genius!
Posted by: manxome
Comments are closed-
Posted by: 092098jvm on Jan 11, 2006 7:23 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: The OttO Show on Jan 16, 2006 10:18 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It does however indirectly point out what I have always said: the President of the United States has little effect on the US economy beyond affecting consumer confidence. There have been a lot of things going on since 2000: the dot-com bubble crash, the corporate stock scandals, 911, the invasion of two countries, hurricanes, floods etc that should have each caused pessimism in consumer confidence. I am not sure we can blame this on any one person, as the article does. After all, tsunamis are not George Bush’s fault.
More importantly the consumer portion of the economy is only one of three sections, the other two being business and government. And as we know, as consumer spending decreased, causing a recession. Bush spent to make up for it. That is a little something we economists call 'economic stimulus'. If you really want to learn the rationale behind it, I suggest that you look up John M Keynes. Non-economists just call it deficit spending and then support that stance by calling the president names.
Also, the bullet points were a source of great amusement for me:
"Salaries are still below where they were at the start of the recovery in November 2001. That, while productivity -- the growth of the economic pie -- is up by almost 15 percent. Meaning we're working harder, producing more, for the same money as five years ago."
Their conclusion is bull! The labor force was bloated in 2001. There were people hired in the dot-com boom who produced nothing and were paid extravagantly, in some cases millions of dollars for projects and companies that never produced anything of value at all. That would be considered inefficient; i.e. output/wages would be a smaller number. In order to come to the conclusion they do, the labor force of pre-911 and today world have to be static, there would have to have been no tech bubble and no reshuffling of labor resources.
But of course there was, so the assumption is wrong.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: The Despair Of Alternet's Economy
Posted by: The OttO Show
» RE: The Despair Of Alternet's Economy and Yours
Posted by: cbishopp
» RE: The Despair Of Alternet's Economy and Yours
Posted by: The OttO Show
Comments are closed-
Posted by: reno on Feb 27, 2006 11:35 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Vancouver's Games Will Be the Gayest Olympics Ever
Trial Begins for Activist Who Fought to Protect Federal Lands from Drilling -- Join the Protest
Starbucks' Cop-Out to Gun Nuts: Customers Served Coffee While Strapped




