Did 9/11 Make Economic Recovery Impossible?

[Daktoria]

Despite how the War on Terror was a neocon response, there has been a clamor against equating social conservatism to fundamentalist, terrorist, Islamofascism since 9/11.

It is impossible for the economy to recover as long as this attitude remains.

The reason is that for any recovery to ever happen, people need the peace of mind to engage in creative thinking and problem solving at their own tempo. People cannot be exposed to assuming the risk of unreliable disturbance. An emotivist, relativist, contextualist society does not provide the psychological security required to allow creative thinking and problem solving to take place. Instead, it compels people to endure hedonist libertinism that hides behind freedom of speech while degrading freedom of assembly and rights to privacy. It does not respect "meetings of the minds" or "offer and acceptance", but rather mandates that people endure duress, intimidation, harassment, provocation, and negligence while blaming the victim.

Furthermore, it drives society into a state of paranoia where people are expected to conform to politically correct norms just to fit in. They refrain from engaging in creative thinking and problem solving in order to avoid seeming difficult, abnormal, pathetic, or exploitable.

You cannot have fiscal responsibility without social responsibility. In order for an economic recovery to happen, the culture of a society must be conducive to creative thinking and problem solving. That way, people come up with culture to celebrate in order to grow endogenous demand as well as come up with sustainable production to reflect that culture.

Until this happens, there is a 0% chance of economic recovery for all eternity, especially considering that there is no new land to colonize. Society cannot simply make an appeal to Manifest Destiny or jingoism in order to acquire new natural resources and land for expansion.

Either acknowledge the psychological foundations of economics or die.

 

[Mad Scientist]

Despite how the War on Terror was a neocon response,

NeoCon Response? Yes, War on Terror Plan come from CPAC but have Socialist support too.

Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists passed in 2001 by both "parties".

House: 1 vote against.
Senate: No vote against.

Why is this? International Bankers own both parties.

 

[waltky]

Avg. household no where near recovering wealth lost in the Great Recession...

Average US household far from regaining its wealth
May 30,`13 WASHINGTON (AP) -- The average U.S. household has a long way to go to recover the wealth it lost to the Great Recession, a report by the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis concluded Thursday.

The typical household has regained less than half its wealth, the analysis found. A separate Federal Reserve report in March calculated that Americans as a whole had regained 91 percent of their losses. Household wealth plunged $16 trillion from the third quarter of 2007 through the first quarter of 2009. By the final three months of 2012, American households as a group had regained $14.7 trillion. Yet once those figures are adjusted for inflation and averaged across the U.S. population, the picture doesn't look so bright: The average household has recovered only 45 percent of its wealth, the St. Louis Fed concluded. That suggests that consumer spending could remain modest as many Americans try to rebuild their wealth by saving more and paying off debts.

The number of U.S. households grew 3.8 million to 115 million from the third quarter of 2007 through the final three months of last year, the report said. As a result, the rebound in wealth has been spread across more people and reduced the average wealth for each household. In addition, though inflation has averaged just 2 percent over the past five years, it's eroded some of the purchasing power of Americans' regained wealth. The St. Louis Fed's analysis noted that the rebound in wealth hasn't been equally distributed. As a result, many households are even further behind than the average.

Nearly two-thirds of the increase in household wealth since 2009 is due to rising stock prices, the authors note. Stock indexes reached record highs this month. Those gains disproportionately benefit affluent households: About 80 percent of stocks are held by the wealthiest 10 percent of the population. For middle- and lower-income households, home values represent the biggest chunk of total wealth. And home prices remain about 30 percent below their peak, even after jumping nearly 11 percent in the past year. The analysis was written by William Emmons, an economist at the St. Louis Fed, and Ray Boshara, who directs its new Center for Household Financial Stability. "It's like the economy is this airplane and not all the engines are firing," Emmons said.

Still, wealthier households account for a disproportionate share of consumer spending: About 20 percent of Americans account for about 40 percent of spending. Consequently, the rise in stock prices should provide some lift to spending, Emmons said. The average household had a net worth of $539,500 at the end of last year, according to a separate paper the St. Louis Fed released Thursday. That was up from $469,900 in the first quarter of 2009. But it was sharply below the peak of $641,000 in the first quarter of 2007.

Source

 

[itfitzme]

"The number of U.S. households grew 3.8 million to 115 million from the third quarter of 2007 through the final three months of last year"

How does that make sense?

Date * * * *10/1/2007 * to 1/1/2013 *

Households *3.8 mil * * * * * *115 mil

CPS * * * * *232.7 * * * * * * 244.7

%chg Households * * *2926%
%chg CPOP * * * * * * 5.16%

How does that make sense?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Despite how the War on Terror was a neocon response, there has been a clamor against equating social conservatism to fundamentalist, terrorist, Islamofascism since 9/11.

It is impossible for the economy to recover as long as this attitude remains.

The reason is that for any recovery to ever happen, people need the peace of mind to engage in creative thinking and problem solving at their own tempo. People cannot be exposed to assuming the risk of unreliable disturbance. An emotivist, relativist, contextualist society does not provide the psychological security required to allow creative thinking and problem solving to take place. Instead, it compels people to endure hedonist libertinism that hides behind freedom of speech while degrading freedom of assembly and rights to privacy. It does not respect "meetings of the minds" or "offer and acceptance", but rather mandates that people endure duress, intimidation, harassment, provocation, and negligence while blaming the victim.

Furthermore, it drives society into a state of paranoia where people are expected to conform to politically correct norms just to fit in. They refrain from engaging in creative thinking and problem solving in order to avoid seeming difficult, abnormal, pathetic, or exploitable.

You cannot have fiscal responsibility without social responsibility. In order for an economic recovery to happen, the culture of a society must be conducive to creative thinking and problem solving. That way, people come up with culture to celebrate in order to grow endogenous demand as well as come up with sustainable production to reflect that culture.

Until this happens, there is a 0% chance of economic recovery for all eternity, especially considering that there is no new land to colonize. Society cannot simply make an appeal to Manifest Destiny or jingoism in order to acquire new natural resources and land for expansion.

Either acknowledge the psychological foundations of economics or die.

ah, thats crap. the huge stress of war produces many many inventions that often drive civilization upward and onward.

 

[AmazonTania]

What? You don't believe in the Keynesian rhetoric of disasters creating jobs?

Shame on you. A pox upon your house.

 

[Dugdale_Jukes]

Despite how the War on Terror was a neocon response, there has been a clamor against equating social conservatism to fundamentalist, terrorist, Islamofascism since 9/11.

It is impossible for the economy to recover as long as this attitude remains.

The reason is that for any recovery to ever happen, people need the peace of mind to engage in creative thinking and problem solving at their own tempo. People cannot be exposed to assuming the risk of unreliable disturbance. An emotivist, relativist, contextualist society does not provide the psychological security required to allow creative thinking and problem solving to take place. Instead, it compels people to endure hedonist libertinism that hides behind freedom of speech while degrading freedom of assembly and rights to privacy. It does not respect "meetings of the minds" or "offer and acceptance", but rather mandates that people endure duress, intimidation, harassment, provocation, and negligence while blaming the victim.

Furthermore, it drives society into a state of paranoia where people are expected to conform to politically correct norms just to fit in. They refrain from engaging in creative thinking and problem solving in order to avoid seeming difficult, abnormal, pathetic, or exploitable.

You cannot have fiscal responsibility without social responsibility. In order for an economic recovery to happen, the culture of a society must be conducive to creative thinking and problem solving. That way, people come up with culture to celebrate in order to grow endogenous demand as well as come up with sustainable production to reflect that culture.

Until this happens, there is a 0% chance of economic recovery for all eternity, especially considering that there is no new land to colonize. Society cannot simply make an appeal to Manifest Destiny or jingoism in order to acquire new natural resources and land for expansion.

Either acknowledge the psychological foundations of economics or die.

If my understanding is accurate, you took some hundreds of words to make the point that

Faith underwrites securities-based economies.
​

Paper currencies, for example, are a form of security issued by governments. Further, currencies have been valued by faith since gold was stripped two generations ago.

The United States may or may not survive the anger of nutball white trash at the clock that keeps ticking into the future and...

Social CHANGE
​

but short of civil war no one reading this shall live to see the US dollar replaced as the global reserve currency.

Consequently, the foundation for a strong US economy is still there. Until corporations are pulled off the government tit, however, there is no hope for the survival of the United States' middle class.

The United States middle class is a dead duck as long as voodoo economics is the mode. So, if a secondary point of your post was something akin to "Will there be a return to the pre-Reagan era type of general prosperity, the answer is 'Not any time soon.'
​

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Until corporations are pulled off the government tit, however, there is no hope for the survival of the United States' middle class.

What is your best example of this or are you too slow to provide it??

Do you want crony capitalism wherein business and government are separate or crony socialism wheren they are together as in Obamacare??

As a silly liberal you have no idea do you???????????

 

[Dugdale_Jukes]

Such name calling. Tut, tut, Ed.

Reagan, Clinton, Junebug, Obama. All crony capitalists, Ed. Sad but... It's twoo, it's twoo!
Put'em in a bag and shake'em up, you couldn't tell which one you pulled out.

Okay, you could tell Reagan by the bobblehead effect.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Such name calling. Tut, tut, Ed.

Reagan, Clinton, Junebug, Obama. All crony capitalists, Ed. Sad but... It's twoo, it's twoo!
Put'em in a bag and shake'em up, you couldn't tell which one you pulled out.

Okay, you could tell Reagan by the bobblehead effect.

substance free from typical liberal without IQ for substance.

 

[Dugdale_Jukes]

Such name calling. Tut, tut, Ed.

Reagan, Clinton, Junebug, Obama. All crony capitalists, Ed. Sad but... It's twoo, it's twoo!
Put'em in a bag and shake'em up, you couldn't tell which one you pulled out.

Okay, you could tell Reagan by the bobblehead effect.

substance free from typical liberal without IQ for substance.

Are you familiar with the 'fart paradigm', Ed?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Such name calling. Tut, tut, Ed.

Reagan, Clinton, Junebug, Obama. All crony capitalists, Ed. Sad but... It's twoo, it's twoo!
Put'em in a bag and shake'em up, you couldn't tell which one you pulled out.

Okay, you could tell Reagan by the bobblehead effect.

substance free from typical liberal without IQ for substance.

Are you familiar with the 'fart paradigm', Ed?

substance free from typical liberal without IQ for substance.