Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Exactly, you were asking about the purchasing power of the American middle class....We're not contrasting other economic systems to the USA's...For hundreds of years, all classes of free American workers have had the power to purchase both US grown corn and wheat along with foreign grown coffee and chocolate. People who life in a socialist workers paradise only have the power to purchase and earn what the state tells them to.Where is the middle class's purchasing POWER gone?...
OK, good to know you understand that purchasing power thing now, but let's get clear before we change the subject again. You want to compare American's wealth and income now to what it was 30 years ago.We contrasting what America once was compared to what it is after 30 years of supply side policies.[/I]
Yeah yeah, we KNOW you love you some Guberment.
They be that GREAT sugar daddy of ALL TIME.
Exactly, you were asking about the purchasing power of the American middle class....We're not contrasting other economic systems to the USA's...For hundreds of years, all classes of free American workers have had the power to purchase both US grown corn and wheat along with foreign grown coffee and chocolate. People who life in a socialist workers paradise only have the power to purchase and earn what the state tells them to.
OK, good to know you understand that purchasing power thing now, but let's get clear before we change the subject again. You want to compare American's wealth and income now to what it was 30 years ago.We contrasting what America once was compared to what it is after 30 years of supply side policies.[/I]
Americans are more wealthy and have higher incomes now than 30 years ago. OK, a couple years ago unemployment peaked to 10.2. So what. In '83 it was 10.8. We're better off now.
Really? He was just here a minute ago --ah, here he is. Huh, I just asked Incomedisparity and he said I was right and you misunderstood what he was telling you. So there. OK, you're probably thinking I made up what I said about income disparity. I believe you made up what you said about income disparity too.Income disparity says you are wrong......Americans are more wealthy and have higher incomes now than 30 years ago. OK, a couple years ago unemployment peaked to 10.2. So what. In '83 it was 10.8. We're better off now.
No, it's not 'far higher'. How about we look at the numbers first, and say what they are after:...a trade deficit that's far higher now than at the end of the Bush Admin. Meaning: A net negative for this country...
First, the trade balance now is the same it was when Bush left office. Second, the trade balance was 'worse' back when we had jobs and it's 'better' now with people out of work. The only way to hate a big trade deficit is to hate working.
We hear that a lot so I guess it's easy for many to get turned around....we're only like losing about half TRILLION dollars a year in trade imbalance!...
We're talking about trade with foreigners. Foreigners don't use dollars so we can't possibly lose "about half TRILLION dollars a year" by giving it to foreigners. They use their own money. The only way we can buy foreign goods is with their money. The only way we can get their money without selling them our goods is by selling other stuff to get their money. Our dollars never go there. Our dollars never get lost there.
It's called the balance of payments and it's how money, buying, and selling work with foreigners.
Really? He was just here a minute ago --ah, here he is. Huh, I just asked Incomedisparity and he said I was right and you misunderstood what he was telling you. So there. OK, you're probably thinking I made up what I said about income disparity. I believe you made up what you said about income disparity too.Income disparity says you are wrong......Americans are more wealthy and have higher incomes now than 30 years ago. OK, a couple years ago unemployment peaked to 10.2. So what. In '83 it was 10.8. We're better off now.
Planet Earth. No more making things up. Table A-2 in this Census Bur. report says real median income now is more than 15% above what it was 30 years ago.
Yeah yeah, we KNOW you love you some Guberment.
They be that GREAT sugar daddy of ALL TIME.
Did our founders deside government was how you obtain freedom?
Yes they did you brain washed fool
That's what I was saying, before 2009 everything was so much better, but even though we've dropped a lot since 2007. Table A-2 in this Census Bur. report still says real median income now is more than 15% above what it was 30 years ago....From you pdf: Between 2007 and 2009......Americans are more wealthy and have higher incomes now than 30 years ago. OK, a couple years ago unemployment peaked to 10.2. So what. In '83 it was 10.8. We're better off now.
LOL!!! The GDP isn't money lost or found, it's money that moves. When the GDP drops a half trillion dollars, it's because $1/2T got put in the bank and didn't work in the economy. Money sitting in the bank is not in the GDP, and nobody lost the $1/2T, we know exactly where it is!Yes we do lose it, why else would our trade deficit SUBTRACT from economic/GDP growth nearly every quarter......we can't possibly lose "about half TRILLION dollars a year" by giving it to foreigners. They use their own money. The only way we can buy foreign goods is with their money. The only way we can get their money without selling them our goods is by selling other stuff to get their money. Our dollars never go there. Our dollars never get lost there. It's called the balance of payments...
LOL!!! The GDP isn't money lost or found, it's money that moves. When the GDP drops a half trillion dollars, it's because $1/2T got put in the bank and didn't work in the economy. Money sitting in the bank is not in the GDP, and nobody lost the $1/2T, we know exactly where it is!
Of course the GDP is still economic activity and that's important too, but while we're having net exports subtracted we're also having the capital and financial transactions that balance it added. Here's how it's been happening in real life for the past four years:
At the beginning of 2008 we had a good GDP even though the 'bad' trade deficit was taken out. A year later the GDP tanked while the 'better' trade deficit took less out. Now the GDP is picking back up even though that 'terrible' trade deficit takes more out.
Trade deficits are subtracted and a capital surplus is added when the economy is good.
That's what I was saying, before 2009 everything was so much better, but even though we've dropped a lot since 2007. Table A-2 in this Census Bur. report still says real median income now is more than 15% above what it was 30 years ago....From you pdf: Between 2007 and 2009......Americans are more wealthy and have higher incomes now than 30 years ago. OK, a couple years ago unemployment peaked to 10.2. So what. In '83 it was 10.8. We're better off now.
Hey, don't blame me, I don't run the Census Br.
Funny, I was all set to show you why that wasn't true but then I checked and it turns out the amount of the annual trade deficit ($1/2T) is about equal to the amount of foreign purchases of T-bills. The thing is that even though that's what's happening now, foreign T-bill money could also be used to say, buy US real estate and it would be giving us a trade surplus....Ironically, the money flowing in to fund our budget deficits is what's offsetting our record trade deficits...
That part is crazy though, the dollar's exchange rates have nothing to do with the trade deficit....preventing a dollar collapse...
We just went from crazy to halucinagenic --EARTH TO LIKEABIRD, NO $1/2T went anywhere!!...That 500 billion that leaves is money that could have gone into the pockets of Americans...
Ah, maybe the problem here is I get my GDP numbers from the BEA, and you're talking about numbers from well,...Answer me this expat - if high growth and a high deficit somehow go hand-in-hand, then how come the 2000's, a decade where our trade deficit was so much higher than any other decade was also a decade where we saw the lowest GDP growth in generations?...
Funny, I was all set to show you why that wasn't true but then I checked and it turns out the amount of the annual trade deficit ($1/2T) is about equal to the amount of foreign purchases of T-bills. The thing is that even though that's what's happening now, foreign T-bill money could also be used to say, buy US real estate and it would be giving us a trade surplus.
That part is crazy though, the dollar's exchange rates have nothing to do with the trade deficit.
We just went from crazy to halucinagenic --EARTH TO LIKEABIRD, NO $1/2T went anywhere!!
Ah, maybe the problem here is I get my GDP numbers from the BEA, and you're talking about numbers from well,
--elsewhere...
Exactly, you were asking about the purchasing power of the American middle class....We're not contrasting other economic systems to the USA's...For hundreds of years, all classes of free American workers have had the power to purchase both US grown corn and wheat along with foreign grown coffee and chocolate. People who life in a socialist workers paradise only have the power to purchase and earn what the state tells them to.
OK, good to know you understand that purchasing power thing now, but let's get clear before we change the subject again. You want to compare American's wealth and income now to what it was 30 years ago.We contrasting what America once was compared to what it is after 30 years of supply side policies.[/I]
Americans are more wealthy and have higher incomes now than 30 years ago.
Are you fucking blind?
SEriously there's no point in discussing this issue if we cannot agree on the facts in discussion.
If you believe that the American people are better off now than they were, then I can understand why your POV is so very different than mine.
So I guess we have to agree to disagree since there is nothing to debate unless we can first agree on the state of the nation.
You apparently think the middle class is fine.
I disagree.
IN debating terms we have reached an impasse.
Trading bonds for goods is how the US has done things since before Washington took office and that part's sustainable and prosperous enough for me. What's not sustainable are current federal spending levels. That has to change....Us paying them for goods then them turning around and loaning the money back to us is hardly a good economic model, or a path to sustained prosperity...
No, not even indirectly. Some times exports soar with a rising dollar and sometimes a falling dollar comes when exports drop off. We don't sell exports for dollars, we trade exports for things that foreigners are unloading. There's no $1/2T going overseas.Not directly, but smaller exports against larger imports (which then get converted to local currencies) decreases the demand for US dollars, causing a fall in the value of the dollar......the dollar's exchange rates have nothing to do with the trade deficit.
It may subtract more in people's imaginations, but in real life--...trade subtracts more from our gdp than it does add to gdp...
We've seen the actual BEA numbers for GDP and trade, we know the website says gdp and trade do the opposite of what we seen them do. and you don't accept that as proof that the websites wrong....Show proof that the website is inaccurate then...
Running our government and earning a living are important. Must be done ony when sober.Are you fucking blind?.......Americans are more wealthy and have higher incomes now than 30 years ago.
Trading bonds for goods is how the US has done things since before Washington took office and that part's sustainable and prosperous enough for me. What's not sustainable are current federal spending levels. That has to change.
not even indirectly. Some times exports soar with a rising dollar and sometimes a falling dollar comes when exports drop off. We don't sell exports for dollars, we trade exports for things that foreigners are unloading. There's no $1/2T going overseas.
It may subtract more in people's imaginations, but in real life--
--it doesn't.
We've seen the actual BEA numbers for GDP and trade, we know the website says gdp and trade do the opposite of what we seen them do. and you don't accept that as proof that the websites wrong.
Sounds like there's nothing more that anyone can say here.
