Is the US becoming a serf economy

[Mr. H.]

But for those who seek it, the U.S. is the most fertile ground on earth.

I think it has been proven that this is not true.

It is increasingly true that the only wealthy people in the US were born that way.

Economic mobility is lower in the US than in most other developed countries.

Well, this is where you've lost credibility with me and cemented yourself into the annals of the truly fucked of mind.

 

[Saigon]

Mr h.

What I have stated is fact, and there are a couple of American studies which confirm this.

This is probably why you find you can not reply to it sensibly.

 

[oldernwiser]

But for those who seek it, the U.S. is the most fertile ground on earth.

I think it has been proven that this is not true.

It is increasingly true that the only wealthy people in the US were born that way.

Economic mobility is lower in the US than in most other developed countries.

You make some excellent points. Our economic mantra has always been that "it takes money to make money" for as long as I can remember, and there haven't been a whole lot of recent rags to riches stories lately.

If given the space and time, I could also make the argument that our government has already been rendered mostly irrelevant - the real power comes from what we call the 1%, and that their hold on the country is the lie that one day, we could be rich too.

We have lords and ladies which we hold in reverence and awe. We don't call them lords and ladies though - we call them Mr Gates, Mr Buffet, Ms Walton.... yada yada.

(Before you conservatives start banging the thread for "spreading the wealth", understand that there's a very compelling reason to actually want better than the bowl of thin gruel we're told is better than anything on earth.)

 

[Saigon]

(Before you conservatives start banging the thread for "spreading the wealth", understand that there's a very compelling reason to actually want better than the bowl of thin gruel we're told is better than anything on earth.)

Exactly.

All companies need entrepreneurial thinking, and that thinking requires rewards and incentives.

I think a lot of US companies have lost ground, because people see that the CEO's salary has risen 400% faster than theirs have, and they realise that there is little point in creativity.

We've all seen stories where a CEO is earning $10 million a year, while laying off staff earning $50,000 a year as part of cost cutting.

That makes no economic sense to me at all. I do not call that effective capitalism.

 

[Mr. H.]

Mr h.

What I have stated is fact, and there are a couple of American studies which confirm this.

This is probably why you find you can not reply to it sensibly.

And gosh darn it, you post the best kind of facts- with no links or reference.
I am stupified by your stupidence.

 

[Mr. H.]

Oh- and in the future you shall capitalize the letter H.

 

[KissMy]

Funny, you don't see most of the innovation and technology coming out of northeastern Europe these days. No, you see that coming out of the UNITED STATES and Eastern Asia. LOL

Our system is better as it gets people to innovate and to think, while Europe these days just hands them free shit.

Perhaps you need to look at the chart again.

What your system does is pour money into the hands of a rich elite.

If you think that encourages thinking and innovation, I'd be interested as to how that works.

btw, northeastern Europe? You mean Poland?

Pouring money into the hands of a rich elite is not working in the USA. The USA is in worse shape than Europe. We have more national debt than the Eurozone combined. We also have more debt per person, per worker & per tax payer than Europe.

We do fund & reward R & D, Innovation & Start-ups better than other countries. We also attract the most foreign talent. The Rich, Wallstreet bankers, trustfund babies & entitled people are a drag on our system. Steve Wozniak, Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, Elon Musk, Nikola Tesla, Mark Zuckerberg, George Washington Carver & Henry Ford did not come from money & were not rich when they changed the world for the better. They got rich after they changed the world. Giving rich people money destroys innovation. Investing in hungry inventors is the secret to success. Wall street's "financial innovations" have wrecked the economy.

 

[ScienceRocks]

But for those who seek it, the U.S. is the most fertile ground on earth.

I think it has been proven that this is not true.

It is increasingly true that the only wealthy people in the US were born that way.

Economic mobility is lower in the US than in most other developed countries.

You make some excellent points. Our economic mantra has always been that "it takes money to make money" for as long as I can remember, and there haven't been a whole lot of recent rags to riches stories lately.

If given the space and time, I could also make the argument that our government has already been rendered mostly irrelevant - the real power comes from what we call the 1%, and that their hold on the country is the lie that one day, we could be rich too.

We have lords and ladies which we hold in reverence and awe. We don't call them lords and ladies though - we call them Mr Gates, Mr Buffet, Ms Walton.... yada yada.

(Before you conservatives start banging the thread for "spreading the wealth", understand that there's a very compelling reason to actually want better than the bowl of thin gruel we're told is better than anything on earth.)

How do we economically do it without hurting our national wealth? If we transfer wealth that will just make things worse off as transferring from an educated(skillfull) class to an uneducated one will do.

We need a free market with people able to become rich as that's an important part of our system. I understand the reasons for having a system that helps people achieve a higher living standard, but how do we do it without hurting our self’s? I think the best way to do this is to make education easier to get and increase the standards. Reform is what I'm talking about. For starters we should bring back trade schools and focus on basic degree's for people to get their foot in the door. People must want to start up a business with the skills to move forward.

This is how we start getting the poor to at least middle class.

 

[Saigon]

Mr h.

What I have stated is fact, and there are a couple of American studies which confirm this.

This is probably why you find you can not reply to it sensibly.

And gosh darn it, you post the best kind of facts- with no links or reference.
I am stupified by your stupidence.

There are links at the beginning of this OP, which you have thus far ignored.

When you have looked at those, I'll post the data on eonomic mobility.

 

[Saigon]

How do we economically do it without hurting our national wealth? If we transfer wealth that will just make things worse off as transferring from an educated(skillfull) class to an uneducated one will do.

We need a free market with people able to become rich as that's an important part of our system. I understand the reasons for having a system that helps people achieve a higher living standard, but how do we do it without hurting our self’s? I think the best way to do this is to make education easier to get and increase the standards. Reform is what I'm talking about. For starters we should bring back trade schools and focus on basic degree's for people to get their foot in the door. People must want to start up a business with the skills to move forward.

This is how we start getting the poor to at least middle class.

Certainly welfare is not the answer.

What works is giving people an opportunity to pull themselves out of poverty.

This seems to be a concept conservatives once triumphed, and have now abandoned as the positions of influence within and around the party have come more and more to cater to the interests of a small elite, and to ignore the lives of ordinary working people.

I'd like to see conservatives talking more openly and honestly with business leaders, and reminding them that $10 million salaries do not sit well in companies which are slashing workforce numbers as part of cost cutting. Not legislatiing anything, just talking straight.

And I'd like to see conservative politicians pushing for higher taxation on share income, and insisting that the supper rich pay a fair % of tax right across their income.

It really is unacceptable that someone can earn what Romney does, and pay 13% tax.

 

[kiwiman127]

But for those who seek it, the U.S. is the most fertile ground on earth.

I think it has been proven that this is not true.

It is increasingly true that the only wealthy people in the US were born that way.

Economic mobility is lower in the US than in most other developed countries.

Well, this is where you've lost credibility with me and cemented yourself into the annals of the truly fucked of mind.

Hey Mr H, how are you doing this late in the day?
Actually what Saigon is saying is quite true.

The downward path of upward mobility
The downward path of upward mobility - The Washington Post

The Loss of Upward Mobility in the U.S
Read more: The Loss of Upward Mobility in the U.S. | Moneyland | TIME.com

What Ever Happened To Upward Mobility?
What Ever Happened To Upward Mobility? - TIME

From the linked Moneyland article:

Economic mobility is becoming a more prominent issue in the 2012 Republican presidential race, and will likely be widely discussed in the general election. The GOP’s remaining top-tier candidates — Mitt Romney, Rick Santorum, Ron Paul and Newt Gingrich — have all sounded the alarm about American decline, promising to restore the “American Dream” and make the pursuit of happiness seem like more of a worthwhile endeavor (as Romney as consistently hammered on about recently). But what’s shocking is that rather than focusing on the American Dream these days, politicians and academics seem to be talking more about the European Dream.
The New York Times reported today on the lack of upward mobility in the U.S., specifically citing comments made by presidential hopeful Santorum that movement “up into the middle income is actually greater … in Europe, than it is in America.” National Review, a conservative weekly, and Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wisc.) have made similar remarks about economic opportunity in Europe.
The piece mirrors TIME’s cover story from Nov. 14 by Rana Foroohar, “What Ever Happened to Upward Mobility?”, and includes many of the same stats on economic opportunity (or lack thereof) in various Western industrialized nations. Both pieces cite numbers from the Pew Charitable Trusts’ Economic Mobility Project and other studies that found that 42% of American men with fathers who were in the bottom fifth of the earning curve stay there. Meanwhile, only a quarter of Danes and Swedes and 30% of Britons born into the lower-income bracket will die in that same bracket
========================================

No one is implying that upward mobility is dead, but it sure has declined. So is Europe the new land of opportunity? It seems so.

 

[Mr. H.]

Mr h.

What I have stated is fact, and there are a couple of American studies which confirm this.

This is probably why you find you can not reply to it sensibly.

And gosh darn it, you post the best kind of facts- with no links or reference.
I am stupified by your stupidence.

There are links at the beginning of this OP, which you have thus far ignored.

When you have looked at those, I'll post the data on eonomic mobility.

When you postulate bullshit, it doesn't matter how many Wiki links you post- it's still bullshit.

In my opinion, this should be regarded as a national disgrace and embarassment. It in no way resembles the ideals upon which America is founded, IMO.

America is not out of touch with you, you are out of touch with America.

If you can not find a path to "the ideals upon which America is founded"...
and if you can not solve issues relative to "the ideals upon which America is founded"...then you should think about renouncing your citizenship- assuming you have it.

Pony up or ship out. THAT is the American ideal. And you ain't got no pony.

 

[Saigon]

Mr H -

The tiny elite who control so much of America's wealth are extremely grateful that you don't mind them having all the wealth you work so hard to create.

 

[Mr. H.]

Mr H -

The tiny elite who control so much of America's wealth are extremely grateful that you don't mind them having all the wealth you work so hard to create.

Who are you to assume my contribuion of work or the value that I place upon such work.

 

[Saigon]

Mr H -

You are right - more likely you are on welfare.

 

[Mr. H.]

Mr H -

You are right - more likely you are on welfare.

At the onset I took you for a reasonable and rational individual, yet you've turned out to be a most disappointing member of this discussion board. Thanks for vetting yourself- you saved me the trouble.

 

[rdean]

Is the US becoming a serf economy

That's the plan. It's been going on since 2001. Republicans have been wildly successful. Their plan has worked.

 

[Mr. H.]

Is the US becoming a serf economy

That's the plan. It's been going on since 2001. Republicans have been wildly successful. Their plan has worked.

And you are our most noteworthy *****.

 

[ScienceRocks]

Is the US becoming a serf economy

That's the plan. It's been going on since 2001. Republicans have been wildly successful. Their plan has worked.

Both party's appear to be in on it. The buck stops at the president's desk.

 

[Saigon]

Is the US becoming a serf economy

That's the plan. It's been going on since 2001. Republicans have been wildly successful. Their plan has worked.

Both party's appear to be in on it. The buck stops at the president's desk.

It does.

I don't think the Democrats can point the finger too much on this, because their party is also far too dependant on the interests of Goldman Sachs that they can claim to really represent the ordinary working American.