<p>I agree that the “blame game” does not get us to higher ground. And it is very much the haven of those too incompetent to actually implement policies that move us forward.</p>
<p>The American populace is in a rather odd state these days, I think. We are quite cynical. I think the chest beating rhetoric about the evil rich, no matter how strident and trumpeted by the media, is somehow failing to resonate with any real strength. </p>
<p>FDR initially campaigned as a fiscally prudent candiate who would reverse the spending increases of Hoover. Then he found his political gold in bashing businesses. The Great Depression persisted a very long time under the New Deal. Yes WWII probably brought us out, but not because we printed money and made believe we had money to spend that didn’t exist. With our intact resources and factories, we were the provider to the Allies of war goods – we had an actual market that paid actual gold for what we produced. Then of course, in the aftermath of the War, we were in the enviable position of being largely unscathed on our own soil and in a ridiculously good position to supply the world with everything.</p>
<p>The folk wisdom that FDR and the WPA and New Deal brought us out is a very sweet narrative and one that is increasingly out of favor by academic economists. If only it could all be that simple . . .</p>
<p>I have not earthly idea really what our “answer” is right now. I do know that I respond very badly to idiots holding signs about the evil jewish 1 percenter bankers. I think those people are sort of the poster children of our egregiously failed education system. And that brings up what I personally think really is a primary source of our woes.</p>
<p>dstark: Thank you for answering busdriver (one of my favorite posters :)). I used to try and get our accountant to explain to me a whole lot of what you have just covered with your recent posts, but he charges so much hourly that I gave up on that idea. Thank you for the free explanation!</p>
<p>
Like! </p>
<h2>A whole lot of smart, hardworking, do-everything-right-and-by-the-rules folks have lost their jobs. Bad luck. Those who still have jobs are just going to have to suck it up and sacrifice a little. You can see this as a sacrifice for the good of the whole or you can see it as in your own self interest because without sacrificing some, you may lose all. imho. ymmv</h2>
<p>off present topic but I just can’t help myself</p>
<p>I went to bed last night and woke up this morning thinking about uggs, ipods, land rovers and even houses…
And this is what I came up with:</p>
<p>If we agree that “the poor” hurt themselves by being so profligate with limited resources as to buy unnecessary luxuries, is there anyone who does benefit from these purchases? If, so who benefits? OH MY! Is it the 1% who produce these goods? Because maybe, like Nick Hanauer points out, we really are running out of consumers and they have to sell to someone to stay 1%ers. And if “the poor” have internet access they have the ability to shop 24/7, right? Of course the internet could be valuable for more than shopping…</p>
<p>But then I had another thought about uggs and ipods and land rovers. I seem to remember in Greek and Roman times that there were laws in place requiring slaves to dress differently than free men and women. And that possibly the reason for this was to prevent the possibility of a surprise revolt. When the OWS villagers come with their pikes, how will they be able to tell who is a 1%er? Maybe these days it is to the advantage of the wealthy for there to be no easy markers to determine net worth. And maybe it is not pure altruism that motivates some 1%ers to very vocally support OWS. I am thinking of busdriver’s comments on people with inherited wealth being justified in feeling guilty. Some families keep their inherited wealth by very good planning for the future.</p>
<p>“The folk wisdom that FDR and the WPA and New Deal brought us out is a very sweet narrative and one that is increasingly out of favor by academic economists. If only it could all be that simple . . .”</p>
<p>yes it will increasingly be out of favor as those who were alive and working then die off so that history can be rewritten.</p>
<p>alh, you seem to have a very sweet natured view of the world. I take it you think the solution to the economic problems is for the wealthy to pay more taxes to take care of the poor? Is that the reasoning?</p>
<p>I really think that is a lovely vision. But I think you could basically tax “rich” people 90 percent of their income and that would not do much except makes us all poor.</p>
<p>What keeps happening in this discussion is that Dstark and DocT try to reduce the argument down to the idea that if only the rich paid more there would be plenty of money to give everyone a house and a car and a college education and a good job. They accuse those who don’t agree with this scenario as being too selfish to pay more taxes. That is a big leap in reasoning that is not supported by much logic.</p>
<p>Many if not most who do not support increasing taxes disproportionately on higher incomes simply do not believe it will fix any of the problems in the economy. It will simply give more cash to people who blow it in stupid and even illegal ways. It will hinder much of the economic engine of the country. </p>
<p>It would be really nice if Krugman were right but he is not right. Many economists, including ones at places like HYP, think he is not right. He is a very loud man with a penchant for ugly phrases and insults. Oh yes, and he has the Nobel, like a pal he supports. But he is not right. He is also really angry, I think, because the country has tried his approach pretty big time for three years and it really has been a gigantic flop.</p>
<p>sewhappy: I am not that sweet… I am a southerner. Sometimes we seem sweet because we are usually raised not to insult people to their faces. But I lived a long time out of the south so here goes:</p>
<p>You seem to be entirely motivated by self-interest. Fine. But when serious posters like Mini and dstark are generous enough to take the time to explain why the ideas you espouse aren’t really in your own interest, you just ignore their information and arguments. Instead you attack personally those who try to explain to you why you may be mistaken in your world view. At the same time you say a whole swathe of the population is just ill mannered and odd for questioning the status quo, you seem rather ill mannered yourself. Of course that is just one person’s opinion. :(</p>
<p>I spend a lot of time googling trying to figure out where you get your ideas. If you would post some links, it would save me a lot of time that I might be able to spend more productively… rather than just wasting it here on this board. ;)</p>
<p>ps: I don’t have a very good natured world view. I am pretty much preparing for the end times. If some one wants to start a thread on that I have a whole lot of zombie metaphor links that I am saving in a word file :)</p>
<p>They are gone, those in college when the crash happened. They are gone. I grew up with two of them. I know how they thought. They taught me to live within my means, to have no debt. I taught my son who has just begun work, has his own apartment and uses sparse furnishings but he bought a new car and now he wishes he hadn’t but he can afford the payments. He told me the other day it would last a long time. Living well has nothing to do with having things. Living well is living smart, kind, and creatively and doing what you love!</p>
<p>Look, everyone’s story is “unique”.
There is no pure lazy, no pure bad, and no pure perfect, either.
That is why finger-pointing at a person as a whole, let alone a group, is a waste of time.</p>
<p>We are lucky not to have to wear clothing signifying our social class or wealth. That we can change our position, even several times, in a lifetime. That is what capitalism and a democracy are all about.</p>
<p>However, ostentatiousness, per se, may now be desired most by those who have less. And those who have more are prone to hiding it LOL
What does that say about our system today?</p>
<p>IMO we are in uncharted territory here. While understanding history is crucial right now, analyzing the past to repeat it can help us only so much.</p>
<p>The US economy is intertwined into the global economy. Our economic actions are not occurring in a vacuum in any shape or form.
Globalization was one of the most recent “life-style changing” technologies (enabled by so many other technologies). We benefited grandly from it until 2007.
We also puffed ourselves up with the CDO’s, the technology-driven ability to print money, package it into mortgages, then re-package them over and over again, then insure them, all the while adding fees to the investment bankers’ coffers and ultimately into the PAC’s), and building a huge number of new homes, and having home prices escalate and inflate consumer coffers. The credit card revolution was another biggie like this, enabling record levels or credit based purchasing, paying in the future for things to enjoy now.</p>
<p>Ok, so we built these big bubbles. Many have burst. What next?</p>
<p>Does anyone think that the government is basically a big bubble at the moment?</p>
<p>I live in a place that is just starting to feel the pain. The over abundance of mercedes on the roads is laughable. There will be no get out of jail free cards on this, not in China, no where. We are linked around the world. But I do think the USA will work its way out. Who am I to say that? I shrug shoulders. I always see the word government as people because that is all it is. It is us. Are we all a big bubble? Seems like it. Time to get to work at local levels. Performersmom, I like what you said elsewhere…time to make use of natural resources be they 55 or 25. Time to get to work.</p>
<p>“A whole lot of smart, hardworking, do-everything-right-and-by-the-rules folks have lost their jobs. Bad luck. Those who still have jobs are just going to have to suck it up and sacrifice a little. You can see this as a sacrifice for the good of the whole or you can see it as in your own self interest because without sacrificing some, you may lose all”</p>
<p>I agree with this. But what I disagree with is the vocal resentment and targeting of certain groups of people who make higher income than others. As if they have stolen it, or earned it on the backs of others. As if somehow they have been getting a free ride.</p>
<p>“I am thinking of busdriver’s comments on people with inherited wealth being justified in feeling guilty. Some families keep their inherited wealth by very good planning for the future.”</p>
<p>I’m sure not everyone feels guilty about getting large amounts of inherited wealthy, nor should they. I doubt my kids would. But if I personally inherited alot of money, and paid very little in income tax, and didn’t work for a living, I would feel pretty guilty unless I donated alot of it away. My parents have saved a couple million by living an extremist minimal lifestyle, and they still do. When I take them out or ask them over, I pay for everything, I understand they are frugal. And they deserve their nest egg, it gives them security. What they choose to do with their money is not something I consider, I suspect it will all end up at the Sierra Club or Native Plant society. But I would feel pretty guilty if I didn’t donate alot of it, should they decide to leave it to their children.</p>
<p>“sewhappy: I am not that sweet… I am a southerner. Sometimes we seem sweet because we are usually raised not to insult people to their faces”</p>
<p>Oh sure, I know all about you southerners! I married into a southern family. The sweet can be a facade, as they get away with saying things, like,“Oh my, your butt sure does look wide in that outfit. Bless your heart!” Just follow it up with bless your heart, and they get away with it.</p>
<p>busdriver, my point is that families who have been preserving wealth over generations, and who are supporting OWS, may be doing so because they believe it is in their best interests to do so. And thus, it may also be in your best interest in the long run, to support policies that in the short term seem disadvantageous. Paying higher taxes may turn out to be a good thing for you. It may be a really good thing for your children and grandchildren down the line if you support higher taxes and increased social programs. Enlightened self interest. :)</p>
<p>aih, capitalism runs on such self- interest.
What is in one’s self-interest definitely varies in different circumstances.</p>
<p>What one PERCEIVES to be in one’s self-interest is key, however, and there are choices.
And it is not easy to understand all the options or their implications.</p>
<p>Kahneman did disprove the “utility” theory of economics, that we always act in our best interest, rationally, consistently. So it is not an efficient assumption.
With such complexity these days, I suspect that the individual tends to be unaware of he full impact of his/her actions, even to him/herself.</p>
<p>Can’t waste your time on this board ;). Thats a good one…perhaps you migt find some time to grab a placard and join the OWS movement, they can surely use your wisdom and insight, as the folks i’ve met when walking thru the ‘encampment’ are clueless…if i didn’t know better i would have sworn i was at a flea market</p>
<p>qdogpa: Bless your heart! You need to start your own What not to wear show. First episode is food bank. Second episode is OWS encampment. Okay, honey?</p>
<p>okay now I really have to go lie down before I pass out…</p>
<p>“Since I already insulted you today and qdogpa yesterday, I’ll just wait for someone else to point out the obvious… LOL”</p>
<p>Hey now, there’s no limit here on insults, I say go for it! Just follow it up with “bless your heart.” :D</p>
<p>". It may be a really good thing for your children and grandchildren down the line if you support higher taxes and increased social programs. Enlightened self interest"</p>
<p>I don’t think from a perspective of just self interest. Unless you think wanting the country to be well run and everyone to be prosperous and able to take care of themselves as self interest. I think there is a more reasonable way to work out problems, via a solution of simplified (sometimes higher) tax system, but not letting the scoundrels just keep throwing away our money for votes and power.</p>