Middle Class Bubble

Just a note, just who paid for public infrastructure, we and our parents and grandparents paid for it, not the government so what's the point? When needed I will gladly pay for more, but not for Bullet Trains and bridges to nowhere for political reasons.
 
Birchtree said:
"Barack Obama is explicitly seeking a mandate to make the public economy pre-eminent. That is the unmistakable meaning of "You didn't build that". His opponent so far is talking about, but not seeking a mandate for, the other economy. One expects that in time Mitt Romney will seek a mandate equal to Mr. Obama's" Not everyone appreciates the virtues of affirmative action in any form to succeed. If you work hard in the private economy you will have the opportunity to achieve your potential.
Click to expand...

Quit using public infrastructure then.

And who are you quoting? Without proper citation YOU are STEALING from whomever you quoted.
 
Birchtree said:
I went grocery shopping yesterday, while in the store checkout line there was a middle age black guy in front of me. The only thing he bought was a sinle banana that he paid for with food stamps. What is interesting is that he collected cash back. What do you think he will buy with that cash - buy crank or Mogen David. Unfortunately there appears to be around 47 million people on food stamps that will never aspire to the upper classes. Who's fault is that?
Click to expand...

First off, I'm going to call B.S. How did you know he used food stamps? Second, If that's what you saw then you should report the store for unauthorized use because it means, first and foremost, that store is illegally pocketing money. AND you should work through your state, who administers each program and make sure they have the procedures in place to limit such fraud.

Then I say...What? You want the gov't to micromanage every aspect of his life. You willing to pay for that bureaucracy. Cause Mitt sure aint gonna pay for it with all his tax shelters. Then I'll ask, which character is fleecing the gov't for more money Mr. offshore tax haven or Mr. ficticious MAYBEgetting change from food stamps. Finally, until you know the money is used for something other than food, the only clear case of fraud exists on behalf of the store. You should probably change stores if you dislike fraud so much.
 
"Barack Obama is explicitly seeking a mandate to make the public economy pre-eminent. That is the unmistakable meaning of "You didn't build that". His opponent so far is talking about, but not seeking a mandate for, the other economy. One expects that in time Mitt Romney will seek a mandate equal to Mr. Obama's" Not everyone appreciates the virtues of affirmative action in any form to succeed. If you work hard in the private economy you will have the opportunity to achieve your potential.
 
I went grocery shopping yesterday, while in the store checkout line there was a middle age black guy in front of me. The only thing he bought was a sinle banana that he paid for with food stamps. What is interesting is that he collected cash back. What do you think he will buy with that cash - buy crank or Mogen David. Unfortunately there appears to be around 47 million people on food stamps that will never aspire to the upper classes. Who's fault is that?
 
It's true. nearly all middle class wealth is based on credit and debt. Can you imagine an average middle class family purchasing a home with cash! Yeah, right! Paying cash for the average car is hard enough, although there are many models we could actually afford. Our perspectives are certainly warped

This is an interesting article I read recently in Fortune. It's a reprint from 1955 about top executive lifestyles. I'm not sure it completely relates but think it is an excellent read none-the-less. It puts a lot of perspective on many things.

How top executives live (Fortune, 1955) - Fortune Features

excerpt:
"
The executive's home today is likely to be unpretentious and relatively small--perhaps seven rooms and two and a half baths. (Servants are hard to come by and many a vice president's wife gets along with part-time help. So many have done so for so long, in fact, that they no longer complain much about it.) The executive who feels, as apparently Robert R. Young does, that to be completely happy he needs a forty-room "cottage" in Newport and a thirty-one-room oceanside villa in Palm Beach is a rare bird these days. The fact that Young paid only $38,000 for his Newport place, Fairholme, which cost Philadelphia banker John R. Drexel nearly a quarter of a million dollars to build in 1905, demonstrates the decline in the market for such outsize mansions."

I wasn't alive in 1955 but there are a lot of folks (in the masses) longing for the relative prosperity of that era. Therefore I found this very interesting. ​
 
Last edited:
There's been a middle class at least since the Middle Ages when the trade guilds arose and became fairly powerful, and the House of Commons developed from combination of representative knighted landowners who were not Lords of the Realm and from merchant classes. In pre-revolutionary Russia there were the kulaks. It may have been smaller set of the population true. M2 wealth is a combination of real money, and credit. take the credit away, people will feel a whole lot less wealthy. Debt can only be paid down through real increase in production and/or productivity, using credit to pay down debt is a false foundation for wealth). Is the sense of wealth from growth in M2 since the 80s an illusion? I think so at this point.
 
Ambiguous for a reason! :nuts:

This is good thread.

Suburban growth at the expense of ag. comes to mind. Sadly gotta run. Provoking great thought though
 
Mapper said:
There is a reason it was left ambiguous. But I was referring to the one who likes to hide everything :D
Click to expand...

Would that be a reference to tax returns or the use of "executive privilege" : )

It may be that the "middle class" is a transitory illusion that is being used as a red herring by the political classes to try to convince us that "they" are on our side and deserving of "our" support.

Is "democracy" actually responsible for the "middle class" or is it just the result of too many resources and the unsustainable expenditures of "Great Society" expenditures? Would there be a "middle class" without government borrowing and spending? Might the "middle class" exist without government invention, and if so, can it continue in perpetuity or will it necessarily collapse of it's own weight?
 
SkyPilot said:
Could it be that the “middle class” is just a historical aberration that we have come to institutionalize because of a myopic view of history? Maybe this period of prosperity has produced a “bubble” that cannot be sustained due to an end to westward expansion, globalization of markets and limited resources. The historical axion related to “have’s” and “have not’s” does not leave room for “have enough’s, but not a great deal extra”…. The rich get richer, the poor get poorer… ?
Click to expand...

I think it's the result of an attempt to learn from past mistakes. It seems that one thing most American's agree on is the importance of a strong middle class. That's why all politicians are always talking it up. The trick, however, is honing in on a system that can support this roughly flattish class structure. That, in theory, is why we have the ability to chose our governing officials...so we can chose the ones that will best understand and represent our issues. "A government of the people, by the people, and for the people"...if you're into the whole Gettysburg thing.

When I was in a 6th grade Social Studies class there was poster on the wall with a picture of the Capital. The caption read "Democracy, the greatest experiment ever". I didn't realize it at the time, but that really stuck with me and have learned how true it is. There's not much I remember from that time period with such specificity.
 
SkyPilot said:
Based alone on your statement, it would be unclear to me as to which candidate you would be referring too, and would likely be an unfair and extreme judgement to either.
Click to expand...


There is a reason it was left ambiguous. But I was referring to the one who likes to hide everything :D

And yes, on the global stage we are doing quite well, still not quite the 1% though. Much of mid 20th century policy reflected that fact. And, to be sure, we have more "stuff" than our forebears. Which brings up the question of quantity vs. quality.

As to the definitions of sustainability. The point exactly, is that historic civilizations have uncanny tendency to drift toward concentrations of wealth and power prior to crumbling. That is why they say empires fail and the only constant is change.
 
Much of the world views the standard of living of the poorest among us as "wealthy". Maybe our current "middle class" is the "elite 1%" for most of the globe.
 
Mapper said:
There's a large difference between what is legal and what is just. Simply because you can do something doesn't mean it's the right thing to do. That man doesn't recognize the difference. I cannot support a man with no morals
Click to expand...

Based alone on your statement, it would be unclear to me as to which candidate you would be referring too, and would likely be an unfair and extreme judgement to either.
 
Could it be that the “middle class” is just a historical aberration that we have come to institutionalize because of a myopic view of history? Maybe this period of prosperity has produced a “bubble” that cannot be sustained due to an end to westward expansion, globalization of markets and limited resources. The historical axion related to “have’s” and “have not’s” does not leave room for “have enough’s, but not a great deal extra”…. The rich get richer, the poor get poorer… ?
 
Mapper said:
Finally I'd like to see one example of a civilization where allowing concentration of wealth and power in the hands of a select few has proven "sustainable".
Click to expand...
Define "sustainable". Answer appears to be every one, for hundreds or thousands of years. Our experient is very short. People are easily led.

I will agree that "we" (as in everyone, regardless of class) need to learn to live with less because we are a growing population. That is, the pie stays the same size but the number of people splitting up the pie keeps increasing. As such, we learn to share better or increase the efficiency with which we use the pie OR we choose arbitrary groups of winners and losers (haves and have nots). Now, I know which choice is more equitable and democratic and, on the other hand, which has been the path of dictators through the ages...but that's a discussion for another place.
Click to expand...
Why not just make more. M2 is growing without difficulty. Just make more wealth, the good way or the bad way, but make more, and stop thinking the pie has one size.
 
There's a large difference between what is legal and what is just. Simply because you can do something doesn't mean it's the right thing to do. That man doesn't recognize the difference. I cannot support a man with no morals
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top