The middle class and "Screwflation"....

[blackangst1]

What do you expect when the weathy and powerful are the people who write the laws?

And thats different from the 70's how?

 

[dullard]

And thats different from the 70's how?

You have to be kidding if you don't know what they did in the last 40 years.

For starters (all numbers assuming married filing jointly): 70% federal taxes on the highest earners in the 1970s vs 35% now for the highest bracket. What about the median people? 1975: 22.55% for median income of about $11,800 vs 2010: 25% for median income of about $50,000.

So, the wealthy brackets were cut in half and the middle class had their tax brackets increased slightly.

It isn't so much that the wealthy weren't in power back then. The real problem is 40 more years of their laws building up.

 

[theeedude]

Krugman has never been right about anything. He's so spectacularly wrong it's a safe bet to always assume the opposite of what he says is the truth.

http://www.luskin.net/krugmantruthsquad.pdf

People wouldn't be writing these kinds of hit pieces about him if he didn't hit a nerve. Truth hurts.

 

[Generator]

I'm pretty sure we are past the point of no return, so in a sense more stimulus isn't going to hurt the country if the plan is to murder our creditors. I wouldn't be surprised if the majority of the country shares in Donald "Deadbeat" Trump's thinking. Are we or are we not a country that pays its debts? Probably not.

Krugman and Summers want a trillion more in spending. It would end up being 3 trillion to their choicest friends on walstreet. I say fuck Krugman, even though the bankruptcy is unavoidable at least we will be able to look back after another lost decade to say enough was enough.

 

[shira]

I don't disagree with this. They legislate disincentives so it's harder for competing participants to gain wealth/power.

But I thought 2008 election was all about change?

Yes, and the Republicans in the Senate were all about filibustering.

 

[RedChief]

Krugman is right, so I'll keep listening to him.

And this explains why you are wrong on so many different subjects.

 

[PokerGuy]

Krugman. LOL. Silly libs.

The middle class is definitely getting hammered, by both sides of the political spectrum.

 

[DirthNader]

and on the horizon are massive increases in energy due to the eco-KOOKS in the epa/obama admin. The price of all goods and services are tied to the cost of energy. Discretionary consumer spending will evaporate.

This is what bothers me about pundits commenting on rising food and energy prices. Yes, in terms of my monthly cash flow they're relatively small expenditures, but compared to the money I have left over after paying my fixed expenses (mortgage, utilities, etc) they're large expenditures.

Every extra dollar that I spend at the gas pump or the grocery store is a dollar that's not going into discretionary spending. Considering that consumer spending is the foundation for the modern US economy, I don't see how that's not a huge concern.

 

[polarmystery]

As long as it is the interest of man to amass wealth as has been for a long time instead of the preservation of the human species, no one should ever hope that things will ever be just in an economic sense.

Which frankly, sucks...

 

[ShawnD1]

Inflation on a few small budget items (food and energy) is up right now, but over the last decade inflation is the lowest it has been since the 1940s. After this "surge" food and energy as percent of income is still pitifully small compared to much of history.

Small budget? Food and energy are 2 of my top 3 expenses (the other is housing). That's true in most of the world, not just the first world.

 

[IHateMyJob2004]

Another issue.

I wanted to start a busienss but I have to get so many god damned certifications that I would not need in practice that I gave up. So much for this middle class person going anywhere. And no, I don't want to talk about it.

 

[ShawnD1]

Another issue.

I wanted to start a busienss but I have to get so many god damned certifications that I would not need in practice that I gave up. So much for this middle class person going anywhere. And no, I don't want to talk about it.

Was it related to food?

By law, it's illegal for me to sell food that I make in my own kitchen. The kitchen found in 99.9999% of houses and apartments is not good enough to meet minimum safety standards.

 

[IHateMyJob2004]

Symbolism. Are you smoking something? You won't find many economists, or rating agencies for that matter, that don't think the US is on a clear path to major and systemic financial pain as a result of its debt-drunk profligacy. The longer the lies are juggled the more painful it will get. Don't believe me see Greece: http://www.cnbc.com/id/43381710. Don't believe that such a thing can happen to Greece see: http://www.cnbc.com/id/43378973 , this an opinion by the guy who oversees the biggest mutual fund on the planet.

Or you can keep listening to Krugman.

Could jsut listen to Buffett who says thath e US is very risilient and has the best economic laws in teh world. And that in 30 years, our lives will all be better than they are today.

 

[IHateMyJob2004]

Krugman never right. First thing I read on wikiipedia:
In the early 2000s, Krugman repeatedly criticized the Bush tax cuts, both before and after they were enacted. Krugman argued that the tax cuts enlarged the budget deficit without improving the economy, and that they enriched the wealthy – worsening income distribution in the US.

 

[IHateMyJob2004]

Was it related to food?

By law, it's illegal for me to sell food that I make in my own kitchen. The kitchen found in 99.9999% of houses and apartments is not good enough to meet minimum safety standards.

No, it's a n industry that I suspect wants alot of these regulations as to create a barrier to entry.

As an example, the trucking industry loves regulations and laws for trucking. Because it increases costs to people that own their own truck or small fleet. If you have 1000 trucks in your fleet, you can maitnain them in a more cost effective manner in order to comply will laws. This makies it harder for competitors that need to pay more for maintenance using facilities outisde their infrastructure. Not to mention the simpel fact that you need to pay someone to keep up with the changes in laws in order to keep your companies procedures current.

 

[dullard]

Small budget? Food and energy are 2 of my top 3 expenses (the other is housing). That's true in most of the world, not just the first world.

Chart of food expenses over time. Or use the raw data by year from 1929 to 2008.

Are you honestly paying 24% of your entire income on food? If so, time to get off the computer you can't afford and find better paying work (or at least more work). Maybe you choose to spend that much on fancy meals out every day, but that is your choice. The average American is now spending 6.9% of income on food (2011 data). And that includes all the more-expensive restaurant eating that we do now that we didn't do in most of history.

Even if food prices triple right now, we'd still be spending less on food as a percent of income than we did less than a century ago. Food is a small expense that is very, very cheap. When small things move around in price, it looks like a big percent gain/loss but the overall impact is still small.

Energy is equally small at under 6% of income.

My comments were related to US spending since this thread is regarding US screwing its middle class. But many of them also apply to much of the world. Third world countries that spend nearly all of their money on food are exceptions, but that is clearly outside the scope of my comments in this thread.

 

[Macamus Prime]

This is what happens when you let the special interests decide the direction and fate of a nation.

Monarchies in the past abused their people. And the rich are clearly doing the same in the USA. They have taken US jobs, increase prices and then use the law to seize personal property.

It's all over. The rich have won. Let the capitalist overlords reward the dogs that followed them through out the years.

 

[PingSpike]

Another issue.

I wanted to start a busienss but I have to get so many god damned certifications that I would not need in practice that I gave up. So much for this middle class person going anywhere. And no, I don't want to talk about it.

Excessive regulations benefit large entrenched players that have dedicated lobbyists by crippling potential competitive upstarts. As if that wasn't enough, the very companies that inspire the regulations are made exempt from it: http://articles.latimes.com/2009/aug/28/business/fi-mattel28 Fuck you small business. I guess you should have hired a better lobbying department.

Same idea as the "to big to fail" banks. Small banks would get dick all over doing things right and trying to survive long term instead of being short term oriented. But big banks fuck up big time and get big bail outs. Then the fucked up banks run the small ones out of business, after all they didn't have shit tons of profit from risky investments and shit tons of free money from when they screwed up so how can they compete? How can you outlast some one that can't die?

 

[zephyrprime]

Krugman has never been right about anything. He's so spectacularly wrong it's a safe bet to always assume the opposite of what he says is the truth.

http://www.luskin.net/krugmantruthsquad.pdf

lol, Krugman is actually the most accurate pundit.
http://www.infotainmentnews.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/pundit_accuracy.png

 

[piasabird]

I think we should start at the federal reserve. We should tie the rate the banks get for cash to how willing they are to lend it out. In the 70's the rate for real estate and business loans was typically tied to being 2% over prime. So if prime is 0%, then we should be able to get a real estate rate of 2%. If the banks are not passing that extra 2% on to the little people then they dont deserve the rate either. Every time the government bails out a bank or a corporation and they dont pass on the savings, they are stealing from the little people. So lets raise up the rate they get.

I also think we need a new tax on imports to incentivize the production of goods in the United States. We need jobs, not cheap goods. If we have free trade, and then companies relocate all their factories overseas, how is that an advantage? That is just a way of supporting slavery.

 

[brencat]

I think we should start at the federal reserve. We should tie the rate the banks get for cash to how willing they are to lend it out. In the 70's the rate for real estate and business loans was typically tied to being 2% over prime. So if prime is 0%, then we should be able to get a real estate rate of 2%. If the banks are not passing that extra 2% on to the little people then they dont deserve the rate either. Every time the government bails out a bank or a corporation and they dont pass on the savings, they are stealing from the little people. So lets raise up the rate they get.

I also think we need a new tax on imports to incentivize the production of goods in the United States. We need jobs, not cheap goods. If we have free trade, and then companies relocate all their factories overseas, how is that an advantage? That is just a way of supporting slavery.

Why would a bank loan your sorry ass money for 10yrs and take credit risk on you for a measely 2% return when they can simply buy 10yr risk-free US Treasuries yielding 3.1% as I sit here today ?

Answer: they wouldn't.

 

[airdata]

What do you expect when the wealthy own the people who write the laws?

my thoughts.

 

[First]

Chart of food expenses over time. Or use the raw data by year from 1929 to 2008.

Are you honestly paying 24% of your entire income on food? If so, time to get off the computer you can't afford and find better paying work (or at least more work). Maybe you choose to spend that much on fancy meals out every day, but that is your choice. The average American is now spending 6.9% of income on food (2011 data). And that includes all the more-expensive restaurant eating that we do now that we didn't do in most of history.

Even if food prices triple right now, we'd still be spending less on food as a percent of income than we did less than a century ago. Food is a small expense that is very, very cheap. When small things move around in price, it looks like a big percent gain/loss but the overall impact is still small.

Energy is equally small at under 6% of income.

My comments were related to US spending since this thread is regarding US screwing its middle class. But many of them also apply to much of the world. Third world countries that spend nearly all of their money on food are exceptions, but that is clearly outside the scope of my comments in this thread.

Excellent post. Didn't realize food consumption had dipped that low, I thought it was closer to 15% of disposable income. Damn I spend way too much on food!

 

[God Mode]

The middle class fuck the poor and each other every chance they get.

 

[Doppel]

Food consumption would be higher if 50%+ of our calories as a nation were not from carbs, specifically garbage sh*t carbs (high fructose corn syrup and wheat so processed nutrients have to be enriched back into it, just crap to spike the blood sugar without any nutritional value whatsoever), which they are.