Thread: American dream lives on, but money's tight

I believe exactly what the poll tells me to.

Thankfully me and my wife, my brother and my parents are all doing fantastic through this recession/depression but scores of millions aren't and that's bad news.

That said, it's my opinion this country, as far as the middle class is concerned, peaked in the 90's. There is no way in hell my conscience would allow me to father a child knowing what I know today.

Originally Posted by Curt James

American dream lives on, but money's tight

By Charles Riley
May 19, 2011: 05:13 AM EDT

What a dillusional, myopic, and crass, point of view.

Americans are down in the dumps about their personal finances, but still think the American dream is alive and kicking.

First, what is the definition of the American Dream?

Only 32% of Americans consider their own personal finances excellent or good, a nine point decline from last year and 23 points lower than 2007, before the economy tanked, according to a new poll from the Pew Charitable Trusts.

What is the definition of "excellent" or "good?"

Does this mean debt free? Statistically this number isn't possible if the even the per capita debt ratios are examined.

At the same time, 68% of respondents feel they have achieved or will achieve the American dream.

Suburban, semi-rural? Flag wavin'? Work in the service sector?

But when asked if their kids will have a higher standard of living than they currently enjoy, only 47% said yes. That's down from 62% in 2009.

Functionally illiterate.

Standard of living has been declining for 40 years and this decline has accelerated, recently.

Originally Posted by Big Smoothy

What a dillusional, myopic, and crass, point of view.


Functionally illiterate.

Interesting.

BTW that word you're looking for is >> d-e-l-u-s-i-o-n-a-l.

Love the Irony.

If you're dreaming you're not living.

Making dreams come true is the most gratifying way to live.

^^^^ Troll alert.


Also, why do we not have a smilie for trolls?

You mean smilies aka emoticons aren't outdated yet??

I find them amusing.

Maybe you're too cool to understand......

Maybe. Actually its a strong possibility.

Originally Posted by Hench

^^^^ Troll alert.


Also, why do we not have a smilie for trolls?

That's why I just negged him. Please join me in the fun.

Apparently I've given out too much reputation in the last 24hours, I feel that is a clear indication of standard of my revision.

Originally Posted by Big Pimpin

That's why I just negged him. Please join me in the fun.

Your actions are deplorable and uncalled for, sir.

Originally Posted by Big Smoothy

What a dillusional, myopic, and crass, point of view.

First, what is the definition of the American Dream?

What is the definition of "excellent" or "good?"

Does this mean debt free? Statistically this number isn't possible if the even the per capita debt ratios are examined.

Suburban, semi-rural? Flag wavin'? Work in the service sector?

Functionally illiterate.

Standard of living has been declining for 40 years and this decline has accelerated, recently.

in terms of education the US is about 18-19th out of about 30 OECD countries. we are also the ONLY OECD country were the 25-34 year-olds are not better educated than 55-64 year-olds.

* those numbers have a lot to do with the way the country is today. US schools are a joke.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

US Import Totals Per Country - total 1.167T

1. China : $334 billion
2. Canada : $252 billion
3. Mexico : $210 billion
4. Japan : $108 billion
5. Germany : $75 billion
6. United Kingdom: $45 billion
7. South Korea : $45 billion
8. France : $35 billion
9. Taiwan : $33 billion
10. Ireland : $30 billion


US Exports Top Countries - total 726B

1. Canada : $228 Billion
2. Mexico : $149 Billion
3. China : $82 Billion
4. Japan : $55 Billion
5. United Kingdom : $44 Billion
6. Germany : $44 Billion
7. South Korea : $35 Billion
8. Brazil : $32 Billion
9. The Netherlands: $31 Billion
10. Singapore : $26 Billion

* the U.S. current account deficit is an outcome of the U.S. economy’s savings/investment imbalance, not trade measures or tax policy.


Basic national income accounting requires that
Y = C + I + G + (EX - IM),

where Y is GDP, C is consumption, I is investment,
G is government consumption, and EX - IM is net
exports (exports minus imports).

C = Y - T - S simply states that consumption is
equal to GDP minus taxes and saving.

Putting these two equations together, we find
another national income identity:

Y = Y - T - S + I + G + (EX - IM)

Rearranging, we find that

(IM - EX) = (G - T) + (I - S)

Thus, the country’s trade deficit is equivalent to the
country’s government budget deficit (G - T ) plus the
country’s private investment/savings imbalance (I - S).

This is an accounting identity, not a theory, and as
such, it holds for all countries at all times. It also
implies that measures that increase the government
deficit or the private sector’s investment/savings
imbalance won't necessarily worsen the trade deficit.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

When the government runs a deficit or when private saving falls short of private investment, demand for loanable funds increases relative to supply, and the U.S. interest rate tends to rise. In
the world of mobile capital markets, this attracts funds from abroad that appreciate the dollar owing to an increased demand for dollar-based assets. A stronger dollar worsens the trade deficit (as
imports increase and exports fall).

This identity also implies that tax or trade policy measures that attempt to affect the trade balance will only be effective as far as they reduce the government budget deficit, increase private saving, or reduce private investment. Therefore, most such measures are unlikely to be effective.

On a more intuitive level, a country that does not save as much as it invests (S < I ) and/or does not
tax as much as it spends (T < G), must therefore get the extra goods and services from overseas. Thus,
such a country will run a trade deficit. This logic explains why countries that do not save a lot publicly or privately (such as the United States) run trade deficits while more thrifty countries run trade surpluses.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

then we have the issue with 30 years of stagnant wages and the loss of purchasing power via inflation. far too many just don't understand the difference between small business "establishments" and "firms" and the effective tax rates of large businesses/corps and the actual rates that they pay.

Remember folks,

The American Dream was first noted and penned by James Truslow Adams in 1931.

His definition (since he's the one who coined the term) was about individuality and pursuing your interests.

Sometimes later, The "American Dream" was morphed and intentionally engineered into taking out 30 year mortgage loans during the 1930s when there was labor strife.

People with high debt and a home as collateral are more complacent.

Originally Posted by Big Smoothy

Remember folks,

The American Dream was first noted and penned by James Truslow Adams in 1931.

His definition (since he's the one who coined the term) was about individuality and pursuing your interests.

Sometimes later, The "American Dream" was morphed and intentionally engineered into taking out 30 year mortgage loans during the 1930s when there was labor strife.

People with high debt and a home as collateral are more complacent.

yep the 30 year is relatively new that didn't come about until the FHA was formed during the New Deal. before that even though there was a contract the lender could call in the debt and if the homeowner couldn't refinance the balance the home was foreclosed on. this happened a lot during the great depression.

my grandmother bought here first house after WWII. the standard terms were 20% down and I think it was only a 15 year mortgage so it must not have been an FHA loan. so along with being "locked" into a contract with your home the fact that you had to put down 20% proved you were fiscally responsible, mortgage defaults back then were almost unheard of.

home ownership would surely make a person less likely to strike and lose income and possible the home.

* I never understood how 100% financing was ever legal. common sense tells you that if the person(s) can't put down a decent down payment they are not fiscally responsible and/or simply can not afford to invest in real-estate. what a simply horrible business model.

If I need to dream, I come here.



All other times, I work my ass off to get ahead.

Originally Posted by LAM

* I never understood how 100% financing was ever legal. common sense tells you that if the person(s) can't put down a decent down payment they are not fiscally responsible and/or simply can not afford to invest in real-estate. what a simply horrible business model.

And those that set it up surely must have known that this was a train crash waiting to happen.

How could they not?

American dream will always be just that, a dream for most.
Survival should be and is the main priority on people's minds.

Originally Posted by Big Smoothy

And those that set it up surely must have known that this was a train crash waiting to happen.

How could they not?

of course they knew...those pieces of legislation that were repealed to allow these banks to become to big to fail was planned and intentional.

Do you know that the IMF which gets 20% of it's monies from US taxpayers is funding bailouts to in Ireland for bonds held by Goldman's? call me crazy but I thought risk was all part of the process.

Originally Posted by LAM

Do you know that the IMF which gets 20% of it's monies from US taxpayers is funding bailouts to in Ireland for bonds held by Goldman's? call me crazy but I thought risk was all part of the process.

LAM,

I did not know that 20% of the IMF funding was from US taxpayer.

How much is that, in dollars?

Time to get out the noose.

Originally Posted by Big Smoothy

LAM,

I did not know that 20% of the IMF funding was from US taxpayer.

How much is that, in dollars?

Time to get out the noose.

those monies are "hidden" in the US budget but I found the info in some IMF documents on the web. will try to find them but have hundreds and I need to better organize them.

check out the documents in this link below that I posted last night. they explain just about everything going on in the US today that started in the 80's. Mexico was basically a test subject in the neo-liberal methodology that started in the 60's. Neo-liberalism was adopted by all OECD countries in 1980, it is not just the US. it is based on the Pareto principle or the 80/20 rule .


Maxine on Minorities

the "american dream" is and never has been for "americans".......