Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

America, a Civilization in Decline

0 views
Skip to first unread message

indiaBPOking

unread,
May 16, 2008, 8:41:43 PM5/16/08
to
http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.jsp?articleId=281474977328862

by EssDee C.
April 21, 2008 03:30 PM EDT

I read and listen and listen and read and I keep hoping someone
somewhere will actually get to the root of our current situation. I
hear about froth in the housing market, a bubble in commodities, a
conundrum in this, a puzzlement in that. On and on. But, I still
haven't heard anyone actually address the real problem at the bottom
of our current economic crisis in this country.
Once long ago, in an economy far, far away... OK. OK. No drama.
I was born in the baby-boomers generation, near the end. During my
lifetime the world has changed in so many ways it's beyond belief. Sci-
Fi became reality and then reality doubled-down.
In 1974 a van came to my high school and 3/4 of it was a computer.
They demonstrated it's "power" and "abilities" and printed each of us
a calendar... :) Cute, huh?
This little known technology turned this country on it's head. On the
way up it gave birth to the YUPPIE. High tech produced a huge wave of
good paying middle class jobs. People in these jobs bought nice homes,
fancy cars and designer clothing. They bought into high tech
themselves. VCRs became DVDs TVs became big screen, hang it on the
wall 3" thick plasma giants, video games in every home, home PCs and
laptops, and anything we could imagine became available for our buying
pleasure. The demand for all the goodies these families wanted and
could easily afford made job opportunities for people working in
construction, the automotive industry, clothing, technology, retail
sales, etc, etc, etc. Then there was the restaurants and fast food
industry, (These high-teckers didn't cook, they ate out.) Vacations
and home decorating. Their good fortune created a whole country of
people who worked in support of the techies lifestyles and improved
the quality of living for those people too. So, what happened?
What happened... The middle class broke the golden rule, they started
moving up the financial ladder on a large scale in a big way- fast.
Too many started making too much money. They were on a rocket ship to
the sky and pulling the lower class up behind them in their back
draft. The rich were in danger of too much company. It was starting to
get crowed on the elevators up to the clouds. The insolence!! This
just could not be allowed. So, the powers that be showed them. They
outsourced the good paying, high tech jobs. Poof!! And then there were
few.
The corporations began to make really big bucks, record profits and
the rich were wallowing in it. They laughed and laughed and laughed.
Those arrogant geeks who thought they could rise to be one of them had
been struck down. The job market started slowing. Annual raises and
bonuses gave way to pay cuts or be fired and replaced. Wall Street was
doing great but Main Street was faltering. Thirty year olds still
living with their parents couldn't afford to live in a place of their
own. The economy was slipping but as long as the general public was
working 2-3 jobs per household and didn't have time to catch on, the
rich were raking in their losses.
The middle class had beautiful homes, fabulously expensive cars,
closets filled with high priced designer clothes, a TV, computer,
video game system and cable TV in every room and their jobs were
disappearing faster than they had been created. Their biggest assets?
Their homes. When the slip in the economy started, they were offered
equity lines of credit up to 110% of the value of their home. Their
paychecks were going down, the cost of living was going up but this
would all blow over and then when the economy came back they could pay
off the mortgages, credit cards, etc and all would be as it was. Then
came the froth in housing. The problem was not that a bunch of
irresponsible people got home loans they couldn't afford. It was that
no one told them they weren't going to be able to afford them after
all their jobs got outsourced to foreign countries and would never
come back. They got blind-sided.
Problem is, we still haven't seen just how deep this hole is going to
get. The jobs that sky-rocketed this economy are now in India, among
other countries where the pay is low, the working conditions are
deplorable and corporations and the super rich can continue to make
record breaking profits.
They stripped the middle class and picked their bones. But, they went
too far. Got too greedy. Wall Street took a big hit. Oops!! Hedge
funds went under. Oh, No!! That's, that's the rich... Gotta stop that.
Pumping millions, billions into the banking system. The Fed
guaranteeing loans. People are still being dumped out of their homes,
but, hey, at least Wall Street and the rich will be OK now. So, what
now?
What now... Until this government admits they let a dumb, red-neck
idiot (whose only goal was to impoverish and punish the arrogant
middle class and re-fund the rich) destroy this country through his
arrogant "I'm the decider" policies, nothing. We just keep sinking. If
they do step up and bite the bullet, admit the screw-ups instead of
trying to cover them up and go around them, we have a chance. Jobs
MUST be brought back. Corporations MUST be made to re-invest in this
country- and NOT with tax-payer tax breaks that they hoard as cash!!
Rather with some of the record breaking profits they stripped out of
this country over the last 7+ years. Taxes on the upper class SHOULD
be higher than those on the working class. THEY should carry the bulk
of the tax burden. I am so sick of the old line about them being
punished for being successful!! It boggles the mind that people who
have enough money to buy a small country from money they made off the
sweat and backs of the average American citizen actually resent paying
taxes. Well, it's only fair that those who paid the most taxes should
get the biggest tax breaks?? OK, so let's give the rich their tax
breaks, forgive oil companies billions upon billions owed to the
American citizens for drilling on public land, let them enjoy the
health-care made available from research paid for through grants paid
for by taxes paid by every American who ever worked and paid taxes. I
could go on for hours, but you get the point.
If the next president does not undo everything Bush screwed up. We are
screwed and you can watch that rocket ship fall from the sky and make
an economical crater with a bottomless pit. During the Bush
administration the two worst tragedies in my lifetime occurred. 9/11
and Katrina. Bush used them to rape this country and the US Congress
let him.

Straydog

unread,
May 16, 2008, 10:45:06 PM5/16/08
to

Most of the articles I see in the recent issues of WSJ are saying that
the US economy isn't doing that bad, and that most of the Asian
economies are suffering double to triple the inflation that we have.

Tourism is up in the USA, and exports are still increasing, and our
trade deficit is going down. Even the real estate market is
stabilizing.
=================

Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted

Straydog

unread,
May 17, 2008, 7:14:03 AM5/17/08
to
On Fri, 16 May 2008 19:49:41 -0700 (PDT), kT <cos...@lifeform.org>
wrote:

>On May 16, 9:45 pm, nos...@nospam.nospam (Straydog) wrote:
>
>> Most of the articles I see in the recent issues of WSJ
>

>All stupid toothless American rednecks get their financial propaganda
>from Rupert Murdoch's Wall Street Journal and Fox News, or course.
>
>It's just common sense!

The editorial page of the WSJ is pure, undilluted robber-baronism but
the line reporter articles are usually pretty good and -- compared to
fanatical, dogmatic, biased mindsets -- seem to me to cover the data,
trends, and situations quite well.

Although consensus should not be taken as evidence of truth,
nevertheless the fact that the WSJ is one of the two only growing
newspapers seems to indicate that people in general feel there is
value in getting it.

Straydog

unread,
May 17, 2008, 7:16:42 AM5/17/08
to
On Fri, 16 May 2008 22:21:24 -0700, retro...@comcast.net wrote:

>On Sat, 17 May 2008 02:45:06 GMT, nos...@nospam.nospam (Straydog)
>wrote:


>
>>
>>Most of the articles I see in the recent issues of WSJ are saying that
>>the US economy isn't doing that bad,
>
>

>LOL. COnsider the source and where they draw their revenue.

Name me any news medium that has no bias of any kind.

>Thus for example todays news was all about how "good" housing starts
>are looking.
>
>But go here and click on the links for the charts:
>http://www.briefing.com/Investor/Public/Calendars/EconomicCalendar.htm

indiaBPOking posts exclusively bad news about the USA and a while back
posted only good news about India. Are you one of those guys who
refuses to look at the whole picture?

Straydog

unread,
May 17, 2008, 7:20:39 AM5/17/08
to
On Fri, 16 May 2008 22:26:17 -0700, retro...@comcast.net wrote:

>On Sat, 17 May 2008 02:45:06 GMT, nos...@nospam.nospam (Straydog)
>wrote:
>
>>

>>Tourism is up in the USA, and exports are still increasing, and our
>>trade deficit is going down. Even the real estate market is
>>stabilizing.
>
>

>LOL. The trade deficit is going down because we're buying less oil at
>these prices and the recession is biting imports.

The articles say that the cause of the trade deficit going down is
largely due to the exchange rate making purchases of US goods/services
less expensive. I think this is correct. Energy use in the US is down
slightly and the articles say that this is partly due to oil/gas price
and some shift from SUV purchase to purchase of cars with better gas
milage.

> The notion the real
>estate market is stabilizing is a joke. You're seeign seasonal
>variation, (more house starts and slaes in Aprl than January) not year
>over year. Compare April 07 to April 08 (and for good measure match
>both of htose to 06.
>http://www.briefing.com/Investor/Public/Calendars/EconomicCalendar.htm
>Click on the entries for tables.

I really don't have time to spend most of my day chasing every source
of data and information.

>Housing starts are down about 30% year over year. and 60% over 06.

I appreciate that the articles discuss the housing sector in terms of
a large number of factors besides "starts".

Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted

morri...@gmail.com

unread,
May 18, 2008, 9:40:08 AM5/18/08
to
On May 17, 5:52 pm, retrogro...@comcast.net wrote:
> On Sat, 17 May 2008 11:16:42 GMT, nos...@nospam.nospam (Straydog)
> wrote:

>
> >On Fri, 16 May 2008 22:21:24 -0700, retrogro...@comcast.net wrote:
>
> >>On Sat, 17 May 2008 02:45:06 GMT, nos...@nospam.nospam (Straydog)
> >>wrote:
>
> >>>Most of the articles I see in the recent issues of WSJ are saying that
> >>>the US economy isn't doing that bad,
>
> >>LOL. COnsider the source and where they draw their revenue.
>
> >Name me any news medium that has no bias of any kind.
>
> That['s a cheap excuse to avoid thinking.

Straydog

unread,
May 18, 2008, 9:47:20 PM5/18/08
to
On Sat, 17 May 2008 14:51:43 -0700, retro...@comcast.net wrote:

>On Sat, 17 May 2008 11:20:39 GMT, nos...@nospam.nospam (Straydog)
>wrote:


>
>>> The notion the real
>>>estate market is stabilizing is a joke. You're seeign seasonal
>>>variation, (more house starts and slaes in Aprl than January) not year
>>>over year. Compare April 07 to April 08 (and for good measure match
>>>both of htose to 06.
>>>http://www.briefing.com/Investor/Public/Calendars/EconomicCalendar.htm
>>>Click on the entries for tables.
>>
>>I really don't have time to spend most of my day chasing every source
>>of data and information.
>

>In other words you wish to hold fast to your illusions and delusions.
>The housing market is no where near stabilization.

Well, I'm telling you what my general impression is based on scanned
WSJ articles and from a few other sources (eg. Business Week, and The
Economist, which I also have subscriptions to).

>
>>>Housing starts are down about 30% year over year. and 60% over 06.
>>
>>I appreciate that the articles discuss the housing sector in terms of
>>a large number of factors besides "starts".
>

>You "appreciate" articles that say what you need to hear. I gave you
>links directly to the statistics. They are evidently to real for you
>to wish to consider. Your loss. reality awaits you.

What do you do, pick out the links that fit your particular preference
to focus only on the negative news? I scan over WSJ articles that
cover a lot of related sectors of the economy and that includes
financing. Don't get me wrong, I am very sorry that the whole housing
industry is in a big funk and lots of people are hurting. Buuuut,
there is a lot more going on in the US economy than housing, and my
general impression is that things could be a whole lot worse.


Message has been deleted
0 new messages