SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Impeach George W. Bush
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: TimF who wrote (81292)6/2/2007 7:20:09 PM
From: JBTFD  Read Replies (2) of 93284
 
""taken many high paying jobs overseas" implies that their are now less high paying jobs in the US. But that isn't in fact what is occurring."

Maybe you could substantiate that. And I'm not talking about CEO jobs, just good paying middle and upper middle class jobs. Or lower middle class jobs for that matter.

"Being able to afford a house is not the only measure of wealth. But even by that measure people have gotten wealthier. Home ownership is up, and the average house is larger."

Apples and oranges. Housing affordability and home ownership rate are two different things. There is no question that housing affordability is down over a generation ago. It now takes 2 good incomes to afford a home in most major cities. A generation ago one good income was enough to afford a home and a good lifestyle. So maybe home ownership is up, but at what cost? Lower affordability means that both parents need to work and children are left at daycare. Do you see this as a step forward in the quality of life? Maybe you do, because of your value system. I don't.

Lower taxes, and a slowdown in regulatory expansion helps far more than the very rich.

Substantiation? One could argue that tax cuts have coincided with a propensity to deficit spend and that it was the flood of new money hitting the economy that spurred on economic gains not the new tax cuts. This is the case with both Reagan and Bush. They both spent like drunken sailors , put it on their card, so to speak. I argue that that spending is what spurred the economy, not the tax cuts. And the long term cost of that type of policy is that the national debt is balooned. So now more and more of our taxes goes to pay interest on all the debt that Reagan and Bush have racked up. This is the underside of republican fiscal policy that no republican seems to want to be honest about.

"Also to the extent the rich are getting richer they are not getting richer at the expense of everyone else, but more often to the benefit of everyone else."

This is also article of faith righty claptrap. But if is not an honest assessment. The bottom 60% of income earners in our country are falling more and more behind and their standard of living is getting lower and lower. Benefit of everyone else my ass.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News