Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Booms, Busts, and Recoveries -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: AC Flyer who wrote (17063)	3/20/2002 9:40:18 AM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74559

>>In the United States, the average ratio of household wealth to disposable income was about 4.5 from 1970 to 1995. Over the next five years, fueled by a modest boom in real estate values and a huge boom in equity values, the wealth-income ratio shot up to more than 6, the highest recorded value in the fifty years for which wealth data are available. Since 2000, equity prices have moderated, but the wealth-income ratio is still above 5. Perhaps because of that, consumption remained strong throughout the downturn of 2001.<< bis.org

To: AC Flyer who wrote (17063)	3/20/2002 10:13:07 AM
From: patron_anejo_por_favor	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74559

<<Families with two wage earners do this by choice - because women prefer work outside the home, because they choose financial independence, or because the family wants the increased spending power that two wage earners bring.>> ROTFL! Yes, this is based on some exhaustive proprietary sampling of the issue by Flyer, Inc, I presume?

To: AC Flyer who wrote (17063)	3/20/2002 10:20:42 AM
From: Petrol	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 74559

AC: how do you explain that families nowadays can't get out of massive debt? They're not better off.

To: AC Flyer who wrote (17063)	3/20/2002 11:42:41 AM
From: JBTFD	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 74559

<<Don't confuse me with the facts, eh, Mark?>> Facts, what facts? The only so called fact in that article is that if you take 5 year income averages and do some statistical hocus pocus to buffer out what he calls the business cycle's effect, that debt service ratio now is 1% less now than in 1980, when interest rates were close to all time highs. The difference between you and me is you want to believe, so you are willing to take at face value some article presenting your world view. I could quote many other articles to the contrary, but I can tell from your response to the 1 wage earner vs 2 wage earner point that you are not open minded, but fixated in your point of view. Did you know that the dow first hit 100 in 1916, and didnt finally leave 100 behind until 1942?