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.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (158538)	1/20/2003 4:45:33 PM
From: TimF	Respond to of 1575596

heritage.org

To: TimF who wrote (158538)	1/20/2003 11:07:02 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1575596

The average household cash income has remained flat through the '80s and '90s for all but the top 1% I question that claim. In any case even if the cash income was flat the cash value of the total compensation package went up, and both wealth and spending adjusted for inflation (and in the case after adjusting for the increased level of consumer debt) have gone up. Houses are bigger and more elaboratly furnished, people own more and better computers, VCRs, DVD players, more cars and the average car is more advanced and powerful and more safety equipment and convience features. I could go on and on with a whole bunch of other examples but I think I gave enough for you to get the point. Actually, I think you may be comparing two different things. He's saying that the wealthier got wealthy while the less wealthy did not.....they basically ran in place. However, you're saying that the living got better. That may well be true. A significant change in the last twenty years has been the cost of commodities....due to productivity increases, their cost has gone down; in some cases, dramatically. So even thought income has remained essentially flat for the middle class, the middle class can buy a lot more goods because of the falling prices. Plus, we have a lot more time saving devises that making living easier. And that would explain the argument in your first link.........things are better now than in the good ole days. That's true for most Americans.....however, it does not refute the author's argument.....that the wealthy of 20 years have become much wealthier. Quite a while ago, I had posted that an analysis came out in the early 90's, showing that an increasingly smaller percentage of people owned more of the wealth in America. Just recently, maybe in the last two years, that thesis was reconfirmed. The only reason people are not up in arms is because the living is better but frankly, by not as much as we think. To keep up with those productivity increases, we have had to run faster on the treadmill.....its amazing to me the number of people who have problems with allergies, chronic fatigue, asthma, heart rhythm irregularities, migraines, etc......I think that may be the price we are paying. I just left my gym where I was talking to the gym owner's girlfriend........a hot woman. However, I had always thought she was around 30. It turns out she's 23 and is on anti depressants, suffers from anemia and chronic fatigue. Her problems started when she finished school and started work two years ago. And when I looked closer, I could see how frazzled she looks. I have become sensitive to this shit because of my asthma.......I am amazed how poorly people are doing....healthwise. So I think there is a price that's being paid......and it ain't pretty. ted