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 : The Residential Real Estate Crash Index -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: GraceZ who wrote (47464)	1/19/2006 6:12:19 PM
From: shades	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 306849

I'm not alone in having improved my life. Sure through the golden years of one of the greatest societies to ever exist. Harvard girl says things are starting to turn over though - you refute that saying wegmans shows an aggregate level of wealth for our whole society. I have provided you link after link and personal story after personal story that for many though, heaven on earth has still not arrived. pbs.org The standard of living is higher, on average, for not just the US but for the world's population, than it was 100 years ago, 200 years ago, 300 years ago, etc. This is inescapable if you examine the data that measures these things, without emotion. I am not refuting that things have gotten better in certain ways for many people - harvard girl says in some ways they have gotten worse and the trend looks down. As I put to gpowell - my grandpa had a lot more freedoms in some regards - and that is one measure of wealth - and as we lose them - we get poorer - in aggregate. Before you give me your anecdotal sob stories, ask yourself what the term, "on average" means. Then also define what is meant by "the standard of living is higher". Harvard girl says the middle class is dying - on average - standard of living going lower - many all over these threads agree the future is in question or going down. Cherry picking data is how you respond. People live decades longer, infant mortality in developed countries is a fraction of what it was in 1900, more people have acccess to clean water supplies, more people have access to sanitary facilities, more people have access to advanced medical facilities, the incidence of famine is greatly reduced, water borne diseases are seriously reduced, more people have access to telephones, electricity, computing power, automobiles, education, organ transplants, treatment for chronic diseases, more people will survive physical trauma due to advances in treatment, etc. All true, harvard girl says the future looks bleak for middle class america though - on average. You seem to vehemetly disagree - harvard girl is from a well known institution with pretty big credentials and a few books - if I told you something about chess and kasparov told you the opposite - who would you believe? If you believed me I would be flattered, but most would probably think you a fool. I can go on and on about the progress of civilization in the last 100 years and what will most likely occur in the next 100 years, AS I could go on and on with failure after failure of many recent socities breaking down and life becoming harder - russia, ukraine, croatia, zimbabwe and that isn't even going far back in history to the dark ages after the roman empire. but I have a feeling it will be completely lost on you. I cannot take you seriously when you say the country in aggregate is rich because you have a wegmans nearby. When harvard folks say things look bad for the middle class of this country of the future - on average - economists like krugman and brad delong say it is a real possibility and mish and puplava and mogambo and so many others here and other boards say the same thing - its hard to hear so many voices that seem to have so much more experience and education get refuted because you have a wegmans near your front door - I guess my mind is just hard wired like dat. hehe

To: GraceZ who wrote (47464)	1/20/2006 5:44:10 AM
From: Chas.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 306849

Grace,I consider the SOL to be a measure of what you can have socially and materially,quanity and quality of goods if you will, relative to ones income..... the only place where the SOL has risen (to the benefit of the people) to any significant degree would be China or India and then only for a small percentage of their populations.... Our, USA, SOL is headed South for all blue collar working class types...it is inevitable with over 2 Billion new workers entering the Global workforce, (China, India)it is already having a significant impact on our workforce and our SOL... Norm today is for both husband and wife to be gainfully employed (if possible) just to keep up with the realities of the new middle class...the $300000 starter home, the 2 SUVs, ... I see it all the time, friends of mine, he is a HS teacher, his wife is a nurse... 2 kids in day care most of the time...gross income $100000+ year...they Need that kind of money just to keep up with the new middle class... another friend of mine... he drives a Forklift and his wife is at home raising their 2 children..gross income $50000... $165000 home in tract house subdivision, 2 used cars, they struggle but are better off IMO...they are more of a family, they used to be considered middle class. OUR SOL is going down because it cost's us more today to live in the middle class then it did in 1960 or 1970...and it is not getting any better... Grace are you the Coffee lady from Scarsdale, NY.... regards