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 : President Barack Obama -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tejek who wrote (103945)	11/7/2011 8:45:27 AM
From: Road Walker	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 149317

Age Gap Rises in Economic Well-Being By Susanna Kim \| ABC News – 41 mins ago The rich aren’t just getting richer, but wealthy older Americans are noticeably better-off than their counterparts from three decades ago in several areas like income, employment, home ownership and housing values. It may be no surprise that older Americans are wealthier than younger ones. But a new study from Pew Research Center analyzed the economic well-being of current older and younger adults to those in the past and found that the age-based wealth gap skyrocketed 47:1 in 2009 compared to 10:1 in 1984. In 2009, the median net worth of households headed by adults aged 65 and older was 42 percent more than the same age group in 1984. In contrast, the net worth of households headed by an adult under 35 in 2009 was 68 percent less than the same age group in 1984. “These age-based gaps widened significantly during the sour economy of recent years, but all key trends are several decades old, indicating that they are also linked to long-term demographic, social and economic changes that have affected different age groups in different ways,” Pew said in a statement. These changes include structural changes in the labor and housing markets, delayed marriage and retirement, and the changing racial and ethnic composition of the population. Pew used two sources from the Census: data for 1984 to 2009 from the Survey on Income and Program Participation and data for 1967 to 2010 from the Annual Social and Economic Supplements to the Census Bureau’s Current Population Survey. Interesting facts from the report: Wealth: Households led by an adult ages 65 or older had median net worth of $170,494 in 2009, compared to $120,457 in 1984, adjusted to 2010 dollars, for a gain of 42 percent. Households headed by an adult under the age of 35 had median net worth of $3,662 in 2009, compared with $11,521 in 1984: a decline of 68 percent. Poverty: The relationship between age and poverty has flipped in the past four decades. In 1967, 33 percent of households led by an older adult were poor, compared to 12 percent of households led by a younger adult. But in 2010, 22 percent of younger households were poor, compared with 11 percent of older households. Housing value: In 2009, the typical homeowner head of household ages 65 or older had $145,361 in housing wealth. In 1984, the similar age group had only $92,326 in housing wealth, showing a growth of 57 percent. In contrast, the typical homeowner younger than age 35 had $24,396 in housing wealth in 2009, compared to $35,150 for the same-aged group in 1984, a decline of 31 percent. Pew points out that these opposing trends are largely a function of market timing because most older homeowners purchased their homes long ago at “pre-bubble” prices. But many young homeowners purchased their homes at “bubble” prices, and now have less equity in their homes.

To: tejek who wrote (103945)	11/8/2011 11:55:15 PM
From: John Vosilla	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 149317

this bumper sticker should be a big seller

To: tejek who wrote (103945)	11/9/2011 12:06:51 AM
From: zeta1961	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 149317

Ted, did you see Benen's piece today re: the sabotage question? November 08, 2011 2:00 PM Putting the ‘sabotage’ question to the public By Steve Benen We’ve been exploring for nearly a year the “sabotage” question: are Republicans trying to hurt the nation’s economy on purpose, simply to undermine the Obama presidency? Over the last few months, the charge has become more common and more mainstream, with the question being raised by leading officials in President Obama’s re-election team, Democratic leaders on Capitol Hill, and a growing number of pundits and political observers. Pollsters, however, have shied away from the question — until very recently. Today, a new survey from Public Policy Polling, commissioned by Daily Kos and SEIU, put the question to respondents nationwide. “Q: Do you think the Republicans are intentionally stalling efforts to jumpstart the economy to insure that Barack Obama is not reelected or not?” Yes: 50% No: 41% Unsure: 10% This comes on the heels on a very similar poll conducted solely in Florida, which produced nearly identical responses. A Washington Post/ABC News poll released yesterday also found 50% of Americans nationwide agree with the statement that President Obama is “making a good faith effort to deal with the country’s economic problems, but the Republicans in Congress are playing politics by blocking his proposals.” The polls come at the same time as a New York Times editorial that stated, simply as an obvious fact, that congressional Republicans are “committed to doing nothing” to improve the economy “in the hopes that the faltering economy will cost President Obama his job in 2012.” Taken together, this is a rather striking shift.. We’re talking about the American mainstream accepting the idea that a major political party, for the first time since the Civil War, actively trying to undermine the strength of the United States in a time of economic crisis. At a fundamental level, that is, or at least should be, an incredible scandal. As Brian Beutler put it, “If the notion that elected Republicans are blocking economic recovery for political gain becomes a mainstream proposition, they’ve got big trouble.” A lot will depend on how Americans come to think of this. At this point, as we discussed yesterday, beliefs about “sabotage” do not necessarily translate into a political boost for the White House. The degree of national cynicism is so intense, many Americans may assume Republicans are sabotaging the national economy, but take their frustrations out on President Obama anyway. Voters’ understanding of the political process is severely limited, and many Americans likely fail to appreciate the role Congress must play in policymaking. There are no doubt plenty of voters thinking, “Sure, Republicans are sabotaging the economy, but why can’t Obama just go around them?” unaware of the fact that, on a grand scale, this isn’t an option. That said, it’s also easy to imagine the sabotage question undermining Republican support in 2012, even if it’s not automatic. Are Americans prepared to reward a party that cares more about power and politics than the nation’s well being? The more Democrats push the question into the public bloodstream, and get voters thinking about the impact of unprecedented GOP tactics, the better it will be for Dems’ electoral efforts. washingtonmonthly.com