This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
America's Lost Decade: Typical Household Wealth Has Plunged 36% Since 2003
Does it feel like you're poorer? There is a simple reason why - you are! According to a new study by the Russell Sage Foundation, the inflation-adjusted net worth for the typical household was $87,992 in 2003. Ten years later, it was only $56,335, or a 36% decline... Welcome to America's Lost Decade.
Simply put, the NY Times notes, it’s not merely an issue of the rich getting richer. The typical American household has been getting poorer, too.
The reasons for these declines are complex and controversial, but one point seems clear: When only a few people are winning and more than half the population is losing, surely something is amiss.
As Russell Sage Foundation concludes, through at least 2013, there are very few signs of significant recovery from the loss of wealth experienced by American families during the Great Recession. Declines in net worth from 2007 to 2009 were large, and the declines continued through 2013. These wealth losses, however, were not distributed equally. While large absolute amounts of wealth were destroyed at the top of the wealth distribution, households at the bottom of the wealth distribution lost the largest share of their total wealth. As a result, wealth inequality increased significantly from 2003 through 2013; by some metrics inequality roughly doubled.
The American economy has experienced rising income and wealth inequality for several decades, and there is little evidence that these trends are likely to reverse in the near-term.
It is possible that the very slow recovery from the Great Recession will continue to generate increased wealth inequality in the coming years as those hardest hit may still be drawing down the assets they have left to cover current consumption.
The inequality-battler-in-chief remains unaware of the greatest irony of this surging rich-getting-richer as poor-get-poorer society:
Inequality in the U.S. today is near its historical highs, largely because the Federal Reserve’s policies have succeeded in achieving their aim: namely, higher asset prices (especially the prices of stocks, bonds and high-end real estate), which are generally owned by taxpayers in the upper-income brackets. The Fed is doing all the work, because the President’s policies are growth-suppressive. In the absence of the Fed’s moneyprinting and ZIRP, the economy would either be softer or actually in a new recession.
The greatest irony is that the President is railing against inequality as one of the most important problems of the day, despite the fact that his policies are squeezing the middle class and causing the Fed – with the President’s encouragement – to engage in the radical monetary policy, which is exacerbating inequality. This simple truth cannot be repeated often enough.
»
- 40892 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
Wealth effect, bitchez!
i don't see how the author doesnt connect all the dots and see that it hasnt been a 'slow recovery'. we are in a depression and have been in one for nearly a decade. use a realistic deflator, such as the way we calculated inflation in 1980, and we havent had real growth since 2005.
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it!"
-- Upton Sinclair
Speaking of the salaries & perks of the parasitical class, here's some completely unexpected news no one could have ever seen coming...
Bloomberg's Top Advocate Admits Gun Control Proposals Wouldn't Stop Mass Shootings
“Because people perceive a mismatch in the policy solutions that we have to offer and the way some of these mass shootings happened, you know, it is a messaging problem for us, I think. … Is it a messaging problem when a mass shooting happens and nothing that we have to offer would have stopped that mass shooting? Sure it’s a challenge in this issue.”
http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2014/06/16/gun-control-advocate-snowden-obamacare-hurt-our-cause/
...not.
Money and debt built the American dream.
Great lecture by Chris Whalen
http://www.planbeconomics.com/2014/07/inflated-how-money-and-debt-built....
About the only wealth most people have is the equity in their homes. The real estate collapse of 2007-2009 is responsible for most of the decline.
The shale boom gives lie to whole load of BULLSHIT.
WE THE USA ARE SAUDI ARABIA.
YET WE THE UNITED STATES ARE FLAT BROKE TOO.
"The wealth creators create more wealth while the debt creators create more debt." AND NEVER SHALL THE TWAIN MEET!
This is not rocket science anymore folks. "Your debt jubilee is to die in the Promise Land." (Apparently with a hundred to one kill ratio and the reckless abandonment of the very idea of humanity. In short a "War Crimes Tribunal.")
King David was no wussie...that's fer sure...but he was still a Christian...meaning any conversion by the Sword was NOT a true conversion. "You must drink of the body and blood and turn yourself WILLINGLY over to Him!"
Anyone who thinks the Bible was written by a Man is a nut...and I might add "so the Founding Fathers said of the United States Constitution."
Separation of powers, Bill of Rights, a Jury of your peers...NO BILLS OF ATTAINDER. This is what it means to be an AMERICAN.
That Basic Law was not founded in guilt but in BATTLE.
(So was the Code Napoleon I might add...
To me, the most shocking part of this study is that a full 25% of American Households have a net worth of just $3,200; and that 5% (1 out of 20) households has a negative net worth of -$27,416!
We are on Year 5 of the Recovery correct?
Layoff List: http://www.dailyjobcuts.com
-
The American middle class is dying on the vine. Bitchez.
and this is not going to end well.
Is NOT ending well.....and we're not done yet.
Fixed it for you.
All the while that a typical wealth of a jewish household surged 3600 percent over the same period.
36% sounds about right as evidenced by the bankrupt furniture stores, empty strip malls, plunge in retial sales, dismale huose purchase numbers by Merikans, and poor car sales.
Son of Loki - The debt overhang by 2008 was 40%. Coincidence with this 36% corrolary number? I think not. But the debt was used to mask the outsourcing and the result of course is a declining living standard.
Seniors and Pensioners dependent on COLA have been serverely crushed with the measley 0% to 1.7% CPI the BLS prints since their COLA is directly linked to that despite food, local taxes, etc sky rocketing the last 8-10 years. I bet those folks are much more then 36% to 40% "less wealthy" now.
Please Cite.
Don't upvote this tool pimping his shitty blog in every ZH article.
Can one of the Tylers block this asshole's IP?
green shoots, baby.
is that what the Laugher curve means?
What King David do you refer to??? If you are referring to King David of the Bible his time was way before Christ. Making him a Jew not a Christian.
Indeed; I took it as of the same line as Jesus, "Son of David."
Woa now, if we start talking debt isnt the typical household net worth a negative number some multiple of their yearly income?
If we count the debt the govt has given us with a gun to our heads.
Whats 100+ trillion / (300 million * (1-.47))? Im only counting tax payers.
Whalen is correct to a point. Money and Debt creation is necessary when you have a growing economy that makes products and creates solid middle class jobs; so new debt (and interest on debt) can be serviced from future (real) growth.
Once our criminal class started the stampede to outsource middle class jobs the link in the chain was broken. Without real income in the hands of the middle class the cancer will only continue to grow.
It's amazing how many people choose to not see this.
And it's sad to see how many people, including the dingbat who wrote this "article," choose to ignore the nosedive from 2003-2009 and find a way to blame Obama.
Money as debt built the Bankster dream... Whalen isn't taking about that, though, is he? Debt Money Fraud - the one topic none of the BIGS dare discuss lest the Debt Money Tyrant respond.
So called gun control advocates only seek to limit gun ownership from the people. They never make any effort to stop .gov agencies from acquiring guns especially military grade weapons.
Which for me proves that they are not anti-gun ownership, they are anti-who has the gun advocates. Never a reason to not deny the law abiding average person, always silent on .gov expansion.
I agree but it's moar like:
Gun control advocates are sociopaths who want all guns taken from the masses so they can be controlled by the police and military for them.
The sound everyone just heard was Michael Bloomberg fainting and doing a faceplant into the floor ;-)
"In light of Heller, McDonald, and their progeny, there is no longer any basis on which this Court can conclude that the District of Columbia’s total ban on the public carrying of ready-to-use handguns outside the home is constitutional under any level of scrutiny.
Therefore, the Court finds that the District of Columbia’s complete ban on the carrying of handguns in public is unconstitutional.
Accordingly, the Court grants Plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment and enjoins Defendants from enforcing the home limitations of D.C. Code § 7-2502.02(a)(4) and enforcing D.C. Code § 22-4504(a) unless and until such time as the District of Columbia adopts a licensing mechanism consistent with constitutional standards enabling people to exercise their Second Amendment right to bear arms.4 Furthermore, this injunction prohibits the District from completely banning the carrying of handguns in public for self-defense by otherwise qualified non-residents based solely on the fact that they are not residents of the District."
http://alangura.com/2014/07/victory-in-palmer-v-d-c/
Truly great news! Alan Gura is a GOD!!
It is good news, very good news.
But the bureaucracy will contnue on in its quest to be the sole provider of self defense. This is how they solicit patronage from the weak minded, its not over, it never is with them.
Stand firm, Molon Labe ;-)
until such time as the District of Columbia adopts a licensing mechanism consistent with constitutional standards enabling people to exercise their Second Amendment right to bear arms.
The fuck? The 2nd amendment doesn't give anyone the right to bear arms... it merely prohibits the government from usurping that natural right.
A fact which escapes many, including those who support the Second Amendment. Self defense is a natural right, and one which carries with it the ability to match one's opponent in firepower if so chosen. Full-auto included....
Exactly. They show little interest in seizing illegal guns, why even Eric 'My People' Holder supplies them to the Mexican drug cartels. Be under no doubt that the destruction of the middle class is the objective. A few years back I'd have thought it crazy, but Cloward-Piven seems to be the agenda.
The Fed is doing all the work, because the President’s policies are growth-suppressive. In the absence of the Fed’s moneyprinting and ZIRP, the economy would either be softer or actually in a new recession.
The above line from the article is total BS. ZIRP does rob from the Middle Class to enable the Government to support the lower classes with entitlement spending. I think the economy and the Middle Class would be a lot stronger if not for ZIRP, because of the distortions it causes.
And without ZIRP, existing debts would implode. Rock, meet hard place.
Reality is that runaway government spending has finally run it's course. And there is nothing anyone can do with interest rate policy to change this.
Reality is that runaway government spending has finally run it's course. And there is nothing anyone can do with interest rate policy to change this.
Sadly, you are incorrect. After ZIRP, comes Negative IRP (NIRP). In that scenario, the Government makes $$ off its debt. It only charges 1-2% for capital "preservation". Don't think it won't come to that.
I have no doubt that NIRP will come. But that does NOT change the fact that there is nothing anyone can do with interest rate policy that is going to fix anything. Period.
So, prove me incorrect here. Where does NIRP lead?
Or, to get back onto your thesis, if not for ZIRP - what would have the outcome been?
And, dont get me wrong here. It is clear that the government sided with banksters and not main street. But, beneath all that - beyond the simpleton shit... we are in a massive ponzi scheme. There is no way the monetary promises that have been made can be kept. The choice made is the most obvious one from the perspective of the powerful... eat the middle class to buy time.
And that is game over time. Do you really think at that point anyone in their right mind will finance new debt issuance as the old debts come due? That will definitely put the dollar in the tank for good if they ever pull a stunt like that. You basically have to force people to buy new debt issuance with gun pointed at the head and there is no way to hide the intention or what you really are at that point no matter what bullshit they want sell it as like economic patriotism for example. That is a bunch of bullshit because you can easily have a United States of America without a federal government uniting the whole mess. All the obligations just become localized.
I think you're confused. It is EASY to sell new debt these days, even junk bonds. Its the only place to get yield. Don't see that turning around any time soon.
Unless I am misunderstanding charging negative interest on things like T-bills won't provide yield for the holder only the issuer.
Doesn't really matter anyways since I think like half the outstanding Federal Debt is coming due by 2016. Don't quote me on the exact amount and date but end result is there is mostly likely going to be a default when this all comes due since it is mostly coming due all at the same time. If BRICS is up and running and is a true god's honest secondary option outside petrodollar that will all but guarantee a default in missed payments since anyone outside the US that can will probably not touch Treasuries with a 10 foot stick while existing shennigans are allowed to persist. You would wait until after the default happens then buy in when the interest rates have to spike if they can't force people to buy in at artificially depressed rates.
No, it won't. NIRP can only "work" in an environment where people are so scared of any investment that they will pay a penalty to "preserve" the bulk of their $$, even if it means losing a little every year. It would be targeted at people whose savings far exceed the FDIC protection limit--or if the FDIC is kaput. Basically, think a very severe depression where a SOLID MAJORITY is dependent on the US Gov for survival, directly or indirectly. You could argue, we are there now.
Also, we have ZIRP today, but could well have NIRP in the future.
So, Zirp vs Nirp. Aren't we already at Nirp if we view Zirp vs Nirp as nominal yields vs real yields?
There is also good debt and bad debt. I agree if you are strictly chasing yield junk bonds are always a good bet if you do a little due dilligence first before buying in but if you are looking for value aka good debt muni bonds are a good place to look for it. If you are still in the system and want to do some good with your investing you invest locally where each dollar has a larger positive effect on every individual through said projects. With that said you still need to do due dilligence to determine which projects are actually beneficial and will generate revenue afterwards, like sewer bonds for example in urban areas.
And back to NIRP on Treasurys I can't see that happening unless they are about to default on debt payments. When you can't squeeze anymore blood out the stones that is like that last trick in playbook to avoid a default and that should be painfully obvious to everyone at that point. With that said I could be wrong since we've seen enough stuff we never thought we'd see in our lifetime already in the past couple of years.
We are destined to be a divided nation by beliefs alone, and that may not be a bad thing in the long run.
You are correct and another way of saying this is that the Fed is not doing any work; the purpose of the Fed is to steal, not to produce. It is the Fed's [counterfeiting] that necessarily causes lower interest rates because this theft simultaneously decreases productive work.
Yes, the economy of productive work would be stronger without the theft from it just like leeches removed from the host must improve the health of the host.
"When only a few people are winning and more than half the population is losing, surely something is amiss."
Nawwwwww come on people we need to loose money so the tribal bankers can make money
oyyyyyyyy
after all some banker needs our money to take a vacation 3 or 4 times a year back to ISrahell
their economy depends on this
our military aid plus what the bankers skim allows their economy to function
at our expense
Yeah, its all the fault of the Joooos. Because none of the bankers or the top 1% are non-Jews, right?
Drama Queen much?
Just calling a spade
a spade
problem is some folks dont like or want the
truth
told
looks like you are one of
those
The truth is that the world is a complicated place. Methinks that those who simply blame everything on the Jews go through life with huge blindspots. Its a handicap that may help you feel better in the short run, but may make your problems worse. If the Jews disappeared tomorrow, the World would not be the Land of Milk and Honey you imagine it would be. Historically, things don't end well for the anti-semites. Most people are their own worst enemy.
And, Mr. Yooper, I did my time in Houghton, MI.
http://thezog.wordpress.com/who-controls-the-economy/
Personally, I would rather prefer more diversity than what we now have, which is 2% of the population with 3200% over representation in offices of power and decision making.
The site may be three years outdated, but the racial/ethnic over representation is unchanged.
It's funny how MSM decry every type of gender/ethnic/religious/sexual proclivity imbalance on earth except for this one.
It appears, if Judaics are truly being unfailry "prosecuted" in the western world, either they are doing it on purpose for reasons of manipulation of public persona (Machiaveli) or they at least allow it to happen and could stop it if they wanted to, or possibly they desire to completely destroy the western way of life (mass choas and crime, what we live with now daily) and become brutal criminal overlords when it all completely crumbles (any day now), which they might possibly be already and most just don't see it or happily are willing to deny the obvious (lambs to slaughter), or combination of all the above.
The graph doesn't show the individual's share of the national debt. Since that has exploded higher I would say that the average American is far in the hole.
You, sir, have the right of it!
Hey, but it's not OUR debt. WE didn't sign the credit-card slips.
In international law, odious debt is a legal theory that holds that the national debt incurred by a regime for purposes that do not serve the best interests of the nation, should not be enforceable. Such debts are, thus, considered by this doctrine to be personal debts of the regime that incurred them and not debts of the state. In some respects, the concept is analogous to the invalidity of contracts signed under coercion.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Odious_debt
When a despotic regime contracts a debt, not for the needs or in the interests of the state, but rather to strengthen itself, to suppress a popular insurrection, etc, this debt is odious for the people of the entire state. This debt does not bind the nation; it is a debt of the regime, a personal debt contracted by the ruler, and consequently it falls with the demise of the regime. The reason why these odious debts cannot attach to the territory of the state is that they do not fulfill one of the conditions determining the lawfulness of State debts, namely that State debts must be incurred, and the proceeds used, for the needs and in the interests of the State. Odious debts, contracted and utilized for purposes which, to the lenders' knowledge, are contrary to the needs and the interests of the nation, are not binding on the nation – when it succeeds in overthrowing the government that contracted them – unless the debt is within the limits of real advantages that these debts might have afforded. The lenders have committed a hostile act against the people, they cannot expect a nation which has freed itself of a despotic regime to assume these odious debts, which are the personal debts of the ruler.
Hi guys, what happens to wealth when payment is demanded on the $60 trillion in debt? If the answer includes "nascent" then I'll be so impressed! Thanks!
Government exists because the overwhelming number of people want it to. It doesn't matter if it is tyrannical, it comes into being because of a massive infrastructure that provides its sustenance.
If 99% of the people were anarchists, you wouldn't have government. In reality, 99% of the people want government. They approve of government stealing from them.
That 99% is morally responsible for any government debt.
the ones who actually pay taxes are the ones in the hole, so, they are farther in the hole than the average citizen.
Greenskeeper_Carl
I agree whole-heartedly. I have never agreed with the term "Great Recession". I have called it the "Disguised Depression". Recently read a post where someone called it "Depression Denial".
And, of course, this has nothing to do with the dysfunction of the bottom 25-40%.
It's quite easy to agree the ratio of under achievers is far larger now than a half C ago. The more aggresive, more controversial, more required question is what is the self-identified nature of the persons in charge since WW2, and how has the balance of their control changed (obviously increased) in the same time period. IOW, who were the Captains of the ship when it went aground? (And of course, who were their sympathizers/enablers?)
I'm just another dumb shite like any one else on the bell curve. But it somehow occurs to me that if we can identifiy the self-proclaimed identity of the persons operating the controls of power, then look closely at their operating manual (The Talmud), that might be a good thing. Is there something wrong with this conclusion?
If the mere nature of closely examining the operating manual of these controllers makes one a bad person, that tells me more about the name caller than it does about the subject of hte verbal abuse.
Personally, I blame Liberals more than the Jews for the current sorry state of our country. Are a lot of Jews liberal? Yes. But IMHO, the three guiltiest people since WWII are Lyndon B. Johnson, Ted Kennedy and Barack Obama, with Barney Frank and Nancy Pelosi vying for honorable mention. So there's one Jew in that bunch.
As for the Talmud, haven't read it. But surely there are English translations of it, no? If you think its such a magic book, why not get off your ass and read it? Maybe its because knowledge isn't enough--you also need drive, nerve and intelligence. The closest thing I've found to an operating manual on how to get ahead is "How to Win Friends and Influence People". It works pretty well, but is hard to execute in practice.
There are so many stupid, dysfunctional people these daze that it makes me want to cry. I am certain that this was not true in my youth. Pre-1982, people just seemed better. Now all too many people are just buffoons--do some time at any Walmart if you doubt me. Why is this? In short, we've made it too easy as a society to be poor and stupid. Once upon a time, if you were stupid and lazy you suffered. Now we subsidize it. Technology has also played a part. It is easy for stupid people to use and it insulates us from our own stupidity. People can use technology to create electronic echo chambers so they only have to deal with others as stupid/lazy as they are. Who knows, ZH may be one of these. There is a very prophetic film called "Idiotocracy" -- it's supposedly a comedy, but I'm convinced its a documentary.
I think the bottom 70, 80, 90% is dysfunctional in most regards.
A 3% deflator we get AT LEAST 3% GDP CONTRACTION, exactly !
We haven't had real growth outside of the 2008 collapse since 1980!!!
You have to subtract out marginal debt increases... spending a credit card is NOT "growth."
Note the second chart at the following link...
http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=229155
Yup, wealth effect to Solyndra execs, et al.
Whenever the government picks winners, everyone else be damned and run for cover.
And here we are. Everyone has run for cover via lobbying, campaign donations, etc.
Which has resulting in their being taken under the wing of the government in a silent partnership.
Which has turned the USA into the FSoA (credit Doomstead Diner).
Welcome to corporatism aka fascism.
“Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power”
- Benito Mussolini
Solyndra.....the smartest guys in the room2.
See, that's why we need yet another increase in the minimum wage. (sarc)
there is a "simple reason" and then there is THE reason:
http://enronnext101.wordpress.com/
;-)
r
Thank God my wealth can't plunge, I'm not wealthy
Wealth takes negative values. Go borrow and spend and see.
"Wealth takes negative values. "
YOU don't even need to go into debt yourself to be made poorer by inflation and leverage; the Government and The FED will destroy the value of your labor and render you unable to work honestly to cover inflated living expenses or live off of what you already have via the slow confiscation.
The solution is easy.
We simply need place higher values on those things we now have. And stop placing so much value on old stuff. Then, you can be RICH!
For example. Old- Big house, pool, 2 cars in the garage.
New- lots of free time, a bike( for exercise) and no car insurance.
Houses,cash,cars,boats, granite counter tops. Realize what a drag these things are, be thankful your now relieved of the burden.
Lower your expectations people. The Amish look happy, don't they?
Actually, Amish people look miserable.
We're all going Amish over the next 50 years.
We're all going Amish over the next 50 years.
Amish people eat good..
The interesting psychological phenomena in play are the upper middle class who defend the status quo that is raping everyone else. They are struggling all the same but are desperate to pretend it isn't happening to them. Funny really but tragic too. They can't let on that their businesses are insolvent and the cost of living has exceeded their ability to keep up with them Kardashian.
the sustainable jobs and income of the top 20% will within 20 years be only 10% of the population - many of the independent businesses are a function of "disposable" income which is shrinking in the aggregate and for the top 20% -as well - those businesses owned by the top 20% will go away - some you are already seeing as Amazon scoops up the volume at margins that retail cant meet
the entire middle class culture of aggressive consumption is imploding not just income
So what are the fucking many more losers in numbers going to do about it !!
Nuttin' more than go to the bar and laugh at the "conspiracy theorist" that told them for years the financial system was rigged. That and dream about "retirement." I'd laugh, but it is so sad.
The jig is up. Obama is the last in a long line to make a career of kicking the carcass.
That's rayciss
still a good time to buy?
how about spinning it possitivly, Looks like a discount for new home buyers. U.s.a. is for sale, firesale, meaning everything at afordable prices?
Fascism and cronyism at its finest.
For everyone else, there's Alpo.
Talkin bout my kennel-ration.
Absolutely fantastic post
That's how growth and inflation must be measured, by 10 year span, not yearly, monthly, weekly or by millisecond.
Fantastic post
The problem with 10 years (or any other fixed span) is that you get artificially low or high growth estimates 10 years after a crash or a peak (2010, 2018, etc).
That's precisely I say 10 years. It'd include strong spikes higher or lower, normally every 4-7 years
And thats based on the offishul numbers...
..We r friggin doomed!
hilarious
Only after Amerika learns that if you consume more than you produce, (trade deficit), you become poorer, will we be able to turn this around. Ross Perot and Pat Buchanan were right when they ran for President, but they lost.
All the professor of economics in the US have always been wrong on their pro free trade doctorine. The Chinese are the winners and decades before that the Japanese were the winners with the pro free trade of the US.
I've been thinking a lot about Buchanan. ( Perot is better known although the memory is waning... )
Pat Buchanan might have actually tried to shut down the globalist agenda and focused the nation on internal problems.
THAT might have exposed the problem. THe U.S. probably would have had a wild exodus of corporations even if he had actually sat down with Ron Paul and taken the long knives to the tax code and bureaucracy...
Buchanan, Perot and Ron Paul all had the same message but the best was Sir Jimmy Goldsmith – a Raider in the 80’s – actually went up against the WTO in Europe and USA
See this 5 part video with Charlie Rose -……1994!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PQrz8F0dBI
T O V, Damned good basic point! No economic free lunch just because you consume your ass off.
Danno that is
The problem isn't free trade, the problem is borrowing more than we can afford to pay back. Free trade just ensures that stuff is made where it can be made most efficiently. It also allows desperately poor people in underdeveloped countries to have a roof over their heads and food in their stomachs, not that the union-bought "humanitarians" on the left give a shit about that.
you lack the understanding of the word "free" in free trade
What we have ain't "free" trade. It's gubbermint-managed trade.
The use of "free" trade to describe gubbermint-managed trade is just another example of the effectiveness of brainwashing through repetitive lying propaganda by the gubbermint-media complex.
Why do we have to change? I thought we were special..We do god's work damn it!
In Obama's defense "trickle down economics" was already used and "bang you in the ass economics" is not ready for prime time yet. He had no other choice than to play the cards he had and fake it.
Check your ass, fonzannoon. You've already been banged!
I'm here if you want to talk about it.
I'm not ready yet, but as long as i know you are there....
:-)))
hey did u get my reply to u late last night with that movie to check out about free will?
I answered this morning
Check it
all i'm saying is you won't regret watching it. great flick.
What's the movie called again?
?
"At this moment I think it is important that I see all of your breats"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1N6rzfoWHzg
Quit playing Mr. Nice guy / We love ya Fonz, ;-)
Wow, what's up YC?
I've always appreciated you ekm. Still cleaning those(air conditioning) ducts?
still there
Good on you/ EKM has good understanding of "Eastern Europe"
I know the the whale escaped in the end; but, what happened to the kid after he was left at the aquarium?
fonz, are you ok?
I'm not comprehending your comment. Reagan's trickle down economics didn't work and have been vilified by the left ever since so Obama's only choice was to do trickle down economics again???
When Reagan tried it, at least some crap that rich people bought was made in America so there was trickle down. Now the likes of John Kerry buy yachts from New Zealand, cars from Europe, and use illegals as domestics and gardeners.
Total wealth in the U. S. reached all time high recently. So does this mean "inflation adjusted total wealth" is not? Any analysis on that?
You have to separately break out the 0.01%, that's where it all goes.
"Total" numbers just don't work anymore.
Sure. Was wondering if there is ready analysis.
was thinking the same..
You're thinking of mean, they're talking about median (and percentiles). Though I wouldn't be surprised if adjusting for inflation also destroyed the gains in total wealth, even using the official lowball estimates for inflation.
Of course. That's close. But not exactly.
There is also a population growth contribution. So I expect the mean to fare worse.
I can tell you for certain that Plunge Protection has been fist fucking me for at least 10 years.....dry.
perhaps i dont understand what you're getting at. i have little sympathy for anyone who loses money speculating on shorting stocks...
You don't understand real markets then. Of course we haven't had one in quite a while so it's easy to understand your stance.
If the chart had a trend line at 99% it would look like a rocketship to space over the last few years.
The 1% control government as well as media. So the great mass of people only hear a very consistent and managed propaganda stream. The number of us on websites like this, reading stuff like this, is very small. That's why nothing if importance is likely to change.
Show me the 99.99th percentile.
Also, discount all of these by about twice the official government inflation number, the median will be down 50%, and even the 75th percentile will barely break even.
This is apples-to-oranges because the average household is smaller in 2014 than in 2003...
especially if you count all of the abandoned households...
You're right, most households have lost a member or two from cancer, diabetes, suicide, gang violence, staged terrorists attacks, heroin overdose etc...
Violent crime and drug abuse rates in the US are at historic lows, dude. You wouldn't know it from media hysteria, of course. Does anyone actually die from diabetes anymore?
Dude....I hope just one more person dies from diabetes
Isn't formation is down as well due to the unaffordability of housing and lack of jobs/income?
Is the administration now counting every illegal alien minor that crosses the border 'unescorted' as a new 'household'?
Wrong. Drug overdose deaths are at 25 year highs. More than half are from prescription drugs. Criminals everywhere.
Great catch. Call Julia, I think she's digging potatos.
You guys do need to be careful about referencing your blockquotes -- the last blockquote is from a ZH article, not the NYT.
But there's 389,100 or 4.63% of New Yorkers that are millionaires !
http://www.bloomberg.com/video/how-many-millionaires-live-in-new-york-PH...
Lost decade? It will, probably, be a lost century.
For somebody it won't be.
Lost decade? It will, probably, be a lost century.
Humans are finished.
Humans... the lost species.
Destroyed by fundamental insanity.
Destroyed by unbounded dishonesty.
Oh, we'll muddle through it all honestann. Insane people, lying to each other, not comprehending the lie.
Its what we do best! ;-)
Great comment nmewn. "Albeit" our paths cross on ocassion, I enjoy your comments.
As long as technology is not too advanced, the species can survive the destruction involved in such behavior. However, that time has ended. A planet full of insane chimps with the kind of weapons and technologies being developed and deployed now... cannot last long. And so, mankind is finished.
I know you're single Ann. The man that lands you is ?
I'm handsome. Looks > eye of the beholder<
Hahaha.
Yes, singularly annoying!
And working on "the singularity".
Single is good. Years ago a close friend described me as most likely to enjoy a solo round-trip to Mars.
http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2014/06/lets-not-send-the-extr...
Extroverts Don't Belong on Mars
A new study suggests their personalities are not meant for long, isolated voyages.
Extroverted friends are good for a lot of things—serving as deft and lively wingmen, spicing up book club, sparking interesting conversations at parties by wearing ostentatious leggings, etc.
One thing they may be less suited for: Long voyages to faraway planets.
Biologically Invasive and Growing Mechanized Ape Culture -- BIG MAC
Blue eyed and hard? Thew Female vagina gets pleasured 2-4"deep. Rub the nub!