Is renting a better option for building a good credit score?

[edward]

...or, at least, they don't think they will. Of course, another way to look at it would be that they only lost what they gained in the '90s...and are now getting the gains back (2013 numbers out later this month).

I really wish that what you think about what American workers possibly don't think was true. I just don't se it that way.

Jobs are still moving in the wrong direction and in too many sectors.

This statement sounds good:

Romulo, chair of the House committee on higher and technical education and a backer of the industry, said in a press statement Wednesday that BPO companies would play an important role in providing jobs especially to college graduates.

“Based on sectoral projections, we are confident that BPO firms will be able to add an average of 124,000 well-paying jobs annually from 2014 to 2016, or a total of 372,000 new posts over the next three years,” Romulo said.

Unfortunately Romulo is a congressman in the Philippines, BP is business processing, and BPO is business processes. And yes I realize that some already understood these terms, I post it is for those who did not. http://business.inquirer.net/158471/call-centers-to-provide-more-jobs-in-2014-says-congressman

Recently my wife realized that the hard copy of her BOA checking account statements were not coming. The local branch manager was able to determine that the statements were going to the wrong address. He closed her account and opened a new one. He also told us that he no longer had anyway to directly contact BOA data processing.

BOA data processing along with the BP of dozens of banks is now done in the Philippines.

Even our coveted $8 per hour call center jobs are going to the Philippines albeit India is losing some of them.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Call_center_industry_in_the_Philippines

But the jobs impact of the China trade deficit is not restricted to job loss and displacement. Competition with low-wage workers from less-developed countries such as China has driven down wages for workers in U.S. manufacturing and reduced the wages and bargaining power of similar, non-college-educated workers throughout the economy. The affected population includes essentially all workers with less than a four-year college degree—roughly 70 percent of the workforce, or about 100 million workers (U.S. Census Bureau 2012b).

It may be the lower paid workers who are most affected by outsourcing to China, but it isn't just low tech products that are being produced there.

Global trade in advanced technology products—often discussed as a source of comparative advantage for the United States—is instead dominated by China. This broad category of high-end technology products includes the more advanced elements of the computer and electronic products industry as well as other sectors such as biotechnology, life sciences, aerospace, and nuclear technology. In 2011, the United States had a $109.4 billion deficit in advanced technology products with China, which was responsible for 36.3 percent of the total U.S.-China trade deficit. In contrast, the United States had a $9.7 billion surplus in advanced technology products with the rest of the world in 2011.

http://www.epi.org/publication/bp345-china-growing-trade-deficit-cost/

I have been observing for the last twenty years how gradually the outsourcing situation, which started as a trickle, has beaten us down to a level we never would have allowed had it happened suddenly.

We have given away the goose that laid the golden egg. Then again after several generations have passed few will realize that great grandpa, and great grandma had a much better , and higher quality of life than they will ever experience.

It makes me think of my younger years in reverse, when I was reminded how much better things were for me than for my grandparents.

 

[russ_watters]

I really wish that what you think about what American workers possibly don't think was true. I just don't se it that way.

Jobs are still moving in the wrong direction and in too many sectors.

The inherent flaw in such studies is that perception and reality aren't required to be linked to each other. So while it can be interesting to see what people think, it doesn't necessarily tell us how things are.

I have been observing for the last twenty years how gradually the outsourcing situation, which started as a trickle, has beaten us down to a level we never would have allowed had it happened suddenly.

That is indeed an example of a common perception that has little to do with reality. The unemployment rate is in fact near exactly the same as it was 20 years ago, while for most of those 20 years (until 4 years ago) it was, by historical standards, very low through even the ups and downs of two economic cycles. There is no long-term decline in jobs happening, whether caused by outsourcing or anything else.
http://data.bls.gov/pdq/SurveyOutputServlet

 

[SteamKing]

The inherent flaw in such studies is that perception and reality aren't required to be linked to each other. So while it can be interesting to see what people think, it doesn't necessarily tell us how things are.

That is indeed an example of a common perception that has little to do with reality. The unemployment rate is in fact near exactly the same as it was 20 years ago, while for most of those 20 years (until 4 years ago) it was, by historical standards, very low through even the ups and downs of two economic cycles.
http://data.bls.gov/pdq/SurveyOutputServlet

You can't always go strictly by the unemployment rate, especially as reported by the government. The UR gives a quick snapshot, an easy sound-bite for politicians to bandy about, but it doesn't include people who have given up looking for a job and have remained more or less constantly unemployed. It is possible to have both a low UR and have large numbers of people who are out of work for whatever reason.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unemployment#United_States_Bureau_of_Labor_statistics

Recently, a new wrinkle has been added to the employment picture in the US, where formerly full-time workers have had their hours cut to below 29 per week, so as not to count as 'full-time equivalents' under the ACA. These people were formerly working 40 or more hours a week but were cut-back to part-time work. How is that scored in the UR?

 

[russ_watters]

You can't always go strictly by the unemployment rate, especially as reported by the government. The UR gives a quick snapshot, an easy sound-bite for politicians to bandy about, but it doesn't include people who have given up looking for a job and have remained more or less constantly unemployed. It is possible to have both a low UR and have large numbers of people who are out of work for whatever reason.

Typically, they move opposite to each other for obvious reasons, but yes, there can be long-term trends in participation rate. These get complicated though due to changing demographics such as the Baby Boomers' in-progress retirements. And more complicated due to the choices of women to be or not to be in the workforce (which is likely why it rose for 25 years, starting in the 1960s). And all of that is on-top of changes due to people too disillusioned to look for work.

In the current climate, workforce participation is indeed pretty low compared to its peak in the 1990s:
http://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2013/images/toossifigure1.png

During the 1970s and 1980s, the labor force grew vigorously as women’s labor force participation rates surged and the baby-boom generation entered the labor market. However, the dynamic demographic, economic, and social forces that once spurred the level, growth, and composition of the labor force have changed and are now damping labor force growth. The labor force participation rate of women, which peaked in 1999, has been on a declining trend. In addition, instead of entering the labor force, baby boomers are retiring in large numbers and exiting the workforce. Once again, the baby-boom generation has become a generator of change, this time in its retirement. Moreover, the jobless recovery of the 2001 recession, coupled with the severe economic impact of the 2007–2009 recession, caused disruptions in the labor market. In the first 12 years of the 21st century, the growth of the population has slowed and labor force participation rates generally have declined. As a result, labor force growth also has slowed. The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) projects that the next 10 years will bring about an aging labor force that is growing slowly, a declining overall labor force participation rate, and more diversity in the racial and ethnic composition of the labor force.

http://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2013/article/labor-force-projections-to-2022-the-labor-force-participation-rate-continues-to-fall-1.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unemployment#United_States_Bureau_of_Labor_statistics

The actual number of people who choose to exit the workforce due to being discouraged is also tracked and as expected, it is dropping drastically due to the lower unemployment rate:

In July, 2.2 million persons were marginally attached to the labor force, down by 236,000
from a year earlier. (The data are not seasonally adjusted.) These individuals were not in
the labor force, wanted and were available for work, and had looked for a job sometime in
the prior 12 months. They were not counted as unemployed because they had not searched for
work in the 4 weeks preceding the survey. (See table A-16.)

Among the marginally attached, there were 741,000 discouraged workers in July, down by
247,000 from a year earlier. (The data are not seasonally adjusted.) Discouraged workers
are persons not currently looking for work because they believe no jobs are available for
them. The remaining 1.4 million persons marginally attached to the labor force in July had
not searched for work for reasons such as school attendance or family responsibilities.

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm

Recently, a new wrinkle has been added to the employment picture in the US, where formerly full-time workers have had their hours cut to below 29 per week, so as not to count as 'full-time equivalents' under the ACA. These people were formerly working 40 or more hours a week but were cut-back to part-time work. How is that scored in the UR?

It isn't. But it is measured by the BLS and has recovered since the recession:
http://data.bls.gov/generated_files/graphics/CES0500000002_46871_1409798788252.gif
http://data.bls.gov/pdq/SurveyOutputServlet?request_action=wh&graph_name=CE_cesbref2

 

[edward]

The inherent flaw in such studies is that perception and reality aren't required to be linked to each other. So while it can be interesting to see what people think, it doesn't necessarily tell us how things are.

That is indeed an example of a common perception that has little to do with reality. The unemployment rate is in fact near exactly the same as it was 20 years ago, while for most of those 20 years (until 4 years ago) it was, by historical standards, very low through even the ups and downs of two economic cycles. There is no long-term decline in jobs happening, whether caused by outsourcing or anything else.
http://data.bls.gov/pdq/SurveyOutputServlet

I don't believe that I had even mentioned the unemployment rate.

I really don't see the how your statistics reflect the OP in any way. The American dream isn't just a perception. People actually know when the American dream changes and when the economy is affecting their lives without any statistics to help them decide.

Then again I suppose that I use statistics to try to convince people that the American dream needs to be put on life support and you use the statistics to reassure them that it doesn't. Am I getting more philosophical or just older?

 

[russ_watters]

I don't believe that I had even mentioned the unemployment rate.

No, you said this:

I have been observing for the last twenty years how gradually the outsourcing situation, which started as a trickle, has beaten us down to a level we never would have allowed had it happened suddenly.

If that were true, it would show-up somewhere in some statistics. I chose unemployment rate, but there are several others (as SteamKing and I discussed). It doesn't. This problem is a figment of your imagination.

But in either case, it was your claim, not mine, so you really should be trying to find the statistics to support it instead of leaving it to me to disprove it.

I really don't see the how your statistics reflect the OP in any way.

I wasn't responding to the OP, I was responding to you.

People actually know when the American dream changes and when the economy is affecting their lives without any statistics to help them decide.

People are notoriously bad at aligning perception with reality. But in either case, if the reality is what is claimed, the statistics should show it. It is better to directly measure something than to guess. And since the statistics exist, there really is no excuse for not using them.

Then again I suppose that I use statistics to try to convince people that the American dream needs to be put on life support and you use the statistics to reassure them that it doesn't.

You provided statistics about perceptions about the economy when you could have provided statistics about the economy.

 

[SteamKing]

More worrisome is that the recent recession has affected the employment of people in the 25-54 age group, which can't be explained away by retirements.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...why-are-people-dropping-out-of-the-workforce/

Now, you can say that the older workers in this group have gone away for whatever reasons, but the problem comes about when workers in the 25-35 year old group are discouraged or drop out. These are the years when a person gets started in a career and begins approaching his peak earning years. If careers don't get established, it affects your earning ability for the rest of your life and the ability to save for a retirement which one may never be able to realize. And if people are not working and paying taxes, what happens to the rest of the social safety net, like Social Security, Medicare, etc.? These programs were teetering on the brink of fiscal insolvency before the recession; having more people availing themselves of their services, as the boomers retire en-masse, with fewer workers and employers paying payroll taxes just moves the dates of disaster that much closer to the present.

Now because of dithering, if not malicious intent on the part of the administration, we are about to have large swathes of Central and South America over for a slumber party of indeterminate length, which will further erode participation in the labor market by the native-born. Our neighbors have already started dropping their kids off on our door step; when will the rest of them show up for cake and coffee with their hosts?

 

[russ_watters]

More worrisome is that the recent recession has affected the employment of people in the 25-54 age group, which can't be explained away by retirements.

84-81% since the '90s is not a drop I find big enough to be "worrisome". Depending on the causes, the 54-34% drop for 16-19 year olds or the 78-71% drop for 20-24 year-olds might be more worrisome. If these drops are because kids are staying in school that might be a good thing -- unless they are getting more education than they need. But a loss of summer work combined with higher student loan debt could be very bad for their path to prosperity, because:

If careers don't get established, it affects your earning ability for the rest of your life and the ability to save for a retirement which one may never be able to realize.

Agreed. Getting off on the right foot when you are in your 20s is key.

And if people are not working and paying taxes, what happens to the rest of the social safety net, like Social Security, Medicare, etc.? These programs were teetering on the brink of fiscal insolvency before the recession; having more people availing themselves of their services, as the boomers retire en-masse, with fewer workers and employers paying payroll taxes just moves the dates of disaster that much closer to the present.

Agreed, except that I'm much more pessimistic. I think the typically cited "dates of disaster" are red-herrings and that by a more realistic/useful measure (comparing the ROI of SS vs what it once was or what an IRA can give, for example) we passed "disaster" decades ago. That's for another thread though...

 

[edward]

No, you said this:

If that were true, it would show-up somewhere in some statistics. I chose unemployment rate, but there are several others (as SteamKing and I discussed). It doesn't. This problem is a figment of your imagination.

But in either case, it was your claim, not mine, so you really should be trying to find the statistics to support it instead of leaving it to me to disprove it.

I wasn't responding to the OP, I was responding to you.

People are notoriously bad at aligning perception with reality. But in either case, if the reality is what is claimed, the statistics should show it. It is better to directly measure something than to guess. And since the statistics exist, there really is no excuse for not using them.

You provided statistics about perceptions about the economy when you could have provided statistics about the economy.

You can pick it apart all you want but you appear to be the one refusing to look at reality. The man below is facing a reality that you won't find in any statistical analysis. It is not erroneously perceived.

This man's changing American dream is the American nightmare. And it isn't an isolated case.

When Joe DeGrella’s construction company failed, he met with a federally funded counselor, who “provided him with a list of job titles the Labor Department determined to be in high demand,” reports the Times. He chose a college certified to offer job training and received a federal retraining grant.

Two years studying to be a cardiology technician at Daymar College, a for-profit in Louisville, left him with $20,000 in debt and no job. Now 57, he moved into his sister’s basement and works at an AutoZone.

About 21 million jobless people entered retraining at community colleges, vocational and business schools, and four-year universities in 2012.

http://communitycollegespotlight.org/tags/debt/

Edit. Yes I do realize that: "At least he is not unemployed."

 

[russ_watters]

You can pick it apart all you want but you appear to be the one refusing to look at reality. The man below is facing a reality that you won't find in any statistical analysis. It is not erroneously perceived.

This man's changing American dream is the American nightmare. And it isn't an isolated case.

That last sentence is precisely what you need to provide statistics to prove.

The key problem with perception vs reality is that these stories come from the news and bad news tends to sell better than good news and sticks with us more. So it creates a false impression of the prevalence of what is being reported.

 

[Dotini]

In Seattle in the 1960's, a man with a high school diploma could go to work at Boeing or Fisher Flour Mill, then expect to buy and pay off a house, have a stay-at-home wife, a muscle car, and maybe a fishing cabin and boat. I know I did, living the dream.

 

[OmCheeto]

In Seattle in the 1960's, a man with a high school diploma could go to work at Boeing or Fisher Flour Mill, then expect to buy and pay off a house, have a stay-at-home wife, a muscle car, and maybe a fishing cabin and boat. I know I did, living the dream.

In the mid 1980's, you could also have come from Kansas, with $125,000, which was half of your inheritance, invested it in Microsoft, and now be worth $50,000,000.

This is what I recall from my friends comments about her brother. He's since been divorced, and worth somewhat less now.

ps. I had dinner in the oven last night, but after reading edward's post, I went out for sushi. The owner had moved here about 25 years ago from Japan. He has, according to my brother, the most respected sushi restaurant in town. I do not doubt that. I expected that he not be there, as he'd been talking of retiring. He was there.

pps. This morning, I threw last night's oven dinner into the recycle bin. It is gone. blech!

ppps. The "Changing American Dream", is, like all dreams, quite dynamic.

 

[mheslep]

Yes, here:

Recall that mfn employment is down, a traditional source of blue collar jobs, even while mfn output is strongly up.

 

[mheslep]

More worrisome is that the recent recession has affected the employment of people in the 25-54 age group, which can't be explained away by retirements

Retirements of boomers are not responsible for the decline in the labor force *rate*. The statistics make themselves blind to regular retirements by defining working age. Boomer retirement accounts for reduction in absolute size, not rate. Millions of working age simply dropped out of the work force during the bust and so far they are not coming back on a trend anywhere close to restoring the pre-bust rate. This means that unemployment rates of now and twenty years ago are not strictly comparable. Data below is current through July this year.https://research.stlouisfed.org/fredgraph.jpg?hires=1&type=image/jpeg&chart_type=line&recession_bars=on&log_scales=&bgcolor=%23e1e9f0&graph_bgcolor=%23black&fo=verdana&ts=12&tts=12&txtcolor=%23444444&show_legend=yes&show_axis_titles=yes&drp=0&cosd=2004-04-29&coed=2013-10-27&width=670&height=445&stacking=&range=Custom&mode=fred&id=CIVPART&transformation=lin&nd=&ost=-99999&oet=99999&scale=left&line_color=%234572a7&line_style=solid&lw=2&mark_type=none&mw=1&mma=0&fml=a&fgst=lin&fq=Monthly&fam=avg&vintage_date=&revision_date=I suspect the jump in disability claims of those still of working age, two year terms of unemployment benefits, and difficulties encountered by small business in this economy have some significant responsibility for those who have simply dropped out the game.

 

[edward]

Quote by edward

You can pick it apart all you want but you appear to be the one refusing to look at reality. The man below is facing a reality that you won't find in any statistical analysis. It is not erroneously perceived.

This man's changing American dream is the American nightmare. And it isn't an isolated case.

That last sentence is precisely what you need to provide statistics to prove.

This former contractor is living in his sisters basement. He doesn't need any statistics to asses his situation. He is the "Joe the Plumber" of the Changing American dream.

The key problem with perception vs reality is that these stories come from the news and bad news tends to sell better than good news and sticks with us more. So it creates a false impression of the prevalence of what is being reported.

This type of story is everywhere I look and in everything I read. It is not an isolated case. The news media uses the same sources as the data collectors do in addition to some that the data collectors don't use.

Fed survey: 40% of households show signs of financial stress

SOURCE:
http://www.latimes.com/business/jobs/la-fi-financial-stress-20140807-story.html

 

[mheslep]

This former contractor is living in his sisters basement. He doesn't need any statistics to asses his situation. He is the "Joe the Plumber" of

This is a significant story, and perhaps you have much more relevant personal experience that would carry weight.

But can't you stop there? This habit of yours where you take your personally valid experience, your views, and attribute them to the entire nation, displacing the experience of 300 million others is unattractive.

 

[edward]

Perhaps I should just say a bit more and then I shall leave it at that.

There are no set of statistics or data that can define the American dream or the Changing American dream as in the OP.

If you want to debate statistics and economics you may brush briefly on the American dream but you will not see it, realize what it is, or comprehend that it is closely tied to the pursuit of happiness.

 

[OmCheeto]

This is a significant story, and perhaps you have much more relevant personal experience that would carry weight.

But can't you stop there? This habit of yours where you take your personally valid experience, your views, and attribute them to the entire nation, displacing the experience of 300 million others is unattractive.

Unattractive, maybe, but I've seen the same thing.

I was at my brothers house a few years back. Same house my family has owned since before I was born. There was a tent in the next door neighbor's yard, and I said; "That's so cool. I've always wanted to pitch a tent in my back yard, and just sleep out there, all summer".

My brother told me that the tent had been there several years.

They apparently cover it with blankets and stuff during the winter.

On the opposite side of the yard, is a shed, in the other neighbor's back yard, with an air conditioner in the window. Yup!

The house next to mine, has a two car garage in the back yard. People have lived in the garage for the last several years. The owner of the main house, who lives about 200 miles away, one day, accused me of vandalism.

I looked him in the eye, and said; "Really? You've got crack heads living in your garage, and I've a management position at a major university, and have lived in this house for 20 years. Really?"

He STFU.

ps. I agree with edward's comment; "...the pursuit of happiness".
It's universal.

I could go on all day, with a War and Peace length edwardian diatribe decline that I've seen, but, as I said; "No one wants to hear my blather".*

------------------------------------
* my apologies, for repeating myself, Mr. B.

 

[lisab]

People already on the margins were hit hard in the recession. I, too, know several. But they're easy to miss, and if you live a "mainstream" life you may not rub shoulders with them very often.

Of course anecdotes don't make good data...so let's look at some data (we love data!).

The food stamp data used in graphs below only go back to 1996, and stop at 2010. But the upward trend is clear:

http://www.ers.usda.gov/amber-waves/2012-march/what%E2%80%99s-behind-the-rise-in-snap-participation.aspx#.VAnK82PFM_A

But data on this site show there is a recent (slight) downward trend in the % of Americans on SNAP ("food stamps") - it's now under 47,000,000:

http://frac.org/reports-and-resources/snapfood-stamp-monthly-participation-data/

Looking at those numbers, it's hard to say times are good and everyone is doing great, and the American Dream is alive and well. We're not in the 1990s anymore, Toto.

 

[OmCheeto]

People already on the margins were hit hard in the recession. I, too, know several. But they're easy to miss, and if you live a "mainstream" life you may not rub shoulders with them very often.

Of course anecdotes don't make good data...so let's look at some data (we love data!).

...
Looking at those numbers, it's hard to say times are good and everyone is doing great, and the American Dream is alive and well. We're not in the 1990s anymore, Toto.

You can download more data from http://www.fns.usda.gov/pd/supplemental-nutrition-assistance-program-snap

It has data going back to 1969.

Here's a graph I just extracted:

Number of people on SNAP by year​

It shows that numerically, SNAP participation has increased by 277% from 2000 through 2013.

year    # of people on SNAP     % of population
1969     2,878,000                  1.42%
2000    17,194,000                  6.09%
2013    47,636,000                 15.1%

I would extrapolate from the graph, the year we are all going be needing food assistance, but I believe I'll be dead by then, so I don't care.

 

[Vanadium 50]

A comment I made some months ago:

Yes, but if the government goes on an advertising spree to try and enroll more people, how do you know what the cause of the changing demographic of recipients is?

 

[OmCheeto]

A comment I made some months ago:

Yes, but if the government goes on an advertising spree to try and enroll more people, how do you know what the cause of the changing demographic of recipients is?

I haven't watched TV in about 6 years, and can't find any data on advertising for the program.

The CBO had this to say:

What Are Some Characteristics of SNAP Beneficiaries?
In 2010, about three out of four SNAP households included a child, a person age 60 or older, or a disabled person. Most people who received SNAP benefits lived in households with very low income, about $8,800 per year on average in that year. The average monthly SNAP benefit per household was $287, or $4.30 per person per day. On average, SNAP benefits boosted gross monthly income by 39 percent for all participating households and by 45 percent for households with children.

I'm afraid I would have to start collecting returnable cans and get SNAP benefits if I only made $8,800 per year. That would leave me only $130 a month after my $600 mortgage payment. Still lower than the lowest though:

What Does the Average Home Owner Pay on a Mortgage?

Meanwhile, in Mississippi, home owners take on the lowest loan amounts at $137,182 or $655 monthly mortgage payments, on average.

 

[Vanadium 50]

I haven't watched TV in about 6 years, and can't find any data on advertising for the program.

http://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=food+stamp+advertising
2 million hits.

This program was somewhat controversial, for a number of reasons (advertising in Mexico attracted criticism on both sides of the spectrum, with the right complaining that it was encouraging illegal immigration, and the left complaining that the money should have been targeting Americans in need) but my point doesn't take any sides in that: if you measure rates pre- and post- advertising, you don't know how much of the change is due to the advertising and how much is due to changes in the underlying economic conditions.

 

[russ_watters]

Right: tracking benefits as a measure of the health of the economy is tough because the programs change, so it is difficult to compare them across time.

 

[Vanadium 50]

Exactly. Nobody would argue that between 1929 and 1935 the US Economy must have been just peachy, because nobody was on Social Security.

 

[russ_watters]

From Lisa's link:

But economic factors alone do not fully explain the growth in SNAP participation. Changes in SNAP policies, some of them associated with the 2002 and 2008 Farm Acts, have made benefits easier to apply for, available to more people, and more generous. Parsing out the relative effects of policy changes and macroeconomic conditions in a dynamic economy is difficult.

 

[lisab]

There are many ways to track the economic health of the US. Also from the link:

http://www.ers.usda.gov/media/360307/feature5_fig01_1_.gif

The number of people in poverty correlates well with SNAP participants (as one would expect).

Both have been increasing since 2000, despite the absence of a media campaign to encourage people to become poor.

 

[OmCheeto]

http://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=food+stamp+advertising
2 million hits.

This program was somewhat controversial, for a number of reasons (advertising in Mexico attracted criticism on both sides of the spectrum, with the right complaining that it was encouraging illegal immigration, and the left complaining that the money should have been targeting Americans in need) but my point doesn't take any sides in that: if you measure rates pre- and post- advertising, you don't know how much of the change is due to the advertising and how much is due to changes in the underlying economic conditions.

Thanks!

http://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q="food+stamp+advertising"
About 7,370 results (0.35 seconds)

I had googled for "SNAP advertising" and got a bunch of advertising agencies named "Snap".

Jan 29, 2014

A new House-passed farm bill bans the Department of Agriculture from actively recruiting or advertising for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), also known as food stamps.

On Wednesday, the House passed the Agriculture Act of 2014, a five-year farm bill, by a vote of 251-166.

(ref)

I can only see one downside to this.

Free money blipverts...​

though... WAIT!
The government will pay off my mortgage?
Let me click on that link!

 

[OmCheeto]

...blipverts...

hmmm...

Last year, PwC^[1] estimated that advertisers spent $63.8 billion on TV, about 75% more than they did on online ads and more than they did on all other traditional media combined.

(ref)

I'm getting so bad at math lately. Does "75% more" mean we multiply $63.8 billion by 1.75?

That would be about $112 billion we spent on advertising, which seems to be a bit more than the $80 billion we are spending to feed poor people.

hmmm...

At least it's more than we spent, feeding our cats, dogs, and goldfish^[2]...

Americans spent a record $56 billion on pets last year

[1] PricewaterhouseCoopers
[2] I paid $18.95 for 7.06 oz (200g) for goldfish food yesterday. Stoopid renters across the street abandoned their 4 goldfish 2 weeks ago, and being a bleeding heart liberal, I took them in...

 

[Astronuc]

"In this 2004 (3-4 years before the economy began to tank and the financial crisis hit the US and other parts of the world) interview, four years ahead of the financial crisis that triggered the Great Recession, Elizabeth Warren, who was then a law professor at Harvard, seems to be looking into a crystal ball."

http://billmoyers.com/segment/flashback-elizabeth-warren-basically-predicts-the-great-recession/

"The active phase of the crisis, which manifested as a liquidity crisis, can be dated from August 9, 2007, when BNP Paribas terminated withdrawals from three hedge funds citing "a complete evaporation of liquidity"."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_crisis_of_2007–08

http://www.theguardian.com/business/2008/dec/28/markets-credit-crunch-banking-2008

 

[mheslep]

So sayeth Bill Moyers.

 

[OmCheeto]

...
Of course anecdotes don't make good data...so let's look at some data (we love data!).
...

Shoah foundation project:

anecdotal style:

107,000 hours of video testimony

data style:

A bunch of people died.
fin​

I like edward's anecdotes.

I spent 3 hours going through that "What [*** ****] is wrong with the US economy" thread yesterday, where I saw one of your anecdotes:

But I don't think you ever saw the economy through my eyes. I work in a lab that serves the building industry. We've been in a recession for many, many months. But things have taken an ugly turn in the last few weeks, from bad to unprecidented. We're looking at a 50% cut in income in the next quarter - and possibly worse in the quarter after that. I expect to lose my job.

It prompted me to post the above, and the following:

100 of my friends just lost their jobs this last Tuesday. They are all younger than I am.

ps. Astro's immediate prior post had me thinking too, in a timeline, kind of way...

The SEC eliminated the uptick rule on July 6, 2007.

from August 9, 2007, when BNP Paribas terminated withdrawals from three hedge funds

When someone can make a billion dollars, in one day, because there are people, making up, "funny rules", then, dreams will die.

----------------------------
ok to delete. my thoughts are saved.
ps. I have about 1000 other thoughts too, but they mostly involve sentences starting with words starting with the letter "F"...

 

[lisab]

Oh I have nothing at all against anecdotes! This particular forum is full of them! They often are better at putting a human touch on a situation than cold, dry facts.

But when dealing with a topic like poverty or underemployment or how our society is changing due to economics, there are soooo much data available! Graphs and tables and statistics :!) - oh yeah baby :!).

And I've yet to see data showing that young people are likely to have a better life (economically) that us old 'uns. That makes me very sad.

 

[OmCheeto]

...

And I've yet to see data showing that young people are likely to have a better life (economically) that us old 'uns. That makes me very sad.

This is exactly what has been eating me all week.

After 999 angry rants on Facebook, someone had the audacity to post:

Actually "HAPPINESS is a Choice" (Abraham Lincoln) So, choose to be HAPPY. It is also a classic book by Minirth. Check it out.

I was so angry by this response, I had to shut up, and say nothing.

I wanted to tell her to go buy 50,000 copies, and distribute them to all the unhappy people in Ferguson. Problem solved!
And those ISIS fellows? Let's translate it into Arabic. Problem solved!
Putin? Russian. Solved!

Just choose to be happy?

Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!

-----------------------------
"There's a darkness upon us that's flooded in light
And I'm [STRIKE]frightened[/STRIKE] [STRIKE]pissed[/STRIKE] frightened by those who wear rose colored glasses, because they don't want to see it"
me and the Avett Bro's.

 

[edward]

So sayeth Bill Moyers.

No actually, so sayeth Elisabeth Warren in 2004 no less. Bill Moyers didn't do the interview.

http://billmoyers.com/segment/flashback-elizabeth-warren-basically-predicts-the-great-recession/