Originally posted by schwarzchildradius
They might be, but unemployment is also rising. I don't see how income could be rising for very long if unemployment is swelling! If there are more potential hole-diggers, the cost of a hole goes Down!
I'm talking LONG TERM here. Unenployment is up in the past two years, but even that isn't all that high historically. In the US, unemployment always fluctuates from about 4-8% with the economic cycle except in severe recession or depression. That is NOT something that has changed. As the economy recovers, the unemployment rate will again go down toward the lower end of that range. It always has and it will agin.
Check out the historical income tables http://www.census.gov/hhes/income/histinc/histinctb.html There are a bunch of tables. Slice the data any way you choose. Individuals, households, families, whatever. Overall, the income levels of EVERY BRACKET has increased about 9 of every 10 years since 1967 (as far back as the tables go).
The reality is, not everyone can be a rock star.
Zero, if you have data that supports your opinion, I'll certainly read it. The data I have provided directly contradicts your opinion and attacking me personally won't prove you are right.
Read the book... its outlandish. H.G. Wells is a classic writer.
Sounds like an interesting book. I may read it. There is a major flaw in what you describe though. Not everyone has either the intelligence nor the desire to be a nuclear physicist. I certainly don't. And I agree with schwarz on this - it does sound like communism. Communism sounds nice in theory, but it doesn't fit with human nature (for the reason I described) and is unworkable in the large scale.
I know its sounds communistic... but, so does democracy when you boil it down to its roots which seem to say... equal opportunity for all.
My boss described the political spectrum as a circle - taking both democracy and communism to their extremes makes them very similar in some respects. I don't buy that they connect, but I'll agree that they are close.
Russ you left out the part where I believe this country's dreams of success is benefiting from the means of foreign countries. The corporations that most Americans work for in one manner or another takes advantage of other countries most powerful resources (people) and in most cases abuses it. Corporations are taking advantage of other countries lax humanitarian laws -- just read the papers. These are the people who are falling.
People in Indonesia are not failing because they make Nike's for low wages. The alternative to those low wages is starvation. I would prefer it if all countries would reform and become stable, prosperous capitalistic democracies like the western world, but the 300 million people in the US can't make it happen for the 5 billion in the 3rd world. They are going to have to do it largely on their own. Either way, the presence of Nike is HELPING these people, not hurting them. it is putting MORE money into the local economy than was there before.
These countries continue to grow poor while we grow rich.
3rd world countries are not "grow[ing] poor" they have always BEEN poor. There isn't anything that they have that we can take from them to make them more poor.
Raven, are you suggesting that the US should start taking over and modernizing all of the 3rd world countries in the world?
All talk to the contrary, it seems that the stock market expansion of the 1990's was nothing but a bubble.
It WAS a bubble, Zero - not unlike 1929 (though nowhere near as bad when it burst). But just like 1929 it will grow again. Through its entire history, the stock market has averaged about a 12% yearly gain (I believe that's NOT adjusted for inflation) and has never been down for more than 15 years at a time.
