An observation in regards to the republican primary.

[Hawkeye10]

Oh, we are severely disappointed in the morons supporting Trump.

You don't have to worry about that one.

Ok, that was cute....

 

[Hawkeye10]

Are you using statements made by fathers about their Hustler centerfold daughters (from the 1970s) as a justification for why its ok for a Presidential candidate to speak that way of his daughter?

No, I am using the modern American males respect and admiration for their daughters erotic lives and health to argue that you should not have a cow man about Trump knowing that his daughter has got it.

 

[lpast]

I don't know of a single candidate that speaks of illegal immigration in a positive light. Now, the democrats might address the people in a more neutral manner and/or be willing to offer those here a path towards legitimacy, but they aren't advocating that anyone come to the States illegally.

Maybe I wasnt clear I didnt mean they speak of it in a positive light, they are for comprehensive reform which is a code word for amnesty.
Rubio biggest phony of all of them when it comes to his stance today compared to when he was one of the gang of 8,

I remember well when cruz hit the senate and and to me acted like a buffoon, he attacked everyone soley to bring attention to himself in that he was successful, everything else he did was a fail.

 

[lpast]

.....no. Conservative Republicans have been fighting the fight on Immigration for years (some for decades). The late-comer who changed his tune 30 seconds ago is Trump, not Cruz et al.

Big money doesn't determine who the nominee is - the voters do, or the delegates do. Money is at best indirect in its effect. If BIG MONEY were the winner, Jeb Bush wouldn't have dropped out, his $100 million would have given him dominance.

Reagan gave blanket amnesty to 3.5 illegal immigrants and it was him that set the stage for what we have today. Ive been awake the last 47 yrs ive been voting. The republican party "mentions" illegal immigration now and then kind of like chumming their base to bite. In reality they have done absolutely nothing to stop illegal immigration. They put things up for votes when they know they wont pass.

Truth is corporate lobbiests want illegal immigration diluting the work force stifles wages from the bottom up.

I dont know how old you are Cpwill you may remember this or not. There was a time in america that a father could to work one job, have his wife stay home with the children, pay for a house and a car and a vacation once a year, with a high school education.

THAT WAS THE AMERICAN DREAM thats when the term started. Now we have people that work that qualify for food stamps and some are homeless.

 

[cpwill]

I dont know how old you are Cpwill you may remember this or not. There was a time in america that a father could to work one job, have his wife stay home with the children, pay for a house and a car and a vacation once a year, with a high school education.

Yeah. You are describing the first decade or so of my working life. Wife, three kids, renting an apartment then a house while building up savings, couple of paid-off cars, etc.

The problem generally isn't that we can't do this anymore - it's that people want to overconsume.

 

[lpast]

Yeah. You are describing the first decade or so of my working life. Wife, three kids, renting an apartment then a house while building up savings, couple of paid-off cars, etc.

The problem generally isn't that we can't do this anymore - it's that people want to overconsume.

I absolutely disagree, the reason we can no longer do that is because corporate america has stagnated wages and stripped employees of benefits. No more health benefits and pensions. They whine they cant afford it while their profits have soared and they pay top ceos in pay and bonus what the payroll of the company is.

 

[cpwill]

I absolutely disagree

It doesn't matter if you disagree. I did it, and everyone around me was generally doing it. 2005-2014. In 2014, I got a job that did not require a college degree, but which the degree that I had earned helped me achieve. Not sure how you'd score that.

the reason we can no longer do that is because corporate america has stagnated wages and stripped employees of benefits.

Actually benefits have expanded dramatically, while wages have flattened without flattening. But if it were true that wages were (relative to inflation) flat, then that means that the ability would have remained.

No more health benefits and pensions.

Actually (again), employer expenditures on health benefits have grown dramatically. There has been a shift from the Industrial-Era Pension system to a 401(k) model, which is good for a modern economy and modern workers.

 

[Sweden]

Or better yet, a Muslim! Of course that would also cost your vote, along with the vote every other islamophobe in the country.

I am critical of the Islamist philosophy and the political agenda that goes with it. It is contrary to all that I want: freedom of thought, belief and expression: equality of the sexes: tolerance: the absence of cruel and unjust laws and punishments. Stamp your little feet and screech "islamophobe" if you wish. After all that's much easier than trying to defend putting gays to death.

 

[MrT]

I am critical of the Islamist philosophy and the political agenda that goes with it. It is contrary to all that I want: freedom of thought, belief and expression: equality of the sexes: tolerance: the absence of cruel and unjust laws and punishments. Stamp your little feet and screech "islamophobe" if you wish. After all that's much easier than trying to defend putting gays to death.

I am calling you an islamophobe because you believe that Muslims are the only ones who put gays to death.

 

[lpast]

It doesn't matter if you disagree. I did it, and everyone around me was generally doing it. 2005-2014. In 2014, I got a job that did not require a college degree, but which the degree that I had earned helped me achieve. Not sure how you'd score that.



Actually benefits have expanded dramatically, while wages have flattened without flattening. But if it were true that wages were (relative to inflation) flat, then that means that the ability would have remained.



Actually (again), employer expenditures on health benefits have grown dramatically. There has been a shift from the Industrial-Era Pension system to a 401(k) model, which is good for a modern economy and modern workers.

Most big employers have dropped paid health care and the switch to a 401K pension system gave wall street a many billions of dollar windfall and the corps pay NOTHING towards pensions. Seriously Cp do you think everyone lives in a cocoon

 

[JasperL]

It doesn't matter if you disagree. I did it, and everyone around me was generally doing it. 2005-2014. In 2014, I got a job that did not require a college degree, but which the degree that I had earned helped me achieve. Not sure how you'd score that.

Anecdotes =/= evidence.

Actually benefits have expanded dramatically, while wages have flattened without flattening. But if it were true that wages were (relative to inflation) flat, then that means that the ability would have remained.

Sure, at 1970s standard of living. I agree you have a point, that if we were to accept stagnant living standards that stagnant wages would be OK, but then we get back to the point that if that's all we are going to spend or can sustainably spend, which is roughly real wages, we can't also have a growing economy.

Actually (again), employer expenditures on health benefits have grown dramatically. There has been a shift from the Industrial-Era Pension system to a 401(k) model, which is good for a modern economy and modern workers.

The growth in the share of wages paid in health benefits is really just inflation. Yes, health benefits have gotten better so there is a real benefit in some ways, but lots of that is just inflation and all the bad that brings.

And 401(k)s and defined contribution plans in general have been a disaster for workers, but fantastic for employers and fee based investment firms, etc.

Seriously, you appear to read the financial press, I can't believe you've not run across the stats on that.

 

[cpwill]

Most big employers have dropped paid health care and the switch to a 401K pension system gave wall street a many billions of dollar windfall and the corps pay NOTHING towards pensions. Seriously Cp do you think everyone lives in a cocoon

:shrug: the data does not support your claims. Many employers have had to give up healthcare (accelerated in the wake of Obamacare), as we have an amazingly idiotic socialized-prepayment system that we decided politically to double-down on.

You are trying to tell me that my life didn't happen. :shrug: Sorry, you are going to fail at that. It's a common mantra, it just happens to not be true.

 

[cpwill]

Anecdotes =/= evidence.

The claim was that you can't. People achieving what can't be done indicates that, in fact, it can be done. Much of the household-v-income-v-workers breakdown isn't driven by wages, but in fact, by divorce and lack of marriage. Two households, amazingly, turn out to be more expensive than one.

Sure, at 1970s standard of living.

On the contrary, because of the incredible advances in technology, at a much higher standard of living. 2.5 cars. Universal A/C. A computer or two in every home, and a smart phone in every pocket. Food prices are lower as a portion of our household budget. Our cars are safer, and cost us less in gas.

Nor do flat economy-wide wages mean that individual incomes are stagnant. Our incomes rise as we age - meaning that the individual experience of Americans is still pay raises, even as broad indexes slow in growth.

It's been a disaster for workers, good for employers and fee based investment firms, etc.

Seriously, you appear to read the financial press, I can't believe you've not run across the stats on that.

Some high-profile incidents of 401(k)s have gone bad, certainly. There have also been lots of incidents of pensions going bad.

Pensions, however, are typically awarded at the end of a working lifetime for decades' of labor. That is no longer the American norm - Americans tend to job-hop, switching positions every four years or so. A Pension for Americans means a retirement program that only very few can benefit from. A 401(k) for Americans is something you can take with you, that will follow you, and be there when you retire, whether you have one job or 8 jobs over your career. In 2014, for example, I left a job that came with a pension attached after 20 years of service, having only worked there for a little over 8 years. I got? Precisely bupkis. The same job had a 401(k) account that they hadn't put money into, but which I had. That money is still mine.

 

[Sweden]

I am calling you an islamophobe because you believe that Muslims are the only ones who put gays to death.

I believe only Islamic states have laws punishing homosexuality with the death penalty. If you know of others please tell us.

 

[Moot]

To be fair, he is uniting America....


In the #NeverTrump campaign.

He's uniting white supremacists.

But he's also uniting Hispanics, Blacks, Asians, women, veterans, seniors, gays, democrats, republicans, congress and other nations against him.

 

[cpwill]

He's uniting white supremacists.

.... that is also true, yes.

 

[JasperL]

The claim was that you can't. People achieving what can't be done indicates that, in fact, it can be done. Much of the household-v-income-v-workers breakdown isn't driven by wages, but in fact, by divorce and lack of marriage. Two households, amazingly, turn out to be more expensive than one.

LOL, if someone says "we can no longer do that" it's obviously in the general sense, not that is is literally impossible for ANYONE to EVER do that.

I'm not sure if that's true about divorce, etc. - if you look at median household income or median wages per worker, the story is very similar, with income mostly flat for decades. Do you have any stats? And again a lot of economic growth is fueled with working women providing a second income. Seems like you want it many ways at the same time.

On the contrary, because of the incredible advances in technology, at a much higher standard of living. 2.5 cars. Universal A/C. A computer or two in every home, and a smart phone in every pocket. Food prices are lower as a portion of our household budget. Our cars are safer, and cost us less in gas.

I think you're making an argument that living standards are improving with flat real wages, and I haven't seen any evidence that that is true.

Nor do flat economy-wide wages mean that individual incomes are stagnant. Our incomes rise as we age - meaning that the individual experience of Americans is still pay raises, even as broad indexes slow in growth.

That's how it's supposed to work but it's sort of broken down in recent years for a lot of people. It's the flip side of the decline of unions, seniority, job stability, etc. that you mention with pensions.

Some high-profile incidents of 401(k)s have gone bad, certainly. There have also been lots of incidents of pensions going bad.

Pensions, however, are typically awarded at the end of a working lifetime for decades' of labor. That is no longer the American norm - Americans tend to job-hop, switching positions every four years or so. A Pension for Americans means a retirement program that only very few can benefit from. A 401(k) for Americans is something you can take with you, that will follow you, and be there when you retire, whether you have one job or 8 jobs over your career. In 2014, for example, I left a job that came with a pension attached after 20 years of service, having only worked there for a little over 8 years. I got? Precisely bupkis. The same job had a 401(k) account that they hadn't put money into, but which I had. That money is still mine.

I'm just talking about the observed evidence that there are HUGE shares of the working population who have effectively no pension at all, or woefully inadequate pensions. Pushing the burden of saving and investing to people who have seen flat incomes and no experience in investing or even basic financial planning will absolutely leave a whole lot of working class people retiring in relative poverty. Those in the pension field recognize it as a looming and mostly unnoticed crisis on the horizon.

 

[cpwill]

LOL, if someone says "we can no longer do that" it's obviously in the general sense, not that is is literally impossible for ANYONE to EVER do that.

:shrug: Generally it is still possible as well. I was bringing home about ~2300(ish) a month or so, wife and kid, paid off cars, all that good stuff. We used the dark power of "budgeting" to achieve the magical status of "responsibly living on less than we made".

I'm not sure if that's true about divorce, etc. - if you look at median household income or median wages per worker, the story is very similar, with income mostly flat for decades. Do you have any stats? And again a lot of economic growth is fueled with working women providing a second income. Seems like you want it many ways at the same time.

You are right that more women have entered the workforce. The point is that that has occurred as household formation has reduced. So, if you shift from a married man in 1970 with a wife and kid making $50,000, to a single man and a single woman in 2015 with a kid between them, with the man making $60,000, and the woman making $40,000, then in fact the income between them has doubled, but the average has remained flat.

Is that all of it? Nope. But it's a good chunk.

I think you're making an argument that living standards are improving with flat real wages, and I haven't seen any evidence that that is true.

Did you type that response into a personal computer?

That's how it's supposed to work but it's sort of broken down in recent years for a lot of people. It's the flip side of the decline of unions, seniority, job stability, etc. that you mention with pensions.

Er.... no. Generally people's incomes still rise pretty significantly as they age.



Those gaps have generally remained about comparable over the last few decades, with of course the exception of our Seniors v our teenagers.

I'm just talking about the observed evidence that there are HUGE shares of the working population who have effectively no pension at all, or woefully inadequate pensions

Okay. They are also job hopping every 4.6 years, meaning that if that job offered a pension, it would be useless to them. A 401(k), on the other hand, travels with them, and belongs to them, meaning that when the company decides to invest the entire pension fund in buying back their own stock so as to push management's options higher, they are protected because they aren't trapped in it.

Pushing the burden of saving and investing to people who have seen flat incomes and no experience in investing or even basic financial planning will absolutely leave a whole lot of working class people retiring in relative poverty.

You're going to have to sell that song to someone who hasn't run the numbers hundreds of times for low and moderate income families. They will retire in relative poverty only if they lack consistent discipline over their working life.

That being said, I do favor the transition of Social Security into a forced-savings program for the reason that most Americans do, in fact, lack fiscal discipline.

 

[lpast]

:shrug: the data does not support your claims. Many employers have had to give up healthcare (accelerated in the wake of Obamacare), as we have an amazingly idiotic socialized-prepayment system that we decided politically to double-down on.

You are trying to tell me that my life didn't happen. :shrug: Sorry, you are going to fail at that. It's a common mantra, it just happens to not be true.

I made no statement as to you life, I did however state what I know to be true and the data does support that. No sense in beleaguring our difference in beliefs and opinon

 

[Sweden]

I am calling you an islamophobe because you believe that Muslims are the only ones who put gays to death.

Here is another reason why I am an "islamaphobe".

The Islamic Pakistani lawyers who are behind surge in blasphemy Prosecutions | Daily Mail Online

Do you support putting people to death for their alleged disrespect of this evil belief system?