141–150 of 394 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is someone wealthy just because the house they own has grown in value? Practical wealth is how much you have relative to the cost of living. Someone in a $1M house is not necessarily more wealthy than when their house was $100K if all their other living expenses have also grown 10x.
If they are near retirement they could always reverse mortgage it. Our generation will not have that option.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That isn't going to happen easily. My experience: I've talked about this to many people (highly educated, smart people) - most of them are adamant on the idea that human beings absolutely have to work to deserve anything, even food and water. This might very well be anecdotal, but very few people get ideas like Basic Income intuitively. It would likely take tremendous amount to first make people understand, then acce…
All humans have a psychological need to be needed. The current way to best feel this is to provide income for yourself and your family through work, and provide a service for your employer. This is extremely satisfying for a majority of people. Take away work and these two things collapse. To get UBI to work, we need a new way for people to feel needed.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree. I've seen a lot of people who have no intention of "settling down" or "having kids" become surprised when their peers who do exactly that become more "successful" (earn more money, move up in job position, etc.). I think making the decision to have kids instills a bit of discipline to get something stable in life.
IIRC there are also studies that suggest employers are more likely to give you raises, promotions, and increased hours if you have a family.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Price per square foot for housing has remained remarkably constant over time. People are spending more on houses than they used to because they are buying bigger houses.
Real house prices are currently up 44% since the nineties. https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-OOfzxFgh8YE/WD2XUyaZeqI/AAAAAAAAp... That is not accounted for by sq footage. Interest rates are a much more likely culprit.
I object to the subtitle "It becomes harder to reverse this trend" like it's an inexorable march without any possible cause. Just look at the difference in context between today and the 1972 reference date for the start of the study. Globalization and automation have taken a huge chunk out of the manufacturing sector, but the US economy has by now (at an aggregate) replaced those positions with knowledge/retail/servi…
The problem with Trump from that perspective is that Donald Trump is not exactly on the side of powerful unions, strong social safety nets, and taxing rich people. He did leverage anti-elite sentiment, but he did it unfortunately with walls and "keep the Muslims out", not unions, safety nets, and progressive taxation. Donald Trump as far as I know is largely anti-union, not on the side of more progressive taxation, a…
Actually a big part of his appeal was that he was strongly for attempting to keep existing safety nets. Particularly when compared to the Paul Ryan "true conservative" wing.
His tax policy is a little more mysterious because it's fairly clear from his speeches that he wasn't reading any of the proposals that his campaign was putting out.
He worked in construction, real estate, and running hotels / casinos. And he tried to avoid hiring illegals. So he has a history of working productively with unions. Although I'm sure there are some nasty disputes in his past.
So I'd say he's more pro-union and pro-safety net than a typical Republican nominee.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is someone wealthy just because the house they own has grown in value? Practical wealth is how much you have relative to the cost of living. Someone in a $1M house is not necessarily more wealthy than when their house was $100K if all their other living expenses have also grown 10x.
If they are near retirement they could always reverse mortgage it. Our generation will not have that option.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If they are near retirement they could always reverse mortgage it. Our generation will not have that option.
Why won't we?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem with Trump from that perspective is that Donald Trump is not exactly on the side of powerful unions, strong social safety nets, and taxing rich people. He did leverage anti-elite sentiment, but he did it unfortunately with walls and "keep the Muslims out", not unions, safety nets, and progressive taxation. Donald Trump as far as I know is largely anti-union, not on the side of more progressive taxation, a…
> Donald Trump as far as I know is largely anti-union, not on the side of more progressive taxation, and not on the side of strong safety nets. Actually a big part of his appeal was that he was strongly for attempting to keep existing safety nets. Particularly when compared to the Paul Ryan "true conservative" wing. His tax policy is a little more mysterious because it's fairly clear from his speeches that he wasn't…
That would be true if he had the first interest in actually governing. So far his approach appears to be "Hand off decisions to existing Republicans and talk shit on Twitter".
I object to the subtitle "It becomes harder to reverse this trend" like it's an inexorable march without any possible cause. Just look at the difference in context between today and the 1972 reference date for the start of the study. Globalization and automation have taken a huge chunk out of the manufacturing sector, but the US economy has by now (at an aggregate) replaced those positions with knowledge/retail/servi…
The problem with Trump from that perspective is that Donald Trump is not exactly on the side of powerful unions, strong social safety nets, and taxing rich people. He did leverage anti-elite sentiment, but he did it unfortunately with walls and "keep the Muslims out", not unions, safety nets, and progressive taxation. Donald Trump as far as I know is largely anti-union, not on the side of more progressive taxation, a…
edit: To clarify I meant that if there were a pro-labor candidate in the general election Trumps populist message would have been less effective.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is based on a history of recessions. Unfortunately this one is different (really)... We've never had interest rates so low for so long. It's possible, and I consider it likely, that those younger will be even more affected. Consider the possibility that parents run out of money and living in the basement isn't even an option. Also consider there is a decent chance for another recession before this one is even ov…
The last recession ended in 2009.