Quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisisall:
Howz about we just limit government's ability to facilitate the rich TAKING money (Haliburton, Blackwater, anyone?) instead of making money? I'd be okay with that, wouldn't you, Kirk? Jong? Or do you guys really have no clue JUST HOW concentrated the wealth has become in this country?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
*Frem takes a magic marker and writes on a 2x4 BAILOUTS, S&L CRISIS, SUBSIDIES, NO BID CONTRACTS, and then bashes Jong over the head with it... several times*

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisisall:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by gorramgroupie:
How does one survive the increasing costs of food, gas, housing, clothing, etc, when wages don't keep up to the increase? Answer me that.

---

By taking any jobs available- even honest ones...

Malisall
]

Actually, I have a great job, one I enjoy and I make the most I ever had, but even price of living in my neck of the woods make it hard to get by, especially if money is not the best thing you're good at. I guess my point was that point of view is everything. Even Hitler didn't think he was bad(Snerk, couldn't help myself). And chrisisall, if you know of any "under the radar" jobs in Idaho, let me know.

I have 6 locks on my door and bolt every other one. I figure no matter how long somebody stands there picking the locks, they're always locking 3 locks.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kirkules:

That "the rich get richer" BS just doesn't fly with me because while the "rich" get richer the "poor" get richer too. As much as I would love to believe we can take money from the "rich" an give it to the "poor" and everything will be just dandy, I know it's not true. Redistribution of wealth by the government will result in a smaller "pie" to divide among the rich and poor and everyone looses in the end.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisisall:

Howz about we just limit government's ability to facilitate the rich TAKING money (Haliburton, Blackwater, anyone?) instead of making money? I'd be okay with that, wouldn't you, Kirk? Jong? Or do you guys really have no clue JUST HOW concentrated the wealth has become in this country?
I could envision a time when peeps here say, "Most homeless get regular meals at the soup kitchens, and have portable 20" flat screen tv's to watch in their cardboard boxes- they're doing fine compared to the poor in the third and fourth worlds!"

A matter of perspective Chrisisall

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kirkules:
I never can figure out who you guys are talking about when you talk about the "poor". The definition changes every few years. Early in my lifetime the "poor" were living in rural areas with not enough to eat and no plumbing, refrigeration, cars, etc. or in slums in the cities. Nobody born in the last 20 years in the US has ever seen a real slum here. I drive through areas that used to be slums and I see new public housing and crack dealers on every other street corner. When I was young the "poor" couldn't afford crack they had to spend every penny on food and housing.

---

Quote:

---

I grew up about as poor as it’s possible to be in this country, and I still had a higher standard of living then probably half of Europe, or at least a third.

---

Quote:

---

Actually, look what happened in Russia when it became the Soviet Union. Same premise, but the wealth never made it down, it just got rearranged between the leaders of the revolution. And you can't just TAKE it either, that's called theft.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:

Quote:

---

I grew up about as poor as it’s possible to be in this country, and I still had a higher standard of living then probably half of Europe, or at least a third.

---

Like? When did you grow up? What did you have that "half" of Europe didn't have?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:

Quote:

---

Actually, look what happened in Russia when it became the Soviet Union. Same premise, but the wealth never made it down, it just got rearranged between the leaders of the revolution. And you can't just TAKE it either, that's called theft.

---

You apparently don't know history. Before the Revolution of 1917 Russia was a destitute backward nation with an ultra-wealthy nobility... gold toilets, 500-room palaces, the works... and a lot of starving peasants and workers. To see what the USSR did, fast forward eighty years and look at what happened when the USSR became Russia again.

Most people became instantaneously impoverished. A few people became VERY wealthy as former national assets were given to a very few. Life expectancy dropped more than 10 years. Infant mortality zoomed. People started pining for the GOOD OLD DAYS OF COMMUNISM.

You really should read history.

---

Quote:

---

Things have turned around in Russia in recent years* and they expect economic growth of 7% or more this year. I predict that sometime in the near future Russia will be an economic threat to the US again for the first time since the 1950's.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
The study, "The EU vs. USA," was done by a pair of economists--Fredrik Bergstrom and Robert Gidehag--for the Swedish think tank Timbro. It found that if Europe were part of the U.S., only tiny Luxembourg could rival the richest of the 50 American states in gross domestic product per capita.

---

In the immortal words of Nomad, I must re-eval-uate...

Open to being corrected Chrisisall

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
Finn- I found some weird figures in the article. But I'll have to get to that tomorrow.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:

I'm not saying anyone has to change their political or economic sympathies, I just want you to appreciate how lucky you are to be an American. I think you owe it to those who are not as lucky as you, to at least be grateful for what you have.

---

Quote:

---

I actually expect you to dismiss everything here outright.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:

Quote:

---

I actually expect you to dismiss everything here outright.

---

Why? I went through the first opinion piece pretty carefully... carefully enough to realize that their numbers didn't square up because they were changing the base of comparison each time they quoted a figure.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
So, as a quick comment on wealth distribution: The bottom half of people in the USA divide about 3% of the total wealth between them, while in Ireland, Sweden, Norway etc they share about 12%. Even if the European average per capita GDP is lower than the USA's by about 35%, MOST of the European population 's wealth is greater than MOST American's wealth by a factor of two.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
It’s not a secret that you’re an ardent and diehard proponent of the welfare state.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisisall:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
It’s not a secret that you’re an ardent and diehard proponent of the welfare state.

---

Whoah (to use a Keanu phrase), that's a jump, why not just call her a Commie?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
Because I don’t think Signym is a communist.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fletch2:
Are the European GDP figures

1) Current --- last time I checked the Eurozone had a higher GDP than the US, seems strange that it should appear less. Also seems strange that Luxembourg "makes the list" and Norway doesnt, especially as Norway has one of the best economies in the world according to Forbes.

2) Is this "corrected" GDP? Per capita GDP for Europe doesn't usually take into account shorter work weeks and longer vacations. Factored in the GDP per capita of US and EU as GDP/per worked hour tends to be the same.

Having worked under both systems I would take the standard of living hit for the flexibility of lifestyle.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:
I don't really see your point about perceptions here Geezer. I'm sure people who have always been well off like you and lawyer types like Hero think the economy is doing great. (I'm only assuming based on your previous post that you have always been privelaged.)

---

Quote:

---

Sure... who said inflation didn't hit everybody? Not me. But $3.09 for gas and $6.89 for a pack of smokes sure kills the guy making $30,000 a year much more than the guy who's making $90,000 a year.

---

Quote:

---

We'll see about the AMT Geeze... I don't buy it for a second. I know there was a one year repreive, which incidentally is going to delay tax returns for most people this year,

---

Quote:

---

What of my grandfather who raised a family of 7 on a single income as a grocery store manager? Will you concede that this is not possible today?

---

Quote:

---

And sure... smoking is my choice Geeze. I am in no short supply of people who tell me that, but all of those fat fuckers choose to eat more than their share, or they pop their prozac or viagra or they watch too much TV or indulge in too much porn. Whatever...

---

Quote:

---

What I saw was you dismissing it as propaganda.

---

Quote:

---

It’s not a secret that you’re an ardent and diehard proponent of the welfare state. I know this not what you want to hear.

---

Quote:

---

Right off the bat, this is not even remotely close to being true. The bottom half of the US population does not divide only 3% of the wealth between them. I don’t know where you get your numbers, but actually, the lowest quintile, that’s lowest 20%, not bottom half, divide around 5% of the wealth in the US and in Sweden they divide about 10% of the wealth.

---

Quote:

---

But this still doesn’t address the assertion as provided by the research in this document that 40% of the households in Sweden would be defined as poor by the US Census Bureau.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
Here's the math: If the USA's per capita GDP is- say- "1.0" that would make Europe's per capital GDP "0.65". If half the USA population has only 3% of that "1", their per capita GDP is 3%. But if the bottom half of Europe's population shares 12% of the GDP, their per capital share of the GDP is 12% * 0.6= 7%. So half of their population is richer than ours by about a factor of two. I) 'll double check this tomorrow- this was just a back-of-the-envelope calculation.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fletch2:
Are the European GDP figures

1) Current --- last time I checked the Eurozone had a higher GDP than the US, seems strange that it should appear less. Also seems strange that Luxembourg "makes the list" and Norway doesnt, especially as Norway has one of the best economies in the world according to Forbes.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fletch2:
2) Is this "corrected" GDP? Per capita GDP for Europe doesn't usually take into account shorter work weeks and longer vacations. Factored in the GDP per capita of US and EU as GDP/per worked hour tends to be the same.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
Since you're the one touting the article, instead of making me write a Master's thesis on YOUR chosen article, why don't you tell us? I mean, you're the one who posted this, so why don't YOU explain it?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
Ach! FINN! I haven't dismissed the article. I intend to look at it rather closely. But YOU asked why the Census Bureau would classify so many Swedish households as being impoverished. I dunno- maybe it's because Swedes don't have AC. (That's a joke BTW) I know enough to know that the Census Bureau uses a different set of measures than the CBO, BEA, or any number of other economic analyses. I haven't looked into what the Census criteria is. But since it's your article, figure it out and let us know.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
I picked GDP because that's what Finn chose to post about. Ask him, don't ask me. :shrugs shoulders:


Thanks for posting the link to nationmaster. I forgot all about it. But I really do have to do something productive today.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Geezer:
And that's their choice too. But you want Mr. Corpo to pay for the results of your addiction, but not for theirs. See what I mean about perception being important?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:
BTW.... glad you didn't take offence to my last post. The "Fuck you if you can't afford a new engine for your yacht" remark wasn't directed towards you, but anyone who whines about the cost of a yacht engine increasing because of inflation.

---

Quote:

---

Swedes have a concept called Lagom, which means "enough" is an important cultural idea.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Geezer:
Not a problem. Besides, my yacht doesn't have an engine, just illegal immigrants chained to the oars.

---

Quote:

---

The study, "The EU vs. USA," was done by a pair of economists--Fredrik Bergstrom and Robert Gidehag--for the Swedish think tank Timbro. It found that if Europe were part of the U.S., only tiny Luxembourg could rival the richest of the 50 American states in gross domestic product per capita. Most European countries would rank below the U.S. average, as the chart below shows.

---

Quote:

---

America’s GDP is far higher than Europe’s and has been so for a long time now, and the American economy has been growing faster than the economies of many European countries in recent decades, not least those of countries like France, Germany and Sweden.

---

Quote:

---

Expressed on a per capita basis, GDP growth rates in the US and the EU are virtually the same over the past decade. The same is true of labour productivity growth.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fletch2:
A few notes since Sweden is somewhere I know about.

1) Most urban Swedes dont own cars, in part because public transport is good in part because the government makes it very hard to get licences (for safety and congestion purposes.) The Swedish driving test has 3 manitory parts, a theoretical, a practical and a "slippy test" which is conducted on a rig that can simulate a car skiding. Since the slippy rigs are in short supply it's not uncomon to have to wait several months to attempt that part of the test. Very few people actually pass the test first time. You REALLY have to want a licence to dedicate the time and money needed to get it.

Consequently if "middleclassness" assumes the ownership of a car, then there are problems.

2) Swedish municiple taxes are calculated in part on the square meterage of your property (minus some areas that you get for free like corridors, kitchens and bathrooms. Because the state of the property does not enter into the floorspace calculation a rundown loft or a palacial mansion can pull in the same taxes. Since people dont like paying taxes they tend to live in the smallest homes they can get away with. My own house had the following characteristics.

1) Large kitchen
2) Large bathroom
3) very wide corridors (people tend to use "free" corridor space for other things, I used the hallway as an office.)

So if "middleclassness" assumes large houses then you wont find them in Sweden. Oh but most Urban Swedes also maintain a summer house -- a cottage somewhere in the country many of which get quite large --- ironically these seasonal holiday houses are not taxed if they are not used all year, so it's fairly normal that the summer house is far bigger than the primary home.

3) Swedes have a concept called Lagom, which means "enough" is an important cultural idea. There isnt really conspicuous consumption for example people wont have a TV in a room where it would rarely be used even if it was dirt cheap to buy. If total number of TV's or none essential discresionary spending is an example of "middleclassness" then you might find that missing in Sweden.

It is in short very different. When we moved to the US we went to Target to get towels for our new second (but mostly unused) bathroom. There was no shop like Target in Stockholm and nothing that sold things quite that cheaply. On the other hand the Target towels quickly became threadbear and were replaced while our more expensive Swedish bought towels are still going strong. A Swede won't buy things just because they are cheap, all the textiles and soft furnishings we brought with us are still going strong. A Swede may not have as many TV's or towels or cars but the ones he does have are generally better quality. If you look just at the amount of stuff and not at what it is then you can be missled.

---