You-Read-It-Here-First Forum Index You-Read-It-Here-First
A collection of textual novelties
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
If you want to read the articles here, go ahead, just click on a forum and find a thread that interests you...no need to register! If you want to post something... either new or in response to someone here, then click the Register link above. It's free... and it's fun to write your ideas here. You can even create a "blog" by starting a personal thread in the Daily Life Every Thread A Diary section...

Poor Get Richer

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    You-Read-It-Here-First Forum Index -> Economic Skirmishes on the Borders of the Status Quo
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
jabailo



Joined: 20 Mar 2006
Posts: 1273
Location: Kent (East Hill), WA

PostPosted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 10:56 am    Post subject: Poor Get Richer Reply with quote

I have long contended that what many referred to as the economic halcyon days of the Clinton Administration were actually not so good for the poor (or the middle class). While they may cite decreasing poverty rates, at the same time there was rampant inflation in critical areas like housing. And the Clinton support for a runaway stock market definitely made some get inordinately rich without adding corresponding value, but left others stuggling to catch up.

I think the Bush policies in the past 6 years have done what it takes to let the bottom 1/3 finally get real money and for the middle 1/3 to catch up with the top third...and in all fairness, it's that middle third, the professionals and technologists who are providing real value to our society.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/08/business/08wage.html?ex=1323234000&en=fa278bf6ba900eac&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss

Quote:
Long a Laggard, Wages Start to Outpace Prices

The average hourly wage for workers below management level — everyone from school bus drivers to stockbrokers — rose 2.8 percent from October 2005 to October of this year, after being adjusted for inflation, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Only a year ago, it was falling by 1.5 percent.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Visit the Instant Postcard Collection @ http://instant-postcard-collection.com
Looking for postcards of that favorite place? Family origins? Or that perfect vacation, except for the photos?
Researching your dissertation? Serious collector? Just looking for something neat?
You've found the right place to add to your existing collection, or to start a new one.
jabailo



Joined: 20 Mar 2006
Posts: 1273
Location: Kent (East Hill), WA

PostPosted: Sun Jun 01, 2008 8:19 am    Post subject: Rich getting Poorer (anecdotal) Reply with quote

It’s Not So Easy Being Less Rich
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/01/fashion/01rich.html?_r=1&ref=fashion&oref=slogin
Quote:

But Ms. Chemtob’s clients are concerned all the same, she said, because their incomes have shrunk, say, to $2 million a year from $8 million, and they know that their 2008 bonus checks are likely to be much less impressive.

One of her clients recently confessed that his net worth had decreased to $8 million from more than $20 million, and he thinks that his wife will leave him. He has hidden their fall in fortune by taking on debt to pay for her extravagant clothes and vacations.

“I literally had to sit there and tell him that he had to tell his wife that she had to stop spending,” she said. “He was actually scared she would leave him because their financial situation changed so drastically.”
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
jabailo



Joined: 20 Mar 2006
Posts: 1273
Location: Kent (East Hill), WA

PostPosted: Sun Jun 01, 2008 5:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Home-Price Erosion Hits the $5 Million-Plus Market
http://finance.yahoo.com/real-estate/article/105161/Cheap-Chic:-Home-Price-Erosion-Hits-the-%245-Million-Plus-Market

Quote:

After seeming impervious to the main market's woes of the past two years, homes in the $5 million-plus market have come down an estimated 10% to 15% in the past two quarters, and they are likely to shed another 10% or more over the next 12 months, according to Housing Predictor, a Destin, Fla., company that crunches data on 250 U.S. regions. "The high-end market is the fortress of the real-estate asset class, and the inner sanctum has been breached," says David Darst, chief investment strategist at Morgan Stanley.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
jabailo



Joined: 20 Mar 2006
Posts: 1273
Location: Kent (East Hill), WA

PostPosted: Mon Aug 04, 2008 6:09 pm    Post subject: Welcome Back To Earth, Dimwits Reply with quote

Rich are not so different when economy is down
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2008090024_wealthy04.html

Quote:
DiRenzo says he's feeling the hit in many places, especially in the value of his house on Long Island's upscale Gold Coast in Muttontown, N.Y.

He owns the kind of place you'd expect a former hedge-fund manager would call home: six bedrooms, seven full baths, hand-crafted Italian doors throughout, high-tech security and sound systems, and 9,000 square feet of living space on 2.4 acres.

It can be had for $7 million — a good deal, he says, when you consider his next-door neighbor's comparable home sold for $9 million last fall. He has cut the price twice in the 12 months it's been on the market.

DiRenzo wants a smaller, cheaper home. He also may buy a hybrid to supplement the two Mercedes in his heated four-car garage. And, he's driving less.

The DiRenzos aren't unlike many American families cutting back to weather a downturn. They're just richer.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Visit the Instant Postcard Collection @ http://instant-postcard-collection.com
Looking for postcards of that favorite place? Family origins? Or that perfect vacation, except for the photos?
Researching your dissertation? Serious collector? Just looking for something neat?
You've found the right place to add to your existing collection, or to start a new one.
brian-hansen
Site Admin


Joined: 17 Mar 2006
Posts: 712
Location: Oregon

PostPosted: Thu Aug 07, 2008 12:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I find myself intrigued by your view on housing prices. In particular,
the likelihood, the depth, and the positive value of a continued housing
price drop.

I don't have a clear idea in my mind about the first two notions.
Prediction is notoriously difficult, and reasonable people can
arrive at different conclusions, none of which may subsequently be
borne out. My own intuition is that your predictions *are* fairly
plausible: it's pretty likely that housing prices will continue to decline
or remain flat for several more years.

The third notion is not so much a prediction than a point of
philosophy.

We seem to share some core ideas about the ill-effects of
rising economic inequality. I view the rapid rise in the inequality
of wealth to be a positive danger to democracy.

The popping of the real estate bubble has caused and is causing
a "shakeout" of questionable deals and speculation. Of course,
innocent bystanders got hurt, too.

So, this is all prelude to the thing which motivated me to post a
reply. Your description of the housing inflation during the Clinton
presidency. Briefly, that isn't the way I remember it.

My recollection is that house price inflation didn't really start
taking off until around 1999-2001, and it really took hold from
2001-2006. Of course, regions vary. I looked around to find
some data on housing price inflation. I found:

http://www.socalbubble.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=510

and
http://lansner.freedomblogging.com/2008/06/24/sp-ranks-this-housing-slump-deeper-than-1990s/

For an analysis *and* prediction, I found:
http://www.oftwominds.com/blogoct07/housing-inflation.html

Just to add a wrinkle or two, it matters how you measure, and this
article touches on some of those wrinkles:
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/26/business/yourmoney/26view.html

It seems to me that these descriptions and graphs of housing prices
in the 90's corroborate my recollections, and directly contradict your
claim about housing inflation during the Clinton administration.

Of course, there may be better graphs, and so on, so I'd be happy
to see them if you come across any.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
jabailo



Joined: 20 Mar 2006
Posts: 1273
Location: Kent (East Hill), WA

PostPosted: Thu Aug 07, 2008 5:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
We seem to share some core ideas about the ill-effects of
rising economic inequality. I view the rapid rise in the inequality
of wealth to be a positive danger to democracy.


I am not sure if that is the case. In fact, my "status quo-ish" reason for posting this thread was merely to counterveil the Liberal salve about "poor getting poorer; rich getting richer". My argument has always been that the marketplace will let people "take turns" at the top and that the notion of a static upper class is just not true.

As far as good or bad, I am saying just "is".
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
brian-hansen
Site Admin


Joined: 17 Mar 2006
Posts: 712
Location: Oregon

PostPosted: Thu Aug 07, 2008 10:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

jabailo wrote:
Quote:
We seem to share some core ideas about the ill-effects of
rising economic inequality. I view the rapid rise in the inequality
of wealth to be a positive danger to democracy.


I am not sure if that is the case. In fact, my "status quo-ish" reason for posting this thread was merely to counterveil the Liberal salve about "poor getting poorer; rich getting richer". My argument has always been that the marketplace will let people "take turns" at the top and that the notion of a static upper class is just not true.

As far as good or bad, I am saying just "is".


So, when you said:
jabailo wrote:
I think the Bush policies in the past 6 years have done what it takes to let the bottom 1/3 finally get real money and for the middle 1/3 to catch up with the top third...and in all fairness, it's that middle third, the professionals and technologists who are providing real value to our society.


You don't think you express that you think the Bush administration
should be praised for doing "what it takes"? to reduce income
inequality? You aren't saying that it is good, merely that it is? Curious.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Visit the Instant Postcard Collection @ http://instant-postcard-collection.com
Looking for postcards of that favorite place? Family origins? Or that perfect vacation, except for the photos?
Researching your dissertation? Serious collector? Just looking for something neat?
You've found the right place to add to your existing collection, or to start a new one.
jabailo



Joined: 20 Mar 2006
Posts: 1273
Location: Kent (East Hill), WA

PostPosted: Thu Aug 07, 2008 11:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well, simplicity doesn't really apply here (or to me in particular as you can see by my bi-polar opinions).

I think I would fall back on my argument of I don't mind if the top guy makes 1 Billion and the rest of people make $100,000 so long as the top guy doesn't buy up all the land, houses and cars and make it impossible for the average guy to live without paying fealty.

Unfortunately, that has characterized a lot of life post 1970 in America which was on a path to near feudalism prior to the "Recession" and "Tech Bust" of 2000/1.

I just don't know if saying "I think it should be this way" is at all possible as in, we tried to make this society where everyone was middle class and people rebelled against it. Some wanted more. Some felt constrained. I don't think it worked well to shoehorn people into the same Leavittown lifestyle.

On the other hand (he says, in his best John Kerry flip-flop voice), having a few "warlords" who can make everyone dance on puppet strings because they own the necessary dollars doesn't seem very pleasant either.

It also makes us promote this lie of the "marketplace". Clearly we live in a constructed economy. The Gov-Erh-Ment is the largest purchaser of anything, anywhere. To say that "private enterprise" rules the roost and it's the "brilliance of entrepreneurs" who drive the economy should only invite eye rolling by anyone of intelligence. Basically the powers that be set the dinner at the table and the cleverness is in us mice climbing the table to get the cheese. But we shouldn't ever think that we could put the food there in the first place.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
jabailo



Joined: 20 Mar 2006
Posts: 1273
Location: Kent (East Hill), WA

PostPosted: Sun Aug 10, 2008 11:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
My recollection is that house price inflation didn't really start
taking off until around 1999-2001, and it really took hold from
2001-2006.


I guess I am basing this on my own experiences post-Princeton. I remember that by the time we left college (1982) New York area apartments were beginning to sky rocket from the lows of the 1970s. In fact, feeling that I would never "break even" in NYC, I ended up trying Pittsburgh, which was a great bargain, but had no job growth, and then Pennsylvania...where housing had just started to outstrip income (1985). Of course then I moved to Seattle and it's been a car chase of income to rents and housing ever since -- up until the last 2 years when everything came to a screeching halt.

So in my mind, it's been almost 3 and 1/2 decades (including the rapid rises during Clinton-Gore).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
brian-hansen
Site Admin


Joined: 17 Mar 2006
Posts: 712
Location: Oregon

PostPosted: Mon Aug 11, 2008 12:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

jabailo wrote:
Quote:
My recollection is that house price inflation didn't really start
taking off until around 1999-2001, and it really took hold from
2001-2006.


I guess I am basing this on my own experiences post-Princeton. I remember that by the time we left college (1982) New York area apartments were beginning to sky rocket from the lows of the 1970s....


Of course, there have been many periods of housing inflation and
inflation in general over those decades. I remember S&Ls offering
14+% interest for savings, for instance. Also, there were flat and
down periods. I didn't mean to give the impression that I was
making any claims about the 70s or 80s. My experience, and the
data I found pretty much contradicted your claim about the Clinton
years.
Quote:

So in my mind, it's been almost 3 and 1/2 decades (including the rapid rises during Clinton-Gore).

You just don't want to let this one go! It looks to me that housing
prices were flat or down, depending on a lot of factors like how
you measure it, from 1992-1999. Compare that to a 250-300%
increase 2000-2006 [I'm looking at the SOCAL data I posted earlier].
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Visit the Instant Postcard Collection @ http://instant-postcard-collection.com
Looking for postcards of that favorite place? Family origins? Or that perfect vacation, except for the photos?
Researching your dissertation? Serious collector? Just looking for something neat?
You've found the right place to add to your existing collection, or to start a new one.
jabailo



Joined: 20 Mar 2006
Posts: 1273
Location: Kent (East Hill), WA

PostPosted: Mon Aug 11, 2008 5:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
flat or down, depending on a lot of factors like how you measure it, from 1992-1999.


Not according to your own sources. For example, click on the chart accompanying the NYT article you posted. What is measures is year over end increases. So, it appears as if sometimes it's flat, but anything over 0% represents an increase in the absolute value or price of the home. And it's compounded, as in year after year of 3% percent increases can really add up. Also, that's across the board -- I'd imagine that trendy areas really shot up. Again, the 90s were the decade when the Puget Sound increased in population by something like one million people, so these people were selling their high valued homes and moving up and inflating the value of homes here and around the country. At the same time California homes were still increasing -- as your own data show.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
brian-hansen
Site Admin


Joined: 17 Mar 2006
Posts: 712
Location: Oregon

PostPosted: Mon Aug 11, 2008 11:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm not sure I'm ready to become an expert on housing prices and
statistics. We both live in areas that have had a pretty hot real estate
markets. I can easily imagine that you saw rapid increases in housing
prices in Seattle during the Clinton administration. I saw them in
Portland, too, but most of it appeared after 2000.

As far as the statistics, there must be better ones than the ones
I uncovered in a brief google search. I'd be interested to see more,
but as far as doing more searching goes, I think I've done my bit.

I wonder about the chart you mention. I have to admit, I didn't
notice it when I read the article. I was more concerned with the
ideas the article raised on the measuring of prices. Looking at
the text and the chart, I can't tell if it is adjusted for inflation.
I suspect that it is not. If that is correct, then it would seem to
generally corroborate my original point.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
jabailo



Joined: 20 Mar 2006
Posts: 1273
Location: Kent (East Hill), WA

PostPosted: Tue Aug 12, 2008 12:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Of course Greenspan's policies were "tight money" and he was in power during Clinton (I am not a fan of Mr. Greenspan). Interest rates were abnormally high until near the end of the decade, and even then, they should have been lower than what Mr. Greenspan pegged them at (this, again, my opinion, is a contributor to the "tech bust" -- companies were capital starved, limiting growth and causing a cascading collapse in business).

So the actual house "payment" in totality -- rising prices, plus interest rates -- kept climbing during Clinton-Gore.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Visit the Instant Postcard Collection @ http://instant-postcard-collection.com
Looking for postcards of that favorite place? Family origins? Or that perfect vacation, except for the photos?
Researching your dissertation? Serious collector? Just looking for something neat?
You've found the right place to add to your existing collection, or to start a new one.
brian-hansen
Site Admin


Joined: 17 Mar 2006
Posts: 712
Location: Oregon

PostPosted: Tue Aug 12, 2008 1:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

That Clinton. He was so bad!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
brian-hansen
Site Admin


Joined: 17 Mar 2006
Posts: 712
Location: Oregon

PostPosted: Tue Aug 12, 2008 8:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I don't know why I bother correcting your errors.

If you had originally posted that Clinton (that bad man) had kept
the chairman of the Fed that Reagan appointed (and who also
served under Bush I and II). And that Greenspan didn't lower
interest rates to keep housing prices low during the final years
of the Clinton administration, thus those folks who have some
notion that their lives were a little easier then than they are now
are just plain deluded. If you'd posted that, I don't think I
would've bothered staying up late researching comparative
housing price trends over the last 20 years.

What appears to be your strategy of never admitting a mistake
might work well on the other forums you post to, but I can tell
you it wouldn't be a good poker strategy, for instance: "Well, my
hand would've beat yours if I'd have made my inside straight
on the river."

The funny thing is, I don't think presidents have all that much
control over things like housing prices anyway. Sure, they appoint
the chairman of the Fed, but the Fed represents big money.
They raise interest rates because they can, and lower them
when they have to. If a president appoints someone big money
doesn't like, then watch out. Big money will punish us all.
The Fed is not really an arm of government.

Next time, I think I might be better off leaving you in your
ignorance.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
brian-hansen
Site Admin


Joined: 17 Mar 2006
Posts: 712
Location: Oregon

PostPosted: Wed Aug 13, 2008 10:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Looking back at my post, I think I may have been a bit harsh.

Never admitting a mistake, *might* be an okay poker strategy.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Visit the Instant Postcard Collection @ http://instant-postcard-collection.com
Looking for postcards of that favorite place? Family origins? Or that perfect vacation, except for the photos?
Researching your dissertation? Serious collector? Just looking for something neat?
You've found the right place to add to your existing collection, or to start a new one.
jabailo



Joined: 20 Mar 2006
Posts: 1273
Location: Kent (East Hill), WA

PostPosted: Sun Nov 16, 2008 12:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aTxtStJrKGr0&refer=home

Quote:

Prices May Have Tumbled as Economy Sank: U.S. Economy Preview

By Bob Willis

Nov. 16 (Bloomberg) -- The cost of living in the U.S. probably fell in October by the most in almost sixty years, while manufacturing and homebuilding sank deeper into a recession, economists said before reports this week.


Life gets even more affordable for the poor!

Meanwhile Energy, Real Estate and DOW stocks -- the drivers of entrenched wealth, are still crashing down.

George Bush -- The Great Equalizer.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
jabailo



Joined: 20 Mar 2006
Posts: 1273
Location: Kent (East Hill), WA

PostPosted: Thu Dec 24, 2009 12:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Wage growth accelerates in November

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/us-wage-growth-accelerates-in-november-2009-12-23-83100
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
jabailo



Joined: 20 Mar 2006
Posts: 1273
Location: Kent (East Hill), WA

PostPosted: Mon Feb 01, 2010 4:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

http://bonddad.blogspot.com/2010/02/personal-income-increases.html

Personal Income Increases


Quote:
Overall disposable income is increasing.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Visit the Instant Postcard Collection @ http://instant-postcard-collection.com
Looking for postcards of that favorite place? Family origins? Or that perfect vacation, except for the photos?
Researching your dissertation? Serious collector? Just looking for something neat?
You've found the right place to add to your existing collection, or to start a new one.
jabailo



Joined: 20 Mar 2006
Posts: 1273
Location: Kent (East Hill), WA

PostPosted: Sat Mar 27, 2010 10:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

In Health Bill, Obama Attacks Wealth Inequality

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/24/business/24leonhardt.html

Quote:
A big chunk of the money to pay for the bill comes from lifting payroll taxes on households making more than $250,000. On average, the annual tax bill for households making more than $1 million a year will rise by $46,000 in 2013, according to the Tax Policy Center, a Washington research group. Another major piece of financing would cut Medicare subsidies for private insurers, ultimately affecting their executives and shareholders.

The benefits, meanwhile, flow mostly to households making less than four times the poverty level — $88,200 for a family of four people. Those without insurance in this group will become eligible to receive subsidies or to join Medicaid. (Many of the poor are already covered by Medicaid.) Insurance costs are also likely to drop for higher-income workers at small companies.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
brian-hansen
Site Admin


Joined: 17 Mar 2006
Posts: 712
Location: Oregon

PostPosted: Fri Dec 16, 2011 11:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I split this topic into two. The other part of this discussion is under the topic: Rich get Poorer, found in this same forum.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    You-Read-It-Here-First Forum Index -> Economic Skirmishes on the Borders of the Status Quo All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group