why should today's youth be loyal to capitalism?

austrianecon · Feb 8, 2016

kjwins said:
I,m a Gen X'er. We are more the tune out generation & not as much the me generation as boomers. Xer's are more the I don't give a **** generation.

That's true.. but I am closer to Xer's because of this.. I just don't give a crap.

kjwins said:
I have 2 kids that are Millennials. One that is just out of college & 40k in debt. One in college, that more than likely will be in debt after. My kids work & bust their ass just like the generations before them. So when I hear people rip on them I tend to say **** you. Kids today do not have the same opportunity as their parents. Cost more to go to school & less jobs when you get out.

Now this is a different debate.. College tuition has increased as more and more federal funding for student loans have increase. I left Penn State University in 2004 with $10,000 in debt after working in summers and scholarships.

kjwins said:
I don't know all that much about a shortage of nurses, but can think of a few factors that could be part of the problem.

1. Its one of the few jobs that can not be off shored or replaced by a machine.

2. Its a tough job that not everyone can do, no matter how smart or committed you are. I have an in-law that is a nurse, you would not believe the horror & human grief that comes with the job. I have heard some of the stories.

3. Its an expensive job to go to school for & if your parents are not paying for it. You will be in debt a good part of your life. Kids today get out of college & have debts bigger than a mortgage on a nice house. 50k a year is an OK wage, but how far in the hole do you want to be, to start your life.

4. Americans are some of the most unhealthy people in the world, we eat like crap. More people will need a nurse in this country.

Still doesn't change the facts.. Nursing is a highly paid profession. It's a tough job but you are well paid for it. It's also not that expensive job to go to college for. You can get your RN credentials at community colleges. I have friends (nurses) in my life as a person born with a heart defect go from LPNs to APRNs (high as you can go) be left with little then $20,00 in debt because Hospitals will help pay for you to get specialized.

kjwins said:
Moms went to work because they had to. Like I said wages have been stagnant since the 1970's. Most people can not make it with one person working & less good jobs to be had. I agree one parent should stay home, just not possible since wages have been stagnant.

1) that's not true. Moms went to work because of the Feminist movement. Books like the The Feminine Mystique and the NOW movement pushed it. This fight started in the 1960s. Wages have been stagnant but this is when women really hit the workforce in larger numbers. It was known as the Quiet Revolution. I am not arguing against it.. but you need equilibrium and that hasn't happened. Wages would increase if the workforce is cut in half in dual income household. Its a clear case of supply and demand. Currently there is more supply then demand despite the "4.9% unemployment" rate.

kjwins said:
China is growing because corporations moved capital & jobs from this country to there. All in the name of paying lower wages & making themselves more money. They sold us out, its plain & simple GREED.

This is wrong. Average wage in China is 29,000 yuan.. or roughly $5,000. They are a long way from creating a middle class and a consumer economy.

DA60 · Feb 8, 2016

Ummm...to get laid.

It's easier to attract women when you are rich then when you are broke. MUCH easier.

And, outside of winning a lottery, theft or through inheritance...the fastest way that I know to get rich is through capitalism.

Frank Apisa · Feb 8, 2016

austrianecon said:
RN credentials at community colleges. I have friends (nurses) in my life as a person born with a heart defect go from LPNs to APRNs (high as you can go)

Actually, nursing doctorates can now be had.

Slartibartfast · Feb 8, 2016

austrianecon said:
Answer me this.. where in the basic human biological drive is there a need for due process, freedom of speech, need for warrants and so forth? There is none. Rather it's the philosophy of Locke which shaped the Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution which recognize these rights as unalienable.

Its stuff invented to support other biological drives. It exists because it seems to support those drives efficiently. The philosophy is an afterthought because humans need self justification and self rightiousness.

kjwins · Feb 8, 2016

austrianecon said:
That's true.. but I am closer to Xer's because of this.. I just don't give a crap.

Now this is a different debate.. College tuition has increased as more and more federal funding for student loans have increase. I left Penn State University in 2004 with $10,000 in debt after working in summers and scholarships.

Still doesn't change the facts.. Nursing is a highly paid profession. It's a tough job but you are well paid for it. It's also not that expensive job to go to college for. You can get your RN credentials at community colleges. I have friends (nurses) in my life as a person born with a heart defect go from LPNs to APRNs (high as you can go) be left with little then $20,00 in debt because Hospitals will help pay for you to get specialized.

1) that's not true. Moms went to work because of the Feminist movement. Books like the The Feminine Mystique and the NOW movement pushed it. This fight started in the 1960s. Wages have been stagnant but this is when women really hit the workforce in larger numbers. It was known as the Quiet Revolution. I am not arguing against it.. but you need equilibrium and that hasn't happened. Wages would increase if the workforce is cut in half in dual income household. Its a clear case of supply and demand. Currently there is more supply then demand despite the "4.9% unemployment" rate.

This is wrong. Average wage in China is 29,000 yuan.. or roughly $5,000. They are a long way from creating a middle class and a consumer economy.

Like I said I don't know that much about a shortage of nurses. Just some thoughts off the top of my head,

Yes women entering the work force is a factor. But not the main factor. You can not export capital & jobs from a closed economy like the US was in the 70's. Call it Free Trade, when its not Free Trade. Free Trade has nothing to do with the movement of jobs, capital, skills, & related jobs of manufacturing. Your under cutting the purchasing power of the country, inflating debt & hollowing out the US economy. This has nothing to do with women wanting to work & more to do with greed.

Yes their would be more jobs with one parent staying home. But people would have to lower their standard of living, with the jobs that build the Middle Class being off shored long ago. 4.9% unemployment is a bogus number, as they do not count the people that have dropped out of the work force, they only count the people that are looking for work. Millions of people have given up looking for a job.

China is slowing down now, because the west ran out of credit (2007 crash). China is an export economy that relies on the west to buy its exports. So now China is trying to move to a service based economy.

Ganesh · Feb 8, 2016

tacomancer said:
This article is very insightful and got me thinking about why we are seeing someone like Bernie Sanders' rise in popularity:

Peggy Noonan: Socialism Gets a Second Life — The Patriot Post

Particularly this line hits the mark, I think. For those, including many people my age, in their thirties, the example of the economy has been anything but friendly towards folks our age or younger. We struggle to find decent and meaningful work and to feel like full participants in the greater society.

We have a great generation that is not being fully utilized and there is resentment being built up about the current system as a result of that under utilization.

People may complain that Sanders is socialist, but here the real question, why should this generation feel any loyalty to a more pure form of capitalism given that their experience with capitalism has been poor? Everything we know about human nature suggests that people will not stick with a system that they don't feel to be a full member of. Why would the expectation of today's youth be any different from that basic understanding of human nature?

Personally, I seem to be doing pretty well in today's economy (I could be doing better, but I survive, have little debt, eat well, and am not living hand to mouth), but most of my friends, some of whom are more talented than I am, are not. Honestly, I don't blame them for seeking a system where they feel like they will be a full participant in society.

A fair question, and I think the answer is that many, probably the majority, will go along with the system, until or if it reaches truly crisis proportions. Spin and group think can be powerful forces, as we have seen historically, and most certainly today. Many Americans blamed themselves for the great depression, as they sat starving, even though recovery was obtainable within a short time by way of public policy, as we have seen in hindsight. 50,000 Americans stepped into a meatgrinder in Vietnam, and died, as they accepted a foolishly flawed geopolitical notion at face value. Take a look at the minor example of this forum. Those on the far right will debate their points until they are full of holes, and then fall back on ideology. This is powerful stuff. I just hope Bernie makes some inroads.

jonny5 · Feb 8, 2016

tacomancer said:
Personally, I seem to be doing pretty well in today's economy (I could be doing better, but I survive, have little debt, eat well, and am not living hand to mouth), but most of my friends, some of whom are more talented than I am, are not. Honestly, I don't blame them for seeking a system where they feel like they will be a full participant in society.

Me neither. I dont expect much out of people who have yet to experience life. How can you expect someone to understand capitalism who has been given everything? Luckily, my parents made me work for the things I wanted.

Frank Apisa · Feb 8, 2016

Ganesh said:
A fair question, and I think the answer is that many, probably the majority, will go along with the system, until or if it reaches truly crisis proportions. Spin and group think can be powerful forces, as we have seen historically, and most certainly today. Many Americans blamed themselves for the great depression, as they sat starving, even though recovery was obtainable within a short time by way of public policy, as we have seen in hindsight. 50,000 Americans stepped into a meatgrinder in Vietnam, and died, as they accepted a foolishly flawed geopolitical notion at face value. Take a look at the minor example of this forum. Those on the far right will debate their points until they are full of holes, and then fall back on ideology. This is powerful stuff. I just hope Bernie makes some inroads.

The bolded: Truer words were never spoken.

Frank Apisa · Feb 8, 2016

jonny5 said:
Me neither. I dont expect much out of people who have yet to experience life. How can you expect someone to understand capitalism who has been given everything? Luckily, my parents made me work for the things I wanted.

Right!

So screw those people who were not as smart as you were in choosing their parents.

I understand.

jonny5 · Feb 8, 2016

Lafayette said:
Illogical.

I exist as a person, and have rights regardless of whether I am working or not.

My rights as a worker must be taken in to consideration by my employer and are codified in law - in most advanced countries. (The US not necessarily amongst them, given the fact that anybody can be fired at a moment's notice.)

Like Trump's TV show, "Your fired!" Worker rights are treated with amusement in the US.

They are dead-serious in the EU (as most modern economies) and companies pay dearly for infraction of them.

So do they here. They are just codified in labor contracts, not govt law. Which is why we are the most succesful economy. We generally have free market labor, which can adapt to changing circumstances. As opposed to 'modern economies' that go bankrupt.

kjwins · Feb 8, 2016

Frank Apisa said:
Right!

So screw those people who were not as smart as you were in choosing their parents.

I understand.

Your a funny guy. LOL Good stuff.

Lafayette · Feb 8, 2016

jonny5 said:
So do they here. They are just codified in labor contracts, not govt law. Which is why we are the most succesful economy.

Most successful economy? What is your criteria?

Fifteen percent of Americans incarcerated below the Poverty Threshold since 1965? Wow! What a success that is!

From the Census Bureau, here is the history of Average Net Income ($) (corrected for inflation):
2014 - 30,176
2010 - 29,005
2005 - 30,350
2000 - 30,719
1995 - 26,594
1990 - 25,284
1985 - 23,116

Compound Growth Rate (29 years) = 0.92% per year - not even 1%.

What, what a "successful" market-economy we've got ... !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

jonny5 said:
We generally have free market labor, which can adapt to changing circumstances. As opposed to 'modern economies' that go bankrupt.

True enough, the US has an open-market economy for labor. The only problem is that most of the economic growth goes to an upper-level of worker (starting household salary level of about $150K - which can mean two individuals earning both a salary of $75K).

How many of those people do you know, because they are only 10% of the population ... ?

Absentglare · Feb 8, 2016

cpwill said:
"Yeah! What has Capitalism ever done but screw us!"

... He typed on his smartphone...

Oh- correlation = causation ?

Hey, life was pretty good when women stayed at home. Let's go back to that model because it gave us the Model T.

Lol...

jonny5 · Feb 8, 2016

Lafayette said:
Most successful economy? What is your criteria?

Fifteen percent of Americans incarcerated below the Poverty Threshold since 1965? Wow! What a success that is!

From the Census Bureau, here is the history of Average Net Income ($) (corrected for inflation):
2014 - 30,176
2010 - 29,005
2005 - 30,350
2000 - 30,719
1995 - 26,594
1990 - 25,284
1985 - 23,116

Compound Growth Rate (29 years) = 0.92% per year - not even 1%.

What, what a "successful" market-economy we've got ... !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

True enough, the US has an open-market economy for labor. The only problem is that most of the economic growth goes to an upper-level of worker (starting household salary level of about $150K - which can mean two individuals earning both a salary of $75K).

How many of those people do you know, because they are only 10% of the population ... ?

We produce more than any other country. Thats my criteria.

cpwill · Feb 8, 2016

Absentglare said:
Oh- correlation = causation

No, capitalism definitely drove the Information Age explosion

You invent the iPhone because you intend to sell hundreds of millions of them.

Sitting in the middle of the First World and bitching about capitalism is like complaining that engineering isn't trustworthy and never did anything for you while driving your car across a highway to get to the airport to catch a ride on an airplane.

Absentglare · Feb 8, 2016

cpwill said:
No, capitalism definitely drove the Information Age explosion You invent the iPhone because you intend to sell hundreds of millions of them.

Sitting in the middle of the First World and bitching about capitalism is like complaining that engineering isn't trustworthy and never did anything for you while driving your car across a highway to get to the airport to catch a ride on an airplane.

Nope, tech nerds aren't in it for glory or wealth or power, that's why Bill Gates stole DOS and stole Windows, that's why the true innovators continue to be stomped on- those are egomaniacs you're thinking of. And we'd be better off if they were denied power.

cpwill · Feb 8, 2016

Absentglare said:
Nope, tech nerds aren't in it for glory or wealth or power, that's why Bill Gates stole DOS and stole Windows, that's why the true innovators continue to be stomped on- those are egomaniacs you're thinking of. And we'd be better off if they were denied power.

[emoji38] that must be why all the real cutting edge developments come out of Cuba, and we had to steal tech from the soviets the whole Cold War [emoji14]

Capitalism is why we have the technology we do. Excuse me - the consumer technology we do. Apple and Alphabet without capitalism are just a fruit and an assortment of phonetics.

Ganesh · Feb 8, 2016

jonny5 said:
We produce more than any other country. Thats my criteria.

Your criteria for a successful society is that is produces more? More than a bit thin right there, but also not true. US per capita GDP is about in the middle of the pack for developed industrial nations. A little behind some, a little ahead of others. More to the point here, it is becoming ominously skewed in terms of inequality and erosion of worker's rights, worse than other western democracies.

Mach · Feb 8, 2016

Ganesh said:
Your criteria for a successful society is that is produces more? More than a bit thin right there, but also not true. US per capita GDP is about in the middle of the pack for developed industrial nations. A little behind some, a little ahead of others. More to the point here, it is becoming ominously skewed in terms of inequality and erosion of worker's rights, worse than other western democracies.

Middle of what pack are you referring to Ganesh. No one produces what we produce at our size. Do you mean your'e comparing tiny countries to the entire U.S.? You do not believe that is skewed?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compa...tes_and_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)_per_capita

That appears to agree with jonny5 more than your claim.

austrianecon · Feb 9, 2016

Frank Apisa said:
Actually, nursing doctorates can now be had.

Well to quibble, todays ARPNs (and so on) are grandfathered into the new nursing doctoral class. There is literally no difference between the two as of today as all ARPNs have Masters or Doctoral degrees already.

The idea of Doctoral degrees for nursing outside of research came about to get people into Nursing profession but it's a long term term process in which it'll be 2030 by the time a Doctoral will be fully required to be a practicing ARPN.

Ganesh · Feb 9, 2016

Mach said:
Middle of what pack are you referring to Ganesh. No one produces what we produce at our size. Do you mean your'e comparing tiny countries to the entire U.S.? You do not believe that is skewed?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compa...tes_and_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)_per_capita

That appears to agree with jonny5 more than your claim.

Just as I stated, total output is no comprehensive measure of a "successful" economy, and at any rate, US output, as measured by GDP per capita, is not at the top, only comparative to other similar economies. In addition, the US has massive social and economic issues that are not being dealt with, only glossed over by a relentless spin machine. Output of some other western countries is similar in terms of GDP per capita, and without the problems of extreme wealth disparity, and atrophying worker rights.

austrianecon · Feb 9, 2016

kjwins said:
Like I said I don't know that much about a shortage of nurses. Just some thoughts off the top of my head,

And that's fine, but it's alot of job openings and future openings that can't be shipped offshore.

kjwins said:
Yes women entering the work force is a factor. But not the main factor. You can not export capital & jobs from a closed economy like the US was in the 70's. Call it Free Trade, when its not Free Trade. Free Trade has nothing to do with the movement of jobs, capital, skills, & related jobs of manufacturing. Your under cutting the purchasing power of the country, inflating debt & hollowing out the US economy. This has nothing to do with women wanting to work & more to do with greed.

I never said it was a main factor, but it is a factor. US was never a closed economy in the 1970s. Hell, it's never been a closed economy. Even North Korea and Cuba aren't closed economies. In 1969 US had a balance of payment deficit of $7b ($45b in todays dollars). Btw, that means US had an open economy.

US economy switched in the 1970s because of several different things. The end of the Bretton Woods system which caused the Nixon Shock. When Nixon announced the US would refuse to be part of the Bretton Woods system.. the rest of the world were shocked and appalled. The dollar collapsed 30% during the 1970s. That means real wages collapsed as well.

This lead to stagflation (inflation and high unemployment) and currency instability which lasted until the early 1980s. The collapse of the US and European steel industry during the 1970s which came about because of currency "wars", then you also had the oil shock. Wasn't Free trade agreements, capital flight or jobs that killed the US economy that you claim was "closed".

kjwins said:
Yes their would be more jobs with one parent staying home. But people would have to lower their standard of living, with the jobs that build the Middle Class being off shored long ago. 4.9% unemployment is a bogus number, as they do not count the people that have dropped out of the work force, they only count the people that are looking for work. Millions of people have given up looking for a job.

No, you are assuming wages wouldn't rise. Wages will rise. It's just the basic of supply and demand. 60% of the 121.41m households have two incomes. That's roughly 73m households.. or 36.5m workers. HINC-05--Part 1

If those 36.5m workers leave and go home it causes a tightening of the labor market. A tight labor market is when wages rise the most as companies are forced to compete. So for example McDonalds, Wendy's, and Burger King will have to raise wages to attract employees. Wal-Mart will be forced to hire employees full time and higher wages because it compete with Target and other stores.

kjwins said:
China is slowing down now, because the west ran out of credit (2007 crash). China is an export economy that relies on the west to buy its exports. So now China is trying to move to a service based economy.

You are not even close. China’s Monumental Ponzi: Here’s How It Unravels | David Stockman's Contra Corner

Lafayette · Feb 9, 2016

jonny5 said:
We produce more than any other country. Thats my criteria.

Nice, but not enough.

How are the fruits of production shared amongst those who produce them? That is the question to be answered.

And since the 1960s in America, upper-income taxation has nosedived. See our History of US income tax-rate levels*.

And all that money that "they" don't pay because of flat-tax rates at upper-income levels become Wealth that they own, which is also distributed unfairly. See Prof. Domhoff: Income, Net Worth and Financial Wealth infographic. (Net Worth = Wealth - Debt)

And finally, believe what you want to believe. But the facts speak for themselves, and loudly. I am not making-up the numbers - they are the results of serious studies.

They are yelling, "You are being screwed by a tax-system that is unfair from the get-go!"

*Note also that since 1913, when the US initiated the Income Tax, every time upper-income taxation was seriously lowered, the consequence has been a subsequent serious economic depression (1930s) or recession (2009).

Lafayette · Feb 9, 2016

cpwill said:
No, capitalism definitely drove the Information Age explosion You invent the iPhone because you intend to sell hundreds of millions of them.

Capitalism did not invent the iPhone. It was key in the use of R&D that helped bring to market smartphones. Invention is native to mankind, we've been doing it for centuries*.

The notion of a "patent" has made capitalism a business money-spinner in a market-economy. Nothing wrong with that - where it is aberrant is in taxing the cash-cow.

About "Capitalism":
-It is the system businesses employ to fund the creation and development of products/services; and as such it is an important tool within a market-economy.
-Capital that is accumulated/stored as Net Worth by a select group of individuals is the Unfair Consequence of a perverse system of taxation (principally in the US) due to a lack of effective Progressive Taxation.

Period.

*Read a book about the inventions of DaVinci, a mastermind of the art. (Perhaps the greatest inventor in history.) He did not die a rich man, and went to others (called "patrons") to build his dreams. In fact, his sole real income was his artwork.

Frank Apisa · Feb 9, 2016

Ganesh said:
Just as I stated, total output is no comprehensive measure of a "successful" economy, and at any rate, US output, as measured by GDP per capita, is not at the top, only comparative to other similar economies. In addition, the US has massive social and economic issues that are not being dealt with, only glossed over by a relentless spin machine. Output of some other western countries is similar in terms of GDP per capita, and without the problems of extreme wealth disparity, and atrophying worker rights.

And we are lucky we have South Korea around...or we would rank at the bottom with regard to the number of hours workers put into production.

We work longer hours than everyone...except the Koreans.

why should today's youth be loyal to capitalism?

Jesus loves you.