• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

An observation about the human predicament.

Frank Apisa

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 4, 2008
Messages
14,102
Reaction score
3,919
Location
New Jersey
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent


Back in the 1950’s when I was growing up, a typical middle-class family had just one breadwinner (usually the man of the house)—and the fruits of his forty hours of weekly toil saw to the mortgage; paid for the car, its gas and upkeep; bought food, clothing and other essentials; put the kids through school; allowed for vacations; and (here’s a quaint idea) permitted a few bucks to be stashed away as savings.


The family’s medical needs were met by the medical plan his company furnished.


That doesn’t seem to be the way things are now.
 


Back in the 1950’s when I was growing up, a typical middle-class family had just one breadwinner (usually the man of the house)—and the fruits of his forty hours of weekly toil saw to the mortgage; paid for the car, its gas and upkeep; bought food, clothing and other essentials; put the kids through school; allowed for vacations; and (here’s a quaint idea) permitted a few bucks to be stashed away as savings.


The family’s medical needs were met by the medical plan his company furnished.


That doesn’t seem to be the way things are now.

simple reason: your dollar does not have the buying power it did in the 1950's

1 dollar is only worth about 4 cents today as compared to the dollar of 1913 when the federal reserve took over our money.

restore the value of a dollar and it will buy more
 


Back in the 1950’s when I was growing up, a typical middle-class family had just one breadwinner (usually the man of the house)—and the fruits of his forty hours of weekly toil saw to the mortgage; paid for the car, its gas and upkeep; bought food, clothing and other essentials; put the kids through school; allowed for vacations; and (here’s a quaint idea) permitted a few bucks to be stashed away as savings.


The family’s medical needs were met by the medical plan his company furnished.


That doesn’t seem to be the way things are now.

The mass introduction of women into the workforce has allowed employers to underpay their employees.
 
The mass introduction of women into the workforce has allowed employers to underpay their employees.

Kind of a weird way to frame it, but yes, increasing the supply of workers while not increasing the supply of work will drive down wages.
 
simple reason: your dollar does not have the buying power it did in the 1950's

1 dollar is only worth about 4 cents today as compared to the dollar of 1913 when the federal reserve took over our money.

restore the value of a dollar and it will buy more

LOL The dollar is worth less because of over 100 years of inflation that does not explain why wages and benefits have not kept up. Mild inflation is imperative for economic growth, without it the economy stagnates. Corporations got us addicted to company health plans as incentives when wage controls prevented them from giving raises. Then after 35 years of supply-side coddling many companies decided they didn't need health care as an incentive and cut back or eliminated it. Now the ACA is "reminding" them that they still have obligations to their workers.
 
LOL The dollar is worth less because of over 100 years of inflation that does not explain why wages and benefits have not kept up. Mild inflation is imperative for economic growth, without it the economy stagnates. Corporations got us addicted to company health plans as incentives when wage controls prevented them from giving raises. Then after 35 years of supply-side coddling many companies decided they didn't need health care as an incentive and cut back or eliminated it. Now the ACA is "reminding" them that they still have obligations to their workers.

More of a liberal myth pushed by Friedman. There is no economic imperative for never ending inflation.
 
Kind of a weird way to frame it, but yes, increasing the supply of workers while not increasing the supply of work will drive down wages.

Yet people still need money to live and healthcare to keep working. We have done enough coddling of corporations its time for them to step up and use some of their record profits for their workers.
 
Yet people still need money to live and healthcare to keep working. We have done enough coddling of corporations its time for them to step up and use some of their record profits for their workers.

You expect them to create more work just because it is needed? The fact is while it was nice to have women come into the workplace the increase in the worker supply it created was too great and caused wages to stagnant.
 
LOL The dollar is worth less because of over 100 years of inflation that does not explain why wages and benefits have not kept up. Mild inflation is imperative for economic growth, without it the economy stagnates. Corporations got us addicted to company health plans as incentives when wage controls prevented them from giving raises. Then after 35 years of supply-side coddling many companies decided they didn't need health care as an incentive and cut back or eliminated it. Now the ACA is "reminding" them that they still have obligations to their workers.

if my dollar has less buying power then it does not buy as much.
 
More of a liberal myth pushed by Friedman. There is no economic imperative for never ending inflation.

It's no myth. It is solid economic policy. Deflation is a REAL boogieman for ecnomic growth.

If rapidly rising prices are bad for the economy, is the opposite, or falling prices, good? It turns out that deflation is not desirable either. When prices are falling, consumers delay making purchases if they can, anticipating lower prices in the future. For the economy this means less economic activity, less income generated by producers, and lower economic growth. Japan is one country with a long period of nearly no economic growth largely because of deflation. Preventing deflation during the recent global financial crisis is one of the reasons the U.S. Federal Reserve and other central banks around the world kept interest rates low for a prolonged period and have instituted other policy measures to ensure financial systems have plenty of liquidity.
Most economists now believe that low, stable, and—most important—predictable inflation is good for an economy. If inflation is low and predictable, it is easier to capture it in price-adjustment contracts and interest rates, reducing its distortionary impact. Moreover, knowing that prices will be slightly higher in the future gives consumers an incentive to make purchases sooner, which boosts economic activity. Many central bankers have made their primary policy objective maintaining low and stable inflation, a policy called inflation targeting.
Inflation: Prices on the Rise - Back to Basics: Finance & Development
 
if my dollar has less buying power then it does not buy as much.

That is what gives you the incentive to buy now instead of waiting for prices to fall. Periods of no inflation often slip into deflation and stagnation.
 
That is what gives you the incentive to buy now instead of waiting for prices to fall. Periods of no inflation often slip into deflation and stagnation.

People commonly just buy when they want to buy.
 
simple reason: your dollar does not have the buying power it did in the 1950's

1 dollar is only worth about 4 cents today as compared to the dollar of 1913 when the federal reserve took over our money.

restore the value of a dollar and it will buy more

I think that's only partially responsible. Greater expectations are the major reason. I grew up in a house smaller than my present garage, one car, a panel truck that doubled as my dad's work vehicle. The latest clothes were a sometimes treat, not an expected right. One 8 party line telephone.

Using today's way of calculating, most of the mothers stayed him, meaning the unemployment rate was close to 50%.

Times change. For the better or worse? Depends on your point of view.
 
Yet people still need money to live and healthcare to keep working. We have done enough coddling of corporations its time for them to step up and use some of their record profits for their workers.

Well, that'll be good for Mexico, Taiwan and Sri Lanka.
 
You expect them to create more work just because it is needed? The fact is while it was nice to have women come into the workplace the increase in the worker supply it created was too great and caused wages to stagnant.

And that has created a problem for workers and record profits for corporations. They don't need to create more work only reimburse their workers in a way commensurate with their productivity. Supply and demand does not change the need of workers to make enough money to live.
 
That is what gives you the incentive to buy now instead of waiting for prices to fall. Periods of no inflation often slip into deflation and stagnation.

the dollar was backed by gold, and was stable for many years in fact a dollar was worth little more then a dollar before 1913

as the federal reserve has taken over the dollar has fallen, which is why it cost more to buy things and after the gold standard is dropped the dollar falls quicker
 
People commonly just buy when they want to buy.

Tell that to the Japanese, their economy has been struggling with deflation for over 20 years. It's not only buying that is depressed, investment is also postponed.
 
the dollar was backed by gold, and was stable for many years in fact a dollar was worth little more then a dollar before 1913

as the federal reserve has taken over the dollar has fallen, which is why it cost more to buy things and after the gold standard is dropped the dollar falls quicker

Currently our dollar is too strong and it has cratered exports. The gold standard is so 19th century...
 


Back in the 1950’s when I was growing up, a typical middle-class family had just one breadwinner (usually the man of the house)—and the fruits of his forty hours of weekly toil saw to the mortgage; paid for the car, its gas and upkeep; bought food, clothing and other essentials; put the kids through school; allowed for vacations; and (here’s a quaint idea) permitted a few bucks to be stashed away as savings.


The family’s medical needs were met by the medical plan his company furnished.


That doesn’t seem to be the way things are now.

Back then, union wages were on the order of $2 - $3 bucks an hour, at a time when a house could be had for ten grand, a new car for two, gas for a quarter or less a gallon, and medical care about 1% as much as it is now. Of course, we didn't spend money on internet access, cable TV, or cell phones back then.

It's no secret that wages for ordinary jobs haven't begun to keep up with inflation since then. Top level management has done quite well, but the rank and file not so much. Meanwhile, to consider yourself well off, you have to have a house the size of a Howard Johnson's and an SUV the size of a Freightliner and be spending more on cell service, internet, and TV than on basic utilities.

So, two incomes are mandatory, and people still spend more than they make.
 
Tell that to the Japanese, their economy has been struggling with deflation for over 20 years. It's not only buying that is depressed, investment is also postponed.

Again, that is long term deflation. As I said, long term inflation or deflation is generally bad.
 


Back in the 1950’s when I was growing up, a typical middle-class family had just one breadwinner (usually the man of the house)—and the fruits of his forty hours of weekly toil saw to the mortgage; paid for the car, its gas and upkeep; bought food, clothing and other essentials; put the kids through school; allowed for vacations; and (here’s a quaint idea) permitted a few bucks to be stashed away as savings.


The family’s medical needs were met by the medical plan his company furnished.


That doesn’t seem to be the way things are now.

Allot has changed since then. There are any number of technical developments and inventions that have an impact on people's lives.

It used to be that there was a steno pool of women who took dictation and produced readable letters and documents from the ramblings of the managers. That doesn't happen anymore. Now we have rambling emails direct from the managers, although they are getting better at it now a days.

It used to be that all international shipping was done by boat and took weeks. Now, much of the smaller time sensitive stuff is shipped on commercial carriers.

It used to be that a letter had to get posted internationally, then the fax, and now, email in an instant.

If you really want to compare what compensation was back then to what compensation is now, compare the number of hours (or minutes) a specific job had to work back then for a loaf of bread to what the same specific job has to work for that loaf of bread now. Pretty much betting that it's less now than then.
 


Back in the 1950’s when I was growing up, a typical middle-class family had just one breadwinner (usually the man of the house)—and the fruits of his forty hours of weekly toil saw to the mortgage; paid for the car, its gas and upkeep; bought food, clothing and other essentials; put the kids through school; allowed for vacations; and (here’s a quaint idea) permitted a few bucks to be stashed away as savings.


The family’s medical needs were met by the medical plan his company furnished.


That doesn’t seem to be the way things are now.

Americans are drunk on consumption and extravagance. Back then a 1,500 sq. ft. house was more than plenty. Now everybody wants no less than 2,500 sq. ft. with a finished basement. How about driving a used, affordable vehicle? Nope, gotta have two luxury vehicles and they need to be brand new. Most also need the latest iPhone. Why use a 4S when you can have a 6! Want a flat screen tv? Hell yeah, the biggest they sell. Your kids will also need an Xbox, Playstation and Wii. Don't have the money, just put it on the credit card, yay!
 
Back
Top Bottom