Suzuki SV650 Riders Forum banner

1 - 20 of 46 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
322 Posts
lol..pay the middle class more. Great idea...then they can just end up spending more money on crap they don't need.
What did you think economies are made of, people only buying what they need and not what they want as well? Who are you to tell me what I don't need, anyway? I don't think you need to ride a motorcycle so I'll ban them ostensibly because they are unsafe.
 

·
BANNED!!!
Joined
·
4,805 Posts
What did you think economies are made of, people only buying what they need and not what they want as well? Who are you to tell me what I don't need, anyway? I don't think you need to ride a motorcycle so I'll ban them ostensibly because they are unsafe.
What? :roflmao:

That's not even close to the point of the topic here. I don't give a crap that people will buy stuff they don't need. I get annoyed when people think because they get a raise it means they can just raise their cost of living allowances so they end up where they were before.

"oh, I got a raise, that means I should buy a more expensive car"

"oh, I got a new job that makes me a little more money, time to buy a bigger house that I don't need!"
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,341 Posts
What? :roflmao:

That's not even close to the point of the topic here. I don't give a crap that people will buy stuff they don't need. I get annoyed when people think because they get a raise it means they can just raise their cost of living allowances so they end up where they were before.

"oh, I got a raise, that means I should buy a more expensive car"

"oh, I got a new job that makes me a little more money, time to buy a bigger house that I don't need!"
That is what keeps the economy going though. Yes it is stupid and irresponsible. I have gotten to the point where I am satisfied with my quality of living so my raises all go into savings but if everyone did that, that newly infused money into the economy wouldnt spur any new growth.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,743 Posts
Well, that's what keeps *our* economy going, but only because we've turned into a purchasing economy instead of producing economy in the decades following WWII. If we moved back to becoming an exporting country...
Woah Woah Woah... take it easy there honcho
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,015 Posts
Agreed.

The better off the middle class is, the better our economy will be. Simply put, the more people that can participate in the economy beyond the necessities the better off we will be.

If we want to fix the economy it is about looking at the middle class, not businesses. It is more then about jobs, it is about well paying jobs.
 

·
site supporter
Joined
·
6,051 Posts
If we moved back to becoming an exporting country...
After WWII, there was little industrial production ANYWHERE in the world (O.K. maybe some east of the Urals, where Stalin had moved most of his heavy production in 1941 and 1942.) The U.S. economy was the only functioning industrial economy. We couldn't manufacture stuff fast enough. There had been 5+ years opf pent-up consumer demand. There was an entire continent (Europe) to re-build and to avert a complete Socialist slide/Communist take-over, the U.S. fed, armed and re-built Europe, at least until Western European industrial and consumer markets had recovered enough to be self-sustaining and growing.

We don't live in that world anymore.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,341 Posts
Well, that's what keeps *our* economy going, but only because we've turned into a purchasing economy instead of producing economy in the decades following WWII. If we moved back to becoming an exporting country...
Yea that would be nice. The problem is we cannot make anything cheaper than other countries that dont have laws to protect workers and wages. The best we can do is to keep ahead of technology but that only lasts so long before other countries start knocking off our ingenuity. We could never afford to keep ahead of the curve. For every success, there are 100 failures that would need to be recouped in sales from the success.

Agreed.

The better off the middle class is, the better our economy will be. Simply put, the more people that can participate in the economy beyond the necessities the better off we will be.

If we want to fix the economy it is about looking at the middle class, not businesses. It is more then about jobs, it is about well paying jobs.
The debate is how to get the middle class to be in the best position when the upper class controls the jobs and the pay. Giving them tax breaks and more money to create more jobs certainly doesnt make them invest the money that way but if we start taxing them to death to take it away, the workers are the ones that will feel the impact. How do you make the upper class pay the lower class well when they dont have to?

Oh, I know. It's a pipe dream to hope to bring them back.

How to "fix" the economy? Well, first, it isn't broken. Second, that question has been asked for decades...heck, I'd bet even Plato and Socrates had something to say on it somewhere...
I agree it is not broken. People fail to study their history and realize the economy runs in cycles and always has. Our down economy is better than most countries up economy. The biggest problem to me is the American sense of entitlement. People would rather not work than take jobs they think are below them and paying less than they think they deserve. There are jobs out there.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
10,443 Posts
What? :roflmao:

That's not even close to the point of the topic here. I don't give a crap that people will buy stuff they don't need. I get annoyed when people think because they get a raise it means they can just raise their cost of living allowances so they end up where they were before.

"oh, I got a raise, that means I should buy a more expensive car"

"oh, I got a new job that makes me a little more money, time to buy a bigger house that I don't need!"
And that is why people who win the lottery end up back where they were rather quickly (or so I read somewhere once, probably on the internet so it's gotta be true)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,341 Posts
There are jobs out there, yes, but not enough. When people can't even find work flipping burgers, the final statement you made isn't completely accurate, and is a typical over simplification of the problem often presented by Republicans.
There are more than enough jobs to get unemployment back to 4-5%. My uncle is a prime example of what I am talking about. He remained unemployed for over a year turning down jobs he felt didnt pay him what he was worth. Its not that he couldnt find work, it just wasnt what he wanted. My brothers mother in law refused to take jobs working at retail or gas stations because her unemployment check wasnt much less and she didnt have to work for it. Even now, she is unemployed and decided to move to Florida to take care of her parents and live off their income. She hasnt worked for a few years and not for lack of job offers. She just didnt find any she wanted. I tested the job market myself for a bit to use for leverage for my current job and had no problem getting interviews and offers. There are quite a lot of jobs out there.

That being said, I realize there are also some problems like people being overqualified for jobs. Most companies will not hire someone that is overqualified because they know they wont stick around long term. Many jobs out there also require degrees (many of which shouldnt) and that keeps a portion of the unemployed unable to apply for those jobs. Its a complex issue for sure and will require a complex solution but I do think many people need to take what they can get instead of waiting for what they think they deserve as their houses get foreclosed on.
 

·
BANNED!!!
Joined
·
4,805 Posts
And that is why people who win the lottery end up back where they were rather quickly (or so I read somewhere once, probably on the internet so it's gotta be true)
Well ya, they quit their jobs..buy huge mansions, tons of cars and other sht and before they know it all the following expenses that are required to upkeep all of this have drained their savings.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,341 Posts
I always find anecdotal evidence to be questionable, at best. National studies find your evidence to not be the norm.

You do realize that you contradicted yourself between those two paragraphs, right?
No I didnt. I stated multiple issues with people getting jobs that are out there and available. The latter are things that are outside the job seekers control. The former are within their control and a problem I think can be fixed more easily than the latter. Anectdotal evidence is questionable but national studies also fail to tease out reasons a lot of times. All they can see is that people are looking for jobs. They cant identify my Uncle who was only applying for jobs he felt fit his income level and was rejecting others that he could have had. They couldnt tell you how many people refuse to apply for jobs they consider below them. If I feel I should be making $100k+ and only apply for those jobs but could have a bunch of jobs making $50k+, all a national study would show is I cannot find work and I am actively applying.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,341 Posts
And there are plenty of anecdotal "evidence stories" of those that applied for any job they could find but got turned down for various reasons: over qualified, under qualified, NOT HIRING.

Basing your view only on those you know is a poor method.
I did say that was part of the problem. That one is out of the control of the job seeker though. The one I pointed out is within a persons individual control so that is the one I focused on. Never said the others werent issues but they dont have immediate solutions.
 
1 - 20 of 46 Posts
Top