Bloggingheads Community

Bloggingheads Community (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/index.php)
-   Diavlog comments (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=9)
-   -   Texas Forever (Amanda Marcotte & Joshua Trevino) (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/showthread.php?t=6991)

Don Zeko 08-26-2011 04:11 PM

Re: Texas Forever (Amanda Marcotte & Joshua Trevino)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by sugarkang (Post 223385)
There will always be bad actors. I'm not happy about the bankers getting away with billions either. However, in general, rich people can only get richer if they invest money wisely. Wisely means making a profit. A business not making a profit would go under along with the investor's money.

People with money have it because they put it to good use. Rich people who don't put their money to good use will lose it in due time.

The world is getting better.

Why do you assume that I'm talking about fraud or bailouts? I'd say that union-busting, or the growth of the financial sector in general, or perhaps the increasing cost of non-wage benefits are all much better explanations of why incomes for the middle class have stagnated or even declined.

whburgess 08-26-2011 09:03 PM

Re: Texas Forever (Amanda Marcotte & Joshua Trevino)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Don Zeko (Post 223403)
Why do you assume that I'm talking about fraud or bailouts? I'd say that union-busting, or the growth of the financial sector in general, or perhaps the increasing cost of non-wage benefits are all much better explanations of why incomes for the middle class have stagnated or even declined.

Stagnation, and sometimes decline, has occurred over the past few years. But this has often happened in the past as well, after which growth in income resumed to new highs. Income increases happen over the long term, in spurts rather then in steady incline.

Hopefully we will continue to discount that segment of our polity who take every opportunity of a slow down to try to exert their own faith based view that a more centrally planned and authorized (by them, of course) economy is better for most.

Don Zeko 08-27-2011 05:10 AM

Re: Texas Forever (Amanda Marcotte & Joshua Trevino)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by whburgess (Post 223416)
Stagnation, and sometimes decline, has occurred over the past few years. But this has often happened in the past as well, after which growth in income resumed to new highs. Income increases happen over the long term, in spurts rather then in steady incline.

Hopefully we will continue to discount that segment of our polity who take every opportunity of a slow down to try to exert their own faith based view that a more centrally planned and authorized (by them, of course) economy is better for most.

Where in my post did I imply support for more central planning? Since when are 30-year trends not the long term?

sugarkang 08-27-2011 03:01 PM

Re: Texas Forever (Amanda Marcotte & Joshua Trevino)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Don Zeko (Post 223403)
Why do you assume that I'm talking about fraud or bailouts? I'd say that union-busting, or the growth of the financial sector in general, or perhaps the increasing cost of non-wage benefits are all much better explanations of why incomes for the middle class have stagnated or even declined.

In the end, the left's main gripe is about fairness and equality. Public unions are illegitimate, but private unions are fine. The union experiment has already been done and the result is Detroit. Still, if workers want to organize and bargain for labor, that is absolutely their right.

Middle class wages have stagnated because they are expecting to get paid $15/hr for a job that can be done for $1/hr. That's as irrational as expecting to sell you a used car at the new, retail price. Workers need to stop expecting to make a living as blacksmiths in the age of the automobile. They need to be retrained and have their sights set on different goals.

The only way I see out of this is to tie the fates of rich and poor together in revenue sharing. I'd like proletariats to be part of the business except the Democrats always want to turn this into a class war.

whburgess 08-27-2011 04:09 PM

Re: Texas Forever (Amanda Marcotte & Joshua Trevino)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Don Zeko (Post 223424)
Where in my post did I imply support for more central planning? Since when are 30-year trends not the long term?

If it's a problem that needs solving, who's going to solve it, and how?

It's true that the last 30 years have shown considerably less increase in real income in bottom half of percentiles then the previous 30 years, but nevertheless, increases have occurred in all percentiles.

Consider income mobility as well, though. Over 10 years, over half of income earners will move to a higher percentile of income.

badhatharry 08-27-2011 04:10 PM

Re: Texas Forever (Amanda Marcotte & Joshua Trevino)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by piscivorous (Post 223350)
... but it seems the science on global warming is not yet quite as settled as some would have us believe.

I saw that, too and posted it on Science Saturday. We must frequent the same climate denier sites ;), although RealClimate did say it was "suprisingly interesting".

This, after being condescendingly critical of Svensmark five years ago.

Quote:

If this group wants to be taken seriously and interact constructively with the rest of the community (which is the only way the ‘missing steps’ will get sufficient attention), they have to act in a serious manner, be honest about the problems and caveats, and resist the temptation to speculate beyond what is justified. The kind of antics seen in this case may play well for the peanut gallery, but they won’t impress the critics.
I particularly like the warning against speculating beyond what is justified. That was rich.

badhatharry 08-27-2011 04:47 PM

Re: Texas Forever (Amanda Marcotte & Joshua Trevino)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by whburgess (Post 223460)
If it's a problem that needs solving, who's going to solve it, and how?

paul krugman. he has the conscience of a liberal, which should suffice.

whburgess 08-27-2011 05:27 PM

Re: Texas Forever (Amanda Marcotte & Joshua Trevino)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by badhatharry (Post 223461)
I saw that, too and posted it on Science Saturday. We must frequent the same climate denier sites ;), although RealClimate did say it was "suprisingly interesting".

This, after being condescendingly critical of Svensmark five years ago.



I particularly like the warning against speculating beyond what is justified. That was rich.

I can't help but feel a little sympathy for folks whose whole lives are committed to saving a world that may not need saving after all......

miceelf 08-27-2011 06:59 PM

Re: Texas Forever (Amanda Marcotte & Joshua Trevino)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by whburgess (Post 223460)
Consider income mobility[/URL] as well, though. Over 10 years, over half of income earners will move to a higher percentile of income.

Economics is not at all my area, so forgive me if this is a dumb question. Isn't the movement of income earners in terms of percentiles an indicator of income volatility? (given that it's frame in percentiles, it would also have to be the case that a similar number of income earners moved into a lower percentile, wouldn't it? And, if real wages are stagnating, moving into a higher percentile doesn't necessarily mean improvement in absolute terms, it just means improvement relative to Joe Average, quite literally. I certianly may be missing something, so please feel free to clarify.

whburgess 08-27-2011 07:18 PM

Re: Texas Forever (Amanda Marcotte & Joshua Trevino)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by miceelf (Post 223465)
Economics is not at all my area, so forgive me if this is a dumb question. Isn't the movement of income earners in terms of percentiles an indicator of income volatility? (given that it's frame in percentiles, it would also have to be the case that a similar number of income earners moved into a lower percentile, wouldn't it?

And, if real wages are stagnating, moving into a higher percentile doesn't necessarily mean improvement in absolute terms, it just means improvement relative to Joe Average, quite literally. I certianly may be missing something, so please feel free to clarify.


I'm not an economist either, but according to data I see, real wages aren't stagnating, they have just increased at a much lower rate over the past 30 years then they did the 30 years before that. I suppose you could call it 'relative stagnation'.

Regarding income mobility, it seems downward movement is more in the top percentiles while most upward movement is from the bottom percentile. There is this from the treasury department.

• There was considerable income mobility of individuals in the U.S. economy during
the 1996 through 2005 period as over half of taxpayers moved to a different income
quintile over this period.
• Roughly half of taxpayers who began in the bottom income quintile in 1996 moved
up to a higher income group by 2005.
• Among those with the very highest incomes in 1996 – the top 1/100 of 1 percent –
only 25 percent remained in this group in 2005. Moreover, the median real income of
these taxpayers declined over this period.
• The degree of mobility among income groups is unchanged from the prior decade
(1987 through 1996).
• Economic growth resulted in rising incomes for most taxpayers over the period from
1996 to 2005. Median incomes of all taxpayers increased by 24 percent after
adjusting for inflation. The real incomes of two-thirds of all taxpayers increased over
this period. In addition, the median incomes of those initially in the lower income
groups increased more than the median incomes of th

miceelf 08-27-2011 10:17 PM

Re: Texas Forever (Amanda Marcotte & Joshua Trevino)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by whburgess (Post 223467)
I'm not an economist either, but according to data I see, real wages aren't stagnating, they have just increased at a much lower rate over the past 30 years then they did the 30 years before that. I suppose you could call it 'relative stagnation'.

Thanks. I wonder what has happened in the last six years.

badhatharry 08-28-2011 08:51 AM

Re: Texas Forever (Amanda Marcotte & Joshua Trevino)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by miceelf (Post 223497)
Thanks. I wonder what has happened in the last six years.

The worst economy since the great depression. Barack Obama

osmium 08-28-2011 09:23 AM

Re: Texas Forever (Amanda Marcotte & Joshua Trevino)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by whburgess (Post 223464)
I can't help but feel a little sympathy for folks whose whole lives are committed to saving a world that may not need saving after all......

You should buy them a present to make them feel better!

badhatharry 08-28-2011 10:09 AM

Re: Texas Forever (Amanda Marcotte & Joshua Trevino)
 
This is interesting in and of itself. But also to show how sophisticated marketing of things like books has become.

And this is an unexpectedly good economic story. Finally, something to be glad about.

“At a time when the world is facing extreme uncertainty, the one thing we know for sure is that going forward there will be strong demand for downward pointy things.”

badhatharry 08-28-2011 10:36 AM

Re: Texas Forever (Amanda Marcotte & Joshua Trevino)
 
This looks like a blog everyone should bookmark.

eeeeeeeli 08-28-2011 12:20 PM

Re: Texas Forever (Amanda Marcotte & Joshua Trevino)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by chiwhisoxx (Post 223014)
either way, there's plenty of other reasons to dislike and distrust perry. there's no need to get this melodramatic about something a governor exerts a rather small amount of control over.

I think this is right. Especially trying to extrapolate any of it to what a president Perry would do for the national economy. In the end all we're doing is transposing our ideological assumptions.

I mean, is any liberal going to agree that Perry has been good for Texas, and conclude that his Republican ideas are therefore good for the American economy?

badhatharry 08-28-2011 12:22 PM

Re: Texas Forever (Amanda Marcotte & Joshua Trevino)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by eeeeeeeli (Post 223533)
I mean, is any liberal going to agree that Perry has been good for Texas, and conclude that his Republican ideas are therefore good for the American economy?

unfathomable.

eeeeeeeli 08-28-2011 12:28 PM

Re: Texas Forever (Amanda Marcotte & Joshua Trevino)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Sulla the Dictator (Post 223061)
I'm sorry.....is this a serious effort to suggest drug trafficking contributes any substantial amount to the Texas economy? Is this just Amanda Marcotte's thing, or is this the kitchen sink being thrown by the liberal blogosphere?

I too am skeptical. But it doesn't sound crazy. Northern California towns have been transformed into little economic miracles from marijuana sales. As far as I know, Texas wouldn't see much benefit from marijuana production, but a lot of middle-men there could have a non-insubstantial impact.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:08 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.