[quote]countingbeans wrote:
Again, the figures I used are built upon the year prior’s. So therefor it factors in cost of living increases in wages.
Wages will always be behind inflation, as wages are reactionary, for a short period, on average. [/quote]
Will you explain the construction of the AWI please for my own edification? I did not realize it factors in cost of living in the listed wages.
[quote]ZJStrope wrote:
[quote]phaethon wrote:
Fair enough. My mistake. Like I said I can’t access his link (dns lookup failing). Its still not great. Increases in productivity over the last 25 years have been massive (2-3x even at the low end of the scale). Yet median income is only barely keeping up with inflation.[/quote]
But what you don’t understand is it doesn’t even matter!
Let’s say for arguments sake, wages were WAY behind inflation. So now you have a ton of people who can’t afford anything at the current prices. So what happens? Either all businesses close down and file chapter 11, or they lower prices and the economy fixes itself.
You want to know one of the REAL problems here? Debt spending, and not necessarily by the government. By individuals. The reasons prices stay so high for things is b/c people buy what they truly can’t afford. Everyone feels entitled to cable, cell phones, nice cars, nice houses, and all these other luxuries so they are willing to go in debt for them.
If people would truly live within their means, you’d see a huge drop in prices.[/quote]
Oh yeah. So so true. Debt and credit cards keep prices up because businesses know that people will buy things anyway, regardless of if they can actually afford things. If people didn’t buy them on a grand scale, businesses would lower the prices down until they got the market they wanted.
[quote]ZJStrope wrote:
[quote]phaethon wrote:
Fair enough. My mistake. Like I said I can’t access his link (dns lookup failing). Its still not great. Increases in productivity over the last 25 years have been massive (2-3x even at the low end of the scale). Yet median income is only barely keeping up with inflation.[/quote]
But what you don’t understand is it doesn’t even matter!
Let’s say for arguments sake, wages were WAY behind inflation. So now you have a ton of people who can’t afford anything at the current prices. So what happens? Either all businesses close down and file chapter 11, or they lower prices and the economy fixes itself.
You want to know one of the REAL problems here? Debt spending, and not necessarily by the government. By individuals. The reasons prices stay so high for things is b/c people buy what they truly can’t afford. Everyone feels entitled to cable, cell phones, nice cars, nice houses, and all these other luxuries so they are willing to go in debt for them.
If people would truly live within their means, you’d see a huge drop in prices.[/quote]
So how do you beat back hyper-commercialism? And the idea of perpetual economic growth based on hyper-consumerism?
[quote]ZJStrope wrote:
You want to know one of the REAL problems here? Debt spending, and not necessarily by the government. By individuals. The reasons prices stay so high for things is b/c people buy what they truly can’t afford. Everyone feels entitled to cable, cell phones, nice cars, nice houses, and all these other luxuries so they are willing to go in debt for them.
If people would truly live within their means, you’d see a huge drop in prices.[/quote]
Great post. So much of our economy has been based on access to credit for almost everything that anytime people start getting a bit scared of things we think the answer is making sure we don’t lose access to easy credit.
As a young couple my fiance and I are using these next two years to get out of debt (already down to just her student loans left and our car payment) and then focus on building wealth and making sure we don’t have to rely on credit so much.
We got a 3 year car loan for a used car and are paying 200 extra a month (566) so we can pay it off quicker.
The vast majority of Americans rich, middle class, and poor make poor financial decisions. Honestly I think personal finance should be a required class for high school students, but for some reason we don’t have an emphasis on it nationwide.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
So how do you beat back hyper-commercialism? And the idea of perpetual economic growth based on hyper-consumerism?
[/quote]
I don’t think you can right now. Consumer spending is the god of our economic system in 2014. The more cavalier people are with their money (spending money on shit they don’t need) the better the economy is doing.
This is what we’ve built. This is what we expect. This is what we want.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
Wages will always be behind inflation, as wages are reactionary, for a short period, on average.
[/quote]
If the workers were getting a decent share of the productivity improvements over the last 25 years wages would be well ahead of inflation.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
I’m flabbergasted this comes in your post before you accuse me of entitlement attitude.
If you quit your job, and don’t have another that is on you, not anyone else to provide for you. Sorry.
Being able to quit and sit on your ass and let the government (ie: working taxpayers) take care of you isn’t fairness, in fact it is the opposite.
[/quote]
It is a basic right in return for giving up our natural rights by recognizing private property. It should be accessible to all citizens.
Completely different than the government favoring certain kinds of businesses and professions.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
lol, you have no idea what my job entails.
Compliance isn’t, not even close, to the only thing I do.
[/quote]
You are right I don’t. However, if we had a less convoluted system there would be a lot less of a need for accountants. This would surely increase competition in the areas of accounting you do work in.
[quote]H factor wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
So how do you beat back hyper-commercialism? And the idea of perpetual economic growth based on hyper-consumerism?
[/quote]
I don’t think you can right now. Consumer spending is the god of our economic system in 2014. The more cavalier people are with their money (spending money on shit they don’t need) the better the economy is doing.
This is what we’ve built. This is what we expect. This is what we want. [/quote]
Who actively shapes this economic-culture for their benefit? Who uses psychology and human weakness (in general) to perpetuate it?
[quote]phaethon wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
Wages will always be behind inflation, as wages are reactionary, for a short period, on average.
[/quote]
If the workers were getting a decent share of the productivity improvements over the last 25 years wages would be well ahead of inflation.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
I’m flabbergasted this comes in your post before you accuse me of entitlement attitude.
If you quit your job, and don’t have another that is on you, not anyone else to provide for you. Sorry.
Being able to quit and sit on your ass and let the government (ie: working taxpayers) take care of you isn’t fairness, in fact it is the opposite.
[/quote]
It is a basic right in return for giving up our natural rights by recognizing private property. It should be accessible to all citizens.
Completely different than the government favoring certain kinds of businesses and professions.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
lol, you have no idea what my job entails.
Compliance isn’t, not even close, to the only thing I do.
[/quote]
You are right I don’t. However, if we had a less convoluted system there would be a lot less of a need for accountants. This would surely increase competition in the areas of accounting you do work in.[/quote]
Nonsense. Accountants will always be needed. It’s the language of business and for businesses to work together and be comparable, there needs to be a common language. And there is no competition right now b/c there is an overabundant need for our skill sets and a very small supply.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]H factor wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
So how do you beat back hyper-commercialism? And the idea of perpetual economic growth based on hyper-consumerism?
[/quote]
I don’t think you can right now. Consumer spending is the god of our economic system in 2014. The more cavalier people are with their money (spending money on shit they don’t need) the better the economy is doing.
This is what we’ve built. This is what we expect. This is what we want. [/quote]
Who actively shapes this economic-culture for their benefit? Who uses psychology and human weakness (in general) to perpetuate it?
[/quote]
People?
Who blindly follows? People.
[quote]H factor wrote:
[quote]ZJStrope wrote:
You want to know one of the REAL problems here? Debt spending, and not necessarily by the government. By individuals. The reasons prices stay so high for things is b/c people buy what they truly can’t afford. Everyone feels entitled to cable, cell phones, nice cars, nice houses, and all these other luxuries so they are willing to go in debt for them.
If people would truly live within their means, you’d see a huge drop in prices.[/quote]
Great post. So much of our economy has been based on access to credit for almost everything that anytime people start getting a bit scared of things we think the answer is making sure we don’t lose access to easy credit.
As a young couple my fiance and I are using these next two years to get out of debt (already down to just her student loans left and our car payment) and then focus on building wealth and making sure we don’t have to rely on credit so much.
We got a 3 year car loan for a used car and are paying 200 extra a month (566) so we can pay it off quicker.
The vast majority of Americans rich, middle class, and poor make poor financial decisions. Honestly I think personal finance should be a required class for high school students, but for some reason we don’t have an emphasis on it nationwide. [/quote]
We make a very good living in our household, but we basically live off of half our income so if shit ever hits the fan, guess what? We wouldn’t miss a beat except I wouldn’t enjoy so many luxuries. Spent the last 3 years putting every extra dime I had into paying off my debt (except student loans and house). It’s a glorious feeling! Never again.
[quote]ZJStrope wrote:
If people would truly live within their means, you’d see a huge drop in prices.[/quote]
This is true, but you’d also see a significant change in our economic landscape.
I have to remind my wife over and over, that quite a few of the people we know and see that appear “rich” aren’t, in fact, even remotely close to as well off as they seem.
I know people worth 100m that couldn’t right a 20k check… I know people who look like they are worth 100m that couldn’t afford the weed pitt does. (Pitt strikes me as someone with good taste that buys the good stuff.)
Debt is a good & bad thing. Too little isn’t leveraging your opportunity, and too much is destined to fail.
[quote]Aragorn wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
Again, the figures I used are built upon the year prior’s. So therefor it factors in cost of living increases in wages.
Wages will always be behind inflation, as wages are reactionary, for a short period, on average. [/quote]
Will you explain the construction of the AWI please for my own edification? I did not realize it factors in cost of living in the listed wages.
[/quote]
To determine the national average wage index for calendar year 2012, we multiplied the 2011 national average wage index of 42,979.61 by the percentage change in average wages from 2011 to 2012, as measured by annual wage data we tabulated. The wage data are based on wages subject to Federal income taxes and contributions to deferred compensation plans.
So not only does this effectuate COL increases in pay (so a portion of inflation) but it excludes HI & other non-retirement 125 plans that come out pretax.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]ZJStrope wrote:
If people would truly live within their means, you’d see a huge drop in prices.[/quote]
This is true, but you’d also see a significant change in our economic landscape.
I have to remind my wife over and over, that quite a few of the people we know and see that appear “rich” aren’t, in fact, even remotely close to as well off as they seem.
I know people worth 100m that couldn’t right a 20k check… I know people who look like they are worth 100m that couldn’t afford the weed pitt does. (Pitt strikes me as someone with good taste that buys the good stuff.)
Debt is a good & bad thing. Too little isn’t leveraging your opportunity, and too much is destined to fail. [/quote]
Absolutely. Sadly, most people fall on the “too much” side of things.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]Aragorn wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
Again, the figures I used are built upon the year prior’s. So therefor it factors in cost of living increases in wages.
Wages will always be behind inflation, as wages are reactionary, for a short period, on average. [/quote]
Will you explain the construction of the AWI please for my own edification? I did not realize it factors in cost of living in the listed wages.
[/quote]
To determine the national average wage index for calendar year 2012, we multiplied the 2011 national average wage index of 42,979.61 by the percentage change in average wages from 2011 to 2012, as measured by annual wage data we tabulated. The wage data are based on wages subject to Federal income taxes and contributions to deferred compensation plans.
So not only does this effectuate COL increases in pay (so a portion of inflation) but it excludes HI & other non-retirement 125 plans that come out pretax. [/quote]
Yup. It’s confirmed. Not enough coffee.
I read that when I linked, but apparently forgot it and where to find it a day later. Boy will I be glad when these experiments are done.
[quote]phaethon wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
Wages will always be behind inflation, as wages are reactionary, for a short period, on average.
[/quote]
If the workers were getting a decent share of the productivity improvements over the last 25 years wages would be well ahead of inflation.[/quote]
Workers should get a share of the productivity increase that is due to their skills and that is that.
The use of fax machines, desk tops, software, email & Cell phones that attribute quite a bit to that productivity increase, should go to the person who paid for those improvements to be installed in the firm. They took the risk.
[quote]phaethon wrote:
It is a basic right in return for giving up our natural rights by recognizing private property. It should be accessible to all citizens.[/quote]
What?
I’m not even going to touch the warped description of rights above and instead focus on the asinine notion that you are saying being a lazy shit, and expecting everyone around you to provide for your welfare is a “basic human right”.
That is beyond any level of reasonableness I don’t even know what to say really, that isn’t insulting.
Again, you don’t understand, at all, what it is I do.
Lmao that the government favors CPA’s in industry, lol.
To help:
A CPA in industry is to government what the Seahawks were to the Broncos in the superbowl.
[quote]phaethon wrote:
However, if we had a less convoluted system there would be a lot less of a need for accountants.[/quote]
False. I would just have to work less hours.
I bill between 2200-2600 hours a year. Only about half of that is compliance, and I could fill half of that half with non-compliance in the blink of an eye.
Doubt it. This isn’t the type of career for everyone.
Just like being a plumber or electrician. I would suck at those jobs, and most of them that I know, wouldn’t be good at mine. Hence why it works out pretty well that we both do what we do.
Accounting is a skill with a limited talent pool.
[quote]H factor wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
So how do you beat back hyper-commercialism? And the idea of perpetual economic growth based on hyper-consumerism?
[/quote]
I don’t think you can right now. Consumer spending is the god of our economic system in 2014. The more cavalier people are with their money (spending money on shit they don’t need) the better the economy is doing.
This is what we’ve built. This is what we expect. This is what we want. [/quote]
I did not help to build it, it is not what I expect, and it certainly isn’t what I want.
I’ll be 50this summer; in my life I have purchased…
…4 cars, only one of them new, and I still own two of the four
…2 TVs
…1 set of living room funiture
…3 matress/box sets
…3 desktop computers
…1 smartphone ($29.00)
…2 stereo systems
I could go on but I think everyone gets the idea.
From a very young age I was taught the difference between needs & wants.
[quote]BlueCollarTr8n wrote:
[quote]H factor wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
So how do you beat back hyper-commercialism? And the idea of perpetual economic growth based on hyper-consumerism?
[/quote]
I don’t think you can right now. Consumer spending is the god of our economic system in 2014. The more cavalier people are with their money (spending money on shit they don’t need) the better the economy is doing.
This is what we’ve built. This is what we expect. This is what we want. [/quote]
I did not help to build it, it is not what I expect, and it certainly isn’t what I want.
I’ll be 50this summer; in my life I have purchased…
…4 cars, only one of them new, and I still own two of the four
…2 TVs
…1 set of living room funiture
…3 matress/box sets
…3 desktop computers
…1 smartphone ($29.00)
…2 stereo systems
I could go on but I think everyone gets the idea.
From a very young age I was taught the difference between needs & wants.
[/quote]
Most certainly, and it is to your benefit. However in the “royal” we sense, Americans have done exactly the opposite :S
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
It also shows an exponential growth in high paying jobs in the area,[/quote]
I thought the discussion was about minimum wage ?
[quote]ZJStrope wrote:
[quote]phaethon wrote:
[quote]Aragorn wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I don’t know what fuckin:) Planet you and beans grew up on but you two should go back and get a room
[/quote]
We live on the planet where facts and circumstances actually dictate that what we have said is true.
Quite like your continued chosen ignorance on taxation, you’ll ignore the links and charts posted above. [/quote]
You live in a world that that skews reality ,looses it in a fog of numbers and deductions , just like the tax code
[/quote]
So you will ignore the fact that the average wages have increased?[/quote]
According to CountingBeans the median increase in income is 89%. According to you inflation over the same period of time has been 113%. The average worker is clearly worse off.
Now take into account that necessities (shelter, utilities, healthcare, education) have gone up significantly faster than general inflation and you will see the average American is way worse off. At least consumer electronics are cheaper and food has been fairly stable.
The median American is having their face rubbed in the dirt because they don’t have a lot of bargaining power. The three main causes are NIMBYs, outsourcing externalities, and lack of a proper social safety net/basic income.
It is extremely scary that my household is in the top 10% of income earners in the US. Because there is no way I am harder working than 90% of Americans. No way.[/quote]
It’s not about how hard you work, it’s about the value your work brings.
And definition of “hard work” is not exactly objective.
And yesterday, I did a calculation of the Cost of Employees for Employers per Hour Worked from the BLS. Cost of employees includes salaries, benefits, etc. It’s CASH out the door, not phantom costs.
From 2004-2013, the cost increased about 25.5% from something like $25/hour to like $31-32/hour…I can’t remember exactly.
I then calculated inflation over the same period by compounding the average inflation rate over the time period and came to about 26.5%.
Not exactly a huge difference. Again, you may not see a big increase in pay, but the government requires businesses to spend a lot more outside of pay than before.
It’s why all the companies I work for now give me a report each year that lists my TRUE compensation.
[/quote]
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
Workers should get a share of the productivity increase that is due to their skills and that is that.
The use of fax machines, desk tops, software, email & Cell phones that attribute quite a bit to that productivity increase, should go to the person who paid for those improvements to be installed in the firm. They took the risk.
[/quote]
In an ideal world that would be fine because almost anyone could take advantage of these capital improvements by starting their own competing business. In reality in most industries there are high incidental barriers to entry. These incidental barriers are bad for consumers and employees.
For example if you don’t want to pay me part of the productivity increase then I’ll buy my own software etc and go straight to your customers and undercut you (keeping a portion of the increase and passing the rest on to the customer).
Now imagine that McDonalds workers could do the same. There are plenty of McDonalds workers who can cook a better burger and know enough about management, the supply chain, and sales to compete. Where they come unstuck is the large costs involved in opening up a store in a good location. Yet this cost is not really related to being able to create an amazing end product. So if anyone could open up a little burger stall next to a McDonalds and not have to pay rent to rent seeking mongrels then employers like McDonalds would be forced to pass a lot of any productivity improvements on to the employees.
Thankfully most jobs are relying less and less upon rent seekers.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
instead focus on the asinine notion that you are saying being a lazy shit, and expecting everyone around you to provide for your welfare is a “basic human right”.
[/quote]
Well really what other fair alternative is there to compensate the less fortunate for agreeing to our private property based theft of natural resources (property, farm land, raw resources, etc)?
The other two alternatives are communism (I don’t think any of us want that) or our current system of pretending that the current allocation of natural resources is somehow just and moral (head in the sand and incredibly immoral but a natural human reaction/coping mechanism and at least we are tech’ing our way out of it just like we did with slavery)
