This Week in our Recession - January 13-18 2013 - Page 4 - New England Patriots Forums

Real World · 01-20-2013, 08:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PatriotsReign

Back to chasing me around in threads again I see!! You and I both know that means I'm renting some space in that head of yours.

Once again, you set up your imaginary "Us against you" scenario. There is nothing in this discussion that includes this fantasy world you're living in.

Good to know you believe the average American is living in a period of prosperity though....

For Americans, 'Cope' Replaces 'Hope': NBC Poll

For Americans, 'Cope' Replaces 'Hope': NBC Poll - Yahoo! Finance

Guest Post: Charts Of The Day: The Economic Recovery Story

Guest Post: Charts Of The Day: The Economic Recovery Story | Zero Hedge

wistahpatsfan · 01-20-2013, 10:33 AM

Looks like good news for the Investor Class and bad news for the Working Class (or what's left of it). This has been in the works for decades and now the investors rule. Well done, America!

PatsFanInVa · 01-20-2013, 11:08 AM

Recession Definition | Investopedia

Quote:

The technical indicator of a recession is two consecutive quarters of negative economic growth as measured by a country's gross domestic product (GDP); although the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) does not necessarily need to see this occur to call a recession.

So evidently NBER can go outside of the technical definition, when it is in a first quarter of economic contraction and when a second quarter seems certain.

By what definition is January 13-18 2013 part of a recession? The most recent quarterly number is Q3 2012, which showed growth, not contraction in the GDP, of 3.1%. The previous quarter had also shown growth, and Q4 is also expected to show growth rather than contraction.

U.S. Economy at a Glance

Why not "This Week in Our Feeling Like the Recovery Isn't Fast Enough," or "This Week in Continuing to Repair the Damage of the 2008 crash"?

You and I both know that the economic activity hanging on the sidelines while the pubbies sabotage our own economy will fuel a faster-paced recovery -- but why gild the lily? There isn't a recession right now.

PFnV

PatsFanInVa · 01-20-2013, 12:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Patters

Well, 401Ks have definitely been a disaster for the American middle class, but without a government that supports unions and makes corporations responsible for their pensions, what alternative was there? Again, Reagan's policies scourged the middle class, and then we had the middle class dopes then went on to argue for a flat tax. What a bunch of idiots! Thanks to the flatter tax rates and the strength of that nonsense ideology among mostly white men for some reason, it's the middle class who are getting screwed. The reality remains that if it wasn't for those bitter white guys who cling to their Bibles and guns, the middle class would be much better off -- the rich would be paying higher taxes, wages would increase thanks to union strength, and more people would have pensions rather than the largely failed 401Ks. (That said, the Robb Report might be out of business--since there would be fewer zillionaires who are interested in reading about full-sized carousels in their children's playroom or private trains that an individual billionaire uses to go to things like the Kentucky Derby.) But, being part of the majority race and gender, I do understand the thinking: this economy has been consistently good to me. Boy, it's great to be a white, straight acting male, with a Christian last name! Too bad about everyone else. LOL.

You've covered the "for some reason" part fairly well.

The success of the right for the last few decades has been to get whites (with extra weight for males, but also women married to white males)... to think that strategies that help the middle class and the working class should be viewed through a prism of race rather than class.

The basic strategy is as follows:

- First and foremost fight against any solidarity among people of the same basic earning stratum, for example, working class or middle class people, regardless of color.

This is indispensable, because otherwise policies meant to gut middle- and working-class life will be seen for what they are.

And you wonder why we saw Willie Horton aired 300 times.

- Next, tell everybody what happens on average, and characterize socioeconomic effects as racial effects. Since whites on average do much better than black or brown people, characterize any program to address inequality as taking from whites and giving to blacks and brown people.

- Tell middle and working class whites that they would become upper middle class or wealthy whites if it weren't for the "redistributionist" idea of the working and middle classes being well-treated.

The key is to magnify the hopes and dreams of one group while treating the other one as "deservedly" hopeless and dreamless.

You see this in white male allegiance to policies that never advanced their own interests, but appeared to stop the "socialist" idea of the working class making a decent living (for example, in the case of the unions.)

In the 1960s, Dylan put together a pretty apt screed on the subject of Medgar Evers' assassination, "Only a Pawn in Their Game" touching on the phenomenon.

Only A Pawn In Their Game | The Official Bob Dylan Site

PFnV

PatriotsReign · 01-22-2013, 06:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PatsFanInVa

You've covered the "for some reason" part fairly well.

The success of the right for the last few decades has been to get whites (with extra weight for males, but also women married to white males)... to think that strategies that help the middle class and the working class should be viewed through a prism of race rather than class.

PFnV

This is tin-foil hat or conspiracy stuff....you been hanging with radicals?

I think 50 years from now when no race has a majority, we should still tell Americans whites respresent 70% of Americans....just saying

PatsFanInVa · 01-22-2013, 08:05 PM

Yeahhhhh not really, PR. You just have to look at this forum sometimes, especially prior to Icy taking a harder line on racism; it is usually expressed as a natural concomitant of conservative ideology. All the "makers and takers" talk, and all the talk about how Rick Santorum doesn't want to give "blah people" [sic] welfare, he wants "them" to have jobs, is another extension of it. Note the rampant hobby of looking for "reverse racism" instances, in a nation that still has what can best be described as a permeable caste system (i.e., any exceptional person from group A can be chosen over a shlub from group B... but by and large all negative impacts get more negative as your skin gets darker.)

Then you look around and see who's rooting for the wealthy -- and it's not the wealthy. It's the dupes, the pawns. Because when you say "food stamps" you don't mean a relief program swelling to higher numbers because the economy has had a once in a lifetime collapse. You don't mean a program that someone you know who works hard might be on. You really mean "those (black) people." Tell me that's not the mental image conservatives are trying to stoke up when they prattle on and on about "Obama the food stamp president." Never mind, you will. But who are you trying to convince?

And the stupidity goes on and on, well past poverty relief, to middle-class "takers..."

It's only the hubris of saying that 47% of people are "takers" and won't vote for you anyway where people draw the line. The broader the definition, the more people realize they're talking about screwing the middle class for the benefit of the rich -- not the racialized images they call up for PR purposes.

Now that said: I think this effect is decreasing, as less racist millenials replace older people more likely to be racist in the voting public? Sure. But do I think it's alive and well on the right wing? And do I think it's a big part of why people vote against their own interests, thinking that their "group" interest is defined by their skin not their own situation? Oh heck yes.

PFnV

PatriotsReign · 01-23-2013, 07:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PatsFanInVa

Yeahhhhh not really, PR. You just have to look at this forum sometimes, especially prior to Icy taking a harder line on racism; it is usually expressed as a natural concomitant of conservative ideology. All the "makers and takers" talk, and all the talk about how Rick Santorum doesn't want to give "blah people" [sic] welfare, he wants "them" to have jobs, is another extension of it. Note the rampant hobby of looking for "reverse racism" instances, in a nation that still has what can best be described as a permeable caste system (i.e., any exceptional person from group A can be chosen over a shlub from group B... but by and large all negative impacts get more negative as your skin gets darker.)

Then you look around and see who's rooting for the wealthy -- and it's not the wealthy. It's the dupes, the pawns. Because when you say "food stamps" you don't mean a relief program swelling to higher numbers because the economy has had a once in a lifetime collapse. You don't mean a program that someone you know who works hard might be on. You really mean "those (black) people." Tell me that's not the mental image conservatives are trying to stoke up when they prattle on and on about "Obama the food stamp president." Never mind, you will. But who are you trying to convince?

And the stupidity goes on and on, well past poverty relief, to middle-class "takers..."

It's only the hubris of saying that 47% of people are "takers" and won't vote for you anyway where people draw the line. The broader the definition, the more people realize they're talking about screwing the middle class for the benefit of the rich -- not the racialized images they call up for PR purposes.

Now that said: I think this effect is decreasing, as less racist millenials replace older people more likely to be racist in the voting public? Sure. But do I think it's alive and well on the right wing? And do I think it's a big part of why people vote against their own interests, thinking that their "group" interest is defined by their skin not their own situation? Oh heck yes.

PFnV

Really dude? Wow...pass the blunt.

PatsFanInVa · 01-24-2013, 07:08 PM

I'll worry more about winning your approval when you learn what "recession" means.

Titus Pullo · 01-24-2013, 11:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Real World

Guest Post: Charts Of The Day: The Economic Recovery Story

Guest Post: Charts Of The Day: The Economic Recovery Story | Zero Hedge

Did you really just turn to Zero Hedge in an attempt to refute the premise that there is no recovery? ... A site dedicated to analyzing global energy depletion, fiat currency and the demise of our fake bubble economy? ... One of my favorite sites, by the way, for their sobering, unfiltered analysis.

From your own link:

Is the recent rally being driven by expectations of a strong economy ahead or is it just the continue chase of a stimulus fueled asset prices? That is up for you to decide. For me the evidence seems pretty clear that the economy remains very weak. Of course, if the economy was truly improving we would have no need for monthly injections of $85 billion...would we?

PatriotsReign · 01-25-2013, 04:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Titus Pullo

Did you really just turn to Zero Hedge in an attempt to refute the premise that there is no recovery? ... A site dedicated to analyzing global energy depletion, fiat currency and the demise of our fake bubble economy? ... One of my favorite sites, by the way, for their sobering, unfiltered analysis.

From your own link:

Is the recent rally being driven by expectations of a strong economy ahead or is it just the continue chase of a stimulus fueled asset prices? That is up for you to decide. For me the evidence seems pretty clear that the economy remains very weak. Of course, if the economy was truly improving we would have no need for monthly injections of $85 billion...would we?

What really makes me wonder is how anyone can believe we're on a solid road to recovery. How is that possible for anyone, never mind very intelligent "anyone's"?

There isn't a single gov't economic report that can't be questioned and broken down as deception today. If we removed all that we are doing to "prop-up" our economy today, we would see it as it truly is. And that word would be DEPRESSION.

Record numbers of Americans on gov't assistance is ignored as a trend reflecting our aging population or an increase in veteran assistance, but that's a bunch of bunk. The reason we've had massive increases in gov't assistance is to just keep our economy going...and it's barely accomplished that objective.

We're now going on 5 years since the crash.....FIVE FRIKKN YEARS!! And where are we today as we sit facing massive increases in taxes and shrinking real income? We look "across the pond" to Euro-land where one week it looks like their getting better, followed by months of dire talk about the future....and on & on & on it goes week after week.

Scary times we're living in....