|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On February 07 2018 01:19 Aveng3r wrote:
so whats all this talk about an economic implosion, isnt this just a natural market correction following many months of aggressive growth?
It is a general fear that stems from mistrust of Wall Street and their ability to manage themselves. They did not get any smarter after 2008.
On February 07 2018 01:19 Biff The Understudy wrote:Show nested quote +On February 06 2018 23:45 Plansix wrote:On February 06 2018 23:38 Velr wrote:
But most are employes.
Do i understand you wrong or are. Youbasically arguing for mass poverty that leads into some revolution as a long term benefit? GH is cheering on the collapse because he doesn’t have to deal with the aftermath. As someone who will if I remain in my current line of work, I’m not excited. The first great recession was not great. I don’t want to see it happen with these indifferent assholes in charge. I think every armchair or real revolutionary is cheering for the world going to the shitter because the glorious dawn that comes after everyone has suffered immensely will make it all worth it. Better to see everything burn that the status quo because a radiant new world will rise from the ashes. Then again, i have tried to convince GH that when the world gets shittier it gets shittier and when people suffer, people suffer. Cheering for economic collapse so you can have your revolution reminds me of the worst hours of the 20th century revolutionary madnesses. But hey, the world got so much better after the 1929 crisis. Wall Street and the horrific oligarchic sustem of the 20’s crashed, but in the aftermath the world probably became a better place and... OH GOD!!
I know someone who says the guillotine was the best part of the French Revolution. And every time I’m respond “You really need to read up on that era of history and how that ended France.”
|
On February 07 2018 01:19 Aveng3r wrote:
so whats all this talk about an economic implosion, isnt this just a natural market correction following many months of aggressive growth?
Yes, but we all have different hopes for an implosion.
GH wants the world to rise better from the ashes
I want the stock market to tank so I can shove all my money in there and make a fortune when it rebounds
|
On February 07 2018 01:24 IyMoon wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2018 01:19 Aveng3r wrote:
so whats all this talk about an economic implosion, isnt this just a natural market correction following many months of aggressive growth? Yes, but we all have different hopes for an implosion. GH wants the world to rise better from the ashes I want the stock market to tank so I can shove all my money in there and make a fortune when it rebounds
Yeah I keep seeing that bit about GH throughout the last 2 pages or so, its pretty clearly not his position so idk why everyone continues to post that
Timing the market is a tricky proposition, it'll have its ups and downs but good luck trying to figure where the tops and bottoms are
|
On February 07 2018 01:06 LegalLord wrote:The Obama clone they were trying to manufacture during the 2012 DNC? I doubt he’ll gain much traction.
He's not nearly likable or charismatic enough for this political climate.
|
On February 07 2018 01:11 ticklishmusic wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2018 01:00 Gorsameth wrote:On February 07 2018 00:33 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 07 2018 00:24 farvacola wrote:
Yeah and your paper pushing comments mixed with an utter lack of granularity in terms of what would actually happen during the course of a massive economic downturn is your "I don't actually have any experience with the nuts and bolts of working society" shining through. There's this class-romantic idea that events like the Great Depression operated as a sort of "great equalizer," when in reality, those at the bottom took some of the hardest hits. Maybe such conditions renewed would lead to needed change, but in any event, the fallout would be terrible for everyone such that support for a downturn makes very little sense, moral or otherwise. Ugh... I didn't know there was a call for me to granular, I'm not opposed though. You're attributing something to my comments which I did not say and wouldn't support. I mean the example I gave of beneficiaries of the Great Depression were gold investors, hardly some romantic "great equalizer". As I said before and stand by, it wouldn't be fun (obviously there would be some horrific shit) but some people would come out better off. So no it wouldn't be terrible for everyone. I think people are also mistaking my acceptance of the inevitability of a significant downturn for me cheering it on. On February 07 2018 00:24 Plansix wrote:On February 07 2018 00:18 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 07 2018 00:12 Plansix wrote:
GH, I don’t give a shit about paperwork. That is my job. I’m talking about an abandoned property burning down and the city coming to my firm to find out who owns it because the investor that bought it no longer exists. And they want that information ASAP, because they need to board up the rest of the buildings this investor owned. I’m talking about houses and offices just abandoned by people who just left, so someone has to deal with that and contact whoever owns what they left behind. And this is the mild shit.
If you had to deal with any of this shit and talk to real people, there is no way you would be cheering it on like you do. lol... Your complaint about an economic implosion is being confident that you'd probably still have a good paying job. That I wouldn't cheer it on if I only knew the suffering it would bring you, since I wouldn't have to deal with the aftermath of an economic implosion. That is some peak neoliberal shining through. No really my guy. Last time around it was a real struggle to keep the bills paid and by my wife and I bounced between a couple jobs. But whatever you want to believe. Which is a far more reasonable argument than the one about your job that you were making prior to this. EDIT: I'm sincerely hoping and going to presume you mean "offline" when you said "real people". Its wont be fun but some people will come out better off. Yeah, people at the top who can play the crash for profit. I don't see the middle classes and lower come out on top of a new great depression. If I remember right the last depression we are just coming out of saw the rich benefit and recovered way more. How is that going to be different next time? It wasn't exactly the rich people in the bread lines. One of the nice things about being rich - barring literal proletariat revolution - is that you're pretty well insulated from an economic downturn. And if the revolution does happen, then you take your helicopter to the airport to your private jet and live off your offshore accounts until it's safe to come back, or die of old age in a luxury villa in Italy or something.
So we need to arm the proletariats with MANPADs to be sure it works out? Can’t let them rich folk get away.
That or start the revolution by taking over the airports I guess. Which might be easier.
|
On February 07 2018 01:28 Aveng3r wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2018 01:24 IyMoon wrote:On February 07 2018 01:19 Aveng3r wrote:
so whats all this talk about an economic implosion, isnt this just a natural market correction following many months of aggressive growth? Yes, but we all have different hopes for an implosion. GH wants the world to rise better from the ashes I want the stock market to tank so I can shove all my money in there and make a fortune when it rebounds Yeah I keep seeing that bit about GH throughout the last 2 pages or so, its pretty clearly not his position so idk why everyone continues to post that Timing the market is a tricky proposition, it'll have its ups and downs but good luck trying to figure where the tops and bottoms are
The entire argument stemmed from a post that said Americans would cheer of Wall Street burned to the ground. And I responded that people would cheer right up until the next pay day when their job couldn’t make payroll.
|
I was about to respond to this:
On February 07 2018 01:19 Biff The Understudy wrote:Show nested quote +On February 06 2018 23:45 Plansix wrote:On February 06 2018 23:38 Velr wrote:
But most are employes.
Do i understand you wrong or are. Youbasically arguing for mass poverty that leads into some revolution as a long term benefit? GH is cheering on the collapse because he doesn’t have to deal with the aftermath. As someone who will if I remain in my current line of work, I’m not excited. The first great recession was not great. I don’t want to see it happen with these indifferent assholes in charge. I think every armchair or real revolutionary is cheering for the world going to the shitter because the glorious dawn that comes after everyone has suffered immensely will make it all worth it. Better to see everything burn that the status quo because a radiant new world will rise from the ashes. Then again, i have tried to convince GH that when the world gets shittier it gets shittier and when people suffer, people suffer. Cheering for economic collapse so you can have your revolution reminds me of the worst hours of the 20th century revolutionary madnesses. But hey, the world got so much better after the 1929 crisis. Wall Street and the horrific oligarchic sustem of the 20’s crashed, but in the aftermath the world probably became a better place and... OH GOD!!
When I saw this:
On February 07 2018 01:28 Aveng3r wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2018 01:24 IyMoon wrote:On February 07 2018 01:19 Aveng3r wrote:
so whats all this talk about an economic implosion, isnt this just a natural market correction following many months of aggressive growth? Yes, but we all have different hopes for an implosion. GH wants the world to rise better from the ashes I want the stock market to tank so I can shove all my money in there and make a fortune when it rebounds Yeah I keep seeing that bit about GH throughout the last 2 pages or so, its pretty clearly not his position so idk why everyone continues to post that
This is at least partly my fault for seeing it happen to Danglars and xDaunt (not every time you claim, so don't get too excited you two) where people respond to errant interpretations of a post rather than the post/content/poster they are trying to insult the argument of.
On February 07 2018 01:34 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2018 01:28 Aveng3r wrote:On February 07 2018 01:24 IyMoon wrote:On February 07 2018 01:19 Aveng3r wrote:
so whats all this talk about an economic implosion, isnt this just a natural market correction following many months of aggressive growth? Yes, but we all have different hopes for an implosion. GH wants the world to rise better from the ashes I want the stock market to tank so I can shove all my money in there and make a fortune when it rebounds Yeah I keep seeing that bit about GH throughout the last 2 pages or so, its pretty clearly not his position so idk why everyone continues to post that Timing the market is a tricky proposition, it'll have its ups and downs but good luck trying to figure where the tops and bottoms are The entire argument stemmed from a post that said Americans would cheer of Wall Street burned to the ground. And I responded that people would cheer right up until the next pay day when their job couldn’t make payroll.
To which I said that most Americans don't have employers.
I'd note that people cheering isn't indicative that they will end up better off, as is the foundation to the point so many are trying to make about their errant assumption that I am cheering it on.
|
GH – Define "employer" please.
|
On February 07 2018 01:29 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2018 01:11 ticklishmusic wrote:On February 07 2018 01:00 Gorsameth wrote:On February 07 2018 00:33 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 07 2018 00:24 farvacola wrote:
Yeah and your paper pushing comments mixed with an utter lack of granularity in terms of what would actually happen during the course of a massive economic downturn is your "I don't actually have any experience with the nuts and bolts of working society" shining through. There's this class-romantic idea that events like the Great Depression operated as a sort of "great equalizer," when in reality, those at the bottom took some of the hardest hits. Maybe such conditions renewed would lead to needed change, but in any event, the fallout would be terrible for everyone such that support for a downturn makes very little sense, moral or otherwise. Ugh... I didn't know there was a call for me to granular, I'm not opposed though. You're attributing something to my comments which I did not say and wouldn't support. I mean the example I gave of beneficiaries of the Great Depression were gold investors, hardly some romantic "great equalizer". As I said before and stand by, it wouldn't be fun (obviously there would be some horrific shit) but some people would come out better off. So no it wouldn't be terrible for everyone. I think people are also mistaking my acceptance of the inevitability of a significant downturn for me cheering it on. On February 07 2018 00:24 Plansix wrote:On February 07 2018 00:18 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 07 2018 00:12 Plansix wrote:
GH, I don’t give a shit about paperwork. That is my job. I’m talking about an abandoned property burning down and the city coming to my firm to find out who owns it because the investor that bought it no longer exists. And they want that information ASAP, because they need to board up the rest of the buildings this investor owned. I’m talking about houses and offices just abandoned by people who just left, so someone has to deal with that and contact whoever owns what they left behind. And this is the mild shit.
If you had to deal with any of this shit and talk to real people, there is no way you would be cheering it on like you do. lol... Your complaint about an economic implosion is being confident that you'd probably still have a good paying job. That I wouldn't cheer it on if I only knew the suffering it would bring you, since I wouldn't have to deal with the aftermath of an economic implosion. That is some peak neoliberal shining through. No really my guy. Last time around it was a real struggle to keep the bills paid and by my wife and I bounced between a couple jobs. But whatever you want to believe. Which is a far more reasonable argument than the one about your job that you were making prior to this. EDIT: I'm sincerely hoping and going to presume you mean "offline" when you said "real people". Its wont be fun but some people will come out better off. Yeah, people at the top who can play the crash for profit. I don't see the middle classes and lower come out on top of a new great depression. If I remember right the last depression we are just coming out of saw the rich benefit and recovered way more. How is that going to be different next time? It wasn't exactly the rich people in the bread lines. One of the nice things about being rich - barring literal proletariat revolution - is that you're pretty well insulated from an economic downturn. And if the revolution does happen, then you take your helicopter to the airport to your private jet and live off your offshore accounts until it's safe to come back, or die of old age in a luxury villa in Italy or something. So we need to arm the proletariats with MANPADs to be sure it works out? Can’t let them rich folk get away. That or start the revolution by taking over the airports I guess. Which might be easier.
According to Social Darwinism, if you don't successfully flee from the proles, it's obviously a sign you were not fit enough (rich enough) and it's just natural selection at work. Only the fittest (richest) survive.
|
|
|
Dow Joans is pretty flatline so far, as predicted by someone last night. The proletariat might have to wait till tomorrow to see if it’s time to bear arms.
|
On February 07 2018 01:20 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2018 00:45 Plansix wrote:
The reason I cited my work is that the problems created by a recession will find me. I have no idea how my wife and I will fair if a recessions, we could be fine. But I don’t want to deal with haggling someone’s through a probate case because the recession motivated them to check out early. I like my job boring and without human drama. They would find most people (in ways much worse than a shitty time at work due to the ensuing chaos), including myself, no idea why you suggested otherwise in the first place. Show nested quote +On February 07 2018 01:00 Gorsameth wrote:On February 07 2018 00:33 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 07 2018 00:24 farvacola wrote:
Yeah and your paper pushing comments mixed with an utter lack of granularity in terms of what would actually happen during the course of a massive economic downturn is your "I don't actually have any experience with the nuts and bolts of working society" shining through. There's this class-romantic idea that events like the Great Depression operated as a sort of "great equalizer," when in reality, those at the bottom took some of the hardest hits. Maybe such conditions renewed would lead to needed change, but in any event, the fallout would be terrible for everyone such that support for a downturn makes very little sense, moral or otherwise. Ugh... I didn't know there was a call for me to granular, I'm not opposed though. You're attributing something to my comments which I did not say and wouldn't support. I mean the example I gave of beneficiaries of the Great Depression were gold investors, hardly some romantic "great equalizer". As I said before and stand by, it wouldn't be fun (obviously there would be some horrific shit) but some people would come out better off. So no it wouldn't be terrible for everyone. I think people are also mistaking my acceptance of the inevitability of a significant downturn for me cheering it on. On February 07 2018 00:24 Plansix wrote:On February 07 2018 00:18 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 07 2018 00:12 Plansix wrote:
GH, I don’t give a shit about paperwork. That is my job. I’m talking about an abandoned property burning down and the city coming to my firm to find out who owns it because the investor that bought it no longer exists. And they want that information ASAP, because they need to board up the rest of the buildings this investor owned. I’m talking about houses and offices just abandoned by people who just left, so someone has to deal with that and contact whoever owns what they left behind. And this is the mild shit.
If you had to deal with any of this shit and talk to real people, there is no way you would be cheering it on like you do. lol... Your complaint about an economic implosion is being confident that you'd probably still have a good paying job. That I wouldn't cheer it on if I only knew the suffering it would bring you, since I wouldn't have to deal with the aftermath of an economic implosion. That is some peak neoliberal shining through. No really my guy. Last time around it was a real struggle to keep the bills paid and by my wife and I bounced between a couple jobs. But whatever you want to believe. Which is a far more reasonable argument than the one about your job that you were making prior to this. EDIT: I'm sincerely hoping and going to presume you mean "offline" when you said "real people". Its wont be fun but some people will come out better off. Yeah, people at the top who can play the crash for profit. I don't see the middle classes and lower come out on top of a new great depression. If I remember right the last depression we are just coming out of saw the rich benefit and recovered way more. How is that going to be different next time? What part of your post do you think I disagree with?
If you don't want people to assume your atleast somewhat ok with a depression you might want to re-read your posts and check their tone. Because apparently multiple people interpreted it wrong.
|
On February 07 2018 02:01 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2018 01:20 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 07 2018 00:45 Plansix wrote:
The reason I cited my work is that the problems created by a recession will find me. I have no idea how my wife and I will fair if a recessions, we could be fine. But I don’t want to deal with haggling someone’s through a probate case because the recession motivated them to check out early. I like my job boring and without human drama. They would find most people (in ways much worse than a shitty time at work due to the ensuing chaos), including myself, no idea why you suggested otherwise in the first place. On February 07 2018 01:00 Gorsameth wrote:On February 07 2018 00:33 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 07 2018 00:24 farvacola wrote:
Yeah and your paper pushing comments mixed with an utter lack of granularity in terms of what would actually happen during the course of a massive economic downturn is your "I don't actually have any experience with the nuts and bolts of working society" shining through. There's this class-romantic idea that events like the Great Depression operated as a sort of "great equalizer," when in reality, those at the bottom took some of the hardest hits. Maybe such conditions renewed would lead to needed change, but in any event, the fallout would be terrible for everyone such that support for a downturn makes very little sense, moral or otherwise. Ugh... I didn't know there was a call for me to granular, I'm not opposed though. You're attributing something to my comments which I did not say and wouldn't support. I mean the example I gave of beneficiaries of the Great Depression were gold investors, hardly some romantic "great equalizer". As I said before and stand by, it wouldn't be fun (obviously there would be some horrific shit) but some people would come out better off. So no it wouldn't be terrible for everyone. I think people are also mistaking my acceptance of the inevitability of a significant downturn for me cheering it on. On February 07 2018 00:24 Plansix wrote:On February 07 2018 00:18 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 07 2018 00:12 Plansix wrote:
GH, I don’t give a shit about paperwork. That is my job. I’m talking about an abandoned property burning down and the city coming to my firm to find out who owns it because the investor that bought it no longer exists. And they want that information ASAP, because they need to board up the rest of the buildings this investor owned. I’m talking about houses and offices just abandoned by people who just left, so someone has to deal with that and contact whoever owns what they left behind. And this is the mild shit.
If you had to deal with any of this shit and talk to real people, there is no way you would be cheering it on like you do. lol... Your complaint about an economic implosion is being confident that you'd probably still have a good paying job. That I wouldn't cheer it on if I only knew the suffering it would bring you, since I wouldn't have to deal with the aftermath of an economic implosion. That is some peak neoliberal shining through. No really my guy. Last time around it was a real struggle to keep the bills paid and by my wife and I bounced between a couple jobs. But whatever you want to believe. Which is a far more reasonable argument than the one about your job that you were making prior to this. EDIT: I'm sincerely hoping and going to presume you mean "offline" when you said "real people". Its wont be fun but some people will come out better off. Yeah, people at the top who can play the crash for profit. I don't see the middle classes and lower come out on top of a new great depression. If I remember right the last depression we are just coming out of saw the rich benefit and recovered way more. How is that going to be different next time? What part of your post do you think I disagree with? If you don't want people to assume your atleast somewhat ok with a depression you might want to re-read your posts and check their tone. Because apparently multiple people interpreted it wrong.
I cited gold investors getting rich off the Great Depression to which several people interpreted that to mean I was obviously cheering it on because I thought it would bring a glorious class revolution, the problem wasn't my tone.
|
I think they are most likely referring to the "bring on the crash" post
|
The lack of specifics has been a big problem with this discussion across the board. Like discussions about “securing the boarder.” It sounds nice to say out loud, but no one knows what it means.
|
On February 07 2018 02:19 BlueBird. wrote:
I think they are most likely referring to the "bring on the crash" post
On February 06 2018 08:21 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +First, there’s a bit of a myth that through indirect holdings, like holdings of stock in a pension fund, the stock market has become democratized, and everyone’s all in. Not so. Wolff’s data shows that while stock ownership has increased over the past few decades, in 2013 (his most recent data point), less than half — 46 percent — of households owned stocks, either directly or through their holdings in some sort of fund (e.g., a retirement account). Contrast that with the 94 percent ownership rate of the top 1 percent.
But even that 46 percent ownership rate gets misunderstood, because it doesn’t differentiate how much stock is owned by different income classes. Less than a third of all households hold at least $10,000 in stocks, compared to 93 percent of those households in the top 1 percent.
The figures below show that, since the late 1980s, about 80 percent of the value of the market has been held by the top 10 percent. Within that top 10 percent, the share of stock wealth held by the top 1 percent is about equal to the share held by the 90-99th percentiles; both groups’ shares are twice as large as the share that the entire bottom 90 percent holds. SourceI say bring on the crash, it's happening in our lifetimes regardless, so better sooner than later imo. If you're worried about how the crash will impact your wealth, just join most Americans in not caring because you don't own any (significant) share.
First, not a single person responded to that post.
Second, this isn't me cheering it on. This is me trying to broach the point that how the people here feel about the stock market isn't shared by a great swath of the American public (in part) because the relationship is fundamentally different. I tried to make the point again by pointing out that screwing over tip employees was good for their portfolio but that wizzed right by and drew a "but only the people with stocks in those businesses right?" and again by pointing out that nearly half (I don't want to quibble over the specific percentage) of the people in this country don't have an employer to not get a check from in the event of an economic implosion.
|
The "most people don't have employers" conversation seems pointless. If you have a family of 4 with one working parent, you have 25% of people who are employees but 100% of people who are financially dependent on employers.
|
On February 07 2018 02:30 CatharsisUT wrote:
The "most people don't have employers" conversation seems pointless. If you have a family of 4 with one working parent, you have 25% of people who are employees but 100% of people who are financially dependent on employers.
I just assumed it was more so related to "Well if you are being paid less than a living wage, you aren't an employee" or something like that.
|
On February 07 2018 02:30 CatharsisUT wrote:
The "most people don't have employers" conversation seems pointless. If you have a family of 4 with one working parent, you have 25% of people who are employees but 100% of people who are financially dependent on employers.
About 150m Americans are part of the workforce, so call it about 40% of the total population. The vast majority of them are getting paychecks from Some Company, Inc. vs another person.
My guess is that it's some commentary on how most of us are slaves to corporate america or something vs a strict definition of full/part time employee vs contractor/ self employed or something like that.
|
On February 07 2018 02:28 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2018 02:19 BlueBird. wrote:
I think they are most likely referring to the "bring on the crash" post Show nested quote +On February 06 2018 08:21 GreenHorizons wrote:First, there’s a bit of a myth that through indirect holdings, like holdings of stock in a pension fund, the stock market has become democratized, and everyone’s all in. Not so. Wolff’s data shows that while stock ownership has increased over the past few decades, in 2013 (his most recent data point), less than half — 46 percent — of households owned stocks, either directly or through their holdings in some sort of fund (e.g., a retirement account). Contrast that with the 94 percent ownership rate of the top 1 percent.
But even that 46 percent ownership rate gets misunderstood, because it doesn’t differentiate how much stock is owned by different income classes. Less than a third of all households hold at least $10,000 in stocks, compared to 93 percent of those households in the top 1 percent.
The figures below show that, since the late 1980s, about 80 percent of the value of the market has been held by the top 10 percent. Within that top 10 percent, the share of stock wealth held by the top 1 percent is about equal to the share held by the 90-99th percentiles; both groups’ shares are twice as large as the share that the entire bottom 90 percent holds. SourceI say bring on the crash, it's happening in our lifetimes regardless, so better sooner than later imo. If you're worried about how the crash will impact your wealth, just join most Americans in not caring because you don't own any (significant) share. First, not a single person responded to that post. Second, this isn't me cheering it on. This is me trying to broach the point that how the people here feel about the stock market isn't shared by a great swath of the American public (in part) because the relationship is fundamentally different. I tried to make the point again by pointing out that screwing over tip employees was good for their portfolio but that wizzed right by and drew a "but only the people with stocks in those businesses right?" and again by pointing out that nearly half (I don't want to quibble over the specific percentage) of the people in this country don't have an employer to not get a check from in the event of an economic implosion.
The thing you are not getting though is even if a family does not own a share in the market, no retirement plan, and no direct ties, they are stil massively affected by the market. Just because your retirement account or income are not tied to the market does not mean it does not affect them. In fact thosepeople get hurt the most.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
