  Onlypeoplewhohatethemselveshateme Member Username: Onlypeoplewhohatethemselveshateme Post Number: 45 Registered: 11-2007 |
As for New Yawkers, meaning mostly Manhattanites, they suffer from a lot of insecurity which is displayed in repeated, mostly unconscious, put downs of anything outside of Manhattan. This famous 'New Yorkers view of the world' 1976 cover of the New Yorker said it all I'd hardly call it insecurity. While DC has its politics and LA has its Hollywood, NYC has it all and then some. It's hard to argue that any American city is better. while it's ridiculously expensive and dirty and crowded, it's the best at everything (finance, politics, entertainment, arts, theatre, etc.) Note: Again, not saying that other place don't also have this but it's either smaller or they don't have them all. ex: Yes, the DIA is amazing, but NYC has like 5 DIA-quality places. | ||
Jjaba Member Username: Jjaba Post Number: 5637 Registered: 11-2003 |
Lowell's 1976 New Yorker cover speaks volumes about New Yorkers. West of the Hudson River is this vast wasteland, including The Garden State which fucking feeds them New Jersey Fresh. Now here comes several New Yorkers who want to be President. Please, fuggettaboutit!••• jjaba, Detroiter. | ||
The_rock Member Username: The_rock Post Number: 2016 Registered: 11-2003 |
I bumped into Joe O'Toole at Einstein's Bagels and told him that not only is he a celebrity in the NYT, but he has also made the Forum on DetroitYES. Although honored that he has now made the headlines in our prestigious Forum, he really would like to sell his house so he could move to Chicago. And he agrees with Onlypeople about his selling price. His home was worth much more two years ago. | ||
Royce Member Username: Royce Post Number: 2429 Registered: 07-2004 |
Your name fits you, Onlypeoplewhohatethemselveshat eme. Only an arrogant windbag like yourself would come up with a name like that. It's people like you who keep believing that an 80% plus "service economy" is going to maintain the wealth of this country. It's a load of BS. The reason we don't need to manufacture most of the items we buy here in the U.S. is because U.S. corporations have found that it is easier to cut costs by simply paying people in traditionally poor countries a "slave wage" than to pay them what they would have to pay a U.S. worker. Paying a Chinese worker 50 cents an hour does trump paying an American worker $50 an hour any day. The problem with the philosophy, "Let other countries manufacture goods, we don't have to to be wealthy" is that the American worker who used to have those high paying(but according to you, undeserving) jobs, can't afford the products that are being manufactured in China and other parts of the world because he or she now has a service job that's only paying them a third of what they used to make. Therefore, to afford the things coming from China, that were made by Chinese workers only making 50 cents an hour, the American worker has to buy goods on credit, putting themselves into debt. Once the credit is tapped out they won't be able to buy any of the items made in China. This slows down the economy and leads to a recession. The whole sub-prime debacle is the perfect example of Americans buying things on credit and then being unable to pay them off. The reality is that most of the people getting these sub-prime loans should have never gotten a loan in the first place or not have gotten one for so much because they didn't qualify. Those slick con artists known as mortgage brokers and bankers(the service industries' finest) knew that the people weren't qualified, but all that they could see were the dollar signs from the commissions and fees from completing the deals. It wasn't their problem if they tricked people into getting into a mortgage they couldn't afford. Anyway, most of the American economy these past five to ten years has been fueled by people paying for things with credit because they no longer have the buying power to afford things with cash because they no longer earn the kind of money that they could earn from manufacturing jobs. All of those who work in the "service industry" have benefitted, but now real estate agents, mortgage brokers, bankers, and stock brokers, like those living the high life in NYC, are feeling the pinch, and are going to feel the pinch for quite some time. Your notion, Onlypeoplewhohatethemselveshat eme, that all Americans have to do to become wealthy is to better educate themselves is a noble ideal, but it's not realistic. Not everyone can be a college graduate. In fact, only 25 out of 100 people in this country have a bachelor's degree. What are the other 75 people going to do to live a comfortable lifestyle? Those people need to have jobs where they manufacture goods and make a good wage doing it. To believe that we as a country can leave 80% plus of manufacturing to the rest of the world is shortsighted. That's why we, not just here in Michigan but in the entire United States, are catching hell now. We're living off of old money and money from the few wealthiest Americans. Once it's gone and our ability to manufacture what we need is gone, this country will be in serious trouble. BTW, Onlypeoplewhohatethemselveshat eme, I like myself. The fact that you are an arrogant windbag has nothing to do with how I feel about myself. Like you've repeated over and over, "look at the facts." (Message edited by royce on November 25, 2007) | ||
Onlypeoplewhohatethemselveshateme Member Username: Onlypeoplewhohatethemselveshateme Post Number: 46 Registered: 11-2007 |
Wow. Where to even begin? I didn’t come up with the idea of having a service economy. It was a trend that happened as industrialized countries got more efficient at manufacturing goods. As a result these countries prospered and continue to do so. It isn’t a coincidence that EVERY single developed country has a more heavily weighted service economy. Again, if jobs move to other places with cheaper labor, that is OK. We live in a capitalist society. This is America. Corporations are required to do all they can to return the highest profits to their shareholders. I don’t believe I’ve ever heard of the philosophy you state. “let other countries manufacture goods, we don’t have to be wealthy” is perhaps the most bizarre thing I have ever heard. First of all, I’m pretty sure that’s wrong. I would guess that the per capita GDP is higher (and probably much more so) for countries that have a service based economy. Again, I don’t think that anyone would agree that someone who has no college education, works only 60 hrs a week on an assembly line deserves a six figure salary (unless they are a salesman or an entraprenuere). If an unskilled worker only makes a third of what they used to make and it is the only job that person can command in the employment market than it is a fair wage. Obviously there are some market failures and underemployment, but markets tend to work efficiently. I assume you’ve heard of market economics. The bottom line is: if you have a basic education and no real skills, you don’t get paid. Simple as that. Obviously, some people can’t immediately adjust to this change in salary and continue living beyond their means and go into debt. I have never heard or read anywhere that the downturn in manufacturing is leading to more consumer debt. That is a new one. How the failure to buy goods from china leads to our recession is lost on me. Or maybe you meant a global recession? That still doesn’t make sense. If we can’t buy their goods, they cut supply. The subprime debacle is an interesting thing. I agree that some people should never have gotten the loan or gotten quite so much. Again, I’m not sure how this is the brokers fault. We live in a self accountability society. If you are so dumb to not understand what an adjustable rate mortgage is, or you believe that appreciatiation will continue to skyrocket, and you can not understand the risk and what you can afford, then that is your problem. Nobody was forcing these people (who already had poor credit scores) to extend themselves. I fail to see how anyone was “tricked”. These people are not children. A lot of things are bought on credit. You do realize credit and debt are not a bad thing? There is such thing as good debt. Again, not sure how service jobs pay less than manufacturing jobs. Of course, its hard for people already stuck on the path to find the same pay, but the new generation who understands that working on an assembly line is not an option will move into other industries. People in finance, law, consulting, engineering and medicine, etc. get paid very well. More than the avg. manufacturing worker and rightfully so. I agree bonuses in the finance industry are going to shrink, but they’ll be okay since liquidity will eventually return in the markets. I don’t think anyone would put real estate agents and mortgage brokers in the same group as people who work on wall st. but that’s not here or there (except it does show how far removed you are from reality). I suppose that depends on your definition of a comfortable lifestyle. Someone who does not have a college education should not be “wealthy” as you put it, unless they win the lottery or open a successful business. They get a middle class lifestyle (very livable) which is what they should get. If you are not educated, than you don’t get paid like a white collar professional (which, btw, includes A LOT of service jobs). I also question your stat, not because it’s not given by the census, but I question the utility since it fails to account for those at retirement age or above. Somebody has to be middle class, and it should be those at lower end of human capital. You’re last bit is complete gibberish. I don’t even understand what this “living off old money” even means. The fact is this. We live in a market driven economy. We allocate resources based on where they can be best used. Like all developed countries, we’ve found that investing in ourselves and providing services gives us the greatest wealth. Until that’s not the case, this trend will continue. Of course, there will be an equilibrium in ratio since we won’t get rid of all manufacturing (think defense companies, etc.) I respect the fact that you feel passionate about this. But your emotional outpour cannot make up for the fact that you are an intellectual lightweight and painfully uninformed. | ||
Ddmoore54 Member Username: Ddmoore54 Post Number: 336 Registered: 07-2004 |
Excellent post Royce! I was discussing the exact same thing with some friends over a pint last night. | ||
Onlypeoplewhohatethemselveshateme Member Username: Onlypeoplewhohatethemselveshateme Post Number: 47 Registered: 11-2007 |
Ddmoore, do you have any thoughts that you can contribute to this debate? | ||
Bearinabox Member Username: Bearinabox Post Number: 396 Registered: 04-2006 |
quote:Firstly, assembly-line workers don't have a "six-figure salary," or any salary for that matter. They're paid by the hour. Secondly, if an assembly-line worker racks up enough overtime to make 100K in a given year, I see absolutely nothing wrong with that. There should be a place in this country for those who don't take well to book-learning, and it's not like assembly-line work is a picnic. Ask anyone who's ever worked one. It's dangerous, boring, loud, dirty, mind-numbing, spirit-crushing work, and somebody's got to do it. If people are going to subject themselves to that for 60 hours a week, they should at least earn a decent living from it. By the way, I wasn't aware that salesmen and entrepreneurs worked on assembly lines (a minor point, to be sure, but for someone who places such a high value on education, you seem to have a good deal of trouble with the basic rules of English sentence structure). | ||
Onlypeoplewhohatethemselveshateme Member Username: Onlypeoplewhohatethemselveshateme Post Number: 48 Registered: 11-2007 |
The difference between salary and overtime is a distinction of no importance. the fact is that it is silly for a non college graduate working a blue collar unskilled job should be commanding that type of wage. I agree, it is "mind-numbing", as you put it. Mind numbing work should not lead you to wealth. A person who is only paid for their physical labor does not deserve the same wage as a person who is paid for their brain. 100K is more than a decent living. It's above the line for the richest 20% (I can only imagine how much higher, percantile wise, this would be if we included benefits). Even so, that is an absurd income, in comparison to the rest of the country, for someone who is not a college graduate and performs unskilled labor. While the work is "dangerous", it's nowhere near the levels of construction workers, for example, who get paid similarly (They are also probably more skilled). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I mage:United_States_Income_Dist ribution_1967-2003.svg The parenthetical modifies people deserving of a six figure salary. This might make it more clear for you. The only people deserving of that income who are uneducated are entraprenaurs and successful salesman. | ||
Jjaba Member Username: Jjaba Post Number: 5638 Registered: 11-2003 |
Your service economy can only generate Wal-Mart wages. The Wal-Martization of wages means shop floor wages are $10.21 out of which you pay your taxes, health care, Social Security, and other pensions. Manufacturing wages are value-added wages and the profit from the products are much larger. Sadly, the off-shoring of production means a huge cost in shipping, and the waste of fuels. If you think pink-collar wages is a good future, it is no wonder houses in Grosse Pointes are not selling. An ecoonomy must be based on more than taking in each others' laundry. jjaba. | ||
Royce Member Username: Royce Post Number: 2430 Registered: 07-2004 |
Onlypeople, for the amount of explanation that you give, one would think you have a doctorate in economics. However, your amazement at some of the things that I pointed out, makes you sound like the intellectual lightweight and that you are painfully uninformed. Where do I begin? On the contrary to what you believe, you have been the one on this thread in several posts pointing out that jobs in the service industry are the way to go here in the U.S. Claiming that 80% of jobs in the U.S. are now service industry jobs, doesn't leave a lot of room for manufacturing. Wow, that remaining 20% can't include many manufacturing jobs when you consider that the remaining 20% has to be divided between government jobs, farming jobs, and manufacturing jobs. Last week on NBC Nightly News, they did a series on the housing bust. In it they reported that realtors have had to lay off more than half of their staffs, which includes agents, because no one is buying homes. The same thing has happened with the staffs and workers of construction companies as well as the staffs at mortgage companies. Now, Only, where do these people, some with college degrees and some without, go to find a job? In the past people in the service industry could find jobs in manufacturing if service jobs were slow and vice versa. So, if jobs are being lost in the service industry, where are people supposed to go to find a job? They can't go into the public sector because in order to reduce the tax burden on citizens, many government officials and departments have also been decreasing jobs. You talk about doctors, lawyers, bankers, consultants, and accountants doing well. Well, for how long? If in this new service industry few workers are given health benefits, how is any one going to be able to afford a doctor? How will a doctor get paid if he has fewer patients. If bankers are losing money because homeowners cant' pay their mortgages and have to go into foreclosure or credit card holders can't pay off their debts, then how long before the banker has to lay off his staff or lose his job? And from what I have heard, many accounting jobs are going over to India, along with engineering jobs. Now, if the jobs of people with college degrees are disappearing, then where are they going to find work? Unfortunately, the lawyers will always have work. Vultures will always find a meal when there are tons of dead carcasses along the road. I think, Only, that you are knowledgeable enough to be aware of everything that I have just pointed out. Your shortsightedness comes in the fact that you don't want to look down the road and see how all of what I said affects this country five, ten, twenty, or fifty years from now. If the answer to being competitive globally is to offer the majority of workers "slave wages", then those workers aren't going to have a lot of "purchasing power" despite the fact that many products are being sold cheaply. However, not everything can be sold cheaply or the big-wigs that run these companies won't make their enormously outrageous salaries and bonuses. Now, regarding my statement about old money, let me simply point out that a large portion of our economy works because of the money people already have. Casinos are successful because they rely on people, especially senior citizens, taking their savings and gambling that money away, instead of spending it somewhere more beneficial. The lure of hitting it big is probably the reason that casinos are doing so well today and has increased their proliferation. However, very few casino patrons win it big. Senior citizens often gamble away their savings instead of using it for food and medicine. But according to you, Only, their adults, they should know better, right? There is also old money in the thousands of families like the Fords, Rockefellers, Kennedys, Waltons, Gates, and the like who have millions, if not billions of disposal income. They keep the economy running but only up to a point because they're not going to spend all of their money at once. The other 99% of the population also needs to contribute to making the economy run smoothly. However, the facts show that there's trouble looming ahead for the economy. It is predicted for 2008 that there will be over a million foreclosures issued. This has to have an effect on the economy and not a good one. I believe, Only, that manufacturing is a vital component to a prospering country. Why would China participate in it if they didn't think it would bring them wealth? How many countries with populations in the 100 millions are doing well with only service industries? How many states have prospered with just service industries? Why did states like Mississippi and Louisiana push for casinos? They pushed for casinos because they had very little manufacturing and the majority of their residents are in poverty. Hurricane Katrina brought out the level of poverty in theses states and showed that these states relied to heavily on the tourist industry. I am passionate about this because I'm affected by the things that happen in our economy. I'm fortunate to have a public sector job, as a teacher, but for how long? If there are no manufacturing jobs here in Michigan, then parents will leave the state taking their children with them, thereby affecting my employment. Also, as prices of gas and other products continue to rise, how do afford living where I live? Will I have enough money for a rainy day? Will I have enough money to live off of when I retire? These are legitimate concerns. (Message edited by royce on November 26, 2007) | ||
Mwilbert Member Username: Mwilbert Post Number: 7 Registered: 11-2007 |
The rise of the service economy doesn't have to mean the decline of manufacturing. All economies have generated higher proportions of services as the people in them get richer, because poor people have to spend their money on goods; they don't have a lot left over for services. As you get richer, you have enough stuff, and start spending mostly on services. That doesn't mean that there is less manufacturing--even now, manufacturing output in the US is continuing to grow, but it isn't growing fast enough to maintain manufacturing employment in the face of rising labor productivity. Surprisingly, manufacturing employment has even been dropping in China--because even though Chinese output is growing rapidly, Chinese productivity is rising even faster. There is no reason to think that the US is going to stop manufacturing things, but if you expect a lot more people to be employed in manufacturing, that isn't going to happen. Fairly steady decline is to be expected. | ||
Johnlodge Member Username: Johnlodge Post Number: 3797 Registered: 10-2003 |
A service economy will not sustain a U.S. middle class. We will, and are beginning to, see our middle class have less, like in many other nations. Without the middle class to purchase goods, the economy will suffer. The middle class is the backbone of this country, but it is being fleeced by our corporations, who use dirt cheap chinese labor to build the goods they sell to us. We can buy the end product, but we can't be paid the proper wages to create those products. It's a net-loss situation. Look at Detroit. Without plentiful jobs for unskilled workers, you get what we have. That being said, the cost of oil for those big freighters will continue to rise, and shipping goods here from China will not always be the cheapest method. China will also face many problems in the future related to its communist philosophies. I am not optimistic about the trends in the U.S. though. | ||
Warrenite84 Member Username: Warrenite84 Post Number: 180 Registered: 01-2007 |
Although I am not an economist, here's my two cents. A lot of good points were made above from several of you. Two things not well covered here is the importance of well paid middle class manufacturing jobs to this area and the poor trade agreements that will sink this country. The skills and know-how to manufacture goods here is extremely important to this countries' ability to protect itself. It also is the tinder that creates the market for the service economy,(wood). Without it, the flames of market activity would eventually extinguish. The poor trade agreements this country has entered into are a lot like playing blackjack when the house can stop on 19. Unless the trade between us and other countries is completely equal, America's financial might will be slowly dissolved due to OUR deficit spending. What can we do about it? Hire knowledgable, competent, congressman who will fight for us on trade policies that offer a win-win to both parties. At least protect OUR interests. Next, get our own financial house in order. Don't buy more than you can afford and live in a fiscally conservative manner. Pay down debt. Volunteer your time or money to help the less fortunate. How does my two cents stack up? | ||
Johnlodge Member Username: Johnlodge Post Number: 3823 Registered: 10-2003 |
Your two cents show a lot of sense. | ||
Rb336 Member Username: Rb336 Post Number: 3695 Registered: 02-2007 |
i second that. what are you doing here? there's a house on woodward N of square lake, nice looking for a mcmansion, been finished for a year, year and a half, no one has ever lived in it | ||
Jjaba Member Username: Jjaba Post Number: 5642 Registered: 11-2003 |
Luckily, jjaba already got him a house. jjaba, Proudly Westside. | ||
Onlypeoplewhohatethemselveshateme Member Username: Onlypeoplewhohatethemselveshateme Post Number: 52 Registered: 11-2007 |
royce, "I'm fortunate to have a public sector job, as a teacher..." If i had just told me this from the beginning I wouldn't have wasted my time engaging you in this conversation. thanks for wasting my time. | ||
Cinderpath Member Username: Cinderpath Post Number: 281 Registered: 05-2006 |
royce, "I'm fortunate to have a public sector job, as a teacher..." If i had just told me this from the beginning I wouldn't have wasted my time engaging you in this conversation. thanks for wasting my time. -What is wrong with being a teacher? | ||
Onlypeoplewhohatethemselveshateme Member Username: Onlypeoplewhohatethemselveshateme Post Number: 62 Registered: 11-2007 |
teachers, by and large, assuming they aren't a tenured professor, aren't the most intelligent or educated group. | ||
Umcs Member Username: Umcs Post Number: 393 Registered: 06-2007 |
Onlypeople; Wow. Just... Wow. | ||
Cinderpath Member Username: Cinderpath Post Number: 282 Registered: 05-2006 |
teachers, by and large, assuming they aren't a tenured professor, aren't the most intelligent or educated group wow, based on what? -you sure are an arrogant schmuck, I'll give you that. I feel sorry for your significant other....... provided you have one. | ||
Spacemonkey Member Username: Spacemonkey Post Number: 270 Registered: 03-2006 |
"The problem with people giving their two cents is that they expect change." ~~Alfred E. Neuman | ||
Onlypeoplewhohatethemselveshateme Member Username: Onlypeoplewhohatethemselveshateme Post Number: 63 Registered: 11-2007 |
ask yourself a question. how many truly smart teachers do you know (discounting tenured profs)? If they were all that smart (discounting people that actually like teaching) they'd get a real job. those who can, do, those who can't, teach. (Message edited by onlypeoplewhohatethemselveshateme on November 27, 2007) | ||
Carolcb Member Username: Carolcb Post Number: 2941 Registered: 11-2006 |
Onlypeoplewhohateteachers __________________ (fill in the blank). I sincerely hope you never have a child. Bless you nevertheless! | ||
Matt_the_deuce Member Username: Matt_the_deuce Post Number: 768 Registered: 10-2003 |
One thing that hasn't been mentioned is the manufacturing sectors ability to shift into wartime mode if need be. Detroit - "the Arsenal of Democracy" Let's hope this kind of shift never has to happen again, but if it did, it would be nice to have the manufacturing infrastructure to be able to protect ourselves. (Message edited by Matt the deuce on November 27, 2007) | ||
Bearinabox Member Username: Bearinabox Post Number: 406 Registered: 04-2006 |
Ask YOURself a question. Have you ever noticed that when you talk like that to people in the real world, you get the shit kicked out of you? Because if you haven't realized that yet, you will. | ||
Johnlodge Member Username: Johnlodge Post Number: 3858 Registered: 10-2003 |
"teachers, by and large, assuming they aren't a tenured professor, aren't the most intelligent or educated group." Hmm. It only took you a week or so to lose all credibility! Could be a record. Nice broad brush you got there! | ||
Onlypeoplewhohatethemselveshateme Member Username: Onlypeoplewhohatethemselveshateme Post Number: 64 Registered: 11-2007 |
most people i know would agree witht my sentiment. the avg elementary, middle school, high school teacher just isn't that smart when compared to the avg. white collar professional. obviously there are examples where that isn't the case but on avg it certainly is. not sure how my opinion means i shouldn't ever have kids, but sure, why not? | ||
Johnlodge Member Username: Johnlodge Post Number: 3859 Registered: 10-2003 |
So tenured professors are smart, but teachers are not. Aren't a lot of tenured professors teachers at some point in their career? Do they get smarter? Don't make claims to which you cannot prove and present them as fact. I had plenty of teachers back in my school days that were "smarter" than many white collar professionals. |
