I did the practical math and while you are correct wages are growing faster than inflation it's not by much, and prices are going up faster than both, and that's just a fact the data shows for the last few decades that predates Mr. Obama. That is true for most people except those in the upper income brackets who have seen great increases in their income despite the recession in which Obama's debts were incurred as well as adding hidden costs of wars and middle class tax cuts, and public works projects. Let's not forget either the under reported news of large companies and their underfunded pensions they did away with further exacerbating those middle class workers job losses.

Quote:

---

Moreover, there's evidence that some companies have taken unfair advantage of PBGC coverage when terminating pension plans. A report from the government's General Accounting Office showed that the sponsors of 10 underfunded pension plans paid 40 executives a total of $350 million in compensation shortly before killing the plans, resulting in employees getting smaller benefits and leaving the PBGC -- and ultimately, taxpayers -- to shoulder much of the shortfall. The report itself didn't name the companies, but independent sources said the companies involved included

UAL's (Nasdaq: UAUA) United Airlines, US Airways(NYSE: LCC), and Polaroid.

---

I get why people say the economy on average is great, but the stories of those that fall below average cannot be ignored, as easy as that is to do if you are average and above. For those reasons that I outlined above and have articulated before I cannot get on the dufus as savior train given the many facets of this economy that you don't seem to know. It's not just about the dufus and his bragging, as I have seen this supply side economic roller coaster many times with the same results, but NEVER as much lying and exaggeration so easily swallowed by the least informed average and above citizens.

All I'm saying guy is judging the economy by a few parameters completely misses the over all picture and the people involved in it. You cannot ignore slow wage and economic growth while having such low unemployment but rising costs. That's fiscal malpractice.

Quote:

---

I did the practical math and while you are correct wages are growing faster than inflation it's not by much, and prices are going up faster than both.

---

I'd love to see that math. If you have concluded that prices are going up faster than inflation, then I wonder if you understand what the term "inflation" refers to. Just another symptom of TDS??

Quote:

---

All I'm saying guy is judging the economy by a few parameters completely misses the over all picture and the people involved in it.

---

You're simply saying that the data plainly supports the idea that the economy is doing very well and you don't like that conclusion because you despise Trump and are unwilling to give him even a whisper of credit for anything. I get why you don't like him. I don't like him either and I sympathize with you about that, but I'm not going to allow that to get me to make all kinds of wild accusations that cannot be supported by data.

They aren't wild accusations, just so many stories like this, and this one. Maybe that changes soon, hopefully, but as it stands some are still struggling in this great economy and that's many millions of real people.

The "wild accusation" I was referring to was the false claim that prices are somehow rising faster than inflation. It's an absurd claim which is untrue by definition, and your links above do nothing to support it.

https://www.gobankingrates.com/makin...ng-in-america/

https://cdn.gobankingrates.com/wp-co..._1920x1080.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

The "wild accusation" I was referring to was the false claim that prices are somehow rising faster than inflation. It's an absurd claim which is untrue by definition, and your links above do nothing to support it.

---

Cannot say how things are going in your economy but prices rising faster than inflation is a reality in my economy as is wage stagnation.

Definition of inflation: "In economics, inflation is a sustained increase in the general price level of goods and services in an economy over a period of time." How can prices rise faster than inflation when inflation is a measure of that price rise?

Sorry Tal, but your HUGE chart proved nothing relevant to this conversation.

I hope you find this article as amusing as I did. The chart goes to my assertion that it's all about real people and not just looking good on paper as an average.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

Definition of inflation: "In economics, inflation is a sustained increase in the general price level of goods and services in an economy over a period of time." How can prices rise faster than inflation when inflation is a measure of that price rise?

Sorry Tal, but your HUGE chart proved nothing relevant to this conversation.

---

Such an idiotic response showing no understanding. Inflation is measured by observing the prices of a number of commodities and you have what is described as an inflation rate. Not all commodities are in the measure and services figure in the way price rises are observed, so if you go to the supermarket and observe, as I have, that prices are 10% higher on a number of items you buy, the observation is prices are rising higher than the reported inflation rate of 2%. Some prices like fuel stay relatively steady and so have an impact on the inflation rate, but the rate charged by my physiotherapist has risen about 30% in recent years certainly far ahead of the inflation rate

Quote:

---

Such an idiotic response showing no understanding. Inflation is measured by observing the prices of a number of commodities and you have what is described as an inflation rate. Not all commodities are in the measure and services figure in the way price rises are observed, so if you go to the supermarket and observe, as I have, that prices are 10% higher on a number of items you buy, the observation is prices are rising higher than the reported inflation rate of 2%. Some prices like fuel stay relatively steady and so have an impact on the inflation rate, but the rate charged by my physiotherapist has risen about 30% in recent years certainly far ahead of the inflation rate

---

If you want to say that YOUR prices have risen faster than inflation, then that's fine. It's meaningless for the rest of us, but it's OK to do that. However, if you want to say that, from a national perspective, prices have risen faster than inflation for everyone else combined, then you reveal without question that you don't know what inflation means, and if you had been paying even the slightest amount of attention, you would have noticed that that was exactly what we were discussing.

I observe that you don't know what inflation means. The point is that inflation is measured after prices rise, not before, it is not a leading indicator, but a trailing indicator so prices could have risen considerably before it is observed as a rise in the inflation rate. The reality is it is all semantics and averages and there are also local influences, such as prices being higher in some districts than others. It is my observation that prices are higher in remote districts than in cities but the inflation rate is measured in the cities or in one particular city because politicians want a standard by which things are measured to talk about, and the inflation rate is a talking point.

Quote:

---

I observe that you don't know what inflation means. The point is that inflation is measured after prices rise,

---

Really? You mean they have to wait until AFTER prices rise to measure the amount of that rise? Isn't that kind of obvious?

Quote:

---

it is not a leading indicator,

---

No one, and I mean no one, said it was.

Quote:

---

but a trailing indicator so prices could have risen considerably before it is observed as a rise in the inflation rate. The reality is it is all semantics and averages and there are also local influences, such as prices being higher in some districts than others

---

I really don't know what your point is. The inflation report comes out monthly and is called the "Consumer Price Index". I just don't know how it could be any more plain. Inflation is a measure of the rise in prices. To say that prices are rising faster than inflation is absurd. It's like saying that the air is getting cold faster than the atmosphere. If you want to say that prices could rise rapidly in November and it wouldn't be reflected in the CPI until sometime in December, then that's understandable, but to suggest that you can use that small detail to say that a rise in prices is not the same basic thing as a rise in inflation is just wrong-headed

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

Really? You mean they have to wait until AFTER prices rise to measure the amount of that rise? Wow. What insight.

not before, No one, and I mean no one, said it was. I really don't know what your point was. The inflation report comes out monthly and is called the "Consumer Price Index". I just don't know how it could be any more plain,

---

As I said you don't understand and even with a simple explanation you still don't understand

Quote:

---

As I said you don't understand and even with a simple explanation you still don't understand

---

You might look a lot smarter if you would simply admit you blew it. To continue to insist that a rise in inflation is not basically the same thing as a rise in prices, especially when the report is called the "Consumer Price Index" is just silly. And to justify that position by "explaining" that, after all, the cost of seeing your therapist has gone up a lot is even worse.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

You might look a lot smarter if you would simply admit you blew it. To continue to insist that a rise in inflation is not basically the same thing as a rise in prices, especially when the report is called the "Consumer Price Index" is just silly. And to justify that position by "explaining" that, after all, the cost of seeing your therapist has gone up a lot is even worse.

---

Paraclete is correct in his explanation of inflation. Econ 101.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

Paraclete is correct in his explanation of inflation. Econ 101.

---

Thank you WG, jl just likes to argue, as it said; a little knowledge is a dangerous thing and jl has little knowledge on many subjects

If I decided to give it up and agree with the two of you that a rise in inflation is a different matter from a rise in consumer prices, then there would be three of us on the earth who believed such a preposterous idea. As attractive a suggestion as that might sound, I think I'll just pass on it and hang in there with the truth.

There is no truth in economics JL, just manipulation, management and marketing. Depends on who gets to make the rules. It's always been that way despite the algorithms and machinations. Nobody sits at the kitchen table and calculates CPI, they look at their check, look at the bills and get busy.

Like the commercial asks, what's in your wallet?

Thanks for the home spun philosophy Tal, might work in Texas doubt it works in Louisiana

Bet it works everywhere people live paycheck to paycheck and that's most EVERY state. Not every American is a hedge fund manager or banker Clete. Lots of firemen, doctors and Walmart associates.

Quote:

---

There is no truth in economics JL

---

Reading some of the comments on this board would certainly lead a person to believe that. Alas, it is not correct. And FINALLY we've changed to another page and no longer have to deal with a page a half mile wide.

I guess we all hope for the best but plan for the worst as best we can, JL but it's always been fairly obvious I had to feed, shelter my own family no matter what Washington or anybody else did, or what the business cycle does. I mean makes for good conversation, discussion or debate, but doesn't pay the rent or get the groceries. That's just my reality, and I suspect yours too. I cast my vote and get back to that reality.

Just grateful for some gravy on my mashed potatoes. Ain't you?

Quote:

---

Just grateful for some gravy on my mashed potatoes. Ain't you?

---

Absolutely!

It occurs to me that living in America is not for the faint of heart. You just gotta deal with whatever comes up, because stuff just happens, and does it matter if it's intentional or not?

Quote:

---

It occurs to me that living in America is not for the faint of heart. You just gotta deal with whatever comes up, because stuff just happens, and does it matter if it's intentional or not?

---

I don't think there is an absolutely easy place to live anywhere, but I do appreciate our freedoms a great deal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

I don't think there is an absolutely easy place to live anywhere, but I do appreciate our freedoms a great deal.

---

You want an easy place to live, come over here, it has to be easier than what you have there. Some things here are not the issue they appear to be there

for example;
Race relations, not really an issue here.
Gun control, the issue was resolved years ago.
Universal health care, we have it, you don't.
Climate, beautiful one day, fantastic the next, don't let the current situation fool you, it is short lived.
Tornados, very rare.
Blizzards, not often and only in a small section of the country.
balanced budget, yes it really can be done.
Constitution, we have one, I think it is in the cupboard since no one seems to need to refer to it.
Taxation, low and getting lower
I could go on but I dont want to bore you

Paraclete: Why gun control in Australia? What was the catalyst for it? What is the extent of it in Australia?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vacuum7

Paraclete: Why gun control in Australia? What was the catalyst for it? What is the extent of it in Australia?

---

We had what was called the Port Arthur massacre. Assault weapons were used and so it was decided to recall all such weapons. This had partisan support. There was an amnesty and compensation and the weapons were voluntarily surrendered. There are about 6 million firearms in Australia, so 25% of the population are armed. Such weapons remain outlawed and there have been no such incidents since. The idea that we are unarmed is nonsense

Isn't is true that all privately owned guns in Australia must be licensed by the government and that the owner must be able to demonstrate a "genuine reason" (which does not include self-defence)? Wasn't it far more than simply banning "assault weapons"? That kind of governmental domination is exactly what we are trying to avoid. While the idea that you are unarmed might be nonsense, the idea that you are government dominated relative to guns is not nonsense but sounds about right.

It can likely be argued that we are over-armed, but I think our problem is not centered around gun ownership so much as it's centered around a culture which includes atheism, glorifying violence, and dishonoring the value of human life. You need look no further than abortion to find the seeds of that idea, but many things including the disintegration of the family, movies, television, electronic games, and narcissistic attitudes contribute to it. In other words, I'm not sure it's something the government can fix.

jlisenbe: I absolutely agree with what you are saying....The U.S. has been full of automatic and semiautomatic weapons for a lot longer than the mantra of the "EVIL BLACK RIFLE"....there were M1 Garands, M1 Carbines, Thompson Submachineguns, Browning Automatic Rifles, and others of like nature from the ending of WW1 to way on past WWII....but we didn't have these "MASS SHOOTINGS".... So, the population had access to high rate of fire weapons but were not using them to kill fellow American citizens.....then came the removal of the word "God" from school, the Rowe Vs Wade ruling, and, of course, the forces of pro-dope. The whole "ASSAULT WEAPONS" hysteria is based upon a lie, too: The AR-15 IS NOT AN ASSAULT WEAPON....neither is the SKS.....neither is the civilian version of the AK-47, and many other: These are not "ASSAULT WEAPONS" because they don't fit the ATF definition of Assault Weapons in that to be an Assault Weapon the firearm MUST, primarily, be CAPABLE OF FULL AUTO, NOT SEMIAUTO. The Assault Weapon banner is waved about by the media and like minded politicians as a method to demonize firearms, in general: First they start with these firearms and then they begin to encroach further upon 2nd Amendment Rights: Its all about HOW MUCH POWER THEY CAN EXERTY OVER THE PEOPLE. The real "ASSAULT" here is the attack by the left upon our Constitutional Rights.

I disagree a bit of course and don't think the gun issue should be confused with the social issues espoused by a few. Our gun issue is but the manifestation of the gun lobby which has been a political force for decades that says there can be no common sense rules and regulations on guns and even blind and crazy people have a right to them. One loon with a gun can scare millions and we have had enough of those the last few years as to have everybody scrambling for solutions even biblical ones by all the trauma. Sure we can blame the ills of society on anything, but until we take responsibility for our own inactions then what good does blame do?

Since even most NRA members can agree on some common sense stuff I can only wonder why hasn't that gotten done?

What "common sense stuff" are you proposing, bearing in mind that the vast, vast, vast majority of gun murders are carried out with handguns?

National background checks so we have an accurate picture on who buys a gun, as I have never understood the opposition to it as well as closing the Gun Show loopholes and mail order sales. Another thing that occurs to me is the 3 day background check and straw man purchases. I think the arms services has it right. They don't just give a gun to anyone who hasn't shown they could handle it, so why should civilians?

It would seem that honorable citizens would at least acknowledge the danger of guns in the wrong hands and take reasonable steps to err on the side of safety. What you don't believe that mass psycho murderers exist or something? Maybe not on the scale of CRIMINALS but I assure you they do and have plenty of evidence of it that is irrefutable.

For the record I'm not endorsing the Aussie view if true, of needing a reason to having a gun beyond self defense. I mean if being a hunter, or for sport doesn't work and just a collector isn't good enough then one would wonder what is. Now on the flip side this notion of allowing a gun that sprays hundreds of rounds in a minute should not be registered and restricted is just plain foolish and begging for abuse.

I think you make some good points, but most mass murders are already being carried out by people who are illegally in possession of a firearm or who have mental problems that the feds cannot find out about due to stupid regulations concerning privacy of medical records.

The real problem with guns is in the inner city. Almost half of all gun murders are black individuals killed by another black individual. Sadly, no one seems to care about that.

I'm still pondering what is, to me, the basic question. What happened during the past fifty years for us to get to this place? It is not the possession of firearms. That has always been the case. What has changed so dramatically for us to end up in this place?

NEGLECT, lack of resources and services due to changing economic factors. GENTRIFICATION at it's best. Maybe the better way to look at this is the number of jobs lost for whatever reasons that adversely affect a given population which in this case are not just small towns and rural cities but the traditional blue collar neighborhoods that cannot transition fully to new economic conditions.

Wish I had the answers but I only "know what I know": Growing up rural, on a farm, and in the South (don't know if the South part has much to do with it) I found guns to be something viewed as highly respected and the thought of aiming a gun at someone never entered my mind outside of the idea to defend the family if necessary. I, and everyone I knew, went to school with, started using guns at a very early age....there was no "fear", only respect. I had the advantage of understanding the hands-on differentiation between "life" and "death" and understood that death and forever were intertwined in a way that the could never be set apart....the finality of death is absolute. That is a part of the story that is lacking today in the understanding of many. Do we have more psychos today than we did years ago? Well, I don't know. Maybe the world of today drives people to insanity more often than it used to do so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

Isn't is true that all privately owned guns in Australia must be licensed by the government and that the owner must be able to demonstrate a "genuine reason" (which does not include self-defence)? Wasn't it far more than simply banning "assault weapons"? That kind of governmental domination is exactly what we are trying to avoid. While the idea that you are unarmed might be nonsense, the idea that you are government dominated relative to guns is not nonsense but sounds about right.

It can likely be argued that we are over-armed, but I think our problem is not centered around gun ownership so much as it's centered around a culture which includes atheism, glorifying violence, and dishonoring the value of human life. You need look no further than abortion to find the seeds of that idea, but many things including the disintegration of the family, movies, television, electronic games, and narcissistic attitudes contribute to it. In other words, I'm not sure it's something the government can fix.

---

Your NRA loves to use Australia as an example of government repression. You can have guns here, you just have to follow some rules but what you can't have is automatic and semi automatic rifles, certain grades of shotgun and so on. You can possess a weapon for a legitimate purpose such as being a member of a rifle club, for feral animal destruction if a land holder, as a security officer and so on. What you cannot do is freely traffic in weapons. You sound like the government is entering and searching homes looking for weapons but the police have no occasion to do this. We don't have the draconian police presence you have. Our police forces are state police forces, not local law enforcement, they are well trained professionals. You also should be aware that we don't have dangerous animals like you do and so hunting is at a different level.

I think you are right about your gun problem being cultural, we don't have rebellion at the heart of our nation, we don't possess this mystique in our thought and culture and so we don't think about aggressively opposing our government. we trust the electoral process

I'm not a member of the NRA so I cannot say what they do. I wasn't trying to be critical of your gun control. It is simply true that your government policies are much more repressive than ours. When you can't own a gun for the purpose of self defense, then it seems to me that the gov has gone too far, but that's what you guys do so it's none of my business. It's just good for the truth to be put on the table for the purposes of comparison.

We trust the electoral policy as well, but bear in mind that Hitler was elected initially. It was easy for him to gain control since private gun ownership was not legal.

Quote:

---

NEGLECT, lack of resources and services due to changing economic factors. GENTRIFICATION at it's best. Maybe the better way to look at this is the number of jobs lost for whatever reasons that adversely affect a given population which in this case are not just small towns and rural cities but the traditional blue collar neighborhoods that cannot transition fully to new economic conditions.

---

It's always someone else's fault. I wonder if a wildly out of control out of wedlock birth rate coupled, of course, with absent fathers might possibly have a little something to do with it? I think this practice of forever wanting to place the blame elsewhere is terribly destructive. People do better when they are challenged to rise above difficulties and better their own lives.

we don't have this need of "self defence", we don't have criminals running around killing people, murder is a rare event here. Yes, there are criminal classes and if they use guns it is most likely to murder each other. You see this is a nonsense, we are not defenceless, we just don't have enemies on the level you seem to think you do. we are not a paranoid society.

I don't think its even fair to compare our two countries that closely Clete, because we are vastly different with different histories and developments, and challenges. Mainly its a bigger competition here, as we have more mouths to feed, and a greater degree of diversity, so an entirely different view of race and religion to deal with. We are a melting pot and you are a pot, attractive enough on your own, but still a pot. Meant that nicely by the way and no insult intended. LOL, we are our own worst enemy here Clete and the danger is from fellow Americans who have their own ideas about how to enjoy the American dream. Even the passive righteous can be an unruly mob when they congregate around a cause, and a bloody nose can become absolute mayhem and murder when they get obsessively emotional for that cause. So let's just give you credit for unique and attractive and am glad it works for you by avoiding the mistakes of older nations.