March Unemployment Rate: 4.7% - Page 3 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 04-08-2006, 09:38 PM   #31
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 07:28 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by melon


Which countries are 1-9?

You'd think with all the bombastic nationalism we get everyday that we'd be #1.

Melon
Here is the top 50 for you on the 2005 UN Human Development Index which measures standard of living.


1 Norway 0.963
2 Iceland 0.956
3 Australia 0.955
4 Luxembourg 0.949
5 Canada 0.949

6 Sweden 0.949
7 Switzerland 0.947
8 Ireland 0.946
9 Belgium 0.945
10 United States 0.944

11 Japan 0.943
12 Netherlands 0.943
13 Finland 0.941
14 Denmark 0.941
15 United Kingdom 0.939

16 France 0.938
17 Austria 0.936
18 Italy 0.934
19 New Zealand 0.933
20 Germany 0.930

21 Spain 0.928
22 Hong Kong, China (SAR) 0.916
23 Israel 0.915
24 Greece 0.912
25 Singapore 0.907

26 Slovenia 0.904
27 Portugal 0.904
28 Korea, Rep. of 0.901
29 Cyprus 0.891
30 Barbados 0.878

31 Czech Republic 0.874
32 Malta 0.867
33 Brunei Darussalam 0.866
34 Argentina 0.863
35 Hungary 0.862

36 Poland 0.858
37 Chile 0.854
38 Estonia 0.853
39 Lithuania 0.852
40 Qatar 0.849

41 United Arab Emirates 0.849
42 Slovakia 0.849
43 Bahrain 0.846
44 Kuwait 0.844
45 Croatia 0.841

46 Uruguay 0.840
47 Costa Rica 0.838
48 Latvia 0.836
49 Saint Kitts and Nevis 0.834
50 Bahamas 0.832
__________________

__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 04-08-2006, 09:48 PM   #32
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 07:28 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by MissMoo
I was a member of a one income household in the seventies. In fact most of my friends were as well. I would say it wasn't until the eighties that women needed (vs. those who did start working in the seventies because they wanted to) to work.
I'm not so sure about that, but one could say 25 years or 20 years and the massive increase in all these household items from then to 2006 still holds true and no society that was really falling behind on the economic ladder would be able to afford such non-essential things.
__________________

__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 04-08-2006, 10:15 PM   #33
The Fly
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 77
Local Time: 07:28 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Se7en
the real estate market should be preparing for its bubble to burst. i can't see home values continuing to rise at these rates for much longer. who is going to be left to buy them? surely your average worker cannot afford $250,000+ homes.
Interestingly enough, home buyers are spending a relatively small amount of income on mortgage payments. In 1990, the median mortgage payment as a percentage of median income was about 22%; now its down to roughly 19%, despite the sharply rising prices (according to Money Magazine). It was actually much worse in the 1980s, when interest rates were sky-high.

One might argue that recent surge in interest-only loans and ARMs are the reason for the percentage drop, but (according to Money) these lending instruments still represent only a small percentage of the total number of active mortgages.
__________________
redsox04 is offline  
Old 04-08-2006, 11:00 PM   #34
ONE
love, blood, life
 
MrBrau1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Verplexed in Vermont
Posts: 10,436
Local Time: 02:28 PM
Real estate can never go down!
__________________
"If you needed my autograph, I'd give it to you." Bob Dylan
MrBrau1 is offline  
Old 04-08-2006, 11:13 PM   #35
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
WildHoneyAlways's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: In a glass case of emotion
Posts: 8,158
Local Time: 01:28 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader


Generations ago, people would be willing to work their way up. Now, people just want to start several rungs up the ladder.
I'm sorry, I believe this is a romanticized version of the past.

God, I love the FYM sweeping generalizations.
__________________
WildHoneyAlways is offline  
Old 04-08-2006, 11:53 PM   #36
Refugee
 
AliEnvy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 2,320
Local Time: 07:28 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by STING2

The single wage household was for the most part gone or on the way out in 1976.
Since I'm going from memory and not published statistics, my understanding is that women flooded the workforce when divorce rates began to rise significantly which would have started in the mid-70s. Prior to that, women who worked were either single or did not yet have children. Pre 76 or so, the majority of women tended to leave their jobs once they began to raise a family. So I stand by my assertion that in 76, most middle class families did very well on one salary.

Quote:
Originally posted by STING2

The average work week in 1900 was 60 hours, today its just under 40 hours in the United States and as low as 27 hours in countries like Norway. Worker productivity per hour is the highest it has ever been,
Get your head out of the numbers and get real. Do those hours include overtime? They sure don't for a vast number of white collar jobs where the 40 hour work week is just numbers on the pay cheque and in no way relates to actual hours worked.
__________________
AliEnvy is offline  
Old 04-09-2006, 12:13 AM   #37
Acrobat
 
aislinn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 328
Local Time: 01:28 PM
Quote:
Generations ago, people would be willing to work their way up. Now, people just want to start several rungs up the ladder.
True in some cases....

but this generalization has nothing to do with those of us who want to work, who are willing to work, but who:

--cannot find a job at all
--find only service jobs with no benefits and low, hourly pay
--have to work more than one part-time job in order to make ends meet

What about those people who have run out of unemployment benefits? Does anyone think there are actually more unemployed people out there than this 4.7%, but because their benefits have ended, they are no longer counted?
__________________
aislinn is offline  
Old 04-09-2006, 12:21 AM   #38
Refugee
 
AliEnvy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 2,320
Local Time: 07:28 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by STING2

Here is the top 50 for you on the 2005 UN Human Development Index which measures standard of living.

10 United States 0.944
Right, let's give that a little more perspective...10th in standard of living yet 1st in GDP in 2005...gee, wonder how that happens. Throw in per capita GDP and the USA still ranks 4th. What do all the countries in 1-9 HDI have that America doesn't have? Healthcare.
__________________
AliEnvy is offline  
Old 04-09-2006, 12:54 AM   #39
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 07:28 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by AliEnvy


Since I'm going from memory and not published statistics, my understanding is that women flooded the workforce when divorce rates began to rise significantly which would have started in the mid-70s. Prior to that, women who worked were either single or did not yet have children. Pre 76 or so, the majority of women tended to leave their jobs once they began to raise a family. So I stand by my assertion that in 76, most middle class families did very well on one salary.



Get your head out of the numbers and get real. Do those hours include overtime? They sure don't for a vast number of white collar jobs where the 40 hour work week is just numbers on the pay cheque and in no way relates to actual hours worked.
These are "facts", not imagined numbers to fit ones theory. The statistics come from the U.S. Department of Labor.

By the late 1980s, the two wage earning family had been established enough for sometime to a degree that all the same complaints about it as well as its use in articles about declining prosperity were just as common then as now. There was all that talk about how parents forgot about their kids in the 1980s, the "latchkey kids" as they would call them. The Kids would greet their parents when they came home hours later instead of the other way around with at least one parent. Eddie Vedder of Pearl Jam actually discussed this issue a lot around the release of their first album in 1991.

I know 1976 was definitely different than 1986, but it was not that far away and definitely closer to the condition we see today rather than what the typical family was like the 1950s.
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 04-09-2006, 01:03 AM   #40
BAW
The Flower
 
BAW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: The OC....!!!!
Posts: 11,094
Local Time: 11:28 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Se7en
the real estate market should be preparing for its bubble to burst. i can't see home values continuing to rise at these rates for much longer. who is going to be left to buy them? surely your average worker cannot afford $250,000+ homes.

I don't even hold the faintest glimmer of hope that my kids will ever own their own homes, at least not where we live right now (Orange County, CA). You can't even buy a 1 bedroom condo for $250,000. Our median home price is sitting somewhere around $650,000 and rising.

And the average rent for a 1 bedroom apartment is $1,400 per month
__________________
BAW is offline  
Old 04-09-2006, 01:06 AM   #41
Refugee
 
AliEnvy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 2,320
Local Time: 07:28 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by STING2

These are "facts", not imagined numbers to fit ones theory. The statistics come from the U.S. Department of Labor.
And where do you think the Department of Labor gets their "facts"? From companies who are required to report financial and payroll data. As I said, the pay cheque says 40 hours, therefore the report to the Dept of Labor says 40 hours. Many employees would probably tell you the actual numbers are more like 50-80 hours and that is not an exaggeration.

That's not a deception in reporting, just an overlooked "fact" that salaried employees are paid based on a set number of hours week to week even though they may work many more.
__________________
AliEnvy is offline  
Old 04-09-2006, 01:07 AM   #42
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 07:28 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by AliEnvy


Right, let's give that a little more perspective...10th in standard of living yet 1st in GDP in 2005...gee, wonder how that happens. Throw in per capita GDP and the USA still ranks 4th. What do all the countries in 1-9 HDI have that America doesn't have? Healthcare.
Countries 11 to 21 are not much different than countries 1-9 in that respect, but they rank behind the United States in standards of living. The United States also spends a massive amount of money on international security related programs which benefit the entire planet and is something that countries 1-9 do not make a large contribution towards despite the fact that they have perhaps benefitied the most from the current global economic system. 40% of Canada's GDP is dependent upon exports to the United States. The other countries in 1-9 also benefit from having a favorable trade balance with the United States. In addition, the average population of those 9 countries is under 10 million. When a country like Norway is sitting on a massive amount of Oil relative to its 4 million population, it makes it rather easy to have such a high standard of living compared to other countries.
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 04-09-2006, 01:16 AM   #43
Refugee
 
AliEnvy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 2,320
Local Time: 07:28 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by STING2

The United States also spends a massive amount of money on international security related programs which benefit the entire planet and is something that countries 1-9 do not make a large contribution towards despite the fact that they have perhaps benefitied the most from the current global economic system.
So basically you're dodging the healthcare issue by saying America's military saves the world and therefore Americans must sacrifice a better standard of living to protect everybody else?

__________________
AliEnvy is offline  
Old 04-09-2006, 01:17 AM   #44
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 07:28 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by AliEnvy


And where do you think the Department of Labor gets their "facts"? From companies who are required to report financial and payroll data. As I said, the pay cheque says 40 hours, therefore the report to the Dept of Labor says 40 hours. Many employees would probably tell you the actual numbers are more like 50-80 hours and that is not an exaggeration.

That's not a deception in reporting, just an overlooked "fact" that salaried employees are paid based on a set number of hours week to week even though they may work many more.
Just because some employees report working massive amounts of overtime for which they are not payed does not translate into a national average. We have the facts from the Department of Labor, we have an unproven allegation from you that the AVERAGE American is working 10 to 20 hours longer than any hours that are reported.
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 04-09-2006, 01:24 AM   #45
ONE
love, blood, life
 
MrBrau1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Verplexed in Vermont
Posts: 10,436
Local Time: 02:28 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Bono's American Wife



I don't even hold the faintest glimmer of hope that my kids will ever own their own homes, at least not where we live right now (Orange County, CA). You can't even buy a 1 bedroom condo for $250,000. Our median home price is sitting somewhere around $650,000 and rising.

And the average rent for a 1 bedroom apartment is $1,400 per month
Don't worry.

When you pass your current house on to your kids it will be worth $4,000,000.

Remember, real estate never goes down.
__________________

__________________
"If you needed my autograph, I'd give it to you." Bob Dylan
MrBrau1 is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:28 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com