Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: HamiltonJay
Banks are scared stiff over foreclosure numbers they know are coming.... More today than EVER before... that's not a fact that jives with your assertions.

You haven't posted any facts on this entire thread. Conversely, others have posted numerous links to facts easily debunking your feelings.

I've done balance sheet analysis for lots of folks, and seen lots of folks who thought they had lots, wind up with little

Herein lies the problem. You are drawing broad, emotional conclusions from anecdotes in your little corner of the world without any consideration to what's going on outside.

This fact alone makes you uniquely unqualified to be lecturing anyone about getting into the real world.

Look at the Median Income numbers, they are basically flat, some up here and there, but for the most part FLAT when adjusted for inflation over the last 30 years.

From The Conservative Heritage Foundation:

"The coming stories about flat real wages in 2004 bring to mind many counter-arguments. First, we might note that inflation statistics have been overstated for decades, as described by the Boskin Commission and many nonpartisan economists, which implies that real earnings have been underestimated. Or we could compare Americans’ after-tax incomes, which are much higher after the passage of the 2001 and 2003 tax cut packages. Or we could talk about how consumption remains robust. Or we could ponder the dramatic rise in non-wage employee benefits.

Look at the graph in the link below showing an upward slope in real wages and tell me where they are wrong.

The Real Story on "Stagnant Wages"

Did real incomes increase after the recent tax cuts?

Are you looking at total compensation numbers? Could employers be picking up a large proportion of the dramatic increase in health-care costs? If not, shouldn't that be considered part of the equation since it means more money in the pockets of workers?

It's impossible to tell where you get your numbers since you refuse to share any of your sources.

In fact most of the FREE TRADE treaties are unconstitutional as far as I can tell. Bilateral agreements are tarrifs are spelled out in the constitution

Which is it,"fact" or "as far as you can tell"?

If it's fact, please show us any lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of these treaties. If it's the latter, well, it's nothing more than feelings....

221 posted on 05/13/2005 10:12:36 AM PDT by Mase
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 217 | View Replies ]


To: Mase
You are drawing broad, emotional conclusions from anecdotes in your little corner of the world without any consideration to what's going on outside.

That does not make his observation invalid. That is his reality from his point of view and it is a reality shared by many, and a mountain of selectively manipulated statistical information is not going to pursuade that point of view. You can trust the reports if they suit you, but when someone tells you that they do not trust your source, you best accept it as a fact that they do not believe the conclusions drawned from your statistics. If you want to pursuade you have best find clearer evidence and a better presentation.
222 posted on 05/13/2005 2:16:36 PM PDT by ARCADIA (Abuse of power comes as no surprise)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 221 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson