If freedom is money, how come Americans are less free than ever?

thermodynamic

Suspended
Original poster
May 3, 2009
1,336
1,175
USA
They're not the best resource, but:

http://www.wnd.com/2016/03/obamas-economic-recovery-in-just-9-charts/



Had costs not been so high, never mind wages, students retraining thanks to the great recession so they can still have a chance at a job that requires a degree wouldn't have become an issue. Obama is not to blame for that since Obama doesn't control the market - private companies do and they set the job requirements, for which a degree is a determining qualifier. Other reasons for this include subsidy cuts in funding to colleges, and far more obvious-in-plain-sight: colleges ramping up costs because the value of a degree had been noticed so with "supply and demand" addressing that, that is why costs went up (I'll save the tangent on grade inflation, course quality dilution, etc for another post), and don't look at instructors who have to have expensive Masters degree for that luxurious $60k/yr job if they're lucky...

http://education.cu-portland.edu/blog/teaching-careers/general-science-teacher/
(thus proving that expensive piece of paper is valuable for far more reasons than just having the resume you sent in given more than a cursory glance...)






Anyway,


Companies continue to pay so low or value so little that people need to apply for welfare:


(That graph alone should bestow Candidate Clinton an easy victory!)



It does not help considering how much corporate welfare companies take, so if they need to take corporate welfare but pay so little, despite being big names like Walmart, isn't something fundamentally wrong in not valuing or rewarding work??


The following is simple - job offshoring or automation led to this, news articles for years have pointed those issues out, and excuses companies make are largely hysterical, though there are a couple of valid reason - but people will have to do their own research to find out what those rare reasons are:




Correlation is not causation, however- what Obama is blamed for easily stemmed from issues that came about before he was elected. If you go into a burning house and rescue people and people outside didn't see you come in, those people might blame you for starting the fire because of a perceived correlation.

And Bush did hide war costs for an illegal war, for which he admitted there was no imminent attack - Obama put those costs back into the general budget, which then brands him a big spender even though that was not deserved.

Forgive me I'm wrong or at least gently edify me, Obama doesn't control the market. He has to sign or veto bills that Congress, lobbied by private industry, makes, and a veto can be a waste of time is a president notices a congress that clearly is able to override a veto. Then again, everyone says Congress is lazy and does nothing?
 

Desertrat

macrumors newbie
Jul 4, 2003
2
706
Terlingua, Texas
The problem with Obama is that in his tenure, none of his ideas have improved anything. He's been incompetent in either his efforts or his appointees' efforts to solve any of our economic problems. He's not spoken out against the efforts of the Federal Reserve Bank against savers, retirees and the economic middle class in general and in favor of the giant investment banks.

By and large, Obama's monetary policies have differed little from those of Bush 2. Remember that Obama spoke in favor of TARP in 2008.
 
  • Like
Reactions: aaronvan

throAU

macrumors 603
Feb 13, 2012
5,284
2,276
Perth, Western Australia
The problem with Obama is that in his tenure, none of his ideas have improved anything. He's been incompetent in either his efforts or his appointees' efforts to solve any of our economic problems. He's not spoken out against the efforts of the Federal Reserve Bank against savers, retirees and the economic middle class in general and in favor of the giant investment banks.

By and large, Obama's monetary policies have differed little from those of Bush 2. Remember that Obama spoke in favor of TARP in 2008.
Goes back a lot further than Bush.

The monetary situation in the states has been unsustainable since the 80s at least. It's just finally catching up with you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: adroit

Desertrat

macrumors newbie
Jul 4, 2003
2
706
Terlingua, Texas
True, but Obama's lack of knowledge of monetary history entered into his blaming Dubya. Regardless of when and by whom monetary policy went bad, Obama's done zip/zero/nada to correct any of it.

Over-simplified, the reaction to the pain of Volcker's recession of 1981 was to always alleviate pain during a recession. Along came Greenspan, whose policies on interest rates usually led to bubbles and the bursting thereof. Followed by the equal idiocies of Bernanke and now Yellen.
 

samiwas

macrumors 68000
Aug 26, 2006
1,575
3,518
Atlanta, GA
True, but Obama's lack of knowledge of monetary history entered into his blaming Dubya. Regardless of when and by whom monetary policy went bad, Obama's done zip/zero/nada to correct any of it.
Would he be able to? Is there literally ANYTHING that Obama has said in the last seven years that the Republicans have agreed with and wanted to follow through with? Sorry, but I just don't believe it's possible for someone to be wrong on literally everything they say. Well, you know...there are a couple of posters on this forum, so maybe I'm wrong.
 

ssong

macrumors 6502a
May 3, 2015
518
347
London, UK
Well I wouldn't solely put the blame on the government but it's also a social issue in the sense that people and companies focus on the wrong things when they look at a candidate and assess their worthiness of a job. The fact that we live in a society which predominantly believes an individual has failed their life without a college degree, pushes many youth and families towards a brand name degree. The universities are obviously going to raise costs just because they fully know that regardless of what they raise people will still apply with the false sense of necessity.

I'd put the blame on society more than the government as it is we who facilitated this to happen in the first place by classifying people based on their level of education. I dunno about the US but in countries like Korea, Germany and UK, there still is a overwhelming belief that one must go to university to make something of their lives. It's a dangerous statement to make and is continuously upheld through the recruitment staff at businesses.

Disclaimer: depending on how you judge one's right to have an opinion some of you may believe that I don't have any rights as I'm currently finishing my undergraduate degree and about to start my graduate degree. Nevertheless, I felt the need to make this comment as I work for a HR analytics company and based on early research, a high level of education does not always equate into high performance or competence, and yet people still take out massive loans to get a degree.
 

Altis

macrumors 68030
Sep 10, 2013
2,987
4,421
Because the U.S. is, as a country, in a colossal amount of debt. What happens when the debt ceiling is reached once again? Raise it as always? If not, then what?
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheAppleFairy

throAU

macrumors 603
Feb 13, 2012
5,284
2,276
Perth, Western Australia
Not only that, in recent times your GDP numbers have been changed (as in, what the measurement includes) so far as to not be a useful metric other than for hiding bad news in.

Also, GDP is a measure of spending. When that spending is all funded via credit (e.g., raising the debt ceiling so the government can spend more borrowed money in the government's case - credit cards and mortgage equity in the public's case), and in the government's case, credit funded via sale of t-bills to China and Saudi Arabia (i.e., those countries are financing your government's debt growth), GDP numbers grow with debt. Growing the debt further is not a good thing.

Saudi Arabia illustrated this a couple of weeks ago when the government wanted to de-classify some (presumably damning to the Saudis) pages of the 9/11 report. They threatened to unload huge amounts of US dollars to crash the currency. They have a huge sway on political motivation of the US.
 

tunerX

Suspended
Nov 5, 2009
355
825
Freedom is expression and choice. If our freedoms really are tied up in money and/or property, it's not really freedom at all.
Freedom is property... if you don't own your own body... you are not free.