Elizabeth Warren - The Two Income Trap:


petros
#31
There is economic rcovery and there is growth. Don't donfuse the two....or toe.
 
Tonington
#32
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

There is economic rcovery and there is growth.

And there is recession and there is contraction. You can't recover without growth...seriously I don't understand what part of that is perplexing you. I never said the US is recovered, I said it is growing faster, which is true.

I guess if a 300 pound man loses 100 pounds, and then a year and a half later he goes up to 290, he didn't actually gain any weight from 200 to 290, he was just recovering...euphemistic spin.
 
petros
#33
Quote: Originally Posted by ToningtonView Post

And there is recession and there is contraction. You can't recover without growth...seriously I don't understand what part of that is perplexing you. I never said the US is recovered, I said it is growing faster, which is true.

I guess if a 300 pound man loses 100 pounds, and then a year and a half later he goes up to 290, he didn't actually gain any weight from 200 to 290, he was just recovering...euphemistic spin.

He is still down 10 pounds from his peak.
 
TenPenny
#34
Quote: Originally Posted by ToningtonView Post

And there is recession and there is contraction. You can't recover without growth...seriously I don't understand what part of that is perplexing you. I never said the US is recovered, I said it is growing faster, which is true.

I guess if a 300 pound man loses 100 pounds, and then a year and a half later he goes up to 290, he didn't actually gain any weight from 200 to 290, he was just recovering...euphemistic spin.

You call yourself a scientist?

I'll tell my daughter to avoid UPEI, they can't be too smart over there.
 
L Gilbert
#35
Quote: Originally Posted by karrieView Post

I am going to unapologetically skip over the vid as my time on here this morning is limited, but, I had a thought to add to the discussion just based off the title of it... I don't understand how my friends can afford to work. I watch them shell out for daycare, after school care, ready made meals, spend more on everything from clothes to groceries because they don't have time to chase sales, pay more for their wardrobe, pay more for vacations because the family NEEDS some time together after all that hectic chaos. They spend more on vehicles. Having a two income household equates to a cash hemmorage. I don't get it at all. Everyone sits and tells me how 'lucky' I am to be able to afford to stay home. Luck has zero to do with it. We have planned for it, we budget for it, we deny ourselves debt for it. We do not take out credit on any depreciating item unless it's a cash earner (a loan on hubby's truck because he gets paid allowance and mileage on it). If we can't afford something, we can't afford it, plain and simple. Our society's view of 'wealth' is ridiculous!

That's mentioned in the vid.

Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

He is still down 10 pounds from his peak.

lol He hasn't grown relative to his earlier state, but he has grown. Whether he's still 10 pounds lighter than he was is irrelevant.
 
petros
#36
No? What makes up the shortfalls? Snacks?
 
Angstrom
#37
Quote: Originally Posted by karrieView Post

I am going to unapologetically skip over the vid as my time on here this morning is limited, but, I had a thought to add to the discussion just based off the title of it... I don't understand how my friends can afford to work. I watch them shell out for daycare, after school care, ready made meals, spend more on everything from clothes to groceries because they don't have time to chase sales, pay more for their wardrobe, pay more for vacations because the family NEEDS some time together after all that hectic chaos. They spend more on vehicles. Having a two income household equates to a cash hemmorage. I don't get it at all. Everyone sits and tells me how 'lucky' I am to be able to afford to stay home. Luck has zero to do with it. We have planned for it, we budget for it, we deny ourselves debt for it. We do not take out credit on any depreciating item unless it's a cash earner (a loan on hubby's truck because he gets paid allowance and mileage on it). If we can't afford something, we can't afford it, plain and simple. Our society's view of 'wealth' is ridiculous!


What she is saying is People are getting in problems when they lose there jobs, or they have big health problems.

Lets say (knock on Wood) tomorrow your husband loses his job, and you fall terribly ill.
Elizabeth is saying, a good many of the lower income middle class families can't deal with that kind of disaster.


She is not talking about buying stuff you can't afford.
She is talking about borrowing money to pay your rent/mortgage Electricity, heating, car, insurance, phone, tax's, water bill's.
Because you lost your income but still need to pay that stuff to be in the middle class.

I hope you never have to deal with that. And if you do, I hope you have 15 000$ sitting around for it,
cause that's around how much you'll need in that situation to keep making your normal payments for
The time needed to land on your feet.
 
karrie
+1
#38
Quote: Originally Posted by AngstromView Post

I hope you never have to deal with that. And if you do, I hope you have 15 000$ sitting around for it,
cause that's around how much you'll need in that situation to keep making your normal payments for
The time needed to land on your feet.

We have disability insurance, RRSP's, and stocks. We can pull money out of any number of places to get through a hard time, it's part of fiscal planning. We live on apprx. 60% of hubby's takehome pay. The rest is invested. I'm already 'disabled' so we know full well what life can throw at you, and plan accordingly.
 
L Gilbert
+1
#39
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

No? What makes up the shortfalls? Snacks?

The economy shrunk. Then it started growing again. Get over it.
 
petros
#40
Do you have 6 toes?
 
Tonington
#41
Quote: Originally Posted by TenPennyView Post

You call yourself a scientist?

No, I don't. Maybe you missed my sarcasm...if we follow Petros logic, addition of any quality cannot be growth unless it produces a new maximum. Afterall, the American economy he says can't be growing because it is recovering from a large recession.

By that same logic, the man who gains weight after losing weight, isn't really gaining weight, they are simply recovering. That's asinine. Similarly, species that reach historic lows are not gaining when their population goes up...tumors that shrink and then begin to grow again are not actually growing, they are recovering, according to Petros logic.

I can think of plenty of examples from my own field where a quantity gets smaller and then larger again. Antibodies and viral pressure in challenge tanks, all sorts of things biologically go up and down, deterministically as well as randomly. We don't say that they aren't growing in number or gaining in some fashion simply because at one point there was more...
 
petros
+1
#42
A simple analogy. If two cars are racing and one is a lap and a half back and the losing car gains a half lap in a short period is it now winning the race?
 
Tonington
#43
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

A simple analogy. If two cars are racing and one is a lap and a half back and the losing car gains a half lap in a short period is it now winning the race?

It is a simple analogy, and it's completely divorced from what I said. I said the American economy is now growing faster. I never said anything about absolute values, like 6 toes.

I guess we could extend your logic a bit though. America produces far more GDP than Canada does. Many multiples. So it must be winning
 
petros
+1
#44
It's an economy stupid. They don't "grow" until they surpass the benchmark prior to losses.

I hope you old lady manages your money.
 
TenPenny
+1
#45
Quote: Originally Posted by ToningtonView Post

No, I don't. Maybe you missed my sarcasm...if we follow Petros logic, addition of any quality cannot be growth unless it produces a new maximum. Afterall, the American economy he says can't be growing because it is recovering from a large recession.

By that same logic, the man who gains weight after losing weight, isn't really gaining weight, they are simply recovering. That's asinine. Similarly, species that reach historic lows are not gaining when their population goes up...tumors that shrink and then begin to grow again are not actually growing, they are recovering, according to Petros logic.

I can think of plenty of examples from my own field where a quantity gets smaller and then larger again. Antibodies and viral pressure in challenge tanks, all sorts of things biologically go up and down, deterministically as well as randomly. We don't say that they aren't growing in number or gaining in some fashion simply because at one point there was more...

The part that you're missing is that in this case, we are discussing the economy, which means that you have to use definitions from economics when you talk about 'growth' and 'recovery', not from weight watchers.
 
Tonington
#46
Quote: Originally Posted by TenPennyView Post

The part that you're missing is that in this case, we are discussing the economy, which means that you have to use definitions from economics when you talk about 'growth' and 'recovery', not from weight watchers.

Yes, I'm well aware about what I was discussing before Petros brought up extra toes. The American economy is growing, GDP is going up and jobs are going up...would you agree with Petros and say that the American economy isn't growing?
 
petros
#47
Quote:


The American economy is growing

It's recovering not growing.
 
taxslave
+1
#48
Quote: Originally Posted by ToningtonView Post

And there is recession and there is contraction. You can't recover without growth...seriously I don't understand what part of that is perplexing you. I never said the US is recovered, I said it is growing faster, which is true.

I guess if a 300 pound man loses 100 pounds, and then a year and a half later he goes up to 290, he didn't actually gain any weight from 200 to 290, he was just recovering...euphemistic spin.

That is much like MF's fuzzy logic that not increasing health care spending by the same amount every year is somehow a cut.
 
Tonington
#49
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

It's recovering not growing.

So, explain logically how an economy can recover from a recession without growth.
 
petros
#50
By recovering losses.
 
Tonington
#51
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

By recovering losses.

So, by adding more of something...
 
petros
#52
Maybe this will help you?
Recovery.gov - Tracking the Money
 
Tonington
#53
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

Maybe this will help you?
Recovery.gov - Tracking the Money

No that won't help me to understand how you can recover from a recession without growing again.
 
petros
#54
Of course it won't help you when you don't have a clue.
 
Tonington
#55
1+1=2 Petros. To go from one to two is growth.
 
petros
+1
#56
-1+1=1

If you keep this up you'll qualify for journalism school.

Definition of 'Economic Recovery'

A period of increasing business activity signaling the end of a recession. Much like a recession, an economic recovery is not always easy to recognize until at least several months after it has begun. Economists use a variety of indicators, including GDP, inflation, financial markets and unemployment to analyze the state of the economy and determine whether a recovery is in progress.

Read more: Economic Recovery Definition | Investopedia (external - login to view)


Definition of 'Economic Growth'

An increase in the capacity of an economy to produce goods and services, compared from one period of time to another. Economic growth can be measured in nominal terms, which include inflation, or in real terms, which are adjusted for inflation. For comparing one country's economic growth to another, GDP or GNP per capita should be used as these take into account population differences between countries.

Read more: Economic Growth Definition | Investopedia (external - login to view)
 
Tonington
#57
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

-1+1=1

No, it equals zero.

For the record, I haven't denied that the American economy is recovering. If you can't understand that an economy can be recovering and growing concurrently, well then I'm not really surprised at all that you think -1 + 1 =1.

But hey, you can still get a plus one on this forum for being math challenged!
 
petros
#58
You don't like when I use your economic math and correct economic terminology?
 
Tonington
#59
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

You don't like when I use your economic math and correct economic terminology?

I don't care if you can't use math correctly, doesn't impact me at all. Yes, you quoted some terms about economics, but you still apparently fail to realize that for recovery to take place, that growth needs to occur. Did you not notice the similar terms in both definitions?
 
petros
#60
Quote: Originally Posted by ToningtonView Post

I don't care if you can't use math correctly, doesn't impact me at all. Yes, you quoted some terms about economics, but you still apparently fail to realize that for recovery to take place, that growth needs to occur. Did you not notice the similar terms in both definitions?

It's your math bub. In the real world you can't have a positive until the negative is eliminated. I did notice similarities but more importantly I can grasp the differences which mandate the need for two terms to describe two seperate scenarios. Someday maybe you will.
 

Similar Threads

20
Warren Jeffs Trial
by damngrumpy | Jul 27th, 2011
9
Fredom is a trap .
by china | Jul 15th, 2007
no new posts