patrick.net

this is really misleading as you can live VERY WELL living paycheck to paycheck. even if they are welfare/disability checks.

just ask the hispanic immigrants who die trying to get here. 'zero net worth' people here almost all have a fridge, a car, a tv, a cell phone.

they might be '3 missed paychecks from homeless' but so what.

Also lots of doctors lawyers have zero net worth live paycheck to paycheck, rent and have leased cars.

Also what about union/gov people with huge pensions who rent and live mostly paycheck to paycheck but dont need to save even $1 for retirement as the pension is going to be there for them (they sure hope so!)

Total BS.

But wealth is not a right.

Vicente says

By contrast, the share of total net worth held by the weathiest 1 percent of American households continued rising, hitting 34.5 percent in 2010. The top 10 percent's share was 74.5 percent."

Home prices only go up! it wasnt the top 1% who were saying that...it was the 99% as you call them..

Fact is anyone ( the whole 100%) who overpays for RE will get hosed in the end...

Its not loans or rates on mortgages that was the issue.. it all comes down to PRICE!

It doesnt matter if its Dot.com stock, housing, Facebook IPO, or Beanie Babies.

It was pure stupidity that anyone would believe homes would appreciate double digit well into the future... they created and believe their own lies...

People who did well, didnt buy into the hype and ignored it all..

And than you have people who have 5 rental properties and are still gaming the system for bailouts while appear to be dirt poor to the government....

http://patrick.net/?p=1214304

I don't really care how statistics can be skewed, I don't see super wealthy being a problem. I do see government dependence being a huge problem though.

FortWayne says

And than you have people who have 5 rental properties and are still gaming the system for bailouts while appear to be dirt poor to the government....

An anecdote is not DATA. What's the trend, and tell me where you see this ending.

Historically the top elites were true masters and starving to death was a real prospect. We are very far from that.

yes i read an article that HOMELESS people have the same % rate of obesity in america as the non homeless. I know they are crazy and/or addicts but they arent starving.

Peter P says

Historically the top elites were true masters and starving to death was a real prospect. We are very far from that.

Not sure what you are saying here.

So.... we should wait until we get back to historical norms before trying to make any changes? Or, are the historical norms the correct way society should be run?

Many underwater homeowners are in this predicament because they were greedy. In other words, they wanted more wealth for themselves, possibly at the expense of renters. Now they are complaining?

if you cut a check for 100k to these 50% of americans within one year (proably one month) they would be back in the same category. Half of them would quit working until the money ran out!!! Seriously people do some of you guys have any experience with how most humans live? A dog with full belly will not hunt - half the country with $ in the bank will not work. I know this for a fact from experience. Look at how many people took max HELOC withdrawal and had no income for years then sqaut - its totally normal, not an exception.

Its ants vs grasshoppers.

leoj707 says

Peter P says

Historically the top elites were true masters and starving to death was a real prospect. We are very far from that.

Not sure what you are saying here.

So.... we should wait until we get back to historical norms before trying to make any changes? Or, are the historical norms the correct way society should be run?

I suspect that historical norms better reflect human nature. Not that they are right. Nor do I think we should actively promote that.

Peter P says

Many underwater homeowners are in this predicament because they were greedy. In other words, they wanted more wealth for themselves, possibly at the expense of renters. Now they are complaining?

So you resort to generalities and hand-waving, instead of addressing the point. It DOESN'T MATTER if someone somewhere got "too much" house for a few years. If they are NOW worse off than before they started, and going to CONTINUE to get worse.... don't you get it?

I know a guy who didnt work for a few years because he said 'i still have $1,200 in the bank so I dont need to work right now. He sponged off parents,girlfriends for years. Now hes employed half the time or so. (no work ethic - but a fun guy!)

This type of attitude is held by at least half the population.

PockyClipsNow says

This type of attitude is held by at least half the population.

It is.... because you say so?

Thanks for clearing up that half of the population are just useless deadwood we can toss in an oven. We'll put you in charge of deciding which half then.

Peter P says

I suspect that historical norms better reflect human nature.

I agree, but another aspect of the historical norm is that every now and then the masters get slaughtered by those teetering on the brink of starvation then new masters are chosen and the cycle restarts itself.

Peter P says

Nor do I think we should actively promote that.

I think that we should actively discourage a return to historical norms. However, over the last 40ish years we have chosen to revamp our system so that we move closer to the historical norms. The article posted is yet another example that this is happening. If nothing is done wealth will continue to concentrate and the peasants will begin to sharpen their scythes.

Vicente says

It DOESN'T MATTER if someone somewhere got "too much" house for a few years.

No one bought More or Too much House... they overpaid ! Its all about prices.

The saying.. "they bought more house than they could afford" wasnt the real issue.. the term has been over used and ignores the real issue at hand...

is all about the real sustainable prices... today, its the same home as before during the "Price" bubble! no bigger no smaller!

leoj707 says

Peter P says

I suspect that historical norms better reflect human nature.

I agree, but another aspect of the historical norm is that every now and then the masters get slaughtered by those teetering on the brink of starvation then new masters are chosen and the cycle restarts itself.

Peter P says

Nor do I think we should actively promote that.

I think that we should actively discourage a return to historical norms. However, over the last 40ish years we have chosen to revamp our system so that we move closer to the historical norms. The article posted is yet another example that this is happening. If nothing is done wealth will continue to concentrate and the peasants will begin to sharpen their scythes.

I do not dispute that. My point is that history finds its ways.

We are still quite far from that.

Peter P says

I do not dispute that. My point is that history finds its ways.

Unfortunately history will probably find a way to get us back to the "norms". However, that is not a reason for us to give up and let it happen.

People evolve, society evolves and values evolve.

While going back to an aristocratic system might be likely, it does not have to be inevitable.

I doubt much can be done. It will be like trying to reverse global warming.

In the end, we just have to live with it.

Peter P says

I doubt much can be done. It will be like trying to reverse global warming.

In the end, we just have to live with it.

Anything is possible! it takes real knowhow and leadership to make it happen! It take in believing..

Obama isnt the one.. never could be.. his experience has never led him capable to understand or manage an economic system he never believed in
.
He spent his important years.. searching for marxist professors, feminist, and radicals... Not someone anyone can seriously hire as a leader.

http://www.youtube.com/embed/X4EHmzslKLw

Possible just highly unlikely. I have lost faith in humanity some years ago.

Peter P says

We are still quite far from that.

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/US/hunger-children-america-slow-steady-starvation/story?id=14328390#.UAiQuXjvZBk

A little 2-year-old boy came to the hospital hungry, not just for dinner, but every day of his young life. He is smaller than he should be and his organs, including his brain, are not developing fully. And he lives in Boston, one of America's most prosperous cities.

Doctors at Boston Medical Center's Grow Clinic, which provides assistance to children diagnosed with "failure to thrive," say they have seen a dramatic increase in the number of children they treat who are dangerously thin.

* * * * *

That is life for nearly 15 million children living in poverty in the U.S., according to the National Center for Children in Poverty.

* * * * *

The number of children living in poverty in the U.S. is up nearly 20 percent from 2000...

* * * * *

U.S. food banks say they face slow and steady starvation rather than sudden African famine.

Peter P says

Possible just highly unlikely. I have lost faith in humanity some years ago.

I think they are discussing your candidate in this thread here:
http://patrick.net/?p=1214423

Vicente says

PockyClipsNow says

This type of attitude is held by at least half the population.

It is.... because you say so?

Thanks for clearing up that half of the population are just useless deadwood we can toss in an oven. We'll put you in charge of deciding which half then.

“Eagles are dandified vultures” - Teddy Roosevelt

I don't think thats what he was saying

i took him to mean that most people don't care to work, they just want to survive, so if they can scrape by, they are fine with that

i know more people like that then those of us that sweat out having money most all the time

It is just sad. People really need to think twice before having kids. It is a huge responsibility. More people need to know stories like this so that they can help by donation or volunteer work.

leoj707 says

That is life for nearly 15 million children living in poverty in the U.S., according to the National Center for Children in Poverty.

* * * * *

The number of children living in poverty in the U.S. is up nearly 20 percent from 2000...

* * * * *

U.S. food banks say they face slow and steady starvation rather than sudden African famine.

Maybe the rich entertainers in China and India can throw a huge 3 day Music Festival... and hopefully the millions of rich people in Asia will donate billions to our cause...

What will they call it ....

How about " LIVE US AID " catchy !!!

errc says

Vicente says

PockyClipsNow says

This type of attitude is held by at least half the population.

It is.... because you say so?

Thanks for clearing up that half of the population are just useless deadwood we can toss in an oven. We'll put you in charge of deciding which half then.

“Eagles are dandified vultures” - Teddy Roosevelt

I don't think thats what he was saying

i took him to mean that most people don't care to work, they just want to survive, so if they can scrape by, they are fine with that

i know more people like that then those of us that sweat out having money most all the time

Yeah errc gets what im saying. Maybe these people who dont care to work unless 'they have to' or scrape by are right. Life is short. Why should we worry about their net worth if they dont? (liberals use any statistic they can to grow big gov bigger, im tired of it)

thomaswong.1986 says

Maybe the rich entertainers in China and India can throw a huge 3 day Music Festival... and hopefully the millions of rich people in Asia will donate billions to our cause...

One can hope.

Apparently, the Africans are already being plugged to help the fat Americans:
http://www.youtube.com/embed/xp-Z3JAo01s

Vincente, its not the 1%'rs fault, "someone else made that happen".

Honest Abe says

Vincente, its not the 1%'rs fault, "someone else made that happen".

There would be MUCH less of an imbalance if OUR GUBMINT was not in conflict with the natural recourse of a free enterprise system.
Do I understand this correctly ?
Our tax's are now used by the FED to loan at ZERO interest to the lenders.
GUBMINT is the cause of the disparity.
ie; We the PEOPLE took risk buying high priced property.
Banks accepted the same risk lending on that same high priced property.
WHO HIRED DA GUBMINT TO BE SO ONE SIDED ?

Below One-percenters, there is a new middle class:
http://www.fullertonsfuture.org/2012/a-close-look-at-total-compensation/

Look at the salaries for precious public "servants" in Fullerton, California.
They seem to be doing fine. Total compensation for a fireman around $150K. $180K+ for the unionized goon in blue - or as they call themselves - police sergeant. If you are a lowly ranked police "officer" - you get to survive on $150K. That's for a hard work of bullying bystanders, robbing motorists, and seating in a donut shop.

Compare that to the median income of tax victims supporting these cushy salaries and benefits and guaranteed pensions: $40K.

I much rather policemen be well-paid. One must be paid according to the power he has or it is a recipe for corruption. (Frankly, I am not willing to risk my life on the job for $150K-$180K.)

Thus if we want the government to cost less we must also give it less power.

Would that be the Republican half or the Democrat half?

Huh?

TMAC54 says

Do I understand this correctly ?
Our tax's are now used by the FED to loan at ZERO interest to the lenders.
GUBMINT is the cause of the disparity.
ie; We the PEOPLE took risk buying high priced property.
Banks accepted the same risk lending on that same high priced property.
WHO HIRED DA GUBMINT TO BE SO ONE SIDED ?

Actually the Federal Reserve just prints the money they loan to banks! They don't need our taxes for that, and we can't stop them. It is a kind of taxation without representation, taxation on everyone else's money by diluting it.

The Federal Reserve is just a private banking cartel created to protect the biggest banks from having to take losses. They protect the banks the expense of everyone else. Privatized profits and socialized losses make banking a wonderful business if you're big enough to have the Fed on your side.

But you're right, the government itself is obviously very one-sided about bailouts. If you're a big bank, the government will loan or give you $800 billion, then another $800 billion, "whatever you need dude, so sorry your bets all went bad, taxpayers will cover it as long as you donate to my re-election campaign..." while the little guys who bet on their own house get very little or nothing (as it should be).

Peter P says

One must be paid according to the power he has or it is a recipe for corruption.

Mexico is a good example of this. $350 a month is like paying waiters minimum wage, and tips will fill the gap right?

"whatever you need dude, so sorry your bets all went bad, taxpayers will cover it as long as you donate to my re-election campaign..."

Reminds me of that old Eddie Murphy skit "White Like Me".

The bank loan is at about 3:35...
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x7msba_saturday-night-live-white-like-me_fun

Peter P says

much rather policemen be well-paid. One must be paid according to the power he has or it is a recipe for corruption. (Frankly, I am not willing to risk my life on the job for $150K-$180K.)

Well, if you don't want to risk your life - don't become a roofer, fisherman, forester, or a night club bouncer - you know the professions with actual risk. Note - Police is not even in top 10.

Last time I checked - roofers don't make $150K, and fishermen don't make $180...

Here is another note - no matter how much you pay the goons in blue, they still manage to engage in bullying, rape, gang-style killing, killing people in their custody, pimp and sell drugs on the side, and even stealing iPads in airports.

And that just from the recent record of Fullerton PD, I won't even say what's going on in bigger metros like LA or Chicago.

Pay is needed strictly to attract and keep good people. Pay never makes anyone a better employee. Paying $150K to unionized goons while tax victims are suffering is insanity.

AlexS says

no matter how much you pay the goons in blue, they still manage to engage in bullying, rape, gang-style killing, killing people in their custody,

A friend came to the US from Sri Lanka many years ago. He was so struck by the HONESTY and straightforward process in his dealings with police and courts for small matters like traffic stops etc. that he went into law enforcement. I think you have NO idea how honest our police are compared to what is normal around the world.

I was in Cabo San Lucas a few years ago diving off a small boat. We had a dive flag up and jet-skis were clearly violating our space in dangerous ways. I asked the divemaster if he would call the police or coast guard or something and he said "no point, they will only come if they need money, and they are good for today".

Privatized profits and socialized losses make banking a wonderful business if you're big enough to have the Fed on your side.

Zombie Andrew Jackson for President!