patrick.net

AmericanKulak says

And all the spending is just a way to cover it up?

I'm good. Not sure how the rest of you cats are doing. I don't think it's good for everyone, but is it ever?? Depression seems a bit hyperbolic. The spending goes to the poor and the military. I don't know any normal people hurting to be honest. Not saying I'm right, but not seeing a depression.

AmericanKulak says

What if... we've been in a Depression for 15-20 years And all the spending is just a way to cover it up?

Depression and also recession are just words made up by the media and their definition changes to fit the narrative.

AmericanKulak says

And all the spending is just a way to cover it up?

Good point as I wonder that the economic models and reasoned is antiquated because they never accounted for quantitative easing and other fiscal gimmicks (alias: modern monetary theory).

Look at debt load like debt to GDP in the 1930's compared to today.

Examine government spending like for healthcare in 1930s to present day, and the role of church charities back then.

Now a lot of working and middle class have a large part of their retirement savings in federal government bonds, whereas I am not sure back in the 1930s this was a prevalent even with no IRAs and 401Ks.

Fortunately science technology engineering and progressed so much especially as far as agriculture and food industry.

Its comparing apples to tofu, not even close with apples to oranges. They are extremely different time periods (1930s to present day).

.

It’s been longer than 20 years. It goes back to at least the 70’s if not earlier. The “depression” really deepened when the globalists started offshoring American manufacturing. This trend combined with the already existing trend of increased number of two income households, it now takes two incomes to afford housing in many if not most areas. Until a man working the assembly line can provide for the needs of his family without his spouse working and without government aid, we are in a depression.

Falling birth rates in the 1970’s was perhaps the biggest sign. They never recovered. Less kids is poverty for the American family, which is the foundation of the nation.

And bailing out insolvent investment banks and bankers.

PeopleUnited says

Falling birth rates in the 1970’s was perhaps the biggest sign. They never recovered. Less kids is poverty for the American family, which is the foundation of the nation.

Get fucking. Go mormon style. Easily could pop out 3 a year and let them ladies take care of them. I'm too old, in my opinion, but my buddy is popping out his 4th kid and 1st boy. At 41. Fuck that. Millennials I think are under represented because of covid. That Census was fucked up, just saying.

When you find out things you learn how fucked up they are. I was gonna side hustle census work because the wife makes bank. I can't. Elected official. Non-partisan position. Retarded. Was kind of pissed. Even if you don't agree with me I'm not gonna mess with you. Voting is too important and I need to know where the retards live so I need to know if I gotta move.

Depression? What Depression? Just print more money.

AmericanKulak says

What if... we've been in a Depression for 15-20 years

I've heard talking heads on financial programs state this - since the GFC.

I think it's a depression if people can't find work.

The government has been employing more and more people, and it's paid for by debt (bonds), so it's a plausible theory that without government borrowing money maybe a lot of people would be out of work.

I wish that the government would employ fewer people, and not grow. I don't think it's likely.

WookieMan says

Not saying I'm right, but not seeing a depression.

Not saying we're in a Depression. I'm saying we'd be in a Depression IF we didn't just debt-spend $36T, almost all of which was the past 15-20 years.

clambo says

The government has been employing more and more people, and it's paid for by debt (bonds), so it's a plausible theory that without government borrowing money maybe a lot of people would be out of work.

Yes - the jobs reports now get throttled way back when revised, and really it's only the government creating jobs.

komputodo says

Depression and also recession are just words made up by the media and their definition changes to fit the narrative.

About two or three years ago, didn't we have two successive quarters of negative/no growth and some Government Agency/NGO suddenly change the definition of recession, claiming the unemployment numbers weren't there.

When every econ textbook/definition I ever read simply defined it as "Two successive quarters of negative economic growth".

In the 1950’s, an average dude on the basis of a factory job could buy a home, cars, and put his kids through college.

I’d say we have been in a boiling-the-frog depression defined by a plummeted standard of living. Two parents working full time can’t match the 1950’s dude’s standard of living.

AmericanKulak says

two successive quarters of negative/no growth

Yeah NBER said there were other factors like no significant increase in unemployment and COVID adjustments which caused them to not classify it as a recession.

NBER is not very clear and transparent on all of its economy scoring guide or rubric. They should have declared the recession and then this year state the economy is recovering to help the Democrats.

Now NBER is going to have a hard time "pressing send" that the economy is in a recession when there are no two consecutive quarters of at least 0.01% growth.

Unless the bean counting economists within the federal bureaucracy "mysteriously" start "adjusting down" the GDP (and GDI) statistics AFTER THIS ELECTION.

.

Al_Sharpton_for_President says

I’d say we have been in a boiling-the-frog depression defined by a plummeted standard of living.

Add this data point to the standard of living trend graph : USDA reports hunger is getting worse in America.

Its just that it seems surreal all this economic bad news has not come out at least 6 months before early voting starts for the upcoming election.

https://www.salon.com/2024/09/05/hunger-in-america-is-getting-worse-not-better-according-to-an-explosive-new-usda-report

.

Al_Sharpton_for_President says

I’d say we have been in a boiling-the-frog depression defined by a plummeted standard of living. Two parents working full time can’t match the 1950’s dude’s standard of living.

And then consider on top of that: Cheap jet travel, massive expansion of interstate and intrastate highways, fax machine, PCs, Internet, on-demand printing, smartphones, scanning documents & digital storage since the 1960s. All those incredibly YUGE efficiency gains... and yet, not only has nothing trickled down to the 80-90%, it's worse.

You can also look at culture: Fewer good movies, bands, albums, etc. each year. Look at the offerings for any year in the 50s to about the early 90s. Take 1986 for example:

Top Gun
Crocodile Dundee
Platoon
Aliens
Karate Kid II
Star Trek IV
Golden Child
Back to School
Ruthless People
Feris Bueller's Day off. At least 2/3 of those are classics that gave up tons of quotes (Game Over, Man! Maybe you can help me with my Longfellow. Dance, Motherfucker!) , in fact the eldest kid and I watched Aliens last weekend. Show me a year in the 2010s and 2020s with so many classic & quotable movies. I won't even get into music.

You could do this with 1974 (Godfather II, Blazing Saddles, Death Wish) or 1967 or whatever, too.

2010s and 2020s: "Supie Hewo Reboot IV: Now with extra girl boss, minority replacement, and tired old Infinity MacGuffin and CCP financing." And fat skank ass shaker music.

In fact it's so bad that McD's has had to cut prices because a third of households can't afford to go once a week and get a couple of happy meals.

"Just a few more crippling taxes and inflation, and we can have them all back to groveling serfdom again!"

AmericanKulak says

CCP financing

Yep, all by design as per China's 100 Year Plan.

And the major studio films that are not directly funded by Chicom money, are careful in regards to China's image.

Look at how the last Red Dawn does not show China as the invader. Not that they did this because they planned on showing the last Red Dawn in Chinese theaters.

Look at Matt Damon's movie The Martian showing China's space agency as one of the heroes, granted 2/3's of its $630 million box office receipts were from overseas.

.....................

"China has invested in several American industries since its entry into the World Trade Organization in 2001. Once an engine for American soft power, Hollywood has seen a dramatic increase in investment from China, with deals being valued at billions of dollars."

https://www.airuniversity.af.edu/AUPress/Display/Article/3267338/mapping-chinese-influence-in-hollywood/

.

.

The 100 Year Plan by the Chinese is to take over or significantly weaken America without having to fire a single shot or missile (or at least firing a few, if any).

.

AmericanKulak says

McD's has had to cut prices because a third of households can't afford to go once a week and get a couple of happy meals.

Great point

also CEO's of Dollar General, Amazon and Disney said middle and working class consumers are cutting back

and Dollar Tree stock price has taken a dive because of the weakening finances of the working and lower middle class ; Dollar Tree stock is at 2014's price level

maybe its just me, but it all seems like there is some Big Setup to have the economy crash right after the election if Harris wins, so that it will be fully recovered by spring 2028

.

Al_Sharpton_for_President says

In the 1950’s, an average dude on the basis of a factory job could buy a home, cars, and put his kids through college.

I’d say we have been in a boiling-the-frog depression defined by a plummeted standard of living. Two parents working full time can’t match the 1950’s dude’s standard of living.

there is a book about that called THE TWO INCOME TRAP

komputodo says

THE TWO INCOME TRAP

more wives joining the work force equated to more demand from dual income households which then drove up the price of housing

anyone who owned housing before this economic trend started made a lot of money

seems like a negative feedback loop as the more this occurs, the more new households seeking to buy their first home have to go to dual income from single income since the supply of affordable houses decreases (due to increased demand for housing from dual income households)

examine the NAR's housing affordability index

all of this of course exacerbated by local politics like in California with the Asian (and White Liberal) Tiger Moms families fighting the construction of any new affordable housing which could impact local public school test scores and quality

also building code makes it more expensive to build as well as builders do not want to build affordable housing since they cannot make enough profit (unless they get subsidized by the government and / or Non Profits / NGOs)

.

Turd worldism.

AD says

also building code makes it more expensive to build as well as builders do not want to build affordable housing since they cannot make enough profit (unless they get subsidized by the government and / or Non Profits / NGOs)

And developers and Realtors(tm)(R) combine to ban small houses and RVs or reasonably sized lots to force people to rent or buy.

The ladder kickers lived in RVs on 1 acres well outside the town (then a mere 20 minute drive), slowly built their house as they paid no rent and minimal property tax, with the much more modest zoning and code, and once it was built, turned around and demanded nobody be able to live in an RV in the whole county whether it was half an acre or 5 acres to protect their "Home Value"

This was done for decades until about the 1980s when the Yuppies started kicking the ladder down behind them

The real knee slapper is Dave Ramsey, who you'd think would be all over this idea as a great way to 'live small until your build your main asset up".

Al_Sharpton_for_President says

In the 1950’s, an average dude on the basis of a factory job could buy a home, cars, and put his kids through college.

Agree, but they lived a much lower lifestyle than today. The house of that factory worker or Esso station manager was typically a sub 1000 sq ft house with 2-3 bedrooms and only one bath. No A/C, and often just a central space heater. 50-amp service with a fuse box. Also, one TV and one phone. Clothes were expensive, so Mom had a sewing machine and made the kids garments using patterns she would trade with neighbors. Sox were "darned" when they got holes. Clothes that were bought, like coats, were handed down to younger children, even neighbor children. Food was expensive also, so most moms knew 100 ways to cook hamburger, can, and maximize leftovers. Meatloaf was a once-a-week treat. Despite having regular milkman deliveries, kids often drank powdered milk. Only one car, and even if full sized, had a manual transmission like "3 on the tree," had no A/C, no power brakes or power steering, crank windows, and often no radio and no heater. No seatbelts, and an engine that required a "tune up" every few months that involved a new distributor cap, new points, reset timing and new plugs. And even that simple car would be ready for the junkyard long before 70,000 miles. Nobody had a dryer, it was all clotheslines.

A single mom today living in a trailer park and driving a 10 year old car has a far more luxurious lifestyle than that working family of the 50s and early 60s.

HeadSet says

Meatloaf was a once-a-week treat.

Meat consumption was 2-3lb per person throughout the 20th Century, declined during the Depression but increasing after WW2. I saved the chart somewhere, I'll post it.

I dislike comparing Economy of Scale changes because Hedonics is a trick to conceal the vast increase in the iron costs of living since Globaloney. Iron Costs = Unavoidable. You can delay a new laptop, or drive stick instead of auto, but you have to live somewhere and buy groceries.

Food Quality is certainly way down. Mayo went from real egg Whites to nutshrinking soy oil starting in the 90s. The tiniest jar of real mayo sets you back $10 now. Big Agra also got "Imitiation" or "Sandwich Spread" switched to "Mayo" even though I'm pretty sure the French Chef who invented it centuries ago didn't make it with soybean oil.

Housing stock - esp. surburban - in the 1950s was mostly brand spanking new. Not 30, 50+ years old like today.

None of this explains how we had half a dozen Century-Shattering massive efficiency gainz each one on par with the railroad or diesel engine in 70 years but there's almost no way an Esso Manager can afford even a former Shotgun Shack Crackhouse on the bad side of town in 90% of the country that used to be occupied by an alcoholic ditch digger and his family of 5. They go for $200k in Central Florida and almost all of them are teardowns. Also, chances are Factory Worker/Gas Station Manager got a new postwar built one, not a 70-year old one.

Median Home Prices are now 6X the median household income and over 8X the median personal income ($50k), so even a man who makes the median household income ($70k) by himself is going way beyond 3x income, it's not even a stretch at 4x income, making traditional 50s families with mom at home impossible. The Econoalchemist line to "buy a smaller house" doesn't work because there haven't been any modest homes built in decades, only zero lot monsters, McMansions, and Condos. The number of tiny homes is something like 20k total stock and those run barely 300-500 sq ft and meant for a single person or Couples in the first year or two of a relationship who fuck all night.

What's left is crackhouses or HUD housing in the hood where a guy with a job would be stabbed to death his first night in it.

And of course, a Gas Station Manager or Store Assistant Manager or other Service/White Collar didn't have $50k+ in college debt in the 1950s, either. Hell, well into the 80s most bank loan officers were just Tellers who worked there a while, and almost none of them had any degree whatsoever, just a HS Diploma and not confused by numbers.

And that was back in the day of triplicate forms, where the typewriter or hand pressed carbon copy sheet didn't prompt: "Did you mean $400,000, not $4,000,000?" for a fat finger.

Beef consumption is actually down almost 10% from 1960: 63lb in 1960 vs. 58lb in 2023. Pork is down almost 20%. So 30% down for "Red Meat" which the USDA calls Beef and Pork together. Though Chicken is up ~30% to compensate and surprisingly, Seafood doubled from 10lb to about 20lb, but that's in a whole year.

https://www.nationalchickencouncil.org/about-the-industry/statistics/per-capita-consumption-of-poultry-and-livestock-1965-to-estimated-2012-in-pounds/

USDA:


BTW those Chickens aren't fed hormones to be so much larger; it's actually a breeding trick and it skips a generation; the birds that aren't sized for supermarkets go to pet food or chicken filler for fast food.

Senator McGovern, who was a newly converted Pritikin Carb Looney, pushed the "We ate more veggies" narrative in the 1970s. But it wasn't true:
https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2014/06/how-americans-used-to-eat/371895/

Dammit, can't find the chart, I know I saved it in the past few weeks. But I remember it was about half a pound a day/person around 1900.

EUREKA! Last sperg post for the night:



We eat about the same amount of Red Meat as we did in the 50s, but a lot more Poultry. The 60s-80s were Beef Fiestas. Then Globalization came.

The solution is simple: Ban beef exports to the Turd World and make beef cheap again. Ranchers and Meatpackers did just fine 1950-1990, in fact they were rolling in dough - or maybe gristle.

AmericanKulak says

We eat about the same amount of Red Meat as we did in the 50s, but a lot more Poultry.

"Love That Chicken From Popeyes"

Then not only do you got Popeyes, KFC, Church's Chicken, Chick Fil A, then you got wing joints like Hooters and Wings n Things.

And Publix has a good deal on rotisserie chicken.

.

HeadSet says

A single mom today living in a trailer park and driving a 10 year old car has a far more luxurious lifestyle than that working family of the 50s and early 60s

and yet they consider themselves poor and unsuccessful.

Most of these perks of today are lifestyle chlices, not quality of life issues. You don't need an AC (sure it's nice to have in some areas), central heating is fine. Phone and TV, who cares. We still hand down clothes. Food wasn't expensive, but families simply didn't spend as much on food as people do today, so they can get out of debt or achieve other goals. We could have afforded to throw away scraps every single day, but we finished our plates or ate it the next day. Sure there was good progress in technology, cars etc. but at the end of the day only one worker was required. Also I would peg the best decades the 70s and 80s, not 50s and 60s. My grandparents cooked meat every day, wasn't rare at all.

HeadSet says

A single mom today living in a trailer park and driving a 10 year old car has a far more luxurious lifestyle than that working family of the 50s and early 60s.

The tragedy of single mothers notwithstanding, for the most part what you describe doesn’t exist. That is to say it is ridiculous to claim that a welfare queen compares at all to one income working household from the 50’s and 60’s. Not to mention the welfare queen is not saving for retirement or building equity in her house. It is just daft bloviating.

PeopleUnited says

The tragedy of single mothers notwithstanding, for the most part what you describe doesn’t exist. That is to say it is ridiculous to claim that a welfare queen compares at all to one income working household from the 50’s and 60’s. Not to mention the welfare queen is not saving for retirement or building equity in her house. It is just daft bloviating.

Odd that you think all single mothers living in a trailer are on welfare. I was referring to people like my cousin's kid, who manages a Dollar Store and has a trailer on a rural half-acre lot. That home has central heat and air, washer and dryer, flat screen TV, and is a comfortable place. She has an older car, but unlike the during the 50s, the car is reliable and has automatic transmission, power windows and locks, good entertainment, and will last several more years.

HeadSet says

my cousin's kid, who manages a Dollar Store and has a trailer on a rural half-acre lot.

She might be more successful than this guys mom.


But it’s ridiculous to compare them with this. And if you do, this is definitely a higher quality of life.

HeadSet says

trailer on a rural half-acre lot.

While the lot might slowly appreciate, the trailer only Depreciates with time, so it's not comparable to a 1000 sq ft Levittown owned by a 50s-60s family. Those are much closer to the City and going for half a million on up easy, I mean in cities NOT in California.

Have you seen the price of a 10 year old Civic with well over 120k miles? $9k is considered a GOOD price. How long would a teen working at $11/hr, 20 hours a week - already over half again the federal minimum wage, need to work to buy one? Getting on a whole year, if they didn't go out with friends to buy a burger or see a movie. Just going to a movie and having a fast food lunch on a Saturday afternoon once a week ($25 minimum) would make it an entire year.

EDIT: HOLY SHIT!!! I haven't been to the movies since 2011. Tickets are $17 in the burbs now! Make that $25 minimum if you don't buy any popcorn or soda or candy and McD's still has the $5 value meal and your state's sales tax is well below 10%. And the teen has no girlfriend.
Great Thunderballs of Jove! It'd be like $60 just to take the kids and myself to a movie. Hot Damn!!!

The published monthly car loan is now given in 72 months, not 48 or 60, btw. Although the big car price collapse is already here. Solantra is truly fucked for misgauging the market with $100k+ trucks and SUVs. Some of the big ones are going on 300 days at the lot.

The house depreciates with time just like the trailer does. Hopefully if the construction is better it depreciates at a lower rate.

The land is the only thing that appreciates unless remodeling, additions, etc are poured into the dwelling. For the most part cities/suburban land price increases have far outdistanced price increases in rural areas.

There is no guarantee that this trend will continue.

Misc says

The house depreciates with time just like the trailer does.

You'd agree though that a 20-year old Trailer, even the best cared for and well built, is going to be a lot more beat up than a 20-year old house. I think the latter will start needing a new roof, but Trailer will have had major roof fixes by 20 years in 'on the hard'. Especially outside low-humidity areas.

I also know that manufactured homes have a much lower cost going in.

Misc says

I also know that manufactured homes have a much lower cost going in.

And depreciate faster as well. If very well maintained and a good build, they can go. But if somebody said "Sight unseen, you want your typical mfg house or trailer after 20-30 years, or do you want a typical Florida CBS built in the 1950s or 60s, I'd take the latter."

Mfg homes have definitely improved though. I forgot the year but someboy told me if it was built before some year before the 70s or early 80s, walk away. The code for them was completely changed and the ones past that date have far fewer problems and hazards.

Just FYI my first car was a 1981 Ford Econoline with 60k miles I brought in 1993... for $700. It literally took me two months of P/T work at the minimum wage to buy it, including plates and registration.