.

BCClone

Well Seen Member.
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Sep 4, 2011
61,962
56,627
113
Not exactly sure.
Well, 25 years ago I was a teen and lived with my parents. I worked and saved. I graduated high school, took out loans, and went to school. Worked while I was there. Graduated and got a **** job out of college paying 28k a year for a skilled/educated position. I hated it but tolerated long enough to get experience to get my foot in The door of a better opportunity. Worked my way up. Nobody paid my way, I didn’t get the benefit of “friends in high places”. I worked, I saved, I took opportunities that I looked for around every corner and under every rock. It happens for millions of people every day. The American dream is there for those who take initiative. Can bad things happen and bottom a person out, yes, absolutely. You can sit in a pity pit or you can go out and find your dream. Freedom, I guess.


Pretty much the same for me, but I didn't start with such a great wage out of college. (94 grad)
 
  • Like
Reactions: bos

AuH2O

Well-Known Member
Sep 7, 2013
11,160
17,059
113
you honestly don’t know this? The movement of an individual between economic classes.

where does the us rank in terms of upward mobility compared to the rest of the world?

You have to define absolute mobility vs. relative mobility. You are defining relative mobility. In other words - ability to move up in terms of percentile. Keep in mind that of course means the higher percentage of relative upward mobility means it is also easier to drop in terms of percentile. Which I suppose is probably signs of being more merit based. But even when you look at that, compared to other high income countries like Western Europe and Canada, the US is on the low end of those, but they are all relatively close together. For example I believe moving up from the bottom quintile or quartile ranged for all of those countries between something like 26-33%. The US being at the bottom, but that's really not that big a difference.

Yes it is more difficult than it was, and more difficult relative to other high income nations, and yes there are policies that could and should be enacted to boost those odds of mobility across income levels. But the US is not all that out of line with comparable countries.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: CascadeClone

BCClone

Well Seen Member.
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Sep 4, 2011
61,962
56,627
113
Not exactly sure.
Washington state was the first to report a case and were about 3-7 days (going off memory so don't take that as a truly accurate range) ahead of the rest and they look to have turned the corner. Hopefully that means we are getting there.
 

Stormin

Well-Known Member
Apr 11, 2006
44,494
12,809
113
Look, I am NOT a fan of bailouts at all (e.g. GM, Chrysler). But your point is not reflective of reality.

The people that own a business should put money into it, but not get any money out of it?

If you think putting $1B into a passbook account is a good move for a business, then there isn't much point trying to explain why it isn't.

Take some classes in finance, or economics. It's interesting stuff. I am sure that reads as a **** statement, but it isn't meant that way.

Those stock buybacks were not truly investing in the business to grow the business. Those purchases were made to prop up share prices and then they gave big bonuses to CEO’s and shareholders. That is a terrible business practice.

And now those businesses, after a massive tax cut, want a bailout? If the government is going to bail them out then the government should get the portion of the business in shares that they are giving the company. The equity of the company can be put up against the loan of money given, to be paid back with interest. Don’t like the terms, then piss on them. But no bailout of just giving these greedy ass companies money. And CEO and executive pay will be limited. No more of that massive salary and bonus BS.
 

Cyclonepride

Thought Police
Staff member
Apr 11, 2006
96,835
58,078
113
53
A pineapple under the sea
www.oldschoolradical.com
Those stock buybacks were not truly investing in the business to grow the business. Those purchases were made to prop up share prices and then they gave big bonuses to CEO’s and shareholders. That is a terrible business practice.

And now those businesses, after a massive tax cut, want a bailout? If the government is going to bail them out then the government should get the portion of the business in shares that they are giving the company. The equity of the company can be put up against the loan of money given, to be paid back with interest. Don’t like the terms, then piss on them. But no bailout of just giving these greedy ass companies money. And CEO and executive pay will be limited. No more of that massive salary and bonus BS.

Just don't give it to them, and the government has no authority to demand shares.
 

Cat Stevens

Well-Known Member
Mar 7, 2017
10,786
7,856
113
54
Well, 25 years ago I was a teen and lived with my parents. I worked and saved. I graduated high school, took out loans, and went to school. Worked while I was there. Graduated and got a **** job out of college paying 28k a year for a skilled/educated position. I hated it but tolerated long enough to get experience to get my foot in The door of a better opportunity. Worked my way up. Nobody paid my way, I didn’t get the benefit of “friends in high places”. I worked, I saved, I took opportunities that I looked for around every corner and under every rock. It happens for millions of people every day. The American dream is there for those who take initiative. Can bad things happen and bottom a person out, yes, absolutely. You can sit in a pity pit or you can go out and find your dream. Freedom, I guess.


Where did you grow up?
 

brianhos

Moderator
Staff member
Bookie
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Jun 1, 2006
54,913
26,157
113
Trenchtown
Washington state was the first to report a case and were about 3-7 days (going off memory so don't take that as a truly accurate range) ahead of the rest and they look to have turned the corner. Hopefully that means we are getting there.

We are not even testing people yet, we are not getting there.
 

ArgentCy

Well-Known Member
Jan 13, 2010
20,387
11,176
113
Moved more into the markets and more long than I've been in a long time. Not as picky as i would have liked but no time with this move.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Doc

ArgentCy

Well-Known Member
Jan 13, 2010
20,387
11,176
113
Those stock buybacks were not truly investing in the business to grow the business. Those purchases were made to prop up share prices and then they gave big bonuses to CEO’s and shareholders. That is a terrible business practice.

And now those businesses, after a massive tax cut, want a bailout? If the government is going to bail them out then the government should get the portion of the business in shares that they are giving the company. The equity of the company can be put up against the loan of money given, to be paid back with interest. Don’t like the terms, then piss on them. But no bailout of just giving these greedy ass companies money. And CEO and executive pay will be limited. No more of that massive salary and bonus BS.

I'm gone for a few months and you joined the Tea Party? I posted this somewhere but OPEN market stock buybacks should never have been allowed. But then again we have tons of problems with clearing and short sales also not clearing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Doc

Cat Stevens

Well-Known Member
Mar 7, 2017
10,786
7,856
113
54
You have to define absolute mobility vs. relative mobility. You are defining relative mobility. In other words - ability to move up in terms of percentile. Keep in mind that of course means the higher percentage of relative upward mobility means it is also easier to drop in terms of percentile. Which I suppose is probably signs of being more merit based. But even when you look at that, compared to other high income countries like Western Europe and Canada, the US is on the low end of those, but they are all relatively close together. For example I believe moving up from the bottom quintile or quartile ranged for all of those countries between something like 26-33%. The US being at the bottom, but that's really not that big a difference.

Yes it is more difficult than it was, and more difficult relative to other high income nations, and yes there are policies that could and should be enacted to boost those odds of mobility across income levels. But the US is not all that out of line with comparable countries.


So the us is at the low end amongst other peer nations, and it’s harder than ever, and there are things we could do to help, but it’s what it is?

just confirming that i understand what it is you were trying to say.