The consequences of vanishing wealth
You’ve probably seen the headline version: “U.S. families see prosperity plunge” is how this morning’s AJC front page puts it. And unfortunately, “plunge” is an accurate term.
The median American family — the mythical family at the dead center of the U.S. economy, with half of families being richer and half being poorer — saw its net worth plunge from $126,400 in September of 2007 to just $77,300 in September of 2010, a decline of $49,100 in perceived wealth in just three years’ time.
Again, “perceived” wealth is the accurate term. Much of that net worth came in the form of rapidly increasing home values, a rise that ended right about the time that the 2007 survey by the Federal Reserve was being conducted. And as we know, it wasn’t just homeowners or Fed survey-takers who perceived that home value as real wealth that could be counted upon and even spent. So did credit-card companies, banks, mortgage lenders, security brokers, Wall Street, purchasers of credit default obligations and federal regulators.
When the bubble burst, everybody who had counted upon that false wealth being real took a hit. But nobody took a harder hit than the homeowner. According to one recent study, almost a third of all homeowners with a mortgage now owe their lenders more than the home is worth, which means their property reduces rather than enhances their net worth.
It’s no secret what happens when millions of people suddenly discover that they are several tens of thousands of dollars more poor than they thought. They stop spending and buying. When they stop spending and buying, companies start laying people off. When companies start laying people off, net worth plummets even deeper, and a destructive cycle begins.
Some of the lost wealth reflected above has been recovered since the most recent Fed survey was taken in September 2010. By then, the Dow Jones average had recovered some but not all of its previous value and stood at roughly 10,500. Today it’s at roughly 12,400, depending on how the market takes the news out of Europe.
And as usual, the decline in net worth was not felt equally across all income groups, as the chart below indicates. Because of the scales involved, net worth of families in the bottom 20 percent of incomes don’t show up well, but they fell by roughly a third between 2001 and 2010. However, the biggest hit was experienced by those in the 60-to-90 percent income groups, essentially the upper middle class. They were most likely to have a lot of their wealth tied up in their homes, and because they make a good amount of money and spend most of what they make, they also tend to be the group that drives a consumer economy.
Or not.
– Jay Bookman
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
719 comments Add your comment
Joe Hussein Mama
June 12th, 2012
12:00 pm
SfD — “JHM, what I’m saying is, I thought even an irredeemable a##hole like Hannity wouldn’t make light of something like the Commerce Secretary’s medical condition”
I can’t speak for Hannity in that regard, but it wasn’t that long ago that Rush was making fun of Michael J. Fox’s condition.
stands for decibels
June 12th, 2012
12:00 pm
>>I will never count of the government to supply me with anything other than law enforcement and national security…
>Not intended to be a factual statement.
It might be factual. He might not be counting on all this stuff, it’ll just be a pleasant surprise to have functioning electricity and water and roads and such.
Chuck
June 12th, 2012
12:01 pm
Steve I trusted most of my money to precious metals, it never fails when the economy goes belly up so does the price of gold and silver. Short term you may lose some money in the market, but over the long haul that usually is not the case.
Verbal Kint
June 12th, 2012
12:02 pm
Steve – Jay’s post from Rex Nutting at Marketwatch has been debunked for half truths
http://spectator.org/archives/2012/05/30/plenty-of-nutting
Adam
June 12th, 2012
12:02 pm
Erwin: Mitts however was not.
Yes it was. Here’s his “sentence” according to you: “I’m not concerned about the very poor, we have a safety net there”
Here’s how it was quoted on another site:
“I’m in this race because I care about Americans. I’m not concerned about the very poor. We have a safety net there. If it needs repair, I’ll fix it”
That’s because those are all complete thoughts.
Joe Hussein Mama
June 12th, 2012
12:02 pm
Chuck — “I will never count of the government to supply me with anything other than law enforcement and national security”
How deep is your backyard well? And did the post office give you any backtalk when you did away with your mailbox?
weetamoe
June 12th, 2012
12:02 pm
According to the chart, net worth reached its peak and began to plummet in 2007–In January of that year democrats took the house and senate. Between that period and 2010 average family lost 40% of net worth. TEA party candidates took seats in house in January 2011.
Our family *did everything right* and *with integrity* as well, did ok, and do not blame anyone. A small side business taking advantage of the dot com bubble helped a bit, but we realized that the end of the Y2K hysteria would end the profits so got out early.
Oblama
June 12th, 2012
12:03 pm
Mama- That is the current law. If the intruder, while climbing in your window, is shot and falls inside your home you are within the law. If he falls out on the lawn you have a potential problem.
Steve - USA (I support "None Of The Above")
June 12th, 2012
12:03 pm
“I trusted most of my money to precious metals”
Did you really receive it in 10 days or less?
Adam
June 12th, 2012
12:03 pm
Also Erwin, lest you missed it: Here’s the whole quote:
“The truth of the matter is that, as I said we’ve created 4.3 million jobs over the last two — 27 months; over 800,000 just this year alone. The private sector is doing fine. Where we’re seeing weaknesses in our economy have to do with state and local government, oftentimes cuts initiated by, you know, governors or mayors who are not getting the kind of help that they have in the past from the federal government and who don’t have the same kind of flexibility as the federal government in dealing with fewer revenues coming in.”
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2012/jun/08/context-private-sector-doing-fine/
stands for decibels
June 12th, 2012
12:03 pm
making fun of Michael J. Fox’s condition.
I’m not sure I ever properly thanked Rush for delivering Claire McCaskill to the Senate in 2006.
Adam
June 12th, 2012
12:04 pm
Mama- That is the current law. If the intruder, while climbing in your window, is shot and falls inside your home you are within the law. If he falls out on the lawn you have a potential problem.
What if you grab his arm, shoot him point blank, and drag him inside?
Joe Hussein Mama
June 12th, 2012
12:05 pm
Oblama — “Mama- That is the current law. If the intruder, while climbing in your window, is shot and falls inside your home you are within the law. If he falls out on the lawn you have a potential problem.”
That’s kinda what the cop told us. He said that if the burglar fell back outside the door, then we should try to drag him back in before he managed to bleed on the steps. I think he was only partly joking when he said that.
Oblama
June 12th, 2012
12:05 pm
Mama – You could drag him inside but that would be tampering with evidence.
Erwin's cat
June 12th, 2012
12:05 pm
Okay Adam..I’ll take that…if only because there are better things to debate
stands for decibels
June 12th, 2012
12:06 pm
“I’m in this race because I care about Americans. I’m not concerned about the very poor. We have a safety net there. If it needs repair, I’ll fix it”
Which sure sounds to me like “the very poor are not actual Americans.” It’s ok, I’m sure a lot of the people he’s courting tend to agree.
Chuck
June 12th, 2012
12:06 pm
Joe Hussein Mama
On 2 of my properties I do have well water thank you, plus I was talking about the Federal government.
As for the post office, as poor run and mismanaged that is, I would rather use the internet and UPS, who mails letters anymore.
Adam
June 12th, 2012
12:07 pm
What if his body just kind of stays half in half out of the window?
Steve
June 12th, 2012
12:07 pm
Chuck should hope he doesn’t have to take the socialist highways to work if he has a long commute, either…or any of the state or local roads for that matter. Government funded infrastructure be damned!
Joe Hussein Mama
June 12th, 2012
12:07 pm
Chuck — “Steve I trusted most of my money to precious metals, it never fails when the economy goes belly up so does the price of gold and silver. Short term you may lose some money in the market, but over the long haul that usually is not the case.”
I hope you’re not buying from one of those outfits like Goldline that Beck used to shill for. If you’re not buying actual bullion (and only a very few coins on the world market actually *are* bullion under the US tax law definition), then you stand to eat a 28% surtax *on top of* any capital gains taxes you incur when you sell.
I don’t expect Beck actually bothered to tell his viewers that when he was shilling for Goldline.
Steve - USA (I support "None Of The Above")
June 12th, 2012
12:08 pm
“What if you grab his arm, shoot him point blank, and drag him inside?”
That is not a bad plan.
stands for decibels
June 12th, 2012
12:09 pm
What if his body just kind of stays half in half out of the window?
Post it to Youtube. Duh.
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
June 12th, 2012
12:09 pm
Joe Hussein Mama
This was discussed a couple of months ago, complete with copy/pasted laws from both Ga. and N.C., and it boils down to a threat of bodily harm by a weapon of the intruder.
Simply defending “stuff” does not allow for the use of deadly force.
But my original point remains, tough talk about shooting others only to defend “stuff” doesn’t further the cause for gun ownership.
Mighty Righty
June 12th, 2012
12:09 pm
Typical liberal think is government creates jobs. No, No, No. Jobs come from “wealth” that was created by indiviuals outside of government. The government has no money except that which it collects from tax payors current or future. For every dollar confiscated by the government from tax payers, that money must first be earned. The government first removes the money from the society, deducts a handling fee and returns a small percentage. Everyone who works for the governemnt is paid by taxes that were earned by private enterprise. The government does borow money which must be paid back in the future by the non governmnet tax payers. All borowed money should be for investment only since it is a mortgage on the future. To borrrow money as we are now doing to cover current expense is the path to bankruptcy.
godless heathen
June 12th, 2012
12:10 pm
When Middle Class Americans’ net worth rose dramatically prior to 1989 due to escalating real estate prices, were we stealing from the rich then?
Mitt Romney's Ethics Problem: Blind Trust Edition
June 12th, 2012
12:10 pm
Well, this is interesting news. It seems that Mittens hasn’t really got his investments in a blind trust. What he has is about $250 million in trust accounts which are managed by his personal lawyer, and which continue to receive payments from Bain Capital which are classified as “carried interest.”
On its face, this would indicate that not only does Mitt Romney have no problem hiding his tax returns from voters, but he also has reasons to hide his tax returns from voters.
When is a blind trust not a blind trust?
A blind trust is not a blind trust when there is direct or indirect control over investment decisions. While Romney has nominally placed his investments in a trust which is managed by someone else, the person he has chosen to manage those investments is his close associate and personal attorney. That is not a blind trust under federal law. It is a trust managed by a close personal friend and advisor.
http://crooksandliars.com/karoli/mitt-romneys-ethics-problem-blind-trust-edi
getalife
June 12th, 2012
12:11 pm
The con’s end game is for the wealthy to control all the wealth so there is no way for their kids to make a living.
Self defeatism for the brainwashed kooks.
the cat
June 12th, 2012
12:11 pm
righty-you bought into that trickle down theory thingie didn’t you?
I'm a liberal and believe everything I read and nothing the other side comes up with...cause we're smart and they are not
June 12th, 2012
12:11 pm
Capital=wealth=investment=stuff=need for people=jobs……..Government=collect all you can=support half not supporting themselves. …………Greed is good……..And Obama telling all he didn’t HAVE TIME to go to Wis. to help………..LOL………..11 fund raisers the previous 48 hours before election, 5 or 6 pretty close by…………..Does he think anyone believes him?
Chuck
June 12th, 2012
12:11 pm
Joe Hussein Mama
I would not know I do not listen to talk radio. I have heard the Neil Boortz show, back in the 90’s I shared an office with a guy that listen to him, but I have never heard Glen Beck.
Joe Hussein Mama
June 12th, 2012
12:11 pm
Oblama — “Mama – You could drag him inside but that would be tampering with evidence.”
My thought would be to take an extra second or two to aim and let him get inside the door. If one of us lays down flat on the upstairs hall, we have an *excellent* field of vision for any one coming in either door — while we present almost no target at all.
That said, my wife’s piece is a Mossberg 410 pump action with a pistol-grip slide. I load it with triple-ought shot, giving her three chances to ventilate any burglars with any single shot. I prefer revolvers, myself; easier to handle and aim in close quarters like a house.
Lord Help Us
June 12th, 2012
12:12 pm
Thank goodness chuck doesn’t drive, or fly…
Jefferson
June 12th, 2012
12:13 pm
My feelings are if someone will walk away from their ss and accept it as loss means they must not have worked for it, it was easy money. If you won’t defend what you work for, why do you work ? The program will have to change due to demographics, but that doesn’t mean those who paid in should just give up and write it off. The GOP gives up too easy on hard questions that involve money.
Mick
June 12th, 2012
12:13 pm
**Typical liberal think is government creates jobs. No, No, No**
Wrong, wrong and triple wrong….every piece of military hardware from the bolts and screws to the engine etc creates jobs!!!! Rethink that bs limbaugh talking point please…
They BOTH suck
June 12th, 2012
12:13 pm
“Typical liberal think is government creates jobs. ”
So military contractors as well as others who contract to sell products or services would have the same exact number of employees if the government stops buying the service or product?
Example?
They BOTH suck
June 12th, 2012
12:14 pm
Mick @ 12:13
You beat me to it. Righty can come up with some good ones…… He is consistent
Joe Hussein Mama
June 12th, 2012
12:14 pm
Chuck — “As for the post office, as poor run and mismanaged that is, I would rather use the internet and UPS, who mails letters anymore.”
I would, especially legal documents. Furthermore, I’ve worked for UPS and I will *always* choose another option if at all possible. You can complain about the USPS, but the difference in accountability and responsiveness when a shipment is lost or destroyed is night an day. UPS wants as much as two weeks just to do research, whereas the USPS has paid me on the spot *twice* for lost items. You just try to get that level of service from UPS or Fedex.
josef
June 12th, 2012
12:16 pm
RIGHTY, et al
Harping the line that wealth creates jobs is fine and good when those possessed of wealth are putting their money in places that do, The problem is that they are not. They are playing the paper game which does not create jobs. I can see arguing for breaks for the middle and even the upper middle class who DO put their money in enterprises which create jobs…but, quit carrying water for that top 1%. You’re just being a toadie.
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
June 12th, 2012
12:16 pm
On 2 of my properties I do have well water thank you, plus I was talking about the Federal government.
The same Federal government that built the interstate system that supplies the markets with the food you eat?
Or do you raise all your vegetables, cows chickens, pigs, fish, shrimp, crab as well?
Joe Hussein Mama
June 12th, 2012
12:16 pm
K’Chak — “But my original point remains, tough talk about shooting others only to defend “stuff” doesn’t further the cause for gun ownership.”
Ah. I see. Thank you for clarifying.
I have no *intention* of shooting others, but if it comes to someone breaking into my house, I am capable of and willing to do so.
They BOTH suck
June 12th, 2012
12:17 pm
“Government=collect all you can=support half not supporting themselves. ”
Do you mean those that do not pay any Fed Inc Taxes?
You do know that some of the lower ranking enlisted personnel that have served in Iraq and Afghanistan meet that criteria, right?
stands for decibels
June 12th, 2012
12:17 pm
I load it with triple-ought shot
in a .410 shell that’s, what, three pellets?
I'm a liberal and believe everything I read and nothing the other side comes up with...cause we're smart and they are not
June 12th, 2012
12:17 pm
The folks making the military hardware do it for PROFIT, not patriotism. They pay taxes. THEY NEED WORKERS. So, yes, government needs is a by product of those type products………But we all know the management of the Fed’s ( under either party) is horrible, so the military product providers are really getting rich.
Steve - USA (I support "None Of The Above")
June 12th, 2012
12:18 pm
“I have no *intention* of shooting others, but if it comes to someone breaking into my house, I am capable of and willing to do so.”
This
Lord Help Us
June 12th, 2012
12:18 pm
Chuck reminds me of some of my neighbors who are on medicare and absolutely outraged at the ‘gov’t takeover of healthcare!’
DBCOOPER
June 12th, 2012
12:19 pm
consequences of re-electing ‘The Food Stamp Prez’
Joe Hussein Mama
June 12th, 2012
12:19 pm
Chuck — “I would not know I do not listen to talk radio.”
If you don’t know whether you’re holding bullion or not, then I strongly recommend that you FIND OUT. You have a much greater tax liability if you’re holding non-bullion gold, especially coins.
If it turns out that you are, in fact, holding non-bullion gold, then I suggest you meet with a financial and tax professional on the matter.
Lord Help Us
June 12th, 2012
12:20 pm
‘You do know that some of the lower ranking enlisted personnel that have served in Iraq and Afghanistan meet that criteria, right?’
SOME? try almost ALL…
Joe Hussein Mama
June 12th, 2012
12:21 pm
SfD — “in a .410 shell that’s, what, three pellets?”
Correct. They’re ~.38-cal pellets, IIRC.
Doggone/GA
June 12th, 2012
12:22 pm
“You just try to get that level of service from UPS or Fedex.”
Amen to that. Fedex took nearly SIX MONTHS to pay out on a shipment that got “lost” in transit, and on the others that got damaged. Six dog houses shipped. 5 delivered, 3 damaged, one never got here. Pay out took six months.
Steve
June 12th, 2012
12:22 pm
My uber conservative grandparents were racist and voted GOP. Hated govt programs. When my grandfather got Alzheimers, I remember my Grandma boasting to me that it only cost her $300/month to put him in a nice home a mile from their house, close enough to walk to, and she was going to get to keep her house, thanks to Medicare. W/out Medicare, this would have cost her $3000+ a month and she would have lost everything. The irony of this situation kills me. (and of course it was great for her and I was happy for her).
Matti
June 12th, 2012
12:23 pm
“Job Creationists” (rather like creationists) blather on about how the wealthy create jobs with their tax cuts, despite tangible evidence to the contrary. It’s all about FAITH. They want us to have faith that their tax cuts and the astounding growth rates of their own personal wealth will reach the people who actually work all day to put food on the table (when we can).
Faith — without works — doesn’t mean much, now does it? (Who said that?) Show us your fruit, “job creators,” or prepare to have your trees chopped down by hungry peasants.
East Cobb RINO
June 12th, 2012
12:23 pm
Wealth does not create jobs. Wealth is created for business owners when an expanding customer base (the middle class) purchases more of the product made by that business thus increasing the profit. This demand from the expanding customer base creates jobs. Which in turn further expands the customer base and increases the wealth of the business owners.
Chuck
June 12th, 2012
12:23 pm
Joe Hussein Mama the biggest differnece between the post office and UPS or Fed Ex is that the Post office does not have to make a profit, The post office, may not lose alot of mail, but they do lose massive amounts of money, like every other department of the government , doesn’t matter they will just take more from me and you, no reason to ever get better.
stands for decibels
June 12th, 2012
12:25 pm
Correct. They’re ~.38-cal pellets, IIRC.
argh. I re-read your post and realized you’d already answered the question with “three chances to ventilate any burglars.”
Joe Hussein Mama
June 12th, 2012
12:25 pm
Doggone — “Six dog houses shipped. 5 delivered, 3 damaged, one never got here.”
Are you a breeder or a rescuer?
Steve
June 12th, 2012
12:26 pm
Chuck:
http://money.cnn.com/2011/01/24/news…lose/?iref=NS1
Quote:
Even though it’s a federal agency, the Postal Service has not received any taxpayer funding since the early 1980s, when it was phased into an independent, self-sufficient financial entity.
Granny Godzilla - Union Thugette
June 12th, 2012
12:26 pm
Chuck
Are you familiar with the prefunding pension problem with the USPS?
Perhaps you should check it out.
Billybob
June 12th, 2012
12:26 pm
national defense is paramount and a responsibility of our gov’t per the constitution…..liberals, what part of that do you not understand……redistribution per obama is not…..easy
They BOTH suck
June 12th, 2012
12:27 pm
Mighty Righty
Go down to Columbus (Ft Benning) or Hinseville (Ft Stewert) and ask the Chamber of Commerce and local officials if the troops and their families being stationed on those basis result in JOB CREATION in those two towns.
Michael
June 12th, 2012
12:30 pm
Since the chart was created, the stock market is up 20%, so we can assume the recovery of net worth has begun. Also, housing markets are recovering in several areas, so that will also help. Given the low interest rates vulture investors can buy houses and rent them at a profit. That will also stabilize the market.
The comments about Obama and the market remind me of Boortz’s special discussion in April of 2009. He and his callers agreed that no one would invest in the stock market with a socialist in the White House. Of course the market is up about 75% since that diatribe. I find Boortz to be one of the best contrarian indicators about markets in that he is almost always wrong.
I have one question about the etiquette of shooting discussed above. Since the CDC studies showed that more Americans shoot family members and neighbors than shoot intruders, do the same rules apply? That is, should you wait until your neighbor is inside your house before you shoot him? If that were the case, did George Zimmerman violate the etiquette of shooting his neighbor while on a sidewalk.
getalife
June 12th, 2012
12:31 pm
I think the dems should purge all con voters a day before the election just to be fair and balanced.
Joe Hussein Mama
June 12th, 2012
12:31 pm
Chuck — “Joe Hussein Mama the biggest differnece between the post office and UPS or Fed Ex is that the Post office does not have to make a profit, The post office, may not lose alot of mail, but they do lose massive amounts of money, like every other department of the government , doesn’t matter they will just take more from me and you, no reason to ever get better.”
I’d rather have a reliable and responsive government service that costs me tax money than an unresponsive and inefficient business providing the SAME service, but which does a WORSE job at it and is more concerned with providing profit to investors than in providing good service to its customers.
UPS, Fedex and the rest can kizmiaz. USPS forever, and quit using them if you don’t like them.
stands for decibels
June 12th, 2012
12:31 pm
liberals, what part of that do you not understand……redistribution
I’ll go there again. “Redistribution” is one of those scary sounding terms that means absolutely nothing.
There isn’t a soul alive in this country who gets back precisely the amount they pay in, in taxes. Not one. We couldn’t ever calibrate our spending/budget in order to accomplish that. It’s always “redistributed” in some way.
It’s childish to complain about it.
the cat
June 12th, 2012
12:32 pm
I’m beginning to wonder if the republicans posting on here are representative of the entire party. Seriously- some of the most uneducated, clueless folks ever. People-at least watch some mainstream news shows and read some main stream newspapers and educate yourselves.
Billybob
June 12th, 2012
12:34 pm
sfd,
it’s childish and foolish for you to ignore it…..
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
June 12th, 2012
12:35 pm
It’s childish to complain about it.
It’s toolish to repeat it.
Billybob
June 12th, 2012
12:35 pm
the cat,
liberalism 101 intellectual superiority template in use….nice job lib
Joe Hussein Mama
June 12th, 2012
12:35 pm
TBS — “Go down to Columbus (Ft Benning) or Hinseville (Ft Stewert) and ask the Chamber of Commerce and local officials if the troops and their families being stationed on those basis result in JOB CREATION in those two towns.”
IMO, one of the most secure small businesses one could ever own would be a drycleaner/laundry shop just across the street from a military post. Do a good job on servicemen’s uniforms and you’d never want for customers. Add a couple of seamstresses to sew on buttons, name tapes, make repairs, and you’d be set for life.
Except, of course, you’d be relying on the GUBMINT for all your business, so it’d be dirty money, right?
TiredOfIt
June 12th, 2012
12:36 pm
Just returned from vacation and it looked to me that a lot of people are doing quite well. If you are not, maybe you need to look at yourself and quite blaming everyone else.
curious
June 12th, 2012
12:36 pm
All that “wealth” before the “collapse” was just phony wealth created when all us suckers fell for the no down payment loans, ARMs, and luxury items we couldn’t afford scams.
Thw wealth never was there; we just thought it was. Now we can pay the price.
the cat
June 12th, 2012
12:37 pm
Answered my question by peeking in on Kyle’s blog. OMG
getalife
June 12th, 2012
12:37 pm
the cat,
They are that ignorant. They read nothing but negative on drudgey and brainwashed by fox news.
They are America’s self defeatists..
Doggone/GA
June 12th, 2012
12:39 pm
“Are you a breeder or a rescuer?”
Neither!
stands for decibels
June 12th, 2012
12:39 pm
foolish for you to ignore it…
to ignore WHAT? the fact that you are NEVER, EVER, EVER going to get back, in goods and services, precisely the same amount you pay out in taxes? That such a thing would be impossible to accomplish? Whether we’re talking about in any given year, or over the course of any individual taxpayer’s lifetime?
Some day I do hope you’ll wake up and realize just how badly you’ve been played.
josef
June 12th, 2012
12:39 pm
Maybe it’s just me, but what is the problem with redistribution? The uberwealthy could lead the way by re-DISTRIBUTING their wealth instead of hoarding it under the metaphorical mattress…
My problem is not that they have it, but what they’re doing with it…
Doggone/GA
June 12th, 2012
12:41 pm
“The uberwealthy could lead the way by re-DISTRIBUTING their wealth instead of hoarding it under the metaphorical mattress…”
Especially as they would certainly get it back…eventually…in the form of more customers for the businesses upon which their wealth depends.
Rightwing Troll
June 12th, 2012
12:43 pm
“On average, Obama has create more jobs EACH MONTH than Bush did over the entire 8 years of his disastrous reign.”
And increased domestic oil output, and decreased the number of government employees, and killed OBL…
stands for decibels
June 12th, 2012
12:45 pm
but what is the problem with redistribution?
No problem at all, which was the point I was making. We have a government so that we can lead civilized lives. Some people need to pay in more than they get back; some people need to get back more than they pay in. It’s been like that since the first hominid tribes figured out how to pool their resources.
East Cobb RINO
June 12th, 2012
12:45 pm
What is really funning is on the front page of AJC.com is an article about good news for job seekers with a picture of a “Now Hiring” sign. Look closer and you will see the “ay” of the Subway logo at the top of the sign. Good news for teens and college kids.
getalife
June 12th, 2012
12:46 pm
The cat,
cons are like children that will never admit they are wrong and think it is some kind of game.
You are arguing with children with no personal responsibility and lost their family values to determine right from wrong.
I have been arguing with cons for a long time and they and their corrupt party will never change.
Doggone/GA
June 12th, 2012
12:47 pm
“and they and their corrupt party will never change.”
That’s not quite correct. Changing for the worse is still changing.
GT
June 12th, 2012
12:50 pm
The canaries were dying in the mines long before the world realized they were broke. We were entering new underwriting territory for refinanced loans at 125% of the appraised value of your home. Nobody is going to walk away from his or her home was the theory. No doc loans where with these soaring appraisal prices they equity was all they needed. The equity turned out to be confederate money, printed up like a banana republic. MAI was made as instructed, then used the sale of one MAI home as comparable for the next MAI, creating value in the minds of once in a life time buyers with no feel for the market and everybody giving advice on a commission cut, so the higher the price the more money was made. On the other end Wall Street was selling this fish in a barrel securities to baby booming pension funds desperate to find a steady safe investment that took little research and made lots of fees for the seller of mass.
Then the Republicans park this wreaked vehicle gives the keys to Obama and call the police and report a wreaked car. Most fat dumb happy Americans didn’t know what had happened until months into the Obama administration and now believe the same drivers of the car should have the keys back.
This stuff is not fixed after the house blows up, it has to be done with preventive measures. Smart guys on Wall Street saw this coming and bought shorts on MBSs. The same feds who think they are stopping inside trading should have had enough information to see this coming, there are people with less resources who did and the proof is the fortune they made off of it. You get the idea our agencies that was paid by the tax payers in the Republican administration took those jobs as perks with not much intention of having to work, because no work was getting done.
It is now coming out that Morgan Stanley knew they had a problem with this “Whale” trader a year ago. Yet the man goes about his destruction as if every day is Christmas, for a year. Now he has all those millions from commission, and they think the punishment is letting him go. I would love some good reporter telling us where the Whale is now, probably in the water again with a fund or Wall Street firm not missing a beat. This is the one thing I see wrong on the Obama watch.
What I do not like about the Republican Party is there is no preventive medicine, these unexpected bombs go off all through their administration each one preventable including 9/11, New Orleans and this economic disaster. They spend too much time in leisure and too little time watching the signals of our time. They brag that no other disaster happened on their watch after 9/11, well no 9/11 happened on any other watch but theirs, before or afterwards, and I consider this economic disaster as big as 9/11 and it was on their sleepy watch as was the homeland disaster of New Orleans.
the cat
June 12th, 2012
12:52 pm
GT-great post.
They BOTH suck
June 12th, 2012
12:53 pm
Jay
How about an article relating to Lindsey Graham’s comments on new tax pledges?
I’m sure talk radio pundits are having a field day with him today……….
Madmax
June 12th, 2012
12:55 pm
getalife – look in the mirror and see the child that will never admit he is wrong who thinks it is a kind of game won by one liner retorts..
USMC
June 12th, 2012
12:58 pm
Now union members are deserting Obama…
http://washingtonexaminer.com/politics/washington-secrets/2012/06/now-union-members-are-deserting-obama/721241
Jm
June 12th, 2012
12:59 pm
Lord hab mercy
6 pages of redistribution comments
You do realize that capital employed in businesses reduces costs for consumers, and it would be stupid to redistribute said wealth?
Because if so, the cost of everything would go way up, and you wouldn’t be able to get your basic necessities met.
Pretty much, exactly like, Zimbabwe.
ken
June 12th, 2012
1:00 pm
GT, do you work with Frank and Dodd ? George Bush mentioned NINE times that these loans would create problems but you know what Frank said , don’t you.
getalife
June 12th, 2012
1:00 pm
“Changing for the worse is still changing.”
That is true.
They BOTH suck
June 12th, 2012
1:02 pm
ken
Not discounting Freddie and Fannie’s role, however you do know that the majority of these BS loans were not Frannie and Freddie, “don’t you”?
Thulsa Doom
June 12th, 2012
1:02 pm
“It’s no secret what happens when millions of people suddenly discover that they are several tens of thousands of dollars more poor than they thought. They stop spending and buying”
Nope. This is just a liberal talking point to excuse Obama’s poor economy. And its wrong for several reasons
1- An examination of history is in order. When the stock market crashed in 1987 it lost nearly 23% of its value in one day and stayed down roughly the same amount for the month. In one day people who had investments, pensions, retirement nest eggs, etc. saw nearly a quarter of their investment holdings vanish. Did they suddenly stop spending and buying? Um. Nope. That right there refutes this talking point
2- The losses whether it be in retirement savings above or in diminished housing values have some effect on consumer confidence but its exaggerated. The fact that your house is not worth as much isn’t going to stop you from spending or purchasing on every day goods. What matters is if your monthly mortgage payments are within budget.
3- A lot of houses were artificially inflated to begin with after purchase due to the bubble. All they are doing is giving back some of those inflated gains. Eventually housing prices, similar to stock prices, will recover. And I suspect most people know this.
4- The biggest caveat of this article which Jay and the libs ignore is the fact that while many homeowners have lost value in their house this presents a remarkable buying opportunity for new entrants into the housing market and for people looking to upsize their homes. If its someone who is already a homeowner he may have reduced value in his own home but he also has an opportunity to purchase a much bigger house at a substantially reduced value.
As for the new home buyers they will be feeling mighty optimistic buying a home greatly reduced from 5 years ago. Their perceptions and willingness to buy and spend will counterbalance those who are underwater. Its a 2 way street and its no surprise that Jay and the liberal talking points folks choose to ignore this obvious fact.
Mick
June 12th, 2012
1:03 pm
usmc
I think that steel cap in your head is starting cut into your microscopic brain cells! As if union members are going toward romney? No, the sky is not falling mr. jarhead…
Adam
June 12th, 2012
1:05 pm
You do know that some of the lower ranking enlisted personnel that have served in Iraq and Afghanistan meet that criteria, right?
Surely not! Not the TROOPS! They take care of themselves and never want for anything because they are all self made government employ—- er…. self made manly men!
Mick
June 12th, 2012
1:06 pm
**The biggest caveat of this article which Jay and the libs ignore is the fact that while many homeowners have lost value in their house this presents a remarkable buying opportunity for new entrants into the housing market and for people looking to upsize their homes.**
Dude, have you tried to get a mortgage loan these days? Better be able to come up with 20% or fuhgetaboutit…
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
June 12th, 2012
1:07 pm
You do realize that capital employed in businesses reduces costs for consumers…
Blessed be to our Galtian overlords for their benevolence in keeping prices down.
Congregation: Blessed Be!
We will now Tebow in supplication to show our appreciation.
Congregation: YES, TEBOW!
josef
June 12th, 2012
1:09 pm
Maybe somebody can help me out here. Let’s take any one of the uberwealthy, and I’m just as satisfied if you choose Soros or Buffett. Where is their money? How many jobs is it creating? Let’s say s/he owns X percent of Company Y. Company Y employs Z number of people. How many jobs does that X percent “fund?”
Adam
June 12th, 2012
1:10 pm
“Redistribution” is code for “the poor are handed everything on a silver platter” to cons. Of course, it’s not true, but still. Keep the lie alive!
Seriously though, it’s not “redistributed” in the way cons seem to think. Taxes are collected and pay for government services that all of us use. It’s not taking from one wealthy dude to give cash money to the poor welfare queen so she can live the high life with an Escalade, new iPhone, and booze bought with food stamps (btw, no such person exists, if they do you have to prove it with photographic evidence).
Mick
June 12th, 2012
1:10 pm
josef
So you’re looking for simple answers to complex questions? This ain’t the place…
Goldie
June 12th, 2012
1:10 pm
“…provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare,…”
billybob @ 12:26 — what part of the preamble to the Constitution do YOU NOTunderstand? It doesn’t say “national defense” but COMMON DEFENSE and GENERAL WELFARE. That’s what it says and you need to pay your share in order to sustain and support our U.S. Constitution!