US Better Off Than Now Than Two Decades Ago

This article explains how life is better now > We're Living The Dream

The author says the media often ignores the positive. That's probably true. I wasn't even aware of several of these trends.

 

Rebecca: I read the article. In '92 I was a commercial real estate broker. My memories are a bit dim as to exact occurrences at each year, but in our industry we had experienced a DEPRESSION for a short time prior to '92, had experienced many instances of all cash and liquidity having been removed from business, and by 92 were on the slow long road to some kind of recovery. It had started for us in Spring of '89 and so it was already about 3 years. Probably some time around '92 I heard some local firm in the industry coining the phrase "staying alive to '95". I still remember that.

Oh sh!t I recall thinking....these miserable times might be around for another 3 years.

But the article references totally different information. Off the top of my head, I don't recall cr@p about the social indicators referenced in the article and how they relate to those same items today. I did look up something about pollution and found that CO2 emanations from the US are at levels similar to 1992 and way down from previous years. The article I saw referenced the huge growth in relatively recent US natural gas production, the enormous drop in costs of natural gas, and how quickly large users have switched from coal to natural gas to take advantage of the cost savings. It would appear that is pretty significant to have such an impact on total CO2 emanations.

One other little memory reflecting on some of the social indicators referenced in the article, though not tied to either 1992 or today: Around 1997, 1998, 1999, the national tech boom was hitting its peak. The communications industry had grown by leaps and bounds and was particularly big in the DC region where I live. The first internet "revolution" was underway also increasing hiring.

The DC region is very lucky and fortunate. It generally has overall lower unemployment than most of the nation, and because the Fed Govt, and all these contractors are here, tends to suffer less economically and recover faster than other regions in the nation.

Regardless, around those latter years of the 1990's the unemployment rate dropped to incredible all time lows because of that tech boom. A lot of those indications of social malaise dropped. Unemployment was lower, crime dropped, etc. It was sort of astonishing. Of course the employment surge was a once in a decades kind of experience. It was soon followed by a recession and immense firings specifically in those industries and things returned to prior levels.

 

In two decades even Rwanda improved , the article is srsly full of bull . Wordwide in the past two decades we've implemented the major discoveries of the 50's . DNA research , computers and instant transmission of information . Last time I checked upgrading the tech level of a nation greatly improves the quality of life .

No one's living any dream in fact this is the beginning of a nightmare , a nightmare where extremists and tyrants get more and more power . A nightmare where the planet we inhabit becomes uninhabitable due to our very action . A nightmare were evil crushes good . The first taste of this nightmare is here in the form of the ongoing economic downfall .

There is plenty of good to focus on , however there's too much darkness to ignore it .

 

Lies and statistics, or does the saying go lies via statistics? I find it amazing and entertaining that one can make numbers say pretty much anything they want to. All one has to do is cherry pick their numbers and trend on the data points that make the graph look the way they want.

To me, the world was a hell of a lot better 20 years ago if for no other reason than the fact I was 20 years younger (or 20 years further from the grave). I look at statistics for inner city blacks and I defy someone to show me how those numbers could possibly be worse 20 years ago, whether we are talking about marriage, education, or employment. I look at statistics tracking the size of the middle class or what portion small business makes up of the GDP, and it seems obvious something is very wrong at a structural level.

I suspect what we have done here in the US is to make poverty tolerable. The average household in poverty in the us has multiple television sets, free health care, and a variety of amenities poor people from other nations would risk death to get here for. In the mean time, our social mobility and global competitiveness indexes have plummeted while our corruption indexes have skyrocketed.

Earl, the fact you live in the DC area sheds a lot of light on your belief system. I look at Obama's budget, and I want to move to DC, if only to swim in the ocean of taxpayer cash the city swims in.

 

O-Nation: There is a continuous theme coming out of the cyber fingers of the Right Wing Extremists. Each and every post oozes the angry elements of the party that just lost the election. While I know the Right/The GOP and all its factions will go through a lot of internal debate/fighting/etc. to try and figure out how to move forward one consistent response since the election was to stop being so stupid and stop insulting parts of the electorate.

By example this phrase you wrote just is full of extremist anger, criticism, and an effort to put down a part of the population:

So be it. You guys can continue to express those emotions of anger and alienate an enormous population, let alone a majority.

All the author did was write with a perspective. There was nothing political in the article, if in fact you read it. It didn't say those elements of social well being had continuously improved in the last year, the last 5 years, the last 10 years or 20 years. All it did was pull a bunch of items and express an opinion on them.

One thing nobody realized in 1992 was the enormous economic growth the US experienced through the recession that hit around 2000.

You can tie it to a lot of factors. To me it was the result of huge increases and improvements in two different but somewhat related technologies; telecommunications, that I believe started to grow and improve like crazy over a long stretch, essentially starting when the Feds mounted an anti trust case against AT&T and settled it around 1984. Even before that competition started in that industry. Subsequent to the break up of AT&T there was an enormous rush of dramatic new better, more productive technology.

The 2nd, in my mind was the maturation and effective use of the PC industry. It was possibly 10-15 years old by 1992. By that time usage of PC's was extensive and had been supported by widespread networking to create powerful productivity advances.

It took a decade or more to get to that level wherein the technological advances could really be put to enormous usage and widespread beneficial economic value. But those are my opinions. Simply opinions such as those of the author of the article Rebecca cited.

As for me in DC....I am significantly removed from local political interaction and discussions. I had my taste of it years ago and didn't like it. Of interest one of my long term business partners is pretty much politically to the Right of Ghenghis Khan, and it was somewhat startling to me when working as a commercial real estate broker to see that a vast majority of my peers and the ones with whom I was friendly were overwhelmingly Right Wing in perspective.

You of course live in the hotbed of liberalism, the San Fran area. I'm surprised you hold the views you hold.

 

Earl, if I point out your car is dirty, am I insulting you? No. Obviously not. If I point out social mobility has fallen while the financial well being of our worst off has improved, it is not an insult or a statement of rage. It is simply a fact. Like most liberals, you should learn to carry on a conversation based on facts without the need to demonize those who don't share your views as misogynistic, racist, or plutocratic.

A bunch of items that formed a conclusion: "We are all better off than 20 years ago". As I already pointed out, that conclusion can be easily refuted by pulling together a different bunch of items and expressing a different opinion.

You see, here we have something we can agree on! Reagan broke up AT&T, a small business killing, poor customer service providing, monopolistic company that was too big to fail, and our economy flourished. Today, AT&T is bigger than ever, providing the same anti-competitive poor customer service they always have. They are pond scum. Any takers on whether Obama addresses breaking them, or any of the big banks up? I thought not.

Why doesn't Obama take on AT&T, or Goldman, or Chase, or Wells, or any of the "fat cats" he demonized as champions of the Republican party during his campaign? Two reasons: 1) They fund him too. 2) Breaking up AT&T hurts what remains of the private sector Unions. In essence, Obama will keep around companies that are bad for the American economy in order to protect the unions. Most people would call that corruption.

I am a classic liberal. I fit right in.

Too be fair, I don't live in SF anymore. I live in the OC.

 

Interestingly enough, we probably are quite better off. There is much to be thankful for!