Tim Geithner to Laid Off Americans: Your getting laid off is “healthy”

izoneguy

let’s make sure Obama & his team get laid off ASAP.

http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

Freedom is Slavery
Ignorance is Strength
Unemployment is Prosperity

applycs

Well thanks to Frank, Dodd, Schumer, Pelosi, Reid, et al via the sub-prime idiocy we are being put through an adjustment rather than going through one. And thank you the fascist state media for aiding and abetting.

http://cib4me.blogspot.com mrdadx6

We, as conservatives, believe that capitalism is the best economic system there is. We agree that capitalism results in natural cycles of boom and bust. Therefore, the boom is natural, and the bust is also natural.

As I see it, this is Timothy Geitner paying proper homage to the virtues of capitalism, although granted he only does so when it is useful for defusing criticism of his boss.

Unemployment after a boom, during a bust, IS healthy, and IS the natural order of things. Does it suck? YES. Should it be the governments job to create jobs, bail people out, or buy extra crap from companies to keep them employing people?

I thought the answer on this forum would be a resounding NO. Now, maybe I’m not so sure anymore…

IJB

…handled in the “normal” way, he’d actually be right – part of the Boom/Bust cycle is to clear out moribund & obsolete jobs, companies, sectors & industries.

Unfortunately, this in *not* a normal “recession”, and it hasn’t been “handled” in the normal way, so Geithner’s dead wrong in what he’s saying.

IJB

See my post above.

This isn’t a normal Boom/Bust result – it’s the result of an out-of-control Gov’t doing untold and unnecessary damage to this economy, and now making it all the worse with the policies this Administration has either already implemented or is trying to implement.

So, no – we’re not going to toast the platitudes of these morons.

mom2oneson

people that don’t need to balance their checkbooks to pay their bills, that glamorize cutting back, being frugal, having too low of an income for your needs, they think of it has a hobby or something to do for fun for a while. They go on spending on luxuries and really have no idea what need is.

I heard some conservative talk show host say how great a depression will be because his kids won’t be fighting over getting some kind of video game. I wonder if his tune will change when he can’t buy them clothes or glasses or sneakers.

rsss

than they did in 2008, when the recession started. Then they were screaming that the government had to “step in & fix” what the markets were trying to correct.

http://cib4me.blogspot.com mrdadx6

Fair enough. I will certainly agree that this bust is the result of government meddling in the processes of the economy.

However, my opinion is that, every time you write an article or make a statement regarding the deplorable condition of the US economy currently, you need to make clear that, in your opinion, the situation is the direct result of unnecessary and inappropriate government intervention. Because otherwise, you sound like this post, which sounds like Erick is calling out the Obama Administration for not being compassionate enough, and not getting the government involved enough in stimulating business.

Like you, I agree that the best stimulus to business is to get the government out of the way, and provide more stability. Dr. Thomas Sowell said it very well in part 4 of the interviews at National Review Online. Government involvement creates uncertainty, which requires a lot more up-front investment in order to provide a sure return.

I just want to make sure we beat that drum enough that anyone who reads a post here about the economy realizes that we think the government being involved is a BAD THING.

Swamp_Yankee

In a free market the freedom to succeed includes the possibility of failure.

If the auto industry took its natural course without government bailouts, massive layoffs and perhaps bankruptcy would have ensued. They would have reformed as stronger companies. But layoffs are an inevitable part of the evolution of a non-competitive business. Most conservatives opposed to the auto bail were content letting a certain amount of auto workers go unemployed for a time.

What’s wrong is that this administration is ceating unemployment with its fiscal and monetary policies. TG is trying to sound like Milton Friedman here, but the growing unemployment is not caused by market forces, but by the Obama administration’s own incompetance and policies.

http://cib4me.blogspot.com mrdadx6

That’s exactly the kind of point we need to make in every post, so that we don’t come across as agitating for more government involvement.

http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

Why use the language of Marx?

No, I am not a capitalist. I am a proponent of freedom.

No, a bust isn’t healthy. No, it isn’t inevitable.

Yes, this one was triggered by left-wing government intrusion into the market.

No, I reject your comment entirely.

gatorbait

Soooo.. when do the Obama’s go back to living within their means? How much does he make as prez anyway? He and Michelle have probably blown way past it by now.

http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

Obama is in the Inner Party.

http://www.skiloveland.com lholsenbeck

This administration has shredded the abilities of companies to add and keep jobs, it has made business owners give up their lives to keep thier businesses open and there is not one blue spot in the sky anywhere telling people or business owners that it is okay to trust the administration for their future livelihoods !

Quoting Hillary, “I am sick and tired” of these guys telling the people to grin and bear it, to hunker down, to sit on their wallets; while they do the exact opposite and try to reach further into the people’s wallets every day.

The cure to this whole mess is simple, keep the current tax cuts, increase tax cuts for people and business, allow all forms of US energy to be produced and brought to market, to decrease government spending and privatize as many government entities as possible. Within 2 years, unemployment would be back under 7 and all US businesses would be in a bull market as the US is still that baddest little economic vehicle in the lands when policy wonks aren’t stepping on its throat !

E Pluribus Unum

olsmithie

salaried guys at GM to lose 70% of their retirement, while the hourly union folks lost zilch, nada, nothing. (Guaranteed by Taxpayer dollars.)

Regards

http://www.fredsnews.com Fred Maidment

…that it has actually made things worse. Rather than “stimulating” the economy, the stimulus and TARP sucked so much liquidity out of the worldwide economy, it appears to have actually deepened the pain of an otherwise normal recessionary period following an economic expansion.

Another stimulus? Sure: LOWER MY TAXES.

http://www.fredsnews.com Fred Maidment

No, if everyone acted in a long-term economic manner (as macro-economists would like), then we’d all act in ways that lead to long-term stability.

However, as micro-economists will tell you, choices are made on the margin: that is, they are made in the moment, and what seems most important at that moment will be the choice made. A junkie might know they need to lay off the stuff, but plunging that needle just feels so gooooooood (which, hating needles as I do, is a disturbing thought entirely).

A micro-economist can see that people will make choices for short-term gain at the expense of the long-term benefit. As such, when these choices (such as purchasing a home they cannot really afford or voting a tax-raising community organizer into the Presidency) pile up all at once, somebody somewhere realizes that things are out of whack and in need of an adjustment starting a chain-reaction among others making similar decisions..

Indeed, recessions are where micro- and macro-economics meet.

So while no, it is not inevitable, it is a normal process of an economic system.

http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

The inflation of the real estate market was not normal.

The porkulus was not normal.

The threats of totalitarian control of industries are not normal.

Nothing about this is normal.

And so much of the blame rests with Barney Frank, the CBC, and Barack Obama.

http://www.fredsnews.com Fred Maidment

…when he took over Chrysler back in the ’80s. He got to the HQ, found out how bad it was, and took a salary of ONE DOLLAR.

Essentially, he was saying, “It’s bad enough that I can’t take a salary. I legally have to or I’m a slave, so I’m taking as little as possible. I’m used to earning millions. Now tell me that you can’t take a pay-cut to save this company.”

Don’t agree with the talk-show host, but sometimes the point is valid.

Vegas_Rick

I went back and re-read Erick’s post to see where even implied, let alone said, what you claim. He didn’t.

As far as creative destruction, which I think is what you are referring to, it IS healthy. When it is implemented by the free market, and not the government. Failing companies must be cleared out to make room for new, innovative and profitable replacements. This creates long-term jobs and prosperity. Selective bailouts, which is what Obama is doing, is not healthy for anyone. It merely perpetuates a cycle of economic failure.

bobojake

Geithner, schummmmmmmmmmmmmer, reid, peloski and obama.

http://cib4me.blogspot.com mrdadx6

While I agree with all the specifics you’ve listed, I still argue that capitalism (which I think is the greatest financial system ever), will still inevitably result in cycles of boom and bust. Because I believe that the nature of humanity is to be greedy, selfish, and self-interested.

People will make decisions which benefit them to the detriment of other people, even to the detriment of their own security. These decisions will, en masse, result in the cycles that we’re talking about. Anyone who says that it’s possible to avoid the bust in the boom-and-bust cycle is either fooling themselves, or selling government intervention.

Vegas_Rick

they are not normal, and they were not inevitable. But, based on those causes, mostly created by the statist liberals, the bust was both inevitable and normal.

http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

Why does “greedy, selfish, and self-interested” behavior lead to a boom and bust cycle for the greater economy?

Were we less “greedy, selfish, and self-interested” from 1984 to 2006?

And your last sentence is just wrong.

It’s amazing how much you argue without dirtying your hands with facts. Of course, I’ve thought you were a moby since your first comment, so there you have it.

http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

http://www.fredsnews.com Fred Maidment

n/t

Vegas_Rick

http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

http://www.fredsnews.com Fred Maidment

“voting a tax-raising community organizer into the Presidency”

No, it’s not normal. This recession COULD have been “normal,” as government pretty much has at least a partial hand in all of them.

However, the activities leading up to the market crash, TARP, bailouts and takeovers are not normal.

6eorge Jetson

When a member of the ∅bama administration cites “market forces” after Zer∅ sold the spending to the public under the mantra “only government can fix this problem”, I’m calling them out.

When a member of the ∅bama administration fails to note that the pain is due to a government incentivized over-allocation of resources to the housing sector (thank you Fannie/Freddie/Alan), I’m calling them out.

When a member of the ∅bama administration fails to acknowledge the exacerbation of unemployment due to a capital-hostile government agenda, I’m calling them out.

When a member of the ∅bama administration fails to acknowledge the debt that the US Govt is incurring at its own option (porkulus) and the credibility were losing with lender nations (such as the Chinese, hahahahah), I’m calling them out.

http://www.fredsnews.com Fred Maidment

…the means Mr. Geithner and his ilk allow us to hold on to after they raise our taxes to European levels and kill the economy…

http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

So much of this is rooted in Fannie Mae, the CRA, and government meddling.

It was never normal, even before goverment started trying to clean up its own mess.

6eorge Jetson

Vegas_Rick

which hasn’t been the case in this country since FDR, there are no booms and busts. The markets correct themselves before things get that far out of whack. There are ups and downs in individual markets, but they are smoothed out by the greater economy.

Take simplistic view of recent events. The real estate bubble was created by government intervention, namely the Community Reinvestment Act and its off shoots. The bubble burst last summer because of skyrocketing gas prices and a tightening of credit.

Those gas prices are another direct result of interference in the energy markets. Prohibitions on domestic energy production. The availability of credit is controlled by the Fed.

If they just left thighs alone, none of this would have happened.

http://www.fredsnews.com Fred Maidment

“Selective bailouts, which is what Obama is doing, is not healthy for anyone. It merely perpetuates a cycle of economic failure.”

Few have spoken or written a greater truth.

Vegas_Rick

http://cib4me.blogspot.com mrdadx6

Greedy, selfish, self-interested behavior, in and of itself, does not lead to recession. It leads to people making decisions that will, in the long-term, lead to problems. People will make decisions that benefit themselves in the short run, even if it hurts them in the long run. A company will falsify it’s returns in order to keep flying high in the short run, despite the fact that in the long run, they get caught and all go to jail. Madoff’s pyramid scheme, Enron, these are examples of people making decisions based on short-term self-interest.

Don’t misunderstand, I’m not arguing that people should make decisions based on the needs of the community at large, because I don’t believe that. I just accept that people acting in their own (perceived) best interests, will result, eventually, in negative consequences for the community at large.

This may come as a surprise to you, but the period from 1984 to 2006 does not describe the sum total of human history. There was capitalism before 1984, and there were boom and bust cycles. The fact that we did not experience more dramatic bust cycles during that time period is in fact due to government intervention, so are you claiming that some government intervention is good for the economy, as long as it’s the right kind?

http://www.fredsnews.com Fred Maidment

…as I’m referring to “normal” as being “similar to previous recessions.”

As noted by somebody above, we haven’t had a “normal” recession since the Great Depression.

However, in that government has had a hand in just about every boom-and-bust since, it’s “normal.”

You’re right, in a pure economic sense, this isn’t normal.

http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

Vegas_Rick

Neither individual nor corporate decisions alone can bring about a recession. Only government can do that.

http://cib4me.blogspot.com mrdadx6

Tulip Mania

http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

Keynesian economic practice will lead to government-driven boom and bust.

http://cib4me.blogspot.com mrdadx6

My point is just that, when you call them out on it, make sure to point out that the reason you find their comments to be grotesque is because they’re responsible for the unemployment, due to all of their intervention! Don’t just leave that to be assumed by the reader, since not everyone is a free-marketeer.

highflyingconservative

Geithner is a genius! He is a genius I say! I couldn’t have said it better my self.

And being the selfless genius he is perhaps he would be willing to demonstrate how each of us can contribute to the good will of the nation by leaving office — NOW!

http://cib4me.blogspot.com mrdadx6

I agree with your points that the selective bailouts are not healthy for anyone. I agree that creative destruction is healthy. I agree that jobs lost in one sector will end up being created in another sector (barring government intervention), because America is strong and creative.

But my point was that this:
“It?s a ?necessary and healthy adjustment?? Seriously? 9.5% unemployment is necessary and healthy how exactly?

How is ?an economy that is [not] growing? necessary and healthy?”

sounds like a complaint that the government should do more.

I would guess Erick’s position is that government should do less. Should have DONE less, and then we would not be where we are today, but that’s not how it comes across. Not to me, anyway.

Swamp_Yankee

The economy tanked long before FDR got into office. There were a few in the 1800s too. It started in 1929 and FDR was elected in 1933. His programs didnt help as liberals like to believe. we cant delude ourselves either into thinking that free markets are utopian.

But the general agrument is about unemployment. You can’t herald free markets and competition without acknowledging that businesses and markets will fail leading to unemployment

Not to make an asault on the free market. I just think conservatives are better in intellectual battle when they understand what the other side will say.

A Marixist economist will destroy the proclamation that boom/busts ans unemployment dont occur in free markets.

Vegas_Rick

of economic historians who believe the accounts of this event are overblown and that the “bubble” was insignificant. It’s mostly a legend based on one book:

“Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds”

But even then, what effect did it have on the global economy? You’re certainly not comparing the economy of Holland to that of the US are you?

http://cib4me.blogspot.com mrdadx6

What does that mean?

Vegas_Rick

And I certainly didn’t mean to leave the impression that I think unemployment will not occur in free markets. Of course, it must. But it usually of shorter duration than when government intervention is involved.

http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

That’s one commodity, not an entire economy.

Swamp_Yankee

nt

http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

…and rooted somewhat in the erratic and inflexible gold standard.

JadedByPolitics

much more atrocious…that statement from a man who could not pay his taxes and whose Boss along with all his Democrat friends are spending us into oblivion…we American’s could live with in our means if the government could live within their’s however they continue to take more and more or OUR MEANS to pay for their bad choices. The idiot is simply to stupid to head the IRS and on top of that a criminal who got away with not paying his 140K in back taxes that would have anyone of us in jail.

Vegas_Rick

When we win this fight against statist collectivism, and we will, it will be great fun to send these idiots back to obscurity.

penguin2

and Jaded, that remark of “living within their means” torqued me off as well. It was adding insult to injury. Geithner and his cohorts have a lot of nerve. The average hardworking American was living within their means. Those that have really blown the economy were the people not entitled to houses and loans, as they were not qualified.

The country had always functioned reasonably, when people had to take personal responsibility for their choices. When the government stepped in the “make things fair” it away the accountability for their choices. Now we have a government with irresponsible spending and no accountability.

Scope

Bush and McCain made some noise about the dangers ahead with Freddie and Fannie. They had alot more info. than any of us did. Wasn’t Bush’s warning somewhere back around the beginning of his term? Don’t know when McCain made it an issue. Shouldn’t they have creamed the alarm? It may have made the fall a little less hard.

Do you think that the Cap and Trade/Global Warming/Climate Change bill passed in the House would not set up the next bubble? I see it as a whole new investment vehicle, for those that can still afford to invest.

Vegas_Rick

At the bare minimum, reasonable people can agree they’ve ignored/violated the constitution. I believe some of this administrations strong arm tactics, used to convince individuals and businesses “go along to get along” may, in fact, be criminal. I also think that there’s evidence that many actions taken by the Obama campaign, such a sharing donor lists with, and contributing money to, ACORN merits further investigation. But I’m no lawyer.

Scope

n/t

http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

GEITHNER: The president is committed and is working with the leaders of Congress on very comprehensive broad-based financial reform to put in place new rules of the game, more constraints on risk taking to prevent a crisis like this from happening again.

ROSE: When will we see that start to happen?

GEITHNER: Well, we need to get through this crisis. It is very important we get through this crisis and be definitively through it, but we’re hoping to legislate this year.

ROSE: Whatever you can do in terms of regulation and legislation will take place during the next three years?

RUSH: Hang on, listen.

GEITHNER: Yes, within that period of time. Within that period of time. But, again, these things are about preventing the next boom.

ROSE: Yeah.

PREVENTING THE NEXT BOOM!
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_051109/content/01125113.member.html

cump

Since being laid off from a purely profit driven energy company here in Ohio, I have had the opportunity to begin jogging (something I absolutely ABHOR!), and have completed my first 5k (don’t ask the time…28min), so I must now be classified as “healthier”. That’s good for the Obama health care talk…right?

As far as my bank account, I can’t say that it is ‘healthier’….I have one in college, and one looking at colleges this week. Matter of fact, I think my bank account is quite sick, and in need of some ‘stimulus’. Perhaps with my severence check, I should invite good ol’ Tim over to do my taxes, as I am sure he and his ilk will want to take considerable ‘taxes’ out of it. And, only he can work his brand of magic to make it look ‘healthier!”

Now you all have done it…I’m totally sick (not healthy), about this subject.

http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

Vegas_Rick

Nice discussion.

http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

But a totalitarian like Obama thinks his actions are cleaning up.

http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

coupled as it was with a flat stock market that caused investors to replace stocks with housing due to too low interest rates for way too long.

JadedByPolitics

to use their large majority to ensure investigations of ACORN and voter abuse as well as write legislation that ensures AGAIN that the WH have no interference in the Census! These small actions will ensure that EVERY vote counts and EVERY vote is counted and if you are dead or illegal it will be thrown out and that every service man and woman be emailed their ballot 120 days prior to an election and they are downloaded and printed and verified recieved and then mailed back and COUNTED.

When you have completed that task I ask of you to hold hearings on Fannie and Freddie and no matter if some of your Sr. members are involved you find out WHY & HOW that EVER came to happen.

http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

All that government-backed loaning going on…

aesthete

snewb098

This is the key.
Congress(house term) is 2 years, president is 4 years BUT
Senate is 6 years!!!!
Vote all these folks out and our odds will be better.
There is no 2 party system anymore!
They only care about being re-elected so to reap
the benefits from lobbyists and special interests.
In the Constitution, we the people are supposed to be represented.
Here again are the senators up for grabs in 2010 and
all they care about is being re-elected..nothing more.
Blanche Lincoln (Arkansas)
Barbara Boxer (California)
Daniel Inouye (Hawaii)
Evan Bayh (Indiana)
Barbara Mikulski (Maryland)
Harry Reid (Nevada)
Chuck Schumer (New York)
Byron Dorgan (North Dakota)
Ron Wyden (Oregon)
Patrick Leahy (Vermont)
Russ Feingold (Wisconsin)
Richard Shelby (Alabama)
Lisa Murkowski (Alaska)
John McCain (Arizona)
Johnny Isakson (Georgia)
Mike Crapo (Idaho)
Chuck Grassley (Iowa)
Jim Bunning (Kentucky)
David Vitter (Louisiana)
Kit Bond (Missouri)
Judd Gregg (New Hampshire)
Richard Burr (North Carolina)
Tom Coburn (Oklahoma)
Arlen Specter (Pennsylvania)
Jim DeMint (South Carolina)
John Thune (South Dakota)
Bob Bennet (Utah)

avgamerican

That’s economics 101. It”s because of environmental changes-technology, competition, costs, resources,etc. However, government intrusion (Community reinvestment act-mortgage crisis) devastates an economy. The multiplier works in both directions, positive and negative. Obama goes beyond all this as he is a socialist. Pretty soon there will be no incentive to produce anything. Anyone with capital will take what’s left and shut down.

aesthete

In some economic circumstances, it can be said that layoffs and bankruptcies are a natural part of the market. What should be argued is that the current round of unemployment and the like are not normal, and in fact, were government-caused, or at least, government influenced. It does conservatives no favors when we argue that such unfortunate happenings are never healthy for the economy, though.

izoneguy

at least the business’s not controlled by the unions or rundown by the government. This cycle of Marxism will run long & deep. It will be a decade before we shake of the shackles of government – that is if we are able too. The socialists will end up with nothing and promising everything. Mexico & Canada are gearing up to take away as much business as they can from the US. The EU has slapped tariffs on bio-fuels imports from the US. Obama does not have a clue how fragile and inter-connected the system is. Paling around with dictators really won’t accomplish much. Soon the majority will realize that Obama was One Big *ss Mistake America….
Hope & Change my big fat *ss AMERICA.

izoneguy

How about a firing squad?

izoneguy

And Obama & friends will be in for a rude awakening.

http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

I’d settle for them losing elections and going down in history as the miserable failures they and their policies are. Get them where it hurts.

mom2oneson

izoneguy

I would rather they get the Carter treatment. I hope they live long enough to know what failures and shams they are. Once America comes back they will looked down as the great destroyers who almost killed America…..

gatorbait

I know , I know, it’s a dumb question and we all know the answer, but still wanted to ask anyway.*sigh*

http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

lenders to be enablers for un-credit worthy borrowers and loan officers and realtors that only got paid when another sale took place.

http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

the US was in recession approx 32% of the time

gatorbait

Ha! The infamous “black widow dress”, it suits her personality perfectly!

izoneguy

The Role of Government Affordable Housing Policy in
Creating the Global Financial Crisis of 2008

STAFF REPORT
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
111TH CONGRESS
COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT REFORM
JULY 7, 2009

http://republicans.oversight.house.gov/media/pdfs/20090707HousingCrisisReport.pdf

djemi

I don’t think the fact that he makes somewhere in the region of $400,000 a year makes a difference, everything is paid for by US anyway. I would say that given the Past (you my need to scroll down a ways) and the evidence to date Our first couple doesn’t give a flying P.H.U.Q about what it cost they’re minted by the title now, and I fear they will use it as an attension getter for many years after they leave.

http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

djemi

The Past teaches US that capital will always flow to where it is easiest for it to grow. Thus the need for the lowest TAXES poss, period.

izoneguy

I sold real estate for a few years 2004-2007
I had the opposite problem. I had plenty of buyers but most of them had horrible credit. In Texas the mortgage companies I dealt with did not do sub-prime. Our real estate company was very above board and did not deal with the shady characters. They were out there but I stayed away from them. It just dried up and I quit.

http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

itrytobenice

if you think I’d vote against Tom Coburn because of some crazy libertarian rant on RS. Get a clue or get out.

itrytobenice

I didn’t know you’d already been gacked.

wordsarepower

I have known a lot of people who look down on those of us who have known great need, accusing us of being losers, lazy, good-for-nothings…some in my very own family. It is really easy for them to say “It’ll be okay,” “Just hang in there…,” or, more often, they say nothing to your face, but…

I suppose those of us who have known/do know need can look at it this way: When really tough times do come, and they are coming, we who have been tried by fire will be better off than those who will fall from their ivory towers. The farther the fall, the greater the hurt.

penguin2

to not surpass economically it’s parents generation. Part of that is due to the lost economic opportunity in this country, a global economy that has shifted jobs overseas, and I would add one major variable: the desire to strive, achieve and work hard to improve one’s lot and get ahead. Our generation and our preceding generations all seem to have this drive inbred in them. It has been much harder to instill that same value system in our children. I’ll qualify that by not implying all.

IMHO, many young people of this next generation do not have a strong understanding of the difference between want and need. The smallest denial to them elicits frustration and annoyance. The sense of entitlement that has been promoted by society at large, keeps them from delaying gratification. To them, not having the latest gizmo or gadget is deprivation. Not having name brand clothes, or turning up their noses at generics in the grocery store, or rushing out to see the latest movie or get the newest DVD release. These seem like the big deal to them.

As you said Mom2, many don’t understand the difference between need and want. I would also add, when we teach and help them to learn the difference, they will be stronger for it. IMO.

janis

help them learn the difference, penguin2. Trying to tell my 24 year old son that much of what he is doing with his paycheck is wasteful and then trying to show him what would save him a lot of money is an exercise in futility. The only way I see him learning the hard lessons of economy is by just not having the money to burn.

In the name of full disclosure, I will be the first to say that I learned my lesson the hard way, too. Got into all kinds of stupid debt in my 20′s and vowed never to go there again if I ever got out of it. The upshot is that in my 50′s, I own no credit cards and no debt. Other than utility bills, we have no monthly payments. If we can’t pay cash for it, we don’t buy it. Yes, it does limit what we own, but it also limits what we have to maintain. And taking care of “stuff” is not how I want to spend my time anyway.

penguin2

I should have added that! I think raising children today is far more difficult than our parents generation. Not much was open for discussion if a parent said no… The easy availability of “stuff” surrounding kids today makes it that much harder. And then one could get into all the issues of society/government undermining families and parental authority. But that is a another discussion for another day.

As you say, they’ll have to learn the hard way.

johnt

and who decides that, tax dodging Democrats?
And when does government live within it’s means, constrained by the discipline of reduced deficits and closely targeted growth rates.

Increasingly ugly, liberal pigs telling free Americans what their place is. We have come to the point where these swine regard themselves as a kind of royalty, the filth of the earth and they think they are royalty.

http://uslibertyjournal.blogspot.com/ daezy

we just HAD to have, and forgive all his trespasses!

http://uslibertyjournal.blogspot.com/ daezy

we just HAD to have, and forgive all his trespasses!

RS

EDITOR OF REDSTATE

Tim Geithner to Laid Off Americans: Your getting laid off is “healthy”

COMMENTS

ALL

COMMENTS

POPULAR

#RSRH

PICK YOUR STATE & GET LOCAL