1960
In 1960 I made $1.10 an hour. Paid $.19 to $.24 a gallon for gas. I wrenched at a gas station so boss took my gas out of my pay. I rode a Harley 165 that got 100 mpg. Thought I was rich. In 1965 after the Air force I started with FPL making $1.90 an hour. In 1968 I bought my 1st house for $14.999. 2 bedroom 2 bath. I worryed about paying my $107 mortgage payment. I think I had less to worry about then. Bob…
Kevin don’t confuse average with median. The “average” income is affected more by Bill Gates than the “median” - he’s still just one person.
The 2003 median income in Florida for a family of 4 (this is from census figures adjusted for 2006 dollars) was somewhere around $65,000 - which puts me well below median in declared income.
(Data taken from http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/income/medincsizeandstate.html)
I am no economics expert, but the problem I see in the US is that with our political system the way it is, all politicians end up making promises to everyone, saying that “we can all be above average” …
HUH?
By definition, half of us have to be below average, no?
here john this goes with what you are saying not one of the politicians ever due one thing they say there going to do
WARNING VERY STRONG LANGUAGE
http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=CDnxIfjcSIc
My opinion of the way things are is because we have gave big business alot of breaks to move out of the country which for you clinton fans it was he who pushed it with the nafta bill or however you say it. What the USA needs is quit giving are money away and our jobs. After standing on the steet for 5 mounths on strike I swore I would never vote for a Republican President again but to tell you the truth we got more support from the Rep then the Dem. So that being said anybody that thinks that Hilery Clinton will do anything for the working guy you need to get back under that rock.
We currently have free trade agreements with many communist countries that control the value of their dollar versus our own dollar.
while philosophically for ‘Free Trade’, i have made the point myself in off-line debates that ‘Free Trade’ with a slave economy ( communist dictatorship ) is a contradiction in terms and physically impossible.
in my opinion, normalization of relations with China was by far the most destructive thing Nixon / Kissinger ever did to this country. you’ll notice that that is the only thing the news media ever speaks positively about him though. they still drool over Kissinger.
Todd, I have to respectfully disagree with one of your points. We have not priced ourselves out of the global labor market. We are trying to compete in a game we cant win.
not true. we aren’t ‘competing’ successfully with Mexico, Ireland, India, Malaysia, etc. non of these countries are Communist dictatorships.
China is a symptom, not the problem. they’re just the best at exploiting our problem.
we gave every other country on the planet a knife and then hog-tied ourselves. now we wonder why they’re cutting slices off. duh. because we’re fat and they’re not.
They can live on 50 dollars a week, because of the cost of living … So what if a the price of a hamburger goes up.
you contradict yourself here. either the COL matters or it does not. given the ease with which 3rd world countries sell products to us i would suggest that it matters a great deal.
you’re also ignoring the impact that minimum wage laws have on artificially inflating the price of our own labor. which is why the US is so irresistable to illegal aliens. they can work ‘off the books’ for half of the legal minimum and still make 10x as much as they would at home.
don’t even get started on the whole ‘free health care from the hospital emergency room’ thing.
The “average” income is affected more by Bill Gates than the “median” - he’s still just one person.
the only problem is, at his height Gates was equivalent to 2 million households earning $50,000. he’s still worth 1 million $50,000 households today.
wait, i said that wrong. i don’t have a problem with Gates making that much money. i had a problem when Greenspan said that he would exclude executive compensation when calculating wage inflation. that was patently absurd and a large part of the reason why we’ve been having these speculation bubbles rolling around to various parts of the economy for the last 20 years. when you’ve got a spare $10 billion sitting in your pocket it’s hard to restrain your spending on cars/art/real estate/etc. and why should you?
for you clinton fans it was he who pushed it with the nafta bill or however you say it.
while i have no fondness for Clinton it must be admitted that the result would have been no different with a Republican. but then, i don’t have a problem with free trade between nominally free economies.
NAFTA had no effect on our trade deficit with China. being the “North American Free Trade Agreement” and all.
anybody watch the state of the union address last night
Nope, I quit watching it a couple years ago pretty much. Might have watched it a little last year, just don’t remember. It’s a joke, with a “president” manipulating words trying to say things people want to hear. And it’s interupted every few seconds by applause and standing ovations. If last night was different, tell me so.
no same old same old
he was blaming congress and the house for not passing bills etc
begging the works
same same
the lady speaker of the house did more eye rolling and stare downs to some one
half the room stood the other half didn’t
he was blaming congress and the house for not passing bills etc
but, er, they didn’t pass any bills to speak of. well, at least not much beyond extending funding for the Iraq war. so much for majority Dem control of both houses, eh? 
if Congress doesn’t pass laws, there’s nothing on the Presidents desk for him to sign. or veto, as the case may be. it’s kind of the way our government is designed to work.
if Congress doesn’t pass laws, there’s nothing on the Presidents desk for him to sign. or veto, as the case may be. it’s kind of the way our government is designed to work.
Todd makes a great point. We tend to blame the president for most of our problems because he is in the spotlight. (He’s also quick to take credit, regardless of party.) However, it is actually the fault of the congress, representatives, and executive branch not working together. It seems like it been this way for the majority of my adult life. Politics have gotten so partisan that nothing beneficial gets done. Deals are made, pork barrel projects are put into every bill, and the only winners are the politicians, lobbyists, and large corporations. This is another reason I think the 2 party system is the wrong system to have. It is better than the one party system but why can’t our representatives actually do what we want, not what the party leaders tell them to do. People say we can vote them out if we don’t like what they do. That’s true but the replacement will do, and has done, the same thing. (vote with their party) It doesn’t matter what party it is. And if the president and majority of congress are on opposite sides of the aisle, nothing tends to get done. Take this last 1+ year as an example.
yep
todd the president has to pass bills around the loop to get back to his desk to sign as well
and nothing ever gets done
anything they get there hands on or noses in does the opposite it is designed to do
there pass history shows that
recommended reading and quiz
“The Creature from Jekyll Island” a second look at the federal reserve by G. Edward Griffin (no relation to pee wee)
Interesting stuff only 600 pages.
2 part quiz (advanced)
You run 5 laps at osw with the following times. (Boneman driving)
Lap 1 20 sec
2 21
3 22
4 23
5 44
What is your average time and what is the median?
What is the significance (or lack thereof) of the number 71?
Have the dems found a way to blow a 100 lap lead???
This is fun
That’s the name of the book I read. I couldn’t think of it. It is enlightening.
Quiz:
Average is 26 seconds. Median is 22 I believe.
Or the median may be what Boneman ran over on lap 4 to blow his tire, giving him a 44 lap time on his last lap.
No idea what 71 is unless it’s the number Dave Marcis ran for years and he’s not running it now.
If the dems nominate Hilary I think they will give up any advantage. I may be wrong though. I have some very good democratic friends from Massachusetts that I harass from time to time. Quite influential in the democratic party actually. I tell them they need to nominate someone that can win. It seems like they haven’t been able to do that since Clinton was president. I can’t see Hilary being any different but I can imagine Obama doing it. Time will tell.
todd the president has to pass bills around the loop to get back to his desk to sign as well
no.
the President has nothing to do with writing or initiating laws. the only thing he can ‘officially’ do is veto something he doesn’t like. then the prospective law goes back to Congress and they try to override his veto with a 2/3rds majority vote.
the President can influence the bill writing process somewhat by saying “I’d like such and such to be put into law” or “I’ma veto that if you put it on my desk” but he has no other official lawmaking powers.
Winger, you sound alright, through and through.
But wouldn’t it be kind-of weird, if another Clinton would be Prez.
I mean:
Old Bush—4 years—
B. Clinton–8 years—
G.W. Bush-8 years—
H. Clinton–4 years—
Almost a 1/4 Century with only 2 families that could lead this Country.
Two (2) Families, for the past 1/4 Century: is that all the better that there is to lead the Nation?
C’mon, there has to more out there, that the general public will elect.
Two Families for the past 1/4 Century?
This Nation is only a tad-bit over 200 years old.
Youngsters we are.
Well I am sorry, but 5 laps gets me a little fatiqued.
Here is a guess on the number series. Including the 71, it would make a curve that looks like the taxes paid by Americans. 39% of all taxes are paid by 1% of the population, while a huge percentage pays nothing, gets the benefits and does the complaining.
[quote=Todd McCreary;4336]todd the president has to pass bills around the loop to get back to his desk to sign as well
no.
the President has nothing to do with writing or initiating laws. the only thing he can ‘officially’ do is veto something he doesn’t like. then the prospective law goes back to Congress and they try to override his veto with a 2/3rds majority vote.
the President can influence the bill writing process somewhat by saying “I’d like such and such to be put into law” or “I’ma veto that if you put it on my desk” but he has no other official lawmaking powers.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veto#United_States[/quote]
opps ok my bad
i thought he could make up bills and budget plans
so back to what i really thought he is just a puppet hu
wo
i thought he could make up bills and budget plans
he can use the “bully pulpit” to campaign for specific policies with Congressmen.
IF his party controls Congress AND he presents them with a list of specific budgeting items he has a better than even chance of getting what he asked for.
plus a whole bunch of pork that he didn’t but that happens with everything.
in the current situation, he’s kind of along for the ride on bill and budget writing except for his veto power. this is hardly negligible. maybe if the Dhimmicrats had bothered passing anything you’d have gotten a chance to see him use it.
there are plenty of valid reasons to complain about Bush, you don’t need to tar him with the Dems f-ups.
I’ve always loved bush but it’s way harder to find these days.
Forgive me if I wax nostolgic.
Larry