Jump to content
ragerunner

US Economy: News & Discussion

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Foraker said:

 

Maybe.  But I doubt it.  The costs to teach are fixed -- you need professors to teach (unless you only sell canned pre-recorded Kahn Academy lectures and electronic testing and grading, in which case you will struggle to differentiate yourself from other schools).  (If we had universal health insurance, that would help reduce the overhead burden on schools.)

 

We have a glut of colleges and universities right now, but prices are not falling.  Why?  Maybe competition is pushing schools to over-improve their facilities and to provide additional services and amenities than in the past.  Also, the reputation of a school still matters; Harvard will never need to lower its price.  I do think that some of the smaller private schools are struggling and if enrollment drops suddenly (2023?) we could see a wave of college closings.  Even then I don't see how reducing supply is going to lead to tuition reductions of 60%.

 

I agree that no one is going to be dismissing college debt by fiat.  But no one is suggesting it.  There are ways to reduce student loan debt, however, such as by offsetting taxes or through direct government payments.  The Fed could print money to buy out some amount of student loan debt, say for public employees like teachers and firefighters.  I would argue that that would spur the economy enough to counter the inflationary effect if we limited it to people earning less than a  median income.  Congress will have the final say, however, so who knows what plans they will all agree to.

 

I've heard that out-of-state and foreign students (both undergrads and grad students) are what are keeping many schools afloat.   While there may be universities using undergrads to subsidize grad programs, I don't think that is the case for our state schools.  I've seen advertisements for foreign students from Case's and Cleveland-Marshall's  law schools, so I would expect those students to be of particular value to those schools.

 

You didn't listen to the Democratic debates.  "Wiping out" student debt is exactly what they promised, not the government paying it off.  

 

Also, you are correct in that foreign students are the only students paying "rack price" and they are also subsidizing the other students.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Graduate school professors are often much more expensive than their undergraduate counterparts and the programs have different endowments than the undergraduate school and their various colleges. There's a lot of people that are filthy rich with a Bachelor's from the school that don't care about the graduate programs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎9‎/‎18‎/‎2019 at 4:38 PM, GISguy said:

 

I've never contributed to this side of UO, but this definitely struck a chord. While it was nice to have spending money from my pizza shop job, I lost a lot of friends over my schedule and not being able to go out on the weekends and just be a kid. Looking back on it, I made maybe $115-130 per week? Sure, I was able to pay for clothes and to eat out at denny's (lol) and pay to repair my '92 Tempo, 

 

Yeah I spent a huge amount of time working in college to earn a pretty inconsequential amount of money.  For 2.5 school years I worked 4 nights per week a sub shop for, I think, $5.50/hr.  I remember that my weekly checks were roughly $80.  I then worked full-time during the summers at a warehouse and made about $3,000.  According to my SS statements, I made about $8,000 those years.  For one summer I lived off loans and just partied.  It was awesome.  I also took a huge pay cut by quitting the restaurant and working for the college newspaper 40+ hours per week, but it was a fantastic experience.  

 

I recently visited one of my much-younger brothers, who lives with his rich girlfriend.  Her parents pay for everything - the apartment, the BMW in the garage.  She graduated from a Top 20 school with no debt and sustains herself in a very expensive city by being an Airbnb maid while she waits for her big break into the biz.    

 

It's just absolutely crazy what an advantage people from wealthy families have.  The degree is incidental for them; they're still getting the money just for having the right last name.  They can dawdle around NYC or LA or SF for years until they get their break.  Meanwhile, hordes of much more talented people are drowning in student loan debt and working 2 jobs to pay the rent on a closet in Queens.  

  • Like 2
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, jmecklenborg said:

 

Yeah I spent a huge amount of time working in college to earn a pretty inconsequential amount of money.  For 2.5 school years I worked 4 nights per week a sub shop for, I think, $5.50/hr.  I remember that my weekly checks were roughly $80.  I then worked full-time during the summers at a warehouse and made about $3,000.  According to my SS statements, I made about $8,000 those years.  For one summer I lived off loans and just partied.  It was awesome.  I also took a huge pay cut by quitting the restaurant and working for the college newspaper 40+ hours per week, but it was a fantastic experience.  

 

I recently visited one of my much-younger brothers, who lives with his rich girlfriend.  Her parents pay for everything - the apartment, the BMW in the garage.  She graduated from a Top 20 school with no debt and sustains herself in a very expensive city by being an Airbnb maid while she waits for her big break into the biz.    

 

It's just absolutely crazy what an advantage people from wealthy families have.  The degree is incidental for them; they're still getting the money just for having the right last name.  They can dawdle around NYC or LA or SF for years until they get their break.  Meanwhile, hordes of much more talented people are drowning in student loan debt and working 2 jobs to pay the rent on a closet in Queens.  

 

But my conservative friends tell me that everyone has an equal opportunity and taxing estates is mean.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, jmecklenborg said:

 

Yeah I spent a huge amount of time working in college to earn a pretty inconsequential amount of money.  For 2.5 school years I worked 4 nights per week a sub shop for, I think, $5.50/hr.  I remember that my weekly checks were roughly $80.  I then worked full-time during the summers at a warehouse and made about $3,000.  According to my SS statements, I made about $8,000 those years.  For one summer I lived off loans and just partied.  It was awesome.  I also took a huge pay cut by quitting the restaurant and working for the college newspaper 40+ hours per week, but it was a fantastic experience.  

 

I recently visited one of my much-younger brothers, who lives with his rich girlfriend.  Her parents pay for everything - the apartment, the BMW in the garage.  She graduated from a Top 20 school with no debt and sustains herself in a very expensive city by being an Airbnb maid while she waits for her big break into the biz.    

 

It's just absolutely crazy what an advantage people from wealthy families have.  The degree is incidental for them; they're still getting the money just for having the right last name.  They can dawdle around NYC or LA or SF for years until they get their break.  Meanwhile, hordes of much more talented people are drowning in student loan debt and working 2 jobs to pay the rent on a closet in Queens.  

 

Wealthy people use their money to work for them.  My father was brought up middle class. He moved up the ladder, my brother and I we're raised upper middle class.  I worked hard my entire life and worked my way up the latter.  Today,  I am blessed to be outright rich.  But I planned and reevaluated my financial wealth. I think its inaccurate to lump all "wealthy" people into one category.  I want what is best for my nephews/nieces and whippersnapper.  So if I can give them a leg up, I will.  My nephew attended Columbia, but lived with me.  I wanted to make sure all he had to do is worry about school, nothing else.  If that is a crime, I'm guilty.  I purchased an apartment in Chicago, my niece and cousins daughter live there.  They had a situation with their old landlord and so that they don't have to worry about paying a shady landlord, they can pay me.  They both worked hard internships prior to graduating and both were offered jobs in Chicago after graduating.  If I have the means to help, why shouldn't I?  Hell I can't take it with me.  I've always shown them what they need to do for their financial security.  I have to change some estate planning because I want to leave the whippersnapper something, in the event I won't be able to adopt him.  I'm not a fan of "hand outs" but passing on family financial status with stipulations is fine. 

 

Talent comes in different packages.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, freefourur said:

 

But my conservative friends tell me that everyone has an equal opportunity and taxing estates is mean.

 

The thing is if you add up the raw money that a wealthy family can throw at their kids between the ages of 1 and 30 as opposed to an ordinary middle class family like mine, it's like $50k versus $550k.  It's not even close.   It's literally a $500k difference for many of these people, and that's before the inheritance.  The tuition.  The car.  The wedding.  Then the wedding gift.  Then the down payment on a $800k house.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, jmecklenborg said:

 

The thing is if you add up the raw money that a wealthy family can throw at their kids between the ages of 1 and 30 as opposed to an ordinary middle class family like mine, it's like $50k versus $550k.  It's not even close.   It's literally a $500k difference for many of these people, and that's before the inheritance.  The tuition.  The car.  The wedding.  Then the wedding gift.  Then the down payment on a $800k house.  

 

Is this a bad thing?

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, freefourur said:

^ it's neither a good thing nor a bad thing.  It's just a fact

 

But it seems TO ME there is a bias against people who are well off.

 

I've read some thread, over the years here, and some seem to believe that they are entitled to things without working for them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, MyTwoSense said:

 

But it seems TO ME there is a bias against people who are well off.

 

I've read some thread, over the years here, and some seem to believe that they are entitled to things without working for them.

Many people work very hard and have nothing to show for it because of wage stagnation and decline of labor unions.  To say that people should get things without working for them is a strawman.  

 

BTW, how hard did Donnie Jr. work for his money?

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, freefourur said:

Many people work very hard and have nothing to show for it because of wage stagnation and decline of labor unions.  To say that people should get things without working for them is a strawman.  

 

BTW, how hard did Donnie Jr. work for his money?

My grand father was one of those people.  Not to mention being black, he so that was another barrier. 

 

Giving people things, just to do so, is one thing.  Estate planning and being named in someone will is completely different.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, MyTwoSense said:

My grand father was one of those people.  Not to mention being black, he so that was another barrier. 

 

Giving people things, just to do so, is one thing.  Estate planning and being named in someone will is completely different.

Look, I don't have any problem with peopke having money and and generational wealth,  But it is a fact that some people have more opportunities because of the luck of birth. It is not a judgment I am making.  It's just an observation.

 

My dad had a 5th grade education and worked hard. We didn't have a lot but we had enough.  My wife and I are very financially secure and our children will have many opportunities that I never had.  This does not men they are evil or bad. They are just privileged and lucky.  It's just a fact.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, freefourur said:

Look, I don't have any problem with peopke having money and and generational wealth,  But it is a fact that some people have more opportunities because of the luck of birth. It is not a judgment I am making.  It's just an observation.

 

My dad had a 5th grade education and worked hard. We didn't have a lot but we had enough.  My wife and I are very financially secure and our children will have many opportunities that I never had.  This does not men they are evil or bad. They are just privileged and lucky.  It's just a fact.

 

Isn't that what this is all about?  😉  Generational financial stability is a marathon and one hell of a hill to climb.  Also, there are plenty of people that are wealthy and squander it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, MyTwoSense said:

 

Isn't that what this is all about?  😉  Generational financial stability is a marathon and one hell of a hill to climb.  Also, there are plenty of people that are wealthy and squander it.

I think we generally agree. My initial point is that opportunity is not equal. Some people are born on third base and others are not given at chance to bat. Government should always strive to increase opportunity for the latter.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the '80s my family was quite rich. By the year 2000, we weren't. Things started off easy, but now they are very hard -- and that's without kids or student loan debt. Maybe I wasn't born into a situation that fostered compassion for those worse off than me but I sure as hell have it now.

Edited by GCrites80s
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MyTwoSense said:

they don't have to worry about paying a shady landlord

 

Bad living situations/bad roommates put hair on your chest.  

 

This goofball rolling the sushi was my landlord for five years:

 

So he was my landlord even though he was 5+ years younger than me.  How did he get the house at age 20~?  Who knows.  Actually he got two houses and managed two more that his sister owned.  The four houses were identical and sat in a row on the same side of the block.  His drug habit got so expensive that he lost his two houses in 2009 or 2010.  A squatter was living in one of them for at least a year until the cops showed up one night and smoked her out.  Then a guy bought the houses out of foreclosure for $20k apiece.  I was living in one of the houses owned by the sister so I didn't have to move.  There is a lot more to this story, but I'll hold back.  

 

Anyway, there have been a few moments in my life when I felt like I was "falling behind my peers".  One was having to rent a room in a house owned by a guy who was significantly younger than me.  Another was the time when I bought a house and the guy who owned the 20-unit building across the street came over and introduced himself.  He was about 10 years younger than me.  He somehow bought a $700k building in 2013 back when NOBODY could get a commercial loan.  So dude is set for life because his dad, uncle, or somebody bought that apartment building for him.  

 

It's really fun when people who are 5-10 years younger than you talk down to you because you didn't inherit money and they did.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jmecklenborg said:

 

Bad living situations/bad roommates put hair on your chest.  

 

This goofball rolling the sushi was my landlord for five years:

 

So he was my landlord even though he was 5+ years younger than me.  How did he get the house at age 20~?  Who knows.  Actually he got two houses and managed two more that his sister owned.  The four houses were identical and sat in a row on the same side of the block.  His drug habit got so expensive that he lost his two houses in 2009 or 2010.  A squatter was living in one of them for at least a year until the cops showed up one night and smoked her out.  Then a guy bought the houses out of foreclosure for $20k apiece.  I was living in one of the houses owned by the sister so I didn't have to move.  There is a lot more to this story, but I'll hold back.  

 

Anyway, there have been a few moments in my life when I felt like I was "falling behind my peers".  One was having to rent a room in a house owned by a guy who was significantly younger than me.  Another was the time when I bought a house and the guy who owned the 20-unit building across the street came over and introduced himself.  He was about 10 years younger than me.  He somehow bought a $700k building in 2013 back when NOBODY could get a commercial loan.  So dude is set for life because his dad, uncle, or somebody bought that apartment building for him.  

 

It's really fun when people who are 5-10 years younger than you talk down to you because you didn't inherit money and they did.  

 

You never know how he bought.  I bought my apartment for nothing, and remodeled.  Also, how you're raised, is a big influence as well. 

 

I appreciate all my grand parents did for equal rights in the 1960s, although they were denied many things.  I have a keen appreciation for a dollar.  Today, my grandparents are thousands of years old, and although my father and his siblings are all alive, I will do whatever to make my grandparents lives easier.  They will never want for anything.   I''m fostering a child that had nothing, and i mean, nothing.  so I can understand and appreciate inequalities in wealth in many forms.  

 

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Terdolph said:

You didn't listen to the Democratic debates.  "Wiping out" student debt is exactly what they promised, not the government paying it off. 

 

Actually, I did listen to the Democratic debates.  I heard the same words as you, but apparently I understood them differently.  As you noted, a President cannot unilaterally issue an executive order canceling privately-owned debt.  That means that "wiping out" student loan debt will require legislation of some sort.  Can we agree on that point?

 

So the candidates' intent is clear, to find a way for the government to ease the population's student loan debt burden.  The exact mechanism employed, whether it is the government buying and retiring the debt or writing checks to those with student loans or something else, will require Congressional action. 

 

Surely you're not taking every candidate's promises literally, are you?

 

Let's remember that despite candidate Trump's promises, coal mining is not making a comeback in the US.

Quote

More than any other recent president, Donald Trump came to office promising to revive coal and restore mining jobs.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-08-21/trump-promised-to-bring-back-coal-it-s-declining-again

 

Quote

The federal government says it received no bids during a competitive lease sale for coal underneath about 430 acres of Ohio’s Wayne National Forest.

https://www.nbc4i.com/news/state-news/no-bidders-for-coal-leases-inside-ohios-wayne-national-forest/

 

But the intent -- to increase reliance on US-based rather than foreign-originated natural resources -- surely was supported by many and helped candidate Trump win the election.  (and helped to support state initiatives like Ohio's plan to subsidize two coal plants and two nuclear plants.)  And while Trump failed to deliver on the literal campaign promises, I don't think the Republican party is surprised or disappointed that  the Trump administration has reduced the number of mine safety inspectors and relaxed Clean Air and Clean Water rules to try to help the industry. 

 

Similarly,  Democratic candidates' promises of "wiping out" student loan debt surely will not lead to "elimination of all student loan debt," but likely will lead to new legislation and new regulations that will ease the student loan debt burden to at least some degree for at least some of the population.  (In contrast, my understanding is that most Republicans think that government has no role to play in student loan debt.)

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, MyTwoSense said:

 

You never know how he bought. 

 

 

He bought two houses at age 18 or 19.  His sister bought the two houses right next door.  So there was almost certainly a gift from a family member.  Must be nice. 

 

boohoo.png.c1d6efc98e5720c4797a6e2dd116aec5.png

 

Aaaannnd in November of 2008 so much of the rent had gone up his nose we get to do this:

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 


"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities."-Voltaire

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still maintain Trump initiated economic anxiety the minute he took office, even among his voters who took a minute to "see what he was going to do". The minute that election happened people just stopped spending except for Buzz the Overpaid Boomer who went on a spree of F-150s, Side By Side UTVs, and other camo-colored and flat black stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes they did! Even Buzz is spent out as dealer lots fill with unneeded vehicles. I almost wonder if the GM strike is actually good for dealers, many of whom that wanted to clear their backlog of stock.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any drop in manufacturing could hit legacy cities in the Midwest harder than most others.

 

Cleveland's economic numbers show the Manufacturing Sector employment retracting, beginning in May of this year.

 

https://www.bls.gov/eag/eag.oh_cleveland_msa.htm

 

Cleveland's overall regional economy hasn't been affected as of yet (thank God) as it's no longer centered on Manufacturing, and is still growing year-over-year.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wework is on the brink of collapse.  Just another scam in tech's clothing:

http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/10/marketing-expert-scott-galloway-on-wework-and-adam-neumann.html

 

The last two paragraphs of the interview are quite sad.  Apparently much of the staff took relatively low wages in exchange for equity.  Now the company is virtually worthless.  

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wework leases 45 million sq feet around the world, a volume of office space equivalent to downtown Philadelphia . 

 

So all of those landlords are suddenly going to have to scramble for tenants to fill spaces that were all just renovated into coworking spaces.  It's a disaster.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, GCrites80s said:

At least nobody is going to trust "tech" anymore... at least for a while

 

I bought and read an old copy (like 1971) of Benjamin Graham's book 10~ years ago, just as the economy was tanking.  He has all of these examples in there where pension fund managers -- not just one, but many across the nation -- made the same mistakes throughout the 1960s (especially the collapse of the Pennsylvania Railroad) because they were all listening to each other instead of analyzing fundamentals on their own and adhering to sound principals.  This was right when mutual funds were starting so he doesn't talk about them much but the same problem exists with fund managers and venture capitalists.  They get so caught up in the emotion and glamour that they can't just chill out and do what they were taught in business school.  

 

My brother is in a top MBA program.  He's going to be north of $100k in debt when he gets out.  I read his syllabi for fun while using his computer and couldn't believe how basic it all was.  It was the exact same crap covered by pop business books.  But unfortunately it was all tilted toward VC-type stuff (one lecture during one class was titled "institutional investors vs. venture capitalists".  I suppose that the business schools are forced to do this because that's what their customers prospective students want.  

 

 

Edited by jmecklenborg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/2/2019 at 7:08 AM, Foraker said:

 

Actually, I did listen to the Democratic debates.  I heard the same words as you, but apparently I understood them differently.  As you noted, a President cannot unilaterally issue an executive order canceling privately-owned debt.  That means that "wiping out" student loan debt will require legislation of some sort.  Can we agree on that point?

 

So the candidates' intent is clear, to find a way for the government to ease the population's student loan debt burden.  The exact mechanism employed, whether it is the government buying and retiring the debt or writing checks to those with student loans or something else, will require Congressional action. 

 

Surely you're not taking every candidate's promises literally, are you?

 

Let's remember that despite candidate Trump's promises, coal mining is not making a comeback in the US.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-08-21/trump-promised-to-bring-back-coal-it-s-declining-again

 

https://www.nbc4i.com/news/state-news/no-bidders-for-coal-leases-inside-ohios-wayne-national-forest/

 

But the intent -- to increase reliance on US-based rather than foreign-originated natural resources -- surely was supported by many and helped candidate Trump win the election.  (and helped to support state initiatives like Ohio's plan to subsidize two coal plants and two nuclear plants.)  And while Trump failed to deliver on the literal campaign promises, I don't think the Republican party is surprised or disappointed that  the Trump administration has reduced the number of mine safety inspectors and relaxed Clean Air and Clean Water rules to try to help the industry. 

 

Similarly,  Democratic candidates' promises of "wiping out" student loan debt surely will not lead to "elimination of all student loan debt," but likely will lead to new legislation and new regulations that will ease the student loan debt burden to at least some degree for at least some of the population.  (In contrast, my understanding is that most Republicans think that government has no role to play in student loan debt.)

 

 

We are pretty much in agreement.  To make it short, I don't think the Democrats will do anything at all about student loans and were simply making promises that they know can't be fufilled-pure pandering.  I also think that Trump pandered to W. Virginia etc. with the coal mining thing.  It's not because of environmental issues really, it's just that natural gas is so cheap coal can't compete.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Terdolph said:

We are pretty much in agreement.  To make it short, I don't think the Democrats will do anything at all about student loans and were simply making promises that they know can't be fufilled-pure pandering.  I also think that Trump pandered to W. Virginia etc. with the coal mining thing.  It's not because of environmental issues really, it's just that natural gas is so cheap coal can't compete.

 

If you think that the Democrats will do nothing at all about student loans and it's only pandering, then we aren't in agreement.  They will do something, just as Trump's administration made it easier to mine coal, the Democrats will do something to lesson the burden of student loan debt, they just won't make current student loans disappear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that the Democrats will do nothing about the student loans.

No matter how easy Trump makes it to mine coal, as long as fracking exists, natural gas will be cheaper. 

End of story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The coal companies know that and even announced it to the Trumpies over and over. They wouldn't listen to the professionals because Trump goosed their belief system afterburners.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 


"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities."-Voltaire

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/gdp-report-3q-2019-advance-estimate-economy-203535589.html

 

Q3 GDP growth slowed to 1.9% (and I'd put money on this getting revised down in the coming months like it usually does).

 

Quote

Nonresidential private investment turned negative for the first time since 2016 in the second quarter and contracted again during the third quarter, this time by 3.0%, or the most since the fourth quarter of 2015.

 

Within this, structures investment posted the steepest decline of 15.3%, with economists having anticipated that factors including weaker oil patch and factory spending would weigh on this measure.

 

“The capex numbers were awful,” Ian Shepherdson, chief economist for Pantheon Macroeconomics, wrote in an email Wednesday. “Investment in intellectual property strengthened, rising by a solid 6.6%, but it’s less volatile than structures and equipment spending, which appear to have fallen victim to slower earnings growth and the uncertainty caused by the trade war.”

 


Very Stable Genius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

September 2018:

Dow high was 26,743.50 (up 2.7% since).

Nasdaq high was 8010.04 (up 5.28% since).

S&P high was 2913.98 (up 5.6% since).

In other words, growth has been somewhat moderate. It's just the crazy dip last winter has distorted this year's gains a bit.

And that's good. Conservative growth is a better indicator than crazy growth (after which steep declines may follow).

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...