Fed declares American dream dead

[+OverSword]

 

Quote

 

We all know what comedian George Carlin said about the American Dream: that you have to be asleep to believe it.

Well, now the Federal Reserve is agreeing with him.

In a new study published by the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, they admit the so-called American Dream is now largely an impossible goal for a majority of the country.

In other words, the American Dream is officially dead.

In the study, Stanford economist Raj Chetty measured, “the probability that a child born to parents in the bottom fifth of the income distribution makes the leap all the way to the top fifth of the income distribution.”

Chetty concluded that American children have a whopping 7.5% chance on average of actually achieving the American Dream in America.

Sure, a chance is still a chance, but that’s a really low chance.

As it turns out, Americans who actually want to achieve “the dream” would have a better chance of doing so in Canada (13.5%), Denmark (11.7%), or even the UK (9%) than here in the US.

So Americans would basically have almost twice the chances of achieving the American Dream in Canada, making it the Canadian Dream.

But 7.5% is just the average, mind you. That factors in super wealthy neighborhoods. When you get down into the major cities where the majority of people live, 7.5% looks more like a cruel, unachievable joke.

“In the city of Baltimore, you unfortunately have only a 3.5 percent chance of making that leap from the bottom fifth to the top fifth. That compares with 4.7 percent in D.C.”

 

Source

[StarMountainKid]

In the 1950's my dad was just a bookkeeper for the Borden milk company. On his salary he bought a nice house, raised two kids, wife didn't have to work, had nice cars, nice furniture, presents for Christmas, vacation once a year, bought everything the family needed for the good life.

Impossible today. I feel sorry for kids nowadays looking to achieve the same quality of life.

[aztek]

yea it was dead decades ago, i wonder when fed will admit war on drugs failed, in 2120?

 

oh wait, nvrm it's not those feds.

Edited March 16, 2017 by aztek

[StarMountainKid]

4 minutes ago, aztek said:

yea it was dead decades ago, i wonder when fed will admit war on drugs failed, in 2120?

It seems the drug culture is so pervasive, maybe it's the new American Dream.

[aztek]

Just now, StarMountainKid said:

It seems the drug culture is so pervasive, maybe it's the new American Dream.

the new american dream, is to become a rapper, gangster, or drug dealer, that seems to be hot things among most kids these days.

[Merc14]

and yet here is the head of the Fed, Janet Yellin, on 15 March:

http://www.nbc-2.com/story/34888781/newly-confident-janet-yellen-is-a-believer-in-the-us-economy?utm_source=jolt&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Jolt 3/16/2017&utm_term=Jolt

Janet Yellen has a message for Americans: It’s finally safe to “feel good” about the U.S. economy.

“We have confidence in the robustness of the economy and its resilience to shocks,” the Federal Reserve chief said during a press conference on Wednesday.

Yellen, the normally-cautious economist, sounded a far more confident and upbeat tone than in the past. She said the Fed’s decision to raise rates is a signal that the “economy is doing well” and “people can feel good” about the outlook.

The Fed chief is particularly optimistic about America’s ability to add back millions of jobs after the Great Recession.

“Many more people feel optimistic about their prospects in the labor market. There’s job security. We’re seeing more people who are feeling free to quit their jobs,” Yellen said.

Asked about the big rally on Wall Street, Yellen declined to voice any concern about market valuations. Instead, she mentioned how higher stock prices could lead to stronger consumer spending.

Yellen joins a chorus of CEOs, small business owners and everyday Americans who are feeling more confident these days.

 

Above article is sourced from CNN money so....

Edited March 16, 2017 by Merc14

[+and-then]

An appropriate statement, coming from the source of the crime.  

[Yamato]

3 hours ago, OverSword said:

 

Source

How ironic.  What were the upward mobility rates before Quantitative Easing?   Does the Fed have those numbers?

[Tatetopa]

3 hours ago, aztek said:

the new american dream, is to become a rapper, gangster, or drug dealer, that seems to be hot things among most kids these days.

Or an Internet entrepreneur, or part of a business startup, or a computer programmer.  Young people still do have aspirations.  I think what  Oversword's article is saying is that people already in the middle 3/5 of society might have a better chance of migrating into the top 1/5 than people in the bottom 1/5 do.  Course I am reading a little much into it maybe.

[Gromdor]

31 minutes ago, Tatetopa said:

Or an Internet entrepreneur, or part of a business startup, or a computer programmer.  Young people still do have aspirations.  I think what  Oversword's article is saying is that people already in the middle 3/5 of society might have a better chance of migrating into the top 1/5 than people in the bottom 1/5 do.  Course I am reading a little much into it maybe.

It does.  But odds are still better in Canada than here in the US.

[Merc14]

7 minutes ago, Gromdor said:

It does.  But odds are still better in Canada than here in the US.

I was in college during the Carter years with explosive inflation, a burgeoning USSR and a quaking democrat president named Carter who told Americans to wear sweaters rather than find more oiland learn to live with communism on a global scale because we couldn't win.  

Politically I was a democrat, because everyone in NYS was a democrat, but common sense screamed at me that this just doesn't work and then I found a whole new world of economics and common sense in conservatism.  And then Reagan came along .  The rest is history.  

Hardcore leftists still hate Reagan and that is all anyone needs to understand about hard left politics.   Success is irrelevant, that you are in power is all that matters.  The proof is your politics have NEVER worked.  Not ever, not anywhere and never will.  

Canada has absolutely no relevant defense, they depend on the country you are denigrating to protect them, so please,  give me a break when you extol their virtues.  I grew up 20 minutes from the border and consider it a second home but they are not viable without the US defending them.  Don't go yamato on us gram, you were doing well

[Frank Merton]

I credit Reagan with understanding the Soviet Union and engineering, without causing war, its dissolution, although of course what has happened since was out of his domain.  I also credit him with understanding that the debt itself is not such an evil and can be fine if the economy is growing.  He also was far more a social liberal than he pretended to be, if one goes by his actions.

Many Democrats today worry me that they would, out of an impulse to try to solve everybody's problems, over-regulate and over-spend and create welfare dependence.  Obama obviously over-regulated and in effect handed several states to the Republicans.

Still, that is much better than the racism and jingoism and all the other prejudices that now seem to predominate among Republicans, especially since there is hope at least among Democrats for moderation.

[Frank Merton]

I think the US is such now that it cannot grow faster than it is without suffering progressively increasing prices, which is why the Fed is beginning to tighten a little.  Good changes in tax law, greater technological advances, more people (immigration) and maybe some well thought out infrastructure improvements, could all serve to increase this rate without inflation, but present Executive policy seems oblivious.  The budget proposed is harmful, the tax changes will not help and may actually hurt, immigration is being discouraged (even legal -- people now think there are better places) and the infrastructure spending is too political and not productive.

[Gromdor]

15 hours ago, Merc14 said:

I was in college during the Carter years with explosive inflation, a burgeoning USSR and a quaking democrat president named Carter who told Americans to wear sweaters rather than find more oiland learn to live with communism on a global scale because we couldn't win.  

Politically I was a democrat, because everyone in NYS was a democrat, but common sense screamed at me that this just doesn't work and then I found a whole new world of economics and common sense in conservatism.  And then Reagan came along .  The rest is history.  

Hardcore leftists still hate Reagan and that is all anyone needs to understand about hard left politics.   Success is irrelevant, that you are in power is all that matters.  The proof is your politics have NEVER worked.  Not ever, not anywhere and never will.  

Canada has absolutely no relevant defense, they depend on the country you are denigrating to protect them, so please,  give me a break when you extol their virtues.  I grew up 20 minutes from the border and consider it a second home but they are not viable without the US defending them.  Don't go yamato on us gram, you were doing well

  Numbers aren't partisan.  The defense industry neither helps nor hampers the odds that an individual will "pull himself up from his bootstraps" and go "from rags to riches".  Let's face it- If America and Canada were casinos, the odds for "winning" at life are better in Canada.  The house is more stacked against the poor and more tilted to the rich here in the US.  It's little things like traffic tickets, health insurance, etc..... that does it.  It all adds up to keep the poor in the ghetto and shopping at Walmart.

 

  I think you might be taking offence at perhaps other political systems that you disagree with (like Canada's) demonstrating better success at certain things than the US.  No one is best at everything and nothing is perfect.  The whole idea of American Execeptionalism making the populace think that the US is best at everything is what is stopping Americans to strive and be better or even recognize that perhaps they are not as great at everything as they thought.

[aztek]

16 hours ago, Tatetopa said:

Or an Internet entrepreneur, or part of a business startup, or a computer programmer.  Young people still do have aspirations.  

i'm sure some do,   but those are not popular concepts in schools.

Edited March 17, 2017 by aztek

[Merc14]

19 minutes ago, Gromdor said:

  Numbers aren't partisan.  The defense industry neither helps nor hampers the odds that an individual will "pull himself up from his bootstraps" and go "from rags to riches".  Let's face it- If America and Canada were casinos, the odds for "winning" at life are better in Canada.  The house is more stacked against the poor and more tilted to the rich here in the US.  It's little things like traffic tickets, health insurance, etc..... that does it.  It all adds up to keep the poor in the ghetto and shopping at Walmart.

I mentioned the armed forces not from an economic perspective but from a national defense perspective in that Canada could not defend itself against many foes with the armed forces they now have (ranked 74th in size), they are dependent on America for self defense.  This dependency frees up a lot of money to indulge in socialist handouts such as national health care. 

19 minutes ago, Gromdor said:

 I think you might be taking offence at perhaps other political systems that you disagree with (like Canada's) demonstrating better success at certain things than the US.  No one is best at everything and nothing is perfect.  The whole idea of American Execeptionalism making the populace think that the US is best at everything is what is stopping Americans to strive and be better or even recognize that perhaps they are not as great at everything as they thought.

First of all Canada is not offensive to me, I simply think people need to recognize that they enjoy the benefit of a close relationship with a militarily powerful border nation.     Also, I NEVER said America does everything best, we clearly do not but we have one of the highest standard of livings in the world and comparing a country that supports 35 million people to a country that supports 320 million people is a bit difficult. 

American exceptionalism is not America being the best at everything it is America's unique history and difference from other countries in that our constitution gives power to the people rather than the nation.  I do agree that we are losing much of that exceptionalism but maybe getting rid of 1200 democrats in state and federal elective positions we can get some of it back despite the RINOs  insistence on playing democrat-lite (let's vote them out next).

[Gromdor]

Canada could get away with two mounties and a beaver for their national defense and still be fine.  It doesn't need the US.

Heck the US could cut back to next to nothing and no foreign troops would ever reach our shore.

The whole needing the US to protect them is rather moot.  Noone wants to invade or attack Canada.  Heck, I even remember when it was popular for Americans to pretend to be Canadians overseas just to get better service: http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/01/travel/fake-canadians-canada-day-travel/index.html

[aztek]

not if Russia would decide to invade them,  i mean there is a reason why they joined nato.

[Merc14]

30 minutes ago, Gromdor said:

Canada could get away with two mounties and a beaver for their national defense and still be fine.  It doesn't need the US.

Heck the US could cut back to next to nothing and no foreign troops would ever reach our shore.

The whole needing the US to protect them is rather moot.  Noone wants to invade or attack Canada.  Heck, I even remember when it was popular for Americans to pretend to be Canadians overseas just to get better service: http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/01/travel/fake-canadians-canada-day-travel/index.html

A military is much more than defending your shores from invasion, it is protecting your maritime interests your natural resources and offshore assets.  Canada's rich fishing grounds and offshore oil reserves needs to be protected from Russian and Chinese encroachment and their share of emerging Arctic resources is now challenged by both countries.  America during its early existence built a Navy to do exactly what you say a military is for, protect its borders and that lasted until the Barbary pirates started stealing our merchant ships and enslaving our merchant seamen and the royal navy began stopping our ships and Americans into their service.  At that point congress realized that a world involved nation cannot be isolationist and built our first six frigates to project power overseas and protect our merchant fleet.  

[Likely Guy]

Just sticking my Canadian nose in here.

We're 38th in size of population and our military is ranked 22nd.

[aztek]

your military is not even in 29 list, thou it places armies by amount of personnel. 

http://www.worldatlas.com/articles/29-largest-armies-in-the-world.html

[Likely Guy]

15 minutes ago, aztek said:

your military is not even in 29 list, thou it places armies by amount of personnel. 

http://www.worldatlas.com/articles/29-largest-armies-in-the-world.html

http://www.globalfirepower.com/country-military-strength-detail.asp?country_id=canada

NOTES:
The values showcased above are all considered for the final GFP ranking recognized as the "Power Index" (abbrv: "PwrIndx"). PwrIndx scores are judged against a perfect value of "0.0000" which is realistically unattainable due to the number of factors considered per country. Balance is the key - a large, strong fighting force across land, sea and air backed by a resilient economy and defensible territory along with an efficient infrastructure - such qualities are those used to round out a particular nation's total fighting strength on paper; it is not enough to field 10 million men or 20,000 tanks or lead the world in oil production.

[DarkHunter]

Got to be careful with using globalfirepower.com, it is a really good resource but it's important to mention that they look at only quantity and not quality in their calculations.  While they look at different factors they seem to consider all equipment in a category as the same so  for example an F-22, an F-16, and an F-4 are all counted as the same even though there is drastic differences between the three.

But to be more on topic, Canada does definitely rely on America for defense like most of NATO.  America and the UK are the only two nation's in NATO that are really able to project power in any meaningful way and even then the UK is pretty limited in power projection ability.

[Likely Guy]

And in the same breath North Korea is a Super Power.

Of course Canada relies on the US, and they rely on us to maintain border control. NORAD, and all that.

When did we become America's Achilles' heel?

Edited March 18, 2017 by Likely Guy

[Gingitsune]

But let's be honest here, invasion from who? Greenland and St-Pierre et Miquelon are no threat at all, neither are Iceland or Bermuda. Further then that there are European countries which have no taste to invade anyone. On the West, Russia would have to go through Alaska first, Japan has no interest in invading Canada and has no real army to begin with, the Koreas aren't interested either. China isn't even that powerful yet. The only real threat to Canada is the United States.

If Alaska was Canadian, the dynamic would be different regarding Asian powers, but it's American for now. Europe and Greenland shield Canada from the East, Alaska shield the country from the West and continental USA shield the country from any Latin America invasion. Plus, the Arctic Sea make any invasion from the North too complicated to even contemplate. Blame geography.

If we were in the positions of top army spenders like South Sudan, Jordan or Algeria, surrounded by enemies, things would be different, but we're not. I mean as a percentage of GDP, of course.

As for saving money on army budget allowing more found for social spending, health and education are provincial spending, defense is federal spending, they are not even on the same budget.