Economy in American heartland deteriorating

>economy in American heartland deteriorating
>extremism on the rise
>College costs keep rising with no signs of stopping
>housing prices insane
>wages stagnant
>entering another stagflation

>all the news talks about is how trump ate two scoops of ice cream

how did we get here? What led here?

and yes I'm posting this on Veeky Forums because I want actual answers as to what policies led to this shit hole today

I know for a fact that FDR is responsible for siphoning away a huge chunk of our income in SS tax and income tax. LBJ is responsible for siphoning away another chunk in welfare

Nixon is responsible for opening trade with China which opened a cheap pool of labor to ship manufacturing base to and also he got rid of the gold standard

Reagan is responsible for muh trickle down and believing neoconservative bullshit

Those 4 presidents seemed to fuck our shit up the most

FDR and LBJ are responsible for taking away a huge portion of your paycheck for scam government programs and Nixon and Reagan for deregulation of shit that shouldn't be deregulated

Also maybe Bill Clinton for causing the housing bubble by forcing banks to sell houses to people who aren't financially sound

Thoughts? And other presidential fuck ups I'm missing? 25 year rule etc

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=fHm7P4TA97U&feature=youtu.be
paulcraigroberts.org/2016/02/18/expanded-version-the-us-economy-has-not-recovered-and-will-not-recover/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

Nah user you're right those 4 presidents did more damage than anyone else

Also LBJ for changing immigration policy to let non-whites in. Why did he do that? I'll never understand why anyone supported the hart Keller act. Nobody wanted it.

It's like all the white countries in the 60's said fuck it and changed their immigration policies for no good reason

was going to give a serious reply but your obnoxious spacing convinced me not to. you come off like an adhd spastic jumping from thought to thought.

I'm not sure what leveraged buyouts are or why they were so bad in the 80s, but I think it's that.

>giving a fuck

The jews control the media. They are trying to distract us from the real problems

the last good president we had in the past 30 years was Jimmy Carter only because he didn't fucking do anything. we don't need presidents who do "big things"

presidents trying to do "big things" is what fucked this country over

>FDR: muh new deal, muh SS, muh enjoy your income tax
>Nixon: muh EPA, muh gold standard, muh china
>LBJ: muh vietnam and muh great society
>Raegan: muh raegonomics
>obongo: muh healthcare

literally the ONLY fucking time presidents tried to do something "big"' and it didn't fuck this country over in the longrun was when Eisenwhower created the interstate highway system. LITERALLY every other time a president tried to do something it backfired.

as far as i'm concerned presidents doing fucking nothing is a good thing

this reminds me of that yuri bezenov video where he sayd the media will try and distract you with trivialities that don't matter in the slightest

every time I see some statistic about how college and housing costs are out of control and wages haven't risen since 2009 theres nothing on tv about it just memes about transgender bicycle racks

The intersection of globalization and Reagonomics. Also ineffective overly obtuse government wastefully spending.

>when raegan tried to save us from the commies but was too stupid to realize that neoconservative ideology was started by literal communists turned """conservative"""

how did a man who spent his entire life hating commies not see that obvious trojan horse for what it was

>Not a mention to the guy who invaded a country for no reason

>25 yr rule
bush was shit too and he was nothing other than an israeli pawn to get the US trillions in debt to topple governments israel was too weak to ever topple themselves

It's Reddit spacing

>>economy in American heartland deteriorating

The economy keeps growing.

>>wages stagnant

Meme.
youtube.com/watch?v=fHm7P4TA97U&feature=youtu.be

>The economy keeps growing.
maybe on the coasts. the midwest never recovered from the recession

paulcraigroberts.org/2016/02/18/expanded-version-the-us-economy-has-not-recovered-and-will-not-recover/

>The US economy died when middle class jobs were offshored and when the financial system was deregulated.

pretty much this desu

Reagonomics actually works and improved the US economy gdp by 5% a year. Once globalism favored by Clinton occured the economy slowed to a standstill with wages dropping yet wealth increased. Because the wealthy just took their dollars and sent them overseas replacing factory jobs with service jobs that can't support a family.

This is true but there is no mythical reasoning for it. It's just capitalism. The advent of the internet and Asia's growth has made it so they can now easily compete with America who up until recently was more or less thriving in their own bubble. Globalism, capitalism, whatever you want to call it...otherwise localized jobs have the means to be available on a global stage. There really is no solution other than innovating new technologies or jobs that can only be done domestically

It's all the fault of protestants. None of this would have happened if Luther hadn't been born

>It's just capitalism
No, it's immoral crony capitalism. We had responsible capitalism until neoconservatives ruined shit

What exactly is immoral or 'crony' about buying your goods or services at the best value possible?

Why should a company pay $2,000 to manufacture a steel frame when they could get it manufactured overseas for significantly less?

>>The US economy died when middle class jobs were offshored

Literally never happened.

>all the news talks about is how trump ate two scoops of ice cream

You obviously don't actually read the news.

Reeeee stop contradicting the narrative!

and yet...late 40s-70s was the biggest growth years in history
this is teleological reasoning at its worst, by all standards we live in the best conditions in human history yet you're insisting we're stagnating (of course there's great qualitifactions as the third world and america's poor don't have it that easy)

Doesn't matter if it's cheaper to produce via slave labor and ruining the environment overseas. That graph doesn't answer why the US is a steel importer now, rather than exporter. Which is globalism.

...

...

The news report what people will tune into. People love learning about Trump. They want to hear how Trump is fucking up and how evil Trump is. You may have heard the term "outrage culture" where people are more interested in being outraged than actually learning anything. They see a Trump article, get outraged, feel a rush, and go about their day.

That's what news is. Trump Trump Trump. All day, because that's what people want to see. When people read the news they want to feel outraged and superior.

Lol I bet you also buy American and drink Budweiser

>Doesn't matter if it's cheaper to produce via slave labor

There is no slave labor. People in China, Vietnam, Bangladesh, and other nations have benefitted massively from trade with the United States.

It's also only cheaper for certain goods. The value of US manufacturing still far exceeds the value of what we import. And even if we shut down all trade with China tomorrow, it wouldn't do anything to create more jobs, because while Chinese labor is cheaper than automation for these tasks, automation is still much cheaper than American labor.

The only way to re-create those factory jobs is to start destroying all our machines like Luddites. The days of spoiled brats with no valuable education or skills whatsoever getting an 80k/year job right out of high school due to a temporary economic boom are over.

>That graph doesn't answer why the US is a steel importer now, rather than exporter.

Because we use more steel you silly mong.

What are you trying to show?

also important 35% if all journalists are diagnosed psychopaths, which will affect the reporting by a wide margin

[citation needed]

>economy in American heartland deteriorating
good. fuck them. they believe in 'muh bootstraps, muh boi', they can live in the hills relying on meager food-stamps while States that invest their tax cheddar in education and infrastructure prosper.
>extremism is on the rise
not really since the election.
>College costs keep rising with no signs of stopping
this is only a bad thing for current students after they graduate. The whole tuition system is easily reversible, and shouldn't be a huge worry

>muh SS and income tax
which has saved many of the eldery and disabled from utter destitution, has generate revenue that allowed the US to come out of WW2 as a victor and a global hegemony, which resulted in our economic and financial dominance. you better say 'thank-you'.
>LBJ is responsible for siphoning away another chunk in welfare
nigger please. Welfare in the US is a meme and isn't compatible to the rest of the developed world. The only free-cash payment you get here--outside of social security disability practically always requires you to prove it in front of a judge and social worker--is TANF, and Bill Clinton gutted it pretty well, and it of itself is pretty limited and gives dismal aid, and is only available to families with children.
>Nixon is responsible for opening trade with China which opened a cheap pool of labor to ship manufacturing base to and also he got rid of the gold standard
that's not a bad thing. American manufacturers should've shifted to crafting more specialized and only high quality products like the Germans, instead of being kikes who want to undercut their workers then come crying like autistic chimps about the Chinamen underscoring them. Also, the gold-standard is retarded in a globalized world. Credit allows you to strengthen and expand your economy far better than having it tied to gold or whatever. we enjoy a shit ton of more benefits from that than with gold.

No, the solution is stop doing jobs overseas when they import our raw materials so that industries. An freely pollute and cause health epidemics like the smog that is strangling Chinese cities.

US consumers do not benefit from the cheaper/same price products, because jobs are lost in the process creating a dependent underclass that vote for benefits which have to be taxed from the wealthy who avoid paying those taxes whenever possible. It also means less is spent by the government on local infastructure, since less of the local governments tax base comes from the people who use those services. Instead the tax money is centered on the wealthy 1% who are now comparatively richer than at the height of the robber barons.

The economy has recovered from pneumonia but is still not healthy.

pay has stagnated while debts are raising (not shown on the graph)

Oh yeah another issue is the mass importation of Mexicans for manual labor. Instead of paying better or innovating to provide better working conditions you just bring in millions of poor people to short circuit the pattern of economic activity.

We are living in a period of the most freedom and prosperity in history.

would it surprise you?

>pay has stagnated

But that's not what that shows?

what about this?

>you just bring in millions of poor people to short circuit the pattern of economic activity

People traveling to better work opportunities IS the "pattern of economic activity." This country was not built by people who stayed in their home towns.

Also this only accounts to 2007. The wealthiest had a huge windfall through the stock market after it recovered.

>Historical discussions should be focused on past events, and not their contemporary consequences.
Actually read the sticky you stupid motherfucker.

People started winning at capitalism so much the failed capitalists started thinking the game has been rigged against them because they lost.

Its literally people blaming the left for themselves failing at their own right-wing economics they voted into place with right-wing politicians who did exactly what they said they would do.

Not the economic cycle of the US

So everyone for richer. And this is a problem because we didn't get equally richer? That's not rational.

>Not the economic cycle of the US

Of course it is.

They aren't being worked like slaves, their families cost more than they bring in by their labour. Mexicans are just a tool to place Americans in debt slavery by depressing the growth of wages.

>They aren't being worked like slaves,

What?

>their families cost more than they bring in by their labour.

Absolutely false.

>Mexicans are just a tool to place Americans in debt slavery by depressing the growth of wages.

Do you listen to yourself? Whose dastardly plan is this? If I hire a Mexican immigrant it's because he can do a job better and/or cheaper. Same reasons I would hire anyone.

shill

They pay sales tax and buy food and stuff, they contribute to the economy but get no benefits from citizenship.

Basically if your job is working for a corporation for in the service industry, your money partly comes from illegal immigrants buying things.

Less people = less things being purchased = less jobs = worse off economy = less pay and/or less work for the average person.

>this is only a bad thing for current students after they graduate. The whole tuition system is easily reversible, and shouldn't be a huge worry

Okay Mr. Genius. Go ahead and fix the tuition bubble.

>people hop the border
>they have children in the United States
>children in the United States have birthright citizenship
>said children can now go to any ER in the country and be legally guaranteed medical attention
>said children are now allowed to enroll in schools
>said children now eligible for Medicare, TANF, EBT, and all the other social services
>said children are statistically highly likely to consume more in social services than they produce in labor
>???????
>declining standards of living

why isn't it rational? for a time we did and then we stopped, why would it be wrong to loathe that unless there was a good reason for it? besides the household debt is increasing steadily.

i don't think its the journalists themselves. all they do it follow the guidelines set by their corporate masters.

Immigrant children still buy stuff, people eating food is the vary base of the economy.

Whats worse than consuming more in social services than they produce in labor is not existing to consume at all.

Every poor person eating a big mac employs fast food workers, every fast food joint employs a manager. Fast food employs truck drivers to deliver the food, farmers who grow the food, corporate people who manage the thing, these corporate people buy things themselves and supports the industries that employ those people.

The middle-class cannot support itself, it needs people to sell stuff to. The upper-class and lower-class can exist without the middle-class though. That's the issue we are facing today. 'The middle class: why do we need one still?' and 'How do we keep small businesses alive in the face of Walmart?'

>One person worked like a slave
>Their kids now get a free education
>They have access to quality emergency medical
>Government provides benefits for those children
They are the reason why education and other welfare benefits are so shit. Along with African American population. They are a financial blackhole of crime and welfare.
Consumption from a minium wage job? Little to none, because they require benefits from the government to keep from all starving, while others turn to crime which is another malus. Instead of importing third Worlders to do a minimum wage job let the market decide what pay is nessecary to get an American to mow a lawn.

The fundamental problem is that mixing a welfare state and mass immigration does not work particularly well.

The types of societies that develop welfare states are extremely specialized societies with a very high degree of education and labor productivity.

The types of people that have immigrated en masse to the United States and Western Europe are typically people who are unable to integrate into the economy of their host society.

These people will generally fail to integrate into the much more challenging labor market of a post-industrial economy, and will always, in aggregate, consume more in government services than they produce in taxable revenue.

If the US can not survive without a dirt poor underclass, when did this start?

Because it certainly wasn't the case in the fifties. During those days, wages for unskilled labor were high enough that a man could support a college education, a house, a stay at home mother, and children, by working at a job that required nothing more than a high school diploma.

but the journalists readily accepts doing the biddings of their masters and all it imply.
pic sort of related, not psychopathy but this is how journalists behave

In the 1950s, all of Europe was smashed to bits from WW2 and still recovering and the rest of the world was industrialized. The people of the 50s were selling to the rest of the world. Before WW2, most everyone was a farmer or some kind of small town person.

We are literally trapped in an unwinnable situation at the moment, economically. Stop immigration or not, doesn't matter.

*Correction, the rest of the world was industrialized I meant to say.

Stop immigration and establishing good trade relations not based on political cronyism to line the pockets if the wealthy.

that's literally all journalists ever, though. if you refuse to follow the guidelines set down by management you get fired. journalists are not the independent thinkers they want you to believe they are. that image also suits the corporations because you think the journalists themselves are in control when they're really marionettes

But the rest of the world hasn't experienced the same skyrocketing wealth inequality the United States has.

In places like Sweden, high development and automation hasn't meant high wealth inequality, and the working class has not collapsed.

As best I can figure, America's economic problems are caused primarily by rent-seeking and the failure of neoclassical economics, but illegal immigration has lowered standards of living by increasing tax burdens, lowering wages, and depriving the native population of access to public services.

yes, and a executioner will get fired and jailed if he don't follow the guidelines still earning your daily dollar executing people or slandering requires a certain sort of people.

This wasn't always true.

In 1970, if you wanted to control a majority of the media in the US, you'd have to control more than a thousand different companies.

Today it's three.

Cable has straight fucked us up.

You also have to consider the costs of emergency medical services and crime prevention need that is much higher by immigrants of swarthy socio economic backgrounds

executioner is almost a nonexistent job, so I think that's a bad analogy. tens of thousands are journalists for a living on the other hand. all jobs that require you to work for someone else is going to force you to compromise your principles. journalists are no different from any other job in this regard, but people believe it because they've been forcefed the idea of journalistic "integrity" and "objectivity"

Once upon a time, there were so many different media outlets that it was actually difficult to be completely full of shit and stay afloat in the media.

If there are a thousand different newspapers, or affiliate stations, or so on, your reputation is the only thing that keeps you in business.

you're right, but that was actually an exceptional period in journalism it seems to me. there are just as many examples in history of here and other countries where a few news corporations dominated the market.

I don't really see how social security is bad, when you're 70 and you can only work as a greeter at walmart, the money from that isn't enough to pay for things like medication and so on and so forth.

>But the rest of the world hasn't experienced the same skyrocketing wealth inequality the United States has.

Mate, the min wage in Canada is like 8 dollars an hour and their houses cost over a million bucks on average without mortage. America's houses are only 100-250k on average if you don't live in California or parts of New England. America has it pretty easy compared to most of the other first world when it comes to paying for domestics imo

I'm quietly praying that the internet brings those days back.

The current trends do not look promising. Most normies get their media from the Facebook newsfeed.

Sometimes that means actual newspapers, which is an improvement over cable news.

But a lot of the time it's shitrags like Salon or Breitbart that are designed to conform to the readers existing beliefs.

With capitalism, you need more people each generation to sell stuff to, like a pyramid scheme. So you would have to either increase the native birthrates if you stop immigration, or force another country to buy stuff from you (and not from anyone else, including themselves), mercantilism style.

Otherwise, jobs vanish. And with automation that rate will accelerate, self driving vehicles if it works out may just 'JUST' huge segments of the population, there is a reason that I read that some people in the tech industry have become preppers because they are afraid their work will lead to them getting lynched by mobs of unemployed people.

>But the rest of the world hasn't experienced the same skyrocketing wealth inequality the United States has.

A lot of the dangers can be mitigated by two evil words, 'wealth redistribution'. Huge segments of the population in the US is averse to taxes and programs.

Take a look at how the latifundia estates ruined the small time roman farmer in the late republic period. And how the Grachus brothers proposed land redistribution, but what ended up happening was 'the dole', huge cities of unemployed farmers, the Marian reforms, and the the destruction of the republic and rise of the Caesars. It was the Walmart VS mom and pop store issue of the day and it radically changed Rome.

yes but besides what i wrote here, the other problem is that the nature of media has been changing since digitalization started eating into the profits of traditional newspapers, thereby forcing smaller firms out of business and favoring bigger consolidated firms. i'm not sure how you can solve the problem. breaking monopolies wouldn't mean smaller firms would suddenly make a profit, right?

The basic issue with Social Security is that it assumes constant population growth and industrial societies don't have that any more.

So you end up with a multi-trillion dollar Ponzi scheme.

There were once federal laws that mandated that equal time be given to both sides of a political issue, and that banned broadcasters from exceeding a given percentage of the market in any one geographical area.

Reagan scrapped the first one, Clinton scrapped the second one.

>how did we get here? What led here?

Keynesian economics coupled with marxism and socialism

Pls fucking go

It doesn't work when you have an aging population and stagnating birthrates. More people become dependent on social security every year, it's an ever increasing burden, yet the rate at which people enter the work force to support social security is not keeping pace. There's a population imbalance. As baby boomers gradually age out of the work force and into retirement it's going to put an immense strain on a much poorer age demographic.

Constant population growth in unsustainable in the long term. Economies will go through booms and busts. When the elderly die a boom will occur and the economy will swing up and births will increase. As that population bubble grays the economy will slow down. Importing third Worlders is a short run solution to a long run problem, meaning not a solution at all.

yeah, definitely. like many things before the neoliberal era, the government laid down a set of guidelines which, in retrospect, were restricted economic liberties to the benefit of political liberty (i.e. greater political consensus, an educated citizenry). Even the government made music stations broadcast public news every hour for the edification of the public. Once these things got retracted it became a race to the bottom shitshow

Could also reduce medical costs by making it a competitive industry rather than operating as a near Monopoly over things like health insurance where companies cannot compete across state lines and the perverse use of medical patents

>unsustainable

That's the key word in all of this.

>le trump state line meme
states have had their own healthcare regulatory agencies long before obamacare was a thing, so you couldn't do that. medicare and medicaid is also a lot less expensive per person than private healthcare so it'd make more sense to expand that rather than encourage the growth of more insurance companies that replicate the same bureaucratic hierarchies and corporate structures, thereby creating more positions that need to be paid, which lowers everyone's profit margins.

when will this stupid meme die?

>boogeyman x 3

It's not a stupid meme. People needlessly double spacing every sentence does come from the way Reddit comment formatting works.

>Here's all these reasons why medical industry isn't competitive
>Let's expand a non competetive service

I just don't think Medicare Medicaid are that good of a service. It provides incentives for people to not take care of themselves working themselves to death and stress eating. That is only my opinion though, I have to well supported facts for that claim.

DESU it's the quick reply box being deceptively small.

>With capitalism, you need more people each generation to sell stuff to, like a pyramid scheme.

This is what socialists actually believe.

>saying muh is somehow an argument

>said children are statistically highly likely to consume more in social services than they produce in labor

Let's see these stats!

>Let's expand a non competitive service
because applying markets to healthcare is retarded. healthcare costs were rising in the decade before obamacare as healthcare bureaucracies got bigger, hospital administrations got bigger and the higher ups on both of these corporate ladders cut as much costs, jacking up costs and pocketing the profit for themselves, all to the detriment of the doctors and nurses who actually spent years of training to treat patients.
>I just don't think Medicare Medicaid are that good of a service.
they're pretty good as far as i know.

>It provides incentives for people to not take care of themselves working themselves to death and stress eating.
That's a symptom of something else, not what you believe to be the alleged "sloth" encouraged by free healthcare. Why would I want to be any less healthy just because I have to pay less for an emergency procedure or medication necessary to treat some congenital condition I have?

And why are people working themselves to death? Because the cost of living increases while wages have stagnated, among other things. Stress eating is not just a matter of lacking discipline but also the inaccessibility of cheap, healthy food and the existence of cheap extremely unhealthy alternatives like soft drinks, sweets and fast food, most of which contains corn and sugar products heavily subsidized by government handouts to rich farmers.

cont.
Also forgot to mention that government allows corporate food industries to market unhealthy products on children's tv channels and the sugar and corn syrups industry's funding phony research and huge campaigns to deflect the fact their products are unhealthy

you should look up why corporations had to resort to payment plans in the 1920s. they were running out of consumers to market to so they made it look affordable to a lot of people by establishing installment plans. guess what happened when people couldn't defaulted when the depression struck?

leverged buyouts, also called corporate raiding, also called hedge funds are thus:
realise a companies assets and land are worth more than the compaines profits in the short term.
keep in mind some of these comapanies were making money and viable.
Buy out the company with debt, fire everyone, now keep in mind again some of these comapines were always profitable. sell the land and buildings for a quick buck.
these deals are only good for the 5 people in the room making the deal, they build nothing, create no wealth. They take wealth and turn in into money for wallstreet (understand the difference between money and wealth, wealth is not zerosum, money is, wealth is created and produces something, money doesn't).
Sometimes it involves pretending to imrpove the company while resturcting it to take your debt when you spin it off.
did you know blockbuster was never unprofitable? it was bought out with debt then spun off with that debt and it's profits were not enoigh to service the debt. it would have been fine on it's own.
Or take k-mart, which was run as a personal investment scam for the hedge fund owner that bought it, he wasn't really interested in growing it, fixing it's supply chain or anything (creating wealth) he just wanted to bleed it dry for dividinds for as long as possible, then dump it after he had personally made money from stock ownership and leave his company with the problem

yes you foolish slave goyim, you will never win. never take up arms against your masters!

oh wait, you have... 50 million guns? and hundreds of millions of people? oy vey, all these millions is making me want to demand reparations!

>*makes degenerate art, music and cinema to appease the carnal pleasures of the goyim*
>*creates central banking to rob people of their wealth on national, and even global scale*
>*establishes israel, making it an ethnostate for jews but push for migration in western countries*

that'll keep them busy. now, to where's my talmud...

All social ills and problems could be solved by:
>Distributing land to all citizens with children, guaranteeing a positive internal growth rate and widely distributed means of production

>Getting rid of red tape everywhere for small businesses, third world countries have thriving small businesses everywhere because they don't require all these health codes and licenses, and people aren't dying left and right despite what government shills would like you to think

>FUCKING TRAINS EVERYWHERE. Cars are dying out and just syphon money out of the economy, trains are modern, fast, phallic, and generally fun to ride

>Extrajudicial executions of drug dealers. Drug addictions are a huge problem in rural communities and the general permissive attitude towards it only contributes to the problem, despite what liberals say. I'm all for the legalization of pot, opium, mushrooms, acid, coca leaves, and even cocaine as long as its regulated, but when some biker gets caught with a pound of heroin they shouldn't get a slap on the wrist, they should get a shotgun to the mouth

>Free higher education. The dunces on the right wing like to say that this will only put the price of higher eduction on the backs of the rich. The truth is, it will put the price of higher education on the lazy and the stupid, and fuck those people.

>Tax breaks or benifits for people who stay in the communities they're born/grow up in. I'm not one of those people, but brain/talent drain is a very serious issue that no one talks about. It's no wonder that rural communities are failing when every generation the people who can leave for a city and economic opprotunities while the ones who can't sit around in their home town wallowing in misery and drinking

>Ban factory farms. Not only are they cruel to the animals, they're also too efficient. Why use ten people to produce enough food to feed a village when traditionally it would have employed most of the village.

>More industrialization, stop raw exports