Here's a statement of the obvious: The opinions expressed here are those of the participants, not those of the Mutual Fund Observer. We cannot vouch for the accuracy or appropriateness of any of it, though we do encourage civility and good humor.
Support MFO
Donate through PayPal
Americans' Median Net Worth by Age -- How Do You Compare?
Dan: We are probably in agreement as to 'diminished work options' for the current college-age kids. And that is govt-policy driven, by the pols who serve the Establishment/Elite/Aristocracy of this country. Hillary, Bush 41, Obama, Bill Clinton, and Bush 43 served the interests of the American Aristocracy quite well. The dismantling of the American Middle Class was not by accident, it was by design.
But I am talking about spending, not income. -- Its been my life’s observation that most Americans tend to spend up to their income, or overspend, regardless of their income (unless they make obscene amounts of money). There is a desire among the majority of our people, no doubt fostered by corporate-marketing types, to consume today, at the expense of putting away money for a rainy day – even if one must borrow to do so. Parents splurge on their kids, husbands splurge on their wives, most everyone insists on “keeping up with the Joneses”. Bigger houses, bigger cars, more & endless indulgences. “Enough” is never enough. The financial impact of decisions is ignored – especially if such an analysis might cause one to defer immediate gratification.
So of course (maybe), the ‘median’ household has little savings. That is what happens when you choose to spend, borrow to spend, and choose not to save -- and make those choices so frequently that having little/no savings becomes who you are.
David: As for UBI, I recently heard an interesting saying that applies: “Politicians who chose to take from Peter in order to pay Paul, can ALWAYS count on the vote of Paul.”
I don't have much to contribute to this current exchange because I have not devoted much time or thought to UBI (Universal Basic Income). I perceived it as an idea well ahead of its time for anything approaching adoption in one of its many potential formats. It has had and will continue to have a challenging uphill climb. It was recently convincingly defeated in a Swiss referendum. Here is a Link that reports on the Swiss vote:
One of its early and persistent advocates is prolific author Charles Murray. I was most impressed with his coauthored book "The Bell Curve". He developes his arguments with great care and much data. Here is a Link to a recent article by him that was published in the WSJ.
It's a rather lengthy article but a worthwhile examination of the pros and cons of the UBI controversy. All UBI plans are complex. That must be so when redistributing national wealth. The issue is so complex that any implementations of UBI are likely to be in the distant future. I choose to not invest much time examining the many options since they will most assuredly and dramatically change with compromise a key element. Enjoy.
Indeed"The Bell Cirve" unleashed a firestorm of controversy when released. Actually, that was expected and one of the reasons why my wife and I purchased the book. It did not disappoint. It is still hotly debated, and Murray still vigorously defends it. Here is a Link to a relatively recent interview:
Controversy is not bad. When the subject matter discusses white/black performance scores, one should anticipate controversy-squared.
I haven't opened the book since 1995 so I dusted it off. It is a heavy weight study with an extensive Bibliography and 7 appendixes. My copy is a serious 845 pages long. I'm sure I didn't agree with all its findings or its methodology but I do remember being impressed with the work it reflected.
When I was in the military, I was assigned to score standard tests given to all recruits. It is not an overstatement to reflect that many answers from both whites and blacks were ridiculous. That's a sorry reflection of our educational system. Now that's a "glittering generality".
I don't plan to visit the tome again. There are more updated assessments of the topic if it attracts your interest.
They represent a viewpoint that is not shared by some other folks. The book was sure to be controversial given the subject matter. I'm sure some reviews were positive, but neither perspective dictates my understanding or appreciation of the work. I formulate my own assessment.
Mark Twain said something like "it is the difference of opinion that makes horse racing".
Given the investment thrust of this exchange, diverting the discussion to a review of The Bell Curve is too far off topic. It was an inconsequential offhand secondary comment.
Besides, diversity of opinion makes for both better horse racing and a vibrant equity marketplace. Diversity of opinion should be and is welcomed for any open mind or investment decision. It provides opportunities.
>> I did read the references you provided. ... I'm sure some reviews were positive, but neither perspective dictates my understanding or appreciation of the work. I formulate my own assessment.
And what was that? Surely you are not so 'one the one hand / on the other hand' in all of life. What did you think about the scholarly demolition of Murray's sources? Without any horses involved.
Comments
We are probably in agreement as to 'diminished work options' for the current college-age kids. And that is govt-policy driven, by the pols who serve the Establishment/Elite/Aristocracy of this country. Hillary, Bush 41, Obama, Bill Clinton, and Bush 43 served the interests of the American Aristocracy quite well. The dismantling of the American Middle Class was not by accident, it was by design.
But I am talking about spending, not income. -- Its been my life’s observation that most Americans tend to spend up to their income, or overspend, regardless of their income (unless they make obscene amounts of money). There is a desire among the majority of our people, no doubt fostered by corporate-marketing types, to consume today, at the expense of putting away money for a rainy day – even if one must borrow to do so. Parents splurge on their kids, husbands splurge on their wives, most everyone insists on “keeping up with the Joneses”. Bigger houses, bigger cars, more & endless indulgences. “Enough” is never enough. The financial impact of decisions is ignored – especially if such an analysis might cause one to defer immediate gratification.
So of course (maybe), the ‘median’ household has little savings. That is what happens when you choose to spend, borrow to spend, and choose not to save -- and make those choices so frequently that having little/no savings becomes who you are.
David:
As for UBI, I recently heard an interesting saying that applies: “Politicians who chose to take from Peter in order to pay Paul, can ALWAYS count on the vote of Paul.”
Or not.
>> The dismantling of the American Middle Class was not by accident, it was by design.
man
I don't have much to contribute to this current exchange because I have not devoted much time or thought to UBI (Universal Basic Income). I perceived it as an idea well ahead of its time for anything approaching adoption in one of its many potential formats. It has had and will continue to have a challenging uphill climb. It was recently convincingly defeated in a Swiss referendum. Here is a Link that reports on the Swiss vote:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/06/world/europe/switzerland-swiss-vote-basic-income.html
One of its early and persistent advocates is prolific author Charles Murray. I was most impressed with his coauthored book "The Bell Curve". He developes his arguments with great care and much data. Here is a Link to a recent article by him that was published in the WSJ.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/a-guaranteed-income-for-every-american-1464969586
It's a rather lengthy article but a worthwhile examination of the pros and cons of the UBI controversy. All UBI plans are complex. That must be so when redistributing national wealth. The issue is so complex that any implementations of UBI are likely to be in the distant future. I choose to not invest much time examining the many options since they will most assuredly and dramatically change with compromise a key element. Enjoy.
Best Wishes.
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/1995/02/02/the-bell-curve-and-its-sources-1/
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/1994/12/01/the-tainted-sources-of-the-bell-curve/
(paywalled, alas)
http://www.slate.com/articles/briefing/articles/1997/01/the_bell_curve_flattened.html
https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/extremist-files/individual/charles-murray
Indeed"The Bell Cirve" unleashed a firestorm of controversy when released. Actually, that was expected and one of the reasons why my wife and I purchased the book. It did not disappoint. It is still hotly debated, and Murray still vigorously defends it. Here is a Link to a relatively recent interview:
http://www.aei.org/publication/bell-curve-20-years-later-qa-charles-murray/
Controversy is not bad. When the subject matter discusses white/black performance scores, one should anticipate controversy-squared.
I haven't opened the book since 1995 so I dusted it off. It is a heavy weight study with an extensive Bibliography and 7 appendixes. My copy is a serious 845 pages long. I'm sure I didn't agree with all its findings or its methodology but I do remember being impressed with the work it reflected.
When I was in the military, I was assigned to score standard tests given to all recruits. It is not an overstatement to reflect that many answers from both whites and blacks were ridiculous. That's a sorry reflection of our educational system. Now that's a "glittering generality".
I don't plan to visit the tome again. There are more updated assessments of the topic if it attracts your interest.
Best Wishes.
Yes, I did read the references you provided.
They represent a viewpoint that is not shared by some other folks. The book was sure to be controversial given the subject matter. I'm sure some reviews were positive, but neither perspective dictates my understanding or appreciation of the work. I formulate my own assessment.
Mark Twain said something like "it is the difference of opinion that makes horse racing".
Given the investment thrust of this exchange, diverting the discussion to a review of The Bell Curve is too far off topic. It was an inconsequential offhand secondary comment.
Besides, diversity of opinion makes for both better horse racing and a vibrant equity marketplace. Diversity of opinion should be and is welcomed for any open mind or investment decision. It provides opportunities.
Best Wishes,
And what was that? Surely you are not so 'one the one hand / on the other hand' in all of life. What did you think about the scholarly demolition of Murray's sources? Without any horses involved.