Total Posts:9|Showing Posts:1-9
Jump to topic:

Explain This Dilemma From Both Perspectives

GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/13/2013 12:31:25 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
"Normal is getting dressed in clothes that you buy for work and driving through traffic in a car that you are still paying for - in order to get to the job you need to pay for the clothes and the car, and the house you leave vacant all day so you can afford to live in it."

-- Ellen Goodman

Is this a problem to either Libertarians or Socialists?

What is the solution from both a Libertarian and Socialist perspective?
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/13/2013 12:54:12 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
It's a problem for people who spend beyond their means and go into debt.

Unless you stop people from having access to credit and the ability to consume, then no political system will be able to compensate for people who spend more than they make.
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/13/2013 12:58:24 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 11/13/2013 12:54:12 PM, Wnope wrote:
It's a problem for people who spend beyond their means and go into debt.

Unless you stop people from having access to credit and the ability to consume, then no political system will be able to compensate for people who spend more than they make.

Agree. A LOT of people go into layaway on just about everything. Given that creditors seem to be able to make a healthy profit, the system is most likely not going to change. One of the most credible sources of profit is stupidity.
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/13/2013 1:14:48 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 11/13/2013 12:54:12 PM, Wnope wrote:
It's a problem for people who spend beyond their means and go into debt.

Unless you stop people from having access to credit and the ability to consume, then no political system will be able to compensate for people who spend more than they make.

I have an exceptional credit score (top 10% in my demographic) and yet I am still driving work to pay for the car I use to get there and pay for the apt that is left vacant and pay for the clothes used to wear at work.

A middle class family that is financially responsible still has to pay off 5-10 year car loans and 30 year mortgages and live paycheck to paycheck.

It's like we're chasing our own tail.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/13/2013 1:47:36 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 11/13/2013 12:58:24 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 11/13/2013 12:54:12 PM, Wnope wrote:
It's a problem for people who spend beyond their means and go into debt.

Unless you stop people from having access to credit and the ability to consume, then no political system will be able to compensate for people who spend more than they make.

Agree. A LOT of people go into layaway on just about everything. Given that creditors seem to be able to make a healthy profit, the system is most likely not going to change. One of the most credible sources of profit is stupidity.

What do you know about layaway ya rich f*ck.
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/13/2013 1:49:03 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Communism is the answer, Geo. Either that or like in Fight Club you shoot yourself in the neck and kill yourself through the head by doing that somehow and then everything is all right.

Wait. Sex. Sex is the answer.
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/13/2013 2:14:06 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 11/13/2013 1:14:48 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 11/13/2013 12:54:12 PM, Wnope wrote:
It's a problem for people who spend beyond their means and go into debt.

Unless you stop people from having access to credit and the ability to consume, then no political system will be able to compensate for people who spend more than they make.

I have an exceptional credit score (top 10% in my demographic) and yet I am still driving work to pay for the car I use to get there and pay for the apt that is left vacant and pay for the clothes used to wear at work.

A middle class family that is financially responsible still has to pay off 5-10 year car loans and 30 year mortgages and live paycheck to paycheck.

It's like we're chasing our own tail.

I never said stopping access to credit is a GOOD idea.

It'd be the equivalent of economic armagedon for America, a complete freeze in capital transfer. Nearly what happened in 2008.

People who are able to balance their credit with their income should absolutely take out loans if it benefits them. Nearly every "rags to riches" story I've heard that wasn't straight innovation came from men and women who mortgage property or take out huge bank loans.

The biggest problem for people who are good with credit is due not to politics but to the nature of reality.

Namely, we can't predict the future. If you take loan x out with income y, and you're fired the next year, what was once within your means no longer is.

For people with good credit, job security is really all that is needed.

But for people without good credit (and they deserve the rating), job security will only encourage over-consumption.
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/13/2013 2:21:41 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 11/13/2013 1:14:48 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 11/13/2013 12:54:12 PM, Wnope wrote:
It's a problem for people who spend beyond their means and go into debt.

Unless you stop people from having access to credit and the ability to consume, then no political system will be able to compensate for people who spend more than they make.

I have an exceptional credit score (top 10% in my demographic) and yet I am still driving work to pay for the car I use to get there and pay for the apt that is left vacant and pay for the clothes used to wear at work.

A middle class family that is financially responsible still has to pay off 5-10 year car loans and 30 year mortgages and live paycheck to paycheck.

It's like we're chasing our own tail.

A "middle class family", which lets say earns mean income of around $100,000 per year (2 spouses both working at mean income for America), living in a 2 bedroom apartment in San Francisco (the most expensive city in America to live in) with, let's say, a Camry with a 5 year car loan, will more than likely be able to save enough to put 2 kids through college and save for a healthy retirement.

Let's break down expenses:

Rent: $3000/month
Food/household expenses: $1000/month
Car/Gas/Insurance/Maintenance: $ 1000/month
Entertainment: $500/month
Child expenses: $500/month
Kids' college fund: $1000/month
Retirement: $3000/month ($1500/spouse)

Saving $500/month for each kid for 15 years will result in over $100,000 per kid. Saving $1500/month for 30 years for retirement will result in around $750k per spouse by age 50 (assuming working from 20-50 years old), which is more than 3x the national average:
http://www.dailyfinance.com...

$6,000/year for kid-related stuff is more than enough to pay for a decent summer camp experience for each kid, a new bike, piano lessons, etc...

If they use the same car for 15 years, that's 10 years during which they can slash their car expenses by about half. Also, there's nothing stopping them from getting a used car.

$1000/month on food is rather generous and accounts for several weekend restaurant trips.

---

This is in the most expensive city in America at what is below average income for the city. There are many communities in America where rent for a 2 bedroom house is under $1500/month, and where a middle class family could be expected to earn more than $50k per spouse.

This took me about 20 minutes to come up with, because I care about personal finance. Most Americans never spend the time to take control of their financial future, so they have no financial future.
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
Citrakayah
Posts: 1,500
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/13/2013 2:22:20 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 11/13/2013 12:31:25 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
"Normal is getting dressed in clothes that you buy for work and driving through traffic in a car that you are still paying for - in order to get to the job you need to pay for the clothes and the car, and the house you leave vacant all day so you can afford to live in it."

-- Ellen Goodman

Is this a problem to either Libertarians or Socialists?

What is the solution from both a Libertarian and Socialist perspective?

Well, most socialists, I think, would argue that something as essential as housing should basically be guaranteed--not like a mansion, but a decent house.

This socialist sees less of a problem with it, depending on how it affects people's lives. If they manage to pay off what they owe, fine. If we're having a national problem, then we need to examine what is happening, determine why it is happening, and work to stop it.