Why don't Americans save?

funny! I felt bad for you at first, but no longer.

no contradictions here.


Please don't argue economics or anything with me, unless you know what you are talking about. You have no clue of what you speak and that is likely why you have not advanced. Here is a brief overview of the marxist/communist ideal, it fits your beliefs perfectly. any questions?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Means_of_production

<i> Marxist analysis of ownership of MoP within capitalism
The analysis of people's relationships with the means of production is one element that stands at the basis of Marxism. Marxists argue that those means of production participate in the process of exploiting labor for surplus value.[1] To the question of why classes exist in human societies in the first place, Karl Marx offered an historical explanation that it was the cultural practice of Ownership of the Means of Production that gives rise to them. This explanation differs dramatically from other explanations based on "differences in ability" between individuals or on religious or political affiliations giving rise to castes. This explanation is consistent with the bulk of Marxist theory in which Politics and Religion are seen as mere outgrowths (superstructures) of the basic underlying economic reality of a people. To remain consistent with these principles, an explanation as to why classes exist in a society must derive from causes that are essentially economic in nature, and appeal to the alleged underlying reality of material production.

There are two subtle but important points to the Ownership of the Means of Production. The first being that owning the Means of Production is not the same thing as owning physical property, nor is it equal to owning money. Rather OMP refers to a cultural practice in which a few individuals within a larger corporation (or company) control and decide what is done with the entire profit created by that corporation. If one were to define the word "Corporation" as a particular kind of "group of people" then to later say that a few select individuals "own the corporation" then, by substitution, one must be saying that those select individuals own the group of people. In any case, this apparent paradox only arises when one confuses the owning of property with the owning of a corporation. When keeping these two kinds of ownership separate, the paradox of "owning people" evaporates.

The conclusion ultimately reached is that while the "owners" of a corporation only contribute a tiny fraction of the total labor and time in creating profit, they have complete control over that profit and how it is used. The practice of OMP in human societies is then a type of game where some people are labeled owners (Marx used the term, Bourgeoisie) and other people are labeled workers (Marx used the term, Proletariat). The bourgeoisie have complete control over both how the proletariat are paid in wages and complete control over how the profit from production is used, thus giving rise to a class division.

Contrarian interpretations of this practice might state that wages paid to workers are subsumed under the regular costs of maintaining business. However, Marx considered it a reification to treat labor as just another "factor" in production; it implied an inversion of means and ends, so that people were effectively used as things.

Marx's terms are often employed in economic analysis by socialists who advocate public ownership of some or all of the means of production. The affinity between labor movement causes and this advocacy is very strong - and often shared by social democrats, socialists, communists and greens. Marx's analysis in particular helped to make clear the key differences between capital and "labor".

Marxists define economic systems in terms of how the means of production are used, and which social class controls them. Thus, in capitalism, the means of production are controlled by the bourgeoisie, (the "capitalists" - the owners of capital). In the pure ideal of socialism, such as that "communism" was/is supposed to be, the MoP are controlled by the workers production collectives directly. In fact this situation has only been historically realized temporarily such as in the Israeli kibbutz or the early Soviets before the entrenchment of the communist party as a "New Class", or in isolated or preliminary form such as in the final phase of the Second Spanish Republic, or various experimental utopian communities.</i>

 

There is no such thing as investing. Only speculation.

 

You make some very good points. Very well thought out unlike many others around here who just make blanket statements. I think it just all comes down to supply and demand. There are so many people out there that need jobs, they can pay however much they want and treat people how they want because there is always someone else at the door willing to do it for less. The turnover at these place is very high. There are many risks to starting a business and they should be rewarded when the business succeeds. But I think you’re right most owners and employees just care about themselves and not improving anything. Employers hire people who work just enough to not get fired and pay them just enough so they won’t quit.

I have started several very small businesses and know the challeges they face. A few years ago I had a small store in the mall that didn’t work out at all. Even something like that required a lot of capital. I am very aware of the costs in doing business.

BTW the delivery charge is a scam. The price of delivery is already included in the pizza. It used to be that a pizza cost $10 and the customer paid $10 and they driver kept 86 cents for mileage (that’s what I get, it varies). Now, the pizza costs $10 plus a $2 delivery charge. The customer pays $12 and the driver keeps 86 cents. You see the scam? They are charging for delivery and not giving it to the one that incurrs the cost of delivery. They keep it for themselves. Of course the charge is not stated anywhere on the menu or advertisements, and naturally customers think I get it and tip less. On top of that when the states raised the minimum wage, instead increasing the pay, they just decreased the drivers pay $1 to pay for the instore people who they needed to pay more, and then made the driver claim their tips to get them above the minimum wage. So minimum wage goes up and pay goes down. That’s messed up. And they are still required to do other things in the store like cook and clean and answer phones for that $4.50 an hour. Anyways I’ve had enough of it and will start looking for a new job next week. It’s not worth it anymore. I’m not here to complain to get sympathy, I’m trying to point out some reasons why people don’t save.

 

That’s not a contridiction? Oh well.

You say I don’t know what I’m talking about, but haven’t actually pointed to anything I’ve said and contridicted it. You just called my ideas Communist. The very premis of Communism is that it discourages incentive and those that produce more are forced to give to those that produce less. Is this what I am proposing? What I propose is giving people incentive to perform better and increase efficiency. Your idea of the status quo discourages incentive. Don’t blame me the next time you go to a fast food joint and they messed up your order because they are only getting $7 an hour and don’t care about anything.

That’s ok if you want to critisize my ideas. The college professor of the ceo of FedEx told him his idea would never work and gave him an F. Who’s laughing now? He saw an opportunity and so do I.

I disagree with the wording of this. The premise of Communism is not that the workers controlled the means of production, but that the government does. The government is not the people. In Communism the government fundamentally own all of the wealth and decide how it will be redistributed while meanwhile taking a large cut for themselves. In my system the workers will in essence have a direct ownership interest in the success or failure of their work and the business as a whole. Plus those that are lazy will be kicked out The incentive is there so how can it be Communist? Please try to answer points directly this time instead of making broad statements that are untrue.

 

Then what jobs are worth decent pay? All the factory jobs are gone, a thing of the past. Wages have been reduced so dramatically that if you don’t take risks and start a business or have some super specialized skill, you won’t be making a decent living. Also the cost of living has gone up so dramatically that it’s a struggle just to stay ahead.

There are millions of illegal immigrants because apparantly their countries economies are worse than ours. They are in search of a better life like everybody else. If their governments weren’t so corrupt, then maybe their economies would be better. But that’s not our problem. You’re drinking the Bush Kool Aid.That’s just crap he came up with to help out his buddies get cheap labor. There is no such thing as jobs Americans won’t do, just jobs that don’t pay Americans what their worth.



yup, you are a communist Sandy- Complain all day that someone doesn't hand you a good job while you work for $4.50 an hour at a pizza joint when you have the freedom to quit. Let's see, some super specialized skill like nursing? welding? accounting? policeman??


I mop the floors. But I’m not going to work for below minimum wage under the table. Insourcing is just as much a problem as outsourcing. Nothing is ever said about how much the careless immigration policies we have are actually costing us. Sure employers are saving on cheap labor, but think of how much that ends up costing society. They don’t have health insurance so they just go to the hospital and we end up paying for it. They have 500 kids and put them all in public schools, which we pay for. Overcrowding leads to even more schools needing to be built. They usually all receive public assistance in some way, which we pay for. They obviously are not paying much taxes because they aren’t making much money in the first place. So maybe all that cheap labor ended up costing more in the end than just paying an American enough to have a decent life.

I am against illegal immigration, but if you don't have any more education or skills than an illegal immigrant than either you are dumb or lazy.

Give me one example of an American who refuses to do low end jobs that will provide a decent living. I’ll do it.

Construction. Previous next door neighbor owned a roofing business during the housing boom. Could not get american kids to take the work even though he offered training into a higher paying position. Too late for that one, but you have not defined decent. Why should an entry level person with no skills get $30K a year when they aren't worth it- that is they are incapable of creating as much wealth as they consume?

Surf said it right, hard work means nothing, it's what you actually produce. You can mop floors all day long but in the end you haven't produced jack in terms of wealth useable by someone else, unless of course you offer a floor mopping service that many people are willing to pay you for.


What do you think your son is doing working at Wal-Mart? Isn’t that a job that American’s won’t do? Apparantly not. The question is will he do it after taking a pay cut so the government can bring in new immigrants who will do it for less. Think about it.

I have thought about it. My son stocked the dairy at a super Wal Mart simply because he needed money for college. It was easy work and Wal Mart gets a bad rap for being on the 'bottom'. I could not get him to take harder jobs that paid more, oh well. If he think he is not getting enough pay, I am teaching him to take a realistic view of the world around him and try and do something about it. Right now he makes even more as an engineering intern in the time he has off. To sit and bitch that someone else should make sure he makes a living is childish, and leftist. I will agree however that globalism is probably not healthy for americans, but there are still ways to make money.


I have many friends that are first generation to come here. Most are hard working, but I think the time has come for us to really reexamine our immigration policies. Also immigrants very rarely ever go into the military. Why? Well I’ll leave that up to you. I didn’t go in because that life is just not for me, but you can bet that if my country ever asked or needed me to serve, I would. Can you say the same about most immigrants that come here? Also I believe there are many other ways to serve your country than just the military.

The military is actually a good paying job with lots of opportunities for advancement. I doubt most immigrants could fit in, but some manage to do so as a means to obtain citizenship. As I said, I agree that illegal immigration is a problem.


Yes, new money is always being created, but it certainly ain’t the little guy getting it. That’s how they rich screw the little guy. They don’t take more money from the poor, they just create more of it and keep it and thereby devalue what little the poor and middle class have. I contend it’s the largest and most secretive theft in human history.

Learn the game, then play it. You won't get super rich, but you can probably make a living. I am assuming you have some intelligence and drive of course. To want the type of security you are talking about means giving up liberty- no thanks.

I disagree with the wording of this. The premise of Communism is not that the workers controlled the means of production, but that the government does. The government is not the people. In Communism the government fundamentally own all of the wealth and decide how it will be redistributed while meanwhile taking a large cut for themselves. In my system the workers will in essence have a direct ownership interest in the success or failure of their work and the business as a whole. Plus those that are lazy will be kicked out The incentive is there so how can it be Communist? Please try to answer points directly this time instead of making broad statements that are untrue.

In true communism the workers own the means and there isn't much of a government, but we already have that through many existing coops and stock ownership by employees. The beauty of liberty is that you can be a communist if you want to- just join a coop.

The problem with your thinking is that it is simplistic and idealistic. We already have many companies like that as I mentioned, they don't perform or really pay any better than average and most ambituous people would rather work at a place where they can invest as they see fit. It is not that easy to kick out the lazy or even prove someone is lazy, workers have rights and people are corrupt.

The market generally rewards people with skills that can produce something of value. Your real problem is that you don't have those skills

 

You can call me a Communist all day, but that doesn’t negate what I say. Again the title of the thread is “why don’t Americans save”? You only want to hear it’s because people bought big screen tv’s, Hummers, and 5 bedrooms homes. I’m telling you there is a different side to the story. You just don’t want to believe it.

I have had a Life and Health insurance license for 6 years but have never sold anything. I worked full time for 6 months, but my partner never sold anything and I ran out of money, so I went back to pizza delivery. It’s a tough business. You are either all commission and get no help, or if you have an MBA you might be able to get a salary to get you through when you don’t sell anything. I wouldn’t mind working in that field again as an assistant or something, but I have a conscience. And usually those with a conscience don’t make it in the insurance industry. I’m not trying to make excuses, but the insurance business is hard and not for everyone.

Well, I speak English for one. Obviously, I speak it well enough to piss you guys off. I suppose knowing every street on the map including the street numbers doesn’t count as a skill? I can make pizza really good. I have sold 2000 items on Amazon and eBay and have 100% feedback. Unfortunately, I can’t find more items to sell. I can type 50 words a minute as well and am proficient in Excel and Word. Whatever I do that will eventually get me ahead, I will need to do it on my own. Nobody looking at my resume cares about any of the above, save one. The first thing they see is PIZZA DELIVERY and the first thing they think is the same thing you’re thinking, LOSER. NEXT. It’s actually a bad thing to have it on there. It would be better if it were blank. In 6 years, not only have I never gotten a job as a result of someone seeing my resume, but I have only gotten one call and that was because they were selling an eBay related product. So relying on people to give me a job isn’t going to work, I am going to have to go find it.

Anyways, I am probably going to take an intro to programming class at my local community college. I’ve been trying to program a trading system and would like to learn the fundamentals and see if that might lead to a job. $295 for a 18 hour non credit class. Gee it sure is expensive to try to get ahead. Hit up the credit card at 24 % interest.

I don’t know where you live, but where I’m at the construction industry is comprised of 90% Hispanics. Your neighbor would not want not want to hire any American kids because he can pay $7 an hour under the table for insourced labor.

I applaud him however if he did offer training and advancement opportunites. I think apprenticeships are a great thing, but I have never really found one. Like I said I have an insurance license, but no company really offers an apprentiseship. They sign you up and tell you to go sell. If you don’t make it in a few months, then you die out. Again I’m not blaming anybody for not making it, but that’s how it is.

You say it’s rediclous that people should ask for 30k when they aren’t worth it, but that’s exactly what you got growing up, so why should my generation ask for anything less? Let me explain. In 1975 the minimum wage was $2.10. Now if you simply take that and multiply it by the yearly CPI (which we know is crap and inaccurate) you will find that if minimum wage simply stayed consistent with inflation, it should be approximately $8.83 in 2007. Of course it was $5.85 then. If you take the housing market as a different gauge of inflation you will see that the average home in 1975 was worth $35,300. In 2005 it was worth $214,000. This is just the latest stats I saw on a website. This represents a 606% increase. If you multiply that times $2.10, you will see that if minimum wage was indexed to housing, it should $12.73 in 2007.

Now your son makes $8 an hour. So taking the 2007 minimum wage, Wal-Mart valued him at 36% above minimum wage. So if minimum wage were indexed to the cpi, your son should actually be making $12.08 an hour. If it were to housing then he should actually be making $17.41 an hour. $17.41 times 40 hours a week, times 52 weeks a year = …………. $36,212 a year. FOR WORKING AT WAL- MART! If he had been making $12.08 then it would still be over $25,000 a year. So in affect somebody in 1975 doing the same thing did make 30K a year, not including benefits. So you’re calling me a lazy Communist who thinks he’s owed everything for simply wanting the same thing you had at my age. Still feel the same way?

BTW I love going to Wally World and I wish your son all the best. But don’t blame me if in a few years he comes to you and says he simply can’t get ahead no matter how hard he tries. It’s much harder for our generation.

 

They seem to fit in taking all of our other jobs. Why can’t they do our fighting as well, at half the price of course? Think of how much it will save the taxpayer.

Whoa! Hold on there. Are we talking about the same thing? If you’re talking about the Patriot Act and all that, I’m with you on that. I am talking about the fact that the rich and the banks and the government can print money out of thin air. The little guy inevitable pays for it that through inflation, and decreased wages, as I outlined above. Having our currency backed up by gold so it can’t be manipulated has nothing to do with security. This is how the rich screw the little guy. As outlined above, wages never keep up with inflation. However the rich are hedged and profit through inflation.

It’s nice to know I won’t get “super rich,” but can probably “make a living.” Isn’t that the premise of Communism?

You’re right I don’t have any skills. I pissed away my time deliverying pizza and tried to use the money I made to start business’s and invest. Obviously that didn’t work out. But why am I continually making less and less money and paying more and more for the cost of living while doing the same thing? OK so I don’t get ahead deliverying pizza, but in the past few years, I’ve been moving backwards. Again, we have this premise in this country that people should work even harder just to maintain the same level of living. I’m swimming upstream here and everytime I wash out and have to jump back in the river, the current gets stronger and stronger. My and others inability to get ahead has little to do with my lack of skills, because a few years ago those same lack of skills made a lot more money. Do you think the money I’ve used to start business’s or trading came from my rich uncle? Every dime has been earned deliverying pizza. I used to save more than $1000 a month to use, but now I am spending more than I make.

Also everything has worth to it. You just see it as pizza delivery. Think of it in a business sense. The company provides a delivery service to increase it’s sales. Instead of buying its own cars, paying the insurance, gas, repairs, etc, they just hire me to use my own car pay me 86 cents a delivery. Clearly this brings more value to the business than say a cashier that just shows up to work. However like I’ve said before, the job market is so tight that companies don’t care anymore, there is always somebody else at the door willing to do it for less.

 

Sandybestdog, if you put in the same effort in getting a high paying job as you have in this thread you will be making 6 figures.

 

But why am I continually making less and less money and paying more and more for the cost of living while doing the same thing?
------------------------------

I do not find this extraordinary. This happens even in business. Expenses go up (ie gas recently) no way to recoup the cost except work longer hours.

Imo, two young people who get married, each need a 40hr work week to get by, 50 hours and you can have a few things, if they both work 60 hrs a week, they can save and have nice things. Point being if you're working 60 hs a week, you should be on track for a better future, promotion, etc where you can work less hours and have the same standard of living.

Ask anyone in business how many hours they work a week, I think you'll find the hours worked are well over 60.

Tough economy to find employement with jobs letting you work over 30 hours, people have to have two jobs.

 

Yup. You’re the second person to tell me that in the past week. I’m pretty much done now. Except I have worked more than my share of 80 hour weeks. I have invested tens of thousands of dollars in businesses and trading and pretty much lost it all. So I don’t really know how much more “effort” I can put into it.