With good jobs going away, middle class downsizes

[Sigaba]

Originally Posted by GratefulCitizen

Entire post

Your two posts argue four points of view. Three of these views--one of which is yours-- disagree with what you wrote in your penultimate post.

So it isn't a case of reading "too much" into what you're trying to say but rather figuring out what you're trying to say.

[GratefulCitizen]

Originally Posted by Sigaba

Your two posts argue four points of view. Three of these views--one of which is yours-- disagree with what you wrote in your penultimate post.

So it isn't a case of reading "too much" into what you're trying to say but rather figuring out what you're trying to say.

Muse, speculate, explore; pick a verb.
Not trying to reach a conclusion.

[Detonics]

There's a lot of good detail about the economy in this thread. I tend to believe we're discussing symptoms and overlooking the cause of the malaise. If you look back through the last 6 or 7 POTUS, how many would fit the term "Globalist?"

If you see that in 1999 outsiders to the system such as Steven A. Holmes from New York Times business section wrote -speaking about backing unqualified borrowers- that "In moving, even tentatively, into this new area of lending, Fannie Mae is taking on significantly more risk, which may not pose any difficulties during flush economic times. But the government-subsidized corporation may run into trouble in an economic downturn, prompting a government rescue similar to that of the savings and loan industry in the 1980's. " What do you think the insiders knew?

Perhaps a better question is "How can you have a viable 'Global Economy' with widely disparate standards of living?" My belief is that you can't. You have to bring down the higher nations and bring up the poorer. Known in the modern vernacular as "redistribution of wealth." Look at the philosophy behind the Senate Bill 2433 - Global Poverty Act of 2007 by our current POTUS and I venture you'll find a clue to the true intention in play.

An America in solid financial shape, with average to low unemployment, victorious in its recent military engagements would never allow its sovereignty to be diminished. Not so with a country plagued by financial woes on myrad levels; considering cutting spending for a military actively engaged on several fronts and being systematically attacked from within.

Some fairly noteworthy folks from the past have summed things up better than I probably ever can:

“We shall have World Government, whether or not we like it. The only question is whether World Government will be achieved by conquest or consent.” –James Paul Warburg (1896-1969) son of Paul Moritz Warburg, nephew of Felix Warburg and of Jacob Schiff, both of Kuhn, Loeb & Co. which poured millions into the Russian Revolution through James’ brother Max, banker to the German government, Chairman of the CFR while speaking before the United States Senate, February 17, 1950

“This present window of opportunity, during which a truly peaceful and interdependent world order might be built, will not be open for too long – We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis and the nations will accept the New World Order” –David Rockefeller, Sept. 23, 1994