The US Election

[Lateralthinking1]

It is not easy to recognise oneself as "greedy". Many people would say that they are simply making the best possible provision for their families.

The idea of the poor scholar has much to recommend it, but they are not allowed to have children to bring up, are they?

Allowed? I don't understand what you are saying.

That as much money has to be made by parents because any additional state provision for children is inadequate? And this requires a business like approach rather than an academic one? And then that business does not need to be principled?

Or something else?

I am intrigued to hear more and would be grateful for clarification.

[Lateralthinking1]

......No reply. I think your post, Greenilex, is a red herring and it also appears barbed as well as inaccurate.

Many involved in the sub-prime scandal were under 30. Much selling in the financial "industry" is undertaken by the young. They are often childless and motivated by early retirement. Elsewhere, I know of middle aged people who rake in as much money as possible. There is no distinction between those who have children and those who do not. The overly well-off middle aged are no different from the overly well-off who are retired. There are frequent flights here, there and everywhere with little broader regard.

The poor scholar is not an idea. It is an actuality. All one needs to do is consider the thousands with degrees who cannot find jobs. Mainly they are young people. I doubt many would choose it or see it as something to be recommended. It is also probably not the case that a lack of wealth prohibits people from having children. At one time, it might have done. My parents waited until the age of 32. There was no child benefit and arguably more people then had a greater sense of responsibility than is true now.

As for me, I have had very long periods of being single. I have no children but I was for quite some time in a relationship with someone who had a daughter of junior school age. We lived within our means. I ceased running a car in 1992. It was not a big deal. When I was young, we didn't have a car until I was 10. I ceased going abroad in 2005. That too wasn't a big deal. I only had one foreign holiday before the age of 25 although there were several later. And we never had any need for a telephone.

I don't have a second house, a dishwasher, Sky TV, a fridge freezer, a mobile phone, and umpteen other things people acquire. There have been times when I could have bought into most of them. I never felt the need. Generally I consider consumption on impulse for what it is - greedy! In fact, increasingly I find the narrow attitudes to money in this country repugnant. That isn't a particularly scholarly notion. We all should have more thought for the rest of the world rather than defending the indefensible.

One final thing. I have never applied for a credit card and have no bank loans either. When I hear people in the media defending the banks and saying that we were all responsible for the crisis, it annoys me considerably, particularly as it is never challenged.

[Serial_Apologist]

......No reply. I think your post, Greenilex, is a red herring and it also appears barbed as well as inaccurate.

Many involved in the sub-prime scandal were under 30. Much selling in the financial "industry" is undertaken by the young. They are often childless and motivated by early retirement. Elsewhere, I know of middle aged people who rake in as much money as possible. There is no distinction between those who have children and those who do not. The overly well-off middle aged are no different from the overly well-off who are retired. There are frequent flights here, there and everywhere with little broader regard.

The poor scholar is not an idea. It is an actuality. All one needs to do is consider the thousands with degrees who cannot find jobs. Mainly they are young people. I doubt many would choose it or see it as something to be recommended. It is also probably not the case that a lack of wealth prohibits people from having children. At one time, it might have done. My parents waited until the age of 32. There was no child benefit and arguably more people then had a greater sense of responsibility than is true now.

As for me, I have had very long periods of being single. I have no children but I was for quite some time in a relationship with someone who had a daughter of junior school age. We lived within our means. I ceased running a car in 1992. It was not a big deal. When I was young, we didn't have a car until I was 10. I ceased going abroad in 2005. That too wasn't a big deal. I only had one foreign holiday before the age of 25 although there were several later. And we never had any need for a telephone.

I don't have a second house, a dishwasher, Sky TV, a fridge freezer, a mobile phone, and umpteen other things people acquire. There have been times when I could have bought into most of them. I never felt the need. Generally I consider consumption on impulse for what it is - greedy! In fact, increasingly I find the narrow attitudes to money in this country repugnant. That isn't a particularly scholarly notion. We all should have more thought for the rest of the world rather than defending the indefensible.

One final thing. I have never applied for a credit card and have no bank loans either. When I hear people in the media defending the banks and saying that we were all responsible for the crisis, it annoys me considerably, particularly as it is never challenged.

I expect we'll be called a couple of sanctimonious hairshirters, Lat!

[Lateralthinking1]

I expect we'll be called a couple of sanctimonious hairshirters, Lat!

Yes. Anyone who has household economics that are typical of those in the 1970s, and is pleased about it, will obviously require rebuke. Of course, one didn't necessarily want or expect to be praying not to go back to the 1800s.

But well into the 20th Century, there was nothing saintly about such a norm, nor is there anything saintly about it now that it is an exception. A large number of people will remember living it comfortably themselves. Still, it just cannot be accommodated by most - the overly well-off and the many who want to be overly well-off - in 2012, hence their lack of rationality.

Many of the first category know that the system into which they bought has proven useless as well as immoral. At the same time, they themselves have done pretty well. The only answer the majority have is even greater growth. It isn't happening and it never will do to any significant extent again. In parallel, some sort of solution becomes increasingly urgent.

[handsomefortune]

A large number of people will remember living it comfortably themselves.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jpvXelKpMM4&feature=related

months (years)? of 'entertainment' on utube ..... looking at various abandoned buildings many of which speak volumes about how we learned not to think of ourselves as 'greedy'.

[Serial_Apologist]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jpvXe...eature=related

months (years)? of 'entertainment' on utube ..... looking at various abandoned buildings many of which speak volumes about how we learned not to think of ourselves as 'greedy'.

That speaks volumes about the deregulated American model being talked about as salvation for the consequences of an overdue crisis hastened by the activities of banks!

[Lateralthinking1]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jpvXe...eature=related

months (years)? of 'entertainment' on utube ..... looking at various abandoned buildings many of which speak volumes about how we learned not to think of ourselves as 'greedy'.

Dreadful. We continue to build out-of-town shopping malls (in (Old) English - arcades). The US hasn't built one in five years.

What will we do with our abandoned shopping malls? Turn them into prisons probably.

[prokkyshosty]

I really shouldn't wade into this thread, but I just feel the need to clarify things a bit, given the oddly doom-laden tone of that video. Its true, those blighted malls are all over the place, but only part of that is due to the economy. There are still plenty of malls going up, but malls are different these days. The malls from the 1950s-1980s are generally dreadful places, concrete nightmares with leaky roofs, too-small retail spaces and low ceilings. Many consumers abandoned them. The new ones are either of two popular styles. One is the same Australian-based Westfields megamalls just like the ones in London; the other is the outdoor market popularized by the Caruso company in Los Angeles, where "big box" stores share a common parking lot with a cobblestone outdoor pedestrian mall with small shops and restaurants.

The irony of course is that the original malls, which blighted the mom-and-pop stores and the rural downtowns, have now themselves been blighted. Even the original Wal-marts are being closed down in favor of new 24-hr mega-Walmarts, with grocery and warehouse stores attached (and, I kid you not, Walmart dental clinics).

Keep in mind that while some areas are in serious retail crisis such Detroit or my own Las Vegas, for most of the country the problem is not so much economic contraction, but simply the slowing of growth, which of course, if you're a right-wing nutter, means the End of Capitalism Itself. God forbid we don't have our 3-5% growth every year!

Lateral, you should probably remove your prisons idea -- once the Americans see that, they'll think it's a brilliant idea and you'll be lauded as a genius!

[Lateralthinking1]

I really shouldn't wade into this thread, but I just feel the need to clarify things a bit, given the oddly doom-laden tone of that video. Its true, those blighted malls are all over the place, but only part of that is due to the economy. There are still plenty of malls going up, but malls are different these days. The malls from the 1950s-1980s are generally dreadful places, concrete nightmares with leaky roofs, too-small retail spaces and low ceilings. Many consumers abandoned them. The new ones are either of two popular styles. One is the same Australian-based Westfields megamalls just like the ones in London; the other is the outdoor market popularized by the Caruso company in Los Angeles, where "big box" stores share a common parking lot with a cobblestone outdoor pedestrian mall with small shops and restaurants.

The irony of course is that the original malls, which blighted the mom-and-pop stores and the rural downtowns, have now themselves been blighted. Even the original Wal-marts are being closed down in favor of new 24-hr mega-Walmarts, with grocery and warehouse stores attached (and, I kid you not, Walmart dental clinics).

Keep in mind that while some areas are in serious retail crisis such Detroit or my own Las Vegas, for most of the country the problem is not so much economic contraction, but simply the slowing of growth, which of course, if you're a right-wing nutter, means the End of Capitalism Itself. God forbid we don't have our 3-5% growth every year!

Lateral, you should probably remove your prisons idea -- once the Americans see that, they'll think it's a brilliant idea and you'll be lauded as a genius!

Thank you for the clarification prokkyshosty. I thought it was surprising that malls weren't still being built in some form. Somehow I have managed not to set foot inside any Westfield style out-of-town development. They are really not my idea of fun.

The prisons idea - ironic - is all my own but the comment was prompted by Ann Widdecombe. Generally high profile in all kinds of controversial matters, and wrong, she was at one time Prisons Minister.

She was on the radio this week saying that she brought in prison ships from the US when prison places were running out. I don't recall them. But according to her, this Government must now do the same.

Sadly, I have never come close to qualifying for the British genius league. I should have emigrated to the land of opportunity.

[prokkyshosty]

I suppose I'm going off-topic with this digression, but I think it's a fine point of distinction between the two cultures... a Britisher would look at an abandoned mall and say, "what's going to move in to that space?" The American developer (wearing his cowboy hat and kicking up his spurs, of course) would say, "what do you mean, what's going in there? Ya put a big fence around it and then build a bigger mall up the road!" Such is the result of being blessed/cursed with so much space. We'll leave it to another thread to discuss the environmental repercussions of the American way, ahem.

Abandoned areas are part of the landscape in many places. Heck, there's even an entire ghost city, planned out in 1958 but never got off the ground, California City:

http://www.good.is/post/ghost-town-the-abandoned-suburb-of-california-city/

It was supposed to be the 3rd largest city in California, but now only has 14,000 residents, and most of it is only visible in Google satellite images!

[prokkyshosty]

...and now, please, back to your elections discussion! I very much enjoy reading this thread. I'd be hard-pressed to imagine a US-based forum where the British political system was so knowledgeably discussed...

[Lateralthinking1]

...and now, please, back to your elections discussion! I very much enjoy reading this thread.

I thought your previous post was fascinating.

I can't think of anything like California City here but perhaps we can make it into a twin town of little Tyneham -

http://www.501places.com/2011/06/tyn...t-time-forgot/.

[Lateralthinking1]

It's day two of the Democratic Party convention. Michelle Obama has already spoken. The Independent reports:

"They willed her to soar when she stepped out last night but she was already fuelled up. With charm mixed with almost yearning earnestness, Michelle Obama stole the first night of the Democratic Convention offering a paean to her husband that silenced the ushers bossing us to keep the aisles clear and drew others to tissue away tears.

At one point calling herself Mom-in-Chief, Mrs Obama delivered a narrative that might have at times veered towards the saccharin and the Disney but which drove home a powerful theme: that the president her husband is a leader who knows himself and knows the nation because of where he came from and what he went through."



And here is the New York Times report:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/05/us/politics/from-michelle-obama-a-heartfelt-testimonial-as-the-first-helpmate.html?_r=1

THE OPINION POLLS

CNN's latest opinion poll shows each candidate on 48% - a tie. The RCP average of all polls is 46.8% for each - also a tie. That's pretty extraordinary. 2000 here we come? Slightly earlier polls include Gallup - Obama +1 - and Rasmussen - Romney +1.

Bill Clinton speaks to the Democrats later today. A neutral observer might question whether that is likely to have a good effect on unsure voters. But rallying the troops is an important aspect of the conventions too. Is it just me or has the Obama campaign generally seemed just a little lacklustre? That really needs to change by the time the President has given his speech.

[amateur51]

Obama received support from two excellent and different speakers, former-President Bill Clinton, who was looking & sounding as fit as a flea, and rising star Julian Castro, mayor of San Diego who does a nice line in 'I'm sure Romney's a nice guy but he just doesn't realise how lucky he's been' which is very telling.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/video/2012/sep/06/bill-clinton-barack-obamas-democratic-convention-video

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/video/2012/sep/05/julian-castro-democrat-convention-video?INTCMP=ILCNETTXT3486

[Serial_Apologist]

rising star Julian Castro, mayor of San Diego who does a nice line in 'I'm sure Romney's a nice guy but he just doesn't realise how lucky he's been' which is very telling.

You sure about that, Ams? I'm not sure Romney supporters would understand irony...