From: mcdonald@cs.sfu.ca (Ken Mcdonald)
Subject: Re: Income & Wealth (Was: Effects...Debt)
Organization: CSS, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 09:13:20 GMT


From a previous posting:
>>>
In article <1992Oct6.015831.6817@cs.sfu.ca> mcdonald@cs.sfu.ca (Ken Mcdonald) wr
ites:
>
>The book itself is interesting reading.  Batra's thesis is that depressions
>occur when a normal recession is worsened by the fact that the well-to-do
>own so much that a large share of the population cannot afford to keep spending
>in the recession (i.e. larger than would be "normal"), which of course
>disrupts the economy severely.  According to his figures, wealth disparity
>in the 80's attained levels which had not been seen since 1929.  Yay!
 
 
An other obvious obstacle to consumer spending is the high level of
consumer debt as a percentage of income.  This factor is far more
important than wealth disparity.  Still another obvious obstacle is
a pervasive uncertainty of job security.  I would think these 2
factors alone far outweight the wealth disparity factor quoted.
 
Seems like the previous posters all have an axe to grind.  Perhaps
they might like to contribute more of their income to the federal
bureaucracy.
<<<
Yes, you're correct about the consumer debt.  Now:  Who owns that debt?
Remember, for everyone owing a dollar, there is someone counting that
dollar as an asset.  Hint; the people who own all that debt are not
the ones who owe it . . .

Now, on a completely unrelated topic, let's regard this little paragraph
from the above . . .
>Seems like the previous posters all have an axe to grind.  Perhaps
>they might like to contribute more of their income to the federal
>bureaucracy.
Well, no, I don't have an axe to grind.  I long ago gave up believing my
opinions, thoughts, or knowledge, however correct or incorrect, could have
any major impact on society.  What I do have is an interest int the way
things work, and a desire to discuss these matters with other people.
As a human being, I have opinions and I try to advance them; that's half
the fun.  As a semi-rational person, I try to support these opinions,
either with logically based arguments, with facts, or with appeal to
some reasonably respected or empirically justified authority.  And, I
like replies in kind, whether agreeing or disagreeing.

I do not, however, appreciate personal insults, or comments to the effect
that I am a pinko commie liberal intent on undermining freedom democracy
and family values.  (As previously stated, I don't believe I could, even
if I wanted to--and to be honest, I couldn't give two hoots about 
changing the system anymore, I figure it's more "cut and run" time.)
C'mon people, the net should be a place for semi-intelligent discussion.
If you disagree with what I'm saying (and note that I'm largely passing
on info and theories from books I've read, in hopes that others might
find the information useful in understanding their own situations, and
hence ultimately in improving their situations), then either ignore it,
make a response based on facts/theories/etc which I can read about, and
which you believe bolster your position, or read the book and reply based
on what you think of it.  Anything else is wasted bandwidth.  (Not that
I haven't done some of that in my time.)

By the way, the previous poster should not think this is aimed at him;
it's more prompted by other responses, and also by some email.

Ken McDonald
mcdonald@cs.sfu.ca

P.S.  My Book-of-the-Month pick: "Money:  Whence it Came, Where it Went,"
by J.K. Galbraith.  Very funny, very erudite, very applicable.