Do you think incomes......

[Rosie_0801]

I don't live in the middle on nowhere, just on the edge of it!:lol:

 

:lol::lol:

 

I agree sometimes the American attitudes are mind boggling, and I for one find it hard to bite my tongue and not sling some mud with the rest of them

 

I admire your self control :D

 

Now tell me, who do we need guns to defend ourselves from? Call me an ignorant Aussie, but I thought that part of the American Constitution was about protecting oneself from the government. If that's what it's all about, we don't need guns, they (our government) do! :lol:

 

Rosie

[Melissa in Australia]

 

 

Now tell me, who do we need guns to defend ourselves from? Call me an ignorant Aussie, but I thought that part of the American Constitution was about protecting oneself from the government. If that's what it's all about, we don't need guns, they (our government) do! :lol:

 

Rosie

I know I have never had to protect myself from anything other than huntsman spiders, and I wouldn't use a gun for them.

 

I have GUARD GEESE that protect me from anything scary

[Margaret in GA]

:lol::lol::lol:

you are so funny.

 

I suggest you go and read some books like Atlas Shrugged , by Ayn Rand, and see what the world would be like if what you want to happen happens.

 

 

Tried to stay out of this silly argument, but this statement got me. Atlas Shrugged is FICTION. Please, please-- fans of the book, would you stop quoting it like it's the Bible? Or even a decent, well-written piece of fiction...

 

 

Margaret

[MBM]

I would recommend watching Justice with Michael Sandel (Harvard U prof) to learn more about the underlying philosophies that are being brought up in this thread. (We're watching the series on PBS, but it can also be viewed online.) I mention this because last night's show, episode 8, was particularly interesting and pertinent to some of the comments being made on this thread.

 

http://justiceharvard.org/

 

As to what incomes will be like in the future, I think the U.S. will go through a period of readjusting, but I have no idea how long it could last.

[Murphy101]

Thanks! That looks interesting.

 

 

 

I would recommend watching Justice with Michael Sandel (Harvard U prof) to learn more about the underlying philosophies that are being brought up in this thread. (We're watching the series on PBS, but it can also be viewed online.) I mention this because last night's show, episode 8, was particularly interesting and pertinent to some of the comments being made on this thread.

 

http://justiceharvard.org/

 

As to what incomes will be like in the future, I think the U.S. will go through a period of readjusting, but I have no idea how long it could last.

[MSNative]

I've tried to read all the posts, but admit that I may have missed this if someone else posted it. The US was in an artificial economic bubble based on poor economic practices. So why would we expect incomes and home values to return to that artificial high? Yes eventually the dollar amounts may rise to that high again, but inflation will make those dollars worth less so the underlying values will still be lower. But just because they are lower doesn't necessarily mean they are wrong. For example, should my home double in value in 5 years? No. That is not a reasonable expectation, even though it did happen. I think we need to change our expectations.

[JumpedIntoTheDeepEndFirst]

Tried to stay out of this silly argument, but this statement got me. Atlas Shrugged is FICTION. Please, please-- fans of the book, would you stop quoting it like it's the Bible? Or even a decent, well-written piece of fiction...

 

 

Margaret

 

It may be fiction but it has inspired and been inspired by a philosophy and set of political ideals that are active and being used by political parties and societies here in the US. I think Atlas Shrugged and other Rand books are just an artistic expression of a very real school of thought. It is not "just fiction" in the same way other works are. Quoting it is apt as these groups often use quotations from Rand's books as verbiage for their opinions.

[JumpedIntoTheDeepEndFirst]

But pqr wasn't talking about the US, which was the point. He was talking about the rights of Australians, looking through an American lense. Your constitution doesn't apply to other countries and what they do or do not vote upon.

 

Yes-but you were discussing Australia, Canada and the US when referring to the countries that work by majority rule weren't you?

 

I was merely pointing out-as Mrs. Mungo did in her post above-that in the US we have rights that we believe are above majority rule and that the majority cannot rule. Under our belief system those are the rights of all people, everywhere. Obviously in practice it only applies to our citizens-that is the nature of the legal system, national or international. But this belief often colors our view of other countries and makes what seems logical and reasonable in another country seem incomprehensible in the US.

 

 

ETA: And to answer the OP-I believe that economies operate in cycles. The timing may vary but basically it is a roller coaster. Yes, we will come out of it-the only question is when and after how much damage. The problem is that average people don't see that it is a cycle and when they are riding high they tend to ride too high and forget that all waves also have troughs. (Yes, that is a broad generalization but as I can't see the future I can't be more specific.)

Edited September 20, 2010 by JumpedIntoTheDeepEndFirst

[Margaret in GA]

I've tried to read all the posts, but admit that I may have missed this if someone else posted it. The US was in an artificial economic bubble based on poor economic practices. So why would we expect incomes and home values to return to that artificial high? Yes eventually the dollar amounts may rise to that high again, but inflation will make those dollars worth less so the underlying values will still be lower. But just because they are lower doesn't necessarily mean they are wrong. For example, should my home double in value in 5 years? No. That is not a reasonable expectation, even though it did happen. I think we need to change our expectations.

:iagree:

We've all been rather unreasonable in our assumption that we can continue to sell each other over-priced junk from China, build enormous subdivisions full of $400-600K McMansions in the middle of nowhere, fail to save for retirement, and use our houses like ATM's. And we think slapping a band aid on all these issues will solve the bigger problems? We have to do some hard things to get on the right track again (go back to a more localized economy, wean ourselves from fossil fuels, insist on a reasonable and simplified tax system, less money funneling into Washington, on and on) . I know we can do it, but I doubt we will.

 

Margaret

[cathmom]

I agree sometimes the American attitudes are mind boggling, and I for one find it hard to bite my tongue and not sling some mud with the rest of them

 

Sometimes they're mind-boggling even to Americans.

[Renee in NC]

:iagree:

We've all been rather unreasonable in our assumption that we can continue to sell each other over-priced junk from China, build enormous subdivisions full of $400-600K McMansions in the middle of nowhere, fail to save for retirement, and use our houses like ATM's. And we think slapping a band aid on all these issues will solve the bigger problems? We have to do some hard things to get on the right track again (go back to a more localized economy, wean ourselves from fossil fuels, insist on a reasonable and simplified tax system, less money funneling into Washington, on and on) . I know we can do it, but I doubt we will.

 

Margaret

 

:iagree:

[Mrs Mungo]

Yes, the second amendment is supposed to be about people defending themselves against a tyrannical government. So, should people be allowed to own tanks and cruise missiles? If not, this argument against any sort of gun control, applied to modern times, fails.

[Slartibartfast]

If dh brought home a tank I admit I would be mad. "Where are you planning on putting that? Do you realize there is a not-functional washing machine in the shed? If you can't get rid of it then you can't bring home a tank"

[Spy Car]

Yes, the second amendment is supposed to be about people defending themselves against a tyrannical government. So, should people be allowed to own tanks and cruise missiles? If not, this argument against any sort of gun control, applied to modern times, fails.

 

While there certainly were (and continue to be) extra-constitutional arguments for arming the populace as a bulwark against tyrannical government, the Constitution itself reflects a very different notion. That being that "Militias" (remembering \that the rationale for the Second Amendment was hinged on the idea that "a well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State") would serve to protect the State and its laws from enemies both foreign and domestic. And nowhere does the Constitution give support to the purpose of Militias being an instrument for destroying the American Union or its government.

 

From The US Constitution Article 1 Section 8:

 

"The Congress shall have Power...

 

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

 

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress."

 

Bill

[Mrs Mungo]

I don't disagree with you, Bill, it wasn't your argument I had an issue with. ;)

[Spy Car]

I don't disagree with you, Bill, it wasn't your argument I had an issue with. ;)

 

I know :001_smile:

 

It's just the fact that Militias should by necessity be "well-regulated" according to the Second Amendment, and that the Constitution explicitly gives Congress a role in organizing Militias so they act in support of law and order, and against insurrections or invasions that seem to be lost on some people.

 

Bill

[Crimson Wife]

If dh brought home a tank I admit I would be mad. "Where are you planning on putting that? Do you realize there is a not-functional washing machine in the shed? If you can't get rid of it then you can't bring home a tank"

 

:lol::lol::lol:

We actually were acquainted with a guy who collected tanks before he passed away last year. It's probably easier to legally own a tank in the Bay Area than it is to own a firearm.

[Mommyfaithe]

A lot will depend on the policies put in place by the government.

 

There are many un-seen (to the consumer) taxes that affect the end cost of the product. We don't see all the taxes on gasoline, for example, but the cost is passed on to us both at the pump and in the cost of goods that are trucked--which is everything!

 

Payroll taxes affect hiring--if the company can't afford the taxes, they can't afford to hire or can only pay a certain rate. Also with the general instability of the economy now, people are reluctant to hire. The companies are "nesting" just like individuals are.

 

As to health insurance costs--There's an article in the Christian Science Monitor that cost will rise 12.9%

 

This is true. We just received a notification that our health insurance will be increasing mid-contract 12.5%....sigh...I don't even know HOW they can do that mid contract, but they can...

 

~~Faithe

[NoPlaceLikeHome]

This is true. We just received a notification that our health insurance will be increasing mid-contract 12.5%....sigh...I don't even know HOW they can do that mid contract, but they can...

 

~~Faithe

 

Health insurance rates have been rising every single year for at least the past 10 years and more. My employers told us year after year that the premiums were going up anywhere from 20 to 50% every year from what I recall.

[pqr]

It's just the fact that Militias should by necessity be "well-regulated" according to the Second Amendment, and that the Constitution explicitly gives Congress a role in organizing Militias so they act in support of law and order, and against insurrections or invasions that seem to be lost on some people.

 

 

Nevertheless the Supreme Court has held that there is a Constitutionally guaranteed right to keep and bear arms, this still seems to be lost on some people.

 

We Americans have this right, the Constitution guarantees it and it was obviously the intention of the founders.

 

Americans have the right and advantage of being armed – unlike the citizens of other countries whose governments are afraid to trust the people with arms. – James Madison

 

The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed. – Alexander Hamilton

 

When the resolution of enslaving America was formed in Great Britain, the British Parliament was advised by an artful man, who was governor of Pennsylvania, to disarm the people; that it was the best and most effectual way to enslave them; ...I ask, who are the militia? They consist of now of the whole people, except a few public officers. But I cannot say who will be the militia of the future day. If that paper on the table gets no alteration, the militia of the future day may not consist of all classes, high and low, and rich and poor... - George Mason, Virginia Constitution Convention

 

To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them. – Richard Henry Lee 1788

 

To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them. – George Mason

 

Are we at last brought to such humiliating and debasing degradation that we cannot be trusted with arms for our defense? Where is the difference between having our arms in possession and under our direction, and having them under the management of Congress? If our defense be the real object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands? - Patrick Henry

 

...arms...discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. ...Horrid mischief would ensue were (the law-abiding) deprived the use of them. -- Thomas Paine

 

We should not forget that the spark which ignited the American Revolution was caused by the British attempt to confiscate the firearms of the colonists. - Patrick Henry

 

 

Section 8 of the Constitution does call for the Congress "To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress" but this in no way erases the guarantee that "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

 

As I said, it really is fairly simple, and was put to bed with DC vs Heller and McDonald vs Chicago, it should no longer be lost on any people there is a Constitutional right for the individual to bear arms.

[Spy Car]

Nevertheless the Supreme Court has held that there is a Constitutionally guaranteed right to keep and bear arms, this still seems to be lost on some people.

 

We Americans have this right, the Constitution guarantees it and it was obviously the intention of the founders.

 

No one has argued otherwise.

 

Americans have the right and advantage of being armed – unlike the citizens of other countries whose governments are afraid to trust the people with arms. – James Madison

 

The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed. – Alexander Hamilton

 

When the resolution of enslaving America was formed in Great Britain, the British Parliament was advised by an artful man, who was governor of Pennsylvania, to disarm the people; that it was the best and most effectual way to enslave them; ...I ask, who are the militia? They consist of now of the whole people, except a few public officers. But I cannot say who will be the militia of the future day. If that paper on the table gets no alteration, the militia of the future day may not consist of all classes, high and low, and rich and poor... - George Mason, Virginia Constitution Convention

o

To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them. – Richard Henry Lee 1788

 

To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them. – George Mason

 

Are we at last brought to such humiliating and debasing degradation that we cannot be trusted with arms for our defense? Where is the difference between having our arms in possession and under our direction, and having them under the management of Congress? If our defense be the real object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands? - Patrick Henry

 

...arms...discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. ...Horrid mischief would ensue were (the law-abiding) deprived the use of them. -- Thomas Paine

 

We should not forget that the spark which ignited the American Revolution was caused by the British attempt to confiscate the firearms of the colonists. - Patrick Henry

 

I acknowledged that were (and are) extra-Constitutional arguments for an armed populace. But these reasons are absent from the Constitution itself.

 

Section 8 of the Constitution does call for the Congress "To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress" but this in no way erases the guarantee that "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

 

As I said, it really is fairly simple, and was put to bed with DC vs Heller and McDonald vs Chicago, it should no longer be lost on any people there is a Constitutional right for the individual to bear arms.

 

While there is an established right to bear arms shall not be "infringed," it's also clear that this right should be part of a well-regulated environment. And that the government has a role and a duty to make sure things are organized and disciplined. So having sensible gun laws (requirements for things like background checks) is not an "infringement" but part of the Constitutional duty to make sure there is some order when it comes to the exercise of this right.

 

The Supreme Court has supported this interpretation consistently.

 

Bill

[Mrs Mungo]

Nobody here has suggested completely disarming the population. Against whom are you arguing, pqr? Other than ubiquitous strawman?

[Slartibartfast]

I don't have a dog in a second amendment fight. I don't care about guns, we own guns.

 

 

My dh cannot have a tank. That is a hill I am willing to die on. :lol:

[Mrs Mungo]

I don't have a dog in a second amendment fight. I don't care about guns, we own guns.

 

 

My dh cannot have a tank. That is a hill I am willing to die on. :lol:

 

:iagree: The last time my dh drove one (many moons ago), he knocked down a fence!

[MSNative]

If not, this argument against any sort of gun control, applied to modern times, fails.

 

I thought PQR was responding to this comment. May not have been what you were meaning, but when I read it your post, this is what struck me.

 

 

Back to incomes, thoughts on the news that the recession ended months and months ago? Are you seeing the recovery in your community?

Around here, we still have lots and lots of empty commercial real estate, lots of homes lingering on the market and not a lot of new jobs popping up.

[Tea Time]

I thought PQR was responding to this comment. May not have been what you were meaning, but when I read it your post, this is what struck me.

 

 

Back to incomes, thoughts on the news that the recession ended months and months ago? Are you seeing the recovery in your community?

Around here, we still have lots and lots of empty commercial real estate, lots of homes lingering on the market and not a lot of new jobs popping up.

 

 

Lots and lots of empty commercial property here, too. We own some of it, and small businesses just can't get a foot hold. Mostly due to lack of capital and crushing regulations that only large corps can sustain.

 

There has been little change that I can see in lending practices. We have been working on a mortgage and it is such a laughable process. My dh and I just about can't believe what we see in the way of regulations in the process that are supposed to be there to "protect us" but really they just fleece us. What WOULD we all do without a "well disciplined" government to control everything? Can't wait to see how they do with the genetically altered salmon they plan to grow in Panama. Lol!

 

Still, I don't think it has been as bad in Texas as much of the rest of the country. We simply did not have the kind of bubble here to burst in the first place.

[TravelingChris]

I understand why the say the recession eded in June of 2009 but there explanation of why makes no sense. A recession is defined as decline in GDP for two or more quarters.. We stopped having a declining GDP then but the explanation on the news talked of taking into consideration unemployment and that made no sense. GDP has no factor for employment or unemployment.

 

Now normally unemployment rates drag behind after a recession ends but in this case, we may very well be heading into a second recession since GDP has been slowing greatly.

 

GDP otherwise known as Gross Domestic Product measures

Y=C+ I + G + NX

where Y stands for GDP, C= consumption expeditures of both goods and services whether domestically produced or not, I = investment expenditures and inventory made by firms on new capital goods including building and equipment but the inventory is only counted in the quarter it was put into the inventory, G= government expenditures, and NX= net exports (or how much we exported minus how much we imported. Notice there is nothing in that equation about employment or about such things as price levels.It simply isn't what it measures.

 

I would recommend reading Economics for Dummies by Sean Masaki Flynn if you want a easy to understand and thorough introduction to economics. I am using the book with high schoolers I teach at co-op.

[FaithManor]

Yes, back to the economy....Michigan is in terrible shape so even if parts of the country were seeing some hints of recovery we won't be anytime soon. Michigan is really in a Depression if one looks at the statistics from the 1930's and then compares that with ours. The unemployement rate in Detroit City Proper is expected to hit 33%! In our rural county, it is 15% if one goes only by the head count of who is receiving unemployment benefits. But, if the number of individuals whose unemployement ran out and yet have no job, that rate is 22%. If the number of people who lost a full-time job and when the unemployment ran out, took a part time job because that was all they could get, then we have an unemployment/underemployment rate of pretty close to 30%. When the numbers get this big, there isn't any kind of fast recovery. It takes a very, very long time to rebuild an economy to the place that it can then support jobs for that many people.

 

We are also losing population rather rapidly. 2000 people from the city of Flint since January 1. My guess is that by the year's end, we will see a net loss in Michigan population of at least 50,000 and possibly higher.

 

1 out of every 3 office buildings in Detroit are empty and after our last airport run to DTW, I'd hazzard a guess, based on what we could see from I-75, that the burbs (once fairly well-to-do) must be a 1 in 5 scenario or pretty close. I think Detroit is planning on burning at least 3000 residences and several office complexes. As for the crime rate, the murder rate dropped 14% and in response, a mayoral candidate made this comment, "There isn't anyone left to kill." Snarky sentiment and probably not the most thought out remark, but the situation in Detroit is so bad that not many took offense to it!

 

Lansing, Kalamazoo, and Grand Rapids are holding their own...they have some pharmaceutical companies that are making it and Dow Chemical is expanding a little in Midland so there will be jobs there for those that have the skills. But these are not manufacturing, line jobs. In many cases, chemistry, biology, engineering, degrees and what not are required and those take time to get. So, many if not most unemployed Michiganders are not qualified for those jobs. It's sad but much of the recruiting will be done out of state. That's good news for those coming in because beautiful, expensive homes can be had for a song and a handful of beads! A large percentage of the unemployed in Michigan worked manufacturing and manufacturing related jobs that did not require advanced degrees so it is just horribly difficult for them to find positions that pay living wages.

 

Oh, the median home value for Detroit in 2008 was $7500.00 (this is not a typo). A couple of repos in Rochester Hills (very nice neighborhood in the northern burbs) sold for less than $20,000.00 and required little to no fix-up. If you can find a job and have job security, Michigan is the place to find a wonderful home, land, you name it for virtually nothing. 8000 sq. ft. homes on Lake Huron (Sandpoint to be specific) - the kinds of places where there is a fireplace in every room, private lake footage, two dining rooms, and kitchens the size of conference rooms, are selling for less than $100,000.00

 

No recovery here.

 

Now, as for the discussion of "arms" and the right to bear them. We believe whole heartedly in the 2nd amendment. That said, Spycar and Mrs. Mungo should note that I believe in regulation because DH LOVES THINGS THAT PRODUCE SPARK, FIRE, AND EXPLOSIONS! Not only will there be NO TANKS in this yard, but I exercise my God-given right as his wife to HEAVILY regulate his right to bear arms or for that matter, anything potentially flammable! LOL

 

Faith

[ColoradoMom]

Oh, the median home value for Detroit in 2008 was $7500.00 (this is not a typo). A couple of repos in Rochester Hills (very nice neighborhood in the northern burbs) sold for less than $20,000.00 and required little to no fix-up. If you can find a job and have job security, Michigan is the place to find a wonderful home, land, you name it for virtually nothing. 8000 sq. ft. homes on Lake Huron (Sandpoint to be specific) - the kinds of places where there is a fireplace in every room, private lake footage, two dining rooms, and kitchens the size of conference rooms, are selling for less than $100,000.00

 

No recovery here.

 

 

 

They keep telling us Colorado is "lucky" to have escaped most of the recession but if your business depends on national sales - who cares if Colorado is doing better - customers come from all over the country.

 

Too bad about Michigan - it is so pretty up there. If i had money I'd buy a place - and I have a friend who is from Michigan and they just purchased some lakefront property up in Northern Michigan and can't wait to go home.

 

Did anyone see the lady ask Obama if this was "her new reality" the other day? I felt so bad for her - she looked like she was going to cry as he responded. It's hard not to look back and say we were doing so well - what happened?

 

Everyone needs to think outside the box for income potential. I know I will be selling hatching eggs on E-Bay next spring like I did a few years ago for extra money. Normally this time of year I am downsizing my animals for winter - but I can't afford to this year. I need them to produce income for me next year. I thought those days were over but I guess not. And of course - all the homeschool curriculum goes up for sale just as soon as we are done with it.

 

It sucks to think this might take 10 years or more to dig out of and ya know what sucks even more - to hear that Germany, China, and LOTS of other countries are already growing again. Something is terribly wrong here. Terribly wrong.

[pqr]

Nobody here has suggested completely disarming the population. Against whom are you arguing, pqr? Other than ubiquitous strawman?

 

Tea time is correct it was a response to your comment and the other "lost on some people" comment.

[Mrs Mungo]

Tea time is correct it was a response to your comment and the other "lost on some people" comment.

 

Rosie (I think it was Rosie) asked a specific question, I was answering it. I *do* think that *particular* argument fails in modern times. Could someone with an assault rifle (or a lot of them) beat the modern US military or even federal police? The answer is no. It doesn't matter what the founders thought of it, and I didn't use the example as a point in favor of gun control. Most of the people I know own guns, it's pretty darn common in my community.

[Spy Car]

Rosie (I think it was Rosie) asked a specific question, I was answering it. I *do* think that *particular* argument fails in modern times. Could someone with an assault rifle (or a lot of them) beat the modern US military or even federal police? The answer is no. It doesn't matter what the founders thought of it, and I didn't use the example as a point in favor of gun control. Most of the people I know own guns, it's pretty darn common in my community.

 

I think it is kind of sad that some people's rationales for keeping weapons is so they can kill American soldiers if the need arises, as if our troops represent some threat to our fundamental freedoms that their hand-guns and rifles keep at bay.

 

Bill

[pqr]

Could someone with an assault rifle (or a lot of them) beat the modern US military or even federal police?

 

No....but then again what are they using in Iraq and Afghanistan? Primary weapons are homemade IEDs and small arms. While they have not beaten us and can not as long as our will remains strong those two conflicts have offered ample evidence as to what even a minority of the population can do against a superbly trained and modern army.

 

In Europe, the IRA, in N. Ireland, offered similar evidence.

[Melissa in Australia]

It sucks to think this might take 10 years or more to dig out of and ya know what sucks even more - to hear that Germany, China, and LOTS of other countries are already growing again. Something is terribly wrong here. Terribly wrong.

 

And some countries, like Australia, haven't really noticed much of a downturn at all.

[pqr]

And some countries, like Australia, haven't really noticed much of a downturn at all.

 

 

You are very lucky as it does hurt many in the States and Europe.

[Melissa in Australia]

You are very lucky as it does hurt many in the States and Europe.

 

Not me but the whole country. I think it is mostly because Australia has lots of minerals to sell, Australians always had a higher cost of living so they couldn't afford so much stuff to start off with. Our banks are more regulated, plus our interest rates are I think the highest in the world. I think they are around 5% I know you can get over 6% on term deposits. which means that people all over the world are putting their money into Australian banks for the higher interest rate.

[Audrey]

And some countries, like Australia, haven't really noticed much of a downturn at all.

 

 

Same here. Canada, overall, was able to avoid it. I give a lot of credit for that to our big-bad-banking-regulations, and our general tight-wad nature. Oh, and Paul Martin may have been a so-so PM, but when he was Minister of Finance, he most obviously did an excellent job of setting us up to weather a storm.

 

My province has fared better than most others. I think Ontario was hard hit by losing several auto plants, but here, no one has really noticed much difference. We're mostly a manufacturing and natural resources province. The Northern lumber industry isn't hiring at the usual pace, but manufacturers are hiring a lot. Our provincial unemployment rate is below 5% for the whole province and my region in particular has the lowest rate with just below 3% unemployment.

 

What is noticeable, though, is the biggest new trend -- all the border-hoppers coming up for the jobs here. There are some companies who have so many american licence plates in the employee parking lot, you'd almost be compelled to do a double check to make sure you're still in Canada. :lol: It's all good, though. The jobs are there. They're not cushy or trendy -- they're hard-working manufacturing and labour jobs. IMO, if someone is willing and skilled enough to do those jobs AND make that commute, then more power to 'em. :001_smile:

Edited September 22, 2010 by Audrey

[Crimson Wife]

Back to incomes, thoughts on the news that the recession ended months and months ago? Are you seeing the recovery in your community?

 

Things were looking better in the spring but unfortunately it seems the recovery stalled & we might be in for a "double dip". We're starting to hear of layoffs again & those who are interviewing for new positions seem not to be getting definitive yes/no answers. Not a good situation.