truckers strike 2008

[Gary - K7GLD]

DING DING DING ... we have a winner. These are the main reasons for the outragous increases in prices.

CORRECT - but merely IDENTIFYING the problem, for most of us, isn't the issue - the ISSUE is what to do about our knowledge and concerns! As much as we might like to "pass a law", or use other "politically correct" methods, virtually ALL those involved in applying the proper "fix", ALSO have THEIR hands in the same cookie jar! They are sitting on the same profit limb as the ones most visibly involved in the rape and mugging, and aren't ABOUT to cut that limb out from under themselves, OR their accomplices!



Eventually, our society will wake up to the realization that conventional, normal processes will NOT apply to, or remedy the energy situation...

 

[MOates]

Layoff at Freightliner

Well, I can tell you part of the effect this is having on the OTR manufacturers.



I work at the Freightliner plant in Cleveland NC. Back on Thursday we had a town hall meeting with the CEO.



Bottom line - effective June 6th 2nd shift is going away, 1500 people laid off, going back to a hire date of Aug 18th '96. That affects me as well, I hired on in Aug '97 after retiring from the Navy.



Plant will be down to one shift operation, and even at that will have 25% to 50% shutdown time each month due to the lack of orders for the forseeable future.



This is their main North American Class 8 truck plant, with the largest manufacturer having well over 1/3 of the market share of the OTR market. What does that tell you about what's happening to the rest of the market, as well as the economy as a whole?



According to his statements, late last year we were starting to see a recovery in orders after the hit from '07 emissions taking effect. But after the first of the year, with the sudden rise in diesel prices, the subprime mortgage/credit/Bear Stearns mess, and the economy as a whole generally tanking, the orders flat out stopped and some were even canceled.



Some of the largest OTR companies, that in past years have been Freightliner's bread and butter, have ZERO - none, nada - trucks on order FOR THE REST OF THE CALENDAR YEAR. In a normal year, they'd have anywhere from 40 to 60 thousand Class 8's on order. Right now it's down to less than 10,000 and dropping.



Even the CEO is less than happy about this. Laying off 2nd shift is cutting into his core of experienced workers - most with more than a decade's experience, a majority of them veterans or former military with a strong work ethic and low absenteeism - and he knows that if this layoff goes for more than a couple months, he'll be lucky to recall even a fraction of them back - and that is going to play hell with production when the economy does recover and he needs to ramp up again.



Even the plants in Canada and Mexico are seeing layoffs and shutdown weeks. One new plant they're building in Mexico and scheduled to open early next year will most likely remain idle for some time - the CEO went as far as to state if they'd known two years ago the market was going to be in this shape, they wouldn't have broken ground on that plant until this mess was over.



He wouldn't give an estimate, but from a couple Freudian slips in other statements I get the feeling they expect this current mess in the OTR industry to last for at least another year.

 

[HBarlow]

From "Washington Times" today.

Washington Times Article published Apr 8, 2008



"Supply, demand and prices"



By David W. Kreutzer - During the summer, television networks don't seem to discriminate in airing reruns. The miserable shows get re-aired along with the good ones.



Washington seems to have the same mindset on policy reruns. Failed policies are as likely to be reinstituted as successful ones. Case in point: petroleum regulation and the "windfall profits" tax.



In a ritual as predictable as Donald Trump firing an eager go-getter, Congress demands testimony from oil executives and threatens additional taxes and price regulations whenever petroleum prices rise. It's an old tradition and one based on economic ignorance.



Bowing to flawed thinking and the popular will, President Nixon (with Congress) instituted general price controls in 1973. It was a vain attempt to control inflation. After the predictable shortages arose, price controls were eliminated on everything except petroleum products and natural gas. Not eliminating those price controls created the energy crisis of the 1970s and the memorable gas lines.



Yes, the Arab oil embargo reduced world petroleum supply, and worldwide economic growth increased demand. However, rising demand and shrinking supply cause higher prices, not gas lines.



This isn't a mystery. Around Chapter 5 in every "principles of economics" class, the impacts of price ceilings are explained. They lead to shortages. The logic is clear, and the evidence is consistent and overwhelming. When Reagan eliminated petroleum price controls in 1981, the shortages and the gas lines disappeared.



Why would politicians use such tried-and-failed policies? Maybe because the public rarely understands who is actually at fault. Surveys in the 1970s about the energy crisis bear this out. Who did the respondents blame? Not Washington for its Byzantine price and allocation controls, nor even OPEC. They blamed "Big Oil. "



In "The Myth of the Rational Voter," economics professor Bryan Caplan exposes the discouraging gap between popular conceptions of economics and economic reality. So it isn't surprising that the same 1970s-era surveys showing the energy crisis to be the biggest problem also showed the most popular solutions would amplify the very things causing the crisis. A large majority wanted more stringent price controls. A near majority even wanted to issue ration coupons.



Then as now, a weakening dollar and strong economies overseas led to higher petroleum prices. Then as now, the popular culprits were the oil companies. In a result especially depressing to those of us who spent decades teaching Chapter 5, a recent Gallup survey found 70 percent of Americans want Washington to implement price controls to counter the high price of petroleum. Even more unnerving is the 64 percent of Americans who think you can cut the price of gasoline by imposing "a significant additional tax on oil company profits. "



In a bad-policy rerun, Congress, blaming high prices on high profits, again demands testimony from oil-company executives and threatens regulations and additional taxes. Though consumers may not realize it, none of this will help them.



Today's high oil-company profits are largely caused by high prices on the petroleum they pump from their own reserves. Any owner of petroleum reserves, whether it's Exxon, Venezuela, Iran, widows, orphans or the University of Texas, gets more money when petroleum prices rise.



These high prices are the result of straight-forward economics: Demand has increased more than supply. For instance, China's demand for petroleum has doubled in just the last 10 years. Unless and until supply catches up, no regulations, taxes or histrionics will bring gas prices down.



Penalizing Americans for having the foresight to buy and develop oil reserves (which an additional profits tax would do), ensures that a larger percentage of these valuable resources will be controlled by the likes of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez and Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. A political truth-in-advertising law would require disclosing this fact when legislators propose additional profit taxes on oil companies.



Expecting politicians to ignore popular opinion may be asking too much. But if our leaders are going to read the polls, maybe they should read some from the 1970s and then look at the careers of those who followed them.



None of the presidents who enforced energy price controls and windfall profits taxes was re-elected. Yet the president who eliminated them served two terms and remains one of the most respected figures in American history. Which rerun would you want?



David W. Kreutzer is senior policy analyst for energy economics and climate change at the Heritage Foundation (heritage.org).



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[SHobbs]

We received news Sun. night that GM in Arlington is shutting down for three weeks starting April 14th. They are saying that there is very little demand for SUV's even the hybrids they are building. The shut down may be longer or fewer shifts will be used if demand does not come back. Seems the fuel prices and mileage of these things has caught up with GM. This is not good news for us being that GM is a major customer for our small rail yard, actually it's the main reason the yard is there.



It might get to me and I may have to back to riding the rails between Ft Worth and Sweetwater. Sure has been nice to be home after every shift.

 

[JMetzger]

I heard on both CBS & NBC news about oil in sand in Canada & that they can extract it out for $30. 00 a barrel. Canada claims that they have more of this oil then the Saudis ever had. Very interesting.

 

[MOates]

Even though I'm number 275 out of 1500 for when/if Freightliner does call back 2nd shift, and those recall rights extend out to one year after the layoff, my gut and everything else I see going on in the country tells me I'd be a fool to take some half-***** job just to get by while waiting for a phone call from Freightliner - it's not going to happen this time.



This is the first time in the 20 years that plant has been in operation things have been bad enough to lay off 2nd shift, and 1st shift has been told they'll only be working part-time even after the layoff.



Forget all the BS from the talking heads - this is a recession, and giving all indications of sliding further into a depression. This isn't going to be over in a few months - we're talking years. For those of us old enough to remember it, deja vu - welcome back to the 70's.



Time to switch over to a sector that does well no matter what - energy/oil. I've an old Navy friend that does quite well working for a contractor with BP, operating natural gas wells in the field. They've discovered quite a few new natural gas fields around the country, and are hiring big time to get them on line. I've already contacted my friend, who said I should have very little problem given my background and offered to give what help he could in scrounging up a job.



Matter of fact, a few years back when he was having difficulties finding work, I helped him purchase a '98 CTD 12V regular cab 4X4 to use as a work truck for getting the very job he's now working. And now that the shoe's on the other foot, he's offering to give me help finding employment. What my mother said years ago - "what goes around comes around" - that your deeds, good or bad, will one day come back to either repay or haunt you, is certainly ringing true now. And it also shows that at least a few of us old vets still believe in the saying "we take care of our own".



As far as Congress trying to pass new taxes on the oil companies - I've already stated previously what I felt the cause of the artificially high prices we're seeing at the pump are, and slapping new taxes on the oil companies will just drive them higher - passed on to the consumer. And it does nothing to address what's going on with the middlemen - refiners, distributors, and price gouging by gas station owners/operators.



If they truly wanted to divert money for alternative sources of energy, instead of instituting a new oil company tax, repeal some of the tax credits and subsidies the government has been doling out to them for decades, last I checked upwards of 30 billion per year and an additional 10 billion in the '05 energy bill, and divert that money into development of alternative energy sources. Given their record profits over the past few years, the argument could be made they're in little need of taxpayer support to prop up their businesses.



While I've strongly disagreed with him in the past, this is one instance I feel GW would be well justified in using his veto powers.



CONGRESS ITSELF AND THE GOVERNMENT AS A WHOLE have a large share of the blame in creating this situation, over the years accepting lobbyist money to dole out tax credits, subsidies, loopholes, and special interest provisions that have distorted the situation into the current mess.

 

[HBarlow]

... ... ... ... ..... Forget all the BS from the talking heads - this is a recession, and giving all indications of sliding further into a depression. This isn't going to be over in a few months - we're talking years. For those of us old enough to remember it, deja vu - welcome back to the 70's.



Time to switch over to a sector that does well no matter what - energy/oil... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... .

MOates,



I agree with much of what you wrote but it is not completely clear whether this is even a recession and it is simply not true that there is a possibility of a depression.



Some parts of the economy and some parts of the nation are doing very well. Michigan is in a recession due to local government and local events. TX is booming as are other parts of the country.



My own managed investment account with a top financial firm is only down a modest amount from highs last year and actually perked up in the last few days.



All is not gloom and doom. Big trucks sales are certainly off right now, primarily because of stupid government emissions regulations.



I regret that you find yourself in a difficult situation and commend you for seeking your own solution. I wish you well.

 

[Morsed]

Well Just MY Two cents worth...

Since OPEC sets the price of oil _ would it not be better to boycott their oil for a whole month instead of all of the oil for a day? Seems to me if we hurt the importers of OPEC oil that they should lower their prices and force the whole market down... Oh ya we can also do this with our gas vehicles also... ... We just need everyone in the US to participate...
Here is the text from an e-mail I got back in the middle of March

These companies import Middle Eastern oil:

Shell... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 205,742,000 barrels
Chevron/Texaco... ... ... 144,332,000 barrels
Exxon /Mobil... ... ... ..... 130,082,000 barrels
Marathon/Speedway. . 117,740,000 barrels
Amoco... ... ... ... ... ... ... ..... 62,231,000 barrels
Citgo< /B> Gas comes from South America, from a Dictator who hates Americans.
Do the math at $30/barrel, these imports amount to over $18 BILLION! Some of the Citgo's are being renamed to Petro PlusThe latest price is a record high $111. 00 / barrel !

Here are some large companies that
DO NOT import Middle Eastern oil:

Sunoco... ... ... ... ... . 0 barrels
Conoco... ... ... ... ... . 0 barrels
Sinclair... ... ... ... ... . 0 barrels
BP/Phillips... ... ... . 0 barrels
Hess... ... ... ... ... ... ... 0 barrels
ARC0. ... ... ... ... ... 0 barrels
Also: Pilot, Flying J, Love's, RaceTrac, Valero

All of this information is available from the Department of Energy
and each is required to state where they get their oil and how much they are importing.

Dave

 

[BrianJ]

Well Just MY Two cents worth...



Since OPEC sets the price of oil _ would it not be better to boycott their oil for a whole month instead of all of the oil for a day? Seems to me if we hurt the importers of OPEC oil that they should lower their prices and force the whole market down... Oh ya we can also do this with our gas vehicles also... ... We just need everyone in the US to participate...

Here is the text from an e-mail I got back in the middle of March



These companies import Middle Eastern oil:



Shell... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 205,742,000 barrels

Chevron/Texaco... ... ... 144,332,000 barrels

Exxon /Mobil... ... ... ..... 130,082,000 barrels

Marathon/Speedway. . 117,740,000 barrels

Amoco... ... ... ... ... ... ... ..... 62,231,000 barrels

Citgo< /B> Gas comes from South America, from a Dictator who hates Americans.

Do the math at $30/barrel, these imports amount to over $18 BILLION! Some of the Citgo's are being renamed to Petro PlusThe latest price is a record high $111. 00 / barrel !



Here are some large companies that

DO NOT import Middle Eastern oil:



Sunoco... ... ... ... ... . 0 barrels

Conoco... ... ... ... ... . 0 barrels

Sinclair... ... ... ... ... . 0 barrels

BP/Phillips... ... ... . 0 barrels

Hess... ... ... ... ... ... ... 0 barrels

ARC0. ... ... ... ... ... 0 barrels

Also: Pilot, Flying J, Love's, RaceTrac, Valero



All of this information is available from the Department of Energy

and each is required to state where they get their oil and how much they are importing.



Dave

With all due respect, after reading that I am due about . 01999 in change.



OPEC producing countries only provide appx 25% of the US oil supply. That info from the email has been floating around for years and is basically useless information. If nothing else tells you that the price quoted of $30bbl sure should. Everyone has their conspiricy theories on the price of fuel, from "big oil greed" to crooked government. Fact is fuel/oil is a worldwide commodity and is a very complex issue with no "one size fit's all" solution.



Keep in mind, the first time oil went over $100 barrel a couple months ago it was because of an over-ambitous trader. What else has happened the last few years as oil & fuel have skyrocketed... we the american consumer are feeding the tremendous economic growth in China and Inda (to mention a couple), thereby causing a tremendous growth in demand for fuel, especially diesel. Might be able to "blame" the epa a bit for the new ULSD fuel. When LSD was produced the US was really the only market for the fuel, we had that inventory to ourselves. Now with the advent of ULSD it can now easily be blended to meet European (and other) standards of 10ppm fuel, and now we export refined diesel overseas. We will no longer see a surplus of diesel fuel now that our supply is open to the world market, which happends to coincide with the tremendous growth of diesel fuel demand in the world market.



On top of that we have a tremendously weakening dollar, which has sent all comodities through the roof. Look at the price of gold now, verging on $1000oz.



This is a much more complex issue than "big oil greed" and government (or lack of) control. Think big oil profits are out of hand, you better read all of the financial reports because a simple figure of $100B profit doesn't mean squat until you digest the rest of the picture. Even at these high profit DOLLARS, they are still operating at appx 10% gross profit margin, which is hardly out of hand. These high profit dollars are driven by huge demand and volume from what is the worlds largest corporation/employer (in the case of Exxon/Mobile).



Do I like the high prices of fuel today? Nope! Is there something we can do about it? Probably, but takes more effort than a truckers strike that would more likely raise the cost of other goods by limiting supply. It will take more than "lip service" complaining about issues that may or may not be part of the issue (government or big oil). Could big oil do more, perhaps, I am not saying they could not do more to help. Could we do more that will involve more personal sacrifice, you bet! Stop buying imported goods to help stop the feeding of foreign economies, i. e. Walmart, of which Walmart goods from China accounts for 14% of our national deficit. Ahhh, but to us Americans we want, want, and want more... we NEED all the latest electronic gadgets and whatever else is hot so we have to shop at Walmart to buy cheap products so we can get more more more.



I am certainly not pointing this to everyone, as I well know that is not the case, especially the population here on TDR, but American's as a whole have gotten very spoiled in our demands for the biggest house (see current mortgage crises), best electronics, and need for everything else. To anyone that I know that travels outside the US that has become glaringly obvious compared to most other parts of the world.



Wow, kind of a long winded reply here so I will stop and let the flaming begin!



(No offense intended to anyone here, just some observations that I and people I know see in the current state of events)

 

[Gary - K7GLD]

Keep in mind, the first time oil went over $100 barrel a couple months ago it was because of an over-ambitous trader. What else has happened the last few years as oil & fuel have skyrocketed...

Which is sorta humorous, in that there are those who steadfastly INSIST that the traders "really have little impact" on fuel cost and the price of crude oil - and that they are really "needed" for the "stability" they provide for the flow of crude oil between the producers and the refiners...



BS!

 

[JMetzger]

I agree with Gary. I think that it all has to do with the future traders although last night on Altanta, GA CBS ch 46 11:00 news they talked about the truckers strike & they said the reason diesel was so high is because demand for diesel is higher than supply. Now just a week ago they said that supply was not a problem. Oh well a good liar doesn't have a chance.

 

[JDiepstra]

I agree with Gary. I think that it all has to do with the future traders although last night on Altanta, GA CBS ch 46 11:00 news they talked about the truckers strike & they said the reason diesel was so high is because demand for diesel is higher than supply. Now just a week ago they said that supply was not a problem. Oh well a good liar doesn't have a chance.

Who is the rocket scientist that said that supply was greater than demand? Was it a driver or a news person? I have yet to pull into a station and found that they have no diesel fuel. Anyone? Anyone?

 

[MMcLeran]

I was driving Hwy 95 through Vegas, Beatty, Tonapah and all along that long lonesome stretch diesel was $5. 79 p/gal. Goes up towards the weekend when tourists head that way to visit Death Valley, Las Vegas, etc. The air carrier crisis is interesting and I believe has a darker side well concealed from the public. Grounding thousands of MD-80's to add a few wire ties is like grounding fleets of aircraft and disrupting thousands of travelers because the valve caps on the main gear tires are different colors. I've been flying for thirty years and have never seen an AD note from the FAA that grounds this many aircraft at one time. An AD is an airworthyness directive that must be performed within a presribed period of time but never this many aircraft at one time unless there has been several nasty accidents close together in same type of a/c. My guess is that it's a fuel issue much like we are experiencing. What do you tell the flying public when you can't afford enough fuel to make the destination airport plus the required 45 min. reserve in case you have to use an alternate airport. What a PR nightmare. You raise your airfare to cover costs and your competitor imeadiately

lowers his fare. Other choice is to sell routes which is the beginning of the end for an airline. More will be revealed. Most airlines operate on a day to day basis just like the working stiff only we have no where to hide, no wire ties to add.

 

[HBarlow]

Brian,



You wrote an intelligent post and I agree with much of what you said. I will, however, offer another point of view on a couple of points you made.



"Keep in mind, the first time oil went over $100 barrel a couple months ago it was because of an over-ambitous trader. "



Your statement is accurate but standing alone it creates a false impression. I make no claim to being knowledgeable of commodities markets but the way I remember the event was a trader did cause the market price of crude oil to rise above $100/bbl. but only overnight. The market corrected itself the following day as trading resumed. The "market" involves the buying decisions of millions of individuals and companies and billions, possibly trillions of dollars. Moving the market would be a little like changing the level of the Atlantic Ocean. It would take a lot more than one speculator to move the market on a longer term basis as I understand the way it works.



"What else has happened the last few years as oil & fuel have skyrocketed... we the american consumer are feeding the tremendous economic growth in China and Inda (to mention a couple), thereby causing a tremendous growth in demand for fuel, especially diesel. "



Again, your statement standing alone is not incorrect... ... . our American dollars are feeding their economic growth but it misinterprets what is actually occuring. Newly unleashed capitalism, entrepreneurship, and industrializatioin in China and India has fed the economic growth of their respective economies. They build many quality products cheaper than the rest of the world does and Americans improve our standard of living by buying their products. Essentially all consumer electronics products are made in China or India and are of excellent quality. Likewise small home appliances and many other products. They are simply following our model and making a huge success of it.



"On top of that we have a tremendously weakening dollar, which has sent all comodities through the roof. Look at the price of gold now, verging on $1000oz. "



True and accurate.



"This is a much more complex issue than "big oil greed" and government (or lack of) control. Think big oil profits are out of hand, you better read all of the financial reports because a simple figure of $100B profit doesn't mean squat until you digest the rest of the picture. Even at these high profit DOLLARS, they are still operating at appx 10% gross profit margin, which is hardly out of hand. These high profit dollars are driven by huge demand and volume from what is the worlds largest corporation/employer (in the case of Exxon/Mobile). "



True and accurate.



"... ... ... ... ... ... ... . Could we do more that will involve more personal sacrifice, you bet! Stop buying imported goods to help stop the feeding of foreign economies, i. e. Walmart, of which Walmart goods from China accounts for 14% of our national deficit. "



Ahhh, but to us Americans we want, want, and want more... we NEED all the latest electronic gadgets and whatever else is hot so we have to shop at Walmart to buy cheap products so we can get more more more.

I guess you can say it that way if you want but Americans enjoy the highest standard of living in the world. If Americans want to buy those products it is their right. It is also their right (and obligation if they're smart) to buy them at the lowest price.



When I buy an automobile, RV, or consumer product I shop for the best price I can find... ..... don't you? I buy Michelin tires because they are the best. My wife drives a small Honda CR/V because it is, in my opinion, the best choice among small SUVs. My Dodge Ram was made in Mexico. I bought it because it is the best light truck offered by the market. If an American manufacturing plant made those products I would prefer to buy American. However, it is in my own best economic interests to buy the best regardless of where the product was assembled or where the parent company has it's offices.

 

[Gary - K7GLD]

I guess you can say it that way if you want but Americans enjoy the highest standard of living in the world. If Americans want to buy those products it is their right. It is also their right (and obligation if they're smart) to buy them at the lowest price.

Sorry Harvey, but like MANY Americans, you're living in the fantasy land of the PAST!



Fact is, according to the latest statistics, posted nationally just a week or so ago, the US is now ranked *22nd* as to standard of living around the world, and most here would be surprised and SHOCKED at which countries rank higher - even one as close to us as Canada ranks higher than us, and Mexico is gaining on us fast. .



But cheer up, we're still SLIGHTLY ahead of Cuba and Chad...



SHOCKED?



GOOD, many complacent Americans NEED a wakeup call as to where we are, and where we're headed!

 

[HBarlow]

Sorry Harvey, but like MANY Americans, you're living in the fantasy land of the PAST!



Fact is, according to the latest statistics, posted nationally just a week or so ago, the US is now ranked *22nd* as to standard of living around the world, and most here would be surprised and SHOCKED at which countries rank higher - even one as close to us as Canada ranks higher than us, and Mexico is gaining on us fast. .



But cheer up, we're still SLIGHTLY ahead of Cuba and Chad...



SHOCKED?



GOOD, many complacent Americans NEED a wakeup call as to where we are, and where we're headed!

Based on whose and what criteria?



I have traveled extensively in Canada and in various countries around the world. I have seen with my own eyes how the rest of the world lives and do not accept your conclusion.



My guess is the unspecified source of the OPINION you are citing is based on some liberal utopian concept of "free" (meaning funded by other citizens) health care, "free" education, "free" public transportation, and other BS concepts.



Europeans and our brothers in Canada generally live in smaller homes, drive smaller cars, and, in Europe, own very few personal RVs, boats, etc.



If you are going to throw such a controversial criticism of my country out please provide the source and criteria by which the comparison was made.

 

[Gary - K7GLD]

WELL, Harvey, it happens to be MY country as well, but that doesn't mean I have to bury my head in the sand, and avoid FACTS as to changing conditions - and long past experience has repeatedly demonstrated that when a statistic from ANY source is presented that conflicts with someones long-held and preconceived notion, it will ALWAYS be discarded as from a "slanted", or "meaningless" source - so no, I did NOT save that one - and any I MIGHT supply wouldn't satisfy you anyway - so why bother... :-laf



It's certainly true that there are varying elements used to "measure" standards of living - and for sure, wealth alone is hardly the deciding factor - and selecting only the measuring criteria that supports ONE individuals position, might be totally different than that of another. Here's another one for you:



High Living Standard Countries, High Standard of Living Countries



That one shows the USA is only in *6th* place - feel any better? :-laf



AH, but here's another that shows us *12th* - unh-OHHhhhh! :-laf



Human Development Index - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



And THAT study reveals that during the years that set of statistics has been in use, the USA has NEVER been rated at the top of the list!



But, personally, I have little doubt that the result of the study I referred to DOES reveal a significant slide in the across-the-board living conditions of this country, as compared to many others - and merely clinging, Pollyanna-like, to what WAS true (or we WISH was true!) in past decades will NOT erase what's happening, and where we're headed as a nation today - believe - or discard as you will...

 

[HBarlow]

WELL, Harvey, it happens to be MY country as well, but that doesn't mean I have to bury my head in the sand, and avoid FACTS as to changing conditions - and long past experience has repeatedly demonstrated that when a statistic from ANY source is presented that conflicts with someones long-held and preconceived notion, it will ALWAYS be discarded as from a "slanted", or "meaningless" source - so no, I did NOT save that one - and any I MIGHT supply wouldn't satisfy you anyway - so why bother... :-laf



It's certainly true that there are varying elements used to "measure" standards of living - and for sure, wealth alone is hardly the deciding factor - and selecting only the measuring criteria that supports ONE individuals position, might be totally different than that of another. Here's another one for you:



High Living Standard Countries, High Standard of Living Countries



That one shows the USA is only in *6th* place - feel any better? :-laf



AH, but here's another that shows us *12th* - unh-OHHhhhh! :-laf



Human Development Index - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



And THAT study reveals that during the years that set of statistics has been in use, the USA has NEVER been rated at the top of the list!



But, personally, I have little doubt that the result of the study I referred to DOES reveal a significant slide in the across-the-board living conditions of this country, as compared to many others - and merely clinging, Pollyanna-like, to what WAS true (or we WISH was true!) in past decades will NOT erase what's happening, and where we're headed as a nation today - believe - or discard as you will...

Gee Gary, I'm really surprised that you are unable or unwilling to provide the criteria by which your source determined that American lags other countries of the world in standard of living. As I said before, my guess is the criteria used to get those slanted statistics is weighted in favor of socialist utopian values like handouts.



Of course there are many Americans who do not enjoy a high standard of living. It is human nature. Some are brighter than others, some more energetic or more ambitious than others. It has been my experience that people who are not very successful for whatever reason are often reluctant to admit that the cause of their problem can be seen in their own bathroom mirror. It is far easier to blame someone else... ..... their boss, their company, their industry, politicians, incredible conspiracies, or their country.



Any reasonably informed and objective person would KNOW absolutely that Americans enjoy the highest standard of living that the world has ever known unless you measure standard of living by wealth transfer from fellow citizens or goofy socialist notions like 30 hour work weeks in France or other socialist utopias.



Unfortunately, America's greatest strength, personal and economic freedom that allows anyone to start a business and become wealthy in one generation, is also the source of much of our national challenge. The freedom we enjoy and that allows many to become wealthy creates deep resentment and envy among those who don't understand or fail to take advantage of the opportunities offered by this great nation.



Many spend their lives working for wages paid by another man complaining and blaming their boss, their company, their industry, or the other political party for their failure to get ahead.



Rather than sit around at their union hall and cry about declining buying power from their paychecks and voting for a politician who promises to transfer wealth from other Americans to them, they should decide to solve their own problem.



Great opportunity still exists in America. I have written about my wife's nephew, a new immigrant to this country who joined the successful middle class in America earning high wages and bought a beautiful new home in only 3 1/2 years in this country.



Here's another: In the summer of '01, shortly after I bought my first Dodge dually, I was asking around for a mobile car wash service. A stanger overheard my question and told me his younger brother ran one. I called that young man who was maybe 20 years of age at the time. He has been washing my cars and trucks ever since as well as those owned by friends and family members I have referred. After about 3-4 years in business this young single entrepreneur qualified for a mortgage and bought himself a very nice new home in a new subdivision. He lives within his means, saves money and invests in his future. He is living the American dream. He considers his standard of living quite comfortable.



Successful people don't sit around whining about their country that doesn't provide them with the standard of living they desire. They go out and earn it.

 

[HBarlow]

Gary,



I looked at the bogus sources you were relying on to provide the slanted ranking you prefer.



Your first source was laughable. It was Ambien, a prescription medicine, and offered no criteria for their bogus statistics but obviously ranked them in order of socialist dominance. At a glance it seemed to be a world travel website. Totally discredited.



Your second bogus source was a group of Indian and Pakistani liberal academics chosen by the America-hating United Nations to present the biased result they sought. Their ranking did not measure "standard of living" as you falsely claimed, but their own biased criteria "Human Development Index" which is a liberal mishmash of BS based on measuring income inequality (wealth (re)distribution), poverty,"social rights", etc.



Below is Wikopedia's definition of Standard of Living. If you review it you will see it is not actually a measure of standard of living but wanders off into socialist values of equal distribution and free handouts.



As I initially wrote: AMERICANS ENJOY THE HIGHEST STANDARD OF LIVNG THE WORLD HAS EVER KNOWN! Of course, not every American participates. Some are stupid, some are lazy, and some, although neither stupid or lazy simply don't get it and don't take advantage of the opportunity available to every American.



Standard of living

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



The standard of living refers to the quality and quantity of goods and services available to people, and the way these goods and services are distributed within a population. It is generally measured by standards such as income inequality, poverty rate, real (i. e. inflation adjusted) income per person. Other measures such as access and quality of health care, educational standards and social rights are often used as well. Examples are access to certain goods (such as number of refrigerators per 1000 people), or measures of health such as life desires It is the ease by which people living in a time or place are able to satisfy their wants.



The idea of a 'standard' may be contrasted with the quality of life, which takes into account not only the material standard of living, but also other more intangible aspects that make up to human life, such as leisure, safety, cultural resources, social life, mental health, environmental quality issues etc. More complex means of measuring well-being must be employed to make such judgements, and these are very often political, thus controversial. Even among two nations or societies that have similar material standards of living, quality of life factors may in fact make one of these places more attractive to a given individual or group.



However, there can be problems even with just using numerical averages to compare material standards of living, as opposed to, for instance, a Pareto index (a measure of the breadth of income or wealth distribution). Standards of living are perhaps inherently subjective. As an example, countries with a very small, very rich upper class and a very large, very poor lower class may have a high mean level of income, even though the majority of people have a low "standard of living". This mirrors the problem of poverty measurement, which also tends towards the relative. This illustrates how distribution of income can disguise the actual Standard of living.



There are many factors being considered before measuring standard of living. Some factors are gross domestic product, the per capita income, population, infrastructural development, stability (political and social), and many other indicators.

 

[Gary - K7GLD]

Like I said Harvey, those with their heads in the clouds - or elsewhere, will ALWAYS find fault with whatever proof provided that challenges their own hard-held beliefs - you wanna continue believing the USA is infallible, and the best and the greatest, have at it, just don't let the ashes get in your eyes...



SO Harvey, how about YOU providing a countering "Standard of living" source that shows that the USA is still #!, HMMmmmmm? :-laf



The ONLY way to realistically correct problems, is after you ADMIT there is a problem. until then, you're just another "walking wounded"...