Is The Obama Youth Brigade "The Lost Generation"?

[Politico]

Politico is just displaying how Romney's entire campaign is built on emotions and opinions that seem factual, but really fly in the face of facts.

Unlike the notion Obama is pushing that job growth that does not even keep pace with population growth is a real recovery? Or the notion that refusing to stand with Irsael and failing to protect our embassies/ambassadors is a "strong foreign policy"?

[independent-lefty]

All roads lead to finance - this is why Dems/Obie, as good cops, are pushing debt-financed education.  If Dems/Repubs really though an educated public were a social good, and were interested in acting in accordance, education would be absorbed as a public cost. All Obie and Dems are doing is pushing people into further debt peonage - perhaps/probably with limitless government subsidization of our "savvy" financial sector.  If everyone needs a well-rounded liberal arts education, tack it on the high school; if not, and some would better benefit/serve society with vocational skills, reintroduce those programs into high schools.  Nowadays, it's about debt peonage with the illusion of job prospects.

But Amurrkuh would rather play culture war games and pick one of two complementary tribes while parasitic finance and insurance bleeds us dry.  Have at it & good riddance!  "Debt" "crisis"!

[Politico]

All roads lead to finance - this is why Dems/Obie, as good cops, are pushing debt-financed education.  If Dems/Repubs really though an educated public were a social good, and were interested in acting in accordance, education would be absorbed as a public cost. All Obie and Dems are doing is pushing people into further debt peonage - perhaps/probably with limitless government subsidization of our "savvy" financial sector.  If everyone needs a well-rounded liberal arts education, tack it on the high school; if not, and some would better benefit/serve society with vocational skills, reintroduce those programs into high schools.  Nowadays, it's about debt peonage with the illusion of job prospects.

But Amurrkuh would rather play culture war games and pick one of two complementary tribes while parasitic finance and insurance bleeds us dry.  Have at it & good riddance!  "Debt" "crisis"!

Edgy, but you're not far off IMHO.

[Beet]

Beet, I'm going to let you in on a dirty little secret: Just like Potter Stewart once said that  hard-core pornography was hard to define but you know it when you see it, a good or bad economy is hard to define but you know it when you see it. This is a bad economy, and there's no point in us self-deluding ourselves.

You can try spinning with BLS data on the youth labor market (are they doing Facebook and World of Warcraft outreach now? LOL), but we are staring at the prospect of a "Lost Generation" the likes of which the nation has never witnessed before. And it's only going to get worse unless something changes and soon. That change needs to be Romney because there is no other viable alternative.

You know what Politico? You could be right.

The problem (if you're reading) is this: I posted and posted in response to you, and your final response implies that you never understood a single thing I said. No matter where we stand on politics or the economy, nothing can happen on this forum between us unless we can communicate with one another. And, having been on this board for nearly a decade, I've never had such a failure of communication as just happened between us now.

independent-lefty- Direct federal public financing of higher education would also be financed with debt, unless you say how you're going to pay for it. The total quantity of dollars in the economy can only be increased by creating it, and money is only created in two ways-- by being printed, or by being created as debt. What the good news is, is that money is not wealth, money are just numbers that helps us organize distribution. Society's wealth is in almost everything that is not numbers. What does that mean for policy? Nothing, necessarily, except that sometimes, thinking about outcomes independently of numerical figures is helpful. If a person can go to college and be happier or more productive later in life, or simply experience it as an intrinsic joy, then that is good; you are only 18-21 once.

[Politico]

Beet, when I have time to post on here I tend to be doing other things at the same time. Furthermore, when somebody responds to a post by me with a quote I tend to immediately re-quote them and formulate my response after reading each paragraph while editing accordingly. I also get distracted and have to leave the keyboard mid-post quite often (and sometimes I decide to edit my post after finally getting back to reading it and realizing I misspoke or want to add/subtract from the post). I apologize if this leads to any misunderstandings. I think highly of you even though I disagree with you on many issues. It is important to remember that this place is for entertainment and education.

[Beet]

You're also the poster on the forum I most fear getting into a discussion with because out of all the people here, you suck the most time out of me, since you seem to have the most time to write copious quantities. It's really fascinating that you complain about lacking time.

[Politico]

You're also the poster on the forum I most fear getting into a discussion with because out of all the people here, you suck the most time out of me, since you seem to have the most time to write copious quantities. It's really fascinating that you complain about lacking time.

I type 120 WPM and obviously read/think even faster than that. I am efficient, but sometimes not so effective.

[Negusa Nagast 🚀]

You're also the poster on the forum I most fear getting into a discussion with because out of all the people here, you suck the most time out of me, since you seem to have the most time to write copious quantities. It's really fascinating that you complain about lacking time.

Beet, I find your politico beat downs to be highly informative on economics. Do not fear that you are wasting your time; you're doing quite the opposite. You teach me and other forum members a big deal about economics. You've explained the deleverage process quite well and I always look forward to reading your posts.

[Beet]

You're also the poster on the forum I most fear getting into a discussion with because out of all the people here, you suck the most time out of me, since you seem to have the most time to write copious quantities. It's really fascinating that you complain about lacking time.

I type 120 WPM.

But you don't think at that speed. The last time I was determined to finish a conversation with you, was up until 5, 6 or 7 AM. Thankfully it was a Sunday morning.

What time is it where you live? Right now it's midnight where I am, and few people who truly led a busy life with family responsibilities would be up on Internet forums right now.

[Politico]

See the edit. I would rather not get into personal details on an Internet forum. I will say that my current obligations are generally of a professional nature, albeit from a distance right now, but I am also taking care of a sick relative from time to time.

[independent-lefty]

Beet, I'm going to let you in on a dirty little secret: Just like Potter Stewart once said that  hard-core pornography was hard to define but you know it when you see it, a good or bad economy is hard to define but you know it when you see it. This is a bad economy, and there's no point in us self-deluding ourselves.

You can try spinning with BLS data on the youth labor market (are they doing Facebook and World of Warcraft outreach now? LOL), but we are staring at the prospect of a "Lost Generation" the likes of which the nation has never witnessed before. And it's only going to get worse unless something changes and soon. That change needs to be Romney because there is no other viable alternative.

You know what Politico? You could be right.

The problem (if you're reading) is this: I posted and posted in response to you, and your final response implies that you never understood a single thing I said. No matter where we stand on politics or the economy, nothing can happen on this forum between us unless we can communicate with one another. And, having been on this board for nearly a decade, I've never had such a failure of communication as just happened between us now.

independent-lefty- Direct federal public financing of higher education would also be financed with debt, unless you say how you're going to pay for it. The total quantity of dollars in the economy can only be increased by creating it, and money is only created in two ways-- by being printed, or by being created as debt. What the good news is, is that money is not wealth, money are just numbers that helps us organize distribution. Society's wealth is in almost everything that is not numbers. What does that mean for policy? Nothing, necessarily, except that sometimes, thinking about outcomes independently of numerical figures is helpful. If a person can go to college and be happier or more productive later in life, or simply experience it as an intrinsic joy, then that is good; you are only 18-21 once.

"Printing" money specifically for a federal jobs guarantee (perhaps federally funded, locally-administered) - as we printed $15-16 trillion for the financial sector, no-strings (truly alarming/devastating) - isn't as alarming as we've been conditioned to believe.  The wheelbarrows of money hyperinflation narrative is garbage.  Yes, there is a constraint - an operational one - on how much money we should print - enough to ensure full employment.  Both legacy parties believe in planned disemployment - to drive downward pressure on wages, make the still-employed docile, push people (back) to diploma factories and further into debt penury for "jobs" that don't exist (all roads lead to finance).  As a money sovereign, with any debt issued denominated in said currency, there is no solvency risk.  In fact, every dollar of public debt is tantamount to a dollar in private savings - the remaining issue being about distributive effects (taxes don't "pay" for spending; rather, taxes and spending serve redistributive and demand-control/catalyzing functions).  Obie and Dems are playing good cop, which can't be emphasized enough:  They are trying to convince the public that a token/nominal tax increase on the wealthy (leaving accumulated wealth unscathed) is commensurate with the sacrifice they'll ask of the non-rentier class (fire-selling SS to Obie's bankster bros).  However, there is a real risk in 8% nominal / 20% real disemployment.  Obie, by executive order like FDR, could implement a jobs guarantee.  Full-employment would effect an upward pressure on wages at a rate exceeding inflation (more spending power for median households).  Think of it this way:  With everyone willing and able to work and full-employment direct-public sector jobs guarantee, the likelihood of being offered more than one job increases.  Ceteris paribus, one will likely choose the job paying the ___ [fill in the blank!] - in aggregate, effecting upward pressure on wages.  The inflation terrorism - stepchild of debt terrorism - stems from opposition to erosion of accumulated wealth.  The remaining pooled money in a system of full employment will erode - something the usury-dependent elite are hellbent on preventing.  Likewise, pooled money in the public sector - the revered surpluses - is money that isn't going to real economic activity.  Pooled money with a private elite or public surplus breeds disease, like standing water.  To circle back to the money-sovereignty point, i'll close with a quote from Thomas Edison:

"It is absurd to say that our country can issue $30,000,000 in bonds and not $30,000,000 in currency. Both are promises to pay; but one promise fattens the usurer, and the other helps the people. If the currency issued by the Government were no good, then the bonds issued would be no good either. It is a terrible situation when the Government, to increase the national wealth, must go into debt and submit to ruinous interest charges at the hands of men who control the fictitious values of gold."

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Interesting you include philosophy among the useless degrees.

Philosophy is actually one of the more useful degrees that one can acquire.

Pretty much every other endeavour relies upon Philosophy to some degree. Science requires a robust and proper understanding of empiricism in order to obtain useful knowledge about the world. Math and computer science require logic.

The ability to structure arguments and to understand other people's arguments and their motivations are all philosophy, and are quite handy in the field of law, and of teaching - understanding how people learn. Counsellors and caregivers need to have an understanding of ethics. Businessmen and economists are rather dependent on philosophy as well. Ideas like Kant's rational actors, are cornerstones to modern economic theory.

So let me ask you a question, politico? Do you consider yourself a classicist?

[Politico]

Ben, I did not call it useless. I said in so many words that it has practically no ability by itself to boost your earnings potential after college. I agree with everything you have said, and would add that philosophy is arguably the best major for people who know without a doubt that they want to go into law and will make it (and I would strongly recommend young ones on here to at least sit in on intro philosophy, no matter what their concentration is). It pained me to add philosophy to the list, but I felt like it was necessary.

Edit: To answer your question, I love (in no particular order) politics, film, history, astronomy, business, mathematics, and economics. The only sports I thoroughly enjoy watching are football and basketball, both of which I played as a kid. I respect all of the arts, and every discpline for that matter, but I am afraid the only arts that I love are film and history (although I suppose politics belongs in this category). Obviously I'd be a very different person living in classical antiquity, an era that still influences our lives in more ways than I can imagine. I'd probably be most attracted to mathematics, philosophy and astronomy if I lived in that era.

[krazen1211]

It is an interesting curiosity that 3.5 years of the obama economy has generated

1. Massive profit for large corporations
2. Falling incomes for the middle class
3. Unemployment and poverty in his voting base
4. Unprecedented levels of income inequality
5. A long overdue downsizing of the bloated public sector

You get what you vote for.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

It gives you useful tools like understanding what utilitarianism is.

[TJ in Oregon]

Pretty much every other endeavour relies upon Philosophy to some degree. Science requires a robust and proper understanding of empiricism in order to obtain useful knowledge about the world. Math and computer science require logic.

While philosophy is important to understand on some levels in science, a degree in it is less so. Yes, a scientist needs to understand empiricism, but less as a grand abstract idea and more as an implicit understanding of how to conduct ones self. You don't need a degree in philosophy to collect data. In fact, I've yet to meet anyone with a degree in philosophy in a science graduate program. You can use logic without defining it.

Interestingly I know a few people in science that study philosophy as a hobby on the side. One of my friends in undergraduate wanted to be an engineer in industry for a while to earn enough income to go back to graduate school and get a doctorate in philosophy. But I don't really see people move in the other direction because it would be hard to conduct meaningful research without a years of technical training that a philosophy major would lack.

[AmericanNation]

It is an interesting curiosity that 3.5 years of the obama economy has generated

1. Massive profit for large corporations
2. Falling incomes for the middle class
3. Unemployment and poverty in his voting base
4. Unprecedented levels of income inequality
5. A long overdue downsizing of the bloated public sector

You get what you vote for.

If BO acknowledged his own record and showed that he grasped what was going on and how he effected it, than outlined an actual path/plan foreword he would have a case to be president, however he hasn't done that.  So, here we are.  LOL.

PS, I like how Politico was right about almost everything in this thread and not one lefty will acknowledge one point.  Pathetic.   

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Science itself runs on top of empiricism. No empiricism, no reliable data.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I have a history degree. The breakdown is this. BA in history minimums of 36 history credits and 60 arts credits. I have 60 arts/60 science credits.

It would be a dual major history/physics if my institution permitted such a thing.

History (36 credits)
Physics (30 credits)
Math    (24 credits)
English (12 credits)
Philosophy (12 credits)
Chemistry (6 credits)

[Badlands17]

http://cew.georgetown.edu/whatsitworth/

There is no need to speculate on which majors fail to boost earning potential; statistics have been collected on this matter, use them. Most people with liberal arts majors can successfully make it into nonspecialized fields like management, sales, and clerical work, it seems.

[TJ in Oregon]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Science itself runs on top of empiricism. No empiricism, no reliable data.

Yes, but you missed my point. You don't have to know what empiricism is to use it. I could go into my department and ask all the grad students what empiricism is and maybe half if you're lucky will know. Having a philosophy degree isn't going to help you collect data; we already assume it's reliable whether we know what empiricisism is or not.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I have a history degree. The breakdown is this. BA in history minimums of 36 history credits and 60 arts credits. I have 60 arts/60 science credits.

It would be a dual major history/physics if my institution permitted such a thing.

History (36 credits)
Physics (30 credits)
Math    (24 credits)
English (12 credits)
Philosophy (12 credits)
Chemistry (6 credits)

I have a chemical engineering degree. I had 133 credit hours required for graduation. Of these, 22 were outside Chemical Engineering, some other kind of engineering, Math, Chemistry, and Physics. The other 111 required credit hours were in technical areas related to my major. Perhaps someone majoring in Chemistry, Physics, or some other closely related type of Engineering would have the necessary background for a job in chemical engineering, but certainly not someone who never went beyond liberal arts' majors Calc II in math or beyond intro chemistry or physics. Employers are not looking to teach chemical systems analysis, transport phenomena, and vector calculus. If they were it would take them at least 3 more years to catch non-technical employees up. That's not to say there isn't a field out there somewhere in which a philosophy degree may be useful, but it isn't doing graduate chemical engineering research.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Wow. That scares me.

[Politico]

http://cew.georgetown.edu/whatsitworth/

There is no need to speculate on which majors fail to boost earning potential; statistics have been collected on this matter, use them. Most people with liberal arts majors can successfully make it into nonspecialized fields like management, sales, and clerical work, it seems.

One, the same is generally true of high school graduates and people who did not finish college. Two, all else equal a science or business grad will beat out a liberal arts grad in getting a chance in those type of industries. Finally, look at your source. They are selling a product and would never in a million years tell us what the true economic value of certain majors is (hence their chosen groupings). You'll never get that information from an educational institution.

[TJ in Oregon]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Wow. That scares me.

Well we assume that if the experiment is constructed correctly; we do verify that much. The error in data is considered either intrinsic to the property measured, attributed to the measuring equipment, or from our failure to accurately read the measuring equipment. It's viewed as common sense quite more than some grand epistemological statement.

[AmericanNation]

I have the movie "The Sun Also Rises" on my DVR, I see.  Thinking about the mid twenties crowd, I'm optimistic that the light will turn on for a great many of them and that in a sad way this dem disaster will be beneficial in that you will have a significant cohort with a hardened opinion about the incompetence of the modern left.  It will be much more difficult for the next lefty to pull off this type of scam as long as that cohort is around.         

[Sbane]

The recession happens under a Republican president and this is all the Democrats fault? Wow, that is ridiculous.