6 ms·

The average household also includes empty nesters and people who have moved out yet haven't started a family yet. The average number of children per family in t

The average household also includes empty nesters and people who have moved out yet haven't started a family yet. The average number of children per family in the 60s was 2.3, which means quite a few families had 3 or 4 children.

bugbuddy 2y ago
According to our experience of the last 7 years, we should expect interest rate cuts, tax cuts, and more fiscal expansion either at the same time or in some sequence. Each of them will help solve our problem. There is no fiscal conservative left in America.
- voisin 2y ago
  > There is no fiscal conservative left in America. Truer words have never been spoken. Fiscal conservatism died with Reagan.
  - sanp 2y ago
    Yes, Reagan the fiscal conservative who tripled the deficit and national debt: https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/commandingheights/shared/minitext/ess_reaganomics.html https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/commandingheights/shared/minitext/e...
    - imtringued 2y ago
      Greek austerity imposed by Germans had resulted in the doubling of debt as percentage of GDP.
      - Rinzler89 2y ago
        Which Germans imposed Greek austerity? AFAIK Greek austerity was imposed by Greece's major creditors, but Germany was only one of many.
        buran77 2y ago
        Between Brussels and Frankfurt (EU institutions I mean) the general consensus was that the Greek situation was more akin to loansharking than anything else. And Germany was undeniably the largest driving factor behind this approach, and the country that most benefited from it.
        Rinzler89 2y ago
        But what was the better alternative for Greece?
  - MisterBastahrd 2y ago
    In what way was Reagan a fiscal conservative other than making the poor targets for pain? He destroyed half the social safety net in this country while running on a hideously bigoted platform and STILL ended up spending an insane amount of money compared to his predecessors. The only fiscal conservative of the past 50 years in the White House was Bill Clinton.
    - Slava_Propanei 2y ago
      [dead]
    - MathMonkeyMan 2y ago
      I saw an interview where Bill quipped "You know how we balanced the budget? We used a little thing called 'arithmetic'."
      - lostlogin 2y ago
        Imagine a candidate who could make a quick, sharp and accurate quip. Out here in the wider world, American elections are more terrifying every time they come around.
      - silverquiet 2y ago
        That one of the two American political parties believes they can lower the deficit by cutting taxes (primarily for the wealthy but that's immaterial to the basic math here) has always created some sense of unreality for me; I really no longer understand what the goal is for many of these people and I often think that they don't really know either. It's almost pure nihilism except when it comes to lust for power.
        jpgvm 2y ago
        It's much less deep then nihilism. Their goal is simply to live their life as richly as they can at the expense of those they consider less than themselves. They are the wealthy and they act accordingly. Why anyone sees Republicans as anything else boggles my mind. Anyone who isn't a billionaire and is voting Republican may as well be a turkey voting for Thanksgiving.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - unyttigfjelltol 2y ago
    Fiscal conservatism died with fiat and John Maynard Keynes' "In the long run we are all dead."
  - trts 2y ago
    maybe more like Bush. Clinton was the last president who oversaw a brief surplus in the federal budget and once said "the era of big government is over". pretty wild to think that surplus was in part driven by the internet boom. now we have some kind of stock market boom while the federal deficit is 10% of total GDP and national debt is growing by a trillion dollars (a million times a million) every 100 days or so.
- bongodongobob 2y ago
  "Fiscal conservativism" is the equivalent of a household not purchasing any insurance, not going to the doctor or dentist, and saying "look how affordable everything is if we cut out all those stupid things? It's wasteful spending!" Then you get into a car accident, go to the hospital, lose your job, and cry about the inefficiency of the market because you now have a huge bill that you can't pay. It's short sighted at best. True fiscal conservatism would be all about social safety nets and free education to grow the economy, but y'all just want to save a few hundred bucks on your property taxes, everything else be damned.
  - bugbuddy 2y ago
    You are using a straw man. The reason we have a democracy and freedom of speech is so that each of us can voice our opinions and vote for those that share them. Unfortunately, nothing is perfect.
    - bongodongobob 2y ago
      I'm using the term as it's used 9/10 times it comes up. I've never in my life met a self proclaimed fiscal conservative that didn't just mean "I want lower taxes". The way to lower taxes is a healthy and intelligent population. That is seen as a cost but is actually an investment that pays massive dividends. That's what a fiscal conservative would do, invest at the societal level. Otherwise they're basically just a libertarian.
      - latency-guy2 2y ago
        So a strawman. You set up the premise, you set up your misunderstanding, and then expect everyone else to follow your misunderstanding. You've even redefined what a "fiscal conservative" would actually do (if you were the one defining it). Then you pulled in "libertarian" out of nowhere. Which is an obvious set up for another strawman, so lets lean into it. Whats a "libertarian"?
        ben_w 2y ago
ta1243 2y ago
Far more divorced now too, so more demand on housing, and more people want to live in cities than in the 1960s, leading to even more demand. It all comes down to the cost of housing, at least in the UK where housing has been ridiculous for over 20 years. That housing is driven up to soak all available income by artificially constrained supply. All available income has increased on a household basis because of egalitarian reasons -- more women work now, which means that more women have to work now. The excess income is lost to housing costs.
- zarzavat 2y ago
  We’ve replaced a world in which women are forced to stay at home with a world where women are forced to work until 70 (or whatever the retirement age is in your country). Great if you’re an exec or have some mentally stimulating job, but for the typical woman it means stacking shelves until your back gives out. What an achievement for society.
  - seec 2y ago
    I personally think the "forced" part is mostly bullshit. It was the default arrangement but far from the only one. In fact, when you read some historical without the feminist propaganda bias it becomes very obvious that it was mostly a desirable position for women. It seems to me that the whole equality propaganda mostly comes from less desirable women who would have a much harder time finding a highly valuable man that would be able to bring a lot to the home (either in the way of money or skills, craftmanship, etc). They wrongly determined it would be better for them if they could be like a man. But reality doesn't care much about feelings and what happens is that those women still get the less desirable man and if they go at it solo, they find out the hard way that there are many things a man provide that are very costly if you have to pay for it in the market. One thing too often overlooked is the importance of a man in children upbringing and there are some nasty statistics about single women raising kids that pretty much depict that very painfully. In the end it doesn't matter, everybody's got much poorer for it, the only winners are the bourgeois women who started it all, who already had a lot of power in the first place. But I guess it was the intended result even if it came at the expense of all the lower social class...

bugbuddy 2y ago

According to our experience of the last 7 years, we should expect interest rate cuts, tax cuts, and more fiscal expansion either at the same time or in some sequence. Each of them will help solve our problem. There is no fiscal conservative left in America.

voisin 2y ago
> There is no fiscal conservative left in America. Truer words have never been spoken. Fiscal conservatism died with Reagan.
- sanp 2y ago
  Yes, Reagan the fiscal conservative who tripled the deficit and national debt: https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/commandingheights/shared/minitext/ess_reaganomics.html https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/commandingheights/shared/minitext/e...
  - imtringued 2y ago
    Greek austerity imposed by Germans had resulted in the doubling of debt as percentage of GDP.
    - Rinzler89 2y ago
      Which Germans imposed Greek austerity? AFAIK Greek austerity was imposed by Greece's major creditors, but Germany was only one of many.
      - buran77 2y ago
        Between Brussels and Frankfurt (EU institutions I mean) the general consensus was that the Greek situation was more akin to loansharking than anything else. And Germany was undeniably the largest driving factor behind this approach, and the country that most benefited from it.
        Rinzler89 2y ago
        But what was the better alternative for Greece?
- MisterBastahrd 2y ago
  In what way was Reagan a fiscal conservative other than making the poor targets for pain? He destroyed half the social safety net in this country while running on a hideously bigoted platform and STILL ended up spending an insane amount of money compared to his predecessors. The only fiscal conservative of the past 50 years in the White House was Bill Clinton.
  - Slava_Propanei 2y ago
    [dead]
  - MathMonkeyMan 2y ago
    I saw an interview where Bill quipped "You know how we balanced the budget? We used a little thing called 'arithmetic'."
    - lostlogin 2y ago
      Imagine a candidate who could make a quick, sharp and accurate quip. Out here in the wider world, American elections are more terrifying every time they come around.
    - silverquiet 2y ago
      That one of the two American political parties believes they can lower the deficit by cutting taxes (primarily for the wealthy but that's immaterial to the basic math here) has always created some sense of unreality for me; I really no longer understand what the goal is for many of these people and I often think that they don't really know either. It's almost pure nihilism except when it comes to lust for power.
      - jpgvm 2y ago
        It's much less deep then nihilism. Their goal is simply to live their life as richly as they can at the expense of those they consider less than themselves. They are the wealthy and they act accordingly. Why anyone sees Republicans as anything else boggles my mind. Anyone who isn't a billionaire and is voting Republican may as well be a turkey voting for Thanksgiving.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- unyttigfjelltol 2y ago
  Fiscal conservatism died with fiat and John Maynard Keynes' "In the long run we are all dead."
- trts 2y ago
  maybe more like Bush. Clinton was the last president who oversaw a brief surplus in the federal budget and once said "the era of big government is over". pretty wild to think that surplus was in part driven by the internet boom. now we have some kind of stock market boom while the federal deficit is 10% of total GDP and national debt is growing by a trillion dollars (a million times a million) every 100 days or so.
bongodongobob 2y ago
"Fiscal conservativism" is the equivalent of a household not purchasing any insurance, not going to the doctor or dentist, and saying "look how affordable everything is if we cut out all those stupid things? It's wasteful spending!" Then you get into a car accident, go to the hospital, lose your job, and cry about the inefficiency of the market because you now have a huge bill that you can't pay. It's short sighted at best. True fiscal conservatism would be all about social safety nets and free education to grow the economy, but y'all just want to save a few hundred bucks on your property taxes, everything else be damned.
- bugbuddy 2y ago
  You are using a straw man. The reason we have a democracy and freedom of speech is so that each of us can voice our opinions and vote for those that share them. Unfortunately, nothing is perfect.
  - bongodongobob 2y ago
    I'm using the term as it's used 9/10 times it comes up. I've never in my life met a self proclaimed fiscal conservative that didn't just mean "I want lower taxes". The way to lower taxes is a healthy and intelligent population. That is seen as a cost but is actually an investment that pays massive dividends. That's what a fiscal conservative would do, invest at the societal level. Otherwise they're basically just a libertarian.
    - latency-guy2 2y ago
      So a strawman. You set up the premise, you set up your misunderstanding, and then expect everyone else to follow your misunderstanding. You've even redefined what a "fiscal conservative" would actually do (if you were the one defining it). Then you pulled in "libertarian" out of nowhere. Which is an obvious set up for another strawman, so lets lean into it. Whats a "libertarian"?
      - ben_w 2y ago

ta1243 2y ago

Far more divorced now too, so more demand on housing, and more people want to live in cities than in the 1960s, leading to even more demand. It all comes down to the cost of housing, at least in the UK where housing has been ridiculous for over 20 years. That housing is driven up to soak all available income by artificially constrained supply. All available income has increased on a household basis because of egalitarian reasons -- more women work now, which means that more women have to work now. The excess income is lost to housing costs.

zarzavat 2y ago
We’ve replaced a world in which women are forced to stay at home with a world where women are forced to work until 70 (or whatever the retirement age is in your country). Great if you’re an exec or have some mentally stimulating job, but for the typical woman it means stacking shelves until your back gives out. What an achievement for society.
- seec 2y ago
  I personally think the "forced" part is mostly bullshit. It was the default arrangement but far from the only one. In fact, when you read some historical without the feminist propaganda bias it becomes very obvious that it was mostly a desirable position for women. It seems to me that the whole equality propaganda mostly comes from less desirable women who would have a much harder time finding a highly valuable man that would be able to bring a lot to the home (either in the way of money or skills, craftmanship, etc). They wrongly determined it would be better for them if they could be like a man. But reality doesn't care much about feelings and what happens is that those women still get the less desirable man and if they go at it solo, they find out the hard way that there are many things a man provide that are very costly if you have to pay for it in the market. One thing too often overlooked is the importance of a man in children upbringing and there are some nasty statistics about single women raising kids that pretty much depict that very painfully. In the end it doesn't matter, everybody's got much poorer for it, the only winners are the bourgeois women who started it all, who already had a lot of power in the first place. But I guess it was the intended result even if it came at the expense of all the lower social class...