With so many reports and articles that actually say something, why this is this one posted. It might have been readable if it had been posted abridged to highlight significant points. But that is the problem. It is so subjective and vague - and no useable numbers - as to be useless when abridged.
mbpark simple posted so much more useful information in his post of 26 Mar 2007 entitled
My Evil Fucking Corporate Masters....
Anyone can make things look good by mortgaging. George Jr is doing it by raiding government trust fund to temporarily pay for "Mission Accomplished"; then not leaving an IOW so the debt does not appear on spread sheets. GM did this throughout the 1990 by shorting their pension funds; which will eventually dumped upon the government. A pension funds are disappearing or diminishing. Meanwhile since 2000, the actual income in the middle of the middle class is diminishing over the past 6 years as people pretend inflated property values will remain inflated.
That article ignores all of this to spin "more than 40 percent of middle-income households carry no credit-card debt at all." IOW 60% are in various degrees of financial indenturehood with solvency dependent on low interest rates, high employment, and not savings. That somehow is a good thing? Suddenly cell phones means life is somehow better? When did that happen? When was the quality of my life determined by how fast someone can interrupt me?
Why of all the good articles about status of living was this pathetic article cited? It says nothing. Apparently the writer needed something to meet a deadline. As
As naoki300 says:
Quote:
|
ive read the article about twice. but cant get the real main claims
|
It has no central or logical point. Amazing that cell phones somehow prove a better quality of life. Far more informative (and with a logical point) is mbpark's post in
My Evil Fucking Corporate Masters...