ECA--isn't your point captured at Reply #18?  If not, how much more clearly do you need it shown?  Often, an injection of cash HAS raised the wages==all part of general inflation.  That is why THIS downturn is not part of the normal business cycle but rather is a "re-set" or "new normal" as some of the pundits say.  Then the non-bought pundits point out that the increased wealth/wages has rather been captured by the 1%.  All as graphed for our elucidation.

And since the last raise in Lower wages, we have had 3-5(?) increases into the economy...
A bunch by Bush, and going for 2 under  Obama..

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

You see ECA==Keynes is right.  Stimulate the economy and wealth/income is created.  But with the mania for "regulations are class warfare" BS that passes for sound social policy these days, there is no controlling where the increase stimulus created income goes.

Ain't that a bitch?

Lets go back, Just before 1970..
When a weeks salary was enough to fill a car FULL of groceries..about $20, at min wage.
AT this time, Im getting about $800 per month on disability.
And to get a few bags, costs me $50-75 per bag.

Wages in 1970?
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0774473.html
read this carefully..  this is based on the 1996 dollar.  AND the current value of the Dollar.
In 1968 a person at min wage, was earning Equal to $7.21 per hour, for the cost of living.
In 2007 a per at min wage was earning EQAUL to $4.41 per hour...  Even after an increase of about $5.60 per hour.
The value of the goods we buy, has MOSTLY held in costs, EXCEPT the value of the dollar has fallen.

Keep injecting money into the economy, and it keeps getting worse.  You can raise Wages, and make it LOOK GOOD, but the VALUE of your money ISNT THAT GOOD.
You can make GOLD look good, as you make the Value of the Dollar LESS, it inflates in VALUE to match the change.  ITS fake Economics..

The basis for one of the most "telling" charts you will ever see:



Telling when matched to another chart showing that the vertical take off by the Republicans is closely matched to the increase in net income, net wealth, and political contributions of the top .1%.  Can't find that chart but will post it when I find it.

It demonstrates why our political process is not responding to the well evidenced and understood "popular will." - But- in politics as in so much:  Follow the Money.

The political polarization and ill will between Republicans and Dems is illustrated by this chart.  10 years ago the Republicans pushed for the single mandate and such pushing was scored as a Republican measurement.  2 years ago, Obama, a Democrat, proposed the single mandate but the Republicans reject it as Socialism.  So now the Republicans claim State Nannyism and they move farther to the crazy right as the compromise seeking Obama can't keep up with them.

Republicans won't be happy until we are but a nation of temporary work drones on free market no minimum wages all working for international corporations dolling out their jobs program for the rest of us.

So clear---you can chart it.

So clear---you can chart it.

Not sure I agree. First, the image is so small I had to blow it up to insanely grainy size to read it at all. Second, there is no indication of how that scale is derived or what the standard is for the numbers on the left axis. Third, it defies observation. The country has been shifting so steadily to the right that the Democraps are now in the same upper right quadrant on the political compass as the republicans. Those leaning slightly left, like Kucinich, are labeled radical and insane. So, what I disagree with most strongly is that the Democrat line is shown as getting more liberal. Compared to what? I strongly disagree. Today's democraps are more conservative than Nixon.

BTW, don't miss the severe shift in Obama himself.

This is the chart for the 2012 U.S. presidential election.



Source: http://politicalcompass.org/uselection2012

Compare with just 4 years ago, the 2008 presidential election:



And note the candidates at the time of the primary, including the shift of Obama even in that short time span.



Source: http://politicalcompass.org/uselection2008

So, where is the line showing that today's democraps are yesterdays repugnicans? The lines correctly show that today's repugnicans are extreme right-wing nutjobs. But, the democraps are only better, not good, and certainly not liberal.

Excellent points.  Our too charts are based on measurements of different things with the same/overlapping labels.  All valid within their own domain, some correlations between the two, but not the same thing.

That said, it does seem to me that "my" chart should show that rightward drift we all have a gut feel has happened.  Its like the entire chart should have an upward slope?  But it all depends on what that vertical axis is.

One show did have some talk about it as there is an independent group that formulated and made the measurements.

Even good statistics, and their charting, need to be understood.

Even good statistics, and their charting, need to be understood.

Agreed!

One thing I love about the political compass is that it clearly separates social issues from financial issues on separate axes.

Another thing you may note on the political compass charts I posted earlier is that someone like me, charted below, has absolutely no one to vote for, merely abhorrent and less abhorrent candidates.



Yes, I know I'm a radical. This neither surprised nor upset me when I first took the test. I wonder if I'd shift at all if I took it again. This was from 3/2008.

I took the test again and moved very slightly toward the lower left corner, making me even more radical. But, I confess that the first test may be slightly less biased as I understood the test less well. I may have unconsciously or semi-consciously answered one or two questions differently with the knowledge that it would push me that way. So, let the original graphic stand.

Didn't I take that test after your posting somewhere a while back?  I think I landed very close to you==and Mahatma Ghandi if memory serves?

How can Ron Paul as a libertarian be so conservative?==except that personal liberty issues have very little weight compared to spending issues? >>>>  Again, all so, if not "subjective" THEN >>>Definitional.

I'll take the test if the categories have at least an attempt to define themselves?--by other than the questions asked and the scores received?

Didn't I take that test after your posting somewhere a while back?  I think I landed very close to you==and Mahatma Ghandi if memory serves?

How can Ron Paul as a libertarian be so conservative?==except that personal liberty issues have very little weight compared to spending issues? >>>>  Again, all so, if not "subjective" THEN >>>Definitional.

I'll take the test if the categories have at least an attempt to define themselves?--by other than the questions asked and the scores received?

I think you did take the test. I think you didn't end up quite as far down in the lower left as I did, but did end up in that quadrant. Funny though, I don't see a response from you on this thread.

http://cagematch.dvorak.org/index.php?topic=3882.0

Regarding Ron Paul, he believes corporations should be completely deregulated. That's what the left-right axis is all about. He's not terrible on social issues but does oppose abortion pretty vehemently. The spending issues are the left right axis. The personal freedom issues are the up down axis. Note that all of the main stream candidates are very strongly for corporate freedom and none for personal freedom. Scary as all hell, no? I liked Kucinich. I wonder what he'll do now that he's lost his spot in congress in the Ohio primary. Another victim of redistricting.

For my part, I think corporations should be regulated quite strongly, think fair market rather than free market, and that people should be free. That's my interpretation of the lower left quadrant.

I took that test long ago, and am amazed that Im still about the same spot...

I took that test long ago, and am amazed that Im still about the same spot...

Mind sharing where you are on the grid? Of course, it is personal if you'd prefer not to. I'm just curious.

tHINK i POSTED IT back then..

Some place around -6,-4, Im near Ghandi..
If you are an idiot, BE an idiot, area..
PARENTS should be helping kids learn..area
And
Everyone NEEDS to help..

I do think genetics plays a bigger role in our lives than it is still given credit for.  Is there a republican/crazy/fascist/zombie gene?  Of course not---but there could be a "complex" of such genes.  Why do we all think the way we do?  Why is reality not perceived the same way by all of us?  Why do some people refuse to change their minds???

I blame the amyglia.  Its a part of the brain that would form the alter of whatever I would worship if I were given the command to do so.  Ha, ha.

Here is a recent study showing the differences between Liberal and Conservative minded people.  I believe it completely:  100%.  Group measurements still allow for all kinds of individual variability.  As a liberal, this study says I should understand that and be comfortable with it.  And I am.  As a conservative, this study says you will not understand that and will be quite uncomfortable with that.

So, the question for this post is:  How do you feel?

The tease:  "As far as toleration goes, the research certainly suggests that liberals and conservatives alike have strengths and weaknesses, and ought to fare better in some situations than others. Liberals are better at handling nuance, uncertainty and flexibility, while conservatives do better with leadership, duty and loyalty. There are good things about both ideologies."  ///  My response:  what in the world is "good" about doing better with leadership, duty, and loyalty???  HahHAW==looks like LAME STREAM MEDIA BIAS again--trying to equate the two sides, the opposing sides, of an argument trying to make it look like there is a fair choice between them?

I'll wait for the studies as to why Republicans vote to their own injury.  Thats where the rubber meats (sic) the road.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21428590.200-political-divides-begin-in-the-brain.html?DCMP=OTC-rss&nsref=online-news