Positively Misguided: The Myths and Mistakes of the Positive Thinking Movement

[Pale Blue Dot]

Lately I've been dismayed by a lack of serious skeptical analysis of claims made by all sides in the debate over the current economic crisis. I see this as an area in which rationalism, realism and critical thinking are desperately needed, yet very few skeptics seem to want to talk about it. I think that there is a great deal to be skeptical of in current economic discussions.

First, let me make it clear what my bias is: I believe that this crisis is much worse than most people think. I see complete collapse looming in the near future, with very little that can be done to stop it. This thread is not meant (yet) to articulate my reasons for believing this, but let me assure you that my beliefs are based on data and analysis. I keep up with several economic blogs daily, as well as the Stock Market Watch thread and the Economics forum on DU. (Chris Martenson's Crash Course is an excellent, data-driven overview of our economic problems.) Because of that knowledge and analysis, I correctly predicted, several years ago, the severe downturn that we are experiencing now. I am not claiming that this means I am right about everything that's going to happen, or that my data and analysis can't be wrong. I'm simply saying that my predictions are not based on emotion, or because I "want the economy to fail" (as I have been accused of here on DU), but on actual data, logic and critical thinking.

One of the main arguments that's used against those of us who are economic "pessimists" is that what's causing the downturn is negativity. If Americans would simply believe in the economy again, the logic goes, the recovery would start right away. An assistant at the Treasury Department said as much a few weeks ago when he said that "What we really need now is a little optimism." The press has been spinning very bad economic news as positive ever since.

For instance, take yesterday's announcement about initial jobless claims. Analysts predicted that this weeks number would be 660K - 660,000 new people applying for jobless benefits. The actual number from the government was 654K. The press, and many on DU, breathlessly claimed that unemployment was "better than expected." Because of this number, there is a renewed sense of optimism. However, those reporting this story missed 3 important facts:

1. 654K is still an awful, awful number, by any historical measure;

2. The previous month's numbers were revised UP by 5K. If that 5K had been added to yesterday's release, the number would have come in almost exactly at what analysts had expected;

3. The number of continuing jobless claims (in other words, people collecting unemployment who have yet to find a job) ROSE to a brand new record.

It is in this context that I read with interest Steve Salerno's article in the latest issue of Skeptic magazine called "Positively Misguided: The Myths and Mistakes of the Positive Thinking Movement". Unfortunately, Skeptic has not reprinted the article on their website, but I'll type out so excerpts here, and I encourage you to pick up this issue at your local book store:

For the record, studies of the alleged link between positivity and productivity hardly show a straight-line correlation. Though surveys do show that American workers are both highly productive and relatively upbeat, one cannot posit a causal relationship without adjusting for the myriad ambient variables that make American life so much more uplifting to begin with. History's most rigorous studies, like the bellwether 1985 effort by occupation psychologists Hackett and Guion, cast doubt on even the most basic correlations you'd expect to find- for example, between job satisfaction and low absenteeism. It should be noted that in Japan, the very well-spring of "5S" and other vaunted productivity programs currently overspreading Fortune 500 America, employees aren't exactly giddy. According to a 2002 study by Andrew Oswald, and economics professor at University of Warwick, UK, just 30% of japanese workers describe themselves as "happy" on the job.

In the end, there's scant reliable evidence that a positive attitude has much to do with the result of any objectively measurable enterprise. There is, in fact, modest but intriguing evidence that a positive outlook may be bad for business. Last year a university of Alberta psychology team studied multiple groups of workers assembling printed circuits and deemed the crankier employees superior to their upbeat counterparts. The cheerful people were too invested in their cheerfulness and devoted significant energy to perpetuating it. their grimacing co-workers simply threw themselves into their work - and did it better: Malcontents made half as many mistakes. (Nor for that matter, should we dismiss the role played by undue optimism in the recent mortgage/housing meltdown - on the part of lenders and borrowers alike.)

Much of the economic information in the press and on DU is skewed because we have so much invested in perpetuating the myth that everything's going to be all right. If we can just remain positive, then surely we will find a way out of this mess. Obama's campaign and presidency, likewise, has been built on the themes of "hope" and "yes we can".

Salerno ends the article by suggesting that perhaps what we need is to have "the willingness to accept failure." I believe that a realistic, data-based analysis of the economic data suggests that the American economy has failed. We need to accept that failure and move on from there, rather than perpetuating the idea that hope and positive thinking can save us.

[leftstreet]

1. Don't Worry, Be Happy!

[progressoid]

9. Damn you.

Now I have that earworm stuck in my head.

[CoffeeCat]

2. It's clear that the media began with this...

..."positive" theme several weeks ago--and that it is their dominant message. I guess it's what corporate
American wants pulled through the media to the American people.

They want the economic recovery on the shoulders of the American people. We need to spend. We need to shop.
We need to get the economy going again.

I believe that our entire economic paradigm has been destroyed. It was a flawed paradigm that relied on consumer
spending to prop up the economy. The problem was--this paradigm bankrupted the citizens while enriching the
corporations and the wealthy.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I can't imagine us following that same flawed model.

I think this crisis has been a wake-up call for most Americans who were spending like drunken sailors.

The media and their corporate partners in crime--are trying to get us to fix everything. We fueled their growth, they
caused the crash, we bailed them out--and now we're supposed to fix it all by spending our futures away? I don't think so.

People are sitting on cash now, because they're not spending. I think the media and the corporations are attempting to
entice people into feeling safe--so they'll spend those dollars. So, they tout silver linings--even if the silver linings
are twisted statistics.

They're not telling us the truth--that's for sure. We must do our own due diligence and continue to have this discussion here.

[DemReadingDU]

8. The model is broken

The model relied on consumers spending/buying stuff, whether with cash or credit. Consumers can't continue to spend if they lose their jobs and or homes. Credit cards can smooth things for awhile, but credit is declining and probably will be cut off entirely within a few years. The economy as we knew it in 2006, is gone. And it is not coming back. Look for an economy like 1930's to take it's place.

[zipplewrath]

3. Bit of a straw man

You come off as picking and choosing a bit from your critics so as to color them in the most favorable light to yourself. I'm not saying that you can't find examples of people advocating the "positive outlook" point of view, but it is framing it as some sort of totality of that position that is suspect.

"Talking down" the economy is the phenomenon to which to are alluding and many folks will accept it as a reality, but not a singular cause, but really more of a slope changer, but not the sign on the slope.

Alternately, you are describing a rather extreme point of view yourself, depending upon what you mean by "complete collapse". I think you can get alot of folks to agree that the "bottoming out" that is being proposed may actually be deeper than many are willing to project. There are many questions in that though, how long to the bottom, how low to the bottom, how long AT the bottom, how steep the rise out of the bottom. Your dispute with folks could merely be the semantic difference between "complete collapse" and "much lower bottom".

And fussing about unemployment numbers tends to work against you since unemployment is a lagging indicator. Unemployment could continue to increase for months, and that wouldn't be a sign of anything but a longer, or lower, bottom.

[Zenlitened]

4. As long as unemployment is steadily rising...

... I'm not convinced it's a lagging indicator at all, not in this environment.

/ 2 cents

[Pale Blue Dot]

5. I used unemployment because it was the most immediate example.

I've heard and read this "lagging indicator" idea for a few weeks now. People are basing this idea on the fact that it has been a lagging indicator in previous downturns. I believe that this is a logical fallacy. Just because this has happened in the past does not necessarily mean it will happen in the future. What was the mechanism that caused the recovery in the previous downturns? Do those conditions exist today?

Unemployment, however, is not the reason why I am so pessimistic. It is merely a symptom of the larger problems, mostly the enormous levels of personal, corporate, and governmental debt that we are carrying. Again, the Chris Martenson series that I link to above is an excellent primer on the various problems we are facing.

I will cop to the straw man. It's hard to write a relatively brief OP that people will actually read without doing some over-generalization.

[zipplewrath]

6. It's more than historical

It effectively is a functional reality. Industry tends to downsize, but maintain some excess capacity, either intentionally or out of habit. When the initial upturn begins (if it begins) that excess capacity has to be consumed first. Then employment will begin to increase. To some extent increasing unemployment can be seen as predictive, but only in the sense of an expression of the pessimism of the employer. Of course that pessimism can be very accurate. But very few employers will layoff people before they are done using them. There are nuances of course, and we may see some here. It will be important to pay attention to government based employment because that isn't based as much on demand or productivity. And it can mask an otherwise continued depression of commercial labor.

[Hugin]

11. But, unemployment hasn't plateaued yet.

To expect it to snap around into the positive from a strong downward trend is very unrealistic.

If it were static and low, I could buy the 'lagging indicator' argument. But, the fact it's movement is contrary to the claims makes me doubt the improvement claims I'm hearing.

The most recent expected unemployment number survey of employers I've heard forecast is that 7.6 Million ADDITIONAL people are expected to be either laid-off or not hired... That's on top of the 5 Million we currently have...

Yeah, it's a lagging factor all right... But, not for the 1%-ers. For them the recession might be over, but, not to those 7.6 + 5 Million other Americans.

[Dr.Phool]

7. It's not just the employment numbers.

Household debt is down. Savings are up. I think that the gas price spike last year caused a fundamental change in people's thinking. They know it can, and probably will happen again.

Commercial real estate is set to tank, big time. Where I live, off one of the busiest urban highways in the country, newly constructed strip malls are vacant. Some have stopped construction. The existing ones are running vacancy rates of 50%.

Exports and imports are down everywhere. Railroad cars are parked on desert sidetracks. Cargo shipping is down globally.

I've been through every recession since '71, when I got out of the service. In the early '80s, I was laid off for 2 solid years. From my experience, this is going to turn out much worse.

It takes correct planning, and spending programs to recover, and no amount of spin, positive thinking, or happy talk is going to cure it.

In my book, I think capitalism is in it's death throes.

[wuvuj]

29. Check these charts?

The paradigm of "perpetual growth" which predatory capitalism is based on is in it's death throes?

Resource depletion...global warming...over population...debt crisis....will kill it?

I think things are going to change in major ways...but it will be like watching paint dry....as they try to re-float the boat...and continue to fail?

Once it becomes obvious that it's GAME OVER...will it be wars and Blackwater...or will humans get it right this time? They don't have a very good track record you know.

So here we have the US...real big military run on borrowed dollars...heavily in debt. Using it's military in support of corps to game labor and resources worldwide. Aforementioned brick walls straight ahead. US running with the old paradigm like a turkey with it's neck stuck out right before Thanksgiving?

......................................................

Much is still being bid up...but shipping is dropping again?


http://www.investmenttools.com/futures/bdi_baltic_dry_index.htm


4/8/09 Worldwide shipping rates set to tumble 74%

“We expect industry fundamentals to deteriorate further as demand continues to remain weak and the large order book begins to be delivered,” wrote Nomura’s Andrew Lee in a note to clients. On container shipping, the outlook is similarly miserable: “International routes are loss-making and are likely to remain so,” he said.

[ozymandius]

41. "Where the dollar goes, the flag goes. And the troops follow the flag."

So said Major General Smedley Butler.

We have a lousy history among ourselves while reshaping world history over the centuries. Since we abandoned the spearhead ideas that began our republic after just four presidents (James Monroe, our fifth president, started us on this unsustainable path) - the basic framework of democracy will have to be addressed with the cold rationale concerning our military's intervention in economic matters. It has become a scenario of diminishing returns on an investment.

Consider the following: the military has been deployed since Thomas Jefferson's administration to secure American financial interests outside our borders. Now that we have a vastly decentralized economy, due mainly to globalization, the wealth that our military has been previously employed to protect is fungible and harder to pin to a single location. That, I believe, was the whole point of Bretton Woods 2. This agreement made the U.S. dollar the fiat trading currency worldwide for oil transactions. One only needs to examine where the U.S. military has been involved over the past thirty years in terms of dollar protectionism. In most of these cases, our bogeyman du jour has committed the cardinal sin of either threatening to or abandoning the dollar for some other currency (i.e. Iraq trading oil in euros). The other cardinal sin in which the military has been involved (and threatened to engage) centers on the prospect of losing access to natural resources (i.e. Libya and Venezuela).

Rallying cries like "Remember the Maine!" and "For God and Country!" just don't work anymore to start righteous wars. Now that the "weapons of mass destruction" lie has been outed - what's left? We are at an evolutionary crossroads.

In the case of diminishing returns: top scrutiny is reserved for the military itself. The United States military is the most powerful in the history of the world. Yet, it has become bogged down in Iraq - essentially stalemated by the remnants of a fourth rate military power. How is that investment working out? If this were a stock, would you sell?

Afghanistan: the same. Yet there was no modern, formal military power in existence prior to our invasion. So our stalemate is an even more debilitating investment than Iraq's situation.

In both cases, as you say, these are interventions financed by overseas borrowing. If the military were able to justify its existence based on the mere return on investment how would our numbers and degree of engagement look right now? I envision a military greatly reduced in size and much narrower in focus.

In sum, a military sustained with unsupportable debt levels to maintain an economy based on unsupportable debt spending will fail. There is not enough money in the world - even with fiat currency hegemony - to keep this scheme going. 'Growth' will eventually be redefined by ideas involving 'sustainability'. Capitalism under these circumstances outlined here will certainly fail. The circumstances in which we now find ourselves will force us to reassess the intent of our republic.

Social Contract. Look to our ideological forefathers Thomas Hobbes and John Locke. Hobbes was dour and fatalistic in his vision of evolutionary democracy. Locke was ever more optimistic, pragmatic and, admittedly, surreal in his expectations. But both philosophers centered on one thing: the social contract. The contract can be summed up in one phrase: the greatest good for the greatest number of people. That is an attainable goal. But how do we get there? Is our path to be Hobbes-ian or will it be a Locke-ian one? If I were the Commissar then I would most certainly choose the Locke path. Nonetheless, this is where we find ourselves.

The dogmas of the quiet past, are inadequate to the stormy present.

- Abraham Lincoln

Perhaps the captains of the Ship of State do not want to examine your ideas of predatory capitalism. Perhaps they want things to stay the way things have been. Maybe they are comfortable with the way things have developed because this is the was the world has worked (or not) for their entire professional lives.

These ideas of what is 'workable' for the future, and greater still, of what is 'salvageable' from this crash need to be sent outside and away from these message boards. We will need to address either willingly or unwillingly (should new realities assert themselves) how to move on from this point.

[sendero]

32. I love the "lagging indicator" argument...

.. whose basic premise is that unemployment won't go down until the recession is over. Which is true but so what? You are basically saying "well, that indicator lags so it means nothing, we could already be recovering". Yes we could, and monkeys could fly out of my ass, but they are not.

[ozymandius]

42. You are right. It's a 'lagging indicator' that is posted weekly.

Bureau of Labor Statistics posts new unemployment benefits claims every Thursday at 8:30am. If there is a lag in assessing a trend then it's only a week old. That's expeditious in terms of gauging economic health. These economic markers are extremely helpful in creating a dynamic overview of economic activity.

[Hugin]

10. Very good... Let's keep this as objective as possible. nt

[Dr.Phool]

12. K&R

For more discussion.

But, look on the bright side folks. The Easter Bunny comes tomorrow night!

Gettin' tired of these damn faeries, anyway.

[Karenina]

23. +1

[wuvuj]

31. So now it's...

...the Easter Bunny! When will they EVER learn? :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :)

Probably being promoted by the MSM again? Barack will be out on the WH lawn chasing eggs?

[Demeter]

13. Those Glimmers in the Economy Obama Is Seeing?

Those are tears in the eyes of people facing economic ruin for themselves, their children, and their grandchildren. In a matter of months, if not weeks or days.

[unc70]

14. "Always look on the bright side of life." -- M. Python

This is exactly the right day (Friday) for that thought.

Makes me want to whistle.

[nichomachus]

15. Great post. The "prosperity is just around the corner" attitude is poisonous

The system is fundamentally flawed. That's what go us into this mess. So far, nothing we've seen has addressed that fundamental flaw. So, any "fixes" will be temporary and may make the problem worse.

It's like the situation with many people suffering from chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. In a perverse twist of nature, smoking a cigarette actually makes them feel better -- for a while. But continuing smoking makes the condition worse.

Most of the stuff I'm seeing is predicated on the idea that if we just adjust a few dials and levers we can get the economy "back on its feet." It was never on its feet and without some massive -- and painful changes -- there's nothing to go back to.

What many people are suggesting is that we give banks massive amounts of taxpayer money so they can lend it to consumers at outrageous interest rates to buy shit they really don't need. That's like the person on a crash diet who can't wait to get to their goal weight, so they can go back to eating the way that made them fat to begin with.

[Hugin]

17. "can't wait to get to their goal weight, so they can go back to eating the way that made them fat"

Good and accurate analogy.

[KT2000]

16. Positivity keeps the peace

Whether it is finance or even one's health - the positive thinking concept is nothing more than an attempt to convince people they are in control when really they are not.
The concept engages people, thereby avoiding civil unrest or a depressed out of control patient.
People want to believe that they have such control over thir lives.

I think most people want to place themselves at the center of the universe, something marketing people understand. Whatever reinforces that belief is a marketing winner but not necessarity the truth.

I believe you are right about the economy - it is much worse than we know. The attempt to fix a house of cards with another house of cards will fall apart eventually. I think that all they can do is take measures to avoid panic.

[county worker]

18. You do live in the life you manufacture for yourself.

Call it logical thinking, reason or what ever. You created your world. If you want to be pessimistic go ahead no one is stopping you. You need a reason and you gave yourself one.

For me, I don't agree with you and I don't want to live in your pessimism. The economy is not the only thing going on and as a matter of fact it is a man made thing. To many things on this planet it isn't even relevant.

[Hannah Bell]

27. If you were the only entity in the world, your "life you manufacture for yourself"

might have some validity.

But you're not. Your very identity is the result of a long historical chain & the play of forces you have no knowledge of or control over.

[barbtries]

19. ok. so what's to be done???

i fear the worst to come, but what is to be done about it? right now i have a job, a home, and the ability to feed myself and my son. what's next?

i can take the doom and gloom but i do need some kind of direction. i'm not going to curl up and die. i have children and grandchildren; i want them to be okay, i even want them to be happy and healthy and secure and well educated. what to do?

it's just not enough in my opinion to offer up that the sky is falling even if you are right. solutions. there must be ways to get through it.

i rent an apartment. no place to grow my own food. the economy in CA has already driven my youngest son and i 3000 miles away from our home. my oldest son and my 3 grandchildren are all the way on the other side of the country now; my middle son up in Northern CA on his own, far, far away.

i work full time, 9 to 10 hours a day. i don't know what else i can do. we just get by. we were able to go home for christmas. we have telephones, and a 15-year-old car, without which i would be gone for work 12 to 15 hours a day or more (no viable mass transit). i already have no credit.

so the sky has fallen. the country has failed, or the world has failed. now what?

i'm all for positive thinking. at least it can lead to creative solutions. after all, humanity is not going to just die out in 2009, or 2010. what is, is. there just has to be something better than the relentless doomsaying. i repeat, i am not denying you may be right (and i will grant you have a more solid working knowledge of what is going on and the forces that caused it than i do). but it's like, okay, so here we are. where do we go next? i'll join a mass march, i write and i call, i donate when i can...since september i have gained a hell of an education on the economic crisis. it's bad. now what?

[Dr.Phool]

20. Even the Fed says it's going to get worse.

Armed with knowledge, you can cushion the blow. I used to keep a months supply of canned and dry foods on hand, and plenty of bottled water. Hurricane supplies here in Florida. I've increased that to a six month supply. If I had the money, I'd convert to complete solar power tomorrow.

I also keep plenty of dog food on hand for my large lovable 4 legged alarm system.

[CoffeeCat]

22. Glad I'm not the only one...

I started stockpiling several years ago, because I got into couponing and refunding. I would
combine coupons with sale prices, and buy in bulk--to save money on our monthly grocery bills.
I amassed about a 1-2 month stockpile. Now, I still do the couponing thing, but I stockpile
for longer term. I have a year's supply of shampoo, basic medicines, toothpaste, paper goods, etc--and about a
4 month's-supply of food.

I also try to stockpile cat litter and food too. It's hard to keep up with three kitties.

Good to know that others are doing the same. We have two children, and I can't imagine leaving
ourselves vulnerable--without a supply of food, water and other essentials.

[DemReadingDU]

37. Same here

Probably have 6-7 months stockpile of food, shampoo, toothpaste, toilet paper, pet food, cat litter. I converted 1 bedroom for my pantry. Daughter-in-law calls it my bunker. Using coupons, I have also saved money.

My spouse thinks it is his personal store. Unfortunately, he thinks the size of the can or package, is the serving. So maybe I really only have 3 months stockpile of food.

[grasswire]

21. you articulate the dilemma for parents and grandparents...

...who have been accustomed to finding solutions and making things work for children and grandchildren. There always was a way to solve the problems. How can there not be a path out, for us and ours? Getting more education or getting another job was always possible, before. Now, there seems to be no solid ground.

The first thing I think to be done is to shelter together to save costs and for common protection. Americans will have to live as people do in the rest of the world -- more people under one roof. Children will no longer have a bedroom to themselves -- an American absurd idea anyway. In many European cities, no one even has a bedroom. People sleep in the dining room, the kitchen, etc.

The second task is to build community -- essential for barter, for personal safety.

Third, get tools and how-to information.

Fourth, establish water and food sources.

Yeah, it's a lot of the old survivalist blahblah. But, really, is there any downside to being prepared for the worst?

[barbtries]

25. my parents lived through the great depression.

my mother's father died and her mother ran a boardinghouse. i'd run a boardinghouse, but there are no resources already to even give that a serious consideration. my father worked for the CCC and WWII came along and he joined the navy. well, i would eat nails before i would let my son join the service when my country is engaged in senseless wars and torturing people. he talks about it though, because he's graduating high school next year and i don't have enough money to send him to college.

in a sense i suppose the depression came home to us a long time ago - or recession, or poverty. i have been poor for virtually my entire adult life. paycheck to paycheck. when we moved to NC i was fortunate to get a really good job. rent is affordable here. we're doing slightly better than treading water, which is what we were doing in CA.

your post gives me food for thought. if and when i lose my job...what then? it's not a bad idea to make provisions. on the other hand after 20-30 years of experiencing so much of worst coming to worst - everything short of true hunger, i mean - i'm kind of over the mindset that says the worst is coming. i find it less than productive to wring my hands, and i despise worrying. it's such a waste of energy.

so i suppose my life history, which includes unemployment, homelessness, estrangement from my family, and tragedy (lost both my parents by age 25, my daughter was murdered in 2001), has if nothing else served to prove the strength and depth of my mettle to myself. we will be okay. if we can be okay ever, we will be okay for ever.

but just to give an example of creative solutions. all the foreclosed homes, all the homeless people. in the event of worst comes to worst, why not find a way to house the people and people the houses? they could be put to work maintaining and repairing said houses. just a thought. there must be thoughts such as these that put the concepts you mention to work toward the common good.

peace.

[Hannah Bell]

30. your vision for the future is: sleep in the kitchen?

there's plenty of housing in this country; 1 in 9 units is vacant.

why do we have to sleep in our kitchens?

[grasswire]

38. if there's plenty of housing, why are there millions of homeless people?

Hm?

[muriel_volestrangler]

24. What's your definition of 'failure' for an entire economy?

Or of 'collapse'? Is it "the national currency becomes unusable"? Or just "there's no growth, and occasional shrinkage, in GDP"?

Japan, as many point out frequently, was in and out of recession for almost all of the 90s. People say there are all kinds of lessons there on how not to cure the problems we have now. But it continued to function as a major industrial economy. It just stopped being the "OMG, they're going to own world!" country.

If that happens to the USA - if it drops a few places in the GDP per capita ratings - is that a 'failure' or 'collapse'?

[DemReadingDU]

28. The key words: major industrial economy

There is no major industry in the U.S. anymore. Seriously, what do we manufacture? Shoes? Outer clothing? Underwear? Sheets & towels? Small appliances? Cars?

As the recession deepens into a depression where more people become jobless, homeless, pennyless and hungry, what are all these people going to do? How many fast food restaurants, and big-box stores will be able to be supported? If some of the major industries could return to the U.S., we could have jobs for people, and jobs produce a stable economy.

I don't know what's coming would be called a collapse or a failure?

[muriel_volestrangler]

35. Cars, areoplanes, pharmaceuticals and much more

Here's one list (from the CIA factbook): "petroleum, steel, motor vehicles, aerospace, telecommunications, chemicals, electronics, food processing, consumer goods, lumber, mining"

Industry is 19.6% of GDP; per capita (total $47,000), that's $9,212. Compare that with Japan: 27.9% of $34,200 (at PPP) is $9541.80. So the amount of industry, in the USA, is roughly comparable (per person) to Japan; services are (were?) bigger in the USA. The figures for services include a lot of financial stuff, and that seems to have been overvalued. But the US still does have industry; it just doesn't dominate the world like it did in the decades after the Second World War.

[DemReadingDU]

36. US still does have industry

Yes, we do still make things - toilet paper, shampoo, food, autos. But many auto manufacturers are shutting down, hundreds of thousands more are unemployed. Unfortunately, there is no major manufacturing starting up to replace those lost auto jobs. And unemployed people will not be able to afford to buy any car, new or used. And unless they have a savings account, they will not be afford to buy food, shampoo, and toilet paper after their unemployment-insurance runs out.

[eridani]

26. Also, the study pointed out that the self evaluations of sourballs--

--were very similar to their evaluations by their bosses and coworkers. The terminally perky overestimated their worth by quite a bit. Note that the sourballs were not putting themselves down--they were simply accurate.

[sendero]

33. I've always laughed..

... at the "positive thinking" crowd. There is nothing wrong with trying to keep an upbeat attitude in the face of adversity, but there is something very wrong with closing your eyes, plugging your ears and chanting la la la la la.

So, while the positive thinking crowd buys another Lexus they cannot afford to "help the economy", I will not spent much I don't have to.

While they assume that this is "just another recession, it will last 12-18 months", I'm quite sure they are wrong and I'm taking steps.

And I know for a FACT that the people at work who are most likely to be cranky are the most productive and talented, the pollyannas are always blindsided by their repeated failures.

[DemReadingDU]

34. sounds like my family

Eight of us siblings, all have done well. Some of us even have grown children, also doing well.

But I am the only one looking at the facts. Everyone else believes the spin that recovery is just around the corner, the stock market always comes back.

How, I ask? We have no major industry. Factories are closing down, unemployment is rising higher. Recovery cannot be soon, and the market may not come back for generations because there are trillions of worthless toxic investments around the world.

They think I'm obsessed because I am taking steps to survive in a coming depression.

[KakistocracyHater]

39. I view 'central banks' as bs houses

but I'm looking at the global economy with that paper money crap thrown out. I look at employment numbers, food productivity, manufacturing output, natural resources. Apparently, the U.S. is good at exporting scrap metals & filling up garbage landfills rapidly.

They falsely attached new home buying & new car sales to the gdp, THAT was a sign they were jiggering their numbers. I know a government could quite rapidly shift away from the printing presses at those central banks. 35%ish of the world's wealth owned by 1%? There's something fishy about that.

http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html

..."The Wealth Distribution

In the United States, wealth is highly concentrated in a relatively few hands. As of 2001, the top 1% of households (the upper class) owned 33.4% of all privately held wealth, and the next 19% (the managerial, professional, and small business stratum) had 51%, which means that just 20% of the people owned a remarkable 84%, leaving only 16% of the wealth for the bottom 80% (wage and salary workers). In terms of financial wealth, the top 1% of households had an even greater share: 39.7%. Table 1 and Figure 1 present further details drawn from the careful work of economist Edward N. Wolff at New York University (2004)."...

...."In terms of types of financial wealth, the top one percent of households have 44.1% of all privately held stock, 58.0% of financial securities, and 57.3% of business equity. The top 10% have 85% to 90% of stock, bonds, trust funds, and business equity, and over 75% of non-home real estate. Since financial wealth is what counts as far as the control of income-producing assets, we can say that just 10% of the people own the United States of America."....

[Karenina]

40. . .