http://www.gmu.edu/departments/economics/wew/articles/07/IncomeMobility.htm

Dr. Williams uses hard data from a study of low and moderate income people following them for 10 years. Guess what, there is no class warfare, no income disparity equal to the rhetoric we hear from some politicians.

Good to know. Where's my raise?

Not all, I may be getting the ax today. Will keep you posted.

(Bank merger)

good luck Nan...if you get the ax, it just means you can head south earlier this year

Someone should tell that to my company and my wife's company. No raises in the 2008 budget for either company.

Yeah, no raises OR bonuses for anyone who stays through the merger. The meeting is not scheduled until late this PM, so I'll let you know tommorrow.

Funny, I will clock OT to find out I am canned!

Well they obviously didn't talk to everyone since mine is not on the rise, not has it been over the last 5 years.

Mergers are crummy.
Hang in there Nanwa.

Income is on the rise, meanwhile our net worth erodes in both the stock market and the real estate market.

No stay bonus, no severance; no golden handshake from your current employer - what kind of deal is this!!!!

come to Texas, house values are still rising and my 401(k) is way up since the tech bubble correction

louisiana as well...

And yet HRC wants to retain the inheritance tax as a means to get rid of the growing disparity and to uphold the bias in the USA against inherited wealth. I, for one, was unaware of the bias against inherited wealth. The greatest growth in this country occurred before the impostion of personal income taxes. However, we won't be getting rid of income taxes and allow us all to actually get richer and provide for ourselves because we have to fund the social programs and various conflicts in which we find ourselves embroiled.

What happened to the bias toward an independent spirit and personal responsibilty? If a wealthy individual doesn't want their kids to inherit - that person can always leave the money to some charitable cause s/he favors.

That's odd - since 2002 the net worth of US households has increased 44.5%. Sounds like someone made some bad picks.

Hmmm. No raise, no bonus the last two years for me. House value is probably below 2005 value, but way up from what I bought it at. Investment portfolio doing very well, thank you.

Unfortunately, three of the board members are greedy SOBs, two are yes men. The only one with integrity is the bank president, but he has been voted down by these shmucks at every turn.

It is their greed that says no bonuses - it would lower their stock value.

Do you include the $33,000 each person in your household owes as their fair share of the deficit? I'm doing fairly well personally, but I agree that the relative value of the dollar, and everyone's corresponding wealth has eroded over time.

Well my net worth is up over 2002 as well, but the last couple years have not been stellar. Also, 44.5% in 5 years is a 7.6% annualized growth rate, considering incomes are up considerably (including mine) I don't consider 7.6% per year anything to get excited about. If one's home even increased 4% per year in value, and you had 33% equity in it, that portion alone would be up 12%.

You are so predictable. First, complain that net worth is eroding. When proved that it isn't, you complain that 7.6% CAGR is too low. Then, you make absolutely no sense in your discussion of home value appreciation. (Does your mortgage loan increase based on your residence's market value?)

Have you received a bill for the 33000.00? I haven't. Sounds like a red herring to me.

Hmmm, let me see...Have I received the bill? The bill...Oh yes, here it is. It's called the ridiculous budget deficit this country is running!!! WE THE PEOPLE don't print the money the federal reserve and our government uses to spend recklessly, but when the bill comes due, expect our leaders to throw the constitution back in our faces by saying WE THE PEOPLE have to pay this back - through increased taxes on income that is already being devalued through inflationary money policy!

It's funny, you'll be squeezed from both sides: increased taxes to pay for our leader's reckless spending habits, and increased prices for everything due to inflation.

The fact the people aren't rioting in the streets over this astounds me! But then again, that might interrupt American Idol.

Well tell Ron Paul(isnt he your guy?) to get on the fair tax thing, then wages will rise.

I wasn't aware the Federal Reserve was recklessly spending money. In fact, they turn over about $22 billion in excess revenue to the US Treasury every year

I don't know if he's the end all answer, but he's already starting to reshape the debates, similar Perot did in '92.

Personally, I think the US need to not re-elect every public official for a period of 20 years or so. Make politicians worry about their jobs a little so they actually do something!

Politics are starting to become family businesses. Joe Biden's son recently won public office in Delaware, I expect him to replace his father whenever Joe decides to step down. How's that for job security? A lifetime sucking the public teet, then passing it on to your kids.

So two things: Google Ron Paul & No Encumbents in 2008!!

Whether it's borrowed or taxed, it's still spending that is coming out of the private economy - either out of paychecks or out of the capital markets. It's the spending that's the problem, not financing it.

And, I know this is futile, but can you please explain to me how the Federal Reserve is to be criticized for inflation that has fallen below 2%? In the early 90's, it was more than double that. It reached a cycle peak of about 2.5% eighteen months or so ago, and has been on the decline since. Just how much deflation do you want, Hen?