How America Lost the Skyscraper Race

[FairAndUnbiased]

1. Is the vid poster's profile-pic from the film A Clockwork Orange ?

2. Why did the person dive towards the end of the vid ?

Most US posters here are grossly out of touch because they're part of the oligarch class, are boomers who cashed in on their generational privilege, or their status in society depends on not understanding the issues in US society. They don't know what it is like to be part of the working or middle class. Talk to some real Americans under the age of 40 or so, they'll tell you the truth.

64% of Americans cannot afford a $500 emergency, are choking on student loan ($1.6T)and work shit contract slave labor jobs with no benefits or security. Wages have stagnated for decades.

The consumer market, unlike what the cheerleaders would have you believe, is flat. Energy consumption is flat, the retail market is flat. All GDP gains have gone straight to the top. I am one of the few lucky enough to have a relatively high wage permanent job, and it is still a nightmare to navigate the healthcare system when I needed acute medical care. And this is not even going into race issues.

 

[Hamartia Antidote]

Most US posters here are grossly out of touch because they're part of the oligarch class, are boomers who cashed in on their generational privilege, or their status in society depends on not understanding the issues in US society. They don't know what it is like to be part of the working or middle class. Talk to some real Americans under the age of 40 or so, they'll tell you the truth.

LOL! There are a couple boomers here but most of us were born after 1964. Besides I'm not even sure how the over 40 people can possibly be getting a boomer benefit since we have to go to work every day just like the 20-40 somethings. Not like the over 40 crowd were making millions in the 1990's or something and can sit on a Waikiki beach all day.
Oligarch class?...er what? Don't know what it is like to be part of the working or middle class?
We'll see who gets the finger pointed at them for being out of touch.

Gentlemen
@Gomig-21
@KAL-EL
@gambit
@F-22Raptor

64% of Americans cannot afford a $500 emergency,

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-06-04/the-400-emergency-expense-story-is-wrong
Americans May Be Strapped, But the Go-To Statistic Is False
It is a myth that a large share of people can’t cover a $400 emergency expense. Why does the story persist?

A large share of Americans can’t cover a $400 emergency expense: You’ve probably heard politicians and journalists breathlessly report that shocking statistic more than once in the last year or so.

A few recent examples. Senator Kamala Harris, in April of this year: “In America right now today, almost half of Americans are a $400 unexpected expense away from complete upheaval.” Senator Elizabeth Warren last month: “The gap between incomes and costs is so gaping that 40% of Americans can't come up with $400 in an emergency.” And Senator Bernie Sanders, also in May: “Four in 10 [Americans are] unable to afford a $400 emergency expense.”

This claim has never seemed plausible to me. After all, if so many Americans can’t cover a relatively minor unexpected expense, that would affect daily life in obvious ways. You’d frequently have a coworker out of the office who can’t afford to buy a new tire. You’d frequently hear from friends and neighbors who can’t afford to fix their dishwashers.

Others have been equally skeptical of the $400 story, and published convincing rebuttals. Nevertheless, it has become the conventional wisdom. So when this issue flared up again last month, I decided to look into it. It turns out the claim that nearly half of Americans are a flat tire away from financial crisis is largely based on an inaccurate reading of one survey question.

The question comes from the annual “Report on the Economic Well-Being of U.S. Households” by the Federal Reserve. The report finds, in 2018, that 61% of adults would cover a $400 unexpected expense using cash (or its equivalent). Politicians and many in the media seem to be subtracting 61 from 100, and concluding that 39% of people, to use Warren’s phrase, “can’t come up with” the money they’d need to handle this situation.

Instead, as the Fed report makes clear, though “the remaining 4 in 10 adults” “would have more difficulty covering such an expense,” many of them would be able to make it work by carrying a credit card balance or borrowing from friends and family. (Presumably some of these adults are 18-year-olds borrowing from their parents, but I’m not sure about that.)

The report states: “Twelve percent of adults would be unable to pay the expense by any means.” I’m dubious about that as well. In any event, 12% is a lot less than 39%.

The report also goes out of its way to make clear that some of the 39% who wouldn’t use cash might still have $400 in the bank: “It is possible that some would choose to borrow even if they had $400 available, preserving their cash as a buffer for other expenses.” In a footnote, the report even cites a 2016 study finding that 76 percent of households had $400 in liquid assets, even after taking into account monthly expenses.

A number of people with healthy finances carry some credit-card debt while also holding cash. A financial adviser might counsel against this, but it is not necessarily a sign that the borrower’s life is, to use Harris’s phrase, in “complete upheaval.”

The common misinterpretation of this finding in the study is particularly strange in light of two other questions on the same survey. The Fed asks respondents whether they are able to pay all of their bills in full. Only 17% say they can’t pay some bills. Again, 17%, not 39%.

The Fed also asks respondents how a $400 emergency expense that they had to pay would affect their ability to pay their other bills. Eighty-five percent report that they would still be able to pay all their bills. Only 14% say that the emergency expense would result in their not being able to pay some bills.

I am troubled that 12% say they couldn’t cover the $400 expense, and that 14% claim it would stop them from paying some of their other bills. But even if respondents are accurately reporting on their finances, these numbers suggest their situation is relatively uncommon. By making the problem seem so widespread, politicians and journalists are making it harder to identify how to help people who really are suffering financial hardship.

Why does the conventional wisdom about the $400 expense refuse to die? The easy answer is because it riles up voters and attracts readers. That raises a different question: Why is there an appetite for this finding?

I’d speculate, in part, that this faulty interpretation resonated during the slow and painful recovery from the Great Recession. The recession was traumatic, and affected how many people think about their personal finances, their employment relationships — their economic security.

Fortunately, the economic recovery is largely complete. But judging by the persistence of the myth that a broken washing machine would be a crisis for well over one-third of adults, the psychological recovery is continuing.

 

[KAL-EL]

LOL! There are a couple boomers here but most of us were born after 1964. Besides I'm not even sure how the over 40 people can possibly be getting a boomer benefit since we have to go to work every day just like the 20-40 somethings. Not like the over 40 crowd were making millions in the 1990's or something and can sit on a Waikiki beach all day.
Oligarch class?...er what? Don't know what it is like to be part of the working or middle class?
We'll see who gets the finger pointed at them for being out of touch.

Gentlemen
@Gomig-21
@KAL-EL
@gambit
@F-22Raptor



https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-06-04/the-400-emergency-expense-story-is-wrong
Americans May Be Strapped, But the Go-To Statistic Is False
It is a myth that a large share of people can’t cover a $400 emergency expense. Why does the story persist?

A large share of Americans can’t cover a $400 emergency expense: You’ve probably heard politicians and journalists breathlessly report that shocking statistic more than once in the last year or so.

A few recent examples. Senator Kamala Harris, in April of this year: “In America right now today, almost half of Americans are a $400 unexpected expense away from complete upheaval.” Senator Elizabeth Warren last month: “The gap between incomes and costs is so gaping that 40% of Americans can't come up with $400 in an emergency.” And Senator Bernie Sanders, also in May: “Four in 10 [Americans are] unable to afford a $400 emergency expense.”

This claim has never seemed plausible to me. After all, if so many Americans can’t cover a relatively minor unexpected expense, that would affect daily life in obvious ways. You’d frequently have a coworker out of the office who can’t afford to buy a new tire. You’d frequently hear from friends and neighbors who can’t afford to fix their dishwashers.

Others have been equally skeptical of the $400 story, and published convincing rebuttals. Nevertheless, it has become the conventional wisdom. So when this issue flared up again last month, I decided to look into it. It turns out the claim that nearly half of Americans are a flat tire away from financial crisis is largely based on an inaccurate reading of one survey question.

The question comes from the annual “Report on the Economic Well-Being of U.S. Households” by the Federal Reserve. The report finds, in 2018, that 61% of adults would cover a $400 unexpected expense using cash (or its equivalent). Politicians and many in the media seem to be subtracting 61 from 100, and concluding that 39% of people, to use Warren’s phrase, “can’t come up with” the money they’d need to handle this situation.

Instead, as the Fed report makes clear, though “the remaining 4 in 10 adults” “would have more difficulty covering such an expense,” many of them would be able to make it work by carrying a credit card balance or borrowing from friends and family. (Presumably some of these adults are 18-year-olds borrowing from their parents, but I’m not sure about that.)

The report states: “Twelve percent of adults would be unable to pay the expense by any means.” I’m dubious about that as well. In any event, 12% is a lot less than 39%.

The report also goes out of its way to make clear that some of the 39% who wouldn’t use cash might still have $400 in the bank: “It is possible that some would choose to borrow even if they had $400 available, preserving their cash as a buffer for other expenses.” In a footnote, the report even cites a 2016 study finding that 76 percent of households had $400 in liquid assets, even after taking into account monthly expenses.

A number of people with healthy finances carry some credit-card debt while also holding cash. A financial adviser might counsel against this, but it is not necessarily a sign that the borrower’s life is, to use Harris’s phrase, in “complete upheaval.”

The common misinterpretation of this finding in the study is particularly strange in light of two other questions on the same survey. The Fed asks respondents whether they are able to pay all of their bills in full. Only 17% say they can’t pay some bills. Again, 17%, not 39%.

The Fed also asks respondents how a $400 emergency expense that they had to pay would affect their ability to pay their other bills. Eighty-five percent report that they would still be able to pay all their bills. Only 14% say that the emergency expense would result in their not being able to pay some bills.

I am troubled that 12% say they couldn’t cover the $400 expense, and that 14% claim it would stop them from paying some of their other bills. But even if respondents are accurately reporting on their finances, these numbers suggest their situation is relatively uncommon. By making the problem seem so widespread, politicians and journalists are making it harder to identify how to help people who really are suffering financial hardship.

Why does the conventional wisdom about the $400 expense refuse to die? The easy answer is because it riles up voters and attracts readers. That raises a different question: Why is there an appetite for this finding?

I’d speculate, in part, that this faulty interpretation resonated during the slow and painful recovery from the Great Recession. The recession was traumatic, and affected how many people think about their personal finances, their employment relationships — their economic security.

Fortunately, the economic recovery is largely complete. But judging by the persistence of the myth that a broken washing machine would be a crisis for well over one-third of adults, the psychological recovery is continuing.

Almost wish I was part of that money class

 

[FairAndUnbiased]

Almost wish I was part of that money class

in America its fucking awesome to have money. It is significantly less awesome to not have money.

 

[Gomig-21]

LOL! There are a couple boomers here but most of us were born after 1964. Besides I'm not even sure how the over 40 people can possibly be getting a boomer benefit since we have to go to work every day just like the 20-40 somethings. Not like the over 40 crowd were making millions in the 1990's or something and can sit on a Waikiki beach all day.
Oligarch class?...er what? Don't know what it is like to be part of the working or middle class?
We'll see who gets the finger pointed at them for being out of touch.

Gentlemen
@Gomig-21
@KAL-EL
@gambit
@F-22Raptor

Oli... wut?! I'm about as blue collar as they come lol. Believe me if I had endless amounts of money and didn't have to get up and go to work at a physical and mental job running my small business, I'd be on a 50 foot Italian Azimut yacht cruising the Bahams and Florida and doing the same in the Red Sea in Sinai. Sadly I'm nowhere near doing either of those!!!

 

[Nan Yang]

View attachment 644643
1950's to present: wealthier suburban living

American living conditions reflect its strong individualism and ego culture.
Take one example. Swimming Pools - They like to own their own swimming pools. But how often do they use it ? Only 3 months of the summer ? How much do each have to pay to maintain it. The chemicals bills, the electrical bills, the filters, the cleaning, the repairs if things break etc. Its pretty expensive.
For most Chinese this is impractical. Most of the high rise condominium have community pools and sport centers. Each family only have to pays a small month subscription. You can also rent rooms for parties BBQ etc.
The same thing apply to owning their own boats, jet skis, buggies etc. You can just rent it.
Or each person having their own car. Because you cannot live without a car in the suburbs in US. Its not like you can walk to the grocery store. You can't just hop onto a cheap bus because there are none. So more cost.

US also have alot of rules. You might own a house with a nice front yard (Which pretty useless as it is only for show). And then you have to maintain it or the Housing association will fine you. Like dead leaf on a palm tree or too much weeds or too much dead leaves. Just more work or maintenance cost.
Most American by 40 years old (I could even say by 60years old) have not even finish paying for their house loan. They rather pay for all the underutilized expensive toys. Why do you think that once a person loses his job, he will be out on the street within 2 months.

Then there is the rich poor divide in US. In US the cost of house is based how good the local schools are. Each school have a boundary. So only the rich can afford a house within a good school boundary. So this create a rich neighborhood and poor neighborhood. So in the rich neighborhood, you are safe and nothing gets stolen. That is why a blackman walking around a rich neighborhood attract alot of attention from the local people.

There are pro and cons. You cannot have the cake and eat it too. There has to be a balance. A Middle Path.

 

[Hamartia Antidote]

American living conditions reflect its strong individualism and ego culture.

I'm pretty sure the US doesn't have a monopoly on individualism.

Take one example. Swimming Pools - They like to own their own swimming pools. But how often do they use it ? Only 3 months of the summer?

3 months if you live in the north but in areas of the South you can use your pool almost year round. In fact many waterparks in the south can be open even in December.

Here's a Disney one in December..when it's snowing in the north.

The chemicals bills, the electrical bills, the filters, the cleaning, the repairs if things break etc. Its pretty expensive.

Yes, it can be expensive and the US has more private immovable pools than probably any other nation. However they were not as common pre-WW2 when we were still where China is today in the "urbanization" stage (as with you most people back then living outside cities considered it completely impractical). Sure they had enough money to buy cars and things but not enough of an income level to afford taking things to the next stage.

Now jump to the time after WW2 and pools were suddenly all over the place. In the south where it is very warm you can fly a drone for miles in the suburbs and see the crazy number. However fly that drone pre-WW2 in that same area and you'd see a far far different picture.

For most Chinese this is impractical.

More like impossible.
BTW Mao scoffed at the thought of the average Chinese person owning a car. Said it was just a western waste and bicycles were good enough.

Now look at what has happened when incomes rise.

You can also rent rooms for parties BBQ etc.

Not if you want to do it at the spur of the moment.
We can rent rooms too. Just another option.

The same thing apply to owning their own boats, jet skis, buggies etc. You can just rent it.

You can rent it here to. But maybe you'd like one all day and don't want to deal with the uncertainty of availability. Maybe you want to run it on the ocean in an area with no rentals or some obscure lake. Maybe you want to tinker with the engine to make it run faster. Maybe you feel the design could be improved so you mod it to your liking. Progress happens when somebody speaks up instead of just rolling with the flow.

Hey @Gomig-21 why aren't you renting a boat instead of owning one...
You should post a pic of it.

Want to have more fun at the ski slopes: Buy a nice set and wax them every time.
Want to have more fun ice skating: Buy a nice pair and have them professionally sharpened every time.
Want to ...

Its not like you can walk to the grocery store. You can't just hop onto a cheap bus because there are none. So more cost.

Stop making generalizations about things you know nothing about. I can walk to a major chain supermarket near me. The buses in my state are only $1.70 for the entire route length. Contrary to popular belief not all public transportation buses are just in big cities. They run down some suburban roads too (yes, I know...not the majority of them).

Some bus routes (ie not ALL) in the suburbs of Boston.

If people want to live in an area that doesn't offer things like that well that is their choice. Best to do your homework on what you are getting yourself into before buying.

US also have alot of rules. You might own a house with a nice front yard (Which pretty useless as it is only for show). And then you have to maintain it or the Housing association will fine you.

HAHAHA!!!
If only every homeowner in the US was so lucky enough to have rules like this to force all their neighbors to upkeep their property. Sadly places this that fine people are not common. This is mostly in a specially built housing development where you have to sign a contract to live by the builder/owner rules...not the town/city.

Most American by 40 years old (I could even say by 60years old) have not even finish paying for their house loan.

This is true because the most common mortgage in the US is a 30 year and since the median home buyer is ~33 your 60 number is not far-fetched.

However I paid my house off in under 14. Not 60 yet.

They rather pay for all the underutilized expensive toys. Why do you think that once a person loses his job, he will be out on the street within 2 months.

In my state you get 30 weeks of unemployment (~7 months). In the past (like in 2008) when things got bad they extended it to 99 weeks. That pretty nice.

Then there is the rich poor divide in US. In US the cost of house is based how good the local schools are. Each school have a boundary. So only the rich can afford a house within a good school boundary.

Well it depends upon how the town votes on what to spend the money on.
One wealthy town can vote to funnel tons of money into their schools. The wealthy town next door may vote to skimp on the school money and build a 100,000 seat sports arena. The wealthy town next to that may be cheapo and cuts government programs and lowers people's taxes.

The major issue with education in poor areas is simply dealing with a higher percentage of students who treat schools as enforced daycare and have zero interest in learning.

So this create a rich neighborhood and poor neighborhood. So in the rich neighborhood, you are safe and nothing gets stolen. That is why a blackman walking around a rich neighborhood attract alot of attention from the local people.

In my state there is a requirement that all towns offer low income housing to even things out a bit.

There are pro and cons. You cannot have the cake and eat it too. There has to be a balance. A Middle Path.

Sure, and we do things to mitigate it.

 

[Gomig-21]

Hey @Gomig-21 why aren't you renting a boat instead of owning one...
You should post a pic of it.

lol, that was a heck of a post, ma bro! Wow, you pretty much nailed every point head on and about as accurately as one could. Good on you.

I own my own boat because I want to be able to go out whenever I or my family wants and don't want to be limited by rental exceptions etc. Although for some, renting is a better option and most likely costs a lot less in the end. But many of the personal choice reasons are exactly because of what you mentioned perfectly.

A still from my son's MavicPro drone last summer on a super hot day, kinda like today where it was in the high 90's and with the heat index, it felt like it was over 100.

 

[Hamartia Antidote]

lol, that was a heck of a post, ma bro! Wow, you pretty much nailed every point head on and about as accurately as one could. Good on you.

I own my own boat because I want to be able to go out whenever I or my family wants and don't want to be limited by rental exceptions etc. Although for some, renting is a better option and most likely costs a lot less in the end. But many of the personal choice reasons are exactly because of what you mentioned perfectly.

A still from my son's MavicPro drone last summer on a super hot day, kinda like today where it was in the high 90's and with the heat index, it felt like it was over 100.
View attachment 656019

View attachment 656027

Awesome pics! Now I wonder how many PDF members in east Asia own one.

You and your horrible individualism.

 

[Gomig-21]

You and your horrible individualism.

Shame on me!

 

[Nan Yang]

I could have bought a cabin boat too. I had wanted to buy one together with a dive marshal friend of mine. Only that it just was not practical. The boat would be in Port Klang on the West coast and all my favorite diving spots were on the East coast.
I ended just renting a pump boat to go diving or snorkeling on the East coast. Its slow but cheap. Each boat could take 12 pax so it get cheaper when you have more people.

Diving in Maldives. One of them is me !

Having your own boat is a hassle. You also need to know the waters. I was on a speed boat once while I was living in Singapore. Friend of my dive instructor. It was fun until we hit a submerged reef. Propeller was chipped. Had to limped back home very slowly as the boat was vibrating too much due to the now unbalanced propeller.

Another diving buddy of mine had a cabin boat that sank off Pulau Aur off Malaysian East coast. He and his partner survive. Base on what I heard he was speeding and suddenly decided to stop. The wave hit from the back and sank the boat.

Another occasion I was on a sailing boat own by some German expat in Singapore. We did not even make it to the sea. On the way out the in-board motor broke down. LOL. We had to sail back in very light wind and had to crisscross as we were sailing close to the wind. In the end got towed by another returning boat. Made it back before night fall.

 

[beijingwalker]

Not only skyscape race, US lost all infrastructure race in every category to China, skyscrapers, highways, railways, subways, bridges, ports, airports...

 

[Gomig-21]

I could have bought a cabin boat too. I had wanted to buy one together with a dive marshal friend of mine. Only that it just was not practical. The boat would be in Port Klang on the West coast and all my favorite diving spots were on the East coast.
I ended just renting a pump boat to go diving or snorkeling on the East coast. Its slow but cheap. Each boat could take 12 pax so it get cheaper when you have more people.

Yep, that's certainly a factor that we considered greatly before deciding on getting it. We live about 15 minutes from the water and about 20 minutes from the marina and so it helps a lot when the distance is short. If it was a 45 minute or over an hour drive to get to the water, forget it. The first year we had it, we launched it at the ramp and retrieved it at the end of the day every time we went out. That was a horror show and A LOT of work. But it kept the bottom clean and easy to upkeep. After that we decided to rent a slip at the marina which made going out at anytime and coming back at anytime much easier. But the marina fee is enough to make you go broke.

Diving in Maldives. One of them is me !

That's great. Watch out for sharks in slightly murky water like that! We just had a fatality from a shark bite yesterday in the state of Maine, just 1/2 states north of Antidote and myself. We have a serious great white shark problem here that's getting worst by the year.

Having your own boat is a hassle. You also need to know the waters. I was on a speed boat once while I was living in Singapore. Friend of my dive instructor. It was fun until we hit a submerged reef. Propeller was chipped. Had to limped back home very slowly as the boat was vibrating too much due to the now unbalanced propeller.

Very true. It's no fun at all when you ground the boat, especially on hard rock. Sand is one thing but you can ingest a lot of it into the engine and cause it to seize which is another big problem, but hitting shallow rocks is probably the worst. That's why I have 2 GPS navigation MDFs with depth markings for the entire US east coast. So anywhere we go, I know exactly how deep it is even if I'm unfamiliar with the waters. And having two is redundancy since it's not just for water depth, but many other functions as well as the primary one which is navigation. GPS gets you from point A to B and back to A the easiest and safest way.

All those numbers are the depth in feet at low tide. White water is water that is 20 feet or more and blue water is 20 feet or less. The black marks are "bread crumbs" so that when you leave your home base, they leave those black bread crumbs so you can follow them back easily.

It even gives you a digital depth reading as well.

Another diving buddy of mine had a cabin boat that sank off Pulau Aur off Malaysian East coast. He and his partner survive. Base on what I heard he was speeding and suddenly decided to stop. The wave hit from the back and sank the boat.

That's one of the first things they teach you is to always come off plain slowly so you don't submerge your transom and get engulfed by water. Some boats are designed worst than others but with ours, the built-in (integral) swim platform in the back has a 8" step up to the walkway to prevent that from happening. But we still stop slowly just because it's good practice.

These basterds are almost always boarding me to check papers and if anyone is drinking. They're always disappointing haha.

 

[dbc]

These basterds are almost always boarding me to check papers and if anyone is drinking. They're always disappointing haha.

Wait passengers can drink

 

[Gomig-21]

Wait passengers can drink

Yeah but they take note of who's drinking and who isn't because if they catch you later and you're driving the boat when you were clearly drinking, you get a nasty DUI. Not only that, but if you're involved in an accident or something of the sorts, they have a record that so and so was drinking etc. That doesn't usually have any effect on us since none of us drink, but sometimes I have my buddies who like to fish etc. and they enjoy their beers.