Fact 1: The US doesn't have negative savings according to your own stats.
Fact 2 The US has the highest per capita income (GDP per capita) by your own
stats.
Fact 3: The US has higher quality homes than Japan, the country that was
being compared.
Stick a fork in you, you're done.
"John Knight" <johnknight at usa.com> wrote in message
news:%Gp39.61193$Fq6.5571593 at news2.west.cox.net...
>>> -- > parsetree wrote:
> > Americans consume things that are not necessities. They also have much
> > higher quality homes and many other things.
>>>>> and "Richard C. August" <raugust at ptd.net> responded:
> > Dear Parse Tree,
> >
> > Obviously, you have never been outside the USA.
> >
> > I lived in West Germany, prior to and during the Fall of the Wall. I
> > conversed in German with the German people, and was even "allowed"
(read:
> > INVITED) into their homes). I ate at German restaurants. I shopped
> German
> > stores and drank at German bars. I can say, with DEAD CERTAINTY, that
> > Germany's homes are of MUCH HIGHER quality than US homes, and at a rate
at
> > parity with German incomes. This is because Germans who study a trade
are
> > first paid a wage that the German Government says is commensurate with
> that
> > trade, and second APPRENTICED under a MASTER until they achieve MASTERY
of
> > their trade, usually taking about 3 to 5 years, often much longer
> depending
> > on the trade.
> >
> > Translation: German manufacture is much better because their workers
are
> > more highly educated and more highly skilled than the average American
> > laborer, who is often NOT apprenticed and only masters a skill by the
seat
> > of his pants.
> >
> > In the 1870s-1880s, during King Ludwig II's reign in Bavaria, Ludwig, a
> > liberal patron of the arts, commissioned Bavarian chemists to formulate
> > outdoor paints which could be used to paint beautiful murals on the
sides
> of
> > prominent buildings, or which could be used to paint in solid colours.
> > These chemists went to work, very pleased with the pay they received
from
> > the King's hand, and formulated outdoor paint which is the STANDARD for
> > outdoor paint on German buildings, because this formula lasts for YEARS
> > without much maintenance. American chemists could not come up with such
a
> > formula if it stood on its head and slapped their knees.
> >
> > In the bombing of Dresden, in WW 2, the explosive and incendiary bombs
the
> > Americans used were 3 TIMES what could have been used in America to
> destroy
> > American buildings, yet some buildings were still standing even though
> they
> > were targets. Among the buildings reduced to rubble, the Germans kept
> every
> > blueprint, and reconstructed those buildings to exact specifications,
> using
> > the same or similar bricks, mortar, and steel used at the time of
> > construction. Can we say the same for the USA? This enabled the
GERMANS
> to
> > not only scrimp and save money in reconstruction, but also to PAY OFF
> their
> > Marshall Plan debt well in advance of every other nation on the Plan!!!
> >
> > Go take a vacation in Germany, and see their houses and buildings. See
> how
> > clean and well-kept and litter-free their streets are. Then come back
to
> > America and vomit over the difference. Ask a German you befriend about
> his
> > personal savings, then compare that to your own. Be befuddled over how
a
> > German of modest means can actually save money, while you, a college
> > educated and salaried employee, can barely scratch two pennies together.
> > Then tell us how great is the USA. Enjoy your vacation, and write us a
> > postcard!!
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Sincerely,
> >
> >
> > Richard C. August
>>> Having lived in Germany for 9 years, I can confirm that what Mr. August
> writes above is true and correct, which is why it's so embarassing when
> fellow Americans say such silly things as "Americans ... also have much
> higher quality homes and many other things".
>> The reality is that we are the biggest throw-away society in world
history,
> we have the ONLY negative personal savings rate in the industrialized (or
> even third) world, we are now down to 17th place in per capita income and
> dropping fast, each American household already has a net worth of a
NEGATIVE
> $77,000 [and the debts are still growing incontrollably], yet we still
> "think" we're "the world's last superpower" (presumably to justify blowing
> up babies in Afghanistan at the behest of jews).
>> But, Richard, I'm going to raise the stakes on your argument one more
notch.
> A house I bought in Russia is even better built, more solid, and will last
> longer, than just about anything I ever saw in Germany--except King
Ludwig's
> castles, of course ); It's already 400 years old and looks like it will
> last another 2,000 years. There ain't NUTTIN' like this in the US,
period.
>> We have no statistics about what Russia was like before the jews Lenin and
> Trotsky were "allowed" to take charge [read: before AMERICAN jew Jacob
> Schiff funded them to assassinate the Czar and kill 25-20 million fellow
> Christians], but what remains of Russia is truly awesome. Much of what
the
> Russians built 200 years before this nation was even founded is far
superior
> to ANYTHING [and I mean ANYTHING] we've ever built, to date, and who knows
> what the jews destroyed during their slaughter of up to 50 million fellow
> WHITE Christians in Russia.
>> Is that bad enough? No. There's more. Between 1984 and 1993, a period of
> nine years the "median values of holdings" for "own homes" in the US
> decreased by 17%, from $56,430 to $46,669. In 1996 the Census Bureau
> changed the format for how this asset change was being reported so a
> comparison can't be made to prior years, and since 1996 this data hasn't
> been reported separately. But if this trend continued, then in 1997 it
was
> down to $42,120 and in 2000 to $37,240. The increase in the number of
> female headed households, whose median net worth is less than $15,000
each,
> is one of the primary factors for this loss of household assets.
>http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/wealth/1993/wlth93a.html>> The worse thing, Richard--feminazis don't care, couldn't understand even
if
> they tried, and don't even try.
>> John Knight
>>>>>>>>> > "Parse Tree" <parsetree at hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:AlY19.1458$9g7.263938 at news20.bellglobal.com...> > > "John Knight" <johnknight at usa.com> wrote in message
> > > news:xGV19.48957$Fq6.4303868 at news2.west.cox.net...> > > >
> > > > "Parse Tree" <parsetree at hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > > > news:tpE19.59$9g7.22300 at news20.bellglobal.com...> > > > > You have your date set incorrectly.
> > > > >
> > > > > "John Knight" <johnknight at usa.com> wrote in message
> > > > > news:8cC19.45114$Fq6.4020271 at news2.west.cox.net...> > > > > >
> > > > > > So tell us, parsetree, do you think we should believe the
> > affirmative
> > > > > action
> > > > > > hirees at the CIA who pad their figures with "purchasing power
> > > parity",
> > > > or
> > > > > > would you prefer ACCURATE data from independent, industry
sources
> > > which
> > > > > use
> > > > > > REAL data?
> > > > >
> > > > > Corporations use figures that reflect PPP. It costs $299 for a
PS2
> in
> > > > > Canada, and $200 in the US. That's not the literal exchange rate.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > This isn't ppp. This is market pricing which is far more complex
than
> > > ppp,
> > > > and has literally noting to do with ppp.
> > >
> > > Actually, it has a lot to do with PPP. They don't want to price
> products
> > > out of the consumer's price range.
> > >
> > > > > > If you want to know how misleading "purchasing power parity"
> really
> > > is,
> > > > > take
> > > > > > a look at Asia Week Magazine's "Bottom Line" at
> > > > > >
>http://www.asiaweek.com/asiaweek/magazine/2000/0818/bottomline.html> > > > >
> > > > > Do you honestly think that $783 is an accurate depiction of
China's
> > GDP
> > > > per
> > > > > person? I know that in NA you can't live off of that much money
in
> a
> > > > year.
> > > > > It's literally impossible.
> > > >
> > > > No, it's not accurate at all. The REAL average income in China is
$25
> > per
> > > > month, which is more than enough to live comfortably on. I know
> > Russians
> > > > who went to China so they could earn more money, because after 75
> years
> > of
> > > > being controlled by the jews, the average income of Russians is now
> one
> > > > third of the Chinese.
> > >
> > > So you seem to understand PPP with respect to China, but why not
Japan?
> > >
> > > Can you not conceive of a country with goods that cost more to buy
than
> > > America?
> > >
> > > > > > To be specific, Japan has a higher GDP per capita than the US,
but
> > the
> > > > CIA
> > > > > > and other feminized American sources use ppp to penalize Japan
to
> > > reduce
> > > > > it
> > > > > > from $34,715 to $23,480, based on the most senseless excuses,
like
> > how
> > > > > long
> > > > > > students are in school, and a whole bunch of irrelevant tricks.
> > > > >
> > > > > It is incredibly expensive to live in Japan. Just like it is more
> > > > expensive
> > > > > to live in new york, rather than some little village.
> > > >
> > > > Yeah, right. If it's "incredibly expensive", then how exactly did
the
> > > > Japanese manage to put FIFTY ONE PERCENT (51%) of their income into
> > > > personal savings in one month. You don't seem to be able to
> comprehend
> > > the
> > > > term
> > > > "percent", so let's break it down into something you feminazis may
be
> > able
> > > > to appreciate: American dollars. In just ONE MONTH, the AVERAGE
> > Japanese
> > > > household ADDED another 554,351 yen to their personal savings
> accounts,
> > > the
> > > > equivalent of $5,039.
> > > > http://christianparty.net/japan1999income.htm> > > >
> > > > Do you understand how weak your argument about their "high prices"
is?
> > >
> > > Americans consume things that are not necessities. They also have
much
> > > higher quality homes and many other things.
> > >
> > > You know it's somewhat easy to survive on $10 000 a year, and yet many
> > > people make more than that and spend more.
> > >
> > >
> > > > > > The CIA doesn't report ANY data correctly, as they always use
this
> > ppp
> > > > and
> > > > > > other "tricks" [read: LIES] in their reports. Where they report
> > > > > > Switzerland's GDP to be $22,600, their REAL GDP per capita is
> > $37,145,
> > > > > much
> > > > > > higher than ours at $28,600. Germany is penalized $3,000 for
> WHAT?
> > > > Their
> > > > > > cost of living certainly isn't higher, though their savings rate
> of
> > > 22%
> > > > is
> > > > > > literally *infinitely* higher than ours, since our personal
> savings
> > > rate
> > > > > is
> > > > > > NEGATIVE after all the interest on the humongous debts is paid.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > http://christianparty.net/bottomline.htm> > > > > >
> > > > > > http://christianparty.net/personalsavings.htm> > > > > >
> > > > > > The countries with the highest per capita incomes, like Kuwait
and
> > > > Qatar,
> > > > > > aren't even on these lists. Why not? What does "planet101"
hope
> to
> > > > hide
> > > > > > from you? Lookit how easy it is to LIE to you with statistics.
> > > > >
> > > > > "Purchasing-Power Parity (PPP) takes into account price
differences
> > > > between
> > > > > countries to provide a more accurate picture of national wealth"
> > > > > From your vaunted Christian Party website. It seems even they
> > > understand
> > > > > PPP.
> > > >
> > > > What ppp does NOT take into account is far more important than what
it
> > > DOES
> > > > take into account. It does NOT take into account that the Japanese
> pay
> > > only
> > > > 9.9% for taxes, yet they get dinged for having shorter school hours
> than
> > > us
> > > > (even though they scored 105 TIMSS math points higher at the 8th
grade
> > > > level). It does NOT take into account that they SAVED ANOTHER
$5,039
> in
> > > > JUST ONE MONTH, but dinged them for their "high
> > > > prices".
> > > >
> > > > ppp is a complete and total jewish con job, just like cpi is.
> > >
> > > No, it's not. You can't just blame anything that demonstrates you to
be
> > > completely and utterly wrong on the Jews.
> > >
> > > > > > The fact that we have a NEGATIVE personal savings rate means
that
> we
> > > > have
> > > > > NO
> > > > > > private ownership of property, because the state now owns it
all,
> > and
> > > > you
> > > > > > don't even realize it. This is FAR more important to
determining
> > who
> > > is
> > > > a
> > > > > > "rich country" and who is not than "purchasing power parity".
> > > > >
> > > > > So now the United States has no private ownership?
> > > > >
> > > > > You just don't stop, do you?
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > To have a "constitution" which calls for private property ownership
at
> > one
> > > > end, and a government which takes so much of incomes that we have a
> > > NEGATIVE
> > > > personal savings rate at the other end, makes the mere concept of
> > "private
> > > > property" a sick joke.
> > > >
> > > > Don't rely just on this comparison to Japan. NO country, not even
> > > > non-industrialized countries, have NEGATIVE personal savings rates.
> Go
> > > down
> > > > the list http://christianparty.net/bottomline.htm . Singapore saves
> 52%.
> > > > Even Vietnam has a 7% savings rate, but they don't spend all of this
> > > paying
> > > > off HUGE debts, like the ones we have. Even Kenya saves 21%. South
> > Korea
> > > > saves 35%, and their debt is minimal compared to their savings.
> > Thailand
> > > > saves 37%.
> > >
> > > Not even the US, according to that list. You save 15%.
> > >
> > > Also, I looked at the GDP growth listed on that page for Canada, and
it
> > > doesn't match the GDP growth given by any of the pages that are
> > referenced.
> > >
> > > > We threw King George out over a 1% "tea tax", then implemented so
many
> > > other
> > > > taxes that 43% of every American wage dollar is SPENT by government.
> > > > Feminazis just don't seem to understand, or at least appreciate,
that
> > this
> > > > process takes so much out of an American workers' income that he has
> to
> > > > borrow ever more money just to pay it.
> > >
> > > You really seem to inflate the number of goods that people need in
order
> > to
> > > live.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>>
