Spending Less because of the Economy

My favorite is the 10 pm news preview during the prime time programming....."Guess what the government isnt telling you that could kill you....details at 10":p
 
That looks like a terrific book, Dex! I really do think he is right. The media presentation of some issues is overly alarming.
 
I, on the other hand, am spending more this Christmas because I suspect that we are headed into a recession and I know I won't feel comfortable taking a trip when the stock market goes down or is flat. Strange logic, huh?
 
I don't worry about what I spend for Christmas, but rather what I spend for the whole year as I learned from Joe Dominguez.
 
God I hate when people spoil a wonderful story (American's are drowned in Credit Card debt) with facts. I say anybody posting a link with data should be permanently banned from the forums.:rant:

Yeah, when you go to the races, ya wanna see real flame'in wrecks not just fender benders.
 
I wonder if the average person isn't saying:

"Ewwwww, the economy is bad? That is sooooo depressing! I think I'll go to the mall and buy a bunch of stuff to make me feel better".

-ERD50
 
I saw a story on TV awhile back that said something like 80% of the people surveyed said they were doing OK, but thought a majority of others were in trouble.

What this told me, was that the news media has done a good job of hyping the negative. So it will not surprise me if holiday spending goes either way. People know they are OK, and may spend more, however, they may be worried they will be like the rest of the economy and decide to save a little. If they do decide to spend less it could be a self fulfilling prophecy.
 

Thanks for the citation, though it is based on 6-year old data. It contains the sentence:

These figures are from the Federal Reserves 2001 Survey of Consumer Finances, one of the most comprehensive assessments of what Americans own and owe. (The survey is updated every three years; a summary of 2004's results will be published in early 2006.)

The Federal Reserve Board published newer data (from 2004), though I've not been able to find it on the web yet.
 
I wonder if the average person isn't saying:

"Ewwwww, the economy is bad? That is sooooo depressing! I think I'll go to the mall and buy a bunch of stuff to make me feel better".

-ERD50

LOL!! Could be.

I was wondering if the economy might have had a damping effect on those legendary HUGE Christmas bonuses that are doled out to high dollar earners in NYC and on the East Coast. Presumably these bonuses go for high end Cadillacs and Ferraris, Lear jets, spectacular large diamonds, weekend trips to Paris and such. This is beyond my milieu or station in life, so I am just guessing.

In difficult economic times, these poor fellows might have to tighten the belt and just make do with new flatscreen TVs, cubic zirconia, or a weekend trip to New Jersey.
 
Thanks for the citation, though it is based on 6-year old data. It contains the sentence:

These figures are from the Federal Reserves 2001 Survey of Consumer Finances, one of the most comprehensive assessments of what Americans own and owe. (The survey is updated every three years; a summary of 2004's results will be published in early 2006.)

The Federal Reserve Board published newer data (from 2004), though I've not been able to find it on the web yet.

2004 Survey results


FRB: 2004 SCF
 
Read this book and have a Happy New Year.
Amazon.com: The Culture of Fear: Why Americans Are Afraid of the Wrong Things: Books: Barry Glassner

After reading the book, the pattern became clear of how the media spins its stories to make them deliberately misleading in order to sell fear and keep viewers and readers plugged in.
You had to read a book to figure that out? LOL!

Sorry - just couldn't resist the tease! That's just been so darn obvious to me for > past 10 years and a minor peeve. The local nightly news is the absolute worst at this type of fear-mongering manipulation. If it's not the lead in your toy or your tuna it's the pedophile living next door.....

I don't know how many times I see them plug an outrageous or sensational headline many, many times. Finally get to the story - and the story either in no way backs up the headline - sometimes even directly contradicting it, or the headline was way blown out of proportion to the actual story.

So sloppy and just plain bad journalism, but unless people actually pay attention and weight the content, they'll miss the truth. I can only assume most people don't? I suppose there is a level of critical thinking required to wade through the BS and most people are just too lazy?

Maybe, maybe not. Not my problem (that's why it's a minor peeve). I decided not to worry about that a long time ago, just like I decided to never waste time worrying about whether society is "going to hell in a hand basket" or lose too much sleep over it when someone I don't like is voted in for president.

Audrey
 
Maybe, maybe not. Not my problem (that's why it's a minor peeve).

When we come back: Think that scare tactics in the media can't affect you? You might be surprised at what leading experts say about how sensationalized news stories and responses of your own neighbors can destroy your peace of mind, elect a president who is not qualified to serve, and make you a victim of identity theft. So stay tuned to Action Eyewitness News 7.
 
When we come back: Think that scare tactics in the media can't affect you? You might be surprised at what leading experts say about how sensationalized news stories and responses of your own neighbors can destroy your peace of mind, elect a president who is not qualified to serve, and make you a victim of identity theft. So stay tuned to Action Eyewitness News 7.
ROFLOL! :2funny::2funny:

Audrey
 
2004 Survey results


FRB: 2004 SCF

Here is some updated info from the survey

From 2001 to 2004, the proportion of families carrying a balance
rose 1.8 percentage points, to 46.2 percent. The preceding
three years had seen a much smaller increase in use ...
Overall, the median balance for those carrying a
balance rose 10.0 percent, to $2,200; the mean rose
15.9 percent, to $5,100....
In the recent period, the median balance rose strongly for most demographic groups; but borrowing declined notably for the lowest
and next-to-highest income groups and for the
youngest age group. Many families with credit cards do not carry balances.

41​
Of the 74.9 percent of families with credit cards in 2004, only 58.0 percent had a balance at the time of the interview; in 2001, 76.2 percent had
cards, and 55.4 percent of these families had an
outstanding balance on them


Far more troubling to me was 12.4% of home owners had HELOC with balances on them with an average balance of $22K

 
Well, we aren't spending much on Christmas this year because our big present to ourselves is the trip to Hong Kong and Tibet in the Spring. That'll cost $7-8K, and should help out the Chinese economy some. Not that they seem to need it.
 
I am spending more this year. Last year only spent $60. This year will be $400. I'm doing my part.

Please do not try to connect this with a supposed belief that the economy is doing better.
 
This brings up something I've wondered about lately -- what do news people themselves think about all the blather on TV these days? Do they just LOVE those interviews at the mall, or are they secretly hating life?

I once considered journalism and talked to some professors, students, and journalists who really wanted to change the world, be the next Woodward and Bernstein, etc.

Has anyone out there every been a journalist and what do folks on the inside think of the current state of the industry?

Such a great question.

My hubby is a radio newscaster who majored in journalism. He fell in love with Woodward and Bernstein, and I think he really did hope to do something important with his career. Over eight years at the same local news station, he's become very discouraged and disillusioned. There's not much scope for creativity or serious journalism in his current situation.

It's very much: We'll decide what we want to report on, and then we'll find people in the street who will feed us back this stuff that everyone can relate to. Relatability is their mantra. The audience is thought to be monolothic--interested in the same television shows and celebrities, and engaging in the same kinds of shopping and holiday-going behavior.

It's not that his station is actively quashing meaty investigative reporting. It's more that they've done their consulting and focus group research, and have determined that the listeners don't want it. They want fluff, so that's what they're getting. My DH is tired of working in a cliche factory.

He did do a cute story about Santa Claus getting cheaper shipping rates during Christmas. He had fun with that.
 
Has he consider NPR?

Ooh...great suggestion. It wouldn't be DH's thing (long topic for another thread), but I've thought of it for myself. I'm in the commercial side of radio, and have considered doing some local reporting as a way to kick myself out of my rut. Kind of scary. Reporting is hard to do well. It's a real job, compared to what I do now (commercial data entry and occasional voice work).

The new temporary executive director of our station was our local public radio head honcho for the past 20 years. They did some local features and aired NPR the rest of the time. Maybe he's still got some contacts over there!

Thanks for the idea ;)
 
The more I watch local TV news, the more I realize that it's a gigantic waste of time. There seems to be no journalistic standards applied to news stories. I absolutely detest the "man on the street" interviews.

When gas first hit $3 (last year?), one of the reporters asked a hapless looking customer at a gas station. I'm sure he was picked because he would exude the hopelessness of the gas being $3 a gallon. Here's how the interview went:

Reporter: So, is $3 gas really affecting you?
Customer: Yeah, it's really tough, it's really eating into my other purchases etc. Look, I can only afford to buy 1 gallon of gas today. <camera pans over to the pump fixated on the 1 gallon>
Reporter: Wow, yeah, you do have tough. Back to you Jim.

:rolleyes:. So, when gas was $1.50 a gallon, this guy would have only been able to afford *2* gallons of gas! I'm not saying this guy isn't having it tough, but come on.
 
The more I watch local TV news, the more I realize that it's a gigantic waste of time. There seems to be no journalistic standards applied to news stories. I absolutely detest the "man on the street" interviews.

When gas first hit $3 (last year?), one of the reporters asked a hapless looking customer at a gas station. I'm sure he was picked because he would exude the hopelessness of the gas being $3 a gallon. Here's how the interview went:

Reporter: So, is $3 gas really affecting you?
Customer: Yeah, it's really tough, it's really eating into my other purchases etc. Look, I can only afford to buy 1 gallon of gas today. <camera pans over to the pump fixated on the 1 gallon>
Reporter: Wow, yeah, you do have tough. Back to you Jim.

:rolleyes:. So, when gas was $1.50 a gallon, this guy would have only been able to afford *2* gallons of gas! I'm not saying this guy isn't having it tough, but come on.

What they probably left out was that the guy was driving a motor scooter that gets 100MPG and would get him to work and back for a week on a gallon ;).
 
You wouldn't believe what some of the reporters get paid outside of the top 10 markets. About 20K to start. Some even less if it is their first job.
 
Back
Top Bottom