Robert J. Samuelson: For the young, 'economic escalator' has stopped

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • Howard Beal Provo, UT
    Dec. 13, 2012 8:59 a.m.


    It is funny how we laughed at Perot and his charts but if I remember rightly, generally speaking, everything he said about NAFTA, Medicare and Social Security has come to fruition. The American public focused on the messenger and hence he couldn't win, but his message was dead set on.

  • HaHaHaHa Othello, WA
    Dec. 12, 2012 7:13 p.m.

    Apparently the author of this article didn't read the professor Davis article above. He claims things are not really worse.

    ....and who wouldn't be in favor of free, fair and open trade? A leftist nut of course, who thinks he can live in his protectionist state while the world passes him by. That is the ideal that has labor unions signing their own death certificates right now. Their protectionist principles are leaving them without jobs. Perot was not against free trade, he was against the hidden agendas within free trade agreements, that actually prevented free trade!

  • Gildas LOGAN, UT
    Dec. 12, 2012 11:07 a.m.


    I should have typed that young, old and middle-aged would all benefit from smaller government, operating within constitutional limits. As Reagan said: Government is not the solution; government is the problem. There are those who would divide us all up: male and female, old and young, black and white, bond and free (employee and employer). Unity accomplishes great things.

  • Gildas LOGAN, UT
    Dec. 12, 2012 10:28 a.m.

    The young, the middle aged, the young: we're all in this together and need to unite to obtain smaller, responsible, constitutional government.

  • Screwdriver Casa Grande, AZ
    Dec. 11, 2012 10:47 p.m.

    Ross Perot stated the obvious over 20 years ago, NAFTA would cost the US jobs. It has. If you supported NAFTA and other poorly thought out free trade agreements you should not be surprised.

    And now you have the gall to complain and say the young voted for 4 more years? If you are here on this forum to spread lies you should really be ashamed of yourselves.

  • red state pride Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Dec. 11, 2012 6:51 p.m.

    This generation is about to learn the hard truth that not only are they expected to take care of themselves but also the retired baby-boomer generation that didn't have enough kids to sustain the Social Security and Medicare plans they never supported restructuring. How can you have kids when you are also expected to support a few unrelated geezers in a nursing home?
    It's a brave new world with upside down family trees- let's see how it works out. Not well I suspect.

  • Kent C. DeForrest Provo, UT
    Dec. 11, 2012 4:23 p.m.


    A vote for Romney-Ryan would have been a major setback to the young. The R-R dedication to trickle-down economics would have simply shifted more wealth to the top and made the imbalance even greater.

    Take a look at the most recent column by Paul Krugman. He explains briefly why the old contest between capital and labor is becoming relevant once again.

  • Chris B Salt Lake City, UT
    Dec. 11, 2012 4:11 p.m.


    Yes they did.

  • KDave Moab, UT
    Dec. 11, 2012 9:36 a.m.

    The young must be content with their situation. They just voted for four more years.

  • one old man Ogden, UT
    Dec. 11, 2012 8:31 a.m.

    A good and sensible opinion piece. Thank you, Mr. Samuelson.