Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

FarCenter

(19,429 posts)
Sun Jun 10, 2012, 06:48 PM Jun 2012

Everything You Remember About The 1990s Is Wrong

As we deal with an under-employment crises that refuses to go away, the 1990s are now remembered as an age of prosperity that only got out of hand in a tech bubble at the end of the decade.

But that's not what happened at all.

Peter Thiel – the billionaire Facebook investor, former PayPal CEO, and Palantir cofounder – taught a class at Stanford this Spring.

Going through student Blake Masters's notes on the class we discovered a lecture from Thiel on what actually happened in the 1990s.

In it, Thiel says that times were not as good as we remember them. He argues that we may have learned the wrong lessons from the tech bubble and bust that ended the decade.


Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/peter-thiel-presents-everything-you-remember-about-the-1990s-is-wrong-2012-6

29 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Everything You Remember About The 1990s Is Wrong (Original Post) FarCenter Jun 2012 OP
Sounds like it is a good article, too bad I can't read it because Business Insider Egalitarian Thug Jun 2012 #1
You're not missing anything from BusinessInsider, really. TheWraith Jun 2012 #6
Yeah, that's the main reason I haven't gone to the trouble of circumventing their idiocy. Egalitarian Thug Jun 2012 #10
It's his opinion... He is a Libertarian OKNancy Jun 2012 #2
he also claims that bush I was the first 1 term pres in 30 years... pepperbear Jun 2012 #3
I have empirical evidence that 1986 was the shits for Houston/Texas economy Xipe Totec Jun 2012 #4
Interesting. Thanks. AnotherMcIntosh Jun 2012 #5
Now there's an innovative and, I suspect, very telling metric. n/t Egalitarian Thug Jun 2012 #11
Except that doesn't bear much relation to the actual figures muriel_volestrangler Jun 2012 #13
I guess you have to live through it to see it Xipe Totec Jun 2012 #21
You said your son did the experiment in 1995 muriel_volestrangler Jun 2012 #24
And yet, they leave an indelible mark Xipe Totec Jun 2012 #29
The drive to undermine the 1990s is funny to watch cthulu2016 Jun 2012 #7
It was at that time that the field of perception management matured. The 90's were not nearly Egalitarian Thug Jun 2012 #15
I agree it was a missed opportunity cthulu2016 Jun 2012 #22
We're just going to disagree on that. The numbers belie the reality. Egalitarian Thug Jun 2012 #27
It depends on your own personal experience... Drunken Irishman Jun 2012 #16
The 1990s were great! The 80's sucked DBoon Jun 2012 #20
The 1990's were a con during which we implemeted unsustainable policies. NYC_SKP Jun 2012 #8
Everything you remember or were told about the 1980's is wrong... kentuck Jun 2012 #9
Here's what I remember of the 1990's. SheilaT Jun 2012 #12
I grew up in the 1990s... Drunken Irishman Jun 2012 #14
Yes, you were in the minority, but it was a huge and purposely created minority. Egalitarian Thug Jun 2012 #19
It was an interesting decade... Drunken Irishman Jun 2012 #25
No, they weren't MadHound Jun 2012 #17
Another right wing "libertarian" attempting to undermine Dawson Leery Jun 2012 #18
The import of goods significantly worsened during the '90s FarCenter Jun 2012 #23
Yes, our trade deficits ballooned in the 90s... Drunken Irishman Jun 2012 #26
There was good stuff and bad stuff bhikkhu Jun 2012 #28
 

Egalitarian Thug

(12,448 posts)
1. Sounds like it is a good article, too bad I can't read it because Business Insider
Sun Jun 10, 2012, 06:55 PM
Jun 2012

insists on third party scripts and several trackers. Oh well, it will turn up somewhere else that isn't determined to commit suicide.

K&R anyway.

TheWraith

(24,331 posts)
6. You're not missing anything from BusinessInsider, really.
Sun Jun 10, 2012, 07:12 PM
Jun 2012

They have a lot of "interesting" news, and by "interesting" I mean "mostly imaginary."

 

Egalitarian Thug

(12,448 posts)
10. Yeah, that's the main reason I haven't gone to the trouble of circumventing their idiocy.
Sun Jun 10, 2012, 07:27 PM
Jun 2012

But, this topic has been ignored and spun for so long by so many different 'sides' that I thought this might be one of the good ones.

I lived through this era in an unusual position, as both a Democratic insider and an IT pro, and was pretty consistently impressed with the lies flying from both sides during this time.

Xipe Totec

(43,890 posts)
4. I have empirical evidence that 1986 was the shits for Houston/Texas economy
Sun Jun 10, 2012, 07:06 PM
Jun 2012

A 1995 science experiment for my my son, then in 6th grade in a Galveston County science magnet school.

Distribution of pennies in circulation by year and mint mark.

Just collect pennies in circulation and classify them by year of issue and mint mark...

You can see an exponential rise in frequency by year from oldest to most recent. Then, 1986 happens... There are hardly any 1986 pennies in circulation... Plenty of 1985, plenty of 1987, but no 1986...

Why?

Because when the economy hits the skids, you don't need any pennies. People are cashing-in their piggy banks, not breaking new dollars at the cash register. Low demand -> low mint numbers -> slow economy....


You can actually see the dent Regan made on the Texas economy in that year.

We barely survived...

muriel_volestrangler

(101,311 posts)
13. Except that doesn't bear much relation to the actual figures
Sun Jun 10, 2012, 07:44 PM
Jun 2012

here: http://www.coinfacts.com/small_cents/cents_lincoln_memorial_reverse.html

There's a bit of a dip in 1986 and 1987, but there was also, for instance a big increase from 1979 to 1980. There was another big increase from 1981 to 1982. But there were recessions from January to July 1980, and July 1981 to Nov 1982.

In reality, the pennies minted in a year are a small fraction of those in circulation. There were 2 billion fewer minted in 1986 than 1985 - $20 million worth. $20 million is not that much, in the American economy.

There were about 4 billion fewer minted in 1997 than 1996 - do you read that as a slow economy in the 90s?

Xipe Totec

(43,890 posts)
21. I guess you have to live through it to see it
Sun Jun 10, 2012, 08:43 PM
Jun 2012

To you it was a slight dip. To us, we were the last house left standing. Not a single neighbor survived without foreclosing.

If it happens to somebody else, it's a recession. if it happens to somebody you know, it's a depression. If it happens to you, it's a catastrophe...

We're not talking about the total number of coins minted in a given year. If that's what we wanted to know, we could just look at the publications.

What we were interested in were the coins in circulation in the local economy. No new coins were entering circulation in Texas, because Texas was in a severe housing collapse in 1986, two years after the recession hit the rest of the nation.

muriel_volestrangler

(101,311 posts)
24. You said your son did the experiment in 1995
Sun Jun 10, 2012, 09:00 PM
Jun 2012

So what he measured was the coins in circulation in 1995 in your area of Texas that had a minting date of 1986 and other years. That does not show you the number of coins in circulation in the area 9 years before. You are part of a national economy. Coins move around, over 9 years.

Xipe Totec

(43,890 posts)
29. And yet, they leave an indelible mark
Sun Jun 10, 2012, 10:44 PM
Jun 2012

That's the point...

You may argue the interpretation, but you cannot argue the facts.

The facts are:

There was a significant drop in 1986 pennies in circulation in the Houston Galveston economy in 1995.

I'm willing to entertain alternative explanations to that fact.

cthulu2016

(10,960 posts)
7. The drive to undermine the 1990s is funny to watch
Sun Jun 10, 2012, 07:13 PM
Jun 2012

The one thing everyne can agree on is that the 1990s were an econmic nightmare.

The RW seeks to undo the public perception the Dems are better on the economy

The "professional left" seeks to undo the perception that Clinton was any different than Herbert Hoover because he was a DLC Dem. (Which he sure was... but it's not like anybody to the left of Clinton is likely to get the Job. See: Obama.)

The Obama extremists seek to undermine anything Clinton, even if it undermines Obama and the rest of the party by proxy


Yeah... the 1990s were an unrelenting economic nightmare. The only period that was worse than the nightmare 1990s was EVERYTHING ELSE SINCE 1970.

 

Egalitarian Thug

(12,448 posts)
15. It was at that time that the field of perception management matured. The 90's were not nearly
Sun Jun 10, 2012, 07:46 PM
Jun 2012

as great for tens of millions of Americans as the Democrats would like to believe, nor was it as bad as the republicans would pretend.

I come at it from a purely economic position and I think of it as one of the greatest missed opportunities in our history.

cthulu2016

(10,960 posts)
22. I agree it was a missed opportunity
Sun Jun 10, 2012, 08:48 PM
Jun 2012

But then, everything is so fucked up for so long that everything looks like a missed opportunity.

I don't think the 90's was heaven, and I believe the 90's bubble didn't really burst until 2008. So I understand what some 90s trashers are saying.

But whatever the malign legacy of the 1990s, real wages increased (not enough, of course) and poverty declined (not enough of course) and the American dream felt more real (however illusory in the long run), and since human life is short it's good for the average person to have a few years mixed in where they didn't feel like they would be fired the next day.

It's mostly just kind of funny that the 1990's bashing (however deserved) is so loud during an election year. There have been several things posted on DU so eager to trash Clinton that one is left being asked to pity Bush for having to clean up Clinton's mess.

To me that is too far to go.

Income inequality will always increase during an asset bubble. No way around that. But having seen an asset bubble under Clinton and one under Bush, the striking difference is that 1990s inequality increased like (average-folks=100 rich=1000 going to average-folks=120 rich=2000) and under Bush it was like (average-folks=120 rich=2000 going to average-folks=100 rich=4000).

In many ways the two parties are similar in that they are all about setting a banquet for the rich. The difference is that Democrats will let the little people have the scraps from the banquet. Republicans will make a big show of giving the scraps to the dog and laughing at the hungry onlookers.

 

Egalitarian Thug

(12,448 posts)
27. We're just going to disagree on that. The numbers belie the reality.
Sun Jun 10, 2012, 09:10 PM
Jun 2012

It was this cycle where the numbers diverged so dramatically that the averages were skewed. Real wages went up a lot for those that made a good living (like me), but for those that didn't they didn't go up at all and accelerated a persistent decline that continues today. But the real damage was to continue laying all of the groundwork that made this most recent collapse not only possible, but inevitable.

We're still not through this and we're still being warned and we're still pretending that the warnings are fallacious.

 

Drunken Irishman

(34,857 posts)
16. It depends on your own personal experience...
Sun Jun 10, 2012, 07:55 PM
Jun 2012

I'm sure for millions of Americans, the 90s were a decade of success. For my family? Not so much. We struggled. I mapped out that struggle below. It's not to undermine Clinton or the entire decade, but just to point out my own personal experience.

What I remember about the 90s:

Good TV
Good music
Gangs
Crime
Financial insecurity
My parents going without so that my brother and I could have new school clothes and Christmas gifts

My experience might be completely different than yours, though.

DBoon

(22,363 posts)
20. The 1990s were great! The 80's sucked
Sun Jun 10, 2012, 08:19 PM
Jun 2012

based solely on my personal experience of course, but as a tech worker my pay stagnated during the 80s while housing prices soared.

In the '90s I saw nice increases in pay, while stable housing prices left me with more discretionary income and the ability to buy later in the decade.

 

NYC_SKP

(68,644 posts)
8. The 1990's were a con during which we implemeted unsustainable policies.
Sun Jun 10, 2012, 07:18 PM
Jun 2012

Get rich quick schemes, promoted globalism at the expense of local sustainable prosperity.

Our energy goals stagnated, CAFE standards froze, SUV's sprung out of virtually nowhere.

I hate the 1990's

The 1990's were a con, a lie.

 

SheilaT

(23,156 posts)
12. Here's what I remember of the 1990's.
Sun Jun 10, 2012, 07:39 PM
Jun 2012

And I'm currently 63, so it wasn't exactly my early childhood.

There were good and bad times. I remember around 1991 or 1992 when I saw people working retail who clearly had lost a better job elsewhere, and I recall some prices of things falling to what felt like third-world levels.

Then it started getting better, and generally stayed better. By the end of that decade in my part of the country (the Kansas City area) unemployment was in negative numbers, meaning there were many more jobs than people, and unemployment in that areas was effectively at zero. Yes, there are always those without a job for all of the many reasons people are without work, but basically anyone and everyone could get a job, and could probably get a job in whatever field that person wanted and was qualified to work in.

I recall telling my son during his senior year of high school (class of 2001)that he was graduating into an amazing economy, one that none of us were likely to see again. Guess I was right.

 

Drunken Irishman

(34,857 posts)
14. I grew up in the 1990s...
Sun Jun 10, 2012, 07:45 PM
Jun 2012

In a poor-to-working class neighborhood. We lived in rental units that were pretty ghetto. It was all my parents could afford. My dad was a trucker in the 80s, but my mom felt the job kept him away from the family too much, especially after I was born in the late-80s. So, he quit and struggled finding consistent work. He was a roofer for a time, and then eventually got a job working at 7-11. It's embarrassing admitting as much, since 7-11 is far from a prestigious job, but that's where my dad worked for a bulk of the 90s. He eventually quit, in the mid-90s, and received a job at a window and door frame constructing plant. He worked there until they tried to unionize a few years later and the plant owner laid them all off. It wasn't until the very late 90s, early 00s, he received a job working at the local VA Hospital here in Salt Lake. It was probably his best paying job and one that allowed good hours.

I remember when my dad worked at that door frame plant in the 90s and how he and my mom would discuss raises in 'cents', not dollars. It always perplexed me how they would get excited over such little money, but now that I'm older, it makes sense.

I think my dad also worked for a grocery warehouse where they stocked the goods to be shipped to the grocery stores, but had to quit due to a hand injury. That might've been the job he held before being employed at the VA. But like I said, he had a lot of jobs in the 90s and we struggled financially because of it. But my dad was never really out of work. He'd lose a job and find a new one and work his butt off to provide for his family.

But we lived in a four-plex, never went on vacation, never owned a new car, or even a nice used one. We had a used Monte Carlo for a time and the thing I remember most about that car is that the driver's seat door was a pain to close, so, they would never open it. So, to get into the car, you had to enter through the passenger side, even if you were going to drive it. After that, my dad bought my grandpa's old Dodge Rampage (I wonder how many people even know what that is?!?) - yes, RAMPAGE. Not Dodge Ram - RAMPAGE. This is what it looked like:



In fact, that was the one he owned - well, at least the color. He still drove that sucker until he couldn't drive anymore in 2009 and it still sits outside my mom's house, even though he's been dead since 2010! That thing was awful to drive in as a kid. There was a very narrow area to sit in the back and often, we would sit in the bed of the truck.

Eventually, my parents bought a Chevy Impala from one of their friends, but it was really rusted and about 15 or so years old. The car was a mess, but my mom drove it for a while until it failed to pass inspection. Eventually, we were back to only using the Rampage. It wasn't until high school, in the 00s, that my parents finally could afford to buy a used car from a real car lot. They bought a 1995 Jeep Cherokee.

But the thing I remember most about the 90s is the crime. Like I said, we lived in a poor neighborhood with a lot of rental properties and it attracted seedy people. We had a lot of gangs and drug dealers and users on my street. Across the street from me was the mom of a Mexican Blood and he often would stop by his mom's house with his gang buddies. Next door to me, in the same housing complex (remember, we lived in a four-plex), was a Tongan-Crip. The Crips & the Bloods fought, a lot. Now Salt Lake is different than L.A. in the sense there are no real gang boundaries. Gangs don't own certain area of the town. They mix and mingle, which is a bit more dangerous because it leads to clashing. Well, one night, my house was shot up because they were targeting my neighbor.

I couldn't sleep on the top bunk of my bunk bed because it was level with the window and my mom feared I'd get shot if there was ever another drive by shooting. We had cops constantly on our street, drug overdoses, fights, you name it, I saw it growing up.

So, for me, the 90s was always about crime and economic instability. That's what I remember most about that decade. Maybe I was in the minority, which is entirely possible, but growing up in that decade, we didn't see an economic boom. It just didn't happen for us. We lived on a ghetto street, with gangs and drug abusers and it really was the early-to-mid-90s when things really went down hill on that street. Maybe it was the early-90s recession that did it, I don't know. But when we first moved there, it wasn't bad. Then it got bad and stayed bad for years. There were murders, there were beatings and it's not like we lived in on a huge street. We were a circle! So, it wasn't nice. It exciting at times, of course, but there was always economic instability in my family. We couldn't afford any vacations. We rarely went out to eat. We never went to the movies. My mom would send me to my local elementary school in the summer for free lunch. But you know what? I still had a blast as a kid. I miss a lot of those times. But for my parents? I'm sure it was a constant struggle.

 

Egalitarian Thug

(12,448 posts)
19. Yes, you were in the minority, but it was a huge and purposely created minority.
Sun Jun 10, 2012, 08:08 PM
Jun 2012

That's one of the things that both fascinates and irks me about that time. Bill Clinton totally suckered me in 1992 and the republicans graciously assisted by nominating a barely animated corpse to run against him in 1996.

The popular misconception is how wonderful the 90's were when the reality is that those in power sold the nation out to the billionaires they created. People like your parents didn't fit the narrative, so they were completely ignored. The top 10% did very well, the 1% made more than any time in history, the next 70% made modest (and temporary) gains, and the bottom 20% got stuck with the check.

But that's OK because Bill finally got into the club and that was the whole reason for becoming President.

 

Drunken Irishman

(34,857 posts)
25. It was an interesting decade...
Sun Jun 10, 2012, 09:01 PM
Jun 2012

One of my first memories is my mom watching the 1992 election returns and the network announcing Clinton as the winner. She was jumping up and down she was so happy.

Personally, I was too young to grasp the whole struggle. I just didn't think much of it until I got older. Yeah, we didn't go on vacation, but neither did most my friends. Yeah, we didn't have nice shiny new electronics and cars, but neither did most my friends. In retrospect, I was like them because they were like me - we were all lower working class. Sometimes, though rarely, we would splurge and get something nice - like a new TV from the rent-to-own place. That was always nice. I had good Christmases in the 90s, but I think it was because my parents knew how to budget and saved for the entire year, often using layaway, so that we could have good Christmases.

I mean, we weren't on the street poor, but we hardly were well off, or even middle class. I often think of my family similar to the Conners on the TV series Roseanne and less like the other families seen on TV during that era. We just didn't have much expendable income.

But like I said to another person above, the things I remember most about the 90s were gangs, crime, good TV, good music and always seeming to have just enough money to get by but nothing more. I couldn't climb in trees because my parents didn't have health insurance for us kids and they constantly worried about broken bones. There was no CHIPS when I was a kid, that came by the time I hit middle school, I believe. That was a good thing, but it didn't exist until the late 90s.

One of the biggest memories that sticks out to me is that I couldn't wear certain colors to school. My dad is from Chicago, so, I grew up a Bulls fan ( ) and I had a Bulls jacket. They wouldn't let me wear it to school because red = bloods and they feared kids being shot on the way to school. Jerseys? Forget about it. LA Raiders gear? No way! Not gonna happen. British Knights? I loved 'em. They were the shoes I wore all the time as a kid until I was told I couldn't anymore because BK stood for Blood Killer and it was associated with gangs.

Those are the memories I remember the most about the 90s. A lot of gang violence. A lot drug use. A lot of poverty. Back then, it was normal. So, I didn't give it a second thought.

But today? Violent crime isn't nearly as high. I feel safer. Even my old neighborhood is safer today than it was in the 90s. So, it really is weird how some areas can thrive and other areas struggle. We struggled. Life wasn't bad, but it wasn't great at times. If the 90s boomed, it didn't boom for my family and me.

 

MadHound

(34,179 posts)
17. No, they weren't
Sun Jun 10, 2012, 08:03 PM
Jun 2012

People tend to forget that the nineties was where we saw the start of the major divide between the rich and the rest of us. The nineties is when we first saw the middle class starting to slip in its grip as our economy changed from a relatively well paying manufacturing base to a lower paying service based economy. The nineties is when we saw our financial sector riding high again, especially as it was deregulated in a major way(remember, it was under Clinton that we saw the most deregulation of the financial sector, not Reagan).

As we all were distracted by the Clenis, our civil liberties, social safety net, and basic social contracts were being reworked, rewritten or rejected. Real world wages continued to decline throughout the nineties, as did our standard of living. The economic bubble masked the real pain and suffering that many people were going through while the faux good times allowed Clinton to "reform" welfare and consolidate the media.

The fact of the matter is that the nineties only look good by comparison to now, just as the '00's will probably look good compared to the '20s or '30s. Our empire is in decline, that the only good we can really see is by looking back.

Dawson Leery

(19,348 posts)
18. Another right wing "libertarian" attempting to undermine
Sun Jun 10, 2012, 08:06 PM
Jun 2012

the fact that Democrats are better for the economy.
Thiel & Company never discuss the massive increase in the debt accumulated by Ronnie Reagan (or the massive exodus of factories which occurred on his watch.)

 

FarCenter

(19,429 posts)
23. The import of goods significantly worsened during the '90s
Sun Jun 10, 2012, 08:54 PM
Jun 2012

In 1994 the imports of non-petroleum goods were $555 billion, and exports were $501 billion, for a deficit of $54 billion.

In 2000 the imports of non-petroleum goods were $1,116 billion, and exports were $818 billion, for a deficit of $298 billion.

In 2006 the imports of non-petroleum goods were $1,526 billion, and exports were $966 billion, for a deficit of $560 billion.

The deficit in manufactured goods ballooned during the Clinton years as US manufacturers shipped factories to China.

http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/statistics/historical/realpetr.pdf

bhikkhu

(10,715 posts)
28. There was good stuff and bad stuff
Sun Jun 10, 2012, 09:15 PM
Jun 2012

bad being retail died a death from a thousand cuts, delivered by w-mart. It seems like everyone became bargain shoppers in the 90's too, probably helped along by wage stagnation. Imports drove that as well, and I think the last time I saw a "look for the union label" add was back then.

Good was technology really did make most things more efficient, and the US had plenty to do with that. Perhaps it only became a bubble because there was so much money floating around looking for a place to go, but I don't know offhand the dynamics of that.

Lots of people had an easy ride through that period, myself included. Most of what I know now (that keeps me employed) I learned in the early nineties.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Everything You Remember A...