With all the swirling confusion about whether or not we’re in a recession, this Barnes & Noble display completely devoted to Money For Dummies books is a clarion blast of yellow: we’re in deep doggy doo. This wasn’t simply in the business and finance section, mind you, this was the window display.
(Thanks to c-side!)
More From Consumerist
-
China Smacks Samsung & LG With $35 Million Fine For Fixing Prices Of LCD Panels
-
Judge Sides With Comcast Against “Shakedown” Porn Lawyers
-
Here's How To Get A Refund If You Don't Want A Book With Fake Bob Dylan Quotes
-
Washington State Consumers To Get $2 Million In E-Book Price Fixing Settlement
-
Amazon To Kindle Customers: If & When E-Book Settlement Is Approved, You Might Get A Refund
First, a disclosure. I work for John Wiley & Sons, Inc, the publisher of the For Dummies series. I enjoyed all the comments so far, both positive and negative. And no, I’m not responsible for this display, but I’m familiar with the process.
March is Dummies Month, hence the display. You’ll find details about our $5 rebate and many other retailers participating at either http://www.wiley.com or http://www.dummies.com.
I’m sure the state of the economy had something to do with the book choices, but it’s common to group books of fairly common theme together (money, sports, religion, Vista, Mac).
Thanks for the the comments from those of you who’ve used a Dummies book to learn a little something about whatever your chosen topic might be.
@spinachdip: I agree with you in saying that recessions are inevitable. It’s a wave function and any instability of any minute amount is going to cause fluctuation. Without the fluctuation, there would be no opportunity to move forward.
What I am saying about “fear mongering” is that it makes the recession kick harder. Where you would normally have a slight downward decline over a long period, “fear mongering” causes a steep cliff off which everyone is forced to jump. I’m not saying that ignoring a recession is a good idea either. I’m just saying that any attempt at playing up a recession to get a bigger reaction than a “ho-hum” is equivalent to playing with hairspray and a match. I’m also very free speech oriented (i.e., “If it isn’t true then what are you afraid of?”) so I’m not advocating any fascist blocking of the press. I’m just suggesting that the press, and famous notables alike, take some responsibility for their words when they cause flare ups.
As to the media “hating Bush,” I’d consider it more of an active but mild dislike. And I didn’t mean to suggest that it was somehow inappropriate or disproportionate. I’m just saying it’s been obvious everywhere except Faux News, though even they’ve hopped on the wagon recently.
Let me reiterate: I believe it is the active responsibility of the press to oppose the government when they seek to hide or down play information, but there is a certain level of safe guarding of the public required of the press just as much as the government.
@spinachdip: Right, SUNY Buffalo is in Amherst, yet NY-26 (which includes all of Amherst) is the most Conservative district in NY, even more than upstate.
It honestly doesn’t matter if Borders wants to fill their shelves with Liberal/Democrat books, but at least be straightforward – don’t take a centrist view when you are clearly not a centrist. I would never claim to be a moderate, but there are idiots on both sides claiming to be centrists when they so clearly are not.
Unless you are Lou Dobbs, you probably don’t fall into the middle
@smoothtom: We’re forced to make investment decisions now, whether we’re dummies or not. We can’t leave it to “people with advanced degrees” anymore because we’re all responsible for investing our own retirement money.
Whether we’re in a recession or not, things are going to be interesting for the next few years. The net personal savings rate in the U.S. has been negative for nearly four years. With wages flat or declining, the middle class has been borrowing money to sustain their standard of living. Now the easy credit is gone and there’s nowhere left to borrow from, we’re in for a period of belt-tightening. Since consumer spending is about the only thing that’s kept the economy propped up for the last several years (remember after 9/11 when Bush told us to all go out and spend money?) we’re in for a bupy ride.
I meant “don’t claim a centrist view when you are clearly not a centrist,” sorry.
@ADismalScience: No, by all means, read up and enjoy. But think about that photo for a second, and read the titles. The books are intending to demystify and open the processes of many highly complex financial instruments–the very instruments that, now democratized, are exploding in our faces.
The “dummies” books are not the cause of our problems, and I never intended to say they were. They are, however, a symptom of the problem of a bubble economy.
I think a little bit of what has happened is that people who don’t know a thing about money got into dealing with money and are now running to a person or to a book to figure out why they are in trouble with money.
There isn’t enough education about simple common sense anymore. Don’t buy what you can’t afford. Don’t get into debt unless you have money in the bank when you purchase it to pay for it. Don’t go buying big ticket items if your car seems to be on the fritz. Keep extra money in case of emergencies.
Sometimes people can access the ‘dummies’ self-help books a lot easier than the internet. Hello, local library. Some of these books are actually a good tool to educate everyday consumers. Let’s face it: Not everyone reads SmartMoney.com and Fortune every day. Not everyone reads the news…all they hear is “RECESSION RECESSION RECESSION” and have no clue just how it will affect their quality of life.
@smoothtom:
Don’t be such a chicken little. Nothing is exploding. A few things are declining in value; it’s a bear market. Shit happens, but take comfort in that the shit never ends. The only symptom here is that there’s a demand to understand finance, which, you know, fucking finally. People get all the way out of college without understanding basic personal finance and investing in this country’s education system. Good luck with that strategy.
@Optimus:
Most investments are controlled by vast institutions who, believeyoufuckingme, are not worried about Jim Cramer’s analysis.
@Canerican: When did the strawman say what? For what it’s worth, the center of public opinion in America, based on opinion polls, lies to the left of center of the Democratic Party. So in a sense, you are correct – Republican centrists are actually conservative, while Democratic centrists like Obama and Clinton are actually to the right of center.
@spinachdip:
I find that argument patently ridiculous. Democratic social issues have lost on general-election ballot items for 8 years.
@ADismalScience: Which ballots, where? I’d argue the last two Presidential elections haven’t been about social issues at all, but rather about national security and fears of terrorism.
@ADismalScience: Election year issues drive people to or away from the polls, but they aren’t necessarily issues that the majority of the people are primarily concerned about. When it comes to bread and butter issues, the center of opinion is, by modern American standards, pretty liberal, whether people realize/admit it or not. It’s just that “liberal” and “Democrat” have become dirty words in the American lexicon, and wedge issues have trumped the bread-and-butter.
@ADismalScience: Well, far be it from me to derail this thread more than it already has been, but I think it’s pretty well established that the true number of Democratic/liberal voters in society tends to be under-represented by those who actually vote for a number of reasons. (Put another way, liberals are less likely to get to the polls). Thus the fact may well be that Democratic social issues, while more popularly-held, are still not winners in the election booth.
@Orv:
I’m talking about physical ballot items vis a vis gay marriage etc.
@Optimus: You might be missing my point. Even before the mass market media was screaming about it, people in finance realized this was an “Oh shit!” recession, rather than just a temporary downturn.
Whereas the 2000 recession was the result of the bubble bursting in a relatively small sector of the economy, real estate loans are not only a much larger segment of the economy, it also is more intertwined with other asset classes. Which is to say, this isn’t big because of the media blowing it out of proportion. In fact, I don’t think the media or the public realize exactly how big it is i.e. calling it a “sub-prime crisis” trivializes its magnitude and reach.
My point about the inevitability is that, had market gone through its natural cycle, we would’ve hit a downturn much earlier. But my guess is that the Feds could have slowed down the housing boom (if not the ARMs and the bogus AAA ratings) but refused, because the rise in home sales was a silver lining in an otherwise ho-hum economy and “Ownership Society” was a pet cause for the administration. Whether that was due to miscaluculation by Greenspan, hubris, or influence by the White House, I don’t know, but they had to have known it was a bubble economies, and yes Bart Simpson, bubbles do burst.
@ADismalScience: @ADismalScience: That kinda proves my point about the disconnect between election year issues and general public opinion. Gay marriage isn’t a bread and butter issue for most Americans, but when polled, people are generally supportive gay civil unions, if not marriage. But referendums mobilize people who support the initiatives, which is what happened in 2004 with gay marriage ban referendums in battleground states.
Very funny!