Corporate Profits hit a new record high!

[Matt1970]

So none of them?

You got it.

 

[Jhhnn]

Do you have any evidence that people are working substantially harder or longer, or that worker happiness is drastically lower than usual? I don't believe it and tend to think this simply fits a certain anti-business narrative.

Profit remains relatively high despite lower employment primarily because of the reasons I stated in my previous post: Technology and outsourcing. A symbolic example I caught recently is a ski resort that had 4 ticket checkers stationed at various points amongst the lifts, while now they use bar codes and 1 person sits in front of a computer and monitors it all. Lower skilled white collar jobs are getting hit extremely hard... clerical, admin, sales, even x-ray analysis can be done overseas for cheaper. Bottom line is businesses are finding ways to maintain productivity and profits while unemployment remains high. Our economy has changed a lot while the workforce has changed little. We have an oversupply of low skilled workers and an under-supply of high skilled. Moral of the story is more people had better do what they can to try and become high skilled or this country faces some serious economic problems.

You put it all on the workers rather than employers. Perhaps employers need to do what they can to employ more low & middle skill workers in this country, huh? Perhaps they need to step up & foster the skills among their employees that they want, train them, rather than on insisting that prospective employees appear at the HR office with all the skills employers want...

Just because loyalty towards employees is at an all time low doesn't mean that the converse is true... more than anything else, employees want stable employment w/ decent pay & benefits.

 

[Jhhnn]

Just watch this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=192oEC5TX_Q

Total denial, huh? Right Wing Fringe Whacks act as if they were born in a lean-to, forged a trail into virgin wilderness, fought off the natives & built mighty empires of commerce from scratch. Which just shows how fragile their egos really are, and how much delusion they'll entertain to support their ideology.

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

Why would you want to keep this so called "experiences exec" that is sterring you ship into bankruptcy? And why would you pay him more and not fire him for being shitty?

16k "bakers" - and by "bakers" I mean people who sit in a factory and push buttons getting an average salary of $45k - that has NOTHING to do with it. Does it?

I mean, thats only $720,000,000.00 per year for a skill-less job. Thats BAWWWRight, huh?

 

[Jhhnn]

16k "bakers" - and by "bakers" I mean people who sit in a factory and push buttons getting an average salary of $45k - that has NOTHING to do with it. Does it?

I mean, thats only $720,000,000.00 per year for a skill-less job. Thats BAWWWRight, huh?

Envious? Perhaps you'd care to try it, see how well you like it.

Where Righties fail, as always, is in their judgmental moralizations about the value of other people's work, and about the macroeconomic effects of what they believe. It's not as if there is huge demand for higher skill sets, or as if the vast expanses of American Suburbia, the mortgages associated with that, and the financial system in general can be supported by shit-fer-wages employers, at all. Nor can it support other realms of the economy, either.

Not that you're capable of looking past your own preconceptions & prejudices to see that, but it needs to be pointed out, anyway.

 

[Matt1970]

Envious? Perhaps you'd care to try it, see how well you like it.

Where Righties fail, as always, is in their judgmental moralizations about the value of other people's work, and about the macroeconomic effects of what they believe. It's not as if there is huge demand for higher skill sets, or as if the vast expanses of American Suburbia, the mortgages associated with that, and the financial system in general can be supported by shit-fer-wages employers, at all. Nor can it support other realms of the economy, either.

Not that you're capable of looking past your own preconceptions & prejudices to see that, but it needs to be pointed out, anyway.

That's ironic coming from someone who has done nothing but bitch about what other people have.

 

[Incorruptible]

That's ironic coming from someone who has done nothing but bitch about what other people have.

That's the problem with this type of trash, they want what others have and expect the government to steal from successful people to give to them. He really is pathetic

 

[Londo_Jowo]

That's the problem with this type of trash, they want what others have and expect the government to steal from successful people to give to them. He really is pathetic

It's one thing to argue a point but there's no reason to refer to the other person as trash.

 

[Jhhnn]

That's ironic coming from someone who has done nothing but bitch about what other people have.

Standard Right Wing deflection. Perhaps you'd care to address the substance of my post?

Probably not... which is why you deflected in the first place.

 

[Jhhnn]

That's the problem with this type of trash, they want what others have and expect the government to steal from successful people to give to them. He really is pathetic

Taxes are not theft, no matter what sort of Libertopian bullshit you rely on to claim that they are. Nor is some redistribution when necessary. You seem to be on a moral crusade for billionaires so that they can keep every fucking nickel, money they'll never use. You fail to realize it's not about money for them, but rather keeping score & acquiring more power.

The sad truth is that the very actions of American Capitalists have necessitated greater redistribution. Another sad truth is that Righties have a great disdain for people who perform necessary low skill work.

Our world would go to Hell in a handbasket a lot faster if nobody would carry off the trash than if the heads of the fortune 500 died in their sleep tonight. Not everybody gets to be a billionaire, no matter how smart they are or how hard they work. Luck plays a part, even in the accident of birth, even if that concept offends your oh so fragile & judgmental ego.

That's why Righties get so twisted over Obama's "You didn't build that" remark- they all see themselves as John Galt or the fucking Lone Ranger. Mostly, you got lucky, starting with being born in this country instead of some third world shithole, and the reason this is a great country is because of all the little people who worked to make it that way.

 

[cwjerome]

Yes, in the form of higher unemployment, falling wages and rising prices.

Lolz... how does that even answer my question again? Right, it doesn't. Saying people are working harder and longer because unemployment is high pretty much shows you don't know dick about economics.

Profit remains high because those at the top can use their power and influence to keep things that way.

The moral of the story is that those at the top are going to have to part with some of that wealth that they've been hoarding for so long. Otherwise, it'll just get taken from them.

Nice case conspiratorial envy you have there. "Those greedy bastard businesses are hording wealth and we need to take it from them!"

There are perfectly reasonable social and economic reasons for high profits and low employment, and I've explained some big ones whether you accept it or not. It doesn't fit into your partisan rhetoric, but businesses have been streamlining for 20 years with technology and outsourcing and the chickens are coming home to roost. The world is changing and we don't need (or have) the number of low skilled jobs that were necessary before. The ratio of low skilled and high skilled jobs is reversing but the people are slow to adapt. Every economist in the world will tell you the US has a severe high skilled labor shortage.

All these economic isolationists like to pretend this is the 1950s and we can have maintain all these low skilled, routine jobs that pay well. I am sorry to be there bearer of bad news -however fucking obvious it is- but for this country to compete globally in the reality of today, we need to be pushing highly dynamic, creative, and modern jobs... and this means our policies should be pushing money towards and promoting the highest standards of education, technology, and training to keep the US on the edge of the envelope instead of trying to maintain a regressive dinosaur economy that will keep us stagnant.

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

That's ironic coming from someone who has done nothing but bitch about what other people have.

It comes from someone with no talent that looks up towards everyone else that worked harder for their possessions - it comes to no surprise.


Coincides perfectly with the entitlements expectations. THEY HAVE IT, WHY THE FUCK DON'T I?? THIS IS RIDICULOUS. All I have is an air conditioner, refrigerator, food, and ciggarettes. I CANT EVEN GET A DAMN IPAD!!! THIS ISNT FAIR!

 

[Jhhnn]

Lolz... how does that even answer my question again? Right, it doesn't. Saying people are working harder and longer because unemployment is high pretty much shows you don't know dick about economics.



Nice case conspiratorial envy you have there. "Those greedy bastard businesses are hording wealth and we need to take it from them!"

There are perfectly reasonable social and economic reasons for high profits and low employment, and I've explained some big ones whether you accept it or not. It doesn't fit into your partisan rhetoric, but businesses have been streamlining for 20 years with technology and outsourcing and the chickens are coming home to roost. The world is changing and we don't need (or have) the number of low skilled jobs that were necessary before. The ratio of low skilled and high skilled jobs is reversing but the people are slow to adapt. Every economist in the world will tell you the US has a severe high skilled labor shortage.

So there are enough high skill jobs going begging to reduce unemployment to something under 5%? Really?

Cite those economists while you're at it... and account for the enormous loss of jobs in a very short time when the flimflam of the Ownership Society collapsed on itself.

All these economic isolationists like to pretend this is the 1950s and we can have maintain all these low skilled, routine jobs that pay well. I am sorry to be there bearer of bad news -however fucking obvious it is- but for this country to compete globally in the reality of today, we need to be pushing highly dynamic, creative, and modern jobs... and this means our policies should be pushing money towards and promoting the highest standards of education, technology, and training to keep the US on the edge of the envelope instead of trying to maintain a regressive dinosaur economy that will keep us stagnant.

Gee, seems like you're channeling Obama with that one... not that I disagree with it for the future, but it doesn't account for today, or for the short term at all. How do we keep up all those suburban mortgage payments & energy bills to support the financial elite & keep money flowing?

Beggar thy neighbor, the usual right wing sentiment, isn't much of a strategy for a healthy economy is it?

 

[Michael]

I am very puzzled by the suggestions that companies should hire employees that are not needed and/or at wages that are higher than necessary. I say that in a broad sense, many companies are not profit motivated and are simply a legal framework to conduct business.

The Fortune 500 tend to be public companies where there is a promise to and an expectation from shareholders to be profit motivated.

Taxation is not theft but it can be. For example, taxes can be used to pay for schools to make schooling free, or to pay for roads, or to pay for policing. I think even the most hardened "profit" orientated manager sees the benefit and need for that. They can argue on the management and rate of spending, but not the real goal itself - invest in the infrastructure and future development of the population.

However, take from him because he has more just to give to someone else so we are all equal swerves right into the area of "theft". Taxes can also be used to seize property for the government and it is hard to argue that it is not theft.

My way of thinking is simple. The government needs money now and you can only get money in the short term from those that have it. Taxing the poor doesn't give you any revenue and makes selling bonds to investors harder and harder.

You can cut spending, but, again, if you go where the spending is, you are pretty much have to cut entitlement spending for very popular programs or make a big cut in military spending, or probably both.

So what I am hoping that there is a balance in the result of the current negotiations. I support leaving the rates alone and working on deductions. I also support looking carefully at "carried interest" and eliminating some of the technical abuse that is now happening. I support changing deductions as in the short term it is the most logical way to make "richer" people pay more without making the tax rates uncompetitive.

I think that dividends should be taxed at a lower rate because they already have been taxed and a lower rate encourages money to be paid to shareholders so you don't inefficiently pile up money in corporations. Shareholders, either directly or via a mutual fund, have a much higher chance of being people who will be spending money in their localities.

Lower capital gains taxes is also desirable. I have no issue with long-term being changed from 1 to 2 years to benefit investors vs. speculators, but lower taxes there makes sense.

Michael

 

[DucatiMonster696]

I am very puzzled by the suggestions that companies should hire employees that are not needed and/or at wages that are higher than necessary. I say that in a broad sense, many companies are not profit motivated and are simply a legal framework to conduct business.

The Fortune 500 tend to be public companies where there is a promise to and an expectation from shareholders to be profit motivated.

Taxation is not theft but it can be. For example, taxes can be used to pay for schools to make schooling free, or to pay for roads, or to pay for policing. I think even the most hardened "profit" orientated manager sees the benefit and need for that. They can argue on the management and rate of spending, but not the real goal itself - invest in the infrastructure and future development of the population.

However, take from him because he has more just to give to someone else so we are all equal swerves right into the area of "theft". Taxes can also be used to seize property for the government and it is hard to argue that it is not theft.

My way of thinking is simple. The government needs money now and you can only get money in the short term from those that have it. Taxing the poor doesn't give you any revenue and makes selling bonds to investors harder and harder.

You can cut spending, but, again, if you go where the spending is, you are pretty much have to cut entitlement spending for very popular programs or make a big cut in military spending, or probably both.

So what I am hoping that there is a balance in the result of the current negotiations. I support leaving the rates alone and working on deductions. I also support looking carefully at "carried interest" and eliminating some of the technical abuse that is now happening. I support changing deductions as in the short term it is the most logical way to make "richer" people pay more without making the tax rates uncompetitive.

I think that dividends should be taxed at a lower rate because they already have been taxed and a lower rate encourages money to be paid to shareholders so you don't inefficiently pile up money in corporations. Shareholders, either directly or via a mutual fund, have a much higher chance of being people who will be spending money in their localities.

Lower capital gains taxes is also desirable. I have no issue with long-term being changed from 1 to 2 years to benefit investors vs. speculators, but lower taxes there makes sense.

Michael

It would also be great if government were to incentivize the repatriation of profits made overseas by lowering taxes on those profits rather then antagonizing businesses to keep that money safely overseas.

 

[Michael]

The problem with incentivizing companies to repatriate money is last time they did so, the benefit actually was pretty small. The more requirements of how the repatriated money has to be spent, the less desirable it is. There are real reasons why companies want the money overseas as well as there quite often are more investment opportunities than in the local market which may be saturated.

There was an excellent article in the NY Times "today" (I live in China so I only get the electronic version and only because I use a VPN) on the effect of local incentives. From the article, it appears that local and state governments have been giving away a lot of taxpayer money without making sure they really get the benefit for their spending.

Michael

 

[Jhhnn]

It comes from someone with no talent that looks up towards everyone else that worked harder for their possessions - it comes to no surprise.


Coincides perfectly with the entitlements expectations. THEY HAVE IT, WHY THE FUCK DON'T I?? THIS IS RIDICULOUS. All I have is an air conditioner, refrigerator, food, and ciggarettes. I CANT EVEN GET A DAMN IPAD!!! THIS ISNT FAIR!

Beautiful example of denial & false attribution.

You really have no idea who I am, what i do, how much I'm worth or how hard I've worked for it. Your ego is apparently so fragile, your point of view so self aggrandizing & puerile that you need to claim I'm somebody that I'm not.

What you apparently find so threatening, so frightening is that I acknowledge luck as part of success, including my own. I've known people who worked very, very hard & gotten nowhere, others who had fortune fall in their laps, but mostly a lot of people in between those extremes. We all start from different places & families, all have different levels of support along the way- from our families, from our schools, from our communities & our govt. Some of us just land in the right place at the right time, some of us don't. Some of us are offered greater opportunities, some of us have greater talents than others, and sometimes those talents are undiscovered & unappreciated, too.

You also seem to feel threatened by the idea that anybody who works deserves some respect, no matter how menial their job might be, by the idea that all such people should make a decent living in this land of plenty, by the fact that you need them to do their jobs & pay their bills, raise their families, a lot more than you need for billionaires to get a solid return on their money.

 

[Ausm]

Scared to address topics anymore without diverting?

That's a wannabe "non partisan "ex Mod for ya.

 

[Engineer]

That's a wannabe "non partisan "ex Mod for ya.

Who? I thought that EK was an administrator and Umbrella was the mod? I could be wrong though...I'm getting old and don't remember things.

 

[OverVolt]

I don't mind people who got lucky, as long as they are thankful for being lucky :awe:

 

[cwjerome]

So there are enough high skill jobs going begging to reduce unemployment to something under 5%? Really?

Cite those economists while you're at it... and account for the enormous loss of jobs in a very short time when the flimflam of the Ownership Society collapsed on itself.

I'm sure if the supply of high skilled labor met demand it would be very near 5%. Please Google "American high skilled job shortage" and be amazed at the obvious.

The housing/credit bubble is both a cause and a consequence of the disappearance of low-to-medium skilled blue and white collar jobs. The "booming" economy disguised it by creating a huge housing/credit bubble to artificially sustain people's standard of living, in effect creating an industry -housing construction- to absorb a lot of the unskilled labor that would otherwise struggle to find jobs in a super competitive marketplace. Once things blew up it wiped out a huge chunk of those blue collar jobs- the people who built the houses, just as the intensity of globalization wiped out a chunk of low and medium skilled white collar workers- the people who bought the houses. Chickens. Roost. A perfect storm that uncovered the artificial hiding of low skilled job loss.

Gee, seems like you're channeling Obama with that one... not that I disagree with it for the future, but it doesn't account for today, or for the short term at all. How do we keep up all those suburban mortgage payments & energy bills to support the financial elite & keep money flowing?

Beggar thy neighbor, the usual right wing sentiment, isn't much of a strategy for a healthy economy is it?

That fact is, more and more old jobs are never coming back, and the majority of those jobs are low skilled blue and low skilled white collar jobs. More than ever, we need creative, innovative, well educated and well trained high skilled workers and more of them. Many more. Globalization and the IT revolution are not the friend of low skilled jobs in America and there's nothing we can do to change that. That's just the world we live in... someone in India can transcribe or do bookkeeping. A machine or computer can do the job of many low skilled workers. Instead of trying to hold onto dying jobs we need to be looking to the future and enable people to work the new types of jobs that will pay well and keep our economy strong.

There is a polarization of jobs occurring between high and low pay and it will probably continue to grow. Less demand for middle skill routine jobs mean they shrink in pay or vanish while more demand for educated workers performing abstract, non-routine tasks is at least keeping wages level or climbing. It sucks but it's inevitable. It's a challenge but it's an opportunity. I suggest less pointing of fingers at conservatives and chasing your own tail in the process and more sincere discourse and honestly trying to deal with REAL issues. Everyone, EVERYONE, needs to put down the propaganda and start over fresh. We're in this together and it is the future at stake.

 

[Retro Rob]

There is a polarization of jobs occurring between high and low pay and it will probably continue to grow. Less demand for middle skill routine jobs mean they shrink in pay or vanish while more demand for educated workers performing abstract, non-routine tasks is at least keeping wages level or climbing. It sucks but it's inevitable. It's a challenge but it's an opportunity. I suggest less pointing of fingers at conservatives and chasing your own tail in the process and more sincere discourse and honestly trying to deal with REAL issues. Everyone, EVERYONE, needs to put down the propaganda and start over fresh. We're in this together and it is the future at stake.

It's not quite this cut and dried. Employers have to be willing to train and actually be patient and let employees develope.

In my experience, the demand is really for those who can hit the ground running with little to hardly any learning curve. This requires that they've done virtually the same job before. I dont think employers want to coach a guy up anymore..., they want a person who can be the company's Senior Network Admin and also double as the account exec as part of his normal job function, consolidating several jobs into one, saving said company money while overworking someone and eliminating more jobs in the process.

Jack of all trades are hard to find. Wages can go up, but so will responsibility and workloads. There needs to be a balance.

 

[Veliko]

Lolz... how does that even answer my question again? Right, it doesn't. Saying people are working harder and longer because unemployment is high pretty much shows you don't know dick about economics.

Here is what I actually said. You'll note that I didn't use high unemployment as my answer:

Yes, in the form of higher unemployment, falling wages and rising prices.

Nice case conspiratorial envy you have there. "Those greedy bastard businesses are hording wealth and we need to take it from them!"

Erm, yes they are. I think you need to put down your sixth form economics book, and instead pick up a history book.

The rich and powerful have been doing their best to maintain the status quo for centuries.

There are perfectly reasonable social and economic reasons for high profits and low employment, and I've explained some big ones whether you accept it or not. It doesn't fit into your partisan rhetoric, but businesses have been streamlining for 20 years with technology and outsourcing and the chickens are coming home to roost. The world is changing and we don't need (or have) the number of low skilled jobs that were necessary before. The ratio of low skilled and high skilled jobs is reversing but the people are slow to adapt. Every economist in the world will tell you the US has a severe high skilled labor shortage.

All these economic isolationists like to pretend this is the 1950s and we can have maintain all these low skilled, routine jobs that pay well. I am sorry to be there bearer of bad news -however fucking obvious it is- but for this country to compete globally in the reality of today, we need to be pushing highly dynamic, creative, and modern jobs... and this means our policies should be pushing money towards and promoting the highest standards of education, technology, and training to keep the US on the edge of the envelope instead of trying to maintain a regressive dinosaur economy that will keep us stagnant.

Which regressive dinosaur are you referring to? The one we have at the moment, whereby the gap between the rich and the poor is increasing?

 

[OverVolt]

Which regressive dinosaur are you referring to? The one we have at the moment, whereby the gap between the rich and the poor is increasing?

Yea its almost like the more social programs we have, the more inequality, its so weird.

Entitlements are a bone the rich throw to the poor to keep them preoccupied while they go and reap the REAL money/wealth.

 

[OverVolt]

I'm sure if the supply of high skilled labor met demand it would be very near 5%. Please Google "American high skilled job shortage" and be amazed at the obvious.

The housing/credit bubble is both a cause and a consequence of the disappearance of low-to-medium skilled blue and white collar jobs. The "booming" economy disguised it by creating a huge housing/credit bubble to artificially sustain people's standard of living, in effect creating an industry -housing construction- to absorb a lot of the unskilled labor that would otherwise struggle to find jobs in a super competitive marketplace. Once things blew up it wiped out a huge chunk of those blue collar jobs- the people who built the houses, just as the intensity of globalization wiped out a chunk of low and medium skilled white collar workers- the people who bought the houses. Chickens. Roost. A perfect storm that uncovered the artificial hiding of low skilled job loss.

That fact is, more and more old jobs are never coming back, and the majority of those jobs are low skilled blue and low skilled white collar jobs. More than ever, we need creative, innovative, well educated and well trained high skilled workers and more of them. Many more. Globalization and the IT revolution are not the friend of low skilled jobs in America and there's nothing we can do to change that. That's just the world we live in... someone in India can transcribe or do bookkeeping. A machine or computer can do the job of many low skilled workers. Instead of trying to hold onto dying jobs we need to be looking to the future and enable people to work the new types of jobs that will pay well and keep our economy strong.

There is a polarization of jobs occurring between high and low pay and it will probably continue to grow. Less demand for middle skill routine jobs mean they shrink in pay or vanish while more demand for educated workers performing abstract, non-routine tasks is at least keeping wages level or climbing. It sucks but it's inevitable. It's a challenge but it's an opportunity. I suggest less pointing of fingers at conservatives and chasing your own tail in the process and more sincere discourse and honestly trying to deal with REAL issues. Everyone, EVERYONE, needs to put down the propaganda and start over fresh. We're in this together and it is the future at stake.

People blow technology way out of proportion. There are pharmacies for example that have $1-5 million dollar machines to replace human pharmacy techs and the damn things break so frequently it takes the same number of people to maintain the machine as it would have replaced.

If we mechanized/computerized everything, think of the energy costs. At the end of the day its the people that matter, not the technology. Its how the technology affects and interfaces with people. Despite all the current technology we have, productivity is actually abysmal. Our "economy" is thousands of people in cubicles, and we ship everything we need from 18,000 miles away. This is a phase that will end, not the future trend.

Besides what makes white collar not able to be outsourced? That is entirely a myth. Pretty soon Japan and several other countries will be so much more competent at modern math/science/computers and you don't even have to ship anything physical 18,000 miles. Good luck.