• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Profits Outpace Job Growth Five To One At Largest U.S. Corporations

Oldgamer

Diamond Member
Link to Source

shutterstock_142842139-638x423.jpg


Profits have grown five times faster than jobs at America’s largest publicly-traded companies over the past dozen years, according to a new analysis by Reuters.

Staff levels rose by 31 percent from 2001 to 2013 at the companies analyzed while inflation-adjusted profits grew 150 percent, the wire service reports.

The analysis is based on corporate filings by 100 of the largest publicly owned U.S. companies. The filings do not specify where hiring took place, and it is likely that a significant portion of the job growth reported in the documents came from outside the U.S.

Nearly a third of the companies actually shed jobs over the period Reuters examined, including several that shrank payrolls amid rising profits and revenues. Verizon, for example, sliced its workforce by over 30 percent while doubling its profits.

The analysis adds to the wealth of evidence that the success of businesses and their shareholders has become decoupled from workers’ success. Wages have been stagnant throughout the same period despite steadily rising worker productivity, leading the economists at the Economic Policy Institute to label the past 10 years a “lost decade” for the American worker. If the minimum wage had risen in proportion to worker productivity over the past several decades, it would now stand at nearly $22 an hour.

Low-wage work has been the primary source of job growth so far in the slow recovery from the Great Recession. Wages in those job categories have gotten steadily worse over the period Reuters examined. Wages fell by 5.5 percent in the 10 lowest-paying employment categories tracked by government statisticians even as the ranks of those workers swelled by 15 percent from 2001 to 2013. At the same time, earnings for the top categories rose by more than 25 cents on the dollar.

Trends like these exacerbate economic inequality in ways that contradict the trickle-down narrative of American capitalism. According to that story, boom times on corporate balance sheets would inevitably translate into benefits for the middle class as well as the wealthy ownership class.

But the message that severe inequality is actively harming economic growth and security for the country as a whole may be starting to take hold in mainstream analysis as more and more evidence piles up that the trickle-down approach to growth is wrong.

A report prepared for investors last week by Standard & Poor’s summed up much of the years-old evidence that wealth and income inequality undermine growth and even make recessions more likely.

As the New York Times noted, the S&P report’s conclusions and sources were not new. But the fact that an old-line elite institution like S&P would take the time to spell out the practical case against inequality, if not the moral one, indicates that “a debate that has been largely confined to the academic world and left-of-center political circles is becoming more mainstream.”
 
I was under the impression that if job creators kept more of their money they would create more jobs.
 
Jobs have been created, in Asia.

That is not a very balanced article as it only looks at the US job market. If we wish to create jobs here, we need more reporting on how many jobs are being created in china.
 
I don't expect higher profits to automatically translate into job growth they could be the result of productivity gains. However we have an issue now where gains in productivity are not translating into higher wages driving down worker's purchasing power.
 
Last edited:
I don't expect higher profits to automatically translate into job growth they could be the result of productivity gains. However we have an issue now where gains in productivity are not translating into higher wages driving down worker's purchasing power.

Employees of most, if not all, companies have been asked to be more productive without getting any added benefits. Now that these companies see how productive people can be, why pay them more and hire other people.
 
Employees of most, if not all, companies have been asked to be more productive without getting any added benefits. Now that these companies see how productive people can be, why pay them more and hire other people.

This is crap. After arriving at my current employer I discovered a huge waste of time and resources due to a manual data entry process when the data was already accessible in an xml file submitted by our vendors. With 20 hours of IT coding I managed to increase the productive capacity for that task 8 times over the prior capacity. Should those employees get added benefits just because I made their tasks significantly less time intensive? We benchmark our productivity. An employee that exceeds KPIs will get rewarded.
 
Profits Outpace Job Growth Five To One At Largest U.S. Corporations

Who would have ever guessed that human capital cost avoidance would drive profits? People are still a resource with an associated cost even though they are a necessary component of production (and hopefully profits in turn) you can't ignore that you have to pay them. What I've not seen is a generally applicable business case for paying employees (or potential hires) premium salaries in such a huge buyers' market for labor. The very idea that simply because a company is doing well does not mean there is a moral case for the company to pay its employees more. Should the teenage kid cutting your grass expect to double his fees just because you got a raise at work?
 
You all can keep blaming Reagan and trickle down all you want, this problems go back to the early 70's and late 60's right around the time we started running trade deficits.

ib330-figureA.png.538


slowincomegrowth-figure1-version1.png


2012-11_rom-chart2-e1352236996477.jpg
 
You all can keep blaming Reagan and trickle down all you want, this problems go back to the early 70's and late 60's right around the time we started running trade deficits.

ib330-figureA.png.538


slowincomegrowth-figure1-version1.png


2012-11_rom-chart2-e1352236996477.jpg

Yeh, when there's a grease fire in the kitchen, put it out with gasoline.
 
I was under the impression that if job creators kept more of their money they would create more jobs.

Can you hear that noise...?

It's the sound of the wealth tumbling it's way down the trickle slope!

Jobs have been created, in Asia.

That is not a very balanced article as it only looks at the US job market. If we wish to create jobs here, we need more reporting on how many jobs are being created in china.


All of the above.
 
Back
Top