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

[theeedude]

Right because somehow a lower tax rate at the top makes people buy more imported crap. Got it.

No, you didn't get it. Arbitrage generated the profits and capital gains at the top, trickle down made sure those profits and gains were taxed as little as possible and stayed at the top.

 

[Jhhnn]

You want to try again? The facts haven't changed since last time.

Never claimed that they have.

Regardless of the time this "really" started, the adoption of right wing economic ideology has fueled it in no small way. Holding to that ideology won't make it better. It just makes it worse.

You can go on about Dems, Clinton & Obama all you want. In the sense that their economic policy is flawed it's because they accept too much of it themselves.

It's still right wing economic ideology to some degree or another. It still leaves median families with a 40% smaller share of national income than they enjoyed in 1978 and the top .1% & .01% with massive multiplication of their share.

If the rewards of the system were equitable back then, what justifies them being different today? Why should they be?

If American workers have to settle for less, why should the people at the top be allowed even more?

 

[Matt1970]

Never claimed that they have.

Regardless of the time this "really" started, the adoption of right wing economic ideology has fueled it in no small way. Holding to that ideology won't make it better. It just makes it worse.

You can go on about Dems, Clinton & Obama all you want. In the sense that their economic policy is flawed it's because they accept too much of it themselves.

It's still right wing economic ideology to some degree or another. It still leaves median families with a 40% smaller share of national income than they enjoyed in 1978 and the top .1% & .01% with massive multiplication of their share.

If the rewards of the system were equitable back then, what justifies them being different today? Why should they be?

If American workers have to settle for less, why should the people at the top be allowed even more?

And there you go. If you only use stats that go back as far as 1978, Reagan looks like the one who set all this shit in motion, but I have proven to you time and time again it goes back at least a decade before that.

 

[Jhhnn]

And there you go. If you only use stats that go back as far as 1978, Reagan looks like the one who set all this shit in motion, but I have proven to you time and time again it goes back at least a decade before that.

So what? I could claim it went back to the Kennedy tax cuts or Nixon & it would discredit what I said not in the slightest.

Reagan era Repubs made it ideological, sold people on the whole trickledown act. They took an existing trend & made it worse, sold it as better, covered the difference with massive borrowing & spending, mostly on the military.

 

[Zorkorist]

Meanwhile, Jhnnn favors Government taxing and spending like there is no tomorrow.

You can't have it both ways, Jhnnn.

-John

 

[Zorkorist]

Name one little Sacrifice you are willing to give, Jhnn.

I mean other than cutting off rich peoples heads and holding them up to the firelight.

-John

 

[Zorkorist]

Wow, I just fell in the Jhnn trap.

I will never, ever, negotiate with you.

Your ideas are abhorrent to me.

-John

 

[BoberFett]

Never claimed that they have.

Regardless of the time this "really" started, the adoption of right wing economic ideology has fueled it in no small way. Holding to that ideology won't make it better. It just makes it worse.

You can go on about Dems, Clinton & Obama all you want. In the sense that their economic policy is flawed it's because they accept too much of it themselves.

It's still right wing economic ideology to some degree or another. It still leaves median families with a 40% smaller share of national income than they enjoyed in 1978 and the top .1% & .01% with massive multiplication of their share.

If the rewards of the system were equitable back then, what justifies them being different today? Why should they be?

If American workers have to settle for less, why should the people at the top be allowed even more?

Please, tell us how "left wing economics" will solve the fact that most real work can be done by a small number of people due to technology while everything else is makework.

 

[Zorba]

Notice that chart shows "family income," over a period of time that significantly more women joined the workforce. So basically a little less than 2 now make as much as ~1.1 in the 1970

 

[Zorkorist]

It's quite simple that when Government starts playing around with employment, and money policy, especially when they can spend unli9mited, etc., normal people are losers.

-John

 

[Zorkorist]

______--------
Government...----

Normal People -------_________

 

[jruchko]

Please, tell us how "left wing economics" will solve the fact that most real work can be done by a small number of people due to technology while everything else is makework.

Do you think capitalism has an answer to this problem? We currently only have a 63% workforce particiapation rate, and of that, about 50% can be automated.

What should we do when jobs just aren't there for people to be employed? Do we just let them starve and die? How about when physicists manage to find a way to change matter into anything you want at the push of a button?

There is no economic system out there right now that can solve the current problems, let alone future problems as technology becomes better. I don't have an answer, but I do know that we need to start looking into entirely new economic systems.

 

[Zorkorist]

Economics, solves many decisions that Governments need to look at.

Supply and demand.
A balanced budget

But they refuse to look at these simple facts, and here we are a mess today.blame it easily on Government.,

-John

 

[Zorkorist]

No one is being held accountable for the absurd spending of our Government.

-John

 

[BoberFett]

Do you think capitalism has an answer to this problem? We currently only have a 63% workforce particiapation rate, and of that, about 50% can be automated.

What should we do when jobs just aren't there for people to be employed? Do we just let them starve and die? How about when physicists manage to find a way to change matter into anything you want at the push of a button?

There is no economic system out there right now that can solve the current problems, let alone future problems as technology becomes better. I don't have an answer, but I do know that we need to start looking into entirely new economic systems.

Agreed, but the left wing has no other answer than "taxes."

 

[jruchko]

Agreed, but the left wing has no other answer than "taxes."

To be fair, if you are thinking short-term raising taxes on the wealthy to fun programs for the poor makes sense. The problem with that, is that it just delays the inevitable.

The only correct solution is to start seriously thinking outside the box and coming up with a new system before our current system collapses due to the reasons I stated in my last post. We both know that it will never happen though, because politicians are bought and paid for by people who will not give up the current system without a fight.

 

[Matt1970]

So what? I could claim it went back to the Kennedy tax cuts or Nixon & it would discredit what I said not in the slightest.

Reagan era Repubs made it ideological, sold people on the whole trickledown act. They took an existing trend & made it worse, sold it as better, covered the difference with massive borrowing & spending, mostly on the military.

Show me your evidence it made things worse.

 

[ch33zw1z]

I'm not an economist, I can only provide knowledge from my life. This is impacting many people, and you get what you pay for. It really shows that Corporations no longer even pretend to care about their employees, you're just a number.

 

[Jhhnn]

Please, tell us how "left wing economics" will solve the fact that most real work can be done by a small number of people due to technology while everything else is makework.

So we create the necessity for the welfare state and then decry the necessity, right?

Do you think capitalism has an answer to this problem? We currently only have a 63% workforce particiapation rate, and of that, about 50% can be automated.

What should we do when jobs just aren't there for people to be employed? Do we just let them starve and die? How about when physicists manage to find a way to change matter into anything you want at the push of a button?

There is no economic system out there right now that can solve the current problems, let alone future problems as technology becomes better. I don't have an answer, but I do know that we need to start looking into entirely new economic systems.

Thank you, jruchko. I don't pretend to have the answers, either, but "let them eat cake" isn't it. This ongoing concentration of wealth & income will destroy the cohesiveness of society. Like it or not, redistribution is economic self defense for middle America.

 

[Jhhnn]

Show me your evidence it made things worse.

You already posted it. Clearly, you didn't understand it then, nor will you ever until you take off the ideological blinders.

 

[Tombstone1881]

You already posted it. Clearly, you didn't understand it then, nor will you ever until you take off the ideological blinders.

Perhaps he just didn't notice the downward trending lines of his graphs during the period that Reagan held office.

 

[glenn1]

So we create the necessity for the welfare state and then decry the necessity, right?

Thank you, jruchko. I don't pretend to have the answers, either, but "let them eat cake" isn't it. This ongoing concentration of wealth & income will destroy the cohesiveness of society. Like it or not, redistribution is economic self defense for middle America.

You had better ensure that your riot insurance is paid up then, because Americans are never going to accept a long-term social welfare state much less systematic wealth redistribution. Like it or not, the puritanic work ethic will not allow those with jobs to accept those without jobs getting a "free ride" for anything but a short stint between losing a job and finding a new one. The idea of making social welfare arrangements to directly support the long-term unemployed in that state would horrify them. Even 99 weeks of unemployment payments began to create pushback, and 'welfare to work' has been the driving policy for nearly 2 decades now. If the unemployed proles started rioting, the middle class would either support having them brutally dispersed via police action or being forced into chain-gang style work teams to keep them busy.

 

[jruchko]

You had better ensure that your riot insurance is paid up then, because Americans are never going to accept a long-term social welfare state much less systematic wealth redistribution. Like it or not, the puritanic work ethic will not allow those with jobs to accept those without jobs getting a "free ride" for anything but a short stint between losing a job and finding a new one. The idea of making social welfare arrangements to directly support the long-term unemployed in that state would horrify them. Even 99 weeks of unemployment payments began to create pushback, and 'welfare to work' has been the driving policy for nearly 2 decades now. If the unemployed proles started rioting, the middle class would either support having them brutally dispersed via police action or being forced into chain-gang style work teams to keep them busy.

I can guarantee that you will see things change when there are only enough jobs to employ about 20-30% of the working age population.

 

[Matt1970]

You already posted it. Clearly, you didn't understand it then, nor will you ever until you take off the ideological blinders.

Maybe it's my ideological blinders but 2 out of the 3 graphs actually show things improving from around 82 till around 90.

 

[DrDoug]

Workers haven't been properly compensated for productivity gains since Reagan was President. Now companies like Kroger are laying off most of their cashiers and cross-training every employee in the store to do not only their job but be cashier too. Same with stocking shelves, every employee is expected to not only do their job and be a cashier when needed but they also have to stock shelves in departments other than their own. Now Kroger has laid off their janitors and every employee is also a janitor! Think of that next time you are purchasing groceries at a Kroger or Kroger affiliate store...

That employee bagging your groceries may have just finished cleaning up the restrooms or just cleaned up a deuce someone dropped in one of the fitting rooms. Or picked up a used tampon that was changed in a fitting room.

You wanted cheap stuff? You got it.