Will America recover?

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

6 hours ago, SKJ said:

Oh Lord. Here we fucking go.

 

It's called "externalities" and it's another form of corporate welfare

Just shut the fuck up

Hey fuck you too. There's this thing called the economy and inflation learn what they are.

[Incredulity 11657]

8 hours ago, SKJ said:

It's shameful for the fucking companies that externalize the cost of living to the government in the form of government assistance, rather than paying a living wage.

It is a chicken and egg situation.  

I would argue that in the majority of cases it is not a conscious business decision to utilize government assistance as a tool to further a business. 

[BabaYaga 15289]

2 hours ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

Mc Donalds should pay a living wage to fry cooks and burger flippers ?  Grocery store chains should pay a living wage to bag boys, stock workers ?

McDonalds has already seen the writing on the wall and replacing staff with automated kiosks.  The unintended consequences of this MW/Living wage bullshit are just starting.  Seattle already tucked tail and backed off their absurd "head tax".  That this was even an idea shows the level of stupidity that these policies are hurting those they are designed to help.  You simply decrease employment opportunities for the demographic designed.  In fact, the only group shown to have a positive impact are the unions - who conveniently tie their baseline increases across the entire spectrum of pay ranges, and create artificial barrier of entry to non-union contractors who's companies have to absorb higher costs.  When there are more job opening posted now than people looking for work, the idea that we need artificial price controls is even more idiotic.  It's pandering.  An artificial transfer of wealth from one entity to another that winds up negatively impacting the very group it was designed to help (as we're seeing in Seattle - doubling the labor cost of many businesses)

[David Dennison 18851]

2 hours ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

Mc Donalds should pay a living wage to fry cooks and burger flippers ?  Grocery store chains should pay a living wage to bag boys, stock workers ?

Absolutely.

[BabaYaga 15289]

6 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Absolutely.

Sure.  Let's artificially double the labor costs of every business.  They should just sell more stuff then, right?  Easy enough.  

[Incredulity 11657]

Its a fascinating topic regarding employee pay/market pricing.

I happened across the Google Reviews and Yelp Reviews for the new Modern Times Brewery in Portland Oregon when I was there.( fan of Modern Times beer from visits to SD)  They pay a $15 min wage, full benefits, PTO, ......... basically the liberal basic employment wet dream.

The results were a number of, "OMG, the price" reviews.  So MT has to spend time explaining their business model over and over and over.  

I personally am fine with higher min wage and don't think the govt should be "subsidizing" wages for employers.  Consumers however do benefit from that subsidization as well.

[BabaYaga 15289]

10 minutes ago, Incredulity said:

Its a fascinating topic regarding employee pay/market pricing.

I happened across the Google Reviews and Yelp Reviews for the new Modern Times Brewery in Portland Oregon when I was there.( fan of Modern Times beer from visits to SD)  They pay a $15 min wage, full benefits, PTO, ......... basically the liberal basic employment wet dream.

The results were a number of, "OMG, the price" reviews.  So MT has to spend time explaining their business model over and over and over.  

I personally am fine with higher min wage and don't think the govt should be "subsidizing" wages for employers.  Consumers however do benefit from that subsidization as well.

Which is fine.  If your business model can facilitate a labor cost more than double that of your competitors.  Fine.  Conquer the world.  I'm sure you will attract the brightest and best.  But that is your model.  It's not for everyone.  And when your margins compress.  And they will.  Then let's talk. 

When there are more open job requisitions than there are people available to fill them.  All this talk of artificial price controls is idiotic.  Just populist talking point pandering.  We've seen it in Seattle.  Many firms cannot sustain this and have cut payrolls and it's hurting, not helping the very demographic it was intended to help.  

[ScottishHorn 172]

On 6/10/2018 at 2:50 PM, pyrohornIII said:

I feel like we are in Neville Chamberlain's Great Britain before WW2.  Seems he and others in power at that time were willing and maybe even anxious to appease Hitler, to sit by while he pillaged the rest of Europe.   In return, England would be unmolested, and those that helped bring about such a peaceful capitulation would most likely be rewarded by positions of power in the new government set up by the Nazis. 

That's what this feels like.  Like Trump is selling out America and our allies to feather his nest somewhere else.  He acts like someone who is intent on surrendering,  trying to convince everyone else he is looking out for the best deal for America, but really only looking out for himself.

I'm not sure there is a clear cut threat that is headed by an individual.   But more likely it's fear of globalization that is what is driving this fracture.  I think Putin can't handle globalization anymore that Trump can.  Therefore he has made Trump his ally, his puppet. 

Now we have to either get ahead and lead again in making this work for all, or we fall behind and have to play catch up.    For so many years we were the cutting edge in technology, now we are being forced to drop that advance, retreat to old standards.   Coal vs renewable energy is a great example.  Environment, immigration, fair trade, affordable health care are more examples.  Instead of trying to improve these things, we keep allowing advancements to be surrendered.

We as a country have to determine what is important again.  Then we have to stand up and say it, stand up and demand it.   If new standard is ruining everything else to improve our own individual bank accounts, then let me know.  I can play that game too. Or I could protest, or I can move.  But at least I would know what the rules are.  I get tired of people who live by one set of rules and espouse another.  Looking for justification for how other people are treated while profiting off of that treatment.

Until we can get common goals of human rights and decency again, then we won't get very far.   And human rights and decency goes beyond the right of being birthed.   Until a person's scoreboard reflects what he/she has done to make the world a better place for others, instead of how much they have accumulated, then we are stuck. 

So much of what you guys have said about the boomers is right on...same for our country and its tendency to go offshore for reasons that aren't entirely humanitarian or even barely humanitarian.  

 

 

I wouldn't compare Trump to Chamberlain.  He is basically undefined at this point because there has been nobody quite like him.  I have not seen an appeaser quite like Obama in some time.  Total transformation of middle east in a bad way under his watch.  An emboldened Iran and still the greatest terrorist state in the middle east and we give them 150 billion in cash to continue it.  Egypt is a disaster (pre Obama it was a great place to visit).  Syria, terrible relations with Israel, creation of ISIS.  North Korea's nuclear program exploded, all sorts of issues regarding the border and immigrants from central and south America resulting in the explosion of diseases not seen in this country in decades.  Completely kissing Putin's ass (ie I'll be much more flexible after election bs while they were doing all sorts of cyber warfare).  He was buddies with some of those ridiculous leaders in western Europe.  That about sums him up

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

1 hour ago, David Dennison said:

Absolutely.

No they should not. And to suggest such shows a complete lack of perspective and economic sense. Wages should reflect the task you're hired to do.  Your solution is a road map for inflation.  Someone has to pay the increased costs for inflated wages. It's going to be the consumers, not the companies.

Edited June 12, 2018 by Onboard 2.0

[Smax 3800]

18 hours ago, wildcat09 said:

Whenever Republicans bitch about certain people getting handouts, they're invariably bitching about minorities getting handouts. When white people get handouts, they "earned" them.

jfc..

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

6 minutes ago, Smax said:

jfc..

He'd probably say the same thing.

[BabaYaga 15289]

16 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

No they should not. And to suggest such shows a complete lack of perspective and economic sense. Wages should reflect the task you're hired to do.  Your solution is a road map for inflation.  Someone has to play the increased costs for inflated wages. It's going to be the consumers, not the companies.

You're trying to have an honest dialogue with the same person that proudly proclaimed the Constitution is "archaic" and not well adapted for the "modern world".....don't waste your time.

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

Just now, BabaYaga said:

You're trying to have an honest dialogue with the same person that proudly proclaimed the Constitution is "archaic" and not well adapted for the "modern world".....don't waste your time.

Yeah yeah I know. We all say stupid things from time to time.....  He's 12, he'll learn, maybe.

[Smax 3800]

1 hour ago, David Dennison said:

Absolutely.

 

Not, those are entry level stepping stone skill-less jobs for younger individuals

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

1 minute ago, Smax said:

 

Not, those are entry level stepping stone skill-less jobs for younger individuals

I think what he's doing is lobbying for a raise.....

[thrillhammer 683]

On 6/9/2018 at 11:28 PM, RayDog said:

The US could easily have a Democratic president for 16 years or more starting in 2020. After Texas, Georgia, and Arizona turn firmly blue over the next 10 years it is hard to see how the Republicans will win it again. It will take some major changes or major democratic screw up.

So there is a chance to have an FDR-like period to stabilize things assuming we ride out the inevitable world depression that is coming. 

I'm not convinced trump doesnt win again.   His base sees no fault in him, and he keeps pandering to them and they stay energized.  I'll be uneasy until november 4, 2020.

[FondrenRoad 4378]

2 minutes ago, thrillhammer said:

I'm not convinced trump doesnt win again.   His base sees no fault in him, and he keeps pandering to them and they stay energized.  I'll be uneasy until november 4, 2020.

His base is mostly in the South.  They are as irrelevant as California.  Swing voters in swing states are all that matter, just like last time.  Dems should ignore the deplorables, get Midwest unions back on board, get out the urban and African American voters in Virginia/North Carolina/Georgia/Pennsylvania, and get out the Latino voters in Florida (in particular, Puerto Ricans who moved there post-Maria).  Ignore Texas this cycle and the next.  Once the Dems gain Texas, the GOP will permanently move to get the Midwest, but the GOP will become pro-labor to do it, and the nation will be in a better place politically when that happens.

[Gardner Barnes 1562]

The threat of cyberwarfare is severely overblown but it makes for great headlines which in turn makes me money.

The NMCI (basically the Navy network) is remarkably secure and innovative. I sold some software into the project so I only know some high level public stuff - but the Navy network is like a mesh network where each ship is a node.

Point being it is highly adaptable and easy to adjust/secure from outside entities.

[Gardner Barnes 1562]

I'm not convinced trump doesnt win again.   His base sees no fault in him, and he keeps pandering to them and they stay energized.  I'll be uneasy until november 4, 2020.

The debates in 2020 will be high comedy. I don’t think he will win but it will make for some great reality TV

[hayden_horn 11362]

5 hours ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

Mc Donalds should pay a living wage to fry cooks and burger flippers ?  Grocery store chains should pay a living wage to bag boys, stock workers ?

yes?

[Gardner Barnes 1562]

His base is mostly in the South.  They are as irrelevant as California.  Swing voters in swing states are all that matter, just like last time.  Dems should ignore the deplorables, get Midwest unions back on board, get out the urban and African American voters in Virginia/North Carolina/Georgia/Pennsylvania, and get out the Latino voters in Florida (in particular, Puerto Ricans who moved there post-Maria).  Ignore Texas this cycle and the next.  Once the Dems gain Texas, the GOP will permanently move to get the Midwest, but the GOP will become pro-labor to do it, and the nation will be in a better place politically when that happens.

I think dems gaining Texas is at least 25 years away. It will happen but the Latino vote is not quite large enough yet and the urban white vote is not yet significant enough to overcome east Texas and fat suburban white people.

[bad_teammate 13192]

5 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

yes?

It's the obvious answer, but we must protect the profits of the already-insanely-wealthy.

[hayden_horn 11362]

1 hour ago, Smax said:

 

Not, those are entry level stepping stone skill-less jobs for younger individuals

see how HEB treats its people. and that's in a shit margin business.

[Hank Scorpio 17729]

Just now, bad_teammate said:

It's the obvious answer, but we must protect the profits of the already-insanely-wealthy.

You keep talking like that and none of that money is going to trickle down to you. Don't rock the boat and maybe you will get lucky and Elon Musk will accidentally throw away bag full of gold before he leaves for Mars and you'll find it as you dig around the landfill you live in because a robot took your job and there is no social safety net. It's just basic economics. 

[FondrenRoad 4378]

7 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

see how HEB treats its people. and that's in a shit margin business.

Or Costco.  But even then, Costco had $7500 in profit per employee last year that could have been used to "spread the love" a little bit more.

The onboards of the world are why we have the consolidation of wealth that we have now. The nerve of people wanting to get paid enough to live after putting in the physical labor required to make a business owner wealthy.

Edited June 12, 2018 by FondrenRoad

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

19 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

yes?

No was the answer the judges were looking for.  Unskilled jobs are just that, instilled jobs and you don't pay living wages for unskilled labor.

[hayden_horn 11362]

3 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

No was the answer the judges were looking for.  Unskilled jobs are just that, instilled jobs and you don't pay living wages for unskilled labor.

well, you are wrong. it was henry ford that said "paying good wages is not charity at all - it's the best kind of business."

we've lost sight of that in some sectors, especially as it relates to unskilled labor. in fact, working at a fast food restaurant or a grocery store isn't unskilled. you do learn skills on the job. they may seem menial to us, but balancing your register, properly preparing food, dealing with the fucking public - all these things are actual skills.

as a society, if we demean the least of our labor pool, and designate them to shit wages that require public assistance (that's our tax dollars, btw, let's not overlook that these corporations who treat unskilled labor like shit are basically subsidized for their labor by you and me), then we marginalize them and by doing so, we are minimizing their purchasing power, which should be part of the engine of our economy.

but whatever.

[Jack Burton 35]

20 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

No was the answer the judges were looking for.  Unskilled jobs are just that, instilled jobs and you don't pay living wages for unskilled labor.

People worked part-time flipping burgers 20-30 years ago to pay for all college tuition and board. I think there kids should get the same luxury and get a living wage.

[Incredulity 11657]

16 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

well, you are wrong. it was henry ford that said "paying good wages is not charity at all - it's the best kind of business."

we've lost sight of that in some sectors, especially as it relates to unskilled labor. in fact, working at a fast food restaurant or a grocery store isn't unskilled. you do learn skills on the job. they may seem menial to us, but balancing your register, properly preparing food, dealing with the fucking public - all these things are actual skills.

as a society, if we demean the least of our labor pool, and designate them to shit wages that require public assistance (that's our tax dollars, btw, let's not overlook that these corporations who treat unskilled labor like shit are basically subsidized for their labor by you and me), then we marginalize them and by doing so, we are minimizing their purchasing power, which should be part of the engine of our economy.

but whatever.

This totally dismisses the consumers role in the equation.  They demand and expect ever lower prices.  They don't give a fuck what a ton of steel, or pound of beef, or barrel of oil, or the labor to make something costs.

Yes, business want to make money.  In fact they must to survive.

The reality is most companies compete for small profit that is driven by market forces.  One of the big market forces is the government.  The subsidization of wages as a cure for low wages.  It truely is a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Edited June 12, 2018 by Incredulity

[FondrenRoad 4378]

17 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

well, you are wrong. it was henry ford that said "paying good wages is not charity at all - it's the best kind of business."

we've lost sight of that in some sectors, especially as it relates to unskilled labor. in fact, working at a fast food restaurant or a grocery store isn't unskilled. you do learn skills on the job. they may seem menial to us, but balancing your register, properly preparing food, dealing with the fucking public - all these things are actual skills.

as a society, if we demean the least of our labor pool, and designate them to shit wages that require public assistance (that's our tax dollars, btw, let's not overlook that these corporations who treat unskilled labor like shit are basically subsidized for their labor by you and me), then we marginalize them and by doing so, we are minimizing their purchasing power, which should be part of the engine of our economy.

but whatever.

Which is why we are the world leader in retail employee theft. 

http://fortune.com/2015/01/26/us-retail-worker-theft/

 

[F250 28764]

37 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

see how HEB treats its people. and that's in a shit margin business.

HEB HQ is loaded with former baggers and cashiers. I've worked with them in the past and was surprised that they had so many lifers at HEB. There are a lot of middle management at HEB that were once $4 an hour employees. I was surprised because I am a former disgruntled HEB cashier.

[hayden_horn 11362]

Just now, Incredulity said:

This totally dismisses the consumers role in the equation.  They demand and expect ever lower prices.  They don't give a fuck what a ton of steel, or pound of beef, or barrel of oil costs or the labor to make somthing costs.

Yes, business want to make money.  In fact they must to survive.

The reality is most companies compete for small profit that is driven by market forces.  One of the big market forces is the government.  The subsidization of wages as a cure for low wages.  It truely is a self-fulfilling prophecy.

consumers demand and expect lower prices because consumers aren't making more money, even as inflation does its thing. so to even break even on purchasing power, the only answer is lower prices and a race to the bottom for certain things. i agree, you're right, it is a self-fulfilling prophecy, though.

the better the average consumer's purchasing power, the more things that they can buy. hell, as a society, we used to actually put money into savings. many households, even in a dual income paradigm, cannot do that. now, many well-off people will say it's because poor people don't know how to manage money or whatever, but that's not the case. 78% of US households live paycheck to paycheck. think about that. 

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/08/24/most-americans-live-paycheck-to-paycheck.html

[hayden_horn 11362]

also, check out wage growth:

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/10/09/for-most-workers-real-wages-have-barely-budged-for-decades/

it's from 2014, but the point remains largely the same, even in our 2018 low unemployment economy.

Quote

But a look at five decades’ worth of government wage data suggests that the better question might be, why should now be any different? For most U.S. workers, real wages — that is, after inflation is taken into account — have been flat or even falling for decades, regardless of whether the economy has been adding or subtracting jobs.

Cash money isn’t the only way workers are compensated, of course — health insurance, retirement-account contributions, education and transit subsidies and other benefits all can be part of the package. But wages and salaries are the biggest (about 70%, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics) and most visible component of employee compensation.

According to the BLS, the average hourly wage for non-management private-sector workers last month was $20.67, unchanged from August and 2.3% above the average wage a year earlier. That’s not much, especially when compared with the pre-Great Recession years of 2006 and 2007, when the average hourly wage often increased by around 4% year-over-year. (During the high-inflation years of the 1970s and early 1980s, average wages commonly jumped 8%, 9% or even more year-over-year.)

But after adjusting for inflation, today’s average hourly wage has just about the same purchasing power as it did in 1979, following a long slide in the 1980s and early 1990s and bumpy, inconsistent growth since then. In fact, in real terms the average wage peaked more than 40 years ago: The $4.03-an-hour rate recorded in January 1973 has the same purchasing power as $22.41 would today.

 

[BabaYaga 15289]

41 minutes ago, FondrenRoad said:

Or Costco.  But even then, Costco had $7500 in profit per employee last year that could have been used to "spread the love" a little bit more.

The onboards of the world are why we have the consolidation of wealth that we have now. The nerve of people wanting to get paid enough to live after putting in the physical labor required to make a business owner wealthy.

Costco?  That only operates in primarily affluent areas and charges expensive memberships?  Yeah.  Let's run with that model across the spectrum of business types.  

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

30 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

well, you are wrong. it was henry ford that said "paying good wages is not charity at all - it's the best kind of business."

we've lost sight of that in some sectors, especially as it relates to unskilled labor. in fact, working at a fast food restaurant or a grocery store isn't unskilled. you do learn skills on the job. they may seem menial to us, but balancing your register, properly preparing food, dealing with the fucking public - all these things are actual skills.

as a society, if we demean the least of our labor pool, and designate them to shit wages that require public assistance (that's our tax dollars, btw, let's not overlook that these corporations who treat unskilled labor like shit are basically subsidized for their labor by you and me), then we marginalize them and by doing so, we are minimizing their purchasing power, which should be part of the engine of our economy.

but whatever.

Yeah build me a car, and I'll pay you skilled labor rates. Flip a burger and it's min. a wage job with incremental raises of $.50 - $.75 an hour. You want more money get more training, a better job or a new skilled labor education. THAT is all on the individual, with some educational tuition help from the gov't maybe .  We are not a nanny state (yet) and if we become one we're doomed.

[Brisketexan 105082]

also, check out wage growth:
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/10/09/for-most-workers-real-wages-have-barely-budged-for-decades/

it's from 2014, but the point remains largely the same, even in our 2018 low unemployment economy.

But a look at five decades’ worth of government wage data suggests that the better question might be, why should now be any different? For most U.S. workers, real wages — that is, after inflation is taken into account — have been flat or even falling for decades, regardless of whether the economy has been adding or subtracting jobs.
Cash money isn’t the only way workers are compensated, of course — health insurance, retirement-account contributions, education and transit subsidies and other benefits all can be part of the package. But wages and salaries are the biggest (about 70%, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics) and most visible component of employee compensation.
According to the BLS, the average hourly wage for non-management private-sector workers last month was $20.67, unchanged from August and 2.3% above the average wage a year earlier. That’s not much, especially when compared with the pre-Great Recession years of 2006 and 2007, when the average hourly wage often increased by around 4% year-over-year. (During the high-inflation years of the 1970s and early 1980s, average wages commonly jumped 8%, 9% or even more year-over-year.)
But after adjusting for inflation, today’s average hourly wage has just about the same purchasing power as it did in 1979, following a long slide in the 1980s and early 1990s and bumpy, inconsistent growth since then. In fact, in real terms the average wage peaked more than 40 years ago: The $4.03-an-hour rate recorded in January 1973 has the same purchasing power as $22.41 would today.

 

And that’s really it. Wages just come down to purchasing power. You don’t pay someone dollars: you pay them money to buy so many meals, make so many car and rent payments, etc. And in those terms, wages buy FEWER of those things. Pay is going down because purchasing power is going down.

That trend cannot produce a healthy, viable society. It is not sustainable, because math. It’s not complicated.

[F250 28764]

14 minutes ago, Jack Burton said:

People worked part-time flipping burgers 20-30 years ago to pay for all college tuition and board. I think there kids should get the same luxury and get a living wage.

Different issue but the cost of attending college used to be relatively inexpensive. I was able to pay for my tuition by working at this small unknown computer manufacturer called Dell over the summer in the early 90's.

 

[bad_teammate 13192]

Just now, Onboard 2.0 said:

Yeah build me a car, and I'll pay you skilled labor rates. Flip a burger and it's min. a wage job with incremental raises of $.50 - $.75 an hour. You want more money get more training, a better job or a new skilled labor education. THAT is all on the individual, with some educational tuition help from the gov't maybe .  We are not a nanny state (yet) and if we become one we're doomed.

There are not an infinite number of skilled labor jobs that you think are worth a living wage.

[hayden_horn 11362]

1 minute ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

Yeah build me a car, and I'll pay you skilled labor rates. Flip a burger and it's min. a wage job with incremental raises of $.50 - $.75 an hour. You want more money get more training, a better job or a new skilled labor education. THAT is all on the individual, with some educational tuition help from the gov't maybe .  We are not a nanny state (yet) and if we become one we're doomed.

yeah, ford employees didn't build a car. they were largely unskilled, single task factory workers. the equivalent of flipping a burger is fastening a handle to a car door. nevertheless...fuck, man, you missed the entire point.

[pyrohornIII 4814]

Hayden Horn putting in work.  Thanks. 

[Brisketexan 105082]

Different issue but the cost of attending college used to be relatively inexpensive. I was able to pay for my tuition by working at this small unknown computer manufacturer called Dell over the summer in the early 90's.
 

That echoes my point - it all comes down to purchasing power. Job X used to pay enough to make rent, tuition, and ramen noodles. Now, that same job does not.

[BabaYaga 15289]

9 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

78% of US households live paycheck to paycheck. think about that. 

Because we just spent 8 miserable years with GDP growth never once topping 3%.  We layered regulation on top of regulation, choked off access to capital, overburdened and already burdened private sector, saw the worst labor participation rate in history, historic welfare recipients, directed attacks by the administration on certain sectors of the economy.....then people piss and moan about a lack of wage growth?  And the 'fix'?  We infused trillions of dollars, washed through the same brokerage houses bemoaned and attacked by the pundits passing the infusions, who then bitch and moan about wealth inequality as it' siphoned off through the financial sector.  We stuck a needle in the neck of the stock market, drove it artificially through the roof, then sat around wondering why people on the street aren't feeling any better?  There was no wage growth....because there was no actual growth.  Not a hard concept.  

[pyrohornIII 4814]

And robotics are taking a lot of those skilled jobs away.   As are economies of size.  Modern row crop agriculture is a good indicator of this.  It doesn't take any skill to plow a straight row anymore.  That is all done by computers and GPS systems now.   Larger machines have reduced the workforce too.   

It is inevitable.  We have to accept these changes and find out ways we can use those changes to make things better for all of us, not just a handful. 

[Brisketexan 105082]

Because we just spent 8 miserable years with GDP growth never once topping 3%.  We layered regulation on top of regulation, choked off access to capital, overburdened and already burdened private sector, saw the worst labor participation rate in history, historic welfare recipients, directed attacks by the administration on certain sectors of the economy.....then people piss and moan about a lack of wage growth?  And the 'fix'?  We infused trillions of dollars, washed through the same brokerage houses bemoaned and attacked by the pundits passing the infusions, who then bitch and moan about wealth inequality as it' siphoned off through the financial sector.  We stuck a needle in the neck of the stock market, drove it artificially through the roof, then sat around wondering why people on the street aren't feeling any better?  There was no wage growth....because there was no actual growth.  Not a hard concept.  

Great point. Let’s agree, for the sake of argument. Now, account for the 20 years BEFORE Obama when we had the exact same trendline. Account for causation, and show your work.

[wildcat09 29347]

5 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

That echoes my point - it all comes down to purchasing power. Job X used to pay enough to make rent, tuition, and ramen noodles. Now, that same job does not.

But the major shareholders got to add some zeroes to the end of their net worth, and that's what really matters!

[Fozzz 152]

this is so odd an unexplainable. lol 

 

https://www.epi.org/productivity-pay-gap/

[Brisketexan 105082]

this is so odd an unexplainable. lol 

 
https://www.epi.org/productivity-pay-gap/

Well, see, when you understand that Obama travelled back in time to mess up our economy in 1973, the explanation makes sense.

[Fozzz 152]

Don't worry, I'm sure all that money stolen from workers over the past forty years will begin trickling down any moment.

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

Modern production means,  modern materials, quicker fabrication thru technological advances (SEE: Computerization).

The skynet is coming, the issue is how are we going to deal with all the people left out of a work force because of automation ?

The gap is not good however, so how do you "share" that wealth without causing pricing pressures  ?

I'm all on board with a living wage for skilled tasks, but no friggin' way for jobs kids in HS can hold as part time jobs.

[Gardner Barnes 1562]

Well, see, when you understand that Obama travelled back in time to mess up our economy in 1973

That’s EXACTY what happened. #dotards #hannity