Answer me this: if productivity in the private sector has only been sky-rocketing...

[Billy000]

... in the last 40 years (yes even now it is at its highest rate), then where are the jobs? If corporations are such sacred job creators, why is unemployment this high?

It really doesn't make any sense.

 

[Big Fitz]

You do understand that if fewer people are needed to do the same amount of work, you need fewer people to meet need. Right?

Increased productivity is NOT necessarily a good thing for job growth, only output and profit because it minimizes cost and/or increases supply.

Case in point, should we stop building bulldozers because it cut down the need for tens of thousands of men to do the same amount of work that a few can do in far shorter time?

This Neo-Ludditeism is really getting old from you lefty loonies. I like the observation I heard the other day that if Obama was president when cars came out, he'd shut them down to protect the buggy industry.

 

[whitehall]

The "jobs" moved to Mexico and China because of a mass of OSHA and federal regulations. The corporations who still hire employees in the US have to deal with unrealistic union demands and an uncertain economic future under radical left wing administration who could tax them into ruin.

 

[lizzie]

Ummm, hate to point this out, but increased productivity typically means fewer jobs.

 

[Avatar4321]

... in the last 40 years (yes even now it is at its highest rate), then where are the jobs? If corporations are such sacred job creators, why is unemployment this high?

It really doesn't make any sense.

 

[whitehall]

Ummm, hate to point this out, but increased productivity typically means fewer jobs.

How does increased productivity translate to "fewer jobs"? Increased (US) productivity results in expansion and hiring in related fields and distribution centers. Increased productivity is what we are looking for.

 

[Sirkarl101]

You do understand that if fewer people are needed to do the same amount of work, you need fewer people to meet need. Right?

Increased productivity is NOT necessarily a good thing for job growth, only output and profit because it minimizes cost and/or increases supply.

Case in point, should we stop building bulldozers because it cut down the need for tens of thousands of men to do the same amount of work that a few can do in far shorter time?

This Neo-Ludditeism is really getting old from you lefty loonies. I like the observation I heard the other day that if Obama was president when cars came out, he'd shut them down to protect the buggy industry.

Infrastructure? High speed rail? Hybrid cars? These are not good ideas? Forget it that means we have to tax fairly and only 76% of Americans think things are unfair.

 

[lizzie]

Ummm, hate to point this out, but increased productivity typically means fewer jobs.

How does increased productivity translate to "fewer jobs"? Increased (US) productivity results in expansion and hiring in related fields and distribution centers. Increased productivity is what we are looking for.

If you are more productive on your job, what is the net result and impact on the company?

Increased productivity means that your bottom line is growing because you have more production out of your current resources. Now, if you want to say that "production" has increased, that might be a different story. If productivity is up, you are churning out more work with the same workforce. If production is up, but productivity is the same, then you need more workers.

 

[Avatar4321]

You do understand that if fewer people are needed to do the same amount of work, you need fewer people to meet need. Right?

Increased productivity is NOT necessarily a good thing for job growth, only output and profit because it minimizes cost and/or increases supply.

Case in point, should we stop building bulldozers because it cut down the need for tens of thousands of men to do the same amount of work that a few can do in far shorter time?

This Neo-Ludditeism is really getting old from you lefty loonies. I like the observation I heard the other day that if Obama was president when cars came out, he'd shut them down to protect the buggy industry.

Infrastructure? High speed rail? Hybrid cars? These are not good ideas? Forget it that means we have to tax fairly and only 76% of Americans think things are unfair.

We cant even get the President to authorize infrastructure that doesn't cost us a dime, namely the oil Pipeline.

 

[Big Fitz]

You do understand that if fewer people are needed to do the same amount of work, you need fewer people to meet need. Right?

Increased productivity is NOT necessarily a good thing for job growth, only output and profit because it minimizes cost and/or increases supply.

Case in point, should we stop building bulldozers because it cut down the need for tens of thousands of men to do the same amount of work that a few can do in far shorter time?

This Neo-Ludditeism is really getting old from you lefty loonies. I like the observation I heard the other day that if Obama was president when cars came out, he'd shut them down to protect the buggy industry.

Infrastructure? High speed rail? Hybrid cars? These are not good ideas? Forget it that means we have to tax fairly and only 76% of Americans think things are unfair.

Hybrid cars? Sure they have their uses. Railroads have been using Electro-Motive Diesels for decades. They make up 85% of all locomotives if not more in this nation.

High Speed Rail? Compared to the same functionality as an extra 2 lanes of highway, they're a boondoggle of the worst sort. 19th century tech moving at 21st century speed with little to no added benefit as compared to cheaper air travel.

These are not examples of productivity, as infrastructure only increases efficiency IF you choose the most efficient method. Why did Highways and Air travel replace rail? Simple. Long distance high speed travel is best achieved through air. Local travel is best done through roads and on a person's OWN schedule. This is why buses are generally a failure too. All current light rail and bus projects are profit sinks. They require 8 to 10 times the funding they get by fares needed to survive.

So your argument is a non-sequiter because it does not related to productivity in this context.

Also, a FAIR tax is to tax 100% of the population the same percentage regardless of circumstances and without deductions. Ten percent of a buck is still 10 cents, while 10 percent of a million is 100,000.

 

[whitehall]

Ummm, hate to point this out, but increased productivity typically means fewer jobs.

How does increased productivity translate to "fewer jobs"? Increased (US) productivity results in expansion and hiring in related fields and distribution centers. Increased productivity is what we are looking for.

If you are more productive on your job, what is the net result and impact on the company?

Increased productivity means that your bottom line is growing because you have more production out of your current resources. Now, if you want to say that "production" has increased, that might be a different story. If productivity is up, you are churning out more work with the same workforce. If production is up, but productivity is the same, then you need more workers.

You have the wrong idea of "increased productivity" lizzie. The term "increased productivity" means that there is a market for products and employers want to take advantage and hire more people and expand facilities. No offense lizzie but only union educated ignorant people would characterize increased American productivity as a loss in jobs.

 

[lizzie]

How does increased productivity translate to "fewer jobs"? Increased (US) productivity results in expansion and hiring in related fields and distribution centers. Increased productivity is what we are looking for.

If you are more productive on your job, what is the net result and impact on the company?

Increased productivity means that your bottom line is growing because you have more production out of your current resources. Now, if you want to say that "production" has increased, that might be a different story. If productivity is up, you are churning out more work with the same workforce. If production is up, but productivity is the same, then you need more workers.

You have the wrong idea of "increased productivity" lizzie. The term "increased productivity" means that there is a market for products and employers want to take advantage and hire more people and expand facilities. No offense lizzie but only union educated ignorant people would characterize increased American productivity as a loss in jobs.

Productivity and increases in production are two different concepts.

Productivity is a ratio
Production is an amount of output

 

[lizzie]

You have the wrong idea of "increased productivity" lizzie. The term "increased productivity" means that there is a market for products and employers want to take advantage and hire more people and expand facilities. No offense lizzie but only union educated ignorant people would characterize increased American productivity as a loss in jobs.

This is very simple to understand if you will answer the question I asked earlier. What does it mean if you personally are more productive on your job?

 

[whitehall]

If you are more productive on your job, what is the net result and impact on the company?

Increased productivity means that your bottom line is growing because you have more production out of your current resources. Now, if you want to say that "production" has increased, that might be a different story. If productivity is up, you are churning out more work with the same workforce. If production is up, but productivity is the same, then you need more workers.

You have the wrong idea of "increased productivity" lizzie. The term "increased productivity" means that there is a market for products and employers want to take advantage and hire more people and expand facilities. No offense lizzie but only union educated ignorant people would characterize increased American productivity as a loss in jobs.

Productivity and increases in production are two different concepts.

Productivity is a ratio
Production is an amount of output

I get it, we are playing word games. OK, lets agree that the generic concept of American productivity is a good thing that results in hiring and economic stimulous.

 

[lizzie]

You have the wrong idea of "increased productivity" lizzie. The term "increased productivity" means that there is a market for products and employers want to take advantage and hire more people and expand facilities. No offense lizzie but only union educated ignorant people would characterize increased American productivity as a loss in jobs.

Productivity and increases in production are two different concepts.

Productivity is a ratio
Production is an amount of output

I get it, we are playing word games. OK, lets agree that the generic concept of American productivity is a good thing that results in hiring and economic stimulous.

No- it's not a word game. It's the facts of the difference between two economic concepts- that of production (output) and productivity (ratio of work to output).

 

[lizzie]

Found an explanation at the link that may help you understand the difference:

Difference Between Production & Productivity | Production As Measure Of Output Produced | Example On Production & Productivity | School, College & University Industrial Management Homework Assignment Help

 

[rdean]

You do understand that if fewer people are needed to do the same amount of work, you need fewer people to meet need. Right?

Increased productivity is NOT necessarily a good thing for job growth, only output and profit because it minimizes cost and/or increases supply.

Case in point, should we stop building bulldozers because it cut down the need for tens of thousands of men to do the same amount of work that a few can do in far shorter time?

This Neo-Ludditeism is really getting old from you lefty loonies. I like the observation I heard the other day that if Obama was president when cars came out, he'd shut them down to protect the buggy industry.

Infrastructure? High speed rail? Hybrid cars? These are not good ideas? Forget it that means we have to tax fairly and only 76% of Americans think things are unfair.

We cant even get the President to authorize infrastructure that doesn't cost us a dime, namely the oil Pipeline.

A pipe is going to save US jobs and the economy? Did buying oil from the Middle East save the US economy? Buying from foreign countries only sends US capital overseas and you guys are laughing at the OP? Seriously? Hilarious!

 

[Quantum Windbag]

... in the last 40 years (yes even now it is at its highest rate), then where are the jobs? If corporations are such sacred job creators, why is unemployment this high?

It really doesn't make any sense.

Do you have any idea how stupid the question you just asked is?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Ummm, hate to point this out, but increased productivity typically means fewer jobs.

How does increased productivity translate to "fewer jobs"? Increased (US) productivity results in expansion and hiring in related fields and distribution centers. Increased productivity is what we are looking for.

Wow.

Increased productivity means that fewer people can accomplish the same amount of work. What you are talking about is not productivity, it is production, which is aggregate productivity. (Very simple explanation for a very simple person.)

 

[Quantum Windbag]

You do understand that if fewer people are needed to do the same amount of work, you need fewer people to meet need. Right?

Increased productivity is NOT necessarily a good thing for job growth, only output and profit because it minimizes cost and/or increases supply.

Case in point, should we stop building bulldozers because it cut down the need for tens of thousands of men to do the same amount of work that a few can do in far shorter time?

This Neo-Ludditeism is really getting old from you lefty loonies. I like the observation I heard the other day that if Obama was president when cars came out, he'd shut them down to protect the buggy industry.

Infrastructure? High speed rail? Hybrid cars? These are not good ideas? Forget it that means we have to tax fairly and only 76% of Americans think things are unfair.

Hybrid cars? Sure they have their uses. Railroads have been using Electro-Motive Diesels for decades. They make up 85% of all locomotives if not more in this nation.

High Speed Rail? Compared to the same functionality as an extra 2 lanes of highway, they're a boondoggle of the worst sort. 19th century tech moving at 21st century speed with little to no added benefit as compared to cheaper air travel.

These are not examples of productivity, as infrastructure only increases efficiency IF you choose the most efficient method. Why did Highways and Air travel replace rail? Simple. Long distance high speed travel is best achieved through air. Local travel is best done through roads and on a person's OWN schedule. This is why buses are generally a failure too. All current light rail and bus projects are profit sinks. They require 8 to 10 times the funding they get by fares needed to survive.

So your argument is a non-sequiter because it does not related to productivity in this context.

Also, a FAIR tax is to tax 100% of the population the same percentage regardless of circumstances and without deductions. Ten percent of a buck is still 10 cents, while 10 percent of a million is 100,000.

If we built high speed rail for freight it might actually pay for itself.