The Rich Love High Unemployment

[asterism]

"The unemployment crisis has been a godsend for America's superrich, who own the vast majority of financial assets - stocks, bonds, currency and commodities...

"America's labor market depression propels asset price appreciation. In the last two years, US corporate profits and share prices rose at the fastest pace in history - and the fastest in the G-7.

"Considering the source of profits, the soaring stock market appears less a beacon of prosperity than a reliable proxy for America's new misery index. Mark Whitehouse of The Wall Street Journal describes Obama's hamster wheel recovery:

"'From mid-2009 through the end of 2010, output per hour at U.S. nonfarm businesses rose 5.2% as companies found ways to squeeze more from their existing workers.

"'But the lion's share of that gain went to shareholders in the form of record profits, rather than to workers in the form of raises.

"'Hourly wages, adjusted for inflation, rose only 0.3%, according to the Labor Department. In other words, companies shared only 6% of productivity gains with their workers. That compares to 58% since records began in 1947.'"

"Out of work Americans deserve more than unemployment checks - they deserve dividends.

"The rich would never have recovered without them."

Why the Rich Love High Unemployment | Truthout

Yep, there is nothing rich business owners love more than not having employees to man their companies nor consumers who can purchase their products.

Jesus where are you morons coming from?

Consumption has gone global.
Rich businessmen (and women) couldn't care less where the product is sold.
As far as production, it's not a case of no workers, but rather as few workers as possible.

From 1947 to mid 2009 companies shared 58% of productivity gains with workers.

Between mid-2009 to the end of 2010 companies shared 6%.

Workers deserve dividends.

Why the Rich Love High Unemployment | Truthout

Perhaps the companies with productivity gains did so with automation instead of squeezing employees. Should we bring back the typing pools and punch card operators?

 

[Ernie S.]

can someone answer the question?

What if lets say 95 percent of americans never spent a penny for one day, just one day. Would the effect be devastating? Something to ponder. It would be a neat experiment.

The result would be negligible. See post #30.

 

[Bern80]

The notion that the business owners are all about cheap labor is asinine. If it were true, there would be far FEWER jobs in the U.S. What business owners are concerned with is productivity. THAT is where the bottom line is. If overseas labor costs $5 hour and produces $10 worth of goods in that hour and a an American worker costs $10 an hour and produces $20 worth of goods, who is the business owner going to hire?

 

[georgephillip]

The richest man in the world lives in Mexico.
We're headed for a Banana Republic as well.

"'What gives the gringos the right to pass judgment on other peoples' elections?' asks Berta Robledo, a pro-Lopez Obrador activist, over café con leche in downtown Mexico City.

"The comparison of coverage of electoral fraud in Iran and Mexico comes at a curious juncture for the New York Ayatollahs now that the Times Corporation's biggest creditor and quite possibly its top shareholder outside of the royal Sulzberger-Ochs dynasty is a Mexican - the tycoon Carlos Slim, once the richest billionaire on the Forbes list but now relegated to third place behind Bill Gates and possibly Warren Buffet after suffering debilitating stock losses in the current (6/2009) suicide market."

Carlos and the Sulzbergers: The Best Press Money Can Buy.

John Ross: The New York Times and Stolen Elections

 

[bripat9643]

If you live in a state with established third party candidates appearing on your ballot, consider FLUSHING as many Republicans AND Democrats from all levels of US government as possible.

The idea, sometimes called the "anti-vote", has been around for generations.

Maybe it's been waiting for the Internet?

I encourage you and all your lib friends to vote for a third party candidate. Vote your true heart's desire. Vote for a communist.

 

[georgephillip]

When I started working, 8 hours got me a single $10 That ten bucks would buy me the same amount of gas that $120 buys today.

I remember those days too, Ernie.

13.9 cents per gallon was the cheapest gas I could find, but I wouldn't stop there because I had to get out of my car and pump it myself.

I could fill both tanks of a '69 VW bug and drive it for two weeks for less than three dollars, if I remember correctly.

I filled my Harley for under a buck most times. These days, it's 20 bucks if I'm real low.

13.9??? Cheapest I can remember as long as I've been buying gas was 18.9 in Albany back about '66. You must be older than dirt.

I'm closing in fast on dirt, Ernie.

I found 13.9 in 1969 but like I said I had to actually get out of my car and pump the damn gas myself.

Usually I went up the street to Chevron and had it pumped for me (25.9, as I recall)

 

[georgephillip]

If you live in a state with established third party candidates appearing on your ballot, consider FLUSHING as many Republicans AND Democrats from all levels of US government as possible.

The idea, sometimes called the "anti-vote", has been around for generations.

Maybe it's been waiting for the Internet?

I encourage you and all your lib friends to vote for a third party candidate. Vote your true heart's desire. Vote for a communist.

While you continue to vote Wall Street?

 

[bripat9643]

Consumption has gone global.
Rich businessmen (and women) couldn't care less where the product is sold.
As far as production, it's not a case of no workers, but rather as few workers as possible.

From 1947 to mid 2009 companies shared 58% of productivity gains with workers.

Between mid-2009 to the end of 2010 companies shared 6%.

Workers deserve dividends.

Why the Rich Love High Unemployment | Truthout

So you're comparing a period 6 months long with a period that's 60 years long. That's like comparing the temperature change between January and July with the temperature change between 1949 and 2010. Obviously, over short periods, economic variables can vary much more greatly than they vary over much longer periods.

What you just did is a blatant lie.

You're nothing but a cheap, lying, commie propagandist.

 

[georgephillip]

any full time job taken by an adult that pays less than $15/hour should not be considered a real "job"
Hard to live on those wages.

How much should I pay to have my house cleaned?

Stop sleeping.
Clean your own house.
Slacker.
($20/hour seems reasonable to me)

 

[bripat9643]

I encourage you and all your lib friends to vote for a third party candidate. Vote your true heart's desire. Vote for a communist.

While you continue to vote Wall Street?

The Last time I checked, there was no candidate named "Wall Street" on the ballot. I certainly won't for any sleazy Democrat who wants to raise my taxes and spend money like there's no tomorrow.

 

[bripat9643]

Stop sleeping.
Clean your own house.
Slacker.
($20/hour seems reasonable to me)

Most house cleaning people make at least that much. Some, who run their own cleaning businesses, make much more.

If you have enough money, why should you waste your time cleaning your house? If you make $200/hr, why would you waste your valuable time doing something you could pay someone to do for 1/10th the price?

Every time you post, you prove you're an idiot as an economist.

 

[georgephillip]

Consumption has gone global.
Rich businessmen (and women) couldn't care less where the product is sold.
As far as production, it's not a case of no workers, but rather as few workers as possible.

From 1947 to mid 2009 companies shared 58% of productivity gains with workers.

Between mid-2009 to the end of 2010 companies shared 6%.

Workers deserve dividends.

Why the Rich Love High Unemployment | Truthout

So you're comparing a period 6 months long with a period that's 60 years long. That's like comparing the temperature change between January and July with the temperature change between 1949 and 2010. Obviously, over short periods, economic variables can vary much more greatly than they vary over much longer periods.

What you just did is a blatant lie.

You're nothing but a cheap, lying, commie propagandist.

I'm really impressed you can spell commie correctly.

Do you think Wall Street's looting of the global economy had any affect on the 6% return on productivity gains?

btw, there's nothing about capitalism remotely comparable to natural cycles like temperature.

You've been lied to your whole life and you obviously aren't smart enough to understand why.

 

[Flaylo]

No, the rich dont like high unemployment. They like dirt cheap labor. Something for nothing.

WRONG. They hire at what the free market will bear. IF you don't like what a JOB pays ACE? Don't take it. Individual CHOICE...what a concept...eh?

I'll be sure to remember this shit when you dickhead rightwingers bitch and complain with your benefits envy and job envy for those who have government jobs.

 

[georgephillip]

The rich love private jets, sports cars, rich food, nice clothes,long vacations, pretty women,cuban cigars,french wine,expensive art and high unemployment.

And the Federal Reserve.

"Much of the conservative nanny state’s economic policy is devoted to the principle of keeping doctors and other highly educated professionals in short supply, while at the same time keeping the supply of less-skilled workers plentiful.

"The Federal Reserve Board is one of the key nanny state tools for maintaining this imbalance.

The Conservative Nanny State

 

[georgephillip]

Yep, there is nothing rich business owners love more than not having employees to man their companies nor consumers who can purchase their products.

Jesus where are you morons coming from?

Consumption has gone global.
Rich businessmen (and women) couldn't care less where the product is sold.
As far as production, it's not a case of no workers, but rather as few workers as possible.

From 1947 to mid 2009 companies shared 58% of productivity gains with workers.

Between mid-2009 to the end of 2010 companies shared 6%.

Workers deserve dividends.

Why the Rich Love High Unemployment | Truthout

Perhaps the companies with productivity gains did so with automation instead of squeezing employees. Should we bring back the typing pools and punch card operators?

Do you believe America's unemployed are superfluous?

Is it accurate to say that over the last two years unemployed "Americans have played a critical role in helping the richest one percent recover trillions in financial wealth"?

"On the basis of sustaining economic growth, the United States is doing better than nearly all advanced economies. From the first quarter of 2008 to the end of 2010, US gross domestic product (GDP) growth outperformed every G-7 country except Canada.

"But when it comes to jobs, US policymakers fall short of their rosy self-evaluations.

"Despite the second-highest economic growth, Paul Wiseman of the Associated Press (AP) reports: 'the U.S. job market remains the group's weakest. U.S. employment bottomed and started growing again a year ago, but there are still 5.4 percent fewer American jobs than in December 2007. That's a much sharper drop than in any other G-7 country.'

"According to an important study by Andrew Sum and Joseph McLaughlin, the US boasted one of the lowest unemployment rates in the rich world before the housing crash - now, it's the highest.[1]

Why the Rich Love High Unemployment | Truthout

 

[georgephillip]

The notion that the business owners are all about cheap labor is asinine. If it were true, there would be far FEWER jobs in the U.S. What business owners are concerned with is productivity. THAT is where the bottom line is. If overseas labor costs $5 hour and produces $10 worth of goods in that hour and a an American worker costs $10 an hour and produces $20 worth of goods, who is the business owner going to hire?

Capitalism is all about profits.

"In the boardrooms of corporate America, profits aren't everything - they are the only thing. A JPMorgan research report concludes that the current corporate profit recovery is more dependent on falling unit-labor costs than during any previous expansion.

"At some level, corporate executives are aware that they are lowering workers' living standards, but their decisions are neither coordinated nor intentionally harmful.

"Call it the 'paradox of profitability.'

"Executives are acting in their own and their shareholders' best interest: maximizing profit margins in the face of weak demand by extensive layoffs and pay cuts.

"But what has been good for every company's income statement has been a disaster for working families and their communities."

Why the Rich Love High Unemployment | Truthout

 

[teapartysamurai]

So the rich people like high unemployment because somehow they profit off no one being able to buy their services or products?

You nailed it!

This is the "logic" of the Obama left!

It's not Obama's fault that there is high unemployment! Nooooooooooooo!

It's an eeeeeeeeeeeeeeevil cabal of "rich people" who like high unemployment because . . . . well, they just do!

Hilarious!

 

[teapartysamurai]

I agree one hundred percent young grasshopper. Thats why I walked off of two jobs with no phone calls nothing...no notification at all. Stone cold quit right in the middle of a work day. Got myself a better job each time. Proudest two moments of my life. STicking up for myself and sticking it to bad employers....gives one a tremendous sense of pride.

Yeah, it also gives you a tremendous resume!

How do you explain to your next employer about just walking off two jobs without giving notice!

Geesh!

 

[georgephillip]

I encourage you and all your lib friends to vote for a third party candidate. Vote your true heart's desire. Vote for a communist.

While you continue to vote Wall Street?

The Last time I checked, there was no candidate named "Wall Street" on the ballot. I certainly won't for any sleazy Democrat who wants to raise my taxes and spend money like there's no tomorrow.

Maybe you should check for a candidate named "Government Sachs"?

Republicans AND Democrats are wholly owned subsidiaries of Wall Street.

Why do you think Goldman Sachs gave Obama's campaign over 900,000 dollars in 2008?

 

[teapartysamurai]

I am disjointed with both parties. One gives everything away, the other wants me dead and hates me because I am not wealthy. Time for a third party... stick it to the american system...