Workers’ share of national income plummets to record low

[thereisnospoon]

oh,,, you think small to mid size business can handle it huh? good luck.

Yes, I do. Help folks get started and you'll see millions of new businesses (and new jobs) springing up... you know that phantom "competition" you clowns get so misty-eyed over... real competition... instead of Monsanto/Cargill and the meat monopolies, etc.

Ok genius....Who is Delta Airlines going to buy aircraft from.....Pokemoke City Aircraft Company or Boeing?
Put away your blinders and look at the world in real terms. There is a place for all sized companies.
Your one man crusade....BTW do you dress up like a hooligan and hitchhike/Stow away to every G-8 summit?...Anyway, this crusade against large firms you seem to be running, makes you look very silly.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Really? Can you provide us with a link where any CEO's have stated they want to lower American wages to that of India or China? I mean, you state this as a known fact and I've never actually heard a CEO express such a desire. Please enlighten us on which major corp CEO's have stated this as a goal.

Look at what's going on... Corporations are making record profits, productivity is at a record high, CEO pay is at record levels... but the workers' wages are declining - how can this be? Of course corporations desire to pay as little for labor as they can, hell, they'd have slaves and indentured servants if they could. Are you really going to pretend this isn't happening?

Which workers wages are declining? Are you implying that companies at review time are offering pay cuts instead of pay raises?
Look, this is the end. Either you start providing some facts or you need to explain that your comments are subjective observations.

 

[thereisnospoon]

And how much will you regulates these small to mid sized businesses?? Will you tell them how much they must pay? will they have to hire union labor?? What are the rules gonna be and how much will you pay?

They will be regulated like any other business, only they probably won't have the millions to pour into lobbying... in fact, we need to get rid of lobbyists all together. No more buying politicians.

They must pay at least minimum wage, but I would raise that to a basic living wage. Subsidies, like the billions in farcical "farm subsidies" which equates to a corporate handjob will actually go to GROWING our economy & can be used for start-ups and support.

Yes, we need unions. We are where we are now because the worker's voice has been all but silenced.

What do you mean "what would you pay?"

You...would raise the minimum wage to a living wage.....Ok if we say good bye to large companies and as you say, replace them with millions of small businesses, which in your commentary seem to think less about profit and more about people.....Where would the money come from to pay for your magical auto raise to what ever the fuck is a living wage....
BTW the term living wage cannot be defined. The reason is the living wage is a subjective outcome formed out of the opinion of whomever is studying the cost of living in a given area.
For example, what say you if you read where one group studied the cost of living in large cities, decided that it takes a minimum hourly (living) wage of $34.07 to make ends meet in Los Angeles.....Do you really think the local True Value Hardware store could afford to pay all of it's employees a min wage of $34 per hour? Have you any idea what the prices in that store would have to be in order for the owner who no doubt are getting by on small margins anyway?
Let's say the average worker in that store makes $12 per hour. If wages are tripled then prices must triple. SO that $4 # Phillips screw driver would then be priced at $12....REALLY?!!!!!
Look, if wages are forced upward without the requisite influx of additional revenue, it either becomes impossible for the business to stay afloat or the owners must raise prices to make up the difference.
A sudden government ordered boost in wages is the worst of unfunded mandates.

 

[hellofromwarsaw]

Obviously there needs to be reasonable regulation and enforcement to protect workers and customers from the kinf of pubcrappe that started this and other depressions. Pubs and now marketing types never learn that boom and bust and screwing the workers only helps them in the short run...

 

[bripat9643]

That chart tracks wages and income, not unemployed people. Pay attention!

that chart tracks nothing at all since the axis aren't labeled. futhermore, there's no source listed. In other words, the chart is total bullshit. Why would anyone waste their time arguing against a fiction?

 

[hellofromwarsaw]

I say a living wage is the equal of 1968 min. wage before Nixon and Pubs started in on it, about $10.50- all this talk of $34 etc is pure Pub horse patoot.

 

[mike beev]

Back in the 19 teens or 20s Henry Ford doubled the wages he paid to his workers in one day. The Wall Street Journal called it "an economic crime". Two years later he was selling twice as many cars. The simple economic fact is that you can't have a real economy if the workers cannot afford to buy the products they make. At some point it stops, like 1929 with the Great Depression when the top 1% were up to 23 % of the nation's income, not 7% like in the 1950s but like in 2007 at 23 % again.

 

[thereisnospoon]

You inferred that someone is advocating that corporations go away.

That makes you the moron. I didn't infer that someone was advocating.. anything,, I said if the rules and regulations you libtards wish to impose and corporations came to be they would in fact go away.. my question is what are you going to replace them with and how much would you pay, I have yet to get an answer.

I understood completely what you said. There is not one law or suggested law that would drive out corporations from this country. Feel free to link me to something that proves otherwise.

Like I said....a ridiculous question.

You're obfuscating.
The question is based on the desire of the OP to have government place restrictions on large companies that it would make it very difficult to operate and turn a profit. Therefore these firms would have little choice but to relocate to a more friendly environment outside the US or cease operations entirely.
With that in mind and the OP's insistence that if large companies were forced out of business only to be replaced with millions of small firms, why is it that the Obama regime insisted that GM needed a bail out because the company could not be allowed to fail?
Based on the OP's comments would it not then be logical to assume that if GM failed, other auto makers would not simply have filled the void?
Answer honestly.

 

[thereisnospoon]

So you can't back up your claim that CEO's have a stated goal to pay Americans the same as India and Chinese. Duly noted.

You and I both know, this is EXACTLY what they would love to happen. Come on now, don't play dumb. Tell me this... why are wages not back up to where they were before the recession if a company's profits are at record levels? Why is that job that paid $20 an hour 4 years ago now paying $10? It's because they can and there are 100 workers fighting over that $10 job. Part of me thinks the financial sector actually planned and caused this collapse on purpose so that they could kill wages in this country.

First...Profits are NOT at record levels. In fact, business is not very healthy right now. If your claim was correct, the stock market, the measuring tool of business health, would be booming. Contrary to your claims without Quantitative Easing, the DJIA would probably be sitting somewhere around 10,000. That's about 4000 points below it's all time high in the mid 2000's
Now, you will need to show some data that backs up your claims about business profits. We are growing tired of your unsubstantiated claims.

 

[American Cowboy]

And this is what the "trickle down" farce got us. Disgusting. I hope you corporatists are happy in your new third world country, 'Murka...

You mean the stupid MFer in the White House has not fixed all your problems?

Obama is the problem, not the solution. You do not declare War on Wealth and expect a thriving economy.

Truthfully, I hope you dumb Solialist pigs all suffer!!! You are the dogs under the table of the bourgeois socialists waiting for your scraps. I hope you starve. You did it to yourselves.

Me, my business is recession proof, so while you stupid fvcking Obama voters are waiting for the black knight to come save your ass. I'll be enjoying a record year.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Below is another good article which shows how the top 1% of the uber wealthy and powerful in this country have managed to gain a much higher percentage of the national wealth even as the bottom 90% have lost ground.


.AOLWebSuite .AOLPicturesFullSizeLink { height: 1px; width: 1px; overflow: hidden; } .AOLWebSuite a {color:blue; text-decoration: underline; cursor: pointer} .AOLWebSuite a.hsSig {cursor: default}
And the Republicans are trying to sell America on even GREATER tax cuts for the people at the top while they plan on cutting spending and services for the rest of us?

Don't fall for the psychobabble! The Republicans are trying to screw the average Joe even as they're serving their campaign contributor masters.

So what would you replace corporations and the "uber rich" with? And what would you pay?

We don't have to replace corporations and the uber rich. We just need to stop handing them the keys to the kingdom.

Look, if you REALLY want to know what's wrong with our political system, it's the corrupting influence of campaign contributions. It's a pay to play system. The rich give LOTS of money because they expect policies to return them many, many times more than what they spent.

The average working class American (including the poor, and the middle class) just can't hope to compete with the kind of leverage that millions of dollars can buy the people who open up their purses to give whatever amount it's going to take to keep their gravy train running at full speed.

You're all over the place. First it's the corporations. Then it's the political system....Face palm.

 

[FiscalSanity]

Spoon,

Funny this should come up, because our CFO and I were just talking about this years pay raises (or lack thereof) today. We didn't get a raise last year, and he's talking about needing to take a pay cut himself this year, though he tends to be a bit silly/dramatic about that kind of thing. Whats funny is that sales are up, just not by enough to offset inflation.

I see both sides of this situation. As an accountant I get to see lot more of the money side of the company then most people do, while still being an employee. I've been researching pay scales as part of our preperation for annual reviews next month, and there is no doubt that some of our office staff are being underpaid by local standard. However, where's the money supposed to come from to pay for these raises when we're barely breaking even most months? Do you want to be the one who has to go in and tell the owner that he's going to have to give himself a pay cut and cut back on his expense account so that people that don't even generate sales for him can have a raise? And how long do you think you're still going to be working for that company after telling him? This isn't a rhetorical question, because my boss and I are probably going to have to have that discussion with our owner soon, and I'd really like to think that his first cost cutting measure won't be to fire both of us.

 

[hellofromwarsaw]

"Let's say the average worker in that store makes $12 per hour. If wages are tripled then prices must triple."

Absolutely wrong. Labor costs are 50% or MUCH less of the cost of production. Ridiculous...

 

[Vel]

oh,,, you think small to mid size business can handle it huh? good luck.

Yes, I do. Help folks get started and you'll see millions of new businesses (and new jobs) springing up... you know that phantom "competition" you clowns get so misty-eyed over... real competition... instead of Monsanto/Cargill and the meat monopolies, etc.

Do you think that Monsanto and Cargill started out as giant corporations? What's your plan to tell the owners of those small and mid sized businesses that you're counting on to provide jobs. Are you going to warn them that you expect them to take the financial risk but if they're too successful that you'll vilify them next. And do you really think that corporations can't go to other parts of the world and do just fine without selling to the U.S? Do you not realize that when they go, they take their wealth with them? Did it occur to you that if they provide those jobs to citizens of other nations, then the purchasing power those jobs create ALSO goes to the other nation. Corporations are more than capable of creating new consumer nations. Just look at the uptick in demand for automobiles in China.

 

[thereisnospoon]

We don't have to replace corporations and the uber rich. We just need to stop handing them the keys to the kingdom.

Look, if you REALLY want to know what's wrong with our political system, it's the corrupting influence of campaign contributions. It's a pay to play system. The rich give LOTS of money because they expect policies to return them many, many times more than what they spent.

The average working class American (including the poor, and the middle class) just can't hope to compete with the kind of leverage that millions of dollars can buy the people who open up their purses to give whatever amount it's going to take to keep their gravy train running at full speed.

So then you would agree if corporations were made to stop contributions to the politicians of their choice it would be fair then to prohibit unions from contributing to demonRats?

If ALL campaign contributions from ALL interests group were stopped in favor of public financing, then there would be no overriding incentive for politicians to essentially sell their votes to the highest bidder.

Here's where I may have some agreement with you. Lobbying is on one hand corruption. It is the most powerful using their influence on elected officials to get what the employer of the lobbyist wants.
On the other hand, lobbying IS necessary. Lobbying allows time for legislators to become informed on what it is they cast their vote.
Let's say for a moment we have a House member from Iowa who knows very little about the auto industry. A bill is about to read on the Floor for a vote. The Bill contains legislation that helps auto parts manufacturers through incentives provided by the Bill. Now, if the House member from Iowa is not lobbied, how is he supposed to make an informed choice?
It works both ways. Poorly when lobbying places undue influence. Well when lobbying educates.
Campaign contributions....This is easily wrapped up. The elimination of soft money. That is large contributions to national party committees. Also, fund raising dinners should be banned. No more $5,000 per plate deals so that an incumbent Senate candidate can fill his coffers while his opponent is running a grass roots campaign with his own funds....
No more charging of political candidates for political ads. Take the money out of it. TV/radio stations and networks can either provide the time or they can cut bait and not allow any ads at all.
With the elimination of big dollar campaigns, we do two things. One we get to vote on issues rather than perfectly packaged career politicians. It ends the era of entrenched office holders through perpetual incumbency.
The result would be a return of the "citizen legislature". Which is precisely what the Founding Fathers had in mind.
if an all out ban on lobbying and campaign contributions existed, there would be serious freedom of speech issues that would land on the Supreme Court steps.

 

[hellofromwarsaw]

Yes it's the political system , in that it's dominated by corporations, especially on the Pub side. And the lobbyists, who spend much more on lawmakers than campaign contributions, are an even bigger problem...and then there's the corporate media problem...now much more worried about ratings and controversy than the truth, same reason...

 

[thereisnospoon]

What your paying now in bad public policy that works against your interests in favor of the wealthy dwarfs whatever additonal money you would end up paying as your share of a public financing law for political campaigns.

just as soon as everyone pays what I have to pay we will talk. long as 50% of you asswipes get off paying zero.. we have nothing to say.

Well 26% of my check is gone before I even cash it. Then the rest is scarffed up in bank fees, ulitity billing service charges, sales taxes and the such. So I have as much right to talk as you. By the way quit your whinning, and if you don't like paying taxes move to another country, I hear Africa is a pure capitalist society.

"26% of my check is gone before I cash it".....Who is whining?
And why are you cashing your check? Why are you not putting it the bank? DO you not budget your finances each pay period so you can take care of your obligations FIRST?
BTW, your bank should not be charging you fees to cash your check. If it is, switch banks. Or stop using check cashing services and get a bank account.
"utility billing service charges"....? What?!!!! Your gas company charges you for charging you? On what planet do you reside?
I have lived in quite a few different places and unless my bill is paid late, there are no additional utility billing service charges. And even if you have those, so what? Use less and you'll realize a savings.
You actually LIKE paying taxes?

 

[hellofromwarsaw]

Corporations' campaign financing and lobbying spending are estimated now to be 30-50X that of unions. Don't be daft...

 

[hellofromwarsaw]

"just as soon as everyone pays what I have to pay we will talk. long as 50% of you asswipes get off paying zero.. we have nothing to say."

Those who don't pay federal INCOME taxes pay the same percentage as the rich in federal taxes (payroll taxes and fees)- You have been misled and whipped into hatred of your more unfortunate fellow citizens by elitist mega rich a-hole Pubs and their bought off, misled minions. Hoping for your recovery (smiley face).

 

[hellofromwarsaw]

After 30 years of Voodoo, the gov't now takes in more in payroll taxes and fees than in income taxes, for the FIRST time. St. Peter will not be impressed by your ignorance, arrogance, andmisled hatred. LOL!