Proof Corporations & the GOP Scewed Labor/Middle Class

[midcan5]

These sort of outcomes are why I consider Reagan the worst president in modern times for the American worker.

CEPR - America Since 1980: A Right Turn Leading to a Dead End


The Conservative Nanny State

 

[sealybobo]

Commerce Department data released today show that the share of national income going to wages and salaries in 2006 was at its lowest level on record with data going back to 1929.[1] The share of national income captured by corporate profits, in contrast, was at its highest level on record.[2]


Wages and salaries have grown at a 1.9 percent average annual rate, after adjusting for inflation. In previous post-World War II recoveries, wages and salaries grew at an average annual rate of 3.8 percent.
Corporate profits have grown at a 12.8 percent average annual rate, after adjusting for inflation, as compared with an average annual growth rate of 8.3 percent in the equivalent periods of past post-World War II business cycles. (See Appendix Table 1.)


Republicans can not argue this, can they?

Share of National Income Going To Wages and Salaries at Record Low in 2006 — Center on Budget and Policy Priorities


Can't blame this on unions.

What are you, some leftist socialist?

WHAT makes you think the GOP is out to screw labor????????

"We're going to crush labor as a political entity"
Grover Norquist - Republican economic guru

And they lied and told us wages were up. I knew it wasn't true. Not with what was happening to Michigan and New Orleans. No fucking way wages were up with all those displaced and unemployed people.

 

[Zoomie1980]

Look all you want. You keep saying you guys. You act like such an idiot sealy. Your like speaking to a broken record that has a badly written song on it.

You want to push something by putting me into some category you have envisioned in your own mind. Let me tell you this again. I am fairly sure I did already once but just in case I repeat it. In 1985 I was blacklisted for being an uppity woman who did not take kindly to sexual discrimination. I "rocked the boat". In 1987 I decided that I was not going to let them do that to me because if they did it to me they were surely doing it to others. No doubt they were. Worse than that though they were endorsing a company that paid slave wages (2.70 an hour). That 2.70 an hour was the part that riled me up enough to make a difference. By 1989 the state changed their minimum wage laws to match the federal minimum wage standard. It was a massive struggle for me with my limited education and being a single mother of two to make those meeting with officials and people who could make a difference. Those twenty dollar bills were damn hard to come by and I would have to spend a whole one of those twenty dollar bills to just to drive to the capital to be heard. Long distance calls cost a small fortune yet I made those calls whenever I knew I could make a difference. My children still remember eating a lot of beans back in those days. They wore hand me downs and I wore whatever I could find at thrift stores or garage sales that would fit. We have never lived in a fully finished house as we lived in what we could afford at the time.

Now, tell me what you have personally accomplished to make a difference in other peoples lives so they could make enough to live?

I continue to fail to understand why it is up to ME to make some kind of "difference" in ANOTHER persons life so they could make more money? That other person is responsible for themselves. I am not.

 

[Zoomie1980]

Commerce Department data released today show that the share of national income going to wages and salaries in 2006 was at its lowest level on record with data going back to 1929.[1] The share of national income captured by corporate profits, in contrast, was at its highest level on record.[2]


Wages and salaries have grown at a 1.9 percent average annual rate, after adjusting for inflation. In previous post-World War II recoveries, wages and salaries grew at an average annual rate of 3.8 percent.
Corporate profits have grown at a 12.8 percent average annual rate, after adjusting for inflation, as compared with an average annual growth rate of 8.3 percent in the equivalent periods of past post-World War II business cycles. (See Appendix Table 1.)


Republicans can not argue this, can they?

Share of National Income Going To Wages and Salaries at Record Low in 2006 — Center on Budget and Policy Priorities


Can't blame this on unions.

I really like corporate profits. Makes for nice, fat, dividend checks.....

Do you work for a living? How much did you make? How much have your wages been lowered?

Roach, back at Morgan Stanley, listed four factors that are working to keep worker's wages depressed-- foreign competition, outsourcing of jobs, worries about future demand, and labor saving devices to replace the need for workers.

Political Affairs Magazine - Workers' Wages Down, Corporate Profits Up

You can be smug, but with proof like this, I don't see my liberal democrats losing any elections anytime soon.

I hope Obama makes the companies you invest in pay their employees more so your dividends are shit.

You probably don't even get dividend checks.

How many years has it been since you got one? What company? I'm going to expose you for lying.

My W-2 income has increased 82% in five years....

I got over $30,000 in dividends in 2007, not so good in 2008....

And I am taking full advantage of this recession by buying up foreclosed homes and renting them out....often to the families that were foreclosed on! I just bought a home appraised at $155,000 for $65,000 at a foreclosure auction, turned around and rented it back to the former owners for $800/mo, I pay about $500 on the mortgage and taxes and expect to sell it for at least appraised value in 3-5 years. $300/mo positive cash flow, and then a 120% profit on a resale at the end!! And the money earned? Invested in foreign bonds, and tax free muni bonds and totally immune to state taxes. I'm taking full advantage of this downturn and intend to do very well in the recovery....especially intend to siphon my share of the stimulus spending, and stupid Obama energy tax credits.....directly to my own pocket....

 

[sealybobo]

I really like corporate profits. Makes for nice, fat, dividend checks.....

Do you work for a living? How much did you make? How much have your wages been lowered?

Roach, back at Morgan Stanley, listed four factors that are working to keep worker's wages depressed-- foreign competition, outsourcing of jobs, worries about future demand, and labor saving devices to replace the need for workers.

Political Affairs Magazine - Workers' Wages Down, Corporate Profits Up

You can be smug, but with proof like this, I don't see my liberal democrats losing any elections anytime soon.

I hope Obama makes the companies you invest in pay their employees more so your dividends are shit.

You probably don't even get dividend checks.

How many years has it been since you got one? What company? I'm going to expose you for lying.

My W-2 income has increased 82% in five years....

I got over $30,000 in dividends in 2007, not so good in 2008....

And I am taking full advantage of this recession by buying up foreclosed homes and renting them out....often to the families that were foreclosed on! I just bought a home appraised at $155,000 for $65,000 at a foreclosure auction, turned around and rented it back to the former owners for $800/mo, I pay about $500 on the mortgage and taxes and expect to sell it for at least appraised value in 3-5 years. $300/mo positive cash flow, and then a 120% profit on a resale at the end!! And the money earned? Invested in foreign bonds, and tax free muni bonds and totally immune to state taxes. I'm taking full advantage of this downturn and intend to do very well in the recovery....especially intend to siphon my share of the stimulus spending, and stupid Obama energy tax credits.....directly to my own pocket....

I applaud you my brother. I hope you don't think for a second that I begrudge you for what you are doing. I only wish I had more money to invest myself.

I am upset with the people who trashed the economy. Because you are a right winger, you won't agree with me what caused the crash or that I think they did it on purpose. Its called disaster capitalism. Corporations made a fortune the last few years. And they socialized all of the losses along the way. The bailouts, tax payers paying for iraq, subsodizing oil companies, etc. And right before Bush left office, they stuck us for one last bill of $750 billion. Fucking Genious!!!!!

Not good for me. Lost money on 401K, lost wages/commissions in a down economy, home not worth as much, cost of gas, cost of insurances went up, cost of food, etc.

And most Americans share my experience, not yours, which is why you lost the last two elections. That and Mark Foley, Larry Craig and Spitzer.

So congrats on being able to take advantage of the depression.

Just don't expect to fool us regular folks into agreeing with you or going along with it. I'm glad you were honest about where you are in life. You're in a better position than probably 90% of the people out there.

Don't try to tell us Obama is socialist when you are a mini robber baron yourself.

And don't say we HATE the rich or hate corporations. When they aren't practicing disaster capitalism at our expense, we love them. I am very loyal to the companies I work for. Who isn't?

What, didn't make enough money in the 90's? No. They needed to make a little more so you went after wages/labor.

You know it is true. I have argued with right wingers who admit and defend this, and I talk to dishonest right wingers who deny. Maybe they don't know. Anyways, I suspect you are one of the honest ones.

But I have no problem with you making money. I have a problem with the robber barons that crashed the economy so they could buy low. Not cool.

 

[editec]

characteristically stupid. thanks for asking.

You don't see a problem with this Del?

"Wages and salaries in 2006 was at its lowest level on record with data going back to 1929. The share of national income captured by corporate profits, in contrast, was at its highest level on record."

i don't see it being a one party problem.
deal with it.

He's kinda got ya' there, Sealy.

The fact is that the Democratic party was complicit in the erosion of working class salaries no less than the Republicans were.

It was the DEMS who started us down the road of FREE TRADE at any price, you know.

NOT the Rpublicans, the DEMS started that crap.

In fact it was the Republicans who WARNED US (back in the 1950s) what the ultimate outcome of these foolish trade policies would be.

You get that?

The Republicans were against FREE TRADE fifty years ago.

But once that die was cast, industrialists had NO CHOICE but to play the game by these new rules.

The economic mess is a BIPARTISAN DISASTER.

It's really about CLASS not party, amigo.

 

[sealybobo]

You don't see a problem with this Del?

"Wages and salaries in 2006 was at its lowest level on record with data going back to 1929. The share of national income captured by corporate profits, in contrast, was at its highest level on record."

i don't see it being a one party problem.
deal with it.

He's kinda got ya' there, Sealy.

The fact is that the Democratic party was complicit in the erosion of working class salaries no less than the Republicans were.

It was the DEMS who started us down the road of FREE TRADE at any price, you know.

NOT the Rpublicans, the DEMS started that crap.

In fact it was the Republicans who WARNED US (back in the 1950s) what the ultimate outcome of these foolish trade policies would be.

You get that?

The Republicans were against FREE TRADE fifty years ago.

But once that die was cast, industrialists had NO CHOICE but to play the game by these new rules.

The economic mess is a BIPARTISAN DISASTER.

It's really about CLASS not party, amigo.

]

No he doesn't "have me here".

And yes it is about class. I agree. So which party is the rich party? The GOP. No question about that. And who did the Unions support/endorse? Obama and the Dems?

So who cares what happened 50 years ago? The GOP freed the slaves too. But today they are the racist party. Things change.

And there is nothing wrong with free trade and open borders, so long as we protect American workers. The unions have been screaming this for years. How come if it was the Dems that fucked them they never endorsed the GOP?

And NAFTA may not have originally started off as a bad thing. But we know that GOP policies between 2000-2006 when they controlled all three branches, made NAFTA a bad thing.

The Dems are in full control of all three branches of government now. In 2011, no one will say the GOP share responsibility for the direction our country is going. It will be all Dems fault or credit.

So in 2006 when corporations were showing record profits and wages were down, and the God Damn GOP was denying it and the Dems were screaming it, who's fault is that? The GOP had full control for 5 straight years. Oh the war, the clinton dot com bust, waaaaa, waaaaa, 9-11 happened.

Bottom line is that Corporations were making record profits in 05 & 06 and they were cutting our pay.

Yesterday I heard telecoms had record profits last year but are still trying to ask their union members to take a pay cut. They're acting like they are strugging like GM, when they are breaking profit records.

Following diplomatic negotiations dating back to 1991 between the three nations, the leaders met in San Antonio, Texas, on December 17, 1992, to sign NAFTA. U.S. President George H.W. Bush, Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney and Mexican President Carlos Salinas, each responsible for spearheading and promoting the agreement, ceremonially signed it.

North American Free Trade Agreement - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In the U.S., Bush, who had worked to "fast track" the signing prior to the end of his term, ran out of time and had to pass the required ratification and signing into law to incoming president Bill Clinton. Prior to sending it to the House of Representatives, Clinton introduced clauses intended to protect American workers and allay the concerns of many House representatives. It also required U.S. partners to adhere to environmental practices and regulations similar to its own. The ability to enforce these clauses, especially with Mexico, was considered questionable, and with much consternation and emotional discussion the House of Representatives approved NAFTA on November 17, 1993, by a vote of 234 to 200. Remarkably, the agreement's supporters included 132 Republicans and only 102 Democrats. NAFTA did not get the votes needed to pass as a Treaty in the U.S. Senate. That unusual combination reflected the challenges President Clinton faced in convincing Congress that the controversial piece of legislation would truly benefit all Americans. The agreement was signed into law in the U.S. on December 8, 1993, by President Bill Clinton and went into effect on January 1, 1994.[2][3][4][5][6]

Before the negotiations were finalized, Bill Clinton came into office in the U.S. and Kim Campbell in Canada, and before the agreement became law, Jean Chrétien had taken office in Canada.

 

[sealybobo]

You don't see a problem with this Del?

"Wages and salaries in 2006 was at its lowest level on record with data going back to 1929. The share of national income captured by corporate profits, in contrast, was at its highest level on record."

i don't see it being a one party problem.
deal with it.

He's kinda got ya' there, Sealy.

The fact is that the Democratic party was complicit in the erosion of working class salaries no less than the Republicans were.

It was the DEMS who started us down the road of FREE TRADE at any price, you know.

NOT the Rpublicans, the DEMS started that crap.

In fact it was the Republicans who WARNED US (back in the 1950s) what the ultimate outcome of these foolish trade policies would be.

You get that?

The Republicans were against FREE TRADE fifty years ago.

But once that die was cast, industrialists had NO CHOICE but to play the game by these new rules.

The economic mess is a BIPARTISAN DISASTER.

It's really about CLASS not party, amigo.

I understand that the dems aren't angels, but you're starting to swallow the right wing coolaid that "they are all equally as bad".

As if Bush/McCain would have been no different than Obama?

 

[Oddball]

These kinds of replies are so frustrating because I truly believe you believe the shit coming out of you mouth.

Sorry idiot, but the Corporations and the GOP did this, and YOU ASSHOLES defended it. Did you forget? You spit on labor and the middle class. First it was unions, then it was all American workers.

Now you want to take a different approach to this and spread the blame?

Then spread the wealth.

Which party is the party that thinks labor sucks and corporations/ceo's deserve all the profits?

So in 2005 and 2006 when I was telling ASSHOLES like you that we were making less and the corporations were making more, you ASSHOLES asked me, "why do I hate the rich", and you lied. YOu said wages were up. You said the fundamentals of our economy were strong.

You guys are trying desperately to get people to forget how fucking bad you were the last 8 years. And you're trying to blame the Dems???

Just like Pelosi is now responsible for torture and iraq.

And Freddy mack is responsible for the economy.

Fine, you want to assess some blame to the Dems. How's 5% sound?

Wow....I feel stupider for having read that polemic cliché dreck.

 

[Toro]

There is definitely truth in the OP and partly explains why Democrats completely dominate the political landscape today.

 

[Oddball]

The only truth I can sift out of that leftist boilerplate is that bobo probably was whining and crying about all that crap for eight years.

Of course, like all socialist whiners, his distrust of corporations doesn't also extend to the biggest multi-national corporation of them all -known as District of Columbia- when his favored political hacks are at its helm.

 

[sealybobo]

The only truth I can sift out of that leftist boilerplate is that bobo probably was whining and crying about all that crap for eight years.

Of course, like all socialist whiners, his distrust of corporations doesn't also extend to the biggest multi-national corporation of them all -known as District of Columbia- when his favored political hacks are at its helm.

No Dude. See, us liberals will join you in forcing Obama/Reed/Pelosi to do what we want instead of caving in to corporate interests.

Who else do you think they are corrupt for? Everytime any politicians are found to be corrupt, its always for corporations, DUDE.

Today we see why we have to take a pay cut. Things are bad. But why did we take a pay cut in 06 when corporations had record profits dude? Remember CEO pay was out of control? Remember AIG?

So who won? In business, there are always winners and losers. If we lost all that money in the stock market, who won Dude? I'll tell you. The rich. And what happened when the wall came crumbling down? They got us to bail them out? And the Fed didn't even ask before they gave AIG their first check. Who are the Feds? The bankers? The credit card companies? The Lehman brothers? $750 billion dollar bailout of the bankers and mortgage brokers and wallstreet? Is that really capitalism dude?

 

[Oddball]

Obama/Reed/Pelosi wouldn't be anywhere near the seats of power if they weren't tools of corporate interests.

Get a grip.

 

[editec]

Why did the unions USUALLY support the Dems?

Because half a loaf is often better than none, I suppose.

I'll tell you what they didn't usually support though...any DEMCORATIC plan to expand FREE TRADE.

ON this single issue, I cannot simply blame the Republicans.

You can try if you want, but it simply makes you look blindly partisan.

Where were the Dems when it came to FREE TRADE.

they were (mostly) supporting it.

The Democratic party you believe in, hasn't existed in a mighty long time.

 

[sealybobo]

Obama/Reed/Pelosi wouldn't be anywhere near the seats of power if they weren't tools of corporate interests.

Get a grip.

We have no problem agreeing with you and when they do that, lets call them and tell them if they don't do what we want, we will fire their asses!!!!

Here is where your theory is blown and you are exposed for the hack that you are. Ready? You must be new, because this is easy!!!

Ready? This is so exciting. The more right I am, the more Del and Willow will come to your rescue! Get ready idiot.

Ok. You won't call and stop the Dems from caving in to corporate interests because you bend over for corporations. You defend them fucking us so they can get richer. So we won't hold our breath waiting for your dumb ass to wake up.

Second and last reason you are full of shit!!!! You wouldn't complain when the GOP was in charge.

So when exactly are you ever complaining about politicians that bend over for corporations? Have you forgot dumb ass? You are pro corporation and anti labor!!!!

Exposed!!! Checkmate!!! Good day sir!!!! And welcome.

 

[Oddball]

Why did the unions USUALLY support the Dems?

Because half a loaf is often better than none, I suppose.

I'll tell you what they didn't usually support though...any DEMCORATIC plan to expand FREE TRADE.

ON this single issue, I cannot simply blame the Republicans.

You can try if you want, but it simply makes you look blindly partisan.

Where were the Dems when it came to FREE TRADE.

they were (mostly) supporting it.

The Democratic party you believe in, hasn't existed in a mighty long time.

First of all, most of the union membership left anymore is in bureaucrat unions like AFSCME and NEA/AFT. To them, bloating budgets and bureaucracy is good for bidness.

Secondly, the so-called "free trade" agreements are nothing of the sort. Nobody needs a couple of wheelbarrows worth of rules and regs to be free in any context, let alone trade. All you need for real free trade are two rules:

1) We agree to trade freely.

2) If you don't want to trade freely with us, we'll give you the same deal you give us.

 

[Oddball]

Obama/Reed/Pelosi wouldn't be anywhere near the seats of power if they weren't tools of corporate interests.

Get a grip.

We have no problem agreeing with you and when they do that, lets call them and tell them if they don't do what we want, we will fire their asses!!!!

Here is where your theory is blown and you are exposed for the hack that you are. Ready? You must be new, because this is easy!!!

Ready? This is so exciting. The more right I am, the more Del and Willow will come to your rescue! Get ready idiot.

Ok. You won't call and stop the Dems from caving in to corporate interests because you bend over for corporations. You defend them fucking us so they can get richer. So we won't hold our breath waiting for your dumb ass to wake up.

Second and last reason you are full of shit!!!! You wouldn't complain when the GOP was in charge.

So when exactly are you ever complaining about politicians that bend over for corporations? Have you forgot dumb ass? You are pro corporation and anti labor!!!!

Exposed!!! Checkmate!!! Good day sir!!!! And welcome.

I bend over for nobody, you simp.

And I complained plenty when the republicans were in charge.

Best check your premises before you embarrass yourself even more, bozo.

 

[sealybobo]

Why did the unions USUALLY support the Dems?

Because half a loaf is often better than none, I suppose.

I'll tell you what they didn't usually support though...any DEMCORATIC plan to expand FREE TRADE.

ON this single issue, I cannot simply blame the Republicans.

You can try if you want, but it simply makes you look blindly partisan.

Where were the Dems when it came to FREE TRADE.

they were (mostly) supporting it.

The Democratic party you believe in, hasn't existed in a mighty long time.

Editec!!! What's wrong with free/fair trade? The GOP took NAFTA and made it worse! Do you get that? Sure the corporations, public opinion and media got the Dems to go along. I don't know that free trade was avoidable.

And ok, the Dems are partially responsible. I'll conceed. You win!!!

Now, which party is more likely to fix what is wrong with NAFTA.

The only proof you needed about NAFTA was the bickering I remember from Hillary and Barrack on the subject. Yes, you are right. Dems are soft on that.

But that doesn't mean they aren't our only chance to save the American middle class. If McCain won and was in charge for the next 8 years, I would have been very afraid for the middle class.

Hell, I'm afraid for the middle class and we have an all dem government. I know they are corruptable and some have already been corrupted (dodd).

I'm not a blind partisan like these fools say. I only defend the Dems as the lesser of two evils.

I suspect you agree because of your half a loaf comment. I told you, my grandma says, "at least the dems give a dog a bone every once in awhile".

 

[sealybobo]

Why did the unions USUALLY support the Dems?

Because half a loaf is often better than none, I suppose.

I'll tell you what they didn't usually support though...any DEMCORATIC plan to expand FREE TRADE.

ON this single issue, I cannot simply blame the Republicans.

You can try if you want, but it simply makes you look blindly partisan.

Where were the Dems when it came to FREE TRADE.

they were (mostly) supporting it.

The Democratic party you believe in, hasn't existed in a mighty long time.

First of all, most of the union membership left anymore is in bureaucrat unions like AFSCME and NEA/AFT. To them, bloating budgets and bureaucracy is good for bidness.

Secondly, the so-called "free trade" agreements are nothing of the sort. Nobody needs a couple of wheelbarrows worth of rules and regs to be free in any context, let alone trade. All you need for real free trade are two rules:

1) We agree to trade freely.

2) If you don't want to trade freely with us, we'll give you the same deal you give us.

Who did you blame the housing crash on, the corporations that predatory loaned us and then bundled up all our loans into toxic assets and then needed to get bailed out, or did you blame poor people and Freddy/Fanny?

Here are a couple of great articles:

Democracy - Not "The Free Market" - Will Save America's Middle Class

'You Can't Govern if You Don't Believe in Government'

 

[Oddball]

Your semantics belie your extreme bias.

The notion that the housing bubble, the auto bubble, and the dollar bubble can be blamed on free markets presumes that a truly free market has been in operation in the first place......Something that you'd be hard pressed to prove, since the only place you seem from whence to glean your information is from equally radically biased sources.

But you keep on pimping for your favored corporate fascist hacks and blame anything and everything, up to and including rained out picnics, on the corporate fascist hacks you've chosen to hate, if it helps you sleep at night.