Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Policies and other approaches that will deal humanely with the existing surplus.
Polices and other approaches that will humanely avoid growing a future surplus.
.
This makes sense from a supply and demand perspective. But I don't think it will happen.
The Republicans want more workers all the time so that they can keep wages down. They do nothing about the issue of undocumented immigrants. They want a wall. But do they stop businesses from hiring and exploiting undocumented immigrants? They don't.
The Democrats want to reward the poor. Their social welfare goes to a point where it's nicer to not work than work. Once people figure that out, population will actually grow in the poor communities. The Democrats also want more immigrants, thus making it harder for each immigrant to achieve a good wage.
Then there is politics. Both parties want votes. If you want votes today, you better welcome more immigrants. Likely you better promise to give the masses more things. The Democrats have a better chance of winning as the needy population grows.
Neither party is dealing humanely with the existing surplus and neither wants to humanely avoid growing a future surplus.
What's most likely to happen:
Our population grows at the fastest at the lowest wealth level.
A growing number of people are unemployed, underemployed, or choose not to work.
A growing block of voters wanting better redistribution of wealth.
A high concentration of skilled affluent professionals, both American and international, who will be increasingly fiscally conservative.
An increasingly hostile environment for business and industry.
Before 2030, China will surpass us to be the world's biggest economy. We will go down rather fast. To make a pessimistic estimate, America's best days are long behind it. We will be a new kind of country, the first of its kind in the world. Where does it go from here? We don't know. I think at some point the Greeks, the Romans, the Venetians all asked the same question when their empires entered a phase of no return. We are there now.
Ok 70% of our economic welbeing is based on Buying goods. Based on this ideal. In order to be strong you need a strong middle and working class(lower). The problem is the growing line between those who have and have not. Our economy is strong and growing, the problem is it not growing in the correct way. In the last 30 years, we have seen a steady decrease in pay for the middle class and working class. But the top 15% pay has increased by 30x what it was making in 1970s. Further the top 300 riches americans have more money then half of the countries population.
Please understand that wealth in it own right isn't bad. The problem is our economy is based on Buying goods. But having that much money you can only buy on pillow, bed, maybe a car or two? So really it doesnt benefit the economy.
Heres how it should work, the more you pay your middle class and lower class workers, the more they spend(far more middle class & poor then wealthly class) the more they buy and spend on goods
The more companies make, which in turn they have to hire more employees, which creates more taxes income for the government to invest in education and programs which educate a better work force and so on and so on.
The problem is recently the rules of finance have changed. Corperations are at the mercy of investers and shareholder to make as much profit as posible so the cutting of wages, benefits, jobs are first to go, and recent globalization has eliminated laber jobs as technology becomes more efficient. Never in history has this country been more productive, and this more money. But the divide continues to get wider.
The more companies make, which in turn they have to hire more employees, which creates more taxes income for the government to invest in education and programs which educate a better work force and so on and so on.
The problem is recently the rules of finance have changed. Corperations are at the mercy of investers and shareholder to make as much profit as posible so the cutting of wages, benefits, jobs are first to go, and recent globalization has eliminated laber jobs as technology becomes more efficient. Never in history has this country been more productive, and this more money. But the divide continues to get wider.
Yah. The trick is to get more money in the pockets of the middle class in a politically acceptable manner. Less taxes, especially less payroll taxes. And more benefits that everyone needs and has to buy anyway. Like HC coverage.
Corperations are at the mercy of investers and shareholder to make as much profit as posible so the cutting of wages, benefits, jobs are first to go, and recent globalization has eliminated laber jobs as technology becomes more efficient. .
Not so fast on drinking the koolaid friend. I saw the same Jeff Emelet 60 minutes segment. Corporations don't give a damn no matter what BS they spin. If Investors said to onshore they will do whatever gets another penny in their pocket.
The more companies make, which in turn they have to hire more employees, which creates more taxes income for the government to invest in education and programs which educate a better work force and so on and so on.
The problem is recently the rules of finance have changed. Corporations are at the mercy of investers and shareholder to make as much profit as posible so the cutting of wages, benefits, jobs are first to go, and recent globalization has eliminated laber jobs as technology becomes more efficient. Never in history has this country been more productive, and this more money. But the divide continues to get wider.
Corporations are not expecting to rely on Americans buying products. They are switching to consumers in China and other developing countries to give them their profit. They are also switching to a nationless laborforce, whether it's an international labor force in America or a labor force overseas. The development of the third world itself creates a lot of opportunities. Corporations want not only cheap labor, but also new economic opportunities in fastly growing economies.
What you are saying makes sense before the economy became global. Now it's going to be difficult. Investment in education gets much less attention since companies can get skilled labor from other countries (and liberals welcome them). What would be the incentives, then, to invest in education in the U.S.? Not to mention that our educational institutions have become very cynical of business and capitalism in general. They make their own curriculum and the industry often can't even find people with the right expertise. It is sad that we claim to educate students to be global citizens, yet they graduate with little skills to actually be a global citizen.
The liberal solution is just redistributing wealth into the hands of the middle class. These middle class people then go buy more things made by workers overseas. It then reinforces global capitalism. It then gives the middle class the illusion that this system works. But the problem is still there. And how would you create jobs?
The more companies make, which in turn they have to hire more employees, which creates more taxes income for the government to invest in education and programs which educate a better work force and so on and so on.
The problem is recently the rules of finance have changed. Corperations are at the mercy of investers and shareholder to make as much profit as posible so the cutting of wages, benefits, jobs are first to go, and recent globalization has eliminated laber jobs as technology becomes more efficient. Never in history has this country been more productive, and this more money. But the divide continues to get wider.
You talk about cutting wages like businesses can randomly cut it despite the market. It's just not true. A lot of companies are paying good salaries to skilled workers because these skills are hard to find. They would love to cut that wage, but not until the competition level increases. Companies pay people crappy wages because these people will still work there, too many competitors and too few jobs.
When businesses resented unions, they sought to increase competition by expanding the global work place (hence the Cold War to bring down communism). Once that's done, wages stagnated, jobs gone. Businesses didn't do that randomly out of the blue. They made supply-and-demand work for their interests.
Today when workers resent businesses, the best way is to make supply-and-demand work for workers' interests. Where there is labor surplus, reduce it and create labor shortage. But that's not what's happening. We are adding more workers every year because businesses claim that they want workers. Conservatives welcome cheap labor. Liberals welcome immigration. American workers took a totally different route. They watch the rising labor surplus in most fields and do nothing. They demand that businesses create more jobs and the rich pay more tax. Population growth and job growth aren't proportionate. There may be more jobs for every enormously big population jump, each time adding more people than jobs. If Americans really want to put people back to work, they must reduce labor surplus. You know why businesses think Americans are "entitled"? It's because Americans like to demand and lecture businesses. Meanwhile, Americans are not challenging businesses with businesses' worst fear, labor shortage.
Imagine what would happen if businesses simply demanded and lectured workers to accept lower wages, without working on supply-and-demand. Workers would have leverage over business. So, businesses, as calculating and unemotional as they are, went straight to creating labor surplus. The rest is history. Likewise, workers demanding and lecturing won't be effective. They have to reduce labor surplus. There is no hope though.
Not so fast on drinking the koolaid friend. I saw the same Jeff Emelet 60 minutes segment. Corporations don't give a damn no matter what BS they spin. If Investors said to onshore they will do whatever gets another penny in their pocket.
Who is Jeff Emelet? What im saying is simple economics that is taught at college.
Who is Jeff Emelet? What im saying is simple economics that is taught at college.
The head of GE, watch the last 60 minutes segment, and no it is propaganda to squeeze every penny from every damn worker, I call BS when I see it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
