Donald J. Trump (For everyone else)
I assume it's still acceptable to have a Trump thread in a Politics forum?
So this is an obvious lie - basically aimed at
I wonder about that productivity and income split a lot. Like what caused it to happen so abruptly? USA went off the gold standard in 1971 and the oil crisis was in 1973. I also wonder if the continuing increase in productivity is not genuine and is measuring paper wealth of some sort with increased financialization. Or, is it a kind of a cap on what level of real median income and wealth is achievable under the basic economic system and all extra goes to the ownership class. Or the decline of organized labor? Changes in tax rates?
Probably more than one cause, but it is a pretty abrupt change.
Productivity is an odd measure. When amazon only employ 100 people the productivity will be really impressive. Yay! As all the jobs go.
Maybe that's why pruductivity is going up
As of February 2024, Amazon had 1,556,000 full- and part-time employees. This is a decrease from the peak of 1,608,000 employees in 2021
2024: $637.959 billion, a 10.99% increase from 2023
2023: $574.785 billion, an 11.83% increase from 2022
2022: $513.983 billion, a 9.4% increase from 2021
2021: $469.82 billion
Unemployment is not that high though.
But how productive is all that productivity? Surely not all productivity is the same.
That chart basically shows that income generated/hour of labor worked (productivity measure) decoupled from wage growth. Policy decisions like tax rate cuts on higher incomes, less hikes of minimum wage, deregulation efforts etc. have devalued labor. Most productivity increases have been captured in corporate profits, executive pay, and shareholder gains.
The counterpoint is that you should not legislate the value of labor and that the free market has to be unleashed. This is fine but will result in EXTREME inequality that totally breaks the system (as well as horrendous quality of life). Maybe labor is naturally devalued in an automated world but then we need to think up new policy decisions that ensure society as a whole captures the benefits of automation. Hence ideas like universal income or shifting the burden of taxation away from income on to corporate/wealth taxes of some sort.
Unemployment is not that high though.
But how productive is all that productivity? Surely not all productivity is the same.
There's still a huge market for manual/caring/service jobs. They are probably increasing with fairly stable productivity. Meanwhile there's an increasing area of producivity that is down to automation.
Soi we will have along period of stable/increasing productivity where humans are doing more and more manual/service class jobs while productivity ins oem areas keeps going up and the top few get richer and richer. The middle will be hollowed out.
Meanwhile AI/Robotics/etc will be working it's way through all the jobs.
How long and smooth is unclear but it's happening. Thee only option we have is about who owns it.
That chart basically shows that income generated/hour of labor worked (productivity measure) decoupled from wage growth. Policy decisions like tax rate cuts on higher incomes, less hikes of minimum wage, deregulation efforts etc. have devalued labor. Most productivity increases have been captured in corporate profits, executive pay, and shareholder gains.
The counterpoint is that you should not legislate the value of labor and that the free market has to be unleashed. This is fine but will resu
I agree with this and don't really have anything to add. I'm pretty pessimistic on what the most likely outcome is going to be.
Yep some people can be so blinded by ideology not to understand which data they produce.
OR, he wanted to claim that vs 1960 post tax income inequality increased (true, but that stopped decades ago), OR he wanted to claim that with no taxes income inequality would be a lot higher (true).
If you have a better indicator of income inequality than post tax Gini feel free to tell me which one it is.
Also keep in mind that basically the ENTIRE increase in inequality sinche the 1960, and more (post gini
Nonsense .
Ie: CEO incomes went from like 35-40 of median income to over 250 today .
From 1978–2023, top CEO compensation shot up 1,085%, compared with a 24% increase in a typical worker’s compensation.
Wedding as nothing to do with it .
Furthermore u went has far as 1960?
That was an whole different time due the tax being much higher and US dollar still being backed by gold .
FWIW here is another chart showing how productivity was always in line with increase of productivity and a huge breakdown happened afterwards 1978 .
First chart of this link :
The growing wedge between productivity and typical workers’ pay is income going everywhere but the paychecks of the bottom 80% of workers. If it didn’t end up in paychecks of typical workers, where did all the income growth implied by the rising productivity line go? Two places, basically. It went into the salaries of highly paid corporate and professional employees. And it went into higher profits (returns to shareholders and other wealth owners). This concentration of wage income at the top (growing wage inequality) and the shift of income from labor overall and toward capital owners (the loss in labor’s share of income) are two of the key drivers of economic inequality overall since the late 1970s.
Anyway Luciom , your pov seem very dishonest because I suppose much harder to find a charts or explanation ( the wedding % was atrocious for an example) to sustain that inequality did not rise dramatically compare of finding charts that says it did ….
Lol it's not a redistribution JFC. The 50-99 didn't LOSE ANYTHING, their wealth GREW IN REAL TERMS, just less than that of the top 1%.
Jfc if your wealth doubles and mine quadruples you would call that a large redistribution? which mental model even thinks of using that word while describing an improvement for both people?
That said, it's not a large increase in inequality, especially because it doesn't account for SS, which for all purposes is actually wealth, which value increased (annuities ar
?
It’s value doesn’t increase -> debt keep going higher …..
Higher debts to pay for SS-> inflation rises too .
No wealth creation in real term at all .
Ps: if a billionaire double is wealth and someone having 200k quadruple, u don’t think it’s still massive inequalities rising ????
Keep counting for the next 20-30 years and see if it still so if u can’t see it to make it clearer….
WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. — President Donald Trump declined to rule out a recession this year as the economy stutters from his efforts to impose tariffs and rebuild the U.S. manufacturing sector, acknowledging in an interview broadcast Sunday that “it takes a little time” before Americans will see a payoff from his policies.
Where’s resident financial advisor blahblahdickhead to eat up why this is great news
Fucking imagine if sleepy or kamabla for no reason at all initiated recession inducing policies and said it’s all good knowing full well they initiated it
Also we loving life yet crypto bros?
Where's resident financial advisor blahblahdickhead to eat up why this is great news
****ing imagine if sleepy or kamabla for no reason at all initiated recession inducing policies and said it's all good knowing full well they initiated it
FWIW if this was the sole real reason for tariffs , to rebuild manufacturing in the U.S. ( I hope it’s not …😉 , it’s again always the same $h!t -> make pay the people but not the top 1-5% and corporations …with tariffs .
IMHO , They could for example incite moving producing here by taxing more any income produce offshore and reducing any income produce onshore instead ?
Ah yes but that would hurt too much the stock markets and corporations ….
Why do this when we just make pay the bottom 80% with higher price consumption instead ?
"How can I help seeing what is in front of my eyes? Two and two are four."
"Sometimes, Winston. Sometimes they are five. Sometimes they are three. Sometimes they are all of them at once. You must try harder. It is not easy to become sane"
Who will be the Picard in the maga movement?
Great series .
