Trickle Down?

[hcap]

Like in "Animal Farm" Some are more a lot more equal than others.
The numbers in this chart are all normalized to zero in 1979, and what they show is that the total share of national income going to the super-rich has more than doubled over that time. The merely well off have also gotten a slightly bigger piece of the pie, while everyone else has funded this free-for-all. "Everyone else," in this case, means 90% of the country. Our share of national income has gone down in order to make sure that virtually all the fruits of economic growth over the past four decades could go to the well-off, the rich, and the super-duper-rich.
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/blogphotos/Blog_CBO_Income_Inequality_2007.jpg

Many thanks to all the Republicans, Democrats, and politicians that have contributed to and endorsed destroying our manufacturing base, out sourcing jobs, and generally supporting corporate welfare. Job well done

[Indulto]

Like in "Animal Farm" Some are more a lot more equal than others.

... Many thanks to all the Republicans, Democrats, and politicians that have contributed to and endorsed destroying our manufacturing base, out sourcing jobs, and generally supporting corporate welfare. Job well doneEven though this information will undoubtedly be treated in the usual fashion by the usual suspects, you still get credit for another job well done. Happy holidays. :ThmbUp:

[ljb]

Yeah but we all got a tax break. :rolleyes:

[PaceAdvantage]

Wow...looks like Clinton really started that train rolling, and under Bush, it was actually coming down for a while....

I hope all Dem Hillary supporters out there will take this chart to heart....

[Lefty]

You forgot the unions. They actually priced their own workers out of the market.

[ljb]

Wow...looks like Clinton really started that train rolling, and under Bush, it was actually coming down for a while....

I hope all Dem Hillary supporters out there will take this chart to heart....
Like i said, Clinton is a moderate republican.

[ljb]

You forgot the unions. They actually priced their own workers out of the market.
Right you are Lefty,
We need more of those low wage immigrants don't we !!

[Lefty]

King of the twisters. Got your brain a knot again, eh? Those jobs go to other countries so they don't have to pay $20 an hr or more for low skill jobs. If you were in business wouldn't you buy your labor so you could make a decent profit? Business is about profit, maybe not in the world of socialists, but profit is the bottom line and unions have been part of the process of driving jobs out of the country.

[Tom]

In spite of all the rhetoric, union themselves are big business.
The reasons for many business outsourcing are many - not just corporate greed. As Lefty says, unions have a share of the blame, as to ignorant states and thier taxes (NY tops the list), and the dems always crying out for higher taxes and fines for this and that, and how horrible rich people are. And of course, corporate greed. We need to both encourage and reward corporate growth in this country, and to force corporate responsibility at the same time.

[delayjf]

How does the chart factor in the wealth that was created since 1979? I.E. I don't know what Warren Buffet, Bill Gates, Paul Allen, Michael Dell. Larry Ellison etc were worth in 1979, but they are all billionaires now - yet no one inherited their money (to my knowledge).

"Trickle down" does not mean everybody is going to be rich, it may mean that you have a job - which is better than not having a job. Want to take a look at a microcosm of trickle down economics check out the effects of the writers strike on the Hollywood community.

[Show Me the Wire]

The trickle down effect of NAFTRA is the tidal wave of illegal Mexican immigration to the U.S.

[ljb]

King of the twisters. Got your brain a knot again, eh? Those jobs go to other countries so they don't have to pay $20 an hr or more for low skill jobs. If you were in business wouldn't you buy your labor so you could make a decent profit? Business is about profit, maybe not in the world of socialists, but profit is the bottom line and unions have been part of the process of driving jobs out of the country.
Right again Lefty,
Any job that can't be filled by a low wage immigrant should be shipped overseas. No sense in sharing the profit with the workers here when we can get it done for pennies on the dollar overseas. Means larger bonuses for the big shots come Christmas time. :jump: :jump: :jump:

[ljb]

How does the chart factor in the wealth that was created since 1979? I.E. I don't know what Warren Buffet, Bill Gates, Paul Allen, Michael Dell. Larry Ellison etc were worth in 1979, but they are all billionaires now - yet no one inherited their money (to my knowledge).

"Trickle down" does not mean everybody is going to be rich, it may mean that you have a job - which is better than not having a job. Want to take a look at a microcosm of trickle down economics check out the effects of the writers strike on the Hollywood community.
I think the original intent of the graph was to show how trickle down economics is not working as it was sold to the public. Remember "a rising tide lifts all boats" ?

PS>
Read Tom's post it may be the most sensible post on this thread so far.

[delayjf]

Means larger bonuses for the big shots come Christmas time.
Or it means layoffs, chapter 7, and going out of business. Some where in there is a happy median. But Ford wouldn't know about that.

[ljb]

Or it means layoffs, chapter 7, and going out of business. Some where in there is a happy median. But Ford wouldn't know about that.
Delphi just filed for bankruptcy. In doing so they lowered the workers pay by 50 percent and cut benefits also. As a reward for this astute management the top officers of Delphi awarded themselves $60 million in bonuses. Gimme a break :bang: :bang: :bang:

[delayjf]

I think the original intent of the graph was to show how trickle down economics is not working as it was sold to the public. Remember "a rising tide lifts all boats" ?
Define "not working". I don't think anybody ever quaranteed the Janitor at Microsoft that he would be a millionaire simply because Microsofts stock went up in value. If Microsoft is successful and they hire thousands of employees due to their success - aren't those employees benefiting ( rising with the tide) from Microsofts success?

Adelphia officers trial
The founders of Adelphia were charged with securities violations, five officers were indicted and two (John Rigas and Timothy Rigas) were found guilty [4]. Rigas founded Adelphia with a $300 license in 1952, took the company public in 1986 and built it by acquiring other systems in the 1990s. The company collapsed into bankruptcy in 2002 after it disclosed $2.3 billion in off-balance-sheet debt.

Federal prosecutors proved that the Rigases used complicated cash-management systems to spread money around to various family-owned entities and as a cover for stealing $100 million for themselves. A second Rigas son, Michael, former executive vice president for operations, was acquitted of conspiracy and wire fraud in 2005. However, jurors were deadlocked on certain counts, and Michael Rigas is scheduled for a second trial. Former Adelphia assistant treasurer Michael Mulcahey was acquitted of all charges.

John and Timothy Rigas started their prison sentence at the Butner Federal Correctional Complex near Raleigh, North Carolina on August 13, 2007. John received 15 years and Timothy received 20 years.

[Tom]

Means larger bonuses for the big shots come Christmas time.

Wow. Talk about your whinning and crying.:lol:

Typically, the bigger bonuses go to those who did the most for the company. The guys who area there weekends, late at night, work through lunch, travel a lot, bring in business, cut the costs, grow the stocks. You know, like those who paid the most taxes go the biggest rebates.

Perhaps you whines would be better used to complain about the slaggards who do not pull thier weight, clock out a 3pm on the dot, or only stay to eat up OT. The ones who need a union rep to wipe thier.....noses everyday.

:lol::lol:

[hcap]

I don't begrudge anyone becoming super rich or super duper rich. But it's pretty shameful that the division between the super rich and the rest of us is increasing at the rate shown in the chart. That was why I thought it was worth posting. It doesn't look like the rising tide is lifting us all.

[chickenhead]

It doesn't look like the rising tide is lifting us all.

Not that I disagree, but one thing is not the other. If you want to post about rising (or sinking) tides, post a chart of per capita income adjusted for inflation. If you want to talk about disparity, post what you did. But they are not the same thing.

You are smart enough to know that both the income disparity and the per capita numbers can increase, i.e. the rich get richer faster, but the poor also get richer. They are not fundamentally linked to each other. In the same way, the disparity can shrink WHILE the per capita numbers are going down. i.e the rich are getting poorer faster, but the poor are also getting poorer. Is that better somehow?

Disparity is a zero sum gain (everyones share cannot go up)...income is not zero sum. Income is more important.

[skate]

Great Chart, if you do something with IT.

IT Means nothing if you do Nothing.

it's a DAa DAa da...

Oracle just posted a 35% jump in Profit.

Chainsaw donated $600 million to charity.

And And and, a lot of Good Paying Jobs are for the taking. think about moving, that's what the Founders did.

They just put lots of Rich People in Jail w/ heavy fines. Big Time.

So so so, im agreeing and covering some other points. like Handycapping...:cool:

[Indulto]

Not that I disagree, but one thing is not the other. If you want to post about rising (or sinking) tides, post a chart of per capita income adjusted for inflation. If you want to talk about disparity, post what you did. But they are not the same thing.

You are smart enough to know that both the income disparity and the per capita numbers can increase, i.e. the rich get richer faster, but the poor also get richer. They are not fundamentally linked to each other. In the same way, the disparity can shrink WHILE the per capita numbers are going down. i.e the rich are getting poorer faster, but the poor are also getting poorer. Is that better somehow?

Disparity is a zero sum gain (everyones share cannot go up)...income is not zero sum. Income is more important.What neither chart will tell you is that
a) Being a Republican means never having to say you're sorry since the rich richly deserve to get richer. :lol:
b) Being a Democrat means having to say you're sorry you aren't taking as much money away from the middle class as the Republicans. :bang:

BTW Happy holdays, Chick.

[rastajenk]

The reference to Animal Farm seems out of place next to a chart of income disparity in the US. The story was a warning about the evils of socialist totalitarianism, not about free economies. Our Declaration says that all men are created equal, but does not say that they have to remain so for the rest of their lives.

[delayjf]

What neither chart will tell you is that
a) Being a Republican means never having to say you're sorry since the rich richly deserve to get richer
Actually, the areas of the country that encompass the most wealth are controlled by the Democrats. (i.e. California, NY)

[ljb]

Define "not working". I don't think anybody ever quaranteed the Janitor at Microsoft that he would be a millionaire simply because Microsofts stock went up in value. If Microsoft is successful and they hire thousands of employees due to their success - aren't those employees benefiting ( rising with the tide) from Microsofts success?
This chart displays how income disparity between the super rich and the rest of us has grown over the years. And that is what I mean by not working as defined originally. This rising tide has NOT lifted all boats. Glad to hear that thousands are working at mickeysoft but that has nothing to do with the chart and it's implications.

[chickenhead]

This chart displays how income disparity between the super rich and the rest of us has grown over the years.

But, the poor might also be richer than they were in 1979. All the chart means, is that the rich did better. It doesn't mean the poorest did poorly. That is why these charts never have enthralled me like they do others.

[hcap]

These charts are adjusted for inflation. Go as far as 2005
Anyone think it has gotten better??

http://mwhodges.home.att.net/family.htm

http://mwhodges.home.att.net/male_female_income.gif

2006 chart, showing the percentage decline in median household incomes from 1999-2005.

Nationwide incomes dropped 6%. Note the dark orange colors showing those states where incomes dropped more than 10%. Note also this chart shows that incomes fell in 94% of the states (47 of the 50 states) during that period.

http://mwhodges.home.att.net/1999-2006-income-drop-1.jpg



"Dr. Milton Friedman, Nobel Prize winner for excellence in economics, said in various letters: "I certainly commend you for the Grandfather Economic Report, and for the imaginative way in which you have displayed data highly relevant to very important issues. I am impressed. The analysis are excellent. Your objective is one I fully endorse."

[JustRalph]

Delphi stock is trading at .15 cents a share.......... I suggest everybody go buy some tomorrow.................

[ljb]

Sell Burger King.

[Lefty]

Right again Lefty,
Any job that can't be filled by a low wage immigrant should be shipped overseas. No sense in sharing the profit with the workers here when we can get it done for pennies on the dollar overseas. Means larger bonuses for the big shots come Christmas time. :jump: :jump: :jump:
You are certainly reading words that i didn't type, but not surprised.

[ljb]

I think not Lefty,
But that is besides the point, check out the link provided by Hcap. It shows some rather dismal stats.

[Lefty]

lbj, right. You think not. I was responding to the stats and pointing out one of the big causes for the stats. Try to stay focused.

[GameTheory]

This chart displays how income disparity between the super rich and the rest of us has grown over the years. And that is what I mean by not working as defined originally. This rising tide has NOT lifted all boats. Glad to hear that thousands are working at mickeysoft but that has nothing to do with the chart and it's implications.Chickenhead already posted what I would have, but I'll ramble a bit anyway. Your chart doesn't show anything that relates to whether poor and middle-class are better or worse off (financially) than they were, it just shows share of the pie. If the pie has gotten bigger at a rate fast enough to more than offset any decline in percentage of the pie, then "all boats" could very well have risen.

Now, I don't think the large disparity is a good thing, but for social reasons, not purely economic ones. (It creates a situation where the rich not only live in another world from most of us, but in another universe. I don't think that's good.)

As CH said, if you want to explore whether or not poorer people are better or worse off than they used to be, post something relevant to that. The gap is not.

Your other chart is more relevant but seems to be skirting the issue. Why are we seeing only male income from that time period and not household income or overall standard of living? Looking at other charts from the site you got it from show family income to have grown (flatly but very slightly) from 1979-2004. Not great, but not the downward line that you tried to sell us. (The site also seems to indicate that women are being "forced" into the workplace for financial reasons when we all know the reason that women have flooded the workforce in the last 30-40 years is because of the feminist movement. Go try to find a sizable sample of modern urban women who claim they'd rather be at home with their husband being the sole breadwinner.)

What you zealots never seem to understand is that if you constantly lie about everything, then your credibility is blown and that we can all safely assume that every piece of "bad news" you post to attempt to prove your points is just another lie and the opposite is likely the truth. Why do you post this stuff that doesn't pass the most cursory logic test or fact-check? What is the point exactly? Are you really trying to change minds or is it just about being obnoxious to people you don't like?

[Tom]

If one class keeps working hard, investing, and the other keeps being slaggards and looking for entitlements, of course the gap will widen.
The rising tide raises all boats, but the anchors stay on the bottom.

BTW, thank Hillary for much economic plight - since she was elected, upstate NY has lost 20% of it's manufacturing jobs. That was one of her top goals - increas jobs. Must be she can't campaing and do her real job at the same time.

[hcap]

Your other chart is more relevant but seems to be skirting the issue. Why are we seeing only male income from that time period and not household income or overall standard of living? Looking at other charts from the site you got it from show family income to have grown (flatly but very slightly) from 1979-2004. Not great, but not the downward line that you tried to sell us. (The site also seems to indicate that women are being "forced" into the workplace for financial reasons when we all know the reason that women have flooded the workforce in the last 30-40 years is because of the feminist movement. Go try to find a sizable sample of modern urban women who claim they'd rather be at home with their husband being the sole breadwinner.)http://mwhodges.home.att.net/non-work-wifes.gif


Evidently in order for families to earn incomes out pacing inflation, two wage earners are now needed. When ONE previously sufficed. Nothing surprising.

"Even married-couple families are under economic pressure,
while they send more wives into the work force than ever before.
The upper curve in this chart shows that married-couple families with the wives in the labor force increased their inflation-adjusted family incomes during the past 25 years.

The lower curve shows inflation-adjusted family incomes were stagnant to falling where the wives were not in the labor force, which reflects stagnant to falling real income of full-time working males during that period. That's a sharp departure from pre-1970 when wives could stay home and still family incomes rose twice as fast as inflation.

Although this chart clearly shows the motivation factor for wives entering the work force more than ever before, still these working wives only increased their family incomes over that 25 year period only about 0.8% per year ahead of inflation. Even that increase is way below what families were doing with but one wage earner prior to 1970 (as seen in the chart at the top of this report). Additionally, this meager gain is even more meager when we recognize that today's average female has more 'education' than prior generations, plus have the capacity to earn more than pre-1970 woman.

Of course, the lower curve shows a net decrease in income of families with non-working wives of about 0.2% per year below inflation.

Its clear that even married-couple families are under pressure, compared to prior generations. "

[ljb]

If one class keeps working hard, investing, and the other keeps being slaggards and looking for entitlements, of course the gap will widen.
The rising tide raises all boats, but the anchors stay on the bottom.

BTW, thank Hillary for much economic plight - since she was elected, upstate NY has lost 20% of it's manufacturing jobs. That was one of her top goals - increas jobs. Must be she can't campaing and do her real job at the same time.
So are you suggesting that only the very rich work hard ?
Yes, that moderate republican Hillary should be blamed for upstate NY's loss of mfg. jobs. She probably had them outsourced.

[delayjf]

So are you suggesting that only the very rich work hard ?
I think its more a matter of some endeavors have more profit potiential than others. Simply repairing autos for a living will provide a steady income with limited upward potiential. Invent the engine that gets 100 mpg that will be used world wide and your a billionaire.

[Lefty]

Read a book once that basically said to get rich you need to:
"FIND A NEED AND FILL IT" A lot of rich people have done that.

[GameTheory]

I think its more a matter of some endeavors have more profit potiential than others. Simply repairing autos for a living will provide a steady income with limited upward potiential. Invent the engine that gets 100 mpg that will be used world wide and your a billionaire.

Read a book once that basically said to get rich you need to: "FIND A NEED AND FILL IT" A lot of rich people have done that.
That's the seldom-heard side of this debate. I don't believe very many if any people (adults) are "trapped" into staying poor except by their own choices. It is like the minimum-wage debate where one side insists that you should be able to live on minimum-age (and raise kids, no less). If you don't like being at the bottom of the financial ladder, then go make a lot of money doing something with that potential. Your life is what you make of it. Initial circumstances may have to be overcome, true, but they are seriously overrated...

[skate]

well lets see, last election (three yrs ago) the Poverty class was able to donate more money to the Demos Party than the Wealthy were able to donate to the "Party of the Rich and Famous".


soooo, might the sub-primeys have their Priorities-in-a-bunch w/ Panties?


just asking...:)

[ljb]

Read a book once that basically said to get rich you need to:
"FIND A NEED AND FILL IT" A lot of rich people have done that.
Lefty,
what does this have to do with the topic of this thread ?

[ljb]

I think its more a matter of some endeavors have more profit potiential than others. Simply repairing autos for a living will provide a steady income with limited upward potiential. Invent the engine that gets 100 mpg that will be used world wide and your a billionaire.
Yeah or hitting a bunch of home runs. Or being born a Walton.
But what does this have to do with the topic of this thread ?

[ddog]

King of the twisters. Got your brain a knot again, eh? Those jobs go to other countries so they don't have to pay $20 an hr or more for low skill jobs. If you were in business wouldn't you buy your labor so you could make a decent profit? Business is about profit, maybe not in the world of socialists, but profit is the bottom line and unions have been part of the process of driving jobs out of the country.

If we posit your stmt above is true then :

A question, what has changed in the last 20(?) years so that a company can't pay an adjusted 20an hour and make a profit and stay in this country?
I recall in the 60's-70's that was possible.
I even had one of those type of jobs back in the day for 3-4 years.

Now, I will await the reply to that one and in the meantime I will give you mine.

I start with the stmt that our workers for the most part are FINE and have been sold out by an elitist class for sheer greed and by a blind and I mean BLIND attachement to a free-trade dogma.

Some of my reasons are :

Hi-tech revolution that allows info and CAPITAL to fly around the world instantly. Capital seeking the highest immediate rate of return.

Collapse of the Soviet Union, and (China-India)'s embrace of a kind of command capitalist system.
This brought a huge burst of "workers" onto the market that would work for nothing and a bottomless pool of them along with much less regulation costs than any of you would put up with at your place of work.

Our fed-state corp tax rate of around 40 percent versus around 25 percent for the EU.
Of course those others mentioned above can allocate huge state subsidies to target areas of our business they want to pick off which currently can be financed by our own defict with them.

EU VAT - avg in Euorpe is about 20 percent.
Under WTO they can rebate the VAT on exports and impose it on imports.
So we can be under a double disadvantage both on our exports and our imports in relation to them.
Last I saw around 90 percent of all our exports go thorugh the VAT process with the avg vat imposed on US goods at 15 percent.

So, if you have made it this far, I submit that this has more to do than anything the average workers(union or not) of the US have done to themsleves.

the idealogues and free-trade radicals have sold them out for a few good years of returns for the top 5 percent of us and the rest be damned.

people have been beheaded for less.

Ask during the upcoming election which of your reps will support the
Border Tax Equity Act introduced in the House in 2007.
This would impose a tax on imports of goods and services equal to the VAT imposed on our exports. This revenue would go to our exporters of those goods and services to cover the VAT that was charged on their exports.

What's not fair about that?

Hang up the old b.s. about most people being lazy or not wanting to work.
True , not all will be as blessed as some on this board seem to be to have exceptional abilities to create, but the VAST middle class that made us what we WERE was not stocked with that either and to be "in" it you didn't need to be Gates or Buffett and there is no reason other than blind greed and blind stupidity to not adjust to a changing global landscape and try to bring back a more robust and propserous middle class.


If we persist on our current free-trade at all costs course in this country then the bottom 90 percent will eventually see what is being done and will then toss this whole thing overboard,if you Repubs think the country is dominated by the left-dem-wackos now, just wait, you will recall these as the good ole days.

[Lefty]

Back in the 60's the min wage was 1.25 an hr. I worked a couple of those. Then I got a job paying $1.75 an hr then a union job at Whirlpool that pd $2.50 an hr but i was laid off more than i worked.
These days what's the hourly wage of Auto workers and other bi union jobs? Well over $20, I imagine. Too much the Union tries to tell business what to do, what to pay and business is sick of it. The Unions were necessary but now they have gone too far. So business seeks cheaper labor elsewhere.

[ljb]

Ddog,
Interesting points. Many here have been taught/trained or what ever, to think of unions as being the cause of all financial woe in this country. They fail to see the unions as the force that moved the middle class from an existence type living to a life style that may have included a cabin in the woods, a boat, a vacation at the beach and/or many other "nice" things in life.
A few years back I was traveling south on I-75. I stopped for lunch in Sweetwater Tenn. I was talking to the hard working-non union, middle aged, waitress about other restaurants along the highway. I asked her if she had seen any restaurants similar to the one she worked in. She replied "honey I ain't never been out a Sweetwater."
And this is the direction we are heading under our corporate controlled government. Greed is good ?

[ArlJim78]

Unions exist now to protect lazy people, that's my opinion.
I have never seen an energetic motivated union worker. All they want to talk about is what a shaft they are getting and if they should file a grievance for some petty issue.

[Lefty]

Lefty,
what does this have to do with the topic of this thread ?
Funny thing: I don't recall you EVER asking zilly this question. And i'm closer to topic than a lot of stuff he posts on various threads.

[Lefty]

Corporate greed, lbj? Corporations exist to make money, pure and simple. They have an obligation to their investors. Over 50% of us either directly or through 401ks own stock in Corporations.
And what's that waitress never being out of Sweetwater got to do with your so called, "Corporate greed"?

[ljb]

Unions exist now to protect lazy people, that's my opinion.
I have never seen an energetic motivated union worker. All they want to talk about is what a shaft they are getting and if they should file a grievance for some petty issue.
ArlJim78,
Anything you as an employee get from your employer above and beyond basic wage, you can thank a union for. If on the other, you are the employer, anything you have to provide your employees be it vacation, 40 hour week, health care, retirement package or other bennies, you can blame a union.
You wouldn't happen to be from the south would you?
There are lazy people in all walks of life, union membership is not a qualifier in this case.

[delayjf]

Yeah or hitting a bunch of home runs. Or being born a Walton.
But what does this have to do with the topic of this thread ?

You implied that working hard should make one rich. My point is, that is not so, rather it's the impact of your work that will produce wealth.

But with regards to hitting home runs, have you ever considered the economic impact of a sold out football or baseball game on the local economy, classic trickle down?

Speaking of hitting home runs, a while back I questioned whether or not A-Rod was economically really worth 30 million a year. So I took a look at NY Yankee attendance since he joined the team. Attributing the rise in Yankee attendance primarily to him I loosely calculated that the Yankees made anywhere from 60-90 million dollars a year in ticket revenue alone. So you tell me, if one player will put 90 million more dollars into your pocket - is he worth it.

I realize this is off topic - but you brought it up. Being born a Walton is just pure luck, like winning the lottery.

[ljb]

Corporate greed, lbj? Corporations exist to make money, pure and simple. They have an obligation to their investors. Over 50% of us either directly or through 401ks own stock in Corporations.
And what's that waitress never being out of Sweetwater got to do with your so called, "Corporate greed"?
Lefty, Yes corporations exist to make money at least those that are not non-profit do. No argument here.
My concern is their pursuit of money prevents them from having any social conscience at all. Our government being controlled by these corporations, not only allows this lack of social responsibility they encourage it.
The non-union Sweetwater waitress cannot afford to travel even to Nashville because her minimum pay and lack of medical benefits and lack of paid vacation while increasing corporate profits, decrease her ability to live life to it's fullest.
Over 50% of us owned stock in corporations during the union hey days also. So your point is ?

[Lefty]

And unions now are a part of the problem of business outsourcing jobs for cheaper labor. Notice I didn't say they were the sole problem, but part of the problem. They also mostly contribute some of the union dues to the dem part even though 40% or so may be Repubs, but they give members no say in this.
That's Unions today.

[ljb]

You implied that working hard should make one rich. My point is, that is not so, rather it's the impact of your work that will produce wealth.

Actually it was Tom that implied working hard makes one rich.

But with regards to hitting home runs, have you ever considered the economic impact of a sold out football or baseball game on the local economy, classic trickle down?
Baseball and Football and Basketball professional sports teams. Billionaires fighting with millionaires over who gets how much. While the taxpayers build them stadiums and pay $9.00 for a beer at their stadiums.


Speaking of hitting home runs, a while back I questioned whether or not A-Rod was economically really worth 30 million a year. So I took a look at NY Yankee attendance since he joined the team. Attributing the rise in Yankee attendance primarily to him I loosely calculated that the Yankees made anywhere from 60-90 million dollars a year in ticket revenue alone. So you tell me, if one player will put 90 million more dollars into your pocket - is he worth it.

No argument here, reminds me of years ago when Johnny Carson received a million dollar contract. The question was Is Johnny Carson worth 1 million dollars ? The answer..... of course he is, he makes many millions in advertising revenue for NBC.


I realize this is off topic - but you brought it up. Being born a Walton is just pure luck, like winning the lottery.
yepper !

[ljb]

And unions now are a part of the problem of business outsourcing jobs for cheaper labor. Notice I didn't say they were the sole problem, but part of the problem. They also mostly contribute some of the union dues to the dem part even though 40% or so may be Repubs, but they give members no say in this.
That's Unions today.
Yepper Unions are part of the problem because they force the corporation to have a social conscience. And the corporations having control of our gov't. push through laws etc. that encourage/promote outsourcing. As for union dues going to dems, the corporate profits donated to Republicans are earned in part because of the efforts of the workers and they have no input as to where this money is donated.

[Lefty]

As far as union money going to dems and corporate money going to Repubs as you say,(I think Corps contribute to both sides)buty let's go with your premise.
Here's the Diff: Unions supposed to work for the members.
Emplyees work for the business or Corp. Hope you can discern the difference.
Hope. hope, hope...

[Tom]

Corporations R Us.
Unions are businesses too.

[ljb]

Lefty and Tom,
Yes I understand.
And your point is ?

[Tom]

Let's go tax the hell out those mean old corporations. After all, it is our money - we own stock, we have our retirements invested in them. So let's really get even with them by sticking it to ourselves. Then, after we make ourselves pay through the nose, the corporations will raise thier prices and we can pay through some other orafice. :eek: We will really show ourselves, dagnabit!

[ljb]

Tom,
You must have missed my previous note where I said I do not recommend taxing these corps. Consumer pays all taxes. I was just looking for some regulation to help the average guy have a fighting chance against corporate misdeeds. Just caught one on tv dealing with Cigna taking a teenage girl's name off kidney transplant list. Seems the poor 17 year old died but then Cigna did save a bundle of their stockholders money.
If you have time you may want to look into Oklahoma oilman Clayton Smart's actions after taking over Forest Hill mortuary and cemetary of Memphis. Another example of "hard work".

[delayjf]

I was just looking for some regulation to help the average guy have a fighting chance against corporate misdeeds.
Couldn't agree more, you did mention Aldephia earlier and how the
Corps leaders gave themselves mult-million dollar payouts. They are also doing 15-20 years in prison for their acts. Not all get away with it.

[delayjf]

I stand corrected, it was Adelphi's corp leaders who are doing time. From what I've read, Delphi is being eaten alive by the legal costs of bankrupsy. 38 different law firms are all getting a chunk of Delphi's butt to the tune of 200 million plus.

[ljb]

No I mentioned DELPHI. This company is a former portion of General Motors. There is some sort of bidding war going on right now for the company. The workers are concerned about the possibility of the winning bidder salvaging what they can from the business and then locking the doors. A case of what I think is going on at Burger King right now. Watch Burger King closely. A few Wall Street giants have purchased this organization and it appears they are raping it.

[ArlJim78]

ArlJim78,
Anything you as an employee get from your employer above and beyond basic wage, you can thank a union for. If on the other, you are the employer, anything you have to provide your employees be it vacation, 40 hour week, health care, retirement package or other bennies, you can blame a union.
You wouldn't happen to be from the south would you?
There are lazy people in all walks of life, union membership is not a qualifier in this case.
total BS, I am a little bitter because I have watched over thirty years union shops that were our customers go out of business with guys sitting on their asses, while meanwhile people that they make fun of in Mexico come to work for much less wages, are at least as educated, and work circles around our people, who need constant pampering. I'm lucky I have a job, the only reason i do is because I jumped ship and work for a foreign company that invested in the US. The US based companies in my industry went out of business long ago. Great that some of those guys got their vacation homes, but that really wasn't the soundest long term strategy. The next generation ain't getting the vacation homes.

i go to all kind of factories, i'm kind of a troubleshooter. its amazing what you see in our UAW factories. nobody gives a crap, they don't care how much money is wasted and it shows because the market share has dwindled to the point where the old big three is not even the big three anymore. in fact they are almost irrelevant. I'm happy that I no longer work for a company that depends on having union customers because they are basically in what we call a death spiral.
why do you think the union membership has plunged steadily over the years? it doesn't work, its short-sighted, they lobby the work rules in order to do less work for more pay. Hey what a great idea! yeah it was great for the guys working at the time, but the gravy train stopped long ago.
no i'm not from the south, and I don't know why you would ask.

[skate]

"I certainly commend you for the Grandfather Economic Report, and for the imaginative way in which you have displayed data highly relevant to very important issues. I am impressed. The analysis are excellent. Your objective is one I fully endorse."


Milton, aint that the Same guy that Confirms 'Skate', when he teaches about economics.

DEBT is Good.

[ljb]

total BS, I am a little bitter because I have watched over thirty years union shops that were our customers go out of business with guys sitting on their asses, while meanwhile people that they make fun of in Mexico come to work for much less wages, are at least as educated, and work circles around our people, who need constant pampering. I'm lucky I have a job, the only reason i do is because I jumped ship and work for a foreign company that invested in the US. The US based companies in my industry went out of business long ago. Great that some of those guys got their vacation homes, but that really wasn't the soundest long term strategy. The next generation ain't getting the vacation homes.
Glad to hear you work for a foreign company that has no people sitting on their asses. And also glad to hear you have mexicans working for less wages. Sorry to hear the U.S. companies in your industry went out of business. Perhaps if we had more detail we would be able to discuss the unfair trade practices that led to their demise. I guess in your opinion a good long term strategy would be to have those guys still working for wages you pay the mexicans. sans benefits.


i go to all kind of factories, i'm kind of a troubleshooter. corporate raider ? its amazing what you see in our UAW factories. nobody gives a crap, they don't care how much money is wasted and it shows because the market share has dwindled to the point where the old big three is not even the big three anymore.
And what is management doing in these factories ?
I'm happy that I no longer work for a company that depends on having union customers because they are basically in what we call a death spiral. What makes me think the companies are happy about this also?

why do you think the union membership has plunged steadily over the years? it doesn't work, its short-sighted, they lobby the work rules in order to do less work for more pay. Hey what a great idea! yeah it was great for the guys working at the time, but the gravy train stopped long ago.
Union membership has plunged steadily over the years because of guys like you.

no i'm not from the south, and I don't know why you would ask.
I thought you might be from the south as the biggest anti-union sentiment in this country is in the south. They have their own unions only they call them churches. There the members are taught from a very young age to submissively accept their dismal lot in life as they will be rewarded in the afterlife for their earthly sacrifices. Not seven virgins but a good thing anyway.

[Lefty]

Couldn't agree more, you did mention Aldephia earlier and how the
Corps leaders gave themselves mult-million dollar payouts. They are also doing 15-20 years in prison for their acts. Not all get away with it.
lbj, you're hollering about a "way" to deal with then and guess you completely forgot about the court system. The Bush justice system have put a lot of folks in jail for their corporate misdeeeds.

[ljb]

lbj, you're hollering about a "way" to deal with then and guess you completely forgot about the court system. The Bush justice system have put a lot of folks in jail for their corporate misdeeeds.
Tell that to the family of the 17 year old girl that just died as a result of Cigna health's trying to save a buck.

[chickenhead]

there are plenty of decisions made by corporations that are perfectly legal, but also shitty for the average citizen here. That more or less goes along with being a "global" company in many cases.

It's not a case of something being either good or illegal. 98.7% of all corporate decisions fall in the grey area between good and illegal.

What I don't like to see, but it seems to me a constant, is were are selling tomorrow for today. That is what scares me. Selling out the future to keep the train rolling today.

[Lefty]

So, lbj, what should be done? Put em out of business. How many will be uninsured or die then? I'm sorry the little girl died, but more and more regulations not the answer. You started with outsourcing now you'e talking insurance. My how you ramble. There's not an answer for every prob in the world; certainly not bigger and bigger govt.

[ljb]

Nope Lefty,
the largest growth in government had occurred during the current administration. I would just like to see regulations and/or policies that made the corporations more responsible for their misdeeds be it mfg. health care, ins. or whatever. As it is we have the fox guarding the hen house in all federal agencies. And the courts have been loaded with corporate supporters. It will take some time but eventually we can take back control of this government and it will again be a country of, for and by the PEOPLE.
Thank you for helping me bring these points to the surface.
ps. How are you doing at the tables ?

[JustRalph]

Tell that to the family of the 17 year old girl that just died as a result of Cigna health's trying to save a buck.

yep, if she would have just worked harder her liver would have grown back

[Lefty]

The courts are loaded with Corporate supporters? Good luck proving that. Courts are loaded with liberal judges and btw, have you ever heard of juries, lbj?
We have plenty of regs and laws, don't need more.

[ljb]

We have plenty of regs and laws, don't need more.
So then you must be a Ron Paul supporter?

[ljb]

Trying to pull this thing back on track. It is the policies, regulations and laws passed by our government for the past 20-30 years that have created the growing disparity in income as displayed in the graphs.
If you find this disparity acceptable, then continue to support the corporate control of our government.
I will continue to support any person, group or organization working on regaining control for the good citizens of the U.S.

[Lefty]

Then you must be going to vote Republican.

[ljb]

Then you must be going to vote Republican.
:lol: :lol: :lol:
I used to vote republican until the party was taken over by K Street. Now i vote moderate republican aka Hilliary

[Lefty]

yeah, great choice lbj, ha ha. Did you see her commercial where she's hanging presents for us pipples on the tree. Universal, Health Care, Free Pre natal care, etc. As Dick Morris said," it's the gift that keeps on taking." I reckon you have fell for Hillary's "Pose." of the day. Moderate ANYTHING, nope.
She makes it, get ready for a tax raise and if you think it won't affect you better go bk to Economics 101.

[ljb]

Lefty,
Do you have a plan for paying the bills that have been run up by the neocons ?

[chickenhead]

haven't heard much talk on here regarding the AMT "patch" they recently pushed through, a pretty good example imo of the inability of Congress to do the right thing.

[doophus]

Trying to pull this thing back on track. It is the policies, regulations and laws passed by our government for the past 20-30 years that have created the growing disparity in income as displayed in the graphs.
If you find this disparity acceptable, then continue to support the corporate control of our government.
I will continue to support any person, group or organization working on regaining control for the good citizens of the U.S.
(Bold inserted)

The timeframe sorta coincides with the advent of the GREAT SOCIETY, huh?! I knew there was an overlooked reason for the demise of the union "businesses." Most folks don't realize that the union heirarcy (management) is identical to corporate management (maybe "corruption" even fits).

Thanks ljb.

[ljb]

haven't heard much talk on here regarding the AMT "patch" they recently pushed through, a pretty good example imo of the inability of Congress to do the right thing.
Last week, Congress once again staved off pandemonium by increasing the exemption amount for married couples by about 6 percent to $66,250 and by 4.4 percent for singles to $44,350.

[ljb]

(Bold inserted)

The timeframe sorta coincides with the advent of the GREAT SOCIETY, huh?! I knew there was an overlooked reason for the demise of the union "businesses." Most folks don't realize that the union heirarcy (management) is identical to corporate management (maybe "corruption" even fits).

Thanks ljb.
You are welcome. BOTH management and unions are to be held responsible for current conditions.
This board has some that just want to blame Unions.

[chickenhead]

Last week, Congress once again staved off pandemonium by increasing the exemption amount for married couples by about 6 percent to $66,250 and by 4.4 percent for singles to $44,350.

A. They did not offset the tax cut by reducing spending.

B. They did not fix the problem, hence the "temporary patch" part of it. This has been a problem for years, it did not sneak up on anyone.

C. Those dollar amounts are a f'ing joke. This was put in for the uber-rich, not for wager earners.

[Lefty]

lbj, didn't wasn't the national debt reduced not too long ago? Do you know what baseline budgeting is? Under baseline budgeting the govt HAS to grow incrementally. It can't be stopped under baseline budgeting. And do you know the main way they get pork into a bill by attaching it to an important bill?
Do you have a plan to save us from Hillary's Socialism? You don't think Universal Health Care and Univertsal PreNatal Care and Universal everything this woman and other Dems propose won't drive govt spending up even more?
My plan is to vote Republican. I don't need my taxes to be raised. We need business to keep increasing to keep providing jobs. But i'm afraid if we don't get the govt out of education, a lot of our kids won't be smart enough to handle the most technical of those jobs.
BTW, I and others said Unions were a big part of the problem, no one ever said they were the whole problem. Pleae correct yourself on that. Don't be as disengenous as the dim party.

[chickenhead]

Do you know what baseline budgeting is? Under baseline budgeting the govt HAS to grow incrementally. It can't be stopped under baseline budgeting.

The baseline is an estimate made by the CBO, of what the budget will be if it is left as is and allowed to grow with inflation, population, etc. It does not dictate what the budget will be. They can come up with a budget bigger or smaller than the baseline number, and bigger or smaller in real terms than the previous year.

[Lefty]

No, it does not dictate what the budget will be, but after that, it guarantees the budget will grow. You guys wanna see runaway spending and this country gallop towards communism more and more then vote demdims in.
Don't blve me, just look at what Hillary and other dims proposing and imagine how it's gonna be paid, and if you think it will come out of the pockets of the rich, think again.

[Lefty]

lbj, you askedme my plan what's yours to pay for everything Hillary proposes?

[chickenhead]

No, it does not dictate what the budget will be, but after that, it guarantees the budget will grow. You guys wanna see runaway spending and this country gallop towards communism more and more then vote demdims in.
Don't blve me, just look at what Hillary and other dims proposing and imagine how it's gonna be paid, and if you think it will come out of the pockets of the rich, think again.

Before we imagine anything, let's consider the facts. Have a look the chart (which is inflation and population adjusted). Do you see a significant difference between Democrat and Republican? If there is one, it is that Republicans have spent more, slightly. That is at least in part because the Republican faithful don't seem to care how much the Republicans spend, spending only matters if there is a D next to the name.

All of the extra spending is actually not coming out of the pockets of the rich, it is coming out of the pockets of the young, my generation. I'm pretty much to the point where I don't care how much debt your generation thinks they can saddle us with...that's not for you to decide.

[Tom]

All of the extra spending is actually not coming out of the pockets of the rich, it is coming out of the pockets of the young, my generation.


And we thank you sincerely for it. Keep up the good work - us GEEZERS haven't finished our spree yet! :rolleyes::lol: