CEO Compensation Increased 940% Between 1978 and 2018, Workers’ Only by 12%

[Correll]

Not if the labor market is flooded with cheap foreign labor. Power will always been [be] with the employer in such a situation.

Unemployment is at 3.6%. We have far more jobs than we have workers. So explain to me how that places the power with the employer.

It does not. FOr the first time in generations.

And we are finally seeing some movement in our wages, especially the lower end.


Now, let's keep doing that, for the next 50 years, and we might catch up to where we should have been today.

 

[Correll]

1. So, you are assuming that none of those jobs can come back. Well I disagree.

Assume all you want.

2. Capitalism has a good track record. "Free Trade" not so much.

Moving your business to take advantage of cheaper labor is a Capitalistic idea.

1. Do you want to craft policy to encourage bring back manufacturing jobs, or not?

2. So is moving it BACK to America, to avoid tariffs.

When someone comes up with a policy to bring jobs back we can then discuss that.

Dude. That is cowardly in the extreme.

That is factual to the point. I can not comment on what has not been done.

YOu can comment on what you want as a goal for policy.

 

[Correll]

Not if the labor market is flooded with cheap foreign labor. Power will always been [be] with the employer in such a situation.

Unemployment is at 3.6%. We have far more jobs than we have workers. So explain to me how that places the power with the employer.

Despite that wages are not going up or at the very best barely trickling up. That isn't the case for the "overhead".

They are increasing more than they have done for decades, especially on the lower end.

 

[pknopp]

Assume all you want.

Moving your business to take advantage of cheaper labor is a Capitalistic idea.

1. Do you want to craft policy to encourage bring back manufacturing jobs, or not?

2. So is moving it BACK to America, to avoid tariffs.

When someone comes up with a policy to bring jobs back we can then discuss that.

Dude. That is cowardly in the extreme.

That is factual to the point. I can not comment on what has not been done.

YOu can comment on what you want as a goal for policy.

I want U.S. companies that signed bad deals with China to abuse their cheap labor and are now complaining about those deals, taxed hard enough to be forced back or out of business.

 

[Markle]

Despite that wages are not going up or at the very best barely trickling up. That isn't the case for the "overhead".

U.S. Workforce Continues to Experience Wage Increases in 2019
PRESS RELEASE PR Newswire
May. 13, 2019, 06:00 AM
[...]
The Bureau of Labor Statistics reported "over the year, average hourly earnings have increased by 3.2 percent." In April, according to the recent BLS Employment Summary, "average hourly earnings for all employees on private payrolls rose by 6 cents to $27.77 while average hourly earnings of private-sector production and nonsupervisory employees increased by 7 cents to $23.31 in April."

PeopleTicker Labor Index shares a similar view of growth in jobs however, our compensation data indicates wage growth is higher than reported by the BLS when considering the contingent labor market. "The Manufacturing and Technology industries experienced increased wage growth in the first quarter of the year, said Musacchio. "The manufacturing industry has seen more than 5 percent growth in wages while hard-to-find technologies are seeing increases of over 10 percent."

The United States added 263,000 jobs last month, an increase with an average monthly gain of 213,000 over the prior 12 months according to the BLS. Unemployment declined by 0.2 percent to 3.6 percent, the lowest rate since December 1969. The job creation in April marks the 119th month of straight gains.
[...]
U.S. Workforce Continues to Experience Wage Increases in 2019 | Markets Insider

 

[pknopp]

Not if the labor market is flooded with cheap foreign labor. Power will always been [be] with the employer in such a situation.

Unemployment is at 3.6%. We have far more jobs than we have workers. So explain to me how that places the power with the employer.

Despite that wages are not going up or at the very best barely trickling up. That isn't the case for the "overhead".

They are increasing more than they have done for decades, especially on the lower end.

Should two per cent appear too small
Be thankful I don't take it all

Sorry George.

 

[pknopp]

Despite that wages are not going up or at the very best barely trickling up. That isn't the case for the "overhead".

U.S. Workforce Continues to Experience Wage Increases in 2019
PRESS RELEASE PR Newswire
May. 13, 2019, 06:00 AM
[...]
The Bureau of Labor Statistics reported "over the year, average hourly earnings have increased by 3.2 percent." In April, according to the recent BLS Employment Summary, "average hourly earnings for all employees on private payrolls rose by 6 cents to $27.77 while average hourly earnings of private-sector production and nonsupervisory employees increased by 7 cents to $23.31 in April."

PeopleTicker Labor Index shares a similar view of growth in jobs however, our compensation data indicates wage growth is higher than reported by the BLS when considering the contingent labor market. "The Manufacturing and Technology industries experienced increased wage growth in the first quarter of the year, said Musacchio. "The manufacturing industry has seen more than 5 percent growth in wages while hard-to-find technologies are seeing increases of over 10 percent."

The United States added 263,000 jobs last month, an increase with an average monthly gain of 213,000 over the prior 12 months according to the BLS. Unemployment declined by 0.2 percent to 3.6 percent, the lowest rate since December 1969. The job creation in April marks the 119th month of straight gains.
[...]
U.S. Workforce Continues to Experience Wage Increases in 2019 | Markets Insider

WOOT!!!! .6 cents. After 5 hours, after taxes they can afford an additional gum ball.

 

[Correll]

1. Do you want to craft policy to encourage bring back manufacturing jobs, or not?

2. So is moving it BACK to America, to avoid tariffs.

When someone comes up with a policy to bring jobs back we can then discuss that.

Dude. That is cowardly in the extreme.

That is factual to the point. I can not comment on what has not been done.

YOu can comment on what you want as a goal for policy.

I want U.S. companies that signed bad deals with China to abuse their cheap labor and are now complaining about those deals, taxed hard enough to be forced back or out of business.

"forced back" so they could avoid the taxes by coming BACK and bringing the jobs BACK?

 

[pknopp]

When someone comes up with a policy to bring jobs back we can then discuss that.

Dude. That is cowardly in the extreme.

That is factual to the point. I can not comment on what has not been done.

YOu can comment on what you want as a goal for policy.

I want U.S. companies that signed bad deals with China to abuse their cheap labor and are now complaining about those deals, taxed hard enough to be forced back or out of business.

"forced back" so they could avoid the taxes by coming BACK and bringing the jobs BACK?

Sure.

 

[Correll]

Not if the labor market is flooded with cheap foreign labor. Power will always been [be] with the employer in such a situation.

Unemployment is at 3.6%. We have far more jobs than we have workers. So explain to me how that places the power with the employer.

Despite that wages are not going up or at the very best barely trickling up. That isn't the case for the "overhead".

They are increasing more than they have done for decades, especially on the lower end.

Should two per cent appear too small
Be thankful I don't take it all

Sorry George.

I want rising wages. Limiting immigration ie supply seems to be working some. Let's do more of it.

 

[Correll]

Dude. That is cowardly in the extreme.

That is factual to the point. I can not comment on what has not been done.

YOu can comment on what you want as a goal for policy.

I want U.S. companies that signed bad deals with China to abuse their cheap labor and are now complaining about those deals, taxed hard enough to be forced back or out of business.

"forced back" so they could avoid the taxes by coming BACK and bringing the jobs BACK?

Sure.

And this is so different from Trump and taxes how?

 

[pknopp]

Not if the labor market is flooded with cheap foreign labor. Power will always been [be] with the employer in such a situation.

Unemployment is at 3.6%. We have far more jobs than we have workers. So explain to me how that places the power with the employer.

Despite that wages are not going up or at the very best barely trickling up. That isn't the case for the "overhead".

They are increasing more than they have done for decades, especially on the lower end.

Should two per cent appear too small
Be thankful I don't take it all

Sorry George.

I want rising wages. Limiting immigration ie supply seems to be working some. Let's do more of it.

We haven't even made a scratch in immigration. Still coming by the thousands and businesses have been shown they have immunity to hire them, legal or not.

 

[pknopp]

That is factual to the point. I can not comment on what has not been done.

YOu can comment on what you want as a goal for policy.

I want U.S. companies that signed bad deals with China to abuse their cheap labor and are now complaining about those deals, taxed hard enough to be forced back or out of business.

"forced back" so they could avoid the taxes by coming BACK and bringing the jobs BACK?

Sure.

And this is so different from Trump and taxes how?

Trump has never enacted taxes, but you know that. I hate discussing things with people who are intentionally dishonest. It does explain Trump though.

 

[Frannie]

Nonsense check your math fartwad, if this were true you could not afford your cigarettes

I quit sissy tobacco 10 years ago pal. But here's a nice wet fart for you to gargle with.

Dude if you did the math you would know that wage increases of 0.3 percent would not as I said keep up with your bubble gum purchases

 

[TRFjr]

An Economic Policy Institute study shows that the dramatic increase in CEO compensation has a large impact on increasing inequality--worker pay could have doubled without the rise in CEO income.
CEO Compensation Increased 940% Between 1978 and 2018, Workers' Only by 12%

But, greed is good isn't it ?

and the average NFL player salary has increased by about that same amount between 1978 and present along with most other professional sports players and actors and actresses
but not once have I've heard a liberal bitch about that

I don't go to pro sports games or movies. Well, I don't go to the top levels. Minor league ball instill enjoy. Parking and the best seat in the place for $10 tops.

then don't buy products from corporations you think pay their CEO to much
problem solved

 

[Brain357]

Salaries of the top 10 highest paid CEO's combined was .0008 of GDP. That's 8/10ths of 1/10th of 1%.

Which is a lot in a country of over 300 million.

 

[the other mike]

I don't go to pro sports games or movies. Well, I don't go to the top levels. Minor league ball instill enjoy. Parking and the best seat in the place for $10 tops.

If you live near an NFL team that sucks, wait until about the end of the season and
like Browns tickets will go for $5 each. You'll pay more for parking and food for sure.

 

[Brain357]

Because the republican war on unions is why they left in the first place.

It does not make sense that decreased union membership HERE, is a reason to send jobs overseas.

Union jobs were sent to China. Hence decreased membership and stagnant wages.

1. That is the opposite of what you just claimed.


2. And still does not explain why you think it is funny.

No its exactly what I claimed. Republicans started a war on unions, making it acceptable to ship jobs overseas. Shipping jobs overseas lowered union membership. Remember when repubs said things would be great without unions? Another policy in which they were very wrong.

1. Not quite the way I remember it.

2. Yes, I do remember when republicans said without unions, AND SOME OTHER FACTORS, that things would be great again. And yes, they were wrong.


3. Hence why I support changing the policies that led to those disappointing results. You are here supporting the status quo.

What we need is more unions. If service jobs become union the problems are solved. The manufacturing jobs aren't coming back. And there is really no reason for manufacturing to pay more than service jobs. I think most would find manufacturing to be the easier job.

 

[Brain357]

It’s a political game. They don’t care about workers, they sent the jobs away in the first place.

So, you missed that entire debate about Free Trade Ideologues vs economic self interest Populism in the primaries?



What actually happened was the Free Trade Ideologues used to rule the GOP. They got their way for a long time.


The results were not what they promised.


Eventually, far too slowly, imo, the less Ideologically and more pragmatic republicans, managed to sway the party to a new direction.


The Free Traders who sent the jobs overseas, were not pretending. They believe in Free Trade.


The Economic Nationalists who want those jobs back, are not pretending. We want those jobs back.


This should not be confusing to you.

Republicans turned good paid union workers into villains which made it ok to buy products from other countries. Previously people wanted to buy USA made.

I think you give Republicans too much credit.


When cheaper goods are made available, people buy them.


You don't want those goods bought? Then support Trump in his attempts to change trade policy.


INdeed, contact the white house and demand higher tariffs.


You do know that Trump is the ONLY one, looking to push back on this issue you pretend to care about, right?

Actually there was a time when people wanted to buy American. Then repubs ruined that with their war on Unions.

It's all quite lost now. Trump is just moving jobs from China to other Asian countries.

Yeah, I don't recall events moving like that. Free Trade was based on the idea that we needed to and could become more competitive.


Yes, unions were seen as part of the problem, with that process, but I don't recall any hint that undermining unions were part of the process of outsourcing.

I remember when people bought American. Then repubs waged their war on unions and buying imported products became acceptable.

 

[Brain357]

Moving production to Thailand does not change the problem.

1. Does punish China for their predatory trade practices.

2. Does stop feeding the Dragon.;

3. And you are assuming that NONE of the jobs can ever come back? That seems defeatist.

You can assume anything you want. Raising prices to the consumer isnt going to do it.

i'm not assuming anything. I asked you if you were. You did not answer.

I did answer. Before you even asked.

Raising prices to the consumer, very well could bring back jobs. If it gives enough of an edge to DOMESTIC manufacturing, to compete with Third World labor.



I'm against having American workers compete with Third World workers on a level playing field.


We've tried that. It does not work for US.


So, let's not do it anymore.

Yes, Capitalism can be destructive.

1. So, you are assuming that none of those jobs can come back. Well I disagree.

2. Capitalism has a good track record. "Free Trade" not so much.

Free trade is an important part of capitalism. You want government control of trade? Yeah what could go wrong...