US Jobless claims fall to 4 decade low

[Oldstyle]

Google it.

And thanks Obama.

If a Republican were in the white house conservatives wouldn't be making excuses for the people who've given up

The unemployment rate is only one criteria for measuring the health of the economy. Other criteria include the rate of growth which has been anemic for nearly all of BO's term. Another is the wealth gap which has exploded under BO, wage growth which has been stagnant also with BO. So go ahead and thank him for more poor people employed in low end jobs if you want.

Do not tell me about the wealth gap that we were warning you about for decades. OMG! And don't try to put that on Obama. Unfuckingbelievable. Really.

Here was us warning you about it in 2005, but you didn't want to listen because these were't "credible" sources. Fucking douchbag!

How Rich is Too Rich For Democracy?

Nobles Need Not Pay Taxes

What the fuck were you saying in 2005? You were saying the economy was great and anyone making excuses is just a slacker. Now here you are telling us what we already knew 16 fucking years ago. Wow!

No Bucktooth you were talking to me. It was after I made this comment and posted these links showing you that back as far as 2005 we were warning you about the widening wealth gap and I remember specifically the right wing reply to that. They said THEY DIDN'T CARE! They said that's free market capitalism. I said, "we use to have 25% of the $ and now we only have 10%. Would you be ok if the rich had 99% of the money and us 1% and you guys said, "every man for himself, free market libertarian style capitalism where government is powerless to do anything about it".

Now you say you care about the wealth gap? Show me you cared about it before Obama got into office. The internet is a pretty amazing fucking thing. It saves articles from really far back. So if you have an article you can show us that shows you worried about the wealth gap in 2007 well we would fucking love to see it. Just fucking do a google search like I did.

Now cry that my sources are too liberal. Let me guess, you don't like Thom Hartmann. Well so fucking what? I'm showing you that back in 2005 we were saying the right things and YOUR SIDE was fighting us every step of the way. Now your side wants to blame our side for the wealth gap? Hardy Har Har.

The laughable thing is that for decades, to today, conservatives have said that the wealth gap is both natural and no problem. Now they see it as a problem and want to blame obama. Because they are cons. And cons can not reason. And they believe what they are told to believe. Because it is easy.

What's "laughable" is that you liberals blame conservatives for the "wealth gap" but when you look at the numbers income inequality EXPLODED under Barry! What's even more amusing is now you want to put Hillary Clinton in the Oval Office...a candidate who has taken millions of dollars in contributions from Wall Street fat cats...and you expect SHE is going to look out for the "little guy"!

 

[Oldstyle]

The laughable thing is that for decades, to today, conservatives have said that the wealth gap is both natural and no problem. Now they see it as a problem and want to blame obama. Because they are cons. And cons can not reason. And they believe what they are told to believe. Because it is easy.

Typical of you to lie.

We conservatives are not saying it is a problem, we are pointing to the FACT that the policies and doctrines of Lame Duck President Barack Hussein Obama have made the situation far worse.

As you deny, this is but one reason.

Really? You post most, but not all, of a graph, dipshit. With no link, dipshit. Please, me boy, what did you think that proved? Dipshit.
Please, dipshit, if you think that Obama made it worse, tell me how. And for gods sake, tell me how republicans have passed bills to make it better. Name a .bill. Or simply tell me you are too ignorant to do so.

And, dipshit, tell me why Republicans not bringing a single bill forward to help the problems they created with the great Republican Recession of 2008 helped anything. Or why blocking every piece of legislation brought forward to help, by democrats, helped. Or name a single bill they brought forward.
Dipshit. Jesus, it pisses me off to have to deal with someone as brainless as you.

Hmm, just an observation- Rshermr just called Markle brainless. I suppose in Rshermr's mind you must call someone a dipshit at least a half dozen times per post to prove you have a brain.[/QUOTE]

Rshermr continually whines about "personal attacks" yet he is usually the first person in a string to go that route. It's who he "IS"!

 

[Chuz Life]

Google it.

And thanks Obama.

If a Republican were in the white house conservatives wouldn't be making excuses for the people who've given up

The unemployment rate is only one criteria for measuring the health of the economy. Other criteria include the rate of growth which has been anemic for nearly all of BO's term. Another is the wealth gap which has exploded under BO, wage growth which has been stagnant also with BO. So go ahead and thank him for more poor people employed in low end jobs if you want.

Do not tell me about the wealth gap that we were warning you about for decades. OMG! And don't try to put that on Obama. Unfuckingbelievable. Really.

Here was us warning you about it in 2005, but you didn't want to listen because these were't "credible" sources. Fucking douchbag!

How Rich is Too Rich For Democracy?

Nobles Need Not Pay Taxes

What the fuck were you saying in 2005? You were saying the economy was great and anyone making excuses is just a slacker. Now here you are telling us what we already knew 16 fucking years ago. Wow!

No Bucktooth you were talking to me. It was after I made this comment and posted these links showing you that back as far as 2005 we were warning you about the widening wealth gap and I remember specifically the right wing reply to that. They said THEY DIDN'T CARE! They said that's free market capitalism. I said, "we use to have 25% of the $ and now we only have 10%. Would you be ok if the rich had 99% of the money and us 1% and you guys said, "every man for himself, free market libertarian style capitalism where government is powerless to do anything about it".

Now you say you care about the wealth gap? Show me you cared about it before Obama got into office. The internet is a pretty amazing fucking thing. It saves articles from really far back. So if you have an article you can show us that shows you worried about the wealth gap in 2007 well we would fucking love to see it. Just fucking do a google search like I did.

Now cry that my sources are too liberal. Let me guess, you don't like Thom Hartmann. Well so fucking what? I'm showing you that back in 2005 we were saying the right things and YOUR SIDE was fighting us every step of the way. Now your side wants to blame our side for the wealth gap? Hardy Har Har.

The laughable thing is that for decades, to today, conservatives have said that the wealth gap is both natural and no problem. Now they see it as a problem and want to blame obama. Because they are cons. And cons can not reason. And they believe what they are told to believe. Because it is easy.

What's "laughable" is that you liberals blame conservatives for the "wealth gap" but when you look at the numbers income inequality EXPLODED under Barry! What's even more amusing is now you want to put Hillary Clinton in the Oval Office...a candidate who has taken millions of dollars in contributions from Wall Street fat cats...and you expect SHE is going to look out for the "little guy"!

The most hilarious is when they bitch and moan about Corporations exporting all the jobs overseas and praise dubummer for the great employment rate at the same time.

 

[Oldstyle]

The unemployment rate is only one criteria for measuring the health of the economy. Other criteria include the rate of growth which has been anemic for nearly all of BO's term. Another is the wealth gap which has exploded under BO, wage growth which has been stagnant also with BO. So go ahead and thank him for more poor people employed in low end jobs if you want.

Do not tell me about the wealth gap that we were warning you about for decades. OMG! And don't try to put that on Obama. Unfuckingbelievable. Really.

Here was us warning you about it in 2005, but you didn't want to listen because these were't "credible" sources. Fucking douchbag!

How Rich is Too Rich For Democracy?

Nobles Need Not Pay Taxes

What the fuck were you saying in 2005? You were saying the economy was great and anyone making excuses is just a slacker. Now here you are telling us what we already knew 16 fucking years ago. Wow!

No Bucktooth you were talking to me. It was after I made this comment and posted these links showing you that back as far as 2005 we were warning you about the widening wealth gap and I remember specifically the right wing reply to that. They said THEY DIDN'T CARE! They said that's free market capitalism. I said, "we use to have 25% of the $ and now we only have 10%. Would you be ok if the rich had 99% of the money and us 1% and you guys said, "every man for himself, free market libertarian style capitalism where government is powerless to do anything about it".

Now you say you care about the wealth gap? Show me you cared about it before Obama got into office. The internet is a pretty amazing fucking thing. It saves articles from really far back. So if you have an article you can show us that shows you worried about the wealth gap in 2007 well we would fucking love to see it. Just fucking do a google search like I did.

Now cry that my sources are too liberal. Let me guess, you don't like Thom Hartmann. Well so fucking what? I'm showing you that back in 2005 we were saying the right things and YOUR SIDE was fighting us every step of the way. Now your side wants to blame our side for the wealth gap? Hardy Har Har.

The laughable thing is that for decades, to today, conservatives have said that the wealth gap is both natural and no problem. Now they see it as a problem and want to blame obama. Because they are cons. And cons can not reason. And they believe what they are told to believe. Because it is easy.

What's "laughable" is that you liberals blame conservatives for the "wealth gap" but when you look at the numbers income inequality EXPLODED under Barry! What's even more amusing is now you want to put Hillary Clinton in the Oval Office...a candidate who has taken millions of dollars in contributions from Wall Street fat cats...and you expect SHE is going to look out for the "little guy"!

The most hilarious is when they bitch and moan about Corporations exporting all the jobs overseas and praise dubummer for the great employment rate at the same time.

Which is really funny when you consider that the man Barack Obama chose to be his "Jobs Czar" was the CEO of General Electric...and GE was one of the biggest exporters of American jobs to China!

What ever happened to the "Job Czar" by the way? Has anyone heard even a peep from that lofty appointee in years? Gee, think that was just more Obama pretending to address a problem by creating another layer of Big Government to deal with it but really doing nothing at all?

 

[sealybobo]

Google it.

And thanks Obama.

If a Republican were in the white house conservatives wouldn't be making excuses for the people who've given up

The unemployment rate is only one criteria for measuring the health of the economy. Other criteria include the rate of growth which has been anemic for nearly all of BO's term. Another is the wealth gap which has exploded under BO, wage growth which has been stagnant also with BO. So go ahead and thank him for more poor people employed in low end jobs if you want.

Do not tell me about the wealth gap that we were warning you about for decades. OMG! And don't try to put that on Obama. Unfuckingbelievable. Really.

Here was us warning you about it in 2005, but you didn't want to listen because these were't "credible" sources. Fucking douchbag!

How Rich is Too Rich For Democracy?

Nobles Need Not Pay Taxes

What the fuck were you saying in 2005? You were saying the economy was great and anyone making excuses is just a slacker. Now here you are telling us what we already knew 16 fucking years ago. Wow!

No Bucktooth you were talking to me. It was after I made this comment and posted these links showing you that back as far as 2005 we were warning you about the widening wealth gap and I remember specifically the right wing reply to that. They said THEY DIDN'T CARE! They said that's free market capitalism. I said, "we use to have 25% of the $ and now we only have 10%. Would you be ok if the rich had 99% of the money and us 1% and you guys said, "every man for himself, free market libertarian style capitalism where government is powerless to do anything about it".

Now you say you care about the wealth gap? Show me you cared about it before Obama got into office. The internet is a pretty amazing fucking thing. It saves articles from really far back. So if you have an article you can show us that shows you worried about the wealth gap in 2007 well we would fucking love to see it. Just fucking do a google search like I did.

Now cry that my sources are too liberal. Let me guess, you don't like Thom Hartmann. Well so fucking what? I'm showing you that back in 2005 we were saying the right things and YOUR SIDE was fighting us every step of the way. Now your side wants to blame our side for the wealth gap? Hardy Har Har.

The laughable thing is that for decades, to today, conservatives have said that the wealth gap is both natural and no problem. Now they see it as a problem and want to blame obama. Because they are cons. And cons can not reason. And they believe what they are told to believe. Because it is easy.

What's "laughable" is that you liberals blame conservatives for the "wealth gap" but when you look at the numbers income inequality EXPLODED under Barry! What's even more amusing is now you want to put Hillary Clinton in the Oval Office...a candidate who has taken millions of dollars in contributions from Wall Street fat cats...and you expect SHE is going to look out for the "little guy"!

You should have been a Bernie Sanders supporter

Why declining manufacturing leads to income inequality

The higher income for the top 1% completely distorts the political system. With more power for Wall Street and billionaires, politicians who depend on the rich and powerful for campaign funds pass more bad policies, leading to even worse income inequality, in a vicious cycle.

income and wealth inequality have been getting much worse over the last half-century., not just under Obama.

First, manufacturing generates so much wealth that a middle class can develop, as happened in the 19th century. Before that time, what little surplus wealth was generated was grabbed by the ruling elite, and almost everybody else engaged in the toil of farming. But the surplus that manufacturing creates can also be taken by the ruling elite, leaving everyone else in the same boat as before. However, the second reason manufacturing leads to a middle class is that manufacturing requires high skill levels — which is why Germany now, and the United States before, have had comfortable middle class families working in factories. When people have high skills — assuming they can organize, as in unions — then they have power, and with power comes better income and better income equality.

But if the manufacturing sectors start to decline, then so does the wealth-generating power of the country, as well as the power of the middle class. And thus we find that the United States is declining in power and in its middle class.

Income equality, and manufacturing, both peaked around 1968 in the United States. Manufacturing has almost always been the quintessential middle class sector because manufacturing employs about the same percentage of the workforce as the income it receives. In 1968, 25% of the workforce was engaged in manufacturing, and 25% of the country’s income went to manufacturing. On average, in 1968 people in manufacturing received the average income of the economy. No other sector can boast this “middle class-ness”.

From 1968 to 2009 the manufacturing sector declined from one quarter of the economy — every fourth working person — to about one in every 11 people, a decline of about 16% of the total employment pool. Where did those people go? Most of them went into the lower income service workforce, which grew from 12.8% to 20.5% of the workforce (and many others stopped working altogether). So, on average, the people that moved from manufacturing to low income services lost 1/3rd of their income, if not more.....

But I'm sure you know all this, right?

 

[sealybobo]

Do not tell me about the wealth gap that we were warning you about for decades. OMG! And don't try to put that on Obama. Unfuckingbelievable. Really.

Here was us warning you about it in 2005, but you didn't want to listen because these were't "credible" sources. Fucking douchbag!

How Rich is Too Rich For Democracy?

Nobles Need Not Pay Taxes

What the fuck were you saying in 2005? You were saying the economy was great and anyone making excuses is just a slacker. Now here you are telling us what we already knew 16 fucking years ago. Wow!

No Bucktooth you were talking to me. It was after I made this comment and posted these links showing you that back as far as 2005 we were warning you about the widening wealth gap and I remember specifically the right wing reply to that. They said THEY DIDN'T CARE! They said that's free market capitalism. I said, "we use to have 25% of the $ and now we only have 10%. Would you be ok if the rich had 99% of the money and us 1% and you guys said, "every man for himself, free market libertarian style capitalism where government is powerless to do anything about it".

Now you say you care about the wealth gap? Show me you cared about it before Obama got into office. The internet is a pretty amazing fucking thing. It saves articles from really far back. So if you have an article you can show us that shows you worried about the wealth gap in 2007 well we would fucking love to see it. Just fucking do a google search like I did.

Now cry that my sources are too liberal. Let me guess, you don't like Thom Hartmann. Well so fucking what? I'm showing you that back in 2005 we were saying the right things and YOUR SIDE was fighting us every step of the way. Now your side wants to blame our side for the wealth gap? Hardy Har Har.

The laughable thing is that for decades, to today, conservatives have said that the wealth gap is both natural and no problem. Now they see it as a problem and want to blame obama. Because they are cons. And cons can not reason. And they believe what they are told to believe. Because it is easy.

What's "laughable" is that you liberals blame conservatives for the "wealth gap" but when you look at the numbers income inequality EXPLODED under Barry! What's even more amusing is now you want to put Hillary Clinton in the Oval Office...a candidate who has taken millions of dollars in contributions from Wall Street fat cats...and you expect SHE is going to look out for the "little guy"!

The most hilarious is when they bitch and moan about Corporations exporting all the jobs overseas and praise dubummer for the great employment rate at the same time.

Which is really funny when you consider that the man Barack Obama chose to be his "Jobs Czar" was the CEO of General Electric...and GE was one of the biggest exporters of American jobs to China!

What ever happened to the "Job Czar" by the way? Has anyone heard even a peep from that lofty appointee in years? Gee, think that was just more Obama pretending to address a problem by creating another layer of Big Government to deal with it but really doing nothing at all?

Glad you guys are finally fed up with jobs going overseas. In 2007 leading up to McCain vs. Obama you guys pretended and defended. Seems you've changed your tunes as of late. You argued with us when we said it but now that Trumps saying it you're licking the tip of his cock like its a lollypop.

 

[Rshermr]

What's "laughable" is that you liberals blame conservatives for the "wealth gap" but when you look at the numbers income inequality EXPLODED under Barry! What's even more amusing is now you want to put Hillary Clinton in the Oval Office...a candidate who has taken millions of dollars in contributions from Wall Street fat cats...and you expect SHE is going to look out for the "little guy"! [/QUOTE] [/QUOTE]

The most hilarious is when they bitch and moan about Corporations exporting all the jobs overseas and praise dubummer for the great employment rate at the same time.
So, hardly, me boy. The ue rate had dropped from the great republican recession of 2008, when it reached over 10%, to under 5%, which I understand bothers you immensely. Sorry, it is simply fact. No bragging or praise about it. It was really a simple, obvious move by Obama and Dems. Our country was loosing over 600,000 jobs per month when Obama was sworn in. He pushed, and dems voted for, and passed the Obama stimulus. And the job losses stopped, and job gains have occured monthly and persistently since.
Now, as you know, absolutely no Republicans voted for the stimulus. NONE. Which is odd, since their hero, Ronald Reagan had used the stimulus to great effect after his tax cut failed miserably.

By the way, have you noticed I always use the past presidents full and proper names. It shows respect, class, and integrity. Barry and dubummer show childishness, lack of class, and no integrity. Thanks for showing all what you are.

Which is really funny when you consider that the man Barack Obama chose to be his "Jobs Czar" was the CEO of General Electric...and GE was one of the biggest exporters of American jobs to China!
Actually, you are pushing a lie. Again. Obama appointed no Czars. That title was provided by the media and politicians. Are you simply trying to show your ignorance?
Czar Search
What ever happened to the "Job Czar" by the way? Has anyone heard even a peep from that lofty appointee in years? Gee, think that was just more Obama pretending to address a problem by creating another layer of Big Government to deal with it but really doing nothing at all?
Hard to find a czar when there never was one. Kind of a stupid question.

Still waiting for a single economic argument from you, me boy. And have been waiting for months to hear what republicans did to diminish the damage from their Great Republican Recession of 2008. Apparently you can find no bill from your republican politicians. So, at this point, you admit by inability to provide such a response that you admit they did nothing.
Here is what has worked under the Obama administration, me boy:

 

[Oldstyle]

The unemployment rate is only one criteria for measuring the health of the economy. Other criteria include the rate of growth which has been anemic for nearly all of BO's term. Another is the wealth gap which has exploded under BO, wage growth which has been stagnant also with BO. So go ahead and thank him for more poor people employed in low end jobs if you want.

Do not tell me about the wealth gap that we were warning you about for decades. OMG! And don't try to put that on Obama. Unfuckingbelievable. Really.

Here was us warning you about it in 2005, but you didn't want to listen because these were't "credible" sources. Fucking douchbag!

How Rich is Too Rich For Democracy?

Nobles Need Not Pay Taxes

What the fuck were you saying in 2005? You were saying the economy was great and anyone making excuses is just a slacker. Now here you are telling us what we already knew 16 fucking years ago. Wow!

No Bucktooth you were talking to me. It was after I made this comment and posted these links showing you that back as far as 2005 we were warning you about the widening wealth gap and I remember specifically the right wing reply to that. They said THEY DIDN'T CARE! They said that's free market capitalism. I said, "we use to have 25% of the $ and now we only have 10%. Would you be ok if the rich had 99% of the money and us 1% and you guys said, "every man for himself, free market libertarian style capitalism where government is powerless to do anything about it".

Now you say you care about the wealth gap? Show me you cared about it before Obama got into office. The internet is a pretty amazing fucking thing. It saves articles from really far back. So if you have an article you can show us that shows you worried about the wealth gap in 2007 well we would fucking love to see it. Just fucking do a google search like I did.

Now cry that my sources are too liberal. Let me guess, you don't like Thom Hartmann. Well so fucking what? I'm showing you that back in 2005 we were saying the right things and YOUR SIDE was fighting us every step of the way. Now your side wants to blame our side for the wealth gap? Hardy Har Har.

The laughable thing is that for decades, to today, conservatives have said that the wealth gap is both natural and no problem. Now they see it as a problem and want to blame obama. Because they are cons. And cons can not reason. And they believe what they are told to believe. Because it is easy.

What's "laughable" is that you liberals blame conservatives for the "wealth gap" but when you look at the numbers income inequality EXPLODED under Barry! What's even more amusing is now you want to put Hillary Clinton in the Oval Office...a candidate who has taken millions of dollars in contributions from Wall Street fat cats...and you expect SHE is going to look out for the "little guy"!

You should have been a Bernie Sanders supporter

Why declining manufacturing leads to income inequality

The higher income for the top 1% completely distorts the political system. With more power for Wall Street and billionaires, politicians who depend on the rich and powerful for campaign funds pass more bad policies, leading to even worse income inequality, in a vicious cycle.

income and wealth inequality have been getting much worse over the last half-century., not just under Obama.

First, manufacturing generates so much wealth that a middle class can develop, as happened in the 19th century. Before that time, what little surplus wealth was generated was grabbed by the ruling elite, and almost everybody else engaged in the toil of farming. But the surplus that manufacturing creates can also be taken by the ruling elite, leaving everyone else in the same boat as before. However, the second reason manufacturing leads to a middle class is that manufacturing requires high skill levels — which is why Germany now, and the United States before, have had comfortable middle class families working in factories. When people have high skills — assuming they can organize, as in unions — then they have power, and with power comes better income and better income equality.

But if the manufacturing sectors start to decline, then so does the wealth-generating power of the country, as well as the power of the middle class. And thus we find that the United States is declining in power and in its middle class.

Income equality, and manufacturing, both peaked around 1968 in the United States. Manufacturing has almost always been the quintessential middle class sector because manufacturing employs about the same percentage of the workforce as the income it receives. In 1968, 25% of the workforce was engaged in manufacturing, and 25% of the country’s income went to manufacturing. On average, in 1968 people in manufacturing received the average income of the economy. No other sector can boast this “middle class-ness”.

From 1968 to 2009 the manufacturing sector declined from one quarter of the economy — every fourth working person — to about one in every 11 people, a decline of about 16% of the total employment pool. Where did those people go? Most of them went into the lower income service workforce, which grew from 12.8% to 20.5% of the workforce (and many others stopped working altogether). So, on average, the people that moved from manufacturing to low income services lost 1/3rd of their income, if not more.....

But I'm sure you know all this, right?

I personally think CEO's are paid too much in this country but that's a result of them sitting on each others boards and voting for those salaries.

As for why manufacturing jobs in the US started to decline in the late 60's? Look at why they boomed in 50's! We were one of the few industrial nations to come out of WWII with an intact industrial infrastructure. Our manufacturing sector boomed because we were supplying the rest of the world while they rebuilt themselves. At some point that advantage was going to disappear and there really wasn't anything we could do about it. All the finger pointing about who is to blame for manufacturing jobs going overseas ignores reality. The jobs left because it's cheaper to make things elsewhere. Raising labor costs even higher or passing more legislation that raises the cost of energy or healthcare isn't going to improve the situation...it will simply accelerate the job loss.

 

[sealybobo]

Do not tell me about the wealth gap that we were warning you about for decades. OMG! And don't try to put that on Obama. Unfuckingbelievable. Really.

Here was us warning you about it in 2005, but you didn't want to listen because these were't "credible" sources. Fucking douchbag!

How Rich is Too Rich For Democracy?

Nobles Need Not Pay Taxes

What the fuck were you saying in 2005? You were saying the economy was great and anyone making excuses is just a slacker. Now here you are telling us what we already knew 16 fucking years ago. Wow!

No Bucktooth you were talking to me. It was after I made this comment and posted these links showing you that back as far as 2005 we were warning you about the widening wealth gap and I remember specifically the right wing reply to that. They said THEY DIDN'T CARE! They said that's free market capitalism. I said, "we use to have 25% of the $ and now we only have 10%. Would you be ok if the rich had 99% of the money and us 1% and you guys said, "every man for himself, free market libertarian style capitalism where government is powerless to do anything about it".

Now you say you care about the wealth gap? Show me you cared about it before Obama got into office. The internet is a pretty amazing fucking thing. It saves articles from really far back. So if you have an article you can show us that shows you worried about the wealth gap in 2007 well we would fucking love to see it. Just fucking do a google search like I did.

Now cry that my sources are too liberal. Let me guess, you don't like Thom Hartmann. Well so fucking what? I'm showing you that back in 2005 we were saying the right things and YOUR SIDE was fighting us every step of the way. Now your side wants to blame our side for the wealth gap? Hardy Har Har.

The laughable thing is that for decades, to today, conservatives have said that the wealth gap is both natural and no problem. Now they see it as a problem and want to blame obama. Because they are cons. And cons can not reason. And they believe what they are told to believe. Because it is easy.

What's "laughable" is that you liberals blame conservatives for the "wealth gap" but when you look at the numbers income inequality EXPLODED under Barry! What's even more amusing is now you want to put Hillary Clinton in the Oval Office...a candidate who has taken millions of dollars in contributions from Wall Street fat cats...and you expect SHE is going to look out for the "little guy"!

You should have been a Bernie Sanders supporter

Why declining manufacturing leads to income inequality

The higher income for the top 1% completely distorts the political system. With more power for Wall Street and billionaires, politicians who depend on the rich and powerful for campaign funds pass more bad policies, leading to even worse income inequality, in a vicious cycle.

income and wealth inequality have been getting much worse over the last half-century., not just under Obama.

First, manufacturing generates so much wealth that a middle class can develop, as happened in the 19th century. Before that time, what little surplus wealth was generated was grabbed by the ruling elite, and almost everybody else engaged in the toil of farming. But the surplus that manufacturing creates can also be taken by the ruling elite, leaving everyone else in the same boat as before. However, the second reason manufacturing leads to a middle class is that manufacturing requires high skill levels — which is why Germany now, and the United States before, have had comfortable middle class families working in factories. When people have high skills — assuming they can organize, as in unions — then they have power, and with power comes better income and better income equality.

But if the manufacturing sectors start to decline, then so does the wealth-generating power of the country, as well as the power of the middle class. And thus we find that the United States is declining in power and in its middle class.

Income equality, and manufacturing, both peaked around 1968 in the United States. Manufacturing has almost always been the quintessential middle class sector because manufacturing employs about the same percentage of the workforce as the income it receives. In 1968, 25% of the workforce was engaged in manufacturing, and 25% of the country’s income went to manufacturing. On average, in 1968 people in manufacturing received the average income of the economy. No other sector can boast this “middle class-ness”.

From 1968 to 2009 the manufacturing sector declined from one quarter of the economy — every fourth working person — to about one in every 11 people, a decline of about 16% of the total employment pool. Where did those people go? Most of them went into the lower income service workforce, which grew from 12.8% to 20.5% of the workforce (and many others stopped working altogether). So, on average, the people that moved from manufacturing to low income services lost 1/3rd of their income, if not more.....

But I'm sure you know all this, right?

I personally think CEO's are paid too much in this country but that's a result of them sitting on each others boards and voting for those salaries.

As for why manufacturing jobs in the US started to decline in the late 60's? Look at why they boomed in 50's! We were one of the few industrial nations to come out of WWII with an intact industrial infrastructure. Our manufacturing sector boomed because we were supplying the rest of the world while they rebuilt themselves. At some point that advantage was going to disappear and there really wasn't anything we could do about it. All the finger pointing about who is to blame for manufacturing jobs going overseas ignores reality. The jobs left because it's cheaper to make things elsewhere. Raising labor costs even higher or passing more legislation that raises the cost of energy or healthcare isn't going to improve the situation...it will simply accelerate the job loss.

Maybe deep down, just like with oil, for years we stop manufacturing and we let Africa, China, India and Mexico eat up all their natural resources until they don't have any left and we become the largest oil producer and manufacturer one day. Wouldn't that be great?

And who cares if Chinese and India and Mexico manufacture now? That doesn't mean we had to buy from them. We certainly don't sell to them. We shouldn't buy from anyone we don't sell to. China doesn't buy our cars. And we purchased the cars we made in the 60's. We produced and we purchased. We didn't have to outsource the manufacturing but corporations wanted to and if we complained they cried PROTECTIONISM but the fact is every country protects their vital industries. All except us because our workers are or were the highest paid.

 

[Oldstyle]

No Bucktooth you were talking to me. It was after I made this comment and posted these links showing you that back as far as 2005 we were warning you about the widening wealth gap and I remember specifically the right wing reply to that. They said THEY DIDN'T CARE! They said that's free market capitalism. I said, "we use to have 25% of the $ and now we only have 10%. Would you be ok if the rich had 99% of the money and us 1% and you guys said, "every man for himself, free market libertarian style capitalism where government is powerless to do anything about it".

Now you say you care about the wealth gap? Show me you cared about it before Obama got into office. The internet is a pretty amazing fucking thing. It saves articles from really far back. So if you have an article you can show us that shows you worried about the wealth gap in 2007 well we would fucking love to see it. Just fucking do a google search like I did.

Now cry that my sources are too liberal. Let me guess, you don't like Thom Hartmann. Well so fucking what? I'm showing you that back in 2005 we were saying the right things and YOUR SIDE was fighting us every step of the way. Now your side wants to blame our side for the wealth gap? Hardy Har Har.

The laughable thing is that for decades, to today, conservatives have said that the wealth gap is both natural and no problem. Now they see it as a problem and want to blame obama. Because they are cons. And cons can not reason. And they believe what they are told to believe. Because it is easy.

What's "laughable" is that you liberals blame conservatives for the "wealth gap" but when you look at the numbers income inequality EXPLODED under Barry! What's even more amusing is now you want to put Hillary Clinton in the Oval Office...a candidate who has taken millions of dollars in contributions from Wall Street fat cats...and you expect SHE is going to look out for the "little guy"!

The most hilarious is when they bitch and moan about Corporations exporting all the jobs overseas and praise dubummer for the great employment rate at the same time.

Which is really funny when you consider that the man Barack Obama chose to be his "Jobs Czar" was the CEO of General Electric...and GE was one of the biggest exporters of American jobs to China!

What ever happened to the "Job Czar" by the way? Has anyone heard even a peep from that lofty appointee in years? Gee, think that was just more Obama pretending to address a problem by creating another layer of Big Government to deal with it but really doing nothing at all?

Glad you guys are finally fed up with jobs going overseas. In 2007 leading up to McCain vs. Obama you guys pretended and defended. Seems you've changed your tunes as of late. You argued with us when we said it but now that Trumps saying it you're licking the tip of his cock like its a lollypop.

How long have you been been having thoughts like that about Donald Trump's cock, Sealy? Like a lollypop? Really...

 

[Oldstyle]

No Bucktooth you were talking to me. It was after I made this comment and posted these links showing you that back as far as 2005 we were warning you about the widening wealth gap and I remember specifically the right wing reply to that. They said THEY DIDN'T CARE! They said that's free market capitalism. I said, "we use to have 25% of the $ and now we only have 10%. Would you be ok if the rich had 99% of the money and us 1% and you guys said, "every man for himself, free market libertarian style capitalism where government is powerless to do anything about it".

Now you say you care about the wealth gap? Show me you cared about it before Obama got into office. The internet is a pretty amazing fucking thing. It saves articles from really far back. So if you have an article you can show us that shows you worried about the wealth gap in 2007 well we would fucking love to see it. Just fucking do a google search like I did.

Now cry that my sources are too liberal. Let me guess, you don't like Thom Hartmann. Well so fucking what? I'm showing you that back in 2005 we were saying the right things and YOUR SIDE was fighting us every step of the way. Now your side wants to blame our side for the wealth gap? Hardy Har Har.

The laughable thing is that for decades, to today, conservatives have said that the wealth gap is both natural and no problem. Now they see it as a problem and want to blame obama. Because they are cons. And cons can not reason. And they believe what they are told to believe. Because it is easy.

What's "laughable" is that you liberals blame conservatives for the "wealth gap" but when you look at the numbers income inequality EXPLODED under Barry! What's even more amusing is now you want to put Hillary Clinton in the Oval Office...a candidate who has taken millions of dollars in contributions from Wall Street fat cats...and you expect SHE is going to look out for the "little guy"!

You should have been a Bernie Sanders supporter

Why declining manufacturing leads to income inequality

The higher income for the top 1% completely distorts the political system. With more power for Wall Street and billionaires, politicians who depend on the rich and powerful for campaign funds pass more bad policies, leading to even worse income inequality, in a vicious cycle.

income and wealth inequality have been getting much worse over the last half-century., not just under Obama.

First, manufacturing generates so much wealth that a middle class can develop, as happened in the 19th century. Before that time, what little surplus wealth was generated was grabbed by the ruling elite, and almost everybody else engaged in the toil of farming. But the surplus that manufacturing creates can also be taken by the ruling elite, leaving everyone else in the same boat as before. However, the second reason manufacturing leads to a middle class is that manufacturing requires high skill levels — which is why Germany now, and the United States before, have had comfortable middle class families working in factories. When people have high skills — assuming they can organize, as in unions — then they have power, and with power comes better income and better income equality.

But if the manufacturing sectors start to decline, then so does the wealth-generating power of the country, as well as the power of the middle class. And thus we find that the United States is declining in power and in its middle class.

Income equality, and manufacturing, both peaked around 1968 in the United States. Manufacturing has almost always been the quintessential middle class sector because manufacturing employs about the same percentage of the workforce as the income it receives. In 1968, 25% of the workforce was engaged in manufacturing, and 25% of the country’s income went to manufacturing. On average, in 1968 people in manufacturing received the average income of the economy. No other sector can boast this “middle class-ness”.

From 1968 to 2009 the manufacturing sector declined from one quarter of the economy — every fourth working person — to about one in every 11 people, a decline of about 16% of the total employment pool. Where did those people go? Most of them went into the lower income service workforce, which grew from 12.8% to 20.5% of the workforce (and many others stopped working altogether). So, on average, the people that moved from manufacturing to low income services lost 1/3rd of their income, if not more.....

But I'm sure you know all this, right?

I personally think CEO's are paid too much in this country but that's a result of them sitting on each others boards and voting for those salaries.

As for why manufacturing jobs in the US started to decline in the late 60's? Look at why they boomed in 50's! We were one of the few industrial nations to come out of WWII with an intact industrial infrastructure. Our manufacturing sector boomed because we were supplying the rest of the world while they rebuilt themselves. At some point that advantage was going to disappear and there really wasn't anything we could do about it. All the finger pointing about who is to blame for manufacturing jobs going overseas ignores reality. The jobs left because it's cheaper to make things elsewhere. Raising labor costs even higher or passing more legislation that raises the cost of energy or healthcare isn't going to improve the situation...it will simply accelerate the job loss.

Maybe deep down, just like with oil, for years we stop manufacturing and we let Africa, China, India and Mexico eat up all their natural resources until they don't have any left and we become the largest oil producer and manufacturer one day. Wouldn't that be great?

And who cares if Chinese and India and Mexico manufacture now? That doesn't mean we had to buy from them. We certainly don't sell to them. We shouldn't buy from anyone we don't sell to. China doesn't buy our cars. And we purchased the cars we made in the 60's. We produced and we purchased. We didn't have to outsource the manufacturing but corporations wanted to and if we complained they cried PROTECTIONISM but the fact is every country protects their vital industries. All except us because our workers are or were the highest paid.

Look at our import-export ratios back in the 60's and compare them to what we have now. The rest of the world isn't buying American. Why? Because our workers WERE the highest paid and therefore our products started costing more and more in comparison to the rest of the world.

 

[Oldstyle]

No Bucktooth you were talking to me. It was after I made this comment and posted these links showing you that back as far as 2005 we were warning you about the widening wealth gap and I remember specifically the right wing reply to that. They said THEY DIDN'T CARE! They said that's free market capitalism. I said, "we use to have 25% of the $ and now we only have 10%. Would you be ok if the rich had 99% of the money and us 1% and you guys said, "every man for himself, free market libertarian style capitalism where government is powerless to do anything about it".

Now you say you care about the wealth gap? Show me you cared about it before Obama got into office. The internet is a pretty amazing fucking thing. It saves articles from really far back. So if you have an article you can show us that shows you worried about the wealth gap in 2007 well we would fucking love to see it. Just fucking do a google search like I did.

Now cry that my sources are too liberal. Let me guess, you don't like Thom Hartmann. Well so fucking what? I'm showing you that back in 2005 we were saying the right things and YOUR SIDE was fighting us every step of the way. Now your side wants to blame our side for the wealth gap? Hardy Har Har.

The laughable thing is that for decades, to today, conservatives have said that the wealth gap is both natural and no problem. Now they see it as a problem and want to blame obama. Because they are cons. And cons can not reason. And they believe what they are told to believe. Because it is easy.

What's "laughable" is that you liberals blame conservatives for the "wealth gap" but when you look at the numbers income inequality EXPLODED under Barry! What's even more amusing is now you want to put Hillary Clinton in the Oval Office...a candidate who has taken millions of dollars in contributions from Wall Street fat cats...and you expect SHE is going to look out for the "little guy"!

You should have been a Bernie Sanders supporter

Why declining manufacturing leads to income inequality

The higher income for the top 1% completely distorts the political system. With more power for Wall Street and billionaires, politicians who depend on the rich and powerful for campaign funds pass more bad policies, leading to even worse income inequality, in a vicious cycle.

income and wealth inequality have been getting much worse over the last half-century., not just under Obama.

First, manufacturing generates so much wealth that a middle class can develop, as happened in the 19th century. Before that time, what little surplus wealth was generated was grabbed by the ruling elite, and almost everybody else engaged in the toil of farming. But the surplus that manufacturing creates can also be taken by the ruling elite, leaving everyone else in the same boat as before. However, the second reason manufacturing leads to a middle class is that manufacturing requires high skill levels — which is why Germany now, and the United States before, have had comfortable middle class families working in factories. When people have high skills — assuming they can organize, as in unions — then they have power, and with power comes better income and better income equality.

But if the manufacturing sectors start to decline, then so does the wealth-generating power of the country, as well as the power of the middle class. And thus we find that the United States is declining in power and in its middle class.

Income equality, and manufacturing, both peaked around 1968 in the United States. Manufacturing has almost always been the quintessential middle class sector because manufacturing employs about the same percentage of the workforce as the income it receives. In 1968, 25% of the workforce was engaged in manufacturing, and 25% of the country’s income went to manufacturing. On average, in 1968 people in manufacturing received the average income of the economy. No other sector can boast this “middle class-ness”.

From 1968 to 2009 the manufacturing sector declined from one quarter of the economy — every fourth working person — to about one in every 11 people, a decline of about 16% of the total employment pool. Where did those people go? Most of them went into the lower income service workforce, which grew from 12.8% to 20.5% of the workforce (and many others stopped working altogether). So, on average, the people that moved from manufacturing to low income services lost 1/3rd of their income, if not more.....

But I'm sure you know all this, right?

I personally think CEO's are paid too much in this country but that's a result of them sitting on each others boards and voting for those salaries.

As for why manufacturing jobs in the US started to decline in the late 60's? Look at why they boomed in 50's! We were one of the few industrial nations to come out of WWII with an intact industrial infrastructure. Our manufacturing sector boomed because we were supplying the rest of the world while they rebuilt themselves. At some point that advantage was going to disappear and there really wasn't anything we could do about it. All the finger pointing about who is to blame for manufacturing jobs going overseas ignores reality. The jobs left because it's cheaper to make things elsewhere. Raising labor costs even higher or passing more legislation that raises the cost of energy or healthcare isn't going to improve the situation...it will simply accelerate the job loss.

Maybe deep down, just like with oil, for years we stop manufacturing and we let Africa, China, India and Mexico eat up all their natural resources until they don't have any left and we become the largest oil producer and manufacturer one day. Wouldn't that be great?

And who cares if Chinese and India and Mexico manufacture now? That doesn't mean we had to buy from them. We certainly don't sell to them. We shouldn't buy from anyone we don't sell to. China doesn't buy our cars. And we purchased the cars we made in the 60's. We produced and we purchased. We didn't have to outsource the manufacturing but corporations wanted to and if we complained they cried PROTECTIONISM but the fact is every country protects their vital industries. All except us because our workers are or were the highest paid.

Interesting theory, Sealy! Not based in reality but then again that's usually a struggle for you progressives...isn't it! You think if we stop all manufacturing that it will somehow "eat up" the manufacturing capabilities of other countries? How does that work? There isn't a finite amount of manufacturing that can be done like there is a finite amount of oil on the planet.

 

[Rshermr]

Do not tell me about the wealth gap that we were warning you about for decades. OMG! And don't try to put that on Obama. Unfuckingbelievable. Really.

Here was us warning you about it in 2005, but you didn't want to listen because these were't "credible" sources. Fucking douchbag!

How Rich is Too Rich For Democracy?

Nobles Need Not Pay Taxes

What the fuck were you saying in 2005? You were saying the economy was great and anyone making excuses is just a slacker. Now here you are telling us what we already knew 16 fucking years ago. Wow!

No Bucktooth you were talking to me. It was after I made this comment and posted these links showing you that back as far as 2005 we were warning you about the widening wealth gap and I remember specifically the right wing reply to that. They said THEY DIDN'T CARE! They said that's free market capitalism. I said, "we use to have 25% of the $ and now we only have 10%. Would you be ok if the rich had 99% of the money and us 1% and you guys said, "every man for himself, free market libertarian style capitalism where government is powerless to do anything about it".

Now you say you care about the wealth gap? Show me you cared about it before Obama got into office. The internet is a pretty amazing fucking thing. It saves articles from really far back. So if you have an article you can show us that shows you worried about the wealth gap in 2007 well we would fucking love to see it. Just fucking do a google search like I did.

Now cry that my sources are too liberal. Let me guess, you don't like Thom Hartmann. Well so fucking what? I'm showing you that back in 2005 we were saying the right things and YOUR SIDE was fighting us every step of the way. Now your side wants to blame our side for the wealth gap? Hardy Har Har.

The laughable thing is that for decades, to today, conservatives have said that the wealth gap is both natural and no problem. Now they see it as a problem and want to blame obama. Because they are cons. And cons can not reason. And they believe what they are told to believe. Because it is easy.

What's "laughable" is that you liberals blame conservatives for the "wealth gap" but when you look at the numbers income inequality EXPLODED under Barry! What's even more amusing is now you want to put Hillary Clinton in the Oval Office...a candidate who has taken millions of dollars in contributions from Wall Street fat cats...and you expect SHE is going to look out for the "little guy"!

You should have been a Bernie Sanders supporter

Why declining manufacturing leads to income inequality

The higher income for the top 1% completely distorts the political system. With more power for Wall Street and billionaires, politicians who depend on the rich and powerful for campaign funds pass more bad policies, leading to even worse income inequality, in a vicious cycle.

income and wealth inequality have been getting much worse over the last half-century., not just under Obama.

First, manufacturing generates so much wealth that a middle class can develop, as happened in the 19th century. Before that time, what little surplus wealth was generated was grabbed by the ruling elite, and almost everybody else engaged in the toil of farming. But the surplus that manufacturing creates can also be taken by the ruling elite, leaving everyone else in the same boat as before. However, the second reason manufacturing leads to a middle class is that manufacturing requires high skill levels — which is why Germany now, and the United States before, have had comfortable middle class families working in factories. When people have high skills — assuming they can organize, as in unions — then they have power, and with power comes better income and better income equality.

But if the manufacturing sectors start to decline, then so does the wealth-generating power of the country, as well as the power of the middle class. And thus we find that the United States is declining in power and in its middle class.

Income equality, and manufacturing, both peaked around 1968 in the United States. Manufacturing has almost always been the quintessential middle class sector because manufacturing employs about the same percentage of the workforce as the income it receives. In 1968, 25% of the workforce was engaged in manufacturing, and 25% of the country’s income went to manufacturing. On average, in 1968 people in manufacturing received the average income of the economy. No other sector can boast this “middle class-ness”.

From 1968 to 2009 the manufacturing sector declined from one quarter of the economy — every fourth working person — to about one in every 11 people, a decline of about 16% of the total employment pool. Where did those people go? Most of them went into the lower income service workforce, which grew from 12.8% to 20.5% of the workforce (and many others stopped working altogether). So, on average, the people that moved from manufacturing to low income services lost 1/3rd of their income, if not more.....

But I'm sure you know all this, right?

I personally think CEO's are paid too much in this country but that's a result of them sitting on each others boards and voting for those salaries.

As for why manufacturing jobs in the US started to decline in the late 60's? Look at why they boomed in 50's! We were one of the few industrial nations to come out of WWII with an intact industrial infrastructure. Our manufacturing sector boomed because we were supplying the rest of the world while they rebuilt themselves. At some point that advantage was going to disappear and there really wasn't anything we could do about it. All the finger pointing about who is to blame for manufacturing jobs going overseas ignores reality. The jobs left because it's cheaper to make things elsewhere. Raising labor costs even higher or passing more legislation that raises the cost of energy or healthcare isn't going to improve the situation...it will simply accelerate the job loss.

Yup. Some of that is true. However, you like most cons ignore the undeniable fact that when we had totally private healthcare, we had the highest cost healthcare among the advanced nations. And you ignore the fact that we still have private, non socialized healthcare. And that health care costs have been raising more slowly since obamacare started. What we have is totally private healthcare, with federal regulations.
Then, while we have proposals to raise the minimum wage, it will not put us beyond what other advanced nations are paying for labor. Not at all. Minimum wage is simply a conservative talking point topic. It is and has never been a competitive issue.

International Comparisons of Hourly Compensation Costs in Manufacturing, 2015 - Summary Tables
12 April 2016
International Comparisons of Hourly Compensation Costs in Manufacturing, 2015 - Summary Tables | The Conference Board

 

[Rshermr]

The laughable thing is that for decades, to today, conservatives have said that the wealth gap is both natural and no problem. Now they see it as a problem and want to blame obama. Because they are cons. And cons can not reason. And they believe what they are told to believe. Because it is easy.

What's "laughable" is that you liberals blame conservatives for the "wealth gap" but when you look at the numbers income inequality EXPLODED under Barry! What's even more amusing is now you want to put Hillary Clinton in the Oval Office...a candidate who has taken millions of dollars in contributions from Wall Street fat cats...and you expect SHE is going to look out for the "little guy"!

You should have been a Bernie Sanders supporter

Why declining manufacturing leads to income inequality

The higher income for the top 1% completely distorts the political system. With more power for Wall Street and billionaires, politicians who depend on the rich and powerful for campaign funds pass more bad policies, leading to even worse income inequality, in a vicious cycle.

income and wealth inequality have been getting much worse over the last half-century., not just under Obama.

First, manufacturing generates so much wealth that a middle class can develop, as happened in the 19th century. Before that time, what little surplus wealth was generated was grabbed by the ruling elite, and almost everybody else engaged in the toil of farming. But the surplus that manufacturing creates can also be taken by the ruling elite, leaving everyone else in the same boat as before. However, the second reason manufacturing leads to a middle class is that manufacturing requires high skill levels — which is why Germany now, and the United States before, have had comfortable middle class families working in factories. When people have high skills — assuming they can organize, as in unions — then they have power, and with power comes better income and better income equality.

But if the manufacturing sectors start to decline, then so does the wealth-generating power of the country, as well as the power of the middle class. And thus we find that the United States is declining in power and in its middle class.

Income equality, and manufacturing, both peaked around 1968 in the United States. Manufacturing has almost always been the quintessential middle class sector because manufacturing employs about the same percentage of the workforce as the income it receives. In 1968, 25% of the workforce was engaged in manufacturing, and 25% of the country’s income went to manufacturing. On average, in 1968 people in manufacturing received the average income of the economy. No other sector can boast this “middle class-ness”.

From 1968 to 2009 the manufacturing sector declined from one quarter of the economy — every fourth working person — to about one in every 11 people, a decline of about 16% of the total employment pool. Where did those people go? Most of them went into the lower income service workforce, which grew from 12.8% to 20.5% of the workforce (and many others stopped working altogether). So, on average, the people that moved from manufacturing to low income services lost 1/3rd of their income, if not more.....

But I'm sure you know all this, right?

I personally think CEO's are paid too much in this country but that's a result of them sitting on each others boards and voting for those salaries.

As for why manufacturing jobs in the US started to decline in the late 60's? Look at why they boomed in 50's! We were one of the few industrial nations to come out of WWII with an intact industrial infrastructure. Our manufacturing sector boomed because we were supplying the rest of the world while they rebuilt themselves. At some point that advantage was going to disappear and there really wasn't anything we could do about it. All the finger pointing about who is to blame for manufacturing jobs going overseas ignores reality. The jobs left because it's cheaper to make things elsewhere. Raising labor costs even higher or passing more legislation that raises the cost of energy or healthcare isn't going to improve the situation...it will simply accelerate the job loss.

Maybe deep down, just like with oil, for years we stop manufacturing and we let Africa, China, India and Mexico eat up all their natural resources until they don't have any left and we become the largest oil producer and manufacturer one day. Wouldn't that be great?

And who cares if Chinese and India and Mexico manufacture now? That doesn't mean we had to buy from them. We certainly don't sell to them. We shouldn't buy from anyone we don't sell to. China doesn't buy our cars. And we purchased the cars we made in the 60's. We produced and we purchased. We didn't have to outsource the manufacturing but corporations wanted to and if we complained they cried PROTECTIONISM but the fact is every country protects their vital industries. All except us because our workers are or were the highest paid.

Look at our import-export ratios back in the 60's and compare them to what we have now. The rest of the world isn't buying American. Why? Because our workers WERE the highest paid and therefore our products started costing more and more in comparison to the rest of the world.
I believe you are WRONG. Please show a link proving your statements.
Actually, our labor costs are toward the middle of the thirty or so nations considered industrial nations. And those that have lower costs are almost all near third world nations. However, the other half of the equation, productivity, finds that american workers are in third place, behind only Germany and France. So we tend to be quite competitive from a labor standpoint.
Which Country Has the Most Productive Workers?

 

[Rshermr]

The laughable thing is that for decades, to today, conservatives have said that the wealth gap is both natural and no problem. Now they see it as a problem and want to blame obama. Because they are cons. And cons can not reason. And they believe what they are told to believe. Because it is easy.

What's "laughable" is that you liberals blame conservatives for the "wealth gap" but when you look at the numbers income inequality EXPLODED under Barry! What's even more amusing is now you want to put Hillary Clinton in the Oval Office...a candidate who has taken millions of dollars in contributions from Wall Street fat cats...and you expect SHE is going to look out for the "little guy"!

You should have been a Bernie Sanders supporter

Why declining manufacturing leads to income inequality

The higher income for the top 1% completely distorts the political system. With more power for Wall Street and billionaires, politicians who depend on the rich and powerful for campaign funds pass more bad policies, leading to even worse income inequality, in a vicious cycle.

income and wealth inequality have been getting much worse over the last half-century., not just under Obama.

First, manufacturing generates so much wealth that a middle class can develop, as happened in the 19th century. Before that time, what little surplus wealth was generated was grabbed by the ruling elite, and almost everybody else engaged in the toil of farming. But the surplus that manufacturing creates can also be taken by the ruling elite, leaving everyone else in the same boat as before. However, the second reason manufacturing leads to a middle class is that manufacturing requires high skill levels — which is why Germany now, and the United States before, have had comfortable middle class families working in factories. When people have high skills — assuming they can organize, as in unions — then they have power, and with power comes better income and better income equality.

But if the manufacturing sectors start to decline, then so does the wealth-generating power of the country, as well as the power of the middle class. And thus we find that the United States is declining in power and in its middle class.

Income equality, and manufacturing, both peaked around 1968 in the United States. Manufacturing has almost always been the quintessential middle class sector because manufacturing employs about the same percentage of the workforce as the income it receives. In 1968, 25% of the workforce was engaged in manufacturing, and 25% of the country’s income went to manufacturing. On average, in 1968 people in manufacturing received the average income of the economy. No other sector can boast this “middle class-ness”.

From 1968 to 2009 the manufacturing sector declined from one quarter of the economy — every fourth working person — to about one in every 11 people, a decline of about 16% of the total employment pool. Where did those people go? Most of them went into the lower income service workforce, which grew from 12.8% to 20.5% of the workforce (and many others stopped working altogether). So, on average, the people that moved from manufacturing to low income services lost 1/3rd of their income, if not more.....

But I'm sure you know all this, right?

I personally think CEO's are paid too much in this country but that's a result of them sitting on each others boards and voting for those salaries.

As for why manufacturing jobs in the US started to decline in the late 60's? Look at why they boomed in 50's! We were one of the few industrial nations to come out of WWII with an intact industrial infrastructure. Our manufacturing sector boomed because we were supplying the rest of the world while they rebuilt themselves. At some point that advantage was going to disappear and there really wasn't anything we could do about it. All the finger pointing about who is to blame for manufacturing jobs going overseas ignores reality. The jobs left because it's cheaper to make things elsewhere. Raising labor costs even higher or passing more legislation that raises the cost of energy or healthcare isn't going to improve the situation...it will simply accelerate the job loss.

Maybe deep down, just like with oil, for years we stop manufacturing and we let Africa, China, India and Mexico eat up all their natural resources until they don't have any left and we become the largest oil producer and manufacturer one day. Wouldn't that be great?

And who cares if Chinese and India and Mexico manufacture now? That doesn't mean we had to buy from them. We certainly don't sell to them. We shouldn't buy from anyone we don't sell to. China doesn't buy our cars. And we purchased the cars we made in the 60's. We produced and we purchased. We didn't have to outsource the manufacturing but corporations wanted to and if we complained they cried PROTECTIONISM but the fact is every country protects their vital industries. All except us because our workers are or were the highest paid.

Interesting theory, Sealy! Not based in reality but then again that's usually a struggle for you progressives...isn't it! You think if we stop all manufacturing that it will somehow "eat up" the manufacturing capabilities of other countries? How does that work? There isn't a finite amount of manufacturing that can be done like there is a finite amount of oil on the planet.

Wow, you do like to twist what people say. What he was saying (now listen carefully so you do not have to lie later) is that countries use up their natural resources. There is indeed a finite amount of natural resources, but not of manufacturing. But manufacturing becomes finite when the resources are gone. Even a 10 year old could understand that, quite easily.

 

[sealybobo]

What's "laughable" is that you liberals blame conservatives for the "wealth gap" but when you look at the numbers income inequality EXPLODED under Barry! What's even more amusing is now you want to put Hillary Clinton in the Oval Office...a candidate who has taken millions of dollars in contributions from Wall Street fat cats...and you expect SHE is going to look out for the "little guy"!

You should have been a Bernie Sanders supporter

Why declining manufacturing leads to income inequality

The higher income for the top 1% completely distorts the political system. With more power for Wall Street and billionaires, politicians who depend on the rich and powerful for campaign funds pass more bad policies, leading to even worse income inequality, in a vicious cycle.

income and wealth inequality have been getting much worse over the last half-century., not just under Obama.

First, manufacturing generates so much wealth that a middle class can develop, as happened in the 19th century. Before that time, what little surplus wealth was generated was grabbed by the ruling elite, and almost everybody else engaged in the toil of farming. But the surplus that manufacturing creates can also be taken by the ruling elite, leaving everyone else in the same boat as before. However, the second reason manufacturing leads to a middle class is that manufacturing requires high skill levels — which is why Germany now, and the United States before, have had comfortable middle class families working in factories. When people have high skills — assuming they can organize, as in unions — then they have power, and with power comes better income and better income equality.

But if the manufacturing sectors start to decline, then so does the wealth-generating power of the country, as well as the power of the middle class. And thus we find that the United States is declining in power and in its middle class.

Income equality, and manufacturing, both peaked around 1968 in the United States. Manufacturing has almost always been the quintessential middle class sector because manufacturing employs about the same percentage of the workforce as the income it receives. In 1968, 25% of the workforce was engaged in manufacturing, and 25% of the country’s income went to manufacturing. On average, in 1968 people in manufacturing received the average income of the economy. No other sector can boast this “middle class-ness”.

From 1968 to 2009 the manufacturing sector declined from one quarter of the economy — every fourth working person — to about one in every 11 people, a decline of about 16% of the total employment pool. Where did those people go? Most of them went into the lower income service workforce, which grew from 12.8% to 20.5% of the workforce (and many others stopped working altogether). So, on average, the people that moved from manufacturing to low income services lost 1/3rd of their income, if not more.....

But I'm sure you know all this, right?

I personally think CEO's are paid too much in this country but that's a result of them sitting on each others boards and voting for those salaries.

As for why manufacturing jobs in the US started to decline in the late 60's? Look at why they boomed in 50's! We were one of the few industrial nations to come out of WWII with an intact industrial infrastructure. Our manufacturing sector boomed because we were supplying the rest of the world while they rebuilt themselves. At some point that advantage was going to disappear and there really wasn't anything we could do about it. All the finger pointing about who is to blame for manufacturing jobs going overseas ignores reality. The jobs left because it's cheaper to make things elsewhere. Raising labor costs even higher or passing more legislation that raises the cost of energy or healthcare isn't going to improve the situation...it will simply accelerate the job loss.

Maybe deep down, just like with oil, for years we stop manufacturing and we let Africa, China, India and Mexico eat up all their natural resources until they don't have any left and we become the largest oil producer and manufacturer one day. Wouldn't that be great?

And who cares if Chinese and India and Mexico manufacture now? That doesn't mean we had to buy from them. We certainly don't sell to them. We shouldn't buy from anyone we don't sell to. China doesn't buy our cars. And we purchased the cars we made in the 60's. We produced and we purchased. We didn't have to outsource the manufacturing but corporations wanted to and if we complained they cried PROTECTIONISM but the fact is every country protects their vital industries. All except us because our workers are or were the highest paid.

Interesting theory, Sealy! Not based in reality but then again that's usually a struggle for you progressives...isn't it! You think if we stop all manufacturing that it will somehow "eat up" the manufacturing capabilities of other countries? How does that work? There isn't a finite amount of manufacturing that can be done like there is a finite amount of oil on the planet.

Wow, you do like to twist what people say. What he was saying (now listen carefully so you do not have to lie later) is that countries use up their natural resources. There is indeed a finite amount of natural resources, but not of manufacturing. But manufacturing becomes finite when the resources are gone. Even a 10 year old could understand that, quite easily.

How much steel does he think is buried in the ground?

 

[sealybobo]

No Bucktooth you were talking to me. It was after I made this comment and posted these links showing you that back as far as 2005 we were warning you about the widening wealth gap and I remember specifically the right wing reply to that. They said THEY DIDN'T CARE! They said that's free market capitalism. I said, "we use to have 25% of the $ and now we only have 10%. Would you be ok if the rich had 99% of the money and us 1% and you guys said, "every man for himself, free market libertarian style capitalism where government is powerless to do anything about it".

Now you say you care about the wealth gap? Show me you cared about it before Obama got into office. The internet is a pretty amazing fucking thing. It saves articles from really far back. So if you have an article you can show us that shows you worried about the wealth gap in 2007 well we would fucking love to see it. Just fucking do a google search like I did.

Now cry that my sources are too liberal. Let me guess, you don't like Thom Hartmann. Well so fucking what? I'm showing you that back in 2005 we were saying the right things and YOUR SIDE was fighting us every step of the way. Now your side wants to blame our side for the wealth gap? Hardy Har Har.

The laughable thing is that for decades, to today, conservatives have said that the wealth gap is both natural and no problem. Now they see it as a problem and want to blame obama. Because they are cons. And cons can not reason. And they believe what they are told to believe. Because it is easy.

What's "laughable" is that you liberals blame conservatives for the "wealth gap" but when you look at the numbers income inequality EXPLODED under Barry! What's even more amusing is now you want to put Hillary Clinton in the Oval Office...a candidate who has taken millions of dollars in contributions from Wall Street fat cats...and you expect SHE is going to look out for the "little guy"!

You should have been a Bernie Sanders supporter

Why declining manufacturing leads to income inequality

The higher income for the top 1% completely distorts the political system. With more power for Wall Street and billionaires, politicians who depend on the rich and powerful for campaign funds pass more bad policies, leading to even worse income inequality, in a vicious cycle.

income and wealth inequality have been getting much worse over the last half-century., not just under Obama.

First, manufacturing generates so much wealth that a middle class can develop, as happened in the 19th century. Before that time, what little surplus wealth was generated was grabbed by the ruling elite, and almost everybody else engaged in the toil of farming. But the surplus that manufacturing creates can also be taken by the ruling elite, leaving everyone else in the same boat as before. However, the second reason manufacturing leads to a middle class is that manufacturing requires high skill levels — which is why Germany now, and the United States before, have had comfortable middle class families working in factories. When people have high skills — assuming they can organize, as in unions — then they have power, and with power comes better income and better income equality.

But if the manufacturing sectors start to decline, then so does the wealth-generating power of the country, as well as the power of the middle class. And thus we find that the United States is declining in power and in its middle class.

Income equality, and manufacturing, both peaked around 1968 in the United States. Manufacturing has almost always been the quintessential middle class sector because manufacturing employs about the same percentage of the workforce as the income it receives. In 1968, 25% of the workforce was engaged in manufacturing, and 25% of the country’s income went to manufacturing. On average, in 1968 people in manufacturing received the average income of the economy. No other sector can boast this “middle class-ness”.

From 1968 to 2009 the manufacturing sector declined from one quarter of the economy — every fourth working person — to about one in every 11 people, a decline of about 16% of the total employment pool. Where did those people go? Most of them went into the lower income service workforce, which grew from 12.8% to 20.5% of the workforce (and many others stopped working altogether). So, on average, the people that moved from manufacturing to low income services lost 1/3rd of their income, if not more.....

But I'm sure you know all this, right?

I personally think CEO's are paid too much in this country but that's a result of them sitting on each others boards and voting for those salaries.

As for why manufacturing jobs in the US started to decline in the late 60's? Look at why they boomed in 50's! We were one of the few industrial nations to come out of WWII with an intact industrial infrastructure. Our manufacturing sector boomed because we were supplying the rest of the world while they rebuilt themselves. At some point that advantage was going to disappear and there really wasn't anything we could do about it. All the finger pointing about who is to blame for manufacturing jobs going overseas ignores reality. The jobs left because it's cheaper to make things elsewhere. Raising labor costs even higher or passing more legislation that raises the cost of energy or healthcare isn't going to improve the situation...it will simply accelerate the job loss.

Yup. Some of that is true. However, you like most cons ignore the undeniable fact that when we had totally private healthcare, we had the highest cost healthcare among the advanced nations. And you ignore the fact that we still have private, non socialized healthcare. And that health care costs have been raising more slowly since obamacare started. What we have is totally private healthcare, with federal regulations.
Then, while we have proposals to raise the minimum wage, it will not put us beyond what other advanced nations are paying for labor. Not at all. Minimum wage is simply a conservative talking point topic. It is and has never been a competitive issue.

International Comparisons of Hourly Compensation Costs in Manufacturing, 2015 - Summary Tables
12 April 2016
International Comparisons of Hourly Compensation Costs in Manufacturing, 2015 - Summary Tables | The Conference Board

Someone said to me the other day, "we used to have cheap/affordable healthcare in this country. I got sick or my wife got pregnant and it was $35 or $100 or I don't remember the exact dollar amount but the fact is, back in the day the doctor would take $100 to stitch you up and be happy. Today they take $35 co pay or deductable and then bill your insurance company $1000. It's bullshit. We've all seen those hospital bills where they bill our insurance $5000 or $10000 or more for some bullshit procedure.

 

[BuckToothMoron]

The laughable thing is that for decades, to today, conservatives have said that the wealth gap is both natural and no problem. Now they see it as a problem and want to blame obama. Because they are cons. And cons can not reason. And they believe what they are told to believe. Because it is easy.

Typical of you to lie.

We conservatives are not saying it is a problem, we are pointing to the FACT that the policies and doctrines of Lame Duck President Barack Hussein Obama have made the situation far worse.

As you deny, this is but one reason.

Really? You post most, but not all, of a graph, dipshit. With no link, dipshit. Please, me boy, what did you think that proved? Dipshit.
Please, dipshit, if you think that Obama made it worse, tell me how. And for gods sake, tell me how republicans have passed bills to make it better. Name a .bill. Or simply tell me you are too ignorant to do so.

And, dipshit, tell me why Republicans not bringing a single bill forward to help the problems they created with the great Republican Recession of 2008 helped anything. Or why blocking every piece of legislation brought forward to help, by democrats, helped. Or name a single bill they brought forward.
Dipshit. Jesus, it pisses me off to have to deal with someone as brainless as you.

Hmm, just an observation- Rshermr just called Markle brainless. I suppose in Rshermr's mind you must call someone a dipshit at least a half dozen times per post to prove you have a brain.

Ah. So you are confused. And ignorant. You prove you have a brain by posting logical information and backing it up with rational and impartial sourced information. You prove you have no brain when you use irrational and partial sources, or no sources at all, to attempt to back up drivel. Like your posts.
And I call post authors who waste my time dipshits.
Dipshit.[/QUOTE]

Profanity is the tool for those who either lack a compelling argument, or the ability to express it. Which are you?

 

[Oldstyle]

What's "laughable" is that you liberals blame conservatives for the "wealth gap" but when you look at the numbers income inequality EXPLODED under Barry! What's even more amusing is now you want to put Hillary Clinton in the Oval Office...a candidate who has taken millions of dollars in contributions from Wall Street fat cats...and you expect SHE is going to look out for the "little guy"!

You should have been a Bernie Sanders supporter

Why declining manufacturing leads to income inequality

The higher income for the top 1% completely distorts the political system. With more power for Wall Street and billionaires, politicians who depend on the rich and powerful for campaign funds pass more bad policies, leading to even worse income inequality, in a vicious cycle.

income and wealth inequality have been getting much worse over the last half-century., not just under Obama.

First, manufacturing generates so much wealth that a middle class can develop, as happened in the 19th century. Before that time, what little surplus wealth was generated was grabbed by the ruling elite, and almost everybody else engaged in the toil of farming. But the surplus that manufacturing creates can also be taken by the ruling elite, leaving everyone else in the same boat as before. However, the second reason manufacturing leads to a middle class is that manufacturing requires high skill levels — which is why Germany now, and the United States before, have had comfortable middle class families working in factories. When people have high skills — assuming they can organize, as in unions — then they have power, and with power comes better income and better income equality.

But if the manufacturing sectors start to decline, then so does the wealth-generating power of the country, as well as the power of the middle class. And thus we find that the United States is declining in power and in its middle class.

Income equality, and manufacturing, both peaked around 1968 in the United States. Manufacturing has almost always been the quintessential middle class sector because manufacturing employs about the same percentage of the workforce as the income it receives. In 1968, 25% of the workforce was engaged in manufacturing, and 25% of the country’s income went to manufacturing. On average, in 1968 people in manufacturing received the average income of the economy. No other sector can boast this “middle class-ness”.

From 1968 to 2009 the manufacturing sector declined from one quarter of the economy — every fourth working person — to about one in every 11 people, a decline of about 16% of the total employment pool. Where did those people go? Most of them went into the lower income service workforce, which grew from 12.8% to 20.5% of the workforce (and many others stopped working altogether). So, on average, the people that moved from manufacturing to low income services lost 1/3rd of their income, if not more.....

But I'm sure you know all this, right?

I personally think CEO's are paid too much in this country but that's a result of them sitting on each others boards and voting for those salaries.

As for why manufacturing jobs in the US started to decline in the late 60's? Look at why they boomed in 50's! We were one of the few industrial nations to come out of WWII with an intact industrial infrastructure. Our manufacturing sector boomed because we were supplying the rest of the world while they rebuilt themselves. At some point that advantage was going to disappear and there really wasn't anything we could do about it. All the finger pointing about who is to blame for manufacturing jobs going overseas ignores reality. The jobs left because it's cheaper to make things elsewhere. Raising labor costs even higher or passing more legislation that raises the cost of energy or healthcare isn't going to improve the situation...it will simply accelerate the job loss.

Maybe deep down, just like with oil, for years we stop manufacturing and we let Africa, China, India and Mexico eat up all their natural resources until they don't have any left and we become the largest oil producer and manufacturer one day. Wouldn't that be great?

And who cares if Chinese and India and Mexico manufacture now? That doesn't mean we had to buy from them. We certainly don't sell to them. We shouldn't buy from anyone we don't sell to. China doesn't buy our cars. And we purchased the cars we made in the 60's. We produced and we purchased. We didn't have to outsource the manufacturing but corporations wanted to and if we complained they cried PROTECTIONISM but the fact is every country protects their vital industries. All except us because our workers are or were the highest paid.

Look at our import-export ratios back in the 60's and compare them to what we have now. The rest of the world isn't buying American. Why? Because our workers WERE the highest paid and therefore our products started costing more and more in comparison to the rest of the world.
I believe you are WRONG. Please show a link proving your statements.
Actually, our labor costs are toward the middle of the thirty or so nations considered industrial nations. And those that have lower costs are almost all near third world nations. However, the other half of the equation, productivity, finds that american workers are in third place, behind only Germany and France. So we tend to be quite competitive from a labor standpoint.
Which Country Has the Most Productive Workers?

If you think I'm wrong, Georgie provide a link showing that to be the case! Oh, wait...I forget...you're not smart enough to handle things like that! You're the A-B=Jobs Saved, Guy!

 

[sealybobo]

The laughable thing is that for decades, to today, conservatives have said that the wealth gap is both natural and no problem. Now they see it as a problem and want to blame obama. Because they are cons. And cons can not reason. And they believe what they are told to believe. Because it is easy.

Typical of you to lie.

We conservatives are not saying it is a problem, we are pointing to the FACT that the policies and doctrines of Lame Duck President Barack Hussein Obama have made the situation far worse.

As you deny, this is but one reason.

Really? You post most, but not all, of a graph, dipshit. With no link, dipshit. Please, me boy, what did you think that proved? Dipshit.
Please, dipshit, if you think that Obama made it worse, tell me how. And for gods sake, tell me how republicans have passed bills to make it better. Name a .bill. Or simply tell me you are too ignorant to do so.

And, dipshit, tell me why Republicans not bringing a single bill forward to help the problems they created with the great Republican Recession of 2008 helped anything. Or why blocking every piece of legislation brought forward to help, by democrats, helped. Or name a single bill they brought forward.
Dipshit. Jesus, it pisses me off to have to deal with someone as brainless as you.

Hmm, just an observation- Rshermr just called Markle brainless. I suppose in Rshermr's mind you must call someone a dipshit at least a half dozen times per post to prove you have a brain.

Ah. So you are confused. And ignorant. You prove you have a brain by posting logical information and backing it up with rational and impartial sourced information. You prove you have no brain when you use irrational and partial sources, or no sources at all, to attempt to back up drivel. Like your posts.
And I call post authors who waste my time dipshits.
Dipshit.

Profanity is the tool for those who either lack a compelling argument, or the ability to express it. Which are you?[/QUOTE]
It's the best way to show you how we are feeling when typing a response. Don't take it personally. Someone can still be debating with intellectual honesty and thoughtfulness and still occasionally say I think you are a stupid cock sucker. LOL