Well are you?

[initforme]

Cheap labor is a motto of poorly run businesses.

 

[Never3ndr]

The Class Of 2015 Is In For A Rude Awakening On Pay

Job prospects for college graduates have been pretty terrible for a long time, said Josh Bivens, research and policy director at the left-leaning Economic Policy Institute. The average young college graduate, between the ages of 21 and 24, makes just under $18/hour, or $36,000 a year, according to new data that EPI is set to release later this month. As an average, that figure is probably skewed a little high, said Bivens.

Since 2000, grads have actually seen their pay fall from $18.41 an hour to $17.94, according to the new EPI data.

A lot of college graduates wind up "underemployed" in jobs that don't require a degree, said Bivens. The unemployment rate for young college graduates was 8.5 percent, according to a 2014 report from EPI, but the underemployment rate was nearly double that.

"There's a reason there's a stereotype of college grads working as baristas in coffee shops," he said.

Indeed, 49 percent of graduates from 2013 and 2014 consider themselves "underemployed," according to Accenture's latest study.

Meanwhile, the class of 2015 has the highest-ever levels of student loan debt, according to data published in the Wall Street Journal last week. The average amount a 2015 grad will have to pay back is $35,000. More than 70 percent of this crop of grads took out loans to pay for school.

I don't disagree that many graduates face a lot off issues in today's modern society. I'm not going to argue with and of the data sets that you proposed (to be honest I only really perused them). Instead, I will posit this understanding:

1) Many Americans are told that they need to attend university in order to get a job

2) Many Americans (when they are older) are told to pursue their passion rather than concentrate on a marketable skill

3) Many Americans attain degrees that have little to no marketable value and / or are in over saturated job markets

I don't think that anybody can really argue that, in today's society, computer technology (and jobs in that field) is one of the most lucrative and sought after fields in the professional world. However, only 2.9% of student graduate with a degree there. On the other hand, 83.8% of students graduate in a non-STEM major including 15.2% in social sciences and 11.7% in the humanities. I mean, do you really expect to be much more than a barista in Starbucks with your degree in History concentrating on the World War II era, or a degree in English literature?

http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2014/2014141.pdf

Now, I am not saying that things are all sunshine and roses for college grads. What I am saying is that your numbers are skewed. If you look at stats for something marketable, like computer science degrees, your numbers tend to be pretty respectable.

Bachelor of Science (BS / BSc), Computer Science (CS) Degree Salary, Average Salaries | PayScale

Now, what I would be interested in is some numbers regarding marketable degrees, employment rates, and earnings. Again, I think that there may be a real issue with college debt and "worth" of a college education...but I'd like to see actual data regarding that issue rather than broad data sets including people with a 4-year degree in art wondering why they aren't making $70,000 a year and can't find a job.

 

[Never3ndr]

The Incredible Shrinking Incomes of Young Americans

American families are grappling with stagnant wage growth, as the costs of health care, education, and housing continue to climb. But for many of America's younger workers, "stagnant" wages shouldn't sound so bad. In fact, they might sound like a massive raise.

Since the Great Recession struck in 2007, the median wage for people between the ages of 25 and 34, adjusted for inflation, has fallen in every major industry except for health care.
Young People's Wages Have Fallen Across Industries Between 2007 and 2013

Census: Current Population Survey
These numbers come from an analysis of the Census Current Population Survey by Konrad Mugglestone, an economist with Young Invincibles.

In retail, wholesale, leisure, and hospitality—which together employ more than one quarter of this age group—real wages have fallen more than 10 percent since 2007. To be clear, this doesn't mean that most of this cohort are seeing their pay slashed, year after year. Instead it suggests that wage growth is failing to keep up with inflation, and that, as twentysomethings pass into their thirties, they are earning less than their older peers did before the recession.

The picture isn't much better for the youngest group of workers between 18 and 24. Besides health care, the industries employing the vast majority of part-time students and recent graduates are also watching wages fall behind inflation. (40 percent of this group is enrolled in college.)

I think that these are interesting findings however there are two issues:

1) How reliable is the Young Invincibles as a data source? It seems to be a pretty targeted organization with an obvious bias (i.e. would they find / publish data that is counter intuitive to their core mission to give young people a voice?) I would normally try to crunch some data and compare myself, but, let's be honest, working with the census data is usually a shit show that requires a lot of time.

2) We have this information in a vacuum. This data would be much more meaningful if we had comparisons to both historical data concerning average rise / fall of income over a 6-7 year period of time (especially concentrating on recessions). Also if we had a comparisons to earnings for all age groups versus the younger generation. Does the data show a large divergence from other age groups during this time period? If the average wages in general are holding steady or falling for these industries then we should actually EXPECT the same to be true for this age group.

On to your main point, which I believe is addressing income inequality and the growing gap between the ultra rich and the poor...I agree with you that I think that it is an issue. I think all you really need to do is post something like this:

Richest 62 people as wealthy as half of world's population, says Oxfam

as an indication that there is a growing gap. As far as arguing with that guy that income inequality is a bad thing...I'm pretty sure that is a lost cause. I've posted it before, and I'm pretty sure it was in direct response to this guy that income inequality is an issue and pointed towards both historical studies indicating this and things as the GINI coefficient that the growing gap is a reality...he seems to be a bit deaf, and unwilling to entertain anything outside of his pre-established idea set.

 

[francoHFW]

The Incredible Shrinking Incomes of Young Americans

American families are grappling with stagnant wage growth, as the costs of health care, education, and housing continue to climb. But for many of America's younger workers, "stagnant" wages shouldn't sound so bad. In fact, they might sound like a massive raise.

Since the Great Recession struck in 2007, the median wage for people between the ages of 25 and 34, adjusted for inflation, has fallen in every major industry except for health care.
Young People's Wages Have Fallen Across Industries Between 2007 and 2013

Census: Current Population Survey
These numbers come from an analysis of the Census Current Population Survey by Konrad Mugglestone, an economist with Young Invincibles.

In retail, wholesale, leisure, and hospitality—which together employ more than one quarter of this age group—real wages have fallen more than 10 percent since 2007. To be clear, this doesn't mean that most of this cohort are seeing their pay slashed, year after year. Instead it suggests that wage growth is failing to keep up with inflation, and that, as twentysomethings pass into their thirties, they are earning less than their older peers did before the recession.

The picture isn't much better for the youngest group of workers between 18 and 24. Besides health care, the industries employing the vast majority of part-time students and recent graduates are also watching wages fall behind inflation. (40 percent of this group is enrolled in college.)

Here's a good one from factleft. Obviously, Reaganism and it's anti-unionism and lack of investment etc, pander to the rich and giant corps policies, are killing us all...

The Demise of the American Middle Class In Numbers.

Over the past 30 years the American dream has gradually disappeared. The process was slow, so most people didn’t notice. They just worked a few more hours, borrowed a little more and cut back on non-essentials. But looking at the numbers and comparing them over long time periods, it is obvious that things have changed drastically. Here are the details:

1. WORKERS PRODUCE MORE BUT THE GAINS GO TO BUSINESS.

Over the past 63 years worker productivity has grown by 2.0% per year.

But after 1980, workers received a smaller share every year. Labor’s share of income (1992 = 100%):

1950 = 101%
1960 = 105%
1970 = 105%
1980 = 105% – Reagan
1990 = 100%
2000 = 96%
2007 = 92%

A 13% drop since 1980

2. THE TOP 10% GET A LARGER SHARE.

Share of National Income going to Top 10%:

1950 = 35%
1960 = 34%
1970 = 34%
1980 = 34% – Reagan
1990 = 40%
2000 = 47%
2007 = 50%

An increase of 16% since Reagan.

3. WORKERS COMPENSATED FOR THE LOSS OF INCOME BY SPENDING THEIR SAVINGS.

The savings Rose up to Reagan and fell during and after.

1950 = 6.0%
1960 = 7.0%
1970 = 8.5%
1980 = 10.0% – Reagan
1982 = 11.2% – Peak
1990 = 7.0%
2000 = 2.0%
2006 = -1.1% (Negative = withdrawing from savings)

A 12.3% drop after Reagan.

4. WORKERS ALSO BORROWED TO MAKE UP FOR THE LOSS.

Household Debt as percentage of GDP:

1965 = 46%
1970 = 45%
1980 = 50% – Reagan
1990 = 61%
2000 = 69%
2007 = 95%

A 45% increase after 1980.

5. SO THE GAP BETWEEN THE RICHEST AND THE POOREST HAS GROWN.

Gap Between the Share of Capital Income earned by the top 1%
and the bottom 80%:

1980 = 10%
2003 = 56%

A 5.6 times increase.

6. AND THE AMERICAN DREAM IS GONE.

The Probably of Moving Up from the Bottom 40% to the Top 40%:

1945 = 12%
1958 = 6%
1990 = 3%
2000 = 2%

A 10% Decrease.

Links:

1 = ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/special.requests/pf/totalf1.txt
1 = https://www.clevelandfed.org/Research/PolicyDis/No7Nov04.pdf
1 = Clipboard01.jpg (image)
2 – Congratulations to Emmanuel Saez
3 = http://www.demos.org/inequality/images/charts/uspersonalsaving_thumb.gif
3 = http://www.bea.gov/national/nipaweb...able=58&Freq=Qtr&FirstYear=2008&LastYear=2010
4 = http://www.prudentbear.com/index.php/household-sector-debt-of-gdp
4 = http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/z1/current/
5/6 = http://www.businessinsider.com/15-c...lity-in-america-2010-4?slop=1#slideshow-start

Overview = http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-entry/2010062415/reagan-revolution-home-roost-charts

 

[froggy]

The Incredible Shrinking Incomes of Young Americans

American families are grappling with stagnant wage growth, as the costs of health care, education, and housing continue to climb. But for many of America's younger workers, "stagnant" wages shouldn't sound so bad. In fact, they might sound like a massive raise.

Since the Great Recession struck in 2007, the median wage for people between the ages of 25 and 34, adjusted for inflation, has fallen in every major industry except for health care.
Young People's Wages Have Fallen Across Industries Between 2007 and 2013

Census: Current Population Survey
These numbers come from an analysis of the Census Current Population Survey by Konrad Mugglestone, an economist with Young Invincibles.

In retail, wholesale, leisure, and hospitality—which together employ more than one quarter of this age group—real wages have fallen more than 10 percent since 2007. To be clear, this doesn't mean that most of this cohort are seeing their pay slashed, year after year. Instead it suggests that wage growth is failing to keep up with inflation, and that, as twentysomethings pass into their thirties, they are earning less than their older peers did before the recession.

The picture isn't much better for the youngest group of workers between 18 and 24. Besides health care, the industries employing the vast majority of part-time students and recent graduates are also watching wages fall behind inflation. (40 percent of this group is enrolled in college.)

Here's a good one from factleft. Obviously, Reaganism and it's anti-unionism and lack of investment etc, pander to the rich and giant corps policies, are killing us all...

The Demise of the American Middle Class In Numbers.

Over the past 30 years the American dream has gradually disappeared. The process was slow, so most people didn’t notice. They just worked a few more hours, borrowed a little more and cut back on non-essentials. But looking at the numbers and comparing them over long time periods, it is obvious that things have changed drastically. Here are the details:

1. WORKERS PRODUCE MORE BUT THE GAINS GO TO BUSINESS.

Over the past 63 years worker productivity has grown by 2.0% per year.

But after 1980, workers received a smaller share every year. Labor’s share of income (1992 = 100%):

1950 = 101%
1960 = 105%
1970 = 105%
1980 = 105% – Reagan
1990 = 100%
2000 = 96%
2007 = 92%

A 13% drop since 1980

2. THE TOP 10% GET A LARGER SHARE.

Share of National Income going to Top 10%:

1950 = 35%
1960 = 34%
1970 = 34%
1980 = 34% – Reagan
1990 = 40%
2000 = 47%
2007 = 50%

An increase of 16% since Reagan.

3. WORKERS COMPENSATED FOR THE LOSS OF INCOME BY SPENDING THEIR SAVINGS.

The savings Rose up to Reagan and fell during and after.

1950 = 6.0%
1960 = 7.0%
1970 = 8.5%
1980 = 10.0% – Reagan
1982 = 11.2% – Peak
1990 = 7.0%
2000 = 2.0%
2006 = -1.1% (Negative = withdrawing from savings)

A 12.3% drop after Reagan.

4. WORKERS ALSO BORROWED TO MAKE UP FOR THE LOSS.

Household Debt as percentage of GDP:

1965 = 46%
1970 = 45%
1980 = 50% – Reagan
1990 = 61%
2000 = 69%
2007 = 95%

A 45% increase after 1980.

5. SO THE GAP BETWEEN THE RICHEST AND THE POOREST HAS GROWN.

Gap Between the Share of Capital Income earned by the top 1%
and the bottom 80%:

1980 = 10%
2003 = 56%

A 5.6 times increase.

6. AND THE AMERICAN DREAM IS GONE.

The Probably of Moving Up from the Bottom 40% to the Top 40%:

1945 = 12%
1958 = 6%
1990 = 3%
2000 = 2%

A 10% Decrease.

Links:

1 = ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/special.requests/pf/totalf1.txt
1 = https://www.clevelandfed.org/Research/PolicyDis/No7Nov04.pdf
1 = Clipboard01.jpg (image)
2 – Congratulations to Emmanuel Saez
3 = http://www.demos.org/inequality/images/charts/uspersonalsaving_thumb.gif
3 = U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA)
4 = Federated Prudent Bear Fund (A): Overview
4 = FRB: Z.1 Release--Financial Accounts of the United States--December 10, 2015
5/6 = 15 Mind-Blowing Facts About Wealth And Inequality In America

Overview = http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-entry/2010062415/reagan-revolution-home-roost-charts

When the illegals came across the border in groves and took your jobs at half the wage and you didn't make your gov't do their job and send them back you let them screw you out of higher wages. So who's at fault?

 

[initforme]

Reagan was a hero...at least that is what some say...I never saw it. He didn't help the middle class.

 

[MaryL]

are you better off now than you were eight years ago

No.

 

[francoHFW]

The Incredible Shrinking Incomes of Young Americans

American families are grappling with stagnant wage growth, as the costs of health care, education, and housing continue to climb. But for many of America's younger workers, "stagnant" wages shouldn't sound so bad. In fact, they might sound like a massive raise.

Since the Great Recession struck in 2007, the median wage for people between the ages of 25 and 34, adjusted for inflation, has fallen in every major industry except for health care.
Young People's Wages Have Fallen Across Industries Between 2007 and 2013

Census: Current Population Survey
These numbers come from an analysis of the Census Current Population Survey by Konrad Mugglestone, an economist with Young Invincibles.

In retail, wholesale, leisure, and hospitality—which together employ more than one quarter of this age group—real wages have fallen more than 10 percent since 2007. To be clear, this doesn't mean that most of this cohort are seeing their pay slashed, year after year. Instead it suggests that wage growth is failing to keep up with inflation, and that, as twentysomethings pass into their thirties, they are earning less than their older peers did before the recession.

The picture isn't much better for the youngest group of workers between 18 and 24. Besides health care, the industries employing the vast majority of part-time students and recent graduates are also watching wages fall behind inflation. (40 percent of this group is enrolled in college.)

Here's a good one from factleft. Obviously, Reaganism and it's anti-unionism and lack of investment etc, pander to the rich and giant corps policies, are killing us all...

The Demise of the American Middle Class In Numbers.

Over the past 30 years the American dream has gradually disappeared. The process was slow, so most people didn’t notice. They just worked a few more hours, borrowed a little more and cut back on non-essentials. But looking at the numbers and comparing them over long time periods, it is obvious that things have changed drastically. Here are the details:

1. WORKERS PRODUCE MORE BUT THE GAINS GO TO BUSINESS.

Over the past 63 years worker productivity has grown by 2.0% per year.

But after 1980, workers received a smaller share every year. Labor’s share of income (1992 = 100%):

1950 = 101%
1960 = 105%
1970 = 105%
1980 = 105% – Reagan
1990 = 100%
2000 = 96%
2007 = 92%

A 13% drop since 1980

2. THE TOP 10% GET A LARGER SHARE.

Share of National Income going to Top 10%:

1950 = 35%
1960 = 34%
1970 = 34%
1980 = 34% – Reagan
1990 = 40%
2000 = 47%
2007 = 50%

An increase of 16% since Reagan.

3. WORKERS COMPENSATED FOR THE LOSS OF INCOME BY SPENDING THEIR SAVINGS.

The savings Rose up to Reagan and fell during and after.

1950 = 6.0%
1960 = 7.0%
1970 = 8.5%
1980 = 10.0% – Reagan
1982 = 11.2% – Peak
1990 = 7.0%
2000 = 2.0%
2006 = -1.1% (Negative = withdrawing from savings)

A 12.3% drop after Reagan.

4. WORKERS ALSO BORROWED TO MAKE UP FOR THE LOSS.

Household Debt as percentage of GDP:

1965 = 46%
1970 = 45%
1980 = 50% – Reagan
1990 = 61%
2000 = 69%
2007 = 95%

A 45% increase after 1980.

5. SO THE GAP BETWEEN THE RICHEST AND THE POOREST HAS GROWN.

Gap Between the Share of Capital Income earned by the top 1%
and the bottom 80%:

1980 = 10%
2003 = 56%

A 5.6 times increase.

6. AND THE AMERICAN DREAM IS GONE.

The Probably of Moving Up from the Bottom 40% to the Top 40%:

1945 = 12%
1958 = 6%
1990 = 3%
2000 = 2%

A 10% Decrease.

Links:

1 = ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/special.requests/pf/totalf1.txt
1 = https://www.clevelandfed.org/Research/PolicyDis/No7Nov04.pdf
1 = Clipboard01.jpg (image)
2 – Congratulations to Emmanuel Saez
3 = http://www.demos.org/inequality/images/charts/uspersonalsaving_thumb.gif
3 = U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA)
4 = Federated Prudent Bear Fund (A): Overview
4 = FRB: Z.1 Release--Financial Accounts of the United States--December 10, 2015
5/6 = 15 Mind-Blowing Facts About Wealth And Inequality In America

Overview = http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-entry/2010062415/reagan-revolution-home-roost-charts

When the illegals came across the border in groves and took your jobs at half the wage and you didn't make your gov't do their job and send them back you let them screw you out of higher wages. So who's at fault?

BS. Pubs who CONTINUE to refuse a good SS ID, the only real solution. The billionaires in charge love the cheap labor, dupe.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

The Incredible Shrinking Incomes of Young Americans

American families are grappling with stagnant wage growth, as the costs of health care, education, and housing continue to climb. But for many of America's younger workers, "stagnant" wages shouldn't sound so bad. In fact, they might sound like a massive raise.

Since the Great Recession struck in 2007, the median wage for people between the ages of 25 and 34, adjusted for inflation, has fallen in every major industry except for health care.
Young People's Wages Have Fallen Across Industries Between 2007 and 2013

Census: Current Population Survey
These numbers come from an analysis of the Census Current Population Survey by Konrad Mugglestone, an economist with Young Invincibles.

In retail, wholesale, leisure, and hospitality—which together employ more than one quarter of this age group—real wages have fallen more than 10 percent since 2007. To be clear, this doesn't mean that most of this cohort are seeing their pay slashed, year after year. Instead it suggests that wage growth is failing to keep up with inflation, and that, as twentysomethings pass into their thirties, they are earning less than their older peers did before the recession.

The picture isn't much better for the youngest group of workers between 18 and 24. Besides health care, the industries employing the vast majority of part-time students and recent graduates are also watching wages fall behind inflation. (40 percent of this group is enrolled in college.)

Here's a good one from factleft. Obviously, Reaganism and it's anti-unionism and lack of investment etc, pander to the rich and giant corps policies, are killing us all...

The Demise of the American Middle Class In Numbers.

Over the past 30 years the American dream has gradually disappeared. The process was slow, so most people didn’t notice. They just worked a few more hours, borrowed a little more and cut back on non-essentials. But looking at the numbers and comparing them over long time periods, it is obvious that things have changed drastically. Here are the details:

1. WORKERS PRODUCE MORE BUT THE GAINS GO TO BUSINESS.

Over the past 63 years worker productivity has grown by 2.0% per year.

But after 1980, workers received a smaller share every year. Labor’s share of income (1992 = 100%):

1950 = 101%
1960 = 105%
1970 = 105%
1980 = 105% – Reagan
1990 = 100%
2000 = 96%
2007 = 92%

A 13% drop since 1980

2. THE TOP 10% GET A LARGER SHARE.

Share of National Income going to Top 10%:

1950 = 35%
1960 = 34%
1970 = 34%
1980 = 34% – Reagan
1990 = 40%
2000 = 47%
2007 = 50%

An increase of 16% since Reagan.

3. WORKERS COMPENSATED FOR THE LOSS OF INCOME BY SPENDING THEIR SAVINGS.

The savings Rose up to Reagan and fell during and after.

1950 = 6.0%
1960 = 7.0%
1970 = 8.5%
1980 = 10.0% – Reagan
1982 = 11.2% – Peak
1990 = 7.0%
2000 = 2.0%
2006 = -1.1% (Negative = withdrawing from savings)

A 12.3% drop after Reagan.

4. WORKERS ALSO BORROWED TO MAKE UP FOR THE LOSS.

Household Debt as percentage of GDP:

1965 = 46%
1970 = 45%
1980 = 50% – Reagan
1990 = 61%
2000 = 69%
2007 = 95%

A 45% increase after 1980.

5. SO THE GAP BETWEEN THE RICHEST AND THE POOREST HAS GROWN.

Gap Between the Share of Capital Income earned by the top 1%
and the bottom 80%:

1980 = 10%
2003 = 56%

A 5.6 times increase.

6. AND THE AMERICAN DREAM IS GONE.

The Probably of Moving Up from the Bottom 40% to the Top 40%:

1945 = 12%
1958 = 6%
1990 = 3%
2000 = 2%

A 10% Decrease.

Links:

1 = ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/special.requests/pf/totalf1.txt
1 = https://www.clevelandfed.org/Research/PolicyDis/No7Nov04.pdf
1 = Clipboard01.jpg (image)
2 – Congratulations to Emmanuel Saez
3 = http://www.demos.org/inequality/images/charts/uspersonalsaving_thumb.gif
3 = U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA)
4 = Federated Prudent Bear Fund (A): Overview
4 = FRB: Z.1 Release--Financial Accounts of the United States--December 10, 2015
5/6 = 15 Mind-Blowing Facts About Wealth And Inequality In America

Overview = http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-entry/2010062415/reagan-revolution-home-roost-charts

When the illegals came across the border in groves and took your jobs at half the wage and you didn't make your gov't do their job and send them back you let them screw you out of higher wages. So who's at fault?

BS. Pubs who CONTINUE to refuse a good SS ID, the only real solution. The billionaires in charge love the cheap labor, dupe.

And the liberals love vote buying. Free college!!!!

 

[francoHFW]

The Incredible Shrinking Incomes of Young Americans

American families are grappling with stagnant wage growth, as the costs of health care, education, and housing continue to climb. But for many of America's younger workers, "stagnant" wages shouldn't sound so bad. In fact, they might sound like a massive raise.

Since the Great Recession struck in 2007, the median wage for people between the ages of 25 and 34, adjusted for inflation, has fallen in every major industry except for health care.
Young People's Wages Have Fallen Across Industries Between 2007 and 2013

Census: Current Population Survey
These numbers come from an analysis of the Census Current Population Survey by Konrad Mugglestone, an economist with Young Invincibles.

In retail, wholesale, leisure, and hospitality—which together employ more than one quarter of this age group—real wages have fallen more than 10 percent since 2007. To be clear, this doesn't mean that most of this cohort are seeing their pay slashed, year after year. Instead it suggests that wage growth is failing to keep up with inflation, and that, as twentysomethings pass into their thirties, they are earning less than their older peers did before the recession.

The picture isn't much better for the youngest group of workers between 18 and 24. Besides health care, the industries employing the vast majority of part-time students and recent graduates are also watching wages fall behind inflation. (40 percent of this group is enrolled in college.)

Here's a good one from factleft. Obviously, Reaganism and it's anti-unionism and lack of investment etc, pander to the rich and giant corps policies, are killing us all...

The Demise of the American Middle Class In Numbers.

Over the past 30 years the American dream has gradually disappeared. The process was slow, so most people didn’t notice. They just worked a few more hours, borrowed a little more and cut back on non-essentials. But looking at the numbers and comparing them over long time periods, it is obvious that things have changed drastically. Here are the details:

1. WORKERS PRODUCE MORE BUT THE GAINS GO TO BUSINESS.

Over the past 63 years worker productivity has grown by 2.0% per year.

But after 1980, workers received a smaller share every year. Labor’s share of income (1992 = 100%):

1950 = 101%
1960 = 105%
1970 = 105%
1980 = 105% – Reagan
1990 = 100%
2000 = 96%
2007 = 92%

A 13% drop since 1980

2. THE TOP 10% GET A LARGER SHARE.

Share of National Income going to Top 10%:

1950 = 35%
1960 = 34%
1970 = 34%
1980 = 34% – Reagan
1990 = 40%
2000 = 47%
2007 = 50%

An increase of 16% since Reagan.

3. WORKERS COMPENSATED FOR THE LOSS OF INCOME BY SPENDING THEIR SAVINGS.

The savings Rose up to Reagan and fell during and after.

1950 = 6.0%
1960 = 7.0%
1970 = 8.5%
1980 = 10.0% – Reagan
1982 = 11.2% – Peak
1990 = 7.0%
2000 = 2.0%
2006 = -1.1% (Negative = withdrawing from savings)

A 12.3% drop after Reagan.

4. WORKERS ALSO BORROWED TO MAKE UP FOR THE LOSS.

Household Debt as percentage of GDP:

1965 = 46%
1970 = 45%
1980 = 50% – Reagan
1990 = 61%
2000 = 69%
2007 = 95%

A 45% increase after 1980.

5. SO THE GAP BETWEEN THE RICHEST AND THE POOREST HAS GROWN.

Gap Between the Share of Capital Income earned by the top 1%
and the bottom 80%:

1980 = 10%
2003 = 56%

A 5.6 times increase.

6. AND THE AMERICAN DREAM IS GONE.

The Probably of Moving Up from the Bottom 40% to the Top 40%:

1945 = 12%
1958 = 6%
1990 = 3%
2000 = 2%

A 10% Decrease.

Links:

1 = ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/special.requests/pf/totalf1.txt
1 = https://www.clevelandfed.org/Research/PolicyDis/No7Nov04.pdf
1 = Clipboard01.jpg (image)
2 – Congratulations to Emmanuel Saez
3 = http://www.demos.org/inequality/images/charts/uspersonalsaving_thumb.gif
3 = U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA)
4 = Federated Prudent Bear Fund (A): Overview
4 = FRB: Z.1 Release--Financial Accounts of the United States--December 10, 2015
5/6 = 15 Mind-Blowing Facts About Wealth And Inequality In America

Overview = http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-entry/2010062415/reagan-revolution-home-roost-charts

When the illegals came across the border in groves and took your jobs at half the wage and you didn't make your gov't do their job and send them back you let them screw you out of higher wages. So who's at fault?

BS. Pubs who CONTINUE to refuse a good SS ID, the only real solution. The billionaires in charge love the cheap labor, dupe.

And the liberals love vote buying. Free college!!!!

ACTUALLY, it's called investing in America, as opposed to corrupt GOP pandering to the rich and bubble/busts/war mongering, dupe.

 

[Never3ndr]

Here's a good one from factleft. Obviously, Reaganism and it's anti-unionism and lack of investment etc, pander to the rich and giant corps policies, are killing us all...

The Demise of the American Middle Class In Numbers.

Over the past 30 years the American dream has gradually disappeared. The process was slow, so most people didn’t notice. They just worked a few more hours, borrowed a little more and cut back on non-essentials. But looking at the numbers and comparing them over long time periods, it is obvious that things have changed drastically. Here are the details:

1. WORKERS PRODUCE MORE BUT THE GAINS GO TO BUSINESS.

Over the past 63 years worker productivity has grown by 2.0% per year.

But after 1980, workers received a smaller share every year. Labor’s share of income (1992 = 100%):

1950 = 101%
1960 = 105%
1970 = 105%
1980 = 105% – Reagan
1990 = 100%
2000 = 96%
2007 = 92%

A 13% drop since 1980

2. THE TOP 10% GET A LARGER SHARE.

Share of National Income going to Top 10%:

1950 = 35%
1960 = 34%
1970 = 34%
1980 = 34% – Reagan
1990 = 40%
2000 = 47%
2007 = 50%

An increase of 16% since Reagan.

3. WORKERS COMPENSATED FOR THE LOSS OF INCOME BY SPENDING THEIR SAVINGS.

The savings Rose up to Reagan and fell during and after.

1950 = 6.0%
1960 = 7.0%
1970 = 8.5%
1980 = 10.0% – Reagan
1982 = 11.2% – Peak
1990 = 7.0%
2000 = 2.0%
2006 = -1.1% (Negative = withdrawing from savings)

A 12.3% drop after Reagan.

4. WORKERS ALSO BORROWED TO MAKE UP FOR THE LOSS.

Household Debt as percentage of GDP:

1965 = 46%
1970 = 45%
1980 = 50% – Reagan
1990 = 61%
2000 = 69%
2007 = 95%

A 45% increase after 1980.

5. SO THE GAP BETWEEN THE RICHEST AND THE POOREST HAS GROWN.

Gap Between the Share of Capital Income earned by the top 1%
and the bottom 80%:

1980 = 10%
2003 = 56%

A 5.6 times increase.

6. AND THE AMERICAN DREAM IS GONE.

The Probably of Moving Up from the Bottom 40% to the Top 40%:

1945 = 12%
1958 = 6%
1990 = 3%
2000 = 2%

A 10% Decrease.

Links:

1 = ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/special.requests/pf/totalf1.txt
1 = https://www.clevelandfed.org/Research/PolicyDis/No7Nov04.pdf
1 = Clipboard01.jpg (image)
2 – Congratulations to Emmanuel Saez
3 = http://www.demos.org/inequality/images/charts/uspersonalsaving_thumb.gif
3 = U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA)
4 = Federated Prudent Bear Fund (A): Overview
4 = FRB: Z.1 Release--Financial Accounts of the United States--December 10, 2015
5/6 = 15 Mind-Blowing Facts About Wealth And Inequality In America

Overview = http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-entry/2010062415/reagan-revolution-home-roost-charts

Interesting post, I wanted to see the information on point (3), but the demos link doesn't work and I have no clue what table you looked at on bea.gov (which is a great resource I never knew about).

Anyways, if savings are going down, that is a really horrible indicator for our future economic growth. It's been a while since my economic coursework, but I'm pretty sure that savings (and investment) are two clear indicators for the future growth of an economy.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

The Incredible Shrinking Incomes of Young Americans

American families are grappling with stagnant wage growth, as the costs of health care, education, and housing continue to climb. But for many of America's younger workers, "stagnant" wages shouldn't sound so bad. In fact, they might sound like a massive raise.

Since the Great Recession struck in 2007, the median wage for people between the ages of 25 and 34, adjusted for inflation, has fallen in every major industry except for health care.
Young People's Wages Have Fallen Across Industries Between 2007 and 2013

Census: Current Population Survey
These numbers come from an analysis of the Census Current Population Survey by Konrad Mugglestone, an economist with Young Invincibles.

In retail, wholesale, leisure, and hospitality—which together employ more than one quarter of this age group—real wages have fallen more than 10 percent since 2007. To be clear, this doesn't mean that most of this cohort are seeing their pay slashed, year after year. Instead it suggests that wage growth is failing to keep up with inflation, and that, as twentysomethings pass into their thirties, they are earning less than their older peers did before the recession.

The picture isn't much better for the youngest group of workers between 18 and 24. Besides health care, the industries employing the vast majority of part-time students and recent graduates are also watching wages fall behind inflation. (40 percent of this group is enrolled in college.)

Here's a good one from factleft. Obviously, Reaganism and it's anti-unionism and lack of investment etc, pander to the rich and giant corps policies, are killing us all...

The Demise of the American Middle Class In Numbers.

Over the past 30 years the American dream has gradually disappeared. The process was slow, so most people didn’t notice. They just worked a few more hours, borrowed a little more and cut back on non-essentials. But looking at the numbers and comparing them over long time periods, it is obvious that things have changed drastically. Here are the details:

1. WORKERS PRODUCE MORE BUT THE GAINS GO TO BUSINESS.

Over the past 63 years worker productivity has grown by 2.0% per year.

But after 1980, workers received a smaller share every year. Labor’s share of income (1992 = 100%):

1950 = 101%
1960 = 105%
1970 = 105%
1980 = 105% – Reagan
1990 = 100%
2000 = 96%
2007 = 92%

A 13% drop since 1980

2. THE TOP 10% GET A LARGER SHARE.

Share of National Income going to Top 10%:

1950 = 35%
1960 = 34%
1970 = 34%
1980 = 34% – Reagan
1990 = 40%
2000 = 47%
2007 = 50%

An increase of 16% since Reagan.

3. WORKERS COMPENSATED FOR THE LOSS OF INCOME BY SPENDING THEIR SAVINGS.

The savings Rose up to Reagan and fell during and after.

1950 = 6.0%
1960 = 7.0%
1970 = 8.5%
1980 = 10.0% – Reagan
1982 = 11.2% – Peak
1990 = 7.0%
2000 = 2.0%
2006 = -1.1% (Negative = withdrawing from savings)

A 12.3% drop after Reagan.

4. WORKERS ALSO BORROWED TO MAKE UP FOR THE LOSS.

Household Debt as percentage of GDP:

1965 = 46%
1970 = 45%
1980 = 50% – Reagan
1990 = 61%
2000 = 69%
2007 = 95%

A 45% increase after 1980.

5. SO THE GAP BETWEEN THE RICHEST AND THE POOREST HAS GROWN.

Gap Between the Share of Capital Income earned by the top 1%
and the bottom 80%:

1980 = 10%
2003 = 56%

A 5.6 times increase.

6. AND THE AMERICAN DREAM IS GONE.

The Probably of Moving Up from the Bottom 40% to the Top 40%:

1945 = 12%
1958 = 6%
1990 = 3%
2000 = 2%

A 10% Decrease.

Links:

1 = ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/special.requests/pf/totalf1.txt
1 = https://www.clevelandfed.org/Research/PolicyDis/No7Nov04.pdf
1 = Clipboard01.jpg (image)
2 – Congratulations to Emmanuel Saez
3 = http://www.demos.org/inequality/images/charts/uspersonalsaving_thumb.gif
3 = U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA)
4 = Federated Prudent Bear Fund (A): Overview
4 = FRB: Z.1 Release--Financial Accounts of the United States--December 10, 2015
5/6 = 15 Mind-Blowing Facts About Wealth And Inequality In America

Overview = http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-entry/2010062415/reagan-revolution-home-roost-charts

When the illegals came across the border in groves and took your jobs at half the wage and you didn't make your gov't do their job and send them back you let them screw you out of higher wages. So who's at fault?

BS. Pubs who CONTINUE to refuse a good SS ID, the only real solution. The billionaires in charge love the cheap labor, dupe.

And the liberals love vote buying. Free college!!!!

ACTUALLY, it's called investing in America, as opposed to corrupt GOP pandering to the rich and bubble/busts/war mongering, dupe.

Yeah, an investment by Democrats to try and make sure they stay in power forever. It's just that you on the left will never realize it living in your bubble world loaded with conspiracy theories instead of looking at straight out facts.

 

[Never3ndr]

Yeah, an investment by Democrats to try and make sure they stay in power forever. It's just that you on the left will never realize it living in your bubble world loaded with conspiracy theories instead of looking at straight out facts.

You realize that there are extremists on both sides that buy into a lot of absurd conspiracy theories. I mean, from the Right, I've heard everything from 9/11 being an inside job (which you would think would come from the Left (anti-Bush) more than the right...b/c I've honestly only really heard this from my conservative (anti-government) friends) to Obama not being an American. I'm not saying that there aren't radical liberals that buy into a load of baloney conspiracy theories, what I am saying is that the market is far from being cornered by the left.

 

[Arianrhod]

Reagan was a hero...at least that is what some say...I never saw it. He didn't help the middle class.

Reagan was a showman. He had a trained voice and great hair and was the epitome of what Lincoln said about fooling some of the people all of the time.

 

[francoHFW]

Here's a good one from factleft. Obviously, Reaganism and it's anti-unionism and lack of investment etc, pander to the rich and giant corps policies, are killing us all...

The Demise of the American Middle Class In Numbers.

Over the past 30 years the American dream has gradually disappeared. The process was slow, so most people didn’t notice. They just worked a few more hours, borrowed a little more and cut back on non-essentials. But looking at the numbers and comparing them over long time periods, it is obvious that things have changed drastically. Here are the details:

1. WORKERS PRODUCE MORE BUT THE GAINS GO TO BUSINESS.

Over the past 63 years worker productivity has grown by 2.0% per year.

But after 1980, workers received a smaller share every year. Labor’s share of income (1992 = 100%):

1950 = 101%
1960 = 105%
1970 = 105%
1980 = 105% – Reagan
1990 = 100%
2000 = 96%
2007 = 92%

A 13% drop since 1980

2. THE TOP 10% GET A LARGER SHARE.

Share of National Income going to Top 10%:

1950 = 35%
1960 = 34%
1970 = 34%
1980 = 34% – Reagan
1990 = 40%
2000 = 47%
2007 = 50%

An increase of 16% since Reagan.

3. WORKERS COMPENSATED FOR THE LOSS OF INCOME BY SPENDING THEIR SAVINGS.

The savings Rose up to Reagan and fell during and after.

1950 = 6.0%
1960 = 7.0%
1970 = 8.5%
1980 = 10.0% – Reagan
1982 = 11.2% – Peak
1990 = 7.0%
2000 = 2.0%
2006 = -1.1% (Negative = withdrawing from savings)

A 12.3% drop after Reagan.

4. WORKERS ALSO BORROWED TO MAKE UP FOR THE LOSS.

Household Debt as percentage of GDP:

1965 = 46%
1970 = 45%
1980 = 50% – Reagan
1990 = 61%
2000 = 69%
2007 = 95%

A 45% increase after 1980.

5. SO THE GAP BETWEEN THE RICHEST AND THE POOREST HAS GROWN.

Gap Between the Share of Capital Income earned by the top 1%
and the bottom 80%:

1980 = 10%
2003 = 56%

A 5.6 times increase.

6. AND THE AMERICAN DREAM IS GONE.

The Probably of Moving Up from the Bottom 40% to the Top 40%:

1945 = 12%
1958 = 6%
1990 = 3%
2000 = 2%

A 10% Decrease.

Links:

1 = ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/special.requests/pf/totalf1.txt
1 = https://www.clevelandfed.org/Research/PolicyDis/No7Nov04.pdf
1 = Clipboard01.jpg (image)
2 – Congratulations to Emmanuel Saez
3 = http://www.demos.org/inequality/images/charts/uspersonalsaving_thumb.gif
3 = U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA)
4 = Federated Prudent Bear Fund (A): Overview
4 = FRB: Z.1 Release--Financial Accounts of the United States--December 10, 2015
5/6 = 15 Mind-Blowing Facts About Wealth And Inequality In America

Overview = http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-entry/2010062415/reagan-revolution-home-roost-charts

When the illegals came across the border in groves and took your jobs at half the wage and you didn't make your gov't do their job and send them back you let them screw you out of higher wages. So who's at fault?

BS. Pubs who CONTINUE to refuse a good SS ID, the only real solution. The billionaires in charge love the cheap labor, dupe.

And the liberals love vote buying. Free college!!!!

ACTUALLY, it's called investing in America, as opposed to corrupt GOP pandering to the rich and bubble/busts/war mongering, dupe.

Yeah, an investment by Democrats to try and make sure they stay in power forever. It's just that you on the left will never realize it living in your bubble world loaded with conspiracy theories instead of looking at straight out facts.

The fact is you are duped by the New BS GOP. There's always fools like you to support the BS GOP despite their never doing a gd thing for you or the country. See SS, UE, workers comp, ACA, Medicare/aid etc etc...

 

[francoHFW]

Yeah, an investment by Democrats to try and make sure they stay in power forever. It's just that you on the left will never realize it living in your bubble world loaded with conspiracy theories instead of looking at straight out facts.

You realize that there are extremists on both sides that buy into a lot of absurd conspiracy theories. I mean, from the Right, I've heard everything from 9/11 being an inside job (which you would think would come from the Left (anti-Bush) more than the right...b/c I've honestly only really heard this from my conservative (anti-government) friends) to Obama not being an American. I'm not saying that there aren't radical liberals that buy into a load of baloney conspiracy theories, what I am saying is that the market is far from being cornered by the left.

In fact, it's cornered by the right. Half their party believes Obama is a muslim Kenyan communist and a giant pile of bs (FEMA camps, take away guns, etc etc.) Dems have about 1% conspiracy people...

 

[Never3ndr]

Yeah, an investment by Democrats to try and make sure they stay in power forever. It's just that you on the left will never realize it living in your bubble world loaded with conspiracy theories instead of looking at straight out facts.

You realize that there are extremists on both sides that buy into a lot of absurd conspiracy theories. I mean, from the Right, I've heard everything from 9/11 being an inside job (which you would think would come from the Left (anti-Bush) more than the right...b/c I've honestly only really heard this from my conservative (anti-government) friends) to Obama not being an American. I'm not saying that there aren't radical liberals that buy into a load of baloney conspiracy theories, what I am saying is that the market is far from being cornered by the left.

In fact, it's cornered by the right. Half their party believes Obama is a muslim Kenyan communist and a giant pile of bs (FEMA camps, take away guns, etc etc.) Dems have about 1% conspiracy people...

I don't know...I'd generally consider modern feminists to be left wing, and if you believe all their antics...you may be in for a bad time.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

When the illegals came across the border in groves and took your jobs at half the wage and you didn't make your gov't do their job and send them back you let them screw you out of higher wages. So who's at fault?

BS. Pubs who CONTINUE to refuse a good SS ID, the only real solution. The billionaires in charge love the cheap labor, dupe.

And the liberals love vote buying. Free college!!!!

ACTUALLY, it's called investing in America, as opposed to corrupt GOP pandering to the rich and bubble/busts/war mongering, dupe.

Yeah, an investment by Democrats to try and make sure they stay in power forever. It's just that you on the left will never realize it living in your bubble world loaded with conspiracy theories instead of looking at straight out facts.

The fact is you are duped by the New BS GOP. There's always fools like you to support the BS GOP despite their never doing a gd thing for you or the country. See SS, UE, workers comp, ACA, Medicare/aid etc etc...

At least when Republicans are in power I don't lose. I may not gain anything, but it's not the job of politicians for me TO gain anything. Just stay the F out of my life and I'll be happy.

Now that DumBama totally screwed up the country, it's costing me thousand and thousands of dollars per year. Those are thousands and thousands I can't reinvest into our economy. There are millions of people just like me--many of us middle-class.

I was way better off before this big-eared creep invaded the White House thanks to Cradle-to-Gravers just like yourself who want a government that relieves you of personal responsibility and gives you government programs to live off of.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Yeah, an investment by Democrats to try and make sure they stay in power forever. It's just that you on the left will never realize it living in your bubble world loaded with conspiracy theories instead of looking at straight out facts.

You realize that there are extremists on both sides that buy into a lot of absurd conspiracy theories. I mean, from the Right, I've heard everything from 9/11 being an inside job (which you would think would come from the Left (anti-Bush) more than the right...b/c I've honestly only really heard this from my conservative (anti-government) friends) to Obama not being an American. I'm not saying that there aren't radical liberals that buy into a load of baloney conspiracy theories, what I am saying is that the market is far from being cornered by the left.

Well I would debate you on that. I've never heard of a true right-winger claim 911 was a conspiracy. I have heard that from the left by kooks like Jessie Ventura and like.

I do agree there are extremists on the right, it's just that they don't dominate the party as they do on the left.

Even people on the right laugh at people on our side like the birthers. They are a small faction of our movement. But nobody on the left will ever agree with the fact that Commie Care was never designed to make sure everybody is covered. Commie Care was designed to make as many more government dependent citizens as possible. According to the White House, they were successful too. They claim we now have 14 million more government dependents. Congrats to the DUPS like FrankFart who made that creation possible.

 

[froggy]

Reagan was a hero...at least that is what some say...I never saw it. He didn't help the middle class.

Reagan was a showman. He had a trained voice and great hair and was the epitome of what Lincoln said about fooling some of the people all of the time.

He started out a Democrat