- Mar 11, 2015
- 85,374
- 53,829
Bill Clinton had to clean up a mess because of 3 terms of Reaganomics. Obama had to clean up a near Depression after Bush. Biden had to clean up a huge mess left by Trump and Republicans are talking about Democrats destroying America? WTF? It is apparent that being "conservative" is a mental disorder.
www.businessinsider.com
William Lazonick, The Financialization of the U.S. Corporation: What Has Been Lost, and How It Can Be Regained
Since the beginning of the 1980s, employment relations in U.S. industrial corporations have undergone three major structural changes—which I summarize as “rationalization,” “marketization,” and “globalization”—that have permanently eliminated middle-class jobs.2 From the early 1980s, rationalization, characterized by plant closings, eliminated the jobs of unionized blue-collar workers. From the early 1990s, marketization, characterized by the end of a career with one company as an employment norm, placed the job security of middle-aged and older white-collar workers in jeopardy. From the early 2000s, globalization, characterized by the movement of employment offshore, left all members of the U.S. labor force, even those with advanced educational credentials and substantial work experience, vulnerable to displacement.
Cross-country comparisons of unemployment rates illuminate how effective strong worker protections and early testing measures could have been in the United States had they been promoted by the federal government. South Korea, which largely avoided shutting down its economy due to its early and aggressive actions, recorded an unemployment rate of 3.8 percent in April—only slightly above the 3.3 percent figure recorded in February. Australia, which implemented a wage subsidy program equivalent to 3.5 percent of its gross domestic product (GDP), has seen its unemployment rate increase from 5.1 percent to 6.2 percent over the same time period. Germany, too, only saw a modest increase in its unemployment rate, as it ticked up from 5.0 percent to 5.8 percent. The United States, on the other hand, recorded an unemployment rate of 14.7 percent in April—up dramatically from the 3.5 percent figure in February.
These differences in unemployment rates have massive consequences for the number of Americans currently without employment. Had the United States unemployment rate followed the same trajectory as those of its peers, millions more Americans would still be employed. Based on the percent changes in unemployment rates, between 17 and 18 million more Americans would still have their jobs if the United States had experienced changes in unemployment rate similar to those of Australia, Germany, or South Korea. And even if the United States had followed a slightly worse trajectory, like that of Canada, at least 11 million fewer people would be unemployed.
www.americanprogress.org
And this is what some peope want to return to?
The White House is only telling you half of the sad story of what happened to American jobs
- The Trump administration's timeline on the decline of American workers starts in the late 1990s with the rise of China.
- That thinking overlooks the impact of spending cuts, deregulation, and a shift to shareholder primacy at the expense of investment in innovation and workers.
- That began in the 1980s when Ronald Reagan was president and led a push for more Laissez Faire economics.
- Ignoring the US's hand in the demise of its own working class means this administration will never actually find ways to grow the economy for them.
The White House is only telling you half of the sad story of what happened to American jobs
The way White House trade council Peter Navarro tells it, America's jobs problem started in the 90s. That's not the whole story at all.
www.businessinsider.com
William Lazonick, The Financialization of the U.S. Corporation: What Has Been Lost, and How It Can Be Regained
Since the beginning of the 1980s, employment relations in U.S. industrial corporations have undergone three major structural changes—which I summarize as “rationalization,” “marketization,” and “globalization”—that have permanently eliminated middle-class jobs.2 From the early 1980s, rationalization, characterized by plant closings, eliminated the jobs of unionized blue-collar workers. From the early 1990s, marketization, characterized by the end of a career with one company as an employment norm, placed the job security of middle-aged and older white-collar workers in jeopardy. From the early 2000s, globalization, characterized by the movement of employment offshore, left all members of the U.S. labor force, even those with advanced educational credentials and substantial work experience, vulnerable to displacement.
Economic Downturn and Legacy of Bush Policies Continue to Drive Large Deficits
Federal deficits and debt have been sharply higher under President Obama, but the evidence continues to show that the Great Recession, President Bush’s tax cuts, and the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq explain most of the deficits that have occurred on Obama’s watch — based on the latest Congressional Budget Office projections as well as legislation enacted since we last issued this analysis of what lies behind current deficits and debt.Economic Downturn and Legacy of Bush Policies Continue to Drive Large Deficits | Center on Budget and Policy Priorities
Federal deficits and debt have been sharply higher under President Obama, but the evidence continues to show that the Great Recession, President Bush’s tax cuts, and the wars in Afghanistan and...
www.cbpp.org
5 Ways the Trump Administration’s Policy Failures Compounded the Coronavirus-Induced Economic Crisis
The weakness of the Trump administration’s economic response to the coronavirus crisis—much like the failure of its public health response—can be seen in comparison with the United States’ international peers. As demonstrated by the experiences of peer nations, a rapid and coordinated public health response could have contained the pandemic more effectively and reduced the mounting economic losses. Instead, it seems as though the United States is getting the worst of both: the highest death toll of any country and what will likely be the sharpest economic contraction in American history.Cross-country comparisons of unemployment rates illuminate how effective strong worker protections and early testing measures could have been in the United States had they been promoted by the federal government. South Korea, which largely avoided shutting down its economy due to its early and aggressive actions, recorded an unemployment rate of 3.8 percent in April—only slightly above the 3.3 percent figure recorded in February. Australia, which implemented a wage subsidy program equivalent to 3.5 percent of its gross domestic product (GDP), has seen its unemployment rate increase from 5.1 percent to 6.2 percent over the same time period. Germany, too, only saw a modest increase in its unemployment rate, as it ticked up from 5.0 percent to 5.8 percent. The United States, on the other hand, recorded an unemployment rate of 14.7 percent in April—up dramatically from the 3.5 percent figure in February.
These differences in unemployment rates have massive consequences for the number of Americans currently without employment. Had the United States unemployment rate followed the same trajectory as those of its peers, millions more Americans would still be employed. Based on the percent changes in unemployment rates, between 17 and 18 million more Americans would still have their jobs if the United States had experienced changes in unemployment rate similar to those of Australia, Germany, or South Korea. And even if the United States had followed a slightly worse trajectory, like that of Canada, at least 11 million fewer people would be unemployed.
The Trump administration failed to take the coronavirus outbreak seriously. In late February, while other high-income countries were ramping up testing and developing tracing procedures, President Donald Trump stated that “the Coronavirus [was] very much under control.” It was during these critical early weeks and months that the United States should have been stockpiling protective gear for frontline workers and making testing widely available. In contrast, South Korea, a country whose first confirmed case of COVID-19 coincided with that of the United States, bought 720,000 masks for employees of businesses considered at risk of exposure to the coronavirus. When asked if the U.S. federal government would supply personal protective equipment (PPE) to states, President Trump responded that it would not act as a “shipping clerk.”
5 Ways the Trump Administration’s Policy Failures Compounded the Coronavirus-Induced Economic Crisis
The Trump administration’s failure to respond to the coronavirus pandemic and the subsequent economic fallout has exacerbated both crises in the United States.
www.americanprogress.org
And this is what some peope want to return to?
