4% in 40 years
from David Ruccio
Neil King, Jr., for the Wall Street Journal, is perplexed:
It is in many ways both the ultimate economic puzzle and the great political challenge: Why have American incomes remained so flat, for so long, and what can be done to change that?
Uh, well. Maybe it’s this, maybe it’s that. King just can’t be bothered to figure it out.
So, let’s help him out: American incomes are flat precisely because of the anti-union, free-trade, decrease-taxes, cut-social-programs, don’t-raise-the-minimum-wage policies
Leave a Reply Cancel reply
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.
RWER 26,369 subscribers
Regular Contributors
follow this blog on Twitter
Top Posts- last 48 hours
- Chicago economics — the triumph of empty formalism
- The war against scientific economics continues
- Sameness is just wrong
- Confusing statistics and research
- To prevent the resurgence of the pandemic, can we talk about open-source research?
- The leap of generalization
- Richard Werner on the Ideal 'European' Central Bank
- The World Economic Forum is planning the “Great Reset” to prevent it from happening
- Re-estimating wealth inequality in the United States
- Lock Step: How the Rockefeller Foundation wants to implement its autocratic pandemic scenario
Real World Economics Review
The RWER is a free open-access journal, but with access to the current issue restricted to its 25,952 subscribers (07/12/16). Subscriptions are free. Over one million full-text copies of RWER papers are downloaded per year.
WEA online conference: Trade Wars after Coronavirus
Comments on recent RWER issues
————– WEA Paperbacks ————– ———– available at low prices ———– ————- on most Amazons ————-
WEA Periodicals
----- World Economics Association ----- founded 2011 – today 13,800 members
Recent Comments
- Yoshinori Shiozawa on Sameness is just wrong
- Ken Zimmerman on Want to reverse inequality? Change intellectual property rules
- Ken Zimmerman on Forecasting errors
- pfeffertag on AI and democracy
- Ken Zimmerman on Excessive stimulus and other things Larry Summers worries about
- Ken Zimmerman on January 6th, one month on
- Ken Zimmerman on Dealing with a pandemic as if human lives mattered
- evidencebasedeconomics on Sameness is just wrong
- Christian Mueller on Sameness is just wrong
- larrymotuz on The war against scientific economics continues
- larrymotuz on The leap of generalization
- Lars Syll on Say ‘consistent’ one more time and I …
- pfeffertag on Information take two
- davetaylor1 on Keynes on the methodology of econometrics
- Yoshinori Shiozawa on Beyond mathematical modelling
Comments on issue 74 - repaired
Comments on RWER issues
WEA Online Conferences
—- Forthcoming WEA Paperbacks —-
———— Armando Ochangco ———-

Shimshon Bichler / Jonathan Nitzan

————— Herman Daly —————-

————— Asad Zaman —————

—————– C. T. Kurien —————

————— Robert Locke —————-

Guidelines for Comments
• This blog is renowned for its high level of comment discussion. These guidelines exist to further that reputation.
• Engage with the arguments of the post and of your fellow discussants.
• Try not to flood discussion threads with only your comments.
• Do not post slight variations of the same comment under multiple posts.
• Show your fellow discussants the same courtesy you would if you were sitting around a table with them.
Most downloaded RWER papers
- Global finance in crisis (Jacques Sapir)
- What Is Neoclassical Economics? (Christian Arnsperger and Yanis Varoufakis)
- New thinking on poverty (Paul Shaffer)
- Why some countries are poor and some rich: a non-Eurocentric view (Deniz Kellecioglu)
- The housing bubble and the financial crisis (Dean Baker)
- Green capitalism: the god that failed (Richard Smith)
- Debunking the theory of the firm—a chronology (Steve Keen and Russell Standish)
- The state of China’s economy 2009 (James Angresano)
- Trade and inequality: The role of economists (Dean Baker)
Family Links
Contact
follow this blog on Twitter
RWER Board of Editors
Nicola Acocella (Italy, University of Rome) Robert Costanza (USA, Portland State University) Wolfgang Drechsler ( Estonia, Tallinn University of Technology) Kevin Gallagher (USA, Boston University) Jo Marie Griesgraber (USA, New Rules for Global Finance Coalition) Bernard Guerrien (France, Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne) Michael Hudson (USA, University of Missouri at Kansas City) Frederic S. Lee (USA, University of Missouri at Kansas City) Anne Mayhew (USA, University of Tennessee) Gustavo Marqués (Argentina, Universidad de Buenos Aires) Julie A. Nelson (USA, University of Massachusetts, Boston) Paul Ormerod (UK, Volterra Consulting) Richard Parker (USA, Harvard University) Ann Pettifor (UK, Policy Research in Macroeconomics) Alicia Puyana (Mexico, Latin American School of Social Sciences) Jacques Sapir (France, École des hautes études en sciences socials) Peter Söderbaum (Sweden, School of Sustainable Development of Society and Technology) Peter Radford (USA, The Radford Free Press) David Ruccio (USA, Notre Dame University) Immanuel Wallerstein (USA, Yale University)
Shorter answer, well trimmed by Occam’s Razor: Equity has not been justly shared with the workers because employers have had the option instead of borrowing from a government-subsidized credit cartel, the banking system.
This particular graph is the best evidence the US is a superbly controlled centrally planned economy and culture.
“Adjusted for inflation” does not come close to accounting for the increase in the “cost of living (subsisting)”, for the bottom 90% working-class households, while the top 1-5% to 10% benefit from hyper-financialization of the economy and society, including the “health care” and “education” sectors that have become increasingly dependent upon financialization by the insurance industry (they get paid first, or no “health care” is provided) and the federal gov’t via student loans respectively.
Consequently, total US local, state, and federal gov’t spending, private health care and education, and household debt service now combines for an equivalent of 53-54% of GDP.
Perceived alternatively, the US economy cannot grow in real terms per capita unless gov’t grows as a share of GDP (of which growth of spending in recent years is attributable to war, food stamps, unemployment payments, and Obamacare-induced Medicaid spending), we are increasingly aging, ill, and dying, and we are collectively more indebted per household.
This is profoundly and depressingly perverse and indicative not of a truly wealthy, technological and universalist-humanist, progressive society but an increasingly unsustainable, neo-feudal, rentier-parasitic society and economy in decline and devolving to collapse.
Of course, the rentier Power Elite top 0.01-0.1% have no illusions or doubts about this whatsoever, which is why they are busily accumulating everything of economic, financial, and political value, influence, and power before the inevitable post-Oil Age collapse occurs, ushering in the conditions for “Elysium” for the top 0.01-0.1%.
The simple answer is that the effectiveness of labor organizations, the so called trade-unions, has become less virile. There is a continuous battle between the managers of industry and the organizers of the labor that work for it. Today there have been considerable losses on the worker’s organization side.
The longer answer is that it is also affected by the lower demand for goods and the associated degree of unemployment. If a full employment situation existed the competition for labor would raise the wages to a level where the cost of production would be more equally met by the purchasing price of goods. This is by better paid workers and so there would continue to be more prosperity.
The monopolism of land and certain durable capital investments in buildings, machines, communications nets, etc., has the result of making goods more costly due to little competition for them. This means that the only kind of person to benefit basically are the land owners and the banks who support them. They are the ones whose control of the opportunities to work through land ownership (including unused speculative land, particularly in development areas) should be stopped by taxation of land values instead of our current taxation of the produce and the process of production.
TAX LAND NOT PEOPLE; TAX TAKINGS NOT MAKINGS!
The simple answer is that the effectiveness of labor organizations, the so called trade-unions, has become less virile. MacroCompassion
Because of automation and outsourcing financed with the (legally) stolen purchasing power of the workers (among others) via loans from the government-subsidized credit cartel for the sake of the so-called “credit-worthy” which typically includes employers – if they can show how they can reduce their labor costs.