Skip to main content

Home/ Politically Minded/ Group items tagged growth

Rss Feed Group items tagged

Filter: All | Bookmarks | Topics Simple Middle
thinkahol *

Since 2009, 88 Percent Of Income Growth Went To Corporate Profits, Just One Percent Wen... - 0 views

thinkprogress.org/...corporate-profits-recovery

Since 2009 88 Percent Of Income Growth Went To Corporate Profits Just One Wages | ThinkProgress

shared by thinkahol * on 12 Jul 11 - No Cached
  • thinkahol * on 12 Jul 11
     
    "Between the second quarter of 2009 and the fourth quarter of 2010, real national income in the U.S. increased by $528 billion. Pre-tax corporate profits by themselves had increased by $464 billion while aggregate real wages and salaries rose by only $7 billion or only .1%. Over this six quarter period, corporate profits captured 88% of the growth in real national income while aggregate wages and salaries accounted for only slightly more than 1% of the growth in real national income. …The absence of any positive share of national income growth due to wages and salaries received by American workers during the current economic recovery is historically unprecedented."
thinkahol *

Good Government vs. Less Government « The Baseline Scenario - 0 views

baselinescenario.com/...-government-vs-less-government

good government

shared by thinkahol * on 02 Jun 10 - Cached
  • thinkahol * on 02 Jun 10
     
    Recently, a controversy raged in the blogosphere about whether neo-liberalism has been a bane or a boon for the world economy. The argument is rather coarse, in that it fails to distinguish between the various elements of neo-liberalism, or moderate deregulation vs. extreme deregulation. But if we take the argument at face value, one of the major claims of neoliberals is that countries in the world which are more neoliberal are more successful (because they are more neoliberal). I disagree. My disagreement is not with the raw correlation between the Heritage Index and Per Capita GDP. A number is a number. My disagreement is with the composition of the index itself, and interpreting this correlation as causation between neo-liberalism and 'good things.' My primary contention below is that many of these measures used in the composite Heritage Index have nothing to do with less government, and a lot more to do with good government. It is these measures of good government that correlate to economic growth and drive the overall correlation between the "Freedom Index" and positive outcomes. Secondarily, I will argue that many of the other items in the index (like investment freedom) are not causes of growth, but rather outcomes of growth.
thinkahol *

Things We're Supposed To Be Quiet About - NYTimes.com - 0 views

krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/...ere-supposed-to-be-quiet-about

Things We're Supposed To Be Quiet About - NYTimes.com

shared by thinkahol * on 15 Jan 12 - No Cached
  • thinkahol * on 15 Jan 12
     
    Apologists for rising inequality often argue that since most Americans' income has risen despite rising inequality, there's no reason to complain about inequality other than envy. So it's worth remembering that we used to expect economic growth to deliver large increases in real income, not just a bit of a rise that's accomplished in large part through longer working hours; and that a major reason so many have seen such small gains is that a large part of growth has been siphoned off to the very high end.
thinkahol *

Economic Scene; If taxes were lower, the economy would grow faster, right? Economists s... - 0 views

www.nytimes.com/...w-faster-right-economists.html

Economic Scene; If taxes were lower the economy would grow faster right? Economists say not necessarily. - New York Times

shared by thinkahol * on 20 Aug 11 - No Cached
  • thinkahol * on 20 Aug 11
     
    AS Election Day approaches, serious discussion about economic policies is hamstrung by the devotion of both parties to reducing taxes. The big reason, of course, is that President Bush emphasizes tax cuts, including elimination of the estate tax, to the exclusion of almost everything else. The Democrats, in turn, hesitate to propose an economic plan that does not include long-term reductions for middle-income workers, and most refuse to talk about rescinding the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy. But the degree of misleading information emanating from both Washington and the media about how taxes affect the economy is disturbing. As I listen to the radio, watch TV news and read a variety of newspapers, it seems that quite a few Americans, including economics writers and media hosts, think that low-tax countries unquestionably grow faster than high-tax economies. Right and left, they seem to attribute more rapid growth in America to lower taxes. What may surprise them is that there is no evidence for that. ''You can make a theoretical case that high taxes impede economic growth, but it is just not supported by the evidence in the U.S. or across countries,'' said William Easterly, a former World Bank economist soon to join the faculty of New York University.
Sarah Eeee

Income Inequality and the 'Superstar Effect' - NYTimes.com - 0 views

www.nytimes.com/...26excerpt.html

inequality economics capitalism

shared by Sarah Eeee on 27 Dec 10 - No Cached
  • In 1982, the top 1 percent of pop stars, in terms of pay, raked in 26 percent of concert ticket revenue. In 2003, that top percentage of stars — names like Justin Timberlake, Christina Aguilera or 50 Cent — was taking 56 percent of the concert pie.
  • . In an article entitled “The Economics of Superstars,” he argued that technological changes would allow the best performers in a given field to serve a bigger market and thus reap a greater share of its revenue. But this would also reduce the spoils available to the less gifted in the business.
  • IF one loosens slightly the role played by technological progress, Dr. Rosen’s framework also does a pretty good job explaining the evolution of executive pay. In 1977, an elite chief executive working at one of America’s top 100 companies earned about 50 times the wage of its average worker. Three decades later, the nation’s best-paid C.E.O.’s made about 1,100 times the pay of a worker on the production line.
  • ...2 more annotations...
  • CAPITALISM relies on inequality. Like differences in other prices, pay disparities steer resources — in this case, people — to where they would be most productively employed.
  • In poor economies, fast economic growth increases inequality as some workers profit from new opportunities and others do not. The share of national income accruing to the top 1 percent of the Chinese population more than doubled from 1986 to 2003.
  • Sarah Eeee on 27 Dec 10
     
    What impact do the incredible salaries of superstars have on the rest of us? What has changed, technologically and socially, to precipitate these inequities? This article also offers a brief look at the relationship between income inequality and economic growth, comparing the US throughout its history and the US vis a vis several European countries. (Part 1 of 2)
Christopher Aiden

How Outsourcing is the Solution for Contract Management Tasks? - 0 views

contract management Contract management services Contract review services Contract Drafting Services Outsourcing Contract Management Outsource contract review Contract review and management

shared by Christopher Aiden on 24 Jan 17 - No Cached
  • Christopher Aiden on 24 Jan 17
     
    Contract management is complex and risky part of a legal business but plays an important role in terms of business and client management. Thus, to handle the issues, outsourcing has concluded as a best option for law firms to increase profitability and business growth.
Thomas Sullivan

Obama's Post-Recession Economy a Failure - 0 views

bit.ly/adjseH

recession economy Obama jobs unemployment

shared by Thomas Sullivan on 02 Jul 10 - Cached
  • Thomas Sullivan on 02 Jul 10
     
    The Obama economy is tanking, its growth rate is slowing, businesses are shedding jobs and a wave of pessimism has sent U.S. stock markets into a nose dive, threatening recovery.
thinkahol *

Robert Reich (Why We're Falling Into a Double-Dip Recession) - 0 views

robertreich.org/...ng-into-a-double-dip-recession

robert reich recession why double-dip

shared by thinkahol * on 04 Aug 10 - Cached
  • thinkahol * on 04 Aug 10
     
    We're falling into a double-dip recession. The Labor Department reports this morning that the private sector added a measly 41,000 net new jobs in May. (The vast bulk of new jobs in May were temporary government Census workers.) But at least 100,000 new jobs are needed every month just to keep up with population growth. In other words, the labor market continues to deteriorate. The average length of unemployment continues to rise - now up to 34.4 weeks (up from 33 weeks in April). That's another record. More Americans are too discouraged to look for a job than last year at this time (1.1 million in May, an increase of 291,000 from a year earlier.)
thinkahol *

Cato Unbound » Blog Archive » The Digital Surveillance State: Vast, Secret, a... - 0 views

www.cato-unbound.org/...tate-vast-secret-and-dangerous

digital surveillance state secret government

shared by thinkahol * on 10 Aug 10 - Cached
  • thinkahol * on 10 Aug 10
     
    It is unsurprising that the 9/11 attack fostered a massive expansion of America's already sprawling Surveillance State. But what is surprising, or at least far less understandable, is that this growth shows no signs of abating even as we approach almost a full decade of emotional and temporal distance from that event. The spate of knee-jerk legislative expansions in the immediate aftermath of the 9/11 trauma - the USA-PATRIOT Act - has actually been exceeded by the expansions of the last several years - first secretly and lawlessly by the Bush administration, and then legislatively and out in the open once Democrats took over control of the Congress in 2006. Simply put, there is no surveillance power too intrusive or unaccountable for our political class provided the word "terrorism" is invoked to "justify" those powers.
thinkahol *

Japan Goes From Dynamic to Disheartened - NYTimes.com - 0 views

www.nytimes.com/...17japan.html

Japan Goes From Dynamic to Disheartened - NYTimes.com

shared by thinkahol * on 17 Oct 10 - No Cached
  • thinkahol * on 17 Oct 10
     
    Economists are pointing to Japan, which has been trapped in low growth and deflation, as a dark vision of the future for the West.
thinkahol *

ThinkProgress » Reagan Budget Director: GOP Has Abandoned Fiscal Responsibili... - 0 views

thinkprogress.org/...stockman-slams-gop-taxes

ThinkProgress » Reagan Budget Director: GOP Has Abandoned Fiscal Responsibility By Adopting 'Theology' Of Tax Cuts

shared by thinkahol * on 05 Dec 10 - No Cached
  • thinkahol * on 05 Dec 10
     
    As Congress prepares to take up extension of the Bush tax cuts during its lame duck session, Republican lawmakers have been unanimous in demanding that the cuts for the richest two percent of Americans be extended, claiming they are necessary for economic growth and that tax cuts (miraculously) pay for themselves.
Skeptical Debunker

In Past Decade, American Funds Created Most Wealth - Yahoo! News - 0 views

news.yahoo.com/...americanfundscreatedmostwealth

mutual funds wealth decade performance

shared by Skeptical Debunker on 07 Mar 10 - Cached
  • Morningstar determined that Janus and Putnam were the two largest "wealth destroyers" during the decade, losing $58 billion and $46 billion, respectively. "Janus and Putnam rode the growth wave more than anyone else," Kinnel says. "They had some very aggressive funds that put up big numbers that got huge inflows." After the tech bubble burst, the funds that were most heavily invested in these types of holdings experienced huge sell-offs, which made it difficult for these funds to attract inflows through the remainder of the decade. According to Morningstar, American Funds created about $191 million in wealth for investors during the decade, followed by Vanguard and Fidelity. Since American Funds generally employs a more value-oriented strategy, the firm was largely able to avert the first bear market of the decade. "The 2000 to 2002 bear market was all growth and tech, and American barely touched that, whereas they had lots of value, dividend payers, and bonds, which did very well," Kinnel says. Recently, the tables have turned for American. In 2009, it lost the most of any fund family (more than $25 billion). No fund family, including American, was able to avoid the bear market of 2008. The same strategy that allowed American to bypass most of the first bear market failed because many well-known dividend-paying companies, like big financial firms, experienced huge losses.
  • Skeptical Debunker on 07 Mar 10
     
    In a decade with two bear markets and lackluster returns for many investors, American Funds created the most wealth for investors, while Janus destroyed the most wealth, according to a survey released by Morningstar. For the survey, Morningstar looked at the 50 largest mutual fund families and their total net assets at the end of 1999. Then the fund tracker subtracted each fund company's total cash flows over the decade and deducted their total net assets at the end of 2009. Numbers were calculated in dollar terms so that any funds that were liquidated during the decade would also be included.
  • Skeptical Debunker on 07 Mar 10
     
    Get this! Mutual funds, where most American's have their 401Ks, IRAs, and retirement savings, performed pitifully in the "great economy" of the 2000's (brought to you by Republican deregulationists starting with Ronald Reagan). The "best" made $191 million (but lost $25 billion in 2009!), the worst lost around $50 billion! What a great way to transfer all that hard earned savings, mostly by the "little guy", from them to the Wall Street gamblers. Another socialistic Republican "redistribution of wealth" of the corporate criminal rich, by the corporate criminal rich, and for the corporate criminal rich.
Sarah Eeee

Income Inequality and the 'Superstar Effect' - NYTimes.com - 0 views

www.nytimes.com/...26excerpt.html

inequality capitalism economics

shared by Sarah Eeee on 27 Dec 10 - No Cached
  • Yet the increasingly outsize rewards accruing to the nation’s elite clutch of superstars threaten to gum up this incentive mechanism. If only a very lucky few can aspire to a big reward, most workers are likely to conclude that it is not worth the effort to try.
  • It is true that the nation grew quite fast as inequality soared over the last three decades. Since 1980, the country’s gross domestic product per person has increased about 69 percent, even as the share of income accruing to the richest 1 percent of the population jumped to 36 percent from 22 percent. But the economy grew even faster — 83 percent per capita — from 1951 to 1980, when inequality declined when measured as the share of national income going to the very top of the population.
  • The cost for this tonic seems to be a drastic decline in Americans’ economic mobility. Since 1980, the weekly wage of the average worker on the factory floor has increased little more than 3 percent, after inflation. The United States is the rich country with the most skewed income distribution. According to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, the average earnings of the richest 10 percent of Americans are 16 times those for the 10 percent at the bottom of the pile. That compares with a multiple of 8 in Britain and 5 in Sweden.
  • ...4 more annotations...
  • Not coincidentally, Americans are less economically mobile than people in other developed countries. There is a 42 percent chance that the son of an American man in the bottom fifth of the income distribution will be stuck in the same economic slot. The equivalent odds for a British man are 30 percent, and 25 percent for a Swede.
  • Just as technology gave pop stars a bigger fan base that could buy their CDs, download their singles and snap up their concert tickets, the combination of information technology and deregulation gave bankers an unprecedented opportunity to reap huge rewards. Investors piled into the top-rated funds that generated the highest returns. Rewards flowed in abundance to the most “productive” financiers, those that took the bigger risks and generated the biggest profits. Finance wasn’t always so richly paid. Financiers had a great time in the early decades of the 20th century: from 1909 to the mid-1930s, they typically made about 50 percent to 60 percent more than workers in other industries. But the stock market collapse of 1929 and the Great Depression changed all that. In 1934, corporate profits in the financial sector shrank to $236 million, one-eighth what they were five years earlier. Wages followed. From 1950 through about 1980, bankers and insurers made only 10 percent more than workers outside of finance, on average.
  • Then, in the 1980s, the Reagan administration unleashed a surge of deregulation. By 1999, the Glass-Steagall Act lay repealed. Banks could commingle with insurance companies at will. Ceilings on interest rates vanished. Banks could open branches anywhere. Unsurprisingly, the most highly educated returned to banking and finance. By 2005, the share of workers in the finance industry with a college education exceeded that of other industries by nearly 20 percentage points. By 2006, pay in the financial sector was again 70 percent higher than wages elsewhere in the private sector. A third of the 2009 Princeton graduates who got jobs after graduation went into finance; 6.3 percent took jobs in government.
  • Then the financial industry blew up, taking out a good chunk of the world economy. Finance will not be tamed by tweaking the way bankers are paid. But bankers’ pay could be structured to discourage wanton risk taking
  • Sarah Eeee on 27 Dec 10
     
    (Part 2 of 2 - see first part below) What impact do the incredible salaries of superstars have on the rest of us? What has changed, technologically and socially, to precipitate these inequities? This article also offers a brief look at the relationship between income inequality and economic growth, comparing the US throughout its history and the US vis a vis several European countries.
thinkahol *

Record profits and record unemployment: Nothing's trickling down - CSMonitor.com - 0 views

www.csmonitor.com/...yment-Nothing-s-trickling-down

profits and record unemployment: Nothing's trickling down - CSMonitor.com

shared by thinkahol * on 08 Mar 11 - No Cached
  • thinkahol * on 08 Mar 11
     
    The Big Money economy is booming. According to a new Commerce Department report, third-quarter profits of American businesses rose at an annual record-breaking $1.659 trillion - besting even the boom year of 2006 (in nominal dollars). Profits have soared for seven consecutive quarters now, matching or beating their fastest pace in history. Executive pay is linked to profits, so top pay is soaring as well. Higher profits are also translating into the nice gains in the stock market, which is a boon to everyone with lots of financial assets. And Wall Street is back. Bonuses on the Street are expected to rise about 5 percent this year, according to a survey by compensation consultants Johnson Associates Inc. But nothing is trickling down to the Average Worker economy. Job growth is still anemic. At October's rate of only 50,000 new private-sector jobs, unemployment won't get down to pre-recession levels for twenty years. And almost half of October's new jobs were in temporary help.
thinkahol *

Fast Track to Inequality - NYTimes.com - 0 views

www.nytimes.com/...02herbert.html

Fast Track to Inequality - NYTimes.com

shared by thinkahol * on 26 May 11 - No Cached
  • thinkahol * on 26 May 11
     
    The clearest explanation yet of the forces that converged over the past three decades or so to undermine the economic well-being of ordinary Americans is contained in the new book, "Winner-Take-All Politics: How Washington Made the Rich Richer - and Turned Its Back on the Middle Class." The authors, political scientists Jacob Hacker of Yale and Paul Pierson of the University of California, Berkeley, argue persuasively that the economic struggles of the middle and working classes in the U.S. since the late-1970s were not primarily the result of globalization and technological changes but rather a long series of policy changes in government that overwhelmingly favored the very rich. Those changes were the result of increasingly sophisticated, well-financed and well-organized efforts by the corporate and financial sectors to tilt government policies in their favor, and thus in favor of the very wealthy. From tax laws to deregulation to corporate governance to safety net issues, government action was deliberately shaped to allow those who were already very wealthy to amass an ever increasing share of the nation's economic benefits. "Over the last generation," the authors write, "more and more of the rewards of growth have gone to the rich and superrich. The rest of America, from the poor through the upper middle class, has fallen further and further behind."
thinkahol *

Will US Mayors Vote Against War? - 0 views

www.readersupportednews.org/...ill-us-mayors-vote-against-war

Will US Mayors Vote Against War?

shared by thinkahol * on 20 Jun 11 - No Cached
  • thinkahol * on 20 Jun 11
     
    But Barry's words ring true. The city of Detroit stands as a mirror to the United States' battered economy and failing wars. Our nation's continued military exploits in Iraq and Afghanistan are fueling Detroit's destruction. Taxpayers from Detroit shell out over two billion dollars a year for war, money that could cover healthcare for over 150,000 children or the payment of some 3,000 teachers' salaries. While Senator Levin might not want to make the link between war funding and the financial woes of our cities, mayors around the country are doing just that. At this year's annual US Conference of Mayors, to be held from June 17-21 in Baltimore, hundreds of mayors will gather to discuss diverse issues from job growth to homeland security. One of the issues they will vote on is the Bring Our War Dollars Home resolution, introduced by Mayor Kitty Piercy from Eugene, Oregon, which calls on Congress to redirect military spending to domestic priorities.
thinkahol *

The Real Deficit Problem: One More Essential Chart - James Fallows - Politics - The Atl... - 0 views

www.theatlantic.com/...243164

The Real Deficit Problem: One More Essential Chart - James Fallows Politics Atlantic

shared by thinkahol * on 06 Aug 11 - No Cached
  • thinkahol * on 06 Aug 11
     
    The federal deficit is a serious challenge in the long run. The real emergency is how many people are still out of work. That's the deficit that matters. Almost nothing can do more harm to a nation's cultural, social, political, and of course economic fabric than sustained high joblessness. And of nothing can do more, faster, to reduce a federal deficit than a restoration of economic growth. That political and media attention got hijacked to a fake debt-ceiling "emergency" is 1937 all over again -- but worse, because in principle we had the real 1937 to learn from.
thinkahol *

Economist's View: "The Greatest Increase in Poverty and Hardship Produced by Any Law in... - 0 views

economistsview.typepad.com/...-law-in-modern-us-history.html

Economist's View: The Greatest Increase in Poverty and Hardship Produced by Any Law in Modern U.S. History

shared by thinkahol * on 03 Aug 11 - No Cached
  • thinkahol * on 03 Aug 11
     
    Mathew Yglesias: CBPP Analysis of John Boehner's Plan: The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities concludes that if enacted, John Boehner's debt ceiling plan "could well produce the greatest increase in poverty and hardship produced by any law in modern U.S. history." That sounds to me like something that would create strong incentives to not be poor and, indeed, to fully incentive richness. Consequently, we'll have massive economic growth. Right? Think of all the old people who will be willing to do odd jobs, whatever, in order to pay for health care. No more free-riding from grandma and grandpa to slow the economy down. The CBPP adds: This may sound hyperbolic, but it is not. The mathematics are inexorable. ... In short, the Boehner plan would force policymakers to choose among cutting the incomes and health benefits of ordinary retirees, repealing the guts of health reform and leaving an estimated 34 million more Americans uninsured, and savaging the safety net for the poor. It would do so even as it shielded all tax breaks, including the many lucrative tax breaks for the wealthiest and most powerful individuals and corporations. As for the way the debt ceiling talks are going, what a disaster.
1 - 20 of 39 Next ›
Showing 20▼ items per page