95 Percent Of The Jobs Lost During The Recession Were Middle Class Jobs

[NikolayaRadchenkova]

95 Percent Of The Jobs Lost During The Recession Were Middle Class Jobs

Michael Snyder
The Economic Collapse
Wednesday, May 2, 2012
http://www.infowars.com/95-percent-o...le-class-jobs/

Who is the biggest loser in the ongoing decline of the U.S. economy? Is it the wealthy? No, the stock market has been soaring lately and their incomes are actually going up.

Is it the poor? Well, the poor are definitely hurting very badly, but when you don’t have much to begin with you don’t have much to lose. Unfortunately, it is the middle class that has lost the most during this economic downturn. According to Bloomberg, 95 percent of the jobs lost during the recession were middle class jobs. That is an absolutely astounding figure. Yes, some executives lost their jobs during the last recession as did some minimum-wage workers. But overwhelmingly the jobs that were lost were middle income jobs. Sadly, the limited number of jobs that have been added since the end of the last recession have mostly been low income jobs. A higher percentage of Americans are working low income jobs than ever before, and the cost of living continues to rise at a very brisk pace. This is causing an erosion of the middle class unlike anything we have ever seen in American history.

When I was growing up I was taught that the fact that we had the largest middle class in the history of the world was evidence that our economic system was working incredibly well.

So what does the fact that the middle class is shrinking at a very rapid pace at this point say about how well our economy is working?
Middle Class Incomes Are Going Down

During the last recession, millions of Americans lost their jobs and the percentage of working age Americans that have jobshas not bounced back in the years since the recession ended.

But most middle class Americans still have jobs. The big problem for many middle class families is the fact that their incomes are not going up. In fact, after you account for inflation, middle class incomes are actually way down during the Obama years as a recent Bloomberg article explained….
As a candidate in 2008, Obama blamed the reversals largely on the policies of Bush and other Republicans. He cited census figures showing that median income for working-age households — those headed by someone younger than 65 — had dropped more than $2,000 after inflation during the first seven years of Bush’s time in office.

Yet real median household income in March was down $4,300 since Obama took office in January 2009 and down $2,900 since the June 2009 start of the economic recovery, according to an analysis of census data by Sentier Research, an economic- consulting firm in Annapolis, Maryland.
So is this the “hope and change” that Obama was talking about?

But let’s not just blame Obama and Bush. The truth is that the trend toward lower paying jobs has been going on for a very long time.

Back in 1980, less than 30% of all jobs in the United States were low income jobs. Today, more than 40% of all jobs in the United States are low income jobs.

So where will it end?

Will 50 percent or 60 percent of all Americans soon be working low income jobs?

At this point, approximately one out of every four jobs in America pays $10 an hour or less.

Could your family survive on $10 an hour?

The Rising Cost Of Living

As middle class incomes go down, the cost of almost everything that middle class families buy continues to go up.
The Federal Reserve claims that it has kept inflation “low” for decades, but that is a giant lie.

When you take a look at the long-term picture, it is amazing how much prices have changed.

Back in 1950, the average price of a new car was $1,510.

Today, the average price of a new car is $30,748.

In 1967, yearly tuition at Yale was $1,950.

Today it is $38,300.

And inflation continues to take a great toll on the paychecks of middle class families.

For example, electricity bills in the U.S. have risen faster than the overall rate of inflation for five years in a row.
Also, the price of gas has risen by more than 100 percent since Barack Obama entered the White House and the average U.S. household spent a staggering $4,155 on gasoline during 2011.

The Destruction Of Middle Class Wealth...

continue reading: http://www.infowars.com/95-percent-o...le-class-jobs/

[Danke]

Without a prosperous middle class, who is gonna pay the taxes for the government employees' salaries and pensions?

[ILUVRP]

hard to disagree with the above numbers .

in the 50's the avg wage was about $2600 a year , now about 10x that.

in the 1950's gas was about 28c a gal , now $4/gal.

with energy and medical is taking about 30% of our economy now, its one of our biggest problems , with the goverment involved in the medical industry prices will keep going higher. nothing will stop energy from going much higher until we get everything we can on nat gas.

if we don't count --cat--deere--autos--boeing--defence plants ( these would be outsoursed except the goverment says no ) we really have no major mfr in america , even most of our tooth paste is made in china ( i use pepsodent and wear new balance shoes --both made in america ).

who knows what the answer is , we will never be a major mfr again unless we drag our country down to 3rd world status.

america is not as nationalist as countries like japan and most of europe , so we don't care where things we want is made .

we are now a service industry country .

i would think that anyone looking for a avg job with steady employment to get into the medical industry. also if people have anything with a "made in america" on it , save it as it will be a collectors item someday.

as far as mfr goes i guess if people consider making a big mac is a mfr job , then i wonder if the ones making the paddies are also mfr jobs.

[The Gold Standard]

We can have manufacturing jobs again. All it takes is for input costs to fall to the point where we are competitive globally, and the government untie the hands of private business. The destruction of the middle class is always the end result of currency debasement. We are seeing it first hand, but people still don't believe it.

[showpan]

The only way we will ever have decent paying manufacturing jobs again would be to do what our founding fathers did to build this country into the largest industrialized nation in the world....tariffs.

I can still hear the great echo of Ross Perot.

[Paul Or Nothing II]

We can have manufacturing jobs again. All it takes is for input costs to fall to the point where we are competitive globally, and the government untie the hands of private business. The destruction of the middle class is always the end result of currency debasement. We are seeing it first hand, but people still don't believe it.

+1

Exactly, it's stupid to try to hold price of labor above the market level through minimum wage & welfare, governments need to let the market work & let the labor-prices fall & there will more jobs & goods & services & subsequently prices of things will go down & living standards will go up again

The only way we will ever have decent paying manufacturing jobs again would be to do what our founding fathers did to build this country into the largest industrialized nation in the world....tariffs.

I can still hear the great echo of Ross Perot.

Protective tariffs are a form of socialism, it's an indirect transfer of wealth from low-skilled workers to higher-skilled workers who will have to pay higher & higher prices for locally-produced HIGH-PRICED goods, which could have otherwise been gotten cheaply through imports
It is no different than government raising income-taxes on the rich & middle-classes to subsidize the unskilled & low-skilled laborers, which is exactly what's been hurting the American economy, like socialism always does
The real problem is minimum wage laws & welfare which create price-floors for labor & outprice the workers at the lower end of the spectrum as well as high taxation & regulation that drives out businesses

Ross Perot also supported gun-control, war-on-drugs, EPA & socialism & what not

[angelatc]

Meh - I'd trade the income tax for tariffs any day.

[Seraphim]

As would I, BUT, we should also not denigrate ourselves to the point of choosing the lesser of evils. If the gun is pointed at your head, choose the tariffs, no doubt...But I push for neither the moment the perp loses focus.

Meh - I'd trade the income tax for tariffs any day.

[Paul Or Nothing II]

Meh - I'd trade the income tax for tariffs any day.

Does it matter whether somebody steals from your front-pocket or back-pocket?
The point is that just moving the taxes around won't do anything while cutting spending, taxes, regulation along with getting around minimum wage laws & at least making it harder to go on welfare will definitely uplift the economy
Protective tariffs simply prop up inept local businesses & workers, & block capital & labor that could be spent elsewhere more fruitfully to produce more REAL WEALTH - goods & services

[thoughtomator]

realize that the necessary setup for this was the middle class throwing the lower class under the bus by wholesale acceptance of illegal alien labor

[showpan]

First of all, this country was only built into the largest industrialized nation in the entire world by using tariffs...not personal taxes. Without them, we would have been broke shortly following the Revolution. We were broke and civil unrest was breaking out due to the inability of Washington to repay the soldiers who had fought. Tariffs not only protected the business that was already here, they also opened up entirely new industries that moved here since it is cheaper than paying the tax. This increased employment, which increased wages and created the now deceased middle class. The poor are still poor but now there are so much more of them. Your argument, Paul Or Nothing II, is completely without basis given the facts of how this country evolved and how it's economy expanded and has now contracted since the removal of tariffs. Can you say over 25 MILLION Americans need a decent paying job or do you insist on ignoring the facts. The wealth has been redistributed and they did so by wiping out the manufacturing capabilities of this country by removing tariffs and giving subsidies for companies to leave.

Ross Perot was right.
While he did support stricter gun control laws, stricter ones were enacted without him...lol

The middle class did NOT throw the lower class under the bus...lol
The only one who has accepted illegal labor is our government, shareholders and greedy business owners.

[heavenlyboy34]

+1

Exactly, it's stupid to try to hold price of labor above the market level through minimum wage & welfare, governments need to let the market work & let the labor-prices fall & there will more jobs & goods & services & subsequently prices of things will go down & living standards will go up again



Protective tariffs are a form of socialism, it's an indirect transfer of wealth from low-skilled workers to higher-skilled workers who will have to pay higher & higher prices for locally-produced HIGH-PRICED goods, which could have otherwise been gotten cheaply through imports
It is no different than government raising income-taxes on the rich & middle-classes to subsidize the unskilled & low-skilled laborers, which is exactly what's been hurting the American economy, like socialism always does
The real problem is minimum wage laws & welfare which create price-floors for labor & outprice the workers at the lower end of the spectrum as well as high taxation & regulation that drives out businesses

Ross Perot also supported gun-control, war-on-drugs, EPA & socialism & what not

Tariffs and indirect taxes are the only Constitutional ways to fund government activities (if you believe in Constitutionalism).

[heavenlyboy34]

The middle class did NOT throw the lower class under the bus...lol

This^^ The jobs were (and still are) always there for the "lower class" to take (and they used to)-but illegal aliens began outdoing US labor in quality and affordability. If the "lower class" had the initiative and endurance, they would push illegal aliens out of the market.

[showpan]

This^^ The jobs were (and still are) always there for the "lower class" to take (and they used to)-but illegal aliens began outdoing US labor in quality and affordability. If the "lower class" had the initiative and endurance, they would push illegal aliens out of the market.

+1 You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to heavenlyboy34 again.

It's hard to find good help these days, just because somebody looks busy, doesn't mean they are actually getting anything done and done right.

[heavenlyboy34]

+1 You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to heavenlyboy34 again.

It's hard to find good help these days, just because somebody looks busy, doesn't mean they are actually getting anything done and done right.

Yep. Back in the ol' days, my grandpa and uncle hired regular ol' gringos to help with farm work. Plenty of people were willing and able. Not anymore. Nowadays manual labor is done mostly by immigrants and illegal aliens. My folks hired roofers a few years ago to retile the roof, and all the guys were Mexican. I see gringos doing street repairs often, but that's about it.

I'll take your +rep IOU, but I expect timely payment.

[Paul Or Nothing II]

realize that the necessary setup for this was the middle class throwing the lower class under the bus by wholesale acceptance of illegal alien labor

Liberty entails people pursuing their own self-interest without force so obviously people are going to want to buy cheaper goods & services

If a bunch of businesses are selling a product at $10 & all of sudden a bunch of other businesses start selling it at $8 then existing ones are either going to have to find ways to reduce their prices or close down that business & put their resources somewhere else in the economy; same holds true for labor, if price of labor falls because of increased supply or whatever then you're going to have to lower the price of your labor at the market-level but the problem is that minimum wage laws hinder hinder competitive lowering of wages & welfare-state takes away any incentive to do so

It has to be remembered that it's NOT "money" that makes a society prosperous otherwise Zimbabwe would have seen an explosion of prosperity after their hyperinflation; so it's GOODS & SERVICES that make countries prosperous, the more are produced, the lower the prices & higher the living-standards

You know, during the Industrial Revolution, prices & wages FELL & yet living-standards WENT UP so if government didn't just steal & give people "free" goods & services then those people would have to actually PRODUCE goods & services, stealing less will leave private sector with more to invest, & the overall price-levels will be comparatively lower & affordable

Theft doesn't breed sustainable prosperity

[Paul Or Nothing II]

First of all, this country was only built into the largest industrialized nation in the entire world by using tariffs...not personal taxes.

Saying that tariffs made America prosperous is like saying that slavery & segregation made America prosperous; & sure as hell it's not that hard to make that correlation either but here's the thing - correlation does NOT mean causation

It's no different than liberals claiming that Clinton-years were good for the country despite high taxes while Bush-years were bad when we had the tax-cuts & therefore they'll argue that high taxes are good for the country; but it's a ridiculous claim since there are many other factors involved other than just taxes like spending, state of the economy, bubbles, etc
But that's how spurious this claim of "tariffs made America prosperous" is, it ignores the fact that total government spending back then was 5% of GDP, today it is about 40-50% of GDP so it has to do with LOW TAXES, less regulation, CHEAP LABOR, etc
If taxes are 5% of GDP then the country will thrive no matter whether they're collected as tariffs, income-taxes or sales-taxes or whatever; as I've said, it does NOT matter whether someone steals from your front-pocket, back-pocket or your bank account, the bottomline doesn't change

Tariffs not only protected the business that was already here, they also opened up entirely new industries that moved here since it is cheaper than paying the tax. This increased employment, which increased wages and created the now deceased middle class.

Yes, uncompetitive businesses that charge high prices definitely need government "protection" so that they could suck consumers' blood
And again, the industries & people came to US because it was much freer than anywhere else, less regulation, less taxes & CHEAP LABOR

The poor are still poor but now there are so much more of them.

So there were fewer people in 19th century America than today? Is that a joke or something? There's NO DOUBT that today's America is a lot better off with regards to poverty than 19th century America

Your argument, Paul Or Nothing II, is completely without basis given the facts of how this country evolved and how it's economy expanded and has now contracted since the removal of tariffs.

I don't know, may be it has to do with government STEALING 40% of the GDP from the private sector, may be it has to do with high regulation, high taxes & monetary policy & such but of course, all that is irrelevant, right! All we have to do is put in huge tariffs & FORCE people to pay higher & higher prices for goods & services & there will be prosperity again

Yes, making everything more expensive creates prosperity

Can you say over 25 MILLION Americans need a decent paying job or do you insist on ignoring the facts.

Firstly, "decent paying job" is a liberal/progressive rhetoric, not for the ones who believe in liberty & understand how the markets work; people get paid according to the supply-demand for their labor/skill, & that's all anyone deserves, nothing more than that

The wealth has been redistributed and they did so by wiping out the manufacturing capabilities of this country by removing tariffs and giving subsidies for companies to leave.

Companies left because of minimum wage laws & welfare-state raising the price of labor above the market-rates determined by supply-demand of labor

The only one who has accepted illegal labor is our government, shareholders and greedy business owners.

EVERYONE is "greedy", shareholders want more returns on their investments, businesses want more profits AND workers want higher & higher pay but what tempers all of their "greed" is supply-demand for the things provided by them, that's how markets work

Following is probably the best Austrian work that demonstrates how markets prioritize & allocate various economic factors to various parts of the economy through prices & profits; the name of the book is Economics in One Lesson - http://hacer.org/pdf/Hazlitt00.pdf
It destroyes all the pro-government- socialist/communist theories from price-gouging, minimum wage, government-spending, war-spending & many others including obsession about tariffs & saving particular industries
Related topics - "How the Price System Works", "The Function of Profits", "Minimum Wage Laws", "Who's Protected by Tariffs?" & "Saving X Industry"

[Paul Or Nothing II]

Tariffs and indirect taxes are the only Constitutional ways to fund government activities (if you believe in Constitutionalism).

I'm not as much of a Constitutionalist as I am a supporter of liberty, equality of rights & voluntary action
If one accepts that all individuals should have EQUAL rights to their life, liberty & property, & that their liberties shouldn't be violated in any way through violence, coercion, fraud, theft, etc then one must acknowledge that there should no "ruling-class" of people with power to rob & coerce other people by calling themselves government
I'm a minarchist but one that believes in VOLUNTARY funding of the government because the principles of voluntary action & equality of rights should be preserved

Of course, any such endeavor can't be adopted in the immediate future but then I'm not against LOW & UNIFORM tariffs across the board during the "transition period" but eventually repealing ALL taxes (theft) must be the end-goal if one truly believes in liberty & equality of rights

As for having PROTECTIONIST tariffs to "create jobs" or to "save X industry" is just bunkum where people don't realie that its net-negative for the economy, & even Ron Paul doesn't support protectionist tariffs - http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul21.html

We've all heard about how these tariffs are needed to protect the jobs of American steelworkers, but we never hear about the jobs that will be lost or never created when the cost of steel rises 30 percent. We forget that tariffs are taxes, and that imposing tariffs means raising taxes. Why is the administration raising taxes on American steel consumers? Apparently no one in the administration has read Henry Hazlitt's classic book, Economics in one Lesson. Professor Hazlitt's fundamental lesson was simple: We must examine economic policy by considering the long-term effects of any proposal on all groups. The administration instead chose to focus only on the immediate effects of steel tariffs on one group, the domestic steel industry. In doing so, it chose to ignore basic economics for the sake of political expediency. Now I grant you that this is hardly anything new in this town, but it's important that we see these tariffs as the political favors that they are. This has nothing to do with fairness. The free market is fair; it alone justly rewards the worthiest competitors. Tariffs reward the strongest Washington lobbies.

Here's a FREE pdf of this book Economics in One Lesson, the whole book is a great source for anyone to understand how markets work & how government intervention always leads to bad consequences - http://www.hacer.org/pdf/Hazlitt00.pdf

This^^ The jobs were (and still are) always there for the "lower class" to take (and they used to)-but illegal aliens began outdoing US labor in quality and affordability. If the "lower class" had the initiative and endurance, they would push illegal aliens out of the market.

Well, may be they'll push the illegals out if there were no minimum wage laws & free welfare so that people would actually need to start working & be productive & there will be NET ADDITION to goods & services in the economy

[showpan]

Saying that tariffs made America prosperous is like saying that slavery & segregation made America prosperous; & sure as hell it's not that hard to make that correlation either but here's the thing - correlation does NOT mean causation

It's no different than liberals claiming that Clinton-years were good for the country despite high taxes while Bush-years were bad when we had the tax-cuts & therefore they'll argue that high taxes are good for the country; but it's a ridiculous claim since there are many other factors involved other than just taxes like spending, state of the economy, bubbles, etc
But that's how spurious this claim of "tariffs made America prosperous" is, it ignores the fact total government spending back then was 5% of GDP, today it is about 40-50% of GDP so has to do with LOW TAXES, less regulation, CHEAP LABOR, etc
If taxes are 5% of GDP then the country will thrive no matter whether they're collected as tariffs, income-taxes or sales-tax or whatever; as I've said, it does NOT matter whether someone steal from your front-pocket, back-pocket or your bank account, the bottomlike doesn't change

You are a revisionist, rewriting history isn't working so well in the digital age.
Also throwing the word "liberals" around doesn't change anything. It's a bull$#@! tactic.

Yes, uncompetitive businesses that charge high prices definitely need government "protection" so that they could suck consumers' blood
And again, the industries & people came to US because it was much freer than anywhere else, less regulation, less taxes & CHEAP LABOR

They came because it was cheaper to set up shop than pay the tariffs.....Toyota, Honda, etc, etc
Labor was not cheaper...lol...it was considerably higher and regulations were also an added burden since they couldn't just dump their chemicals into a pit in the back yard.
Employment boomed, wages increased and the middle class is what drove our economy.
Economics 101...without decent paying jobs, we can't buy your Chinese crap.

So there were fewer people in 19th century America than today? Is that a joke or something? There's NO DOUBT that today's America is a lot better off with regards to poverty than 19th century Americans

really...I guess over 25 MILLION people who need a job don't count
the disparity between the poor and the top 3% is so great that fuzzy math can be used by anyone to increase wealth for all. You are so out of touch. Have you been to the cities lately?

I don't know, may be it has to do with government STEALING 40% of the GDP from the private sector, may be it has to do with high regulation, high taxes & monetary policy & such but of course, all that is irrelevant, right! All we have to do is put in huge tariffs & FORCE people to pay higher & higher prices for goods & services & there will be prosperity again

Yes, making everything more expensive creates prosperity

Funny how this all came about after NAFTA.....making Big Macs and salads are NOT manufacturing jobs that pay well...they are low paying service jobs in the food industry no matter what lies are printed in NAICS to collect census data so that people like you can claim otherwise. EPA regulations and taxes were decreased prior to NAFTA

Firstly, "decent paying job" is a liberal/progressive rhetoric, not for the ones who believe in liberty & understand how the markets work; people get paid according to the supply-demand for their labor/skill, & that's all anyone deserves, nothing more than that

Bull$#@!....if greedy $#@!s didn't get NAFTA enacted, then we wouldn't be having this conversation and people would still be working making a DECENT wage buying cars, homes and Playstations.

Companies left because of minimum wage laws & welfare-state raising the price of labor above the market-rates determined by supply-demand of labor

WRONG...stop rewriting history. Companies left because they were given huge tax breaks to leave as tariffs were reduced next to nothing. Minimum wage laws only effected low paying companies like Walmart and McDonalds who BTW did not suffer at all by higher min wages...lol...The Waltons each have a combined net worth of $100 BILLION (5 x $20 BILLION each)
Companies were growing at their normal rate and profits were normal. It doesn't take a PHD to look up the historical financial pages of those companies who have left. I built many of their plants before NAFTA and this countries manufacturing capabilities were unparalleled, second to none. Wages increased along with profits and demand right up until JP Morgan decided that share price was worth more than people's lives. Now profits are setting all time records...and millions of Americans are now jobless and homeless.

EVERYONE is "greedy", shareholders want more returns on their investments, businesses want more profits AND workers want higher & higher pay but what tempers all of their "greed" is supply-demand for the things provided by them, that's how markets work

NO, that is how they should work without interference by greedy globalists who want to rule the world.

[Paul Or Nothing II]

You are a revisionist, rewriting history isn't working so well in the digital age.
Also throwing the word "liberals" around doesn't change anything. It's a bull$#@! tactic.

You're the one re-writing history, you ignore facts like America grew because it was freer, less overall taxes, less regultions & yes, CHEAP LABOR, that's what 19th century America looked like but instead you only choose to focus on tariffs & act if tariffs are the highway to prosperity, it's laughable

As I've said, picking just one of numerous things to define America's success is like white-nationalists arguing that America succeeded because of slavery & segregation; it's just wishful thinking

They came because it was cheaper to set up shop than pay the tariffs.....Toyota, Honda, etc, etc
Labor was not cheaper...lol...it was considerably higher and regulations were also an added burden since they couldn't just dump their chemicals into a pit in the back yard.

That's simply not true, from everything you're saying like "decent wage", environmentalism, more government intervention, etc clearly shows that you are liberal

Employment boomed, wages increased and the middle class is what drove our economy.

Wow! So all a nation has to do is raise tariffs & bam! Prosperity! Many nations under their naive assumptions have tried that & failed miserably; REDUCING the amount of goods & services in the economy simply doesn't create prosperity

Economics 101...without decent paying jobs, we can't buy your Chinese crap.

Economics 101 - GOODS & SERVICES create prosperity, importing cheaper goods does NOT cause unemployment, all the workers in the local economy can still be hired & be productive irrespective of imports; but the problems arise when people don't can't or don't want to take up available jobs because of minimum wage & welfare-subsidies

really...I guess over 25 MILLION people who need a job don't count
the disparity between the poor and the top 3% is so great that fuzzy math can be used by anyone to increase wealth for all. You are so out of touch. Have you been to the cities lately?

The question is why aren't they being hired? It's because the price of labor is too high!

When you have a huge stock of a certain product in your warehouse & nobody wants to buy it? What do you do? You LOWER THE PRICES!
Exactly the same holds true for labor-prices

Funny how this all came about after NAFTA.....making Big Macs and salads are NOT manufacturing jobs that pay well...they are low paying service jobs in the food industry no matter what lies are printed in NAICS to collect census data so that people like you can claim otherwise. EPA regulations and taxes were decreased prior to NAFTA

So government is spending more because of NAFTA? I have heard all kinds of explanations for it but this one is probably the most absurd!

Bull$#@!....if greedy $#@!s didn't get NAFTA enacted, then we wouldn't be having this conversation and people would still be working making a DECENT wage buying cars, homes and Playstations.

Again, wages are determined by supply & demand for labor, just like every other economic product
So if supply of labor increases & thereby prices of labor fall then laborers must lower their prices but when there are things like minimum wage & free-welfare subsidized with STOLEN money, then the laborers have little reason to take up the jobs that they can

And again, "decent wage" is typical liberal/progressive rhetoric, nobody deserves any more than what they can voluntarily get on the market; asking for government favors & theft is socialism

WRONG...stop rewriting history. Companies left because they were given huge tax breaks to leave as tariffs were reduced next to nothing. Minimum wage laws only effected low paying companies like Walmart and McDonalds who BTW did not suffer at all by higher min wages...lol...The Waltons each have a combined net worth of $100 BILLION (5 x $20 BILLION each)

If minimum wage is gotten rid of & welfare is restricted then all those "unemployed" would have to work & be productive & they'll add ADDITIONAL GOODS & SERVICES to the economy & that would lower relative prices throughout the economy

Companies were growing at their normal rate and profits were normal. It doesn't take a PHD to look up the historical financial pages of those companies who have left.

Companies typically try to profit, just as workers try to work for a pay so so the fact that they were profitting is irrelevant, the point is they could hire more workers if there are no minimum wage & welfare & thereby produce more REAL WEALTH - goods & services - & everyone's living-standards would get a boost

I built many of their plants before NAFTA and this countries manufacturing capabilities were unparalleled, second to none.

That was before more & more labor from other countries entered the markets; just like when more competitors entering into an industry leads to more competition & lower prices, same holds true for labor, when more labor enters then wages fall but that also means more goods & services are produced & higher living-standards

Wages increased along with profits and demand right up until JP Morgan decided that share price was worth more than people's lives. Now profits are setting all time records...and millions of Americans are now jobless and homeless.

Inflation is setting new records too, so may be you consider that when considering profits
Plenty of businesses have gone out of business too, only few that succeed that make profits but liberals always ignore those that went into losses & focus only on those making profits & act as if there's something unfair about it

NO, that is how they should work without interference by greedy globalists who want to rule the world.

Such conspiracy theories are the reason Ron Paul & liberty movement often loses credibility



Again, more imports does NOT mean more unemployment, the local workers can still get jobs & local economy can still be just as productive, the imports merely act as NET ADDITION to the economy but it's the minimum wage & welfare that destroy incentive to be productive at the lower end

Read this FREE book Economics in One Lesson - http://hacer.org/pdf/Hazlitt00.pdf (It's even recommended by Ron Paul himself, in this article - http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul21.html)

[Paul Or Nothing II]

Another post of mine on the same topic

Is this supposed to be some kind of joke or something? I don't know how can you not know the implications after spending so much time on this forum!

Anyways, when people prefer imported products, it's because they are more cost-efficient, & it's the nature of the markets to continuously move towards the most cost-efficient products
So, imports only means that the labor used on producing those products domestically would be used to produce something else & hence there would be MORE goods & services (REAL WEALTH) within the country, lower prices & higher living-standards so jobs don't necessarily have to be "lost", they merely shift to producing other products.
The problem isnt' necessarily the imports, they merely INCREASE real wealth in the country; the problems are the often the regulatory hindrances that prevent businesses from taking utilizing that labor as soon as possible & other stupid laws like minimum wage laws, which keep people unemployed

Ah! The money! That's the Keynesian issue because they think "money" is wealth & that's why they THINK just printing more of it will create more wealth But for those who understand real economics, GOODS & SERVICES are REAL WEALTH; if "money" was wealth then Zimbabwe would have become the richest nation in the world when they'd hyperinflation.

Let's look at a simple example :
Let's say there are a $100 in the economy & there are 100 people capable of producing 100 goods in a closed economy
Now, that's the baseline at an averate rate of 1 person = 1 good = $1
Let's say 11 goods are imported from China at $10, what effect does that have on 100 Americans' labor capacity? NONE. They can STILL produce 100 goods & since the supply of money has reduced in relation to labor, it puts downward pressure on its NOMINAL price (wage/salary) so now it's $0.90 = 1 person = 1 good
But guess what happened to the WHOLE ECONOMY, now there are 111 goods (100 + 11 imports) & $90, meaning every $1 is worth 1.23 goods instead of $1 = 1 good, the average NOMINAL wage has dropped from $1 to $0.90 BUT previously they could each buy 1 good on average, now they can buy 1.11 goods each on average (1.23 x 0.90)
Oooh, those $10 are gone BUT there are 11 MORE goods that otherwise wouldn't have been there

So again, "money" is NOT wealth at the macro-level, it's the goods & services that determine the living-standards within a country, the more goods & services there are, the cheaper they'll be & higher the living-standards

Again, you should seriously consider leaning about "opportunity cost"
You keep posting this Keynesian fallacies that have been debunked ages ago, you should read this book & may be you'll gather the market-perspective - http://www.hacer.org/pdf/Hazlitt00.pdf
It's a very short book, written in plain English & it's absolutely free so please go ahead & have a look!

[Paul Or Nothing II]

Duplicate

[Paul Or Nothing II]

Duplicate

[showpan]

You're explanation doesn't hold water and is based upon "0" facts

Calling me Liberal IS a bull$#@! tactic.

Min wage only takes a a few pennies from Walmart and McDonalds and has absolutely no effect on their profits or companies that employ the middle class who has been hiding their money in offshore accounts.

The middle class jobs are lost because manufacturing has been lost. The reason the numbers are false would be because the new middle class...our troops...have been added. Fire 100,000 manufacturing workers and hire 100,000 troops.

You're whole take on this Paul Or Nothing II ignores every fact out there.

You're so called free market myths have and never will be a reality.

The real Liberals are the neocons.

I am a constitutionalist.

You are a globalist

get it right please.

[The Gold Standard]

You're explanation doesn't hold water and is based upon "0" facts

Calling me Liberal IS a bull$#@! tactic.

Min wage only takes a a few pennies from Walmart and McDonalds and has absolutely no effect on their profits or companies that employ the middle class who has been hiding their money in offshore accounts.

The middle class jobs are lost because manufacturing has been lost. The reason the numbers are false would be because the new middle class...our troops...have been added. Fire 100,000 manufacturing workers and hire 100,000 troops.

You're whole take on this Paul Or Nothing II ignores every fact out there.

You're so called free market myths have and never will be a reality.

The real Liberals are the neocons.

I am a constitutionalist.

You are a globalist

get it right please.

Minimum wage doesn't take anything from Walmart or McDonald's. They just hire fewer workers.

Manufacturing jobs are gone because it costs too much money to manufacture products here. Oil, gas, steel, copper, labor, etc. are all rising in price and have been for 100 years. At some point it got too expensive. You can thank your heroes at the Fed for that.

The middle class jobs that we do have pay less and less every year, because the prices of most things people buy increase every year. You can thank your heroes at the Fed for that too.

Every time the "free market myths" have been tried it has led to decreased poverty and increased prosperity.

I assume your solutions are protective tariffs and printing the money to pay higher nominal wages and empowering unions to drive the wages up. How has that "reality" worked throughout history? Oh, we had a 15 year depression.

[Paul Or Nothing II]

You're explanation doesn't hold water and is based upon "0" facts

And your "facts" are based on - conspiracy theories

Seriously, anyone who proclaims that tariffs are panacea for prosperity simply doesn't understand what causes prosperity; prosperity is caused by more & more goods & services, NOT by redistribution, whether that redistribution is done through income taxes, tariffs or whatever, theft doesn't create sustainable prosperity, that's why socialism/communism always fails

Calling me Liberal IS a bull$#@! tactic.

You are a liberal - you want more & more government-intervention, you like regulations & environmentalism, you have no faith in the markets, you don't understand simple economics & you talk of "decent wage" instead of market-wage & who knows how much more government intervention you want

Min wage only takes a a few pennies from Walmart and McDonalds and has absolutely no effect on their profits or companies that employ the middle class who has been hiding their money in offshore accounts.

The profits they make aren't an arbitrary phenomenon, they're determined by the market-forces of supply-demand for the services they provide; read the book I've linked & go to chapter "The Function of Profits"

The middle class jobs are lost because manufacturing has been lost. The reason the numbers are false would be because the new middle class...our troops...have been added. Fire 100,000 manufacturing workers and hire 100,000 troops.

Manufacturing has been lost because the competition on the labor market has increased & as it works with anything else, increased supply lowers prices; sure, you can put up tariffs all you want, all it's going to do is raise prices WITHIN the US while the rest of the world benefits from cheaper products; many third world countries tried to do exactly the same thing, they tried to block cheaper foreign products & relegated themselves to lower living-standards with their misguided economic notions

Again, if tariffs were the panacea then everybody would just put up tariffs & become prosperous but that's not how it works

You're whole take on this Paul Or Nothing II ignores every fact out there.

You're so called free market myths have and never will be a reality.

What I'm saying has nothing to do with free markets, prices/wages & profits are ALWAYS dictated by the market-forces of supply & demand; you might understand that if you read the book I've posted & read the chapter "How the Price System Works"

And there are only two choices, markets & government

Those who seek freedom & understand economics always choose markets but you like a typical liberal/progressive choose the government force & redistribution

The real Liberals are the neocons.

I am a constitutionalist.

You are a globalist

get it right please.

I'm a capitalist, who understands that prosperity is propelled by higher availability of goods & services, NOT by raising prices or blocking cheap goods or redistribution through government force
Again, imports will have no impact on local employment or local productivity, they can still produce to their fullest, imports just form NET ADDITION to total goods & services in the country; the problem though is that there are two many socialists who believe in government-intervention, be it minimum wage, welfare-subsidies, high taxes, high regulations, etc which mayn't allow the markets to re-allocate economic resources like labor & capital

Again, I'm a capitalist & so is Ron Paul & he understands the net-negative effect of tariffs & trade-wars

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul21.html

We've all heard about how these tariffs are needed to protect the jobs of American steelworkers, but we never hear about the jobs that will be lost or never created when the cost of steel rises 30 percent. We forget that tariffs are taxes, and that imposing tariffs means raising taxes. Why is the administration raising taxes on American steel consumers? Apparently no one in the administration has read Henry Hazlitt's classic book, Economics in one Lesson. Professor Hazlitt's fundamental lesson was simple: We must examine economic policy by considering the long-term effects of any proposal on all groups. The administration instead chose to focus only on the immediate effects of steel tariffs on one group, the domestic steel industry. In doing so, it chose to ignore basic economics for the sake of political expediency. Now I grant you that this is hardly anything new in this town, but it's important that we see these tariffs as the political favors that they are. This has nothing to do with fairness. The free market is fair; it alone justly rewards the worthiest competitors. Tariffs reward the strongest Washington lobbies.

For the third time, read the book that Ron Paul is advocating, Economics in One Lesson, here it is completely FREE - http://www.hacer.org/pdf/Hazlitt00.pdf
Important topics - "How the Price System Works", "The Function of Profits", "Minimum Wage Laws" & of course, your favorites, "Who's Protected by Tariffs?" & "Saving X Industry"

The whole book is simple yet powerful exposition on how the markets work & how government-intervention of the noblest kind always ends up with bad consequences

[Paul Or Nothing II]

Minimum wage doesn't take anything from Walmart or McDonald's. They just hire fewer workers.

Manufacturing jobs are gone because it costs too much money to manufacture products here. Oil, gas, steel, copper, labor, etc. are all rising in price and have been for 100 years. At some point it got too expensive. You can thank your heroes at the Fed for that.

The middle class jobs that we do have pay less and less every year, because the prices of most things people buy increase every year. You can thank your heroes at the Fed for that too.

Every time the "free market myths" have been tried it has led to decreased poverty and increased prosperity.

I assume your solutions are protective tariffs and printing the money to pay higher nominal wages and empowering unions to drive the wages up. How has that "reality" worked throughout history? Oh, we had a 15 year depression.

+1

Yes, "free market myths", statements like that can only come from liberal socialists, who believe government, government & more government & force, force & more force is the answer to problems; things like liberty, voluntary action, market-economics, etc etc don't matter

[showpan]

Fact

The Waltons have a combined worth of $100 BILLION. They are the richest and nobody even comes close to them. Minimum wage has not hurt their bottom line at all. As a matter of fact, why don't you check their financials and see how well they have done since min wage was increased. But then facts are pretty much ignored as only opinions keep getting repeated here. It also has not effected the amount of stores they have opened or are planning to open as they are constantly hiring because some $#@! for brains college grad gets hired as a corporate manager and has no clue on how to responsibly manage given resources and has absolutely no clue about human resources. But never the less, they still make a lot of money selling those cheap crappy Chinese goods that barely last a year or just until the warrenty runs out.

Just because you read a book does not give you the intelligence to make rational assumptions concerning reality. How long has Paul II actually worked in a factory...lol...I'm betting never. Throwing the "LIBERAL" around like you actually know what one is exposes your immaturity.

It's no secret that lowering tariffs increases unemployment. It's been proven for over 200 years and 25 MILLION Americans are now out of work. You claim that it was the cost of doing business.....this is just some more political bull$#@! that you read in one of your biased unrealistic books based on "0" facts.

The truth is that the cost of doing business was greatly reduced before NAFTA was enacted.

The Federal Register is where all of America's proposed and adopted regulations are found, and in 1980 it ran 87,012 pages. By 1986, this was cut almost in half: to 47,418 pages The current one can be found here.

Billions of dollars in political contributions freed corporate giants from numerous regulations since the 1970s.

Jimmy Carter, in fact, spearheaded deregulation Nixon and Ford began by hiring Alfred Kahn to head the Civil Aeronautics Board.

The 1978 Airline Deregulation Act followed. It dissolved the CAB, removed industry restraints, eased consolidation, and subsequent bills deregulated trucking and railroads - the 1980 Motor Carrier Act and 1980 Staggers Rail Act, following the 1976 Railroad Revitalization and Regulatory Reform Act.

Carter also phased out interest rate deposit ceilings, and gave the Fed more power through the 1980 Depository Institutions and Monetary Control Act, removing New Deal restraints and enabling subsequent administrations to go further.

Under Reagan, energy deregulation followed, notably oil and gas, then electric utilities under GHW Bush and Clinton, the result being high prices, brownouts, and Enron-like scandals.

In the 1980s, the 1982 Alternative Mortgage Transactions Parity Act led to exotic feature mortgages with adjustable rates or interest-only. They carry low "teaser" rates for several years, after which they're adjusted much higher, often making loans unaffordable, especially for low-income, high-risk borrowers using subprime and Alt-A loans.

The 1982 Garn-St. Germain Depository Institutions Act deregulated thrifts and fueled fraud, so much that the Savings and Loan crisis followed. As a result, hundreds of banks failed, sticking taxpayers with most of the $160 billion cost. In 1987, the Government Accountability Office (GOA) declared the S & L deposit insurance fund insolvent because of mounting bank failures.

1980's OSHA was seriously cut by Reagan, then Bush. Clinton tried to raise standards but was forced to eliminate them in his deal with the GOP a year later.

In 1988, global regulators imposed minimum bank capital requirements, known as the Basel Accord or Basel I, enforced in G-10 countries.

In 1989, the Financial Institutions Reform and Recovery Act abolished the Federal Home Loan Bank Board and FSLIC, transferring them to the Office of Thrift Supervision (OTS) and FDIC. It also created the Resolution Trust Corporation (RTC) to liquidate troubled assets, assume Federal Home Loan Bank Board insurance functions, and clean up a troubled system.

Clinton era telecommunications deregulation let media and telecommunication giants consolidate, gave new digital television broadcast spectrum space to current TV station owners, and let cable companies increase their local monopoly positions.

His 1994 Reigle-Neal Interstate Banking and Branching Efficiency Act let bank holding companies operate in more than one state.

In 1996, the Fed reinterpreted Glass-Steagall to let bank holding companies earn up to 25% of their revenue from investment banking.

The 1998 Citicorp-Travelers merger followed, combining a commercial/investment bank with an insurance company ahead of the 1999 Financial Services Modernization Act, also called the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA) authorizing it.

In 2000, the Commodity Futures Modernization Act (CFMA) passed, legitimizing swap agreements and other hybrid instruments, at the heart of today's problems by ending regulatory oversight of derivatives and leveraging that turned Wall Street more than ever into a casino.

EPA Deregulation of Pesticide Tests on Humans 2004

This is just a partial list and I won't list all of the Deregulation that Bush did because I have already proven my point.

Deregulation has been the topic of almost every administration since Carter and corporations had successfully lowered their burden prior to NAFTA. If regulations have been cut since the 1970's, than why would corporations wait until after NAFTA to leave in mass amounts?

[showpan]

Reagan lowered taxes for corporations and the top income brackets and then raised sales taxes and personal taxes to make the working class pay for those cuts.

Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981
Included in the act was an across-the-board decrease in the marginal income tax rates in the U.S. by 23% over three years, with the top rate falling from 70% to 50% and the bottom rate dropping from 14% to 11%. This act slashed estate taxes and trimmed taxes paid by business corporations by $150 billion over a five year period. Additionally the tax rates were indexed for inflation

Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982
Improvements in compliance and collection. Imposed withholding on interest and dividends; further accelerated corporate estimated tax payments; expanded information reporting; and increased penalties on non-compliance.
Reduction in unintended benefits and obsolete incentives. Strengthened individual minimum tax; repealed future acceleration of depreciation allowances; repealed safe-harbor leasing; and tightened completed contract method of accounting rules.
Increased excise taxes. Increased airport and airway trust fund taxes, cigarette excise taxes, and telephone excise tax.
Increased employment taxes. Increased FUTA tax rate and wage base, and extended hospital insurance taxes to Federal employees.

Federal Unemployment Tax Act wage base and tax rate were increased. Excise taxes on cigarettes were temporarily doubled, and excise taxes on telephone service tripled, in TEFRA

Highway Revenue Act of 1982
Increased the United States gasoline excise tax from 4 cents to 9 cents to pay for:

Surface Transportation Assistance Act
four cents dedicated to restore interstate highways and bridges, and one cent for public transit.

Social Security Amendments of 1983
Accelerated scheduled increases in OASDI payroll tax rate.
Taxed Social Security benefits. At most 50 percent of Social Security benefits subject to tax if income exceeds $25,000 for a single taxpayer or $32,000 for a joint return

Railroad Retirement Revenue Act of 1983
Increased railroad retirement payroll taxes and railroad unemployment insurance taxes.
Taxed railroad retirement pension plan benefits.

Deficit Reduction Act of 1984
Increased excise taxes. Increased distilled spirits excise tax and extended telephone excise tax.
Restrictions on leasing. Reduced benefits from tax-exempt leasing and postponed effective data of liberalized finance leasing rules.
Increased depreciable life of structures from 15 to 18 years.
Placed state volume limitation on private purpose tax exempt bonds.
Placed time value of money restrictions on accounting rules.
Repealed net interest exclusion (ERTA provision) before its effective date.
Reduced long-term capital gains holding period from one year to six months.
Increased earned income credit rate and phaseout range.
Set maximum estate tax rate at 55 percent.

Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985 (COBRA)
Permanently extended 16 cents per pack cigarette excise tax.
Enacted new excise tax on smokeless tobacco.
Increased excise tax on coal production.
Extended hospital insurance coverage to new state and local government employees.
Repealed income averaging for former students.

Tax Reform Act of 1986
Individual income tax provisions. Lowered top marginal tax rate to 28 percent; increased standard deduction to $5,000 for married couples; increased personal exemption to $2,000; and increased earned income tax credit.
Repealed two-earner deduction, long-term capital gains exclusion, state and local sales tax deduction, income averaging, and exclusion of unemployment benefits. Limited IRA eligibility, consumer interest deduction, deductibility of passive losses, medical expenses deductions, deduction for business meals and entertainment, pension contributions, and miscellaneous expense deduction.
Reduced top corporate marginal tax rate to 34 percent, and tightened corporate minimum tax.
Repealed the investment tax credit and lengthened capital cost recovery periods.
Further tightened state volume limitations for private purpose tax-exempt bonds.
Extended research and experimentation credit: initiated new low-income housing tax credit and phased in deductibility of health insurance costs of self-employed individuals.

Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1986
Accelerated state and local government deposits of Social Security payroll taxes.
Accelerated collections of alcohol and tobacco excise taxes.
Increased substantial underpayment penalty and penalty for failure to comply with deposit requirements.
Increased customs user fee on value of imported merchandise.

Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986
Enacted excise tax of 8.2 cents per barrel on domestic crude oil and 11.7 cents per barrel on imported petroleum products.
Lowered the tax on all corporations equal to 0.12 percent of alternative minimum taxable income in excess of $2 million.
Enacted a 0.1 cent per gallon excise tax on gasoline, diesel fuels and other special motor fuels to finance cleanup of wastes from leaking underground petroleum storage tanks. (he taxed us to clean up their mess)

Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1987
Accelerated corporate estimated tax payments.
Limited employer deductible contributions to defined benefit pension plans.
Limited mortgage interest deduction to less than $1 million and home equity loans of less than $100,000.
Extended telephone excise tax, FUTA tax, 55 percent estate tax rate, and employer Social Security to cover cash tips.
Increased IRS and BATF fees.

The Family Security Act of 1988
Tightened eligibility for the dependent care credit.
Required taxpayer identification number for younger children.

Medicare Catastrophic Coverage Act of 1988
Passed new supplemental premium tax on all persons eligible for Medicare. Premium rate was 15 percent of individual income tax liability in excess of $150, increased to 28 percent in 1993. Premium limited to $800 in 1989, raised to $1,050 in 1993, with future premium cap dependent on medical care costs after 1993.

Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1989
Limited tax deductions and exclusions for employee stock ownership plans.
Increased fees and excise taxes on air travel, ozone-depleting chemicals, and oil spill liability.
Modified the corporate alternative minimum tax.

Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990
Excise tax increases.
Individual income tax rate increases
Payroll tax rate increases

Tax Extension Act of 1991
Tax provision extensions. Provided a six-month extension for a number of tax provisions and credits facing expiration. Categories included research tax credits; exclusions for employer-provided educational assistance; targeted jobs credits; alternative energy credits; itemized deduction for health insurance costs; drug clinical testing credits; issuance authority for mortgage revenue bonds, certificates, and manufacturing/farm facility construction; credit for charitable contributions of appreciated tangible property.

The Decline of Corporate Income Tax Revenues
Revised October 24, 2003

EFFECT OF REAGAN, KENNEDY, AND BUSH TAX CUTS ON REVENUES

The current corporate tax rate for the United States is claimed to be 35% but this does not compute since many companies do not pay ANY federal tax and yet continue to move:
GM, Please Pay Your Taxes
Hey, Look At That -- We Pay More Taxes Than GE
Why are America’s largest corporations paying no tax?
Boeing, Citgiroup, and Bank Of America didnt' pay any federal taxes.

Taxes in other nations.
Mexico 28%
China 25% with a 17% VAT tax
India 33.2175%
Germany 29.8%
I am adding Brazil which is booming with tariffs and a 34% tax rate.

[showpan]

I should also post this again.

As former president H.W. Bush was writing NAFTA back In 1991, another despicable lie was being written by the North American Industry Classification System in order to justify this obvious sell out of American jobs. Not only did NAICS reclassify fast foods (hamburgers, salads, fires, soft drinks) as part of manufacturing changing their classification from food service and processing, they also reclassified pasteurization of milk and fish wrapping among others. What is even more shocking, in order to embellish their lie, they also made it retroactive to unemployment statistics beginning in...1995, the year that NAFTA was enacted.
They not only reclassified manufacturing, they did this to the service sector too. This shifting of employment to service sectors under NAICS resulted in declines in other sectors like Agriculture and Retail Trade with the reclassification of restaurants into the service sector. Changes in the definition of Wholesale Trade establishments result in only a small decline 4.8% down to 4.1% so nobody would really notice but the increase in service sector was huge because they also reclassified other industries where nobody really ever pays attention. Corporate headquarters of companies are now classified as service activities under NAICS. Formerly, under SIC these business establishments were classified according to the business activity of the enterprise they served. Also Professional, Technical, Healthcare, Social Assistance and Educational were all reclassifies into the service sector.
The restructuring of industry groups under NAICS when it was implemented in 1997 resulted in a decline in the average weekly wage for manufacturing by $90, but an increase of $74 in service sector. Any statistics in manufacturing and service after 1995 should be considered bunk since the way in which these statistics are collected have been greatly altered. This also effects government handouts (corporate welfare) since reclassifies industries are now able to exploit subsidies and loopholes that were once meant for those industries they were actually created for.
Almost all of the above info can be found through the link provided, other info is freely available on the web.

http://www.census.gov/eos/www/naics/