Posts: 1,242
Threads: 200
Joined: Sep 2017
Reputation:
0
NOTE: This is for Dakota. Paul Stockman was Ronald Reagan's Director of Budget. He thus qualifies as being one of the GOP's Reaganonmics heroes, or perhaps better described as a Reagan Apostle. Questioning his words thus become indisputable and gospel.
Paul Stockman made an appearance last night on MSNBC's "The Last Word", and put forth a very interesting set of numbers. The most interesting was this:
In 1999, this country had 130.7 Million steady payroll jobs.
In 2011, this country has 130.7 Million steady payroll jobs.
In 12 years, the net increase in steady payroll jobs in this country has had a net gain of ZERO.
What's wrong with that picture? Something is wrong with the economic progress of this country, and it started a long time ago. Perhaps we all should start taking a look at the bigger picture of how we got to our present economic tipping point rather than discussing birth certificates, Presidential visits to disaster areas and defunding that hotbed of socialist propaganda, "Sesame Street".
"If we do not learn from the past, we are doomed to repeat it."
"We get the government we deserve."
I'm starrting to learn that we deserve better. Much better.
Posts: 41,879
Threads: 3,652
Joined: May 2025
Reputation:
0
Hard to find raw data on the interwebs (help appreciated) but it appears the biggest shrinkage has been and continues to be manufacturing jobs.
One perspective:
http://www.forbes.com/2009/05/28/robert-...onomy.html
And it appears there are few growth industries besides maybe health care adding a few jobs every year.
My gut feeling is that the "prosperity" of the 50s/60s/70s was built on exploitation of cheap resources (including human capital) that are decreasing in availability. There's going to need to be some combination of global belt-tightening and learning how to make things work going forward. I'm not sure to what degree you can blame the government.
Perhaps we all should start taking a look at the bigger picture of how we got to our present economic tipping point rather than discussing birth certificates, Presidential visits to disaster areas and defunding that hotbed of socialist propaganda, "Sesame Street".
Bcam, do you have an idea of what it is we should collectively be doing to right the ship?
Posts: 50,838
Threads: 670
Joined: Mar 2024
shame he didn't pick the 140 million number from before that rumoured recession that started three years ago.
Posts: 8,773
Threads: 202
Joined: May 2025
Reputation:
0
Looking at what Black brought up, it seems there was, according to the numbers presented, not only a no net gain, but qualitatively the jobs might have gone from cbelt type, to flipping burgers and answering phones.
Posts: 57,772
Threads: 5,854
Joined: May 2025
Reputation:
1
I think you'll find that what we've been experiencing in the last 50 years has been a general leveling of the global 'playing field'. It accelerated significantly with the upsurge of blind 'offshoring', which was pushed by a shortsighted Wall Street demanding quarterly growth in profits.
The net effect has been the loss of millions of manufacturing and food production jobs in the US, and the subsequent expansion of the offshore economies (China, for example) and the subsequent increase in those nation's standards of living.
Empirically, as we have moved jobs from our country to China, China has become more like us, and we've become more like China (Economically speaking).
The 1990's theme of 'a service economy' has been proven, time and again, to be so much bullshit. When times are bad, people do not need services. But they do need manufactured goods, food, energy, shelter, etc..
This is why the leading edge of the 2010/2011 economic recovery has been.. yep, manufacturing. Not the 'service economy'.
Posts: 41,879
Threads: 3,652
Joined: May 2025
Reputation:
0
cbelt3 wrote:
I think you'll find that what we've been experiencing in the last 50 years has been a general leveling of the global 'playing field'. It accelerated significantly with the upsurge of blind 'offshoring', which was pushed by a shortsighted Wall Street demanding quarterly growth in profits.
The net effect has been the loss of millions of manufacturing and food production jobs in the US, and the subsequent expansion of the offshore economies (China, for example) and the subsequent increase in those nation's standards of living.
Empirically, as we have moved jobs from our country to China, China has become more like us, and we've become more like China (Economically speaking).
The 1990's theme of 'a service economy' has been proven, time and again, to be so much bullshit. When times are bad, people do not need services. But they do need manufactured goods, food, energy, shelter, etc..
This is why the leading edge of the 2010/2011 economic recovery has been.. yep, manufacturing. Not the 'service economy'.
Mostly agree, although your last point about a "service economy" is a bit obscure.
Did we end up with more manufacturing jobs than we did before the slowdown? It stands to reason that the sector that came closest to grinding to a complete halt would be the one to pick up most dramatically during a recovery. It could be said that the manufacturing slowdown is what's actually driving/defining the recession and the recovery.
Posts: 23,016
Threads: 575
Joined: May 2025
Reputation:
2
billb wrote:
shame he didn't pick the 140 million number from before that rumoured recession that started three years ago.
There's truth here. Stockman is comparing the peak of the previous boom to not much beyond the depths of the most recent bust.
His point may still be valid, but cherry picking is cherry picking.
Posts: 1,108
Threads: 90
Joined: Jan 2017
Didn't see the Stockman interview, but appreciate the reference. I'm going to chase it down. Thanks.
A couple of "preliminary" observations:
I agree the cherry-picking has to be taken into account; however, it seems to me that the 2nd "130.7" should be seen in the context of a larger working population which makes that comparison dire, indeed.
I don't know of another period in our history where we've backtracked that much over a 12-year period. I'm not 100% on that.
As for recessions, there were 22 months of recession (officially) in Bush's 96 months. That's a horrid figure.
Posts: 15,647
Threads: 1,310
Joined: Aug 2013
Reputation:
0
How many are paid NOT to work; for years. There is a segment of the population that has found a way not to work and still make a living.
Posts: 41,879
Threads: 3,652
Joined: May 2025
Reputation:
0
Dakota wrote:
How many are paid NOT to work; for years. There is a segment of the population that has found a way not to work and still make a living.
I don't know if this can be considered a root cause, or even a significant factor in loss of jobs (which has not been established)-- but what would you do about it?
|
