Financial News

[NorthSideSox72]

Marx was right; capitalism will eat itself.

Capitalism is the engine, and the hunter, and you need it to grow. But like any aggressive creature, if you want to stay alive around it, it needs training, and a leash. Both are needed, not one or the other. A toy poodle on a leash means you get stomped. A fight-trained pit bull with no control does the same, just in a different way.

 

[Balta1701]

Capitalism is the engine, and the hunter, and you need it to grow. But like any aggressive creature, if you want to stay alive around it, it needs training, and a leash. Both are needed, not one or the other. A toy poodle on a leash means you get stomped. A fight-trained pit bull with no control does the same, just in a different way.

The problem now is that the pit-bull has figured out that he can bribe people to take the leash off.

[NorthSideSox72]

The problem now is that the pit-bull has figured out that he can bribe people to take the leash off.

I agree, that is part of the problem. But getting rid of your pit bull, as SS has suggested, means the other dogs attack you and you are defenseless. That is what I was responding to.

 

[StrangeSox]

I actually meant to follow up that post with this but forgot:

 

Give Karl Marx a Chance to Save the World Economy: George Magnus

 

Marx obviously got some things wrong and his prescription was much less useful than his diagnosis, but he still had some insightful views on capitalism.

 

and this one too!

 

"Karl Marx had it right," Roubini said in an interview with wsj.com. "At some point capitalism can self-destroy itself. That's because you can not keep on shifting income from labor to capital without not having an excess capacity and a lack of aggregate demand. We thought that markets work. They are not working. What's individually rational ... is a self-destructive process."

Edited September 7, 2011 by StrangeSox

[StrangeSox]

[Y2HH]

 

While that image is fair in showing that pay stopped growing with productivity sometime in the early 80's, what it doesn't show is that while productivity continued to skyrocket shortly after, the jobs people perform are 1000x easier and thus more productive due to assisted computer automation, spreadsheets, advanced word processors and [shortly after] the Internet in general. Productivity is through the roof to a large degree BECAUSE of the computers the people are using to perform jobs they once had to manually perform, NOT because of their back breaking manpower.

 

Even a secretary that once had to type one or two page memos on a typewriter, while manually correcting mistakes if any were made and/or having to retype the ENTIRE document if changes were necessary (sometimes multiple times), and then having to Xerox the memo, have them carried to individual desks/mailboxes (possibly having to fill out every envelope, stamp it, and have it carried to the post office), can now type the memo once, make easy and instantaneous corrections, and then email it out to every employee in 1/100th the time, at 1/10000th the cost...

 

I'm just putting it out there...so don't think I'm trying to discredit the original point, but the original point doesn't take that into consideration, either.

 

Also, to me the most glaring account of credit gone bad and spending out of control (people feeling entitled to things they cannot afford) is the final part of that image. Where household income is far exceeded by debt despite multiple incomes (this is what I find ridiculous about people becoming slaves to debt/credit card companies), I just don't get it...

 

Maybe people need to spend less money on "stuff" instead of b****ing they don't make enough.

Edited September 9, 2011 by Y2HH

[Balta1701]

But just think about how much the invention of the typewriter increased productivity at the point it was invented.

 

There's no reason out there to think that innovation suddenly took a big jump at 1980.

[StrangeSox]

You've described a lot of benefits for white collar work. Cleaning up s*** hasn't gotten easier because of computers. That's reflected in the graphs floating around recently showing the divergence of life expectancy and how the upper-middle class and wealthy life expectancy continues to climb while lower-middle and lower class has basically flat-lined. And it's not like people are working any less or putting in less effort than they were 30 or 40 years ago, it's that the same amount of effort generates a lot more results because we've better tools. That doesn't justify the wealth benefits of all of that increased productivity going only to a small number of people.

 

As for the explosion of credit, well, when your real wages are stagnant for decades, finding second sources of income or spending on credit are the only real way to maintain or marginally improve your standard of living. It gets to the fundamental problems we're currently facing, and advocating for significantly reduced amounts of consumption only gets us into a paradox of thrift and the current "complete collapse of aggregate demand" situation we face now.

 

[Y2HH]

But just think about how much the invention of the typewriter increased productivity at the point it was invented.

 

There's no reason out there to think that innovation suddenly took a big jump at 1980.

 

The typewriter did increase productivity when it was invented, but in comparison to a computer? Not even close. In the early 1980's, computers started to become mainstream in the office, and very shortly after they appeared in homes.

 

A computer is a quantum leap in innovation over a typewriter, making the typists job much easier in that they can now save documents, quickly edit documents, print off multiple copies, etc...something that they couldn't do very easily up until then.

[Balta1701]

The typewriter did increase productivity when it was invented, but in comparison to a computer? Not even close. In the early 1980's, computers started to become mainstream in the office, and very shortly after they appeared in homes.

 

A computer is a quantum leap in innovation over a typewriter, making the typists job much easier in that they can now save documents, quickly edit documents, print off multiple copies, etc...something that they couldn't do very easily up until then.

Ok, fine, you don't like the typewriter? Mass production, standardization, and electricity. All of those drove enormous productivity jumps.

 

Productivity has been going up steadily for the whole century. The difference after 1980 is that the gains from that productivity stopped being shared.

[Y2HH]

You've described a lot of benefits for white collar work. Cleaning up s*** hasn't gotten easier because of computers. That's reflected in the graphs floating around recently showing the divergence of life expectancy and how the upper-middle class and wealthy life expectancy continues to climb while lower-middle and lower class has basically flat-lined. And it's not like people are working any less or putting in less effort than they were 30 or 40 years ago, it's that the same amount of effort generates a lot more results because we've better tools. That doesn't justify the wealth benefits of all of that increased productivity going only to a small number of people.

 

As for the explosion of credit, well, when your real wages are stagnant for decades, finding second sources of income or spending on credit are the only real way to maintain or marginally improve your standard of living. It gets to the fundamental problems we're currently facing, and advocating for significantly reduced amounts of consumption only gets us into a paradox of thrift and the current "complete collapse of aggregate demand" situation we face now.

 

Even blue collar work got easier.

 

Garbage trucks, for example, lift the cans for the garbage men now...the cans are also 100x lighter, and no longer need replacement due to rust, etc...but never mind that, innovation only exists in white collar offices...apparently.

 

Also, your last paragraph is a load of entitlement bulls***. A truck load of it. Spending on credit is how you "marginally" improve your standard of living? This is such a load of garbage...people have NEVER lived better than they are now...NEVER. The POOR live better than the middle class once lived, and the middle class have no idea what it is to even be middle class. They have 3 computers, 3 tv's, 2-3 cars, a house that's worth 8x than annual combined incomes or an apartment that's as big as a house...they eat out 3-4 times a WEEK, they're leveraged to the hilt, and all because that's what they believe middle class is...because this is, according to you, marginally improving their standard of living?

 

Growing up, I remember MAYBE going out to eat once every 3-4 months. Now, it's a daily occurrence.

 

But yes, let's blame our wages...not our out of whack expectations of a 'standard of living' run amok.

[Y2HH]

Ok, fine, you don't like the typewriter? Mass production, standardization, and electricity. All of those drove enormous productivity jumps.

 

Productivity has been going up steadily for the whole century. The difference after 1980 is that the gains from that productivity stopped being shared.

 

That probably depends on the job, but in fairness I agree in large part...the fact that corporations are more profitable now than ever before tells the tale. I was merely putting it out there that by and large, productivity is through he roof because of these assisted technologies, so I somewhat expect wages to not keep up with productivity anymore.

 

I think a lot of it has to do with how easy jobs have become, to the point the companies in general don't need the people as much as they once did.

 

Movies like the Matrix and Terminator depict evil robots taking over the world.

 

Reality tells the same story, only differently. Those evil robots are just computers/the internet, and they already took over by and large, only they're not shooting guns at us or harvesting us for energy...they're just making us obsolete in the workforce.

[Balta1701]

Aside from anecdotes though can you actually offer any legitimate evidence that "manual labor" has somehow become easier?

 

I can offer some evidence in the reverse actually...life expectancy is at least a non-terrible proxy for the amount of punishment a body has taken over its lifetime (lots of other things go in...all of which play into the argument about how easy the poor have it). Amongst high income groups, life expectancy has been increasing at a solid rate pretty much forever. However, amongst low income groups, it's been stagnant, to the point where there is a growing gap in life expectancy between upper and lower income people.

[Y2HH]

 

I think this says it all to me when it comes to the modern standard of living and people thinking they're lives suck.

[Y2HH]

Aside from anecdotes though can you actually offer any legitimate evidence that "manual labor" has somehow become easier?

 

I can offer some evidence in the reverse actually...life expectancy is at least a non-terrible proxy for the amount of punishment a body has taken over its lifetime (lots of other things go in...all of which play into the argument about how easy the poor have it). Amongst high income groups, life expectancy has been increasing at a solid rate pretty much forever. However, amongst low income groups, it's been stagnant, to the point where there is a growing gap in life expectancy between upper and lower income people.

 

Oh god, here we go with your straw man defacto argument of 'anecdotes'.

 

Ok, you're right, I'm wrong. Blue collar work got even harder, despite better tools existing, better automation, better everything.

 

Sorry, but it's not a f***ing anecdote to say a garbage mans job is easier. It f***ing is.

[Jenksismyhero]

Dude, you're never going to win this argument. They think that having a cell phone is mandatory in today's society. Xbox's and multiple tv's and premium cable aren't luxury items.

[Balta1701]

I can throw things back at you with the same number of anecdotes. Reduced/vanished health care benefits, vanishing of Pension plan replaced by 401k (requiring everyone to become a stockbroker), longer hours, less overtime, spouse working longer hours also.

[Balta1701]

Dude, you're never going to win this argument. They think that having a cell phone is mandatory in today's society. Xbox's and multiple tv's and premium cable aren't luxury items.

And you guys think "Being able to have an infected tooth treated so you don't die" is a luxury item.

[Jenksismyhero]

And you guys think "Being able to have an infected tooth treated so you don't die" is a luxury item.

 

When did I say that?

[Y2HH]

I can throw things back at you with the same number of anecdotes. Reduced/vanished health care benefits, vanishing of Pension plan replaced by 401k (requiring everyone to become a stockbroker), longer hours, less overtime, spouse working longer hours also.

 

Reduced/vanished health care benefits have what to do with making manual labor harder?

 

Oh, that's right...nothing.

 

Vanishing pensions have what to do with making a job harder?

 

Oh, that's right...nothing.

 

Longer hours? For who? Less overtime? Maybe starting now...government workers have been LIVING and abusing overtime for DECADES now. Spouse working longer hours? Who's?!

 

None of those have DICK to do with a job becoming harder...

 

My point remains, manual labor jobs have also become easier.

[Y2HH]

When did I say that?

 

You didn't...and neither did anyone else.

 

I know I didn't.

 

This is how they argue things...

 

 

They need to watch that video and stop being b****es.

[StrangeSox]

Oh god, here we go with your straw man defacto argument of 'anecdotes'.

 

Ok, you're right, I'm wrong. Blue collar work got even harder, despite better tools existing, better automation, better everything.

 

Sorry, but it's not a f***ing anecdote to say a garbage mans job is easier. It f***ing is.

 

my garbage men don't have the fancy automated trucks! anecdote canceled!

 

But still these gains in productivity haven't resulted in increased real wages or less work. Some jobs have gotten easier; others allow a lot more accomplishment for the same effort, others, like literally cleaning up s***, really haven't. I don't really think there's a fundamental disagreement here?

 

eta I first commented on computers because that's the example you used!

Edited September 9, 2011 by StrangeSox

[StrangeSox]

 

I think this says it all to me when it comes to the modern standard of living and people thinking they're lives suck.

 

Remember that these things you're pointing to, more cars TV's etc. have come at the expense of moving manufacturing overseas, a second income and, of course, the expansion of credit along with technological improvements. I think you're really sticking on a semantic nitpick that misses the larger issues brought up in the graph.

[Y2HH]

my garbage men don't have the fancy automated trucks! anecdote canceled!

 

But still these gains in productivity haven't resulted in increased real wages or less work. Some jobs have gotten easier; others allow a lot more accomplishment for the same effort, others, like literally cleaning up s***, really haven't. I don't really think there's a fundamental disagreement here?

 

Well see, I won't disagree with you here, because this is of sound logic.

 

I'm not saying that across the board everything is easier...but a LOT of it is.

 

The first things the young generation needs to do is reset themselves and stop studying useless s*** in college...they also need to recognize that all the stuff they take for granted didn't even exist a mere 20 years ago. They need to stop b****ing about how much everything sucks and recognize how great things actually are.

 

For a recession...I have to say, this is the greatest recession I've ever seen in my life...expressways are full, despite gas costing 5000$ a cup, new cars everywhere, restaurants are packed, casinos are packed...

 

Maybe people need to stop f***ing spending what they don't have and we'd start making some progress.

[Y2HH]

Remember that these things you're pointing to, more cars TV's etc. have come at the expense of moving manufacturing overseas, a second income and, of course, the expansion of credit along with technological improvements. I think you're really sticking on a semantic nitpick that misses the larger issues brought up in the graph.

 

For clarification...

 

I think CEO/executive pay is completely out of whack with reality.

 

I think corporate profits are insane despite the recession (as a matter of fact they've never been higher), etc.

 

I'm not arguing that about the graph in every regard...

 

I'm simply saying that it should be, to some degree, expected that wages slowed while productivity skyrocketed due to automation and advancements in technology that assist us with our work. What I'm not saying is that CEO's deserve to be paid 99% of the companies profits and the rest of the employees 1%.