/biz/ - Business & Finance

growth has stagnated

>>1509644
but productivity hasn't

>>1509640
Taxes, muh welfare and shit, I guess...

>>1509640
G O L D S T A N D A R D
O
L
D

S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D

>>1509644
>>1509648
>>1509652
>>1509654

Incorrect.

>>1509640
It is because the powers that be realised that most people will still work hard even if they are paid peanuts thanks to an inherent evolutionary psychological flaw in humans called "hope".

Keep people on the edge preoccupying most of their time and energy in low paying jobs and they won't rise up against their masters. It is a preferable status quo between the rich and the poor.

>>1509661

For further reading: http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2012/08/kalecki-on-the-political-obstacles-to-achieving-full-employment.html

>>1509640
Due to a collapse of colonialism, increase of third world immigration and the fall of race-realism.

>>1509648
the productivity gains are due to computers and automation. business owners paid for these things, so they reap the gains. workers didn't magically become more productive over the last few decades.

Also consider that there are far more women in the work force now than in 1950. greedy capitalist pigs pay women less because sexism

>>1509663
t./pol/ack

>>1509640
For the lower classes, yes.
Why should they increase? Unskilled labour has the same value now and then.

>>1509661
>>1509662
i bet you have a sociology degree and a copy of Karl Marx's best seller Das Kapital (first edition) on your night stand and with a shiteating grin you smirked then swooshed your balding hair as you sipped some bernie sanders themed koolaid that you overstocked and you proceded to press "Post" for those "oh your so wrong" (You)s

>>1509640
Wut

http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-states/wage-growth

Recent studies have shown that stagnation has occurred up until the last 0.2% percentile since the late 70s.

What happened then?

Technological advances have reduced the demand for labour, especially in white collar jobs.

>>1509779
>since the late 70s.
>What happened then?
Carter became president.

>>1509669
This has always been the way, why did it change in the 70's though?

>>1509786
And Reagan made it worse

>>1509795
Or you can see it as a delayed adjustment to Nixon-era changes

>>1509640
Decreasing union participation, importing illegals, sending jobs overseas.

>>1509794
we have always had technological improvements, but the RATE of technological change went exponential in the 70s. within the next few decades the singularity is gonna happen. we're gonna download our brains into pansexual robot bodies and blast off into outer space! no more jobs needed.

Third world wage competition. /thread

>>1509827
normally I'd call you a raging faggot for /thread-ing your own post, but you're right.

so whatever.

Low standards. Same reason consumerism hasn't pushed companies to produce better technology in the past 10 years. It's just a bigger screen or faster CPU.

>>1509644
No

>>1509640
because capitalism:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p_B5WZCJd5g

saturated work force

1. Technology
2. Free Trade
3. Decline of Unions
4. Decline in redistributive policy
And more.

Anyone who claims the fault is one of those things without acknowledging the others (most people in this thread) are retarded and should kill themselves.

>>1510131
by God, you're right anon! thanks 4 bringing it all together, mate!

/thread?

>>1509669
>workers didn't magically become more productive over the last few decades

>>1509777
Are you incapable of looking at OP's graph.

>>1509814
>but the RATE of technological change went exponential in the 70s.

>>1510126
Unemployment is at 2007 levels where wages grew 5.5%.

>>1510131
>Technology

Made me think

>>1510139
ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME?!

Globalization

There is no incentive to grow as a large company in america compared to countries where you can pay each worker pennies and not have to worry about union strikes, government regulation, etc

You have a lot to lose by starting or growing into a large company in the US outside of things like the tech industry where you can keep your business growing while only having a workforce of ~500 people

>>1510144
ok, tell that to >>1509648

>>1510139
1/2 of the workforce is now women. are you telling me that that increased productivity.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MNH0bmYT7os

even assuming that women are as productive as men, they are distracting men from their work. wearing short skirts and low cut tops, shaking their tits around trying to bag a husband, which is fine bt

>nb4 'back to /pol'
this is real problem

>>1509640
Globalism.

The supply of workers has increased to a huge extent. You can make shit in China and ship it across the ocean for less than having it made in America so the guys that used to make that shit in America are out of a job and are now competing with the rest or American labor driving the wages down.

>>1510165
Back in a small town I used to live in poultry processing was the main industry in the area. Now the plants have shut down and the poultry is being flash frozen, shipped to china to be cut, then returned back to the us. The packaging says made in US because it originated there.

>>1510343
holy fuckin shit that makes 0 sense at all fuckin fuck. ummm carbon footprint much chinkjews?! hellooo!

>>1510354
It is much worse. The industries for 20 years or so would import illegal Guatemalans to the area to do the work for cheap. Now the Guatemalans and US citizens are both in a shit situation.

>>1509640

Several factors drive the split pictured in your graph.

1. Income and productivity use different inflation measures, so you need to deflate using the same measure otherwise you overstate the change.

2. Demographics have changed, the average American household has less people.

3. Healthcare costs are increasing, which cuts into wage's share of total compensation.

https://www.minneapolisfed.org/publications/the-region/where-has-all-the-income-gone

Women immigrants and globalized free trade entry and saturation of the workforce.

>>1509640
>>1509661
>>1509669
>>1509771
>>1509779
>>1509794

In 1963 Tezuka's Astro Boy premiered on NBC, the amount of autism caused by anime decreased wages as American workers could no longer be socialized into the workforce causing their bosses to stop seeing them as deserving of pay raises.

Short thing: anime caused autism, which destroyed the american middle class.

>>1510364
holy cannoli! thank Christ 4 Donald J. Trump amirite?!

>>1510413
solved.

Thank you.

>>1509779
first sl0w growth in inflation

>>1509830
still. no encouraging faggotry

>>1510131
>Financial Terrorism
>Mass Social Engineering

We could just make threads about ideas how to fix this shit?

>Implying that wont involve a decline in most bubble sectors, possible riots, lots of "angry people"

>>1510471
wanna talk about faggotry?
while you were looking the other way, america became a fucking kike faggot disco!:
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=gay+disco+e+michael+jones

watch this video^
it will change your entire outlook on life, i promise.

>>1509640

Inflation

>>1509661
Found the NEET

>>1510648
>>1509661
yup. darn tootin'. what's ur address sonny? i'm a comin' to wup yer ass in ta gear like yer pappy should've. fucking worthless piece of shit. absolute fucking human garbage, >>1509661 .kill yourself. please.

>>1510508
Inflation has nothing to do with why wages have stagnated. If anything inflation would explain a raise in wages leasing to wages higher than the productivity line. If you get paid 25000 per year in 1920 and 50000 per year in 1960 for the exact same job while assuming inflation is constant the entire time you would assume that in the year 2000 you should be making 75000 for the same job when in reality it's only risen to 62000 and 40 years after that you would expect at least 74000 but you only get 67000. There is a lot more going on then inflation.

if they were actually more productive, they would be getting paid more

checkmate atheists

>>1509696
It was a pretty retarded post but mass immigration from poorer countries is certainly a factor.

>>1510759
yeah but what do you expect when the mass media is completely run by jewish kikes, and the supreme court makeup makes schindler's list look like a rolecall of kkk aryan nazis in comparison . the jews are bringing in all these short, fat, ugly, incapable, stupid mexicans to steal our jobs and our womens

>>1510144
>Plunging productivity
>Graph shows growth rate
>Graph doesn't cross below 0 threshold at any point

Whoever did that graph and the blurb on it needs to be lynched for being an illiterate negroid.

>>1509705

This is a underrated point.

>>1509783

Another good point.

One word: globalization. This graph show world income growth: the hump is China and the third world. The dip is the lower and middle class of the first world aka Brexit and trump supporters.

>>1509669
>3. Healthcare costs are increasing, which cuts into wage's share of total compensation.
>doctors are earning more so your stagnant wages aren't actually stagnant!

>>1511165
Or better yet
>my doctor has been getting every one of my raises for the last 30 years. I feel great about this!

>>1509827
>>1510158
>>1510165
>blaming immigrants
It's basic market forces. Turns out unskilled labour is plentiful. If you cut off these foreign workers the cost of goods would go up which offsets the wage increase. Which is why shrinking the labour market to one person doesn't make the person super rich.

In fact they're selling the same goods at a much lower rate while getting pennies. The savings are passed onto you.

>>1511212
I was blaming foreigners.

Mass immigration does have a similar effect however.

>If you cut off these foreign workers the cost of goods would go up which offsets the wage increase.

Often quoted, never cited. Mainly because what has really happened is the wages for workers stagnated and the money saved was simply shifted up the chain instead of being given away in the form of a cheaper good or service.

>>1509771
wagecuck cope

Women and minorities make up a large % of the workplace now. A large part of their compensation is not earned, but siphoned off from the productivity of white men.

Unfortunately for the economy there are now not only fewer white men to shoulder the load but an additional 10% of white men have said fuck this system and dropped out so they are now a drag as well.

>>1509661
>>1509662
This. It's the great wealth transfer and the demise of the middle class.

>>1509661
> It is because the powers that be realized that most people will still work hard even if they are paid peanuts thanks to an inherent evolutionary psychological flaw in humans called "hope".

Lmao

Literally no one knows

It's all conjecture

No one has a fucking clue breh

We're crashing this ship
With no survivors.

>>1509640
Your company gives me your salary.

I average it with another company and sell it back to your HR.

They see you make more and lay you off.

Computers increased output without increasing demand for labor.

>>1513027
not true they increased a totally different demand but wages for developers are artificially held down.

>>1510160
GPD Growth has been faster than productivity growth for nearly 40 years.

>>1510369
>Income and productivity use different inflation measures, so you need to deflate using the same measure otherwise you overstate the change.

You do realize that productivity GROWTH takes into account price inflation?

>>1510814
Total productivity has fallen 3-4 straight quarters.

So the statement is correct. The growth chart just makes it easier to see since 5 year moving averages account for statistical noise.

>>1511212
>n fact they're selling the same goods at a much lower rate while getting pennies. I disagree to an extent on them being the same goods, but in general you are correct.

>The savings are passed onto you.
Now this is where you are wrong.

>>1513027
Wait. Wouldn't more money and chances of making more money > more investment > more demand for "work" > eventually, more demand for labor?

>>1510369
THIS guy knows.

http://www.nber.org/digest/oct08/w13953.html

>The first is a focus on wages rather than total compensation: because of the rise in fringe benefits and other non-cash payments, wages have not risen as rapidly as total compensation. Feldstein feels it is important to compare the productivity rise with the increase in total compensation rather than the increase in the narrower measure of just wages and salaries.

>The second measurement problem that Feldstein addresses is the way in which nominal output and nominal compensation are converted to real values before making the comparison. Although any consistent deflation of the two series of nominal values will show similar movements of productivity and compensation, Feldstein concludes that it is misleading to use two different deflators, one for measuring productivity and the other for measuring real compensation.

>>1510354
You make no fucking sense you dumb fuck. Those goddamn Panamax cargo ships are tiny little toys now, compared to the Chinamax. The fuel-gallons per tonne of cargo is trivial now. Even if the evil corporate capitalist boogeyman of your nightmares cared nothing for the environmental impact, they certainly fucking care about the cost of fuel. If they are willing to pay the cost of fuel for the round trip rather than just processing it here, you can be goddamn sure that the fuel per tonne is low and they've increased efficiency overall.

>>1513210
>2006

>>1513210
>2006

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/PRS85006173

>Total labor share fell from 120 to 100

Wages are growing, just not in America. Look at it from the employer's perspective.

An American worker:
>expects to earn enough money to not just exist, but also buy a few meager trinkets
>expects to have their salary/wages increase the longer they work for one employer
>probably lives in an area with regulations, making it so that you can't lock the fire escapes or dump your waste into nearby storm drains
>probably has friends, a car, a network and a family they can use to acquire a new job if their current one doesn't pay enough
>probably knows several unforgivable curses, such as "OSHA", "Unionize" and "the Department of Labor"

A third world peasant farmer:
>will work for 10 cents a day
>will do anything to escape the wasteland of poverty they were born into
>lives in an area where you can dump your waste right into the street without issue, or have your factory collapse and kill hundreds and the worst that'll happen is someone will write a mean article about you on the internet
>a few of them can even fall into the machinery and nobody will complain since being turned into meat paste is more pleasurable than returning to their old lives

>>1513325
From the perspective of an employer? Sure!

>My product is worth $25
>I want to do none of the work and take all of the revenue.
>Mommy government! Big media! Workers are mean and lazy and stupid! Help e!