3 ms·

It's not just SF and NYC. The rust belt was gutted and what remains of those Union jobs are now slave wage jobs at places with suicide nets in China.

toomuchtodo 9y ago
I agree, but for different reasons. Jobs went to third world workers, while the majority of the productivity went into shareholder pockets. That's an internal policy issue in the US, not a globalization issue (or rather, it's an unchecked capitalism issue). You can use policy to prevent unfettered blood letting of jobs to the cheapest labor sinks in the world. Globalization is not some foregone conclusion we have no control over. EDIT: First world workers aren't competing against third world workers; they're competing against first world owners/shareholders/capitalists cramming down wages, working conditions, and living standards.
- Consultant32452 9y ago
  It didn't really go to shareholders. Maybe a little at first but a global market meant that prices of goods just dropped to compensate for the 'savings'.
  - toomuchtodo 9y ago
    > It didn't really go to shareholders. Data does not support your claim. Consumer excess was definitely realized due to cheaper labor in China and retailers like Walmart exerting influence on vendors, but shareholders most definitely have been receiving the majority of productivity gains. https://www.cbpp.org/research/top-1-percent-of-americans-reaped-two-thirds-of-income-gains-in-last-economic-expansion https://www.cbpp.org/research/top-1-percent-of-americans-rea... http://money.cnn.com/2013/03/07/news/economy/compensation-productivity/index.html http://money.cnn.com/2013/03/07/news/economy/compensation-pr... http://www.finfacts.ie/irishfinancenews/article_1021787.shtml http://www.finfacts.ie/irishfinancenews/article_1021787.shtm... https://hbr.org/2014/09/profits-without-prosperity https://hbr.org/2014/09/profits-without-prosperity http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2014/jan/22/joe-scarborough/scarborough-top-1-took-95-gains-under-obama/ http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2014/jan/22/... http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/apr/19/bernie-s/bernie-sanders-says-99-percent-new-income-going-to/ http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/apr/...
    - twoodfin 9y ago
      To the extent your list of links address productivity gains at all, they miss the most important contribution: Inflation, or rather the historically impressive lack thereof over approaching three decades of net economic growth. When firms produce more with less, supply goes up and prices go down. Compare the median American household in 1988 with today’s and you’ll see exactly where all those productivity gains have gone: More and better appliances, more and better cars, more and better communication technology, cheaper clothes, cheaper food—even at comparable inflation-adjusted income levels.
      - deleted 9y ago
        [deleted]
      - toomuchtodo 9y ago
        Inflation was low due to lack of consumer demand....because of wage stagnation (and I concede, offshoring). The Fed can’t “push the string” with QE, and here we are 10 years later from the GFC, finally with an economy hot enough to push wages up (thereby increasing inflation). https://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-06-29/hollowing-out-of-middle-class-holding-back-economy-says-imf https://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-06-29/hollowing-ou...

toomuchtodo 9y ago

I agree, but for different reasons. Jobs went to third world workers, while the majority of the productivity went into shareholder pockets. That's an internal policy issue in the US, not a globalization issue (or rather, it's an unchecked capitalism issue). You can use policy to prevent unfettered blood letting of jobs to the cheapest labor sinks in the world. Globalization is not some foregone conclusion we have no control over. EDIT: First world workers aren't competing against third world workers; they're competing against first world owners/shareholders/capitalists cramming down wages, working conditions, and living standards.

Consultant32452 9y ago
It didn't really go to shareholders. Maybe a little at first but a global market meant that prices of goods just dropped to compensate for the 'savings'.
- toomuchtodo 9y ago
  > It didn't really go to shareholders. Data does not support your claim. Consumer excess was definitely realized due to cheaper labor in China and retailers like Walmart exerting influence on vendors, but shareholders most definitely have been receiving the majority of productivity gains. https://www.cbpp.org/research/top-1-percent-of-americans-reaped-two-thirds-of-income-gains-in-last-economic-expansion https://www.cbpp.org/research/top-1-percent-of-americans-rea... http://money.cnn.com/2013/03/07/news/economy/compensation-productivity/index.html http://money.cnn.com/2013/03/07/news/economy/compensation-pr... http://www.finfacts.ie/irishfinancenews/article_1021787.shtml http://www.finfacts.ie/irishfinancenews/article_1021787.shtm... https://hbr.org/2014/09/profits-without-prosperity https://hbr.org/2014/09/profits-without-prosperity http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2014/jan/22/joe-scarborough/scarborough-top-1-took-95-gains-under-obama/ http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2014/jan/22/... http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/apr/19/bernie-s/bernie-sanders-says-99-percent-new-income-going-to/ http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/apr/...
  - twoodfin 9y ago
    To the extent your list of links address productivity gains at all, they miss the most important contribution: Inflation, or rather the historically impressive lack thereof over approaching three decades of net economic growth. When firms produce more with less, supply goes up and prices go down. Compare the median American household in 1988 with today’s and you’ll see exactly where all those productivity gains have gone: More and better appliances, more and better cars, more and better communication technology, cheaper clothes, cheaper food—even at comparable inflation-adjusted income levels.
    - deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
    - toomuchtodo 9y ago
      Inflation was low due to lack of consumer demand....because of wage stagnation (and I concede, offshoring). The Fed can’t “push the string” with QE, and here we are 10 years later from the GFC, finally with an economy hot enough to push wages up (thereby increasing inflation). https://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-06-29/hollowing-out-of-middle-class-holding-back-economy-says-imf https://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-06-29/hollowing-ou...