3 ms·
They were able to in the 50s/60s/70s. So why not now?
by skywal_l 2y ago
They were able to in the 50s/60s/70s. So why not now?
- Draiken 2y agoThe line must go up.
- vv_ 2y agoEveryone in the United States was much more well off in the 50s/60s/70s as they had just won a huge war that left most of their competitors factories completely destroyed. There's no economic boom today.
- hagbarth 2y agoBecause there was a shift to shareholder capitalism. Everything is done to increase shareholder value.
- runako 2y agoThe triumph of conservative ideology has broken the unions. No individual factory worker has the leverage to negotiate a better compensation package against the professional management team at Gap or Deere. The 80s was a period of explicitly designing for this condition; it's just taken a while for the ramifications to be acute. Although it's been obvious for decades that we were headed here.
- e40 2y agoYou mean back when rich people paid serious taxes?
- ThrowawayR2 2y ago> "They were able to in the 50s/60s/70s. So why not now?" Because the 50s/60s/70s was the post-World War II economic boom for the US. Unless you're volunteering to endure World War III so that the next generation can enjoy that kind of boom, that is not going to happen again.
- bcrosby95 2y agoWealth inequality. Increases in productivity are going to the top, not the worker. It's also why social security is going broke. It could be funded if you remove the cap. Removing the cap wouldn't be necessary if there weren't such a wealth inequality problem. The ultra wealthy are hoarding wealth then telling the rest of us we can't afford things we've afforded for over 50 years.