APP - "Pay the middle class better, watch the economy improve"

tekkychick

New member
http://www.sfgate.com/default/article/Pay-middle-class-better-watch-economy-improve-4793110.php

Congress will reconvene shortly. That means more battles over taxes and spending, regulations and safety nets and how to get the economy out of first gear. Which means more gridlock and continual showdowns over budget resolutions and the debt ceiling.

But before the hostilities start again and we all get lost in political strategies and petty tactics, it's useful to consider what's really at stake for our economy and democracy.

For much of the past century, the basic bargain at the heart of America was that employers paid their workers enough to buy what American employers were selling. Government's role was to encourage and enforce this bargain. We thereby created a virtuous cycle of higher living standards, more jobs and better wages.

But the bargain has been broken. And until it's remade, the economy can't mend, and our democracy won't be responsive to the majority.

First, a bit of history. Back in 1914, Henry Ford announced he was paying workers on his Model T assembly line $5 a day - three times what the typical factory employee earned at the time. The Wall Street Journal termed his action "an economic crime."

But Ford knew it was a cunning business move. The higher wage turned Ford's auto workers into customers who could afford to buy Model T's. In two years, Ford's profits more than doubled.

Yet in the years leading up to the Great Crash of 1929, employers forgot Henry Ford's example. The wages of most American workers stagnated even as the economy surged. Gains went mainly into corporate profits and into the pockets of the very rich. American families maintained their standard of living by going deeper into debt, and the rich gambled with their gigantic winnings. In 1929, the debt bubble popped.

Sound familiar? It should. The same thing happened in the years leading up to the crash of 2008. The lesson should be obvious. When the economy becomes too lopsided - disproportionately benefiting corporate owners and top executives rather than average workers - it tips over.

It's still lopsided. We're slowly emerging from the depths of the worst downturn since the Great Depression, but nothing fundamentally has changed. Corporate profits are up largely because payrolls are down. Even Ford Motor Co. is now paying its new hires half what it paid new employees a few years ago.

All over the American economy, employee pay is down to the smallest share of the economy since the government began collecting wage and salary data 60 years ago. And corporate profits constitute the largest share of the economy since then. This is a losing game for corporations over the long term. Without enough American consumers, their profitable days are numbered. Europeans are in no mood to buy. India and China are slowing dramatically. Developing nations are in trouble.

Republicans claim rich people and big corporations are job creators, so their taxes must not be raised. This is blatantly untrue. In order to create jobs, businesses need customers. But the rich spend only a small fraction of what they earn. They park most of it wherever around the world they can get the highest return.

The real job creators are the vast middle class, whose spending drives the economy and creates jobs. But as the middle class's share of total income continues to drop, it can't spend as much as before. Nor can most Americans borrow as they did before the crash of 2008 - borrowing that temporarily masked their declining purchasing power.

As a result, businesses are still reluctant to hire and pay decent wages. Which is why the recovery continues to be so anemic.

As wealth and income rise to the top, moreover, so does political power. Corporations and the rich are able to entrench themselves by keeping low tax rates and special tax breaks (such as the "carried interest" loophole allowing private equity and hedge fund managers to treat their incomes as capital gains), and ensuring a steady flow of corporate welfare to their businesses (special breaks for oil and gas, big agriculture, big insurance, Big Pharma, and, of course, Wall Street).

All of this continues to squeeze public budgets, corrupt government and undermine our democracy. The issue is not and has never been the size of our government; it's who the government is for. Government has become less responsive to the needs of most citizens and more responsive to the demands of the monied interests.

The Republican response is to further reduce taxes on the rich, defund programs for the poor, fight unions, allow the median wage to continue to drop and oppose any limits on campaign contributions or spending. It does not take a great deal of brainpower to understand this strategy will lead to an even more lopsided economy, more entrenched wealth and a more corrupt democracy.

So, as Congress reconvenes and the battles resume, be clear about what's at stake. The only way back to a buoyant economy is through a productive system whose gains are more widely shared. The only way back to a responsive democracy is through a political system whose monied interests are more effectively constrained.

We must remake the basic bargain at the heart of America.

© 2013 Robert Reich Robert Reich, former U.S. secretary of labor, is professor of public policy at UC Berkeley and the author of "Aftershock: The Next Economy and America's Future." He blogs at www.robertreich.org. To comment, go to www.sfgate.com/submissions/#1.
 
the republican congress critters are deaf to the population at large and only hear the wealthy contributors or special interest groups like the 'tea' party that can 'primary' them out of office

but keep on trying

ps i have been laid low again
 
I can't believe something so easy to figure out would be such difficult idea to get across. That more people with expendable income would improve the economy in a big way.
 
I can't believe something so easy to figure out would be such difficult idea to get across. That more people with expendable income would improve the economy in a big way.

It is not a difficult idea to get across.
The difficulty is simple; according to those in power there is no problem.
The economy has not been in recession since 2009, the stock market has completely recovered, the rich (our ruling class) still have plenty, and US corporations are sitting on 2 Trillion in cash.

Not a problem.
They don't care if you can't afford organic milk or have to drink tap water filled with industrial poisons, or for that matter, if you live or die.

The system is rigged in such a way that food and energy, by far the highest expenses of the poor and lower class are not factored into inflation calculations, wages have either been stagnant or actually declined, so the standard of living of 80% of americans (true story, look it up) has declined precipitously, yet freaks like Truth Deflecteor, Taft, some of our regular conservatards,
and even some of our supposedly progressive posters will dispute what I have written above out of hand, refusing to even address these facts.
In essence wringing their hands, humming tra la la and sighing as they say if only and there is nothing we can do.

Oh, I forgot, it is really all Obama's fault. Everything was fine, in 2009.
 
the wealthy like to allow this country to limp along so they can be the ultimate masters of everything.

Its no fun for them when others have a decent life.

they need us all desperate and willing to do their bidding.
 
the wealthy like to allow this country to limp along so they can be the ultimate masters of everything.

Its no fun for them when others have a decent life.

they need us all desperate and willing to do their bidding.

Yes, it makes it easier for them to depress wages and buy family heirlooms at great discounts due to people's desperation, never mind the real estate situation. Every decent recession makes the rich get richer faster.
 
the republican congress critters are deaf to the population at large and only hear the wealthy contributors or special interest groups like the 'tea' party that can 'primary' them out of office

but keep on trying

ps i have been laid low again

DQ, we miss you!! please get healthy! And say hi to Miranda for us!
 
used to be, the middle class was shopkeepers, entrepreneurs, businessmen.......it wasn't the right that attacked that group.......
 
So the thesis is that if employers increase their expenses by increasing the pay of their workers they will see profits in excess of those increased expenses?

Why don't business people know this?
 
So the thesis is that if employers increase their expenses by increasing the pay of their workers they will see profits in excess of those increased expenses?

Why don't business people know this?



In 1914, Henry Ford started an industrial revolution by more than doubling wages to $5 a day—a move that helped build the U.S. middle class and the modern economy.

In 1913, to help meet the growing demand for the Model T, Henry Ford turned his attention to improving the manufacturing processes. The business model Ford developed—production on a grand scale, performed by well-paid workers—spread throughout the world and became the manufacturing standard for everything from vacuum sweepers to cars, and more...
http://corporate.ford.com/news-center/press-releases-detail/677-5-dollar-a-day

Who would ever think that paying anything but slave wages is good? Hmmmm... Henry Ford 100 yrs ago for 1.
 
In 1914, Henry Ford started an industrial revolution by more than doubling wages to $5 a day—a move that helped build the U.S. middle class and the modern economy.

In 1913, to help meet the growing demand for the Model T, Henry Ford turned his attention to improving the manufacturing processes. The business model Ford developed—production on a grand scale, performed by well-paid workers—spread throughout the world and became the manufacturing standard for everything from vacuum sweepers to cars, and more...
http://corporate.ford.com/news-center/press-releases-detail/677-5-dollar-a-day

Who would ever think that paying anything but slave wages is good? Hmmmm... Henry Ford 100 yrs ago for 1.

Did he do it because he was a "swell guy" or because he needed to attract talented people to employ his revolutionary production processes? The latter.
 
Did he do it because he was a "swell guy" or because he needed to attract talented people to employ his revolutionary production processes? The latter.

Not talented people (takes very little talent to work on an assembly line) but people who would stay at the job for years and be able to buy the product they are producing.
 
Back
Top