Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

It's the (Tanking) Economy, Stupid

By Barbara Ehrenreich, AlterNet. Posted September 13, 2006.


Conservatives say struggling Americans are just too dumb to grasp the wonders of our 'knowledge-based economy.'

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

More stories by Barbara Ehrenreich

Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

If the people don't like the economy, there must be something wrong with the people.

This is the new line from the Bush administration and its flacks: Growth is up! Unemployment is down! Incomes are soaring! So why, according to a poll taken by the nonpartisan Pew Research Center, do 63 percent of Americans say that the economy is on the wrong track? Obviously they are deluded. Or maybe they're just not all that bright.

Weighing in on the side of delusion is New York Times columnist David Brooks, who wrote the following on Sept. 7:

... workers overall are not getting a smaller slice of the pie. Wages and benefits have made up roughly the same share of G.D.P. for 50 years ... Jobs are not more insecure. Workers are just as likely to hold a job for 20 years as they were in 1969 ... workers are not stuck in dead-end jobs.

And, in a statement that has economists scratching their heads: "The typical male worker with some college but no degree has seen his income rise from $34,000 in 2000 to about $40,000 today." (Who is this guy, and how do I find him?)

If the public is pessimistic, Brooks argues, it must be because "the populists, who usually live in university towns, paint a portrait of unrelieved misery that badly distorts reality." And the public, sated as it is by a steady diet of high-end restaurant meals and distracted by constant mall sprees, is dumb enough to believe those academic cranks.

Elaine Chao, the secretary of labor, tacitly endorses the intellectual defect theory, stating on CNN recently that "our economy is evolving and transitioning to a knowledge-based economy" that favors the highly educated and highly skilled. Translation: If you're not enjoying the economy, it must be because you're just not too smart. And if you're not smart enough for our knowledge-based economy, you're clearly too dumb to understand how great it really is.

Connoisseurs of American political ideologies will note the delicate bind the Pew survey puts the conservatives in. For years, they've styled themselves as the "populists" -- upholding the supposed simple virtues and gut patriotism of the common person against the cynicism and "moral relativity" of the overeducated, Chardonnay-swigging, stem-cell-hating "liberal elite." What to do then when the average Joe and Joan say the economy sucks? Brooks falls back on the liberal elite theory -- attributing public pessimism to the baleful influence of those who dwell in "university towns." Chao wants us to believe that the disgruntled are simply those who haven't yet grasped the wonders of a "knowledge-based economy."

But right-wing populism never applied to economics. While bravely championing chastity, fetuses and heterosexual marriage, the right has pursued an unabashedly elitist economic program: cutting taxes for the wealthy and services for everyone else. The effects of these policies -- along with private sector layoffs and cuts in wages and benefits -- are finally coming home to roost. Real wages are declining; in fact, the share of the GDP that goes to wages and salaries has reached a 59-year low, while the share going to corporate profits is at a 40-year high.

Meanwhile the number of Americans without health insurance rose by 1.3 million in 2005. And while the unemployment rate is admirably low, it fails to take into account the large numbers of people who have given up looking for work or who are working at low-paid jobs for which they may be far overqualified. Odd, isn't it, that in a "knowledge-based economy" so many college graduates are waiting tables and laid-off engineers are driving airport limos?

Here's another explanation for the economic disgruntlement of the American public: They're not dumb or deluded, they're hurting. Stagnant wages and salaries, combined with rising costs of health care, energy, tuition and rent, have left a majority -- somewhere around 63 percent -- battered and bruised. Real populists don't call the people dumb. They listen to what they're saying.

Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

Barbara Ehrenreich is the author of 13 books, most recently "Bait and Switch: The (Futile) Pursuit of the American Dream." This piece originally appeared on Barbara's blog.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
who
Posted by: rsaxto on Sep 13, 2006 12:38 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I wonder who in the administration paid David Brooks to lie for them all the way to the election? If this statement is false then why is it that David Brooks has turned into the dumbest well-paid columnist in the US? Decent people would like to know. Maybe he is just getting dumber and dumber by straining to believe all the propaganda Americans are now bombarded with from the administration and their pet corporations.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Ha! Good one! Posted by: DataDoc
Here we go again!
Posted by: TT2 on Sep 13, 2006 12:55 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Lets see, who should we blame for this? YES! The EVIL immigrants and there EVIL multicultural masters must be behind this devious sceam against the white heterosexual American worker. Of course=P!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Here we go again! Posted by: Lincoln fan
» RE: Here we go again! Posted by: jwg
» RE: Here we go again! Posted by: bullwhip7
» RE: Here we go again! Posted by: derfb1
» RE: Here we go again! Posted by: leftisright
» RE: Here we go again! Posted by: loril
» RE: Here we go again! Posted by: loril
Plundered Economy
Posted by: Tom Degan on Sep 13, 2006 3:52 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is a fact: These murderous bastards have plundered our national treasure. The next president, whoever it is, will be spending at least 90 percent of his or her time dealing with the damage that this half-witted little piece of shit and the tsunami of human shit that comprises his administration did to their once-great country.

This is depressing as hell to even contemplate but here it is: The democrats are our only hope. And please, don't bombard me with notes about how the two parties are nothing more than tweedle dum and tweedle dee. Yeah, yeah, yeah! I know that the minority party is a very big part of the problem! But comparing the democrats to the republicans is like comparing alcohol to cyanide; They are the lesser of two poisons - no question about it.

The major task of the next democratically controlled congress (Oh, please! Oh, please! Oh, please!) must be the impeachment and removal from power of George W. Bush and Richard B. Cheney. Both of them need to be hauled off in an ox cart to Levenworth Prison for the rest of their fucking lives for their crimes against humanity in general and the children of Iraq in particular. Yesterday, on NBC's Today Show, the First Fool actually told Matt Lauhrer that because he says that secret CIA prisons are legal then that makes them legal. To which Lauhrer, in his finest moment ever, asked: "Then if they were legal, why were they kept a secret"? Of course he didn't have an answer to that one! There is no answer.

It's up to us, WEEDA PEEPLE, to bring these people to justice. I've said it before and I'll say it again: If the republican party is allowed to retain control of both houses of congress in November, you might just as well kiss your country goodbye. This is not the time to be experimenting with third parties. Trust me on this one, kiddies.

Pray for peace

Tom Degan
Goshen, NY
"The Rant" by Tom Degan

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Plundered Economy Posted by: jlohman
» RE: Plundered Economy Posted by: Pirate1
» We do need a LEADER!!! Posted by: Conservasaurus
» RE: Plundered Economy Posted by: Basenjis
» RE: Plundered Economy Posted by: Pirate1
» RE: Plundered Economy Posted by: JSquercia
» RE: Plundered Economy Posted by: Lincoln fan
» RE: Plundered Economy Posted by: Pirate1
» RE: Plundered Economy Posted by: Lincoln fan
» Impeachment??? Posted by: Conservasaurus
» RE: Impeachment??? Posted by: bornxeyed
» RE: Impeachment??? Posted by: Conservasaurus
» RE: Impeachment??? Posted by: bornxeyed
» RE: Impeachment??? Posted by: drmflorida
» RE: Impeachment??? Posted by: WILDSTARCHILD
» RE: Plundered Economy Posted by: blueinredstate
» RE: Plundered Economy Posted by: Tom Degan
» RE Any day now Posted by: Lincoln fan
» RE: Plundered Economy Posted by: WILDSTARCHILD
» RE: Plundered Economy Posted by: VannaLaRoche
» RE: Plundered Economy Posted by: lively56
» RE: Plundered Economy Posted by: Thuktun
» RE: Plundered Economy Posted by: ghoster
» Immigration Hawk Posted by: Spyder
» NAFTA Rhymes with SHAFTA Posted by: Spyder
» Thanks Tom Posted by: jwg
» RE: Plundered Economy Posted by: illingsk
» RE: Plundered Economy Posted by: WILDSTARCHILD
» RE: Plundered Economy Posted by: jag585
» RE: Plundered Economy Posted by: dikaiosyne
» RE: Plundered Economy Posted by: WILDSTARCHILD
Politics=Power and Money.
Posted by: Lincoln fan on Sep 13, 2006 4:35 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What Ms. Ehrenreich says is all too true. But, I don't expect much better if the Democrats take office. I base this on the fact that both parties are financed by the same corporate establishment.

Click on Open Secrets You will see that among other industries, the pharmaceutical, defense, and financial industries invested heavily in both parties.

Is it any wonder then that both parties are Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dum? Can any rational person believe that there is a "peoples' party"? Both parties are owned lock, stock, and barrel by the same corporate sponsors and that's who they serve. We can vote the Republicans out but we can't vote the pharmaceutical, defense, and finance industries out. In an election we have the power! We have the power to choose whether the Republicans or Democrats carry out the agenda of the corporatocracy.

I believe that our votes do have power before the election. We can force both parites to compete for our votes. We can say to both parties, "If you want my vote, here's what you have to do. If you don't want my vote; fine, I'll cast a protest vote for "Honest Abe"".

Stand up to both parties. Show the "guts" that you wish our politicians had. Join The Lincoln Initiative it costs nothing and takes five minutes of your time. If you want a revolution do it the easy way. Time is growing short. Do it today!
Bob Reichenbach
Director, The Lincoln Initiative.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Politics=Power and Money. Posted by: Lincoln fan
» RE: Politics=Power and Money. Posted by: bornxeyed
» RE: Politics=Power and Money. Posted by: VannaLaRoche
» RE: Politics=Power and Money. Posted by: raven1984
» RE: Politics=Power and Money. Posted by: hapibeli
» RE: Politics=Power and Money. Posted by: vangogh69
» RE: Politics=Power and Money. Posted by: Lincoln fan
» WORD Posted by: AdamG
» RE: WORD Posted by: edhowes
» RE: Politics=Power and Money. Posted by: Lincoln fan
why did I ever bother to graduate from college?
Posted by: bornxeyed on Sep 13, 2006 5:32 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
some college but no degree has seen his income rise from $34,000 in 2000 to about $40,000 today."

Wonderful to know that after obtaining a bachelor's degeree in engineering, 20 years of working and with some graduate school completed and retraining myself to stay current in the quickly evolving IT field, I'm making slightly more than a 20 year old who never graduated from college. And I've been making that same exact slightly more for the last 10 years. Oh, and did I happen to mention, as deep middle age approaches I haven't had health insurance for the last 2 years.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It's actually very simple
Posted by: ReallyBearish on Sep 13, 2006 6:52 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The economy is bad. This doesn't take an Ivy League economist to figure it out. If we do nothing more than use the previous measure of inflation that avoids all of the statistical flim-flam of the present measure, we find that the economy is in recession and getting worse.

What it takes an ivy-league economist to figure out is how to generate all of the fraudulent data coming out of the Bureau of Labor statistics. For example, there's no such thing as "core inflation", unless you think that housing, food and energy don't amount to much in your life. Anyone that uses the term "core inflation" as a serious measure of anything (other than fraud) is either a fool, a liar or worse.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

skills and power
Posted by: wash123 on Sep 13, 2006 7:04 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
My favorite part of Brooks' column was how he treated skills and elite power as separate and unrelated. Apparently he's completely unfamiliar with Adam Smith, Frederick Taylor, Henry Ford who all acknowledged that deskilling craft work and transferring control of skills to managers/owners as essential to capitalism.

My second favorite part was how he argued that decline of unions accounts for a paltry 10-20% of the increase in economic inequality but that proof in his argument that true skill differences are driving inequality was in the example of carpenters and custom kitchen contractors, fewer than one million workers in May of 2005.

My third favorite part of Brooks' column was how he argued that inequality isn't necessarily due to differences in intelligence or technical skills, but differences in 'social and customer service skills'. So, instead of wasting time pursuing higher education, let's all take up part-time, no benefit work in food service industry. Well, I suppose Brooks' would argue it worked for Ehrenreich!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What the hell?
Posted by: caitlin on Sep 13, 2006 7:16 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
the populists, who usually live in university towns, paint a portrait of unrelieved misery that badly distorts reality.

Brooks is seriously distorting history if he thinks populist movements are or have ever been based around universities.

Frankly, I'm super tired of highly paid columnists and media personalities analyzing statistics so they can tell us how our lives really are, as opposed to how we say they are. How about this - until David Brooks has to worry about a lack of health care or has no idea how he will pay his rent/mortgage/property taxes, his glowing statements about the economic health of this country are about as welcome as a shit in my beer. Now there's some populist sentiment for ya, Dave.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: What the hell? Posted by: hapibeli
» RE: What the hell? Posted by: ALANHESTER
The devil is in the details
Posted by: AdamG on Sep 13, 2006 7:21 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What they forget to mention about the 20 year old making forty grand a year is that he is working 2-3 jobs 80 hours a week to make that. Or that he is spending close to 10 grand of that on gas driving to get to all those jobs. They also don't bring up the fact that if he is even attempting to buy a house, he is probably up to his eyeballs in debt. Or that if he has a partner, they are probably doing the same. And god forbid if they have any children, who they don't get health care benefits for. The way this adminstration is going, we might as well just give up, become one big new world order, so we can just get over the delusion that we have a future.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: The devil is in the details Posted by: drcyflowers
» RE: The devil is in the details Posted by: Madam Hatter
» annoying english majors Posted by: AdamG
» RE: The devil is in the details Posted by: bornxeyed
» Too true! Posted by: DataDoc
Why watch David Brooks, et al
Posted by: hapibeli on Sep 13, 2006 7:28 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
One of the biggest problems in America today, is that people watch CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, and FOX. Why? Why do people watch that crap? Why spend more than 1-2 hours per week in front of the god damned tube? What is the purpose. Self anesthesism? What a nation of boobs! Pun rendered with little forethought.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Watch David Brooks? Posted by: eringhorm
» RE: Watch David Brooks? Posted by: bitter456
» RE: Watch David Brooks? Posted by: realmuzik
Knowledge economy needs commitment to get jobs
Posted by: Bobsays on Sep 13, 2006 7:48 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If we look at the global rivals in the knowledge economy stakes - Japan, China, Scandinavia - you will some interesting factors that propel their knowledge industries. One of the most common factors is state and national government support. This takes many forms. In Estonia, they have committed the entire society to the knowledge economy, so that taxes are very low and the government is fully committed to ensuring everyone plays a role and benefits from the new technologies. This has had some amazing affects, and is one of the more interesting economies in the world today.

In Japan, a very inventive society, the government has always made pacts with industry to get growth and job creation. In China, the communists are following a similar model. Same happened in South Korea. The US needs a new technology deal. There can be no gaps, no hanging people out to dry because we can't afford it.

What is really sad is that there is a common factor in all these countries: there industrial policies were based on the best of American ideas, ideas that were rarely implemented in the US itself. Maybe its time to bring all that creative and funky thinking home.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"Lies, damned lies, and statistics." -- Mark Twain
Posted by: Sojourner on Sep 13, 2006 7:49 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am willing to give Ehrenreich credibility when it comes to an interpretation of statistics. Her "Nickeled and Dimed" was on (or maybe better, off) the money. She knows whereof she writes.

Brooks replaced some other conservative on The NY Times and, with few exceptions, writes to please the plutocracy. I do not believe anything Bush says, I do not believe anything Brooks writes, I am grateful for AlterNet because almost everyone else except for Pacifica Foundation radio is doing PR for the rich.

Part of the problem is that Americans like to be upbeat and optimistic. As Bob Dylan sings, believing that "You can win what's never been won. You can do what's never been done."

So speaking the truth sounds like just complaining. Americans don't like bad news. The result is that we need to live it to believe it. So we are.

For how much longer before we try to change it?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» I used to work for Pacifica Posted by: deborama
Watch David Brooks?
Posted by: eringhorm on Sep 13, 2006 8:09 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
David Brooks may appear on talk shows from time to time, but his primary media outlets are the print and online editions of the NY Times, in full text.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Government's in the kitchen, cookin' the books.
Posted by: monkeywrench on Sep 13, 2006 8:07 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The artificially low unemployment percentage also does not take into account how the government has been "cooking the books" for the past few years. Example: 20 years ago, employment figures did not include the military. Now they do, and those 2 million+ soldiers being included drops the unemployment rate by nearly a whole point. Also, I understand that if you are a volunteer for an organization that pays income tax, you are considered fully employed just like if you're being paid; that part-timers are often counted as fully-employed; and that contract workers are considered fully employed whether or not they are between projects.

Along with not counting those who are no longer accessing the various states' unemployment offices, these and other methods of subterfuge have reduced the "official" unemployment rate to about one-half or less than the actual figure. Don't believe me? Just go into your local home improvement warehouse mega-store and notice all of the able-bodied men wandering around in the middle of the workweek. You didn't see this ten or twenty years ago.

But, as many of you already know, this should be easy to check: after all, thanks to downsizing, outsourcing and age discrimination, you have the free time. . .

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» AGREE 10,000%, cookin' the books. Posted by: Michiganman
Good Comments
Posted by: hbw on Sep 13, 2006 9:40 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Although I read AlterNet a lot (mostly at work) I sometimes dread scrolling down to the comments. Even some of the ostensibly bright commenteers (no names mentioned) tend to be shrill, misinformed, obsessed with propounding their particular worldview, or so exasperated by Bushite dumb-assery they talk like a bunch of left-wing Freeper equivalents. In a word, Aack.

That said, Dr. Ehrenreich's rebuttal to Brooks has generated some very thoughtful, articulate, incisive comments that I have enjoyed reading. Tom Degan gets points for style with his well-seasoned use of non-elite, populist language.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Good Comments Posted by: TT2
Figures Dont Lie, But Liars Figure
Posted by: NoPCZone on Sep 13, 2006 9:44 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The government and the NeoCon (emphasis on CON) think tanks can cook the books and hide the real numbers through artificially selective data, obfuscation and spin and it does not change a thing. In the long run the truth will come out as it is felt throughout our economy.

Any number of things could trigger the collapse of the House of Cards our economy have become, but the odds are high that at least one will. Even lacking an outside trigger, the economic model we are living in is unsustainable over an extended time. When the real price comes due it will be very ugly for many.

When the debt bomb goes it's going to shake our nation to it's core. All the working class/middle class lemmings that have been duped into voting against their own interest by the NeoCons will quickly find themselves evicted from their homes without a car to live in, because it has been repossessed. All of their minimal savings will quickly be claimed by their creditors and bankruptcy will not be an option due to the NeoCon's Bankruptcy 'Reform'. The social safety net won't be there for them and their family because they dismantled it under the NeoCon agenda. Talk about rude awakenings.

To be homeless, without a car, without credit or money in post Bush ( The Compassionate Conservative) America will be a B*tch. Then you will have a lot of time to think about why you were so worried about abolishing the estate tax, busting unions and the social safety net.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It's a FINANCIALIZED economy and we're not that stupid!
Posted by: lonl1 on Sep 13, 2006 10:40 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Production has been marginalized and moved offshore in the interest of greater profit for the capitalists. This process is independent of any intention other than the insatiable drive for profit inherent in the imperialist system. Much of whatever production remains onshore is war materiel. This fact alone explains much about the war policies of both major parties.

The US economy is now dependent on endless consumption of foreign-produced goods purchased with debt financing, foreign and domestic. A passel of pundits, lawyers and financial analysts being served lunch and dinner or sold cars, clothes, etc. by the rest of us does not a viable economy make.

Where all this leaves the majority is out of luck, David Brooks' nonchalant lying notwithstanding. Yes, if you have a marketable skill in the so-called "knowledge economy" you, personally, can be OK. But many "knowledge" occupations such as engineering can now be offshored, with the list of offshoreables very likely to grow. The "knowledge economy" can never absorb anything like the potential working population!

Neither major party has any intention of opposing this economic trend. Campaign financing is entirely dependent on the support of the corporations that have produced it. Further, the key players and power positions are all occupied by people who have completely bought into the truly murderous assumptions of imperialism.

The Dems, if they get back in power, may well apply a bandaid or two to this rotten system. But people should have no illusions that American living standards can rebound with that party's leadership. Nor should we expect much in the way of ending the war. Whatever reforms can be won within this system are much more likely to come from mass movements demanding them than from relying on the Democrats.

The problems we are talking about are inherent in imperialism. It's the system that needs to be changed.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The US economy and the status of workers (briefly)
Posted by: vangogh69 on Sep 13, 2006 2:21 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We must first and foremost remember that we've a capitalist economy which can/does produce a middle-class but, in its extreme form (and most "efficient") drives wages down, surplus labor (i.e. workers) rises (9to5 is becoming a quaint relic for my generation (I'm 26)), and profit goes to the top. The ideas upon which this republic was founded (speaking of the US Constitution, the Bill of Rights, etc.) unfortunately don't guarentee a living wage and access to basic services (something which is in the UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which we've ratified, but of course done zero to impliment in the US).

The US is seeing today the result of its short-sighted policies, not in the Middle East, but rather in Europe. After WWII, we short-sightedly helped the european economy recover (along with the asian in Japan and later Korea). While seemingly beneficial in the shortrun (to prove the effectiveness of the capitalist model against the communist), this policy has proven to be disastrous for the US' long-term goal of remaining the world's superpower. (A note should be said about the US becoming an international power at the end of the 19th century, another short-sighted move which has done more to hurt the US domestically than originally envisioned, economically speaking.) We can no longer dictate the rules of the market and this, combined with our (synergistic) encouragement of globalization and gutting of our own US-export market has seriously compromised us. We are in Iraq now, not for oil (though that is a part of it), but to retain the position we geopolitically/financially/militarily occupy in the world, FOREVER. The "crisis" is of our own making and of the Capitalists' making. Wages, war, and globalization: it's all connected.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Fantastic article!
Posted by: owleyes on Sep 13, 2006 2:57 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I really love this lady. That's all I have to say.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Say Again? "But right-wing populism never applied to economics."
Posted by: albrechtkrausse on Sep 13, 2006 3:34 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I guess someone forgot about Hitler, the Spainish Falangists, Il Duce, Heuy Long, etc etc.

I sure hope you're not advocating right-wing populism?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Barbara is the BEST!!
Posted by: zooeyhall on Sep 13, 2006 5:36 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Barbara:

You say more in one brief article then one gets in hours of listening to the over-paid economic "experts" on the MSM.

I say: Barbara for President!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Barbara is the BEST!! Posted by: realmuzik
Expenses Percentage of G.D.P.
Posted by: 1rufus1 on Sep 13, 2006 10:11 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Even if someone agrees with the statement that wages are the same percentage over a 50 year period, I would like to know what the percentage is concerning common living expenses such as housing, utilities, food, medical, transportation, taxes, etc. over that same period of 50 years. I believe expenses are rising at an alarming pace and they will reach critical mass soon. Maybe it has already begun with the record number of bankruptcys and foreclosures happening during that same period of of $34000 to $40000 salary increase.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A knowledge economy?
Posted by: yellow on Sep 13, 2006 11:09 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Though the Bureau of Labor Statistics cites healthcare and computer services including software engineering as the fields in which the ten fastest job growth categories exist, this by no means indicates that jobs in "knowledge based" fields will be the most plentiful and fastest growing over the next eight years. Projected growth in these fields reflects the health care needs of an aging population and the growth of computer services for a growing service and financial sector. According to the BLS report, nurses and retail clerks are expected to gain the most new jobs--more than 700,000 each! The rate of pay for most of these positions is at or below the national median and many of them pay at or below the national poverty line.

At the end of the 1990s, the "knowledge economy" was supposedly on the rise yet it tanked due to oversupply and a drop in demand. The bursting of the dot.com bubble was part of this development. Overproduction of direct random access memory chips produced in Thailand led to a rapid drop in the market price of DRAMs and a drop in direct investment and employment. A rise in manufacturing overcapacity in this field shifted global investment elsewhere.

Most economists shy away from long term structural definitions of the US economy like "knowledge-based" and emphasize its unpredictable and shifting nature. Continual restructuring means that jobs can be eliminated, move overseas, be casualized and redefined, or outsourced.

Health care job growth is based on the rising spending in that field, an annual average of roughly $2 trillion over the last few years which has shifted investment and raised costs in that field. The rising services and financial sectors call for increasing computer services to increase productivity. The retail sector seems to grow along with increased imports of cheap consumer goods made overseas while and the hospitality industry seems to be expanding as national wealth is skewed toward the rich. Though business travel is down from the halcyon days of the go go nineties the industry has concentrated as a result and is still a major employer. These later two sectors, retail and hospitality, are reknown for their poverty wages!

None of this seems to add up to the Bush Administration's picture of a growing Knowledge economy with an endless production of high wage jobs.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Interesting, but real?
Posted by: bullwhip7 on Sep 14, 2006 3:00 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Today from NPR -

Dynamic Economy Produces High-Paying Jobs

by Frank Langfitt

Morning Edition, September 13, 2006 ยท Many high-paying jobs have been created in key sectors of the economy over the past generation, according to a study from the University of Chicago. The dynamic churn of the U.S. economy has caused turbulence, but on balance it has been good for workers in computers, finance, trucking and the food industry.

That's right - new jobs being added, and existing jobs are higher paid now, "more high wage jobs, and more jobs altogether".

Check it out - Find it here

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Interesting, but real? Posted by: bornxeyed
» RE: Interesting, but real? Posted by: Conservasaurus
» RE: Interesting, but real? Posted by: bornxeyed
» RE: Interesting, but real? Posted by: bullwhip7
» RE: Interesting, but real? Posted by: zooeyhall
» RE: Interesting, but real? Posted by: yellow
Make your own lunch
Posted by: DataDoc on Sep 15, 2006 12:48 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Don't you love it when someone on TV tells you how easy it is to get rid of your debt? Or how you need to work less and spend more time with your family (uh, duh)? It's amazing how many problems can be solved (on TV) by making your own bag lunch and bringing it to work with you!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It is a "knowledge economy"
Posted by: WhatNow? on Sep 15, 2006 8:55 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
but it's not what you know. It's who you know. It's the same old crap it's just getting worse.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]