LabourStart headline - Source: NY Times

More... (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/13/sunday-review/americas-productivity-climbs-but-wages-stagnate.html?smid=tw-share&_r=1&)

“We went almost a century where the labor share was pretty stable and we shared prosperity,” says Lawrence Katz, a labor economist at Harvard. “What we’re seeing now is very disquieting.” For the great bulk of workers, labor’s shrinking share is even worse than the statistics show, when one considers that a sizable — and growing — chunk of overall wages goes to the top 1 percent: senior corporate executives, Wall Street professionals, Hollywood stars, pop singers and professional athletes. The share of wages going to the top 1 percent climbed to 12.9 percent in 2010, from 7.3 percent in 1979.

A century? How ya figure that? Oh, Harvard, nevermind.


Professor Katz of Harvard said it would make sense to create a more progressive tax system when corporations and the top 1 percent are commanding more of the economic pie. He said those on top should agree to some redistribution and to invest in the next generation.

“We’ll end up with a larger pie, and they’ll be better off — even though they may think it clashes with their own self-interest,” he said.

Prof. Katz is another delusional Keynesian. When has the ruling class ever thought like that?

Well, The Newspaper of Record is concerned, the former White House guy has got a bunch of ideas that are probably the reason he's 'former' and it's seemingly intractable, what a conundrum. Nobody knows what to do....oh wait..

A century? How ya figure that? Oh, Harvard, nevermind.



Prof. Katz is another delusional Keynesian. When has the ruling class ever thought like that?

Well, The Newspaper of Record is concerned, the former White House guy has got a bunch of ideas that are probably the reason he's 'former' and it's seemingly intractable, what a conundrum. Nobody knows what to do....oh wait..

Actually, they have been pushing this "labor supply and demand" shit for a generation. How can he be "disquieted". Ten percent unemployment plus globalization... what did he think would happen?

The funny thing is that "senior corporate executives, Wall Street professionals, Hollywood stars, pop singers and professional athletes" are not imune. Neither are Harvard profs. Only those who command Capital are immune... until the next cycle.

Dimwits.

Actually, they have been pushing this "labor supply and demand" shit for a generation. How can he be "disquieted". Ten percent unemployment plus globalization... what did he think would happen?

The funny thing is that "senior corporate executives, Wall Street professionals, Hollywood stars, pop singers and professional athletes" are not imune. Neither are Harvard profs. Only those who command Capital are immune... until the next cycle.

Dimwits.


BTW, the charts accompanying this are the same ones we were talking about mega-years ago at Pop-I. Two things:

1) What did anyone think that a global Great-Recession was going to do to a definite trend which formed prior to major recessions?

2) What do we think of the relative "efficiency" or prosperity of an economic system which defines itself exclusively on such a basis, excusing every other horror in its name... what do we make of such a system that hasn't produced jack in 40 years?




http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2013/01/13/opinion/13greenhousech/13greenhousech-popup-v4.png