What Does ‘Economic Growth' Mean for Americans?: NYT

New York Times:

Suppose we placed a carefully selected sample of men on a hot stove and another sample of men on dry ice. Could we reasonably conclude that, on average, they were comfortable?

Read the whole story: New York Times

Comments

[JBS]

04:38 PM on 09/04/2011

All of the sub-prime mortgage derivatives & credit default swaps by Goldman Sachs, Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers, AIG et al that caused the financial meltdown increased GDP. Didn't actually produce anything other than a lot of empty 401K accounts, but it did count as increased GDP.

Much of apparent GDP growth relied on "Enron Accounting". Substitute "sub-prime mortgage" for "cow".

[seanny53]

03:43 PM on 09/03/2011

"It can help explain why the so-called median American voter, a concept used in political science literature, seems so angry at this time, looking around for culprits behind the economic predicament of the American middle class."

Not angry enough -- yet.

[JBS]

04:04 PM on 09/04/2011

Angry people don't think straight. They fall for bogus, astro-turf organizations like the tea-party.

You can't afford to get mad if you don't also get smart.

[DaveMac45]

10:35 AM on 09/03/2011

So how much of this improved efficiency comes from simply out-sourcing jobs? Long term we are shooting ourselves, since there are very few jobs that can't be outsourced.

[ahzzz]

09:51 AM on 09/03/2011

What I see.
The ruling that corporations are people changed the way corporations do business by further enriching corporate profits and CEO pay. The natural tendency of taking the most profit means that as long as the US is willing to keep taxes low and kowtowing to them (favoring the business rather than the people) means the withdrawal of moneys from the US and investing them where labor is cheapest providing the most gain.
Currently major US corporations are flooding Malaysia with money to be able to gain the most profit. As Malaysia is mostly Muslim, corporations are fueling the very zealots that they preach fear from here.
The future of this is going to be a well funded enemy with an army of millions. Afghanistan and Iran will look like minor players.
The ruling to treat corporations as people with no responsibilities is funding our declared enemies.
Is there a way out?

[tamazul]

04:59 PM on 09/02/2011

Answer: NADA!

[GCurry]

02:54 PM on 09/02/2011

First of all, should be measuring "real median DISPOSABLE household income" (what's left over after survival mandatory spending) rather than just "real media household income". The problem is that the mandatories like healthcare have skyrocketed and household income has stayed relatively flat. Poor and middle class are going under, which is now what his chart leads one to.

Second, public corporations are incented on growth of revenue/profit, which determines P/E, which determines stock price and appreciation, which determines management bonus plans, which determines public corporation goals/policies/programs. After they have gone after easy pickings, they go after household $, whether sociopathically going after the manadatories, or whatever else they can swindle away.

"Growth" of the economy is neither the goal, nor is correlated with what should be the goal.

The goal should be to ensure the likelihood of survival and basic security for citizens when resources permit, and an environment which permits people to reach their potential thereafter.

[blueken]

02:45 PM on 09/02/2011

I say, good article. Everyone should read it. If the top 1% gets 90% of the increase in wages, it is no surprise that the other 98% would borrow to try and maintain their lifestyle in the face of increased prices. It also should not be a surprise that borrowing for today is going to hurt tomorrow. Sooner or later you hit the wall. I have been lucky. My debt is very low. My investments remain strong, but I am the exception, and even I have been somewhat hurt by the decline in real estate and the stock market. We will not have a sustainable economy under these conditions. "The rich are richer when the poor got more". Dr. John

[Social Construct]

11:18 AM on 09/02/2011

Thank you Friedman and Greenspan, and all your supply side/Rand-ian economic mumbo jumbo. Taken down to its root causes, that's what's responsible.

[blueken]

02:45 PM on 09/02/2011

A dog eat dog culture eventualy leads to one dog.