|
|||||||||||||
Capitalism is Opposed to Human Happiness Debate, Volume 2
Posts #021-#025
Post #021 Quote: Citation needed. You actually need a citation for this? Pffft. Here you go: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/28/business/28wages.html http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/5303590.stm http://www.rdwolff.com/content/rising-i ... -dangerous http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesameri ... ealth.html http://www.portfolio.com/views/blogs/od ... ty-growth/ http://www.bls.gov/fls/ >http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/06/opini ... elson.html Wages in the US have remained static since about 1980, even as productivity and profits have soared. Image[real_wage_productivity_gap.jpg] Why is this? 1.) Technological advancement making each worker more productive 2.) "Free" trade policies allowing cheap labor abroad to drive domestic wages downward 3.) The dismantling of unions All this has resulted in growing income inequality of exactly the kind that preceded the last depression: Image[income_inequality_us.jpg] Its not rocket science, Mr. Cato. Post #022
That's not any kind of science, sir, that is speculative journalism. Tell me, do you always turn to the new york times for matters concerning economics? http://129.3.20.41/eps/io/papers/0303/0303002.pdf http://www.cluteinstitute-onlinejournals.com/PDFs/2006231.pdf At any rate, tHose newspapers really prove my point, wHicH is tHat wage rates are determined by productivity. None of tHose newspaper articles disagree witH my assertion. Post #023
CatoLives wrote: Okay. Now you're just making me laugh. I presented a broad range of sources just to show that this basic idea is pretty much universally understood - from the NYT to the academic Marxian economist to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. (I'll supply 50 more sources if you like, though I'm not sure what good it would do. ALL these articles disagree with your assertions.) Meantime, you counter my avalanche of sources with a single obscure article about the decline of the steel industry? What in the world is this supposed to prove? Post #024
Quote: That's hilarious! Try Cato, Heritage or Mises. Post #025
DanDaMan wrote: And why, exactly, would I want to read a bunch of unsupported flim-flam? I'm quite familiar with the Right Libertarian shctick, and its of no interest to me whatsoever. The point is that CatoLives is unable to supply any real numbers to support his thesis that free market Capitalism preserves the relationship between productivity and wages. Numbers show that it does not, and no amount of ideological posturing can change that.
|
