Bush's next speech to the nation

[DemoCoder]

Seeing as more countries got screwed than helped in the last 100 years it might be a good thing for the US to become isolationist even if only for a little while. Now if only you could sever other business ties with super exploited third world cesspools in other than just oil the rest of the planet could develop peacefully and for its own needs in consumption other than the US's. I say force your corporations to make anything americans need or want, to be made in the US.

That single action alone will do more to free the world from oppression than any war on terrorism.

Oh yes pax, only America manufactures stuff overseas and imports raw resources. Oh no, there are no European or Japanese corporations exploiting Africa and the Pacific Rim. Europeans manufacture 100% of everything they need at home right? That would explain all those European textile and car plants I saw in my last trip to Asia. And of course, we all know Europe gets all its oil from Europe.

Don't even start on the "super exploitation" anti-globalism tripe. Have you been to China, India, Phillipines, or Indonesia? Do you even have a basis for comparison of those who work for foreign companies vs those who work local industries vs those who are unemployed?

In the US, it costs me $20 to "eat out" a full meal at a restaurant. In China, it costs me 5 yuan, which is about 50 cents. Sweatshop watch claims average wage is 23 cents/hr in textiles in China. That means it costs 2 hours of time to buy a meal. In the US, if I earn $10/hr, I have to work 2 hours to buy a meal. $10 vs 23 cents yields equivalent buying power. A *LEGAL* DVD or PS/2 game in China costs 10 yuan ($1.25), or the equivalent of 5 hours of work. A DVD or Game at Best Buy typically costs $39.99 or $49.95, equivalent of 5 hours of work. (now you know why region coding and price discrimination exists) Chinese do not pay income taxes. No sales tax in most areas.


I'm not saying that "sweatshop" workers are livin' large, but you cannot compare the wage of someone living in China vs someone living in the US. And if you really want to compare, try comparing the wage that a "sweatshop" worker makes working for a foreign country vs the wage someone makes in a local trade industry, such as waiter, cook, or repairmen.

I frequently travel to China because my wife is Chinese and I have been all over asia, and workers for foreign American, European, or Japanese firms are much better off those those who work for local trades or Chinese state industries. And if you happen to work in the IT industry, they are STUPENDOUSLY well off. My wife's cousin workers as a receptionist in Shanghai for a foreign company and makes 8000 yuan a month ($1000/mo), to put this into perspective, if you work for the state government, your salary is 300 yuan a month. Rent in downtown Shanghai (China's Manhattan) is 1000 yuan tops.



I fear like your flawed information on wages in the US over the last 30 years, your information regarding living conditions, in say China, is way out of date and comes primarily from self-interested socialist/unionist/anti-globalist information providers.

And your attempt to put the US as the lead exploiter in "sweatshops" completely ignores the European fashion industry, and what Japan is doing in Asia.

 

[Clashman]

Watch this

 

[Clashman]

Democoder, you aren't the only one who's been to China. I've been to the sweatshops too, and while there aren't all that many people calling for a return to the Cultural Revolution, the working conditions are atrocious, and people ARE being kicked out of their homes, (1000 Yuan a month my ass). U.S. companies, (and Japanese, and Korean, and European), are making a killing off of what they're doing there. And they are doing it in China not just because they make a killing, but because there is a repressive government in place willing to ensure that they the sweatshops in the country stay that way.

For me, the difference is that I live here in the U.S., and not in Europe or Japan, in a supposed democracy, (or democratic republic, if you will), in which my views are supposed to be represented. And I don't want companies from my country to be profiting from the kinds of inhumanity I witnessed when I was in China. So quit wearing your passport as a badge, and grow up.

 

[pax]

Again you grossly overstate Demo... but Im used to it. I should have to clarify what you added to my post but I wont. Just to say this: Another truth doesnt demean or undo another. What good or evil done by other nations doestn justify what the US has done and all Im doing is staying on topic...

Ive travelled a bit ya. You claim to state the economic evolution of those countries would have been worse without the world bank enforced privatization of even essential services in those countries that got scmmaed thru corrupt politics (if one can consider the fact that most of the loans were made to dictators who scammed the money and are now used to scam what little assets those countriss had).

When that flies in the fact of clear cases of when those countries had protected economies or at least ones less dependant on foreign corp investment designed purely for export industry that they flourished only when allowed to protect their internal markets.

No market has ever been successful with unregulated and unprotected markets. The US is in fact one of those clear cases. You cite anectdotal evidence of costs of living of things as we all well know things are cheaper in China but you dont look at the whole picture. I also know food in India is a dime a meal but what the point of averaging things when we all know its distorted by much greater diaprities of incomes in those countries... 25 cents for a meal? Yeah sounds good when you make 25cemts an hour which is a minute partion of the chinese population... 25 cents an hour puts them in the top 10% of income earners...

if you do travel yourself in those countries demo dont stick to the tourist areas... and stay on topic next time... I mean cant you admit the US made any bad moves AT ALL??? I can admit canada has... Its not that hard you know trying to be objective... You and Vince cant seem to grasp that your country has done ill. EVER... It doesnt help your postings or the appearance of sincerity. Even though your posts are drowning in a sea of ideology which can explain the incessant rebukes...

My info about wages isnt flawed demo. Its your use of average distorting by the huge increases in investment and upper level incomes. I can discern what the top 1% has gotten increases when the lower quintile has gotten massive drops in income vs inflation... The trends in income losses may be less in the US but the US hasnt been left behind at all in terms of losses to wage inflation in certain income groups...


"Long-term problems include inadequate investment in economic infrastructure, rapidly rising medical and pension costs of an aging population, sizable trade deficits, and stagnation of family income in the lower economic groups. "

http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/us.html

Ive posted this one before... just a reminder...

 

[RussSchultz]

Watch this

Michael Moore made another movie? Or did somebody just adopt his editing style?

 

[Sxotty]

Actually he is right there is no question at all that average wages have been falling, but the thing is items like cars have gotten cheaper, thanks to advances in machinery and sweatshops. Goods in general are cheaper to produce, so we can still consume mass quantities thus we are happy, but the while the amount of resources to build a car is less than it was in time and materials, we can only still buy the same amount of cars.

So the sky isn't falling b/c we can get our food, computers, TV's and whatnot, all at cheaper prices than in the past, but we have less money.

There is no doubt that the rich are getting richer faster than the rest of us, but it has happened before. Once enough people get pissed things will change again, and start to moderate. Stable societies are built when there is a large middle class, and while we still have a very large middle class the curve is flattening.

 

[pax]

Democoder, you aren't the only one who's been to China. I've been to the sweatshops too, and while there aren't all that many people calling for a return to the Cultural Revolution, the working conditions are atrocious, and people ARE being kicked out of their homes, (1000 Yuan a month my ass). U.S. companies, (and Japanese, and Korean, and European), are making a killing off of what they're doing there. And they are doing it in China not just because they make a killing, but because there is a repressive government in place willing to ensure that they the sweatshops in the country stay that way.

For me, the difference is that I live here in the U.S., and not in Europe or Japan, in a supposed democracy, (or democratic republic, if you will), in which my views are supposed to be represented. And I don't want companies from my country to be profiting from the kinds of inhumanity I witnessed when I was in China. So quit wearing your passport as a badge, and grow up.

We wouldnt allow half the shit they do overseas to us. Unions would make such a huge comeback if they did... But they rely on huge unemployment with no social gov programs to keep them from starving to indulge their low wage low benefits no environmental protection abuses and also with the help of corrupt politics.

Ive read a few things about the so called democratic revolution in south america. It puts such a legitimate face on WB loans now but the fact is the parties in power often scammed the elections and almost always scuttle true popualist parties rise with all kinds of underhanded shit. Most of the people in power down south are still the old elites who ran dictatorships before...

BBC did a docu in venezuela when the army first tried to overthrow Chavez. In 2 years Chavez took enough oil revenue (by increasing the royalties to 30%) to virtually abolish all poverty in the country. The first south american country to do so. Schools and hospitals everywhere. Jobs for everyone. The so called strike so often told us in the western media was in fact a lockout. A lockout is not a strike. Its the employers refusing to let the employees in to work. They forced their workers in the street to overthrow the gov. Were the oil companies not making any money because of the oil royalties? No they were still making good profits. Less than before of course. But when millions of your own countrymen still starve after 50 years of oil exploitation in the #3 oil country in the world something has to be done.

Western media never reported that the pro chavez demonstrations were 5-10 times larger than the anti chavez ones...

But no doubt hes pretty pig headed Chavez... He might have probs with the middle class because of the extended lockout in next years election. But it takes that kind to get anything done. I respect that.

 

[Himself]

Making lists of enemies and friends is disturbing.

Welcome to the new world where the is no such thing as demarcation. Pretty soon we'll have reached a point where people like yourself won't tolerate any elucidation outside of calling another entity "oscillating space-time" - but then, is my vibration equal to yours? Maybe your vibration's feelings will be hurt...

For most people, there are people you know and don't know, people you like or dislike, you don't think about it or lump them together in groups. The type that divides the world into friends and enemies and sits down making up lists is generally called a psychotic or paranoid. For a country to do it is disturbing since a country tends to be diplomatic and politically correct.

I miss the days of clarity, when people had the guts to stand up and 'speak it how they see it.' Not this pseudo-sensative liberal horse-shit.

If you want to visit flame threads all day long, go right ahead.

 

[DemoCoder]

My info about wages isnt flawed demo. Its your use of average distorting by the huge increases in investment and upper level incomes.

Look pax, no matter how many times you repeat it, it's simply not true. I explained it to you in several messages, you simply refuse to admit it. The data I posted was not AVERAGES of INCOME, but deciles of WAGES, data that comes directly from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the IRS, adjusted by the conservative PCE for constant 2002 dollars.

Repeat after me:

1) it did not include investment income or any other sources EXCEPT wages for individuals. The data is strictly the HOURLY WAGE RATE.

2) it was not an "average" of the top/bottom. For each 10% of the population, it showed the wage rate since 1973-2000+. There was no distortion of the overall picture because the rich got richer. You can track exactly how the bottom 10% of the population faired, or the bottom 50% (median)

Once again, here is the URL http://epi.lights.com/datazone/02/deciles_2_6r.pdf

I hate to be insulting, but I hope you understand the difference between decile, quintile, or median and average, and I hope you read my posts instead of "skimming" them and assuming I wrote average. I specifically EMPHASIZED what these figures were the last two times I brought them up.

Yeah sounds good when you make 25cemts an hour which is a minute partion of the chinese population... 25 cents an hour puts them in the top 10% of income earners

So you're saying that sweatshops put Chinese laborours in the top 10% of income earners?

Do you realize that 90% of the corruption with respect to World Bank Loans is money lent to failing Chinese *state* (non-deregulated) industries ran by the communist party? Do you realize that the World Bank is not lending money to NIKE or so-called "unregulated" companies, but to socialist institutions? Perhaps the workbank should lobby China to get rid of all state socialist institutions, and thereby no need to lend any money, and let them depend on foreign direct investment.

The US, Britain, et al, went through a period of development without workplace rights. Safety, healthcare, etc cost money, surplus money, that can either be invested in making labor more costly, or improving production. Why do you people want to deny to the third world the same path of development that we went through?

How would 18th and 19th century British and Americans felt of Rich Chinese starting telling them that they have to make sure all workers obey OSHA rules, provide ergonomic workspaces for employees, and 35hr work week?

Imagine you are a blacksmith in the 18th century, and a bunch of foreigners show up and criticize the way you run your shop because all employees don't get 3 months paid pregnancy leave? Western labor standards are a LUXURY that can be provided because of our tremendous wealth.

Our grandparents and parents felt that they worked very hard and made tremendous sacrifices so that we can live an easy life. You are now taking what we HAVE and saying to third world people of your grandparents generation "You will not be allowed to sacrifice yourself, take dangerous risks, and work like dogs so that your children can live better. You must immediately have these things imposed on you now."

If you think you can impose these things on third world economies, you will do more damage to their growth and kill more people through lost GDP and than the current "super exploitation" they live under. For one thing, the Japanese, Americans, and Europeans will take their money and go home. That means slower growth for China's billions, more suffering, and more world bank loans to prop them up.


And for the record, I don't "tour" China or do any touristy things. Last time I was there for 1 month straight. I stayed with my wife's family, and traveled all over the country's beautiful (but poor) provinces. The urbanized areas aren't half as bad as most ignorant westerners think who haven't been there. And many Chinese immigrants will feel quite insulted that everyone's impression of China is poor peasantry.

My wife and her Chinese friends always get pissed off when US or European documentaries show China, but they invariably only show the rural country side or desert/mountain areas, or focus on Communist Beijing government.

Imagine if someone made a US documentary and ONLY showed images of the inner city blacks, or of the red-necks in the mid-west. You would get the impression that it is the only reality.

 

[DemoCoder]

people ARE being kicked out of their homes,

Yes, and plenty of people here is california were getting kicked out of their homes because they couldn't afford the new rent, or couldn't afford to buy a new house if they sold their old one.

(1000 Yuan a month my ass)

In Pudong, Shanghai, one of the wealthiest cities in Asia, you can get a flat for that price. When I was there, you could buy a nice apartment for $20,000 US. Recently with the completion of the Maglev bullet train from Pudong airport, I have heard average housing price has gone to $40,000 US (320,000 yuan). In Bu Shi, the ritz Manhattan-like area with the old Western colonial buildings, you can expect housing to go as high as 1million yuan ($125k)

Now consider the mortgage you'd paid on a $20,000 apartment. About $666 in principal a year, or $60 amonth (480 yuan) Now at $40,000 and with interest, you certainly can rent apartments in the 1000-2000 yuan range. My father in law owns several apartments in Pudong and Bu Shi, and I myself considered buying real estate in Shanghai after the PRC relaxed the ownership rules for foreigners.




. U.S. companies, (and Japanese, and Korean, and European), are making a killing off of what they're doing there. And they are doing it in China not just because they make a killing, but because there is a repressive government in place willing to ensure that they the sweatshops in the country stay that way.

And I don't want companies from my country to be profiting from the kinds of inhumanity I witnessed when I was in China. So quit wearing your passport as a badge, and grow up.

Yet you profited when your grand parents built modern Western civilization and went through these conditions. Just 100 years ago, a huge fraction of the US population was rural, children generally were forced to work on farms, and if they lived in the city, in shops. Gradually, this gave way to the society we have today, but do you think the economy would have grown quicker had farmers been told they cannot use their children for labor, but instead had to wait until they turned 18, or hired (with what money?) outside laborers?

It is only because you live a life of comfort that you can conceive that these people are living "inhumane" conditions. Yet, if these people were to look at the conditions lived by rural or desert people, or how people lived only 400 years ago, they would consider themselves blessed. It's all relative, and in your attempt to impose your liberal western attitudes, you may be doing more harm than good.

Great harm is often done with the best of intentions.

(BTW, I've already seen the "Sweatshop Myths" manifesto, and the anti-Sweatshop Myths rebuttal, so please refrain from quoting them)

 

[pax]

And Ive repeated and showed other sources that contradict your own demo. Thing is my stats shows pretty much all the losses against inflation occured in the 70's with most quintiles then stagnating in the 80's and 90's exept for the top one.

In Canada we still lost wages over the last 2 decades tho we actually gained a bit in the 80's we lost a lot in the 90's. In my own Union we lost about 20% against core inflation in the 90's. But almost 30 % in the 70's. I had that great source at statscan but they removed it. They didnt correct it they simply removed it... You can get a good explanation of the stats in Linda McQuaig's book The cult of impotence. She a national columnist here who was never answered on the wage losses... She also deals with the US wage losses a bit but they were less than in Canada.

Like I said before: I question your last link.

WB should not lend to ANY dictatorship communist or otherwise. In my book the people do not owe a penny of that money back. If you want an example of a country that went quickly from poverty to prosperity look at venezuela and now look at Iraq. Iraq will be up to speed in less than 2-3 years. They've been living in third world conditions for the last 12 years at least. I dont believe making the critical public investments will destroy anything. I dont think private investors will do that tho. They only care about low wages for export based industry. I say we build up those countries and in a few years their own economies will be healthy consumers.

Ya that means an international body that helps those countries that have been properly democratized with multi year investements in infrastructure. Not high % loans to scam off what little assets those countries still have into the hands of western business who end up paying dime on the dollar.

http://www.statcan.ca/english/freepub/62-557-XIB/english.pdf

Now if I can only find the wage index that was removed Ill be set

 

[Nagorak]

Democoder, I think your viewpoint and also Pax's are both somewhat incorrect (although in different ways). The corporations are fiscal macro-entitites, independent of governments. The US isn't exploiting the world, per se, its the corporations. What many fail to see is the degradation of workers' rights does not start and end in 3rd world countries. It comes full circle back to the US and other first world countries.

Why do corporations go to these countries for labor? Because it's cheap. Why pay an American worker when they can get a Chinese to work for 1/100th as much? Well that's all fine and dandy, but much of the US (and Japanese and European, etc) manufacturing sector has already moved over seas, now the tech industry (tech support, etc) has begun to move to India. The result of this is the US job market is being eroded from the bottom. Welcome to the wonderful world of globalisation!

The thing is sweatshops don't only affect the people working in them. Everything is connected and it will come full circle and affect people here as well. Granted there is a lag time, but some of the effects are already beginning to show. Frankly, I'm wondering where the US is going to be in 50 years because right now the Japanese are attacking us from the top in terms of technology, and the 3rd world countries are eroding us from the bottom.

The end result is that working conditions in the US end up being a lot worse than they are currently. The only way to stop it is by encouraging better workers rights in other countries. Unfortunately, I don't really have a clue how to accomplish that. But, it's actually a pretty big problem if you look at the long run, instead of the next 5-10 years.Anyway the point is, if you really want to help yourself, you need to try to help other people (unintuitive as that might seem).

The US also has a serious problem is our long-term economic plan seems to be to just keep going further and further into debt. Our government has engaged in deficit spending for the past 20+ years and seems intent on doing it into the future. This is not a problem yet, but it's going to be. Also, going into debt on such a massive scale is completely illogical, because a debt is, in essence, just borrowing from future success. Frankly the reason we're in a recession right now is because we (consumers and corporations in this case) borrowed the significant growth of the past couple years in the late 90s. This stupid debt-infatuation is why we end up with these "starts and stops" in growth, instead of just having a smooth progression.

The US government exists on a large enough scale that it hasn't suffered from having to bail itself out of debt (as many corporations and consumers already have had to do), but what's going to happen when it finally does? This is just worsened by the fact that a more competitive future (with more 3rd world countries developing and starting to challenge the US economically), means later on we may not even be as capable of paying off the debts as we currently are. It's like buying a new car or house just before your employer cuts your wages or hours in half, or worse, you get fired. You end up failing on the payments and losing the car or worse, filing for bankruptcy. This is just looking at the same situation on a more massive scale, and I don't even want to contemplate what the end results will be.

Let's just say that the US's standing a super power is a hell of a lot more tenuous than many people believe. And the joke is, all these politicians talk about terrorists and maintaining the power of our military, when the truth is the biggest danger we face is committing future economic suicide. Our continued debt is a liability much larger than 100 Osama bin Ladens or Kim Jong Ils (won't even mention Saddam since that's such an utter joke).

And Pax, sorry to tell you this but the World Bank DOESN'T CARE what sort of repressive government is in place. Corporations benefit from cheap labor, regardless of the methods required to achieve it. That's one reason why the US government's slow hijacking by corporate interests is such a total disaster. But really, it's inevitable because if the US does something the corporations don't like, guess what, they'll all just move to Indonesia or China. The only real clout the US even has anymore is that it has control over much of the monetary assets of these companies. With the rise of the Euro and other competing currencies (yen, etc) that advantage will slowly diminish. Right now, the US can still dictate to corporations and could concievably enforce antitrust law and so forth. In the future, however, what's to stop a company like MS from just quietly converting all its money into Pecos or Dinars and leaving?

Maybe the truth is the US (and other countries) should not support the World Bank, since it actually runs widely counterproductive to their own future interests. At the very least they SHOULD mandate who the money goes to, but I don't really see that happening since the government long since stopped acting in the "people's" interests, if it ever even did to begin with.

Also, I just wanted to point out that as much as people villify Saddam his social reforms (moving the country away from religious basis to a more secular basis) makes Iraq the prime candidate among Middle Eastern countries to quickly turn into an economic power house. Money going into Iraq will do a lot more than money going into Saudi Arabia, for example, because the foundation has been laid. In a bizarre way Saddam actually had the right general idea although his actually method of doing things was assinine (even ignoring stuff like "human rights", he engaged in a bunch of futile wars that basically bankrupted the country).

 

[Nagorak]

There is no doubt that the rich are getting richer faster than the rest of us, but it has happened before. Once enough people get pissed things will change again, and start to moderate. Stable societies are built when there is a large middle class, and while we still have a very large middle class the curve is flattening.

Sxotty, I'm sorry to tell you this, but this has been the case for the past 6000 years (basically all of recorded history) and probably dates back 100,000 years before that. The idea that this is going to change any time soon is pretty much wishful thinking. The same wealthy elite that ruled as Kings 500 years ago and Pharaohs 5000 years before that, now are just wealthy tycoons.

Although its true people have more "rights" now than they did in the past, that's just because it became more economical for that to be the case. Just like the true end of slavery results (not just US slavery) from it being more economical to simply pay people to work for you willingly, and then just recoup the cost by charging them for goods, rather than forcing them to work for you and having to combat them constantly trying to escape or revolt.

If people all just woke up tomorrow and realized how things really were, yeah things could change. Unfortunately, most are naive enough to believe they are "free" and actually possess individual power. While, in theory they do, in practice they really don't. It's all just the same old song and dance, just with a more modern tune. In the end I suppose it comes down to the fact that many human beings, for all their touted "individuality", are simply incapable of thinking for themselves (or just don't care to). So, they look to the social hierarchy for guidance.

That's where you get into theories like Social Darwinism and such. Unfortunately the most successful creatures have never been the most perfect, but merely the most aggressive.

 

[DemoCoder]

Pax, first you claimed my figures were averages, distorted by how much the rich got richer and by investment income. However, as I have shown, my figures were never averages, but deciles of wages. So your initial assumption for the contradiction between my data and yours was wrong.

Now you claim that you simply don't trust the authority that my figures come from, fair enough. But my figures come from data compiled by the Bureau of Labor Statistics and IRS, and they the org that puts out the report (EPI) are endorsed by labor unions.

Yes, the study that I cited, which comes from the annual report "The state of working america", is frequently used by US labor unions to measure progress in the labor markets, and frequently cited by them when they want to raise trouble.

The labor unions are not asserting (according to the State of Working America report) that real wages FELL in the 90s. They rightly claim (as I have told you over and over again) that wages rose. Their main beef is that most of the benefits went to the top 20% (ala, ME, white collar computer engineer, and not blue collar bolt tightener or peanut-hander-outer) and that work time increased.

If the United Auto Workers agree with me, do you think they are some kind of pro-rightist group?

Why o why do you remain so attached to you viewpoint instead of simply admitting you are incorrect? Are you afraid that your entire political viewpoint, which is based on a fallacy that globalism, the free market, and greed have lowered people's standard of living over the last 20 years, will also have to be revised?

Come on Pax, in the United States, since the 1973s, real wages have not dropped dramatically like you originally claimed. There was a stagnation during the 80s, but growth in wages picked up again in the 90s even in the lowest 10% of the population, and it really got a big boost in the last 5 years of the millenium.


If you have real statistics (not from some essay in a newspaper), put out by a reasonably academic institution, I'd like to see it. I want to see statistics for each decile of the population for the last 30 years corrected for PCE.

 

[pax]

Not just me who disagrees with you demo... I have studies on my desk from the largest Union in the country here based on various studies by economists and statscan data... I didnt pull this thing out of my ass you know.

Just cuz statscan pulls its data from the web doesnt mean there arent other refs... which I gave. And its not just annecdotal evidence. And even if newer studies with 'corrected' data came out and you could prove as cia says that only stagnation occured in the states then you have to say stagnation in the fact of productivity increases over nearly 30 years is nearly as bad an insult. If not worse really...

If I can find web links Ill get it. See if you local library has that book btw... its has all the refs you could want...

 

[DemoCoder]

Pax, the figures I posted ARE the figures that are cited by unions and the progressive left, for example,

http://groups.google.com/groups?sel...s.missouri.edu&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain (posted by Marxists for crying out loud!)

From 1989 to 1993, median real wages fell 2.6 percent overall
and by 4.6 percent among men. During the same period, entry level
wages declined 7.8 percent for high school-educated and 6.1
percent for college-educated workers. New statistics show that
wages for male college-educated workers have fallen at the same
rate as those for male high school-educated workers.

So go back to the figures from EPI I posted. Yes, between 1989 and 1994, there was a small drop in real wages (recession remember?) Now follow the data from 1995-2001, rebound and growth.

So you're willing to trust the authority that unions and socialists use to analyze the labour market when it supports your beliefs, but when it reports good news contrary to your view of the world, all of a sudden you'd rather believe some essays from magazines and unions (who have a vested interest in denying any positive gains while they are losing membership)

Fact is, unions are a third hand source. The stats are crunched by EPI. EPI gets them from BLS, and you can run the numbers yourself from BLS if you want.

Here's what the United Autoworkers Union had to say about the latest EPI report
http://www.uaw.org/publications/jobs_pay/00/1000/jpe02.html

After many years of stagnant and declining living standards for most U.S. workers, there’s plenty to cheer about in the 2000-01 volume. Wages have been rising faster than inflation, particularly for the lowest-paid workers, and productivity growth has taken off. At the same time, the EPI researchers find some continued trouble spots. They point to persistent inequality and rising debt loads as particular problems.

 

[pax]

Last few years they have risen a bit in the states. Youd be surprised how many unions now try to put a good face on figures. They arent all trying to paint a gloomy picture. Why? Because it shows them incompetent at the negotiating table not just over one or 2 collective agreements but over almost a generation in some instances. I have stuides from CUPE on my desk (CUPE is the largest canadian union qwith about 500 000 members) that indicate losses of about 40-50% depending on the jurisdiction in Canada.

Some unions have the courage to face up to the losses but some dont. In Canada the losses were so big that it was impossible to play with numbers to hide them. Annecdotal evidence is one thing but the evidence of virtually all your membership is glaring.

One thing that has lowered averages in some instances is the fact women jouned the workforce in very large numbers but never made near as good wages as men. 70% living at home in the earluy 70's with about 80% working outside the home today.

Theres so many ways to look at median wages but only time will tell if the wage losses or stagnation or radical changes in ways of determining unemployment will eventually affect the consumer society. Its ultimately the fate of mass consumerism that will determine if any trends are actually occuring. I think it might depend on the jurisdiction in the states as well. Most stats Ive seen for the states dont do it on a national basis...

Im still looking for other ressources online... if not Ill just scan some stuff eventually...

I did see a report on NOW with bill moyers about current unionization drives in the states and they showed one large one a couple months back that had the message of income deflation in union vs non union workplaces to argue for the union position... It was interesting and was some construction union in NY state if I remember right... They stated about 20% wage losses in the last 30 years in that part of the country...

 

[L233]

and stay on topic next time... I mean cant you admit the US made any bad moves AT ALL???

Well, I have been around these forums for a long time and had quite some lengthy debates with Democoder. One thing you can ALWAYS count on is his apologetic knee-jerk relativism.

If you critizised the US you could without any danger bet your life on Democoder popping up and posting a piece that decries the wrongdoings of other nations - no matter how far in the past they might lie burried. Just as if that could possibly serve as an excuse for present day US actions.

When it comes to US foreign/economic/military/imperial politics, Democoder is the equivalent of those Nazi apologetics trying to relativize German 3rd Reich atrocities by drawing attention to the bombing of Dresden or the Red Army's rape spree in conquered Berlin.

Other than that, Democoder can be a compelling debater but his "well, XXX did YYY in ZZZ" postings are getting old, not to mention that they are usually off-topic.

 

[RussSchultz]

But America made the Taliban what it was!

(oops, sorry, I spouted a bit of off topic knee-jerk-apologetic-relativism)

 

[L233]

But America made the Taliban what it was!

(oops, sorry, I spouted a bit of off topic knee-jerk-apologetic-relativism)

That would only be a relativism if you were trying to make the point that America's creation of the Taliban was some sort of justification for the murder of 2600 people or that it would at least make the 9/11 attack less heinous from a moral point of view.

Merely pointing out that the Taliban regime was basically a backlash of the American ploy to draw the USSR into the "Afghan Trap" and that US Cold War actions in that regions jump started the spread of Islamistic extremism isn't relativism. It's a historic fact that stands without the need of being but into relation to anything.