Gifted a $1 trillion tax windfall from Congress, US companies only pledge $2 billion for workers

a reply to: Azureblue

You want to give 47bil people 30k a year?

The only people I know who can spend that kinda cash is the Pentagon. LOL

originally posted by: Wayfarer

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: Wayfarer

Im not sure why you'd worry about civility, etc. You don't seem to be rude.

Part of my job is interpreting data. The one thing i have learned is that data may point to something that isn't really there. An example from the first few pages (page 1, actually):

Could relate to the increase in efficiency seen in systems as a natural progression into the industrial age and post war era. It could be that when computers began to be used to gain efficiency in the mid 70's, you see the divergence of productivity and compensation. Honestly, you can't pay me for doing the job of 4 people when i've created efficiencies that allow me to do said work in 50 hours a week.

The only other graph i found is this:

Which creates quite a few questions for me to answer before I can give you any kind of intelligent reply. But I would point out that it isn't the poor we should be measuring, its the middle class. With a strong middle class, the poor feel much less pain.

An example of a question I have is: all the cash holdings from among the top 10% in the US....how many of those are foreign nationals/expats who are offshoring our currency?

First, does it really matter what the driver is for wealth inequality (automation, wealth hoarding, etc.) when the effect is what should be tackled? I understand that nobody is going to have their mind changed regarding trickle down economics (as most of its supporters/detractors can point to as many datasets that potentially support their cause as they can find, but which are ultimately inconclusive on account of the plethora of factors that are yet to be correlated). Rather, when its clear that money is becoming focused into the top 1% (and shown that only a small portion of that reinvested) how does that re-invigorate the economy better than putting that money into lower/middle class hands that instantly return it into the economic system? My earlier post regarding my inability to conceptualize making the wealthy even wealthier hinges on the fact wouldn't it make sense that as the wealthy got wealthier so to would the lower/middle class (which in fact this isn't whats happening). I just can't imagine that there is some magical 'break-point' we are just short of that when reached will suddenly propagate spending surges by the ultra-wealthy.

Secondly, why would the wealthy return their money to the US unless it won't be taxed (or taxed at a lower rate than where it is currently being held)? They exist to perpetuate their wealth, and the only reason it gets brought back into the US is because we're allowing them to return it tax free (which doesn't feed back into the system). Is the middle class made stronger by the rich having larger bank accounts (that aren't being spent, but rather accrued in ever increasing fashion)?

I think some of the trouble in this discussion, Wayfarer, is you are using a cookie cutter entity "the wealthy", to further your argument, operating on the presumption that that covers all instances... when those of us who own businesses, and are very comfortable with our understanding of Monetary Policy and Economics see your argument as massively flawed, because you have so poor an understanding of the complexity of the topic.

On some fronts, you will find me in agreement. People who do paper deals or arbitrage who game the misfortune of others (2007 mortgage crisis for example) PRODUCE NOTHING... and are often engaged in marginal or illegal activities.

Just because those dirtbags make millions... personally... I don't even see them as wealthy... in fact they are morally bankrupt... and odds are good the best things of life will forever allude them. Something inside them is broken.

But people who build wealth and multi-million dollar companies the good old fashioned way... they worked for it, are NOT part of the problem. You see them one way... and they see themselves as folks who have worked 80 to 100 hour weeks and have sacrificed more than the majority of folks would, to build what they built.

85% of American Millionaires live in modest middle class houses, ONLY buy 2 to 3 year old cars, and their whole lives have lived on less than they make. Their neighbors have no idea they're millionaires... because they are prudent and don't throw money around like idiot entertainers or athletes.

Anyway... your argument is using the construct of a "rich villain" that really only fits the .0001% of the wealthy population. That .0001% probably won't pay much tax because they ARE the system, and very well connected with Dem and Rep politicians.

originally posted by: Southern Guardian
Anybody feeling those benefits trickling down? If not don't bother waiting as it's not looking promising:

Donald Trump’s presidency has been marked by turmoil, and his approval ratings are low. But US CEOs seemed eager to show their support for his first major piece of legislation, the “Tax Cuts and Jobs Act” that cleared Congress on Wednesday (Dec. 20). A clutch of big US banks and telecoms pledged to hand out millions in bonuses off the back of tax reform.

qz.com...

That's lovely. A pledge to pass down the benefits of these tax cuts to the little man. We need this.

...

Filling the pockets of the rich has always worked wonderfully for keeping them rich.

Any self-respecting huge nation that wants to compete with China will strongly favor a cheap, dumbed down work force. So make sure education is too expensive for the plebs, and that the same plebs are paid as close to zero as possible.

That way, the rich people in charge can get them to do just about ANYTHING for them - for just as few crumbs off their table as they see fit. Works nicely for filling up the army with cannon fodder, when the options are few and far between.

The poor... so ungrateful - unable to grasp how simple it is to get ahead in this life: Become a TV host and make a yearly salary each day!

There really are no inbetweens, are there? You literally have to get to a point where you are an overpaid douche that get Jennifer Lawrence level money thrown after you - or be happy cleaning toilets for almost zero.

a reply to: Uberdoubter

I'd say 99 percent of the people I know (myself included) are these nonexistent in-betweens you mention. Get a job and join us (unless you're already an overpaid douche).

originally posted by: underpass61
a reply to: Uberdoubter

I'd say 99 percent of the people I know (myself included) are these nonexistent in-betweens you mention. Get a job and join us (unless you're already an overpaid douche).

I'm not an American, but live in a country where the bosses don't make 300X the average employee.

That means we don't have to kiss as much ass and suck up to the douches as much.

We just happen to have a healthy scepticism towards wealth.

a reply to: Uberdoubter

Well, maybe 1% of the bosses make that much so you're still believing a fairy tale. Most Americans work for small to mid-size businesses where the boss has to bust a$$ too. The U.S. isn't what you see in the media or a Hollywood movie, spend some time here and get to know some some of the general population and I'm sure your perspective would change.