new economic suit



Off-shoring jobs creates unemployment, long-term or short-term into lower-paid jobs.

Increasing productivity = getting more output from same or fewer workers or paying workers less in total - or both.

Increasing unemployment (US reported ~9% but more likely closer to 20%) shows direction. Increasing numbers onto food-stamps (~46mio), ditto.

With less income, people have less to spend (der...)

Purchases down mean increased profits can only come from wider margins.

Unless the workers' share goes up, the spiral-down will not stop, just cannot stop.

In a $14trio economy, $1trio spent on bombs-for-export = 7%, which when exploded remove that 'value' from the planet, along with all the innocent 'collateral' lives = murder. This 7% = outright loss, possibly 'compensated' for only if the US can 'harvest' much of the target countries' oil-income (Iraq, Libya (Iran next?), Afghanistan = pipelines, all = US hegemony targeted *at* Russia & China, *for* Israel.)

Of Obama's recent one-time $400bio economy goosing-proposal, only about $150bio is considered 'new' = might create things = 1% possible gain. Compare that to the 7% outright, year-on-year loss...

What else? The only other US exports I can see are from Boeing (more CO2 to f**k the planet's climate) and Microsoft (this article is being written on a lovely PC made in China, almost *crippled* by W7 = total s**t compared to XP, itself hardly problem-free.) Apple makes squillions on marking-up Chinese-made *toys* like iPods (an 8GB 'touch' sells for $10 less than my new netbook), iPhones (Yuppie-toys) & iPads (ditto but as a PC = very expensive, very poor joke.)

Oh, yeah, one other export = neoliberal economics (plus globalisation, supply-side, economic rationalism etc., Wall St. = casino; un-taxing the rich whilst strangling all less-well off = predator economics) - which is ruining the economies of most of rest of the world, as they 'ape' the 'great' US - idiots all.


More of the same?

The 2001 aggressive invasion of Afghanistan (Nuremberg-class), followed by the 2003 aggressive invasion of Iraq (also Nuremberg-class) did not help the US, nor any of its snivelling quisling sycophantic hangers-on (SQSH-Os) like the UK (and Aus, but Aus has mountains of minerals - for now). So why has the US+NATO, mainly F+UK, now done 'more of the same' = aggressive invasion (Nuremberg-class) to Libya?

US-aggressive-war is clearly (mainly, see hegemony + Israel above) only for $s - but the 1st two outrages did *not* appreciably better the economies of the attacker-countries, so what's up? Mainly-US predator economics seemingly can't live *without* war, but doesn't appear to benefit much *with* war either - more idiots.

Bush (the elder) called Reaganomics "voodoo," because (one thinks) he (+ advisors) could not understand how it might work. But now (been getting evidence all along; some was seen in advance), we have *proof* that it *doesn't* work - because most Western countries are descending into debt and other economic crises = chaos, suggested remedy = austerity (à la IMF SAPs - Perkins' "Economic Hit Man"), building & reinforcing a downward spiral. Looks to me like *no-one* understands it, even the head economist of the ECB has resigned in violent disagreement.

The proof is easy: IF neoliberalism worked THEN no crises. Hmmm?

Update 13:13; PS

There's an old expression: "Taxation is theft."

It *certainly* is, unless the money raised, every cent, is spent *responsibly*, on things which bring true benefit to the whole community, like water, sewage, electricity, public transport, roads, phones etc. - all the things capitalism failed at or didn't want 'back in the days,' and which means never to the benefit of anyone who does not strictly need 'community assistance.' Should be clear enough.

Just as "Taxation is theft" - except under strict conditions, so too "Privatisation is theft," where the benefit is *not* strictly to the entire community, exactly as for taxation.

Generally speaking, neoliberalism has skewed the taxation system to the benefit of one certain 'special interest' group = the mostly already (obscenely) rich. Privatisation has worked in exactly the same direction, adding costs (interest, bizarre 'management' fees and obscene CEO payments - whilst reducing employment), effectively robbing the community of egalitarian assets, whilst increasing the cost of the services - water, elec., etc. as above, at the same time reducing the availability (less or no preventative maintenance); if medicine for profit (privatising Medibank, say, or Medicare) - then it's approaching a Crime Against Humanity, and *is* a CAH if/when the poor simply cannot pay.

Again the proof is easy: The rich have made themselves filthy-richer.

THEN consider the 'democratic covenant,' whereby we, the people 'allow' representatives to 'govern' us, also, as for taxation, to the strict benefit of the *entire* community.

The representatives - from both 'sides' - bipartisan = un- & anti-democratic - have presided over the implementation of neoliberalism across 'the West,' with the consequences we can see, and some of us anticipated from '1st sight,' having been Thatcherism + Reaganism, morphed to neoliberalism and its fellow-travellers.

The representatives have put themselves beyond democracy, repeat bipartisan = un- & anti-democratic, and have thus turned themselves into both tyrants and our, we the people's enemy.


Declining Household Income
Real household income has fallen by about 10 percent since the start of the last recession, with a greater decline after the recession ended.

1 comment:

  1. - TOP NEWS -

    Recession Officially Over, U.S. Incomes Kept Falling[1]

    In a grim sign of the enduring nature of the economic slump, a new report shows that despite some improvement in the economy, household incomes have lagged.


    Graphic: Declining Household Income


    US continues to export mainly jobs = unemployment *can't* go down, and armaments/munitions = wars; murdering to steal = $s literally being destroyed by exploding on (Arab, Muslim, innocent collateral) targets, plus software (MS), planes (Boeing), anything else of significance? - The way they 'pay their way' is a) to force the world to buy oil in $US; so-called petro-$s then 'come back' to purchase US exports and any left over 'land' in US treasury bonds, and b) the US purchases imports (TVs, Mercedes) with consu-$s, which are used by producer-countries (China, Germany) to buy their own oil - which is then burnt = $s destroyed to form excess CO2. Any consu-$s left over also 'come back' to purchase US treasury bonds. The US runs chronic domestic and foreign deficits; US$s are 'fiat' = printed, IF print too many THEN get inflation, *proven* by combination of a) external accumulation of treasury bonds and b) continuously falling US$ exchange-rate.

    It's that simple, but the corrupt & venal MSM never puts it that way.

    [1] Definition

    In a 1975 New York Times article, economic statistician Julius Shiskin suggested several rules of thumb for defining a recession, one of which was "two down quarters of GDP".[3] In time, the other rules of thumb were forgotten. Some economists prefer a definition of a 1.5% rise in unemployment within 12 months.[4]

    In the United States, the Business Cycle Dating Committee of the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) is generally seen as the authority for dating US recessions. The NBER defines an economic recession as: "a significant decline in economic activity spread across the economy, lasting more than a few months, normally visible in real GDP, real income, employment, industrial production, and wholesale-retail sales."[5] Almost universally, academics, economists, policy makers, and businesses defer to the determination by the NBER for the precise dating of a recession's onset and end.

    In the UK recessions are generally defined as 2 successive quarters of negative growth. (or 6 months)

    Declining Household Income
    Real household income has fallen by about 10 percent since the start of the last recession, with a greater decline after the recession ended. (See headline article for graph.)