As share of GDP, corporate profits highest since 1950
“So far in this recovery, corporations have captured an unusually high share of the income gains,” said Ethan Harris, co-head of global economics at Bank of America Merrill Lynch. “The U.S. corporate sector is in a lot better health than the overall economy. And until we get a full recovery in the labor market, this will persist.”
The result has been a golden age for corporate profits, especially among multinational giants that are also benefiting from faster growth in emerging economies like China and India.
…. As a percentage of national income, corporate profits stood at 14.2 percent in the third quarter of 2012, the largest share at any time since 1950, while the portion of income that went to employees was 61.7 percent, near its lowest point since 1966. In recent years, the shift has accelerated during the slow recovery that followed the financial crisis and ensuing recession of 2008 and 2009, said Dean Maki, chief United States economist at Barclays.
Corporate earnings have risen at an annualized rate of 20.1 percent since the end of 2008, he said, but disposable income inched ahead by 1.4 percent annually over the same period, after adjusting for inflation.
“There hasn’t been a period in the last 50 years where these trends have been so pronounced,” Mr. Maki said.
Yet conservatives continue to argue that the business climate under President Obama stifles profitability.
This seems a good time to rerun the chart below, taken from data compiled by the Federal Reserve of St. Louis. In the chart, the share of the national economy, or GDP, going to workers’ paychecks is in blue. The share of the economy that is going to after-tax corporate profits is in red. (Again, note that in this combined chart, the two statistics have separate scales.)
– Jay Bookman
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
699 comments Add your comment
mm
March 4th, 2013
3:46 pm
” Conservatives argue that Obama’s policies discourages domestic business investment.”
And they would be lying, because it is their fondness of sabotaging the economy for political gain that is scaring investors and business owners.
Jackie
March 4th, 2013
3:46 pm
@Erwin
You are discounting the demand/supply curve.
If you have more people working and having more disposable income, then those same dollars can go out and purchase those things they want instead of the things they need.
Many people with a few dollars equates to a steady demand for goods and services because we live in a consumption society.
Stevie Ray
March 4th, 2013
3:47 pm
Maybe instead of for profits, we make them illegal in favor of not-for-profits? Sure the transparency issues will become more problematic, but many posters here would love that scenario.
Fred ™
March 4th, 2013
3:47 pm
When a man with money hooks up with a man with know-how, after a while the man with money forgets he didn’t have the know-how.
Not this man. I have to find the money for my restaurant while the guy with the know-how has to run it and teach me. When we get established and profitable and I know how to run it, we will do another one, this time he will get a MUCH larger percentage, or a loan to go completely on his own if that is what he wants.
Everyone isn’t a greedy SOB, although many are.
Erwin's cat
March 4th, 2013
3:49 pm
Jackie – we have yet to see the effects (positive or negative) of the rise in minimum wage.
I don’t understand this way of thinking that the corps some how owe us all a good paying job or one above market value…If you don’t like your job…quit…If you don’t like how a company does biz…don’t patronize them……If you are stuck not being able to do either…then work on changing that
Cheesy Grits
March 4th, 2013
3:49 pm
How many Moonbats here have actually owned a company and made a profit?
+ 1
Jackie
March 4th, 2013
3:49 pm
@Stevie Ray
I think my understanding of the global economy and capitalism is more than adequate. You may have a mistaken belief that what you purport is true, when in fact, I believe that what you are saying is the standard so-called conservative claptrap.
As for you inane question about firing an employee while the employer makes a profit defies credibility.
Brosephus™
March 4th, 2013
3:49 pm
How many consider that the energy policies of the Obama Administration is responsible for higher prices and/or smaller quantities at the same price?
I seriously hope you’re not referring to the price of those global commodities called oil and gas.
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
March 4th, 2013
3:51 pm
Maybe instead of for profits, we make them illegal in favor of not-for-profits?
Maybe there aren’t that many who will fall for your puerile binary mind-set?
Doggone/GA
March 4th, 2013
3:53 pm
“I don’t understand this way of thinking that the corps some how owe us all a good paying job or one above market value”
Henry Ford understood it though. He raised the wages for his male workers so they could have the money to buy the cars they made. And he said:
“A business that makes nothing but money is a poor business.”
If everyone is moving forward together, then success takes care of itself.”
“There is one rule for the industrialist and that is: Make the best quality of goods possible at the lowest cost possible, paying the highest wages possible.”
Read more at http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/h/henry_ford.html#6AZJStTgHMZWtR8y.99
They call me MISTER JamVet.
March 4th, 2013
3:53 pm
…or one above market value…
What??????
Cat, the market values of these multinationals is staggering!
But only a very, very small percentage of their employees are enjoying the rewards of that staggering market value.
THIS is the failure called Reaganomics aka Trickle Down Economics aka VooDoo Economics.
By it’s very definition trickle is a very small stream and for all practical purposes it has dried up…
getalife
March 4th, 2013
3:54 pm
I think he will approve another pipeline and we are drill baby drill.
Yes, I speak con.
Jackie
March 4th, 2013
3:54 pm
@Erwin’s cat
No one is owed anything by anyone in a capitalist society.
My point is, we should pay our workers more thereby putting more money – medium of exchange – in the system. The demand side (consumers) will generate supply (producers) and the economy will move along smartly.
As you well know, the economy of the USA is 25% of the world’s economy, therefore, if we keep our economy and the rest of the world’s economy viable, everyone does well.
Historical Wall Street Returns On Investment (ROI) have been roughly 7%. If business were to maintain a 7% profit margin, one would seem to think that business could continue to prosper.
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
March 4th, 2013
3:55 pm
I don’t understand this way of thinking that the corps some how owe us all a good paying job…
I don’t understand why corps don’t understand that in the long run, it is in their best interest that citizens of this country are paid enough to buy their goods and services.
Fred ™
March 4th, 2013
3:55 pm
How many even consider, for example, how energy drives up prices at all levels?
It’s funny you would ask that. I NEVER considered gas as a huge factor when bidding a job. my ram got 10.9 MPG. Now it gets sub 9 (needs work) and gas is a lot more than it was and it’s a HUGE factor. Going from “here to there and back again” is a major expense where as before it was more of a time suck. When I go check on the rental houses I take care of for absentee owners I now have to add gas charges. When it was a couple of bucks I didn’t think about it, when it became 10-15 I sure as hell did.
Erwin's cat
March 4th, 2013
3:55 pm
Many people with a few dollars equates to a steady demand for goods and services because we live in a consumption society.
Jackie…heck..since we’re in idealistic world…. cut out the middle man, and have the corps give each other their money…Business is started for one reason and one reason only…to make money, and as much as it can…what you spout amounts to charity to some degree…can a company get a tax break if it keeps a job and employee it no longer needs? What is it’s motivation much less its obligation to it’s share holders…it is not in business to save the economy or unemployment
Erwin's cat
March 4th, 2013
3:57 pm
Jackie…what if higher wages means fewer workers…you okay with that?
Jackie
March 4th, 2013
3:57 pm
@Erwin
You stated that if a person does not like his wages he should quite his job.
In today’s economic climate, how many people do you know that has that luxury?
Doggone/GA
March 4th, 2013
3:58 pm
“to make money, and as much as it can…what you spout amounts to charity to some degree”
“A business that makes nothing but money is a poor business.” Henry Ford
getalife
March 4th, 2013
3:59 pm
The chart shows workers are getting screwed and half of them bow down to corporate power.
Sad but true.
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
March 4th, 2013
3:59 pm
Business is started for one reason and one reason only…to
make moneymeet an identified demand.xxx
March 4th, 2013
3:59 pm
Jackie,
If you were cut out to be a CEO, you would already be one. If all you have to offer an employer in this market is labor, you have no bargianing power, there are millions out there just like you and any one of them will satisfy the requirement.
Jackie
March 4th, 2013
3:59 pm
If you had more money to spend on things that you wanted, would that not equate to more demand for the thing(s) that you wanted?
If the demand is greater, there is only so much that can be accomplished by an individual worker. This is an example should relate to the more demand requires more workers.
Bman.
March 4th, 2013
4:00 pm
Bro.. .. It happens, but the odds are still against what you described. It’s not impossible..not at all.
Fred.. .. I opened my first restaurant with only 4,000. Depending on what you’re doing, it can be cost less than what you may have read. More, too though…
Erwin's cat
March 4th, 2013
4:01 pm
How many even consider, for example, how energy drives up prices at all levels?
Doggone and I we discussing this a couple weeks ago…several operations are coming back from China due to the cost of power there
willie lynch
March 4th, 2013
4:02 pm
JohnnyReb
March 4th, 2013
3:38 pm
It seems a natural evolution that workers will demand better wages and working conditions. A fair wage from the start would eliminate the need for a special call by workers to have this area addressed.
Not everyone can be the CEO or whatever other C position is available but without the principle of fairness as perceived by those in the working class there will be unrest sooner or later, history has shown this more than once and as recently as the “Arab Spring”.
I’ll say again business has a right to profit but it has to be tempered for the good of the whole. If not “a house divided…. “
JohnnyReb
March 4th, 2013
4:03 pm
Fred – a big item affected by energy prices is food. Not only does it cost more to produce a product due to higher energy costs, the price for transporting to market goes up. Trucking companies have thier rates but include a fuel surcharge. The cost of the delivered product goes up instantly with gas/diesel prices. You see it on the grocery shelf when the energy costs can no longer be born by the manufacturer and/or retailer. Almost all manufacturers have reduced the quantity of product trying to keep the prices down.
Obama has let the tree huggers set his energy policy. At a time when we are poised to become energy independent, he wants to throw more money down the green hole while also blocking domestic oil drilling, fracking, pipeline, etc.
Erwin's cat
March 4th, 2013
4:04 pm
Kam – Business is started for one reason and one reason only…to
make moneymeet an identified demand.okay…I’m good with that…how about meeting an identified demand in a profitable way
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
March 4th, 2013
4:04 pm
First it’s bman., then it’s Bman.
It’s always a good idea to double check the spelling of your usual nom-de-blog – especially paying close attention to upper/lower case usage – when you sign back in after doing the sock-puppet thingie.
Just suggestin’.
Brosephus™
March 4th, 2013
4:05 pm
I think he will approve another pipeline and we are drill baby drill.
It’s not necessary.
Rail shipments of Canadian crude oil sands are on track to quadruple this year. Producers and refiners are scrambling to buy their own tank cars in order to lower the cost and increase the certainty of transport. Industry sources said that there is an 18- to 24-month waiting period for new tank cars in Canada.
[...]
In January, Peters & Co., a Canadian research and investment advisory firm specializing in the oil and gas sector, estimated that this year Canadian railroads would nearly triple oil deliveries from 70,000 barrels a day to 200,000 barrels a day, which would be more than a quarter of the capacity of the Keystone XL. But the amount of oil on Canada’s rail system has already hit 150,000 barrels a day and is on track to hit 300,000 barrels a day by year’s end.
godless heathen - owner of many things he does not need
March 4th, 2013
4:05 pm
If you have more people working and having more disposable income, then those same dollars can go out and purchase those things they want instead of the things they need.
And if a competitor offers the product at a lower cost because he controlled his labor costs, then your well-paid employees will buy from him.
indigo
March 4th, 2013
4:05 pm
The current Business mantra in these times is to get more work done with fewer employees. That this is working, Business wise, is shown by the larger than ever corporate profits. It is also working for Business by the fact that millions are still out of work and, as long as Business can squeeze more and more work out of their existing employees, these millions will continue to be unemployed.
Just another generous benefit from our predatory Capitalist system.
Union
March 4th, 2013
4:06 pm
willie lynch.. who is to make those decisions? enough profits.. someone has a good idea.. builds a business.. and if its profitable.. good for them.. the same argument could be used for someone winning the lottery.. they only “need” so much.. so take more of their money.
Jackie
March 4th, 2013
4:07 pm
@Erwin
The example of China is excellent.
Do you realize the Chinese economy depends on high-volume exports to sustain itself?
Without all the raw material resources China is buying from around the world, there will be fewer jobs in that country and they are very concerned about larger riots occurring because of lack of adequate resources in the worker’s possession to purchase basic living goods and shelter.
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
March 4th, 2013
4:07 pm
I’m good with that…how about meeting an identified demand in a profitable way
Not unreasonable, but profit isn’t the be-all/end-all raison d’être.
Bman.
March 4th, 2013
4:07 pm
Kam.. .. lol I only post under this name. I had to switch over to mobile…
JAWJA
March 4th, 2013
4:07 pm
Help is on the way for jobs in Georgia. Read Chip Roger’s blog on GPB. He basically posts Youtube videos (he writes the intros) and, what appears to be a copy of an ad from National Enquirer on how to buy and sell junk online in lieu of a job. But, my favorite is “The Chocolate Bar Resume.” I don’t know how many chocolate bars Chip gave Nathan for this job, but, I just know it’s gonna bring lotsa jobs to Georgia. Seeing as how Chip is already nationally known because of the mind control thingy.
Erwin's cat
March 4th, 2013
4:07 pm
Doggone – A business that makes
nothing butno money is a very poor businessFred ™
March 4th, 2013
4:10 pm
Obama has let the tree huggers set his energy policy.
Not that tired assed horse carp again……… you were doing GREAT until you got to that lie. I’m not going to bother going into supply and demand, how China is buying all the oil, the fact our refineries are at full capacity, the fact that we are now producing more oil domestically than ever before blah blah blah………. because we have discussed all this before.
The fact that your irrational hatred (fueled by talk radio and fox) of Obama blinds you to the truth is not my fault and quite frankly takes a wonderfully put post you had written and turns it into pure garbage.
Just damn.
Erwin's cat
March 4th, 2013
4:10 pm
Not unreasonable, but profit isn’t the be-all/end-all raison d’être.
it is when compared to losing money
Jackie
March 4th, 2013
4:10 pm
@godless
If you take you example, the lower cost items will attract more consumers, but, the problem remains when the business reaches a point of diminishing returns.
The new price leader will face the same problem because demand will outstrip his supply and they will have to pay more for their labor force.
Brosephus™
March 4th, 2013
4:11 pm
bman.
It depends on many different things. I don’t discount anybody making it uneless I personally know that their work ethic and such will lead them to failure. That’s just how I view things.
————–
JReb: Obama has let the tree huggers set his energy policy. At a time when we are poised to become energy independent, he wants to throw more money down the green hole while also blocking domestic oil drilling, fracking, pipeline, etc.
Care to show the policies enacted by the Obama Administration that makes companies take their refineries offline all at the same time which creates false shortages? Also, I haven’t found an Obama policy that dictates global demand for oil and gas. Blame Obama all you want, but it’s the decisions made by companies that have more bearing on the energy costs than anything that any administration has ever done.
In the middle
March 4th, 2013
4:12 pm
Corporations and businesses do not make decisions, people make decisions. They are going to do what is best for themselves, not what is best for other people. We all do this. It is not wrong, it is just reality. Not one of you can claim to be completely benevolent when making decisions. Do you buy something because you have a need for yourself or do you buy it because you don’t need it but want to support job growth.
They call me MISTER JamVet.
March 4th, 2013
4:13 pm
…who is to make those decisions?
Again, I say these decisions are to be made by the owners – the employees and shareholders.
Who, under the present system, have virtually NO say so and NO power in a corporation.
Another great idea whose time has come and that goes back to Madison and the Founding Fathers – federal chartering of corporations…
Jackie
March 4th, 2013
4:14 pm
@Erwin
A vast majority of startup’s “loose” money in their first five years and many fail in their first two years.
http://smallbiztrends.com/2005/07/business-failure-rates-highest-in.html
Thomas Heyward Jr
March 4th, 2013
4:15 pm
FACTS TO CONSIDER:
Should the U.S. pull out of Chicago?
Body count: In the last six months, 292 killed (murdered) in Chicago compared to 221 killed in Iraq, and Chicago has some of the strictest gun laws in the entire US.
President: Barack Obama
Senator: Dick Durbin
Congressman: Jesse Jackson Jr.
Governor: Pat Quinn
House leader: Mike Madigan
Atty. Gen.: Lisa Madigan (daughter of Mike)
Mayor: Rahm Emanuel
The leadership in Illinois – all Democrats.
Thank you for the combat zone in Chicago.
Of course, they’re all blaming each other.
Can’t blame Republicans; there aren’t any!
Chicago school system rated one of the worst in the country.
Can’t blame Republicans; there aren’t any!
State pension fund $78 Billion in debt, worst in country.
Can’t blame Republicans; there aren’t any!
Cook County (Chicago) sales tax 10.25% highest in country.
Can’t blame Republicans; there aren’t any!
This is the political culture that Obama comes from in Illinois.
And he is going to “fix” Washington politics for us???
George Ryan is no longer governor; he is in the big house. Of course he was replaced by Rod Blagojevich who is…that’s right, also in the big house. And Representative Jesse Jackson Jr. resigned recently. That’s because he is fighting being sent to…right again, the big house!
The Land of Lincoln, where governors make our license plates!!!!
.
lol
Jackie
March 4th, 2013
4:16 pm
@In The Middle
I agree with you statement about corporations making decisions in their own best interest.
Erwin's cat
March 4th, 2013
4:17 pm
Jam – Who, under the present system, have virtually NO say so and NO power in a corporation.
and all these people (as in the middle posted) will/would decide on what’s best for them personally and not for the corp or collective..(in most cases anyway)
willie lynch
March 4th, 2013
4:18 pm
Union
March 4th, 2013
4:06 pm
I don’t have the answer to what profit is enough profit, but I do know that we experienced the greatest expansion we ever had in this country with a corporate tax rate that was double the current rate. Wages grew and businesses flourished under that tax system, so how did we make it work then?
I guess I’m having a hard time understanding why so many people are defending the excess of today’s corporate world in the face of the indisputable evidence of the decline of wages and quality of life that the American worker has gone through. Just asking.
Erwin's cat
March 4th, 2013
4:19 pm
Jackie – A vast majority of startup’s “loose” money in their first five years and many fail in their first two years.
no kidding…and your point?…they didn’t have enough well paid employees?
They call me MISTER JamVet.
March 4th, 2013
4:21 pm
…and all these people (as in the middle posted) will/would decide on what’s best for them personally and not for the corp or collective..(in most cases anyway)
Exactly! Which would put an end to the perversion whereby a CEO makes 475 times what a line worker makes.
And more importantly would, after nearly fifty years, finally end the FLATLINING of the average American worker’s income…
Time for some income redistribution back down the ladder, wouldn’t you say?
JohnnyReb
March 4th, 2013
4:21 pm
Brosephus – you’re kidding, right? Both Obama and his DOE guy were campaigning for higer energy prices before Obama was elected. They shut down Gulf Oil rigs unneccessarily after the BP accident. They were not letting permits on government controlled land until the heat got to high. They blocked the Keystone. They would love to block fracking, and keep looking for a way to do so. They are hell bent on throwing more money down the green hole.
I suspect that regulations requiring certain blends of gasoline at specific times of the year has more to do with all refineries going off line at about the same time.
All the experts say we are poised to become energy independent. The only thing standing in our way is Obama.
You can keep trying to defend him on this, but you are on very shaky ground.
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
March 4th, 2013
4:22 pm
it is when compared to losing money
And why is the corp losing money?
Did they build the manufacturing facility in the wrong place?
Is the manufacturing facility inefficient due to poor design?
Are there inefficiencies due to shipments of raw materials?
Are there inefficiencies getting the product to market?
Are they building the wrong product to meet the identified demand?
Are they using the wrong tools to build their product?
Did they hire the wrong marketing firm to advertise their product?
Nobama
March 4th, 2013
4:23 pm
You want income redistribution – baby you got it with this administration !
willie lynch
March 4th, 2013
4:24 pm
Thomas Heyward Jr
March 4th, 2013
4:15 pm
Google the list of U.S. presidents who’ve had the most members convicted of crimes.
Jackie
March 4th, 2013
4:25 pm
@Erwin
Apparently you did not bother to read the link I proved, which seems to say that you are basing your insight into supposition.
They call me MISTER JamVet.
March 4th, 2013
4:25 pm
Large corporations have essentially become private governments with an enormous effect on the lives and livelihoods of Americans, but without any accountability to them. The words “corporation” or “company” do not exist in our constitution! This is the antithesis of democracy — a corporate state run by the few without the consent of the many.
The restraint once offered by economic risk has been offset by limited liabilities, government subsidies and bailouts. The power of an effective federal chartering system could instill a new culture of restraint and good behavior within the corporate world, to force corporate bosses to answer to shareholders, to prohibit corporations from lobbying and contributing to electoral campaigns, and from obstructing regulators — in short, to “constitutionalize the corporation.
Fred ™
March 4th, 2013
4:26 pm
Ignore the troll and it will die from lack of troll food
pogo
March 4th, 2013
4:27 pm
Another one of Jay’s “Oooooo, those HORRIBLE corporations” pieces. Seems your King, Obama, seems enamoured of some of the largest in this country Jay. At least those that give him money and that make money off of his policies . He is in bed with Wal-Mart. Check his nomination of Sylvia Burwell out. Of course you pathetic liberals are willing to give the King the pass on that one aren’t you even though Walmart hates unions. This blog is nothing but a watering hole for old entitlement loving liberals who don’t work but take and take and take. Nothing more, and a hell of a lot less. As for the host? He thinks that if he works stirring the liberal muck at the bottom long enough that those liberals in the journalistic hierarchy will eventually give him a better lot in life. Afterall, he really isn’t that good of a writer so he must “earn his patch” so to speak.
Keep Up the Good Fight!
March 4th, 2013
4:27 pm
Kam, you left off a few:
Are they paying the CEO way too much for the services rendered?
Is management looking out for own greed rather than working for the shareholders?
Is management taking unwarranted gambles because they have failed to implement proper controls?
Fred ™
March 4th, 2013
4:31 pm
Anyone who is so stupid that they think we have a King in this Country isn’t worth reading or responding to.
How does one stay that ignorant yet still possess the ability to turn on a computer?
Jackie
March 4th, 2013
4:31 pm
@Erwin
Here is a little Generally Accepted Accounting Procedure (GAAP) information for you, relative to how startup costs are treated and recorded.
http://www.ehow.com/how_12045417_account-startup-costs-gaap.html
Brosephus™
March 4th, 2013
4:31 pm
you’re kidding, right? Both Obama and his DOE guy were campaigning for higer energy prices before Obama was elected.
Nope. Campaigning doesn’t equate to law. If Obama has done such things as you claim, then there would be a trail of laws or Executive Orders to show proof. I’ve looked for such things when those claims have been made and have yet to find anything to back them up. At the same time, there’s more than enough information to show the global demand for oil and gas and how it gives us little control over prices here at home. There’s also the fact that we’re driving less and companies are exporting gas to the point that that was our #1 export a year ago.
The Keystone pipeline would have little to no bearing on the price of gas here in the US. That pipeline would allow Canada to sell their oil on the world market to the highest bidder. If you’re really concerned about the price of gas here, you DON’T want the keystone pipeline built because the status quo leaves a glut of crude oil in Oklahoma. Recently, it’s been shown that rail shipping of oil has exploded in Canada, further proving that the pipeline isn’t necessary or will reduce costs here.
I’m far from on shaky ground, but your ideology refuses to allow you to see reality. I’m not defending Obama at all either. If you were in court trying to convict him on what you’re presenting, he would easily beat the rap. I work in law enforcement and deal with facts. I don’t let “thoughts” cloud my judgement as you appear to.
Brosephus™
March 4th, 2013
4:32 pm
JReb: I suspect that regulations requiring certain blends of gasoline at specific times of the year has more to do with all refineries going off line at about the same time.
Those guidelines were in place long before Obama. Once again, you have nothing but “thoughts” to back your claims.
Drudge
March 4th, 2013
4:35 pm
Probably because they are stockpiling cash and not investing anything until this re-re is out of office…
They call me MISTER JamVet.
March 4th, 2013
4:35 pm
The Three Laws of Capitalism.
1) If you own it, you control it.
Yet this is not the case in corporate America. Shareholders, employees and investors have virtually NO say. Back room closed door “deals” among a tiny number of elites are how these corporations are run. To the point that CEO’s in the past have intentionally mismanaged their companies, inciting shareholders to jump ship and sell their stock.
2) You are free to fail.
Nuff said.
3) No governmental manipulation or intervention; free market fails when government intervenes.
No bailouts, handouts, subsidies, give aways, crony capitalism, tax shelters and dodges.
Many corporations have slashed workers benefits, pensions and wages to support their continued excesses.
And the American worker and his family is beyond fedup of this corporate gluttony that ends up in the pockets of a tiny few.
Occupy that.
Fred ™
March 4th, 2013
4:38 pm
Wow the Judge ruled for Deal:
http://www.ajc.com/news/news/breaking-news/federal-judge-rules-against-dekalb-school-board/nWggG/
Erwin's cat
March 4th, 2013
4:38 pm
Jackie – I read the link..learned nothing new
you were earlier saying that corps just do not pay or employ enough
Jackie
March 4th, 2013
4:39 pm
@Erwin
If you read it or know it, why would you ask a question concerning business losses?
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
March 4th, 2013
4:39 pm
Kam, you left off a few:
More than a few, but it’s about all I can remember from an interview I heard on NPR with H. Ross Perot in the 90s.
getalife
March 4th, 2013
4:41 pm
“It kills me I am not in the White House” romney.
Take a pill will.
Erwin's cat
March 4th, 2013
4:41 pm
Jackie – you are losing me? I actually own a (side) business and have for 7 years and counting…and I am gainfully employed .. I am aware of start up costs etc etc
what’s your point?
Jackie
March 4th, 2013
4:41 pm
@Fred
I do hope the DeKalb school board appeals this decision.
How does one elected official remove another elected official?
Jackie
March 4th, 2013
4:43 pm
@Erwin
See you 4:19 posting, maybe that will shed some light.
Erwin's cat
March 4th, 2013
4:43 pm
Jackie – where did i ask a question about business losses?
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
March 4th, 2013
4:45 pm
How does one elected official remove another elected official?
By using a law that was passed just a couple of years ago.
It remains to be seen if that law will pass a constitutional appeal
Brosephus™
March 4th, 2013
4:46 pm
How does one elected official remove another elected official?
You simply need to get your party loyalists in the legislature to pass the legislation giving you that authority. I don’t think the long term prospects of your opposition wielding the same power ever crosses the minds of those who do these things either.
Erwin's cat
March 4th, 2013
4:46 pm
Jackie – See you 4:19 posting, maybe that will shed some light
no it dosen’t….you stated business should pay and hire more, then linked to why start ups fail…
I simply asked is your point that they failed because the didn’t have enough well paid employees?
They call me MISTER JamVet.
March 4th, 2013
4:46 pm
“It kills me I am not in the White House” romney.
Wow, it takes a special kind of guy to bask in public self-humiliation.
He is a modern day flagellant…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flagellant
Fred ™
March 4th, 2013
4:49 pm
Jackie: I’m of two minds. While I agree with what you say, it’s also true that these idiots needed to go. I just don’t see an upside to this. ESPECIALLY with that thief Nathan Deal in charge of the appointments.
bman.
March 4th, 2013
4:49 pm
Does anyone know how to post viewing the mobile theme? I don’t see it anywhere
They call me MISTER JamVet.
March 4th, 2013
4:49 pm
Statutes have become so broad and sweeping that they let a corporation do just about anything it wants… State law does not and cannot exert any real controls. Corporation statutes and most judicial decisions largely tend to reflect the interests and orientation of management or, to use another popular term, insiders. In short, state law has abdicated its responsibility.
As a result, only federal law can handle the situation. ~Ernest Folk, PhD, 1972
Erwin's cat
March 4th, 2013
4:50 pm
Jam – he will continue the self whipping until his morale improves
DebbieDoRight - What this country needs is more unemployed politicians
March 4th, 2013
4:50 pm
Debbie, what? You object to having horsemeat in your meatballs?
Eeewwww! Only those “free market don’t need no inspections government free bondage” conservatives like crap like that!
bro: Only by searching the bag will we know whether the cat is a vibrator or not.
Thanks for sharing that — If i was ever tempted to travel with one, you’ve JUST killed that temptation!
TBS
March 4th, 2013
4:51 pm
“It kills me I am not in the White House”
Romney
If it is anywhere along the lines as the pain some on this blog seem to be enduring, he does have it bad.
Jackie
March 4th, 2013
4:51 pm
@Erwin
You are correct.
Your implication in answering my question appeared to be something other than I perceived.
You can be sure that I will asked you very pointed and direct questions in the future so there will be no innuendo.
Dumb and Dumber
March 4th, 2013
4:51 pm
“The share of the economy that is going to after-tax corporate profits is in red.” Might want to straighten out the English. GDP doesn’t get “allocated” or “going to” (although that’s what master economic planners like Progressives would love to do, centrally plan the economy). Why don’t us
Brosephus™
March 4th, 2013
4:52 pm
bman
I don’t think you can post with the mobile theme active. At least that’s the case for android devices. That may be some of that iSh*t only software.
josef
March 4th, 2013
4:53 pm
Not sure what I’m doing here today. I don’t know the first thing about the topic at hand. The weather is nice, I’ve been told to shut up on religion, politics is a repeat of the ssdd, and sex is now an abstract discussed in theory…
So, what else is there to talk about?
Brosephus™
March 4th, 2013
4:53 pm
DDR
If you travel with one, put it in your carry-on bag. If your carry-on is packed with clothes, it will be harder to make out individually. As long as there’s nothing else to search for, you’re probably not going to get stopped.
Jackie
March 4th, 2013
4:53 pm
@Fred
Constitutional laws seems to say that when these actions are taken by another elected official, they are nullifying the voters.
http://government.lawyers.com/Throw-the-Bums-Out-Removing-Elected-Officials.html
Erwin's cat
March 4th, 2013
4:54 pm
DDR Thanks for sharing that — If i was ever tempted to travel with one, you’ve JUST killed that temptation!
oh come on…I’m a fun travel buddy
DebbieDoRight - What this country needs is more unemployed politicians
March 4th, 2013
4:56 pm
It remains to be seen if that law will pass a constitutional appeal
If I was on the legal team opposing the replacement, I’d bring up (and cite) precedents of Georgia’s history of illegal disenfranchising voters and use that as an equivalent.
If I got lucky, I’d even bring in some actual georgia VOTERS from the 60’s and early 70s that have been affected and let them testify and ask them if they believe that this new crop of georgians would be diligent as the old ones were in protecting their rights to elect officials with their votes.
///drive by///
Dumb and Dumber
March 4th, 2013
4:56 pm
Oops…hit send a bit early. Why don’t you graph the % of profits that corporations have made overseas in last five years? Due to the devaluing (by the day) dollar, foreign income is worth more and more in US$ terms. Much of multinational corporations’ profits are made overseas and a devaluing US currency adds to that.
And let’s not forget the wonderful draining effect of double taxation of corporate profits, that serves a bit purpose. Let the money flow to the shareholders and let them pay the tax there. They are the owners of the shares, after all (until more Progressive economics ends up with government ownership of everything). Remember the Progressives’ rallying cry in the 1900s…”we planned in war.” They thought that was a good thing…..
Fred ™
March 4th, 2013
4:56 pm
LOL josef, who told you to shut up on religion? I missed that one. Was it after I left last night?
Jackie
March 4th, 2013
4:56 pm
@JamVet
SALUTE!
bman.
March 4th, 2013
4:56 pm
Bro .. .. Yea it does t work on iPhone either. It’s 2013 forpetesakes!
josef
March 4th, 2013
4:57 pm
Okay, What’s with horsemeat meatballs and vibrator cats. Fill me in, Not that I know a lot about either one, but I think after today, I could probably wing it.
Erwin's cat
March 4th, 2013
4:57 pm
Jackie – You can be sure that I will asked you very pointed and direct questions in the future so there will be no innuendo.
great…but be warned I can out-innuedo some (not all) of the best
Fred ™
March 4th, 2013
4:57 pm
Let the money flow to the shareholders and let them pay the tax there.
Yeah if they ever sell the shares……… How many times has Apple given a dividend?