As share of GDP, corporate profits highest since 1950

From The New York Times:

“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.)

corporateprofitsvswages1-1

– Jay Bookman

699 comments Add your comment

Mick

March 4th, 2013
1:11 pm

Well, corporations are treated as persons, tax them as such!

Mick

March 4th, 2013
1:12 pm

jay

By the way, nice to see you using a FRED chart…

Jay

March 4th, 2013
1:19 pm

I use them all the time, Mick. As I noted, I’ve run this particular chart before, last December.

Peadawg

March 4th, 2013
1:19 pm

If only corporations were hiring….

RB from Gwinnett

March 4th, 2013
1:21 pm

“Yet conservatives continue to argue that the business climate under President Obama stifles profitability.”

You’re not digging very deep are you Jay? When the business climate here makes it easier to ship jobs to other parts of the world, how does that affect corporate profit? And how does it affect wages of Americans who feed GDP?

You liberals keep piling on the paperwork and regulations, business keeps following the path of least resistance (shipping jobs overseas), and then you whine about them doing what they have to do to stay in business. You are absolute masters at unintended consequences. Masters!!!

0311/8541/5811/1811/1801

March 4th, 2013
1:25 pm

So …………. ?

They should be even higher ……….. that’s what builds great economies, jobs, etc.

Not bigger government !

Mick

March 4th, 2013
1:25 pm

rb

Are you sure you are an american? Whiny, pessimistic, and sour is no way to go thru life son…

midtownguy

March 4th, 2013
1:25 pm

Wow. For the first time in ages I get to say “before I was born.”

It is just another example of the shrinking working class. When I was growing up my friends who’s fathers worked at the nearby factories (Ford and Reynolds Aluminum) lived comfortable lives in nice homes. Families who have those kinds of blue collar jobs today live in Mobile Homes and get Food Stamps.

Union

March 4th, 2013
1:28 pm

looks like the share of money going to employees has been going down for many years. i guess the companies should jump on the good times bandwagon.. pay more out to everyone.. and hope for the best.. oh.. thats right.. someone did that already.. state and federal govts. how is that working out?

Doggone/GA

March 4th, 2013
1:28 pm

“And until we get a full recovery in the labor market, this will persist.””

Corporations don’t WANT a full recovery in the labor market. As long as unemployment is high, they can depress wages and still get people to hire on.

They call me MISTER JamVet.

March 4th, 2013
1:30 pm

Beginning with Reagan we actually began writing laws that rewarded multinationals for shipping millions of American jobs overseas.

And that disgusting little man who said, “Corporations are people, my friend.” wanted to double down on it. He would have made U.S. corporations’ overseas profits exempt from U.S. taxes.

Romney’s proposed exemption for foreign profits would exacerbate the worst features of our current tax system. It would:

Enhance the tax code’s rewards for moving jobs and investments overseas

Provide a gratuitous windfall to some of the very companies that have already shifted jobs and profits overseas

Further invite the offshore tax haven abuse that deprives the U.S. Treasury of tens of billions of dollars in revenue every year

Fortunately he was so glaringly unfit to lead the republic, that we kicked him to curb where he belonged. But alas, he caught the next flight out to Bermuda and the Caymans to count his billions…

Granny Godzilla

March 4th, 2013
1:30 pm

Regs and Paperwork are the problem?

What a load of claptrap.

Care for some horsemeat in your lasagna? Some WD40 in your shrimp?
Salmonella for two? E coli? Radiation leaks?

History has taught us that corporations cannot police themselves.

RB from Gwinnett

March 4th, 2013
1:31 pm

Mick, “Are you sure you are an american? Whiny, pessimistic, and sour is no way to go thru life son…”

Wake up and realize that moisture on your head ain’t rain, Mick. You’re being lied to.

Jefferson

March 4th, 2013
1:31 pm

The saying that rich people do better in hard times….

Mick

March 4th, 2013
1:31 pm

union

People in this day and age love to union bash but the chickens are coming home to roost because wages have been stagnant for close to a generation. By all means cheer on the corporates because we all know how concerned they are for their workers! wink wink

Normal, Plain and Simple

March 4th, 2013
1:32 pm

0311/8541/5811/1811/1801

March 4th, 2013
1:33 pm

“OBAMA LIED ……. JANITORS ‘CRIED’ … ” ??

Headline (Washington Post Fact Checker): “Sequester spin: Obama’s false claim of Capitol janitors receiving ‘a pay cut’ ”

“Indeed, Obama’s remarks at the news conference so alarmed Capitol Hill officials that an e-mail was sent by the Capitol building superintendent that comments that people who clean the building would get a cut in pay were “NOT true.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/sequester-spin-obamas-incorrect-claim-of-capitol-janitors-receiving-a-pay-cut/2013/03/01/3407535c-82a9-11e2-b99e-6baf4ebe42df_blog.html

Mick

March 4th, 2013
1:34 pm

rb

The vast difference between you and I is I know how to deal with obstacles and overcome, while you get flustered and blame. I control my destiny in the home of the brave and the land of the free. Lies? So what’s new???

mm

March 4th, 2013
1:34 pm

“When the business climate here makes it easier to ship jobs to other parts of the world, how does that affect corporate profit? And how does it affect wages of Americans who feed GDP?”

Can you cons for once be honest about anything? The jobs are going overseas because the wages are cheaper, thus increasing profits.

We have 4 family owned businesses. Regulations are not hurting the businesses. The fact is consumers have no extra money to spend, if they are lucky enough to have a job at all.

BECAUSE CORPORATIONS ARE HIRING OVERSEAS!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Class of '98

March 4th, 2013
1:35 pm

Does this chart account for the shift from pensions to 401K’s as the preferred retirement plan since the 1940’s?

I may be wrong but I’m guessing it includes pensions in “workers paychecks”, but not contributions to 401k plans.

Lies. Damn lies. Statistics.

liberal hack

March 4th, 2013
1:37 pm

Jay, at what percentage of the entire US economy does US corporations support? I’d argue that most of the jobs in this country are created by 1. small business, 2. some gov’t entitie (federal, state, local) then 3. Large corporations. Yea they may be making money but what about small businesses? Yet you are proposing they should have the same tax rates as millionaires? oh wait, what you want to do is tax stock options at 40% and raise corporate tax rates. Do you realize most state pension retirement plans are based on the profitabilty of corporations. If they aren’t making money, then teachers and firemen and police officers get shorted on their retirement. Along with the lower middle class joe like me who is blessed to even have a 401K. why do you want my retirement check taxed at 40%?

Logical Dude

March 4th, 2013
1:40 pm

This can also relate to the previous chart where you had each quintile related to taxes.

As each lower Quintile grows due to the economic slump, of COURSE the lower quintiles will pay a lower tax rate. And as the tax rate for the tiny percentage at the top grows, it will be tempered by the “lower” part of the quintile.

Summary: previous chart that showed tax rates per quintile didn’t necessarily show lower tax rates for everyone, but can be interpreted that many people are now being paid less.

Current Chart: Yep, it’s all about profits and be damned the employees.

Regnad Kcin

March 4th, 2013
1:41 pm

“why do you want my retirement check taxed at 40%?’

Dude, if they’re taxing your retirement check at 40%, you’re in a WAY higher tax bracket than I am! I find I don’t believe you – no offense…

Arms Akimbo

March 4th, 2013
1:44 pm

Corporate profits are a direct result of the Fed’s easy money policy rather than anything coming out of the WH. The corporate profits are coming at the expense of the labor market which is bogged down by regulations coming out of Washington. Too bad the Democratic Party is not as savy with their finances. Duke Energy announced last week that the DNC had defaulted on a $10mm line of credit issued to pay for the Democratic convention in Charlotte last year. Duke is forgiving the loan in exchange for exemption from carbon taxes on its coal fired plants. Duke can also write the loss off on its taxes which passes the burden onto taxpayers.

wahoo

March 4th, 2013
1:44 pm

Jay, what would this chart look like if we were only including domestic corporate profits? My guess is that it would still be impressive in terms of profit growth but probably a meaningful amount less robust. Curious. Thanks.

SPC

March 4th, 2013
1:44 pm

Obama’s policies stifle growth, not profits. The profit growth shown in the graph is largely due to cost cutting and productivity increases, not economic growth (unfortunately) and I think this is what is reflected in the labor graph.

Doggone/GA

March 4th, 2013
1:46 pm

“Obama’s policies stifle growth”

Which policies, and how are the stifling growth?

UNCLE SAMANTHA

March 4th, 2013
1:47 pm

POOR JAY
DOESN’T UNDERSTAND THE CYCLE

UNDER OBAMA………. TOO BIG TO FAIL BANKS, OIL COMPANIES, DEFENSE CONTRACTORS AND APPLE ARE THE ONES SKEWING THE CORPORATE PROFITS………..PLUS ADD IN THE STOCK MARKET BEING INFLATED……….

WHAT THAT HIDES IS THAT THERE IS VERY LITTLE CONSUMER DEMAND………. NO DEMAND………. NO GROWTH………. NO GROWTH THEN CORPORATIONS SIT ON PROFITS…………

AND WHY IS THERE VERY LITTLE CONSUMER DEMAND…….. BECAUSE BOTH PARTIES TRIED TO MAKE THIS A PAINLESS RECOVERY AND ARE MAKING A LOST DECADE LIKE JAPAN DID………

Welcome to the Occupation

March 4th, 2013
1:49 pm

RB from Gwinnett: “You’re not digging very deep are you Jay? When the business climate here makes it easier to ship jobs to other parts of the world, how does that affect corporate profit? And how does it affect wages of Americans who feed GDP?”

Did you not learn one single thing from your reading of Marx?

I mean, seriously.

It doesn’t take an economic genius to see that profits are in direct proportion to the revenue generated from production and the costs of production. And what is usually the central cost of production for any product?

Labor.

The more you can slash you labor costs — and no better way to slash those than to attack labor rights and/or to have the freedom to move production to locales with no labor protections — the more you can, you follow me?, raise profits.

See? Very simple. Even a 5th grader could grasp it very easily.

Can you now?

Welcome to the Occupation

March 4th, 2013
1:52 pm

Doggone: “Which policies, and how are the stifling growth?”

Uh, austerity?

Union

March 4th, 2013
1:54 pm

well we know the coal industry has not suffered from any regulations.. what are these people talking about?

@ mick.. per unions.. etc.. i dont fault unions at all.. i fault the people that setup the ridiculous deals.. seems union spent an absurd amount of money to recall gov walker and they said it the laws went through.. the sky would fall… (picking up on a theme here) but alas they were wrong.. more people hired.. more savings for the local govt.. what a shocker.

They call me MISTER JamVet.

March 4th, 2013
1:55 pm

I’d argue that most of the jobs in this country are created by 1. small business, 2. some gov’t entitie (federal, state, local) then 3. Large corporations

You would be wrong. You have the last two backwards…

According to the U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA). Some 19.6 million Americans work for companies employing fewer than 20 workers, 18.4 million work for firms employing between 20 and 99 workers, and 14.6 million work for firms with 100 to 499 workers.

By contrast, 47.7 million Americans work for firms with 500 or more employees.

Federal government – 2.8 million employed

State and local governments – 19.5 million employed (5.7 million part time).

Doggone/GA

March 4th, 2013
1:56 pm

“Uh, austerity?”

If they come back with that excuse, from the group that claims he’s the “biggest spending President in history”…I just might die laughing.

Keep Up the Good Fight!

March 4th, 2013
1:57 pm

No matter what the facts and what the evidence shows, the conned live in their own world. We have seen time and time again that when they don’t have the evidence they claim “skewed” information, hidden agendas or this is the X step in a grand plan to [FEAR].

In these circumstances, they cannot explain away the profits and the soaring stock prices, so they have to fall back to fiction about “growth” and “atmosphere” and lay blame for 2-3 decades of business outsourcing and globalization while ignoring the relocation of business back to the US. :roll:

Stevie Ray

March 4th, 2013
1:58 pm

JAY

Seems a good time to execute the Anti Dog Eat Dog Bill and the Equalization of Opportunity Act..these would be likely on the path many seem to support. They certainly would slow the divide of the have’s and the have nots as the main tenet to BO’s theme.

Of course profits are robust. Given the circumstances, how could anything else be possible?

Stevie Ray

March 4th, 2013
2:00 pm

Keep Up the Good Fight!

March 4th, 2013
1:57 pm

Are you suggesting profitable corporations should bring back all those offshored jobs?

Scooter

March 4th, 2013
2:01 pm

I say the business environment under The Obama is full of uncertainties created by the Affordable Care Act, Dodd-Frank and our budgetary issues. When businesses are uncertain, they tend to build up reserves to weather any unforeseen negatives. Understanding that I don’t agree with it being used to ruffle populist feathers for political gain

Jm

March 4th, 2013
2:02 pm

Most of that multinational profit growth has come from abroad

Not the crummy US economy

Why do you think American workers are entitled to international profits Jay?

This chart an data is meaningless

American workers have never been more poorly educated relative to international measures

You can thank the crummy US governmental education system

Jm

March 4th, 2013
2:03 pm

Oh and by the way, when democrats are willing to accept entitlement cuts in actual legislation, you will have witnessed something more historic than republicans accepting defense cuts

Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes

March 4th, 2013
2:04 pm

This chart an data is meaningless

There’s your sign.

Regnad Kcin

March 4th, 2013
2:05 pm

Jm – your assertion that “This chart an data is meaningless” because “American workers have never been more poorly educated relative to international measures” is nonsensical.

Fred ™

March 4th, 2013
2:05 pm

Just as I predicted. RB ran away from the truth downstairs and came back pretending it never happened spouting the same old tired lie.

Jay, As I was reading that something occured to me that I think you may have over looked. I had an epiphany as it were that is scary as hell………..

With the global markets feeding profits, the corporations are finding they don’t NEED the US markets. So if they don’t need our markets then the fact that with no jobs we have no money to buy their goods is meaningless. They don’t care if unemployment reaches 89% as long as they are making money, not paying taxes, and the military is there to protect their investments. The rest of us can eat cake. There is no incentive as things stand for them to move any jobs back here, they don’t need us for anything except to continue paying taxes for them to gain the benefit from.

Talk about moochers…….

Fred ™

March 4th, 2013
2:06 pm

LOL And JM is back as well pretending nothing happened…….. just as I predicted.

Jm

March 4th, 2013
2:06 pm

I wonder jay. Why don’t you go measure Chinese profits instead

Make the argument that American workers deserve more because profits are up in China

It would make the same amount of sense frankly

Dividing the economic pie is not a zero sum game

Except in liberals eyes

Stevie Ray

March 4th, 2013
2:06 pm

Why doesn’t anyone want to discuss the prime culprit of productivity gains and upward stress on unemployment? That would be technology. I guess we could retard the growth of technology by making all patents property of the government. That way, our elected officials could decide whether allowing them to hit market is good for employment or should be shelved in the dusty basement bins of some unremarkable white stone DC building…

Fred ™

March 4th, 2013
2:08 pm

I should be a prophet:

Fred ™

March 4th, 2013
12:20 pm

Bosch: I pointed that out to him on either Thursday or Friday, the same time I reminded him him that I have been incorporated for over 20 years. He ran away. He was whining about having to do human resource paper work. I even offered to point him in the right direction so he could outsource that stuff, which is usually cheaper. He ignored my posts then ran away. He’ll do the same today I predict, just as JM ran away after I pwned him on the terrorist stuff lol.

When they come back it will be with a different talking point from Rush or FOX or whoever they are listening to and they will completely ignore their past stupidity like it never happened.

getalife

March 4th, 2013
2:09 pm

Corporate welfare can be cut.

Jump on board cons and force your party to cut corporate welfare.

Stevie Ray

March 4th, 2013
2:11 pm

Fred ™

March 4th, 2013
2:05 pm

IMO, those jobs are never coming back, unless of course we drop to 3rd world economy status. Globalization and technology pretty much make that an impossibility. Don’t discount the fact that those jobs suck.

If and when the feds decide that government control of assignment of profits and the like, ain’t nothing going back in time..

Keep Up the Good Fight!

March 4th, 2013
2:11 pm

Are you suggesting profitable corporations should bring back all those offshored jobs?

No Stevie. Some companies have however determined that the infrastructure problems, the marketing issues and logistics indicate that they should bring some of those jobs back. The world is a different place than it was 30 years ago. But let’s be clear also: If you want to take the advantage of American market, then you need to contribute to the American economy and its government. Those who don’t should have to take a Carnival cruise.

SBinF

March 4th, 2013
2:12 pm

“That would be technology.”

I suppose you could call Chinese child labor, “technology.”

But that’s still a bit of a stretch.

Class of '98

March 4th, 2013
2:12 pm

“Why doesn’t anyone want to discuss the prime culprit of productivity gains and upward stress on unemployment? That would be technology.”

Stevie Ray, I can only assume this is sarcasm. This kind of insightful, critical thinking would have led to government subsidizing horse carriage makers in the early 1900’s so they could compete with Ford.

Obama shows the mental prowess of a 6th-grader when makes claims like “automation, such as the ATM, costs jobs.”

No, it doesn’t. The companies who build, maintain, and refill the ATM’s also need to hire people. Any losses of bank teller jobs is compensated for by these new jobs.

Again, I think you were being sarcastic, Stevie Ray. I certainly hope so.

getalife

March 4th, 2013
2:12 pm

Why deflect cons.

corporate welfare should be cut and you know it.

Brosephus™

March 4th, 2013
2:13 pm

Just in case it hasn’t been said already…

Companies are supposed to profit. That’s what they do. They don’t give a sh*t about the country, government, or the citizens of the company.

:roll:

Now, I’ll go read the comments as I know there’s some comedic gold waiting to be mined.

Stevie Ray

March 4th, 2013
2:14 pm

Fred ™

March 4th, 2013
2:05 pm

Also, I think these corporations desparately need US markets. Where else can that get $6.99 for a jar of Jif?

RB from Gwinnett

March 4th, 2013
2:14 pm

Welcome, “Can you now?”

You should go back and re-read what I wrote. Moving jobs overseas either has a neutral or positive impact on corporate profit while it stifles GDP because there are no wages for American workers to spend.

And here’s the worse news. It ain’t gonna change any time soon. As long as there are millions of “jobs Americans won’t do” there is somebody on the planet who will and would be thrilled to have the income. Our “less fortunate” class is going to be left further behind.

Welcome to the Occupation

March 4th, 2013
2:14 pm

Jm: “Oh and by the way, when democrats are willing to accept entitlement cuts in actual legislation.. ”

Well, get ready for history then. That is, if this president has anything to do with it. If he’s not stopped (by GOP overplaying of their hand, or by his own progressive caucus to his left), he’s just dying to do just what you say and make those cuts. Nothing he’d love more.

So, he’s your guy.

But do you SEE it, that’s the question.

getalife

March 4th, 2013
2:14 pm

Lets start with the banks and big oil welfare that is waste cons.

You can do it.

Low hanging fruit begging to be cut and you know it.

Class of '98

March 4th, 2013
2:14 pm

“Jump on board cons and force your party to cut corporate welfare.”

I am all for slashing subsidies, but I disagree with your basic premise that allowing corporations to keep more of their EARNED money constitutes welfare.

Welfare is when you give money to people who didn’t earn a single dime of it.

Rightwing Troll

March 4th, 2013
2:15 pm

Lots of “OBAMA’S regulations blah blah blah” but no examples of said regulations… just another day at the office here at Bookman’s libural blog…

Fred ™

March 4th, 2013
2:15 pm

Stevie: We need to institute an import tax or tariff on ALL goods coming into this Country. Right now we reward companies for shipping things over seas. China uses our dollars, the dollars they make from American companies to buy oil, food, and other goods from other Countries. Stuff they could buy as cheap or cheaper from us, they don’t.

People don’t understand, if we cut off their supply of dollars for one month they would be in the toilet. All this smoke and mirrors about them loaning us all this cash is just that. Their currency is WORTHLESS and the whole world knows it.

TaxRatesLowerElsewhere

March 4th, 2013
2:16 pm

Profits are made worldwide. If you want a bigger share of tax revenue, lower the corporate rate. It makes no sense to setup a business in the US if the tax rate is 35% when neighboring countries are at 20% or less. Obama been nothing but caustic to business and should learn to lure corporate business back to the US the way other countries have. Just take a look at Canada’s campaign to attract business with a 20% rate. 20% of something is better than 35% of nothing.

getalife

March 4th, 2013
2:17 pm

98,

I am talking about welfare that you are dying to cut for the poor but nothing on corporate welfare.

Man up and be consistent or shut up about welfare.

Got it.

Cheesy Grits

March 4th, 2013
2:18 pm

Now, I’ll go read the comments as I know there’s some comedic gold waiting to be mined.

Your one of the biggest sources of that daily.

Fred ™

March 4th, 2013
2:18 pm

TaxRatesLowerElsewhere

March 4th, 2013
2:16 pm

Profits are made worldwide. If you want a bigger share of tax revenue, lower the corporate rate.
++++++++++++++++++

How did that work out in Ireland chief?

Rightwing Troll

March 4th, 2013
2:18 pm

So what is not asking profitable corporations to pay taxes then?

I owned a small business for ten years, I had to pay taxes, the only regulatory hurdles I had to contend with came from W’s inept regime…

They call me MISTER JamVet.

March 4th, 2013
2:20 pm

Did someone mention subsidies and VAST corproate welfare?

If anyone needs convincing about the need for campaign finance and political reform, they need look no further than the Internal Revenue Code. The Code is riddled with calculated loopholes, exemptions, credits, accelerated depreciation schedules, deductions, and targeted exceptions-many of unfathomable consequences even to trained experts-that are carefully crafted to benefit one or a handful of companies.

These exist solely because well-paid lobbyists representing fat cat campaign contributors managed to convince a legislator to insert a special provision in long, complicated tax bills.

The origin of many of the corporate tax loopholes are the stuff of Washington legend. It represents one of the worst distortions of our political democracy. Well-heeled lobbyists, who spin through a revolving door between government and K Street and represent high-donor corporate interests, facilitate backroom deals that save their clients millions. The taxpayers, of course, lose commensurate amounts.

[To deal with] specially targeted loopholes [in the tax code, Congress should] remove the anonymity, which would make preservation of the tax advantages much more difficult politically. The OMB should be required to compile a list of the top 50 beneficiaries of each corporate tax expenditure.

http://tinyurl.com/c7o7lbl

Class of '98

March 4th, 2013
2:20 pm

Did you ever notice that most dims have no problem with paying $5 for a 24-oz. cup of coffee at Starbucks but complain endlessly about evil, greedy oil companies who provide us with a GALLON of gasoline for $4?

Welcome to the Occupation

March 4th, 2013
2:21 pm

Jm: “Dividing the economic pie is not a zero sum game

Except in liberals capitalists’ eyes”

Fred ™

March 4th, 2013
2:21 pm

TaxRatesLowerElsewhere? What type of business do you own? What businesses have you tried to start but couldn’t since ‘Obama” is in office?

My business is fine. I’m currently working on opening a restaurant. I don’t see obstacles, I see money and opportunity. I find that most of you on the “Obama kills business” bandwagon don’t have a business nor ever have had one.

Stevie Ray

March 4th, 2013
2:21 pm

Class of ‘98

March 4th, 2013
2:12 pm

WOW! That’s quite a contention. How you can suggest that technology plays no role in unemployment seems rather unfounded particularly if you simply look around you.

How many men did it take 10 years ago to repave a road?

How many manufacturing jobs at Diebold for example, will remain as the market gets to point of diminishing returns with ATMS…say, one could accept money via a little gadget on your iphone or something just a sillly?

Will retail jobs, say in bookstores, be offset by new employment in folks stocking warehouses at Amazon?

How many auto employees does it take to build a car compared to 15 years ago? I presume you can submit some idea where the offset of those jobs resides..

I can go along time with these examples..if it seems sarcastic, perhaps simply looking around you may enlighten your world.

getalife

March 4th, 2013
2:23 pm

Just look at the cons bowing down for corporate welfare.

Shut up about the other welfare and the deficit cons.

Brosephus™

March 4th, 2013
2:23 pm

Jay: Yet conservatives continue to argue that the business climate under President Obama stifles profitability.

RB: When the business climate here makes it easier to ship jobs to other parts of the world, how does that affect corporate profit?

Seems as though it makes it much easier to profit while giving the citizens the shaft. Funny that RB doesn’t affirm or deny the “conservative” position that Obama is bad for corporations though. He merely deflects, as is par for the course here.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

It also seems as though RB may be opening a line of thought to make it harder for companies to ship jobs all over the world in the name of profits in order to help the citizens here. Things that make you say, hmmmmmmmmmm…

————–

Scooter @ 2:01

When has business every had certainty? If there were certainty in the business world, you would never see or hear of a failed business as that person would have been certain of their impending failure and never set up shop. Using “certainty” is a cop-out. I’m not blaming you personally for that, but whenever I hear that being tossed around, I laugh my ass off. I really love it when a rightie uses that excuse and then turns around and blasts Obama about Solyndra. :)

Class of '98

March 4th, 2013
2:25 pm

“I am talking about welfare that you are dying to cut for the poor but nothing on corporate welfare.”

Again, I disagree with your premise that allowing corporations to keep more money that they have EARNED constitutes “welfare”.

Got it?

And by the way, let’s say we slam oil companies with more taxes (i.e. ending what you can “corporate welfare”)

What do you think they would do in response to that? Hmmm, do you think they might just raise prices?

I know thinking more than one level deep is difficult for more dims, but give it a try sometime.

Union

March 4th, 2013
2:25 pm

im sensing a new angle here.. is this in addition to taxing the evil rich or just a whole new angle on going after the evil companies?

corporate profits are also translated into earnings for 401k retirement savings as well. so by taking money away from them we are also taking money away from non governmental retires.. we cannot all have the governmental golden parachute..

Jm

March 4th, 2013
2:25 pm

Occupation

I don’t see any legislation that has passed the senate cutting entitlements

Imaginary world you live in

Stevie Ray

March 4th, 2013
2:25 pm

Fred ™

March 4th, 2013
2:15 pm

I am all for that! I don’t see it bringing back low skilled labor but certainly will level the playing field. Also, many of the accounting tricks and other legal schemes to minimize corp taxes could be a trade off to such tarriff’s…

Welcome to the Occupation

March 4th, 2013
2:26 pm

RB: ” Moving jobs overseas either has a neutral or positive impact on corporate profit ”

That’s contingent on numerous factors, RB. As I said, the key factor is wages and labor protections (i.e. the lack thereof) in the two countries, along with various other things like environmental regulations, transportation and distribution costs, etc.

But, presumably, the corporation would not make the move if the net result on profits were negative. So to that extent, of course, what you say tends to be the case.

Brosephus™

March 4th, 2013
2:26 pm

Your[sic] one of the biggest sources of that daily.

I stand corrected. It came AFTER my post.
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Please get a basic grasp of English before trying to insult someone else. That is, unless you don’t want YOUR, not you’re, insults to be meaningless.
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

F. Sinkwich

March 4th, 2013
2:28 pm

As long as O’bozo insists on implementing his anti-business, redistributionist policies these stats are unlikely to change. Since there exists absolutely no evidence he understands how destructive his euro-marxist philosophy affects markets, the economy will struggle for at least another four years.

BOHICA

March 4th, 2013
2:28 pm

One factor in low wages is the fact that there are more people chasing fewer jobs. This will cause wages to be low. Also, while i concede that the “big guys” are gleaning more profits, it is the small businesses that employs the vast numbers in our workforce. Many a small business person has been reluctant to hire more people. Especially those small companies that employ close to 50 people. The new health mandates are in fact slowing or keeping some business from hiring more people. It all adds up. Is our government helping or hurting us?

SBinF

March 4th, 2013
2:28 pm

Stevie Ray, your logic is making my head hurt.

There are always losers when new technologies are introduced. That doesn’t mean necessarily that employment stress is a necessary expectation from said technological improvement.

Brosephus™

March 4th, 2013
2:29 pm

Class of ‘98: Again, I disagree with your premise that allowing corporations to keep more money that they have EARNED constitutes “welfare”.

Serious question for you along those lines. If that’s not welfare for corporations, is it considered welfare for private citizens to keep more of their money that they have earned?

Class of '98

March 4th, 2013
2:30 pm

“How many men did it take 10 years ago to repave a road?”
I’m not sure. It probably takes men to build and maintain the new road paving equipment.

“one could accept money via a little gadget on your iphone or something just a sillly”
Don’t the smartphone companies and app makers have to hire people to build this hypothetical system?

“How many auto employees does it take to build a car compared to 15 years ago?”
Maybe less. Fantastic. Shouldn’t that mean cars will be cheaper? Which leads to more money in your pocket to buy other goods and services? Which leads to new companies, which leads to new jobs?

I guess you weren’t being sarcastic. So technology is the killer of jobs and the economy?

Maybe we should go back to hunting and gathering. Yes, that’s sarcasm.

Billybob

March 4th, 2013
2:31 pm

thanks jay….proof positive that the middle class is being destroyed by the man who claims to want to help it and proof that he is taking us towards europe where you have the political class and bureaucrats and the well off…….and then everyone else chasing crumbs…..see how easy it is to use common sense…..i urge everyone here to read the communist manifesto which i did recently and you might be shocked at so many parallels to the statist and politicians currently in charge of our country…..we need statesman and not politicians or we are in heep-big-doo-doo….that is all

Class of '98

March 4th, 2013
2:33 pm

” If that’s not welfare for corporations, is it considered welfare for private citizens to keep more of their money that they have earned?”

No. Welfare is taking from those who have earned it to redistribute it to those who did not earn it.

Is this concept really that complicated?

mm

March 4th, 2013
2:33 pm

“American workers have never been more poorly educated relative to international measures”

Ah, the con lie that their gullible voters believe.

Hey Jm, these “uneducated” American workers were performing those jobs before the jobs were moved overseas. In many instances, these “uneducated” American workers had to actually train these foreigners

This “uneducated” theme serves 2 purposes for the cons and their ignorant followers:

1. Convince stupid people to believe foreigners are better educated so the jobs can be moved there.
2. Attack the public school system in the US.

gadem also known as Benghazi

March 4th, 2013
2:33 pm

Kenyan Marxist Socialist policies are destroying this great nation of America….if we could only go back to the times of slavery and indentured servitude. Those were the good ol’ days!!!!

Thought I would say it before some Republican said it…

Brosephus™

March 4th, 2013
2:35 pm

Union: so by taking money away from them we are also taking money away from non governmental retires.. we cannot all have the governmental golden parachute..

Congress created the Federal Employees Retirement System (FERS) in 1986, and it became effective on January 1, 1987. Since that time, new Federal civilian employees who have retirement coverage are covered by FERS.

FERS is a retirement plan that provides benefits from three different sources: a Basic Benefit Plan, Social Security and the Thrift Savings Plan (TSP).

http://www.opm.gov/retirement-services/fers-information/

Here’s how the annuity (Basic Benefit) is calculated. As you see, 1% of the average of your three highest salaries don’t really amount to much if you don’t make much to begin with. The people who benefit the most are Congressmembers, but then again, they make the rules.

http://www.opm.gov/retirement-services/fers-information/computation/

So, when you wanna talk about government, don’t use such a broad brush. Saint Ronnie made sure that federal workers have their retirements at the whim of the markets just as private sector workers do. The only difference is that 1% annuity, but as I said, if you don’t make much then you don’t get much.

Fred ™

March 4th, 2013
2:36 pm

Brocephus: I COULD be mistaken, but I think Cheesy Grits meant that comment in a GOOD way. Like many of your posts are humorous, which they are.

Keep Up the Good Fight!

March 4th, 2013
2:37 pm

Well as long as have a suggestion to go back to slavery, I suspect that is going to be rejected. However, we do seem to be on track to reinstitute modern versions of slavery by another name.

http://www.slaverybyanothername.com/pbs-film/

willie lynch

March 4th, 2013
2:38 pm

So the claim is we regulate too much and we make too much money? Wow! How many oil disasters do we hear about in these oil rich countries? When you look at the oil fields in the middle East how much vegetation and living space are surrounding them?

The fact that we have regulations to govern corporations is why we can have habitable land and water we can drink. Jobs are being shipped overseas because the living conditions of those people are not important to the few who rule in those lands therefore not very many regulations. Those of us in this country who see regulations (safeguards) as the reason jobs are leaving this country are failing to think just a little bit further. Greed is why they are setting up business in other countries. How did we build this country with double the corporate tax rate in our history?

Business has a right to profit and a people have a right to a livable wage. I guess what it boils down to is many people see profit as a right and decent wages as a whim.

Brosephus™

March 4th, 2013
2:38 pm

No. Welfare is taking from those who have earned it to redistribute it to those who did not earn it.

Is this concept really that complicated?

It’s really not that complicated. I was asking that to clarify the whole 47% as moochers thing. If GOP policy has enabled them to keep more of the money they’ve earned, why do some of the right leaning people automatically categorize them as moochers or welfare recipients?

That’s the part that’s complicated in my opinion.

Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes

March 4th, 2013
2:38 pm

UNCLE SAMANTHA

March 4th, 2013
2:39 pm

if i read this chart incorrectly

OBAMA IS GREAT FOR BIG BUSINESS

Fred ™

March 4th, 2013
2:40 pm

Geez Brocephus. You can’t expect ‘98 to answer THAT. It requires knowledge and an understanding of the Neal Boortz phrases he is using……..

Brosephus™

March 4th, 2013
2:40 pm

Fred

If so, then my bad… Context doesn’t translate very well. Maybe I should stop trying to channel my inner Fred.

:)

Mick

March 4th, 2013
2:41 pm

sink

**Since there exists absolutely no evidence he understands how destructive his euro-marxist philosophy affects markets**

What realty do you live in? Congress legislates, try blaming your toadies in the house or mcconnell in the senate where the bar is 60 votes – there’s your destruction…

GuyWritingThis

March 4th, 2013
2:41 pm

Pretty sure government spending is, too.

Fred ™

March 4th, 2013
2:41 pm

willie lynch: LOL I read your 2:38 but thought it was from williebkind. As i was reading I thought I had lost my mind or he had been name jacked.

Anyway, good post.

bookman parrot

March 4th, 2013
2:43 pm

So what do lib propagandists think the ROI for corporations should be?