The Purpose of the US Economy is to make the rich richer

[MorkandMindy]

That is the core of neoliberalism, the main type of economy the US has followed from Reagan through to the present.

The founding document of neoliberalism was openly published for all to see in the NY Times in 1970 and people seemed to like it at the time and have been unwilling to change it despite the harm it has done to the country.

Maybe it is time to change it.

 

[MorkandMindy]

Neoliberal economics was launched with the following announcement:

Title: A Friedman doctrine - The Social Responsibility Of Business Is to Increase Its Profits
By Milton Friedman

Published in NY Times September 13th 1970

 

[MorkandMindy]

One thing that surprised me was how few of the general US public even know the concept of Neoliberalism despite being surrounded by it.

And unpacking the consequences of Neoliberalism is a very worthwhile activity.

I'll see what I can do:

Business means basically rich people in control of what the companies do, of how many staff to hire, what to pay them, when to terminate them, what to make and how much to sell the products for.

So the message is that rich people in control have no obligation to anyone except to make themselves richer.

That's no conspiracy theory.

 

[MorkandMindy]

Economies generally grow at a few percent a year, so for business owners to get a lot richer means transferring money from workers to themselves.

And the best way to do that is to move the factory to another country.

For example, car factories in Michigan were moved to Mexico.

The consequences for the workers were firstly loss of their incomes.

And secondly because so many people in the same town had lost their jobs, house prices went down and many houses were even abandoned.

So there was loss of income and loss of capital.

But car company profits increased.

 

[MorkandMindy]

'The Purpose of the US Economy' could be rephrased as: 'What is the overall purpose of the country?'

Observers over the years from Reagan to the present might conclude:

The purpose over the past 4 decades has been to move technology and work and money out of the US and to other countries while making a whole lot of Americans into multimillionaires and multibillionaires.

 

[MorkandMindy]

I think we need Andrew Yang's idea, with a lot of thought put into the actual implementation, to subsidize Americans to do the work instead of sending it all out.

We have an epidemic of depression here and that comes from lack of purpose and lack of work.

At least I think there is a possibility that work for everyone would go a long way to fix the depression and violence problems.

 

[renniks]

One thing that surprised me was how few of the general US public even know the concept of Neoliberalism despite being surrounded by it.

And unpacking the consequences of Neoliberalism is a very worthwhile activity.

I'll see what I can do:

Business means basically rich people in control of what the companies do, of how many staff to hire, what to pay them, when to terminate them, what to make and how much to sell the products for.

So the message is that rich people in control have no obligation to anyone except to make themselves richer.

That's no conspiracy theory.

So should companies try to lose money,? Should the people running the company not be able to decide who to hire? Or what to charge?
What is your point?

 

[SkyWriting]

The founding document of neoliberalism was openly published for all to see in the NY Times in 1970 and people seemed to like it at the time and have been unwilling to change it despite the harm it has done to the country.

Which is evidence of a good economy that has been growing at an ever increasing rate.

 

[Vylo]

So should companies try to lose money,? Should the people running the company not be able to decide who to hire? Or what to charge?
What is your point?

The greater issue is the lack of mutuality. When the company suffers, the workers do, but all too often, when the company thrives, the workers see little to no benefit, or still suffer. CEOs getting 100+% income increases while their workers get 1-3%.

Virtually no one sees an issue with owners/CEOs making more money. They certainly have earned that in most situations. But their value has been inflated so much relative to their workers that it has become ridiculous. The US is not unique or even the worst in this (looking at you India), but we rank quite poorly in income inequality, and the irony is that this drags on the economy, due to consumerism.

 

[MorkandMindy]

... the irony is that this drags on the economy, due to consumerism.

Yes, it seems ironic that an economy designed to make people rich has led to personal, national and international debt (the Current Account).

The problem is a Neoliberal economy is only designed to make the rich richer, and relies on the fictitious 'trickle-down effect' to get money to the rest of the country.

And because it is only shifting money up the economic spectrum it does nothing for the nation overall.

What does help this nation as it does every nation is technological advances.

There was a candidate in the Democratic Party Primaries with a plan for getting the technological advances to help everyone, but he was ignored. So we are still Neoliberal.

 

[renniks]

The greater issue is the lack of mutuality. When the company suffers, the workers do, but all too often, when the company thrives, the workers see little to no benefit, or still suffer. CEOs getting 100+% income increases while their workers get 1-3%.

Virtually no one sees an issue with owners/CEOs making more money. They certainly have earned that in most situations. But their value has been inflated so much relative to their workers that it has become ridiculous. The US is not unique or even the worst in this (looking at you India), but we rank quite poorly in income inequality, and the irony is that this drags on the economy, due to consumerism.

Well in this day and age if you don't like the company you can decide to work for yourself. Are all jobs equally worth the same paycheck? Should the guy who sweeps the floor make the same amount as the CEO?
A living wage would be nice but beyond that there's too many factors to consider to make an across-the-board wage.

 

[Ken-1122]

That is the core of neoliberalism, the main type of economy the US has followed from Reagan through to the present.

The founding document of neoliberalism was openly published for all to see in the NY Times in 1970 and people seemed to like it at the time and have been unwilling to change it despite the harm it has done to the country.

Maybe it is time to change it.

When the rich gets richer, usually the poor and middle class does as well

 

[Ken-1122]

IDK, I supported a family on one income for a lot of years and I was not paid that well. Why are housing prices so high now? Why is everything so high? That's what we have to fix.

The average house built in 1960 was 1,300 sq ft, the average house built today is over 2,000. The average household in 1960 had 1 car, today 3. Today we demand bigger homes, more cars, more clothes, everybody has to have a cell phone, computer, online access, and countless luxuries that weren’t even thought of 60 years ago. The reason nobody can live on 1 income is because we demand a higher standard of living than we did before.

 

[renniks]

The average house built in 1960 was 1,300 sq ft, the average house built today is over 2,000. The average household in 1960 had 1 car, today 3. Today we demand bigger homes, more cars, more clothes, everybody has to have a cell phone, computer, online access, and countless luxuries that weren’t even thought of 60 years ago. The reason nobody can live on 1 income is because we demand a higher standard of living than we did before.

Still not buying it. Even a modest house cost more than you can afford on an average job. And add a car payment... You could buy a house when I got married for 40 grand. Now anything is decent is over 100,000. Wages haven't gone up that much.

 

[RDKirk]

Neoliberal economics was launched with the following announcement:

Title: A Friedman doctrine - The Social Responsibility Of Business Is to Increase Its Profits
By Milton Friedman

Published in NY Times September 13th 1970

Well, yeah.

Is that news to anyone?

 

[RDKirk]

IDK, I supported a family on one income for a lot of years and I was not paid that well. Why are housing prices so high now? Why is everything so high? That's what we have to fix.

Housing costs are so high for precisely the reason stated by the OP. You think the housing industry should operate differently?

 

[rambot]

There is a staggeringly interesting website called "'what happenned in 1971". (The website does not say 'what' but a three letter derivative question in place)
I can't link to it here though the only language issue is in the title. It was fascinating.

The website offers a Loong series of charts that show a lot of chaos and breakdown of a healthy system around or starting right in the year 1971.

 

[RDKirk]

There is a staggeringly interesting website called "'what happenned in 1971". (The website does not say 'what' but a three letter derivative question in place)
I can't link to it here though the only language issue is in the title. It was fascinating.

The website offers a Loong series of charts that show a lot of chaos and breakdown of a healthy system around or starting right in the year 1971.

Does it mention Nixon taking the nation off the gold standard, declaring a nation-wide wage and price freeze, and agreeing to become Saudi Arabia's national bodyguard?

Yeah, lots of things happened around then, basically because the industrial capacity of Europe and Japan had finally caught back up after WWII.

 

[Ken-1122]

Still not buying it. Even a modest house cost more than you can afford on an average job. And add a car payment... You could buy a house when I got married for 40 grand. Now anything is decent is over 100,000. Wages haven't gone up that much.

What was minimum wage in your state when you could buy a house for $40,000? What is it now? I think part of the problem is a lot more being taken out of our paychecks in order to pay for social programs.

 

[MorkandMindy]

Neoliberal economics was launched with the following announcement:

Title: A Friedman doctrine - The Social Responsibility Of Business Is to Increase Its Profits
By Milton Friedman

Published in NY Times September 13th 1970

Well, yeah.

Is that news to anyone?

Yes, unfortunately it is.

I've read political commentaries state that the growing wealth disparity was an unforeseen consequence of the new economics.

I call BS - it's right there in the title.

But the media has only one task and that is to make misleading statements and obfuscations to shape the opinions of sufficient people to ensure the rich get their way.