----- Original Message ----- From: "John D. Giorgis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, September 26, 2004 2:56 PM Subject: Re: Productivity Re: Br!n: some thoughts and quotes.
> Anyhow, its hard to argue from this data that increased productivity is > negatively impacting jobs and wages. That's not my point. My point is that the increase in productivity has not been translated into an increase in salaries. The average salary is still not what it was in 1975. If you include total compensation, then its probably close to even with 1975. During this time, productivity went up about 56%. Why did virtually none of the value of increased productivity per hour worked go to wages and benifits? > As far as the productivity data goes, the US has sustaing 2% + labor > productivity in the nonfarm business sector since 1998. That includes > whopping increases of 4.4% in each of 2002 and 2003. > In fairness productivity did increase pretty steadily between 1957 and 1969 > - although by my eyeballing it,. I think that the current productivity boom > is greater - and had significant job growth at the same time. I only have productivity back to '61, but '61 to '76 showed the greatest rise in productivity of any 15 year period from '61 to '03. The productivity increase from '61 to '76 is 42%. The increase from '88 to '03 is 31%. >But, I also don't think that the current situation is as bad as you describe. Its not horrible now, but the signs for the future are not good. The tax cut, which is focused on the upper income tax payer, should exasperate the problem. Earlier, you mentioned guns and butter in the late '60s. Yet, the deficit, by any measure, was much smaller during that time. There was no two year period that the deficit as a % of GDP went up from the end of WWII to Reagan. Clinton reversed this, and Bush has us back in there. For all of this priming of the pump, employment is still lower than it was when Bush took office. You can use any pejorative terms you want for the improvement in the ecconomy under Clinton. But, it was real and it was not accompanied by inflation or pump priming. Dan M. _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
