Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
8 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Chart of the Year: Changing Distribution of Income Growth During Economic Expansions (Original Post) edhopper Nov 2014 OP
Maddening Prophet 451 Nov 2014 #1
So when was that Ronnie got elected Prez? Hmmmm n/t Tom Rinaldo Nov 2014 #2
Ding, ding, ding. We have a winner. Scuba Nov 2014 #8
This is why DLCers ranting about the "Obama Recovery" look out of touch. Odin2005 Nov 2014 #3
I would say one of the major failings of Obama edhopper Nov 2014 #4
It appears to me that the trend line is independent of the political party in power... badtoworse Nov 2014 #5
That is partly true edhopper Nov 2014 #6
The reason for this is increasing global competition. former9thward Nov 2014 #7

edhopper

(33,579 posts)
4. I would say one of the major failings of Obama
Mon Nov 24, 2014, 12:16 PM
Nov 2014

and the Dems is not rescinding the Bush tax cuts. That and the hands of Wall Street policy have lead to the last data line.

 

badtoworse

(5,957 posts)
5. It appears to me that the trend line is independent of the political party in power...
Mon Nov 24, 2014, 12:38 PM
Nov 2014

...as well as tax rates. Since 1949, the trend has been declining for the bottom 90% and rising for the top 10%. That spans high marginal tax regimes and lowered ones, and it also spans periods of Democratic and Republican domination. This suggests to me that other factors are driving this.

IMO, the root cause is the expansion of the global market place such that products that were previously manufactured only in the US are now being manufactured at lower cost in foreign countries. In 1949, at the start of the graph, Europe and Japan were still recovering from WWII and had limited industrial capability, and the third world countries had not yet started developing into viable locations for new plant. Through the sixties, this meant that the US was basically the only game in town.

This situation gradually changed over the decades making it cheaper to manufacture overseas than domestically. The beneficiaries of the cost reduction were largely wealthy people with ownership or investments in the manufacturing companies. The losers were American workers who were increasingly in competition with foreign workers that would do their job for less money. Increasingly, economic expansion meant building a new plant in China or manufacturing clothing in Sri Lanka. The trade deals like NAFTA were particularly damaging in this regard.

edhopper

(33,579 posts)
6. That is partly true
Mon Nov 24, 2014, 12:44 PM
Nov 2014

but the giant shift to the benefit of the wealthy can clearly be seen as a result tax cuts and deregulation started under Reagan.

Note that with the Clinton tax increase, the trend slightly reversed, only to be squashed under Bush, with Obama doing nothing to change that.

former9thward

(32,006 posts)
7. The reason for this is increasing global competition.
Mon Nov 24, 2014, 12:46 PM
Nov 2014

People in the bottom 90% are in jobs that are affected negatively by global competition. Those in the top 10% are in occupations that benefit by global competition. The U.S. was top dog after WW II. Since then more and more countries can do what we used to do almost exclusively. It is the 'new normal'.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Chart of the Year: Changi...