WHAT’S WRONG WITH THIS PICTURE?

Much blame has been placed on the Obama administration for not creating enough new jobs and to lower the high employment rate which seems to stay at a stubborn 9.2%.

Yet corporate profits according to the news this morning are booming, but they are not hiring; why? It appears corporate America has left the Great Recession but the average American is still stuck in the mud.

OVERSEAS EXPANSION appears to be where the big money is for the corporations. Wages and salaries accounted for just 1 % of economic growth in the first 18 months after economists declared that the recession had ended in June 2009.

Yet in the same period after the 2001 recession, wages and salaries accounted for 15 %. They were 50% after the ’91-’92 recession and 25 % after the ’81-’82 recession.

However, corporate profits, by contrast, accounted for a unprecendented 88% of economic growth during those first 18 months, compared with 53% after the 2001 recession.

The reason for the huge corporate profits and a weak labor market is U.S. corporations are expanding overseas, not much at home.

McDonald’s and Caterpillar which just reported record earnings claim overseas sales growth outperformed the U.S. in the last quarter.

U.S. based overseas companies in the 2000s added 2.4 million jobs and cut 2.9 million jobs in the U.S.  Back home companies are squeezing more productivity out of staffs thinned out by layoffs during the recession; don’t need to hire, don’t need to be  generous with pay raises because they know their employees have nowhere to go. Companies not sure about consumer spending are holding onto $1.9  trillion in cash they’ve accumulated.

Caterpillar’s second-quarter earnings shot up 44%, General Electric, which has paid no taxes for several years, earnings were up 21% to $3.76 ( and Republicans don’t think we need to close tax loop-holes) and McDonald’s quarterly earnings increased 15%.

I feel sorry for my kids, grandkids and future generations how they are going to make a living.  To me the profits are a double-edged sword, hate to see the loss of jobs, but love those stock dividends.  And that’s what companies must do is to make their stock attractive to buyers and that is done by giving higher dividends at the expense of the American worker.

Wasn’t NAFTA supposed to create jobs in this country?  The bill was supposed to open more opportunities for U.S. companies to ship more goods overseas, more markets, instead we shipped our companies overseas.

 

Advertisements

10 thoughts on “WHAT’S WRONG WITH THIS PICTURE?

  1. If I didn’t know better I would think you were blaming President Bush Sr. for Nafta…. but….”Clinton signed it into law on December 8, 1993; it went into effect on January 1, 1994.Clinton while signing the NAFTA bill stated: “…NAFTA means jobs. American jobs, and good-paying American jobs. If I didn’t believe that, I wouldn’t support this agreement.”.

    • Jack are you getting senile? How many times have I written on this blog and in the STAR the worst thing Clinton did was propose NAFTA? I also have said I knew it had to be a bad bill when the Republicans agreed to suport it without any fight, and I was right on both counts. By the way weren’t your boys in control of Congress at that time?

  2. Yet in the same period after the 2001 recession, wages and salaries accounted for 15 %. They were 50% after the ’91-’92 recession and 25 % after the ’81-’82 recession. I could be wrong, but these were years when republicans were president. Jack beat me to it, I was going to post the same thing.

    • I guess I didn’t make my point strong enough; the fact of the matter is no matter who the future presidents will be, Democrat or Republican we cannot stop the bleeding from corporate America with their greed going overseas taking what manufacturing jobs are left in this country.

  3. “stop the bleeding from corporate America with their greed going overseas taking what manufacturing jobs are left in this country.”

    lower the corporate tax rate here and you can.

    • Matt I agree with the first part of your post, but the second part won’t work no matter how much you lower their rate; you said it greed. Corporate America has been given more than their share of breaks; they asked for accelarated depreciation on new equipment so they could hire more, so they purchased equipment which could get the job done as well as a human, and laid people off. The corporate tax rate has been lowered since Reagean took office.

      • Corporate america is owned by the shareholders who are all of us. Most people who have saved their own money for retirement or something else own stock in these companies. As they do good, the shareholders do good. So if the companies benefit so should the shareholders (who is all of us).

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s