Pay Rose With Productivity -- And Then It Didn't

[OmahaBlueDog]

Great graphic from "The Pragmatic Progressive Page" on Facebook

[silverweb]

1. Because only shareholders have mattered since then.

[font color="navy" face="Verdana"]n/t

[porphyrian]

2. That's it. n/t

[BOG PERSON]

3. post-war boom

historical trends don't happen because powerful ppl have a bad change of mind

[orwell]

4. This is likely a result...

...of relentless Con attacks on unions and revisions to the tax code to shift wealth and compensation to the top income classes. This went into high gear under Con front man Reagan.

The flat area in the 70's seems primarily due to the stagflation of the decade which flattened wages as a means of propping up sagging corporate profits. It also is likely a result of the baby boom coming full force into the labor pool. In other words, more workers increases competition for jobs and therefore impacts compensation rates.

In can not be overstated how much the core of RepubliCon "principles" is aligned with low labor costs and high capital gains returns. In other words, the unspoken Con is the relentless transfer of productivity benefits to an ever narrowing group of citizens.

It is by design.

[OmahaBlueDog]

5. I think you are mostly correct

1) Loss of American manufacturing jobs in union shops. Manufacturers started moving to the Sun Belt, with it's right-to-work laws, or out of the country to Mexico, and later, China.

2) Growth of lower-wage service jobs.

3) Big leaps in automation and computerization.