Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post - Bush's Pro-growth economy

apechild · 01-22-2004, 01:39 PM

Thanks Astrocloud.

The article you posted illustrates some real examples of one of the many factors in the economic equation being discussed here. Poignant anecdotes are always a nice way to add a little color to a discussion, but in a nation of 300 million, they don't always paint a complete picture.

If, in the interest of objectivity and fairness, you would like to offer a more complete perspective, please also post articles describing the increases in real income and standards of living that have come about as a result of falling input prices and rising productivity.

And before you go, allow me to redirect your attention to one excerpt from the above article by Epstein that I think you'll find particularly relevant:

"the vast majority of us don't supply these services -- we purchase them! So if a service job costing $100,000 per year (the American salary) now costs $10,000 (what the foreigner will accept), our real -- that is, inflation-adjusted -- income goes up by the difference. That's because, in this era of fierce competition, nearly all of it gets passed on to the consumer in terms of lower prices...

Let's say the displaced worker gets another job for $60,000. He's down $40,000, while all others have gained $90,000, for a net gain of $50,000.

This outcome is actually no different from a job displacement due to rising productivity. Imagine the worker lost a job in agriculture. At a salary of $100,000, say he produced a thousand bushels of wheat, which now cost only $10,000 to produce because of better technology. This worker is also freed up to contribute in some other way, which we'll value at his new salary of $60,000.

That is how incomes rise. And in this case, distribution of income has become more equal. "

01-22-2004, 01:39 PM	#44 (permalink)
apechild Crazy Location: Vermont	Thanks Astrocloud. The article you posted illustrates some real examples of one of the many factors in the economic equation being discussed here. Poignant anecdotes are always a nice way to add a little color to a discussion, but in a nation of 300 million, they don't always paint a complete picture. If, in the interest of objectivity and fairness, you would like to offer a more complete perspective, please also post articles describing the increases in real income and standards of living that have come about as a result of falling input prices and rising productivity. And before you go, allow me to redirect your attention to one excerpt from the above article by Epstein that I think you'll find particularly relevant: "the vast majority of us don't supply these services -- we purchase them! So if a service job costing $100,000 per year (the American salary) now costs $10,000 (what the foreigner will accept), our real -- that is, inflation-adjusted -- income goes up by the difference. That's because, in this era of fierce competition, nearly all of it gets passed on to the consumer in terms of lower prices... Let's say the displaced worker gets another job for $60,000. He's down $40,000, while all others have gained $90,000, for a net gain of $50,000. This outcome is actually no different from a job displacement due to rising productivity. Imagine the worker lost a job in agriculture. At a salary of $100,000, say he produced a thousand bushels of wheat, which now cost only $10,000 to produce because of better technology. This worker is also freed up to contribute in some other way, which we'll value at his new salary of $60,000. That is how incomes rise. And in this case, distribution of income has become more equal. " __________________ Skwerl. Its wuts fer dinner.