Elon Musk: Always A Douche

[Oexmelin]

Unsurprising that they consider themselves makers, and not takers...

[grumbler]

Unsurprising that they consider themselves makers, and not takers...

In spite of the fact that Tesla took in more in subsidies than it paid in taxes.

[Richard Hakluyt]

Musk is essentially a hugely succesful parasite on the greater American economy. There are lots of these, which is why, despite the huge productivity gains since 1970 ordinary Americans (who are the real generators of the wealth) are not much better off.

[DGuller]

Musk is essentially a hugely succesful parasite on the greater American economy. There are lots of these, which is why, despite the huge productivity gains since 1970 ordinary Americans (who are the real generators of the wealth) are not much better off.

Define "not much better off".

[mongers]

Musk is essentially a hugely succesful parasite on the greater American economy. There are lots of these, which is why, despite the huge productivity gains since 1970 ordinary Americans (who are the real generators of the wealth) are not much better off.

Define "not much better off".

Well don't look to at most people on this forum, think people working two or sometimes even three jobs.

[Richard Hakluyt]

https://www.epi.org/productivity-pay-gap/

Productivity up by 92% since 1979, pay only by 33%; these two used to track each other in the post-WW2 period.

[DGuller]

Musk is essentially a hugely succesful parasite on the greater American economy. There are lots of these, which is why, despite the huge productivity gains since 1970 ordinary Americans (who are the real generators of the wealth) are not much better off.

Define "not much better off".

Well don't look to at most people on this forum, think people working two or sometimes even three jobs.

We can trade anecdotes all day long, but the reason I asked for a definition is because I want something solid to work with.  I'm sure someone had to work two or three jobs in 1970 as well.

[Richard Hakluyt]

Just to add that the pay increase that has taken place has been disproportionately gained by the higher paid 10% :

https://www.epi.org/publication/charting-wage-stagnation/

With the bottom 90% only getting a 15% rise on average.

[Sheilbh]

Also share of GDP to labour:
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LABSHPUSA156NRUG

[DGuller]

https://www.epi.org/productivity-pay-gap/

Productivity up by 92% since 1979, pay only by 33%; these two used to track each other in the post-WW2 period.

That speaks to how the productivity gains are captured.  That doesn't speak to how the workers are not much better off.  A 33% real increase is not nothing.

I'm also not convinced that a post-WW2 economy was a sustainable status quo no matter what. You can't make steel for American wages indefinitely when someone in a much poorer country can make it for much less.

[Richard Hakluyt]

As I say most of that 33% increase has been captured by the top decile of workers, for the rest it is only 15%. There are structural reasons for this of course; but the point remains that the overwhelming majority of US workers have seen very little increase in wages in over 40 years despite the US economy generally doing rather well. I believe that this is at the root of the dreadful politics currently pervading the USA; the oligarchs have been very succesful at placing the blame on layabouts, Haitians or whatever; which we see in the facebook posts of Syt's demented relatives.

[The Minsky Moment]

That doesn't speak to how the workers are not much better off.  A 33% real increase is not nothing.

A 33% increase over 46 years is appalling for a country that has grown at the rate of the US.  And even though that increase is "real" (inflation adjusted) - because key costs like health care and housing have grown faster than inflation, it's not clear workers are much better off even in absolute terms.

A policy stance that basically says we are OK with most Americans having a permanently stagnant standard of living, while the apex of the wealth pyramid reaps the benefits, is a formula for revolution. 

I'm also not convinced that a post-WW2 economy was a sustainable status quo no matter what. You can't make steel for American wages indefinitely when someone in a much poorer country can make it for much less

Americans have been fully employed since 2009 bar the COVID blip.  It certainly is possible for distribution of incomes across all workers and owners to be more equitable.  It requires an elite like the one after WW2 that understands that its own self-interest is best served in the long run by ensuring that the benefits of growth are reasonably and fairly shared across all those who "make" it, as opposed to optimizing how best to grab everything for themselves.

[crazy canuck]

Musk is essentially a hugely succesful parasite on the greater American economy. There are lots of these, which is why, despite the huge productivity gains since 1970 ordinary Americans (who are the real generators of the wealth) are not much better off.

Yes, and our political class gave a big assist by adjusting the tax code to incentivize concentrating economic benefits in the capital class, while the doers (the people who actually generate the wealth) saw little benefit.

So who is the taker? 

[Razgovory]

Musk is essentially a hugely succesful parasite on the greater American economy. There are lots of these, which is why, despite the huge productivity gains since 1970 ordinary Americans (who are the real generators of the wealth) are not much better off.

Define "not much better off".

Well don't look to at most people on this forum, think people working two or sometimes even three jobs.

Most people here are in the top quintile, certainly.  I would consider them elites. 

[Josquius]

It's always an iffy game comparing whether people are better off now or in the past.
As of course on one level we are better off now. Double glazing, central heating, so many medical advances, the Queen back catalogue...
But I do think these things need to be controlled for. Taken as a default uplift.
It's not now vs 1976. It's the now we have vs the now we would have if neo liberalism hadn't wrecked the world.