Reply #27: I personally think this graph best depicts ....

[TahitiNut]

... the appalling economic disenfranchisement of the labor force under the Busholini regime. (But it requires some explanation to make it clear.)



First of all, it must be emphasized that only labor creates wealth. The questions then become (1) are people fairly compensated for their labor and (2) how widely distributed is labor compensated at all (i.e. by employment). Because labor has become more productive (i.e. the rate at which labor creates wealth has increased) we see a slightly declining rate of participation in the workforce while, at the same time, the rate at which wealth is created increases. Nonetheless, mere population growth (and reductions in average compensation) has resulted in an average annual growth rate in the number of employed of about 2.1%. What that means is that all other things being equal, we should be able to expect about 2.1% more employed people this month than the same month last year. With a private(non-farm) labor force of 110 million, that means we should see about 2,310,000 more people employed this month than the same month last year. (That, of course, implies an average monthly increase in the number of jobs of about 200,000.)

We don't see that. We see losses and below-average gains. The Busholini Regime has been ruling over the worst decimation of labor since the Great Depression. And it's systemic. Coupled with a 3% (in GDP terms) reduction in labor's fair compensation and an increasingly regressive compensation structure (where CEO's are grossly over-compensated and knowledge workers are grossly under-compensated), labor is getting raped. This is why I call this "plantation economics."