Thread: Chronic unemployment worse than Great Depression

rich will get richer.. poor will get more poor.

The skilled, the ambitious and the educated will continue to get richer.

Originally Posted by Big Pimpin

The skilled, the ambitious and the educated will continue to get richer.

However they are not immune to making mistakes which could be costly down the road.

Originally Posted by minimal

rich will get richer.. poor will get more poor.

Unless the poor hit the lottery, or become smart enough to turn their life around.

Originally Posted by Big Pimpin

The skilled, the ambitious and the educated will continue to get richer.

That's complete bullshit. A lot of people who don't have jobs right now did everything right and they were fucked by Wall Street scumbags and assholes who bought houses they couldn't afford.

Originally Posted by Big Pimpin

The skilled, the ambitious and the educated will continue to get richer.

No.

There has been a change.

Yes, there are too many lawyers in the US, and less are needed, and they often don't help society as a whole.

But lawyers are working at car washes and the days of becoming a partner are gone. It's called the "non-partner" career track. As I said, we don't need so many lawyers and I'm not a fan of them.

Here is a blog about unemployed law school grads were are...or were...."ambitious" or "educated" that have $100K+ debt, and are unemployed or underemployed: shillingmesoftly is the name of the blog.

MBAs: too many of them too. Worth getting? Not sure. Unemployment for them is around 16% depending on how it's calculated.

Skilled tradesman like carpenters, welders and electricians are having a rough time as well.

We're in a new paradigm.

I was let go a month ago. Ive put in countless apps and not one fucking call yet. Oh wait I did get an email back saying I wasnt qualified to push a button in a factory and I have 9 yrs of factory experience. But around here there isnt shit anyway, unless you want to work for $7 or $8 an hour. Who the fuck can raise a family on that?

It's always someone else's fault, it's never the individuals fault they are on food stamps, welfare, WIC, 99 weeks of unemployment and/or lost their home to an interest only mortgage they signed up for willingly.

It's the government's fault

It's Bush's fault

It's big businesses fault

It's the banks fault

It's my bosses fault


It's never:

I shouldn't have knocked that bitch up when I was 18

I shouldn't have got that degree in Non-Profit Organizations

I should have put the dope and booze down and graduated HS or college

I should have went to college instead getting that $8/hr job so I could get a new car

I shouldn't have had 3 kids when I couldn't even afford the first one



The list goes on and but I'll be go to hell if the majority of the 44 million people currently on food stamps aren't in that situation because of multiple piss poor decisions of their own.

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Big Pimpin again.

Originally Posted by Big Pimpin

It's always someone else's fault, it's never the individuals fault they are on food stamps, welfare, WIC, 99 weeks of unemployment and/or lost their home to an interest only mortgage they signed up for willingly.

It's the government's fault

It's Bush's fault

It's big businesses fault

It's the banks fault

It's my bosses fault


It's never:

I shouldn't have knocked that bitch up when I was 18

I shouldn't have got that degree in Non-Profit Organizations

I should have put the dope and booze down and graduated HS or college

I should have went to college instead getting that $8/hr job so I could get a new car

I shouldn't have had 3 kids when I couldn't even afford the first one



The list goes on and but I'll be go to hell if the majority of the 44 million people currently on food stamps aren't in that situation because of multiple piss poor decisions of their own.

True. But, this shit is scary. The true rate of unemployment probably isn't that far off from what it was in the GD. People like myself, who have given up on finding a gig in their field and are no longer filing for UE benefits, are not even factored into the UE rate anymore. The 9.1% rate doesn't even come close to showing the true picture. Nothing is improving either. When we're talking about a double dip recession, 3 years into a recession, it's pretty friggin serious. It's really a depression.

Originally Posted by Big Smoothy

No.

There has been a change.

Yes, there are too many lawyers in the US, and less are needed, and they often don't help society as a whole.

But lawyers are working at car washes and the days of becoming a partner are gone. It's called the "non-partner" career track. As I said, we don't need so many lawyers and I'm not a fan of them.

Here is a blog about unemployed law school grads were are...or were...."ambitious" or "educated" that have $100K+ debt, and are unemployed or underemployed: shillingmesoftly is the name of the blog.

MBAs: too many of them too. Worth getting? Not sure. Unemployment for them is around 16% depending on how it's calculated.

Skilled tradesman like carpenters, welders and electricians are having a rough time as well.

We're in a new paradigm.

JDs and MBAs are only worth it if you attend a top tier school or get a free ride on tuition IMHO.

Originally Posted by Big Pimpin

It's always someone else's fault, it's never the individuals fault they are on food stamps, welfare, WIC, 99 weeks of unemployment and/or lost their home to an interest only mortgage they signed up for willingly.

It's the government's fault

It's Bush's fault

It's big businesses fault

It's the banks fault

It's my bosses fault

* Yes it is the governments fault for not protecting the citizens of this country by controlling wall street, the US banking system or and MNE's and TNE's that operate in the US. corporations are a product of government, they were invented by government they did not exist before.

* the lack of jobs is not Bush's fault, if you check the record the recession of 2001 was also followed by a jobless recovery.

* Part of the blame is on big business, they are there to provide goods and/or services to the customer, they do not exist to serve the shareholders however in the US that is who they serve.

* Privatization decreases the share of income that goes to labor, the money flows to the top while the workers are at the mercy of wage increases based on the flawed and outdated CPI.


If you had ever read any of the documents and annual reports from the OECD and the ILO from say the past 20-30 years they all say the same thing. CEO pay in the US is substantially higher than CEO's in any other OECD country, US CEO's make several times more than their foreign counter parts. wage inequality in the US is a major factor wages at the bottom and the 2 lower income quintiles have remained stagnant and decreased in some markets once adjusted for inflation. there are reports on this from economists from all over the world, the OECD, the ILO and the FRB stating all of this. they also talk about the differences in wages from metro and non-metro areas. in terms of economics the metro area carries the non-metro areas as the concentration of industry and jobs are there.

here are some key stats: 1980 is the baseline for a lot of economic data as that's when the US joined the OECD.

1970 - Median Home Price - $26,000 : Median Household Income - $8,730
Dow Hi was 842 - Inflation was at 3%

1980 - Median Home Price - $76,000 : Median Household Income - $17,000
Dow Hi was 1000 - Inflation ranged from 11-13%

1990 - Median Home Price - $125,000 : Median Household Income - $29,900
Dow Hi was 3000 - Inflation was at 3%

2000 - Median Home Price - $207,000 : Median Household Income - $42,000
Dow Hi was 11,000 - Inflation was at 3%

2010 - Median Home Price - $215,000 : Median Household Income - $49,997
Dow Hi was 12,000 - Inflation was at 1.6%


* A new house cost 826% more in 2010 than in 1970. That means a new house in 2010 is 12 times more expensive than one in 1970. By comparison, the median household income increased 565% between 1970 and 2010 AND this is going from 1 to 2 wager earners.

* the avg new car cost $3,900 in 1970 in 2010 it is 28,400

* College tuition and fees have increased almost 600% from 1982-2010

* Personal Savings Rate in 1980 was 12% in 2007 it was 2%

* In 1970 the US spent 7.6% of GDP on health care and in 2007 it was 16%. The average family premium for health insurance has doubled since 1999. From 2000-2007 Profits At The Largest Publicly Traded Health Insurance Companies rose 428%.

* The price of gas increased from $.36 in 1970 to $2.20-$3.05 in 2006. The cost of an average new car was $3,900 in 1970 and in 2006 it was $24,000 an increase of 600%.

* When adjusted for inflation that median household income of $49,997 in 2010 has the same purchasing power as $18,893.10 in 1980.

* When adjusted for inflation the federal minimum hourly wage of $7.25 has the same purchasing power of $2.74 in 1980.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Your lack of knowledge in this subject is very poor on average with "middle america". But that is not really your fault, this stuff is not taught in public schools for a reason, to keep the masses ignorant.

the media in the US is highly controlled just like it is in all other countries with the exception of the Internet surprisingly. military contractors run network tv, the shows that are on are specifically designed to appease and pacify. social darwinism has been ingrained in our culture via various forms of media also.

self-learning of economics is not encouraged in western society in general the masses are in awe of things that are complex in nature, people are scared to ask basic questions for fear of being labeled stupid, etc. this is further re-inforced by social darwinsim. I have traveled all of the world and the US is the only place I have ever been were those that excel in primary and secondary education are ostracized, while those with beauty and athletic ability are idolized.

Originally Posted by GearsMcGilf

True. But, this shit is scary. The true rate of unemployment probably isn't that far off from what it was in the GD. People like myself, who have given up on finding a gig in their field and are no longer filing for UE benefits, are not even factored into the UE rate anymore. The 9.1% rate doesn't even come close to showing the true picture. Nothing is improving either. When we're talking about a double dip recession, 3 years into a recession, it's pretty friggin serious. It's really a depression.

So, which one of Big Pimpin's reasons did you lose your job:

I shouldn't have knocked that bitch up when I was 18

I shouldn't have got that degree in Non-Profit Organizations

I should have put the dope and booze down and graduated HS or college

I should have went to college instead getting that $8/hr job so I could get a new car

I shouldn't have had 3 kids when I couldn't even afford the first one


Don't worry, though, gears. Employment is sure to pick up now, 6 months after the job creators were given a nice tax cut to spark growth. That's what those cuts were for, right?

BTW, what was your industry?

Originally Posted by lnvanry

JDs and MBAs are only worth it if you attend a top tier school or get a free ride on tuition IMHO.

Aboslutely true, Invanry.

It's got to be top-tier.

Big Pimpin,

My post was about skilled and educated folks and people that always worked, that are now unemployed or underemployed.

I am not talking about the easy going laid-back folks who are riding UE bennies out or other entitlements.

My relatives have a lot to lose: a house they have paid into for many years, supporting a family, saving anything for when they are old.

As I said, I firmly believe we're in a new paradigm.

Originally Posted by Big Smoothy

As I said, I firmly believe we're in a new paradigm.

that's an understatement Smoothy....many just don't get it, the math just isn't there.....

we have a "consumption" based economy yet 50% of the households in the country makes less than $46K a year, and only 20% makes more than $80K. add in 1-2 kids to those median income households and they automatically fall into the working poor category as that income is just barely 2x the federal poverty level. wage earners on the lower end of the pay scale will fall into poverty. the average per capita income in the US is $25K or $9,100 in 1980 dollars.

with stagnant wages there is no "extra" money for consumption beyond the necessities. and now that housing is a bust there is no wealth to be generated from that for the middle class so the personal savings rate has to increase and it has the past 2 years and the GDP has dropped even lower, this will continue for years. factor in that over the decades most company's have done away with pensions in favor of 401K's. but now the majority of company's have done away with the company match or reduced it and the majority of LMI families do not contribute anyway, they simply don't have it.

only 49% of the US population makes annual contributions to various IRA's and it's not the 50% of the US pop that makes $46k or less a year.

the slow down in the economy causes businesses in the service sector to not invest/expand their operations. this means no jobs for many now or around the corner...for some there will be part time and seasonal work.

revolving credit has been cut off to the middle class, the banks will not lend to them because they have no equity in the home anymore and wages are stagnant for all but those in sales or the upper levels of management (district and up).

more company's are shifting a greater percentage of health care costs onto the employee by giving minimum wage increases based on the CPI or below and by reducing employer contributions to various retirement plans. by 2020 health care costs are expected to double what they are now (who needs health care reform lol). when you take into account the economic data (falling GDP in all OECD countries, labors share of the national incomes, stagnant wages) from the past 30 years, the current economy and outlook many people in the US today are never going to make any more money than they are today.

in decades to come the US is going to be in a sad state of affairs when 50% of the country has no monies or real savings for "retirement". but retirement wasn't really meant for low wage earners, they are expected to work until they die.

monetary policy from the FRB has once again created another bubble that will burst eventually. below are some parts from the mission statement on the FRB's website:

To strike a balance between private interests of banks and the centralized responsibility of government

To address the problem of banking panics

maximum employment

To supervise and regulate banking institutions

To protect the credit rights of consumers

To strengthen U.S. standing in the world economy

* they have done none of the above

Originally Posted by Dale Mabry

So, which one of Big Pimpin's reasons did you lose your job:

Don't worry, though, gears. Employment is sure to pick up now, 6 months after the job creators were given a nice tax cut to spark growth. That's what those cuts were for, right?

BTW, what was your industry?

I hope so. If the tax cuts don't work, maybe another round of bailouts and more borrowing and spending, coupled with some higher taxes will help. Never failed to spur growth before.

None of those reasons seem to apply. I've had my share of booze & dope, but still managed to graduate.

I was a banker, specifically in commercial real estate lending. lol That was one helluva place to be when the shit hit the fan. That position is all but extinct today.

The new paradigm is that only those with extraordinary skills or adaption will make it in the next century. My daughter will be trilingual because that is an extraordinary skill that most americans don't have. No matter if she decides to be a physicist who is in short supply or a traditional banker. Unfortunately, how many middle income earners have the opportunity to provide that to their kids?


The current job seekers who have been trained to seek conventional careers are entering a workplace that is alien to every previous generation. Lot's of educated and hardworking people cannot find jobs, unless it is minimum wage. Granted, I am in a specialty that has a huge demand ( internal medicine and willing to do research) but I'm not fooling myself. I'm taking a 5 hourly per week course through the Claro Initiative so I can add spanish to my armortarium of languages. I may get fed up and want to go practice in Costa Rica, who knows. The same diversity I approached my undergrad when I thought I was only going to be an analytical chemist. I made sure I took many many other liberal arts electives, software programming etc. in case I couldn't cut it as a chemist.

My brother's experience bought it home. He works for a international company as a consultaant physicist and it wasn't enough that he had a physics degree from the top university in the country ( princeton), they only hired him because he had that and spoke chinese and spanish flluently ( he had the foresight to major in spanish as well ). His clients are major univerities in Santiago, Chile, etc and the Pacific rim. He beat out his fellow americans from MIT, Stanford etc who had more impressive resumes just because of this "extraordinary skill." They had Phds, he only had a B.S. in theoretical physics from Princeton.

Originally Posted by GearsMcGilf

I hope so. If the tax cuts don't work, maybe another round of bailouts and more borrowing and spending, coupled with some higher taxes will help. Never failed to spur growth before.

None of those reasons seem to apply. I've had my share of booze & dope, but still managed to graduate.

I was a banker, specifically in commercial real estate lending. lol That was one helluva place to be when the shit hit the fan. That position is all but extinct today.

I'd be surprised if the government got involved, they are trying to cut spending. The only way they do is if they raise revenue in the short term, which the GOP has stated is a non-starter.

Originally Posted by Big Pimpin

It's always someone else's fault, it's never the individuals fault they are on food stamps, welfare, WIC, 99 weeks of unemployment and/or lost their home to an interest only mortgage they signed up for willingly.

It's the government's fault

It's Bush's fault

It's big businesses fault

It's the banks fault

It's my bosses fault


It's never:

I shouldn't have knocked that bitch up when I was 18

I shouldn't have got that degree in Non-Profit Organizations

I should have put the dope and booze down and graduated HS or college

I should have went to college instead getting that $8/hr job so I could get a new car

I shouldn't have had 3 kids when I couldn't even afford the first one



The list goes on and but I'll be go to hell if the majority of the 44 million people currently on food stamps aren't in that situation because of multiple piss poor decisions of their own.

This is the reality people REFUSE to face or admit to. I get really ticked at a lot of people who are on the "left" that seem to continually fall into this category but it is far more reaching than that, there are some useless as right wingers too, I have met many. So you fucked around in HS, college getting that retarded philosophy degree dreaming about a PhD you can't afford... guess what, deal with you USELESS FUCK-STAIN and quit your fucking whining!!!!! Your dumbass is not my problem, you are your own problem and should man the fuck up to it. End rant/

Originally Posted by LAM

* Yes it is the governments fault for not protecting the citizens of this country by controlling wall street, the US banking system or and MNE's and TNE's that operate in the US. corporations are a product of government, they were invented by government they did not exist before.

* the lack of jobs is not Bush's fault, if you check the record the recession of 2001 was also followed by a jobless recovery.

* Part of the blame is on big business, they are there to provide goods and/or services to the customer, they do not exist to serve the shareholders however in the US that is who they serve.

* Privatization decreases the share of income that goes to labor, the money flows to the top while the workers are at the mercy of wage increases based on the flawed and outdated CPI.


If you had ever read any of the documents and annual reports from the OECD and the ILO from say the past 20-30 years they all say the same thing. CEO pay in the US is substantially higher than CEO's in any other OECD country, US CEO's make several times more than their foreign counter parts. wage inequality in the US is a major factor wages at the bottom and the 2 lower income quintiles have remained stagnant and decreased in some markets once adjusted for inflation. there are reports on this from economists from all over the world, the OECD, the ILO and the FRB stating all of this. they also talk about the differences in wages from metro and non-metro areas. in terms of economics the metro area carries the non-metro areas as the concentration of industry and jobs are there.

here are some key stats: 1980 is the baseline for a lot of economic data as that's when the US joined the OECD.

1970 - Median Home Price - $26,000 : Median Household Income - $8,730
Dow Hi was 842 - Inflation was at 3%

1980 - Median Home Price - $76,000 : Median Household Income - $17,000
Dow Hi was 1000 - Inflation ranged from 11-13%

1990 - Median Home Price - $125,000 : Median Household Income - $29,900
Dow Hi was 3000 - Inflation was at 3%

2000 - Median Home Price - $207,000 : Median Household Income - $42,000
Dow Hi was 11,000 - Inflation was at 3%

2010 - Median Home Price - $215,000 : Median Household Income - $49,997
Dow Hi was 12,000 - Inflation was at 1.6%


* A new house cost 826% more in 2010 than in 1970. That means a new house in 2010 is 12 times more expensive than one in 1970. By comparison, the median household income increased 565% between 1970 and 2010 AND this is going from 1 to 2 wager earners.

* the avg new car cost $3,900 in 1970 in 2010 it is 28,400

* College tuition and fees have increased almost 600% from 1982-2010

* Personal Savings Rate in 1980 was 12% in 2007 it was 2%

* In 1970 the US spent 7.6% of GDP on health care and in 2007 it was 16%. The average family premium for health insurance has doubled since 1999. From 2000-2007 Profits At The Largest Publicly Traded Health Insurance Companies rose 428%.

* The price of gas increased from $.36 in 1970 to $2.20-$3.05 in 2006. The cost of an average new car was $3,900 in 1970 and in 2006 it was $24,000 an increase of 600%.

* When adjusted for inflation that median household income of $49,997 in 2010 has the same purchasing power as $18,893.10 in 1980.

* When adjusted for inflation the federal minimum hourly wage of $7.25 has the same purchasing power of $2.74 in 1980.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Your lack of knowledge in this subject is very poor on average with "middle america". But that is not really your fault, this stuff is not taught in public schools for a reason, to keep the masses ignorant.

the media in the US is highly controlled just like it is in all other countries with the exception of the Internet surprisingly. military contractors run network tv, the shows that are on are specifically designed to appease and pacify. social darwinism has been ingrained in our culture via various forms of media also.

self-learning of economics is not encouraged in western society in general the masses are in awe of things that are complex in nature, people are scared to ask basic questions for fear of being labeled stupid, etc. this is further re-inforced by social darwinsim. I have traveled all of the world and the US is the only place I have ever been were those that excel in primary and secondary education are ostracized, while those with beauty and athletic ability are idolized.

Though we do not see eye to eye, I cannot ignorantly look past the facts. The US system, economy and government are flawed and needs a complete overhaul. What this shows is an unsustainable path; now I have a few rough ideas what could "help" but this is a very deep rooted problem. The media is a huge, HUGE issue that drives how and why people vote; there is little free thinking that goes on because information like this is twisted well before it gets to people. Sad as it is, we barely stand a chance against it with networks like CNN, MSNBC, Fox News and the list goes on. This is my typical thought as we inch closer to failure...

Originally Posted by Dale Mabry

I'd be surprised if the government got involved, they are trying to cut spending. The only way they do is if they raise revenue in the short term, which the GOP has stated is a non-starter.

The polarity of the two parties is getting to be very annoying as it produces no discernible results either positive or negative in retrospect to where we are currently. Simplification of the tax code and removal of many if not all deductions is a revenue generator, the idea that half or more of the IRS will be out of a job overnight will be a permanent stopgap in that ever going through in my eyes. It actually pissed me off as a fiscal conservative that those on the right can't see that a two pronged approach is necessary, raising revenue through simplification of the tax code and economic growth and the lowering of corporate taxes and dividends/inheritance to spur job growth and make investment in America attractive again. Is this the best option, I believe it is but that remains to be seen, I am no economic guru I just know a little about a little .

yep, the current economic situation is multifaceted, and there is no one solution that is really going to make a difference at all. neo-liberal economic policies have been in place for 30 years and many people at the top are making far too much money to allow any kinds of drastic changes to be made. money = power it has has and it always will. the more money a person or industry has the more power and influence they have.

many things have to be changed, but one of the major problems is the marriage of big-business and the fed gov. most of the politicians on both sides are bought and paid for by one business or industry or another.

Karl Marxx was right, he called it. he said "when" the gov in america becomes in-twined with the markets it would be the end of democracy and capitalism and that's pretty much what is going on today. many can't see past the illusions forced upon on us by the various forms of media.

the US is a nation of excess, where more is always better but that is usually not the case, there is always a point of diminishing returns. wall street with the backing of the FRB since the early 1900's has been the root cause of every recession in this country, and with each recession things get worst and worst for the bottom 50% of the US population. those at the top recover any financial loses in months after recessions those at the bottom, don't recover, ever....

having an excess of labor on one end and a surplus of idle capital on the other makes no sense, and in the interim the infrastructure of the country is falling apart.

Bandaid woman that was a very insightful post at post #18.

LAM, thanks for the info on the OECD.

Originally Posted by Big Smoothy

Bandaid woman that was a very insightful post at post #18.

LAM, thanks for the info on the OECD.

no problem at all. I will send more but have been swamped this week...did you ever get around to reading that study that I sent you on how hideous fonts can increase reading comprehension?

Well, LAM & Big Pimpin,

In addition to unemployment being worse than the Great Deppression, housing is now worse than the Great Deppression. And it hasn't hit bottom, yet.

US Housing Crisis Is Now Worse Than Great Depression

Published: Tuesday, 14 Jun 2011
By: Jeff Cox
CNBC.com Staff Writer

It's official: The housing crisis that began in 2006 and has recently entered a double dip is now worse than the Great Depression.

Prices have fallen some 33 percent since the market began its collapse, greater than the 31 percent fall that began in the late 1920s and culminated in the early 1930s, according to Case-Shiller data.

The news comes as the Federal Reserve considers whether the economy has regained enough strength to stand on its own and as unemployment remains at a still-elevated 9.1 percent, throwing into question whether the recovery is real.

"The sharp fall in house prices in the first quarter provided further confirmation that this housing crash has been larger and faster than the one during the Great Depression," Paul Dales, senior economist at Capital Economics in Toronto, wrote in research for clients.

According to Case-Shiller, which provides the most closely followed housing industry data, prices dropped 1.9 percent in the first quarter, a move that the firm interpreted as a clear double dip in prices.

Entire: News Headlines

Originally Posted by Big Pimpin

The skilled, the ambitious and the educated will continue to get richer.

here here

Housing is fucked and nowhere near the bottom. Plan on another 25-40% drop in values in most major markets in the next 10 years.

Originally Posted by oufinny

It actually pissed me off as a fiscal conservative that those on the right can't see that a two pronged approach is necessary, raising revenue through simplification of the tax code and economic growth and the lowering of corporate taxes and dividends/inheritance to spur job growth and make investment in America attractive again. Is this the best option, I believe it is but that remains to be seen, I am no economic guru I just know a little about a little .

from what I have found there are many problems in the US which over the decades have had a negative cumulative effect on unemployment and wages.

* Monetary policy from the FRB - inflation due to the amount of US currency in circulation and keeping interest rates to low for far too long

* Privatization - reduces the number of jobs in exchange for fewer higher paying jobs. this decreases the share of income to labour in terms of the national income. See the paper that I attached below.

* CPI - no longer effective for use to determining wage adjustments. the CPI tries to adjust wages in a linear manner when average expenses do not increase in the same manner. This comes up over and over in OECD reports regarding wage inequality and stagnant income in the US. CPI is outdated and ineffective.

* Lack of bargaining power for wage adjustments. the lack of alternative employment options, right to work laws, etc. OECD reports countries with unionization rates lower than 30% suffer from lower incomes.

* Taxation - privatization decreases labors share of the national income for those whose only incomes comes in the form of wages. so there are reduced tax receipts coming into the IRS from wages, those at the top pay a much lower effective tax rate when compared to incomes. they have multiple "income" streams many taxed at significantly lower rates than regular income strictly from wages.

* constantly expanding military complex - the US budget for military is more than all other countries combined. now at close to 4% of GDP that is the same percentage as the amount of taxes collected from US corps. see the table below for the list of OECD countries and taxes collected as a percentage of GDP.

* Trade imbalances - the US does not trade evenly with any OECD countries this has various negative effects on account balances both government and public. budget deficits also permit the reduction of taxes on capital which increases the after-tax rate of return further increasing income inequality from the bottom to the top.


http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/4552/1/Priv...Industries.pdf

http://www.unc.edu/~nielsen/soci850/odocs/ajs01.pdf

http://www.tuac.org/en/public/e-docs...ent_news.phtml