You're viewing a single thread.
Is 1971 the timeline split?
Yes this is part of it.
What happened is Nixon fucked up fiat and fucked us all:
Stop perpetuating the gold standard myth. There's as much point having a gold standard as there is any other stable finite chemical.
The problem was neoliberalism/conservatism, which systematically removed all the labor and wealth redistribution policies of the post WW2 era, at the same time as boomers AND women were entering the workforce — higher supply of workers = lower demand and wages — the EU and Japan were rebuilt and competitive, offshoring and automation was gearing up (wage suppression + higher profits for capitalism), the deregulation of financial markets and regulatory/financial capture of government that enabled extreme financial predation, etc, etc.
The gold standard change would be irrelevant if we didn't live in oligarchies masquerading as democracies — where your level of wealth is directly proportional to your level of freedom, speech, and political representation.
I agree, yes, the gold standard sucks. My intention was not really to perpetuate that in any way.
Everything you said is just chefs kiss.
"(wage suppression + higher profits for capitalism)" = they stole prosperity from us.
While topically interesting, a lot of those graphs are either saying the same thing or are misinterpreting an exponential.
Yup this is left wing pseudo science instead of right wing pseudo science. These are just some graphs that don't prove anything without a scientific paper to back it up.
Well what you’re calling left wing psudoscience is an article by Economic Policy Institute: https://www.epi.org/publication/charting-wage-stagnation/
They explain their methodology and data sources in meticilous detail, even more so in their report on how they do; https://www.epi.org/publication/understanding-the-historic-divergence-between-productivity-and-a-typical-workers-pay-why-it-matters-and-why-its-real/
If that’s not enough here’s some more stuff:
I never said it was incorrect but I'm just trying to say that some graphs with some arrows don't prove anything. Thanks for sharing actual factual information.
Agreed. Much love ❤️
"pseudo science"
It's a website with "wtf" in its name, chill. It just shows the degradation of purchase power firstly as a consequence of the 70s oil crisis, and then as a consequence of increased neoliberalism.
i see this often and have ambiguous feelings.
on the one hand yes, this illustrates a huge shift in paradigm of the degree to which laborers are woefully undercompensated in a trend toward a massive wealth gap favoring the wealthy.
on the other, it sort of implies a “good old days” ideal which is utterly unrealistic. as though somehow before 1971 laborers were fairly treated, and if we could “just get back” to that point, everything would be fine.
oppression under capital has existed for centuries, not decades. the implication that Nixon or Reagan are the root of absolutely all of current economic suffering, while enjoyable and tasty to say, is patently untrue.
this graph and that one website are often presented as raw evidence, but the reader is left to draw their own conclusions as to wtf this all means for policy.
best case, the reader gets a “fuck Reagan and the capitalist conservative party” vibe.
worst case, you get totally led astray into thinking that bringing back the gold standard is going to fix every problem with wealth inequality and white supremacy in america or something.
Woah, woah, woah. Here I am just spitting poorly thought out ramblings and you come back with coherent argument! :D
So yes, I totally agree. There is no good old days! Workers were treated like shit. Working in modern day WFH, to put it simply, I'm pampered.
I cite this graph more in context of nobody below a certain age being reasonably able to afford a house (or anything really), unless their parents make the down payment.
"oppression under capital has existed for centuries, not decades.", yes the parallels between today and serfdom are evident, apart from the rather much better living standard (for most of us).
Gold standard sucks, I am just advocating for a new and different system, certainly not an old and worse one!
So I wholeheartedly agree with you.
I'm going to pirate this reply
Laborers weren't fairly treated (in terms of wages, at the very least) before or after that date. It got worse, actually. The problem is that some of those who lived through those times are also saying that the minimum wage is currently too high.
notably, no one who says that is making anywhere near minimum wage
Sometimes they are. It reminds me of the Association of German National Jews.
Slightly less poor people don’t have to be very far up the scale to look down on the slightly more poor. It’s a major part of the conservative playbook after all.
In case you, like me, prefer to have depressing data in the form of a webcomic:
We should add prices for basic need to this chart to show the non believers that there's no reason other than greed for this
Prices are already included in the graph, that's the meaning of "real" wages, i.e. inflation-adjusted
Millennials discover surplus value (1850s concept)
AKA "the only reason you have a job is because they sell what you make for a lot more"
