American workers are getting the smallest slice of the pie on record

[tjscott0]

NBC News:
https://archive.is/xsfPf#selection-1357.0-1357.68
Since 2000, the value of the S&P 500 stock index has gained about 600%. Over the same period, inflation-adjusted worker earnings have climbed just 12.5%.

It is now the least rewarding time to be a worker in the U.S. economy since the government started keeping track.

The share of economic growth captured by labor in the form of compensation like wages fell to a record low last quarter, hitting 52.8%, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, which began recording the statistic in 1947.

The data comes as stock prices continue to hover near all-time highs, while wage growth is barely keeping up with inflation.

Nothing to see here people! Move along!

We all know stock performance is the result of super intelligent erudite CEOs whom receive barely adequate renumeration for their efforts. /sarcasm

Give it to the working class good and hard! The professional class receives a little article from the stock market performance.
Income inequality and the affordable issue are derived by foreign efforts to bring down the Great American Capitalist System!
It’s just a matter of time for the full development of AI to aid the US national surveillance state to bring down those malefactors!
And you thought the Twitter cancellation machine was bad. Or the super enforcement by ICE. Just wait! Elon won’t be able to buy this one as it will be imposed by the government.

Well I got that off my chest. LOL
This post won’t last long so I will post the NBS news article on a different post.

[captainccs]

@tjscott0

Well I got that off my chest. LOL
This post won’t last long so I will post the NBS news article on a different post.

You posted it elsewhere and I replied

NBC News Report of American Worker Share of the Pie

Since 2000, how much has the economy grow? 600%? GoogleAI: No, the economy has not grown by 600% since 2000. The U.S. economy has grown by approximately 74.9% in real terms (adjusted for inflation), while its nominal gross domestic product (GDP) grew from $10.25 trillion in 2000 to about $32.38 trillion, marking a 215.9% nominal increase. [1, 2] To see how that growth compares over time, here is a breakdown of the U.S. economic expansion: Economic Metric Year 2000 Current Level Total…

The Captain

[tjscott0]

@captainccs

You posted it elsewhere and I replied

I’ve been replying on that thread. I am surprised this post has been pulled yet.

[captainccs]

@tjscott0

I’ve been replying on that thread. I am surprised this post has been pulled yet.

You want it pulled?

The Captain

[tjscott0]

No
I seem to offend the powers to be even when my post involves macroeconomics.

Yesterday my post regarding this got pulled.
https://www.morningstar.com/news/marketwatch/20260904176/a-democratic-midterm-sweep-could-make-bonds-the-fourth-quarter-contrarian-play-says-b-of-as-hartnett
A Democratic midterm sweep could make bonds the fourth-quarter contrarian play, says B. of A.'s Hartnett

Lower growth assumptions and weaker stocks would enhance the appeal of bonds, says equity-market strategist and ‘Flow Show’ author

What’s concerning for equities in the event of a Democratic sweep is what Michael Hartnett describes as a shift from populist capitalism to populist socialism and a reversal of the trends toward lower taxes and lighter regulation. The upshot of this would be EPS-negative, lowering earnings per share expectations, Hartnett observes, but, overall, the political changes would challenge the K-shaped wealth boom and the surge of AI capital expenditure.

The thinking behind this call is that, if anticipation of Democratic Party policies leads to lower growth assumptions, this would bring down bond yields, which in turn would weaken the dollar DXY as its interest-rate differential versus other currencies would narrow. So bonds would be a real contrarian call here, especially after this recent period that Hartnett characterizes as the “Anything But Bonds” era.

In fact, the 10-year rolling return from U.S. Treasury bonds is negative-2% - the worst of the last century - and, in his weekly “Flow Show” strategy note, published Friday, Hartnett includes a chart illustrating how negative long-run returns have proved to be excellent entry points in the past, like in December 1959 and September 1981.

Negative long-run returns … great entry points.

Raising short-term rates should have the effect of lowering longer-term yields, and this is why Hartnett thinks we have “peak yields” right now.

Apparently TOO political.

[DrBob2]

@tjscott0

Apparently TOO political.

If you don’t succeed at first…

DB2

[flyerboys]

Boundaries between macroeconomics and politics are like boundaries between the North and South Pacific Oceans, or the quite distinctive bad breaths of Keith and Helen sitting with me at a meeting, a mixture of reality and fantasy and customary beliefs.

[1poorguy]

@tjscott0

Apparently TOO political.

Flyerboys is right. Sometimes (often!) politics affects macroeconomics. And who’s in power at any given time often (usually!) is relevant. It isn’t an attack on either party to comment about bond yields or American workers.

I get the prohibition on politics, but not when it’s coupled with economic concerns and data.