Attention Marxists: Labor's Share Of National Income Drops To Lowest In History

Tyler Durden's picture

Your rating: None

- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Sat, 06/04/2011 - 07:25 | 1338962 pan-the-ist
pan-the-ist's picture

So, you would take a way the right of a wealthy person to own and operate multiple businesses? Or to sit on the boards of multiple businesses that person has a large stake in?

Sat, 06/04/2011 - 13:20 | 1339388 Founders Keeper
Founders Keeper's picture

Hi Pan.

Check into US antitrust laws. That should answer your questions.


Sat, 06/04/2011 - 10:26 | 1339106 tmosley
tmosley's picture

No, you can't restrict ANY form of free association, whoever it is doing the associating.

However, unions ARE NOT the owners of the businesses they work for.  They CAN NOT force the owners to require that new workers join their organization.  Nor can they loiter or destroy property if their entire organization is fired by those who own those businesses (for ANY reason they want, including simply belonging to the organization).

There are very clear boundaries to the behavior of individuals in society that are dictated by the principles of self ownership and ownership of property (ie NATURAL LAW).  If legislation does not respect this, then the system will fall.

Sat, 06/04/2011 - 13:52 | 1339452 Founders Keeper
Founders Keeper's picture


[No, you can't restrict ANY form of free association, whoever it is doing the associating.]---tmosely

Hi mosely.

We disagree. IMO, No public sector Unions.

Private sector Unions have recourse for grievances, the leverage of the market place against management/owners. The public sector employees have no such leverage.

Yes, public sector employees must have recourse for grievances, and may do so as a group or in "association." Their recourse however is the public ballot box. 

Does the US Navy have a Union? Come on mosely, don't be silly.


Sat, 06/04/2011 - 14:00 | 1339478 tmosley
tmosley's picture

Understand that all people have the right to associate with as they like.

In an ideal system, public unions would not exist, simply because there would be no public employees.  That is the source of the problem here.

Governments, as entities that deny the rights of others, do not have rights.

Sat, 06/04/2011 - 14:23 | 1339541 Founders Keeper
Founders Keeper's picture




By the way. Good post upstairs about the Aztecs.

Funny how the libs insist all Native Americans lived in a state of peaceful, non-violent, democratic utopia.

To the article at large. I submit our Founders would be appalled at today's ratio of rich vs poor.

For the Marxists however, this works to their advantage.


Sat, 06/04/2011 - 15:53 | 1339754 Shell Game
Shell Game's picture

To the article at large. I submit our Founders would be appalled at today's ratio of rich vs poor.

For the Marxists however, this works to their advantage.

Well said, a so true on all counts.

Sat, 06/04/2011 - 16:03 | 1339775 eureka
eureka's picture

Oh, so native violence justified U.S. expansionist, Manifest Destiny violence?

Sat, 06/04/2011 - 19:04 | 1340077 Founders Keeper
Founders Keeper's picture





Hi eureka.

I think you missed my point above.

Nevertheless, I'll speak directly to your point. Treatment of the native American populations on a whole by US authorities was unfair at best and atrocious at worst. Our nation's history in this regard is like an open wound for which much healing is required.

As for our conquering all land from coast to coast?  Yeah, I'm good with that.


Sat, 06/04/2011 - 16:00 | 1339768 eureka
eureka's picture

How can government without government employees protect your property rights?

Sat, 06/04/2011 - 23:35 | 1340553 tmosley
tmosley's picture

How can government protect them now?

I had a tire stolen off of my car in a hotel parking lot.  Someone got the license plate number of the guy that did it.  The police never did anything.  There are a million stories like that one.

Individuals do a much better job of defending their own property rights, and can do so without government interference, and did so for many years right here in this very nation.  Private security was cheap and effective.  Much more so than today's official police, even with unlimited power and jack-boots.

Sun, 06/05/2011 - 00:26 | 1340623 toxic8
toxic8's picture

the government is not there to protect you (the citizen).

they are there to serve and protect their interests, mainly themselves and those

in power aka the corporate/government revolving door oligarchy.

Sat, 06/04/2011 - 00:12 | 1338693 redpill
redpill's picture


Sat, 06/04/2011 - 00:51 | 1338760 Yen Cross
Yen Cross's picture

  Red Pill, you don't need to answer for yourself. I have your back!!!

Fri, 06/03/2011 - 22:36 | 1338488 US Uncut
US Uncut's picture

Hmmm, not according to Mish and his gang. At first they went after public unions but now it's pretty much all unions. He seems to have lost his way and seems to think the little people are the cause and fault of this entire mess. He seems to have little or no passion and anger for the bankers and politicians.... that is reserved for people working a basic 8-5 job. It's gotten pathetic. 

Fri, 06/03/2011 - 23:29 | 1338604 downwiththebanks
downwiththebanks's picture

That's because he's a feckless tool who has never worked a day in his life.

Sat, 06/04/2011 - 10:52 | 1339134 Oh regional Indian
Oh regional Indian's picture

What, pray is an unnatural power tmos?
An oxymoron...
But Unions, look at the word itself. Union between who? Management and worker? Or is it a worker collective? seriously, think about that, names matter. if you clarify that for yourself...


Sat, 06/04/2011 - 14:41 | 1339573 goldsaver
goldsaver's picture

Unnatural power is the power obtained by the use or threatened use of force. Whether this force is government guns or union billy clubs is force non the less. Natural law is law that exists because of the nature of the object (water is liquid therefore is wet). No government or gang dictate was required to make it so.

Unions, as used in this discussion, refer to workers joining forces against a common foe, management. The mere existence of unions make them, bu their nature, a gang based on force. Can this be a good thing? In limited instances, yes. When an employer uses force first to impose involuntary work conditions on the work force a counter balancing force is necessary for self defense.

But that is not what unions do. Unions are a gang or tribe that use the threat of force to impose conditions in the trade of labor between employer and employee. In effect, they use the government to artificially increase the price of the labor. The obvious result is that they price themselves out of the market by bankrupting the company they work for.

In the auto industries, the only reason that they have not yet killed the host, is because they shifted the cost of their demands into the public coffers. In effect, all US taxpayers subsidize the cost of union labor since th host can no longer do so.

The nest logical step is complete nationalisation. To shift all the costs to the public. That does not change the model, it just shifts the host form the industry to the populace.

Sat, 06/04/2011 - 15:35 | 1339709 Ghostbusters
Ghostbusters's picture

"There are now only 5 nations on the world left without a Rothschild controlled central bank: Iran; North Korea; Sudan; Cuba; and Libya."

Afghanistan and Iraq recently found "God," and their central bank.

Have you all heard about the Western Play Palace in Iraq:,2933,476464,00.html

Central Bankers think they are "God" and in this reality they are.  Here's to putting the fear of "God" back in them. 

Sat, 06/04/2011 - 11:14 | 1339169 midtowng
midtowng's picture

Mish is an a**hole. Anyone with an ounce of sense knows that workers, if they bargain alone, don't have the same leverage and power than if they bargain together. Free trade with 3rd world countries and the destruction of unions means that the middle class will continue to vanish. Eventually we will have a two class society - the very wealthy and the poor - and no one inbetween. And then we will wonder why our democracy has been gutted like our economy.

Fri, 06/03/2011 - 18:40 | 1337858 Texas Gunslinger
Texas Gunslinger's picture

Just another chart to be filed away in the "George Bush was the worst president in American history" folder.

I'm curious what percentage of the ZHeeple voted for Bush.  Probably 75% or more.  lol



Fri, 06/03/2011 - 18:47 | 1337891 Al Gorerhythm
Al Gorerhythm's picture

Who will be the next Messiah/Mssiah? They'll save you.

Left, right, left, right, left, right; HALT.

Fri, 06/03/2011 - 20:07 | 1338098 Reese Bobby
Reese Bobby's picture

After 5 weeks the above poster weighs in with a Republicans are different than Democrats post.  Read and learn newbie becasue as of now you are sheeple.  ZH can rehabilitate you...

Fri, 06/03/2011 - 21:15 | 1338294 Husk-Erzulie
Husk-Erzulie's picture

Never voted for shrub, saw the bummer coming from a mile away (reminded me of Carlos Menem).  Next up Bummer v Sarah... whoo lordy.  That's a Brehzinski creation and A Kissinger creation by the way (in case you hadn't noticed, Sarah has kissed the ring and will be the GOP candidate hard as that is to believe) The manipulation is winding up and it will be fucking brilliant, a tour de force, old man Henry at the top of his game, history in the making.

Fri, 06/03/2011 - 21:28 | 1338324 Reese Bobby
Reese Bobby's picture

And watching Congress in action is the darkest of comedy.  I consider it a good day in Washington when Boehner doesn't cry and Maxine Waters isn't allowed to talk...

Fri, 06/03/2011 - 22:39 | 1338486 downwiththebanks
downwiththebanks's picture

Maxine Waters understands the world far better than the racist ass clown Ron "John Birch Society" Paul.

Fri, 06/03/2011 - 22:50 | 1338517 Reese Bobby
Reese Bobby's picture

Good one...

Sat, 06/04/2011 - 09:12 | 1339036 cramers_tears
cramers_tears's picture

Go read "End the Fed"

Maxine "UnitedOne Bank" Waters in true form.

And I didn't think I ws going to laugh today!

Sat, 06/04/2011 - 09:58 | 1339079 downwiththebanks
downwiththebanks's picture

One thing we've ALL come to learn is that Ron "JOHN BIRCH SOCIETY" Paul LOVES words.  

In fact, I can think of only one thing he's more full of than words.

"Just shut up and vote GOP asshole!" cry those 'contrarian' ZeroHedge apologists.

Sat, 06/04/2011 - 10:33 | 1339111 tmosley
tmosley's picture

You are too ignorant for words.

Ron Paul is literally the only Republican I would vote for.  Otherwise, it's all third party.

And funny how you are calling him racist, while your own posts here have been incredibly racist.  Ron Paul is the antithesis of racist.  He is an individualist.  Some other people wrote some things and signed his name to them after he left politics to deliver babies.  That doesn't make those words his.  Only in the mind of a collectivist, where all whites are the same, and are responsible for the actions of others, is that so.

Sat, 06/04/2011 - 12:33 | 1339277 eureka
eureka's picture

tbmosley - Canada is really boring, huh? Good thing you have the US collectivists next door to enlighten.

Sat, 06/04/2011 - 12:55 | 1339306 tmosley
tmosley's picture

What on EARTH are you talking about?

I don't live in Canada.  What gave you that impression?  Or do you have me confused with someone else?

Sat, 06/04/2011 - 10:33 | 1339112 Bay of Pigs
Bay of Pigs's picture

And what do you "love" aside of character assassination?

Another clown playing the race card.

Sat, 06/04/2011 - 10:56 | 1339142 downwiththebanks
downwiththebanks's picture

You play the Race Card every day, White Boy.

I voted Cynthia McKinney in 2008 and Nader the 3 previous elections.

Sat, 06/04/2011 - 11:16 | 1339177 nmewn
nmewn's picture

"I voted Cynthia McKinney in 2008..."


Sat, 06/04/2011 - 13:13 | 1339370 downwiththebanks
downwiththebanks's picture

Unlike some geriatric blowhards who affiliates himself with the JOHN BIRCH SOCIETY, at least C-Mac can ask a fucking question.

I wonder if Rummy was ROTFLMAO here:

Cynthia McKinney takes on Donald Rumsfeld

What has Ron "JOHN BIRCH SOCIETY" Paul done for Palestine?

Sat, 06/04/2011 - 22:52 | 1340488 FrankDrakman
FrankDrakman's picture

What has Ron "JOHN BIRCH SOCIETY" Paul done for Palestine?

Just exactly what he's supposed to do - sweet f-a. Where, in the US Constitution or the oath taken as a member of the House, does it say that you have to "do something" for a bunch of murderous, lying scumbags half way around the world?


Sat, 06/04/2011 - 12:02 | 1339238 tmosley
tmosley's picture

You LOOOOVE Democrats and pseudo-Democrats.  As if Nader would change anything.

That IS hilarious.

The question is, how do you like Obama?  He's half African, which must mean he is perfect, happy, selfless, and magical in every way.  But he's also half Irish, which must mean he is evil, disgusting, selfish, hairy, and murderous.

Sat, 06/04/2011 - 13:09 | 1339359 downwiththebanks
downwiththebanks's picture

Never voted Democrat.  The 2-party system is the problem, so I don't support it.

Unlike you, who votes GOP.   It's probably natural law, in your view, that the 2-party system exists forever.

Sat, 06/04/2011 - 14:03 | 1339487 tmosley
tmosley's picture

You are extremely ignorant, and clearly not a reader.

I have never voted for a Republican during an election, though did vote for Ron Paul during the Republican primary.  I vote libertarian or constitution party in general elections.

Your problem is you make baseless assumptions about EVERYONE.

Sat, 06/04/2011 - 11:26 | 1339192 Conrad Murray
Conrad Murray's picture

Go back to playing in the tard pool with the glp faggots where you belong.

Sat, 06/04/2011 - 13:15 | 1339377 downwiththebanks
downwiththebanks's picture

Did you mean "GOP faggots"?

Sat, 06/04/2011 - 00:07 | 1338687 Mr Lennon Hendrix
Mr Lennon Hendrix's picture

There is no left and there is no right there is only up and down.  Down with politicians and up with the people.

Sat, 06/04/2011 - 12:33 | 1339270 eureka
eureka's picture

Clearly: tbmosley - He, is God.

Fri, 06/03/2011 - 18:59 | 1337927 A.W.E.S.O.M.-O 4000
A.W.E.S.O.M.-O 4000's picture

I agree. But I think our boy Barry is working on being a close second

Sat, 06/04/2011 - 01:00 | 1338761 Mr Lennon Hendrix
Mr Lennon Hendrix's picture

Wilson started the ponzi, went to war, and looted the Treasurie.  Hoover had not a clue what to do.  FDR had to steal America's gold to get his little ponzi going, and then went to war.   Truman bombed the shit out of a country that had been desperately losing the war.  Eisenhower acted like he did not know that the Complex by proxie from the banking industry was hijacking the system.  Kennedy did not act swiftly enough.  Johnson  spent money moving blacks to industrial waste dumps, and he continued war.  Nixon took the world off of the gold standard and pissed OPEC off.  Ford was an idiot (enough said).  Carter expanded the military industrial complex times ten.  Reagan officially handed the keys over to the power hungry right, and continued war spending.  Bush went to war, and had poor economic policy considering he wanted NAFTA and he raised rates before an election year, throwing the election (it was the rate rise, stupid).  Clinton ran NAFTA through showing he was more right than a centrist, officially handing the democratic keys to the power hungry, and he did not regulate finance, leading to the dotcom crash.  Bush went to war and went to war again.  Obama has now continued all these policies collectively.  Worse?  Who cares.

Sat, 06/04/2011 - 07:52 | 1338980 Moe Howard
Moe Howard's picture

I can disagree on several points you made. You should move beyond a surface reading of history, its a trap.

Sat, 06/04/2011 - 12:45 | 1339292 gmrpeabody
gmrpeabody's picture


Fri, 06/03/2011 - 19:02 | 1337935 knowless
knowless's picture


kill the paradigm.

only fools vote for a non-candidate,

queue debate on voting lesser of two evils/the irrelivancy of voting.


TGS, you have merit, why do you waste it on partisanship like this?

Fri, 06/03/2011 - 19:07 | 1337940 realitybiter
realitybiter's picture

W sucked and we all know it.  What would have the chart looked like under Gore?  Gore was all over the China migration of manufacturing, which explains most of this.  W inherited the unsustainable dotcom boom and its vacuum aftermath.  What would have Gore done?  I guess it would have been better to have overpriced solar panels everywhere rather than granite countertops, but I still think Gore would have had his own set of problems.  I doubt he would have changed economic policy much since it was the same crew that Clinton had.

I think the dotcom boom misallocated a ton of capital that gave quite an illusion of wealth -like real estate...At least the homes are still there....  

If Clinton were genius he would have seized the opportunity and done a massive governmental secondary and stuffed the coffers.  Instead, the "wealth" largely got squandered and obligated to the future.  

W sucked, but pinning it all on him is a monster mistake and dooms you to fail in the future.

What about our current Prez and the promise of jobs with the bailout that originally started way back with W and has gotten bigger and bigger with BO?  Can we pull up those charts?  W, BO, Gore, and they are all BS.

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!