< HOME  Wednesday, April 05, 2006

NYT Drops All Pretenses, Openly Scorns Working Americans

In an astounding display of utter contempt for the American working class, the NYT published a piece titled The Economics of Henry Ford May Be Passé, in which the author unabashedly trashes the notion of higher wages for workers as being unnecessary for economic growth.

He begins by recalling how Ford's rivals were "horrified" when Henry Ford doubled the pay for thousands of his employees in 1914.
The Wall Street Journal accused him of injecting "Biblical or spiritual principles into a field where they do not belong." The New York Times correspondent who traveled to Detroit to interview him that week asked him if he was a socialist.
According to Ford, "paying high wages" was behind the prosperity of America. But according to this author . . .
It's time to ask . . . whether Mr. Ford's big idea is as ill suited to this century as his car company seems to be.
He then demonstrates his thesis in an amazing display of elitism that I cannot paraphrase without diluting its venality. So, here it is in all its glory:
What was so comforting about Fordism was that it suggested that the economy operated on a virtuous, self-reinforcing cycle. Only when the middle class did well could the country do well. . . .

In the last few years, however, the economy has kept growing in large part because high-income families — the top 20 percent, roughly — have done so well and have been such devoted spenders. Globalization and new technology have helped many white-collar workers make more money, even as those same changes have closed factories and depressed wages for others. Stock portfolios and houses on the coasts, meanwhile, are much more valuable than they once were, making their owners more willing to spend.

In fact, well-off families, not cash-short ones, have been the ones increasing their borrowing and cutting their savings the most in recent years, according to the Federal Reserve. In 1992, the top fifth of households, as ranked by income, accounted for 42 percent of consumer spending. By 2000, the share had grown to almost 46 percent, and it is probably not much different today. That may sound like a small change, but it's an enormous amount of money, a shift of $300 billion a year in spending from the poor and middle class to the affluent.

In Michigan, Ford and General Motors have been cutting thousands of jobs, creating the country's sickest local economy and hurting even well-to-do suburbs. Yet the Suburban Collection, a car dealership north of Detroit, sold 90 Bentleys last year, up from 70 in 2004. David Butler, a manager there, said he expected to sell more than 100 Bentleys this year. The car costs at least $180,000. The dealership also opened a Lamborghini showroom in January. It is true that Rolls-Royces aren't selling very well, but the main reason seems to be that Mr. Butler's customers don't feel comfortable being seen in a $300,000 car when the state is suffering so badly. "It's not that they can't afford it," he said. "It's because of the image it would give."

Wages are likely to rise slightly in 2006, but stagnation seems to be the norm over the long term. Except for a span of a few years in the late 1990's, the hourly pay of most workers has done no better than inflation for the last 30 years. Even some Democrats, who have long embraced Fordism, are coming to the conclusion that Mr. Ford's reassuring cycle is not the only thing that can keep the American economy humming. "You don't need an equitable distribution to have a sustainable recovery," said Jared Bernstein, a liberal economist in Washington.
Ultimately, the author admits this "model" economy - in which the top 20% buy Bentleys and dine at the Ritz - is unsustainable, but only for political reasons; not because it's the most asinine nonsense ever uttered.

He doesn't see the perverse reality he described as a grotesque consequence of unjust monopolies and a thoroughly corrupt monetary system. No.

According to him, the rich should be hailed as economic saviors, divinely entitled to their rank in society and fully capable of sustaining the economy, but for the ignorant clamoring of the working class.

Naturally, he offers no alternatives to his unsustainable fantasy except a few favored platitudes that are completely impossible to implement without monetary reform.

This guy needs a good thrashing, as does the NYT for publishing this insulting venal tripe. We may be the economic underclass, but that's ONLY because the Federal Reserve and our corrupt patent laws keep us that way.

The TRUTH is that WE make up more than 80% of the population, WE do all the WORK, and for that, we not only demand RESPECT, but also our fair share of the economic pie.

As always, the mainstream media has demonstrated how utterly worthless they are to our democratic republic. Indeed, our pervasive media problem must be resolved if we are to survive at all.


At Wednesday, April 05, 2006, Blogger silverisgood said...


another great piece

At Wednesday, April 05, 2006, Blogger silverisgood said...

sorry about the double post thought i would add these links of knowledge...tis crashing faster than we realise...enjoy the truth and Ye will be free hehe



At Wednesday, April 05, 2006, Anonymous neighbor said...

random half-formed thought: well, if it's the uber-rich supporting the economy, let them have it. The rest of us should just drop out of it all as quickly as possible by reducing consumption dramatically; ie. start squatting vacant property, growing our own food, crafting what we need, supporting our locality, our own "tribes" for basic needs (not coporations in other words)....

Just a thought.

At Wednesday, April 05, 2006, Blogger qrswave said...

Excellent links, silverisgood. I'll include the first in the sidebar.

Neighbor, you're absolutely right. A national boycott of their goods and services and a general strike, will put them in their place.

At Wednesday, April 05, 2006, Blogger Red Tulips said...

I wish it was only about the top 20%. The truth is that there is a massive income disparity even amongst the top 20%. The top 1% really own most of America.

As far as Fordism goes...he paid $5 a day, but his brand of scientific management and social engineering was so extreme, that the workers earned their wages.

I don't see Fordism, with his extreme dehumanization of work as well as massive anti-Jewishness (and support of Hitler) is to be praised per se. However, it is sad and sick that somehow the notion of fair and just treatment of workers has become a thing of the past. How did we get to where we are?

At Wednesday, April 05, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

In all the hoopla surrounding immigration and the monetary drain it sets upon the middle classes of this country pale in comparison to the rapid rise and growth of the rich at our direct expense.

It is unsustainable and inhuman. In short, evil.

At Wednesday, April 05, 2006, Blogger tomtom said...

MIss R the answer is greed, pure greed. One of the seven sins.

And for neighbour, good idea, the whole thing is hit them in their weakest part. Greed. The best way however would be an enormous and dramatic decline in the value of the dollar. The only thing is the Chinese would prevent such a decline. But it could happen.

TomTom, Fearless Navigator

At Wednesday, April 05, 2006, Blogger silverisgood said...

I agree Neighbor, and to be honest, Other than actual living costs, and keeping the kids running, I have cut down on several spending habits and eliminated all my debt besides a car payment. Not that I have to I already work to jobs to survive, I choose to not consume. And money in the bank no way I keep my cash close for the pending storm. Other folks such as my neighbors and their brand new SUV braggin about his HELOC a year ago.

I listin to him now and i see stress I tried to no avail to explain to him where rates and such are going and that values are eventualy going to go minus, well typical FB
(thats FUCKEDBORROWER) no it all, living on borrowed money...problem with that is, I hate to say he is NOW! living on borrowed time as rates climb so does the payment. Could he refi doubt it $332,000 for a house that sold 14 years ago for $86,500. and all original...UPSIDEDOWN and from my point of view, appraisal fraud at its finest.

At Wednesday, April 05, 2006, Blogger qrswave said...

Yep, it's a dying shame. Borrowed time eventually runs out.

I've gotten a lot of visits from government agencies, big corporations, their banks (actually - vice versa), and their corporate law firms.

It's important that they know the public is getting informed, fast and furiously. They're old antics are wearing out.

The stakes are extremely high and developments are reaching fever pitch. It's going to get worse before it gets better. But, let's hope that cooler heads keep it from boiling over uncontrollably.

At Wednesday, April 05, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Who would actually expect anything truthful from the NY Times? (the people who helped to bring us the War in Iraq; and will bring you the war in Iran).

The one thing that pisses off Jewish
supremacists more than anything (as constantly suggested by the prejudiced "documentaries" on "public TV" or the "history channel", is that business always needs a Jewish financier; and that Henry Ford knew NOTHING about economics or "money".

Those topics are exclusively the reserved sanctum and domain of Jewish people, regardless of how little the goyim liked it. And many dumb goyim will acknowledge that falacy!

The fact is that Henry Ford knew more about economics, money and prosperity
than any Jew who ever lived including such jokes as Alan Greenspan. AND, Henry proved his ideas and spread the wealth around (even to Jews) without any Jew Financier calling the shots!!!!!

At Wednesday, April 05, 2006, Blogger Red Tulips said...

Um, anon, you are a nincompoop.

I object to Henry Ford because of what scientific management meant. I object to his form of social engineering. I object to his union bashing. I also object to his support of Hitler.

You can read all about this.

Scientific management - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_management

Dearborn Independent - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dearborn_Independent

At Thursday, April 06, 2006, Blogger silverisgood said...

Oh and I forgot to mention after doing a little investigating yesterday, on my local registry of deeds web site. Now I understand why my neighbor looks as streesed as he does...not only does he have a HELOC second, his first is an ARM with 5 point caps IO! thats an AJUSTABLE RATE MORTGAGE INTEREST ONLY LOAN! teaser 6% with 5% LIBOR! what the fuck was he thinking. He told me last year that he refied, and he did from an ARM, to an ARM/IO.

Lesson to be learned here folks?

If a neighbor walks up to you and try's to give you a little friendly advice, and you blow him or her off and say

"na i can just refi apreciation goes up every year"

shame on you for not having an open mind instead of always being right, listin once an awhile you just might learn something before you say to that person.

"mind your own bussiness"

I will mind my bussiness especially when the u-haul pulls up in the drive way.

Take care now bye bye!

At Thursday, April 06, 2006, Blogger qrswave said...

Wow! That's terrible. I feel bad for all those folks out there with ARMS and IO mortgages. There is a possible solution, of course.

If enough people demand it the government can declare a national moratorium on mortgage payments. It's not unprecedented and it would save a lot of families from being destroyed.

At Thursday, April 06, 2006, Blogger silverisgood said...

sorry about the double post for you number crunchers here is how it works so if you have an ARM!

Consider your $300K adjustable rate mortgage at, say, 5% initial interest rate. If my option ARM says that I can skirt by for the first few years with an interest-only payment of only 3% interest per year, then my lowest possible initial monthly payment equals

3% X $300K / 12 = $750/mo,

but at the end of the year, I have added on

2% X $300K = $6000

in deferred interest to my principle balance (and to the asset column in the lender’s balance sheet!). Through the magic of compounding, I will accrue additional interest on this $6000 going forward until I repay it, along with everything else I owe the bank.

For a layman’s explanation of adding deferred interest to the loan balance, you can say that it is like what would if you put $300K into a savings account at 2% / year; at the end of one year, there will be $306K in the account. Only in this case, the homeowner owns the bank the extra $6000, not the other way around.

I think this explanation captures the concept, but I defer to the expertise of industry professionals if you need more realistic numbers for your example.

for you non number crunchers

When I explain neg-ams, I actually refrain from using any numbers. The instant you begin to illustrate with numbers, I see eyes glaze over instantly. I go like this:

“In an interest-only loan, you pay only the interest each month, and none of the actual loan amount. Bad? Yes! But neg-ams are even worse: With a neg-am loan, you pay LESS THAN just the interest each month — so the amount of interest that you didn’t pay gets added to the loan amount. Hence, the amount of your loan grows every month by the amount of interest that you didnn’t pay.”

At Thursday, April 06, 2006, Blogger silverisgood said...

government can declare a national moratorium on mortgage payments. It's not unprecedented and it would save a lot of families from being destroyed

This would be a good thing there m8ty, but the problem i see is the the goverment cant seem to take car of them selves non the less worry about harry and sally who signed a contract stating i will pay this back.. good old greenspan got out when it just started getting good...smart man!

Captin Greespan:
all the crew stay here on the sinking ship while i go get help! ya sure!

At Thursday, April 06, 2006, Anonymous George said...

No wonder that the Whispered Wordbook (http://www.hawaiiobserver.com/2006/03/) defines "Media" as "Obstruction of truth"

At Friday, April 07, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The government and business are merged and their interests are the same. The FED owns ALL banks and credit unions. It is their plan to have a boom and bust cycle from 1913-future. They give easy credit to working class and fatten us up like pigs for slaughter. They have no interest in their paper currency being paid back to them. They create it from thin air. They let us believe propererity will last forever so we buy bigger houses and other property. It is called wealth redistribution. We are nothing but cattle to businessmen and politicians. Buy precious metals and control spending. Every financial problem in US can be traced to 1913 when US citezens became subjects to Federal Reserve. By the way the Federal Reserve is a privite banking monopoly and is as federal as Federal Express. The goal of the FED is profit IN THE LOSS of American workers.

At Tuesday, April 11, 2006, Blogger Anonymous Person said...

You make some good points but to be fair there weren't robots taking away jobs back then. The industrial revolution created jobs, the automation revolution makes them obsolete.

I agree that the Fed is the worst thing to happen to America in a long time. It really is sad that people will lose the homes that they're currently renting from the bank but maybe our generation will have to learn to save the hard way.


Post a Comment

<< Home