Archive for the ‘good paying jobs’ category

Democracy’s Message

June 20, 2017

When Donald Trump was elected President, the US democratic process spoke loudly. Americans had elected someone inexperienced, uninformed, and some said unqualified emotionally to become President by a narrow electoral college margin (Trump lost the popular vote by 3 million votes). What was democracy’s message?

American democracy approximates one man, one vote but it actually reflects the popular vote in each State times the number of House and Senate members apportioned to that State. Therefore it is possible to win the popular vote but lose in the electoral college. So is that why Donald Trump is President?

There’s more. Along with electing Donald Trump, voters returned the Republican Party to majorities in both the House and the Senate. And with these majorities, GOP leaders feel a mandate to roll back much of what constitutes “entitlements” and “excessive regulations”.

Republicans favor less healthcare coverage, less Medicaid spending, and have proposed large changes to Medicaid and even Social Security. On the regulatory front, Republicans are pro-fossil fuels, less regulations on banking and industry, and anti-labor. How can this type of negative, past looking policies appeal to a majority of Americans regardless of which State they reside in?

As usual, there is another way to see life. Republicans claim that best government policy is that which is originated closest to the people (State and local levels). Therefore by definition, healthcare, tax levying, and regulations should be done at the lowest government level which is practical.  Since the governing process is complicated, this simple explanation has appeal. Hmmm.

Traditionally, two key Republican Party segments have been the wealthy and business/banking leadership. Not surprisingly, lower taxes, more fossil fuels, more dependence upon healthcare insurance companies, and anti-labor policies directly benefit these groups. But strangely Republican policies put far more regular people at risk. So, once again, how did American democracy elected a Republican majority and a President of questionable ability?


  • Could there have been too many litmus issues? Like is a woman’s right to choose, or the protection of individual rights of other Americans regardless of sex, gender preference, or gender identity.  Are these considerations more important than healthcare, a progressive tax code, or reasonable controls (checks and balances) on banking and industry?
  • Could it be that many Americans choose to believe what their elected officials tell them and do not fact check their assertions?
  • Could it be that too many Americans want it all but do not want to do the hard work of paying for what they receive?

Democrats lost the 2016 election mainly because they could not, and would not tell the voter what the voter needed to hear. Democrats equivocated on the big issues and pander on the social issues.

And by the narrowest of majorities, Americans have gotten what democracy delivers, this time an incompetent President who harbors no agenda, a Congress with a shameful agenda currently split along serious fault lines but teetering on choosing the darkest options, presenting the average America with no reasonable outlook for good jobs, more discretionary income, or hopes for a secure future.

Democrats need to wake up. Rather than stand by and watch Republicans promise the moon and deliver dirt, Democrats need to tell voters what is realistic to expect and why Americans can expect a Democrat to deliver.  That was democracy’s message in the 2016 election.

Good Paying Jobs

November 5, 2014

One of this past midterm’s election mantras was “I’ll work to create more good paying jobs”. With the GOP gaining control of both Houses of Congress, I wonder how they will try to accomplish this goal.

Good paying jobs would perk up voters and if the GOP somehow appeared to accomplish this, it would almost certainly lock the GOP into Government control for some time to come. But is it in the realm of possibility that the GOP can accomplish this? Could Democrats create good paying jobs?

The answer is yes to both, that is both parties could enact legislation that would promote the creation of good paying jobs. The unfortunate caveat is that neither will do what would be necessary. Why?

First, one has to recognize where all the good paying jobs went and why the average pay in the US hasn’t changed in real terms for almost 40 years. I submit it can be summed up with three words, consumers, technology, and corporate greed (misplaced values).

  • Consumers. Each of us has been seduced with the idea that we can get more for less. The advent of big box stores like Walmart has driven the conversion low cost suppliers regardless of where in the world these suppliers are located. The perceived value has been high quality goods at relatively low prices. The cost has been low US manufacturing wages to match those available in other parts of the globe.
  • Technology. The fruits of computers and robotic manufacture has changed the need and reliance upon manual labor. Gone are secretarial pools armed with carbon paper and white out. Gone are rooms full of draftsmen helping design buildings, ships, planes, or cars. In many cases, gone are warehouse men and in their place are digital tracking systems coupled with automatic materials transfer methods.
  • Corporate Greed. The modern corporation features two elements of greed. The first is to pay workers no more than necessary to accomplish any task. Outsourcing has been found effective in holding down wages and benefits. Moving entire operations to other US locals which offer tax incentives has helped hold wages in check while also being destructive to local economies. In addition, the most hurtful corporate practices involves the decision on how to share productivity increase. The data tells the embarrassing story that for senior executives, especially CEOs, pay have risen over 400% while those who produced the increased productivity remained flat.

So what could Government do?

  • Minimum Wage. Congress could enact minimum wage legislation which could turn workers’ pay at places like McDonalds or Walmart into a living wage ($15/hr, $30,000/yr).
  • Training and Retraining Programs. Congress could offer tuition refunds for those taking “skill” related education or training. In Germany there is a well developed apprenticeship system where jobs ranging from plumbers to electricians to hotel receptionists, to nurses, to draftsmen, to robot technicians, to transportation workers are schooled in skills specifically related to a profession.  Greater skills could energize the growth of new market segments which inherently paid more.
  • Corporate Greed Tax. One must be clear headed about this one. No amount of talking will encourage any manager or senior executive to pay his employees more. Corporate officers either recognize a return for increased pay or they resist paying more. No amount of shame will work either to dissuade the leaders from accepting a greater share of productivity increases. In other words, nothing short of true labor shortage will encourage a greedy employer to pay more than the minimum he can. Congress, could, however modify the tax code to make the decision to pay more easier and more equitable. Congress could pass a progressive corporate wage and salary tax where corporations which increased executive’s pay more than wage earners (by some percent) would be punitively taxed more. In the end, shareholders would have to decide whether to retain a management team which put money in their pockets and returned less value to shareholders.

We can reject out of hand any calls for lower corporate taxes as a route to more good jobs. Lower corporate tax rates tied (as an offset) to elimination of corporate tax credits and reductions could help. Experience, however, has shown that lobbyists will set to work again on incorporating new tax loop holes.

The American capitalist system which has benefited the country so well over the years would still suggest the need to reward more those who work harder or contribute at a higher level than those who did less. Raising the average wage and narrowing the income inequality distribution can be accomplished while still honoring that time tested principle. We will see if the GOP brings any of this attitude.