Monday, December 21, 2009

Dream Deferred... Dream Denied

Recently, I've been reading a book by Robert Reich called Supercapitalism. I am [what can only be described as] obsessed with the numbers. Wealth gaps in the 1920... wealth gaps in the 1960's... and wealth gaps today. With the period from 1945 to 1975 being the period of smallest disparity... all this time I've been thinking... what can we do to get back to 1965? What needs to be done to get our economy similar to the way it was 45 years ago? What reforms need to be passed? What do corporations need to do? How big do labor unions need to get for more representation?


I now realize that the 1965 dynamic isn't coming back. The time period from 1945 to 1975 (the peak of the American dream) isn't coming back. What is the state of the American Dream? Dream deferred? Dream Denied?



The idea that "dad will take care of everything" is a reality for fewer and fewer Americans. Even before the crash... "REAL wages" in this country have been on a steady decline since 1975. Household income is only stagnant (rather than falling) because more and more women are working. Dad's job alone, can't pay for what it did in 1955.


The gigantic monopolies and oligopolies of yesteryear are gone. When you think of oligopolies from a by-gone era, consider the example of the control NBC, ABC and CBS had over the airwaves, and compare their influence of their industry today. There are still large corporations, to be sure, but their control of market share is not as large as it once was. In the past, giant car manufacturers, tv makers, airline industries, soda suppliers, and other sectors had gigantic labor forces. They controlled their markets. They controlled their prices. Companies dealt with labor and came to labor agreements with their employees satisfying both sides and avoiding work stoppages. Big companies do not control prices any longer. Technology and innovation have made it far easier for small startups to compete. The modernization of infrastructure and telecommunication has made it much easier to compete globally. There are freights of goods going to and fro over the oceans everyday. Adjusted for inflation, the cost of products has dropped substantially over the last 30 - 40 years. You've been forced to. If you can't sell your product at this price, someone else, be it a long term competitor, a new foreign rival, or a small upstart... will. American consumers have never had it so good.



But at what cost? How do we get prices so low? For most American businesses, roughly 70% of your costs are wages and benefits. You lay off workers. You cut back hours. You reduce wages. You prevent raises. You decrease health benefits. You increase premiums. You may drop health coverage altogether. There was little competition in the 60's and even less in the late 40's and early 50's... but global competitors are here. Work forces in most nations are not getting paid as well as American labor, and American companies are trying to find a way to level the playing field. And with giant companies like Wal-Mart, they no longer monopolize the market and try to keep prices high, they use their buying power to push their costs from wholesalers down lower... and lower... and lower. Wal-Mart keeps their employees wages low... to the benefit of their customers. And the businesses that deal with Wal-Mart must either do likewise, or consider moving jobs overseas to meet the demands of what Wal-Mart will pay for goods. Could it be, that prices are already too low? Does it benefit America to lower the price of the average good by another $1.59, if it means that small businesses near Wal-Mart will fall... that Wal-Mart's employees will not be given a fair wage... that the medium size businesses that sell plastics and other goods to Wal-Mart must now ship jobs overseas, because their largest customer is telling them they must lower their prices... again?



I haven't mentioned the stock market yet. Above is a chart showing the history of the Dow Jones Industrial average. For almost one hundred years, the Dow just meandered along until the November 14th, 1972 when it finally hit 1000. Then it just starts shooting upward. 2000 on January 8th, 1987. 3000 on April 17th, 1991. 4000 on February 23rd, 1995. 8000 on July 16th, 1997. 11,000 on May 3rd, 1999. 13,000 on April 25th, 2007. After the housing crash, as of this moment, it is down to 10,428. Though (just like other forms of wealth) the vast majority of stock is owned by the top 5%, there are more and more people participating in the game today, than ever before. Day traders... short-sellers... speculators... stock evaluating companies... mutual funds... hedge funds... et al. Passivity in the markets is a thing of the past. The amount of daily trade volume boomed. With the exception of short-sellers (aren't they evil?), everyone was now trying everything they could to shoot up stock values. Some would look at the above graph and say "something is clearly wrong," and I tend to be one of them, in terms of the real value of these corporate stock, but... I suppose... a thing is as valuable as someone is willing to buy it for. So much so, when a cut throat new CEO takes over, and the markets knows he's going to fire 10% of the workforce and slash benefits for those who remain... the stock shoots up! Employees be damned... we have to think about stock holders.



CEO's, CFO's, & COO's can't afford to be mindful of society (over economy) even if they wanted to. Stock holders are watching. Boardrooms are watching. Hedge funds are watching. CNBC is watching! If you play nice with employees, and start decreasing profit margings (even if its still a good profit margin)... oh, beware the quarterly earnings reports broadcast on CNBC "this is lower than the expectations!!!"... your stock value with dip... and you, as CEO, may be out of a job. They have parachutes made from shiny golden fabric from Mount Olympus, so, I dont feel sorry for terminated CEO's, however, in reality, what are the circumstances that would make it feasible for upper management (in this climate) to help employees, even if only to the uber-slight detriment of management? Modern day boardrooms [slaves to stock expectation] will not allow it.


Where does that leave the modern American employee? As consumers and as stock holders, we want low prices and high quarterly earnings reports from the stocks we hold... but as citizens, as neighbors... as friends and family... as society as a whole... is this good for America? Pundits who talk about the housing bubble on television never mention the economic circumstances that put so many Americans in a position, where so many people were unable to buy a home like their grandparents did 50 years prior. People choose to not see the rising cost of living and decreasing standard of living. I was shocked to see Airline pilots in Michael Moore's film admitting that they and many of their coworkers make no attempt to hide the fact that after all the airline industry restructuring... many of them try to work a second job to survive. What has happened to America? While the Wall St. has been given triage by the government, regular people continue to suffer. Including foreclosed homeowners, who live in homes owned by banks that were bailed out!!!




We are a nation of 300,000,000 people. Manufacturing continues to go overseas (where its cheaper) and more and more people have (low wage) service jobs that can't be outsourced. But even still... we haven't had a month of positive job growth in America since December 2007. January 2008, the Labor deparment reported a net loss of 72,000 American jobs.. Feb 08 = 144,000 lost. Mar 08 = 122,000 lost. Apr 08 = 160,000 lost. May 08 = 137,000 lost. Jun 08 = 161,000 lost. Jul 08 = 128,000 lost. Aug 08 = 175,000 lost. Sep 08 = 321,000 lost. Oct 08 = 380,000 lost. Nov 08 = 597,000 lost. Dec 08 = 681,000 lost. Jan 09 = 741,000 lost. Feb 09 = 681,000 lost. Mar 09 = 652,000 lost. Apr 09 = 519,000 lost. May 09 = 303,000 lost. Jun 09 = 463,000 lost. Jul 09 = 304,000 lost. Aug 09 = 154,000 lost. Sept 09 = 219,000 lost. Oct 09 = 190,000 lost. Nov 09 = 11,000 lost. [Approximately 7.3 million job losses]





The highest unemployment rate in 26 years. It has doubled (4.9 to 10%) in only a couple years. Which "good" jobs are coming back? Is the economy more important than the society? Is the consumer more important than the citizen? It seems clear to me now that we can't go backwards, but how exactly do we move forward? The status quo will only lead us closer and closer to a society of aristocrats and peasants, like 18th century Europe... with an ever declining small and invisible middle class. (Let them eat cake?) I dont know the answer... and I'm even less optimistic that there is a GOOD answer to that question. One that doesn't involve the inevitable further squeezing of an already declining middle class. As soon as I find a good answer, I'll be sure to let you know.