@helmut kohl
Overall, the typical American defined as poor by the government has a car, air conditioning, a refrigerator, a stove, a clothes washer and dryer, and a microwave. He has two color televisions, cable or satellite TV reception, a VCR or DVD player, and a stereo. He is able to obtain medical care. His home is in good repair and is not overcrowded. By his own report, his family is not hungry, and he had sufficient funds in the past year to meet his family`s essential needs.
...
In both good and bad economic environments, the typical American poor family with children is supported by only 800 hours of work during a year--the equivalent of 16 hours of work per week.
Machen wir kurz die Probe: 800 Stunden mal 5.15$ Mindestlohn ergibt 4120$. Damit kann man kaum das Auto finanzieren. Die restlichen Dinge samt Haus und Krankenversicherung fallen vom Himmel, oder? Natürlich werden viele arme Leute mehr als den Mindestlohn verdienen, aber diese Studie kann ja hinten und vorne nicht stimmen. Offensichtlich versteht die Heritage Foundation inzwischen etwas vom Wichsen, aber immer noch nichts von der Wirtschaft.
Die bittere Wahrheit ist, daß der Mehrheit der Amerikaner ein Einkommenszuwachs nur per Hedonic vorgerechnet wird, 99% der Amerikaner im Einkommenszuwachs unter dem propagierten Wirtschaftswachstum liegen, und nur das oberste Perzentil absahnt.
Ein lesenswerter Kommentar vom Bill Gross:
http://www.pimco.com/LeftNav/Late+Breaking+Commentary/IO/200…
And if my old friend General Electric is synonymous with the U.S. corporate sector, bite on this appetizer as indicative of the transformation of the U.S. economy. In 1980, 92% of its reported profits came from its manufacturing subsidiaries. In 2003, nearly 50% of earnings were supplied by financing subsidiaries highly dependent on leverage, the cost of that leverage, and its ability to maneuver through the swaps market by turning long-term rates into cheap 1% + short term financing.
...
And so? Why not just keep on going. So far so good the New Agers would claim. What’s wrong with 400% of GDP or 500% of GDP? What’s wrong with dropping it from helicopters if we have to as good Ben Bernanke has suggested? Well, let me tell you what’s wrong. Debt levels and debt ratios have limits. When and if interest rates do go up, the servicing costs of an accelerating debt economy eventually bite the hand of its master.
...
In a finance-based economy this IS productivity. Instead of cheaper and cheaper labor per unit of output, we have cheaper and cheaper interest rates per unit of debt.
Hier zum Credit Market Debt am Höchststand kann man noch das Börsenbubble dazuaddieren, in Punkten noch nicht ganz am Höchststand, aber Dank der zu erwartenden Stock Options-Bonanza in der Marktkapitalisierung sicher bald wieder am Gipfel.
