The Economy's Varsity Blues

You're joking right?

Inflation and wage growth are over-stated? You can't be serious.

The WSJ article is dead-on accurate. I'm just like the lady in the article. I was making $80K+ as a computer tech, had a masters in computer engineering from a prominent school. I had companies begging me to come to them. Then Clinton opened the gates on the H1Bs and not only could I not commaned the similar salary, I couldn't find a job!

Companies were overrun with Indians and Chinese programmers/engineers. In fact it's become so bad, most hiring managers in these departments are not American, but Asians. Good luck getting an unbiased job interview from someone trying to bring in as many Indians as they can.

You must really be out of touch to say wages haven't been AT LEAST stagnant. And you say it so glibly, without any proof or even anectdotal evidence. And inflation? Jeebus man, inflationi is becoming a pandemic.

I'll stick with the WSJ. So you pays your salary? The GW Bush historical society?

Brock Rockman of MI @ Jul 18, 2008 09:32:39 AM

Jobs, Jobs, Jobs!

I saw Jimmy, as Kudlow, calls him on K&C again today. He said he met with the McCain campaign today and .... Then in response to a ? he said Jobs, Jobs, Jobs. I you, Jimmy, have their ear, and Kudlow's too, Tell them use this as their number one slogan...JOBS, JOBS, JOBS! This is what Americans want, more and BETTER JOBS, like all of the jobs that a better Energy Program for America will provide. Drilling = more jobs for each state that does it and more roylaties, so less taxes needed or they can spend that on infrastructure which is more jobs, and a postive circular spiral. Andmore jobs means better support for housing. And more Energy means less imports so it's good for the Dollar and lowers the Trade Deficit and inflation. Etc. etc. But the public's ear will hear more JOBS. They've been trained to argue on the Great Export of Jobs, anti-NAFTA, etc. This turns their argument against them. Stop Exporting Energy JOBS! JOBS here not there, apparently they have a so what if those jobs happen to lower our Energy costs and improve every ailment we have, but they can't argue against more and better JOBS.

RJ McCuen of CA @ Jul 18, 2008 01:18:41 AM

Daniel, you're displaying a bit of hypocrisy. You're upset because James gave his point of view about inflation and wages, but wasn't it you not too long ago that suggested we shouldn't even use the CPI because it didn't consider various factors in prices? I'm pretty sure if James said that inflation is understated and wages are overstated, you would be in total agreement.

That said, regardless of which party leads the government, they equally employ creative accounting techniques that obfuscate and confuse. I'm pretty sure you believe that when Clinton left office, there was a huge budget surplus and Bush squandered it all. All Clinton did was move some future obligations forward and delayed some spending numbers until a future generation to show that the budget was balanced and had a surplus. Bush does it by holding out some spending on the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. This desire to show one party as being at fault for today's ills is disingenuous.

Absolutely a college degree is not enough. I have a college degree in economics, but after I examined many entry level jobs that ask specifically for an econ degree I was not as competitive as I thought I was. If you want to make it, you have to do things that set you apart. As for who profited? The schools, private lenders, and, yes, state and federal governments (through subsidization of education [state] and through interest loan lending [federal], which, by the way, cannot be wiped out by bankruptcy).

"if we have higher tax burdens than european and asian competitors (per this stat) why do we grow faster than them and have more people employed? So corporate income taxes must not be related to growth or employment, ergo?"

Incorrect. We are not growing faster than many European and Asian nations with lower tax rates. We are growing consistently, but our rate of growth is nowhere near that of China's, Taiwan's, Ireland's, Hong Kong's, and other countries with low tax burdens. Now, mind you, we are not going to get double digit growth, but we can certainly must a 3-5% GDP growth rate annually, something we are not near right now.

Chris of AZ @ Jul 17, 2008 14:21:19 PM

Put up or shut up, please

David,

James links to evidence supporting his claim that inflation is being overestimated and wages underestimated. Where's your evidence that it is otherwise? Who's making a reasoned argument here, and who's just a partisan hack shooting off his mouth?

Who profits from massive tuition? The colleges, mostly. Also the politicians, since the loans are heavily subsidized by government, always an excellent way to buy votes.

Kent G. Budge of NM @ Jul 17, 2008 14:18:04 PM

if we have higher tax burdens than european and asian competitors (per this stat) why do we grow faster than them and have more people employed? So corporate income taxes must not be related to growth or employment, ergo?

of NY @ Jul 17, 2008 13:04:41 PM