The most important Chart about the American Economy you'll see this year.

originally posted by: CynConcepts
a reply to: Aazadan
That is what I am seeing in the chart provided. Something drastic occurred in and around 1977-78 and in 1998-1999. These seem to be the most current points that reflect some action that spirals the gauging. Any ideas?

My best guess for 1999 was the pay structure of the tech sector at the time. A lot of companies were internet startups that were paying in worthless stock that would one day be worth something. That's about 5 years after the startups were forming and stock options were coming due for the front runners. All of the worthless stock eventually lead to the recession as the tech bubble burst.

I suppose another argument could be that the repeal of Glass-Steagall lead to flat wage growth because it contributed to far lower interest rates, which lead to people at lower incomes not being able to effectively save.

Alternatively, it could all be due to the exact same issue with inflation screwing everyone which I think is most likely. When the inflation rate is 1-2% above the on paper inflation rate over 20 or 30 years, you eventually end up with wages being far lower than they should be, because the inflation rate is ultimately what determines pay increases.

That's just one sector though and shouldn't have affected everyone/

a reply to: Aazadan

You may have something there! I noticed in searching that Apple really came onto the scene in 1977! Is it due to the technology that we all have embraced? I have heard that some components for our technology can only be obtained through foriegn trade deals. Is it possible, that these fluxations are created due to the actual need to compete?Have we been making seriously bad trade deals globally that have seriously created this effect we see in the OP's chart?

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
You can see just how bad Reagan screwed us over during his presidency. Yeah, things were good for a little while but look what it has led to. I think Reagan is one of the worst presidents we've had in hindsight, he really ended up screwing my generation over big time.

Yeah it was almost as if he was hand picked by a select few to carry the popular vote, and not much seems to have changed to this day...

a reply to: FyreByrd
As you can see by your chart the trend did NOT change with Reagan. It is a consistent trend long before him.

The Federal Reserve System‍ was enacted in 1913. THAT is the reason for this trend you pointed out.

Reagan had nothing to do with it.

originally posted by: CynConcepts
a reply to: Aazadan

You may have something there! I noticed in searching that Apple really came onto the scene in 1977! Is it due to the technology that we all have embraced? I have heard that some components for our technology can only be obtained through foriegn trade deals. Is it possible, that these fluxations are created due to the actual need to compete?Have we been making seriously bad trade deals globally that have seriously created this effect we see in the OP's chart?

Apple started in the late 70's creating computers, they weren't a big company early on though. Their initial major product was the Apple 2 which was the first home computer that utilized a GUI. What made Apple work was the fact that Woz is possibly the best hardware engineer to have ever lived. It also helped that transistors were coming down in price. Apple was an offshoot of the Homebrew Computer Club. That group had a MASSIVE impact on personal computing.

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

So it goes to reason that the income inequality that started with the Reagan administration is 100% Reagan's fault

Look at the OP chart.

It did not start with Reagan, it is a very consistent upward trend long before the 80's.

It started with the creation of the Fed, and is almost at the creators of the Fed's ultimate goal.

Confiscation of ALL the wealth.

reagan killed the middle class

deal with it

originally posted by: MrSpad
And this is why the younger generation has no faith in capitalism. Barely regulated it is like playing the board game monopoly and it ends the same way.

We have not be capitalists since 1913.

originally posted by: syrinx high priest
reagan killed the middle class

deal with it

You need to go farther back in time.

Reagan had nothing to do with it.

originally posted by: stosh64
We have not be capitalists since 1913.

How exactly is a private central bank inconsistent with capitalism?

a reply to: Joecanada11 Its equivalent on both sides as to taking blame, neither wants to admit they are wrong and blame it on the other side. Trump is repeatedly calling out republicans and some democrats so maybe it will change.

I think it was around in the 70's that overseas markets started doing a number on our industries, but, we still had a increase in wages for the working class, it was in the 1982-1992 range that the reversal took place and suddenly the rich were enjoying massive increases in income while the lower income groups saw a lot smaller increase. trickle down economics obviously didn't trickle down much. instead I believe it was used to tap into overseas labor forces, which well we all know the rest of that story.

a reply to: stosh64

Look at the huge drop from before Reagan to when Reagan was put into office. He kicked income inequality into high gear when his administration passed those deregulation policies.

Then look at the huge drop when Bush was put into office. Obama is no better, but more importantly he is no worse. It should be obvious that neither party has the interest of the people in mind, only their own.

a reply to: Aazadan
IMHO, Capitalism is a free market system.

With fractional reserve banking, aka the FED, our markets are anything but free.

Our markets are controlled by the FED.

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: stosh64

It should be obvious that neither party has the interest of the people in mind, only their own.

I couldn't agree more.

I just don't believe ANY president has control of the economy.

The FED is in TOTAL control of it.

a reply to: stosh64

I think you have that backwards.

The fed is in control of not a single damned thing. It is a concept, and nothing more, an idea, a machine made of paper. It does not control anything. It is a control MECHANISM, and the people with their hands at the controls are not beholden to the people, or the government.

In all things, at every level of public life, a civilised society has only one legitimate owner, ruler, one barer of responsibility. That entity is the people who live in that society. Not a small group thereof, not a government, not a financial elite, or secret off shore beneficiary, but the great mass of the people. In any just society, when the people speak, the very land itself rises up to do their bidding, without complaint or resistance.

The fed is a tool used by those who oppose a just society to crush those who wish to live in one, just as runaway inflation and depression was a tool used to do the exact same thing beforehand.

originally posted by: xuenchen
Looks like Obama really failed to fundamentally transform America doesn't it

Obama "Fundamentally Transforming the United States of America"

now people need all the spare change they can get their hands on !!

because he was king of America, with no other parts of a working government having a say in anything.....all the republicans from every state and federal office just resigned and went home to let Obama run the entire government all by himself, for the last 8 years....

originally posted by: stosh64
a reply to: Aazadan
IMHO, Capitalism is a free market system.

With fractional reserve banking, aka the FED, our markets are anything but free.

Our markets are controlled by the FED.

But the Fed is a private entity. Under capitalism, the means of production remain in private hands.

Additionally, FRB has been in use since the 1650's, it wasn't invented in 1913 and that was hardly the first time we had a central bank in the US. Your argument would imply that the US has never been capitalist.

originally posted by: CynConcepts
a reply to: FyreByrd

I really need to do some research" I look at this chart and see a constant steady incline/decline from the very beginning! I am not going to scream Reagan and Obama bs, since there was obviously something that effected this change before 1949! I, now, want to see earlier. I am betting on a bias that it was not necessarily politics and war, but fed reserve and banking as the seed!

Edit add: the only uptick shows that Reagan and Bush Sr. Obviously did something good, but then it really went down hill from there. Honestly this surprises me! I am allowing every president a 2 year reprieve in getting theirselves ability to have an effect against former administrations. That is why I am confused at many posts on here.

I agree with you that more research is needed. And I agree with enlightened that is a 'systemic' trend (meaning really money behind the scenes on all fronts).

Huge changes in the 'balance of power' happened during the Raygun (I can't help myself - I did live in a ronnie CA) executive. The breaking of the Air Traffic Controllers union, the decline of the "Fairness Doctrine" (www.washingtonpost.com... tml) the scapegoating of the poor, open contempt for government and the rule of law. These things were always in the works and have always been active in US society the new propaganda and secrecy (learned well from the German fascists we invited into our midst) found a figure head and willing puppet in Ronald Reagun and his phoney Christianity that made religious orthodoxy (read authoritarianism) a political force.

dollarsandsense.org...

Those are all before Chicago/Friendman economic theory came into vogue (though Reagan did push through the biggest tax increase on working people in history).

dollarsandsense.org...

So the question truly is: Why do working people, the middle class, anyone making less then millions of dollars a year support and vote for 'tools' that will lie, cheat and steal for their Billionaire masters?

By working answer is that (and paraphrased from my signature video) that people willing live in the delusion that one day the will be "Top Dog" and want to treat others as they are presently being treated by the elites rather then accept they are working people, poor people and need the WHOLE of society to support them everyday in everyway.

Then there is a large segment that actually 'sells out to THE MAN' and earns their keep spreading this crap - in media, religion, politics, law enforcement, military, business - oh Big Business, education.....

Thanks for commenting.

originally posted by: Aazadan
a reply to: FyreByrd

Reagan alone isn't to blame, Carter definitely had a role here so if you want to pinpoint a cause I think you need to look at something common to Reagan and Carter. Remember that Reagan didn't take office until 1980 and economic changes are rarely reflected quickly. The changes to income that happened in 1980 would have had their causes rooted several years earlier. This is further reflected by Reagans biggest economic policy which was changing how CPI was computed, that didn't go into effect until 1982 so the changes of 1980 can hardly be linked to him.

My theory is that what caused problems for everyone was the runaway inflation we had and continue to have until this day. This is also what Reagan mainly "fixed" by recomputing CPI. All that did was hide the inflation, it's still there but it does explain why things are continuing to get worse, CPI is off by a couple percent every year and that continues to throw wages out of whack.

This inflation seems to be a problem that no one knows how to fix within the constraints of current economic dogma.

Well read Richard Wolff for potential FIXES to the "constraints of current economic dogma' (www.rdwolff.com...) for one. You say it - DOGMA. There are alternatives - non-authoritarian alternatives. And there are many economists that have FIXES that don't fit DOGMA.

Again just because you've never heard of alternatives doesn't mean they are not available. The functional dictatorship that US citizens live in is not the whole of reality. You might be surprised at all the postive and beneficial things that are being discussed and implemented around the world.