Krugman is a shill…nothing more…and I guess ya really can’t get any less

roflmao

What happened in the early 1970s, besides the oil cartel operating at its peak of power and unity? Anyone remember? That’s right: the beginning of a mind-blowing expansion of regulation at the federal state, and local levels of government in the United States.

Reagan was able to counteract it with tax-rate cuts (as well as some curbing of regulatory excess) in its early stages. The GOP-held Congress was able to hold the line on the expansion of regulatory measures under Clinton, preventing it from getting out of control. That continued at a similar level under Bush 43: regulation grew steadily but not explosively from 1989 to 2009.

But “steadily” has been enough. “Explosively” under Obama is making a bad trend worse. The Bush tax-rate cuts mitigated some of the cost burden of regulation, but in addition to uncertainty about the continuation of current tax rates, businesses now face the income-gouging effect of Obamacare. We can’t have more and more job-killing regulation AND higher taxes and expect business decisions not to change.

18-1 has a good point, but it’s just part of the picture as well. The great majority of wage and salary employees would see 25-30% more in their paychecks — before income tax — if government regulation did not require their employers to spend on several other things for each employee. The cost to the employer of employing someone is significantly more than what the typical employee sees in his paycheck. That employee is working 25-30% of the time so that his employer can deposit money with Social Security, Medicare, unemployment funds, worker compensation insurance, governments’ non-Medicare health care funds (e.g., MediCal), and health plan providers.

Employers don’t “have” that money — it comes from the productivity of the business as a whole, which includes the work done by each employee. Per-employee employment costs are basically government regulations that skim off of worker productivity, requiring employees to work for the state above and beyond what they pay in income taxes.

In other words, the laws of the US mean you can’t get paid as much as you’re worth to your employer. The government gets paid first, and you get what’s left. That household with the $55K earner would see an income level of $70K if the employer could pay the earner himself what he’s worth, instead of sending off a portion of it to the government each month.

For example, suppose you have a husband and wife both making $50k. They get divorced, but since the economy is going strong, they both get raises to $55k.

According to the media family income stat we see their income drop $45k. Really though the same number of people are making 10% more…