The Great Decoupling of Corporate Profits From Jobs
Monday 26 July 2010
by: Robert Reich | Robert Reich's Blog | Op-Ed
Second-quarter earnings reports are coming in, and they’re making Wall Street smile. Corporate profits are up. And big American companies are sitting on a gigantic pile of money. The 500 largest non-financial firms held almost a trillion dollars in the second quarter, and that money pile is growing larger this quarter. Profits that plummeted in the recession have bounced back. Big businesses have recovered almost 90 percent of what they lost.
So with all this money and profit, they’ll start hiring again, right? Wrong – for three reasons.
First, lots of their profits are coming from their overseas operations. So that’s where they’re investing and expanding production.
GM now sells more cars in China than it does in the US, but makes most of them there. The company now employs 32,000 hourly workers in China. But only 52,000 GM hourly workers remain in the United States – down from 468,000 in 1970.
GM isn’t just hiring low-tech assembly workers in China. Last week the firm broke ground there on a $250 million advanced technology center to develop batteries and other alternative energy sources.
You and I and other American taxpayers still own over 60 percent of GM. We bought GM to save GM jobs, remember?
GM officials say no American taxpayer money is being used to expand in China. But money is fungible. Because of our generosity, GM can now use the dollars it doesn’t have to spend in the United States meeting its American payrolls and repaying its creditors, for new investments in China.
Second, big U.S. businesses are investing their cash in labor-saving technologies. This boosts their productivity, but not their payrolls.
Last Friday, for example, Ford reported a $2.6 billion second-quarter profit. The firm is already more than two-thirds the way to equaling its record 1999 profits. But due to labor-saving technologies, Ford now has half as many employees as it did a decade ago.
Wall Street analysts are happy with Ford’s “commitment to keeping capacity in check,” according to the Wall Street Journal. Ford shares rose 5.2 percent Friday. “Keeping capacity in check” is the Street’s way of saying “no new hiring.” In fact, the Street is advising investors to sell the stocks of companies that talk openly of expanding capacity.
Finally, corporations are using their pile of money to pay dividends to their shareholders and buy back their own stock – thereby pushing up share prices.
Last Friday, GE announced it would raise its dividend by 20 percent and reinstate its share-buyback plan. It’s GE’s first dividend increase since the company cut its dividend in early 2009. As a result, GE shares are up more than 5% in the past few days.
Bottom line: Higher corporate profits no longer lead to higher employment. We’re witnessing a great decoupling of company profits from jobs.
The next supply-side economist who tells you companies need more incentive (i.e. lower taxes) before they’ll hire is living on another planet.
The reality is this: Big American companies may never rehire large numbers of workers. And they won’t even begin to think about hiring until they know American consumers will buy their products. The problem is, American consumers won’t start buying against until they know they have reliable paychecks.
All republished content that appears on Truthout has been obtained by permission or license.
Support Truthout's work with a $10/month tax-deductible donation today!




Comments
This forum is moderated by software. Please allow up to 15 minutes for your comments to go live and avoid posting the same comment multiple times.
A republiKKKlan in our forum
Tue, 07/27/2010 - 18:35 β Anonymous (not verified)A republiKKKlan in our forum call it "CEO Jealousy"
I remember when Clinton was
Tue, 07/27/2010 - 18:49 β MarbleRye (not verified)I remember when Clinton was running for president, Rush Limbaugh, the most extreme of right-wing extremism, loved to champion Big Business/Corporate America by trumpeting that when Big Biz succeeds and gets rich, everyone else benefits too because Big Biz always reinvests in their company and hires more people. As if it's some automatic thing because these corporate execs just fall all over themselves wanting to help the regular Joes of this country.
I remember thinking upon hearing that, "what makes you think these jackals aren't pocketing all their profits while cooking-down the books and poor-mouthing the public, leaving no money to invest/hire?"
Much like the moron I realized he is, Rush did not acknowledge the very existence of a simple concept known as greed. To him, corporate greed is a low-brow excuse that only those lacking intellect will use as an excuse for their perceived failures. But it doesn't exist in reality. Oh no.
And here we are, 20+ years after Reaganomics and 10 after the beginning of this Age of Corporate Fraud with Enron/WorldCom and continuing on through AIG/Wall Street/Madoff/Big Auto today. Trickle down economics my butt. Reagan really screwed this country's people and Rush continues to preach his highly incorrect gospel. If this country ceases to exist in the near future, which I suspect it'll be gone inside 20 years, it'll be because of Reagan and Rush. Reaganomics was/is to this country's economy is what the Trojan Horse was to Troy.
If we own 60% of GM (via our
Tue, 07/27/2010 - 19:43 β Alan Stromberg (not verified)If we own 60% of GM (via our government investment/bailout), why don't we simply repopulate GM's board with people (like Reich) who would consider the effect of hiring on our economy.
How juvenile of me to think so stupidly!
American Corporations who
Tue, 07/27/2010 - 20:18 β Anonymous (not verified)American Corporations who pay 35% Income tax on profits in the USA, pay no income tax on profits made from their China Corporations. It was Slick Willie Clinton who gave us Nafta and China via Walmart. Jobs will never come back, we the working classes have been doublecrossed by the leadership of the Democratic Party. It was Kennedy, Kerry, Dodd and Lieberman who voted for Clinton's Nafta.
To anonymous 20:18, True
Tue, 07/27/2010 - 23:45 β Anonymous (not verified)To anonymous 20:18,
True they voted for NAFTA, ALL of it not just the first half. Maybe you weren't aware of the second part that was never implemented by the Repugs. This would have raised wages and work standards internationally.
The result preventing that "great sucking sound" of US jobs. Fault the Democratic leadership for trusting the completely untrustworthy Rebulican leadership.
Silly me. I thought that by
Wed, 07/28/2010 - 00:06 β billnbillieskid (not verified)Silly me. I thought that by "buying American" I was boosting our economy. Now, I find out that it's CHINA'S economy I'm boosting. No matter WHAT happens in America, Big Business wins. When they lose, they win, and when they win they make a killing on the backs of the poor working stiffs. WHERE is Justice? WHERE are the laws that protect the PEOPLE? The Roberts' Court doesn't give a damn about us. We have no money or power. We have no Lobbyists looking out for OUR best interests. We elected the Congress to do that for us and they have failed us miserably. Wake up, America. It's time for the elected officials to start working for the people again. If the won't, as in Republi-won't, VOTE them OUT in November. Let's get America back to working for Americans, ALL Americans, not just Big Businesses and Banks.
Come on folks... this is
Wed, 07/28/2010 - 23:51 β Anonymous (not verified)Come on folks... this is Robert Reich were talking about. H never met a business he didn't hate, so why would you possibly listen to a word he says?!!
Sad, real sad. Our
Thu, 07/29/2010 - 00:51 β EmeraldGreenSea (not verified)Sad, real sad. Our Democracy has been decoupled from its People too -- and this decoupling is not a coincidence to the one Robert Reich writes about here!
If our Democracy were still connected to the people, if it were still viable, and could embrace and act upon the real interests of its citizens, then this article would be a major lead story on every news outlet in the country from now until the next election-- and the election after that too. That's because an independent press (i.e. not corporate controlled) would report essential information such as this to the people, giving it the sense of importance and urgency it deserves.
And Pete Peterson wouldn't be welcomed in the halls of Congress (the People's House) to "fix" Social Security, while payroll incomes -- the sole source of revenue for Social Security -- decline or vanish.
The key here is "Wall
Sun, 08/01/2010 - 17:38 β Brian (not verified)The key here is "Wall Street". Over the years, I've worked for some companies that were private and went public (or were bought by a public company), and my father did too. In every case, the companies changed dramatically, with short term profit becoming the overriding goal. The easiest way to make more profit is to lay off workers, pay them less, reduce their benefits, or don't give them raises when profits go up. All those things make the stock price go up, and the companies are lauded by most (narrow-minded) economic analysts. Other things that happen are shipping jobs overseas, hiring temp or part-time workers (no benefits), and in general avoiding all costs that would boost a company's long-term value without boosting short-term profits (stock price).
The stock market probably used to help businesses grow faster and improve. That was back when people thought in the long term, bought stocks they thought would be more valuable many years or even decades in the future. Now the strategy is to constantly buy and sell, focusing on short term profits and nothing else. I think this is the root cause of most of our economic troubles, combined with those same financial institutions and other corporations having more say about who gets elected and what legislation gets passed. Without fundamental, major changes, our economy and our nation is bound to keep declining, as it has been over the last several decades. The stock market and stock prices are false idols and do not reflect the health of the economy. If you disregard stock prices, you'll see the true health of our economy, and it's not a good picture.
OK, Anonymous on 7/28 at
Tue, 08/03/2010 - 17:45 β Frances in California (not verified)OK, Anonymous on 7/28 at 23:51, how many unemployed have YOU hired in the last six months? Put your HR money into your Mouth that Does the Hiring.