Since the author published this in a business magazine, I would think the intention was to influence businessmen. And indeed, it is businessmen who decide what to pay, so if they accept that paying low wages is harmful to the economy, and hence to them, maybe enough of them will think past next month's profit statement and start contributing to the overall recovery by making the short-term sacrifice of lowering their (record-high) profits for the long-term good.

It may be Obama's greatest failure that he has not used the bully pulpit to preach this, and it might be Romney's greatest campaign device to take the opportunity to do so.

What's wrong with the economy?

The fallout from Reaganomics.

Please, no more trickle-down bullshit. Let's get real that we can't allow corporations and rich people to make all the money while the middle class stagnates.

Or hey...we can...but then rich people might want to check out slide 34...

Ok, but what is the suggestion on how to make corporations transfer more of their profits into wages? We could raise the minimum wage, but wouldn't that simply make corporations outsource more to other countries? What is the practical fix on this one?

Anonymous wrote:Liberal propaganda.

I would need more than a cursory look to understand the charts. However, how did you figure this out so quickly? You must be really smart. Can you explain what you have understood the conservative plan (with actual details) to fix the economy? I might vote for Romney.

Anonymous wrote:Liberal propaganda.

You're going to have to do better than that.

Business Insider's not a liberal site for one thing.

I have a few questions.

First a simple question about a chart I don't understand: The chart that tracks change in GDP minus change in debt shoots up from minus 4 trillion just before the recession (2008, I suppose) to a little over a trillion a short time after the recession (2011?). Can someone explain how the massive increase in debt caused by the stimulus, which I assume is part of the figure subtracted, did not make that line shoot down rather than up. I obviously have things backwards, but I'm at a loss why -- must still be sleepy.

More general substantive question: There are several points where the case is made (which I totally agree with) that a large driving factor in the recession is the fact that the middle class is not spending because their income is down. Then suddenly, near the end, it is argued that people should be spending LESS and saving more. Isn't that a contradiction?

BTW, as far as the "Liberal propaganda" comment, I took the closing exhortation, to go out and elect someone who can fix it, as a pro-Romney message. How did it look to the rest of you?

Liberal propaganda.

I agree. Very well done.

This is really well done:

http://www.businessinsider.com/whats-wrong-with-economy-charts-2012-10#

Urge all regular contributors to this forum to read it.