The "New Economy"

Discussion in 'Economics' started by Comanche, May 23, 2007.

  1. Remember this?? Sounds like the exact thing I am reading on here from quite a few guys. Hell, it sounds like everyone on Wall Street for that matter. The first paragraph sounds like a cue card of current.

    New Economy was a term coined in late 1990s by pundits to describe what some thought was an evolution of the United States and other developed countries from an industrial/manufacturing-based wealth producing economy into a service sector asset based economy from globalisation and currency manipulation by governnments and their central banks. At the time, some analysts claimed that this change in the economic structure of the United States had created a state of permanent steady growth, low unemployment, and immunity to boom-and-bust macroeconomic cycles. Furthermore, they believed that the change rendered obsolete many business practices. When the stock market bubble burst, analysts soon realized they had been wrong. While many of the more exuberant predictions proved to be wrong, some pundits continue to use the term New Economy to describe contemporary developments in business and the economy.

    In the financial markets, the term has been associated with the Dot-com boom. This included the emergence of the NASDAQ as a rival to the New York Stock Exchange, a high rate of IPOs, the rise of Dot-com stocks over established firms, and the prevalent use of such tools as stock options. In the wider economy the term has been associated with practices such as outsourcing, business process outsourcing and business process re-engineering.

    The general idea is that a business should focus on those areas of its operation which are critical to its success and where it has a competitive advantage. Other areas of its operation should be outsourced, typically using technology as the facilitator. In a developed economy, the critical success factors to a leading business are likely to be intellectual things such as brands, products specifications and technical capabilities. Many routine business functions (such as manufacturing and customer service desks) may be outsourced.
  2. bluud


    An editor has expressed concern that this article or section is unbalanced.
    Please help improve the article by adding information and sources on neglected viewpoints, or by summarizing and use of summary style if it is too long already.
  3. Allaces


    The new economy is just the old whore with a fresh coat of lipstick
  4. How does this factor in to your "New Economy"??

    Yep, history will repeat itself again, as it always does.

    Men in their 30s not as well off as their dads were

    01:11 PM CDT on Saturday, May 26, 2007

    Associated Press

    American men in their 30s earn less than their fathers' generation did at the same age, potentially reversing longtime assumptions that each successive generation will be better off than its predecessor, according to a study released Friday.

    Family incomes of thirtysomething men have continued to rise in recent decades, but mostly because more of their wives are working, the study's authors said. Yet even with the addition of women's paychecks, the rate of family income growth has slowed.

    Taken together with data showing more workers are earning less in comparison with the incomes of top earners, the report suggests that a growing number of Americans "believe that the rules of the game are no longer fair," said John Morton, director of the Economic Mobility Project at the Pew Charitable Trusts and one of the study's lead authors.

    In 2004, the median income for a man in his 30s was $35,010 – 12 percent less than thirtysomething men in 1974, adjusted for inflation, according to the study, which was based on Census Bureau data. In contrast, men in their 30s in 1994 earned 5 percent more than their fathers did at the same age.


    Researchers focused on that age group because income in the 30s is a good predictor of lifetime income, according to the report.

    Outsourcing and the demise of higher-paying manufacturing jobs have contributed to the stagnation in men's incomes, Mr. Morton said. The influx of well-educated women into the workforce since the 1970s also might have weighed on men's wages, he said.

    The generational income gap highlights troubling questions, Mr. Morton said, including what happens if an increasing percentage of workers believe the American dream "is off-limits to them."

    The Pew study does not make policy recommendations. But economist Heather Boushey of the Washington-based Center for Economic and Policy Research argues that focusing on low-wage jobs would help curb the relative slide in men's earnings.

    In particular, she supports boosting the pay of low-wage jobs above the minimum wage, along with on-the-job-training that encourages career advancement.

    A stronger push to college also could help raise men's earnings.

    "Education has always been the one staircase out of the class-stratified society," said Ellen Galinsky, president of the Families and Work Institute in New York.

    Yet among those under 50 years old, 32 percent of women hold a four-year degree, compared with 23 percent of men. That's a dramatic change from the past, when men were better educated than women.

    Die-hard careerist baby boomers might partly explain the inability of men in their 30s to move up the income ladder as quickly as their fathers. From the moment Generation Xers set foot in the workplace, boomers have been the "ceiling" blocking their way up the income ladder, said Peter Rose of marketing research company Yankelovich Inc. in Los Angeles.

    "The boomers stand out in defining themselves in terms of their work and have shown a disinclination to get out of the way," he said.

    The Pew report is the first in a planned series of studies on economic mobility drawing together researchers representing think tanks from across the political spectrum.
  5. I have had an opportunity to talk at length with a person who has seen the last 100 years of economic global development. Wealth creation and economic mobility still exist but the paths to it have changed. The names have changed but the face never changes.