Dave wrote:
... the Times has time and again been blinded by its reporters'
biases and sloppy editorial supervision. Remember Jason Blair?

So, just one anecdote "proves" the whole thing is rotten, as far as
you're concerned?

... But generally the reporters tend to be of a moderate to very
slightly liberal bent.


The Wall Street Journal? Surely you jest.

This is symptomatic of your problem... and lots of other people... you
are enslaved by your prejudices. If you disagree, it's liberal bias. If
it's pro-Bush/Cheney, it's hard fact. The direct evidence of your own
eyes doesn't seem to weigh in. You don't want to see America prosper &
succeed, you want to see "liberals" suffer.



Cyclical volume of orders for durable goods.
Increasing demands for off-clock work, unpaid overtime, and overtime
paid at regular wage.
Increasing demand for low-cost low-quality goods
Accounting irregularities skewing returns
Offshore production counted as domestic (ie more accounting tricks)
Consistently low interest rate (ie low demand for capital)


So you are persuaded that productivity has not increased? I don't find the
above very persuasive.

Of course not. It doesn't agree with the pro-Bush/Cheney propaganda you
so eagerly swallow.

In any event, I'm not claiming that productivity has definitely not
increased, but I find it hard to believe that it has increased
significantly enough to affect the US economy... because the US economy
remains unaffected by signs of it.



In any event, if productivity has truly increased, it hasn't been
unequivocal and it has not led to increased profitability.


Jon's claims were about productivity, not profitability.

True.

... I'm sure he would
be screaming like a stuck pig if corporate profits were also up.

Why is it all about hatred for those you disagree with? That's a very
poor attitude, Dave.

DSK