California & Texas Produce as Much as Canada & France -- With Far Fewer Workers

The superior productivity of the American economy in two charts

France and California are both roughly equal in economic output (GDP), but France requires a workforce a third larger to produce it.

Canada and Texas are roughly equal in economic output also, yet Canada requires a workforce 50% larger than Texas to produce it.

Some questions:

1. Why is the US so much more productive than France and Canada? [My answer: Because capital investment is more intensive and because government regulatory burdens are lower].
2. Would we be better off if, as some people desire,  the US were less capital intensive --  that is, if we had less automation, offshored less manufacturing, and employed more people to produce the same amount of goods?
3. Would we be better off if, as some people desire, government regulation of businesses in the US were at higher levels?

Productivity Stagnation = Wage Stagnation

Ultimately, wages must reflect productivity. You cannot justify higher wages without higher production . Efforts to counter that without changing productivity-- e.g. misguided minimum wage actions -- are, then, merely transferring money from one set of people (those whose labor value is less than the minimum and are, therefore, unemployable) to those with higher skills and labor value.

You can argue why productivity has been falling in the 21st century (I blame increased government regulation and capital controls), but unless you change this curve, overall wages are going to continue to be stagnate.