We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page
Wednesday, July 20. 2016
What Americans want is government to get out of their way. I might be wrong, but "making America great" still depends on what it used to, which is a culture of self-reliance without government micro-managing, over-taxing, and over-regulating their lives.
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)
I don't know if it's what most Americans want, but there are enough of us to change the culture if we want it bad enough to spend the time.
It took only a very small minority of people to begin the shift in direction of this country towards where we are today. They did it by entering fields that shape our culture, like HR, education, marketing, television. They took the time to join committees, get in peoples' faces, make people uncomfortable. We are where we are by design.
Also, I think that conservatives tend to have an all-or-nothing attitude. Progressives are good at incrementalism. They make outrageous goals and demands, then settle for seemingly insignificant compromises.
News Junkie, I think this is one of the most important conversations we can have and the hardest.. I know that I have a lot of ambivalence and there are no simple sound bite answers.
I'm going to take awhile to digest this article, I am so irked. It drips with disdain and condescension for all those little people, you know those mindless, easily lead people that attend Little League games, participate as volunteers to collect litter from the highway, those people who want to be assured that there will be jobs in the future for their children; jobs that will provide an opportunity to contribute and be productive. This writer demonstrates such a failure in imagination and empathy. You have to conclude that they have never interacted with anyone outside of the privilege bubble. Surely, an intellectual should be able to offer more than monolithic stereotypes.
Make America Great is about the citizenry and not about the federal government. That's pretty clear from all of Trump's appearances, interviews and speeches. Never once have I heard Trump praise the awesome work of the federal government.
He has talked about:
1) the bad trade deals our government has made.
2) the influence that lobbyist and business buy inside government
3) the mess our nation is in due to bad government policies and poor spending.
4) removing years worth of regulations once he's in office
5) undoing all of Obama's executive orders.
And this is just a few of the things he's mentioned. None of which include MORE policies and MORE regulations and government interference.
What I want is a massive reversal or the excessive regulations and liberal agenda and end to unconstitutional spending and 9 Supreme Court justices who actually have read the constitution and understand their job and it's limits.
Dems just sell out to the Globalists and Financialists for the Money, but the "Grown Up Republicans" of the article, I think are TRUE believers. They are convinced that the regular every day folks have to be racists or stupid for not buying into Globalism(incl open borders) and Automation as a win, win for everyone, everywhere all the time, though they might acknowledge growing pains. They think you are just being obdurate for not going along. They believe that the “rising tide lift all boats” is a law and not a cliché. I’m not saying there isn’t a kernel of truth in this, and certainly historically it usually has paid off.
They don't understand why you don't trust them that you are better off with a dead end temp job or service job, because you have a undreamed of level of material goods. I am not saying there aren't good jobs being created but they aren't sufficient to make up for all the lost middle management or manufacturing jobs. Lots of the jobs that are being required don't necessarily require a high school education, let alone a college education.
There is a huge asymmetry in knowledge and power between the regular folks and the Mandarin class, which translates into income. I don’t think this is driven solely by government but is in part the consequence of REAL ECONOMIC GAME CHANGERS. The information revolution (meta data), instant global communication, the explosion of digital automation, and logistics are all very disruptive. We are all still trying to come to grips with the impact on those mid level jobs that used to be the mainstay of the middle class, and not just the American middle class. The Dems will coalesce around their cargo cult but honestly I haven’t heard a Republican even attempt to discuss it let alone acknowledge this until Trump
Exasperated: They are convinced that the regular every day folks have to be racists or stupid for not buying into Globalism(incl open borders) and Automation as a win, win for everyone, everywhere all the time, though they might acknowledge growing pains.
The problem with growing pains is that people have to eat every day, and their children need to be educated in this generation.
Globalization generally leads to greater economic activity and efficiency. Huge markets create opportunity, while tapping the skills of billions of people allow for increasing levels of specialization. However, there will inevitably be winners and losers. Sometimes, the winners will wrest control of market sectors locking others out. And change is always difficult. Consider a 19th century rug-maker, a long generational line of rug-makers. The French come in with their manufactured goods. The old rug-maker loses most of his business, but is at the point where it is hard for him to adapt or learn a new trade. His son may end up unemployed, or working in a rug factory as an unskilled laborer, if he is lucky. The old rug-maker hates modernity, the economic problems, the rupturing of the old ways.
Developed societies attempt to navigate the maelstrom by educating the young, retraining the middle-aged, and providing sustenance to the old, poor, and dislocated. It's not a perfect system, but this mixture of a social safety net along with robust markets seems to be the most successful system at this point in history.
We may indeed all be rubes out here in flyover country but we aren't stupid. Globalization and open borders is not intended to make us all happier and wealthier it is purely and simply the looting of America by our politicians. The open borders provide millions of new "voters" every year and the politicians fight over them and discard the legal citizens and their interests. Offshoring our jobs and providing tax advantage to do so is extremely lucrative to our politicians. They are given millions for their reelection campaigns or their "charities" and they are promised high paying jobs and board appointments when they leave office in return for greasing the skids of globalization. In the meantime our government borrow trillions to provide welfare to those who lose jobs because of these treasonous acts. By the time this faux economy collapses and the country is plunged into a great depression those politicians will have safely moved to Ireland or Switzerland to live out their golden years. We are being screwed and they didn't even buy us dinner!
Here is a debate from 1994. Who do you think got it right?
Sorry for the length.
The Middle in America seems to be caught in a perfect Storm between globalism, automation, and instant global communication. To be clear, I hope we all realize that a static economy is a kind of death so we want to live in a dynamic economy, which means change. This change is part of the human condition and we have been adapting from the time of the first basket wavers and flint knappers. This is part of an ongoing journey. People had to adapt when the railroad tied America together into one enormous domestic market place, and when the interstate highway system lured corporations to the Sunbelt. There were winners and losers of course. Today, the same thing is happening writ large, but it doesn’t seem like most of us benefit. There are few well paid occupations that can’t be off shored, despite all the assurances.
So American consumers buy imported household and personal products. The countries exporting to the United States, in turn, have a trade surplus so that they can turn around and buy products from the Multinational Megacorps in the USA. OK, so far so good. Supposedly foreign buyers are buying agricultural products, energy, autos & aeronautics, entertainment, capital equipment. I understand this but what I don't see is how this benefits the regular everyday working people, except in an indirect, trickle down kind of way. These industries don’t create huge demands for labor for regular people, gifted creative people maybe , but not regular people. I can’t find the chart comparing the revenues for Google relative to the number of employees compared to General Motors. It is telling. Also check out Boeing. Boeing may suck up a lot of foreign trade dollars but if you look at Boeing’s supply chain, you will see why it doesn’t trickle down to the American working middle. Not faulting Boeing, just saying.
I apparently lack vision because I just don’t get how flea markets, beaders, and aroma therapy candle shops will make up for the jobs that generate “real grow then pie wealth”. Maybe we’re all going to stand around all day working for the government, giving each other flu shots. I just don’t see how dead end service jobs, stoop labor, or government jobs are going to make up for the significant revenues and support for infrastructure that would have been generated by the manufacturing sector.
"Boeing may suck up a lot of foreign trade dollars but if you look at Boeing’s supply chain, you will see why it doesn’t trickle down to the American working middle."
Messed this up, accidently deleted some of my point. Boeing employs a lot of Americans, of course, possibly over a million if you include the entire supply chain. It is not a great example of the decline in # of employees to revenues ratio. I was trying to point out that Boeing's supply chain is worldwide and the $30B in foreign sales doesn't just go to creating American jobs.