dagblog - Comments for "Corporate America Breaks Up With The Middle Class"

Corporate Power Ideology

Resistance — Fri, 17 Jun 2011 23:39:15 +0000

Corporate Power Ideology Rule or Ruin

Get it all while they can, the foundation is crumbling.

But right now they have no power in the political system. Nor do they have anyone with a major megaphone speaking for them.

There's a megaphone yelling "dont panic folks, there's plenty of lifeboats, everythings under control "

From an economic security

Flavius — Fri, 17 Jun 2011 23:27:00 +0000

In reply to Some equilibration of wages

From an economic security standpoint, this is hurting the overwhelming majority of Americans, who make up most of the society, who are not benefiting from long-term economic dynamics, who are unable to secure special privileges for themselves through political influence, and who are increasingly vulnerable if they have not already had their lives collapse around them.

And even this vulnerable position is occuring under a deficit which at some point has to be reduced.

Some equilibration of wages

AmericanDreamer — Fri, 17 Jun 2011 15:41:27 +0000

In reply to Thanks Destor . I'm late to

Some equilibration of wages is inevitable, sure. But neither the extent nor the pace of it are. Nor is the relative degree of sharing of benefits, burdens and risks of the economic transition. The top 10% or so are doing better while everyone else is treading water, hanging on by a thread, or has fallen off the cliff. The current dynamics are intensely destabilizing politically, as we observe every day. They have greatly weakened the quality of our republic and will continue to do so unless and until there is an effective response that reinstills the faith of most Americans in their political system and in the basic premises of American life.

The gross power imbalance and warped public agenda we see today, including the almost complete lack of any sort of countering response during this monumental transition period, is a measure of the degree of domination of the political agenda by corporate America. It avows, and grossly violates whenever it suits its purposes (socialism for the privileged few, capitalism or a weak safety net for everyone else), right-wing premises that have blown up in our faces again and again in recent years--Katrina, Gulf oil spill, financial meltdown most obviously. So far the manifest failure of those premises has not led to the needed correctives and adjustments.

All of the above is why we need a government committed to the well-being of ordinary Americans. Ordinary people--people who are not independently wealthy or wealthy enough to survive intense economic shocks to their lives--can adjust to negative changes that are gradual. Today's GOP is committed to fast-forwarding the current economic dynamics, while at the same time also destroying both public and private economic security cushions. The response of Democrats on economic policy, among elected officials, has been one of timidity, surrender, or me-tooism (many elected official Democrats being relucant to confront or stand up to powerful corporations, others apparently intellectually persuaded by the conservative Republican worldview on economic policy or unable to formulate better alternatives they are willing to fight for) from some, and heroic underdog efforts in other cases, coming from many of the party's progressive elected officials in Congress.

David Brooks had a column the other day where he said the 2012 election is about who has the best response to American decline. I do not want my party to accept, or show through its body language, a narrative of national decline. I think that is politically lethal. But beyond that it is premature, still. Had this country made some good policy decisions since circa 1980--made investments in all of our people, modernized our infrastructure, intensified R&D, at least slowed down otherwise irreversible negative trade dynamics so as to ease the transitions, avoided the ruinous Iraq war--we'd be in better shape. Still challenged and under intense pressure, but in better shape. You're right that all empires or dynasties or dominant powers eventually decline. But those that make good decisions hold up better, for longer, and are less likely to suffer complete collapse, but rather transition to a different, undominant, but still decent place in the global order.

One thing I give Obama credit for is that, however inadequate the substance backing it up is, his WTF SOTU motif is a needed message. Ordinary Americans fear and sense decline even when they are not personally experiencing it. But they are going to be reluctant to vote for candidates, especially presidents, they think are resigned to that and generally prefer the candidate best able to project optimism, nonverbally as well as verbally. We do need to organize and fight, in the sense of making long-term, sustained, prosperity-enhancing commitments, for a good future for our country--or at least the best possible one.

Right now we as a society are figuratively trying to fend off a herd of rampaging rhinos with popgun policies, shackling ourselves far more effectively than any of our competitors ever could. From an economic security standpoint, this is hurting the overwhelming majority of Americans, who make up most of the society, who are not benefiting from long-term economic dynamics, who are unable to secure special privileges for themselves through political influence, and who are increasingly vulnerable if they have not already had their lives collapse around them. But right now they have no power in the political system. Nor do they have anyone with a major megaphone speaking for them.

Could it be that's what it

Resistance — Fri, 17 Jun 2011 11:45:04 +0000

In reply to Thanks Destor . I'm late to

Could it be that's what it would take :a Tea Party victory.?

Yeah could it be, thats how we have to go, in order to get our sovereignty back.?

Obama and the Democrats in order to not be outdone by the Republicans, have essentially accepted the ideology that debt is bad.

Maybe the moment the Dems see Rand making progress they'll conclude. the only way to maintain control is to outdo Rand.

What else can we do, to stop the Corporate enslavement. The Corporations can't be anything else, but what they are.

I am reminded of the old tale of the Scorpion and the Frog "You knew I was a scorpion, when you decided to carry me and put me on your back"

Or the woman who felt sorry for the almost frozen rasttlesnake,and how the woman found out to late, the snake was ungrateful.

Corporate power is ungrateful, It serves only themselves and WE KNOW THIS.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=10WFobBSd0s&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_RyPicPxM3M

"Take me in ol tender woman, take me in for heavens sake ....cried the snake"

"Oh shut up silly woman, said the reptile with a grin

you knew damn well I was a snake before you took me in."

I imagine that is exactly

kgb999 — Fri, 17 Jun 2011 09:35:04 +0000

In reply to Democratic centrist

I imagine that is exactly what they'll say. It's the same thing they said after 2010. It would be kind of unexpected for them to just roll over (and I am not entirely confident the progressives would prevail in the end). Corporatists would probably fight like a rabid wounded badger to keep control (likely by offering to allow progressives to put together an election-winning platform/rhetorical approach for them again while trying to maintain control of the purse strings and nominating process to ensure the platform is never promoted should nominees take office) ... especially if a fringe candidate like Bachmann or Paul were to win and definitively put the ball in the Dem court for 2016. But truth is Democrats have followed the exact course promoted by so-called centrists in most every instance, so that argument would be total bullshit.

In the end, only Democrats will be deciding who maintains control within the party. If liberals were to prove unable to assert controlling influence after the results of corporatist centrism had decimated the party, it would be time for liberals to move on. At that point there would be no viable argument for them to continue to support the Democratic party. Losing consistently after promoting conservative policy *should* kind of blow the "we have to be conservative to win elections" excuse out of the water - kind of turns it in to "we have a shit-ton of money and want the Democratic party to promote conservative economic policy; fuck off you DFHs and get to the phone bank!"

Switching away from something unpopular doesn't take much political dexterity at all. Previous positions wouldn't change that; people are generally downright magnanimous when you do what they want. Some in the public groused a bit over stimulus (sort of), but tons of people are downright PISSED about so-called austerity measures. Regardless, Obama himself will likely not be switching course for as long as he holds power.

Thanks Destor . I'm late to

Flavius — Fri, 17 Jun 2011 04:11:00 +0000

In reply to Corporate America Breaks Up With The Middle Class

Thanks Destor .

I'm late to this so I'll keep it short

It's not American business.It's just business. It's owned by whatever selection of investment trusts which happened to buy the shares sometimes in the past and haven't yet found it was in their interests to sell. They are completely indifferent to the welfare of the US.

Countries go up and countries go down. Smarter people than I can explain why. I just notice that it happens . It was hard to believe it would happen to you if you were a Roman Senator, Venetian Merchant, or Victorian Duke. But it did . And will to us.

Maybe under the scenario you've described.Correctly , I think.

Inevitably all production must drift away from the US.

Some to any emerging nation that can provide security and a $5/ a day work force ,Any management that refused to outsource to Fivedollarsadaystan would be replaced by the shareholders . Whatever their nationality.

.Some to China which will simply insist that if you sell in China , you produce in China..

There's a theoretical solution. Tariffs.

The virtue of protection is, it does the trick.

Keynes

Perhaps uniquely the US could maintain its standard of living if it broke off all relations with the rest of the world tomorrow. Wish them well. Welcome them as tourists Visit them ourselves . Just don't do business with them.

It was called Isolation in the 30s and it carried with it a lot of right wing baggage..

What would Ron Paul do?

Could it be that's what it would take :a Tea Party victory.?

Maybe we can get Obama to

Resistance — Thu, 16 Jun 2011 19:09:35 +0000

In reply to Democratic centrist

Maybe we can get Obama to step aside just as Weiner?

He has let his voters down, .He has embarrased US, the right hates him. The mans economic plan has failed.

Move over and let Sanders deliver us from this bad economy. .

We've tried the centrist corporate way, now as more and more of the electorate wonders about our future, Sanders can give us a direction to ease the coming pain. The shared sacrifice of a country on the ropes.

Obama FAILED why do we need to give him another term?

Maybe this is a good time to make term limits apply to all, even the President.

Whatever your're going to get done you better get it done quick, you dont have another term to jack us around.

Then when Obama wins this next go around, and the country is still in a malaise, we progressives can say WE TOLD YOU HIS POLICIES SUCKED, when are you going to listen?

Hang on to your money progressives, that is if you have any, this economic system based upon a corporate model will fail. The economy is based uopn an illusion, There will be no relief for the middle class.

The bankers knew this, thats why they wanted to be bailed out, the system they made is crumbling. It is only the dumb peasants who believe and trust the government.

A government who sold out and destroyed the essential pillar of support of their continued existence WE THE PEOPLE meant something. The Government made the mistake of taking the people for granted, The Tea party knows; the progressives know, Greek workers know Coprorate interests are screwing the middle class.

Why should we save their bacon when they couldnt give a crap about ours?

It wasnt written WE THE BANKERS

Then we'll give the corporate masters the backlashing they deserve.

Obama: "Where else you going to go, tell us were listening" (Like really listening as in domestic spying. They know were pissed and they dont care)

As others have stated before when the banks were about to go under there was an urgency. Now having saved the banks; the people are going under.

Well folks it's obvious there is no urgency.

Why is that? .

Just hang on to your money, watch who you're investing with.

Remember Money talks, support those who support you.

"From a moral standpoint, I

MrSmith1 — Thu, 16 Jun 2011 18:36:44 +0000

In reply to Corporate America Breaks Up With The Middle Class

"From a moral standpoint, I believe that we do have an obligation to (help) others around the world climb out of poverty."

And corporations are helping us achieve that goal by lowering the average salaries of Americans and raising the average salaries of foreign workers, thus allowing the lines which delineate world-wide poverty to become murkier. And by allowing American workers to creep closer to what used to be defined as poverty and raising the salaries of foreign workers closer to what we used to define as the middle class, we can create a common worker sub-class which will know no boundaries, and will, (possibly), make hiring Americans more attractive to corporations. So, hooray for business, because their helping workers in foreign countries actually means they care about us. Yes, they like us, they really like us, just not enough to pay us a living wage in the country in which we live ... but never mind that. Like the old joke; "The scale says I'm a perfect weight ... if I was a foot taller, I earn a living wage ... if I lived in Pakistan,

(the preceeding was brought to you by sarcasm)

Democratic centrist

AmericanDreamer — Thu, 16 Jun 2011 16:40:15 +0000

In reply to Investment capital isn't

Democratic centrist corporatism would likely be on the ropes institutionally should the philosophy lose the WH on the heels of the 2010 disaster.

I doubt that. I think a '12 presidential loss would get blamed, by the Democratic corporate conservative "centrist" faction, on too-liberal Obama spending and stimulus policies that didn't work--the same argument the GOP presidential nominee will make for '12. Right now no one with any mass media presence whatsoever is pushing back on that argument. It's a freakin' vacuum right now.

In fact, with the GOP race now underway the part of the public that is paying any attention is getting led more and more in that direction through sheer force of repetition and no counter-arguments or alternative views and proposals it is hearing. The part of the public paying attention to politics now may be higher than usual at this point in an election cycle because the economy is so bad, because so many people are desperate, and because there does not appear to be a plan to bring about better results for them any time soon.

If Obama were to change course again he'd have moved from favoring stimulus to favoring austerity to favoring stimulus again. Doing so would tax the political agility of the most skilled politicians we've had.

The attitude around Arizona,

Resistance — Thu, 16 Jun 2011 15:35:36 +0000

In reply to Yeah; I'd read about Arizona

The attitude around Arizona, is put them to work in the parks, like some CC camp and the workers living in tents, or WPA program.

They keep reminding me that 20% of the people pay all the taxes 50% on welfare, 30% barely paying the taxes for their own support, leaving the other 20% to pay for all the lazy.

It’s terrible in Arizona; a Right to Work State, and apparently a Right to be Anal

The geezers around here, are always telling me about the Great Depression, as though it was a badge of courage; and how it's time the New Generation to learn about toughing it out. Money doesn’t grow on trees. They remind me there was no government assistance and they all survived.

It doesn’t matter that Arizona benefits are some of the worst,

All they can say is “90 some weeks at $1200.00 per month, with food stamps and all kinds of bene’s

They say maybe they all should stop working and draw this good money, let someone else work and pay the taxes ?

They are galled that people don’t even have to get up and dressed to report to some welfare office to pick up the check. It gets sent straight to the recipients homes,

"lazy, cant even get up out of bed or away from the TV" is always their reply

They tell me all the time “Show up at the CC camp, ready to work then you’ll get a check,. Oh that’s right the Unions have those jobs”

Then a few of My Union friends have one hell of time, convincing them that it was Unions that made the middle class

Then they start in with their praise of Wisconsin's Walker. "Government workers should not be Unionized, they're taking the jobs the unemployed should do, or as you well know, the illegals have taken up the slack in whatever Jobs the American unemployed could have done"

You cant even get the unemployed to get in the bus to go clean up along the highways, they are not allowed. Evidently a liability issue? Or a DOT workers issue?

They make a choice illegals or the American unemployed.

The old timers on fixed incomes dont want higher taxes and they feel Unemployment benefits raises their taxes. Get rid of the Unemployed problem, put them to work FIRST before offering illegals the job.

You and I both know; Unemployment is not lazy, but they get these wild ideas.