dagblog - Comments for "The Obama Era"

I agree with you Michael, a

ocean-kat — Tue, 13 Nov 2012 00:58:45 +0000

In reply to Politicians spout platitudes.

I agree with you Michael, a good leader could sell progressive ideas to some degree to the people. Especially during a crisis situation like we're in now. But I don't see that happening with this president. With Obama the idea of some big progressive idea being put forward and sold to the public just isn't part of my world view. I'm just not looking for a big idea like you are.

What I'm worried about is a big idea being put forward by this president. The so called Grand Bargain. I think Obama is ready to sell out SS, medicare, and medicaid for some picayune tax hike on the rich.

I'll be happy if all Obama does is raise the taxes on the rich and appoint two or more Supreme Court justices. I hope Breyer and Ginsburg have the good sense to resign in the next four years. I'm not looking for a big idea because I think any big idea from Obama is sure to be crap in form and execution.

Politicians spout platitudes.

Michael Wolraich — Mon, 12 Nov 2012 22:08:33 +0000

In reply to Gun control is a non-starter.

Politicians spout platitudes. They don't lead; they follow...American politics reflects American culture.

I disagree with you. Politics and culture has historically been a two-way relationship, each one driving the other. But in recent years, Democratic politicians have taken an increasingly passive role, always following, never leading.

They don't do that nearly so much on the right, not anymore. From Goldwater to Reagan to Ryan, conservatives have advocated aggressive positions that they know they can't win, but they have nonetheless succeeded in driving the agenda to the right.

Most of what we need is about not doing ourselves unnecessary harm.

This is an entirely new phenomenon. For almost the entire 20th century, an aggressive left had little concern about the passive right undoing what it had achieved. The only question was how fast we went forward.

But now we have an aggressive right and a passive left. There remain few serious discussions about moving forward in substantive way; it's all about how to keep from slipping backward.

A defense of my position requires evidence of course, which I have not offered here, but I've argued it consistently across many blogs with many examples for the past couple of years.

Gun control is a non-starter.

DF — Mon, 12 Nov 2012 21:44:48 +0000

In reply to I think they talk about safe

Gun control is a non-starter. Americans don't want it and they don't seem to care who shoots up what. End of story.

Cap and trade is a liberal idea? Since when? The liberal idea was "command and control." Cap and trade isn't even remotely commensurate with climate science. That's liberal?

I guess at this point I'm just baffled by what you're calling for. Politicians spout platitudes. They don't lead; they follow. Americans like their guns and cars. Gun control would be easy enough to propose, but no one wants it except some Dems. Cap and trade isn't a substantive proposal, period.

Personally, I don't think it has to do with lack of leadership or anything that pat. More broadly, American politics reflects American culture.

I wanted my fellow Californians to end the death penalty. They didn't. They did end three strikes. That's still a net positive. I'd like to end the Drug War yesterday. That's not here yet, but it's on the horizon. I think that perhaps by focusing on a lack of leadership that was never really there, we might be missing the real, yet glacially paced changes that are occurring.

Most of what we need is not about a lack of big, bold, undefined ideas or even leadership. Most of what we need is about not doing ourselves unnecessary harm. To the extent that we continue to do these things, it's largely because they're culturally ingrained, not because there aren't enough bold, charismatic, action-packed leaders telling people how it ought to be. Half the nation denies climate change - hell, they deny evolution - but not because Barack Obama isn't telling to believe hard enough.. To the extent that we're wanting what we're not getting, that's usually about plutocracy.

Serious question: If there was a margin in championing either of the ideas you mentioned, do you really think there's a lack of type A self-aggrandizing egomaniacs who would do so?

Well, all you really said was

DF — Mon, 12 Nov 2012 21:23:53 +0000

In reply to Your Krugman link doesn't

Well, all you really said was automation and global labor markets and how that's the issue. Usually when people are claiming those things are having an effect on domestic labor markets, they telling a story about structural unemployment.

As for debt, you said holding the debt down isn't a solution. It is a solution to the debt inasmuch as the debt is actually a problem.

There are fewer manufacturing jobs. There's also still plenty of manufacturing. Sam Slater did not kill the worker.

Why is it that other OECD nations that don't have huge manufacturing output can maintain a high standard of living? Maybe it's because they have a policy mix that includes healthcare, education and a social safety net. Maybe it's because they have a truly progressive tax structure. Nations like Denmark, Sweden and Finland don't offer a high standard of living because their bursting with manufacturing jobs. Changing the policy mix is a credible plan, but you claim no one has proposed it.

The American worker is not poorer because of workers on foreign shores. The American worker is poorer because she has been systematically made so over the last 40 years as a matter of policy.

Brilliantly done, Michael.

Ramona — Mon, 12 Nov 2012 21:02:16 +0000

In reply to The Obama Era

Brilliantly done, Michael. Makes this liberal pretty darned happy. Now if it'll only happen--especially Donald Trump's well-deserved baldness.

No new wars or terrorist attacks would be grand, too. Now if the rest of the world only cooperates.

I don't expect the Republicans to lie down and die, much less take up any form of cooperation. I think the home-grown terrorists aren't done with us yet. The Tea Party, the anti-gays and anti-poor, the NRA, the right wing organizers and their billionaire sugar-daddies probably aren't going anywhere but underground where they can regroup.

When I see the decline of Fox News and the disappearance of Limbaugh, Coulter and Malkin, I'll believe we're inching toward social sanity.

Still, I like your vision of 2016 much more than mine.

Well, they presented it as a

Michael Maiello — Mon, 12 Nov 2012 20:32:37 +0000

In reply to I'm having trouble

Well, they presented it as a "liberal fantasy." I think you're right that it confuses the issue. It's really a best case scenario for an Obama second term, I think -- something that resets the economy and leaves the world a better place without fundamentally fixing what I really think is wrong. Because, heck... I'm not even sure that Obama agrees with me about what the problems are.

I think we'll get immigration

ocean-kat — Mon, 12 Nov 2012 20:04:03 +0000

In reply to I think they talk about safe

I think we'll get immigration reform. I think we could get gun control if democrats had a spine. We might be able to get other things like cap and trade if they tried. Perhaps one problem is democrats don't want to be seen dealing with other issues when the overwhelming concern of Americans is jobs, jobs, jobs. I'm still amazed that Obama won in this economy. Luckily Thurston Howell III was running against him

Some ideas, like free

ocean-kat — Mon, 12 Nov 2012 19:56:08 +0000

In reply to I do agree that many

Some ideas, like free advanced education can't be tackled until the problems with the economy are tackled. But you're right, some of it is timidity. Gun control is a prime example. Fear of the NRA fanatics is stupid, most democrats will never get those votes no matter how much they pander. And many if not most gun owners as well as non gun owners would support rational gun control.

Your Krugman link doesn't

ocean-kat — Mon, 12 Nov 2012 19:45:07 +0000

In reply to This

Your Krugman link doesn't address anything I posted. It addresses the notion the unemployment is caused by geography or skill deficits, neither of which I claimed. Unemployment is high almost everywhere so workers can't simply move to where the jobs are. And there is no evidence that there are large numbers of high skill jobs waiting to be filled if only people would get the proper training. I agree with Krugman. Again I never claimed that was the problem.

I also never claimed the the deficit was a problem. I'm not worried about the debt. I only stated that it would be extremely difficult to get the house to pass a large jobs bill that would have to rely on deficit financing. Short term programs like a jobs bill aren't a debt problem, just a political problem, but long term programs, like true HCR or the ACA act, can't be deficit financed forever and won't work without a robust middle class.

If you haven't read anything about the long term decline of well paying middle class employment, mainly in manufacturing, and those jobs being replaced with lower paying service jobs than, frankly, you're missing a large part of this discussion. And I really have no desire to do your research for you.

This problem has been masked by a tech bubble, which collapsed, and then a housing bubble, which collapsed. While I agree with 98% of Krugman's analysis, I don't think Keynesian spending will solve this problem. At best that will put us back onto the slow decline we were on, the gradual hollowing out of the middle class.

I think they talk about safe

Michael Wolraich — Mon, 12 Nov 2012 19:23:39 +0000

In reply to I'm having some trouble with

I think they talk about safe topics. Health care (but not single payer) is safe. So are immigration reform and voting rights. "Safety net" is vague and inoffensive minus the details.

Is that all they want? I doubt it. I think that most Democrats want gun control, but you hardly hear a squeak about it in Washington. Not a winning issue. Cap-and-trade? Another policy-non-grata. These are not radical ideas. They are liberal ideas that have been hushed up and pushed to the margins because they're unpopular. There are exceptions of course, and I'm sure you can find Democrats who espouse these policies, but they don't represent the party mainstream. In the party platform, you'll only find namby-pamby references that express concern about global warming and gun violence without substantive proposals to address them.