Over the course of the history of our country political parties have come and gone. Remember the Constitutional Union Party [1860] and the Whigs [1836-1864] among several others, some good and some not so much so (i.e. radicalized and/or extremest). Perhaps both parties are deceased. Since capitalism and politics are intertwined I am commenting on both.
Perhaps we are at a point in time that we are due for another party, or two, to emerge, ones that support and champion the majority of Americans that are truly the ones that make our country and economy strong and robust. The more wealth/disposable income the masses have the stronger the economy will be. Consumption is the major driver of most all industries, presuming that they are not support mainly by government handouts/contracts/etc..
Personally, it appears quite evident to me that the striving for wealth and power are akin to being addicted to powerful drugs. There is never enough of either for those addicted.
However, without sufficient disposable income for workers the economy will ultimately fail, especially in the economic model that we are currently in. The American capitalist model is flawed and failing. We, the masses, are on the verge of becoming the equivalent of serfs. The imbalance of wealth distribution in the country cannot be sustained. Once it reaches a tipping point, where most of the population can only afford the basics of existence (vs. thriving), collapse will follow...history has shown this many times over. What comes from that is a good question.
Can/will we all come together to make positive and significant improvements? I'm not talking about tearing down the economy or eliminating individual wealth (i.e. pure socialism) [Segway- I wonder how many "titans of industry" and avowed anti-socialists will acknowledge that many corporations are beneficiaries of socialist programs in that they exist and profit only because of government "handouts", aka socialism...topic for another discussion?] We need/must have people in power politically that are not beholding to the ultra rich, individuals or corporations (which are not people and I couldn't care less what SCOTUS has to say on that...they are wrong), and have the vision required to move us in a direction that is more functional, positive, equitable and sustainable.
There is one known constant in the universe and that is CHANGE. It is inevitable and inescapable. The question is...what form will it take? Will it be positive or negative?
IMHO an effective tactic would be to point out that although we've been encouraged to conflate capitalism with private enterprise, there's a big difference between them. Private enterprise is the privately owned production of physically real goods and services. That ownership includes co-ops and worker owned businesses. Note I didn't say "free" enterprise; that was a '50s N.A.M. slogan meant to give the impression somehow freedom and political rights were linked to capitalism.
In contrast to private enterprise, capitalism is the privileging of that abstraction known as money. Seen now at its worst with the nearly complete financialization of the economic system. Despite the fact that these manipulations don't create any new products, let alone new jobs. Playing the stock market, except for IPOs, is not investing. It's high stakes gambling for wealthy people, including CEOs and banksters, among themselves. Like how the money someone pays for a used Ford truck doesn't go to Ford.
Another fact is the U.S. economy is still 70% consumer driven. Yet actually making anything consumers will buy has become an unimportant footnote. Tells us the plan is to extract the last remaining $$$ by trickle up before the whole system crashes. The pol and econ elites know a system based on endless growth cannot last much longer on a finite planet. Making this info public is also a good tactic. Also, why not return to emphasis on a consumer (demand side) economy? There's plenty of robust evidence that type of economics works very well for the vast majority. Which of course is the reason elite beneficiaries of econopathy don't want its return.
But, DID workers vote for Trump? How would you know that? With an alleged 48.4% of the votes going to Harris & an alleged 49. 9% going to Trump, to me that looks pretty close to a toss-up. And while "wrecking ball" is a good description of what Trump tends to say, what did his first term in office accomplish but throw workers under the bus via "Warp Speed", and hand the super-rich a big, fat tax break?
Were the "exit polls" mentioned therein adjusted or unadjusted? In counties where more than 20% of voting-age ppl are Hispanic, how many of them voted? How does Reuters know that the votes got counted ACCURATELY? Sheesh.
What amazes me is the bewilderment of the nice, well educated liberals who comment on progressive news sites. They do not understand why and so try to explain the results away by insisting we lessers must be uninformed, bigoted, or stupid. All of which refuted by the robust stats in Les's book.
I point out we workers have tried for decades to get them to listen. But the administrators and professionals of the upper middle class, the types the D party really represents, don't have to worry constantly about job loss, lack of healthcare, or losing a pension. Maybe it's a WWII Pastor Niemoller thing; first they came for___ and I didn't protest...
The Ds have been neolib for decades; in effect D apologists are supporting econopathy. Then add Biden's Dept. of State as controlled by PNAC empire crazed neocons trained by Dick Cheney. My blue collar coworkers might not know fancy terms like neolib and neocon, but they know about trickle up. And they understand that trillions of $$$ going for endless wars means little or no $$$ for domestic needs.
I have yet to hear a Dem defender admit their party is neolib and neocon, let alone defend such. Instead, deflection--blaming us workers for our own demise. IMHO a way to avoid seeing their own responsibility. Hey, we realize what the D party elite really thinks of us--H. Clinton let that slip with the infamous "a basket of deplorables."
On Jim Hightower's site, one nice liberal person, one of the bewildered, urged those who voted wrong (or not at all, a form of voting NO) to "wake up and smell the coffee." I replied that's just a nicer version of "deplorable." Not an effective way to win us back to the party that was once ours. Whereas I used to get many 'likes' for my comments on such sites, now it's one or none. They'd rather think themselves noble or me as merely an ill mannered, angry dissident than see the truth--the D party has devolved to being, like the Rs, an enabler of the worst of America.
In no way does the D elite deserve to rest in peace! I pray the ghosts of FDR and Frances Perkins plus the spirit of the New Deal haunt them for betraying the D party legacy. May the ghosts of Sidney Hillman, John L. Lewis, A. Philip Randolph, Harry Bridges, Walter Reuther, and the spirit of the C.I.O. union movement give them nightmares befitting the neolib shills for econopathy they've become.
The financial capitalists arevjust using Trump to create a crash so they can get bail outs and buy assets
American capitalism and politics are broken.
Over the course of the history of our country political parties have come and gone. Remember the Constitutional Union Party [1860] and the Whigs [1836-1864] among several others, some good and some not so much so (i.e. radicalized and/or extremest). Perhaps both parties are deceased. Since capitalism and politics are intertwined I am commenting on both.
Perhaps we are at a point in time that we are due for another party, or two, to emerge, ones that support and champion the majority of Americans that are truly the ones that make our country and economy strong and robust. The more wealth/disposable income the masses have the stronger the economy will be. Consumption is the major driver of most all industries, presuming that they are not support mainly by government handouts/contracts/etc..
Personally, it appears quite evident to me that the striving for wealth and power are akin to being addicted to powerful drugs. There is never enough of either for those addicted.
However, without sufficient disposable income for workers the economy will ultimately fail, especially in the economic model that we are currently in. The American capitalist model is flawed and failing. We, the masses, are on the verge of becoming the equivalent of serfs. The imbalance of wealth distribution in the country cannot be sustained. Once it reaches a tipping point, where most of the population can only afford the basics of existence (vs. thriving), collapse will follow...history has shown this many times over. What comes from that is a good question.
Can/will we all come together to make positive and significant improvements? I'm not talking about tearing down the economy or eliminating individual wealth (i.e. pure socialism) [Segway- I wonder how many "titans of industry" and avowed anti-socialists will acknowledge that many corporations are beneficiaries of socialist programs in that they exist and profit only because of government "handouts", aka socialism...topic for another discussion?] We need/must have people in power politically that are not beholding to the ultra rich, individuals or corporations (which are not people and I couldn't care less what SCOTUS has to say on that...they are wrong), and have the vision required to move us in a direction that is more functional, positive, equitable and sustainable.
There is one known constant in the universe and that is CHANGE. It is inevitable and inescapable. The question is...what form will it take? Will it be positive or negative?
IMHO an effective tactic would be to point out that although we've been encouraged to conflate capitalism with private enterprise, there's a big difference between them. Private enterprise is the privately owned production of physically real goods and services. That ownership includes co-ops and worker owned businesses. Note I didn't say "free" enterprise; that was a '50s N.A.M. slogan meant to give the impression somehow freedom and political rights were linked to capitalism.
In contrast to private enterprise, capitalism is the privileging of that abstraction known as money. Seen now at its worst with the nearly complete financialization of the economic system. Despite the fact that these manipulations don't create any new products, let alone new jobs. Playing the stock market, except for IPOs, is not investing. It's high stakes gambling for wealthy people, including CEOs and banksters, among themselves. Like how the money someone pays for a used Ford truck doesn't go to Ford.
Another fact is the U.S. economy is still 70% consumer driven. Yet actually making anything consumers will buy has become an unimportant footnote. Tells us the plan is to extract the last remaining $$$ by trickle up before the whole system crashes. The pol and econ elites know a system based on endless growth cannot last much longer on a finite planet. Making this info public is also a good tactic. Also, why not return to emphasis on a consumer (demand side) economy? There's plenty of robust evidence that type of economics works very well for the vast majority. Which of course is the reason elite beneficiaries of econopathy don't want its return.
But, DID workers vote for Trump? How would you know that? With an alleged 48.4% of the votes going to Harris & an alleged 49. 9% going to Trump, to me that looks pretty close to a toss-up. And while "wrecking ball" is a good description of what Trump tends to say, what did his first term in office accomplish but throw workers under the bus via "Warp Speed", and hand the super-rich a big, fat tax break?
For what it's worth. https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trumps-return-power-fueled-by-hispanic-working-class-voter-support-2024-11-06/
Were the "exit polls" mentioned therein adjusted or unadjusted? In counties where more than 20% of voting-age ppl are Hispanic, how many of them voted? How does Reuters know that the votes got counted ACCURATELY? Sheesh.
I don't like it, but I sure do understand why. And that just as surely, the Ds don't.
What amazes me is the bewilderment of the nice, well educated liberals who comment on progressive news sites. They do not understand why and so try to explain the results away by insisting we lessers must be uninformed, bigoted, or stupid. All of which refuted by the robust stats in Les's book.
I point out we workers have tried for decades to get them to listen. But the administrators and professionals of the upper middle class, the types the D party really represents, don't have to worry constantly about job loss, lack of healthcare, or losing a pension. Maybe it's a WWII Pastor Niemoller thing; first they came for___ and I didn't protest...
The Ds have been neolib for decades; in effect D apologists are supporting econopathy. Then add Biden's Dept. of State as controlled by PNAC empire crazed neocons trained by Dick Cheney. My blue collar coworkers might not know fancy terms like neolib and neocon, but they know about trickle up. And they understand that trillions of $$$ going for endless wars means little or no $$$ for domestic needs.
I have yet to hear a Dem defender admit their party is neolib and neocon, let alone defend such. Instead, deflection--blaming us workers for our own demise. IMHO a way to avoid seeing their own responsibility. Hey, we realize what the D party elite really thinks of us--H. Clinton let that slip with the infamous "a basket of deplorables."
On Jim Hightower's site, one nice liberal person, one of the bewildered, urged those who voted wrong (or not at all, a form of voting NO) to "wake up and smell the coffee." I replied that's just a nicer version of "deplorable." Not an effective way to win us back to the party that was once ours. Whereas I used to get many 'likes' for my comments on such sites, now it's one or none. They'd rather think themselves noble or me as merely an ill mannered, angry dissident than see the truth--the D party has devolved to being, like the Rs, an enabler of the worst of America.
The democrats are dead.
RIP!
In no way does the D elite deserve to rest in peace! I pray the ghosts of FDR and Frances Perkins plus the spirit of the New Deal haunt them for betraying the D party legacy. May the ghosts of Sidney Hillman, John L. Lewis, A. Philip Randolph, Harry Bridges, Walter Reuther, and the spirit of the C.I.O. union movement give them nightmares befitting the neolib shills for econopathy they've become.
Can't argue with that!