How Obama's Long Game Will Outsmart His Critics

[Lanval]

They did not protest when jobs were shipped overseas. They did not... by why go on with the litany of failures here? The people choose the government they want, either through action, or lack of it. The latter is what we have, and while you point to polls that show broad dissatisfaction, I urge you to attend more carefully to what I wrote. actions speak louder than words. While people may express dissatisfaction, until they are willing to act on it, those words are meaningless.

We must act on this very thing. Create production in the USA and the world be damned.

Sylvester,

It's been my feeling for some time that companies that operate within the realm of the US states should be compelled to keep manufacturing here; they benefit disproportionately from the environment of freedom/safety/regulation that is bought with tax dollars and soldier's lives.

Doing so would increase their cost, but also enable them to pay better, in return enabling workers a better living standard while being able to buy American products, regardless of whether they are cheaper/more expensive. The issue is what to do with foreign companies that prey on our market with labor that is cheap because that country operates without the kinds of protections/values/etc. that we have. In essence, people need to look at local production/consumption in terms of what is best for all of us rather than what is best for themselves alone.

That shift in thinking is easy to express, but hard to convey; it's been my experience that in most cases, doing the right thing isn't really in my local self-interest. But that's what we need, isn't it? People putting their principles before selfishness. It happens, and on occasion has become a movement (in the background of this post I you should be listening to Alice's Restaurant) and those movements have changed our country; often for the better.

So I say that it starts with me. I will try to lead by example, and continue to teach critical thinking and writing to my students. This is what I can do.

Best,

Michael L

[Lanval]

What actions are you suggesting? Voting for one party or another appears to have had no discernible effect.

Democracy is interactive, and locally driven. "All politics are local" as the saying goes; don't like the leaders? Let's nominate others? Can't find others? We must do it ourselves. I'm reminded of the old fable, which I link to here:

http://mythfolklore.net/aesopica/oxford/293.htm

So long as you argue that there is nothing we can do, we are lost. The moment you argue that you will do something, hope is regained, and everything is possible. Every action carries a meaning; so with each transaction, from the gum you buy to the subjects you portray in your documentaries puts forth a claim of value, and supports things that you may or may not agree with. Choose carefully; a man is the sum of his actions; just so, a country is the sum of the people's actions. Change the people's actions and you will change the country.

Michael L

[dingo]

Glasseye.....I agree w your sentiments, but take exception to “Capitalism has hi-jacked Democracy”.
Until recently, I've never had an interest in Economic or Political Theory, my choice of words may not be much better, but if we are trying to make the world a better place, I believe we need to do our best to clarify what's wrong.

It seems that Capitalism is a bit of a vague term, in my effort to educate myself before posting this, I see this in the first para at Wikipedia, “There is no consensus on the precise definition nor on how the term should be used as a historical category.”
Perhaps one of the more Economic minded here would offer us their definition.

I don't believe that Capitalism is the culprit, what we have is not Capitalism.
I'm not sure what we have, but corporate/crony-ism seems more appropriate.
I'd offer that “Corporate/crony-ism has hi-jacked Democracy and Capitalism.”

We do NOT have Capitalism. When the government prints money at will and bails out failing banks, that is a form of central state control i.e. socialism

Capitalism in its un-tainted form is generally self-regulating...but the keynesian manipulations suffocate capitalism

[ruckman101]

Capitalism is the new Imperialism.

Back to robber barons. Industries that cater to the uber rich are booming. Million dollar luxury RV? Available. They look sweet, too. The price tag is a bit steep in my opinion, but hey, I'm a far demograph from that market.

Remember poor farms?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poorhouse

The classic incarceration camp model of the poor farm was largely eliminated by social security. A system every worker makes an investment in. The robber barons want that, too. The retirement investments of the worker.

Perhaps there is something to the worry of large gitmo style camps being prepared for large populaces that are currently dismissed as the rantings of the conspiracy minded amongst us. Ask Jan Brewer, in the pocket of the private prison industry, determined to fill those facilities with illegal aliens who obviously have no legal rights but incarceration. Why? Well, it's such a threat to freedom and democracy that this country and nation stands for and champions! (??)

Chilling parallels to language I hear today from those who dismiss those unemployed as lazy, unmotivated, happy with a socialistic dole. Jabba the Newt has been spouting it. Poor school children can be indentured to replace union workers mopping and cleaning the school's bathrooms, their wealthier classmates of course exempt, gotta instill that work ethic in the obviously lazy poor, why else would they be poor but because they're lazy, maybe even "shiftless". Again the obvious threat to freedom and democracy that this country and nation stands for and champions! (??)

All I've ever seen championed is the consumer model. Buy Coke, or is that stomach Koch. Aspire to your own microwave oven. Cultural assimilation through consumerism.

I've yet to see a dole available in this country anyone is happy to live on. That ol' bootstraps myth. I've been suckered by that myth. The dew left the bloom and I strategically decided to let the bank foreclose on that dream, cutting my losses and increasing their profits. I spit on the machinations that have brought our country to this sorry state.

But historically, it's nothing new. We've been there, done that, yet here we are again, getting there, doing that. But this time the tools are more refined, the armaments more deadly and increasingly remotely controlled, the legal debt hammer an excuse and tool to evict a populace for blatant, toxic, resource extraction for obscene profit shitting toxins into this nest that is our earth. Maybe that's why Jabba the Newt wants a moon colony, the uber rich can escape the cesspool they've created with the profits they've made from humanity's labor.

But I do go on, don't I?

It's a quagmire of a quandary more tangled than the mycelium of a single fungus that lives under more of Canada than doesn't. I'll bet this climate change crap is hurting it. Save the mycelium.

neal

[Amskeptic]

With all due respect, that's preposterous. To say that the average voter is resposible for the behaviours of the elected leaders belies the fact that approval rates of those leaders by those voters are at record lows. Politicians are doing what's good for politicians, not what's good for their respective countries. And that's why their approval ratings are so low.

To blame Democracy's failure on those who shop at Walmart is equally preposterous. You can't blame people for seeking value. Is it my fault that I chose made-in-China blinds for less than $3 each instead of identical ones from who-knows-where for $100?

To my ESTEEMED colleague in the Koutenays ... it is pre-pre-pre POST erous, it is BLASphemy to interpret such a skillful essay as the one preceding yours and to take from it but a petty little notion of "blame".

I don't give two damns to next Tuesday to blame anyone for seeking value. I mentioned quite rightly that thousands of little decisions brought us here where we save a few nickels shopping at the new WalMart while they enjoy the tax write-offs and hire local people at subsistent wages that end up costing us in subtle ways far more more than your unusual example of "blinds".

When the system has taken away our buying power, we might *have* to buy crap at WalMart, yes. But if you personally *don't have to buy at WalMart* but choose to, then consciously or not, you are legitimatizing their model.

I used WalMart as an example of how we are busily losing our democracy, because we legitimatize the career arcs of people who came before us in the voting booths time and again, and we kept putting in them in there. We chose the $3.00 blinds. Now we get to watch them discolor and tangle up.

That Congress is held in record-low esteem is a Good Thing. Without getting all frothy with blame games, I see a nascent dawning consciousness that this is our country to lose.
Colin

[Amskeptic]

Capitalism in its un-tainted form is generally self-regulating...

No such animal exists or has ever existed.
ColinTaintedByAssociation- member human race, inc

[RussellK]

We were reading old family letters from the early 1900s over the weekend and there was a passage in one that struck me. Uncle Hank was an engineer with the railroad and had written his sister he was taking a bit of time off because things were slow and this way "the married fellows could work and send some money home to their familes" It struck me we no longer seem to have a sense of solidarity in this country. I'm getting mine. Screw everyone else. As long as we continue to operate from this posture those above us will have us by the short hairs.

[glasseye]

I'm getting mine. Screw everyone else. As long as we continue to operate from this posture those above us will have us by the short hairs.

What's the Stalin quote? "When we hang the capitalists they will sell us the rope we use"



I agree, my example of the window blinds bordered on the egregious. It is, however, a true story. ~$50 vs ~$3K. Who ya gonna call?

I try not to shop at Walmart, but outright refusal to shop there requires commitment, especially if you live in the KOOtenays. I find it truly insulting that a microwave oven costs $29.97 and a DVD player $8.99. However, many (if not most) of the other large retailers are not much better. (Costco and IKEA being a couple of exceptions) What are consumers to do? Their choices are limited. If I could pay $109.95 for a quality microwave oven with the proviso that it was 100% sourced and manufactured in North America, I'd do it. But no. I can't. There are none. None that I'm aware of, at least.

"Forcing" corporations doing business in North America to manufacture in North America isn't gonna fly. How are you going to force them? Legislation? Corps own the legislators. Taxation? Ha. Increased taxation can't even get off the ramp, let alone on to the runway.

The point is, without substantial social upheaval, it's too late. We sold them the rope a few decades ago.

[dingo]

Capitalism in its un-tainted form is generally self-regulating...

No such animal exists or has ever existed.
ColinTaintedByAssociation- member human race, inc

maybe not, but to proclaim that we have capitalism in this country is preposterous...the constant tinkering of interest rates and propping up of crony banks...it all works directly against capitalism

[glasseye]

Capitalism in its un-tainted form is generally self-regulating...

Ever the Devil's Advocate, I disagree.

In many cases, Capitalism is not self-regulating, it's self-destructive. Consider the following scenario:

Overfishing depletes fish stocks.
The price of fish rises as availability declines.
Fishers accelerate the rate of harvest in answer to the escalating prices.
Fish stocks tank.
Everyone loses.
Including the fish.

[Lanval]

Capitalism in its un-tainted form is generally self-regulating...

No such animal exists or has ever existed.
ColinTaintedByAssociation- member human race, inc

maybe not, but to proclaim that we have capitalism in this country is preposterous...the constant tinkering of interest rates and propping up of crony banks...it all works directly against capitalism

A bit over the top there. Capitalism isn't a thing. It is an idea that someone (people often link this to Adam Smith, Wealth of Nations, but that is a gross error. He only talks about "a system of perfect liberty"; the word capitalism doesn't come into use until around 1850 or so) came up with to describe an ideal. Do a bit of reading, and you'll see that in fact we do have a capitalist system here in the US. It certainly has it faults, and of course the government intervenes. No serious economist would even allow the possibility of capitalism in the terms you've offered. It's not a question of absolutes, but of relatives. In our case, our system here in the US is recognized by the degree (extent) to which it is characterized by elements of a capitalist system: private ownership (particularly of production), accumulation of wealth, competition in the marketplace, etc.

On the one hand, pretty much all rational people recognize that regulation has some value. Companies can't just do whatever they want. You really want people making children's eating utensils out of lead, just to make a few bucks? By the time the market sorts that out, you've got an epidemic on your hands, and the ex-owners are sitting on a beach in the South Pacific earning 20%.

On the other hand, most people don't like being told what to do. Who the hell is gonna tell me I can't start a hot dog stand in front of the courthouse?! As long as I fill out the permit paperwork, and keep my kit in good, clean working order, I'm free to sell dogs all day long. Don't try that Beijing.

Seriously, the banks, and the corporate cronyism is really part of capitalism; if we're to allow absolute freedom, we'd expect people to work not virtuously but profitably. The latter is by far the more likely outcome of a totally free system, wouldn't you think? So we have a modified form of capitalism, that acknowledges the need to restrain the selfish impulse in favor of enforcing the virtuousness that the guys who dreamed up capitalism unrealistically assumed would characterize the actions of the people who operate within the system.

I see that kind of like Marx; I can't quite figure if Marx was a complete moron, or had simply never met another human. Did he really believe that people in general would toil happily for the benefit of others? Really? So, I guess they have the opposite problem...

Best,

Michael L

[Velokid1]

This is a great thread and I don't mean to muck it up with my amateurish observations but, the type of Capitalism that I think is destroying our country is the kind that seeks growth for the sake of growth. It may not even meet the actual definition of Capitalism. I really don't know. But this idea that every business must choose between growth and death is insane. I really don't know where it came from, though they drove their point home ceaselessly back at Indiana University in the Kelley School of Business. I should have taken better notes.

Everything that is healthy eventually becomes destructive when it doesn't know when to quit. Exercise is good... but there is a limit. Rain is great... but there's a limit to that, too. The business sector's growth is a good thing, until it starts behaving like a cancer cell, just gobbling up and digesting everything in its path.

[Lanval]

This is a great thread and I don't mean to muck it up with my amateurish observations but, the type of Capitalism that I think is destroying our country is the kind that seeks growth for the sake of growth. It may not even meet the actual definition of Capitalism. I really don't know. But this idea that every business must choose between growth and death is insane. I really don't know where it came from, though they drove their point home ceaselessly back at Indiana University in the Kelley School of Business. I should have taken better notes.

Everything that is healthy eventually becomes destructive when it doesn't know when to quit. Exercise is good... but there is a limit. Rain is great... but there's a limit to that, too. The business sector's growth is a good thing, until it starts behaving like a cancer cell, just gobbling up and digesting everything in its path.

I don't think that's amateurish; it's in fact a pretty strong condemnation of the ultimate impossibility of capitalism as it's imagined by the more conservative, pro-business elements. My comments about getting corporations to function according to a different set of values is an attempt to address the issue you bring up.

For example; if we as a society change our perception of wealth/value, corporations will shift to work on that basis, right along with the rest of society. We know this, because it already has, many times. It used to be that cattle/livestock was a pretty good measure of wealth. Then it was land. Now it's other stuff. If we get business to consider NOT raw accumulation of wealth and infinite growth as good, but a balance between wealth and marketshare and the companies effect on society and nature, then we'd be closer to a system that worked ethically.

Glasseye keeps saying things that suggest these sorts of ideas aren't possible; that we're waiting for some outside force to intervene. I don't accept that ~ I believe that society is simply the sum effect of many small decisions, and that consequently small decisions can have a large effect. Call it social chaos theory, if you want. But I'll tell you this. When I buy stock in a company now, I don't look at their returns only. I want to know what kind of business they are. How do they treat the community they're part of? Do they lay waste to the surrounding countryside, or do they seek to leave things better than they were? Same goes for shopping... won't see me shopping at Walmart, and there's a few other places I won't go.

Capitalism is just an idea. We can do whatever we want, including having a capitalist society that treats as valuable the things we value.

Michael L

[Amskeptic]

the type of Capitalism that I think is destroying our country is the kind that seeks growth for the sake of growth. behaving like a cancer cell, just gobbling up and digesting everything in its path.

Capitalism is just an idea. We can do whatever we want, including having a capitalist society that treats as valuable the things we value.
Michael L

There ya go ... from self-centered to aware of others.
The growth of healthy human beings follows that path.
Colin

[dingo]

This is a great thread and I don't mean to muck it up with my amateurish observations but, the type of Capitalism that I think is destroying our country is the kind that seeks growth for the sake of growth. It may not even meet the actual definition of Capitalism. I really don't know. But this idea that every business must choose between growth and death is insane. I really don't know where it came from, though they drove their point home ceaselessly back at Indiana University in the Kelley School of Business. I should have taken better notes.

Everything that is healthy eventually becomes destructive when it doesn't know when to quit. Exercise is good... but there is a limit. Rain is great... but there's a limit to that, too. The business sector's growth is a good thing, until it starts behaving like a cancer cell, just gobbling up and digesting everything in its path.

I don't think that's amateurish; it's in fact a pretty strong condemnation of the ultimate impossibility of capitalism as it's imagined by the more conservative, pro-business elements. My comments about getting corporations to function according to a different set of values is an attempt to address the issue you bring up.

For example; if we as a society change our perception of wealth/value, corporations will shift to work on that basis, right along with the rest of society. We know this, because it already has, many times. It used to be that cattle/livestock was a pretty good measure of wealth. Then it was land. Now it's other stuff. If we get business to consider NOT raw accumulation of wealth and infinite growth as good, but a balance between wealth and marketshare and the companies effect on society and nature, then we'd be closer to a system that worked ethically.

Glasseye keeps saying things that suggest these sorts of ideas aren't possible; that we're waiting for some outside force to intervene. I don't accept that ~ I believe that society is simply the sum effect of many small decisions, and that consequently small decisions can have a large effect. Call it social chaos theory, if you want. But I'll tell you this. When I buy stock in a company now, I don't look at their returns only. I want to know what kind of business they are. How do they treat the community they're part of? Do they lay waste to the surrounding countryside, or do they seek to leave things better than they were? Same goes for shopping... won't see me shopping at Walmart, and there's a few other places I won't go.

Capitalism is just an idea. We can do whatever we want, including having a capitalist society that treats as valuable the things we value.

Michael L

I agree...and it explains how the Keynesian models were implemented and gathered more and more momentum over the last 50 years...but the academicians and economists confused the sequence of bubbles with 'success of the model' and continue to keep on with the idea that it just needs to be tinkered with some more to get it right. None of the experts want to climb down and admit they were wrong or that the experiment didnt quite work out...that would be an admission of many years of following a failed concept....although i have heard Greenspan mumble some vague apologies to that effect...hahaha