Return of the Robber Barons. Where's Carey Elwes when we need him?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
motorfirebox
But the role class plays in future success can and should be limited. If we're not going to limit it, then we ought to quit pussyfooting around and go back to absolute monarchy.
Don't agree. Monarchy has little or nothing to do with class in the US (as opposed to many other nations...). Our classes divide by wealth, by job or career field, by academic accomplishments (a relatively recent addition...) and ethnically or nationally (and I mean that not in the racist sense. The Scotch Irish despise the English, many Italians do not like Germans, etc.). Even geography enters into it -- royal or peerage issues not at all.
Quote:
The purpose of a capitalist economy, as opposed to an economic free-for-all, is to keep the pot stirred.
Is that a purpose or a by product?
Quote:
When the top goes up, part of that good result should be used to bring the bottom up a few points. Not up to the top, not so much that the top goes down to the bottom, but enough to keep circulation happening.
Most will agree, many will quibble about mechanisms and degrees of up...
Quote:
Because what's happening now is the exact opposite. The top is going up, which is fine, but it's doing do in large part by lowering the bottom. That is natural, too--as natural as the strong caveman barging in and taking the weaker caveman's wife.
There's truth in that and it does make a good if questionable talking point (in that it is repeatedly raised by some media personages and some politicians for partisan, not altruistic, reasons) but there's also a degree of unintended consequence. Recall that part of the top's recent upward trajectory was imparted by failures of social policies aimed at raising the bottom...
Quote:
I agree. I've often thought that most laws and government programs ought to come with an expiration date rather than automatically being perpetual...
Strongly agree. I'd also add the stringent Hodenosaunee or Iroquois requirement that the Sachems and councils had to consider effects unto the seventh generation.
Quote:
I don't deny that there's over reliance on government, but I don't think that over reliance is on the part of people who have to worry about whether or not there's a cop around when they need one...Gosh darn those poor and middle class people, why can't they go get their own multi-billion-dollar bailout instead of trying to steal what the financial industry rightfully obtained as ransom!
Hyperbole again??? ;)
My observation -- admittedly mostly but not exclusively in the South -- is that the over reliance exists in all strata but the emphasis on what's expected differs sometimes strongly from locale to locale and level to level in a rather complex mix.
Regardless, it is IMO becoming more problematical and has contributed to a somewhat coddled and certainly risk averse society. It also seem to have a slight adverse impact on initiative and innovation.
Quote:
Not really. The US isn't a turnip, it's a... tick... it's hard to buy the turnip argument when Wall Street is posting record profits.
True on the profits but consider also that the sale of new cars (as opposed to homes -- though we are arguably already over endowed with individually owned homes in comparison with most other nations even considering the Housing crunch) and large flat screen TVs to the great unwashed (we just bought a flat screen... :D ) indicate that while the bottom may not be getting elevated as much as many of us would like, much -- not all but much -- of it is living better than that Royalty did a few years ago. :wry:
Quote:
I don't see equalizing--movement towards equalizing, not to be confused with absolute imposition of equality--as separate from equal opportunity.
We can disagree. Equal opportunity to me is to offer unimpeded access to use one's potential. Equal outcomes are efforts to insure that, regardless of capabilities, effort, merit or productivity, all have a relatively even standing in all things. In no case is the sorting of that simple, nor can, due to the variation in people and circumstances, hard and fast rule be laid down. It is also very important that everyone realize that nuances aside, there will always be outliers and exceptions and that, while true in any event, is particularly true in an issue this complex and in a nation as large and diverse as are we. One of the major flaws with the big government crowd is their refusal to acknowledge the inevitability due to our size of poor rules that will not work in all segments of the society or nation. They create flawed law, see inequities and try to fix it, often only making it worse for someone else...
For most of us the difference between those things is nuanced and probably variable, the largest discriminator IMO being the amount of effort required by the individual versus the amount given by the state.
Quote:
Mmmmm okay. There's bloat. My concern is that in getting rid of the bloat, we'll end up skewing things even more to favor those who already well-positioned.
The well positioned will certainly try to insure that is the case. Rather logical and to be expected. the role of the politicians is to insure that does not happen. Experience shows that Politicians each side will skew the efforts to suit their ideology and that, whether they champion 'more freedom' or 'better control,' the result will be the favoring of the well positioned.
Is that the fault of the well positioned or of politicians from both sides who simply do not do their job and place partisan interests, contributions and votes ahead of the interests of the nation and its people?
Whatever the answer to that question, history says we will screw it up, one way or another and then slowly, over many years adjust and eventually get it about right. It's the American way; we always over react then over correct. :wry:
Quote:
I think that's true. Mainly, I think that our current situation comes as close to fulfilling the phrase "fox guarding the henhouse" as one can get without involving actual poultry, and I think the most effective solutions are going to be those that remedy that.
Being old, I can sigh and write: It's been worse, yeah, we'll mess it up but eventually sort it a bit and then it'll later return. Everything goes in cycles...
Quote:
...and I think a lot of current violence that is attributed to other causes--mainly race--is more accurately the result of financial distress.
Yep. That too is historically illustrated. It'll probably get worse before it gets better. Democracy is messy and inefficient. American democracy is particularly messy and extremely inefficient. Based on time spent in 30 plus other nations, it still beats most others in most ways most of the time...
Oops. Lack of clarity on my part
Quote:
Originally Posted by
slapout9
Ken, that just isn't true.
I'm afraid it is very true -- in part. Anbother part is as you say untrue but that's my fault for not being clear about the type of program to which I referred.
Quote:
They created the Hoover Dam...
Google Six Companies, Inc. Note that both Bechtel and Morrrison-Knudsen were involved. :D
Quote:
They electrified the south through the TVA(Tennessee Valley Authority)
The government did -- but TVA was exceptional in several respects, was and is controversial and most of the high paying jobs were not typical Government make work efforts -- though some were:
""The unemployed were hired for conservation, economic development, and social programs such as a library service that operated for the surrounding area. The professional staff headquarters was composed of experts from outside the region. The workers were categorized into the usual racial and gender lines of the day. TVA hired a few African-Americans for janitorial positions. TVA recognized labor unions; its skilled and semi-skilled blue collar employees were unionized, a breakthrough in an area known for corporations hostile to miners' unions and textile unions. Women were excluded from construction work, although TVA's cheap electricity attracted textile mills that hired mostly women."" (LINK).
Quote:
they created Nuclear Energy, and they created NASA which has created more physical wealth that is used by Americans than any organization in the history of Mankind! Them wuz guvmint jobs!
Yes, they were -- and both the AEC and NASA are productive and permanenet entities of the US Government and not the often temporary make-work government programs like the CCC and WPA were and that many suggest today. Or as had been suggested, expanding AmeriCorps. I should have made clear are the types of thing I was referring to... :(
Particularly as I had one of those permanent type Guvmint jobs for which I was significantly overpaid...:o
Quote:
And more important it is not just Government but it is the American Government. "We the people" not "I" the banker.
Bankers are people, too. they just have different priorites than you or I do... ;)
Capacity considerations...
...it's interesting to consider the capacity of the current crop of the 1st world's political class. Is this crop able to successfully conduct demographic analysis, conduct risk analysis, understand technical (economic, military, etc) considerations, negotiate, craft deals, lead, and perform as committed statesmen and stateswomen? :eek: :wry:
From the Financial Times, European Officials Round on Lagarde, by FT Reporters, 28 Aug 2011
Quote:
European officials rounded on Christine Lagarde on Sunday, accusing the managing director of the International Monetary Fund of making a “confused” and “misguided” attack on the health of Europe’s banks.
Ms Lagarde, the former French finance minister who replaced Dominique Strauss-Kahn as head of the IMF in July, used her address at an annual meeting of central bankers in Jackson Hole, Wyoming, to call for an “urgent” recapitalisation of Europe’s weakest lenders, saying that shoring up the banking system was key to cutting “chains of contagion” across the region.
From the Financial Times, Caterpillar Chief Attacks Washington, by Hal Weitzman, August 28, 2011
Quote:
Mr Oberhelman joins a growing chorus of US business leaders who say they are fed up with the widening gap between Democrats and Republicans, displayed most recently in the gridlock over the debate to raise the country’s debt ceiling.
Howard Schultz, Starbucks chief executive, has called on his peers to stop donating to politicians until Congress reaches a bipartisan agreement on debt reduction. More than 100 business leaders have backed the campaign, including Duncan Niederauer of NYSE Euronext, Walter Robb of Whole Foods and Myron Ullman of JC Penney.
Search for and punish the innocent...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
motorfirebox
Honestly? Not so much. I'm not saying we're there yet, but I think we're headed directly to that state of affairs.
Sigh. Okay, no more plays on words... :(
Quote:
Actually, I place more root blame on the politicians...
That's good to know but hard to divine from your comments.
Quote:
So if people get help they won't want to succeed?
Not what I wrote but a good snap back on what I did write. The granting of excessive aid and creating of excessive dependency on government can have that effect on some persons. Note the use of "excessive." That's a value determination that will vary widely among people; some are more susceptible to coasting than are others.
Quote:
That's simply not a position that makes any sense as a philosophy of government. Why have cops, it just encourages people to leave their doors unlocked. There's certainly a point at which help becomes harm, but when
the median wealth of a black woman is $5 I don't see how it's possible to argue we're helping her
too much.
The existence of Cops doesn't encourage that -- though one's place of residence can -- and we have Cops to take care of most law enforcement issues to the best of their ability. Note use of the words "most" and "best of their ability." The Cops cannot take care of all such issues, just as Government in toto cannot take care of all issues. Nor can you or I take care of every issue with which we're confronted -- that's just reality. Sometimes we need help, nice if its available -- it is also nice and quite satisfying to be able to do things by and for oneself (well, for most people, anyway...). The question is what capabilities are needed and what are we willing to pay for or do to get a selected capability...
The real issue here is not the provision of help but the methods used. We've been trying what you seem to wish for approaching 80 years -- effectively for my lifetime -- and the underclass still exists. Net figures for poverty and such have changed very little. Educational attainment has in many instances declined in spite significantly more spending (we tie with Switzerland in first in the world for the amount per pupil, K-12). What you seem to want to continue, even expand, simply is proven to not work.
Quote:
...The US certainly isn't a turnip--the funding to do the things that, in my opinion, ought to be done is there for the taking.
Still, if that is done, they will come at the expense of something else; wealth, yes -- unlimited wealth, no. Someone has to work to make that money that is taxed to feed the Turnip Crusher. Yes, we're wealthy, perhaps too wealthy in some senses -- but like many with inherited wealth or other wealth that isn't hard earned by ourselves, we do not spend wisely. IMO, you propose to keep spending the same way -- except more. :eek:
Quote:
Throwing money at schools may not be the whole solution, but I find it hard to believe that continually reducing school funding is the way to go, either.
There is no continuing or consistent reduction in school spending nationwide of which I'm aware. There are cases of temporary reduction due to tax shortfalls. Where I live, there is for example a slight retrenchment, they're letting a few teachers go (but no Administrators -- claiming State and Federal Regulatory requirements make them necessary :D) -- though I note we're buying a multi million dollar AV system for the City Council and Bike Path construction continues...
Quote:
... But I also think there myriad ways in which the government, right now, can and should shift wealth from the top of the pyramid to the bottom.
So can I. Most of them have been tried and do not work because people find a way to manipulate them and because they eventually cut too heavily into the tax base and revenues decline so retrenchment is necessary and the cycle begins anew...
Quote:
Not because rich people shouldn't be rich--as fun as it is to bash executives, this isn't about wealthy individuals as it is about corporate machinery--but because the manner in which the financial elite have gained much of their current wealth amounts to outright theft from the rest of the country.
You forget to add in there somewhere 'abetted by Politicians.' You keep leaving that part out. It modifies your complaint a considerable amount. ;)
Until the political problem is fixed, your issues will continue apace...