Inequality much worse than most think

[Forrest]

Re: Inequality much worse than most think

Can't disagree. There is hope, only not for us.

Is there? For whom?

[Forrest]

Re: Inequality much worse than most think

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jIfu2A0ezq0

I don't know how to post the video other than the link, but dcarrig, you must be a lot younger than me. Tennessee Ernie Ford was the one who made this song famous in 1955! It has always been one of my favorites!

On this song, definitely Ford over Cash...but my favorite is still Big Bad John. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KnnHprUGKF0

Still grim reality, but a hopeful note over all.

[jiimbergin]

Re: Inequality much worse than most think

Even in the darkest times there is hope. Things can change. "Impossible" change in social systems can happen suddenly and more quickly than we imagine. After all, we made it all up.

Things are always darkest before the dawn. Legislation, Constitutional, and institutional changes are always reactive, not proactive. It always begins with the spread of an idea.

As that old rabblerouse Thomas Paine once wrote: "We have it in our power to begin the world over again."

+1

[dcarrigg]

Re: Inequality much worse than most think

Can't disagree. There is hope, only not for us.

Even in the darkest times there is hope. Things can change. "Impossible" change in social systems can happen suddenly and more quickly than we imagine. After all, we made it all up.

Things are always darkest before the dawn. Legislation, Constitutional, and institutional changes are always reactive, not proactive. It always begins with the spread of an idea.

As that old rabblerouse Thomas Paine once wrote: "We have it in our power to begin the world over again."

[Woodsman]

Re: Inequality much worse than most think

hey!
every once in awhile woody -
+1
esp in the bluestates - where they have 'binding arbitration' - since the unions WIN just about every time - while
We, The People - The Rest of US - LOSE EVERY TIME.

Yep.

"Democracy must be something more than two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner."

Benjamin Franklin

[Woodsman]

Re: Inequality much worse than most think

I don't think it's useful to have a union vs. no-union debate as that will just end with finger pointing and yelling about global warming....

Amen to that, brother!

[lektrode]

Re: Inequality much worse than most think

Agree, generally. With civil service protections what they are (and if necessary, could be enhanced) the need for public employee unions is lost to me. Let them have their associations, but collective bargaining and strike actions, no.

hey!
every once in awhile woody -
+1
esp in the bluestates - where they have 'binding arbitration' - since the unions WIN just about every time - while
We, The People - The Rest of US - LOSE EVERY TIME.

[santafe2]

Re: Inequality much worse than most think

I believe the first step is to eliminate the Federal Reserve. I worked in steel mills in Pittsburgh when I was in college. Some of the work rules etc. that the union managed to get were pretty ridiculous. I believe strengthening union laws and other labor laws would require high import tariffs. Which, of course, raises the cost of items, not only for union workers, but non union workers also. I think if union rules are changed to help unions more, they should outlaw public worker unions. Politicians mostly care about now, not the future, so they will often allow far more generous conditions for public worker unions than they should, which hurts future generations.

This appears to be the direction we're headed. I think the percentage of workers in a union is down to about 15% nationwide and many/most? are public worker unions. I'm not sure I'd outlaw them, but I share some of your concerns. The percentage of unionized employees are less than 1/2 that number here so I don't think unions hold much sway.

Regarding tariffs, if we want American workers to compete directly with Chinese workers + shipping costs, we should just tell them they're screwed unless they go to college and become something we respect like a banker or a lawyer. I don't think it's useful to have a union vs. no-union debate as that will just end with finger pointing and yelling about global warming.... God knows I've had enough of those here to understand futility.

While I agree that unions can get way out of touch with what workers need and what the system under which they work can support, (especially a public system...see California), but I do think people have a right to a living wage. Even in this back water hamlet, that's probably $15 an hour for someone 18+. It gets more complex and more expensive when calculating for families. If others think a living wage or for that matter, any specific wage is not a right, I think they only need to wait another 10 years or so to see how that plays out in the US as right-to-work laws spread.

[lektrode]

Re: Inequality much worse than most think

I believe the first step is to eliminate the Federal Reserve. I worked in steel mills in Pittsburgh when I was in college. Some of the work rules etc. that the union managed to get were pretty ridiculous. I believe strengthening union laws and other labor laws would require high import tariffs. Which, of course, raises the cost of items, not only for union workers, but non union workers also. I think if union rules are changed to help unions more, they should outlaw public worker unions. Politicians mostly care about now, not the future, so they will often allow far more generous conditions for public worker unions than they should, which hurts future generations.

+1
for appx 4years, in my 20's - i was a united steel worker - we had some of the best paying jobs in the county - and altho the work rules did benefit the union members, they also crippled managements ability to run the company profitably - and the same work rules, coupled with an moron union steward BANKRUPTED the company... there simply is NO way to sugarcoat nor spin it otherwise.

and while i generally believe that the private sector unions only pull as hard to the left as management pulls to the right and think that the trade unions in particular are a necessary equalizer in the game of tugowar tween labor/capital - in the case of the public sector, esp after the downward spiral of private sector union clout - mostly due _directly_ to the effects of 'free' trade and the wholesale offshoring of MILLIONS of manufacturing JOBS - whereby the union bosses power (due$) was slashed - resulting in a double-down of their efforts in the increasing public sector union-dominance (enabled by JFK's executive order allowing the unionization of the federal workforce - when they were already 'protected' by the civil service rules/laws ??)

which has led to various effects such as the BANKUPTCY OF DETROIT (i'd blame the bankruptcy of guvmint motors on the unions, but IMHO, GM's management owns at least 51% of that one) - with some of the .gov unions making far more than the typical private sector workers do with the same jobs - while their numbers have dropped certainly in the bloodbath known as 'the recovery' - why should they not have, when the private sectors jobs numbers have plummeted even more???

i still say it all gets down to the rise of the political aristocracy, that began in ernest in the 1960's - with one particular side of the aisle responsible for at least 51% of the results - which have been anything BUT 'good news' - since at least 2009.

and once again, will point to why the Great State of New Hampshire is _still_ the GOLD STANDARD of how the .gov _should_ be run - with a VOLUNTEER legislature, that still manages to get The Public's business done and _still_ near 400 years later, WITH NO INCOME AND NO SALES TAXES (read: no 'broadbased' revenue streams that the political class can use to BUY VOTES with)

the problem began with the unionization of the federal workforce and the rise - during the reign of the 'camelot' bunch - of THE POLITICAL ARISTOCRACY - that has been bought-off by the FIre brigade - while the political class' clout, tenure, wages/benefits continues to grow - LOCKSTEP - with lower manhattan's stranglehold on the treasury - the ONLY WAY TO FIX THIS PROBLEM

is TERM LIMITS FOR CONGRESS - 2 TERMS MAX AND THEY ARE ***OUT***

else they simply have no incentive to change _anything_

and with NO gold-plated lifetime retirement packages for serving one term, either -
they do their time in office
AND THEN THEY GO BACK TO WORK, like The Rest of US do -

just like the NH legislature does and has done, for near 400 years.

and still, with NO INCOME and NO SALES TAXES.

[Woodsman]

Re: Inequality much worse than most think

I believe the first step is to eliminate the Federal Reserve. I worked in steel mills in Pittsburgh when I was in college. Some of the work rules etc. that the union managed to get were pretty ridiculous. I believe strengthening union laws and other labor laws would require high import tariffs. Which, of course, raises the cost of items, not only for union workers, but non union workers also. I think if union rules are changed to help unions more, they should outlaw public worker unions. Politicians mostly care about now, not the future, so they will often allow far more generous conditions for public worker unions than they should, which hurts future generations.

Agree, generally. With civil service protections what they are (and if necessary, could be enhanced) the need for public employee unions is lost to me. Let them have their associations, but collective bargaining and strike actions, no.

[jiimbergin]

Re: Inequality much worse than most think

I believe the first step is to eliminate the Federal Reserve. I worked in steel mills in Pittsburgh when I was in college. Some of the work rules etc. that the union managed to get were pretty ridiculous. I believe strengthening union laws and other labor laws would require high import tariffs. Which, of course, raises the cost of items, not only for union workers, but non union workers also. I think if union rules are changed to help unions more, they should outlaw public worker unions. Politicians mostly care about now, not the future, so they will often allow far more generous conditions for public worker unions than they should, which hurts future generations.

[santafe2]

Re: Inequality much worse than most think

20 year plan. It's a US-Centric view. But as the hegemon goes, so goes the world.

Just wanted to say thanks for your thoughtful post. As I've posted here over the years, we moved to a small town in the mountains in the middle of nowhere-USA to allow our kids to grow up in an environment where people know each other and 2-3 degrees of separation is the norm. People tend to be nice because the old lady driving 15 miles-an-hour in front of you is probably a friend's grandmother or his cousin's grandmother. When someone is impolite, it's usually a new-comer or a tourist. People are not anonymous. You can talk to the mayor or one of your city councilors at the diner on the plaza. You can know many of the people that grow your food and the teachers that educate your kids. If you try you know the people on the school board and your state representative. People volunteer, sit on boards of non-profits, try to make life better for others in their community.

But even here, many people struggle to get by and the city is getting large enough that it's become two cities with much of it unaffordable to most families. When we left Los Angeles almost 20 years ago it was obvious then that the US system was broken for the average middle class person. We bought ourselves a generation in this little place but I'm not sure how much longer it will last or where we'll go if we move but I'm beginning to feel like the good guys aren't just losing a string of battles, they're losing the war.

[Woodsman]

Re: Inequality much worse than most think

Protest: The only recent organized protests I remember in the US were the various Occupy Wall St. movements. That fizzled soon after authorities began clubbing and macing folks in Zuccotti Park. My takeaway from that movement is that things are going to have to get a lot worse before 20-somethings will give up an evening with their Xbox or Starbucks to go out and get clubbed and maced by the police and/or National Guard. And, I don't think it's going to get that bad. The welfare state did not exist in 1930 and that combined with today's low wages are just enough to keep most people quiet for the next couple of decades. So protest, peaceful or not, is an unlikely answer.

Pro Labor Laws: It's unlikely any laws changing the general direction of the US will be passed any time soon. Corporate America has done a brilliant job gerrymandering US House districts and working locally to get a strong majority of their folks elected. As long as they hold the House, they only need to wait until they can get a more pro-corporate focused President. Other than the occasional Elizabeth Warren, Democrats are spineless. Corporate America does not need a majority in the Senate to grind away more of the welfare state. I think the next time they have a real chance, they'll make changes to Social Security to aim that pipe at Wall Street.

The Supreme Court: It's 5-4 and barring illness, it's not changing soon. Possibly Ginsburg steps down while Obama is in office so he can appoint a 50-something to buy the minority time to flip the court 8-12 years from now. It's unlikely anything good for labor is coming out of this institution.

A Constitutional Amendment to reverse 130 years of corporate personhood: I'm sorry, this is just a pipe dream. If corporate America has done a good job with the US House, they've done a great job at the state level. Any change in law that requires 2/3s of Congress and ratification by 38 states is impossible. See my point on protest above. It will take a huge amount of civil disobedience to soften up corporate resolve.

I've looked at this chessboard many times and I don't see where labor has anything more than a defensive move.

Can't disagree. There is hope, only not for us.

[santafe2]

Re: Inequality much worse than most think

...But the richest people in society felt no sympathy for the starving masses. They had spent the previous decade slashing wages and breaking unions, with widespread success. By 1929, the American Federation of Labor (AFL) had lost a million members.

With the onset of depression, they banded together as a group to oppose every measure to grant government assistance to feed the hungry or help the homeless....

Protest: The only recent organized protests I remember in the US were the various Occupy Wall St. movements. That fizzled soon after authorities began clubbing and macing folks in Zuccotti Park. My takeaway from that movement is that things are going to have to get a lot worse before 20-somethings will give up an evening with their Xbox or Starbucks to go out and get clubbed and maced by the police and/or National Guard. And, I don't think it's going to get that bad. The welfare state did not exist in 1930 and that combined with today's low wages are just enough to keep most people quiet for the next couple of decades. So protest, peaceful or not, is an unlikely answer.

Pro Labor Laws: It's unlikely any laws changing the general direction of the US will be passed any time soon. Corporate America has done a brilliant job gerrymandering US House districts and working locally to get a strong majority of their folks elected. As long as they hold the House, they only need to wait until they can get a more pro-corporate focused President. Other than the occasional Elizabeth Warren, Democrats are spineless. Corporate America does not need a majority in the Senate to grind away more of the welfare state. I think the next time they have a real chance, they'll make changes to Social Security to aim that pipe at Wall Street.

The Supreme Court: It's 5-4 and barring illness, it's not changing soon. Possibly Ginsburg steps down while Obama is in office so he can appoint a 50-something to buy the minority time to flip the court 8-12 years from now. It's unlikely anything good for labor is coming out of this institution.

A Constitutional Amendment to reverse 130 years of corporate personhood: I'm sorry, this is just a pipe dream. If corporate America has done a good job with the US House, they've done a great job at the state level. Any change in law that requires 2/3s of Congress and ratification by 38 states is impossible. See my point on protest above. It will take a huge amount of civil disobedience to soften up corporate resolve.

I've looked at this chessboard many times and I don't see where labor has anything more than a defensive move.

[Woodsman]

Re: Inequality much worse than most think

20 year plan. It's a US-Centric view. But as the hegemon goes, so goes the world.

Step 1: Reframe debate about property being people underlying legal issues. Larry Lessig is already working on this. Public opinion is on the right side of this, but money is not. People still care about justice. If this fails, the plan is lost. It needs to be set up and positioned to enter the public debate prominently and immediately during the next recession. Change only occurs in crisis.

Step 2: All the while work on rebuilding social capital and civil society. This is going to be a damn hard nut to crack. And the 21st century Norman Rockwell's going to paint a very different picture. But we've got to get organizations growing to strengthen direct relationships, especially across classes. It might be churches or clubs or whatever. It doesn't really matter. The point is to get people interacting with each other as equal citizens and recognizing each other as human beings with worth. This can't happen in consumer interactions, and I very much doubt it can really happen over the internet. Somehow we've got to make organizations cool again. I'm open to any suggestions here. I tend to think it best to start with youth.

Step 3: Develop alternative models to financialization with depth and clarity. Economic growth without increasing rents will require a deep retooling. But we will have to find another model anyways. The truth is that things will barrel headlong towards an ever increasing inequality and debt (the two are not unrelated) given the paralysis of Western policymakers. We will see GINI .55 by 2025 in the US. Financialization is doing the lion's share of the work towards ensuring that outcome. It does not take a sage to see that. This is part of the work being done here and in many other places. These models don't have a chance in hell of being implemented unless step 1 works. This has to wait for the second recession out (2030?) or for a national security shock spiking commodities sky high.

Step 4: Shift the risk burden back on those entities and people who can bear it best. Use no public money nor tax expenditures for increasing individual risk in the name of social insurance. Increase the public comfort and legal normalcy of allocatable, non-transferable property (property assigned to a person that can't be traded away or borrowed against). Keep high-risk, leveraged moves up in the stratosphere where they belong (and even then, limit them).

It's a long slog. It will be a fight every step of the way. And it's no quick fix. Quick fixes and get rich quick schemes need to be downplayed anyways. The next awakening must remember that greed and gambling were once considered vices, and should be thought of as such again.

But we cannot find the dignity in work before we find the dignity in each other. And we cannot find the dignity in each other so long as we spend most of our time interacting with each other as consumers and employers and service providers rather than as free and equal citizens. And even if we do find dignity in people again, it will all be for not if corporations are people, my friend.

The path's there. It's all just a matter of lots of people doing a little bit to work towards it every day for an extended period of time. The only reason why such a plan is even plausible is that most everybody today is short-term focused. Just simple, sustained daily actions towards a common end over a decade or two can shift the sands beneath the feet everyone laser focused on this week's news and this quarter's profits. And I figure thinking and moving slow is sort of built into the ethos of this place. May as well try to direct part of the process. After all, we're all in it whether we like it or not. The future comes.

Speaking of human dignity and simple, sustained action, Lessig highlights this on his site as part of his NHRebellion effort for campaign finance reform.


http://www.americanswhotellthetruth....anny-d-haddock