USA Politics (redux)

[Fëanor]

Oh, come on. Didn't you know that CEO's of multi-million dollar companies only ever cared about LGBT and BLM?
...
I'd imagine a racial narrative for the cause of class disparity would be something they prefer, rather than an economic one, as worshippers of the dollar. Even if it's not rooted in truth. Money is the only truth to them.
And it requires no actual change to the system, it's just kind words to appease the "lower class" of people so they don't ask for higher wages. Being anti-union but pro-woke at the same time, sounds genuine, right? 

Humm ... well that's a very good point, IMO.  It's been my opinion for some time that the greater problem in the USA is economic disparity and that racial problem is often pressed as a distraction from the greater problem (-- which is by no means to say that there isn't systemic racism that disadvantages so many).

Capitalism has a natural tendency to concentrate wealth and power as demonstrated by the course of history.  The more laisse faire the instance, the more pronounced that tendency, the USA being a particularly bad example in that regard.

[greg]

Humm ... well that's a very good point, IMO.  It's been my opinion for some time that the greater problem in the USA is economic disparity and that racial problem is often pressed as a distraction from the greater problem (-- which is by no means to say that there isn't systemic racism that disadvantages so many).

I have suspicions that the focus on identity politics started because of the Great Recession.

There was a video I saw a long time ago where during Occupy Wall Street, some group was having a bunch of different people speak, one at a time, and this guy said that "x colored, x gender person who has the least privilege gets the right to speak first." Never have I seen any video or anything in real life, before that time, where people acted that way.

But that sort of thing sure divides the masses to where their main focus is on themselves, rather than organizing together to focus on attacking rich people.

They want to keep you down, even with the stock market/crypto, they are known to use the media to push out articles that scaremonger poor people to sell their stocks so they can buy at a low rate and then sell high.

So it wouldn't be surprising if they played some part in media attention being focused on something that is a distraction from economic issues, it's all power games.
(though admittedly it is hard to tell exactly the role, it's pretty much speculation)

Capitalism has a natural tendency to concentrate wealth and power as demonstrated by the course of history.  The more laisse faire the instance, the more pronounced that tendency, the USA being a particularly bad example in that regard.

More free markets are good, but in general, things work work counter-intuitively in certain ways.

If you want to get sleep, you can't just focus on sleeping whenever. You have to be awake, doing some exercise and fatiguing things will get you there. If you want to wake up with energy, you have to have a good sleep first.

So everything is in a state of transition, capitalism is a game, and once the game is played and the winners win, it is no longer a game anymore. Oppression inevitably occurs. (Same with power vacuums/government). You need to keep going, so what may be necessary is breaking up monopolies, or something (very much anti-free market) in order to perpetuate the free market. (Or, hopefully, as technology advances, more free markets aka "games" can open up, so the new generation has a shot at winning them and not being oppressed by the old generation economically).

[Karl Henning]

Prosecutor in Trump criminal probe convenes grand jury to hear evidence, weigh potential charges.

[BasilValentine]

I have suspicions that the focus on identity politics started because of the Great Recession.

There was a video I saw a long time ago where during Occupy Wall Street, some group was having a bunch of different people speak, one at a time, and this guy said that "x colored, x gender person who has the least privilege gets the right to speak first." Never have I seen any video or anything in real life, before that time, where people acted that way.

But that sort of thing sure divides the masses to where their main focus is on themselves, rather than organizing together to focus on attacking rich people.

Seriously? The focus on identity politics is a result of the right systematically attacking over decades the human, civil, and constitutional rights of people based on race, sexual preference, and gender identity. They fought tooth and nail to keep gays from having marriage equality, the republicans are currently doing everything they can to suppress the voting rights of US citizens based on race, to deny medical care for trans people, and to smear peaceful protestors by drawing a moral equivalence between them and insurrectionsits, blacks have been purposely disenfranchised economically for four centuries. Get a frickin clue: When you relentlessly attack people based on identity you force them to organize and resist the attacks in those terms. In my opinion, it's vile to blame the victims.

[milk]

Seriously? The focus on identity politics is a result of the right systematically attacking over decades the human, civil, and constitutional rights of people based on race, sexual preference, and gender identity. They fought tooth and nail to keep gays from having marriage equality, the republicans are currently doing everything they can to suppress the voting rights of US citizens based on race, to deny medical care for trans people, and to smear peaceful protestors by drawing a moral equivalence between them and insurrectionsits, blacks have been purposely disenfranchised economically for four centuries. Get a frickin clue: When you relentlessly attack people based on identity you force them to organize and resist the attacks in those terms. In my opinion, it's vile to blame the victims.

Is "identitarianism" the answer to all that ills us? I think good people can disagree and every claim should be challenged rather than blindly accepted. Some of what you say is more obviously true, but...
- "to deny medical care for trans people" - It's not wrong to ask a few questions about an issue that was very marginal until recently but has now become a main point in politics. What kind of medical care is being denied and to whom and where? Maybe you're right but I'd like to know more.
- "blacks have been purposely disenfranchised economically for four centuries" - it's also such a complicated issue. Has there been progress on this issue in the last 20 years? What is causing the current disenfranchisement as you see it? Do you accept critical race theory as the only framing and answer or could there be other solutions? Are there "good people" who disagree
with the current trend like "critical theories"?
I think you are right about voting rights and the "long opposition", including the likes of Obama and Clinton, to marriage equality. I'm not sure why gender identity is such a hugely important issue these days - not that every individual suffering isn't important.
I too tend to see the identity and critical theories taught academia and now overtaking schools and businesses as a big distraction from social and political progress. Coke is saying, "hey, look over here; don't look there..." 

[Karl Henning]

I think you are right about voting rights and the "long opposition", including the likes of Obama and Clinton, to marriage equality. I'm not sure why gender identity is such a hugely important issue these days - not that every individual suffering isn't important.

American society has a long history of being squeamish about, yet obsessed with, sex.

[drogulus]

Is "identitarianism" the answer to all that ills us?

     No, the answers will come about from political pressure on Dems to implement Dem policy on the economy and social justice. The identitarian ultras occupy the same space in the discourse as radicals always do. Occasionally a good idea will be one they have. It won't slow change down much that the ultras offend people who are offended almost as much by cutting taxes on working people.

     The big fight is always about net spending for growth and fixing problems vs. net spending to fatten accounts stuffed with the comatose dollars of the wealthy.

     What are these extra dollars for? Wasn't Will Rogers right that dollars for expansion end up with the wealthy anyway, and wouldn't it be better for them to do good for everyone as they trickle up instead of only the fortunate few when they kind of don't trickle down? The idea wasn't even radical when Rogers had it. It goes back as far as W. J. Bryan.

Mr. Hoover was an engineer. He knew that water trickles down. Put it uphill and let it go and it will reach the driest little spot. But he didn't know that money trickled up. Give it to the people at the bottom and the people at the top will have it before night, anyhow. But it will at least have passed through the poor fellows hands. - Will Rogers

[greg]

Seriously? The focus on identity politics is a result of the right systematically attacking over decades the human, civil, and constitutional rights of people based on race, sexual preference, and gender identity. They fought tooth and nail to keep gays from having marriage equality, the republicans are currently doing everything they can to suppress the voting rights of US citizens based on race, to deny medical care for trans people, and to smear peaceful protestors by drawing a moral equivalence between them and insurrectionsits, blacks have been purposely disenfranchised economically for four centuries. Get a frickin clue: When you relentlessly attack people based on identity you force them to organize and resist the attacks in those terms. In my opinion, it's vile to blame the victims.

Too many things mentioned to comment on all of them, so won't go into whether it's accurate or not....

but focusing on these things, you can lose sight of the big picture. People's life experiences are more different based on how much money they came from, moreso than their sexual orientation, gender, race, etc. (maybe with the exception of really bad mental illnesses) But that became the predominant focus, meanwhile these wealthy people destroyed an entire generation economically, which affected everyone regardless of their group identity. And they are laughing at the commoners' squabbles. Divide and conquer is the way, after all, to maintain power.

Also, IIRC in the 2000's there was not story after story about police brutality inciting riots and protests, until it started in 2012 with the Trayvon Martin story. And that type of story has become a trend since then. It's not us who are profiting off of that, that's for sure.


(to be clear, people can group up and try to get what they want, many of the fights are already over (gay marriage, etc.) so not saying they shouldn't do that if they wish, but that it shouldn't be the main focus of discourse compared to things like corruption of the wealthy affecting the masses)

[Karl Henning]

The Republican Party right now is obsessed with competitive victimhood. It's the thematic messaging that captures the Trumpian hearts and minds and MTG is practically a grandmaster at it. Just like Trump. And as for facing real consequences from the Good Republicans? Well, as long as MTG stays on Trump's good side, she'll be protected.

The obvious comparison here is Liz Cheney. When Cheney forthrightly answered basic questions about whether she believes Trump should be the leader of the Republican Party after inciting an insurrection—"no"—she was deemed "off message" and ousted from her leadership post.

The calculation is easy and it doesn't have anything to do with truth or falsity. Marjorie Taylor Greene and her insane grievance politics represent a very large bloc of Republican voters.

Who Has The Power?

[Fëanor]

The Republican Party right now is obsessed with competitive victimhood. It's the thematic messaging that captures the Trumpian hearts and minds and MTG is practically a grandmaster at it. Just like Trump. And as for facing real consequences from the Good Republicans? Well, as long as MTG stays on Trump's good side, she'll be protected.

The obvious comparison here is Liz Cheney. When Cheney forthrightly answered basic questions about whether she believes Trump should be the leader of the Republican Party after inciting an insurrection—"no"—she was deemed "off message" and ousted from her leadership post.

The calculation is easy and it doesn't have anything to do with truth or falsity. Marjorie Taylor Greene and her insane grievance politics represent a very large bloc of Republican voters.

Who Has The Power?

When substantial numbers prefer lies & conspiracy theories and politicians are willing to promote them, cynically or otherwise, because "Democracy doesn't matter as long as our side wins", then a country is effed in the arse.

As I've said for the last 40 years, the threat to American democracy isn't Communism, socialism, or the "extreme Left", it is fascism.  I believe this more & more with every month that passes.

[Karl Henning]

When substantial numbers prefer lies & conspiracy theories and politicians are willing to promote them, cynically or otherwise, because "Democracy doesn't matter as long as our side wins", then a country is effed in the arse.

As I've said for the last 40 years, the threat to American democracy isn't Communism, socialism, or the "extreme Left", it is fascism.  I believe this more & more with every month that passes.

Wish I might refute that, but I cannot.

[drogulus]

     It's Time to Be Worried About Inflation

Whereas the American Jobs Plan envisages close to a $2 trillion increase in public spending over the next eight years, it calls for collecting the revenues to finance that expenditure over a 15-year period. This implies that over the next decade, the Jobs Plan would add an estimated $1 trillion to the country's public debt.

     For libraservatives it's always time to worry, and there's no doubt that when large increases in government spending are proposed, people propose a matching set of inflation worries, or what they think is a match. Take the above, which tries to turn spending over 8 years into a worry about accumulated public debt. On its face, I don't see a worry. After all the debt is the part taxes don't pay, not the part they do. That leaves the money with us, saved instead of canceled. That's what the debt is for. The national debt only reveals its secrets from an analysis of its function.

     We do see some inflation. Given how the economy is revving up it should be expected that bottlenecks should exist as jobs and workers are mismatched. About the pent up demand, it should cause inflation to spike until production meets it. The notion that the economy should be squished in anticipation of economic growing pains is classic conventional thinkery and responsible for decades of low growth and middle class stagnation. Do we really want to sabotage this cycle like the last one?

     

[drogulus]

     Another thing to keep in mind is that it's always the "largest tax cut/increase in history". It's always the largest spending increase, the highest deficits, the biggest debt total since the dawn of time, or since WWII which is almost the same thing.

     But, but.....not only did the world not end from the Big Number Palooza after WWII, we got the greatest expansion of mass prosperity in human history. First we had a serious bout of inflation in the late '40s as the economy suffered through production bottlenecks during the transition from the war economy to peacetime conditions. The huge pent up demand from enforced wartime savings (the other side of the wartime debt) first created inflation and then growth as the economy adjusted to meet demand. Does this sound familiar yet?

     

[greg]

All the news lately about the "ohh, maybe it did come from a lab" lately has me amused.

[drogulus]

All the news lately about the "ohh, maybe it did come from a lab" lately has me amused.

     The controversy was not about whether the virus escaped from a lab or not. The controversy was about the Trumpist claim that the virus did escape from the lab because Chicoms lie about many things. You investigate because you don't know. Trump never wanted to know stuff, he wanted to say stuff. Since the truth matters we should investigate the claim.

[Fëanor]

     It's Time to Be Worried About Inflation

Whereas the American Jobs Plan envisages close to a $2 trillion increase in public spending over the next eight years, it calls for collecting the revenues to finance that expenditure over a 15-year period. This implies that over the next decade, the Jobs Plan would add an estimated $1 trillion to the country's public debt.

     For libraservatives it's always time to worry, and there's no doubt that when large increases in government spending are proposed, people propose a matching set of inflation worries, or what they think is a match. Take the above, which tries to turn spending over 8 years into a worry about accumulated public debt. On its face, I don't see a worry. After all the debt is the part taxes don't pay, not the part they do. That leaves the money with us, saved instead of canceled. That's what the debt is for. The national debt only reveals its secrets from an analysis of its function.

     We do see some inflation. Given how the economy is revving up it should be expected that bottlenecks should exist as jobs and workers are mismatched. About the pent up demand, it should cause inflation to spike until production meets it. The notion that the economy should be squished in anticipation of economic growing pains is classic conventional thinkery and responsible for decades of low growth and middle class stagnation. Do we really want to sabotage this cycle like the last one?

A little more inflation would be alright I suppose -- after all, inflation only hurts middle class retirees and the like with modest saving, not the working man or, needless to say, the Rich.

The USA and other countries like Canada need to tax the Rich harder;  higher income taxes with a lot fewer exemptions plus maybe even a short-term wealth tax.  The Rich tend not to invest unless there is Demand, but regardless they are happy to take the money and buy existing assets which causes real estate bubbles, etc., but doesn't add to productive capacity.

So tax the Rich and don't worry.  Put the money into infrastructure;  lots of the money spent there is going to trickle up to the Rich anyway but helping workers and the nation along the way.  (Check your Will Rogers quote which is so true.)

[drogulus]

The USA and other countries like Canada need to tax the Rich harder;  higher income taxes with a lot fewer exemptions plus maybe even a short-term wealth tax.  The Rich tend not to invest unless there is Demand, but regardless they are happy to take the money and buy existing assets which causes real estate bubbles, etc., but doesn't add to productive capacity.

So tax the Rich and don't worry.  Put the money into infrastructure;  lots of the money spent there is going to trickle up to the Rich anyway but helping workers and the nation along the way.  (Check your Will Rogers quote which is so true.)

     There are reasons to tax the rich, but not because their money can be used to raise demand. What I have in mind is a more productive tax-side fiscal balance where less of the burden falls on low to middle earners, so a combination of cuts lower down and increases at the top means money does more work before it gets to its natural home at the top. The idea is that the rich get richer more slowly and everyone else catches up in an economy designed to grow faster. But no, we don't need the money to come from the rich. Taxes don't do that.

[Karl Henning]

     The controversy was not about whether the virus escaped from a lab or not. The controversy was about the Trumpist claim that the virus did escape Trump never wanted to know stuff, he wanted to say stuff.

And greg is much the same.

[Florestan]

When substantial numbers prefer lies & conspiracy theories and politicians are willing to promote them, cynically or otherwise, because "Democracy doesn't matter as long as our side wins", then a country is effed in the arse.

As I've said for the last 40 years, the threat to American democracy isn't Communism, socialism, or the "extreme Left", it is fascism.  I believe this more & more with every month that passes.

Well, Fascism and Communism have a lot in common --- in many respects they are virtually indistinguishable...

[greg]

     The controversy was not about whether the virus escaped from a lab or not. The controversy was about the Trumpist claim that the virus did escape from the lab because Chicoms lie about many things. You investigate because you don't know. Trump never wanted to know stuff, he wanted to say stuff. Since the truth matters we should investigate the claim.

I don't care what Trump thought about it. But the media sure did.
And yeah, I agree completely with that "Since the truth matters we should investigate the claim," that's the general best approach to take to everything, especially when it comes to ideologies.

And greg is much the same.

Lol. That's funny, being directed at an introvert who spends more time looking up stuff online than actually talking to people.