Prepping for the State of the Union address
By: Daniel J. Becker
With the state of the Union coming up and the current national attention having been drawn toward the question of the nation’s personality via reality mimicking Hollywood (God, that slap in the face hurt bad, assuming you felt it) I want to try to get us ready for the presentation by reminding people that drama can not be the end all and be all as motivation. We truly need to acknowledge the vastness between policy including policy statements and implementation and the living experience post policy.
Last year I posted my state of the union opinion based on real world small business experience. Well, I can tell you, it’s not any better. I’ll get to that in the next post. Let’s just say, I got to experience the down side of the “stimulus” first hand. No, I’m not against stimulus, just poorly implemented stimulus.
In the mean time. There has been much discussion regarding the degree of leftyness of President Obama in the last 2 years. I asked in ’08: Obama, Is he or isn’t he….real? In that post I drew on some statements President Obama made pre-election regarding policy positions. You should go read the comments. It’s kind of a “how wrong/correct were we” experience.
I want to focus on just one statement by President Obama from that post keeping in mind the concept of the “state of the union” address:
I will invest $150 billion over the next decade in renewable sources of energy to create five million new, green jobs – jobs that pay well and can’t be outsourced; jobs building solar panels and wind turbines and fuel- efficient cars;…
Great policy idea. Stimulus, jobs, hits the climate change thing, gives purpose and a direction for say our education system. Kind of lefty on the leftyness scale. However, there has always been rumblings that I’ve read and thought regarding greening our economy and jiving that with globalization and outsourcing. Well, we got our answer. It’s not jiving. Or should I say, it’s jiving just fine considering our current economic industrial policy?
BEIJING — Aided by at least $43 million in assistance from the government of Massachusetts and an innovative solar energy technology, Evergreen Solar emerged in the last three years as the third-largest maker of solar panels in the United States.
But now the company is closing its main American factory, laying off the 800 workers by the end of March and shifting production to a joint venture with a Chinese company in central China. Evergreen cited the much higher government support available in China.
Even though Evergreen opened its Devens plant, with all new equipment, only in 2008, it began talks with Chinese companies in early 2009. In September 2010, the company opened its factory in Wuhan, China, and will now rely on that operation
Let the excuses begin. In the end, the reality of the state of the union is that it’s not good in all aspects of it’s health. As I asked in “Is he or isn’t he…real”
If the change we wanted was not to be bull shitted anymore, and the one I’m listening to is talking “change” using lingo, presenting policy plans of what I want, was I wrong to think they were talking no more bull shit?
DOLB said: “No, I’m not against stimulus, just poorly implemented stimulus.” Agreed! Oh, and the Green” thing, and the anti-terrorism policies (which have not shifted as far as many here wanted), and the energy (non-energy) policies, and the support for “union” not worker policies, and ….
In the end this Prez will be rated as horrid, and progressive/liberal policies just as bad or worse. Accordingly, we might see some huge anti-government spending movement created, huge, near record setting turn over in Congress, and a shift to the right in national thinking. And progressives/liberals won’t understand and deny why those things could happen.
Ofcourse, if you are progressive/liberal your reality might be different than mine, but DOLB’s article is not just a cry in the dark. It might very well be a slow recognition of …. DOLB you can fill in the meaning of the blank here if you wish. I’m just curious.
Hate to think that Obama’s “failures” are being blamed on his being too liberal.
But that’s like the folks telling you to guarantee the future of your SS by cutting it now.
CoRev,
The zenith of tea partying is past, the nadir will be 2012.
Go Sarah!!
coberly, I don’t see Obama as anything near a liberal but, on the other hand, I can’t find enough consistency to label him as anything.
Imagine you are making cookies with someone. You want chocolate chip tollhouse and your friend wants ginger snaps. So you could invent a recipe that might be worth trying as a compromise or you could lay all the ingredients out on the table for both recipes and allow “you choose half your ingredients and I’ll choose half of mine”. You put the choices together and you are less likely to have a good cookie (e.g., no one choose which flour to use), than if you worked together on a new experimental recipe. That’s Obama to me. Whatever he wants for a policy, it gets pieces put in and the opposition gets pieces put in. The result is that I can’t find any policy direction that makes sense.
So even if Obama wanted the best solution for SS, he could never, never achieve a good way forward but, rather, would achieve a basket of disparate pieces that contain time bombs for the workers of this country.
It’s rather mind boggling. Of course, this is just my view and, maybe, someone else might see the “liberal” or something else in him. I see a man who is probably a good person but who lacks those elements of leadership that could work toward policies that could help America and could endure more than a short period of confused time.
I won’t deny that this perception may be my liberal bias but I don’t think it is.
coberly, I don’t see Obama as anything near a liberal but, on the other hand, I can’t find enough consistency to label him as anything.
Imagine you are making cookies with someone. You want chocolate chip tollhouse and your friend wants ginger snaps. So you could invent a recipe that might be worth trying as a compromise or you could lay all the ingredients out on the table for both recipes and allow “you choose half your ingredients and I’ll choose half of mine”. You put the choices together and you are less likely to have a good cookie (e.g., no one choose which flour to use), than if you worked together on a new experimental recipe. That’s Obama to me. Whatever he wants for a policy, it gets pieces put in and the opposition gets pieces put in. The result is that I can’t find any policy direction that makes sense.
So even if Obama wanted the best solution for SS, he could never, never achieve a good way forward but, rather, would achieve a basket of disparate pieces that contain time bombs for the workers of this country.
It’s rather mind boggling. Of course, this is just my view and, maybe, someone else might see the “liberal” or something else in him. I see a man who is probably a good person but who lacks those elements of leadership that could work toward policies that could help America and could endure more than a short period of confused time.
I won’t deny that this perception may be my liberal bias but I don’t think it is.
coberly, I don’t see Obama as anything near a liberal but, on the other hand, I can’t find enough consistency to label him as anything.
Imagine you are making cookies with someone. You want chocolate chip tollhouse and your friend wants ginger snaps. So you could invent a recipe that might be worth trying as a compromise or you could lay all the ingredients out on the table for both recipes and allow “you choose half your ingredients and I’ll choose half of mine”. You put the choices together and you are less likely to have a good cookie (e.g., no one choose which flour to use), than if you worked together on a new experimental recipe. That’s Obama to me. Whatever he wants for a policy, it gets pieces put in and the opposition gets pieces put in. The result is that I can’t find any policy direction that makes sense.
So even if Obama wanted the best solution for SS, he could never, never achieve a good way forward but, rather, would achieve a basket of disparate pieces that contain time bombs for the workers of this country.
It’s rather mind boggling. Of course, this is just my view and, maybe, someone else might see the “liberal” or something else in him. I see a man who is probably a good person but who lacks those elements of leadership that could work toward policies that could help America and could endure more than a short period of confused time.
I won’t deny that this perception may be my liberal bias but I don’t think it is.
Daniel,
This statement didn’t work then didn’t work now:
” will invest $150 billion over the next decade in renewable sources of energy to create five million new, green jobs – jobs that pay well and can’t be outsourced; jobs building solar panels and wind turbines and fuel- efficient cars;… “
Jobs building solar panels, wind trubines, and fuel efficient cars can ALL be outsourced. I can build all three of these in China and ship them here, Jobs that CAN’T be outsourced are jobs that INSTALL solar panels, INSTALL wind turbines, and SELL fuel-efficient cars at the dealer. There is a big difference.
And Obama has made little if any effective effort on Global Warming (Assuming AGW is actually true and humanity can actually do anything about it). As long as China’s is costructing a coal plant/week anything we do is moot. I’ll beleive he’s serious when he starts throwing cash at nuclear energy. Until then color me unimpressed.
As for keeping jobs from being outsourced? 1) Exactly how was he suppossed to do that? 2) With the lock the Dems had on Congress these past 2 years, was there any legislation passed (or even brought to a vote on the House/Senate floor) that would have effectively addressed this issue? (I don’t think so, but I may have missed the No-Outsourcing-to-China bill).
Lastly I agree, poorly thought out and poorly executed stimulous was probably worse than doing nothing. But Obama is the leader of the Dmocrat Party. He’s your guy – and I bet anything you will still vote for him over whomever the R’s put up (and it won’t be S. Palin).
Islam will change
coberly, I don’t see Obama as anything near a liberal but, on the other hand, I can’t find enough consistency to label him as anything.
Imagine you are making cookies with someone. You want chocolate chip tollhouse and your friend wants ginger snaps. So you could invent a recipe that might be worth trying as a compromise or you could lay all the ingredients out on the table for both recipes and allow “you choose half your ingredients and I’ll choose half of mine”. You put the choices together and you are less likely to have a good cookie (e.g., no one choose which flour to use), than if you worked together on a new experimental recipe. That’s Obama to me. Whatever he wants for a policy, it gets pieces put in and the opposition gets pieces put in. The result is that I can’t find any policy direction that makes sense.
So even if Obama wanted the best solution for SS, he could never, never achieve a good way forward but, rather, would achieve a basket of disparate pieces that contain time bombs for the workers of this country.
It’s rather mind boggling. Of course, this is just my view and, maybe, someone else might see the “liberal” or something else in him. I see a man who is probably a good person but who lacks those elements of leadership that could work toward policies that could help America and could endure more than a short period of confused time.
I won’t deny that this perception may be my liberal bias but I don’t think it is.
coberly, I don’t see Obama as anything near a liberal but, on the other hand, I can’t find enough consistency to label him as anything.
Imagine you are making cookies with someone. You want chocolate chip tollhouse and your friend wants ginger snaps. So you could invent a recipe that might be worth trying as a compromise or you could lay all the ingredients out on the table for both recipes and allow “you choose half your ingredients and I’ll choose half of mine”. You put the choices together and you are less likely to have a good cookie (e.g., no one choose which flour to use), than if you worked together on a new experimental recipe. That’s Obama to me. Whatever he wants for a policy, it gets pieces put in and the opposition gets pieces put in. The result is that I can’t find any policy direction that makes sense.
So even if Obama wanted the best solution for SS, he could never, never achieve a good way forward but, rather, would achieve a basket of disparate pieces that contain time bombs for the workers of this country.
It’s rather mind boggling. Of course, this is just my view and, maybe, someone else might see the “liberal” or something else in him. I see a man who is probably a good person but who lacks those elements of leadership that could work toward policies that could help America and could endure more than a short period of confused time.
I won’t deny that this perception may be my liberal bias but I don’t think it is.
coberly, I don’t see Obama as anything near a liberal but, on the other hand, I can’t find enough consistency to label him as anything.
Imagine you are making cookies with someone. You want chocolate chip tollhouse and your friend wants ginger snaps. So you could invent a recipe that might be worth trying as a compromise or you could lay all the ingredients out on the table for both recipes and allow “you choose half your ingredients and I’ll choose half of mine”. You put the choices together and you are less likely to have a good cookie (e.g., no one choose which flour to use), than if you worked together on a new experimental recipe. That’s Obama to me. Whatever he wants for a policy, it gets pieces put in and the opposition gets pieces put in. The result is that I can’t find any policy direction that makes sense.
So even if Obama wanted the best solution for SS, he could never, never achieve a good way forward but, rather, would achieve a basket of disparate pieces that contain time bombs for the workers of this country.
It’s rather mind boggling. Of course, this is just my view and, maybe, someone else might see the “liberal” or something else in him. I see a man who is probably a good person but who lacks those elements of leadership that could work toward policies that could help America and could endure more than a short period of confused time.
I won’t deny that this perception may be my liberal bias but I don’t think it is.
ILSM, we’ll just have to wait and see re: the Tea Party.
The real issue is why did you fixate on that?
Dan, JS-Kit has lost it. I received a message to retry or cancel. Hit retry the first time. Hit cancel the second time thinking I just wouldn’t post my nonsense if it was this hard. You see the result. I will hit post once and go away this time.
Buff, I agree! I am amazed at the level of construction and implementation of the main bills, Healthcare, Stimulus, no 2011 appropriations, etc. passed by the Dems.
Anna
your perception is the same as mine. except i am not sure he is even “compromising.” given the people he picks for advisors, i think he has bought the trickle down fruitcake whole, and his ideas about SS appear to have been picked up from second hand Peterson. no evidence of any thought whatsoever. we’ll be lucky if his being a “good person” prevents the worst “fixes” from becoming law right away. but the second worst fixes will pave the way for the worst.
Buff
what is sad here is that I agree with your “analysis”, and i suspect most of the people here do too. but then you say Obama is “our” guy.
it’s too bad you can’t get past the partisan politics to recognize that both parties are destroying this country.
Buff, when the Dems wanted something and an overwhelming majority of the people wanted something like public option (could be anything, though), you’d think the D’s majority would hold and they could do it. Not of course if the President undermines their efforts and goes around and makes his chocolate chip–ginger snap hybrid deals without consulting them. It’s an implicit threat to veto anything the Congress sends to him. Miss Anna Lee’s observations are accurate. Give this guy two cookies to sell for you and he’ll give one away while bargaining like hell to get half-price for the other one.
The result is that single Senators and Congress members have the ability to high-jack the legislative process either alone or by gathering small groups of like-minded people who support a generic “No or Other” positon. Stupak, Snow, Collins, Baucus, Grassley, Coburn and Demint are among those who come to mind in this category. So, six months of negotiation goes up in smoke when one of these people suddenly withdraws support for fixing the hall water fountain. And, everyone knows the President will keep his hands off any negotiation offerring the opportunity for a loss of any kind or strike a half-price bargain on prime time TV.
So, I think that in reality, the vacillating nature of this President nullified the efforts of the Democratic majorities in Congress. And, he should have seen that and changed his strategy (if any. He may not have any at all.) As for voting for this guy, it depends on how the numbers run.
In my state, the electorals all go to the R candidate, no matter how large the popular vote for the D candidate is. See 2000 election. So, I can stay home if the polls look good. Failing that, wouldn’t be the first time I voted for someone holding my nose. The SS reform he’s opened up for discussion may be the end of my support for him. It’s not a nuke, but it might as well be from my perspective. You don’t blow up your middle class and survive an election. NancyO
coberly,
He is your guy. He is who you voted for and I bet many here sent money too/worked for to get elected.
I did my best to get Hillary into the office, but the Texas Dem party had the vote rigged to favor the caucuses. Oh well.
He’s the leader of the Democrat party and your guy. He will lead the charge to gut SS (it looks like). McCain wouldn’t have even looked at SS. So here is change you can believe! Live with it.
Islam will change
Tea party and Sarah Palin have been entertaining in a vague way. Fun to watch a mass delusion calling out fiction on the “founders”.
You offering free psyche eval?
Show me your sheep skin.
CoRev,
You have been refuting global warming why warm up to buff’s worry on China coal burning?
Oh, yes: ilsm will not change
NO,
I liked you analogy. I thought it very apt. But you on the left voted a guy into office who had very little executive or leadership experience and none with anything of size. He didn’t even finish one term as Senator. You could have picked a random CEO off the Fortune 500 list and have someone more qualified.
So I was not too surprised when he blew a once per generation advantage that the Dems had these last two years. His change on the war was no surprise becuase he at least seems to respond to reality (see Darth Cheney’s latest interview), but I was very surprised he didn’t push through the big social issues that the Dems wanted: Single payer, Elimination of secret ballots in Union votes, DOMA repeal, reduction in the DoD, broad increases in social safety net, large tax increases. About the only thing the left got was DADT repeal (still in work), a screwed up health-care bill, and a expansion in the Federal workforce. Plus two Supreme court picks to replace lefty retirees. YMMV.
I may have missed something but is this what you guys voted for with the Hope and Change express road into town with zero experience?
BTW, where is the anti-war left? And why arn’t the networks showing the bodies coming down the ramps at Dover like they so badly wanted to do during Bush’s time in office? Has Cindy Sheehan met with Obama? Heck the war as basically disappeared from the news cycle these days. Even the Sunday news shows have dropped the coverage and I miss the weekly “In Memorium” that was part of one show. Continues to show that it really wasn’t anti-war as anti-Bush/anti-R.
But UAV production is up! Made-in-America stimulous!
Islam will change
Good strategy when js kit gives false signals.
Evergreen closed its plant in the US built very recently with 53 million subsidy (800 employees), and opened a new plant in China, has since gone bankrupt.. It had a plant in Germany. Other major solar manufacturers are opening plants in China.
China leads in wind trubine production, although quality is a problem.
Part of this move is that global companies are building closer to where their major markets are. I have a friend in the plastic laminate business building the laminate walls you bump up against in air travel and rail cars etc. Building plants in Germany and Singapore area because markets for products is growing, much coming because of government help.
Spencer has pointed out that import substitution is a major part of GDP ‘growth’. Trade policy is a non-starter in the US, multinationals are doing well with the current set up and it appears their is little motivation to address the jobs issues.
This month’s news on the spending cut issues appear to indicate from Cantor and Boehner that such issues are on the backburner until maybe next election.
China itself of course has its own problems that are severe at the macro level.
My bet is that the war issues will lie dormant as people still hope for next year’s drawdown. I don’t see that happening. If memory serves I had asked corev if the 100,000 troops in Afghanistan was the goal( two years ago). The war issue has been overshadowed of course by economic and domestic issues. That is also a normal part of US thinking.
buff,
Opportunities missed.
If war profiteers benefitted came from solar panels, they would not be made in China.
Each UAV that is send off with whatever DCMA inspectors, if they even look, overlooked deficiencies is a wing of new classrooms in some American school.
The 11 carriers the US maintains is a quarter of all the bridges that our commerce tracks over in the crumbling interstate system.
The 12 Marine Amphib groups is another 15% of the interstates which should be repaired and improved.
I scarce to iage what the US could do if the $2B a copy B-2 were grounded so another is not crashed, down to 19, eh?
What to do with $183M from not doing one F-22?
And the empire costs and costs. No tribute from Saudi royals, whom Dubya held hands, and only plunder is from US kids’ future.
Obama is a disappointment, indeed.
You give me all kinds of things to complain about.
Thank You.
ilsm will not change
You’re right about the wars, Buff. I have no hope of ever seeing us get out of Af-Pak. As for Iraq, all I can say is for the same money, we could have bought Pemex outright from the Mexican government in exchange for, oh, South Florida. Been there lately? I think it would be a fair swap. And, Jeb Bush goes with.
Presidents like being CinC. I was afraid this President would succomb to the charm of having guys with a lot of campaign medals on their chests give Power Point presentations on anti-insurgency strategies whipped up just for him. I was right. Young people with no experience of Presidential politics bought that Change stuff. Change is inevitable and mainly uncomfortable. I just thought he would be less objectionable than his opponent. I didn’t expect much from this guy. My expectations have been fully met. 😉 NO
rdan,
I had a ‘conversation’ in the recent past on wind turbine reliability, very inyteresting variables, lots of mechanics and lots of gearing, clutching and so forth. Add in electronic controls to address gearing issues and very complex mechanism.
And the ones off shore are even more interesting since the cost of undependability is much higher than on shore turbines.
“Prepping for the State of the Union address”
Be prepared for disappointment, Libs. The only success Obama has had in the polls is in moving to the center, not surprising since <20% of the electorate is Liberal.
One of the products of Obama’s total lack of experience is that he is a very poor negotiator. He appears to have thrown away the vaunted third rail that is Social Securtiy. If you want a clue to what Obama will do re. Social Security look for the words “shared sacrifice.”
sammy,
I am beyond disappointed.
Helps to be into zen!
We libruls you know.
Buff
I voted for Hillary, and supported her in the local paper. The Democratic party won’t talk to me. Or let me talk to them. I have mentioned this before. But like a lot of the people here, all you hear is your own recorded message.
ILSM, refuting Global Warming? Just the catastrophic predictions, and the percentage caused by man..
Sammy,
much as i hate to say it, i agree with you.
but just to be sure everyone understands.. the only ones to be sacrificed will be the working people.
the funny thing is they pay for SS themselves, but the Petersons have convinced everybody that SS is a huge cost to “the government.” Not much you can do with people that dumb.
Kind of like telling the kids “you’ll never collect Social Security, so let’s kill the program.”
ILSM, don’t use the pejorative term, librul. It upsets folks like KHarris.
“One of the products of Obama’s total lack of experience is that he is a very poor negotiator.” Sammy
Au contraire. He ran as a progressive and he feigned a progressive ideology and platform. He has proved himself to be a centrist DLC clone, maybe even a bit right of the center. He’s been a brilliant negotiatot, but he hasn’t been negotiating with the Republicans. He has been setting up each step with an extremely pessimistic perspective so that he could come roaring back with a compromise that gives way to the right.
I’ll bite on let the excuses begin, why not, and try defending Obama from the glass-half-empty charges here. As a starting point, put on a conservative hat (some here already have one, some here need to stretch their imaginations) and re-watch this leftist’s rant: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YLQ-OKa6OZQ. It’s a half-glass of poison to millions.
Regarding SS and deficit reductions, we honestly haven’t heard from him yet. If you believe he’s in love with Simpson and Bowles, you have to explain to me Reid’s stance and the November retort by Jan Schakowsky (of Chicago). He might want to make them look foolish and ineffective, but that’s typically not “how things work” in Chicago, so put me down as I don’t know, will wait-and-see, watching the glass.
On the left, maybe the most disappointing half-glass was failing to move much beyond job-saving (and funds for the poor and unemployed) to new job-creation. All he had to do is listen to the advice of lefty economists in the blogosphere and reject the advice of virtually everyone else, including all those dumb-ass Bush- and Clinton-era economists in his administration. A half-trillion more stimulus per year for more than a couple of years specifically for job-creating, business-expanding, useful projects (on top of the prior stimulus) would have rejuvinated even flower shops–or so a true lefty would believe. Of course, on the right, Obama just stalled the recovery by funding state/local jobs and giving aid and unemployment insurance–not very Reaganesque.
If you read the article, you’ll realize that the reason for moving the jobs to China was that banks in communist China were willing to lend the company money while banks in the capitalist United States were not. Chinese banks are heavily regulated, and a Chinese banker who bucks the Communist Party can find himself in serious trouble, so Chinese bankers are lending. American bankers have a more effective lobby and so are spoiled by capitalist bailouts and back door subsidies with no stirngs attached. At some point, we have to ask:
Who did win the Cold War? Who is burying whom?
At what point do we have to give up on nurturing the delicate flower of capitalism and free enterprise and focus on building a robust, productive economy?
“All he had to do is listen to the advice of lefty economists in the blogosphere and reject the advice of virtually everyone else, including all those dumb-ass Bush- and Clinton-era economists in his administration.” PJR
I’m not sure if your tongue was hard against your cheek as those words rolled onto the page. What I am sure of is that the economy fell to pieces under the guidance of all those Clinton and Bush economists. Maybe we’ve got the cart before the horse. Folks are broke because the economy tanked and all we have to do is figure out a way to get it “back on the right track.” What ever track that might be. Or were people beginning to recognize that they were going broke over the past several decades of stagnant wages and increasing wealth disprity and with that recognition they decided to stop participating in the economy resulting in the tanking phenomemnon. Actually they didn’t decide of their own accord. People tend to want to stay involved, economically that is. Let’s just say they were increasingly unable to participate in the economy.
Now that’s not a universal phenomenon, disembarking from the economy. There are lots of people spending and having fun. But lots is a rather imprecise measure. How many people are having economic fun if only 3?, 4? or 5% are doing the economic mambo. One, two, three and spend. Oh how nice it is to have the bulin of the income and all the wealth. Check the sales of high line vehicle sales. Porsche had its best year in 2010. Economies tank because of fundamental disruptions of the ebb and flow of goods and cash. Yes, the greedy bankers may have pushed the whole thing opver an edge, but the fundamental flaw is that 95% of the working population is being fed scraps off of a corpulent table. Nothing is being done to change the imbalance of wealth and income. So the “little economy” of the One Percenters and their dutiful minions will hum along while the rest teeters and stumbles and falls. And those real good economists who so cleverly guided us to this point will continue to pontificate about the laws of economics while Joe SixPack dreams of Sarah P. and wonders why he can’t get arrested and every one on TV is having so much fun.
Kaleberg,
Who did win the Cold War? Who is burying whom?
I can understand the Lib fixation on China: “Hey, we can tell people what to do…..we can force banks to lend to solar panel companies if we want……..”
But let’s look at what that approach has wrought:
Capitalist US has a per capita GDP of $47,400, (#11 in the world).
Communist China has a per capita GDP of $7,400, or 1/6th of the US (#128, right below Algeria, and right above Turkmenistan).
Yes, they are growing fast, but that is because they started at such a low base, well, because they are Communist.
Get real!
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2004rank.html
Global warming manmade or not, no big deal. No problem, I live at 143 feet mean above sea level.
How many feet is the Potomoc at the Jefferson?
Oh yes, it is tidal!!
Sammy
speaking of getting real. why do you suppose they started at such a low base?
don’t know many people who want to emulate communist china, but i know lots and lots of people who run with whatever sound bite tickles their ear at a given moment.
meanwhile, we may be seeing what “capitalism” (not the real thing, just what the current insane right calls “capitalism”) can do by way of destroying what was the richest endowed country on earth.
here is a clue for you all
capitalism can work with a quite high degree of government regulation and intervention. government is just part of the environment that real entrepreneurs have to work with if they are going to “get real.”
real capitalists know this. the only people who don’t know this are the poor deluded folks who vote republican because the republican party has found out they can get votes by crying “communism!” whenever they want to stop a policy they don’t like. usually because it would tax them and they don’t like taxes even when the taxes buy them what they need to have a successful business, or it would regulate them, as by stopping them from poisoning their customers. because some “capitalists” are not real capitalists, but just high end criminals.
Jack re location of tongue, I was adopting the lefty point of view in that para, in which view Obama should have listened to Reich or at least Krugman and others on the left who wanted much more done. On the right, of course, the view was that Obama was doing way too much. Nothing has changed since then. So Obama’s advisors are dumb-asses from both perspectives.
Oh good grief sammy…stomping the foot down doesn’t establish cause or correlation for the Chinese experience.
When one takes office as a “progressive” thinker and appoints Larry (There’s no such thing as too much deregulation) Summers as your chief economics adviser and Rham (Tell’m anything they want to hear) Emmanuel as your Chief of Staff it becomes readily apparent that those progressive thoughts are only that and are never likely to turn into progressive deeds.
Note that Obama”s legislative successes would have pleased any first rate moderate Republican. There are none still around so I guess the DLC types feel a need to act in their place. That’s not progress. If the progressives who oppose the Health Care legislation had been more pleased with it (read that to mean something like a public option) would opposition to that legislation be even 35-40%? Boehner and his ilk are using real progressive dissatisfaction to support their contentions that the public is not too happy with Obama. That’s an interesting turn of events.
stomping the foot down doesn’t establish cause or correlation for the Chinese experience
Rdan,
The cause is that command economies are inferior to market economies in creating wealth. With the correlation of Communism to poverty at 100%, I would say that is a pretty strong hypothesis.
The Chinese experience is quite a mixture of different economic strategies, and poverty in China cannot be measured in decades under one system. The Chinese have evolved a system which is draconian and state run…but Communism I believe was not the cause of the poverty in China.
I would not want to live there as a typical farmer or laborer, and probably would have been jailed by now for sponsoring AB. I have no secret love of their system. However, China bashing comes in many flavors, but multinational companies vote with their money, do they not?
Witness GE and sharing of r and d requirements with the partnering mandated by China. What is a trade policy that has room for Americans as an important concern as well as global concerns?