US Politics Thread

[britbox]

Automation.

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/jan/11/robots-jobs-employees-artificial-intelligence

 

[Federberg]

Corporations aren't stupid. They try to employ people wherever possible as it enrichs society and gives them political clout. The problem arises in the scenario I'm describing where government policy is hostile to companies which have spent hundreds of billions of dollars investing in foreign economies. If they are forced to abandon those investments their priority will be defensive. Produce as cheaply as possible in their home countries which means more automation than would otherwise be advisable. There's a subtle but deadly difference. His cure might encourage adverse solutions. Interestingly Bill Gates is already anticipating this, and he's calling for robots to be taxed

 

[britbox]

Corporations aren't stupid. They try to employ people wherever possible as it enrichs society and gives them political clout.

Please.... Corporations are answerable to shareholders and the game is to maximise profits. Enriching society is lip service... and they usually do that by running some rinky dink community programme or local sponsorships which cost a fraction of employing people.

 

[Federberg]

Please.... Corporations are answerable to shareholders and the game is to maximise profits. Enriching society is lip service... and they usually do that by running some rinky dink community programme or local sponsorships which cost a fraction of employing people.

That's a little simplistic. And I'm not talking about "marketing". If your consumer base is unemployed you will lose in the long term. Don't make the mistake of thinking companies aren't aware of enlightened self interest

 

[britbox]

That's a little simplistic. And I'm not talking about "marketing". If your consumer base is unemployed you will lose in the long term. Don't make the mistake of thinking companies aren't aware of enlightened self interest

That's my whole issue with sending jobs overseas and automation...The consumer base ultimately gets squeezed because they don't have the money to spend because the jobs aren't there. We've come full circle.

 

[Federberg]

Lower value jobs were lost yes, partly as a consequence of globalisation, but these were also an inevitable consequence of economic evolution. Those same jobs would be better used in poorer countries with a greater comparative advantage. The benefit would be the greater propensity of those poorer countries to buy goods. This process takes a while unfortunately hence the terrible politics we see right now. It will be apparent in the near future though, if people can hold steady and not let their prejudices run away with them

 

[britbox]

The following real term figures are quite enlightening, considering that the American capitalist model has been the one put on a pedestal since WW2.

http://www.mybudget360.com/cost-of-living-2014-inflation-1950-vs-2014-data-housing-cars-college/

1950:
The average family income: $3,300
The average car cost: $1,510
The median home price: $7,354

2014:
The average family income: $51,017
The average car cost: $31,252
The median home price: $188,900

Cost of a House to Income:
1950: 2.2 ($7,300)
2014: 3.7 ($188,000)

Cost of a Car to Income:
1950: 0.45 ($1,510)
2014: 0.61 ($31,252)

Education to Income:
1950: .18 ($600)
2014: .79 ($45,000+)

So, American exceptionalism over the last 6 or 7 decades sees it's average citizen significantly worse off in real terms... Of course, the very top bracket will be significantly better off.

 

[britbox]

Lower value jobs were lost yes, partly as a consequence of globalisation, but these were also an inevitable consequence of economic evolution. Those same jobs would be better used in poorer countries with a greater comparative advantage. The benefit would be the greater propensity of those poorer countries to buy goods. This process takes a while unfortunately hence the terrible politics we see right now. It will be apparent in the near future though, if people can hold steady and not let their prejudices run away with them

That process takes years, but I see what you mean. Things come full circle on every front. In 50 years, all the workers in India and various other countries will no doubt be demanding the workers rights and wages they don't have now... and demanding the iphones of their day.... meanwhile in America... and the UK....

 

[Federberg]

The following real term figures are quite enlightening, considering that the American capitalist model has been the one put on a pedestal since WW2.

http://www.mybudget360.com/cost-of-living-2014-inflation-1950-vs-2014-data-housing-cars-college/

1950:
The average family income: $3,300
The average car cost: $1,510
The median home price: $7,354

2014:
The average family income: $51,017
The average car cost: $31,252
The median home price: $188,900

Cost of a House to Income:
1950: 2.2 ($7,300)
2014: 3.7 ($188,000)

Cost of a Car to Income:
1950: 0.45 ($1,510)
2014: 0.61 ($31,252)

Education to Income:
1950: .18 ($600)
2014: .79 ($45,000+)

So, American exceptionalism over the last 6 or 7 decades sees it's average citizen significantly worse off in real terms... Of course, the very top bracket will be significantly better off.

especially with all this sh1t going on....

 

[britbox]

Interesting and candid. Although I did smile when one of the Questions was "if you were in the summer of your life, rather than the winter would you have written this book..."

I think a lot of people are aware of the American blueprint in overseas interference. We've seen it time over... Syria was the latest attempt... that one seems destined to fail... hence the demonization of Russia and Putin who got in the way.

 

[Federberg]

What a crazy world we live in. I actually miss this guy now, given what we have....

 

[teddytennisfan]

I don't think there are any obvious signs of impending collapse, in fact left to itself, the global financial system is trying to recover. Slow joyless economic recoveries are the inevitable consequence of financial collapses such as the one we had in 2008. The issue here is that Trump's economic nationalist policies could be the trigger to turn what was a pretty bad financial collapse into something eerily similar to the events that conspired to create the global depression. Smoot-Hawley was the one ingredient lacking this time around that would have made 2008 look almost the same as in the aftermath of the stock collapse in 1929. That was the protectionist trade tariff imposed by legislators in the wake of the 1929 bear market, "American goods for American consumers" is all well and good, but when the inevitable retaliation happens it triggers a cycle of retaliation and destruction of global trade that leads to economic depression and 30% unemployment. This is what we have to look out for now.

Bannon said it in his speech last week, Trump is an economic nationalist, and this is logically what economic nationalism is all about. I don't see how he'll be allowed to do this though, as the GOP in Congress tends to be pro-trade. Besides I think that corporate America will fight with everything they have to prevent this. The moment you hear that congressmen and senators would be willing to enact protectionist legislation then run for the hills folks, and buy as many canned goods as you can..

BUT IN TODAY'S WORLD can that really be done? i mean even if one were to accept that say -- a leader just wants to correct certain practices that he found to be not good for the domestic economy -- such as what trump says about jobs back home...etc...

how can that really be done since the USA is connected in its economy worldwide one way or another? i mean ust about every country is -- under various kinds of agreements anyway...

so would it REALLY mean ''run for the hillds?" rather than a hard adjustment in certain sectors but actually better in other sectors?

very complex reality.

 

[Federberg]

BUT IN TODAY'S WORLD can that really be done? i mean even if one were to accept that say -- a leader just wants to correct certain practices that he found to be not good for the domestic economy -- such as what trump says about jobs back home...etc...

how can that really be done since the USA is connected in its economy worldwide one way or another? i mean ust about every country is -- under various kinds of agreements anyway...

so would it REALLY mean ''run for the hillds?" rather than a hard adjustment in certain sectors but actually better in other sectors?

very complex reality.

The problem is his assessment of what's good or bad for the domestic economy. If he thinks about the US economy in isolation, which is what economic nationalism entails, but as you're correctly pointed out we live an in interconnected, inter-dependent global economy. The repercussions and feedback look to anything that adversely impacts other economies will bounce back at the US economy.

So the issue is that the market has now been alerted to his philosophy. They'll be watching very carefully to ensure that Trump's administration doesn't enact policies that are harmful. If that happened it would affect everything, because the market will lose confidence in US economic policy. And as the US is the largest economy in the world, this would be an unmitigated disaster. I'm talking Lehman style collapses in market confidence. So yes run for the hills

 

[Federberg]

I agree with Rand Paul regarding NATO expansion...

 

[britbox]

I agree with Rand Paul regarding NATO expansion...

Both Rand and Ron Paul have made well-considered arguments against the scale of American military involvement for years. I think they've got it right on foreign policy. Not a fan of John McCain - he's little more than a warmonger with strong campaign funding ties to the defence industry.

 

[teddytennisfan]

The following real term figures are quite enlightening, considering that the American capitalist model has been the one put on a pedestal since WW2.

http://www.mybudget360.com/cost-of-living-2014-inflation-1950-vs-2014-data-housing-cars-college/

1950:
The average family income: $3,300
The average car cost: $1,510
The median home price: $7,354

2014:
The average family income: $51,017
The average car cost: $31,252
The median home price: $188,900

Cost of a House to Income:
1950: 2.2 ($7,300)
2014: 3.7 ($188,000)

Cost of a Car to Income:
1950: 0.45 ($1,510)
2014: 0.61 ($31,252)

Education to Income:
1950: .18 ($600)
2014: .79 ($45,000+)

So, American exceptionalism over the last 6 or 7 decades sees it's average citizen significantly worse off in real terms... Of course, the very top bracket will be significantly better off.

AMAZING POST!!

 

[Federberg]

Watching the FBI/NSA briefing to Congress. Who needs to read a Vince Flynn book. Who needs to watch the new series of 24!? This is captivating stuff

 

[Federberg]

Quite stunning developments today. Comey said that he couldn't comment on active investigations. I'm am amazed the Democratic congressmen didn't challenge him on his speaking out about the Clinton email investigation. In soccer, we would say the striker missed an open goal. Why was it ok to comment about the Clinton investigation but not say anything about the fact the Trump campaign is being investigated for links to Russia... since July!! I am shocked

 

[Federberg]

I completely agree with this guy. I've mentioned this to Democratic friends of mine. It reminds me of Militant in the UK in the 80s...

 

[britbox]

I completely agree with this guy. I've mentioned this to Democratic friends of mine. It reminds me of Militant in the UK in the 80s...

I've never identified the left as liberals. The Liberal Party are the centre-right here in Australia. In the UK, the Libs are a bastardisation of the term - they are basically another left wing party and nothing to do with Liberalism. I see the left becoming more facist and highly intolerant of views outside of their narrow narrative.