America is Regressing into a Developing Nation for Most People

[Nakosis]

I'm curious who you think owns the politicians who run the government. So far as I can see, several lines of evidence come together to strongly support the notion that the politicians and the government are these days beholden to the uber-rich and the major corporations. If so, to claim that "the government creates the problems, not the corporations and the uber-rich" is to be terribly naive.

So you don't want to hold the government accountable? Give them a free pass because it not their fault they are so easily bribed?

 

[David1967]

Shouldn't the unions share some of the blame for the movement of jobs offshore?

Partially at least. If a business becomes unprofitable here, a larger company will simply move it to a more profitable place. Unions don't get all the blame though. There are other reasons such as over regulation etc. So how do we fix this?

 

[Sunstone]

I get that @Sunstone so why is capital flooding into America faster than Honduran migrants? Why is America still the "go to" place on the planet?

That's a good question, Paul. You are right, capital is flooding into America.

But the FTE model predicts that, don't you see. It states American is dividing into two nations -- one rich, one poor -- and that the rich nation is partly driven by the financial sector of the economy. The capital flooding into America isn't coming here to invest in America's new and emerging second economy. Why invest in that? The returns are in investing in America's first economy.

It's like the stock market these days. It can positively boom even though the only jobs being created are poor paying jobs.

All of that supports the thesis that we are becoming an economically divided nation.

 

[Sunstone]

So you don't want to hold the government accountable? Give them a free pass because it not their fault they are so easily bribed?

That's a clear misrepresentation of what I said.

 

[Sunstone]

Shouldn't the unions share some of the blame for the movement of jobs offshore?

How so?

 

[David1967]

That's a BS attitude but what I would expect from a low quality poster. I read it. It took 30 seconds to read.

That's getting a bit personal don't you think?

 

[Nakosis]

That's a clear misrepresentation of what I said.

Yes, I know the feeling, however this was the basis of the point I was making.

 

[Sunstone]

One word: Less than 4 % unemployment.

The general economic consensus is that 4% or below is unsustainable. On the surface it's an impressive figure, alright. But such low unemployment will not be allowed to continue because it threatens to boom inflation as employers raise wages to compete for fewer and fewer workers. Inflation most affects the rich and those on fixed incomes, so they -- especially the rich -- will be demanding something be done. That's why folks are betting the Fed will raise rates. Each quarter-point increase is commonly calculated to result in someone along the lines of 400,000 unemployed.

A job is a job.

Not sure how happy you'd be giving up $25/hour for $10/hour.

The economy was raped by the last administration so it will take a while to recover.

You keep saying stuff like that, but I have never seen any stats to back it up. Do you have empirical evidence?

 

[David1967]

The deep divisions in our country do not reassure me that we do. Still, I could be wrong about that.

I agree with you here. I don't see this division doing anything but widening. This concerns me for my childrens sake. For them, I hope we are both wrong.

 

[Nakosis]

I get that @Sunstone so why is capital flooding into America faster than Honduran migrants? Why is America still the "go to" place on the planet?

Because generally, our poor are more well off than the poor in other countries. We try to provide health care, we try to provide support. We try to provide housing for the homeless. Better education until Highschool level at least. If they come here legally and become citizens, they can have a say in government.

 

[Sunstone]

Partially at least. If a business becomes unprofitable here, a larger company will simply move it to a more profitable place. Unions don't get all the blame though. There are other reasons such as over regulation etc. So how do we fix this?

The notion that jobs are being lost to companies off-shoring is partly correct. Yet, since the Great Recession of 2008, 85% of the job loss in manufacturing in this country has come -- not from off-shoring -- but from replacing workers with robots.

 

[Sunstone]

I agree with you here. I don't see this division doing anything but widening. This concerns me for my childrens sake. For them, I hope we are both wrong.

I hope we are both wrong too. And yet, I see no abatement in the factors driving the political division. I'd be more hopeful if I could.

 

[David1967]

The notion that jobs are being lost to companies off-shoring is partly correct. Yet, since the Great Recession of 2008, 85% of the job loss in manufacturing in this country has come -- not from off-shoring -- but from replacing workers with robots.

And there is that. Lots of unique new problems. How does a worker compete with robot who requires neither wages, nor rest, nor sick leave, healthcare. Doesn't gripe about the workload, etc. etc.

 

[David1967]

I hope we are both wrong too. And yet, I see no abatement in the factors driving the political division. I'd be more hopeful if I could.

I would certainly like to see more civil dialogue between both sides. They each have their good points as well as their nutty ones.

 

[Sunstone]

And there is that. Lots of unique new problems. How does a worker compete with robot who requires neither wages, nor rest, nor sick leave, healthcare. Doesn't gripe about the workload, etc. etc.

Exactly, Dave! Honestly, the current assumptions are that, if nothing is done, unemployment even in America (to say nothing of Europe) will rise within 20 or so years to "levels not seen since the Great Depression".

Broadly speaking, there are two schemes currently being floated by people not blind to the most likely future. First, Guaranteed Universal Income. GUI is a move favored by many people. It would involve giving everyone a relatively small sum of money each month -- just enough to live on -- and perhaps paying for it by taxing robots (Bill Gate's proposal). People who wanted to work -- and could still find work -- could work, but people who either didn't want a job or couldn't find one would be taken care of.

The second is Guaranteed Work. GU would involve guaranteeing everyone a job on the order of what the Conservation Corps did during the great depression. That is, it would involve building schools, roads, etc.

Both plans have their strengths and weaknesses. But the "third plan" is the worse. Ignore the problem until 30% or more of the workers are unemployed and turning to crime and/or revolution to eat.

 

[Sunstone]

I would certainly like to see more civil dialogue between both sides. They each have their good points as well as their nutty ones.

I agree. The trouble is the two of us appear to be fighting the tides. Hopefully, millions will get fed up with this divisiveness and join in tackling our common problems.

 

[Nakosis]

Doesn't this happen every time there is a technological or industrial change? Look what happen to the mill workers of the 19th century when the mills started using steam power instead of man power. There was no great lasting upheaval. Same thing when the farms became industrialized. Sure some people suffered but over all this was a good thing. The same thing is happening in relation to the FTE movement (anybody remember "dial-up").

The article was very transparent about taking digs at "the rich" without pointing to a single person. Seems someone had an ax to grind. Also, the article was posted in April 2017. Maybe the author should re-write a bit of now that the unemployment rate has dropped to below 4% and the manufacturing jobs are on the up sweep.

I agree there is a gap but it's (IMHO) more of an educational or awareness gap which is being quickly closed by my children's children (my three year old grandson is already 'puter literate and he can't even pronounce it). However, I filed this in the same drawer that holds my global warming files.

My two year old grandson knows more about operating my smart-phone than I do. People complain about the time kids spend with electronic media but he learns about the ABC, color, numbers, shapes, etc.

I suspect eventually we will come out the other side better off, however lots of trials and tribulations in the meantime. Computers and robots can revolutionize labor. This should increase GDP. More money per capita.

I tend to envision the Star Trek model eventually. People work because they want to work, not because they have to. They'll have to come up with some kind of base support. Housing, food, education, health, provided by computers and robots. Also a way to limit population growth to not exceed available resources.

 

[David1967]

First, Guaranteed Universal Income.

I was going to mention that. That would require a complete remake of society as we know it. What would that society look like? Would we become a world of philosophers, or of non productive people living most of our lives in a VR world like on the movie "Ready Player One". I think that whatever the outcome, we are on the ground floor of a strange new world.

 

[David1967]

The second is Guaranteed Work. GU would involve guaranteeing everyone a job on the order of what the Conservation Corps did during the great depression. That is, it would involve building schools, roads, etc.

Out of the three you mentioned ,I like this the best, and I have mentioned this in other threads. I think it important to give people a way to be productive.

 

[David1967]

But the "third plan" is the worse. Ignore the problem until 30% or more of the workers are unemployed and turning to crime and/or revolution to eat.

Unfortunately, at the moment anyway, this seems to be the path we're on.