Mark Blyth, the economist who's making sense

Status
Not open for further replies.

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
Posted in this political economics thread because the American political parties are so dependent on money they'll pass up votes to get it. That's not democracy, not is it sustainable.

https://www.commondreams.org/views/2017/05/26/democrats-lemmings-search-cliff-why-you-shouldnt-bet-ranch-2018

Your post sounds like your default assumption is that democracy is good and that it should be sustained.

If the evidence were examined, it's reasonable to question that assumption.
 

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
Your post sounds like your default assumption is that democracy is good and that it should be sustained.

If the evidence were examined, it's reasonable to question that assumption.
If your head were examined, it would be reasonable to question any assumption of your intelligence or sanity.
 

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
The economics of the right wing spin machinists;

That's just it; there's a concerted disinformation campaign that's been run against low information conservatives in this country over a long period of time. The Koch smokers foundations like the American Heritage Foundation, Enterprise Institute and the Cato Institute, Fix News, Breitbart, radio shows like Rush Limbaugh and the rest have all advanced an 'alternative facts' based universe of political discourse that very often does not reflect reality, and belief is heavily promoted in order to help inoculate the target consumer against those who would debate them with fact based arguments.

It's become something of a cult of disinformation, complete with social networks, political connections and the like that serve the interests of the donor class to the detriment of the much larger number of lower economic class consumer.

Attacking the beliefs is hard, using facts and data is ineffective.

It's reached the point where Right and Left find themselves getting frustrated because they speak the same language, yet the differing vocabulary and jargon create such a wide gap of understanding that fights break out more often than agreements on issues or policy.

I believe this is not a coincidence or a bug; it's a central feature benefiting those who disseminate the propaganda and thosewho subsidize it.
 

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
Does anybody care to guess what this study found?

We compare the change in Republican vote share between 1996 and 2000 for towns with the Fox News Channel in 2000 and towns without the channel in 2000, weighting for number of voters. This uses a standard differences-in-differences methodology in that it compares the change over time (fi rst difference) for the towns with the Fox News Channel versus the towns without (second difference). This tests whether or not exposure to the channell, and more in general to politically biased media, leads to persuasion.
 

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
"Dear American conservative; you've been had"

You've been duped into believing that corporations deserve to control the country, that the wealthy are more qualified to act in your interests, that the essential conflicts in politics are centered around abortion rights, gun laws and religious issues.

Meanwhile, the ultra wealthy have stolen not only your prosperity, but the wealth of your grandchildren.

Instead of building a stronger country, they've built stronger rights for their corporations, which they've used to impoverish you, take your jobs, ruin your educational system, and build a military that murders millions during a time of peace in your name.

You've every right to be frustrated with your ever shrinking standard of living. But have the prescriptions advanced by your representatives improved your lives? They've had 40 years since Mr Reagan was elected, one would expect that if they were going to work to build American prosperity, they'd have done it by now.

Instead, we've gotten a ballooning deficit, the greatest national debt in the history of civilisation, a homeless population larger than seen in the Dust Bowl years, millions in prison, and wars of opportunism and profit rather than for protection or peace.

The rich have gained unimaginable wealth and power- and far from being in a mood to share, they blame you for your poverty while shipping your jobs overseas and passing more tax cuts for themselves.

Now, they've come for your health insurance. Your very life expectancy has fallen for the first time in our nation's history, and those who've seen it fall the most are the most stanchly conservative districts in the country. THIS is how they've repaid you for your loyalty.

Maybe it's time to try something different. Perhaps it's time to consider the idea that the wealthy are out for themselves, even at your expense. When the banks were bailed out after the 2008 economic crash, did you get your house back? Your job? Your old standard of living? So why does the television say we've been out of recession for years now?

Because you don't count anymore. All of you put together, the entire American working and middle class makes less than half the income earned, yet you pay far more than half the taxes. The rich have taken most of the income for themselves, sloughed off the tax bill onto you- and your children- and taken nearly all the wealth of the nation for themselves.

None of this is your fault. You've been fooled; by Bill O'Reilly, by Rush Limbaugh, by a succession of Presidents from Reagan to Trump. Even the Democrats have taken the money and are in on the game.

It's time to ask your representatives why you work so much harder than ever before and yet receive so much less for your efforts? Do you live as well or better than your parents? Do you feel confident about your future and that of your children, or, in spite of paying for the greatest military in history, do you feel afraid for your future prospects?

Strangely enough, we on the Left feel exactly the same way. It turns out we have much in common and in fact we've realized that it isn't the other side of the aisles in Congress that's the enemy...

It's ALL OF THEM.

Perhaps it's time for a change. The New Left are not being listened to by our representatives any more than you are. It's time for We the People to take a stand and make our voices heard in unison, rather than being manipulated into opposing one another.

It is our country at stake. Our future, and that of our children. Is it really acceptable that a tiny few should take all the money and leave the rest of us to scrape for scraps?

Sincerely, the New Left
 

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
Does anybody care to guess what this study found?

We compare the change in Republican vote share between 1996 and 2000 for towns with the Fox News Channel in 2000 and towns without the channel in 2000, weighting for number of voters. This uses a standard differences-in-differences methodology in that it compares the change over time (fi rst difference) for the towns with the Fox News Channel versus the towns without (second difference). This tests whether or not exposure to the channell, and more in general to politically biased media, leads to persuasion.
There's no doubt there's a difference, only a question of how much. Do share!

And link the study here?
 

SneekyNinja

Well-Known Member
"Dear American conservative; you've been had"

You've been duped into believing that corporations deserve to control the country, that the wealthy are more qualified to act in your interests, that the essential conflicts in politics are centered around abortion rights, gun laws and religious issues.

Meanwhile, the ultra wealthy have stolen not only your prosperity, but the wealth of your grandchildren.

Instead of building a stronger country, they've built stronger rights for their corporations, which they've used to impoverish you, take your jobs, ruin your educational system, and build a military that murders millions during a time of peace in your name.

You've every right to be frustrated with your ever shrinking standard of living. But have the prescriptions advanced by your representatives improved your lives? They've had 40 years since Mr Reagan was elected, one would expect that if they were going to work to build American prosperity, they'd have done it by now.

Instead, we've gotten a ballooning deficit, the greatest national debt in the history of civilisation, a homeless population larger than seen in the Dust Bowl years, millions in prison, and wars of opportunism and profit rather than for protection or peace.

The rich have gained unimaginable wealth and power- and far from being in a mood to share, they blame you for your poverty while shipping your jobs overseas and passing more tax cuts for themselves.

Now, they've come for your health insurance. Your very life expectancy has fallen for the first time in our nation's history, and those who've seen it fall the most are the most stanchly conservative districts in the country. THIS is how they've repaid you for your loyalty.

Maybe it's time to try something different. Perhaps it's time to consider the idea that the wealthy are out for themselves, even at your expense. When the banks were bailed out after the 2008 economic crash, did you get your house back? Your job? Your old standard of living? So why does the television say we've been out of recession for years now?

Because you don't count anymore. All of you put together, the entire American working and middle class makes less than half the income earned, yet you pay far more than half the taxes. The rich have taken most of the income for themselves, sloughed off the tax bill onto you- and your children- and taken nearly all the wealth of the nation for themselves.

None of this is your fault. You've been fooled; by Bill O'Reilly, by Rush Limbaugh, by a succession of Presidents from Reagan to Trump. Even the Democrats have taken the money and are in on the game.

It's time to ask your representatives why you work so much harder than ever before and yet receive so much less for your efforts? Do you live as well or better than your parents? Do you feel confident about your future and that of your children, or, in spite of paying for the greatest military in history, do you feel afraid for your future prospects?

Strangely enough, we on the Left feel exactly the same way. It turns out we have much in common and in fact we've realized that it isn't the other side of the aisles in Congress that's the enemy...

It's ALL OF THEM.

Perhaps it's time for a change. The New Left are not being listened to by our representatives any more than you are. It's time for We the People to take a stand and make our voices heard in unison, rather than being manipulated into opposing one another.

It is our country at stake. Our future, and that of our children. Is it really acceptable that a tiny few should take all the money and leave the rest of us to scrape for scraps?

Sincerely, the New Left
Naive.
 

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
It sure as fuck helps the other side though.

Especially in a close election.

There is always a better choice in every election. Never, ever are the choices equal. Never. Well, maybe in the fake news.
I realize my political views are unconventional.

I believe we're living in a time when the two major parties have been co-opted by the very richest, thanks to Buckley v Valeo, Citizens United and more.

Progressive Movements have made a big difference in the past when major changes needed to be made in society.

I also believe this is one of those times, where income and wealth inequality have mushrooms beyond all reason or sustainability, where the status quo is maintained by an increasingly aggressive police force at home and military abroad.

Fascism is one solution, leading into another scenario like that leading up to WWII, and it seems we are heading down that road with our leaders being elected because they're 'strong' if not particularly honest or concerned about the well being of the average citizen.

I think that taking the country to the Left is another solution, one that bouys the lives of many more people than just the rich at the top. Raising taxes on the wealthy and the corporations that enrich then, infrastructure improvements that benefit large swaths of the population, and importantly breaking the connections between money and Government are all steps that would usher in another Golden Age of American Prosperity.

No one needs a fortune of billions. The difference between millionaires and billionaires isn't measured in quality of life; rather it's all about concentration of power and the ability to impose one's will on others. That's an unstable paradigm with a bad end, one in which many, even millions, suffer. Such are the lessons of history.

If it means that the majority parties lose votes, well, that seems to be what it takes to get them to pay attention to the needs of the people, as opposed to the donors.
 
Last edited:

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
http://www.iol.co.za/business-report/international/americans-cant-afford-rent-on-a-minimum-wage-9688740
Sometimes what helps is read what is said about you in other countries.

...The minimum hourly wage required to afford rent on a two-bedroom apartment, of course, depends on where you live - ranging from a low of $11.46 in some counties in Georgia to a high of $58.04 in the San Francisco Bay Area.

The most expensive state for housing is Hawaii, where workers would need to make $35.20 an hour to afford a two-bedroom apartment. They would need to make $33.58 in the District of Columbia, $30.92 in California, $28.27 in Maryland, and $28.08 in New York.

In the District of Columbia, where the hourly minimum wage is $12.50, a household say a single parent - must earn $69,840 a year to be able to afford the fair market rent of $1,746 a month for a two-bedroom apartment.

Someone making the federal minimum wage would need to work 117 hours a week or nearly three full-time jobs - to be able to afford a two-bedroom apartment.

Many of the occupations projected to add the most jobs by 2024 pay too little to cover rent.

These are customer service representatives, personal care aides, nursing assistants, home health aides, retail salespeople, home health and food service workers who make, on average, between $10 and $16 an hour. Those whose earnings put them below the federal poverty level cannot even afford the average cost of a one-bedroom apartment in any state.

The national average rent is $892 a month for a modest one-bedroom apartment and $1,103 for a two-bedroom. As a result, more than 11.2 million families end up spending more than half their pay checks on housing, the report said a trade-off with other basic needs such as food, transportation and medical care.

The picture is not expected to improve in the near future as the rental market remains strong and vacancy rates decline. A record 43.3 million households were renters in 2016, a 27 percent increase since 2006, the report said....



...The National Low Income Housing Coalition characterized the lack of affordable rental housing as a national crisis for poor and middle class Americans of all ethnic groups, in cities as well as rural communities.

Ellison has sponsored a bill that would reduce the popular mortgage interest deduction, which benefits mostly high-income earners, and use the additional tax revenue to expand access to rental homes. Each year, he said, three-quarters of the $200 billion Congress spends on housing goes towards subsidizing the homes of the richest families through the mortgage interest deduction and other home-ownership tax benefits.

"This means that we provide more housing assistance to help the richest 7 million households - who earn more than $200 000 a year than to help the 55 million households who earn less than $50 000 each year, even though these families are far more likely to struggle to keep a roof over their head," Ellison wrote.

Previous proposals to reduce the mortgage interest deduction have all failed....​
Shamelessly copied from another thread, since this one is more relevant to the economics of inequality in America.

http://www.iol.co.za/business-report/international/americans-cant-afford-rent-on-a-minimum-wage-9688740
To be fair, that is reprinted from the Washington Post.

Amazing how even the home mortgage deduction helps the wealthy more than the poor. The uncapped deduction therefore directly contributes to the unaffordability of housing!

This is getting comically extreme in some parts of the country, where I've heard of people who make over $80k/yr living in residence hotels instead of apartments.

Comical but in no way funny.

Therefore, the mortgage tax deduction is effectively a tax break for the rich rather than the poor or the middle class; you don't get it at all if you don't own your own residence- and the larger your home the bigger it can be, without limit.

This is yet another statistic showing how badly the middle class is being squeezed and how unsustainable our economic situation is going forward.
 

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
This is my prescription for an American economic and political renewal;

I have confidence in American ingenuity.

Once we actually deal with the huge drag of increasing income inequality, the economy would turn around and grow again, because there will once again be customers.

Part of the solution is a minimum wage that sets the floor and thus raises people out of poverty.

Guaranteed jobs will help address crime by giving people an alternative to that life.

Decriminalized drugs with a new emphasis on treatment instead of incarceration will begin to relieve another enormous cost to society.

Universal health care will help people be more productive and again is a progressive benefit.

Free college with caps on per student subsidies and mandated accreditation, graduation rates and grades will encourage universities to deliver a better quality core product; educated students ready to work.

America must cap benefits so the wealthy don’t get a free ride; the mortgage deduction is now more of a subsidy for the wealthy than for average citizens!

Taxes must be progressive and deductions like social security must not be capped. The rich HAVE enough, they aren’t going hungry. It’s time they paid for the prosperity they and their businesses are benefiting from.

The only people who ‘lose’, and even then only in terms of not earning quite as much as they used to, are the one percent at the top.

How to enforce it? Outlaw campaign finance. Outlaw intergenerational trust funds with human beneficiaries. Estate taxes that take 50% of all fortunes past the first ten million, or pay 50% gift tax to heirs.

Our nation has become the very oligarchic aristocracy our Founding Fathers were most concerned with preventing.

Either this, or we watch the oligarchs wreck our economy, our people, our nation and even the entire planet in their all consuming pursuit of avarice.

Strangely enough, none of the above can be called socialism any more than the socialism with which we currently protect the fortunes of the ultra wealthy.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top