Welcome, Guest |
You have to register before you can post on our site.
|
Online Users |
There are currently 191 online users. » 1 Member(s) | 190 Guest(s)
|
|
|
A Eurovision style North American Song Contest possible? |
Posted by: Lemanic - 05-09-2016, 08:39 AM - Forum: Entertainment and Media
- Replies (3)
|
|
Well, as if Eurovision have finally dropped on to US TV and will air on LogoTV this Saturday on 03.00 PM EST, official discussions about a Eurovision style Song Contest have finally taken place.
http://eurovoix.com/2016/05/07/united-st...e-contest/
Sound fabulous if it wasn't for one tiny hitch...
...cultures in the US are REGIONAL.
As of now, there's regional differences rather than state-wise.
And if there was something akin to ESC over the pond, you would have to include both Canada and Mexico into this, but 92 states is a little much, so I would think that about 30 superstates would be reasonable. Two to four states who neighbours one an another to join forces for this kind of contest.
I've counted 32 superstates, to be exact. Just my suggestions though. No hard feelings.
Here they are in no particular order:
1. (California, Baja California, Baja California Sur, Hawaii)
2. (Oregon, Washington, British Columbia)
3. (Idaho, Nevada, Utah)
4. (Montana, Alberta, Saskatchewan)
5. (Manitoba, Nunavut)
6. (Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota)
7. (Ontario, Michigan, Wisconsin)
8. (Illinois, Indiana, Iowa)
9. (Ohio, Pennsylvania, New York)
10. (Wyoming, Colorado, Nebraska)
11. (Sonora, Arizona, New Mexico)
12. (Quebec, Newfoundland and Labrador)
13. (New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island)
14. (Maine, Vermont, New Hampshire)
15. (Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut)
16. (New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, D.C)
17. (West Virgina, Virgina)
18. (Kentucky, Tennessee)
19. (North Carolina, South Carolina)
20. (Georgia, Alabama)
21. (Florida, Puerto Rico)
22. (Arkansas, Mississippi, Louisiana)
23. (Oklahoma, Kansas, Missouri)
24. (Texas, Coahuila de Zaragoza, Nuevo Leon, Tamaulipas)
25. (Alaska, Yukon Territories, Northwest Territories)
26. (Quintana Roo, Yucatán, Campeche)
27. (Chihuahua, Durango, Sinaloa)
28. (Zacatecas, San Luis Potosi, Guanajuato, Aguascalientes)
29. (Nayarit, Jalsico, Colima)
30. (Tabasco, Chiapas, Veracruz, Oaxaca)
31. (Guerrero, Puebla, Michoacán, Tlaxala)
32. (Querétaro, Hidalgo, Mexico, Morelos, D.F)
Does this sound reasonable or is this blasphemy?
|
|
|
Future Economic Timeline - Transitioning from a 4T world to a 1T world |
Posted by: JohnMc82 - 05-09-2016, 03:14 AM - Forum: The Future
- Replies (10)
|
|
JohnMc82
Senior Member
Future Economic Timeline - Transitioning from a 4T world to a 1T world
08-24-2014, 08:09 AM
Background:
Summer 2014: Bank of International Settlements issues guidance warning that the overvaluation of investment assets threatens global growth and economic stability. Banks and financial elites across the world have basically been put on notice: if you want to keep any of your wealth, you're going to have to share some of it by recognizing (and properly assigning) the value of labor in creating assets. Remember, setting prices is the fundamental job of high finance, and the Bank of International Settlements is pretty much the Vatican of modern global capitalism.
Summer 2014: Federal Reserve says no rate hike - this year. Most analysts expect a modest but deliberate rise in rates by early 2015.Prediction:Winter 2014: Travel remains slow, and demand weak. Gasoline approaches $3 per gallon (falling). Seasonal hiring is weak, adding to fears of a rate hike.
Spring 2015: Federal Reserve announces quarter-point interest rate increase. Markets panic and lose a significant percentage of value in a short period of time. Commodities and non-residential real estate are particularly hard hit. Residential real estate fares better than analysts expect, shortages due to slow construction are cited. (This is pretty much the last chance to buy a house at saecular lows)
Summer 2015: Business earnings reports are better than expected, but analysts say to wait because the full effects of the interest rate change haven't been felt yet. Summer trading remains slow and slightly depressed. Hiring remains weak
.Fall 2015: Business earnings reports beat expectations - again. Accountants cite declining cost of commodities (energy, materials, etc) and low industrial/commercial rents as delivering more-than-expected savings for business operations.
Fall-Winter 2015: Some investment funds return to the market, but the expectation of rising interest rates discourages speculation in commodities. Gasoline approaches $2.50.2016-2017: Music and fashion is increasingly defined by young adults with no personal memory of the 3T music and fashion cultures. Civics increasingly move to management and executive production roles in entertainment.
Spring 2016: Encouraged by better than expected economic situation, business begins expansion operations we haven't seen in a decade. However, new job creation remains in a very low income bracket, only offset by some reduction in consumer cost pressures.
Summer 2016: Gas approaching $3 (heading up with the peak driving season)
Fall 2016: Hillary easily defeats the Republican nominee, but the GOP retains control of the House, leading to a relatively uneventful term.
Winter 2016: Tesla battery factory goes online. Electric cars reach 500 mile range and charging stations are easily found in most major metros.
Fall 2017: Frustrated with the continuing lack of action by the government, protests become more common. Conservative coalition continues rapid deterioration due to demographic pressure. Public arguments between social conservatives, business conservatives, and paleoconservatives become increasingly common and intense.
Summer 2018: 2018 model year cars begin to offer Google and Tesla "auto-pilot" features in states authorizing use. Regulation of self-driving cars become an urgent national discussion.
Fall 2018: Significant House/Senate gains for Democrats.
Summer 2019: Solar power hits cost parity with coal. Federal Funds Rates stabilize at a low but solid 3-4%. Stocks soar and commodities collapse.
Summer 2020: Planetary Explorations (or another competitor) demonstrates proof of concept by landing a survey vehicle on a near earth object. Commodities take another big hit.
Fall 2020: Hillary declines to seek re-election, citing age, health, and inability to work with reactionaries stuck in the past. Republican candidate gets a level of support that would make Mondale feel bad for him/her. (This could even be the Palin-for-president campaign if Republicans blame Hillary's victory on gender politics)
Winter 2020: Second Tesla battery factory opens, fast-charging technology allows a battery to get 300 miles worth of juice in five minutes of being plugged in. Abandoned gas stations become a more common sight, adding to the downward pressure on commercial real estate prices by increasing the availability of storefronts in prime locations.
Fall 2021: Comprehensive corporate, tax, and financial reform begins a rapid trend of favoring wages over corporate profitability. Summer 2022: Michael Bay's latest high-budget blockbuster about explosions and crisis and the end of the world flops so badly that we collectively wonder why we ever paid to see them in the first place.
2021-2035: Economic boom so intense that it can only seem absurd by those of us who put up with the last few decades. Equity values fail to keep up with real economic growth, largely due to the hesitation of civics to trust Wall Street with their money.
2035-2040: Music and fashion culture increasingly defined by young adults who have no personal memory of the 4T. Artists moving in to management and executive production roles.
2045-2050: Equity values overshoot the target, creating a brief but significant echo of the 4T's valuation of speculative paper over real stuff. Equities stumble, but at this point, it is increasingly clear that wages and worker retirement/investment portfolios are relatively overvalued. Right-wing economics becomes a thing again.
Those words, "temperate and moderate", are words either of political cowardice, or of cunning, or seduction. A thing, moderately good, is not so good as it ought to be. Moderation in temper, is always a virtue; but moderation in principle, is a species of vice.'82 - Once & always independent
-24-2014, 10:55 AM
Kepi
Senior Member
Join DateNov 2012LocationNorthern, VAPosts3,664
Couple things...If the economy tanks out again, I would expect to see house prices tank again, as well as gasoline prices. Any money market crash is a threat to Boomer retirement. So how do they scrape together an actual retirement? Well, they sell that 3T monstrosity to someone at a bargain basement price and buy a condo, cut the wining and dining they intended to do and live a hard scrabble life for a good while. Or they have their kids move back in or do the master bedroom flip and assume their loan (and give up the wining and dining).If gasoline commodities tank (which if there's another crash, they will), I expect to see the price drop to the late 08 level, especially now that I'm actually seeing some electric cars on the road.I still think Hillary is unelectable, and won't make it out of the primary if she decides to actually run (I suspect she's a flak target, out there making money while absorbing all the negative attention the conservative media can throw at her so the short list of hopefuls can escape character assassination). If the economy tanks again, I strongly expect that neither parties traditional candidates will fare well.
2014, 12:21 P
Eric the Green
Senior Member
Wow, that's an impressive list of prophetic statements. Interesting to go through it all and see how it compares to this prophet's predictions. We've been disagreeing more lately, but I commend your attempt. Let's see. Originally Posted by JohnMc82 Background:Summer 2014: Bank of International Settlements issues guidance warning that the overvaluation of investment assets threatens global growth and economic stability. Banks and financial elites across the world have basically been put on notice: if you want to keep any of your wealth, you're going to have to share some of it by recognizing (and properly assigning) the value of labor in creating assets. Remember, setting prices is the fundamental job of high finance, and the Bank of International Settlements is pretty much the Vatican of modern global capitalism.Good advice that I don't think will be heeded.Summer 2014: Federal Reserve says no rate hike - this year. Most analysts expect a modest but deliberate rise in rates by early 2015.Prediction:Winter 2014: Travel remains slow, and demand weak. Gasoline approaches $3 per gallon (falling). Seasonal hiring is weak, adding to fears of a rate hike.Spring 2015: Federal Reserve announces quarter-point interest rate increase. Markets panic and lose a significant percentage of value in a short period of time. Commodities and non-residential real estate are particularly hard hit. Residential real estate fares better than analysts expect, shortages due to slow construction are cited. (This is pretty much the last chance to buy a house at saecular lows)There may be a slight increase in the interest rate. I think the recovery continues in 2014-15. Demand is not weakening, and there will be no significant panics. Construction is probably speeding up. But many people still having trouble finding work, though the job market is improving. This is a great 4T recession from which we never fully recover, at least not to the way things were in the 3T.Summer 2015: Business earnings reports are better than expected, but analysts say to wait because the full effects of the interest rate change haven't been felt yet. Summer trading remains slow and slightly depressed. Hiring remains weak.Fall 2015: Business earnings reports beat expectations - again. Accountants cite declining cost of commodities (energy, materials, etc) and low industrial/commercial rents as delivering more-than-expected savings for business operations.I don't know how you arrived at lower costs for commodities or rents. You may be right, but I don't see it. But business earnings may be pretty good as you say.Fall-Winter 2015: Some investment funds return to the market, but the expectation of rising interest rates discourages speculation in commodities. Gasoline approaches $2.50.Gasoline prices will probably be stable, about where they are now. I'm not sure what the connection is between speculation in commodities and expectations of higher interest rates.2016-2017: Music and fashion is increasingly defined by young adults with no personal memory of the 3T music and fashion cultures. Civics increasingly move to management and executive production roles in entertainment.Your statement about music, I sincerely hope is true. And it would be a blessing.Spring 2016: Encouraged by better than expected economic situation, business begins expansion operations we haven't seen in a decade. However, new job creation remains in a very low income bracket, only offset by some reduction in consumer cost pressures. Summer 2016: Gas approaching $3 (heading up with the peak driving season)Probably correct.Fall 2016: Hillary easily defeats the Republican nominee, but the GOP retains control of the House, leading to a relatively uneventful term.Winter 2016: Tesla battery factory goes online. Electric cars reach 500 mile range and charging stations are easily found in most major metros.Yes, those would seem to be spot-on predictions. I'm not sure exactly how fast the electric cars will progress, but sometime along in here the industry will start expanding faster. I have said the whole green energy sector will ramp up in about 2018.Fall 2017: Frustrated with the continuing lack of action by the government, protests become more common. Conservative coalition continues rapid deterioration due to demographic pressure. Public arguments between social conservatives, business conservatives, and paleoconservatives become increasingly common and intense.Summer 2018: 2018 model year cars begin to offer Google and Tesla "auto-pilot" features in states authorizing use. Regulation of self-driving cars become an urgent national discussion.Fall 2018: Significant House/Senate gains for Democrats.Summer 2019: Solar power hits cost parity with coal. Federal Funds Rates stabilize at a low but solid 3-4%. Stocks soar and commodities collapse.Except for that last one, I agree with the above. But now is the time when I think the economy could show signs of strain, due to the lack of reforms. I imagine it may be the reverse of what you say (stocks collapse and commodities soar) because shortages in many commodities are almost certain to increase as resources become strained by global warming and over-use, while stocks are already now overvalued, but will not suffer a panic as you expect so soon in 2015. There will likely be a bear market at the end of the decade instead.Summer 2020: Planetary Explorations (or another competitor) demonstrates proof of concept by landing a survey vehicle on a near earth object. Commodities take another big hit.Fall 2020: Hillary declines to seek re-election, citing age, health, and inability to work with reactionaries stuck in the past. Republican candidate gets a level of support that would make Mondale feel bad for him/her. (This could even be the Palin-for-president campaign if Republicans blame Hillary's victory on gender politics)Yes, you have stumbled into the truth regarding Hillary. But of course there will be no Palin campaign and Mondale is irrelevant. You've got it right though, as I see it now.Winter 2020: Second Tesla battery factory opens, fast-charging technology allows a battery to get 300 miles worth of juice in five minutes of being plugged in. Abandoned gas stations become a more common sight, adding to the downward pressure on commercial real estate prices by increasing the availability of storefronts in prime locations.Exactly, except closing gas stations won't have any effect on real estate prices.Fall 2021: Comprehensive corporate, tax, and financial reform begins a rapid trend of favoring wages over corporate profitability.That would be nice! Yes I think that prediction is spot on. I think pressure for reforms toward greater equality and value of labor will start building up now, and Democrats will gain more power. Hillary will regret her decision to bow out because of "inability to work with reactionaries." They are unlikely to survive the 2020 election.Summer 2022: Michael Bay's latest high-budget blockbuster about explosions and crisis and the end of the world flops so badly that we collectively wonder why we ever paid to see them in the first place.The mood as I see it in the early 2020s is upbeat, but fears have not gone away because the effects of our mismanagement of the Earth are coming home to roost. But in the 2020s they will encourage action and optimism that reform can work. In 2022, the mood of progress returns in a big way. It will seem like 1962 is resuming, after a 60-year hiatus. But now we will be smarter about "progress," having learned some lessons during the 60-year re-examination of what it means during the "post-modern" era. Now we enter the "transmodern" era; progress resumes, but with the light of sustainability and quality gradually returning. A renaissance in the arts is likely too, adding to the glow of this period. Reforms begin in earnest, though not without resistance since this is still after-all America.2021-2035: Economic boom so intense that it can only seem absurd by those of us who put up with the last few decades. Equity values fail to keep up with real economic growth, largely due to the hesitation of civics to trust Wall Street with their money.I think the economy will speed up, and generally-speaking prosperity will last through the late 4T, 1T and early 2T (through 2050). I doubt it will be like the booms of the past though. Adjustments to our mismanagement in so many ways will put a damper on growth, but the depression due to depopulation that Kepi expects will not happen. That's an interesting idea about Wall Street and millies. I don't know if that will happen or not. Civics usually end up trusting the institutions of their time. If reforms and changes keep happening though, that will keep the economy fresh. Millies will probably keep this reform agenda going-- certainly during the late 4T (the 2020s), supported by the young new-silent Sensitives, though held back at times by old fogey Xers and some ancient red Boomer reactionaries (though other blue Boomer prophets like me will still be pushing for the reforms and radical changes). The reformers and activists I expect will have the upper hand, and reactionary parties will be more moderate.2035-2040: Music and fashion culture increasingly defined by young adults who have no personal memory of the 4T. Artists moving in to management and executive production roles.An upheaval in China is likely in this period, and resource or trade wars and confrontations. New energy policies will be propagated. Confrontations and cold wars between the world powers of the time will happen.2045-2050: Equity values overshoot the target, creating a brief but significant echo of the 4T's valuation of speculative paper over real stuff. Equities stumble, but at this point, it is increasingly clear that wages and worker retirement/investment portfolios are relatively overvalued. Right-wing economics becomes a thing again.Quite the opposite. This will be a period of Awakening and Revolution; the sixties revisited in great degree. The Green mindset comes into its own, and corporate institutions will be questioned and often overturned. At the same time, another Great Society will be extended throughout the world by liberal governments. No doubt some movements of this time will seem outrageously optimistic and audacious, and extremists of all kinds could proliferate. Libertarian economics is the opposite of all that. It could experience a revival; I would say it will be looked upon as a fringe extremist idea like Goldwater's campaign was, and will fail to stop the new Great Society, in this period at least. So it might happen, but there will be no Reagan this time to institute it in a coming 3T. Still, there are always trends of cyclic reversal. Labor could become over-valued by this period, if the previous cycle repeats. That could happen if the reforms we need are put in place by then, regulating working hours and wages. If so, it will be the 2050s before we see a reversed trend. If anything, labor will be more active and powerful during the era of revolution itself and shortly afterward. Speculative paper booms seem a little premature for this period too. If there are economic strains and stagnations, they are more likely to happen in the following decade, which will resemble the 1970s cyclically. I also see a strong revival of green economics in the 2040s (first enunciated in the previous 2T), which is locally-based and cooperative. Strong movements to live in harmony with the earth, and organic and sensitive romantic art styles, will propagate. Before the 2045-50 period, in the early 40s, however, its possible that corporate power could concentrate, and their power could be revived. Secret cabals and combinations of wealth could gain power and manipulate the economy to their advantage. This will be reacted to in the decade's 2nd half, which begins the 2T. I also see the power of Europe and especially France reviving in this decade. Another change in French government is certainly likely in the early 2040s, as their Uranus 84-year return cycle comes around. Just as our Uranus cycle came around in the mid-2020s.Last edited by Eric the Green; 08-24-2014 at 12:30 PM."I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin BieberKeep the spirit alive,Eric A. Meece
JDFP
Senior Member
Join DateJul 2010LocationKnoxville, TN.Posts1,200
Originally Posted by Kepi I still think Hillary is unelectable, and won't make it out of the primary if she decides to actually run (I suspect she's a flak target, out there making money while absorbing all the negative attention the conservative media can throw at her so the short list of hopefuls can escape character assassination). If the economy tanks again, I strongly expect that neither parties traditional candidates will fare well.This. Hillary might get the nomination but would be defeated. The woman is too polarizing as a person (an unethical and crudely disgusting human being at that) even if her politics are far more moderate and 'baby blue' regarding most issues. With that said, I despise her as an individual but as a politician she's shrewd, highly intelligent, (so was Emperor Palpatine) and would find ways to compromise (unlike the current regime) with others to actually do something other than posturing/pouting of how she has a pen and a cell phone and refusing to work with others. The one bright side regarding a Hillary nomination is that it would all but guarantee a Conservative White House come 2020. As far as the rest of it, inferences based on current trajectories are interesting and there may be some merit to some of your "predictions" - but even the best predictions is only educated guess-work. And I don't have time for any astrological nonsense as others prefer to spew forth.j.p."And did you get what you wanted from this life, even so? I did. And what did you want? To call myself beloved, to feel myself beloved on the earth." -- Raymond Carver"A page of good prose remains invincible." -- John CheeverReply With Quote
8-24-2014, 04:
JohnMc82
Senior Member
Join DateJan 2011LocationBack in JaxPosts1,962
Hillary's lame-duck presidency is the controversial claim? Hm.You guys should check out RCP. When Fox News polls say Hillary can beat Rand Paul, Chris Christie, or JEB by double digits, I don't think the GOP stands a
chance.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epo...l...nt/They've even got her winning Florida & North Carolina, two states the GOP can't really win without. Hillary could even beat JEB in his home state, forget about the double-digit leads she has here against other potential Republicans.I don't like Hillary either, but, unless some really unexpected contender pops up, or someone manages to beat her in the primary....The Congressional map is a little different, because despite a generic vote favoring Democrats, the Republicans have been more aggressive in securing representation through gerrymandered districts. As a midterm, 2014 will lean conservative, and then 2016 will be another election where the populace votes blue but ends up with a red Congress.Last edited by JohnMc82; 08-24-2014 at 04:54 PM.Those words, "temperate and moderate", are words either of political cowardice, or of cunning, or seduction. A thing, moderately good, is not so good as it ought to be. Moderation in temper, is always a virtue; but moderation in principle, is a species of vice.'82 - Once & always independent
Brian Beecher
Join DateSep 2001LocationDowners Grove, ILPosts2,937
Originally Posted by JDFP This. Hillary might get the nomination but would be defeated. The woman is too polarizing as a person (an unethical and crudely disgusting human being at that) even if her politics are far more moderate and 'baby blue' regarding most issues. With that said, I despise her as an individual but as a politician she's shrewd, highly intelligent, (so was Emperor Palpatine) and would find ways to compromise (unlike the current regime) with others to actually do something other than posturing/pouting of how she has a pen and a cell phone and refusing to work with others. The one bright side regarding a Hillary nomination is that it would all but guarantee a Conservative White House come 2020. As far as the rest of it, inferences based on current trajectories are interesting and there may be some merit to some of your "predictions" - but even the best predictions is only educated guess-work. And I don't have time for any astrological nonsense as others prefer to spew forth.j.p.What you are saying about Hillary is so exactly spot on as to what was, and often still is, said about Richard Nixon. He also was very shrewd and sometimes brilliant, especially on foreign issues, yet despised by so many , even sans Watergate.
Brian Beecher
Senior Member
Originally Posted by JohnMc82 Hillary's lame-duck presidency is the controversial claim? Hm.You guys should check out RCP. When Fox News polls say Hillary can beat Rand Paul, Chris Christie, or JEB by double digits, I don't think the GOP stands a chance.http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epo...lls/president/They've even got her winning Florida & North Carolina, two states the GOP can't really win without. Hillary could even beat JEB in his home state, forget about the double-digit leads she has here against other potential Republicans.I don't like Hillary either, but, unless some really unexpected contender pops up, or someone manages to beat her in the primary....The Congressional map is a little different, because despite a generic vote favoring Democrats, the Republicans have been more aggressive in securing representation through gerrymandered districts. As a midterm, 2014 will lean conservative, and then 2016 will be another election where the populace votes blue but ends up with a red Congress.If Hillary indeed is the Dems nominee, expect to see more folks voting for "none of the above".
JDFP
Senior Member
Join DateJul 2010LocationKnoxville, TN.Posts1,200
Originally Posted by Brian Beecher What you are saying about Hillary is so exactly spot on as to what was, and often still is, said about Richard Nixon. He also was very shrewd and sometimes brilliant, especially on foreign issues, yet despised by so many , even sans Watergate.Good catch there. And you're absolutely right. I didn't think about it but going back and thinking about Tricky Dicky with that I could definitely see some major similarities between Hillary and Nixon. Hopefully Hillary won't be a vicious and unpredictable alcoholic who wants to nuke Putin when she gets upset and has to be talked out of it by her closest advisers ("No, no, don't launch an attack on Russia, the president's just drunk again"). I will have to say Nixon was an incredibly fascinating man though. j.p."And did you get what you wanted from this life, even so? I did. And what did you want? To call myself beloved, to feel myself beloved on the earth." -- Raymond Carver"A page of good prose remains invincible." -- John CheeverReply With Quote
Kepi
Senior Member
Join DateNov 2012LocationNorthern, VAPosts3,664
Originally Posted by JohnMc82 Hillary's lame-duck presidency is the controversial claim? Hm.You guys should check out RCP. When Fox News polls say Hillary can beat Rand Paul, Chris Christie, or JEB by double digits, I don't think the GOP stands a chance.http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epo...lls/president/They've even got her winning Florida & North Carolina, two states the GOP can't really win without. Hillary could even beat JEB in his home state, forget about the double-digit leads she has here against other potential Republicans.I don't like Hillary either, but, unless some really unexpected contender pops up, or someone manages to beat her in the primary....The Congressional map is a little different, because despite a generic vote favoring Democrats, the Republicans have been more aggressive in securing representation through gerrymandered districts. As a midterm, 2014 will lean conservative, and then 2016 will be another election where the populace votes blue but ends up with a red Congress.It's not republican candidates I'd worry about, it's any given democratic one. Even a mildly competent candidate could take her out in the primary. JDFP kinda nodded towards the problem, but as a red side fan he doesn't get the problem. Hillary is "light blue", sure, but she's sky blue, not electric blue. She's out of season. If anyone comes in with a shade that's closer to something seasonally appropriate, Hillary is out. In 2008, Hillary was a touch out of season and she lost. Next time, she may as well come out in clown paint and select Ben Bernanke as her running mate. I don't think that she's not smart, but she's not good at shutting her mouth when she should. In 2016, her hawking will definitely come back to haunt her, because even the middle east degenerating, even with Russia & Ukraine, we're really not that interested in another war, and this time I don't know if anything would really make us want to enter one and I don't know that anyone is crazy enough to pick that level of fight with us this time. We're not the country that mopped up the mess in World War I, but is still on the verge of being deemed unsophisticated savages anymore. We're the Evil Empire. We crush low power nations, demand people do what we say... Likely nobody wants to involve us in their war this time
JDFP
Senior Member
Originally Posted by Kepi It's not republican candidates I'd worry about, it's any given democratic one. Even a mildly competent candidate could take her out in the primary. JDFP kinda nodded towards the problem, but as a red side fan he doesn't get the problem. Hillary is "light blue", sure, but she's sky blue, not electric blue. She's out of season. If anyone comes in with a shade that's closer to something seasonally appropriate, Hillary is out. In 2008, Hillary was a touch out of season and she lost. Next time, she may as well come out in clown paint and select Ben Bernanke as her running mate. I don't think that she's not smart, but she's not good at shutting her mouth when she should. In 2016, her hawking will definitely come back to haunt her, because even the middle east degenerating, even with Russia & Ukraine, we're really not that interested in another war, and this time I don't know if anything would really make us want to enter one and I don't know that anyone is crazy enough to pick that level of fight with us this time. We're not the country that mopped up the mess in World War I, but is still on the verge of being deemed unsophisticated savages anymore. We're the Evil Empire. We crush low power nations, demand people do what we say... Likely nobody wants to involve us in their war this time.Well, a quick tidbit from this "red side fan":How interesting it would be to see a Democratic nominee (Hillary) vs. a Republican nominee (let's say Rand Paul for the sake of argument) and the Democratic nominee being the hawkish figure this time around with the Republican nominee being the one who says: "Hell no; we won't go." - now that would certainly be one for the history books in seeing that unfold! Definitely popcorn worthy there!j.p."And did you get what you wanted from this life, even so? I did. And what did you want? To call myself beloved, to feel myself beloved on the earth." -- Raymond Carver"A page of good prose remains invincible." -- John CheeverReply With Quote
Bronco80
Senior Member
Originally Posted by JohnMc82 Fall 2020: Hillary declines to seek re-election, citing age, health, and inability to work with reactionaries stuck in the past.This is the only part that strikes me as off on first glance. Hillary has wanted the presidency so bad, for so long, that if she wins in 2016 I can't imagine her willingly give it up. If she serves from 2017-24 she'd be the same age as Ronald Reagan during that period, and I don't know of any health issues that she might have. And she's had plenty of experience tangling with the vast right wing conspiracy.Reply With Quote
Eric the Green
Senior Member
Originally Posted by JDFP Well, a quick tidbit from this "red side fan":How interesting it would be to see a Democratic nominee (Hillary) vs. a Republican nominee (let's say Rand Paul for the sake of argument) and the Democratic nominee being the hawkish figure this time around with the Republican nominee being the one who says: "Hell no; we won't go." - now that would certainly be one for the history books in seeing that unfold! Definitely popcorn worthy there!j.p.That's true, that would be interesting. Rand Paul would not win, mostly because he won't be nominated, but he does better in polls than most Republican prospects against her. No-one should over-estimate Hillary's propensity to get us into a war, though. She may be more hawkish, but that 's just around the edges. She may be more likely to do things like give aid to Syria, impose tough sanctions, make some bombing raids; etc. But she's in the new liberal Democrat Clinton/Carter/Obama tradition, and as former Secretary of State is also a diplomat, and a good one. I understand the criticism; just don't get carried away if you want to be correct in your crystal ball "I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin BieberKeep the spirit alive,Eric A. Meece
Kepi
Senior Member
Originally Posted by JDFP Well, a quick tidbit from this "red side fan":How interesting it would be to see a Democratic nominee (Hillary) vs. a Republican nominee (let's say Rand Paul for the sake of argument) and the Democratic nominee being the hawkish figure this time around with the Republican nominee being the one who says: "Hell no; we won't go." - now that would certainly be one for the history books in seeing that unfold! Definitely popcorn worthy there!j.p.It would be interesting, but I don't think a staunchly anti-war republican can actually make up enough of a majority to get through the primaries either. While we are war weary, there's still a lot of voters who definitely believe that a strong America means an America that never backs down and immediately takes every opportunity to make a fight happen. It's not all or even most republicans, but it's a large enough contingent that they have to be appeased with more than just lip service to make the coalition work.Now where I think things get interesting is in the economy. If anything spirals, it's not like you have replacing the Fed chair even as a distant possibility. Meanwhile law suits for misbehavior isn't an option, because we've been doing that. Stimulus isn't an option, because we've been doing that. So what are you left with as options? The republican's traditional "do nothing, reduce taxes, deregulate" won't fly, but neither will the democrat's traditional safety net approach. If John is right and there's a crash in early 15 (I think that it'll be either October this year or next, maybe we can hold or until 16, but I doubt it... October is just a good month to get slammed), it's going to be an ugly, domestically centered quagmire for any candidate.
TimWalker
Senior Member
If Boomer retirement is in jeopardy, how can they afford a new condo? I expect that Boomers' best option would be an austere life in some sort of communal living arrangement.As I posted to another thread, many Boomers may find themselves in a nomadic lifestyle, working temp jobs in their Golden Years. Until their health fails.Last edited by TimWalker; 08-24-2014 at 09:09 PM.Reply With Quote
TimWalker
Senior Member
In general, yes, we are war weary. And isolationist sentiment has reappeared in some groupings. No other nation will want to get into a war with us, but we could stumble into one if they think we are blocking/undermining their interests.Reply With Quote
Kepi
Senior Member
Originally Posted by TimWalker If Boomer retirement is in jeopardy, how can they afford a new condo? I expect that Boomers' best option would be an austere life in some sort of communal living arrangement.As I posted to another thread, many Boomers may find themselves in a nomadic lifestyle, working temp jobs in their Golden Years. Until their health fails.By selling their houses and liquidating some other assets. Basically, they're going to have to sell off a lot of stuff and but something they can actually afford.Reply With Quote
Mikebert
Senior Member
1st post very optimistic. Business cycle been banished. This is the same "it's different this time" stuff that folks were peddling in the 1990's.Reply With Quote
Mikebert
Senior Member
Originally Posted by JDFP Well, a quick tidbit from this "red side fan":How interesting it would be to see a Democratic nominee (Hillary) vs. a Republican nominee (let's say Rand Paul for the sake of argument) and the Democratic nominee being the hawkish figure this time around with the Republican nominee being the one who says: "Hell no; we won't go." - now that would certainly be one for the history books in seeing that unfold! Definitely popcorn worthy there!j.p.I would be very interesting. I can't see Paul getting the nomination.Reply With Quote
Mikebert
Senior Member
Join DateJul 2001LocationKalamazoo MIPosts4,501
Originally Posted by Kepi If John is right and there's a crash in early 15What crash? he mentions a sharp correction, that's all. I don't call 1998 a crash. You don't get a big drop in the market without a recession. And that means years of high unemployment in the current environment. But his forecast has essentially eliminated the business cycle. It's the same thing as they were talking about in the 1990's, that somehow "the internet" or electric cars or insert your favorite technology here "changes everything".Reply With Quote
JohnMc82
Senior Member
Originally Posted by Mikebert What crash? he mentions a sharp correction, that's all. I don't call 1998 a crash. You don't get a big drop in the market without a recession. And that means years of high unemployment in the current environment. But his forecast has essentially eliminated the business cycle. It's the same thing as they were talking about in the 1990's, that somehow "the internet" or electric cars or insert your favorite technology here "changes everything".We're already 15 years in to a long-term trend of weak and falling employment.Labor force participation is dropping like a rock, and it has been since it peaked in late '99 or early 2000. The next correction should only intensify that trend that has already been going on for almost fifteen years, and I don't think it will "turn" in the other direction until at least the early 2020s. Even then, it's more likely to be flat for a turning before there's any real employment growth.The related secular metric to watch is corporate profits as a percentage of GDP. The last time we were at these levels we were fighting WW2, and it wasn't until the 1T had started that this number started to come back down to the more stable 5-7% range.Corporate profits may not even peak until 2024, and there won't be a strong trend in favor of growing wages until after that peak. Between now and then, workers may have a little bit more wiggle room than they had in the prior fifteen years, but it is still an employer's market - probably until the labor force participation rate bottoms out in the low 50%s.The essential technology of the economic 1T is cheap, renewable energy. When we stop thinking about fossil fuels as the essential ingredient to growth, growth will be possible again. When cars run off renewable electricity instead of oil, this directly impacts major themes of the 4T: foreign policy designed to secure access to oil in the Middle East; environmental policy that is struggling to keep up with our fossil-fuel footprint or demand; and corporate policy that is shaped by fear of resource shortages and rapidly rising energy costs.Those words, "temperate and moderate", are words either of political cowardice, or of cunning, or seduction. A thing, moderately good, is not so good as it ought to be. Moderation in temper, is always a virtue; but moderation in principle, is a species of vice.'82 - Once & always independent
Eric the Green
Senior Member
Originally Posted by JDFP As far as the rest of it, inferences based on current trajectories are interesting and there may be some merit to some of your "predictions" - but even the best predictions is only educated guess-work. And I don't have time for any astrological nonsense as others prefer to spew forth.j.p.I understand. But there is a record that is empirically verifiable; not foolproof by any means, but significant enough that some might see it as trumping peoples' beliefsystem that says astrology can't be true just because."I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin BieberKeep the spirit alive,Eric A. MeeceReply With Quote
Eric the Green
Senior Member
Originally Posted by TimWalker In a depressed economy, who will be in a position to buy the Boomers' stuff?Well, if Kepi is right, that could bring down housing prices. If it's not a crash, that could be good. We'll see in about 2019."I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin BieberKeep the spirit alive,Eric A. Meece
Kepi
Senior Member
Originally Posted by TimWalker In a depressed economy, who will be in a position to buy the Boomers' stuff?It's more a matter how low Boomers are willing to cash out. It's going to be that way anyway if you're talking about a cash out for retirement. There's going to be price decline for investments because it's going have to be bought by generations who have not had the ability to amass wealth.Reply With Quote
Mikebert
Senior Member
Originally Posted by JohnMc82 We're already 15 years in to a long-term trend of weak and falling employment.Labor force participation is dropping like a rock, and it has been since it peaked in late '99 or early 2000. The next correction should only intensify that trend that has already been going on for almost fifteen years, and I don't think it will "turn" in the other direction until at least the early 2020s. Even then, it's more likely to be flat for a turning before there's any real employment growth.The related secular metric to watch is corporate profits as a percentage of GDP. The last time we were at these levels we were fighting WW2, and it wasn't until the 1T had started that this number started to come back down to the more stable 5-7% range.Corporate profits may not even peak until 2024, and there won't be a strong trend in favor of growing wages until after that peak. Between now and then, workers may have a little bit more wiggle room than they had in the prior fifteen years, but it is still an employer's market - probably until the labor force participation rate bottoms out in the low 50%s.The essential technology of the economic 1T is cheap, renewable energy. When we stop thinking about fossil fuels as the essential ingredient to growth, growth will be possible again. When cars run off renewable electricity instead of oil, this directly impacts major themes of the 4T: foreign policy designed to secure access to oil in the Middle East; environmental policy that is struggling to keep up with our fossil-fuel footprint or demand; and corporate policy that is shaped by fear of resource shortages and rapidly rising energy costs.OK. Your first post was all sunshine. I don't think we are in for sunshine over the next ten years. Your call for a boom is apparently based on what happened last time. What happened last time happened for a *reason*. It didn't happen because some effect of the turning cycle. It happened because the *details* of the policy response were a certain way. They could have just as easily been a different way, and then it wouldn't have happened.Last edited by Mikebert; 08-25-2014 at 03:01 PM.
JohnMc82
Senior Member
Join DateJan 2011LocationBack in JaxPosts1,962
Like has been pointed out, a Rand Paul vs. Hillary matchup almost puts Hillary in the awkward position of being the conservative with regards to foreign policy and too-big-to-fail corporate policy. Total turnout would probably be pretty low, but the polls so far show Hillary easily defeating any Democratic primary challenger, as well as any potential Republican nominee who has any sort of name recognition.But I do think, that it wouldn't take long for the populace to remember why Hillary is such a divisive character, either. She will blame age or Republicans or whatever when she doesn't run for a second term, but the reality is that her popularity is going to be suffering from the day she steps into office. Knowing that she won't be able to go out with a rich policy legacy, she'll make herself in to a media martyr for her cause (that cause of course, being herself).Knowing she won't be able to pull off too many shady dealings with the right-wing ready to destroy her, she'll bow out of the job in a way that keeps her in the spotlight and collecting bigger-than-ever speaking & consulting fees.
|
|
|
Authoritarianism and American politics |
Posted by: pbrower2a - 05-08-2016, 09:11 PM - Forum: Theory Related Political Discussions
- Replies (75)
|
|
Political values include general attitudes toward humanity -- whether and whom to trust, and whether to obey or rebel.
from 538.com
Note -- originally posted in 2009, but it still seems relevant.
Quote:by Tom Schaller @ 12:35 PM
I'm reading a compelling new book, Authoritarianism & Polarization in American Politics, co-written by Marc Hetherington and Jonathan Weiler. (Disclosure: Jon is a longtime friend; we were in grad school together at Univ. of North Carolina.) The book is an examination of how authoritarian tendencies among American citizens inform and explain attitudes toward government, public policies and their fellow citizens. It is impossible to summarize the book properly in a blog post, but I wanted to hit on some of the points that struck me, many of which were unsurprising and yet startling to see demonstrated empirically.
The first point Hetherington and Weiler make is that authoritarianism is really about order--achieving it, maintaining it, and affirming it--and especially when citizens are uncertain or fearful. This, they say, is why authoritarians seek out and elevate, well, authorities--because authorities impose order on an otherwise disordered world. They provide a useful review the existing literature on authoritarian traits, which have been connected to negative racist stereotyping, a belief in biblical inerrancy, a preference for simple rather than complex problem-solving, and low levels of political information.
Hetherington and Weiler expand and update the authoritarian literature by applying it to contemporary controversies. For example, what they measure and define as "maximum authoritarian" types show much lower support for gay marriage and gay adoption (19 percent, 28 percent) than do "minimum authoritarians" (71 percent, 89 percent). Maximums are three times more likely than minimums to support the government use of wiretaps without a warrant in the war on terror (60 percent to 19 percent), and four times more likely to say it is unacceptable to criticize the president about fighting terrorism (33 percent to 8 percent).
And what do authoritarians look like? The table above--which I have reproduced from Table 3.2 (p. 39) of their book--shows average levels of authoritarianism by descriptive characteristics that, taken together, produce a composite image: rural, southern, under-educated, evangelical Protestant churchgoers. Is it any wonder that when George W. Bush was down to his bottom 30 percent of public support during his second term so much of that support derived from people fitting this profile? And although there is a strong connection between authoritarianism and conservatism (and thus Republicanism), as Hetherington and Weiler caution, authoritarianism is not bounded by party: Among 2008 Democratic primary voters there were significant splits on issues of race and immigration, smacking of authoritarian impulses, that played a role in support for either Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama. "There is strong suggestive evidence that authoritarianism was a core reason for the voting behavior of nonblacks" in the Democratic primary, they conclude.
As for the current debate over health care, some of the same cleavages exist. In a recent piece for the Huffington Post, Weiler talks about race and authoritarianism in the context of the health reform debate: "In sum, there is reason to think that beneath the arguments about government intrusion into the health care market, death panels, and such, a much more visceral dynamic is at work. To be perfectly clear, it is far from the case that every opponent or skeptic of significant health-care reform is a racist or racially motivated in her or his thinking. But there is, at the least, very strong circumstantial evidence that views of race and beliefs about health care reform are linked significantly among many Americans, which probably explains why the debate on health care reform has caused a much stronger uproar in 2009 than it did in 1994."
Reading the book, I kept hearing echoes of Glenn Greenwalds's book, A Tragic Legacy. Greenwald's book is a character study of Bush43 and the Bush White House, its Manichean worldview, and what that meant for public policy. But an us-v-them, good-v-evil governing mentality is only possible in a democracy where authoritarian currents run deep enough to sustain (and re-elect) such leadership. The governing atmosphere Greenwald describes makes even more sense after reading Hetherington and Weiler.
Average Authoritarianism by groups:
Religion
Evangelical Protestant .709
Catholic .571
Mainline Protestant .530
Secular .481
Jewish .383
Church attendance
Weekly or more .689
Less than weekly .549
Region
South .657
Non-South .457
Population area
Rural .603
Small town .584
Suburb .524
Large city .502
Inner city .549
Education
Less than HS diploma .749
HS diploma .590
College degree .510
Graduate degree .370
It's not for any of us to decide "which" authoritarianism is good and which is bad. Nobody is choosing between Stalinism and Nazism or the Klan.
One cornerstone of authoritarianism is an adherence to a supposedly-superior culture and its traditions. Some traditions and cultures are less hostile in their attitudes toward outsiders: such peoples as Orthodox Jews and Old-Order Amish well recognize that their ways of life aren't for everyone and that outsiders must be judged on universal principles instead of similarities to themselves. They would tell outsiders to live according to the highest ethical standards of their groups and when we meet we will get along. Fundamentalist and evangelical Christians would see anyone not like themselves not as quaint, but instead as "sinful'.
Some of the divides beg explanation. I suspect that authoritarianism implies insularity -- less likelihood of meeting people of dissimilar backgrounds under conditions that preclude judgment of others. People in insular environments may be in such places by choice -- out of fear of meeting people dissimilar to themselves or likely to show hostility toward "exotic" types. Outsiders, one learns early, are the untrustworthy people who do things to one instead of collaborating with one.
Education is obvious: people with little formal education are less likely to show social mobility and are likely to be stuck in rural areas and inner cities. Their interactions with outsiders is likely to be unpleasant because of the economic realities among the undereducated, and they are likely to think inside some rigid box because anything else is not accepted. Behavioral standards are rigid, and punishments for violations of the norms are severe. Undereducated people often have poor impulse control, learning disabilities, and proclivity toward violence, none of which fits well into bureaucratic environments (including schools). At the other end, graduate students are likely to meet people of widely-diverse cultural heritages even at the undergraduate schools that feed graduate and professional schools. First-rate schools attract international students who don't have the same ethnicity, ideology, or culture. You can only imagine what attitudes form among graduate students toward homosexuality, interfaith and interracial relationships, and big government (one likely depends upon government grants at the least for research). Rational, flexible thought is a necessity, and part of it entails the ability to deny impulses when appropriate.
A college degree is not enough to shatter authoritarian tendencies; lots of mediocrities now get college degrees (blatant example in politics:the former Governor of Alaska). Someone who attends a second-rate or worse college is likely to be around cultural peers and see little diversity, and if there is any, likely to separate from it. Many college graduates have seen college entirely as a backdoor to Corporate America, a way of having a chance to go into management training in a box store after six months as a store clerk instead of twenty if at all. Big Business is extremely hierarchical, and authoritarian types might fit in far better than might more open-minded people. The drop-off between "college degree" and "high school diploma" isn't so sharp as the one between "college degree" and "graduate degree" or between "high school diploma" and "less than high-school diploma".
The political consequences of authoritarianism include the inability to see political solutions outside a "comfortable" list of "normal" politicians. People who had difficulty voting for Barack Obama would have had difficulty voting for not only a half-African product of miscegenation, but also an Asian, Jewish, Latino, or LGBT candidate for the Presidency.
Some people need rigid direction. It's obvious enough with scoundrels; they need it imposed from above (as in a prison) because they merit no trust from others or from a bigger and more powerful scoundrel (like a higher-ranking Crime Boss like Al Capone or Adolf Hitler). Some impose it because such allows them to get what they want from people whom they have few incentives to offer. Those are the sorts who must make others feel so insecure about themselves that they would never abandon an exploitative environment for something better. Fear remains one of the most powerful tools of control. Maybe you have had some boss who warns you frequently that if you quit that organization you would fail anywhere else.
Poorly-educated people often find themselves under the harshest conditions of employment. Some carry the sorts of educational pathologies -- poor impulse control, inability to defer gratification, a low threshold of frustration, laziness, and rebelliousness. People with those traits need intense supervision just to achieve even the barest of objectives, They might get accustomed to it and accept it as the norm of human existence. People without such traits can get along quite well without such supervision and thus reject authoritarianism.
|
|
|
The Fourth Turning Forum Archive |
Posted by: John J. Xenakis - 05-08-2016, 02:56 PM - Forum: Old Fourth Turning Forum Posts
- Replies (2)
|
|
***** The Fourth Turning Forum Archive *****
http://generationaldynamics.com/tftarchive
The first version of the Fourth Turning Forum archive is now online.
http://generationaldynamics.com/tftarchive
With the Fourth Turning Forum being killed on May 16, 2016, this
archive of some of the threads is presented as a public service to the
hundreds of people who have been members for many years.
This is a first version. I hope to get some of the linking and
formatting working better. If there's something you'd like to see,
let me know and I might be able to accomodate you.
The software to produce this archive has been written and can be rerun
at any time. That means that I can still add new threads. I can also
rerun it to capture any posts that are added to these threads before
May 16.
If this archive is missing any threads that you want, then let me know
as quickly as possible, before they're killed and disappear forever.
I know that I'm going to be going back through notes all week to see
if there are any more threads I want. I urge everyone to do the same.
John J. Xenakis
100 Memorial Drive Apt 8-13A
Cambridge, MA 02142
Phone: 617-864-0010
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com
Forum: http://www.gdxforum.com/forum
Subscribe to World View: http://generationaldynamics.com/subscribe
Here are the threads so far:
2016-18: The nest step down.
Alan Greenspan and the Great Depression
Archive of Strauss and Howe Discussion Thread (July 2 and 3, 2007)
Big Test for Generational Dynamics
Boomers & Silents; 2004-2024
China
Do you like Justin Bieber?
Doonesbury and The Invisible Boomers
Ethnic Russians rioting in Estonia
Financial Crisis
Gender Issues
Generation Zero - A film based on S&H
Generational Boundaries
Generational Dynamics - MIT - April 20 Presentation
Generational Dynamics World View
Generations and Sex
Global Warming
Humor
Iraq Today vs 1960s America
It's time for national healthcare
Leo Tolstoy's War and Peace
New Generational Dynamics Book -- Available online
New book updates Strauss & Howe's "The Fourth Turni
Objections to Generational Dynamics
Official 'Map Project' Thread
Pew Research: Digital 'Natives' Invade the Workplace
Philosophy, religion, science and turnings
Please vote: Correlate political and generational views
Political Archetypes
Political Polarization, Racial Tensions, and The Crisis era
Poll: Would Americans ditch Israel to avoid long gas lines?
Swine Flu
T4T Board Truth And Reconciliation Thread.
The Causes of the American Civil War
The Media and Us
The Singularity
The next pandemic
To all Fourth Turning Forum members:
Visionaries from the Consciousness Revolution
Wall Street in Wonderland
War of Spanish Succession
Web sites for Boomers
Who will become the next Gray Champion?
Why the 4T started in 2008 and NOT in 2001
You and Time Magazine
Your Career and Generational Theory
Sent (STAMP: Sunday, May 08, 2016, 15:49:59 160508)
|
|
|
Legalization of same-sex marriage |
Posted by: pbrower2a - 05-08-2016, 01:52 PM - Forum: Society and Culture
- Replies (4)
|
|
I'm mixing some threads here to create a lesson, basically on how an important civil right (same-sex marriage) could come into being. Some are from the old Fourth Turning forms, and some are from Leip's "Election Atlas". Here I can do this without the banter characteristic of a Forum. This may be good for a civics lesson.
Let's start with the most amazing reality: this has happened while America has become more, and not less, sexually repressive, especially of domestic violence (which is not a right) and even more, the abominable deeds that we can all classify as sexual abuse of children. We are in the worst time ever to be involved in child pornography, a reality that almost everyone finds acceptable. This is also in a time, part of which reflects the rise of the Tea Party movement which melds every thread of religious and economic conservatism. Know well: gays and lesbians wanted to find their way into the mainstream of American life, and they did a good job of it. They distanced themselves as fully as straights from the infamous NAMBLA types. The less said about NAMBLA the better.
Same-sex couples have ended up with children; just like heterosexual couples they can be just as protective of those children as heterosexuals. Two gay men or two lesbians could be very hostile to any pervert showing an inappropriate interest in the child in their custody. Sexual exploitation of children is perversion; homosexuality isn't.
...Before anyone asks me what my stake is -- it is law and order. Having been gay-bashed, I came quickly to the conclusion was that the problem wasn't that I wasn't masculine enough; it was instead that some people think it acceptable to beat people that they deem homosexual. Difference is real. Human rights must be the law of the land. I came to the conclusion that standing for homosexual rights would promote law and order, the first of all civil rights. I changed my tune on homosexuality. I used to make 'gay jokes'. I quite making them when I realized that those contributed, even if subtly, to the danger of gay-bashing.
So here is the legal status of same-sex marriage at the beginning of 2003:
Same-sex marriage was not recognized as a legal right anywhere in America.
Things changed on May 17, 2004 as the result of a state court ruling that the Massachusetts law against same-sex marriage violated the state constitution. But only in Massachusetts, then only the first state to legalize SSM.
Legalization of SSM to 2004
Legalization from previous years (white)
from legal decisions made that year and valid from that year:
resulting from a state court decision invalidating an SSM ban
From here on, a number upon a state indicates the order in which the state recognizes or is compelled to recognize the validity of same-same-sex marriage permanently.
Legalization of SSM to 2008
California briefly legalized SSM as its state Supreme Court invalidated Proposition 8 -- but such was appealed, and SSM quickly vanished. I'm not counting short-lived legalization. But Connecticut would by a ruling that an SSM ban was unconstitutional.
California briefly legalized SSM as its state Supreme Court invalidated Proposition 8 -- but such was appealed, and SSM quickly vanished. I'm not counting short-lived legalization. But Connecticut would by a ruling that an SSM ban was unconstitutional.
Legalization from previous years (white)
from legal decisions made that year and valid from that year:
resulting from a state court decision invalidating an SSM ban
Same-sex marriage would remain strictly a Massachusetts phenomenon until
California briefly legalized SSM as its state Supreme Court invalidated Proposition 8 -- but such was appealed, and SSM quickly vanished. I'm not counting short-lived legalization. But Connecticut would legalize same-sex marriage with a State Supreme Court ruling that an SSM ban was unconstitutional.
Legalization from previous years (white)
from legal decisions made that year and valid from that year:
resulting from a state court decision invalidating an SSM ban
It gets more interesting in 2009.
California briefly legalized SSM as its state Supreme Court invalidated Proposition 8 -- but such was appealed, and SSM quickly vanished. I'm not counting short-lived legalization. But Connecticut would by a ruling that an SSM ban was unconstitutional.
In a mere five days, Iowa (April 3, through a state court decision) and Vermont (April 7, through legislation) ratified same-sex marriage. In May, Maine legalized it through legislation, as would New Hampshire in June. But Maine would repeal the legislation in November, so that would not count in my scheme.
The Council of the District of Columbia would enact a law legalizing same-sex marriage in November -- but that would not take effect until 2010. DC will be shown when SSM becomes possible in 2010.
Legalization from previous years (white)
from legal decisions made that year and valid from that year:
resulting from a state court decision invalidating an SSM ban
resulting from state legislation
|
|
|
Obituaries |
Posted by: pbrower2a - 05-08-2016, 07:32 AM - Forum: Special Topics/G-T Lounge
- Replies (1794)
|
|
Isao Tomita (冨田 勲 Tomita Isao?, 22 April 1932 – 5 May 2016), often known simply as Tomita, was a Japanese music composer, regarded as one of the pioneers of electronic music and space music, and as one of the most famous producers of analog synthesizer arrangements. In addition to creating note-by-note realizations, Tomita made extensive use of the sound design capabilities of his instrument, using synthesizers to create new sounds to accompany and enhance his electronic realizations of acoustic instruments. He also made effective use of analog music sequencers and the Mellotron and featured futuristic science fiction themes, while laying the foundations for synth-pop music and trance-like rhythms. Many of his albums are electronic versions and adaptations of famous classical music pieces and he received four Grammy Award nominations for his 1974 album Snowflakes Are Dancing.
By the late 1960s, Isao turned to electronic music with the impetus of Wendy Carlos and Robert Moog's work with synthesizers. Isao acquired a Moog III synthesizer and began building his home studio. He eventually realized that synthesizers could be used to create entirely new sounds in addition to mimicking other instruments. His first electronic album was Electric Samurai: Switched on Rock, released in Japan in 1972 and in the United States in 1974. The album featured electronic renditions of contemporary rock and pop songs, while utilizing speech synthesis in place of a human voice. He then started arranging Claude Debussy's impressionist pieces for synthesizer and, in 1974, the album Snowflakes are Dancing was released; it became a worldwide success and was responsible for popularizing several aspects of synthesizer programming. The album's contents included ambience, realistic string simulations; an early attempt to synthesize the sound of a symphony orchestra; whistles, and abstract bell-like sounds, as well as a number of processing effects including: reverberation, phase shifting, flanging, and ring modulation. Quadrophonic versions of the album provided a spatial audio effect using four speakers. A particularly significant achievement was its polyphonic sound, created prior to the era of polyphonic synthesizers. Tomita created the album's polyphony as Carlos had done before him, with the use of multitrack recording, recording each voice of a piece one at a time, on a separate tape track, and then mixing the result to stereo or quad. It took 14 months to produce the album. In his early albums, he also made effective use of analog music sequencers, which he used for repeated pitch, filter or effects changes. Tomita's modular human whistle sounds would also be copied in the presets of later electronic instruments. His version of "Arabesque No. 1" was later used as the theme to the astronomy television series Jack Horkheimer: Star Gazer (originally titled Star Hustler) seen on most PBS stations; in Japan, parts of his version of "Rêverie" were used for the opening and closing of Fuji TV's transmissions; in Spain, "Arabesque No. 1" was also used for the intro and the outro for the children TV program "Planeta Imaginario" (imaginary planet).
Following the success of Snowflakes Are Dancing, Tomita released a number of "classically" themed albums, including arrangements of: Igor Stravinsky's The Firebird, Modest Mussorgsky's Pictures at an Exhibition, and Gustav Holst's The Planets. Holst: The Planets introduced a science fiction "space theme" This album sparked controversy on its release, as Imogen Holst, daughter of Gustav Holst, refused permission for her father's work to be interpreted in this way. The album was withdrawn, and is, consequently, rare in its original vinyl form.
While working on his classical synthesizer albums, Tomita also composed numerous scores for Japanese television and films, including the Zatoichi television series, two Zatoichi feature films, the Oshi Samurai (Mute Samurai) television series and the Toho science fiction disaster film, Catastrophe 1999, The Prophesies of Nostradamus (U.S. title: Last Days of Planet Earth) in 1974. The latter blends synthesizer performances with pop-rock and orchestral instruments. It and a few other partial and complete scores of the period have been released on LP and later CD over the years in Japan. While not bootlegs, at least some of these releases were issued by film and television production companies without Tomita's artistic approval.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isao_Tomita
|
|
|
Marxism and its influence |
Posted by: TnT - 05-07-2016, 08:11 PM - Forum: General Political Discussion
- Replies (10)
|
|
Kinser,
I have to thank you. You and your eclectic perspectives on things always make for an interesting read.
Further, you inspired me to break out some reading that I've not looked at for over fifty years, back when I was an undergraduate. And even then, I think I wasn't up to the material, or mature enough to really consider it, or still too unsophisticated and too much of a backwoods boy to think about it.
I've both skimmed and carefully re-read all or part of The Communist Manifesto, Wage-Labour and Capital, Value Price and Profit, and The Poverty of Philosopy.
As a side-study I've also been reading the biography of Jean Jaures, the brilliant French socialist whose life ended all too soon, to an assassin's bullet. One can only wonder if Jaures and his fellows could have made their influence more felt, that WW-I might have even been avoided?
Back to Marx - I'm sure that I'm not the advocate of Marx that you are, but I've found that my re-reading his stuff is fascinating. He got a lot of it right in my opinion. And the general theory pans out occasionally. Of course, it seems to me that it falls way short in other areas.
In any case thanks. I've enjoyed this detour in my reading. Re-reading is often an excellent diversion!
|
|
|
|