America is a sick society

[David Horn]

(08-01-2017, 03:12 PM)Mikebert Wrote:

(08-01-2017, 09:10 AM)David Horn Wrote: Assuming you are right, and the author of the referenced article is as well, nothing short of a cataclysmic crash that triggers mass dislocation and even starvation is going to overcome that mind set. 

The last time it was an economic depression. They was no starvation. Indices of population well-being continued to rise: male height rose from 174.5 cm to 176 for 1930 to 1940; life expectancy rose strongly--by two years.  Neither is evidence of starvation.

The degree of indoctrination, for lack of a better word, has been fine tuned this time -- much more so than the period leading up to the GD.  There are simply no strong countervailing institutions supported by the middle and lower middle classes similar to trade and industrial unions or even fraternal organizations.  The elites learned their lesson: kill the institutions first, and replace them with institutions favorable to the elite.  Fox News is a prime example.

Mikebert Wrote:

David Horn Wrote:As a nation, we can't survive that and rebound to anything greater than second class status, so another answer needs to be found. 

Why?

OK, a bit of hyperbole here, but one used to make the point that followed.

Mikebert Wrote:

David Horn Wrote:Bernie Sanders did yeoman's work trying to raise the flag and get things rolling, but we let that opportunity pass. 

No we didn't.  Electing Bernie would have been a mistake of epic proportions. Bernie is playing the role of John the Baptist.  His big accomplishment IMO opinion is in created the idea that the economy is rigged against working people. Similarly OWS created the meme of the 1%. Together the two link inequality and "rigged". 

I agree that Bernie had little chance of winning, though beating Trump might have actually occurred.  Assuming he would have lost, he would have represented the Barry Goldwater of the left.  Goldwater lead to Reagan, and might have sooner if Nixon hadn't bungled things by being, well, Nixon.

Mikebert Wrote:Functionally, the *cause* of a great deal (not all) of our problems is high inequality.  "Rigging" is one way this is achieved. Republicans *after* the economy was rigged became the party of tax cuts.  Before the rigging was installed and Republicans were the party of tax increases.  You want Republicans to stop fighting tax increases tooth and nail?  To paraphrase Treebeard from LOTR: Break the rigging, release the river (of wage growth) ...

I assume the GOP will be the tax-cut party for the foreseeable future ... tax cuts and targeted spending cuts.  It serves their constituency.  Until their stranglehold is pried loose, I see this continuing with the increase in inequality continuing with it.

Mikebert Wrote:

David Horn Wrote:I'm convinced that this won't be fixed in our lifetimes,,

Why? So far the problem has left elites unaffected.  Do you think this situation will persist forever?

I don't see elites factoring in the decline in economic activity that too little disposable income is already creating.  So far, they've been good at squeezing more profits out of companies by squeezing the working class hard: offshoring, automaton and the use of contractors being the most prominent.  The real question, and you may have a belter handle on this than I do: when does this start to affect revenues enough to make squeezing ineffective?  In other words, when does the merry-go-round finally stop?  Will the capitalists be massively overextended when it does?  I don't see that happening soon enough to trigger the necessary backlash that would make this 4T progressive.  We have a 40 year pattern of this steadily gaing speed, and the LMC and much of the MC is firmly on the side of capital.   They blame the politicians.

Since we can agree that it isn't viable long term, then it gets resolved later.  The longer it takes to rise to the level that triggers a massive response, the greater that response will be. I'm not sure capitalism as currently understood can survive that.