Thank you for this, and more importantly for you life of work on behalf of part of my chosen family.
As is often the case, I wake up in the middle of the night and turn on my computer and find your comments.
The industrial policy followed by Regan was wrong then, and the industrial policy being followed today in the USA is wrong now. I am reading Matthew Desmond’s recent book "Poverty, by America"
He believes that entrenched poverty in the United States is the product not only of larger shifts, such as deindustrialization and family dissolution, but of choices and actions by more fortunate Americans. Poverty persists partly because many of us, with varying degrees of self-awareness, benefit from its penetration. “It’s a useful exercise, evaluating the merits of different explanations for poverty, like those having to do with immigration or the family,” Desmond writes. “But I’ve found that doing so always leads me back to the taproot, the central feature from which all other rootlets spring, which in our case is the simple truth that poverty is an injury, a taking. Tens of millions of Americans do not end up poor by a mistake of history or personal conduct. Poverty persists because some wish and will it to.”
H e reminds us that "Poverty isn’t simply the condition of not having enough money It’s the condition of not having enough choice and being taken advantage of because of that.” He suggests "Becoming a poverty abolitionist, entails conducting an audit of our lives, personalizing poverty by examining all the ways we are connected to the problem — and to the solution.”
I am conducting an audit of my life. I hope some of you will join me.
M Fred, I have the book you mentioned and plan to read it soon, it's in the queue. I also think so little has been done to end poverty or to keep the ending poverty process going as happened during the pandemic is that a whole lot of people, particularly rich and conservative people want to have a group they can look at and mumble their whiny ignorant "there but for the grace of god go I." That means there's always someone worse off than you are and then you can plug in all the excuses you want for your not helping or even caring: they deserve it; they didn't work hard; they didn't take care of what they had; and on and on forever. Reagan did little to nothing to help people in poverty. He preferred to whine about welfare queens that didn't exist and women having too many kids (limited access to birth control and abortion). If one has a few three or 4-word slogans it can replace the need to think. Fox figured that out a while ago and their followers have immersed themselves in it. Having someone to look down on works well for a whole lot of people, particularly conservative religious people because they can console themselves that their god loves them better because they are not poor like those people.
The truth is that 15-20% of the general population cannot manage without "a leg up." Many of those people receive government benefits but vote against their economic and physical health.
The influence of the religious right and the rise of wedge issues to appeal to people's fears and emotions has caused people to park their brains in the trash and vote on emotional fears and grievances....and the rise of massive misinformation has totally harmed the country's future.
Indeed, poverty, or the threat of poverty, serves as economic coercion of the working class to work harder and harder for less and less. All by design. It's a *feature* of (rentier) capitalism and neoliberalism, not a bug.
Poverty could be literally abolished mathematically overnight with a no-strings-attached UBI set high enough. But the oligarchs who write the rules would never go for that, for obvious reasons.
Interesting. The French economy includes capitalism, yet French workers demand a 32 hour work week, 6 weeks vacation, and retirement at age 62. N'est pas?
But they've been a country for more than a thousand years longer - so the comparison doesn't fit. I'm confused about something - and I wonder if the framers of the U.S. Constitution imagined 350 million people in fifty states, would they have allowed all 50 as much independence as they have?
Gerald, you are right. I found the book incredibly disturbing but on target. I still think about the people she discusses in the book and the moral challenges they face. I can't even imagine Republicans being able to read through that one because they don't see any of this as a dilemma at all; they're so wrapped up in their own cocoons and just can't muster the courage to burst out into the real world.
Hi Ruth. I suspect "Republicans" are an inhomogenous group. According to Steve Schmidt, only a minority of republicans chose their presendential candidate. A better way for all of us might be to hold an open primary for the presidency so that voters of all parties, including unaligned, would chose between the top two. What is your opinion?
Gerald, It is an interesting idea and has been suggested before, but somehow states want to do their own thing, being states, you know. It has never flown. I don't know what would have to happen to get all states to make a single national primary. It would save a lot of time and money, but I can't see Alabama wanting to have their primary the same day as New York or Minnesota. Then, there are Iowa and New Hampshire who think they are better than everyone else. Both states get tons of money being "first" as candidates attend state fairs and other baby-kissing, hand-shaking events. Candidates would have a tough time getting around to all the states before a particular super date, and focusing on the "swing" states would be nearly total. Spreading primaries out can let people see more candidates and what they are really saying when under pressure. Hard to know!
I know of this book, but have't gotten to it. I am now finishing Burton Hersh's excellent history, The Mellon Family. Full disclosure, Burton is a friend of many years. His book shows how tax policy is used to aid industries. Also read his book, The Old Boys, considered one of the best histories of the CIA. Not beach books, but worth the investment.
IMO I think the 'governmental solutions' are - attacking the problem of poverty and the
homeless - from the bottom up. When these problems - should be - addressed (attacked)
from the - top down - where the beginnings of all these problems for the 'lower classes' - start. I've experience 1st hand the - sources - the rich, empowered, entitled - who do anything & everything (using j.r.e. = justification, rationalization and excuse) at hand to
maintain their own - privelege... Sadness and despondency ensues ~ ~ ~
As much as I'm a fan of Kennedy, I'd say his space program was wrong in the 60s before Regan's in the 80s. I'd argue that we need to stop looking and spending money into space and focus that money here on earth to solve problems like poverty. This is why I think Elon's SpaceX is a huge waste of money and will ultimately fail:
Communication satellites have made it easier to find my way around using GPS. Star-link helps the Ukranians defend themselves. The value of deep space exploration may be little, but the value of near space exploration and development is enormous.
Impacts by objects around 460 feet in diameter occur every 10,000 to 20,000 years, and a "dinosaur-killing" impact from a rock perhaps a half-mile across or larger happens on 100-million-year timescales.
The sun has a life expectancy of 5,000,000,000—five billion—years.
You've got that right, Gerald. Elon Musk may be a bit paranoid and peculiar, but SpaceX and its commitment to near-space, done sustainably, has already put him in the history books.
I, too, read Poverty by America, and it spoke deeply to me about the area of North Georgia where I grew up, and where there were textile mills before the Civil War. It's always had an Appalachian vibe, but today its voice is Marjorie Taylor Green. I suspect she would not have gained a toe hole there (she's from the Atlanta area) had we not moved most of those textile and rug mills abroad. It's true the first mills were owned by absentee Yankees (Sherman marched through without setting any fires), and they made sure local schools were poorly funded to maintain a steady workforce and keep taxes down. Efforts to unionize failed. In the Reagan Era, there were meth labs in the countryside where my brother and I and our friends once safely roamed. Try as I might, I don't understand how people there make a living, but resentment and guns are widespread.
I join M. Fred in recommending Desmond's book. It's a quick read, but you'll think about it for a long time.
I’m currently reading Alan Taylor: “American Revolutions,A Continental History,1750-1804. It’s quite concise in explaining that the wealthy believed that they alone should rule for their profit&that Democracy was an odious ideal: regular citizens were beasts&rabble not fit to vote. Seems these ideas haven’t changed. Unless Congress is divested from holding stocks or jobs lobbying;and businesses aren’t allow tax subsidies(big oils profits top $9Billion per quarter)there will be deals that profit the rich at the expense of the nation&average citizens.
If you had taken Professor Reich's Wealth and Poverty course, offered twice this year for free via FB, you would know that he said, "Poverty is a political choice." There is no reason except that the voters of America, through their choices at the ballot box, choose NOT to eliminate it. Indeed, the conservative view of the poor is that it is their own fault for making poor choices, not that the deck is stacked against them, and the government just doesn't want to help them with food stamps, childcare, parental leave, subsidized housing for high-rent areas, relief from high interest rate school loans, and bailouts when the economy tanks (but money is found to bail out industries!) or disaster strikes, etc.
I agree Linda. I’ve taken Professor Reich’s Wealth & Poverty class twice. I firmly believe we have poverty because that’s what the political right wants. They seem to have a need to maintain a class of poor
people they can look down on. It also gives them the opportunity to blame dems for catering to the poor because they’re just a bunch of lazy freeloaders.
The truth is, nobody wants to be poor. But the “freeloader” nonsense is deeply entrenched in republican politics. If republicans would get out of the way long enough for dems to pass legislation
like medicare for all, and then pass a law forcing
the pharma industry to negotiate the cost of all
medications, those two things alone would go a long way to help lift many poor people out of poverty...
because for one thing, proper healthcare and access to affordable medication would likely improve their
My life experience does not reflect Desmond's conclusion. My experience suggests resilience, ambition, and perserverance are key factors of an individual to rise from poverty. Labor Unions and various laws protect workers from exploitation by the owners of the means of production.
Various laws exploit workers (federal minimum wage restaurant workers make less than minimum but tips don't compensate)and not enough unions to protect wages. Also laws that exploit like RLA. 5 years plus for my union TWU556 still negotiating. Delay benefits the company. They sit on our back pay and earn interest. We threaten strike and Congress and the president force us back to work under the RLA.
Huh happened twice. I am working on a response to your comment and it keeps disappearing. I am tech challenge.
Gerald
Thank you for joining the conversation. Unfortunatly I do not know what life experience you had that convinces you that Desmond's conclusion is wrong. Perhaps you can share more it it.
I also don't know what conclusion you think is wrong.
I am going to stop now before this goes away again.
Hi M Fred Friedman, in my experience, personal virtues can overcome poverty- education, diligence, ambition, and social skills. Capitalism provides us with an opportunity. Regulated capitalism creates wealth.
That was fast. so are you saying that the capitalism in the USA provides everybody with opportunity? What about people who are injured and suffer traumatic brain injury and thus cannot learn social skills? Are you saying the fact that I am poor, is simply my fault? I am tempted to try to write a clearer response but am afraid that it will disappear. Thanks again for joining the conversation.
Fred, I’ve had things I’ve written on this app disappear too. As far as I know there’s no way to retrieve them. So, what I do if my response turns into something lengthy, is finish writing it in a different app like “notes.” Then I paste it into the appropriate
I agree. I was part of the Teamsters when I drove a Home Juice truck to deliver fresh juice in Detroit during the summer of 1967. The wages I earned paid about 1/3 of my in-state tuition and modest living costs for a year. At my car factory job, the next summer, I was a member of the UAW. Karl Marx did not envision the benefit of labor unions (an anti-monopoly laws) to protect against capitalism. Had he done so, he may have developed a strategy that would have allowed for the private ownership of the means of production AND enfranchisement of the working class.
Pretty much spot on in your predictions even if you were being tongue in cheek. Guess the explosion in tech jobs did insure American prosperity for those workers but not the traditional hard hat blue collar middle class . And that undercut the importance of unions in the economy.
The irony is that the Republicans destroyed the traditional hard hat blue collar middle class and now claims to be the only party that cares about them.
Reagan pulled the solar panels from the White House. Ended gasification of US coal...thus promoting air pollution. Set alternative energy industry back 20 years.
Cut Social Security disability beneficiaries from the rolls without giving them a hearing.
Capital gains policy permitted a sell off of companies, got write offs for shipping American jobs overseas.
Killed PATCO, demonstrating that he was a union buster.
Began his campaign in Philadelphia Mississippi, an overture to white supremacy groups. And as a card carrying Semite I remember Bitburg, James Watt and removal of Jews from DOL.
I'd forgot some of that, and some of that I didn't know. Thank you. A few more reasons to despise the senile idiot.
What makes him even worse in my view is that his undeserved popularity led the Democrats to try to beat the Republicans by adopting neo-liberalism, which further destroyed the country.
Maureen : It is echoed by the 'success' of the Reality TV star who continues to stalk the Presidency ! He is also enabled and supported by the same obscenely wealthy 'people'!
Here's the point: Few of us are aware of all that government and private capitalism can do to shape our lives, and sometimes our attention can be self-focused.
I was a neophyte 19 year old when he took office, but he'd been our governor when I was a small child, and my secretly political (his religion forbade him from participating in voting or activism) father absolutely despised the man. "Blank mind behind a blank face" is how my dad described Reagan. He's the Sulla in our Republic. Not the one who brought it down-just the one who tossed the first stones in the avalanche.
How utterly repulsive is a religion that forbids its members from engaging in two fundamental rights of self-governance. Examples of religious control such as this further reinforce the primary role of organized religion being to enable a small group of people to control and manipulate a large group. I feel sorry for your father; he was a victim of organized religion gone bad.
"a victim of organized religion gone bad." When has it gone GOOD? LOL. There were two valuable lessons I took from growing up as a Jehovah's Witness: 1) I have no fear of public speaking. Good lesson for an introvert and 2) I am utterly inoculated against religious thought. I require evidence. The rest was a waste of the first 18 years of my life, and of decades of my parents and brothers.
As another 'member of the tribe', I flat out REFUSED to vote for this putz back then, regardless of how 'weak' our Dem candidates may have appeared. ;)
I even drove around with The Byrds version of "Drug Store Truck Driving Man" blasting in my car around election day of both of his installments into power.
(And YES, I know that it was not written about/for ol' pompous pruneface. ;) )
Daniel, He also stopped conversion to the metric system 'because it was too hard to understand' As a scientist, I resented this as well as all his faults.
You hit the mail on the head! I can’t understand why the MAGA blue collar workers can’t understand and see that the Fascist Republicans are all lies and hot air and care nothing about the American workers and their future well being!
I think it's because, starting with Clinton, the Democrats largely ignored them and pandered to the big donors. Trump simply came along, told them lies, and scooped them up. Biden is trying to return the Democrats to the party they were from FDR through LBJ (but without the wars), but he's facing opposition from the neo-liberals in his own party as well as from the GQP wing-nuts.
It's the culmination of a lot of factors going back to the Lewis Powell Memo. Neo-liberalsim is one of them.
As for the October Surprise, Reagan was imitating Nixon, who persuaded Ho Chi Minh to put off negotiating an end to the Vietnam War so he could win the election.
Abolhassan Banisadr, the former President of Iran, has also stated "that the Reagan campaign struck a deal with Tehran to delay the release of the hostages in 1980", asserting that "by the month before the American Presidential election in November 1980, many in Iran's ruling circles were openly discussing the fact that a deal had been made between the Reagan campaign team and some Iranian religious leaders in which the hostages' release would be delayed until after the election so as to prevent President Carter's re-election." He repeated the charge in My Turn to Speak: Iran, the Revolution & Secret Deals with the U.S.
At least since Newt Gingrich, the GQP will do anything to damage the US if it will help them win an election, and the super-wealthy will do anything to help them if it will help them get richer.
Which is why Biden will be recorded as one of our most important and effective Presidents. But most presidents have pluses and minuses. Clinton, in particular.
His policies shipped jobs and industries away from America and yet he worked to balance the budget. He ignored Rwanda but helped in Kosovo. He spoke as a unifier but set the stage for disgusting presidential behavior. In a practical sense, he kneecapped Gore and indirectly gave us "W" and two awful and wrong headed wars. And then he spends his senior years trying to help around the world. Some things you just can't "make up for".
And I often have wondered how many more votes Hillary would have harvested in 2016 if she didn't have such an albatross around her neck? How many people couldn't vote for her because it meant having "slick Willy" back in the WH? So many questions.
Your insight about Hillary Clinton is on the money. Besides Bill, the other albatross around her neck was her team of old cronies, some of whom were involved with the Clintons as far back as the Whitewater issue. If she had cleaned house a bit and stocked her team with some untainted advisors, she might have pulled it off.
He's a hero in Northern Ireland for assigning George Mitchell to the peace process. As you say, he has his good and bad sides. It's his economic policies I object to.
Clinton certainly gets my kudos for that assignment.
I heard an interview with Mitchell about what it took to bring the Troubles to an end (mostly). His commitment and patience and respect for everyone are qualities that seem to be less admired of late. But I must say Biden has them on full display. Grateful I am.
What made me so angry with Clinton, was, yes, his NAFTA mistakes but also the fact that he may have been one of the smartest, charismatic Presidents ever - and he destroyed it all with a young woman who he used for a selfish personal pleasure. Unacceptable character flaw, to say the least. And I will always believe that he damaged the brand of his party and Gore's chances of taking the job.
With one incredibly stupid act he set in motion a future presidency that would ignore National Security warnings, launch 2 horrific and stupid wars - and ignore the threat of global warming. Nice legacy, eh?
I don’t think it’s that simple meaning Trump did not just scoop them with his lies and fascist propaganda. I think this was already in the making for a long time from neo Nazi and wealthy anti democratic factions with the aid of Russian oligarchs within the country. They were ignored and downplayed when the ISICS terrorists became the focus of attention. Domestic terrorism rose by leaps and bounds with the approval of Trumpism because it was the easiest solution for converting the ignorant masses to his hidden agenda in securing power for the greedy wealthy power hungry selected class. They used the playbook of fascism blaming the minorities, immigrants and racial diversion. They were covering the very selfish ailments they themselves were inflicting on the country that is ensuring that the masses stay illiterate and be fed their propaganda making it conducive to their well calculated agenda wealth and power for themselves to do as they please. Russians grabbed this opportunity to step in an aid these unpatriotic power seekers to weaken American military security and world influence. Hence the stage was set for the present turmoil within the country. Divisions, hatred, unjustified nationalism, greed, power, authoritarianism, conspiracy theories, attacking freedom of press are the keystones in toppling democracy and enabling the ugly head of fascism to thrive.
I remember SCUMp and his entourage walking into one of the very high zoot Manhattan restaurants right after the '16 election and saying to the clientele there "I'm gonna help all of you people, don't worry, your taxes will be slashed!" or something to that effect.
It is too bad that did not happen BEFORE the election (along with everything else made public about the orange turd back then) to help bring down the SHITler, much as that wealthy fundraiser dinner '47%' speech by Romney, covertly shot, and then released by Mother Jones, helped bring him defeat in '12.
But then again, none of the MAGAts would ever see it (because; Goebbels Nooz was all they watched), and even if they did, they would not have cared anyway since the orange fuehrer was 'their own personal Jaaayyyzzuss' at that point, and could do NO wrong in their vapid eyes.
I agree. Trump was merely the culmination of a concerted effort to implement the Lewis Powell Memo, but it didn't help that the Dems, beginning with Clinton, shifted to neo-liberalism and abandoned the white working and middle class.
Except that I would not disgrace the descriptor 'liberal' by using it to describe the effed-up spoilers in our party whether with the prefix "neo-" or not. ;)
Economically, the "liberal" in "neo-liberal" refers to reviving the economic policies of the British 19th century Liberal party--particularly pro-business policies such as being pro-free trade and anti-protectionism and internationalist in foreign policy (good for business)--not to "liberal" as we use the term today.
In other ways, the policies of the British 19th century Liberal party would be considered "liberal" today--e.g., expanding the franchise and the creation of social programs like old age pensions.
I'm not sure Clinton was "neo-liberal" in the 19th century British sense when it came to social programs; after all he's the one who introduced "work-fare." Welfare was initiated in the US so that single parents (originally only single mothers) could stay home to raise their children instead of going out to work, so "work-fare" certainly under-cut its purpose.
The 'dumbing down' of America by increasing right wing wealthy ownership of our media and weakening of the FCC and ending the Fairness Doctrine added to this decline in wages and well being of the American workers. Reagan interfered with the air traffic controllers' strike, and unions were declining after that.
And don't forget the underfunding of public schools in the places where we need them most. Charter schools leech money from poor and working class areas with the allure of "private" education, while their owners rake in what their hardworking teachers deserve.
Progwoman : Yes, and now there is a push to use public funds for religious (Christian) schools.Even in my progressive area there was an unsuccessful attempt to use public money to 'revitaize' closed, unused churches, because they are 'part of the community' identity', or cultural history. Even though the congregation is long gone.
Well, as people abandoned traditional religion, don't forget that the orders of nuns that had staffed many parochial schools began to close, and charter schools offered the Church and evangelical Protestants a new haven. My extended family includes some kids who attended those schools—political conservatism and anti-GLBTQ reign. Racism? Don't shame my poor kid!
I read this essay and realized, yet again, that life has to be lived going forward, but can only be understood looking backward because then the results can be seen. The economic policies pursued by the Reagan administration gutted the American middle class. I'll be 70 in a few months and I remember how tenuous things felt at the time. I'd ask my husband how was his day at work. He'd reply, "It was a good day. I still have a job." I remember the business decisions his industrial company made. They were an industrial supplier selling to other businesses parts needed by auto, aerospace, electrical industries to keep their machines humming. They had to form overseas joint ventures as mentioned in the essay. This company was in the Midwest. Reagan was a front man for hurtful policies but his campaign ads were "Morning in America," Talking about nonexistent "welfare queens" distracted ordinary folks from realizing they were being cheated blind. Policy is ALWAYS so much more nuanced than a 3-4 word campaign slogan. When I consider how I think government should work, a line from The Book of Common Prayer comes to mind, "... grant that we may never forget that our common life depends on each other's toil."
While attending Boston University in the late 80's, I got a sticker from Newberry Comics that said simply, "Ronnie says F#ck the Poor". No hashtag though. I still have it and still believe he had no idea what the f#ck he was doing.
And sadly, and tragically, they believe them, since they spew the 'common bond' culture war BS of; racism, anti-elitism, xenophobia, misogyny, etc., as a diverting and distracting tactic, to great effect. :( :(
When I was 21 I worked on line at Fisher body at its plant at Willow Run outside Detroit. This summer work paid for 1/3 of my medical school costs for my first year. Eventually GM filed for bankruptcy. Now my best vehicles are manufactured by companies headquartered in Japan and Korea where they pay taxes.
Stalin's Five-year Plans. Mao's Great Leap Forward. Reaganomics. It seems that ANY time a nation restructures its Industry and/or Economy, there WILL be winners and losers. "Out with the Old, in with the New" only works well when it is the Old that get EVERYTHING they need to become the New -- which NEVER happens. The Old get tossed out of their careers and are told to "Retrain!" in a mostly sink-or-swim manner. If you spent the last decade or more on an assembly line, you are NOT about to easily transition to writing Assembly language program code. It takes YEARS to learn high-tech trades. And at the rate that tech goes from latest-and-greatest to OBSOLETE is on the verge of, "Don't blink or you'll miss it."
The ONLY entity that benefits from these kinds of abrupt transitions is Big Business. And the closer you look at the process, the more the rank and file workers start to look like cogs in the machinery: totally replaceable parts.
Capt., the leaders also benefit. The Reagonomics guys are still doing well. They stacked our courts, pushed reality TV which is anything but real, warped our media far beyond the ways it has been warped before, and a whole lot of them used their government positions to get into hedgefunding and other nefarious occupations that pay bundles and require very little from them except perhaps cruelty and ruthlessness, and they learned those quite well during the transition.
Daniel, you are so right. I keep getting the feeling, every time the Fed meets that Powell, a Republican wants our economy to go into recession. It would be a win-win for him, workers would be forced to accept lower wages, and Republicans would most likely win the 2024 election because all the Republican candidates would have to do is their best thing, blame the recession on Democrats. I want to be wrong, but when the Fed raised interest rates for no reason in July, I was pretty sure. What I don't understand is why the rest of the Board is going along with it. Are they all Republicans too? Gag, I hope not!
Well, yeah. "Our" leaders and Big Biz are in a partnership. They play hard at trying to look like frenemies, but that's all roleplaying in the political Kabuki Theater that Washington has become. It's hard to get around the reality that most of "Our" elected representatives had their campaigns funded mostly by their biggest "campaign contributors" who were/are Big Biz/the Wealthy.
Biden has been stymied on that item once already. The GOP's ace in the hole is SCOTUS -- _anything_ Biden does on his own authority will most likely be declared "unconstitutional" by SCOTUS, it will be undone, and Biden will look like an ineffectual leader... again.
Gone "rouge"? They've reddened their cheeks? ;^D Just kidding. Going rogue implies that they're off doing their own thing without regard to anyone else. But these Conservative justices seem to be participating in a larger Right wing gameplan. Sort of like, "You want it? You got it! Just tell us what you want."
Biden, if not a Brainiac himself, certainly has a lot of very smart people advising him. The fact that he used the approach he did when it was obvious that it was vulnerable to a SCOTUS challenge indicates that somebody in that pipeline _wanted_ it to be vulnerable.... and therefore would be shut down. That's the problem with "corporate Democrats": they say and do things that seem supportive of We The People, but they know it won't change a thing because in Reality they're in cahoots with Big Biz.
You have my condolences. (Along with everyone living in TX.) From what I hear from people "passing through", both FL and TX are nice enough places. But given the Governors and governments that The People voted into office, one might conclude that there are A LOT of closet KKK and Bible-thumpers. ["You're either with us, or you're going to Hell. No two ways about it. Don't let the door hit you on the way out."]
Probably applies today too: note the not-so-good policy idea of supporting the (already wealthy) semiconductor industry - with "AI" making up all the difference for skills/training/etc. in a workforce which is as hidebound by its mortgages as it is by xenophobia...
Interesting stroll down memory lane. I am curious just how many people got the intended message. I am guessing not many. Reagan was a strange bird, part of him wanted desperately to live and keep our nation living in the past and another side of him wanted us to have the latest and greatest that we could use to smite anyone who got in our way. He would not have appreciated being referred to as the first to have a "new industrial policy" because he was sure once trickle down got going, the old one would work just fine. Reagan wanted a "Star Wars" program but not really. He wanted us to have a strong industrial base, but decided it was better if he sent everything offshore. I don't know if the Dems would have done much better because they were in charge of Congress and still couldn't stop the trickle-down BS from doing a job on our economy and the passing away of so much of our industry, thus our middle class. Every time a Republican administration is over, I take a few moments to wonder what might have happened if someone with a positive vision for our future had held the White House. We are seeing some of that right now with Biden's plans. Republicans are fighting every step of the way because I think they want to live in their dream past where whites ruled, had all the best houses, schools, churches, jobs, and everything else, hardly having to compete because white was just right everywhere. Reagan made a lot of mistakes while president. That goes with to play a president instead of knowing how to be one. We saw that again with W. Bush to some extent and more fully with Trump. I am glad some of our industry is returning, perhaps we will take the opportunity to become more innovative again and depend on our workers here, not that the workers over there aren't good, they are, but they need their own businesses that work with them, not exploit them as we have done so oftten.
You nailed it. At the core of this stage play is "to play a president instead of knowing how to be one". Perfect. Which is why Biden and "Bidenomics" are so refreshing. He actually understands the job and excels at it.
Reagan, "W" and Trump wallowed in being president but they were really just figureheads. Puppets of the Oligarchs. None of those guys had the depth of knowledge or intelligence to do the job without someone whispering in their ears the talking points for TV.
They had egos and were fueled by ambition. But they were simply unqualified for the job. Not even close to being up to the work. We let hacks have the most important job on the planet. It speaks volumes about the collective intelligence of America - actually the human species.
LOUSY reality show leads, and "Bedtime For Bonzo" 'actors', and failed 'legacy' leaders.
Maybe the 'Muricun public is NOT actually smart enough to choose great leaders (with very few exceptions)??
I still despise and loathe the idea of an electoral 'college' (I REFUSE to even give it the credence to capitalize it!) though, or any other system where a small group gets to choose under the false guise of being a democracy.
The Repubs have been consistent in one particular area, they keep choosing individuals who they believe are ambitious but stupid enough to control to do their bidding. They like to be the puppet masters; however, they probably bit off a bit more than they could chew with Trump.
Stuck in there between the lines is the fallout from Reagan's firing of the Air Traffic Controllers, who represented by their own Professional Air Traffic Controllers Association. That union busting message set the stage for middle class losses ever since.
I can remember as a child when we wanted to express a feeling of total confusion and disconnection we said things were "Discombobulated." The length of the word made us small people seem so much more important. The sound the word made as it left our lips had such a nice ring to it that we discombobulated almost everything. Times change and the words we use to express ourselves are altered as well. The relevance we held for life changes as we grow older. As children, we thought of ourselves as being basically indestructible in a world we couldn't possibly understand. Now fully grown, and then some, we have come to understand just how vulnerable we really are. Our society quivers with time. It struggles when times are tough and when things are good all is "hunky-dory," another adjective we used to throw around. What we're experiencing as a country, both politically and socially, is leaving our people feeling completely discombobulated. A word used by children all those years ago has found relevance in our world today as adults. I'm so proud of myself for composing an entire paragraph without mentioning his name, so why start now? Why can't we turn back time? Before he came on the scene there were differences but we managed to work through our problems in an effort to find solutions that worked for the general good of all the people. How can one overweight man of questionable integrity hog-tie an entire country? I think it's time to reflect and inhale a good dose of smelling salts. We're in for a fight, because if we don't "we won't have a country anymore." What goes around comes around Donnie.
I hear you but....the problems had been building for a very long time. Before TFG became President. He heightened these problems, our polarization. But the sickness if you will was and still is there in our society. He had/has an entire political Party under his sway so it was not one man who hog-tied an entire country. To your point about managing our differences, I think about the SCOTUS decision on abortion. The situation was hardly perfect but there was a compromise of sorts that most people could abide by. But that wasn't good ennough for some.
steve--I apologize for the content, I wrote that in a semi-sleepless state at 3am. My intent was good I just failed to express it in an intelligent manner.
In my youth, in the '60s, we actually felt fairly 'secure' despite all of the racism, the covert/'veiled' ANTI-SEMITISM I experienced, all of the other negative/destructive 'isms', phobias, and 'genys', the mounting climate disaster, and yes, even the threat of total thermonuclear vaporization (replete with the completely useless out into the halls of the schools with our coats over our heads, drills).
But, I never could have imagined, even in my very worst nightmare, the obliteration of our democracy, and the (violent or otherwise) takeover of a NAZI regime, as the putrid orange one threatens (and even PROMISES!) nowadays.
I AM grateful for (and cognizant of, and appreciative of) all of the progressive progression made in securing rights for ALL of our citizens, yes despite all of the setbacks, roadblocks, and the immense 'work still left to do' in this area, but something just does not feel correct right now, as an almost 70 year old adult.
There is way too much of that insecure uncertainty now, like when the rancid SHITler always said "We'll see" during it's regime's reign, in it's sadistic control.
Life seems to have lost it's 'magic', as it were, which I used to feel with at least some sense of optimism, and 'joie de vivre'. :( :(
At this point, sadly, it may be solely to fight the NAZI fascists with my last ounce of strength in order to try and make sure that they cannot perpetrate their sadistic, cruel and torturous genocide on all of the 'others' in this land. ;)
This explains so much pain and suffering and disenfranchisement . The cruelty was the point. Is that what was billed as creative destruction? They pulled it down so the economy could be gerry rigged for the dementedly selfish few. Most people, including me, didn’t know how things were shifting for the worse so fast. It seemed to me that unless you already had a leg up you were stuck where you started or destined for failure. The class division from Reaganomics happened within families sorting people depending on when they came of age in the new way of picking winners, not by merit so much as starting position. The income tax for young adults just starting out used to be graduated to ramp up over a few years to allow for expenses of starting a new household and some savings. My older siblings benefited from that before Reagan did away with it. I found it very difficult to scrape together a few dollars for an emergency fund. It put me at a disadvantage economically. Why? Why step on people who are just starting out? The cruelty is the point.
I don’t know if men in general were more angry about women’s rights because of the economic impact of Reaganomics, but it seemed that way to me. It has always been tough for women to get a fair deal in this bumptious male dominated society. You have to manage behaviors and stand up for yourself just to stay in the game. Nevertheless, women’s lib has been good for everyone, men, women, and children. Economic hardships have been tough on most people, families and individuals alike.
Good point. I wonder, do you agree that we (women) are predisposed to softening the criticism with subtle apology... and thereby voiding its truth? This could be why in contemporary society we feel unheard and are so easily silenced.
It’s such a loaded subject. I try to avoid engaging in mind reading, kid gloves, and tolerance of bad behavior. However, you do have to choose your battles. I’ve been punched in a not so good natured way, shoved aside, dumped out of my chair so some clod could “helpfully” show me something I already knew about using a pc — I never laughed it off or let it go. I was, of course, labeled the difficult one, the bully who made naughty boys behave. I managed to survive long enough to retire. I’m so glad to be retired. Now the fascists want to end SSA. It never ends. You should never let them get away with anything.
So true... its every woman's story. Well done you! 'The Difficult One' would be a great title for your memoir [WINK EMOJI], which I would love to read.
Ah, memories. Those of us who survived eight years of Reagan as Governor of California knew that he had many, many supporters in California's massive defense sector. When he became president he rewarded them well. After all, they had made him first governor and then president. They (and the oil people and anti-New Deal Birchers) ran the government in the back room while he did his avuncular PR schtick out front, just like they had done for eight years in California. This may be a memory, but it was Reagan and his backers who put us on the road to Donald Trump, so it is incredibly relevant.
And certainly he led the way to less public education in our elementary and high schools and more expensive education in our public universities. I remember talking to a teacher in California when he was governor. She left home at 5 a.m. to drive to school, because that's where she had finally found a job.
I think that Reagan’s concern was less — far less - with the nature of the “old” industries versus that of the new than with shaking off what he and his confederates saw — and current descendants still see — as the “tyranny” of a heavily unionized (and Democratic-voting) labor force in favor of new businesses that would resist efforts of workers to unionize. To that extent he was very, and sadly, successful, even as Republicans continued to perpetuate the myth of the nobility of heavy, inefficient industry and how it made America the arsenal of democracy.
Reagan never had an independent thought. Ironically, he was president of a union - surreptitiously gave evidence against his colleagues - his political opponents - as "Reds."
As governor, he killed programs like free tuition that had made California an economic powerhouse. He could care less for the "lesser" among us, the halt, the lame and the blind.
Spot On. I was a well paid mule for a mid-sized auto-part manufacturer. When benefits tanked we suggested that wage concessions weren't unreasonable. By 2000, the only negotiations left for low-tech workers' were how much less would you accept the next pay check to be. By 2020 Our sole-earner worked for a provider for a large government division. Come Covid, she retired, and within 10 years we wont be able to afford the only wealth we have (our home). If this is the American Dream why do i wake with cold sweats?
The 'human resources' are just cogs in the wheel, or changeable parts. there is little to no concern for them. Hence, we see the anger of the MAGA 'party' . It hurts to be expendable. to be blamed for being victims of thoughtless capitalists ; The "I got mine" crowd.
Yes, but they continue to be fiercely loyal to the exact people who hurt them. It’s like a domestic abuse victim who cannot/will not leave their abuser.
Ah, but where would we be without the advantage of high capacity killing machines readily available to one and all? An industry that was already strong absolutely blossomed under Reagan, and the proof is made visible every day in the perpetually rising body count right here at home. Better every year!
So interesting thank you for all you do and the historic perspective on how we got here. The interesting twist is that many of our nations home grown engineer struggle to find jobs which drives that intellectual talent in other directions.
It would be great if a compilation of your warnings of the foolish economic and industrial planning of the 1980s were published.
Predatory (Reaganite social Darwinism focused upon destroying any trace of responsibility to public trust and accountability in government) and parasitic (Thatcherite -- convert state necessities of health, education, transportation, and other agencies into pro-profit enterprises using vampirism as a means) capitalism fails (both failing on a constant).
Professor
Thank you for this, and more importantly for you life of work on behalf of part of my chosen family.
As is often the case, I wake up in the middle of the night and turn on my computer and find your comments.
The industrial policy followed by Regan was wrong then, and the industrial policy being followed today in the USA is wrong now. I am reading Matthew Desmond’s recent book "Poverty, by America"
He believes that entrenched poverty in the United States is the product not only of larger shifts, such as deindustrialization and family dissolution, but of choices and actions by more fortunate Americans. Poverty persists partly because many of us, with varying degrees of self-awareness, benefit from its penetration. “It’s a useful exercise, evaluating the merits of different explanations for poverty, like those having to do with immigration or the family,” Desmond writes. “But I’ve found that doing so always leads me back to the taproot, the central feature from which all other rootlets spring, which in our case is the simple truth that poverty is an injury, a taking. Tens of millions of Americans do not end up poor by a mistake of history or personal conduct. Poverty persists because some wish and will it to.”
H e reminds us that "Poverty isn’t simply the condition of not having enough money It’s the condition of not having enough choice and being taken advantage of because of that.” He suggests "Becoming a poverty abolitionist, entails conducting an audit of our lives, personalizing poverty by examining all the ways we are connected to the problem — and to the solution.”
I am conducting an audit of my life. I hope some of you will join me.
M Fred, I have the book you mentioned and plan to read it soon, it's in the queue. I also think so little has been done to end poverty or to keep the ending poverty process going as happened during the pandemic is that a whole lot of people, particularly rich and conservative people want to have a group they can look at and mumble their whiny ignorant "there but for the grace of god go I." That means there's always someone worse off than you are and then you can plug in all the excuses you want for your not helping or even caring: they deserve it; they didn't work hard; they didn't take care of what they had; and on and on forever. Reagan did little to nothing to help people in poverty. He preferred to whine about welfare queens that didn't exist and women having too many kids (limited access to birth control and abortion). If one has a few three or 4-word slogans it can replace the need to think. Fox figured that out a while ago and their followers have immersed themselves in it. Having someone to look down on works well for a whole lot of people, particularly conservative religious people because they can console themselves that their god loves them better because they are not poor like those people.
Well said. People are encouraged to work for slave wages when they pass the homeless on the streets. The poor serve a function under capitalism.
The truth is that 15-20% of the general population cannot manage without "a leg up." Many of those people receive government benefits but vote against their economic and physical health.
The influence of the religious right and the rise of wedge issues to appeal to people's fears and emotions has caused people to park their brains in the trash and vote on emotional fears and grievances....and the rise of massive misinformation has totally harmed the country's future.
Indeed, poverty, or the threat of poverty, serves as economic coercion of the working class to work harder and harder for less and less. All by design. It's a *feature* of (rentier) capitalism and neoliberalism, not a bug.
Poverty could be literally abolished mathematically overnight with a no-strings-attached UBI set high enough. But the oligarchs who write the rules would never go for that, for obvious reasons.
Interesting. The French economy includes capitalism, yet French workers demand a 32 hour work week, 6 weeks vacation, and retirement at age 62. N'est pas?
Evidently, the French see themselves as a real country rather than just a haphazard collection of individuals pursuing their own interest.
But they've been a country for more than a thousand years longer - so the comparison doesn't fit. I'm confused about something - and I wonder if the framers of the U.S. Constitution imagined 350 million people in fifty states, would they have allowed all 50 as much independence as they have?
Stan of Stanistan, are you implying the Americans do not see themselves as part of a "real country"? Please elucidate.
White Trash: The 400-Year Untold History of Class in America, April 4, 2017, by Nancy Isenberg (Author) is an interesting book on this topic.
Gerald, you are right. I found the book incredibly disturbing but on target. I still think about the people she discusses in the book and the moral challenges they face. I can't even imagine Republicans being able to read through that one because they don't see any of this as a dilemma at all; they're so wrapped up in their own cocoons and just can't muster the courage to burst out into the real world.
Hi Ruth. I suspect "Republicans" are an inhomogenous group. According to Steve Schmidt, only a minority of republicans chose their presendential candidate. A better way for all of us might be to hold an open primary for the presidency so that voters of all parties, including unaligned, would chose between the top two. What is your opinion?
Gerald, It is an interesting idea and has been suggested before, but somehow states want to do their own thing, being states, you know. It has never flown. I don't know what would have to happen to get all states to make a single national primary. It would save a lot of time and money, but I can't see Alabama wanting to have their primary the same day as New York or Minnesota. Then, there are Iowa and New Hampshire who think they are better than everyone else. Both states get tons of money being "first" as candidates attend state fairs and other baby-kissing, hand-shaking events. Candidates would have a tough time getting around to all the states before a particular super date, and focusing on the "swing" states would be nearly total. Spreading primaries out can let people see more candidates and what they are really saying when under pressure. Hard to know!
Ruth, you make good points.
CLARIFICATION : "so that voters of all parties, including unaligned, would select the top two for the final run-off."
That is a fantastic book; I read it a few years ago, and it speaks to so many issues that are front and center today in the USA. Recommended.
I know of this book, but have't gotten to it. I am now finishing Burton Hersh's excellent history, The Mellon Family. Full disclosure, Burton is a friend of many years. His book shows how tax policy is used to aid industries. Also read his book, The Old Boys, considered one of the best histories of the CIA. Not beach books, but worth the investment.
IMO I think the 'governmental solutions' are - attacking the problem of poverty and the
homeless - from the bottom up. When these problems - should be - addressed (attacked)
from the - top down - where the beginnings of all these problems for the 'lower classes' - start. I've experience 1st hand the - sources - the rich, empowered, entitled - who do anything & everything (using j.r.e. = justification, rationalization and excuse) at hand to
maintain their own - privelege... Sadness and despondency ensues ~ ~ ~
Exactly, Dale
Hear! Hear!. You nailed it Ruth. The need for someone to look down to, has imperiled our Nation.
As much as I'm a fan of Kennedy, I'd say his space program was wrong in the 60s before Regan's in the 80s. I'd argue that we need to stop looking and spending money into space and focus that money here on earth to solve problems like poverty. This is why I think Elon's SpaceX is a huge waste of money and will ultimately fail:
https://unorthodoxy.substack.com/p/the-great-spacex-deception
Communication satellites have made it easier to find my way around using GPS. Star-link helps the Ukranians defend themselves. The value of deep space exploration may be little, but the value of near space exploration and development is enormous.
We've already benefitted from new technology to forgo death by asteroid. https://www.nasa.gov/press-release/nasa-confirms-dart-mission-impact-changed-asteroid-s-motion-in-space
Impacts by objects around 460 feet in diameter occur every 10,000 to 20,000 years, and a "dinosaur-killing" impact from a rock perhaps a half-mile across or larger happens on 100-million-year timescales.
The sun has a life expectancy of 5,000,000,000—five billion—years.
You've got that right, Gerald. Elon Musk may be a bit paranoid and peculiar, but SpaceX and its commitment to near-space, done sustainably, has already put him in the history books.
I, too, read Poverty by America, and it spoke deeply to me about the area of North Georgia where I grew up, and where there were textile mills before the Civil War. It's always had an Appalachian vibe, but today its voice is Marjorie Taylor Green. I suspect she would not have gained a toe hole there (she's from the Atlanta area) had we not moved most of those textile and rug mills abroad. It's true the first mills were owned by absentee Yankees (Sherman marched through without setting any fires), and they made sure local schools were poorly funded to maintain a steady workforce and keep taxes down. Efforts to unionize failed. In the Reagan Era, there were meth labs in the countryside where my brother and I and our friends once safely roamed. Try as I might, I don't understand how people there make a living, but resentment and guns are widespread.
I join M. Fred in recommending Desmond's book. It's a quick read, but you'll think about it for a long time.
Wow! I didn't know there were meth labs way back in the 80's!
Guessing this was the late 80s given the age of my nephew.
I’m currently reading Alan Taylor: “American Revolutions,A Continental History,1750-1804. It’s quite concise in explaining that the wealthy believed that they alone should rule for their profit&that Democracy was an odious ideal: regular citizens were beasts&rabble not fit to vote. Seems these ideas haven’t changed. Unless Congress is divested from holding stocks or jobs lobbying;and businesses aren’t allow tax subsidies(big oils profits top $9Billion per quarter)there will be deals that profit the rich at the expense of the nation&average citizens.
If you had taken Professor Reich's Wealth and Poverty course, offered twice this year for free via FB, you would know that he said, "Poverty is a political choice." There is no reason except that the voters of America, through their choices at the ballot box, choose NOT to eliminate it. Indeed, the conservative view of the poor is that it is their own fault for making poor choices, not that the deck is stacked against them, and the government just doesn't want to help them with food stamps, childcare, parental leave, subsidized housing for high-rent areas, relief from high interest rate school loans, and bailouts when the economy tanks (but money is found to bail out industries!) or disaster strikes, etc.
I agree Linda. I’ve taken Professor Reich’s Wealth & Poverty class twice. I firmly believe we have poverty because that’s what the political right wants. They seem to have a need to maintain a class of poor
people they can look down on. It also gives them the opportunity to blame dems for catering to the poor because they’re just a bunch of lazy freeloaders.
The truth is, nobody wants to be poor. But the “freeloader” nonsense is deeply entrenched in republican politics. If republicans would get out of the way long enough for dems to pass legislation
like medicare for all, and then pass a law forcing
the pharma industry to negotiate the cost of all
medications, those two things alone would go a long way to help lift many poor people out of poverty...
because for one thing, proper healthcare and access to affordable medication would likely improve their
ability to work.
My life experience does not reflect Desmond's conclusion. My experience suggests resilience, ambition, and perserverance are key factors of an individual to rise from poverty. Labor Unions and various laws protect workers from exploitation by the owners of the means of production.
Various laws exploit workers (federal minimum wage restaurant workers make less than minimum but tips don't compensate)and not enough unions to protect wages. Also laws that exploit like RLA. 5 years plus for my union TWU556 still negotiating. Delay benefits the company. They sit on our back pay and earn interest. We threaten strike and Congress and the president force us back to work under the RLA.
Huh happened twice. I am working on a response to your comment and it keeps disappearing. I am tech challenge.
Gerald
Thank you for joining the conversation. Unfortunatly I do not know what life experience you had that convinces you that Desmond's conclusion is wrong. Perhaps you can share more it it.
I also don't know what conclusion you think is wrong.
I am going to stop now before this goes away again.
Thank you again for joining the conversation.
Fred
Hi M Fred Friedman, in my experience, personal virtues can overcome poverty- education, diligence, ambition, and social skills. Capitalism provides us with an opportunity. Regulated capitalism creates wealth.
Gerald
That was fast. so are you saying that the capitalism in the USA provides everybody with opportunity? What about people who are injured and suffer traumatic brain injury and thus cannot learn social skills? Are you saying the fact that I am poor, is simply my fault? I am tempted to try to write a clearer response but am afraid that it will disappear. Thanks again for joining the conversation.
Fred, I’ve had things I’ve written on this app disappear too. As far as I know there’s no way to retrieve them. So, what I do if my response turns into something lengthy, is finish writing it in a different app like “notes.” Then I paste it into the appropriate
place on substack.
Susan
Good idea. I know I should do that In part to be sure that I really want to say what I am about to say.
Thanks again
Fred
M Fred Friedman. Our culture supports disabled folks such as with SS Disability. Some folks start with little money and succeed. You know this M.
Labor unions are important for protecting workers. They are what members make of them. Personal responsibility keeps them honest.
I agree. I was part of the Teamsters when I drove a Home Juice truck to deliver fresh juice in Detroit during the summer of 1967. The wages I earned paid about 1/3 of my in-state tuition and modest living costs for a year. At my car factory job, the next summer, I was a member of the UAW. Karl Marx did not envision the benefit of labor unions (an anti-monopoly laws) to protect against capitalism. Had he done so, he may have developed a strategy that would have allowed for the private ownership of the means of production AND enfranchisement of the working class.
Wonderful Comment
FACT: Retirement without a $half-million or greater nest-egg forces one to do that as a matter of course.
Pretty much spot on in your predictions even if you were being tongue in cheek. Guess the explosion in tech jobs did insure American prosperity for those workers but not the traditional hard hat blue collar middle class . And that undercut the importance of unions in the economy.
The irony is that the Republicans destroyed the traditional hard hat blue collar middle class and now claims to be the only party that cares about them.
Reagan pulled the solar panels from the White House. Ended gasification of US coal...thus promoting air pollution. Set alternative energy industry back 20 years.
Cut Social Security disability beneficiaries from the rolls without giving them a hearing.
Capital gains policy permitted a sell off of companies, got write offs for shipping American jobs overseas.
Killed PATCO, demonstrating that he was a union buster.
Began his campaign in Philadelphia Mississippi, an overture to white supremacy groups. And as a card carrying Semite I remember Bitburg, James Watt and removal of Jews from DOL.
I'd forgot some of that, and some of that I didn't know. Thank you. A few more reasons to despise the senile idiot.
What makes him even worse in my view is that his undeserved popularity led the Democrats to try to beat the Republicans by adopting neo-liberalism, which further destroyed the country.
Maureen : It is echoed by the 'success' of the Reality TV star who continues to stalk the Presidency ! He is also enabled and supported by the same obscenely wealthy 'people'!
Don’t forget social security income was untaxed before Reagan.
Thanks. I guess I forgot because I wasn't old then.
I wasn’t either. But I can read
Here's the point: Few of us are aware of all that government and private capitalism can do to shape our lives, and sometimes our attention can be self-focused.
What!
That is exactly why I can’t stand to hear his name!
Or his voice. Or look at him.
I was a neophyte 19 year old when he took office, but he'd been our governor when I was a small child, and my secretly political (his religion forbade him from participating in voting or activism) father absolutely despised the man. "Blank mind behind a blank face" is how my dad described Reagan. He's the Sulla in our Republic. Not the one who brought it down-just the one who tossed the first stones in the avalanche.
His Governorship of California was disastrous for our State
How utterly repulsive is a religion that forbids its members from engaging in two fundamental rights of self-governance. Examples of religious control such as this further reinforce the primary role of organized religion being to enable a small group of people to control and manipulate a large group. I feel sorry for your father; he was a victim of organized religion gone bad.
"a victim of organized religion gone bad." When has it gone GOOD? LOL. There were two valuable lessons I took from growing up as a Jehovah's Witness: 1) I have no fear of public speaking. Good lesson for an introvert and 2) I am utterly inoculated against religious thought. I require evidence. The rest was a waste of the first 18 years of my life, and of decades of my parents and brothers.
Yes, like I said, a 'start-up FASCIST'.
As another 'member of the tribe', I flat out REFUSED to vote for this putz back then, regardless of how 'weak' our Dem candidates may have appeared. ;)
I even drove around with The Byrds version of "Drug Store Truck Driving Man" blasting in my car around election day of both of his installments into power.
(And YES, I know that it was not written about/for ol' pompous pruneface. ;) )
Daniel, He also stopped conversion to the metric system 'because it was too hard to understand' As a scientist, I resented this as well as all his faults.
You hit the mail on the head! I can’t understand why the MAGA blue collar workers can’t understand and see that the Fascist Republicans are all lies and hot air and care nothing about the American workers and their future well being!
I think it's because, starting with Clinton, the Democrats largely ignored them and pandered to the big donors. Trump simply came along, told them lies, and scooped them up. Biden is trying to return the Democrats to the party they were from FDR through LBJ (but without the wars), but he's facing opposition from the neo-liberals in his own party as well as from the GQP wing-nuts.
IMHO it's the culture war. We became "the other" based on propaganda, folklore and perhaps a collective racist subconscious.
I forgot to say that but for the "October surprise" Reagan would not have been elected. Thank Iran. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/October_surprise
Corrupt. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93Contra_affair#:~:text=In%20the%20end%2C%20several%20dozen,the%20presidency%20of%20George%20H.%20W.
It's the culmination of a lot of factors going back to the Lewis Powell Memo. Neo-liberalsim is one of them.
As for the October Surprise, Reagan was imitating Nixon, who persuaded Ho Chi Minh to put off negotiating an end to the Vietnam War so he could win the election.
Abolhassan Banisadr, the former President of Iran, has also stated "that the Reagan campaign struck a deal with Tehran to delay the release of the hostages in 1980", asserting that "by the month before the American Presidential election in November 1980, many in Iran's ruling circles were openly discussing the fact that a deal had been made between the Reagan campaign team and some Iranian religious leaders in which the hostages' release would be delayed until after the election so as to prevent President Carter's re-election." He repeated the charge in My Turn to Speak: Iran, the Revolution & Secret Deals with the U.S.
At least since Newt Gingrich, the GQP will do anything to damage the US if it will help them win an election, and the super-wealthy will do anything to help them if it will help them get richer.
Which is why Biden will be recorded as one of our most important and effective Presidents. But most presidents have pluses and minuses. Clinton, in particular.
His policies shipped jobs and industries away from America and yet he worked to balance the budget. He ignored Rwanda but helped in Kosovo. He spoke as a unifier but set the stage for disgusting presidential behavior. In a practical sense, he kneecapped Gore and indirectly gave us "W" and two awful and wrong headed wars. And then he spends his senior years trying to help around the world. Some things you just can't "make up for".
And I often have wondered how many more votes Hillary would have harvested in 2016 if she didn't have such an albatross around her neck? How many people couldn't vote for her because it meant having "slick Willy" back in the WH? So many questions.
He chose who he listened to. He should have listened more to Reich and Stiglitz.
Your insight about Hillary Clinton is on the money. Besides Bill, the other albatross around her neck was her team of old cronies, some of whom were involved with the Clintons as far back as the Whitewater issue. If she had cleaned house a bit and stocked her team with some untainted advisors, she might have pulled it off.
Yes, the cronies that had her ignore critical states that they took for granted. And oh, what a better world we would be living in today if...
I suspect if Hillary had been in her second term, Putin would never have dared invade Ukraine. He hated her because she scared him with her toughness.
He's a hero in Northern Ireland for assigning George Mitchell to the peace process. As you say, he has his good and bad sides. It's his economic policies I object to.
Clinton certainly gets my kudos for that assignment.
I heard an interview with Mitchell about what it took to bring the Troubles to an end (mostly). His commitment and patience and respect for everyone are qualities that seem to be less admired of late. But I must say Biden has them on full display. Grateful I am.
What made me so angry with Clinton, was, yes, his NAFTA mistakes but also the fact that he may have been one of the smartest, charismatic Presidents ever - and he destroyed it all with a young woman who he used for a selfish personal pleasure. Unacceptable character flaw, to say the least. And I will always believe that he damaged the brand of his party and Gore's chances of taking the job.
With one incredibly stupid act he set in motion a future presidency that would ignore National Security warnings, launch 2 horrific and stupid wars - and ignore the threat of global warming. Nice legacy, eh?
I don’t think it’s that simple meaning Trump did not just scoop them with his lies and fascist propaganda. I think this was already in the making for a long time from neo Nazi and wealthy anti democratic factions with the aid of Russian oligarchs within the country. They were ignored and downplayed when the ISICS terrorists became the focus of attention. Domestic terrorism rose by leaps and bounds with the approval of Trumpism because it was the easiest solution for converting the ignorant masses to his hidden agenda in securing power for the greedy wealthy power hungry selected class. They used the playbook of fascism blaming the minorities, immigrants and racial diversion. They were covering the very selfish ailments they themselves were inflicting on the country that is ensuring that the masses stay illiterate and be fed their propaganda making it conducive to their well calculated agenda wealth and power for themselves to do as they please. Russians grabbed this opportunity to step in an aid these unpatriotic power seekers to weaken American military security and world influence. Hence the stage was set for the present turmoil within the country. Divisions, hatred, unjustified nationalism, greed, power, authoritarianism, conspiracy theories, attacking freedom of press are the keystones in toppling democracy and enabling the ugly head of fascism to thrive.
I remember SCUMp and his entourage walking into one of the very high zoot Manhattan restaurants right after the '16 election and saying to the clientele there "I'm gonna help all of you people, don't worry, your taxes will be slashed!" or something to that effect.
It is too bad that did not happen BEFORE the election (along with everything else made public about the orange turd back then) to help bring down the SHITler, much as that wealthy fundraiser dinner '47%' speech by Romney, covertly shot, and then released by Mother Jones, helped bring him defeat in '12.
But then again, none of the MAGAts would ever see it (because; Goebbels Nooz was all they watched), and even if they did, they would not have cared anyway since the orange fuehrer was 'their own personal Jaaayyyzzuss' at that point, and could do NO wrong in their vapid eyes.
Good analysis IMO.
Of course, it's not that simple, but the Democrats' shifting to neo-liberalism and abandoning the white working and middle class didn't help.
I agree. Trump was merely the culmination of a concerted effort to implement the Lewis Powell Memo, but it didn't help that the Dems, beginning with Clinton, shifted to neo-liberalism and abandoned the white working and middle class.
All the way with FDR and LBJ!
Except that I would not disgrace the descriptor 'liberal' by using it to describe the effed-up spoilers in our party whether with the prefix "neo-" or not. ;)
The term "neo-liberal" has never made any sense to me. It is deep-dyed conservatism at its worst.
Economically, the "liberal" in "neo-liberal" refers to reviving the economic policies of the British 19th century Liberal party--particularly pro-business policies such as being pro-free trade and anti-protectionism and internationalist in foreign policy (good for business)--not to "liberal" as we use the term today.
In other ways, the policies of the British 19th century Liberal party would be considered "liberal" today--e.g., expanding the franchise and the creation of social programs like old age pensions.
I'm not sure Clinton was "neo-liberal" in the 19th century British sense when it came to social programs; after all he's the one who introduced "work-fare." Welfare was initiated in the US so that single parents (originally only single mothers) could stay home to raise their children instead of going out to work, so "work-fare" certainly under-cut its purpose.
Thank you for that explanation! :)
The 'dumbing down' of America by increasing right wing wealthy ownership of our media and weakening of the FCC and ending the Fairness Doctrine added to this decline in wages and well being of the American workers. Reagan interfered with the air traffic controllers' strike, and unions were declining after that.
And don't forget the underfunding of public schools in the places where we need them most. Charter schools leech money from poor and working class areas with the allure of "private" education, while their owners rake in what their hardworking teachers deserve.
Progwoman : Yes, and now there is a push to use public funds for religious (Christian) schools.Even in my progressive area there was an unsuccessful attempt to use public money to 'revitaize' closed, unused churches, because they are 'part of the community' identity', or cultural history. Even though the congregation is long gone.
Well, as people abandoned traditional religion, don't forget that the orders of nuns that had staffed many parochial schools began to close, and charter schools offered the Church and evangelical Protestants a new haven. My extended family includes some kids who attended those schools—political conservatism and anti-GLBTQ reign. Racism? Don't shame my poor kid!
"The unions have all been busted, their proud red banners torn"
-Steve Earle
I read this essay and realized, yet again, that life has to be lived going forward, but can only be understood looking backward because then the results can be seen. The economic policies pursued by the Reagan administration gutted the American middle class. I'll be 70 in a few months and I remember how tenuous things felt at the time. I'd ask my husband how was his day at work. He'd reply, "It was a good day. I still have a job." I remember the business decisions his industrial company made. They were an industrial supplier selling to other businesses parts needed by auto, aerospace, electrical industries to keep their machines humming. They had to form overseas joint ventures as mentioned in the essay. This company was in the Midwest. Reagan was a front man for hurtful policies but his campaign ads were "Morning in America," Talking about nonexistent "welfare queens" distracted ordinary folks from realizing they were being cheated blind. Policy is ALWAYS so much more nuanced than a 3-4 word campaign slogan. When I consider how I think government should work, a line from The Book of Common Prayer comes to mind, "... grant that we may never forget that our common life depends on each other's toil."
Amen.
While attending Boston University in the late 80's, I got a sticker from Newberry Comics that said simply, "Ronnie says F#ck the Poor". No hashtag though. I still have it and still believe he had no idea what the f#ck he was doing.
Agreed
And sadly, and tragically, they believe them, since they spew the 'common bond' culture war BS of; racism, anti-elitism, xenophobia, misogyny, etc., as a diverting and distracting tactic, to great effect. :( :(
Hardly anyone left to contradict their lies?
When I was 21 I worked on line at Fisher body at its plant at Willow Run outside Detroit. This summer work paid for 1/3 of my medical school costs for my first year. Eventually GM filed for bankruptcy. Now my best vehicles are manufactured by companies headquartered in Japan and Korea where they pay taxes.
Stalin's Five-year Plans. Mao's Great Leap Forward. Reaganomics. It seems that ANY time a nation restructures its Industry and/or Economy, there WILL be winners and losers. "Out with the Old, in with the New" only works well when it is the Old that get EVERYTHING they need to become the New -- which NEVER happens. The Old get tossed out of their careers and are told to "Retrain!" in a mostly sink-or-swim manner. If you spent the last decade or more on an assembly line, you are NOT about to easily transition to writing Assembly language program code. It takes YEARS to learn high-tech trades. And at the rate that tech goes from latest-and-greatest to OBSOLETE is on the verge of, "Don't blink or you'll miss it."
The ONLY entity that benefits from these kinds of abrupt transitions is Big Business. And the closer you look at the process, the more the rank and file workers start to look like cogs in the machinery: totally replaceable parts.
Capt., the leaders also benefit. The Reagonomics guys are still doing well. They stacked our courts, pushed reality TV which is anything but real, warped our media far beyond the ways it has been warped before, and a whole lot of them used their government positions to get into hedgefunding and other nefarious occupations that pay bundles and require very little from them except perhaps cruelty and ruthlessness, and they learned those quite well during the transition.
Fed still mesmerized by trickle down BS. Trying to undermine our economy.
Daniel, you are so right. I keep getting the feeling, every time the Fed meets that Powell, a Republican wants our economy to go into recession. It would be a win-win for him, workers would be forced to accept lower wages, and Republicans would most likely win the 2024 election because all the Republican candidates would have to do is their best thing, blame the recession on Democrats. I want to be wrong, but when the Fed raised interest rates for no reason in July, I was pretty sure. What I don't understand is why the rest of the Board is going along with it. Are they all Republicans too? Gag, I hope not!
The Fed won't be done until we're in a recession - so they can blame Biden.
Well, yeah. "Our" leaders and Big Biz are in a partnership. They play hard at trying to look like frenemies, but that's all roleplaying in the political Kabuki Theater that Washington has become. It's hard to get around the reality that most of "Our" elected representatives had their campaigns funded mostly by their biggest "campaign contributors" who were/are Big Biz/the Wealthy.
Biden has been stymied on that item once already. The GOP's ace in the hole is SCOTUS -- _anything_ Biden does on his own authority will most likely be declared "unconstitutional" by SCOTUS, it will be undone, and Biden will look like an ineffectual leader... again.
Gone "rouge"? They've reddened their cheeks? ;^D Just kidding. Going rogue implies that they're off doing their own thing without regard to anyone else. But these Conservative justices seem to be participating in a larger Right wing gameplan. Sort of like, "You want it? You got it! Just tell us what you want."
Biden, if not a Brainiac himself, certainly has a lot of very smart people advising him. The fact that he used the approach he did when it was obvious that it was vulnerable to a SCOTUS challenge indicates that somebody in that pipeline _wanted_ it to be vulnerable.... and therefore would be shut down. That's the problem with "corporate Democrats": they say and do things that seem supportive of We The People, but they know it won't change a thing because in Reality they're in cahoots with Big Biz.
You have my condolences. (Along with everyone living in TX.) From what I hear from people "passing through", both FL and TX are nice enough places. But given the Governors and governments that The People voted into office, one might conclude that there are A LOT of closet KKK and Bible-thumpers. ["You're either with us, or you're going to Hell. No two ways about it. Don't let the door hit you on the way out."]
Your crystal ball was in fine form when you wrote that. Bravo!
Probably applies today too: note the not-so-good policy idea of supporting the (already wealthy) semiconductor industry - with "AI" making up all the difference for skills/training/etc. in a workforce which is as hidebound by its mortgages as it is by xenophobia...
= /
Interesting stroll down memory lane. I am curious just how many people got the intended message. I am guessing not many. Reagan was a strange bird, part of him wanted desperately to live and keep our nation living in the past and another side of him wanted us to have the latest and greatest that we could use to smite anyone who got in our way. He would not have appreciated being referred to as the first to have a "new industrial policy" because he was sure once trickle down got going, the old one would work just fine. Reagan wanted a "Star Wars" program but not really. He wanted us to have a strong industrial base, but decided it was better if he sent everything offshore. I don't know if the Dems would have done much better because they were in charge of Congress and still couldn't stop the trickle-down BS from doing a job on our economy and the passing away of so much of our industry, thus our middle class. Every time a Republican administration is over, I take a few moments to wonder what might have happened if someone with a positive vision for our future had held the White House. We are seeing some of that right now with Biden's plans. Republicans are fighting every step of the way because I think they want to live in their dream past where whites ruled, had all the best houses, schools, churches, jobs, and everything else, hardly having to compete because white was just right everywhere. Reagan made a lot of mistakes while president. That goes with to play a president instead of knowing how to be one. We saw that again with W. Bush to some extent and more fully with Trump. I am glad some of our industry is returning, perhaps we will take the opportunity to become more innovative again and depend on our workers here, not that the workers over there aren't good, they are, but they need their own businesses that work with them, not exploit them as we have done so oftten.
Ruth,
You nailed it. At the core of this stage play is "to play a president instead of knowing how to be one". Perfect. Which is why Biden and "Bidenomics" are so refreshing. He actually understands the job and excels at it.
Reagan, "W" and Trump wallowed in being president but they were really just figureheads. Puppets of the Oligarchs. None of those guys had the depth of knowledge or intelligence to do the job without someone whispering in their ears the talking points for TV.
They had egos and were fueled by ambition. But they were simply unqualified for the job. Not even close to being up to the work. We let hacks have the most important job on the planet. It speaks volumes about the collective intelligence of America - actually the human species.
LOUSY reality show leads, and "Bedtime For Bonzo" 'actors', and failed 'legacy' leaders.
Maybe the 'Muricun public is NOT actually smart enough to choose great leaders (with very few exceptions)??
I still despise and loathe the idea of an electoral 'college' (I REFUSE to even give it the credence to capitalize it!) though, or any other system where a small group gets to choose under the false guise of being a democracy.
If you missed Oliver Stone's move Bush/Cheney, I suggest you look for it.
The Repubs have been consistent in one particular area, they keep choosing individuals who they believe are ambitious but stupid enough to control to do their bidding. They like to be the puppet masters; however, they probably bit off a bit more than they could chew with Trump.
Stuck in there between the lines is the fallout from Reagan's firing of the Air Traffic Controllers, who represented by their own Professional Air Traffic Controllers Association. That union busting message set the stage for middle class losses ever since.
What I say?
I can remember as a child when we wanted to express a feeling of total confusion and disconnection we said things were "Discombobulated." The length of the word made us small people seem so much more important. The sound the word made as it left our lips had such a nice ring to it that we discombobulated almost everything. Times change and the words we use to express ourselves are altered as well. The relevance we held for life changes as we grow older. As children, we thought of ourselves as being basically indestructible in a world we couldn't possibly understand. Now fully grown, and then some, we have come to understand just how vulnerable we really are. Our society quivers with time. It struggles when times are tough and when things are good all is "hunky-dory," another adjective we used to throw around. What we're experiencing as a country, both politically and socially, is leaving our people feeling completely discombobulated. A word used by children all those years ago has found relevance in our world today as adults. I'm so proud of myself for composing an entire paragraph without mentioning his name, so why start now? Why can't we turn back time? Before he came on the scene there were differences but we managed to work through our problems in an effort to find solutions that worked for the general good of all the people. How can one overweight man of questionable integrity hog-tie an entire country? I think it's time to reflect and inhale a good dose of smelling salts. We're in for a fight, because if we don't "we won't have a country anymore." What goes around comes around Donnie.
I hear you but....the problems had been building for a very long time. Before TFG became President. He heightened these problems, our polarization. But the sickness if you will was and still is there in our society. He had/has an entire political Party under his sway so it was not one man who hog-tied an entire country. To your point about managing our differences, I think about the SCOTUS decision on abortion. The situation was hardly perfect but there was a compromise of sorts that most people could abide by. But that wasn't good ennough for some.
steve--I apologize for the content, I wrote that in a semi-sleepless state at 3am. My intent was good I just failed to express it in an intelligent manner.
Not at all. Well expressed. It may be we all just want to pin it all on the most visible maddening immediate source of the discombobulation.
I 'get it' totally!
In my youth, in the '60s, we actually felt fairly 'secure' despite all of the racism, the covert/'veiled' ANTI-SEMITISM I experienced, all of the other negative/destructive 'isms', phobias, and 'genys', the mounting climate disaster, and yes, even the threat of total thermonuclear vaporization (replete with the completely useless out into the halls of the schools with our coats over our heads, drills).
But, I never could have imagined, even in my very worst nightmare, the obliteration of our democracy, and the (violent or otherwise) takeover of a NAZI regime, as the putrid orange one threatens (and even PROMISES!) nowadays.
I AM grateful for (and cognizant of, and appreciative of) all of the progressive progression made in securing rights for ALL of our citizens, yes despite all of the setbacks, roadblocks, and the immense 'work still left to do' in this area, but something just does not feel correct right now, as an almost 70 year old adult.
There is way too much of that insecure uncertainty now, like when the rancid SHITler always said "We'll see" during it's regime's reign, in it's sadistic control.
Life seems to have lost it's 'magic', as it were, which I used to feel with at least some sense of optimism, and 'joie de vivre'. :( :(
David--If there is no joy in living then why live.
At this point, sadly, it may be solely to fight the NAZI fascists with my last ounce of strength in order to try and make sure that they cannot perpetrate their sadistic, cruel and torturous genocide on all of the 'others' in this land. ;)
David--Hold that thought.
How many adjectives do we have for he who isn’t mentionable?
Mary-- we have a bevy of options and none of them are complimentary.
This explains so much pain and suffering and disenfranchisement . The cruelty was the point. Is that what was billed as creative destruction? They pulled it down so the economy could be gerry rigged for the dementedly selfish few. Most people, including me, didn’t know how things were shifting for the worse so fast. It seemed to me that unless you already had a leg up you were stuck where you started or destined for failure. The class division from Reaganomics happened within families sorting people depending on when they came of age in the new way of picking winners, not by merit so much as starting position. The income tax for young adults just starting out used to be graduated to ramp up over a few years to allow for expenses of starting a new household and some savings. My older siblings benefited from that before Reagan did away with it. I found it very difficult to scrape together a few dollars for an emergency fund. It put me at a disadvantage economically. Why? Why step on people who are just starting out? The cruelty is the point.
And these 'strategies' are so much worse for women.
I don’t know if men in general were more angry about women’s rights because of the economic impact of Reaganomics, but it seemed that way to me. It has always been tough for women to get a fair deal in this bumptious male dominated society. You have to manage behaviors and stand up for yourself just to stay in the game. Nevertheless, women’s lib has been good for everyone, men, women, and children. Economic hardships have been tough on most people, families and individuals alike.
Good point. I wonder, do you agree that we (women) are predisposed to softening the criticism with subtle apology... and thereby voiding its truth? This could be why in contemporary society we feel unheard and are so easily silenced.
It’s such a loaded subject. I try to avoid engaging in mind reading, kid gloves, and tolerance of bad behavior. However, you do have to choose your battles. I’ve been punched in a not so good natured way, shoved aside, dumped out of my chair so some clod could “helpfully” show me something I already knew about using a pc — I never laughed it off or let it go. I was, of course, labeled the difficult one, the bully who made naughty boys behave. I managed to survive long enough to retire. I’m so glad to be retired. Now the fascists want to end SSA. It never ends. You should never let them get away with anything.
So true... its every woman's story. Well done you! 'The Difficult One' would be a great title for your memoir [WINK EMOJI], which I would love to read.
Yes, we NEED MANY MANY MORE women like you, and all of the others on this substack, and elsewhere in this land, and world!!
I've been saying this for a while now, but it bears repeating; Women are going to save this world!
I'm sorry but "Republican woman" is an oxymoron.
I just learned RNC chair Ronna McDaniel is Mitt Romney's niece. Maybe it's genetic.
So the annihilation of ALL of our 'social safety nets' DOES run in the bloodlines, I guess?
Ah, memories. Those of us who survived eight years of Reagan as Governor of California knew that he had many, many supporters in California's massive defense sector. When he became president he rewarded them well. After all, they had made him first governor and then president. They (and the oil people and anti-New Deal Birchers) ran the government in the back room while he did his avuncular PR schtick out front, just like they had done for eight years in California. This may be a memory, but it was Reagan and his backers who put us on the road to Donald Trump, so it is incredibly relevant.
And certainly he led the way to less public education in our elementary and high schools and more expensive education in our public universities. I remember talking to a teacher in California when he was governor. She left home at 5 a.m. to drive to school, because that's where she had finally found a job.
I think that Reagan’s concern was less — far less - with the nature of the “old” industries versus that of the new than with shaking off what he and his confederates saw — and current descendants still see — as the “tyranny” of a heavily unionized (and Democratic-voting) labor force in favor of new businesses that would resist efforts of workers to unionize. To that extent he was very, and sadly, successful, even as Republicans continued to perpetuate the myth of the nobility of heavy, inefficient industry and how it made America the arsenal of democracy.
Reagan never had an independent thought. Ironically, he was president of a union - surreptitiously gave evidence against his colleagues - his political opponents - as "Reds."
As governor, he killed programs like free tuition that had made California an economic powerhouse. He could care less for the "lesser" among us, the halt, the lame and the blind.
THANK YOU!!
Spot On. I was a well paid mule for a mid-sized auto-part manufacturer. When benefits tanked we suggested that wage concessions weren't unreasonable. By 2000, the only negotiations left for low-tech workers' were how much less would you accept the next pay check to be. By 2020 Our sole-earner worked for a provider for a large government division. Come Covid, she retired, and within 10 years we wont be able to afford the only wealth we have (our home). If this is the American Dream why do i wake with cold sweats?
The 'human resources' are just cogs in the wheel, or changeable parts. there is little to no concern for them. Hence, we see the anger of the MAGA 'party' . It hurts to be expendable. to be blamed for being victims of thoughtless capitalists ; The "I got mine" crowd.
Yes, but they continue to be fiercely loyal to the exact people who hurt them. It’s like a domestic abuse victim who cannot/will not leave their abuser.
Carey Ragels : Yes, even the Vice President exhibited some of the behavior of a victim of domestic abuse. Tfg seems to inspire such behavior.
Ah, but where would we be without the advantage of high capacity killing machines readily available to one and all? An industry that was already strong absolutely blossomed under Reagan, and the proof is made visible every day in the perpetually rising body count right here at home. Better every year!
Hear! Hear!
So interesting thank you for all you do and the historic perspective on how we got here. The interesting twist is that many of our nations home grown engineer struggle to find jobs which drives that intellectual talent in other directions.
Both predatory (Reaganite) and parasitic (Thatcherite) capitalism have failed.
A compendium of your observations, then and now, would be appreciated.
It would be great if a compilation of your warnings of the foolish economic and industrial planning of the 1980s were published.
Predatory (Reaganite social Darwinism focused upon destroying any trace of responsibility to public trust and accountability in government) and parasitic (Thatcherite -- convert state necessities of health, education, transportation, and other agencies into pro-profit enterprises using vampirism as a means) capitalism fails (both failing on a constant).