I'm really not sure this week. There's the apparently promising budget talks, but what's really going to matter is whether the radicals can once again intimidate mainstream conservatives; I don't think we know that yet. There's the presidents speech on the economy and inequality...that's certainly not apt to have any direct immediate effects, but it surely might signal the future direction of the Democrats. Even on health care, it's not really clear how and whether successful and unsuccessful fixes on Healthcare.gov will matter.
So I'm just going to leave it all to you. What do you think? What else do you have? What do you think mattered this week?
Unemployment down to below 7%. Talk of the Fed taking action, potential of rising interest rates and small quantitive easing might spur additional spending; an perverse incentive to inject activity into the economy.
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed this thought experiment of yours, JB:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2013/12/06/no-a-republican-president-wont-sabotage-obamacare-well-mostly-not/
You may have hit on the correct mixture of what's likely and what's not. And yet, and yet -- the mostly heartening scenario you foresee would also seem to imply that the GOP is not in fact such the broken party that you argue for -- very convincingly! -- in other articles.
It gets so tiring hearing liberals talk about "inequality." And the very people usually talking about it are middle or upper middle class themselves. I hope that soon the American people get fed up with hearing from a group of people who apparently believe that someone incapable of completing any college should be paid the same as someone who completes 8+ years of higher education and contributes much more to society.
ReplyDeleteIt's not nearly as tiring as listening to people ignore reality. The average college graduate has around $80,000 of debt to repay at 6% interest, compounded. How many jobs are out there for entry level graduates, with no work experience, that will allow them to pay off these sums in a timely manner? Do you think it helps the country that they won't be able to afford a house before they are 35?
DeleteWhat about young people who can't afford a pricey college, and enter the work force at minimum wage? Is the country better served that they can't survive on it? Inflation has doubled the price of goods since the 1980's, and rent has gone up even faster, but the minimum wage has barely budged. Same for entry level jobs.
I hope that the American people realize that having a middle class is a good thing, and that young people need to have a chance to work their way up through the world.
Seriously? Nobody's asking for doctor's salaries. Nice straw man.
DeleteWhy, he's right! Raising the minimum wage to $10.10 would mean they'd make exactly as much as someone with eight years of higher education. (I understand that if the $7.25 minimum had grown in keeping with productivity increases, it would now be over $20.)
DeleteBrimleysings, What social strata are these American people who you hope get fed up with your straw man argument coming from? Just people with 8+ years of higher education? Not sure they're a complete majority, there might, just maybe, be more working people at the poverty line.
DeleteAlso glad to see the holidays are bringing out the Grinchiest of us.
Building on what Pat's saying -- I think it's not often appreciated how much higher education has become a barrier to entry to the middle class. I've noticed that a lot of middle class jobs either require a higher degree or give very strong preference to those with a higher degree, and not because some sort of specialized training is needed. That's not to say that higher education isn't very important, but it's insisted on for many jobs that don't require any skills or knowledge beyond what the typical high school graduate has, and that's a good way to decrease social mobility.
DeleteIf we do have a "growing deficit of opportunity," I think that's part of it.
You need a BA to get a job that uses what you learned in middle school, an MA to get a job using what you learned in high school, and a a PhD to use what you learned in college.
DeleteI'd say the GOP retreat on Obamacare matters.
ReplyDeleteBoehner's immigration hire might matter.
The Pope matters a great deal and I am heartened, as a non Christian, by having a powerful non-political entity embracing the tenets of a religion and not the ideology that has been espoused from it and endorsing the qualities of good citizenship. In less matter-y news, the fact that you have Rush attacking the Pope, while dickish doesn't matter. But I will say shitting on religious leaders never seems "to rally the troops."
Nelson Mandela's death matters. But Dick Cheney's take on it, officially, does not.
For thousands of years the Catholic Church has jealouly guarded its generally tax-free status. Until the Pope campaigns against this he is largely blowing hot air.
DeleteIn reply to the poor rebuttals to my statements let me ask this: if America becomes socialist then how many high achieving people are going to want to live in this socialist country? America has a very large third world population that many successful and bright people are not going to want to support. The fact that America is more capitalist than other first world countries is its main strength. If America becomes much more socialist then I would much rather live in a nicer socialist country.
ReplyDeleteMost people would agree with the President about the value of opportunity in our society. But I think you're right to question whether people really care about inequality. Most of the top ten highest income counties in the US are near DC -- is this really a problem that liberals propose to solve?
DeleteI think you're absolutely correct, Couves, that no one gives a damn, really, about inequality. Ask most folks, of all ideologies, to compare their hatred of inequality with their love of cheap shit at Wal-Mart and continued profits in the SPY ETF shares in their 401K, and you'll find that hostility to inequality not only takes a back seat to love for those other things, it gets tied up, shoved out the speeding car, and rolls to the curb, battered and bruised.
DeleteThough I'm about the last guy to defend socialists, the problem in the current discussion isn't really - or at worst, even mainly - socialism.
Since there is no possibility of America going socialist, there is no reason to devote the slightest consideration to the question.
DeleteI have to agree with William Burns. Nothing in the comment warrants a serious rebuttal. There is no proposal to impose socialism. There is no proposal to make everyone's income equal. It's all straw men. If you have to base your critique on imaginary hobgoblins, you're going to have trouble convincing people. On the other hand, the inadequate buying power of a growing share of the population is a major factor undermining the economy (whether most people "care" about inequality or not). It's not a matter of leveling all incomes or of redistributing incomes (though some element of that may be involved), it's primarily a matter of paying people enough to allow them to contribute to aggregate demand.
DeleteJust as an example of the current situation, look at what is happening in banking. The incomes of the top people in finance are without precedent, but I heard on NPR the other day that the average bank teller in New York City makes $14,000 and qualifies for food stamps. Faced with the burden of paying $14,000 salaries, some banks are beginning to install remote teller screens, so you can stand in your bank in Manhattan and talk via a TV screen to some teller in South Dakota, where they don't have to pay so much. I'm sure some executive will get a marvelous bonus for that contribution to society.
Similarly, I've also read that for each Walmart superstore, the employees qualify for approximately $1,000,000 a year in public support, including food stamps, Medicaid, and housing. So allowing Walmart to pay its employees so little money costs taxpayers significant amounts of money.
DeleteThis is not to mention that minimum wage raises will bring in substantial amounts of money for payroll taxes, strengthening Social Security and possibly enabling a pay increase for current retirees.
I'm really curious how you define 'socialism.' Does it include public education? Road maintenance? Public health? Weather information? Or are you just focused on social safety nets, on the presumption that half the population are takers because they have pre-existing medical conditions, don't earn enough to pay for basic living expenses, or might someday receive Medicare and Social Security?
DeleteDid any of you actually read or listen to President Obama's speech? Because what you're talking about has very little to do with it, or with the causes and consequences of growing income inequality. Which means in part people getting paid ridiculous amounts of money for doing very little that's useful, and people who do the real work of the society getting paid less and less.
ReplyDeleteAs for what was important this week, that ACA may well have started to turn the corner politically, plus the President's strong case for it in that same speech.
i am not interested in politics but i like education related activity because its directly effect on my life. So this is good for me to read.
ReplyDeleteEduRadar
I think the Iran sanctions stuff mattered. There wasn't any big particular event, but whether the White House can persuade its Senate allies to hold off on new sanctions legislation could matter very much.
ReplyDeleteDepending on your viewpoint, it could either remove pressure from Iran to make concessions, or it could give breathing space for negotiations. It could be important not just for how it affects the current round of negotiations, but for determining the Democratic party line on Iran negotiations, how candidates in the 2016 Dem primaries talk about it, and the difference could be fully normalized relations being decades sooner or later depending on the result.