Comments on: Use plutocracy to broaden our economic debate Thu, 21 Jul 2016 07:57:19 +0000 hourly 1 By: OneOfTheSheep Wed, 24 Oct 2012 06:54:11 +0000 A refreshingly unbiased and honest article.

Yes, money is very much like water in how it flows here and there responding to forces obvious and almost invisible simultaneously. Tax incentives and disincentives can and do create the great majority of any given society.

But , multinational companies can move wherever gives them the best “deal”, just as manufacturers who find the “business climate” in a state with strong unions today move operations to states with “right to work” laws. It isn’t all that difficult or expensive to shed an American “corporate shell” and set up shop in a country that offers a “better deal”.

There may someday be “…global governance able to tax and enforce on a global scale…” but that day is not today nor is it tomorrow, nor am I likely to live to see it. That means that “the rest of us” had better get our act together while we can.

“We, the people” very much need to have an increasingly serious national dialogue as to what kind of future is today possible. We must “do what we can, where we are, with what we have” while we have time.

We do not have the luxury of picking and choosing “…what levels of growth and wealth are necessary…”. What is, is. We have to work with that. And we had better separate experts from idiots and deal more with reality than wishful thinking to do what we MUST do.

Our quality of life will very much be affected by our quantity of life. Each child is NOT an economic plus at the family level, as it was in the largely agrarian society that existed up to WW II. If we ignore the “value” of cannon fodder among governments that would squabble endlessly over how to divide the world’s resources, it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see that every developed society needs fewer and fewer workers to keep it running.

We need to quit listening to those who sing that “siren song” to lure America’s “ship of state” onto economic rocks that would rip open it’s bowels. Those would “even out” per capita income don’t seem to understand that if their dream were instantly achieved two things are assured. 1. There would be instant universal poverty. 2. All human progress towards a “better life” would cease.

What “constitutes a good society”? Ask a dozen people and you get a dozen answers. It doesn’t MATTER what each of us think. What matters is what sort of society we can afford as we move forward twenty-five, fifty, and a hundred years; tweaking as we move forward!

America is the richest nation in the history of the world, and yet we are living today hopelessly beyond our nation’s collective productivity. As a nation we are getting fatter and fatter, expending less and less energy, and yet eating bigger and bigger portions. So, as bad as qwe are at self-denial, we are going to HAVE to learn one more that we can’t “have it all”. We must again learn to prioritize. We need to come to a national consensus as to “needs” a “tax revenue stream” consistent with America’s gross national product can support over time. We need to understand that government produces NOTHING, and so that expense needs to be reduced to a minimum consistent with efficiency and absolute necessity. Nobody is promising easy, but this MUST be done!

John Smith was right. Those who don’t contribute to this nation’s strength and wealth may not partake of it’s bounty except for that portion set aside for charity. Yes, good faith contributors should not have to work until they die…part of what they earn should support them in a retirement without want.

Kick all the illegal aliens out of our resturants, our hotel industry, our food production industry, our hospitals, and our schools thay will be left with no other economic choice but to go home. That will result in a HUGE “dividend” of jobs, taxes, a higher school graduation rate, less crowded classrooms, less crowded hospitals and emergency rooms

But “medical coverage” is going to have to be cut in two…the “basics” everyone gets and then the “options” that only those who have personal resources get. Until very recently this was “the way it was”. Only now are we seeing what it costs to give everyone who raises their hand access to available doctors for not only basic medical needs but organ transplants, new joints, etc. under our existing medical “system”.

“Retirement” is already that way. Social Security is the “basics”, and those who are able may earn separate pensions (if their company doesn’t underfund or shed those obligations), or a 401K, etc. otherwise. We have the freedom to pursue happiness and/or affluence; and rightfully so because these are “opportunities”. But no government can ever afford to assure ANY outcome.

America today is producing more and more college graduates for fewer and fewer positions actually requiring expertise. Many are in fields of limited or NO commercial potential.

Ideally, there would be national competitions funded by American businesses who would choose high school graduate applicants to further educate according to their needs under a mutually binding contract for an agreed term of years. That way, every graduate’s education would be funded, in whole or in part, with a specific position awaiting a the end of the process.

Today some join the military, and the military trains them and, after discharge, awards them a GI Bill with which to further prepare themselves for civilian employment. These might well be the “first choice” of business arrangement discussed in the preceding paragraph.

In short, America needs to institutionally become the meritocracy it has always pretended to be. Think of our “college graduates” as our “commissioned officers” and every one else “enlisted” or “non-commissioned officers.

In WW II America produced, in addition to soldiers [think police], but firefighters, pilots, navigators, radio operators, maintenance specialists of every kind needed, in an average of six weeks. Such “citizen-soldiers” beat the best the rest of the world could throw at them with America’s manufacturing might behind them. They successfully defended a “way of life”.

Well today we must re-define our “way of life” for a future quite different from a few years ago. That world is gone and isn’t coming back. With all our computers, more and more of what “needs doing” in our society can be reduced to “on-the-job training” and mastered in a few weeks. Such jobs can be easily filled with anyone “off the street with sixth grade math and ninth grade reading and writing skills. The “next level up” of “intelligent technician” can easily be trained as we did in WW II.

As I look around, I see NO great benefit from the endless non-specialized college hours and courses that make “well rounded” citizens. Blue-collar sports fans throw endless and meaningless statistics back and forth with a skill indistinguishable from that of our higher educated.

Judging from the “representatives” that “We, the people” elect, it’s clear we are doing something terribly wrong. And the election so nearly upon us is no different, with a choice only between bad and worse.

By: dennyboy1 Tue, 23 Oct 2012 11:13:53 +0000 nice article zach. i own a small business lets say construction and as demand increases i raise my prices which means i generate more i share that profit with my 50 employees is up to me. with such a weak job market employees are not in position to demand higher pay.this is why we employers can get fewer people to do more work thus taking advantage of the help.unless labor organizes and speaks with one voice they have little chance of keeping up