US election poll

It is an endemic problem that doesn't have a singular solution. Until standards of living are raised in the Third World economies, the standards at the top will continue to be eroded. The super-wealthy seek to insulate themselves from this by accumulating even more wealth, but only so much wealth is created, mostly by those who slap on their boots and go to work every day. Lacking any new ideas, those at the top realize the only way to get wealthier is if a lot of those underneath them on the economic ladder can be made to produce more for less. This is the problem with globalization; as business moves to lower-wage, lower regulation, lower tax countries, the economic base upon which the wealthy stand is constantly eroded and requires shoring up. More and more wealthy folks are created in the process, but less and less of that wealth exists at the levels where it's actually made. China has billionaires, and a (reportedly) burgeoning middle class. But it takes millions of low-wage peons to support, and business constantly tells labor we must compete with that or die. When, in the unknown future, standards are raised in China, businesses will move elsewhere, to India or Malaysia, for example, and the cycle starts over again. Does anyone believe the oilgarchs will give up enough of their treasure that the whole world can enjoy the standard of living we in the US and most Europeans and Japanese have? I believe they will seek to consolidate control and further blur the borders (not strenghten them) so as to exploit the cheapest available alternatives. For the rest of us, it's a race to the bottom.
 
It's political. In the U.S. in the late 19th/early 20th century pro-management Republican courts frustrated unions. Then, naturally and justly, the pendulum swung and pro-union Democrats, with the following wind of the Great Depression and WWII, also went too far. They enabled monopoly power by exempting unions from the Sherman Anti-Trust statutes and by way of a multitude of other pro-union regulatory and statutory changes (including the creation of the US Dept of Labor) that put management at legal disadvantage and that led to post war union bargaining dominance.

Then the long decline.
 
So you are advocating a return to slavery ??

Pay rates in the USA being notably low compared to much of the rest of the (developed) world....
 
Rohan said:
So you are advocating a return to slavery ??

Pay rates in the USA being notably low compared to much of the rest of the (developed) world....
Click to expand...


Considering all the racists who voted for Trump, thats not too far off. Conservatwits like to blame our problems on unions, immigrants, liberal policy, etc, etc... Selective amnesia, projection and denial are the tools of their trade.

Corporate greed and shareholder value have done more to screw working people than any union bs. Not to mention the military establishment thats been pissing away blood and treasure since Korea. Unfortunately nothing will ever get fixed in our country till the self centered conservative boomers who ruined it are gone.
 
xbacksideslider said:
It's political. In the U.S. in the late 19th/early 20th century pro-management Republican courts frustrated unions. Then, naturally and justly, the pendulum swung and pro-union Democrats, with the following wind of the Great Depression and WWII, also went too far. They enabled monopoly power by exempting unions from the Sherman Anti-Trust statutes and by way of a multitude of other pro-union regulatory and statutory changes (including the creation of the US Dept of Labor) that put management at legal disadvantage and that led to post war union bargaining dominance.

Then the long decline.
Click to expand...

The pendulum analogy is apt, but since the 1980s, the accumulation of massive wealth by a very small minority has held the swing artificially to the right. When it finally swings back the other direction (and it will), the shit is really gonna hit the fan. Then, all the survivalists who have been hoarding food and ammunition will look like geniuses instead of the nutballs they now appear to be.
 
There is an aspect of unionism which is not often considered. Unions are a legitimate expression of industrial democracy, which is necessary if improvements to industrial processes are to be achieved. At present, both in the US and in Australia, our manufacturing base has moved to China, mainly to avoid our OHS&E laws and exploit their poor labour conditions. In both of our countries we have a highly paid, well educated workforce. We cannot compete with China on the basis of price and quality while we cannot justify our overheads. So probably the only viable way to go is to move up-market and add value in the form of better quality, - the prices are higher. What this means is we must take ISO9000 Quality Management Systems seriously and become obsessed with doing our jobs better. The basis of ISO9000 is Continual Improvement. This is more difficult to achieve with directive management systems - so better to get the unions on board - perhaps through employee share ownership and productivity gain sharing programmes ?
Germany and much of Scandanavia do not have our problem - they work with their unions, not against them. And their market niche is at the top end.
 
acotrel said:
Germany and much of Scandanavia do not have our problem - they work with their unions, not against them. And their market niche is at the top end.
Click to expand...

Apparently their populations are not nearly as ignorant as ours.
 
I suggest the differences are mainly cultural. I think in Germany, the self-esteem of individuals is greater. In the olden days they used to have guilds which promoted the interests of professionals and the trades. The attitude is never one of reverse snobbery towards intellectuals. In Australia, we have the attitude - 'if it ain't broke, don't fix it'. It is never 'do it right, first time'. My feeling is that if we don't move up-market in a hurry, we are done. The quality ethos is a mindset. What people such as Trump represents is rat-baggery.
 
Flowery language...

The proof of all this is going to be in the eating, isn't it.
Mr Trump is yet to prove himself in the real world...

If in 4 or 8 years, and the USA has prospered, then some folks are going to eat humble pie - or is that crow.
As Mr Obama put it, not sure I can quote his actual words, Mr Trump HAS to be a success as Prez,
the USA is depending on him.

But, putting most policies into full reverse is a hell of a gamble/experiment !!
 
Agree with what you say, going to ultimate outcome. Time will tell.

As for "flowery language;" that's an evasion.
What is your response to what Hanson said?
Not to all of it, it's a long piece. Still there's food for thought in there.
 
I have great disdain for big-mouthed con -men such as Trump. However I suspect his attitude towards China might be the correct one. These days in Australian capital cities the number of unemployed homeless people seems to increasing in proportion to the number of shipping containers arriving at our ports. Out government intends to cut the corporate tax rate to stimulate our economy. Perhaps a better approach might be to cut the rate for manufacturing industries, but increase it for the retail sector which these days sells mainly imported goods ?
 
acotrel said:
big-mouthed con -men such as Trump.
Click to expand...

The commentators, independent ones that is, were saying that Trump was simply telling the voters what they wanted to hear. The mere fact that he told different sets of voters differing things didn't seem to alarm anyone !
Does that actually make him a 'con-man' ?

As more than a few have pointed out too, having policies that can actually solve any of this stuff is going to be the tricky bit. Very little of what he said seemed to have any substance, so what he will deliver is going to be anyones guess, and interesting to watch.

Remember, The Simpsons some years back had an episode where maggie (was it ?) had to be elected Prez, to solve the mess left behind by Prez Trump. Strange - but true ??
 
Glenn Greenwald on Fake News - Now the MSM Hates Him

https://theintercept.com/2017/01/04/was ... -deceived/

Greenwald, as you likely know, is/was regarded as a hero of the Left; he is noted for his support of Snowdon, the source for the NSA surveillance scandal; he reported on Valerie Plame and her husband CIA analyst Wilson and their take downs of Scooter Libby/Cheney/Bush over yellowcake and WMD; he is gay and in a bi-racial marriage but it turns out that what he really cares about is truth and, so, lately he is a heretic, calling out the MSM for its own "fake news."

A good read.
 
Unfortunately, the method by which we choose Presidential candidates has no visibility. Who the hell thought either Trump or Hillary Clinton would be acceptable? As an outsider (a Brit) I don't have a horse in this race, but I sure as hell don't like The Donald as Pres., and I wouldn't have voted for Hillary either, if I'd had the opportunity.

In some voting jurisdictions, there's a line after the candidate listings that reads "None of the above". If "none of the above" gets the majority vote the election has to be re-run with none of the original candidates being eligible.
 
John Q. Adams Won Presidency With 31% Of Vote in 1824—In My Darker Moments About Democracy, This Warms My Heart

In the famous “corrupt bargain” election of 1824, John Quincy Adams won the election even though he won only 30.9% of the popular vote.

This is the Texas Liberal Election Fact of the Day.

In a four-way race, Mr. Adams (photo above) finished second to Andrew Jackson in the popular vote total.

Final popular results were Mr. Jackson of Tennessee 41%, Mr. Adams of Massachusetts 31%, Henry Clay of Kentucky 13%, and William Crawford of Georgia 11%.

31% is the lowest popular percentage ever received by a successful candidate for the Presidency.

Because no candidate won a majority of the electoral college, the race went to the House of Representatives. ( Here is information about the Electoral College including what happens when no candidate wins an electoral vote majority.)

In the House, Mr. Jackson’s arch-rival, Henry Clay, gave his support to Mr. Adams. This allowed Mr. Adams to win the election in the House. Mr. Clay was subsequently selected by Mr. Adams to serve as Secretary of State. The position of Secretary of State was seen then as a stepping stone to the Presidency.

The charge was made, denied by both President Adams and Secretary Clay of a “Corrupt Bargain.” The allegation was that a deal had been cut exchanging Mr. Clay’s support for the Secreatry of State’s office.

Corrupt Bargain or not, Andrew Jackson easily defeated President Adams in 1828 by a margin 0f 56%-44%.

Some days, when I am down on the people, I take a small measure of satisfaction from this 31% President. He made all those Indian-hating, slave-keeping Jacksonians wait another four years.

Abe Lincoln won the White House with 39.9% of the vote in his 1860 four-way race. Mr. Lincoln ,however, won enough electoral votes on Election Day. Mr. Lincoln’s total is the second lowest percentage total for a winning candidate.

I believe in democracy, but sometimes, as we all realize, the majority gets it wrong.
Click to expand...

US election poll


My Rant. Heard Obama Speaking of ' Native Americans ' . Next Moment it was native BORN americans . Has he ever mentioned " Native Americans " The REAL ONES " :shock:
 
I have to laugh, some rednecks in Australia vote for Pauline Hanson who has similar politics to Trump. Trump is shooting his mouth off about China which is Australia's major trading partner while Australia's major defence agreement is with the US. Perhaps some people should take a step backwards and review their own situation ?
 
Im sure we'd all be a lot better off , If ALL Politions had to use motorcycles as Transport ,
theyed be Quicker Witted , more sure footed , faster to react correctly , and never complacent .
And we'd save a foirtune on pensions , on those that couldnt cut it . :D
 

Similar threads

acotrel
Election campaign
2
Replies
25
Views
2,646
norton bob
norton bob
S
UK Election - An excellent result !
Replies
18
Views
1,462
baz
baz
Back
Top