From reading you post, one thing came to my mind. That the only way we are really going to see any significant change, is that it will have to be done as a reaction. Proactive is something this government hasn't truly learned when it comes to the betterment of this country in a long time. No, sadly, I suspect that when even the official unemployment rate exceeds 10%, and that we're mired unnoficially in an economic depression, and that the average middle class family is either on the brink of being in the next two classes below them or have family and friends in that situation, that one will see changes. Remember, it took a stock market crash to create the SEC. I'm sorry, but so far, that's how this country has operated.
I don't know if it'll be that bad. A piece of me has been thinking that Obama may be the new McGovern, I mean look at the parallels. But dunno, don't think if he loses, it'll be THAT bad of a loss.
Demand side economics ain't cool anymore...it's too old...bummer that it worked pretty well. I think Multinational corporations are so focused on getting that 2.3 billion mythical consumer markets in India and China...they say the United States be damned.
But force them to sell the same cars in the US that they sell in the rest of the world (Chrysler nonwithstanding). Check out chevrolet.co.uk and ford.co.uk to get a picture of the economical autos they sell in the rest of the world.
I think Chrysler is doomed, by the way. The government should never guarantee loans made to a privately-held company.
And a little 15% tariff on all imported goods and services until the trade deficit becomes manageable.
That understood demand side economics? that in order to create a market for your products and services, you have to have people who make enough money to buy those products and services?
While I am no means a fan of bailouts, I do believe loaning the not so big anymore 3 would be way more effective than bailing out Wall Street.
Hundreds of thousands of jobs in the industrial midwest depend on a healthy auto industry. Helping Detroit weather the storm will have real impact on mainstreet - way more so than the Wall street bailouts do.
Back in Iacocca's day, Lee recognised and understood the importance of manufacturing to the countries economic health and national security - most people understood this then way more so than today where so many are quick to write off manufacturing and cede it to the Asians. Chrysler paid back the loans pluys interest ahead of schedule.
With that said, there is also a fairness issue involved - if congress can spare a dime for speculators and risk takers on Wall Street they certainly should be able to give a nickel to Detroit. Of course there should be some conditions that go along with any taxpayer money - such as it must be reinvested back in the US - for example on increased fuel mileage technology, domestic capital facilities and equipment and so forth.
None of this taking the money and using it to facilitate offshoring, or like Northwest Airlines did with their 911 bailout - buy European Airbuses.
The bottom line is a manufacturing bailout would be felt and shared by a much larger portion of the workforce and shared more fairly and effectively than a Wall Street bailout could ever be
Because I believe the statistics show when the US middle class, working America is strong and policy is tuned towards the national interest, we've actually had a much stronger GDP and other macro economic data. So, the premise that it's an either/or choice here I don't think is valid.
I also don't think that what is good for America isn't necessarily bad for Multinational corporations either, in terms of raw profits.
I mean sure maybe short term profits such as our lovely bubbles but in terms of long term strategy, I don't think this is so.
I just saw this on CNN. Great. So, Cisco Systems is sponsoring a major political party? Ah, so we get Cisco Systems economic plan? Ya know, the company which said they want to become a Chinese company. God, we are so screwed.
The idea being that questions can be scored on one of the two axes, so that you can set up a grid. And then you'll get coordinates (+10, -10 e.g.) which put you in the upper left quadrant.
We'd have to have questions, but I think that this would lay the groundwork.
I'm busy as all hell with school and getting unpacked from moving at the moment.
That's something to seriously get a handle on and while I see the problem, policy solutions seem few and far between.
The AFL-CIO has a good site Executive Paywatch and here's something I had no idea about, Barack Obama actually introduced a bill to try to let shareholders vote on compensation packages (put a check mark on the plus column on Barack, who is racking up the tally on the negative!).
I was pleasantly surprised to see that one.
Because of the massive corporate donor class $$$$ in the elections, we all know DC is surrounded by 41,000 lobbyists but so far nothing has changed the status quo. I'd like to see some real solutions presented to get the money out of DC too.
Here is a line of questioning i am thinking along the lines of:
CEO Pay should
1. Be no more than a maximum of 10 times the average wages of the company
2. Should be tied to company performance and be accountable to boards and shareholders
3. Should be transparent and accountable to the employees and communities
4. I am a CEO and I got my golden parachute bwaahaahaahaaa!!!
I think Congress should tie it much more strongly to hiring only US citizen/perm resident workers.
Then, I think that they should get into the big three's management faces and require they invest a certain portion of that into making the cars low cost plus invest heavily into battery technologies. That's one of the biggest bottlenecks. The cost of the batteries is prohibitive.
The fact the big three are in trouble, not a surprise. They have not done the real research, invested and have spent a hell of a lot of time trying to figure out how to labor arbitrage their workers. The big 3 are also China obsessed, selling gas guzzling, major polluting autos for next to nothing in China (India too) trying to capture those markets. Well, that's just great big 3...just keep adding to global warming on some mythical consumer market. Now selling that polluting Aero for $1100USD in China...what exactly is your profit margin on that and what does that have to do with losing $15.5B in a single quarter? Or did you (GM) just keep your profits from your China and India subsidiaries offshore which made it seem like you lost $15.5B in a single quarter but maybe didn't? (disclaimer, these are just questions, I don't know the details on their earnings reports but we need to know the answers before coughing up $50B bucks, that is a butt load of money!)
It does take awhile to learn how to format posts, no doubt about it. I fixed your links for you (hey people don't expect this all of the time!)
Now, you should see an edit tab on your posts, you can go in there and see how I got them to format right.
Then, over in the user guide are some examples that should be literally a cut and paste and then put in your URL and text instead of the example one.
Another way: when you go to create content, you see the "body" section. Right below is is a link that says rich text editor. click on that and it will be a little editor which has buttons that if you use them will format the post right.
The Editor is actually the FCKeditor and this link explains how to use the toolbar.
I embedded it into this site. You can also switch between plain text mode and the rich text mode to use both..
since things like embedding youtubes you need to do in the plain text mode (that's the HTML tag mode).
Learning a few things, which I try to cover over in the user guide should cover 90% of the formatting issues when trying to write a post.
I wish to God writing blog posts was easier but this is as good as I could get it so far.
Hey BTW, this isn't DK. The site for one will format correctly any XHTML/HTML tagged post. No limits (no scripts of course). You can click on the private tab just to learn and most importantly you can edit and even delete.
Not a problem. Any feature anybody wants, just ask.
I can write the code for the actual test. Just email me a rough draft of questions and how to put up the results categories.
We could have of the categories
1. Globalist New World Order
2. Middle Class advocate
3. Math head
4. Ron Paul with a lemon
5. Trickle Upon
6. Road Kill (flat tax)
(or be a little more serious on it, say Hamilton Project, Supply Side, Corporate Lobbyist, Globalist, New Deal (Keynesian) and so on.
I will make it a "page" like the "reads" above.
Honestly is there even one economist who promotes economic populism?
I can start: renegotiate the actual terms of trade agreements current in favor of working America. If there is a huge sudden deficit that is a bad trade deal. Base trade policy on the actual results with the biggest indicator being the trade deficit.
I like the Horizon project policy positions (which are extensive) and could claim those are Populist
Universal single payer health (HR 676)?
Immigration; I know the answer to this one, everything has to be US citizens, Americans 1st in all jobs, infrastructure and so on. Remove the corporate cheap labor agenda from US immigration policy period. Enforce US employment law.
Labor: there is a slew of worker rights issues here
Consumer protection is probably in there
Results based policy: Do you believe in some nebulously ill defined theoretical economic philosophy or do you believe policy should be based in detailed fact based analysis and projected results in the national interest? Are you religious or do you subscribe to the whatever works school?
I think that we could do a series of questions on issues to lay out the differences between Rubinites, Economic populists, and all out Bush neo-liberals.
They are promoting some agenda (who are behind these people is another question). When I find a new site or some sort of policy recommendation.
“innovation economics” recognizes the reality that a global, knowledge-based economy requires a new approach to national economic policy based less on capital accumulation, budget surpluses, or social spending and more on smart support for the building blocks of private sector growth and innovation.
hmmm, maybe we should come up with an "what kind of economics person are you?" test.
definitely a biased poll. After foing threu it several times it seemed highty biased toward innovative, and then it changed me to a Rubinite - which made me highly suspect
From reading you post, one thing came to my mind. That the only way we are really going to see any significant change, is that it will have to be done as a reaction. Proactive is something this government hasn't truly learned when it comes to the betterment of this country in a long time. No, sadly, I suspect that when even the official unemployment rate exceeds 10%, and that we're mired unnoficially in an economic depression, and that the average middle class family is either on the brink of being in the next two classes below them or have family and friends in that situation, that one will see changes. Remember, it took a stock market crash to create the SEC. I'm sorry, but so far, that's how this country has operated.
I don't know if it'll be that bad. A piece of me has been thinking that Obama may be the new McGovern, I mean look at the parallels. But dunno, don't think if he loses, it'll be THAT bad of a loss.
Demand side economics ain't cool anymore...it's too old...bummer that it worked pretty well. I think Multinational corporations are so focused on getting that 2.3 billion mythical consumer markets in India and China...they say the United States be damned.
But force them to sell the same cars in the US that they sell in the rest of the world (Chrysler nonwithstanding). Check out chevrolet.co.uk and ford.co.uk to get a picture of the economical autos they sell in the rest of the world.
I think Chrysler is doomed, by the way. The government should never guarantee loans made to a privately-held company.
And a little 15% tariff on all imported goods and services until the trade deficit becomes manageable.
That understood demand side economics? that in order to create a market for your products and services, you have to have people who make enough money to buy those products and services?
While I am no means a fan of bailouts, I do believe loaning the not so big anymore 3 would be way more effective than bailing out Wall Street.
Hundreds of thousands of jobs in the industrial midwest depend on a healthy auto industry. Helping Detroit weather the storm will have real impact on mainstreet - way more so than the Wall street bailouts do.
Back in Iacocca's day, Lee recognised and understood the importance of manufacturing to the countries economic health and national security - most people understood this then way more so than today where so many are quick to write off manufacturing and cede it to the Asians. Chrysler paid back the loans pluys interest ahead of schedule.
With that said, there is also a fairness issue involved - if congress can spare a dime for speculators and risk takers on Wall Street they certainly should be able to give a nickel to Detroit. Of course there should be some conditions that go along with any taxpayer money - such as it must be reinvested back in the US - for example on increased fuel mileage technology, domestic capital facilities and equipment and so forth.
None of this taking the money and using it to facilitate offshoring, or like Northwest Airlines did with their 911 bailout - buy European Airbuses.
The bottom line is a manufacturing bailout would be felt and shared by a much larger portion of the workforce and shared more fairly and effectively than a Wall Street bailout could ever be
Because I believe the statistics show when the US middle class, working America is strong and policy is tuned towards the national interest, we've actually had a much stronger GDP and other macro economic data. So, the premise that it's an either/or choice here I don't think is valid.
I also don't think that what is good for America isn't necessarily bad for Multinational corporations either, in terms of raw profits.
I mean sure maybe short term profits such as our lovely bubbles but in terms of long term strategy, I don't think this is so.
I just saw this on CNN. Great. So, Cisco Systems is sponsoring a major political party? Ah, so we get Cisco Systems economic plan? Ya know, the company which said they want to become a Chinese company. God, we are so screwed.
economic growth could probably be changed to economic wealth so that you don't get the arguments that populists are anti-growth.
axes is a good start.
This is a preliminary from me.
The idea being that questions can be scored on one of the two axes, so that you can set up a grid. And then you'll get coordinates (+10, -10 e.g.) which put you in the upper left quadrant.
We'd have to have questions, but I think that this would lay the groundwork.
I'm busy as all hell with school and getting unpacked from moving at the moment.
That's something to seriously get a handle on and while I see the problem, policy solutions seem few and far between.
The AFL-CIO has a good site Executive Paywatch and here's something I had no idea about, Barack Obama actually introduced a bill to try to let shareholders vote on compensation packages (put a check mark on the plus column on Barack, who is racking up the tally on the negative!).
I was pleasantly surprised to see that one.
Because of the massive corporate donor class $$$$ in the elections, we all know DC is surrounded by 41,000 lobbyists but so far nothing has changed the status quo. I'd like to see some real solutions presented to get the money out of DC too.
Here is a line of questioning i am thinking along the lines of:
CEO Pay should
1. Be no more than a maximum of 10 times the average wages of the company
2. Should be tied to company performance and be accountable to boards and shareholders
3. Should be transparent and accountable to the employees and communities
4. I am a CEO and I got my golden parachute bwaahaahaahaaa!!!
International Herald Tribune has some details on the tie ins to the plan.
I think Congress should tie it much more strongly to hiring only US citizen/perm resident workers.
Then, I think that they should get into the big three's management faces and require they invest a certain portion of that into making the cars low cost plus invest heavily into battery technologies. That's one of the biggest bottlenecks. The cost of the batteries is prohibitive.
The fact the big three are in trouble, not a surprise. They have not done the real research, invested and have spent a hell of a lot of time trying to figure out how to labor arbitrage their workers. The big 3 are also China obsessed, selling gas guzzling, major polluting autos for next to nothing in China (India too) trying to capture those markets. Well, that's just great big 3...just keep adding to global warming on some mythical consumer market. Now selling that polluting Aero for $1100USD in China...what exactly is your profit margin on that and what does that have to do with losing $15.5B in a single quarter? Or did you (GM) just keep your profits from your China and India subsidiaries offshore which made it seem like you lost $15.5B in a single quarter but maybe didn't? (disclaimer, these are just questions, I don't know the details on their earnings reports but we need to know the answers before coughing up $50B bucks, that is a butt load of money!)
It does take awhile to learn how to format posts, no doubt about it. I fixed your links for you (hey people don't expect this all of the time!)
Now, you should see an edit tab on your posts, you can go in there and see how I got them to format right.
Then, over in the user guide are some examples that should be literally a cut and paste and then put in your URL and text instead of the example one.
Another way: when you go to create content, you see the "body" section. Right below is is a link that says rich text editor. click on that and it will be a little editor which has buttons that if you use them will format the post right.
The Editor is actually the FCKeditor and this link explains how to use the toolbar.
I embedded it into this site. You can also switch between plain text mode and the rich text mode to use both..
since things like embedding youtubes you need to do in the plain text mode (that's the HTML tag mode).
Learning a few things, which I try to cover over in the user guide should cover 90% of the formatting issues when trying to write a post.
I wish to God writing blog posts was easier but this is as good as I could get it so far.
Hey BTW, this isn't DK. The site for one will format correctly any XHTML/HTML tagged post. No limits (no scripts of course). You can click on the private tab just to learn and most importantly you can edit and even delete.
Not a problem. Any feature anybody wants, just ask.
I can write the code for the actual test. Just email me a rough draft of questions and how to put up the results categories.
We could have of the categories
1. Globalist New World Order
2. Middle Class advocate
3. Math head
4. Ron Paul with a lemon
5. Trickle Upon
6. Road Kill (flat tax)
(or be a little more serious on it, say Hamilton Project, Supply Side, Corporate Lobbyist, Globalist, New Deal (Keynesian) and so on.
I will make it a "page" like the "reads" above.
Honestly is there even one economist who promotes economic populism?
I can start: renegotiate the actual terms of trade agreements current in favor of working America. If there is a huge sudden deficit that is a bad trade deal. Base trade policy on the actual results with the biggest indicator being the trade deficit.
I like the Horizon project policy positions (which are extensive) and could claim those are Populist
Universal single payer health (HR 676)?
Immigration; I know the answer to this one, everything has to be US citizens, Americans 1st in all jobs, infrastructure and so on. Remove the corporate cheap labor agenda from US immigration policy period. Enforce US employment law.
Labor: there is a slew of worker rights issues here
Consumer protection is probably in there
Results based policy: Do you believe in some nebulously ill defined theoretical economic philosophy or do you believe policy should be based in detailed fact based analysis and projected results in the national interest? Are you religious or do you subscribe to the whatever works school?
;)
they look fine.
If you like, I think that you can use Bob's rich text editor, see below the box where you enter text for that, to make hyperlinks.
I prefer to write my own html, and you can make pretty links doing the old :
It was the best I could do.
I think that we could do a series of questions on issues to lay out the differences between Rubinites, Economic populists, and all out Bush neo-liberals.
They are promoting some agenda (who are behind these people is another question). When I find a new site or some sort of policy recommendation.
hmmm, maybe we should come up with an "what kind of economics person are you?" test.
Despite their motivation, it is fun and neato.
definitely a biased poll. After foing threu it several times it seemed highty biased toward innovative, and then it changed me to a Rubinite - which made me highly suspect
But it was still fun 8-)
Pages