OK technology is and will progress. It can bring great financial gains to a society. Now, if we continue to only have those gains benefit a small number of people then the Robots will have crushed society. However, if we can realize that all of this new technology is to be shared by many then the total society can benefit. It is a major issue as to what kind of society do we want? Do we want one that is owned by a few, who buys the government, rigs the rules, cheats on taxes, Or do we want one that allows the hard working and bright to get rich but the trillions of dollars are not held by a few but are distributed ,by a fair government to the many? Our old way of acquiring and distribution the wealth of a nation needs to be brought up to the new reality.
8
,We need a President who can say "I shall build a high velocity train in the Northeast corridor with all the modern amenities and safety features because labor is unemployed and UncleSam can borrow at unbelievably low interest rates never seen before in our history" and deliver on that promise.
Instead, we have a majority leader in congress who declares it is his job to stop every piece of legislation , every initiative , of Barack Obama. Apparently there is a republican theory out there that says private enterprise will build a rail line from Washington to NY-Boston if enough people want it. I.o.w, it's not happening.
Result: We look inferior to modern countries like Japan, EU and even China pretty soon. We keep hearing we are the richest nation but I'm not seeing it as I look around.
Instead, we have a majority leader in congress who declares it is his job to stop every piece of legislation , every initiative , of Barack Obama. Apparently there is a republican theory out there that says private enterprise will build a rail line from Washington to NY-Boston if enough people want it. I.o.w, it's not happening.
Result: We look inferior to modern countries like Japan, EU and even China pretty soon. We keep hearing we are the richest nation but I'm not seeing it as I look around.
25
"... and as crucial to the outcome of the election as the clash of personalities that commands the lion’s share of our attention."
Bruni did not get the memo from Paul Krugman:
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/13/opinion/it-takes-a-party.html
"In any case, there has never been a time in American history when the alleged personal traits of candidates mattered less... The huge, substantive gulf between the parties will be reflected in the policy positions of whomever they nominate, and will almost surely be reflected in the actual policies adopted by whoever wins [annd not in their personality idiosyncrasies]."
And, almost as if PK had emailed it directly to Bruni -- and David Brooks and Maureen Dowd, those other hawkers of character flaw nonsense:
"Political commentators who specialize in covering personalities rather than issues will balk at the assertion that their alleged area of expertise matters not at all."
Geez, Bruni. Get an area of expertise other than character sniping.
The 2016 election is about whether Medicare will be turned over to the tender mercies of Big Insurance, about whether Social Secuirity will be handed over to the sharks on Wall Street, about whether we can absorb another Scalia and/or Alito on SCOTUS for a generation, about whether people who were previously left to fend on their own for health insurance prior to Obamacare will have to go back to fending on their own.
Not about whether some Upper West Side toff can satisfy his itch for gossip.
Bruni did not get the memo from Paul Krugman:
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/13/opinion/it-takes-a-party.html
"In any case, there has never been a time in American history when the alleged personal traits of candidates mattered less... The huge, substantive gulf between the parties will be reflected in the policy positions of whomever they nominate, and will almost surely be reflected in the actual policies adopted by whoever wins [annd not in their personality idiosyncrasies]."
And, almost as if PK had emailed it directly to Bruni -- and David Brooks and Maureen Dowd, those other hawkers of character flaw nonsense:
"Political commentators who specialize in covering personalities rather than issues will balk at the assertion that their alleged area of expertise matters not at all."
Geez, Bruni. Get an area of expertise other than character sniping.
The 2016 election is about whether Medicare will be turned over to the tender mercies of Big Insurance, about whether Social Secuirity will be handed over to the sharks on Wall Street, about whether we can absorb another Scalia and/or Alito on SCOTUS for a generation, about whether people who were previously left to fend on their own for health insurance prior to Obamacare will have to go back to fending on their own.
Not about whether some Upper West Side toff can satisfy his itch for gossip.
15
And as long as so many comments and recommends are suggesting that the problem can be remedied by either throwing Republicans out of office and/or electing Bernie Sanders, let me also note another cause of the problems: the delusion that electing the right person is all we need to do to remedy the situation.
13
Political pessimism is understandable. A year and a half before the election, the presidential candidates are busy selling themselves to the billionaire donors, whose enormous investments are essential to the protracted costly (and negative) campaign. It's obvious that whichever candidates get the nomination (by winning the "money primary"), and whichever one of those wins, will be solidly dedicated to providing the best return on donor investment. In a political system that is officially (via Citizens United) "one dollar, one vote," the concerns of the ordinary non-donor voter will be entirely drowned out by the superior "speech" of donors. It's amazing that at least some people still vote.
Meanwhile, for those non-donors wages are stagnant, and even declining as employers shift ever more health care costs to employees. And that's for people fortunate enough to have a job now (they have no certainty of having a job tomorrow). Young people face limited job prospects, but an unlimited lifetime of college debt. The only mobility is incessantly downward. And the freedoms that once defined "America" are increasingly being "necessarily" sacrificed to the "War on Terror," even as militarized police wage their own war on citizens who are seen only as enemies to be incarcerated and fined.
For 99.9% of Americans, America is deteriorating into a third-world banana republic that leads the world only in income inequality and incarceration. That's the "bitter backdrop."
Meanwhile, for those non-donors wages are stagnant, and even declining as employers shift ever more health care costs to employees. And that's for people fortunate enough to have a job now (they have no certainty of having a job tomorrow). Young people face limited job prospects, but an unlimited lifetime of college debt. The only mobility is incessantly downward. And the freedoms that once defined "America" are increasingly being "necessarily" sacrificed to the "War on Terror," even as militarized police wage their own war on citizens who are seen only as enemies to be incarcerated and fined.
For 99.9% of Americans, America is deteriorating into a third-world banana republic that leads the world only in income inequality and incarceration. That's the "bitter backdrop."
17
I recall predictions 50 years ago that automation would allow everyone to work 3 hour days for the same or higher incomes. the biggest problem would be what to do with all the leisure time we would have. the reason that has not happened is that all of the rewards from automation have gone to capital instead of labor.
13
The truth that somehow seems to be missing in the conversation is that we need a Kennedy or Martin Luther King to stand up and say if we attack the issues of climate change we will alter the landscape of the world for the next 50 years. Job creation will be overwhelming and the pay good. Like when the the US decided to go to the moon - we must have a leader who can focus the country on the most pressing issue facing the US and then we must assume the leadership position and prove to the rest of the nations on earth that the US is the leader to a better world. If this is too hopeful or naive then we are doomed and the pessimists haven't even touched on the disaster ahead. Millions will die and it will make terrorist threats meaningless because terrorists too will be crushed as the world spins into a climate created holocaust that will spare no one, including the wealthiest in every nation.
4
I do not know anyone who believes any longer that our government, especially Congress, cares about the people of this country, that laws are equally or justly enforced, that considerations other than money (profit) drive policy, or that we even have an actual functioning democracy.
Our malaise is the result of thirty-plus years of pro-corporate, anti-consumer policies, the deliberate undermining of wages and benefits, the deliberate off-shoring of our manufacturing base, the thrown-open doors to bribery on an unprecedented scale, the rapacious self-protection of incumbents, the refusal to do anything about violence or decaying roads and bridges or climate change, the awful schools and the profiteering that drives "choice," and the endless wars.
Our government does not care. It does not listen. It is corrupt.
Our malaise is the result of thirty-plus years of pro-corporate, anti-consumer policies, the deliberate undermining of wages and benefits, the deliberate off-shoring of our manufacturing base, the thrown-open doors to bribery on an unprecedented scale, the rapacious self-protection of incumbents, the refusal to do anything about violence or decaying roads and bridges or climate change, the awful schools and the profiteering that drives "choice," and the endless wars.
Our government does not care. It does not listen. It is corrupt.
15
Part of the problem is our metrics for labor. Let's take the trash collector: I know of few positions that I appreciate more. Every week, in good weather and bad, the trucks come and take away my trash and recyclables. For this I pay something through my taxes and a nominal monthly fee. I hope the guy doing this job makes a good living, with benefits, time to spend with his kids, and the opportunity to save for his future. I am a college-educated professional so I probably make more than him. ( I doubt he would resent me for that if true). And the difference is surely not outlandish. On the other hand, people like Romney call this guy a "taker not a maker," and many of the uber rich probably never stop to think of him at all. Their value you see, is just so much greater than my guy. Well, in their egotistic minds perhaps, but not in a normal person's viewpoint. Somehow we have to make these masters of the universe types get a real jolt of reality, and implement a long overdue adjustment to the value of work. Not sure how to do it, but that's the start of a cure for our depression.
12
We should consider Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King's speech from the Riverside Church in 1967. In this speech (entitled A Time to Break Silence) he said towards the end:
"I am convinced that if we are to get on the right side of the world revolution, we as a nation must undergo a radical revolution of values. We must rapidly begin...we must rapidly begin the shift from a thing-oriented society to a person-oriented society. When machines and computers, profit motives and property rights, are considered more important than people, the giant triplets of racism, extreme materialism, and militarism are incapable of being conquered.
"A true revolution of values will soon cause us to question the fairness and justice of many of our past and present policies. On the one hand, we are called to play the Good Samaritan on life's roadside, but that will be only an initial act. One day we must come to see that the whole Jericho Road must be transformed so that men and women will not be constantly beaten and robbed as they make their journey on life's highway. True compassion is more than flinging a coin to a beggar. It comes to see that an edifice which produces beggars needs restructuring."
"I am convinced that if we are to get on the right side of the world revolution, we as a nation must undergo a radical revolution of values. We must rapidly begin...we must rapidly begin the shift from a thing-oriented society to a person-oriented society. When machines and computers, profit motives and property rights, are considered more important than people, the giant triplets of racism, extreme materialism, and militarism are incapable of being conquered.
"A true revolution of values will soon cause us to question the fairness and justice of many of our past and present policies. On the one hand, we are called to play the Good Samaritan on life's roadside, but that will be only an initial act. One day we must come to see that the whole Jericho Road must be transformed so that men and women will not be constantly beaten and robbed as they make their journey on life's highway. True compassion is more than flinging a coin to a beggar. It comes to see that an edifice which produces beggars needs restructuring."
12
I strongly disagree with your pessimistic view. Our best days are in front of us. We just need to shove the Republicans out of the way.
18
I realize it's tough for Frank to admit this, but the ultimate cause of this malaise is not robotics or sophisticated algorithms, but the inept leadership, or lack thereof, coming from President Obama. From drawing meaningless red lines in Syria to his inability to corral his own fellow Democrats on a trade bill, this President, leader of his party's left wing, has been incapable of providing leadership to anyone but Beverly Hills and UES members of the Gentry Left. As with the last feckless liberal to hold the White House, the sublimely incompetent Jimmy Carter, rudderlesness at the top yields hopelessness elsewhere. The Russians say that a fish rots for the head down. The Russians are right.
4
As long as we are stuck with a two party system where the same wealthy class controls both parties, we will have at least electoral disdain. Right now 40% of the electorate will vote Republican and 40% will vote Democrat no matter the nominee. Of the remaining 20%, some have no idea that a Republican candidate will take one approach to satisfy the wealthy class and that a Democrat will take a slightly different approach to satisfy the wealthy class, i.e., they do not understand politics. Another substantial percent may vote for the candidate that they like better. This works for elections of the prom king and queen, which are popularity contests. For leaders of the free world, likeability has its place, but it pales in comparison to the more important qualities of leadership. Then there is the percent of "undecideds" who remain undecided even as they walk into the polling booth. How these people make a decision has to be fairly far removed from being based on qualities of leadership and/or an adherence to a set of values and beliefs to which those voters subscribe.
So this is how we elect our presidents. Now, if we had multiple parties and candidates, that process would change. Campaigns are costly, but if the Supreme Court reversed Citizens United and ceased to equate free speech with campaign finance, we might have real democratic elections. However, the Supreme Court justices are beholden to the same wealthy class as are the presidents who appointed them.
So this is how we elect our presidents. Now, if we had multiple parties and candidates, that process would change. Campaigns are costly, but if the Supreme Court reversed Citizens United and ceased to equate free speech with campaign finance, we might have real democratic elections. However, the Supreme Court justices are beholden to the same wealthy class as are the presidents who appointed them.
7
Yours is basically an argument for the bygone days of "American Exceptionalism" clothed in thin statistics and survey data. You miss the point in front of you. Obviously Americans feel bad about their country. Who could feel good about all the political nonsense from the conservative Republican side: gridlock, government shutdown, endless battle over the ACA, wars we never should have gotten in, not-so-thinly veiled racism. Who could feel good about that? But tell the truth about what is clearly and undeniably before us: a country that is politically and demographically changing, which means and economic (power) change is in the offing. If I were you, I would be upset, too.
7
When only the top 1% are seeing their wealth increase, the "middle class" sees itself shrinking, racial tensions increasing even with our first "black" President, and everyone seems to be a "victim," there is going to be malaise.
That can change with a President who believes America is "exceptional." Hopefully, we've learned our lesson about "first" anything.
That can change with a President who believes America is "exceptional." Hopefully, we've learned our lesson about "first" anything.
4
I'm not bitter, I am sad. Sad for my country that things have gotten to this point. America needs a leader, someone who genuinely respects cares about all of us, no matter what our political, religious or personal beliefs are.
It isn't Barack Obama.
Millions of voters entrusted him not once, but twice to solve these problems without realizing that Mr. Obama was part of the problem.
I've met Barack Obama. I've also met Bill Clinton. For all of Mr. Clinton's flaws, you have to see him working a room at a political event. The man is genuinely concerned, and shakes hands with everyone he can. I have more than once seen Clinton critics and political foes come face to face with Mr. Clinton and walk away with respect for him. I'm a proud, registered Republican and THAT is what we need in a President...someone who at the very least cares and can identify with ordinary Americans.
Barack Obama did not live a moment of his formative years as an ordinary American, nor is his charmed life as an Ivy League darling sufficient to allow him to get what all of us in the real world face every day. Worse still he's ultimately not interested in anyone's opinions beyond his own.
When young people see Mr. Obama mocking and ridiculing the very people he promised to work with and respect--when we see Mr. Obama golfing and grinning as families of aid workers and journalists see their children beheaded on television--that sends a message. A really bad one.
It isn't Barack Obama.
Millions of voters entrusted him not once, but twice to solve these problems without realizing that Mr. Obama was part of the problem.
I've met Barack Obama. I've also met Bill Clinton. For all of Mr. Clinton's flaws, you have to see him working a room at a political event. The man is genuinely concerned, and shakes hands with everyone he can. I have more than once seen Clinton critics and political foes come face to face with Mr. Clinton and walk away with respect for him. I'm a proud, registered Republican and THAT is what we need in a President...someone who at the very least cares and can identify with ordinary Americans.
Barack Obama did not live a moment of his formative years as an ordinary American, nor is his charmed life as an Ivy League darling sufficient to allow him to get what all of us in the real world face every day. Worse still he's ultimately not interested in anyone's opinions beyond his own.
When young people see Mr. Obama mocking and ridiculing the very people he promised to work with and respect--when we see Mr. Obama golfing and grinning as families of aid workers and journalists see their children beheaded on television--that sends a message. A really bad one.
9
This is the natural evolution of an empire. We rise and then we fall. Talk to the British...or the Spanish...or the Ottomans...or the Romans. I think we need to get over being the leader and become a team player. At some point America's economic and military might will be eclipsed by someone else. It's inevitable and we should figure out how to adapt, survive, and prosper.
5
The United States is going backwards relative to the rest of the world: We have chosen as a nation to give our national treasure of a very few very wealthy individuals. To do that we have abandoned our investment in (1) education, (2) basis research, (3) infrastructure, (4) the poor and middle class individuals who have the genius to invent the future for us (we need the free university education that many states once offered). There seems to be a national passion to give it all to a few so that we can return to the Middle Ages. Collectively we have given up the American Dream.
11
I have no idea why anyone at the New York Times, a newspaper instrumental in sowing the seeds of our nation's discourse and anxiety about the future would be so troubled.
Barack Obama gave every indication on the 2008 campaign trail that he indeed was not up to the task of running this country, uniting us, getting us past race and working with the Republican party. Instead of actually taking a second to find out (and tell us) who Barack Obama really was, the Times and the rest of the mainstream media decided to go along to get along.
Now we have a President who has done more to increase poverty rates in the Black Community than any US President since slavery. Now we have a President who dispatches First Lady Michelle Obama (who has as many if not more insecurities) to turn every situation in the United States into a way to make victims of my race. We have a President more interested in appearing on late night comedy shows and picking NCAA brackets than rolling up his sleeves, going to Detroit, Chicago and Baltimore and meeting people who are disillusioned and suffering in real time, in real ways.
Bitter?
No Frank, try better. As in the news media has to do better in 2016 by getting out of the celebrity candidate business and letting the American people make honest choices about our next leader.
Barack Obama gave every indication on the 2008 campaign trail that he indeed was not up to the task of running this country, uniting us, getting us past race and working with the Republican party. Instead of actually taking a second to find out (and tell us) who Barack Obama really was, the Times and the rest of the mainstream media decided to go along to get along.
Now we have a President who has done more to increase poverty rates in the Black Community than any US President since slavery. Now we have a President who dispatches First Lady Michelle Obama (who has as many if not more insecurities) to turn every situation in the United States into a way to make victims of my race. We have a President more interested in appearing on late night comedy shows and picking NCAA brackets than rolling up his sleeves, going to Detroit, Chicago and Baltimore and meeting people who are disillusioned and suffering in real time, in real ways.
Bitter?
No Frank, try better. As in the news media has to do better in 2016 by getting out of the celebrity candidate business and letting the American people make honest choices about our next leader.
6
What good is a president with vision if the oligarchs and their congressional lapdogs don't allow her to do anything? What's needed is a voting public with vision, and good luck with that one!
7
I wonder when we will decide that unfettered technological progress is not what we want or need. Who are all these innovations for? Not for ordinary people. We don't need them. We don't want to be done out of our jobs. Why should we have robots who can "perform legal, pharmaceutical and medical work?" Who can "produce journalism?" This makes no sense. None. Who is it all for? Who? Corporate heads who don't really need more money? Not for ordinary people, that's for sure. At one time, Adam Smith was thinking of human beings profiting from his ideas. Now the human has been removed from consideration. Just because something can be done, doesn't mean it should be. It sounds like we´re heading for some strange distopian future. I could drive down the wrong side of a highway, but I don´t.
2
''Where there is no vision, the people perish''
For many decades, we had dreams of what we could be as a nation, each person with aspirations that seemed to have a decent chance. We emerged a free people from the Revolution, created the Constitution that sparked a worldwide movement toward democracy, and emerged stronger from a Civil War that made a government, of, for and by the people a new ideal.
We did well at great projects--the intercontinental railroad, universal free public education, WWII, the interstate system, and the race to the moon.
But government became the problem 35 years ago (according to RReagan) and at the same time big businesses were implored to focus on nothing but maximizing shareholder value. As the government was torn down, businesses were focused entirely on whatever they could do to return a buck to shareholders (to include offshoring jobs, cutting worker benefits, anemic hiring, and stashing over $2 trillion in cash overseas.)
There is no vision in any of this, just those in charge grinding away at numbers that are mostly free of any human content whatsoever. There are, of course, rewards for those at the top and those who derive most of their income from capital.
But for the rest of us, there is little to inspire confidence (or the belief that we ''on the right track''), the kind of confidence that used to make us believe in own, and our country's, possibilities.
For many decades, we had dreams of what we could be as a nation, each person with aspirations that seemed to have a decent chance. We emerged a free people from the Revolution, created the Constitution that sparked a worldwide movement toward democracy, and emerged stronger from a Civil War that made a government, of, for and by the people a new ideal.
We did well at great projects--the intercontinental railroad, universal free public education, WWII, the interstate system, and the race to the moon.
But government became the problem 35 years ago (according to RReagan) and at the same time big businesses were implored to focus on nothing but maximizing shareholder value. As the government was torn down, businesses were focused entirely on whatever they could do to return a buck to shareholders (to include offshoring jobs, cutting worker benefits, anemic hiring, and stashing over $2 trillion in cash overseas.)
There is no vision in any of this, just those in charge grinding away at numbers that are mostly free of any human content whatsoever. There are, of course, rewards for those at the top and those who derive most of their income from capital.
But for the rest of us, there is little to inspire confidence (or the belief that we ''on the right track''), the kind of confidence that used to make us believe in own, and our country's, possibilities.
7
A product or service can be provided by American workers, or by third-world workers at a tiny fraction of the cost, or by machines at a still smaller fraction of the cost. But in all cases it is still going to be sold at pretty much the same price, or if at a lesser price then in greater volume. The only difference is who the money goes to. Money that no longer goes to the American workers goes to the owners of the businesses that outsource it to foreigners or machines.
We assume this is fair and just, but it's not. Enriching the few at the expense of the many is an ideal way to destroy democracy, and is therefore profoundly unjust.
The obvious answer is for us as a society to divert the money saved by outsourcing or automation, and distribute it to the displaced American workers rather than to the businesses that bypassed them.
This will require us to think way out of the box. To rethink tariffs, tax rates, and guaranteed national income, for example.
We assume this is fair and just, but it's not. Enriching the few at the expense of the many is an ideal way to destroy democracy, and is therefore profoundly unjust.
The obvious answer is for us as a society to divert the money saved by outsourcing or automation, and distribute it to the displaced American workers rather than to the businesses that bypassed them.
This will require us to think way out of the box. To rethink tariffs, tax rates, and guaranteed national income, for example.
4
Bernie Sanders seems to be the only Presidential candidate that understands the national and personal toll that our current economic system is having on more and more Americans. But then Bruni seems to put the TPP forward as at least a partial solution. How the TPP can address and not exacerbate this downward spiral is a mystery to me and I suspect to most Americans as well.
11
American Democracy's slow death by a thousand cuts (and Supreme votes) manifests daily in broken trains, bridges, roads, software, and just about anything else structural or functional.
It takes will and problem solving for solutions. We could correct this if intelligence was operative. It is blocked by greed, liars, anti science, and insane religious distortion-the GOP platform. How to we turn that around? Depressing.
It takes will and problem solving for solutions. We could correct this if intelligence was operative. It is blocked by greed, liars, anti science, and insane religious distortion-the GOP platform. How to we turn that around? Depressing.
8
I find that "right track/wrong track" poll question to be inherently ambiguous, and the results therefore are inherently misleading. I might respond "wrong track" because I think that extreme conservatives and obstructionist Republicans in Congress have too much influence and are keeping the country from doing what needs to be done. Others might say "wrong track" because they think that valiant conservatives and rigorously principled Republicans in Congress have too little influence and can't get the country back on the right track. There should be some way in the polling to find out what the respondent thinks is wrong about the "track" and what the right track would be. That poll could be meaningful.
10
OK, if we are in decline then, by the same metrics used, what company is ascending? And please, don't say China. We are talking about who can be a single world leader. GDP alone does not make a world leader.
Oh I see. Obama is pushing TPP and drilling in the Arctic because he wants to cheer us up. Very cogent Frank. Keep it up.
4
We still haven't recovered from 9/11, and it's possible that we may never do so. It shattered our illusion that because of the demise of the Soviet Union, we were now in command of the world. Then, like Sisyphus, we watched helplessly as the stone rolled back to the bottom of the hill. It can take individuals decades to pick up the pieces after such a profound psychological shock -- why should nations be any different?
2
We should have overcome that angst years ago. When you lose a loved one, or your ability to walk let's say, your duty is to press on. Only inherently weak or psychologically impaired people struggle on endlessly, wringing their hands. I disagree with your comment totally, but think that maybe that is the hot button a true leader could touch on-- get over it.
1
As mega,and not so mega corporations have become international,they have no allegiance to any country,not even to the one where they were formed and made them what they are.Look at GE .They now have more workers outside the US than they have here .They make their money any place they can and use Wall Street as an international gambling house.They buy politicians making them de facto rulers.Don't believe me? Try find a mom and pop grocery, or drug store or hardware store. Not just manufacturing,finance or insurance.They have taken over the world thanks to some stupid voters happy with some crumbs
8
Tgfc....thank god for comments. Many comments here get to the heart of our real issues. Economic inequality, rule by the 1 percent, and the loss of democracy. We need columnists to reflect that. Not just what do the polls say this week.
9
"The economist Edwin Truman, who worked in the Obama administration, told Weisman: “We’re withdrawing from the central place we held on the international stage.”"
That stage where we paid for the security of Germany, Japan, South Korea, Israel, Saudi Arabia...while they built thriving economies or new industries that took jobs away from American workers. That "central" place and foolish policies enabled the US to make millions of enemies around the world.
Maybe _not_ being the world's policeman won't be so bad.
That stage where we paid for the security of Germany, Japan, South Korea, Israel, Saudi Arabia...while they built thriving economies or new industries that took jobs away from American workers. That "central" place and foolish policies enabled the US to make millions of enemies around the world.
Maybe _not_ being the world's policeman won't be so bad.
4
People become pessimistic because we have a crooked political system that serves only those who pay, which is strange since those same people make laws that give them pensions galore, free health care, etc., and guess who's paying? Those people that they lie to, in order to be elected, only to ignore them once they're in office. Then, our court system has not helped, since it declared that corporations were people, but strangely, those corporations don't go to jail when they break the law!
So, what we have here are crooks making the law and crooks interpreting the law! Just how do you win, if you're an average citizen? In the meantime, jobs that pay a living wage are few and far between and this will continue, as we also bloat as a country, so you have many more people than there are jobs to go around, regardless to what those jobs will pay, and everything is stacked against all but the very rich. Hopelessness?
So, what we have here are crooks making the law and crooks interpreting the law! Just how do you win, if you're an average citizen? In the meantime, jobs that pay a living wage are few and far between and this will continue, as we also bloat as a country, so you have many more people than there are jobs to go around, regardless to what those jobs will pay, and everything is stacked against all but the very rich. Hopelessness?
7
In other democracies with publicly financed elections, they have more equality and more democracy. Even with budget cuts, they have certain standards for public responsibility to ensure the general welfare. Their corruption which exists everywhere is the illegal kind.
Contrasted with the US political corruption which is now completely legalized and blessed by the Court. Private donors and lawmakers have the path open to them to benefit hugely.
We have had 2 Dem presidents who were Repub lite on many issues. Can this pattern be broken, in our system of fund raising by billionaire?
Where is the reporting on how other nations pay for electing their leaders and lawmakers, so average people have a chance to get their interests represented?
Contrasted with the US political corruption which is now completely legalized and blessed by the Court. Private donors and lawmakers have the path open to them to benefit hugely.
We have had 2 Dem presidents who were Repub lite on many issues. Can this pattern be broken, in our system of fund raising by billionaire?
Where is the reporting on how other nations pay for electing their leaders and lawmakers, so average people have a chance to get their interests represented?
5
Obama - whom I voted for twice and gave all sorts of contributions and wrote policy papers for is dead wrong about the benefits of drilling off shore. Of course he knows the con arguments - he made them himself in his race with McCain. There is considerable risk and very few benefits. The source of unease- is clear to all- the game is rigged. Em that has gits. Couple that wih a Congress with no progressive voice and no such instinct and you have a real source of dismay. The public interest has been defined as football stadiums, bipartisan votes on undoing the Iran agreement, climate change denial, the fight to destroy Obamacare, and the callous turning of public education into a profit making endeavor. No wonder there is unease- first from those who suffer and second from those who look on and ask - How did it get this way?
8
We have two economies and two countries.. In the land the wealthy, growth has been in the double digits for many years now. For the rest of us the economy has been contracting for as long. This state of affairs is what informs all politics now.
8
Is it time to get over the obsession with growth in GDP? It appears to me that we need to carefully parse through the relationship between pure economic growth, and growth in equality. It quite often seems that two are at odds with each other. If we think about growth in GDP as the main economic indicator we are chasing, it's very unlikely that anything is going to change. Most of the benefits of growth will accrue to the wealthy who own capital. It is very taboo for a politician to say that he or she is not interested in economic growth, but growth in equality, but I think the second type of growth is the kind that will lead us to see real change in our society, and the type really worth pursuing.
2
Two observations:
1. The economy is changing. As technology improves, capital becomes a more valuable input than labor. The result: in the aggregate, we don't have to work as much - but there are fewer jobs available and the benefits of production go disproportionately to the owners of capital. The solution is to redistribute some of these benefits through taxation, ideally to those who can no longer obtain income-producing jobs because they've been replaced by more efficient technology.
2. The media is a major cause of the failure of American federal government and American feelings of insecurity. Since the repeal of the Fairness Doctrine, we have seen the news media develop competing narratives of reality. Americans subscribe to the narrative they prefer, become polarized, and elect highly ideological politicians. This leads to political dysfunction and the general sense of malaise described in the article. In addition, the narratives delivered by the news media increasingly and deliberately provoke fear and anger in viewers. No wonder people are more pessimistic than ever.
1. The economy is changing. As technology improves, capital becomes a more valuable input than labor. The result: in the aggregate, we don't have to work as much - but there are fewer jobs available and the benefits of production go disproportionately to the owners of capital. The solution is to redistribute some of these benefits through taxation, ideally to those who can no longer obtain income-producing jobs because they've been replaced by more efficient technology.
2. The media is a major cause of the failure of American federal government and American feelings of insecurity. Since the repeal of the Fairness Doctrine, we have seen the news media develop competing narratives of reality. Americans subscribe to the narrative they prefer, become polarized, and elect highly ideological politicians. This leads to political dysfunction and the general sense of malaise described in the article. In addition, the narratives delivered by the news media increasingly and deliberately provoke fear and anger in viewers. No wonder people are more pessimistic than ever.
8
What we need are "innovations, including better software and sophisticated algorithms, that have or will put machines in jobs once held by people" to determine exactly what the value of labor really is. Why should it drive down wages? Fewer people doing more work should drive up wages. The problem with our economy is that people, company owners, with license from Congress, give the value of labor to shareholders. The law should mandate algorithms that pay labors true value to people who do the labor. Shareholders do nothing, their value is, at most, a small interest on their investment. Once corporate workers are paid for their value, then we can determine the true value of service workers and agricultural workers. They provide great value to the people who provide value to corporations. Paying the true value of labor would create a virtuous cycle that will benefit the country and democracy and set a good example to the world. Lets use these innovations for economic justice instead of corporate greed.
3
We are adrift because we have two contradictory pictures of our own reality and possibilities. One wants to improve the government we have and make it function better, spending money where necessary, and the other wants to reduce government in favor of letting markets deal with (or not deal with) problems. Squabbling between the proponents of these two pictures have left the government unable to do much of anything.
Until one of these views wins a decisive victory we will remain adrift. The logical solution is for us to figure out how to decide which of these views is more accurate and go with it. What is actually happening is a series of propaganda wars with little connection to logic or reality and as much connection as possible to peoples' fears.
Basically the country is going insane, having a nervous breakdown, developing a dual personality, and that is why we are adrift and sputtering. Our world leadership position is slipping away, not so much because we are unable to avoid mistakes as because we are unable or unwilling to learn from them. Dubya was either a pretty good president who borrowed too much money or a top competitor for the worst. Obama is either a centrist seeking policies the nation can agree with or an incompetent diabolically clever schemer who is out to weaken and destroy the country and institute big brother socialism.
Which of these views is correct is decided by facts and experiments. Which will win depends on propaganda and money.
Until one of these views wins a decisive victory we will remain adrift. The logical solution is for us to figure out how to decide which of these views is more accurate and go with it. What is actually happening is a series of propaganda wars with little connection to logic or reality and as much connection as possible to peoples' fears.
Basically the country is going insane, having a nervous breakdown, developing a dual personality, and that is why we are adrift and sputtering. Our world leadership position is slipping away, not so much because we are unable to avoid mistakes as because we are unable or unwilling to learn from them. Dubya was either a pretty good president who borrowed too much money or a top competitor for the worst. Obama is either a centrist seeking policies the nation can agree with or an incompetent diabolically clever schemer who is out to weaken and destroy the country and institute big brother socialism.
Which of these views is correct is decided by facts and experiments. Which will win depends on propaganda and money.
4
Good op-ed.
A key para is: "And the presidency may well be determined not by any candidate’s fine-tuned calibration on hot-button issues or by cunning electoral arithmetic. It may hinge on eloquence, boldness and a bigger picture." Isn't that what we got in 2008?
Granted no national leader ever took the job fully ready, but Obama, a really bright guy, had no public executive experience. And, barring Ben Harrison, no national, leader leaves the job having made no mistakes.
Peering into the future to see if today's income (productivity) imbalance will ever self correct takes a naive boldness. But as matters now are, it looks like we will have super-productive computers and other advances. But low-productivity Americans (50% to 70%) will miss out and be on one side of a great gap, while high-productivity Americans (30% to 50%) do pretty well and are on the other side. Not a picture of stability.
A key para is: "And the presidency may well be determined not by any candidate’s fine-tuned calibration on hot-button issues or by cunning electoral arithmetic. It may hinge on eloquence, boldness and a bigger picture." Isn't that what we got in 2008?
Granted no national leader ever took the job fully ready, but Obama, a really bright guy, had no public executive experience. And, barring Ben Harrison, no national, leader leaves the job having made no mistakes.
Peering into the future to see if today's income (productivity) imbalance will ever self correct takes a naive boldness. But as matters now are, it looks like we will have super-productive computers and other advances. But low-productivity Americans (50% to 70%) will miss out and be on one side of a great gap, while high-productivity Americans (30% to 50%) do pretty well and are on the other side. Not a picture of stability.
1
The parties have been too far apart for more optimistic "we're in this together" politics. But there is room for common ground. Here are just three examples:
(1) Immigration -- Republicans will agree to immigration reform that legalizes most of the illegal immigrants who are currently here. But Democrats have to give up on the path to citizenship and settle for a path to permanent residency status. If Democrats think legalizing those people who are here in violation of the law is what is best for our country ... and not just because it will ensure more Democratic voters ... it is a fair compromise. Democrats also have to agree to programs that will lead to more assimilation of immigrants into the American culture and to more control over who comes here in the future. It hurts our schools (and the poorest Americans in them) when they are flooded with non-English speakers who do not understand or respect our history, our laws, and our political institutions.
(2) Tax reform - This has been the low hanging fruit for too long. Republicans say they want lower corporate rates and less loopholes. Democrats say they want lower corporate rates and less loopholes. What's the problem? Take the win and boost the economy!
(3) Healthcare reform - The path to an agreement here lies in letting the Blue states keep Obamacare as is and letting the Red states try different alternatives. This issue has been so contentious, yet neither party has even explored a common ground.
(1) Immigration -- Republicans will agree to immigration reform that legalizes most of the illegal immigrants who are currently here. But Democrats have to give up on the path to citizenship and settle for a path to permanent residency status. If Democrats think legalizing those people who are here in violation of the law is what is best for our country ... and not just because it will ensure more Democratic voters ... it is a fair compromise. Democrats also have to agree to programs that will lead to more assimilation of immigrants into the American culture and to more control over who comes here in the future. It hurts our schools (and the poorest Americans in them) when they are flooded with non-English speakers who do not understand or respect our history, our laws, and our political institutions.
(2) Tax reform - This has been the low hanging fruit for too long. Republicans say they want lower corporate rates and less loopholes. Democrats say they want lower corporate rates and less loopholes. What's the problem? Take the win and boost the economy!
(3) Healthcare reform - The path to an agreement here lies in letting the Blue states keep Obamacare as is and letting the Red states try different alternatives. This issue has been so contentious, yet neither party has even explored a common ground.
8
9/11 certainly made Americans feel a lot more vulnerable and insecure for our safety, like much of the rest of the world. It was The Great Recession, however, that left many of us feeling more expendable than exceptional as our respective shaky economic presents gave way to devastating economic futures of permanent loss and despair. Adjusting to the downward mobility trend being lived by the majority of Americans is a seismic recalibration for the United States overall, as viewed from within the country and by the rest of the world. Blaming racism as the primary motivation for the spate of police shootings and violent arrests of unarmed African American men only serves to obscure the probable root cause, which is a present and future of utter economic hopelessness. As many scholars have pointed out, the growing income equality gap in this country, along with the declining middle class, is on an unsustainable collision course with the future. I don't know how to best resolve this but right now it appears we are evolving into the United States of Despair. And sorry Republicans, tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans will only serve to widen the income equality gap and move the middle class from the current "endangered species" list to the "extinct" one.
6
The lack of optimism you describe is the prime result of greater and greater income inequality. If you were to take a poll of the 0.1%, I think you'd find a lot of satisfaction there, except that they might wish they could be even wealthier. But when most other people ask the question: are my children going to be better off than I am; the answer is a resounding "NO!" This is what people mean when they say that America is on the wrong track.
We can reverse the downward spiral of greater and greater income inequality with new tax policy, rewards for long-term rather than short-term profits at corporations, limits on CEO incomes, breaking up the huge banks, regulating free enterprise so that profits are shared with workers etc. The Ronnie Reagan experiment of trickle-down economics has utterly failed. It is time for change.
We can reverse the downward spiral of greater and greater income inequality with new tax policy, rewards for long-term rather than short-term profits at corporations, limits on CEO incomes, breaking up the huge banks, regulating free enterprise so that profits are shared with workers etc. The Ronnie Reagan experiment of trickle-down economics has utterly failed. It is time for change.
3
Um, that would be Bernie.
6
We cannot claim economic, or any other kind of world leadership, while displaying a philosophy to the rest of the world that is out of line with what we claim are our core values.
Militaristic empire building and abandonment of those in need here and abroad is the face that America presents to the world while we claim the opposite.
The Republican Party most loudly proclaims America's good intentions, while leglislatively showing the world greed and hegemony.
Militaristic empire building and abandonment of those in need here and abroad is the face that America presents to the world while we claim the opposite.
The Republican Party most loudly proclaims America's good intentions, while leglislatively showing the world greed and hegemony.
8
The vision thing is nice but I just want someone in office who will not install another intellectually dishonest conservative mandarin on SCOTUS.
Go Hillary!
Go Hillary!
5
The question is a misleading waste of time invariably answered by uninformed or misinformed voters.
2
So far the Republican candidates are staying true to form: blast Obama and Hillary Clinton. Wouldn't it be refreshing to have a Republican candidate stand up and boldly state what he or she stands on the major issues of our day, what he or she hopes to accomplish in eight years in office based on those issues, and never mention Obama, Clinton, or Democrat? No, of course, not. They are against anything Obama has done and Clinton will do. After they focus group their right wing base they are also against marriage equality, a woman's right to health care choices, financial support for poor people, and they are for everyone being armed armed to the teeth. That's all we hear from that crop. There hasn't been an original thought out of that clown car in years.
10
The author like almost all journalists and pundits treats the 2016 like its electing a dictator.
For example, "President Obama’s current push for a sweeping trade agreement and his support for energy exploration, including drilling in the Atlantic and the Arctic." implies that Obama was responsible for the laws passed by Congress to authorize drilling in the Arctic, that Obama ran the auction in 2007 that sold Shell the lease in the Arctic, that Obama is the one who wrote the Supreme Law of the Land that prohibits Obama taking the lease Shell paid for without due process and compensation.
We the People who vote in ALL elections elected a Congress that made the law that gives Shell the property right to drill in the Arctic, so the best Obama can do is write rules under the administrative procedures established by the Congress elected by We the People who vote in ALL elections to make Shell hire lots more labor driving up costs to do its drilling safely in the Arctic.
However, We the People who vote in ALL elections as well as We the People who shop have made it pretty clear we want fewer people working and those paid less, and if that means Asians instead of Americans working, so be it, because We the People want cheap goods and services. But after seeking out the cheapest stuff, We the People get upset that we are paid low wages.
We the People deserve high wages and low prices because We the People are Exceptional! TANSTAAFL even for American Exceptionalists.
For example, "President Obama’s current push for a sweeping trade agreement and his support for energy exploration, including drilling in the Atlantic and the Arctic." implies that Obama was responsible for the laws passed by Congress to authorize drilling in the Arctic, that Obama ran the auction in 2007 that sold Shell the lease in the Arctic, that Obama is the one who wrote the Supreme Law of the Land that prohibits Obama taking the lease Shell paid for without due process and compensation.
We the People who vote in ALL elections elected a Congress that made the law that gives Shell the property right to drill in the Arctic, so the best Obama can do is write rules under the administrative procedures established by the Congress elected by We the People who vote in ALL elections to make Shell hire lots more labor driving up costs to do its drilling safely in the Arctic.
However, We the People who vote in ALL elections as well as We the People who shop have made it pretty clear we want fewer people working and those paid less, and if that means Asians instead of Americans working, so be it, because We the People want cheap goods and services. But after seeking out the cheapest stuff, We the People get upset that we are paid low wages.
We the People deserve high wages and low prices because We the People are Exceptional! TANSTAAFL even for American Exceptionalists.
5
With the country very closely divided into Red and Blue camps and somewhere around 45% of voters planted firmly on each side, no wonder the trend is the country is on the wrong track: half think we're already too progressive and should go backwards to an imagined better past... and half think we're not moving into the present and toward the future fast enough.
The old South, and the areas mainly settled after the Civil War by people from the old South, never really believed the Confederates lost the war, or at the very least have carried their hard feelings through to the present day - look at a political map. The we have, after slavery, the country's second biggest mistake: Texas. Try a thought experiment: what would the country be like if we had not admitted Texas to the union?
So, to me, it's the same old battle between to impossible-to-resolve ideologies, going back to the Civil War, the Federalist Papers, and the founding of the country which some thought would be a paradise of freedom for everyone, and other thought we be just ducky for white Christian land (and slave) owners who'd be able to keep more if there were no King around to tax them.
Of course nobody is satisfied we're on the right track!
The old South, and the areas mainly settled after the Civil War by people from the old South, never really believed the Confederates lost the war, or at the very least have carried their hard feelings through to the present day - look at a political map. The we have, after slavery, the country's second biggest mistake: Texas. Try a thought experiment: what would the country be like if we had not admitted Texas to the union?
So, to me, it's the same old battle between to impossible-to-resolve ideologies, going back to the Civil War, the Federalist Papers, and the founding of the country which some thought would be a paradise of freedom for everyone, and other thought we be just ducky for white Christian land (and slave) owners who'd be able to keep more if there were no King around to tax them.
Of course nobody is satisfied we're on the right track!
4
The solution is obvious. Remove "progressives" from any and all positions of power. Neo-Marxism simply doesn't work as we have seen since 2006 when democrats took control of Congress.
1
Maybe it has something to do with the fact that American culture despises intelligence and empathy, and glorifies celebrity and selfishness.
Maybe conservatives should talk less about how gay marriage is a harbinger of "cultural decline" and start talking about how their OWN anti-intellectual, anti-scientific, shallow consumerist ethos is turning us into a nation of incurious, credulous idiots.
Maybe conservatives should talk less about how gay marriage is a harbinger of "cultural decline" and start talking about how their OWN anti-intellectual, anti-scientific, shallow consumerist ethos is turning us into a nation of incurious, credulous idiots.
9
The problem with the polling question "Right Direction/Wrong Direction" is it never asks anyone to define or spell out the desired direction. A Tea Party voter thinks we're on the wrong direction because of the introduction of Obamacare. A Progressive thinks we're on the wrong direction because Obamacare doesn't go far enough. These are diametrically opposed directions, but both register in the poll as "wrong." No wonder "wrong" outpolls "right" by so much.
4
"In a column a year ago, I noted that for a solid decade, the percentage of Americans who said that the United States was on the wrong track " - Frank Bruni - NYT.
We have not been on the right track since the days of FDR. Beginning with his administration we as a nation have become very anti-liberal. The liberal, a freeman, a noble generous tolerant person is what we should all strive to be, is almost dead. Politicians, the media and public education have no clue as to the meaning of liberalism or the importance to our way of life. If we continue to destroy liberalism we destroy our very heart and soul. If we continue to embrace, support and import those, legally and illegally, who are extremely ant-liberal and whose sole purpose is to make our culture like their own, a culture of kings, dictators and religious states, we are done as a viable nation. Historians will look back on this era and wonder in amazement as to how and why we allowed this to happen. A land of freeman; noble, generous and tolerant to a land of the oppressed and freedom less !?
We have not been on the right track since the days of FDR. Beginning with his administration we as a nation have become very anti-liberal. The liberal, a freeman, a noble generous tolerant person is what we should all strive to be, is almost dead. Politicians, the media and public education have no clue as to the meaning of liberalism or the importance to our way of life. If we continue to destroy liberalism we destroy our very heart and soul. If we continue to embrace, support and import those, legally and illegally, who are extremely ant-liberal and whose sole purpose is to make our culture like their own, a culture of kings, dictators and religious states, we are done as a viable nation. Historians will look back on this era and wonder in amazement as to how and why we allowed this to happen. A land of freeman; noble, generous and tolerant to a land of the oppressed and freedom less !?
1
Of course the Nation is full of pessimism. How could it be otherwise?.....especially when policies are designed to reward large donors & to win elections as opposed to raising the economic, social & cultural bar for the long term good of the Nation.
At the same time, we are constantly being told that our Country is a terrible place, full of evil doers (rich & poor alike) hell bent on gaming the system thus giving the appearance that everyone is grabbing whatever they can while the getting is good.
Who will lead us out of this morass? When you stop to think that the frontrunners are either another Clinton or another Bush then the real depression starts to set in. And so, if you're waiting for someone in Washington to lead the way you are going to be grossly disappointed.
So the only solution is to keep your head down, keep plowing ahead. and aggressively prepare your own private exit strategy.
At the same time, we are constantly being told that our Country is a terrible place, full of evil doers (rich & poor alike) hell bent on gaming the system thus giving the appearance that everyone is grabbing whatever they can while the getting is good.
Who will lead us out of this morass? When you stop to think that the frontrunners are either another Clinton or another Bush then the real depression starts to set in. And so, if you're waiting for someone in Washington to lead the way you are going to be grossly disappointed.
So the only solution is to keep your head down, keep plowing ahead. and aggressively prepare your own private exit strategy.
2
Malaise
That's what we called it during the Carter administration.
That's what we called it during the Carter administration.
Mr. Bruni writes in part "If one of the aspirants can give credible voice to Americans’ insecurity and trace a believable path out of it, he or she will almost certainly be victorious." Eight years ago one of the then aspirants, Barack Obama, did in fact give "credible voice" to America's concerns. How did that work out? With a nihilistic congress and a goebbelistic Fox television no aspirant can ever succeed.
5
Rupert Murdoch came to America in 1974. Soon thereafter began the sliming of Carter and the beatification of Reagan.
7
Well, Frank, I am more worried about crypto-fascists (some of them not so "crypto") taking advantage of middle class (and former) anxiety more than I am hopeful that someone will come along and offer reasonable, democratic solutions.
How's that for pessimism? At this point I would be satisfied with the status quo rather than a full-blown Arbeit Macht Frei campaign from somebody on the right.
How's that for pessimism? At this point I would be satisfied with the status quo rather than a full-blown Arbeit Macht Frei campaign from somebody on the right.
4
Technology and innovation will eliminate nearly half of all jobs within the next 20 years. Our managerial elite's answer: import millions of foreigners every year.
4
We won the Second World War, and spent 40 years spending the profits. Enter Reagan, stage right. Downhill ever since. Time for a reversal - Bernie Sanders!
11
I'm unfathomably super-rich, and I have to say I'm annoyed by all that ungrateful chatter from the minimum wage workers, but I'm not pessimistic. I'm financing candidates that will continue to redistribute wealth upward, so no matter how you vote, I'll get richer. I'm optimistic that my government can convince you nobody on Wall Street should go to jail, 8.5 million a day is necessary to fight ISIS, affordable health care is bad, trade deals that lower American wages are both necessary and good for you, you shouldn't retire before age 75, and that our surveillance of you is for your own good.
7
People are just so darn tired. Tired from overwork to keep their jobs and stay in their houses, advance their kids' education and well-being, navigate the medical system on theirs and their parents' behalf, try to fit in community help or volunteering and so much more. WHAT power does the average American have, beyond the vote, to advance large scale meaningful change? America is going down the toilet. However I (and I would guess a great many others) are just trying to focus on today, this week, being good parts of the local community, knowing that we have ZERO influence beyond that level. Sad.
2
It's starting to look like a good time for fascism (or something like it) to rear it's ugly head in the US of A...
6
People feeling bad and uncertain? I've got just the tonic. Vote in a Republican president. Along with the Republican Congress you elected, you'll get just what you obviously want and deserve: war and financial ruin.
6
Bush v Clinton ?
A candidate for the .01% with "god, guns and gays" for the rest, or a candidate who will serve the 1%, with some centrist liberal blather.
Either way, the oligarchs win. We either go backwards fast or a bit slower. Obama's support for surveillance and the TPP are what we'd have expected, and excoriated, W. Bush for....yet the left gives him a pass.
A candidate for the .01% with "god, guns and gays" for the rest, or a candidate who will serve the 1%, with some centrist liberal blather.
Either way, the oligarchs win. We either go backwards fast or a bit slower. Obama's support for surveillance and the TPP are what we'd have expected, and excoriated, W. Bush for....yet the left gives him a pass.
3
Disappointment and anxiety can provide an opportunity for "eloquence, boldness and a bigger picture," sure. It also can create an environment ripe for a demagogue's dirty work. Perhaps already there are one or two candidates who sense this.
3
Wow! I didn't expect that you were leading up to a sales pitch for the TPP. Combined with the robots, the TPP is going to accelerate the loss of middle class jobs. Mitch McConnell was on TV last night chastising "the unions" for opposing the TPP. George Meany had it right, decades ago when he said, "Machines don't buy cars." Maybe its time we started listening to "the unions".
7
"… eloquence, boldness and a bigger picture." Sounds like Bernie Sanders, so far.
9
You wrote:
It may hinge on eloquence, boldness and a bigger picture.
Uh, that's why I voted for Barack Obama. Considering the TPP and now permission from the president for Shell Oil Company to drill in the Chukchi Sea . . . well, I am not sure I have faith that eloquence will translate into bold action that actually takes the big picture into account. As for the bigger picture, what bigger picture is there but life on Earth? Whom would I trust? Bernie Sanders and no one else. Good luck on getting him into the White House.
It may hinge on eloquence, boldness and a bigger picture.
Uh, that's why I voted for Barack Obama. Considering the TPP and now permission from the president for Shell Oil Company to drill in the Chukchi Sea . . . well, I am not sure I have faith that eloquence will translate into bold action that actually takes the big picture into account. As for the bigger picture, what bigger picture is there but life on Earth? Whom would I trust? Bernie Sanders and no one else. Good luck on getting him into the White House.
6
The bumbling bonhomie of George W. Bush gave us interminable wars that have spilled out from the Middle East and threaten us in every town in America. And the likely GOP candidate for POTUS says he'd have done it his brother's way? No GOP candidate for POTUS speaks truth to Bibi but would all commit us to supporting injustice to Palestinians and to worse war in the region.
What's to be happy about? We had a generation of Vietnam Vets carrying the weight of a wasted war, and no one learned the lesson. Same again for the NeoCons Vets.
What's to be happy about? We had a generation of Vietnam Vets carrying the weight of a wasted war, and no one learned the lesson. Same again for the NeoCons Vets.
4
"But in the background looms a crisis of confidence that threatens to become the new American way. Let’s hope for a candidate with the vision and courage to tackle that."
We have one: Bernie Sanders. Now, journalists, go find him and augment his voice with serious reporting because neither the Kochs nor Wall Street will do it for you.
We have one: Bernie Sanders. Now, journalists, go find him and augment his voice with serious reporting because neither the Kochs nor Wall Street will do it for you.
9
"If one of the aspirants can give credible voice...." TO the TRUTH. Always I have come to expect an undergirding of this factor from Frank Bruni...and it's here again I believe. This endless Election has been a marketing process, instead of a campaign. I am one who was naïve enough to believe in "one citizen/one vote"......until this term. As a comfortable "Middle Class" Senior, I am no longer comfortable with my "elected" Government, because it seems no longer "elected". It is a "Koch Joke". Cynicism has replaced loyalty.
I have a President that I Trust....and have watched an obstructive, Repulsive,
Congress stifle the Truth, thanks to the freedom of words, thrown in "whatever" direction serves simple Expediency. I have, in my years, seen
enough. That's why I commonly site Ashleigh Brilliant's great title:
"I've Given Up My Search For Truth...And I'm Looking For A Good Fantasy".
I have a President that I Trust....and have watched an obstructive, Repulsive,
Congress stifle the Truth, thanks to the freedom of words, thrown in "whatever" direction serves simple Expediency. I have, in my years, seen
enough. That's why I commonly site Ashleigh Brilliant's great title:
"I've Given Up My Search For Truth...And I'm Looking For A Good Fantasy".
5
I find Bruni's comment below as frighteningly similar to the mood in Germany leading to Hitler's election. "If one of the aspirants can give credible voice to Americans’ insecurity and trace a believable path out of it, he or she will almost certainly be victorious."
4
"If one of the aspirants can give credible voice to Americans’ insecurity and trace a believable path out of it, he or she will almost certainly be victorious."
Oh lord I hope you're wrong, because this is exactly what gave us Ronald Reagan. (Okay, except maybe for the 'credible' part, but when have frightened people ever paid much attention to that?) I've already lived through Morning in America once, thank you very much.
Oh lord I hope you're wrong, because this is exactly what gave us Ronald Reagan. (Okay, except maybe for the 'credible' part, but when have frightened people ever paid much attention to that?) I've already lived through Morning in America once, thank you very much.
7
“If you automate all of these jobs, and technology drives down wages, then consumers have less purchasing power, which can lead to a downward economic spiral.” ---- Indeed. So where’s the societal payoff/return for this technology and who gets it?
2
Our downfall has become greed of the monied. Enough isn't enough. Leave the rest of us in the dust. As stated previously, who will be the purchasers? Interesting thought that the greedy have not yet considered.
5
Does anyone remember the late 1970's when similar malaise affected the US and Europe? How the stunning election of Margaret Thatcher presaged the election of Ronald Reagan and then 20 years of economic growth?
I wonder if the election of the conservatives and David Cameron in Great Britain is causing consternation among the left wing and progressives as they continue to see the slow dissolution and decay of their beloved dream, with Detroit, Baltimore, and Chicago as epitomes of left wing management.
I wonder if the election of the conservatives and David Cameron in Great Britain is causing consternation among the left wing and progressives as they continue to see the slow dissolution and decay of their beloved dream, with Detroit, Baltimore, and Chicago as epitomes of left wing management.
1
its simple. there is a feeling that "something is profoundly wrong". the details are varies - income inequality, the death of competition in our business sectors,
soaring cost of higher education, health/Obamacare. And behind it, the growing evidence that whatever "it" is, it is not getting better. much of Reagan's success came from the feeling, that after Watergate, after Carter's "malaise" speech, a strong communicator was going to spank the children and make things right. whether he did or not is almost irrelevant; the stronger this anxiety grows, the more likely we are to get a leader/crusader/demagogue.
soaring cost of higher education, health/Obamacare. And behind it, the growing evidence that whatever "it" is, it is not getting better. much of Reagan's success came from the feeling, that after Watergate, after Carter's "malaise" speech, a strong communicator was going to spank the children and make things right. whether he did or not is almost irrelevant; the stronger this anxiety grows, the more likely we are to get a leader/crusader/demagogue.
3
The answer to the wrong track question is simple: Yes. There are 2 competing narratives at work here.
On the one hand, we have a country where the economy works for the 1% and almost no one else, where jobs are still being offshored, outsourced, downsized, and increasingly underpaid. We have a fraying safety net under attack, an environment under assault from business interests, and a government that is increasingly a wholly-owned tool of the super wealthy. We have a permanent war on terror, a surveillance state, and an impending climate catastrophe coupled with a rejection of science. The mainstream media is corrupt and biased. The country is going to Hell if we don't do something about this.
On the other hand, we are being over run by illegal immigrants, we have too many brown people, too many of whom are living off government handouts while real Americans keep seeing their taxes going up for no good purpose. People don't want to work or go to church. (Who let all those people out of the closet, and why do they want to make my kids gay?) You can't practice your religion without being called a bigot, and you can't run a business without the government tying you up in red tape. The world is a dangerous place - terrorists are always ready to attack, and the government keeps trying to take our guns away. The mainstream media is corrupt and biased. The country is going to Hell etc. etc.
We need leaders who can solve these problems, not just exploit them for advantage.
On the one hand, we have a country where the economy works for the 1% and almost no one else, where jobs are still being offshored, outsourced, downsized, and increasingly underpaid. We have a fraying safety net under attack, an environment under assault from business interests, and a government that is increasingly a wholly-owned tool of the super wealthy. We have a permanent war on terror, a surveillance state, and an impending climate catastrophe coupled with a rejection of science. The mainstream media is corrupt and biased. The country is going to Hell if we don't do something about this.
On the other hand, we are being over run by illegal immigrants, we have too many brown people, too many of whom are living off government handouts while real Americans keep seeing their taxes going up for no good purpose. People don't want to work or go to church. (Who let all those people out of the closet, and why do they want to make my kids gay?) You can't practice your religion without being called a bigot, and you can't run a business without the government tying you up in red tape. The world is a dangerous place - terrorists are always ready to attack, and the government keeps trying to take our guns away. The mainstream media is corrupt and biased. The country is going to Hell etc. etc.
We need leaders who can solve these problems, not just exploit them for advantage.
The right track/wrong track question itself is part of the problem. It doesn't clarify anything. The 70% in the wrong track camp are split. Some think we're too far to the right, and some think we're too far left. Politicians can spin the 70% toward their partisan cause. Pundits can fill space with words. We're adrift, all right, in entertainment "factoids" pretending to be journalism.
6
Americans have been creating their own economic demise for as long as they have been voting "republican". Many "middle class" voters function under the delusion they share a common interest with the republican elite who have utter contempt for them.
Consistently being duped by issues like right to life, gun rights, opposition to gay marriage,etc,etc, they have ignored the republican assault on Medicare, Social Security, Healthcare, unions, you know, anything they might benefit from.
There is good reason to be pessimistic about the future in and of America. But that pessimism begins with the lackadaisical attitude voters have to what is actually transpiring in real time.
"Hoping" for a candidate with vision sees little, given the prospective candidates.
When all we have to look forward to is "the lesser of two evils" in Bush or Clinton, change for the better is not too hopeful.
Although its not likely in 2016, the "people" still have at least another opportunity to vote, in Their own interests, by selecting a candidate who actually promotes policies that support the middle class.
Consistently being duped by issues like right to life, gun rights, opposition to gay marriage,etc,etc, they have ignored the republican assault on Medicare, Social Security, Healthcare, unions, you know, anything they might benefit from.
There is good reason to be pessimistic about the future in and of America. But that pessimism begins with the lackadaisical attitude voters have to what is actually transpiring in real time.
"Hoping" for a candidate with vision sees little, given the prospective candidates.
When all we have to look forward to is "the lesser of two evils" in Bush or Clinton, change for the better is not too hopeful.
Although its not likely in 2016, the "people" still have at least another opportunity to vote, in Their own interests, by selecting a candidate who actually promotes policies that support the middle class.
4
Two books elaborate on the themes Bruni discusses. The Glass Cage, Automation and Us by Nicholas Carr, and House of Debt by Atif Mian and Amir Sufi, called " the most important economics book of the year" by Lawrence Summers.
When we have potential candidates, like Scott Walker, who says he can take care of ISIS terrorists because he, after all, took care of 100,000 union protesters, (without significant incident, by the way) we ought to be darn scared.
9
Frank Bruni illuminates nothing here. Robots: No jobs: End of story. Bye for now.
1
"Is the United States Still the Indispensable Nation?" If one has to ask the question, the answer is already known. And it is 'no'.
2
Right, Frank! Hillary and the G.O.P. constitute a leadership desert. We need Elizabeth Warren and/or Bernie Sanders in Washington... president and vice-president?
3
Out of high school and into an automobile plant I watched in amazement as four men dressed in clumsy protective clothing wielded spot welders moving in and around auto bodies assembling them glad that my job had me delivering parts around the factory. Later I met a spot welder. It turned out he loved his job, he earned twice as much as I, drove a new convertible, and obviously bought a lot of stuff, and paid taxes locally and nationally. Now his job has been displaced by two robots that don't buy convertibles or pay taxes. The wealth created buy the robots remains in the hands and off shore accounts of those who own the robots. And that is a lot of wealth: $17 trillion plus or minus a few billion or roughly $600K for every American man, woman, and child. All I am saying is that the present state is unsustainable and is exasserbating the ills cited throughout. If i were asked if US is on the wrong path, my answer is absolutely; and my grandkids' generation will be the first to feel the full impact of the present morbid state of affairs. A sea change in attitude about wealth, its creation, distribution, and allocation is necessary. It goes way beyond confidence in leadership.
4
Watch out for the future. I work for a firm that manufacture industrial robots. They do what you say and a lot more, and they get more sophisticated every year (just like your computer does).
So that great job doing spot welds is gone, along with a lot of others. And they can automate a fast food place just as easily, and WILL if the wages are doubled or tripled over night by whinging lefty liberals.
Be careful what you wish for.
So that great job doing spot welds is gone, along with a lot of others. And they can automate a fast food place just as easily, and WILL if the wages are doubled or tripled over night by whinging lefty liberals.
Be careful what you wish for.
2
I must not have made my point: so a robot can flip 100 burgers a minute, who will be there to buy and eat them? Robots are terrible consumers and don't pay taxes, but workers consume goods and services and contribute to the common welfare. Wealth created by automation does not contribute to the common good but rather remains with the robots' owners. I am wishing for nothing but warning that wealth concentrated in fewer and fewer hands will lead to disastrous instability.
2
America, look seriously at what Bernie Sanders is offering: a sane and humane way out of the current miasma.
5
Can I call you Frank?
Thanks so much for the thinly disguised profile of Bernie Sanders today. I'm with you on that!
Thanks so much for the thinly disguised profile of Bernie Sanders today. I'm with you on that!
2
"It may hinge on eloquence, boldness and a bigger picture."
IIRC, we did that back in in 2008. It hasn't worked out all that well.
IIRC, we did that back in in 2008. It hasn't worked out all that well.
Mr Bruni's column describes what Fareed Zakaria envisioned in his 2008 Bood, The Post American World.
1
I do have one suggestion for the Republican debates in 2016. It would save a lot of time if, instead of the candidates, the debates were held between the owners and donors, such as the Koch Brothers and Norman Braman to name just two. We all know there are other billionaires out there who should participate. Such debates would tell us a lot more about what to expect from the so-called "candidates". Why not stop the facades behind which political campaigns are conducted????
7
For about 35% of American's it's ALL la de dah!
The best of everything!
The rest will just have to decide at some point if it's finally worth turning off their TV's and maybe even putting down their snacks and beers and going out to the poll booths and then voting in their OWN interests.
Everybody get's ONE vote!
The best of everything!
The rest will just have to decide at some point if it's finally worth turning off their TV's and maybe even putting down their snacks and beers and going out to the poll booths and then voting in their OWN interests.
Everybody get's ONE vote!
1
Considering how little the American public knows about most things, I place little credence on the silly "right track, wrong track" question. (Since when is our country a train?) Nevertheless, most of the anxiety is likely due to the fact that the corporate oligarchy that has purchased and taken control of our governent and society seems intent to destroy the middle class's remaining economic power and influence.
8
The core set of beliefs of Republican and Democratic, conservative and progressive political leaders in this country do not intersect. The Republicans ignore the consequences of income disparity and growth that profits investors but nobody else, deferred maintenance and upgrading of infrastructure, the increased difficulty of this country to provide the means of social mobility because addressing them means undoing the redistribution of wealth from reducing taxes below what was needed to support government and public services adequately. The Democrats want complete reform of health care system to include everybody from pregnancy to end of life, free education for all through higher education and professional schools, the want a restoration of progressive income rates, raising taxes on the estates of the deceased, raising the taxes upon capital gains, reducing the production of carbon gases much faster than any plans, so far, more regulations upon financial businesses to protect consumers, less subsidies to businesses that really do not need them, preserving and extending programs like Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, assistance to low income families with children and keeping taxes lower for middle and lower income people. That means that not only compromise is impossible but even discussions amongst them have little or nothing in common.
4
The "Rise of the Robots" can lead to two visions for America:
(1) The liberal vision: Central planners control more and more of the economy, set high minimum wages, redistribute income through tax policy to narrow the income gap, and reduce the number of hours in the work week. More robots = more leisure time for everyone. This vision will lead to less innovation and likely the end of American leadership in the world. But it may lead to more security for individuals who can now look to the government for all of their needs (a la "Life of Julia").
(2) The conservative vision: We leave the rise of the robots to the hands of the free market. We reduce the size of government, give businesses room to innovate, and let the free market allocate resources and dictate what new industries will form in the changing economy. This will result in less security for many than in the liberal vision, and it will certainly lead to unprecedented wealth being given to the titans of industry. But it will also allow more opportunity, more "class" movement, and it will give us the best chance of remaining the world's biggest economy.
Even if I trusted the intentions of the central planners, I would still choose 2. I like freedom and opportunity, and I worry what 1 will do to the soul of the individual.
(1) The liberal vision: Central planners control more and more of the economy, set high minimum wages, redistribute income through tax policy to narrow the income gap, and reduce the number of hours in the work week. More robots = more leisure time for everyone. This vision will lead to less innovation and likely the end of American leadership in the world. But it may lead to more security for individuals who can now look to the government for all of their needs (a la "Life of Julia").
(2) The conservative vision: We leave the rise of the robots to the hands of the free market. We reduce the size of government, give businesses room to innovate, and let the free market allocate resources and dictate what new industries will form in the changing economy. This will result in less security for many than in the liberal vision, and it will certainly lead to unprecedented wealth being given to the titans of industry. But it will also allow more opportunity, more "class" movement, and it will give us the best chance of remaining the world's biggest economy.
Even if I trusted the intentions of the central planners, I would still choose 2. I like freedom and opportunity, and I worry what 1 will do to the soul of the individual.
2
Straw man arguments, for conservative perspective. Liberals want everyone to have an equal chance to prosper. They want all to have the basics of life in a civilized society so that want and huge disparities do not keep people down and do not limit the ability of the nation to address it's problems and to provide a well functioning and orderly society for all. They believe that equality before the law and political equality require that disparities of income be somehow offset to enable democracy to work, or our freedoms become defined by how much individual power and wealth one can project. Your description of liberal perspectives is the view of 19th century anarchists and the version of socialism which was manifest in the U.S.S.R., later.
4
Markets are not self regulating, they are impossible to predict very far into the future, they can easily produce extreme booms and busts which waste resources and producing distributions that do not meet overall needs, but if the risks are mitigated prudently they can be more efficient than attempting to distribute that vast and myriad goods and services needed in such a huge and complex world. The Inca maintained a centrally planned economy that worked exceedingly well, which has not been duplicated in most of the rest of the world, so when it comes to economic matters it is best to consider absolute principles with scepticism.
I'm not making straw men arguments, I am painting broad brush political philosophies. Do liberals not want larger government to impose more equality of outcomes? You have to recognize that that comes at a cost to freedom.
And yes, what I am describing was manifest in the USSR. It has also been manifest, to different degrees, in every country that has tried socialism or communism: Cuba, China, Venezuela .... Even in the most socialist European countries, we see government programs and regulations come at a high cost to employment opportunity, especially for the young.
And yes, what I am describing was manifest in the USSR. It has also been manifest, to different degrees, in every country that has tried socialism or communism: Cuba, China, Venezuela .... Even in the most socialist European countries, we see government programs and regulations come at a high cost to employment opportunity, especially for the young.
Frank,
Rest assured I am not one of the "evanescent" when it comes to Hillary. It's a case of more old wine in an old wineskin.
Memories around NYT are so short you've forgotten that you promoted Obama for the same leadership desiderata you are spouting again. Yes, he can sing if it's karaoke, and he can dance if it's DDR, but he can't lead no matter what.
It's not his race that's the blocking factor, it's his and the NYT core belief that all wealth must be redistributed in the name of fairness. A more pudding-headed pied piper could not be found.
You pundits have gotten exactly what you wanted back in 2008. You have convinced the majority of voters that our future lies in more redistribution. We have indeed a "new American way." Guess who's leading us to it.
Rest assured I am not one of the "evanescent" when it comes to Hillary. It's a case of more old wine in an old wineskin.
Memories around NYT are so short you've forgotten that you promoted Obama for the same leadership desiderata you are spouting again. Yes, he can sing if it's karaoke, and he can dance if it's DDR, but he can't lead no matter what.
It's not his race that's the blocking factor, it's his and the NYT core belief that all wealth must be redistributed in the name of fairness. A more pudding-headed pied piper could not be found.
You pundits have gotten exactly what you wanted back in 2008. You have convinced the majority of voters that our future lies in more redistribution. We have indeed a "new American way." Guess who's leading us to it.
2
Yes, there has been more redistribution under Obama as there was under GWB. Unfortunately, that redistribution continues to be from the lower and middle classes to the top 1%.
2
Faux News, Rush Limbaugh, Mike Huckabee and their kind stoke the fires of fear rather than hope. Be afraid of gays, be afraid of Obama, be afraid of anyone who is not a Christian, or just be afraid. They have succeeded beyond their wildest dreams in fear mongering, so much so that I am afraid of being afraid.
6
Dear Mr. Bruni,
Relax, the electorate's got you covered! They showed up in such overwhelming force in 2014 that I'm sure the number who will vote in the Presidential Contest will be, at least, 10% higher (Instead of 36%, the average of registered voters who voted in 2014, this number might go as high as 46%!).
The voting public just doesn't seem to really care. Since both parties gleefully accept cash from just about anyone (Corporations being people and money not buying influence ala SCOTUS's reasoning) and the most important states for candidates are Iowa and New Hampshire (The other 48 are, I guess, just not worth the effort), the rest of the public can sit back and watch the millions flung at these 2 states to determine... what was it again they're trying to do?
There's no UNCERTAINTY in the voting public; they, and me, are just sick and tired of voting for the "lesser of two evils" versus the "best and brightest" the country has to offer.
And with organizations like the NYT supporting only the two "mainstream" parties (Never, ever see a word about a 3rd Party unless it's the Tea Party), the realization that voting is a sop to the masses instead of the ringing voice of choice it's supposed to be, it's no wonder that people are a. staying home in vast numbers and b. disgusted with the entire 3 ring circus government has become.
I'll bet your next column, if it's political in nature, will be about Ms. Clinton, the favorite of the NYT.
If you want us to vote give us choices!
Relax, the electorate's got you covered! They showed up in such overwhelming force in 2014 that I'm sure the number who will vote in the Presidential Contest will be, at least, 10% higher (Instead of 36%, the average of registered voters who voted in 2014, this number might go as high as 46%!).
The voting public just doesn't seem to really care. Since both parties gleefully accept cash from just about anyone (Corporations being people and money not buying influence ala SCOTUS's reasoning) and the most important states for candidates are Iowa and New Hampshire (The other 48 are, I guess, just not worth the effort), the rest of the public can sit back and watch the millions flung at these 2 states to determine... what was it again they're trying to do?
There's no UNCERTAINTY in the voting public; they, and me, are just sick and tired of voting for the "lesser of two evils" versus the "best and brightest" the country has to offer.
And with organizations like the NYT supporting only the two "mainstream" parties (Never, ever see a word about a 3rd Party unless it's the Tea Party), the realization that voting is a sop to the masses instead of the ringing voice of choice it's supposed to be, it's no wonder that people are a. staying home in vast numbers and b. disgusted with the entire 3 ring circus government has become.
I'll bet your next column, if it's political in nature, will be about Ms. Clinton, the favorite of the NYT.
If you want us to vote give us choices!
5
Let’s hope for a candidate who will not kill his own countrymen with
drones once elected. Let's hope for a candidate who keeps promises--
"I will close Guantanamo...". Let's hope for a candidate who can read
a thermometer and a climate report. Let's hope for a candidate who
has more in common with the millions who cannot afford to give millions
than with the few that can.
Most, let's hope for a candidate that does not abuse the precious and
frail notion of hope itself, reducing it to a bumper sticker slogan...
drones once elected. Let's hope for a candidate who keeps promises--
"I will close Guantanamo...". Let's hope for a candidate who can read
a thermometer and a climate report. Let's hope for a candidate who
has more in common with the millions who cannot afford to give millions
than with the few that can.
Most, let's hope for a candidate that does not abuse the precious and
frail notion of hope itself, reducing it to a bumper sticker slogan...
2
Sooner or later our democracy is going to have to face an issue even this article is only dancing around: the end of labor.
The technologists in Silicon Valley tell us today is no different than yesterday, and new technology always opens up new jobs. But there is a big difference between the invention of, say, the invention of the combustion engine and artificial intelligence machines that can design, build, and operate them.
The former created the need for engineers, builders, and drivers; the latter mostly creates the need for passengers.
We should at least be alert, that today may not be the same as yesterday. Technology may be finally delivering its final promise -- the era of the obsolescence of human labor -- but politically and economically, we are not at all prepared, or even aware, of what would then be coming at us.
The technologists in Silicon Valley tell us today is no different than yesterday, and new technology always opens up new jobs. But there is a big difference between the invention of, say, the invention of the combustion engine and artificial intelligence machines that can design, build, and operate them.
The former created the need for engineers, builders, and drivers; the latter mostly creates the need for passengers.
We should at least be alert, that today may not be the same as yesterday. Technology may be finally delivering its final promise -- the era of the obsolescence of human labor -- but politically and economically, we are not at all prepared, or even aware, of what would then be coming at us.
4
Richard Hofstadter used to point out the Americans are most pessimistic about the future precisely at their periods of greatest change and growth. Whatever our woes, the world around us is collapsing much faster than we are.
2
Be careful what you wish for, Mr. Bruni. If such a magical candidate did appear, I wonder if you and the other "moderate" opinion makers would recognize her/him. The rise of the robot may be the latest of the pet explanations for our current quandary, but I rarely hear reports in the media about the billions (maybe trillions) parked off shore hoping for another tax "holiday." If tech companies and those who use technology are going to take jobs away, how about they pay the freight on the money they make by doing so.
We can now drive a truck down the highway with minimal help from a driver, but who is going to deal with the fact that our under-maintained highways are over-loaded with trucks burning fuel that is attacking our breathable air? With the exception of Bernie Sanders, all the candidates I read about are talking about making marginal change (some of it dreadful). And everything Sanders or Senator Warren says is always prefaced in the media about the impossibility of their agenda. Even now the president dismisses Warren as wrong about trade and I haven't heard him mention Sanders. I don't think either candidate is the ideal, but when they and their ideas are dismissed out of hand, we go further down the road toward our demise.
We can now drive a truck down the highway with minimal help from a driver, but who is going to deal with the fact that our under-maintained highways are over-loaded with trucks burning fuel that is attacking our breathable air? With the exception of Bernie Sanders, all the candidates I read about are talking about making marginal change (some of it dreadful). And everything Sanders or Senator Warren says is always prefaced in the media about the impossibility of their agenda. Even now the president dismisses Warren as wrong about trade and I haven't heard him mention Sanders. I don't think either candidate is the ideal, but when they and their ideas are dismissed out of hand, we go further down the road toward our demise.
2
This is the result of American citizens living in an information environment where lies far outnumber facts. Whoever yells the loudest seems to garner the most credibility in this environment, and one liar yells louder than all of the truthsayers combined.
4
May American Exceptionalism RIP. Since WWII, it has brought senseless warfare beginning with Korea. To even begin to live up to its promise, the streets of our cities ran red in the 1960's even while the poor lived in tar paper shacks. Since the Reagan presidency, it has meant a decline of the middle class and an abandonment of what the term exceptional originally meant for America. Perhaps we need to be less exceptional and more like other western nations. Our healthcare, roads, bridges and the overall safety net might improve while we disengage from conflicts around the world where our intervention yields us, and them, nothing.
4
The "rise of the robots" or the "rise of the machines" has been happening for a long time now. And it has been an almost unmitigated success throughout most of America's history. We flourished as we grew out of an agricultural economy. The inventions of the light bulb, automobile, radio, television, computer, iPhone ... and on and on ... have led to explosive economic expansion and growth in America.
Why? Because capitalist markets adapt with remarkable (and unpredictable) efficiency. The best way to ensure that America gets left behind is to fall into the trap of thinking that central planners can predict the future and allocate jobs and resources more efficiently than the free market. They cannot ... as has been so painfully proven over and over again.
If we allow the free market to work, it is not difficult to see the rise of the robots bringing jobs back to the US, instead of the other way around. We currently export a lob of jobs to cheap labor countries, and we import a lot of products from those countries. If we build machines that can do the same work cheaper and more efficiently than those foreign workers, that may actually be a net jobs gain for the US. And never underestimate Americans' ability to create new fields of opportunity. It's happened before and it will happen again if we don't smother it.
Why? Because capitalist markets adapt with remarkable (and unpredictable) efficiency. The best way to ensure that America gets left behind is to fall into the trap of thinking that central planners can predict the future and allocate jobs and resources more efficiently than the free market. They cannot ... as has been so painfully proven over and over again.
If we allow the free market to work, it is not difficult to see the rise of the robots bringing jobs back to the US, instead of the other way around. We currently export a lob of jobs to cheap labor countries, and we import a lot of products from those countries. If we build machines that can do the same work cheaper and more efficiently than those foreign workers, that may actually be a net jobs gain for the US. And never underestimate Americans' ability to create new fields of opportunity. It's happened before and it will happen again if we don't smother it.
1
Obama is the liberal, big government elephant in the room that the media will never turn on. His spending policies and increased regulations of all types have suppressed economic growth in the country during his entire presidency. It's just the plain, simple truth, and it explains the mood of the country since Obama took office. It can be the only explanation. Bush had positive right track/wrong track numbers during periods of his presidency. Obama has had none. It's really remarkably bad. And, don't bring race into the equation. The country elected Obama and then reelected him. Big government, big spending policies hurt all Americans always. The media will continue to put lipstick on the Obama presidency. But Americans know differently.
3
If you read what Bruni wrote, you'd see that the pessimism predates Obama and that it also existed (and persisted) during the Bush presidency. Also, while Obama has had a mixed (but mostly on the positive side) economic record, Obama's policies have been far superior to Bush's deficit spending (i.e. increased spending on a two-front war coupled with tax cuts) and anti-regulatory policies (the economic malaise which started as a deep financial recession in 2007/08, during the last two years of Bush's presidency, was brought about by a lack of regulation, not over-regulation). Hope that helps put things in perspective.
5
The question has always been confusing. I personally feel the country is moving in the right direction in many (not all) of the accomplishments of Obama. But the republican congress has been moving us backwards for years. Time for the pollsters to ask the questions a little differently.
3
Others may feel the progressives are propelling us off a cliff and the republicans are trying to hold us back.
The question, as worded, is about as "unloaded" as it can be.
The question, as worded, is about as "unloaded" as it can be.
Labor, just like any other good, can be marketed based on either cost or differentiation. In a free economy, unless you innovate, the price of any good, including labor, will become commoditized over time. The only long-term solution to resisting downward pressure on wages is innovation and entrepreneurship. Unless we more fully embrace entrepreneurship and innovation as a country, globalization and market forces will continue to drive down all wages and salaries.
The only other solution, which is really a non-solution, is a centrally controlled economy, which eventually leads to Stalinism. All of the suggestions to use legislation to artificially prop up wages or certain industries or market sectors, will eventually either fail or devolve into a totalitarian state. We must innovate to survive. Legislated economic incentives should encourage innovation and entrepreneurship, not artificial wage and price supports or redistribution of wealth.
The only other solution, which is really a non-solution, is a centrally controlled economy, which eventually leads to Stalinism. All of the suggestions to use legislation to artificially prop up wages or certain industries or market sectors, will eventually either fail or devolve into a totalitarian state. We must innovate to survive. Legislated economic incentives should encourage innovation and entrepreneurship, not artificial wage and price supports or redistribution of wealth.
4
How one can read a discussion of how innovation has reduced the overall need for employment and consequently driven down wages, and then assert that the only answer is further innovation boggles the mind.
3
Taxation of any money not plowed back into real investments, not stock buyback, not management bonuses, would encourage innovation. Propping up wages just pushes more jobs offshore or into automation, but pure taxation and redistribution, with no bones about wages and work, would do the trick.
1
Actually, the numbers looked so simple. Long term growth around 4%, then a period around 6%. Well, obviously that was deficit driven growth, so you'll have to balance it with a period of 2% to make up for it. Why is that surprising?
Mr. Bruni, I understand what you're saying, and I think you have summed up the mood well. But I feel as though you're implying that this is a kind of mass-psychological state. The lack of confidence about the future stems from real circumstances, most especially that wages for the broad mass of the population are at best stagnant. Those conditions have been created by specific policies carried out by our government, in many cases to appease big business, which in these post Citizens United vs. FEC days has an even more outsized effect on the elections that determine our policies. And then there is the undeniable change in the international landscape -- the U.S. is no longer one of two "super-powers." As Paul Krugman has put it the world is "flat and hot." I agree that there's been a cultural shift, but I don't think it's solely a state of mind. Where I do agree is that if someone offers a vision, they may well win an election. Will those visions come to fruition? Given the deadlock in the legislative branch, that seems highly unlikely.
7
When I read your analysis of Martin Ford's book, I thought back to Kaufman and Ferber's play, "Dinner at Eight," and the memorable film of it (1933). There's an interchange as the characters come into the dining room at the end between Kitty Packard (Jean Harlow), a former barmaid from Passaic who snagged an industrialist, and Carlotta Vance (Marie Dressler):
Kitty: "You know, yesterday I read a book. (Carlotta gives a stunned reaction.) And it says that in the future all of the professions will be done by machines."
Carlotta: "My dear, you have nothing to worry about!"
Will the future belong to prostitutes of all stripes, from sex workers to politicians?
Kitty: "You know, yesterday I read a book. (Carlotta gives a stunned reaction.) And it says that in the future all of the professions will be done by machines."
Carlotta: "My dear, you have nothing to worry about!"
Will the future belong to prostitutes of all stripes, from sex workers to politicians?
1
With the election of President Obama and the drone of Fox "News" among so much misinformation, the average American can not see the forest for the trees.
1
Reading about the "Rise of the Robots" made me recall a story - perhaps apocryphal - of a day when Henry Ford 2d was giving Walter Reuther a tour of a new Ford automobile factory. Pointing out the latest technology of the day, Ford asked "So Walter, how are you going to get those machines to pay union dues?" Reuther replied, "So Henry, how are you going to get those machines to buy your cars?" Our capitalists would be wise to consider the moral of that story as they continue their drive to lower their "labor costs."
10
Nice story, but the story of the automobile in the US has been one of unprecedented economic success. The auto industry is one of if not the largest industries in the world, and almost every American has one. I can only hope the latest iteration of the "Rise of the Robots" is as "apocryphal."
1
You read the story and completely missed the meaning.
1
A true picture of our major illness is; the scramble for big bucks, watch the jesters beg, sell souls if any had one, each attempting to over achieve in greed, and disrespect for the needy.
2
Okay, I'm confused.
Wasn't Barack Obama supposed to fix all this? What happened to the 2008 Obama who once insisted we were not red states or blue states? Where's the Obama who promised to end politics as usual, bring America together and deliver change we could believe in?
Not one major news media outlet vetted Mr. Obama thoroughly to see if any of this was possible. This includes Mr. Bruni who has been in a position for years to hold this President accountable for dividing this country and creating a great deal of our shared national uncertainty.
Now Frank is worried.
Mr. Bruni, I've been worried about this country since the day Obama took office. Welcome to the show.
Wasn't Barack Obama supposed to fix all this? What happened to the 2008 Obama who once insisted we were not red states or blue states? Where's the Obama who promised to end politics as usual, bring America together and deliver change we could believe in?
Not one major news media outlet vetted Mr. Obama thoroughly to see if any of this was possible. This includes Mr. Bruni who has been in a position for years to hold this President accountable for dividing this country and creating a great deal of our shared national uncertainty.
Now Frank is worried.
Mr. Bruni, I've been worried about this country since the day Obama took office. Welcome to the show.
3
You were late to the party, Barrister. You should have started worrying the day Reagan took office. It's been all downhill from there.
2
The entire world would have been worried if the McCain/Palin ticket had won.
3
Good point. Because nothing is ever Barack Obama's fault.
Just blame the nearest Republican, and if that doesn't work, blame dead Republicans.
Pottree, sadly I have to say you're the problem. Too many people who fall for the cable news nonsense like you are voting and ruining our chances as a nation to get out of this.
Just blame the nearest Republican, and if that doesn't work, blame dead Republicans.
Pottree, sadly I have to say you're the problem. Too many people who fall for the cable news nonsense like you are voting and ruining our chances as a nation to get out of this.
1
And there is absolutely not a "climate in this country that's bigger than any contender" running for President of the United States.
What we do have is a lazy, self-interested news media that does not want to do the work required to change the national political narrative.
Its far easier to steal Twitter posts, grab social media snippets and copy You Tube videos and SNL skits than it is to actually find out what our candidates believe and can do to turn things around.
A nation is only as good as the information it gets.
What we do have is a lazy, self-interested news media that does not want to do the work required to change the national political narrative.
Its far easier to steal Twitter posts, grab social media snippets and copy You Tube videos and SNL skits than it is to actually find out what our candidates believe and can do to turn things around.
A nation is only as good as the information it gets.
10
Who can blame average Americans for their pessimistic realism? The economy is only working well for the top levels of the elite, and this is sure to worsen for the masses as robots, computers, and cheap foreign workers keep shrinking the number of decent paying jobs throughout the country. The Republicans are so opposed to raising taxes on the rich that there's no foreseeable way we can even raise the money to rebuild our grossly decaying, and economically vital, infrastructure, much less improve our schools our cancer research or anything else, except our weapons. As our inner cities get ever grimmer, there's no one on earth with any magic bullets to improve education for poor blacks enough on a mass basis to give more than a tiny fraction of those trapped in urban poverty a way out. There's no way to stop ISIS, and God knows what metastasizing terrorist groups coming down the pike, from convincing more and more of our own citizens to commit lone wolf acts of terrorism, up to and including dropping off dirty suitcase bombs from Pakistan in Times Square. For dessert, there's the fact that the Israel Lobby has quite literally bought total control of the Republican Party and nearly total control of the Dems, too, including all leading presidential candidates--starting with the Lobby's favorite, Hillary--with the possible, but increasingly unlikely exception, of Paul. Obviously, the Lobby has bought both parties to launch another American proxy war for Israel in Iran in 2017.
4
If you take the "well being of your population " as the priority in your governance, you should have no problem making the right decisions. Unfortunately for too long the priority has been "The well being of Wall st & Corporations profit" and with that, leaders decision process is very different.
10
The sad reality is that nobody in America is going to put down their smartphone, iPad or take their ear buds out of their ears long enough to come together and change the way things are going.
America is back to the land of I and me, and no longer a nation of laws or unity.
America is back to the land of I and me, and no longer a nation of laws or unity.
40
That we are no longer a nation of laws and unity is not the public's fault with their iphones and ear pods. It's the fault of the 1 percent who make those products--over seas--depriving Americans of livelihoods. And dominating our politics by enriching congress with the profits from that job off shoring. Stop blaming the victims, more than ever tethered to the commercial media's messages, and the political excuses media conveys 24/7.
Meredith, if Barack Obama had been anything like the polished, made for TV political savior the news media created him to be, things would be better.
A President with decency, integrity and genuine love for Americans could have engaged this nation in a real conversation about our shared present and future. Instead Mr. Obama treats the presidency like he's won some sort of 8 year contest where he gets to be King for a Day, every day.
The President hasn't brought us together. He hasn't shown the integrity or even concern to spend more time helping than golfing. He's AWOL. Blaming the 1% when in fact they've gotten richer on Obama's watch as poverty rates soar is yet another excuse for a failed, detached President.
Excuses aren't change.
A President with decency, integrity and genuine love for Americans could have engaged this nation in a real conversation about our shared present and future. Instead Mr. Obama treats the presidency like he's won some sort of 8 year contest where he gets to be King for a Day, every day.
The President hasn't brought us together. He hasn't shown the integrity or even concern to spend more time helping than golfing. He's AWOL. Blaming the 1% when in fact they've gotten richer on Obama's watch as poverty rates soar is yet another excuse for a failed, detached President.
Excuses aren't change.
2
I say that it may be Hillary Clinton to the rescue. From a woman's perspective the focus is more on the family and the personal side of life and growth. It we want to grow the economy we need people to grow.
Education is, I believe, the key. We need an EDU-CONOMY, with life-long learning and training. The internet provides the means, but people have to make the effort to keep developing their abilities and their interests.
I say, run Hillary, run.
Education is, I believe, the key. We need an EDU-CONOMY, with life-long learning and training. The internet provides the means, but people have to make the effort to keep developing their abilities and their interests.
I say, run Hillary, run.
1
Hilary, I hope, will be president, but she will be no more successful at improving infrastructure (like the jobs bill Obama wanted), immigration reform, clean air initiatives, education overhaul, etc. unless voters elect people to Congress who will do something... anything. Of course the Republicans care only about Wall Street and Big Business - Citizens United was the beginning of the end.
1
The question "Is America on the right track?" is meaningless. A Republican will answer "no" because there's still too much safety net, too many laws, and still not everyone has a gun. A Democrat will answer "no" because there's not nearly enough effort put into reining in Wall Street or climate change, and there's a wave of anti-woman legislation washing over the country. Any poll asking this simple question has no operational validity.
8
The fact that we're even talking about the possibility of an America in decline means it's real -- just like other issues (climate change) that some among us choose to deny. Where is the candidate who will speak the truth and a commitment to all Americans?
3
Bernie Sanders has been on a swing around the country, but he may by now be back in DC or Vermont.
There is very little chance that Sanders will become the creature of Wall Street, even less that he'll be nominated. But the last Socialist to run seriously, Eugene V. Debs, was a write-in in more than one election, I believe, and gained tens of thousands of votes. Probably none of them from Wall Street.
BTW, Wall St. is a good scapegoat, but the fault, dear Brutus, is not in our Wall Street Stars but in ourselves. Those slickers are just taking advantage of the opportunity we serve them on a silver platter.
There is very little chance that Sanders will become the creature of Wall Street, even less that he'll be nominated. But the last Socialist to run seriously, Eugene V. Debs, was a write-in in more than one election, I believe, and gained tens of thousands of votes. Probably none of them from Wall Street.
BTW, Wall St. is a good scapegoat, but the fault, dear Brutus, is not in our Wall Street Stars but in ourselves. Those slickers are just taking advantage of the opportunity we serve them on a silver platter.
Okay, enough with the wrong track stuff.
The pining for an America where everyone seemed to be in a agreement on most things (as long as you were the right skin color) and happy with the direction the country was going is over - and for a good reason. We have way more inequality these days, huge problems, and serious disagreements about how to address them.
We also have a political party that has been playing the division game for decades, and trashing the very idea of a common public interest. They've built a media machine to promote their views - reality not welcome - and stoutly deny that there isn't anything wrong with America that they can't fix, so long as we ignore the fact that their 'solutions' have played a large part in getting us where we are today.
Bitter? You ain't seen nothing yet. Bring it.
The pining for an America where everyone seemed to be in a agreement on most things (as long as you were the right skin color) and happy with the direction the country was going is over - and for a good reason. We have way more inequality these days, huge problems, and serious disagreements about how to address them.
We also have a political party that has been playing the division game for decades, and trashing the very idea of a common public interest. They've built a media machine to promote their views - reality not welcome - and stoutly deny that there isn't anything wrong with America that they can't fix, so long as we ignore the fact that their 'solutions' have played a large part in getting us where we are today.
Bitter? You ain't seen nothing yet. Bring it.
80
What I am looking for is someone to articulate the vision of the future that Bruni claims is so missing. I suspect that whatever could be said would immediately be challenged from both the left and the right as deeply flawed and unacceptable. Instead I read over and over columns like this telling us how bad things are and how we are loosing confidence. Apparently, you cannot sell papers and TV time telling people that things are better than yesterday but not as good today as the future will be. Having lived in the United States for 65 years, I will state unequivocally that my life is better today than it was in the 50s and 60s and 70s and 80s. My children know more and can do more and can buy more and can travel farther than I could have imagined when I was their age. Maybe it is time for us to ask the children where they expect to go and how they will get there; and give them our blessing to try.
4
Wages as a portion of the GDP have been shrinking since 1970, and the decline in economic growth has tracked that closely. We have a consumer driven economy - spending creates demand, which creates employment in a virtuous cycle. Fattening corporate profits and CEO paychecks by cutting costs (paying workers less) is smart for the individual corporation and CEO in the short term, but it starves the engine of the fuel needed for growth.
The declining wage share is not inevitable, nor did it "just happen", it is due to deliberate decisions made by politicians (e.g. allowing the minimum wage to erode, supporting union busting) and corporations.
Of course the columnist Samuelson (who has no training in economics) says "we can’t do much about this” - he has made his career being a stenographer for corporate and Wall Street interests. Same as it ever was.
The new technologies are creating new efficiencies, more productive production methods, that should be fueling a surge in economic growth. That they are not is due to deliberate policies to skim all increases into the pockets of the 0.1%, as has been done for 45 years now, and entire working career.
This is the "tragedy of the commons" writ large. It was in the short term self-interest of English farmers to fatten as many sheep as they could on the commons, even though over-grazing destroyed it. The gradual destruction of our economy is being done in the short term self-interest of rich and powerful interests.
The declining wage share is not inevitable, nor did it "just happen", it is due to deliberate decisions made by politicians (e.g. allowing the minimum wage to erode, supporting union busting) and corporations.
Of course the columnist Samuelson (who has no training in economics) says "we can’t do much about this” - he has made his career being a stenographer for corporate and Wall Street interests. Same as it ever was.
The new technologies are creating new efficiencies, more productive production methods, that should be fueling a surge in economic growth. That they are not is due to deliberate policies to skim all increases into the pockets of the 0.1%, as has been done for 45 years now, and entire working career.
This is the "tragedy of the commons" writ large. It was in the short term self-interest of English farmers to fatten as many sheep as they could on the commons, even though over-grazing destroyed it. The gradual destruction of our economy is being done in the short term self-interest of rich and powerful interests.
4
People understand that it is too late and we did it all to ourselves, even if they are entirely misinformed about why. I am talking about Man made global warmng. IF we had re-elected Carter and kept progressing with solar, used the artificially low oil prices of the 1980's to enact high taxes and transition to a low carbon future we might have a chance today. Of course we know what really happened. Oil bought politicians, not all Republicans, blocked any thought that the 'gloom and doom' democrats of 1980 were correct after all. We are willing to commit planetary suicide rather than admit the' back to the land' people, the hippies, the 'gloom and doom' democrats of the 1970's were correct.
2
Epitaph for our times: "They were too busy fighting about the past to have time to deal with the future."
The left/right divide in America exists in zombie form, the residue from another era, the coffee stains around the cup from the 20th century or, for that matter, the late 19th. Still, the battle rages.
If we are brave, if we are bold, we can redefine work in the 21st century to include almost all of the willing population. We will use robots instead of having them use us. If we continue to create battle zones designed to protect the wealthy and punish the poor, we will fail and find ourselves in actual battles before the century is complete.
There is much to be done, but I am increasingly convinced that the only way to accomplish a good deal of it is to abandon the political mud feast, for citizens to find their own solutions and then impose them on the system. No answers, or very, very few, are forth coming from political leadership dedicated insanely to conflict over solutions. The demonizing, delegitimization of President Obama has reached new, unimagined heights with the tsunami of outside money pouring into third party political groups. Democracy itself is threatened, after which the only "solution" would be pushing it aside.
We should, nonetheless, be hopeful. New ideas will perk upward. Younger people see possibilities that their elders are blind to seeing. We are, at heart, a pragmatic, optimistic nation, looking for the next big chance.
Doug Terry
The left/right divide in America exists in zombie form, the residue from another era, the coffee stains around the cup from the 20th century or, for that matter, the late 19th. Still, the battle rages.
If we are brave, if we are bold, we can redefine work in the 21st century to include almost all of the willing population. We will use robots instead of having them use us. If we continue to create battle zones designed to protect the wealthy and punish the poor, we will fail and find ourselves in actual battles before the century is complete.
There is much to be done, but I am increasingly convinced that the only way to accomplish a good deal of it is to abandon the political mud feast, for citizens to find their own solutions and then impose them on the system. No answers, or very, very few, are forth coming from political leadership dedicated insanely to conflict over solutions. The demonizing, delegitimization of President Obama has reached new, unimagined heights with the tsunami of outside money pouring into third party political groups. Democracy itself is threatened, after which the only "solution" would be pushing it aside.
We should, nonetheless, be hopeful. New ideas will perk upward. Younger people see possibilities that their elders are blind to seeing. We are, at heart, a pragmatic, optimistic nation, looking for the next big chance.
Doug Terry
1
This widespread but hard-to-quantify sentiment may turn out to be the strongest reason Hillary Clinton and the Democrats overstate their chances for next year. When Bill was elected in 1992, the theme music at the Inaugural Ball was "Don't Stop Thinkin' About Tomorrow." The mood was sunny, upbeat, casual, fun. Today, everybody thinks about tomorrow, but with an mistake able amount of worry, if not outright dread. Rubio has already cunningly described Hillary as yesterday's news, as irrelevant as Bill's tenor sax and sunglasses. Every Republican today campaigns on a vague platform of fear, regressive politics, overreaction or just defending the castle from barbarians? I don't agree with a single one of their overstated caricatures, but I recognize the power of their appeal. If Hillary tries to pretend none of this is going on and just orders the band to strike up "Happy Days Are Here Again" the only happy people will be a tiny cadre of Republican handlers who bet on fear and played their hand well.
2
You've got to love (hate?) the hypocrisy of the anti-government reactionaries (regressing back to the robber-baron 19th century): government is feckless; there is too much of it; but please elect us, so that we can run this useless entity.
2
An election is not going to fix the problem. What is needed is an outright rejection and abandonment of the Neoliberal ideology that has destroyed the US and world economy, We have been in a 40 year race to the bottom and the greed of the overclass seems determined to tear down their barns and build bigger ones all the time claiming to follow Judeo-Christian morals and ethics.
5
I think it's time for America to pull back a bit. We can no longer be the world's policemen. We can't support that despite the Republicans being in the pocket of the military-industrial complex. We have a chance to be greater than we've ever been by realizing that the 21st century will re-write the script. Fear is what is driving the Tea Party. We can't go back to the 50s - who really wants to but a few nut cases. Fear of becoming something like Sweden or Germany holds us back.
3
Like Sweden or Germany?! Yeah, go ahead, throw me in that briar patch!
1
The right track/wrong track survey is a proxy for satisfaction, or lack thereof, with the current President. Bruni says the survey has been negative for a decade (i.e., W's second term and all of Obama's tenure). Survey was consistently positive throughout Reagan's and Bill Clinton's two terms. Draw your own conclusions.
2
We were fools to think it was morning in America and anyone felt our pain. We won't get fooled again.
1
We're supposed to hope for a candidate with vision and courage to tackle the nation's crisis of confidence..... but we already had that candidate in 2008. Vision and courage don't go very far inside the Beltway these days. Political savvy and horse-trading and lip-service -- the skills LBJ and Bubba enjoyed -- are what make for an effective presidency.
The days when vision and courage counted for much on the American political scene seem a long way in the past now.
The days when vision and courage counted for much on the American political scene seem a long way in the past now.
Bruni ignores the fact that for twenty years we've drifted away from being a Republic and become a Military Empire engaged in adventures around the world that sap our wealth, destroy our infrastructure, and undermine our credibility--while creating terrible blowback. The lesson we learn? more, more, more. Chalmers Johnson predicted it all in Blowback and The Sorrows of Empire. The rot goes much deeper than Brunie describes, whether people can articulate it or not.
2
This piece does not ask the question "in what way is America on the wrong path?" I have no idea whether any poll asks that question. The author here picks one reason and runs with it. I think the why is far more important and should not be assumed to be the same among all Americans who think we are on the wrong path.
The "crisis of confidence" Mr. Bruni talks about is a direct result of a news media obsessed with itself and for the last 6 years, Barack Obama, who presides over these confusing, sad times in America.
I will never understand why the mainstream media spills the proverbial milk and stands over the mess they've made wringing their hands in despair.
The solution is simple. When we as Americans can name one person in this country who works for the news media who will tell us the truth regardless of which political faction it hurts, and will call it down the middle, we will be okay.
Until then this is the new normal.
I will never understand why the mainstream media spills the proverbial milk and stands over the mess they've made wringing their hands in despair.
The solution is simple. When we as Americans can name one person in this country who works for the news media who will tell us the truth regardless of which political faction it hurts, and will call it down the middle, we will be okay.
Until then this is the new normal.
4
How in the world can Obama be called"eloquent"? He is the worst salesman ever. He never explained the Affordable Care Act in a way anyone could come away with an understanding of it, his lack of military experience makes him a toy for the military/industrial complex, (thank you President Eisenhower). And who are the retreads, Hillary Clinton and "Jeb" Bush? We need a fresh voice, someone with actual military experience, a strong personality, solid experience. Wait a sec, is Jim Webb available?
4
As much as I often agree with Mr. Bruni, I have to say that columns about vague survey questions such as the country being on the wrong or right track are mostly a Rorschach for the columnist's own concerns, rather than a reflection of what's really on the minds of other Americans.
For some, the "wrong track" response may hinge on the increasing influence of money in the electoral process. For others, it may reflect stagnating wages or poor job prospects. Or it may reflect their general dissatisfaction with the current president... or with the Congress. Still others may respond "wrong track" because of what they see as government over-reach and infringement of liberties. The list goes on and on, and for any of us, our reasons may change over time.
Absent specifics, absent some unpacking of how subgroups of people are responding - and why - and how these responses and reasons may have shifted over time, we really don't have anything much to go on.
I'm among those who would respond "wrong track" if I were polled, but I don't flatter myself into thinking my reasons for doing so are the same as another person's - and I'm tired of these shallow analyses that just fire up the usual, predictable comments and illuminate nothing new.
So, columnists: How about turning a more inquisitive eye on survey findings, digging a little deeper for the particulars, and writing when you actually have something useful to convey?
For some, the "wrong track" response may hinge on the increasing influence of money in the electoral process. For others, it may reflect stagnating wages or poor job prospects. Or it may reflect their general dissatisfaction with the current president... or with the Congress. Still others may respond "wrong track" because of what they see as government over-reach and infringement of liberties. The list goes on and on, and for any of us, our reasons may change over time.
Absent specifics, absent some unpacking of how subgroups of people are responding - and why - and how these responses and reasons may have shifted over time, we really don't have anything much to go on.
I'm among those who would respond "wrong track" if I were polled, but I don't flatter myself into thinking my reasons for doing so are the same as another person's - and I'm tired of these shallow analyses that just fire up the usual, predictable comments and illuminate nothing new.
So, columnists: How about turning a more inquisitive eye on survey findings, digging a little deeper for the particulars, and writing when you actually have something useful to convey?
3
The vast majority of Americans feel powerless and resigned to their fates due to politicians believing that what's good for the 1% is good for the country. And so the status quo remains.
66
The pining for a great leader to fix our problems and return our country to its rightful greatness is simplistic and silly at best, delusional and dangerous at worst. Remember "Der Fuehrer" (The Leader)? This country's problems are not due to a psychological loss of confidence and optimism, so let's not fool ourselves; these problems are real and they are systemic. By the way, in whose world is the recession fading ever further into the past?
1
America is one of the most urban societies on the planet, it is over 83% urban yet we are held hostage by a government structure that was born in the 18th century. The famous 20th century American architect is credited with the line "Form follows function." It is time to recognize that America's government as structured cannot function properly in 2015. Most of the people who might provide the vision and leadership to carry the USA into a successful future recognize that global economies require extraordinary local authority to ameliorate the powers of global forces in the lives of their people. Until America understands this simple truth that needed leadership cannot be realized. When a small population state like Arkansas can give us a global corporate entity like Walmart and a politician like Tom Cotton who seeks to optimize the power of the Walmarts at the expense of democracy we will see less control over our lives.
We need a new politic that recognizes the overwhelming power of outsize global forces and will provide a framework under which we the people can exercise control. It is only then where we can even hope for better leadership.
We must realize that both Republicans and Democrats are part and parcel of of forces that have too much control over how our society functions and look to realizing some semblance of democracy in our government. Right now those screaming for less government and those screaming for less corporate control are really on the same side.
We need a new politic that recognizes the overwhelming power of outsize global forces and will provide a framework under which we the people can exercise control. It is only then where we can even hope for better leadership.
We must realize that both Republicans and Democrats are part and parcel of of forces that have too much control over how our society functions and look to realizing some semblance of democracy in our government. Right now those screaming for less government and those screaming for less corporate control are really on the same side.
2
What reason is there for optimism? As long as there are a handful of people insulated from our ever-accelerating decline, our policy will be to pretend there is no decline, or that any such decline is attributed to one president here or one piece of legislation there.
Not only are we on the wrong track, but the guy setting the switches in the interlocking has been laid off, the brake handle has been sold to the highest bidder, and at the helm are a gaggle of well-dressed men with flag pins on their lapels, cackling like a devil-costumed John Candy in a John Hughes movie as they lead the charge into oblivion.
The signs of trouble are there, possible solutions to the problems are apparent to most world leaders but (willfully) not ours, and best yet, millions upon millions of Americans whose lot is to do little but absorb the hellacious energy that will be released by our head-on collision with the 21st century continue to stand up and cheer for the billionaire lunatics who gleefully scream "NO!" to spending a penny to spare us this wreck.
Not only are we on the wrong track, but the guy setting the switches in the interlocking has been laid off, the brake handle has been sold to the highest bidder, and at the helm are a gaggle of well-dressed men with flag pins on their lapels, cackling like a devil-costumed John Candy in a John Hughes movie as they lead the charge into oblivion.
The signs of trouble are there, possible solutions to the problems are apparent to most world leaders but (willfully) not ours, and best yet, millions upon millions of Americans whose lot is to do little but absorb the hellacious energy that will be released by our head-on collision with the 21st century continue to stand up and cheer for the billionaire lunatics who gleefully scream "NO!" to spending a penny to spare us this wreck.
2
A political future looms in which the rising population of people of color, joined by the nouveau-poor and un- or under-employed, face off against a moneyed, mostly white establishment that has rigged the voting districts, the state legislatures, and the Supreme Court in its favor, and backed them with massive amounts of corporate money. A crisis like that of the Civil Rights era, aggravated as it was then by a foreign war (this time in the Middle East) may ensue, with what result is unclear. If the fundamentalists get over their racial prejudice, and their hangup on a few social issues like abortion, they could even switch sides and start voting for the Democrats. Meanwhile, however, globalization will march relentlessly forward (with or without the Trans-Pacific Trade Agreement) and global corporations will not be in any meaningful sense American, either in their headquarters, their leadership, or their fundamental interests. They will use their political power in the US to keep the US military on the job of protecting corporate interests the world over, whether or not these are America's interests. Nor will the American consumer be so important to their profits - there's a world of potential consumers out there who are eager to buy everything these corporations have for sale, and whose buying power is increasing as ours is subsiding. Can the American majority wrest power from the corporate elite? That is the great, unanswered question facing us in future decades.
2
We are becoming weak minded and vulnerable to demagoguery.
Technological innovation has always led to massive upheaval, and the creation of new industries that are never included in the doomsday calculus of the moment.
The not too distant past saw 100s of nuke tipped missiles pointed directly at us on stand by alert with children running weekly air raid exercises from under their desks. We have never been safer or a more dominant military power.
What has changed, is the inability of our political leadership at all levels to develop a narrative to which our diverse populace can relate, and a coherent agenda that doesn't pander to special interest groups that care only for their own. Add the overwhelming propaganda passing for journalism over the Internet as it strives for 'clicks', and it's no wonder the average citizen is worried.
What is needed is not another 'Reagan moment', but rather a strong, honest, fair and principled voice that can cut through the fog and reveal the truth about the most fortunate nation in the history of mankind. What is lacking is not eloquence, it is courage. The leader who is capable of summoning his or her own will find that we are largely a nation of overwhelming strength and character that is the hope for mankind.
Technological innovation has always led to massive upheaval, and the creation of new industries that are never included in the doomsday calculus of the moment.
The not too distant past saw 100s of nuke tipped missiles pointed directly at us on stand by alert with children running weekly air raid exercises from under their desks. We have never been safer or a more dominant military power.
What has changed, is the inability of our political leadership at all levels to develop a narrative to which our diverse populace can relate, and a coherent agenda that doesn't pander to special interest groups that care only for their own. Add the overwhelming propaganda passing for journalism over the Internet as it strives for 'clicks', and it's no wonder the average citizen is worried.
What is needed is not another 'Reagan moment', but rather a strong, honest, fair and principled voice that can cut through the fog and reveal the truth about the most fortunate nation in the history of mankind. What is lacking is not eloquence, it is courage. The leader who is capable of summoning his or her own will find that we are largely a nation of overwhelming strength and character that is the hope for mankind.
Appreciate the sentiment, John. But one voice won't do it. One person will be slimed to oblivion if s/he gets outside the framework dictated by$$$.
Right track/Wrong track is a too simplistic in a country with such diverse opinions on what's important. One big impediment to addressing the issue: the primary system needs to address the problem of selecting electable candidates.
1
What I notice out here in the boondoks is the bitterness and just plain meanness dominating the internet threads. I'm truly sad about this and I fear it is a representation of how billions here think and also act. The lack of even the simplest elements of courtesy is just astounding. Also, I see these same attitudes reflected in the halls of our government, in the Congress, spinning its wheels and devouring taxpayer funds in hate-oriented hearings rather than legislating on behalf of the actual citizens, and in the SCOTUS where entrenched attitudes never veer and are far from fair-minded. Yet we still vaunt ourselves as being exceptional.
1
Lots of opinions here on the American malaise. Few, including FB, see the bigger picture, which is that the past fifty years are not representative of the challenges humanity has always faced--unless we consider the fall of empires to be unusual.
Historically, the challenge of the end of empire may be said to be a choice between a soft landing and a complete disaster. So far, mendacious American politicians and their wealthy masters have opted for the latter. We're headed to be another Italy rather than... Take your pick. Germany, Holland, Belgium were all colonial powers. The UK was the center of empire.
America has enough human and financial resources to be an exemplar of good modern government. "All" that's needed is goodwill among the class that used to provide leadership. It's not a task for an individual. It requires old-fashioned dedication of people with foresight and patience.
Historically, the challenge of the end of empire may be said to be a choice between a soft landing and a complete disaster. So far, mendacious American politicians and their wealthy masters have opted for the latter. We're headed to be another Italy rather than... Take your pick. Germany, Holland, Belgium were all colonial powers. The UK was the center of empire.
America has enough human and financial resources to be an exemplar of good modern government. "All" that's needed is goodwill among the class that used to provide leadership. It's not a task for an individual. It requires old-fashioned dedication of people with foresight and patience.
3
You have probably read "Nixonland" and "The Looming Tower," works of history that suggest we are still living in Nixon's shadow -- the Liar-In-Chief -- and that in 2001 the NSA, CIA, and FBI had between them all the pieces of the Al Qaeda puzzle but refused to share with one another. The invasion of Iraq in 2003 was based on lies, lies, and more lies. Nixon debased the presidency. George W. Bush debased the United States. This is not about economics. It's about morality. The USA has lost its moral compass and is becoming an oligarchy in which people like the Koch brothers determine the future of the nation and are accountable to no one.
A majority of Republicans believe that global climate change is a hoax or is based on bad science. Many of them remain convinced that Saddam Hussein was complicit in the events of 9/11 and are sure that Iran did in fact harbor weapons of mass destruction. "My mind is made up. Don't confuse me with facts." These voters have given us a grid-locked Congress where wealthy white men make policy aimed at making the rich richer.
A new American way? The only candidate who is genuinely interested in that is Bernie Saunders who, sadly, is way too principled and honest to be nominated or elected.
A majority of Republicans believe that global climate change is a hoax or is based on bad science. Many of them remain convinced that Saddam Hussein was complicit in the events of 9/11 and are sure that Iran did in fact harbor weapons of mass destruction. "My mind is made up. Don't confuse me with facts." These voters have given us a grid-locked Congress where wealthy white men make policy aimed at making the rich richer.
A new American way? The only candidate who is genuinely interested in that is Bernie Saunders who, sadly, is way too principled and honest to be nominated or elected.
3
The right wing has redefined the words that describe despots and despotism as 'American Exceptionalism', and they've erected 'golden calves' across society to convey the illusion that 'you too' can overcome the odds against winning their rigged game.
The electorate is confused and bombarded with political marketing sound bites designed to harness the hate, fear, greed, jealousy, and bigotry residing in the most primitive human mind.
The natural instinct of all animals that are afraid and leary is to retrench to the cave and wait out the storm.
The problem is that this 'right wing' storm has been blowing throughout history in it's quest to synthesize and separate the 'master race' from the rest.
As long as the primary measure of human value is the amount of cash in one's bank account, and facts can be readily bent by denigrating the words that represent them, we are all vulnerable to the 'snake oil' of self serving ideologies.
The electorate is confused and bombarded with political marketing sound bites designed to harness the hate, fear, greed, jealousy, and bigotry residing in the most primitive human mind.
The natural instinct of all animals that are afraid and leary is to retrench to the cave and wait out the storm.
The problem is that this 'right wing' storm has been blowing throughout history in it's quest to synthesize and separate the 'master race' from the rest.
As long as the primary measure of human value is the amount of cash in one's bank account, and facts can be readily bent by denigrating the words that represent them, we are all vulnerable to the 'snake oil' of self serving ideologies.
1
It's always interesting to talk presidential politics, but what is destroying the possibility of reform in this country is the Republican Congress. Even if Sanders were elected--and face it, that's impossible--he would be dealing with reactionaries who think that Obama is a radical. Sanders as a self-described "democratic socialist" would probably face impeachment almost immediately. The "bitter backdrop" of 2016 is the fact that political culture in the country is dysfunctional because the Republicans cannot face the fact that their America no longer exists. And now a Pew poll has shown that Christianity has lost 7 percent identification throughout the country. The party is dying, but it's simply going to take too much time.
4
Surely our increasing and increasingly vituperative polarization along political and economic axes are major sources of this angst. Hard to be optimistic in the absence of recognition that, ultimately, we will succeed or fail together.
When a family sets down to play the capitalist game of monopoly everybody starts out with the same amount of money distributed from the bank. As the playing starts those who have played before recognize the importance of buying property at every opportunity and collecting rent from other family members. Those who don't buy aggressively or get bad rolls of the dice and don't get the chance to buy property find themselves losing the game. At the end one person has all the money and property and is deemed the winner. The losers learn the lessons of this ruthless, winner takes all, zero sum game. Aggressiveness and chance make the winner.
America as a family has played out this game and created a few winners and lots of losers. But family is more important than money. It is time for the family to redistribute the money and start a new game. Let's give the next generation a chance to succeed.
America as a family has played out this game and created a few winners and lots of losers. But family is more important than money. It is time for the family to redistribute the money and start a new game. Let's give the next generation a chance to succeed.
5
"All I care about is my iPhone, my Escalade, my iPad, my Money, my iMac, my Favorite Restaurants, my Craft Brews, my Money, my Roku, my Designer Clothing, my Airline Miles, my God..." We are a nation of people who want. We pay more attention to what people say than to what they do, because what they say is what connects with -- and validates -- our wants. Science? Intellect? Conscious action? Worthless. The next president will be the one that connects with our wants just like all the other presidents that have ever been elected. Our knees will jerk and we will lock it in for another 8 years.
40
Computers, he notes, can now perform legal, pharmaceutical and medical work. They can produce journalism. ---- if we can get them to do that, why not get them to eliminate war and human greed, eradicate poverty, improve police-community relations; etc., etc.? after all, there's no limit to what robots can potentially do, right? wrong! what they can potentially do is what we decide to let them do or not do in service to humanity.
1
"For a stunningly long period now, American voters have been pessimistic about the country’s future — and their own. They sense that both at home and abroad, we have lost ground and keep losing more." --- Bruni.
To a large extent, Americans feel this way because they have lost control of their government, which is increasingly owned and run by big-money special interests. Most of the major party candidates are complicit in allowing that to happen. Elections, at least as they're run today in our country, are very expensive, and rulings like Citizens United have made them even more so. All that money isn't turned over to candidates without expecting something in return.
What we need is a candidate who doesn't kowtow to the moneyed interests but who stands up for the people. Bernie Sanders is such a candidate, not afraid to point out that our safety net needs to be strengthened, not shredded, that international trade deals like the TPP are bad for American jobs, that we need to end military adventurism in the Middle East, and that the corporate wealthy must pay more to support our nation. Elizabeth Warren would also be such a candidate of she would run. But the rest are too beholden to Wall Street and corporatism to have much interest in helping the 99 percent, much as they may try to make us believe that they are in order to get our vote. Americans know that they're in for another round of political showmanship that only pretends to address real issues, like jobs.
To a large extent, Americans feel this way because they have lost control of their government, which is increasingly owned and run by big-money special interests. Most of the major party candidates are complicit in allowing that to happen. Elections, at least as they're run today in our country, are very expensive, and rulings like Citizens United have made them even more so. All that money isn't turned over to candidates without expecting something in return.
What we need is a candidate who doesn't kowtow to the moneyed interests but who stands up for the people. Bernie Sanders is such a candidate, not afraid to point out that our safety net needs to be strengthened, not shredded, that international trade deals like the TPP are bad for American jobs, that we need to end military adventurism in the Middle East, and that the corporate wealthy must pay more to support our nation. Elizabeth Warren would also be such a candidate of she would run. But the rest are too beholden to Wall Street and corporatism to have much interest in helping the 99 percent, much as they may try to make us believe that they are in order to get our vote. Americans know that they're in for another round of political showmanship that only pretends to address real issues, like jobs.
2
As several others have noted, there have been plenty of doom-and-gloom moments before. But this one is different. Even excluding looming global disasters such as overpopulation, terrorism, and climate change, the U.S. itself is declining in unprecedented ways morally and intellectually. Immigrants and others with little money had hope in the past, for their children if not for themselves, through the twin engines of abundant employment and free, excellent-quality public education. We're now in a downward spiral where those things are less available, and people are responding with unproductive behaviors--broken family structures; choosing immediate gratification over hard work, public service, and the ground for all educational success, proactive personal reading of books; and gravitating toward feel-good, oppositional, self-confirming political bubbles instead of well-informed compromise and hard political choices. These destructive "values," fuelled by media that attempt to gratify them rather than challenge them, will make it hard to turn this Titanic around.
38
"And the presidency may well be determined not by any candidate’s fine-tuned calibration on hot-button issues or by cunning electoral arithmetic. It may hinge on eloquence, boldness and a bigger picture."
I agree. It's hard to offer a Reaganesque "morning in America" attitude when the parameters of middle class progress feel like midnight. To tap and alleviate citizen anxiety, there needs to be overarching theme: on which to hang concrete proposals.
Bernie Sanders has done this. He's articulated his solution--the need to rebuild the middle class by leveling the proverbial "playing field"-- and presented his agenda bullet points. Problem is, Sander's isn't that eloquent and often seems more of a scold than not.
Warren has a more sunny delivery despite her intense, passion. But Warren could use some seasoning too, as her intensity often comes off as lecturing. (I love it, because I can only imagine what a great professor she was, but I don't think it will play well to the average joe).
Clinton could, if she can present a larger vision than she has thus far. Her announcement video presented a good cross section of folks likely to vote for her, but she hasn't yet articulated a comprehensive solution to malaise.
Naturally, no Republican candidate comes remotely close to what Frank is looking for. If anything, they are racheting up public anxiety with their hysterical, doomsday oratory.
All I hear are candidates babbling. When will they start listening?
I agree. It's hard to offer a Reaganesque "morning in America" attitude when the parameters of middle class progress feel like midnight. To tap and alleviate citizen anxiety, there needs to be overarching theme: on which to hang concrete proposals.
Bernie Sanders has done this. He's articulated his solution--the need to rebuild the middle class by leveling the proverbial "playing field"-- and presented his agenda bullet points. Problem is, Sander's isn't that eloquent and often seems more of a scold than not.
Warren has a more sunny delivery despite her intense, passion. But Warren could use some seasoning too, as her intensity often comes off as lecturing. (I love it, because I can only imagine what a great professor she was, but I don't think it will play well to the average joe).
Clinton could, if she can present a larger vision than she has thus far. Her announcement video presented a good cross section of folks likely to vote for her, but she hasn't yet articulated a comprehensive solution to malaise.
Naturally, no Republican candidate comes remotely close to what Frank is looking for. If anything, they are racheting up public anxiety with their hysterical, doomsday oratory.
All I hear are candidates babbling. When will they start listening?
2
So sad that you say the president's reaction to the sense of drift, stagnation is to reach for the enormous Trans-Pacific Partnership, as that is singularly the biggest damper to middle and working class growth, and will greatly widen wealth inequality. It needs to be defeated.
Experts have advised for years of the foolhardiness of drilling in the Arctic, and the choice of Shell, guilty of past damage in that region, is rubbing salt in an open wound.
If people don't want to spend time and effort understanding TPP, and most people would not, there are economists, Congress people who have seen the treaty, and many others whose judgements should be trusted. Over 2,000 organizations representing the spectrum of American life--from labor, farming, internet, environmental, small business, municipal workers and some American cities--have organized in opposition to TPP.
Experts have advised for years of the foolhardiness of drilling in the Arctic, and the choice of Shell, guilty of past damage in that region, is rubbing salt in an open wound.
If people don't want to spend time and effort understanding TPP, and most people would not, there are economists, Congress people who have seen the treaty, and many others whose judgements should be trusted. Over 2,000 organizations representing the spectrum of American life--from labor, farming, internet, environmental, small business, municipal workers and some American cities--have organized in opposition to TPP.
3
We got the promise of a candidate with the vision to tackle it in Obama, but he has largely failed to deliver on that promise. He has been severely hamstrung by a congress that has failed to deliver us anything but obstructionism and vendetta. Instead of re-establishing confidence after the disastrous GWB, they have further eroded it. How many people in America regardless of their personal politics approves of the current congress, 10 maybe 15%?
In addition we have a capitalistic system that has been severely corrupted by excessive greed, short term planning with the motto of let's make a quick buck and then cut and run. The 1% know if they have theirs that is all that matters and they will not be held accountable for their actions by government. The victims of this are the vast majority of we "ordinary" or "everyday" Americans we used to call the now vanishing middle class.
The Obama administration was doomed at its inception, it relied too heavily upon the "Obama brand" and failed to seize the moment and pursue an aggressive agenda in Congress far too busy basking in the glow of its electoral victory. A major failure was in dealing with the malfeasance of the masters of the universe on Wall Street. It coddled these criminals when what was warranted was aggressive prosecution and a push to re-instate Glass-Steagal.
Finally we have the media or what passes for it these days a collection of "ET" style coverage, gossip and Murdoch machinations. Give me Murrow and Cronkite.
In addition we have a capitalistic system that has been severely corrupted by excessive greed, short term planning with the motto of let's make a quick buck and then cut and run. The 1% know if they have theirs that is all that matters and they will not be held accountable for their actions by government. The victims of this are the vast majority of we "ordinary" or "everyday" Americans we used to call the now vanishing middle class.
The Obama administration was doomed at its inception, it relied too heavily upon the "Obama brand" and failed to seize the moment and pursue an aggressive agenda in Congress far too busy basking in the glow of its electoral victory. A major failure was in dealing with the malfeasance of the masters of the universe on Wall Street. It coddled these criminals when what was warranted was aggressive prosecution and a push to re-instate Glass-Steagal.
Finally we have the media or what passes for it these days a collection of "ET" style coverage, gossip and Murdoch machinations. Give me Murrow and Cronkite.
2
The Republicans cannot respect the notion that we are all in this together and Democrats cannot manage to lead in the discussion of controversial issues leaving the far right to constrain what people discuss to what they want discussed. Conservative perspectives are as important to better outcomes as are progressive ones, neither has a monopoly on the truth but it seems that conservatives have a monopoly on the discussion of all issues of importance these days. Evolution is not a matter of opinion nor is science a religious practice, misrepresenting things like this is not helpful but we have seen Republicans do just that regarding these issues just to cater to people who find long cherished beliefs have some gapping inconsistencies with what science has uncovered. The same for climate change because important donors in the Oil and Gas industries will suffer and reengineering to reduce carbon gas emissions will cost billions for all, but it's real and it must be addressed. Even in foreign policy, the Republicans undermine the President because he is a Democrat, making the U.S. look inconsistent and unreliable. Health care has seen runaway cost increases since the 1970's and despite the efforts to retain a market oriented system of health care insurers instead of a single payer system, the costs have increased far beyond the next most expensive single payer system abroad and with far worse results on average for the people living in our country. So it goes.
1
As long as Americans insist on defining success at home in terms of an ever-rising standard of living and success abroad as the right to control events in other countries, we are doomed to disappointment. The American Century ended in the mid-70s, when the incomes of average workers stopped rising and we finally admitted that Vietnam was a mistake. Forty years on we have still not come to terms with that. We continue trying to salve ourselves with smart phones and futile interventions in the Middle East and other "trouble spots" to no lasting effect. Our "crisis of confidence" is mainly a problem of unreasonable expectations.
48
Ah yes, the David Brooks school of social philosophy: the problem is that the poor haven't learned to be happy - moral failing of theirs.
The declining share of income in the economy, the shocking drop in life expectancy among lower income Americans, wages that have been stagnant for 45 years while wealth explodes at the top are things to get very, very angry about.
It is not unreasonable to expect that Main Street not get ripped off by Wall Street.
Or perhaps your point is that IS unreasonable, in your mind. The vast majority of Americans just need to get used to the New World Order?
The declining share of income in the economy, the shocking drop in life expectancy among lower income Americans, wages that have been stagnant for 45 years while wealth explodes at the top are things to get very, very angry about.
It is not unreasonable to expect that Main Street not get ripped off by Wall Street.
Or perhaps your point is that IS unreasonable, in your mind. The vast majority of Americans just need to get used to the New World Order?
All this talk about decline is really about relative, not absolute positioning. Americans feel worse about the country because we've, quite understandably, lost some of the pre-eminence we had after we emerged with extraordinary power and prestige after World War II. Much of the President's "retreat" merely recognizes the growing power of other nations. And people feel worse about their own situations compared to the postwar decades because of rising inequality and slowed population growth. Our pervasive news media likes to emphasize problems, and putting those problems in perspective is usually too much trouble. But on so many indicators, such as declining violence, improving environmental quality, better healthcare, we're doing better than ever.
As long as money is defined as speech, the USA has lost government of the people, by the people and for the people - always a vulnerable system to begin with. But made quaint in our lifetimes as politicians are compelled to sell out to the billionaire class and voters sense that their votes mean less than they ever did. And it's not that corruption is new, but the scale and capacity to build in every sector has never been greater.
In survey after survey, the peoples' super-majority positions are thwarted. No one is held accountable for "intelligence" failures, financial industry corruption, industrial scale pollution, etc. Truth-tellers must be comedians so at least we can have a laugh at our pitiful powerbrokers peddling one scripture over another. Meanwhile, truth-tellers who threaten the status quo are jailed or have to flee, or try to survive while they fight in a justice system struggling against its own ideologues placed into power - too often not due to fairness and intellectual honesty, but due to who they know and what they believe.
America is in decline, but the ideologues fail to comprehend, it's in large part exactly because of their relentless and merciless pursuit of more power to impose their beliefs on others that is undermining the entire ship of state for everyone.
Control of so much power by so few is what the Founders sought to contain. It has now been overcome by the power of self-interested money to drown out most everything else.
In survey after survey, the peoples' super-majority positions are thwarted. No one is held accountable for "intelligence" failures, financial industry corruption, industrial scale pollution, etc. Truth-tellers must be comedians so at least we can have a laugh at our pitiful powerbrokers peddling one scripture over another. Meanwhile, truth-tellers who threaten the status quo are jailed or have to flee, or try to survive while they fight in a justice system struggling against its own ideologues placed into power - too often not due to fairness and intellectual honesty, but due to who they know and what they believe.
America is in decline, but the ideologues fail to comprehend, it's in large part exactly because of their relentless and merciless pursuit of more power to impose their beliefs on others that is undermining the entire ship of state for everyone.
Control of so much power by so few is what the Founders sought to contain. It has now been overcome by the power of self-interested money to drown out most everything else.
85
The last time we felt this bad was probably in 1980. Unfortunately we took the wrong medicine, and the bitter taste still lingers.
3
I get your point, Mfr. Bruni, but things like taxes, the minimum wage, student debt and immigration are all tied in to the crisis of confidence that you're making note of. You can't tackle the larger issue without working to resolve the "smaller" ones. By obstructing the President at every conceivable turn our Congress (opposite of "progress") has distanced itself from its responsibilities towards the electorate. The GOP agenda can be reduced to the phrase "let the rich run things." Those who fault the President for attempting to impose too much government upon the free citizens of a free country need to recognize that the other alternative will result only the continued enrichment of the rich and the eventual impoverishment of the rest of us.
44
Bruni makes a valid point. Citizens say that they lack confidence in government. Are we losing out economically and otherwise as well? An antidote to this col. is provided today by Tom Friedman, writing about Gordon Moore and Intel. What was so different about the US today and in the 1970s, when we could make such impressive technological advances? Well, despite the war in Viet Nam and the messy if not chaotic social and political life we lived through during these years, our govt. continued to function. The transformation of the Republican Party, begun by Goldwater and Reagan, into the jingoistic, govt.-hating Grand Old Tea Party was in its early years. Now it is full-blown and it controls the Congress, half the states, and the Supreme Court. Is it any wonder that anti-science religious fundamentalists refuse to fund basic research? That much of the GOTP wants to retreat from the world, deport immigrants, and enshrine religion in our public institutions and life? We are reaping what the Republicans have sown, and ahead lies disaster. They wish, as one of them so eloquently put it, to shrink govt. so much that they can then drown it in a bathtub. I think they will fail, but only after doing tremendous harm to all Americans, including themselves.
36
Let's see now. Commentators have blamed the following for the "malaise": Regan, Bush 1 and Bush 2, Roberts and any other convenient scapegoat. Gee, all are Republicans, no mystery there, it's always someone else's fault. May I suggest that the polices and ineptness of our current POTUS has contributed to the downward cycle as his administrations sucks up more and more tax dollars and distributes them to his "friends". He has pitted us against each other; he has spent trillions to seek "equality" and yet he is a 1 per center! In addition to this, citizens do not like to be lied to by our government and certainly not by the POTUS, or conduct our nations business in secret and then lie to Americans about it. That is the crisis or malaise not prior Republican presidents. When will the left finally take some responsibility for the current disaster and his un-American policies?
Thank you for so eloquently validating my comment.
1
With its intrinsic strength as a nation of great potential intact why America looks in decline mode now engendering a profound sense of anxiety and uncertainty among its people is perhaps due to a visible leadership vacuum and dysfunctional politics born out of perpetual confrontations that have stiemied the functioning of its institutions.
9
The leadership is only a microcosm of the voters who empowered them. Voters want simple solutions in easily digestible sound bites. And there is no shortage of (right wing) con men to deliver such (American Exceptionalism, Class Warfare, Religious Freedom). And no shortage of cash from opportunistic billionaires seeking to obliterate by brute force our system of checks and balances that is the foundation of our democracy.
If the age of robots continues to grow, and the age of cheap labor outsourcing does the same, then the current trends of high productivity and an ever-enlarging desperate majority should do the same. One could look at the bright side of this: as so many predicted in the sci-fi of the past, we may be entering an age when more and more people have more and more leisure. This can only occur, as Marx said, in a collectivist society. Such a society would celebrate its economic success by turning that productivity into a large scale welfare state where everyone's needs are covered and all have spending money. We'd have to turn the page on the glorified work ethic and encourage lifelong education, creativity, family time, and pleasure. This is a fertile ground for more and more innovation and productivity, and those who develop such should be justly rewarded.
Instead, our loyalty to 300 year old ideas will produce a third world nation, rage among the vast majority (to be fueled and exploited by the elites), paranoia, and an increasingly militarized police force. Or we could wake up...
Instead, our loyalty to 300 year old ideas will produce a third world nation, rage among the vast majority (to be fueled and exploited by the elites), paranoia, and an increasingly militarized police force. Or we could wake up...
22
Another reaction along the same lines is a reflection on the future of work and income, in response to a column by Paul Krugman, repeated below: "Consider the world in 2100, or 2115: Let's think ahead to a time when almost all of us living now will be gone, and our great and great-great grandchildren alive. If the demographers are right, world population may level off at around 10B or 11B. Technology no doubt will have continued (hopefully mostly for the good) to drive "productivity." World GDP growth will significantly outpace population growth, and productivity defined broadly as value of products/services divided by the number of people will rapidly rise. The number of actual "workers" as we now define work (paying jobs) will decline sharply, meaning that strictly defined "labor productivity" will become a fairly meaningless construct. So, how will the value of the products/services get to the population, if not via wages? Who knows how it will occur, but there will obviously emerge new forms of "social compact" (or social contract) policy that will reasonably and effectively distribute the income. "Redistribution" is a term that won't be used, replaced by new terms that explicitly recognize the realities of the new world economy. The future situation (as summarized) is easy to lay out. How we get from here to there, in fits and starts, hopefully no terrible wars thrown in, will be the history of the rest of the 21st century."
We're all on the same track. It's just that we're heading in opposite directions, away from each other. Yes, the economy is improving but so is wealth inequality increasing. It not that we are on the right or wrong track. The train has become uncoupled.
84
As many will rightly note the problems cannot be alleviated by the election of a president. That will merely act as a bellwether. Our politicians do not even pretend to seek a better way forward, all they do is jostle each other in an attempt to take the lead position in the direction the herd is already going.
What is more discouraging is that the most vocal on the right do not even have their sights set on a better future. They are, virtually to a man, focused on the past. Either of Ronald Reagan or worse of Calvin Coolidge.
What is more discouraging is that the most vocal on the right do not even have their sights set on a better future. They are, virtually to a man, focused on the past. Either of Ronald Reagan or worse of Calvin Coolidge.
24
The short term trend of world wide politics is being driven by the unprecedented transition to the Information Age, a revolution in human progress that will dwarf the 'industrial age'.
The advent of an age where facts are more readily available to humans as a whole will 'cut into' the 'windows of opportunity' that are available to 'snake oil salesmen' (aka, anyone who profits from the opportunistic possession of knowledge or information).
This is a 'big deal'! It cuts into the power of both personal and corporate monopolies as it accelerates the underlying rate of the 'creative destruction of capitalism'.
As it turns out 50-70 years of of 'straight line' thinking has benefited many, but that 'straight line' is just an artifact of the limits of human thinking (aka, human time).
Our Universe, seems to obey the geometry of more of a spiral path that plays out in cosmic time. Thus once, every 50-100 years, the 'straight line of humans progress faces the potential of going off the rails of space-time-and-human-progress.
Those who like their spot on the rails (aka conservatives of one ilk or another), don't like, and strongly resist the idea of the uncertainty of curves, particularly those that they don't currently control. They'll be OK once they feel that they are firmly in control of the current curve.
The advent of an age where facts are more readily available to humans as a whole will 'cut into' the 'windows of opportunity' that are available to 'snake oil salesmen' (aka, anyone who profits from the opportunistic possession of knowledge or information).
This is a 'big deal'! It cuts into the power of both personal and corporate monopolies as it accelerates the underlying rate of the 'creative destruction of capitalism'.
As it turns out 50-70 years of of 'straight line' thinking has benefited many, but that 'straight line' is just an artifact of the limits of human thinking (aka, human time).
Our Universe, seems to obey the geometry of more of a spiral path that plays out in cosmic time. Thus once, every 50-100 years, the 'straight line of humans progress faces the potential of going off the rails of space-time-and-human-progress.
Those who like their spot on the rails (aka conservatives of one ilk or another), don't like, and strongly resist the idea of the uncertainty of curves, particularly those that they don't currently control. They'll be OK once they feel that they are firmly in control of the current curve.
Actually, there have been many reports, over the years, about a decline in American optimism. While there are many problems on the horizon, I am not terribly perplexed about soft news such as reports that our optimism is on the wane.
For example, on the eve of World War Two, many people thought that Democracy as a political force was spent and that capitalism had seen its best days. IN the immediate post war era, we all cringed in fear over nuclear Armageddon. When the intractability of the Vietnam War made the New left angrier and angrier as the casualty reports came in, some people predicted revolution. IN the Seventies, and a malaise set in over Watergate, stagflation and elevated oil prices following the embargo of mid East oil, many people predicted that our good days were numbered.
I would not lose any sleep over reports that more people think we are on the "wrong track."
Also, I think that many people, when interviewed by pollsters, don't want to sound too polyannaish, or merry, lest they appear foolish or soft. To many people, it seems cooler to complain. This may explain the rising numbers who say we are on the wrong track. (I'd also be interested in knowing how the question was framed.)
For example, on the eve of World War Two, many people thought that Democracy as a political force was spent and that capitalism had seen its best days. IN the immediate post war era, we all cringed in fear over nuclear Armageddon. When the intractability of the Vietnam War made the New left angrier and angrier as the casualty reports came in, some people predicted revolution. IN the Seventies, and a malaise set in over Watergate, stagflation and elevated oil prices following the embargo of mid East oil, many people predicted that our good days were numbered.
I would not lose any sleep over reports that more people think we are on the "wrong track."
Also, I think that many people, when interviewed by pollsters, don't want to sound too polyannaish, or merry, lest they appear foolish or soft. To many people, it seems cooler to complain. This may explain the rising numbers who say we are on the wrong track. (I'd also be interested in knowing how the question was framed.)
33
I don't think that it's a lack of optimism, but more a fear of the uncertainty associated with the underlying social and economic change represented by the increasingly loud 'footsteps' of the "Information Age".
Conservatives around the world are retrenching and pushing for a return to 'the euphoria of the old ways'. Witness, the Middle East, Russia, China, Africa, Europe, and Middle America.
If it doesn't result in some 'backlash driven cul-de-sac of conflagration', we should be witnessing an amazing spurt in the advancement of human civilization.
Conservatives around the world are retrenching and pushing for a return to 'the euphoria of the old ways'. Witness, the Middle East, Russia, China, Africa, Europe, and Middle America.
If it doesn't result in some 'backlash driven cul-de-sac of conflagration', we should be witnessing an amazing spurt in the advancement of human civilization.
Frank,
America is 28th in rated quality of education. Binge drinking -- which is a kind of practice-run suicide -- is rampant among the young. Those who make it to college come out with loans to pay off the size of a home mortgage, with higher interest rate, and weasel corporations willing to pay them a fraction of what they'd need to even start paying them off.
The black middle class was stripped of its savings and homes during the economic coup d'état pulled off at the end of King George 2nd's reign (King George 3rd is imminent).
The world is now a global totalitarian state, run by the .001%, for the .001%, and the rest of us are increasingly living in slave conditions.
And you're looking for hope????
The American Delusion is dead. There are many former "third-world" nations doing better than we are now, and better than we will do for generations to come.
America is 28th in rated quality of education. Binge drinking -- which is a kind of practice-run suicide -- is rampant among the young. Those who make it to college come out with loans to pay off the size of a home mortgage, with higher interest rate, and weasel corporations willing to pay them a fraction of what they'd need to even start paying them off.
The black middle class was stripped of its savings and homes during the economic coup d'état pulled off at the end of King George 2nd's reign (King George 3rd is imminent).
The world is now a global totalitarian state, run by the .001%, for the .001%, and the rest of us are increasingly living in slave conditions.
And you're looking for hope????
The American Delusion is dead. There are many former "third-world" nations doing better than we are now, and better than we will do for generations to come.
13
ANY solution to the slide of American confidence/relevance/dynamism that does not include significant taxation where the money is, is not a serious solution. The Republican party must either be reformed or sidelined to achieve these goals because only the government, the we the people government, has the size and dominion to do this. We need more infrastructure, not bigger and fancier homes, cars, yachts and handbags.
17
One of the major problems is our election system - it counts candidates as viable by how much money they raise, not the strength of their ideas, and regularly indulges in personal attacks and mudslinging that keep the best out and reward egos. This results in what I call the "evil of two lessers," where instead of getting a choice between the best candidates, we get a choice between two bought-and-paid-for people beholden to donors instead of the public they're supposed to be serving.
11
What if they held an election and no one came? I have voted in every election primary and regular for the last 40 years (give or take) and I have never voted for someone; just against the worse one. We need a none of the above lever.
You can thank Citizens United for creating the this environment. The ultra rich now control elections and are the biggest customers of the broadcast media.
Their persistent agenda is to create fear in the voting population. Campaign advertising is full of personal attacks on opponents and they invariably sacrifice fact in favor of fiction.
Sadly, the word "democratic process" is fading into history.
Their persistent agenda is to create fear in the voting population. Campaign advertising is full of personal attacks on opponents and they invariably sacrifice fact in favor of fiction.
Sadly, the word "democratic process" is fading into history.
13
You can lay this at the feet of the Republicans who have used their strategy to stoke fear in the hearts of Americans for six years, and using it as a smokescreen to reward the wealthy who could be "job creators" but have no incentive to do so.
There are many economic opportunities for job growth: alternate energy sources, health care (expand Medicaid and embrace, not kill, the ACA), and infrastructure. None of these jobs can be sent overseas, as long as manufacturing solar and wind devices are kept here.
The biggest threat to citizens is not ISIS but the Republicans who are so determined to wreck Mr. Obama's presidency, and then do the same to Ms. Clinton, if elected, and to keep their wealthy benefactors from doing their part in raising the economy, that their scorched earth strategy will leave the wealthy standing around looking at the smoldering ruins and wondering where all the consumers went.
There are many economic opportunities for job growth: alternate energy sources, health care (expand Medicaid and embrace, not kill, the ACA), and infrastructure. None of these jobs can be sent overseas, as long as manufacturing solar and wind devices are kept here.
The biggest threat to citizens is not ISIS but the Republicans who are so determined to wreck Mr. Obama's presidency, and then do the same to Ms. Clinton, if elected, and to keep their wealthy benefactors from doing their part in raising the economy, that their scorched earth strategy will leave the wealthy standing around looking at the smoldering ruins and wondering where all the consumers went.
20
I have one quibble with your comment: the Republicans have been blatantly stoking fear since Sept. 11, 2001 - nearly 14 years, not 6. And they were doing it more subtly long before that - Reagan? Nixon? It's hard to pick a specific starting date, but it's been in the works for many years.
1
Today, American citizens are, as Norm Chomsky said, more a consumer than a citizen. This shift in human character has resulted a distorted view about the future of the country - reflected by the finding - 'country is in the wrong track'. No one is willing to define the right tracks - a destructive mind set. And politicians and money lobby are taking advantage of this confusion and wining elections not to put the country in the right track, but to support their financial goal.
Is there any way to get out of this destructive loop - yes. The need of the time is nationalistic ideas not racist ideas like Tea Party. We need a nationalistic Party and center left groups have to think to organize them under a leader.
Is there any way to get out of this destructive loop - yes. The need of the time is nationalistic ideas not racist ideas like Tea Party. We need a nationalistic Party and center left groups have to think to organize them under a leader.
2
Meh. I think people have always voted their pocketbook/wallet. And somebody's always been trying to sell us something. Only the shrillness of the marketing has changed.
With more people and fewer resources, it will only get worse. With half the electorate at war with science, when we need science more than ever, it will get worse faster. With Climate Change wreaking havoc on both natural and manmade assets, the downward projections become truly horrifying. In this paper today, Bill McKibben betrayed a loss of hope. Anyone who is not an activist is either ignorant, or without care for the future of Mankind, let alone America.
15
The malaise Bruni describes may well be real; but his "solution": a leader determined to restore the nation's "glory days" of the 1950's and 60's, when America stood alone and atop the world cannot be restored. A sunny-side Reagan-style leader calling us back to a romanticized and mis-remembered past is the last thing we need. What we require instead is a redefining of what our "greatness" could and should mean in the 21st century.
12
When Americans participating in these polls say that the country is "on the wrong track," is the economy what they mean? Maybe the answer depends on who they are -- they can feel a shared sense of unease about the direction of the country, but the reason could be not economic but rather something having to do with the tiresome "culture wars," or something related to immigration, or something related to education. Or something else altogether.
6
Everything goes into one's definition of 'satisfaction'.
In times of great change, as we are now experiencing, EVERYONE is apt to have some level of dissatisfaction.
In a world where satisfaction is so much easier to come by than it has been traditionally, it seems that dissatisfaction might even dominate the dialog.
Unfortunately, politics thrives on dissatisfaction, and the information age has made it much easier for political enterprises to leverage dissatisfaction.
In a world where instant gratification, and great levels of satisfaction are ripe for the picking, it's just much more difficult to offer growth as an alternative to the tearing down of perceived evils like the unproductive old, sick, poor, uneducated, and otherwise disadvantaged among us.
Starve the beast if you will, but be aware that it is the only thing that is protecting you against the more carnivorous animals among you.
In times of great change, as we are now experiencing, EVERYONE is apt to have some level of dissatisfaction.
In a world where satisfaction is so much easier to come by than it has been traditionally, it seems that dissatisfaction might even dominate the dialog.
Unfortunately, politics thrives on dissatisfaction, and the information age has made it much easier for political enterprises to leverage dissatisfaction.
In a world where instant gratification, and great levels of satisfaction are ripe for the picking, it's just much more difficult to offer growth as an alternative to the tearing down of perceived evils like the unproductive old, sick, poor, uneducated, and otherwise disadvantaged among us.
Starve the beast if you will, but be aware that it is the only thing that is protecting you against the more carnivorous animals among you.
I agree with you - the simple 'right/wrong track' question isn't asking for enough information. If you drill down one more level, I suspect that you would find a bimodal distribution -- one group (the Fox News demographic) saying that we are on the wrong track by being too liberal, and one group (the NYT demographic) saying we are too conservative (to use easy labels.)
It's the same issue that surfaced with the for/against Obamacare surveys A majority registered disapproval, but it included two groups. one unhappy because Obamacare was doing too much, and the other unhappy because it was not going far enough. So - better surveys, please!
It's the same issue that surfaced with the for/against Obamacare surveys A majority registered disapproval, but it included two groups. one unhappy because Obamacare was doing too much, and the other unhappy because it was not going far enough. So - better surveys, please!
So the obituary for the USA is writ as the rise of the machines? The question of right track v. wrong track continues to indicate what exactly, that We are slipping from the international stage, because of robots? No way Frank.
The country is, and has been divided for since the Vietnam War, Watergate & Nixon, Reaganomics, Willie Horton, The Clinton Impeachment, and the 2000 Supreme Court's appointment of Bush Jr. and the leadup to 9-11 to the Iraq & Afgan wars. The country has survived it all. The current depression has much more to do with the treatment of our first African American President as Racism Large from a little less than half the country, and a complete boycott in congress from the republicans to work with President Obama.
Add to that the high court's allowing the wealthy to commit legalized bribery, the complete set back of voting rights that are once again targeting blacks & Latinos and the "Sunny Optimism" of our country has good reason to be in the funk. Hillary is the candidate that brings us out of this malaise.
The country is, and has been divided for since the Vietnam War, Watergate & Nixon, Reaganomics, Willie Horton, The Clinton Impeachment, and the 2000 Supreme Court's appointment of Bush Jr. and the leadup to 9-11 to the Iraq & Afgan wars. The country has survived it all. The current depression has much more to do with the treatment of our first African American President as Racism Large from a little less than half the country, and a complete boycott in congress from the republicans to work with President Obama.
Add to that the high court's allowing the wealthy to commit legalized bribery, the complete set back of voting rights that are once again targeting blacks & Latinos and the "Sunny Optimism" of our country has good reason to be in the funk. Hillary is the candidate that brings us out of this malaise.
14
So well put, CC, except for your fine post's tried and failed "Hillary as panacea" coda. It is too early for Democrats to settle on a 'safe' candidate - for any reason. Indeed Ms.Clinton's approach seems to suffer from that very faith in focus-grouped, compromise-engineered "smart but safe" solutions. I wish it worked. It looks good on paper. The current President's attempt to dance between smart, often well executed and well-intentioned moves and aggressive yet 20th century-ish efforts to spur economic growth, are working for many parts of the economy. Clearly and tragically, not for all. Would a less resistive Congress, or a little more time for the current regime lift up the poor as well? We'll never know.
As long as negative advertising is the key to political office, as long as the cancer of advertising itself grows unchecked, the elephant in America's living room, what can we expect other than voiced pessimism? It's what the average american, as media consumer is fed daily. Why do the major networks air programming obsessed with crime and murder during prime time?
As long as negative advertising is the key to political office, as long as the cancer of advertising itself grows unchecked, the elephant in America's living room, what can we expect other than voiced pessimism? It's what the average american, as media consumer is fed daily. Why do the major networks air programming obsessed with crime and murder during prime time?
1
I fear that the racism that has blocked Obama at every turn will simply be rebooted (and most likely amped up) as anti-feminism for Hillary. While I very much want her to win, I do not envy her one bit.
1
We may not "slip" because of OUR robots, but because of all of the other robots around the world.
For all of human time, human population has been the natural by product of the 'demand driven' requirement for human labor that has been needed to support both life sustaining acquisition of 'food and shelter', and the need for personal security.
Advanced societies naturally reduce their 'production of offspring' in response to technology that reduces these requirements. This has occurred around the world over the past 100 years.
Just as the "Industrial Age" transformed agriculture around the world, the '2nd Machine Age' is threatening to change ALL other human activities and systems in the same way (the Industrial Age eliminated 97% of the human labor involved in the production of food in advanced countries), but much, much faster, and with more displacement.
The technology is out of the bag, and EVERY country will be facing the dilemma of 'what to do with the excess humans'. No doubt, depending on whether the liberals or conservatives are in charge, there will be radically different solutions. In any event, the ownership and control over 'capital' will be dominant, because "capitalists" will own the robots.
The only outstanding question is: how we maintain a viable base of 'capital' necessary for human survival, and at the same time displace billions of humans along with the economic and social institutions that we've come to know and love so well?
For all of human time, human population has been the natural by product of the 'demand driven' requirement for human labor that has been needed to support both life sustaining acquisition of 'food and shelter', and the need for personal security.
Advanced societies naturally reduce their 'production of offspring' in response to technology that reduces these requirements. This has occurred around the world over the past 100 years.
Just as the "Industrial Age" transformed agriculture around the world, the '2nd Machine Age' is threatening to change ALL other human activities and systems in the same way (the Industrial Age eliminated 97% of the human labor involved in the production of food in advanced countries), but much, much faster, and with more displacement.
The technology is out of the bag, and EVERY country will be facing the dilemma of 'what to do with the excess humans'. No doubt, depending on whether the liberals or conservatives are in charge, there will be radically different solutions. In any event, the ownership and control over 'capital' will be dominant, because "capitalists" will own the robots.
The only outstanding question is: how we maintain a viable base of 'capital' necessary for human survival, and at the same time displace billions of humans along with the economic and social institutions that we've come to know and love so well?
1
Bruni has nailed the diagnosis but waffled on the prescription. What, precisely, should candidates do and say to project a realistic plan brimming with both empathy for current suffering and positivity for the future?
The recent turn to conservatism in the UK, France, and our midterms suggest that the counter-narrative is: hunker down and defend "us" and "ours" which will likely have traction on the Republican side. Democrats, take note.
The recent turn to conservatism in the UK, France, and our midterms suggest that the counter-narrative is: hunker down and defend "us" and "ours" which will likely have traction on the Republican side. Democrats, take note.
7
Conservatives seem to retrench in response to their fear of ceding 'control' to "others". In times of great change, this fear seems to become paramount.
The change isn't going away, and the concentration of wealth an power due to retrenchment has traditionally been lethal to our species (virtually all despots and wars can be attributed to conservative ideas and fears).
We have to hope that all encompassing, human values take precedence over the more narrow security resulting from the instinctual idea of the 'survival of the fittest'.
The change isn't going away, and the concentration of wealth an power due to retrenchment has traditionally been lethal to our species (virtually all despots and wars can be attributed to conservative ideas and fears).
We have to hope that all encompassing, human values take precedence over the more narrow security resulting from the instinctual idea of the 'survival of the fittest'.
The SNP is conservative?
There is no more powerful force to drive the speed of implementation of automation than the increase in the cost of labor.
To Bruni's theme and 2016: the GOP offers too many choices and the Democrats offer one. That irony makes for a rich breakfast.
To Bruni's theme and 2016: the GOP offers too many choices and the Democrats offer one. That irony makes for a rich breakfast.
1
The increase in automation is coming whether we like it or not. The difference between the two parties will determine how we handle the problem of the resulting 5 or 6 billion unemployed or under employed humans, and perhaps even how we manage population growth going forward.
The current GOP philosophy of the 'survival of the fittest', and their use of 'money' as the ultimate measure of the value of a human will not make for a bloodless transition.
Hopefully, they will moderate, and the humans will be given precedence over the accumulation of profits and power as we move into an age of greater prosperity and achievement.
The current GOP philosophy of the 'survival of the fittest', and their use of 'money' as the ultimate measure of the value of a human will not make for a bloodless transition.
Hopefully, they will moderate, and the humans will be given precedence over the accumulation of profits and power as we move into an age of greater prosperity and achievement.
The key will be to tax the owners of capital whether they employ labor or robots.
I believe we are pessimistic about the present, not the future. I do not see any candidate, current or past office holder, talking about the present in a comprehensible manner. All their promises, or threats, about my future mean little to me.
7
Jump in the jacuzzi! If you leave them in there alone, it's going to be their way or the highway, not yours!
A mood of overarching uncertainty and profound anxiety? I don't think so, since in reality it is a mood of total disgust that we must endure eighteen months of lies, lies and more lies from two political parties that are corrupt, dishonest and untruthful. I predict most people will again stay home in 2016 and not vote, as I do. That removes any uncertainty and profound anxiety since you are never disappointed that you did a stupid thing like actual voting for these corrupt people. I do not think there is any real 'juice' in the American electorate.
29
Dear Coolhunter, Too cool to vote? There is always a choice even if not a perfect reflection of your values. Don't care what the Supreme Court does? Just stay home. But don't complain about Citizens United and other less than stellar opinions from this court. The more people who take democracy seriously the more people will actually vote and perhaps we will get better results and a better government. I think you must not have much 'juice' either. Just sit on your couch and wait for a dictator to take over, or move to Russia. Now there's a country without anxiety, that's why they drink so much vodka, to celebrate their wonderful country. Don't be a dimwit VOTE!
1
I appreciate your comments about our silly two party system, so how about voting for an independent or write-in rather than sitting at home? That sends more of a message than not showing up. That's how democracy works, you must engage in it.
It is quite ludicrous that we have so long to decide, and pay so much. Awful.
The first step in shaping our destiny is voter turnout far better than 40 percent in off-year elections and 60 percent in presidential elections. Make the government reflect the desires of the public and you might start to get the things that other western countries take for granted, like affordable universal health care or an affordable college education.
122
That dog won't hunt. See Coolhunter. Vote for whom? I voted for the upstart Obama; he's not keeping his promises - he's a real Republican. I will vote for Bernie Sanders, but the mainstream press bills him as a crank, which he's not. Anyone other than Bush III and her royal Hillary gets only quirky press, not real coverage of the issues. The oligarchs want HRC and Bush III because either choice is fine with them. People in agony will look for a law and order savior; we're more likely to get some nasty tinpot dictator than a progressive.
What if there's no one whom you can, in good conscience, vote for? And what's the point of a college degree when even a Masters degree doesn't get you a job?
1
"It may hinge on eloquence, boldness and a bigger picture." Nice thought, Frank, but it going to take a lot more than that to fix what is broken in our country.
Actually, we went down the road of "eloquence, boldness and a bigger picture" in 2008 & 2012, led by the elegant and articulate President Obama. You know, our most recent President, who is currently trying to sell out us middle- and working-class Americans that he so claimed to love with his TPP. Although we don't really know what is in the TPP, from what we have heard from leaks, the TPP appears to be Christmas for the big corporations and Ash Wednesday for American workers. Welcome to 21st century America!
I think what we Americans are looking for in our leadership is not eloquence but plain honesty, a deeply felt concern for the middle class, and a determination to fix what is broken. FDR comes to mind. But, with the exception of Warren and Sanders (maybe a few others), our politicians are a pathetically dishonest, ambitious, self-serving, narcissistic lot, who don't give a damn about the little people or the future of our country.
Little will change until we change our corrupt and anti-democratic campaign system that our power elite so carefully crafted & our 5 Supreme Court Injustices gave their stamp of approval to.
This won't happen until Americans pay attention, drop their silly prejudices, stop allowing themselves to be bamboozled and divided, and demand constructive action. Who is government for?
Actually, we went down the road of "eloquence, boldness and a bigger picture" in 2008 & 2012, led by the elegant and articulate President Obama. You know, our most recent President, who is currently trying to sell out us middle- and working-class Americans that he so claimed to love with his TPP. Although we don't really know what is in the TPP, from what we have heard from leaks, the TPP appears to be Christmas for the big corporations and Ash Wednesday for American workers. Welcome to 21st century America!
I think what we Americans are looking for in our leadership is not eloquence but plain honesty, a deeply felt concern for the middle class, and a determination to fix what is broken. FDR comes to mind. But, with the exception of Warren and Sanders (maybe a few others), our politicians are a pathetically dishonest, ambitious, self-serving, narcissistic lot, who don't give a damn about the little people or the future of our country.
Little will change until we change our corrupt and anti-democratic campaign system that our power elite so carefully crafted & our 5 Supreme Court Injustices gave their stamp of approval to.
This won't happen until Americans pay attention, drop their silly prejudices, stop allowing themselves to be bamboozled and divided, and demand constructive action. Who is government for?
2
I believe we're on the brink of a 1960s style revolution. We're seeing it already in the black community, which is tired of being murdered. I live in well-educated, professional white America. When the recession first hit 7 years ago, everyone said "ride it out." When that didn't work (ie, the economy stayed miserable and the savings dropped and the debts rose), the new mantra--the current mantra--became "don't retire." Nobody I talk to plans to retire until they drop--how can they? We need the money. So say goodbye to that part of the American Dream. It's going the way of the stay-at-home mother. What happens, however, when age discrimination and "too much pay" forces out people into "retirement" who are probably going to be carrying three generations on their paychecks? Revolt. Anybody who thinks 60 and 70-somethings are going to be quiet and docile is crazy. And what are the authorities going to do? Gun down senior citizens? As with Viet Nam, there are easy solutions, in this case going back to a fair tax and regulatory system that protects the average worker and to a shorter workweek (for decent pay). Being essentially a moderate, if a leftwing one, I'd like to see us fix the system before it implodes. Start with reasonably priced healthcare and education, then guarantee jobs and a living wage. The rich stay rich, if not quite as rich, but heck, think of what they'll save as the price of Picassos tumbles.
8
The country had long been too big and unmanageable. That's been the situation for decades, if not longer. The answer is quite easy: either give states far more rights (like the Founding Fathers' intent was), or allow the country to break up into several smaller countries, each which can handle its own domestic affairs. Foreign affairs, and things such as defense, would be handled by an umbrella organization, much like NATO, but that group would have no say in domestic policies. People would either be with others whom their share common interests or move to one of the new countries. No one's feelings would be hurt or insulted and we all would be happier and more productive. A great solution, if I don't say so myself.
Karl Marx is laughing in his grave. All it took for the belief in a
common good to die in America was for the Darth Soviet Union to
go to the happy hunting ground. Left with no dragons to slay, we began
doing exactly what Marx predicted: offering every possible advantage
to the most fortunate while giving the back of the nation's hand to the
less fortunate. Since materialism and technology are the dominant
forces in history, as Marx told us, we have become a nation where there
is no such thing as right or wrong. Justice, liberty, loyalty: these have
less and less value every day. If it can't be bought or sold in US dollars,
it depreciates to land in the Thrift Shop of Quaint Ideas.
Instead, we kill our perceived enemies as fast as we can, without worrying
about stuff like "due process", and we never stop to inquire who are the
enemies of the values we used to cherish.
There's not enough pain and suffering to engender a "Fire Next Time". Just
as Gandhi's greatest tool in seeking freedom for India was British society's
deep belief in "fair play", until we can find some similar bedrock belief in our own society, we are headed off the rails.
With no intelligent observation to guide us, most of the tracks we can choose from will turn out badly once we're on them.
common good to die in America was for the Darth Soviet Union to
go to the happy hunting ground. Left with no dragons to slay, we began
doing exactly what Marx predicted: offering every possible advantage
to the most fortunate while giving the back of the nation's hand to the
less fortunate. Since materialism and technology are the dominant
forces in history, as Marx told us, we have become a nation where there
is no such thing as right or wrong. Justice, liberty, loyalty: these have
less and less value every day. If it can't be bought or sold in US dollars,
it depreciates to land in the Thrift Shop of Quaint Ideas.
Instead, we kill our perceived enemies as fast as we can, without worrying
about stuff like "due process", and we never stop to inquire who are the
enemies of the values we used to cherish.
There's not enough pain and suffering to engender a "Fire Next Time". Just
as Gandhi's greatest tool in seeking freedom for India was British society's
deep belief in "fair play", until we can find some similar bedrock belief in our own society, we are headed off the rails.
With no intelligent observation to guide us, most of the tracks we can choose from will turn out badly once we're on them.
3
Optimism? Vision and courage to tackle a crisis of confidence? HA, HA! As Bill Clinton stated during the 1992 campaign, "it's the economy stupid." The inequality gap continues to widen; despite the effects of the ill-named "Affordable Care Act", medical costs and drug prices continue to rise at an alarming rate; college is becoming more and more expensive; the minimum wage is ridiculously low; and more people are having to postpone retirement. The gridlock in Congress seems endless, and the polarization of the electorate is the worst it's been since the Civil War. It will take much more than vision and courage to bring back the "sunniness about tomorrows."
2
Doom and gloom! I hate to be too partisan, but it is time to believe that the government can be the solution again. The country has gone anti-government crazy and so we have stopped investing in our country. Guess what, you have to invest in order to get returns. We think that throwing money at international corporations and cutting taxes is what makes people richer, but it doesn't. The 50's and 60's and 90's were times of huge infrastructure projects that lifted the country up. Roads and communication networks meant jobs and more efficient production and commerce. We need to get back to building the country into something better.
4
The so called "rise of the robots" will not only threaten the USA. It will threaten the whole world system, China and India included. Which would bring about a fundamental philosophical question - what are we here for?
Perhaps in a faraway, enlightened future humanity can dedicate itself to the pursuit of science, art, literature and higher comprehension of the universe - while leaving the machines to produce absolutely everything we need, for free. In such a world, markets would not need to exist, And neither would billionaires or poor people.
Perhaps in a faraway, enlightened future humanity can dedicate itself to the pursuit of science, art, literature and higher comprehension of the universe - while leaving the machines to produce absolutely everything we need, for free. In such a world, markets would not need to exist, And neither would billionaires or poor people.
3
Samuelson is right about future growth if we buy into austerity budgets and the ideology of balanced budgets. With greater government spending, at near record low interest rates, for various things including infrastructure great economic growth is possible.
6
Robot anxiety anyone? I just saw an update of Watson, the IBM supercomputer that beat two Jeopardy champions. Watson is now 24 times more powerful and has been shrunk to the size of a refrigerator. Data storage is now in the cloud. It can communicate by reading conversational English. The thing can replace your doctor. All that's needed is a scanner to measure parameters, take a blood test and your annual physical just became the neighborhood car wash.
The world is undergoing a colossal change in how we all make money. Capitalism is based on doing things that produce goods and services. What happens if robots do all the doing?
Self driving cars are on the road. Robots are moving from the factory floor to the construction site. I may soon buy a robot vacuum cleaner.
Meanwhile, human activity is changing the planet in ways that threaten food production. Reservoirs are drying up all over the world. We have politicians that refuse to address any of this. They refuse to invest in America. Poverty is always a moral failing, not a lack of opportunity. America needs more religion. More guns. More military. More spying. More big banks. More profits. Schools don't have to be the best, just adequate. Getting sick is your problem, not mine. Who cares, I have cable with 400 channels. I don't know my neighbor's name and don't care. I have a privacy fence.
We have all retreated into fear and hopelessness. That's the new America.
The world is undergoing a colossal change in how we all make money. Capitalism is based on doing things that produce goods and services. What happens if robots do all the doing?
Self driving cars are on the road. Robots are moving from the factory floor to the construction site. I may soon buy a robot vacuum cleaner.
Meanwhile, human activity is changing the planet in ways that threaten food production. Reservoirs are drying up all over the world. We have politicians that refuse to address any of this. They refuse to invest in America. Poverty is always a moral failing, not a lack of opportunity. America needs more religion. More guns. More military. More spying. More big banks. More profits. Schools don't have to be the best, just adequate. Getting sick is your problem, not mine. Who cares, I have cable with 400 channels. I don't know my neighbor's name and don't care. I have a privacy fence.
We have all retreated into fear and hopelessness. That's the new America.
5
The poll belies the claims of Republicans with regards to their party's approach and illustrates that they control congress through clever districting
a) Obama ranks higher with positive ratings than either party or any other individual politician
b) in the question for voting in primaries - respondents lean more Democratic than Republican
c) as next president respondents consistently prefer a Democrat to a Republican
d) the above reflects a preference for Hillary over JebBush by 6 points, over Walker by 10, over Rubio by 6
e) HIllary is rated as "knowledgeable and experienced for the job" by 51%
In other words we are a center-left country and the next election is the Dems to lose (with regards to the presidency)
a) Obama ranks higher with positive ratings than either party or any other individual politician
b) in the question for voting in primaries - respondents lean more Democratic than Republican
c) as next president respondents consistently prefer a Democrat to a Republican
d) the above reflects a preference for Hillary over JebBush by 6 points, over Walker by 10, over Rubio by 6
e) HIllary is rated as "knowledgeable and experienced for the job" by 51%
In other words we are a center-left country and the next election is the Dems to lose (with regards to the presidency)
2
We are about 18 months out from the election. A 6 point lead is nothing at this point. You don't even know who will be the Republican opponent! and at this time in the 2008 election cycle, PEOPLE WERE SAYING THE SAME THING -- "Hillary is unbeatable" -- and guess what happened? Barack Obama was an unknown junior Senator at that time, with zero chance and a weird name.
Why do we make economic growth such an imperative? Couldn't we produce less, consume less, use less natural resources, and have a better way of life? Our economic problem isn't that we don't produce enough; it is that we don't distribute the fruits of production in an equitable way.
11
That difference - 62 percent to 28 percent - is the greatest judgment on the destructive effects of liberalism you could ever ask for. Twice as many people saying we are in serious trouble for all the people so thrilled to have authoritarian statist socialists has to serve as a warning.
We never had as many peacetime jobs created as during the Reagan years - and he was resisted at least as strongly as our current salesman-in-chief. Yet the old media gives up its credibility to sell us on hating him and everything he stood for and still represents today.
But everything is politics today. Feminist groups are only feminist for liberals. Race groups only care for their clients who are liberal. If we ever have alien unicorn lobbyists, they'll only cry for socialist unicorns.
We never had as many peacetime jobs created as during the Reagan years - and he was resisted at least as strongly as our current salesman-in-chief. Yet the old media gives up its credibility to sell us on hating him and everything he stood for and still represents today.
But everything is politics today. Feminist groups are only feminist for liberals. Race groups only care for their clients who are liberal. If we ever have alien unicorn lobbyists, they'll only cry for socialist unicorns.
2
When has America had "peacetime?" Does Grenada count as peace? Iran Contra? Ronnie's jobs were in the military!!
You wouldn't know a socialist if it bit you. Obama is a corporatist, like anyone else who could possibly win office. There are no socialists in sight.
It is not only American drift, but the whole of western culture and economy is stumbling. The global environment simply cannot sustain the western style or standard of living, neither in natural resources nor in the waste and pollution attendant on living the way the west has developed.
Add to that the ignorance, rashness and greed of corporations and the cruelty that is capitalism and, of course, people are depressed. Weary. Disgusted.
It shouldn't be this way. All of us here could devise schemes to at least ameliorate the world's gravest problems, but we are not billionaire CEO's or superpacs, whorish politicians, or willfully ignorant religious right obstacles to change.
Add to that the ignorance, rashness and greed of corporations and the cruelty that is capitalism and, of course, people are depressed. Weary. Disgusted.
It shouldn't be this way. All of us here could devise schemes to at least ameliorate the world's gravest problems, but we are not billionaire CEO's or superpacs, whorish politicians, or willfully ignorant religious right obstacles to change.
8
There are multiple styles of "Western" living, some of which involve healthy food, walking and public transportation, buying less junk, working fewer hours....
Mr. Bruni just doesn't understand the problem with "President Obama's sweeping trade agreement." The hyper-secretive, corporatized Trans Pacific Partnership makes the US come off like a thug bent on imposing its will (draconian patent laws, Internet restrictions, GMO and chemical-laden foods) on partner democracies like Japan, Canada and Australia while ignoring very real problems among the other nations like rampant human trafficking in Malaysia and near-slave labor in Vietnam. The best thing that could happen to our reputation -- and hopes -- at home and abroad would be to dump the TPP in favor of a truly open, environmentally sensitive and fair trade policy that would enhance life opportunities and outcomes for the vast majority of Americans and the other peoples of the world while shielding them from the harshest and most self serving interests of the multinationals. The TPP does the opposite. May it rest in hell.
13
Why should the U.S. be "the indispensable nation?" How pretentious! In fact, this phrase camouflages our attempt to rule the world. Why should this one country see itself as exceptional so that it somehow embodies global economic leadership? What makes us so special? Democracy? Ours is a make-believe democracy, firmly in the hands of banks and corporations. But the larger fact is this: The threat we face is not robots but out-dated nationalism that pits one group of humans against another. Unless we find a way to join together to live as one our so-called "advanced civilization" will crash and burn. In fact, it's doing so already.
10
The perception that we are moving in the wrong direction is driven, in large part, by the accelerating rate of change (see Friedman's piece on Moore's Law) in technology and culture. This produces a feeling that we have lost control of our future and generates an increasing level of paranoia to the point where any direction is perceived as the wrong direction. I think this affects conservatives a lot more than progressives and gets more compelling with age. We need leaders who can cope with accelerating change and at least try to have a vision for the future that considers more than reelection and the bottom line.
6
Forget it Tom. The country has lost control and yes, it does bother seniors and conservatives more than laissez-faire, someone-else-will-do-it-for-me liberals.
The people who aspire to run the country are NOT the same people who CAN manage this pace of change. They are just not the same people. The current guy ran on hope and change, but he clearly is over his head about the change part, though we can hope, right?
The people who aspire to run the country are NOT the same people who CAN manage this pace of change. They are just not the same people. The current guy ran on hope and change, but he clearly is over his head about the change part, though we can hope, right?
"It’s a mood of overarching uncertainty and profound anxiety." Our country has turned into a plutocracy, government by the wealthy. Try a progressive tax rate, get money out of politics, tax the church, and rebuild our infrastructure along the idea for a greener century. Out of the current muck that is our Republic might rise a more pure and egalitarian platform of what our Democracy could be.
133
We don't have a 'The Church' in the US of A. We do have a lot of religious institutions. And yes, they should certainly be taxed.
2
Eisenhower, a republican , gave us the warning, beware military industrial complex and I am sure that he would have added our bankster class if he could have foreseen what it has become. After WW2, the Great Depression and the roll government had in our recovery even a Republican could see the need for government regulation as a moderator for the rapacious growth of large capitalist systems.
Now Republicans have become the gate keepers and protectors for this military corporate bankster capitalism whose need for profits and societal control out weighs anything else. The vast trend towards robotics gives them further power to do away with workers and is a perfect metaphor for the way corporate leaders look at their companies and society. the military has long looked at people as numbers to be shifted around like meaningless cogs and corporations now do the same. Is this what Republicans seek to protect?
For the next 18 months we will see many candidates to put put on a human face as they try to win voters who their numbers. But people still believe they are more than this as they struggle to live their lives. But in the face of corporate pressures to create them as consumer numbers and irrelevant workers is it any wonder that our people become discouraged? And our compassion and sense of helping those lost in this morass is left at the wayside in the shadow of our out of control military industrial complex.
Now Republicans have become the gate keepers and protectors for this military corporate bankster capitalism whose need for profits and societal control out weighs anything else. The vast trend towards robotics gives them further power to do away with workers and is a perfect metaphor for the way corporate leaders look at their companies and society. the military has long looked at people as numbers to be shifted around like meaningless cogs and corporations now do the same. Is this what Republicans seek to protect?
For the next 18 months we will see many candidates to put put on a human face as they try to win voters who their numbers. But people still believe they are more than this as they struggle to live their lives. But in the face of corporate pressures to create them as consumer numbers and irrelevant workers is it any wonder that our people become discouraged? And our compassion and sense of helping those lost in this morass is left at the wayside in the shadow of our out of control military industrial complex.
77
Eisenhower gave us the warning, which was nice, but gave it as he left. He had set the complex loose and told us that by the way we should make sure to keep it reined in. That warning of his was a profile in cowardice, not courage, given only after his policies and projects could no longer be hurt by it. Four years earlier it would have been brave, and the Birchers would have branded him a secret Communist for it.
Is the miserable future that you describe already embodied in North Korea. The army is ascendant and the rest are living in fear for their lives in abject poverty. Here we are a country less than 250 years from its founding that is foundering in a morass of uncertainty with no end of politicians polling to discover the right themes and rhetoric to secure our votes. How sad for all of us!
1
The trouble with these surveys is that they do not seem to dig into the reasons, which vary a lot and may contradict one another. I for example have some pessimism due to the revival by today;s so-called "Republican" party of the ante-bellum Jeffersonian/Southern opposition to a strong Federal government (except in the case of enforcement of the Fugitive Slave Law) which in my view will drastically weaken our nation. Many others may fear some sort of "left-wing" growth of central power or even the kind of Eisenhower Repulicanism that I would espouse. We all cannot be right
Long run, I am an optimist since I think the Americans will get it right, but it is not going to be straight line from here to there.
Long run, I am an optimist since I think the Americans will get it right, but it is not going to be straight line from here to there.
2
I fully agree with the "downward economic spiral" comment. But unlike recent Progressive thinking, which would have us increase minimum wages to stimulate demand, I prefer the old Progressive approach which viewed the main function of Government as a re-distributor of income. Higher minimum wages will hasten the spiral. Let the market, an efficient allocator of resources, do its work. Government will then be tasked with ensuring that working people have a comfortable lifestyle.
1
The president's current push for "economic juice" - the trade agreement and especially allowing drilling in the Arctic - only increase the sense that we are drifting. These will produce short term economic gains primarily for the wealthy, and that, sadly, is the major force driving even this intelligent, highly informed president.
1
Indeed a great number of citizens harbor a gut feeling of "America in decline" or "being on the wrong track", but the essence of that malaise is unclear, from this article, and to most in the discussion. Its highly complex, broad based and very amorphous. The malaise reaches far beyond economic issues, and judging from the fears of the students I teach (middle school) it is rooted in a spiritual disconnection and a sense that the adult generation is out of touch with a deeper truth about where we find ourselves, careening toward an unsustainable future (environment, resources) and living in complete denial.
2
Unless you have your head in the sand or are a resident of the state of oblivion, one can't help but notice crumbling infrastructure, changing weather patterns & skimpy paychecks. The urban reality is water is being rationed due to a prolonged drought, freeways are clogged with cars, the air is poisoned by fossil fuels & the gap between rich & poor is reaching banana republic proportions.
President Obama gave the green light for Shell to drill in the Arctic because they were sold the rights under the Bush administration. Right now there are over ten countries vying for drilling rights in the pristine Arctic oil rich region. Russia is already building a military base in the Arctic & is the most aggressive threat to the environment as it seems to be in climate change denial mode. Russia's main economic resource is the fossil fuel industry which they intend to protect even by military might.
Meanwhile the US is caught in a Catch-22. Most of the country knows that climate change is an immediate threat, even more so than the rise of the robotic age. The jobs will center around resource management, quantum physics & optimum output vs. industrial decline. If the US was energy independent focusing on clean technology, the military could afford to shrink in size as it wouldn't need to protect interests in far away places.
Candidates for 2016 want to bring optimism to a pessimistic nation. As a start, politicians need to inform the public with the truth & offer real time solutions.
President Obama gave the green light for Shell to drill in the Arctic because they were sold the rights under the Bush administration. Right now there are over ten countries vying for drilling rights in the pristine Arctic oil rich region. Russia is already building a military base in the Arctic & is the most aggressive threat to the environment as it seems to be in climate change denial mode. Russia's main economic resource is the fossil fuel industry which they intend to protect even by military might.
Meanwhile the US is caught in a Catch-22. Most of the country knows that climate change is an immediate threat, even more so than the rise of the robotic age. The jobs will center around resource management, quantum physics & optimum output vs. industrial decline. If the US was energy independent focusing on clean technology, the military could afford to shrink in size as it wouldn't need to protect interests in far away places.
Candidates for 2016 want to bring optimism to a pessimistic nation. As a start, politicians need to inform the public with the truth & offer real time solutions.
130
I believe the underlying pessimism is caused by denial of global warming. We know something is way wrong but are constantly misinformed as to the real culprit
1
It is not just a coincidence that tax cuts for the rich have preceded both the 1929 and 2007 depressions. The Revenue acts of 1926 and 1928 worked exactly as the Republican Congresses that pushed them through promised. The dramatic reductions in taxes on the upper income brackets and estates of the wealthy did indeed result in increases in savings and investment. However, overinvestment (by 1929 there were over 600 automobile manufacturing companies in the USA) caused the depression that made the rich, and most everyone else, ultimately much poorer.
Since 1969 there has been a tremendous shift in the tax burdens away from the rich on onto the middle class. Corporate income tax receipts, whose incidence falls entirely on the owners of corporations, were 4% of GDP then and are now less than 1%. During that same period, payroll tax rates as percent of GDP have increased dramatically. The overinvestment problem caused by the reduction in taxes on the wealthy is exacerbated by the increased tax burden on the middle class. While overinvestment creates more factories, housing and shopping centers; higher payroll taxes reduces the purchasing power of middle-class consumers. ..."
http://seekingalpha.com/article/1543642
Since 1969 there has been a tremendous shift in the tax burdens away from the rich on onto the middle class. Corporate income tax receipts, whose incidence falls entirely on the owners of corporations, were 4% of GDP then and are now less than 1%. During that same period, payroll tax rates as percent of GDP have increased dramatically. The overinvestment problem caused by the reduction in taxes on the wealthy is exacerbated by the increased tax burden on the middle class. While overinvestment creates more factories, housing and shopping centers; higher payroll taxes reduces the purchasing power of middle-class consumers. ..."
http://seekingalpha.com/article/1543642
2
The discovery of fire and the development of farming created socioeconomic chaos. When the spear replaced the rock as the first weapon of mass destruction human conflict became even more bloody and deadly. The first human cities were overflowing with garbage and sewage. Copernicus, Galileo, Newton, Darwin, Wallace, Mendel, Einstein, Bohr, Hubble, Watson and Crick all conspired to cleverly and clearly knock humans off of their delusional divine natural pedestal as being the central reason for the meaning of the life, the universe and everything.
Yet there was no nuclear winter. And there are 7.3 billion Earthlings. But human hubris and pride took an emotional mental big hit. Having lost our raison d' etre we lash out bitterly at others including our leaders and government. Instead of looking with honest discomfort in the mirror and carefully listening to our rhetorical voices and noting what we practice. But I still believe that "The moral arc of the universe is long, but it bends towards justice" Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
Compared to the birth of the nation in revolution and it's maturation in civil war and civil rights this era is akin to a teapot letting off steam atop an ant hill.
Yet there was no nuclear winter. And there are 7.3 billion Earthlings. But human hubris and pride took an emotional mental big hit. Having lost our raison d' etre we lash out bitterly at others including our leaders and government. Instead of looking with honest discomfort in the mirror and carefully listening to our rhetorical voices and noting what we practice. But I still believe that "The moral arc of the universe is long, but it bends towards justice" Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
Compared to the birth of the nation in revolution and it's maturation in civil war and civil rights this era is akin to a teapot letting off steam atop an ant hill.
2
"We're withdrawing from the central place we held on the international stage," says economist Edwin Truman. That "place" was created by our military might; that military might required enormous spending. That spending on the military required much less government spending on every other line in the budget, from infrastructural to health care at home to international aid abroad. Now, the cost of the military is finally obvious to many, except for the most hawkish. But we have lost thirty or forty years of "leadership opportunities" in every country. That deficit will not be overcome in a few short years.
1
One source of the malaise in this country is a lack of work--or enough work of any kind for that matter. How can the United States be an economic leader if it exports so many jobs overseas or replaces people with machines? More important, will we ever ease the national malaise if people aren't fully employed in some meaningful way.
The concept of free trade and lowering economic barriers globally is all well and good in theory, but in practice, where does it take us? For the foreseeable future, there will always be some country somewhere where labor is cheaper than the United States. If it's too expensive to make televisions, mops, and iPhones in China, then those operations will be moved to India or Bangladesh. But if people here don't have enough money to buy an iPhone--or maybe even a mop--what difference do those cheap prices make?
In America's economic heyday, we were a relatively closed, fully employed economy that produced its own energy and goods. Working class people received a living wage, and the disparity between the extremely rich and the extremely poor was much narrower than it is today.
We will never be able to go back to the self-contained economy of our past. The malaise will continue and will be exploited politically until we restructure how we live in ways that we simply cannot see at the present time.
The concept of free trade and lowering economic barriers globally is all well and good in theory, but in practice, where does it take us? For the foreseeable future, there will always be some country somewhere where labor is cheaper than the United States. If it's too expensive to make televisions, mops, and iPhones in China, then those operations will be moved to India or Bangladesh. But if people here don't have enough money to buy an iPhone--or maybe even a mop--what difference do those cheap prices make?
In America's economic heyday, we were a relatively closed, fully employed economy that produced its own energy and goods. Working class people received a living wage, and the disparity between the extremely rich and the extremely poor was much narrower than it is today.
We will never be able to go back to the self-contained economy of our past. The malaise will continue and will be exploited politically until we restructure how we live in ways that we simply cannot see at the present time.
3
We have two converging trends which make emergence from our predicament uncertain. One is the dying out of the older, white, bigoted conservatives who constitute the "base" of the Republican Party and the "George Wallace" fraction of the Democratic Party. The result will be a more socially, if not politically, democratic society. The other is the declining educational attainments of the Twitter generation at a time when technological developments are leading to fewer mid-range employment opportunities and a greater split between many low-range jobs and rarer high-range careers. In addition, higher and higher technologies are going to require higher and higher intelligence, but the Bell Curve assures us that the numbers of the high-IQ types will thus diminish over time, and "job training" programs will prove themselves boondoggles for the trainers and bamboozles for everyone else. Indeed, I think that the recent educational initiatives of both the Bush and Obama administrations have intended to maximize benefits for the purveyors of texts and tests at the expense of the education of student. The result will be more social tensions as people realize that their lack of education has consigned them to lower economic conditions and diminished social status.
2
This current American Malaise is the result of 50 years of constant complaining and unnecessary rebellion by the spoiled children of the "Greatest Generation." It's these Baby Boomers who are the problem. Instead of being grateful that they have never had to confront real trouble (Depression, fascism, world war, etc.) many of them have instead devolved into a perverted liberalism that sees nothing but problems and produces nothing but complaints, even as they live a life of ease and opulence that their parents could never imagine. What do you expect from people whose experience of economic adversity is probably limited to a drop in the value of their 401K account?
Say "revolution" and you may think mobs in Paris in July 1789 or in Moscow in Oct (now Nov) 1917--sudden, violent shifts in political power. "Industrial Revolution" also meant a shift in power, the rise of "money" at the expense of land first, people later. Money bought machines that replaced people, or at the least needed far fewer to do the same work. A man and a mule could earn a living on 40 acres, could farm 160. A man and a tractor can till 3,200 acres.
Next door to Mr Bruni today, Thos Friedman interviews Gordon Moore on the progress of technology, specifically computer chips. Whereas "automation" was once perceived as a threat to people who worked with their muscles, today "artificial intelligence" threatens to replace people who work with their brains, including, yes, doctors, lawyers--and stock traders. One trader with a computer can "outsmart" dozens of people milling the floor of the stock exchange.
Will machines take over? No, the people who own the machines will take over, at least so long as we let them. The notion of "we let them" implies governance, but the owners have already bought government. Repeat: have bought, past tense, unless you think Bernie Sanders stands a chance.
We are glum because we know we have lost; the revolutionaries at the country club have won, not with guns and guillotines but with receipts marked "paid." So long as the Most of Us concede power--not mere money, but the ability to make rules--to "owners," the game is over.
Next door to Mr Bruni today, Thos Friedman interviews Gordon Moore on the progress of technology, specifically computer chips. Whereas "automation" was once perceived as a threat to people who worked with their muscles, today "artificial intelligence" threatens to replace people who work with their brains, including, yes, doctors, lawyers--and stock traders. One trader with a computer can "outsmart" dozens of people milling the floor of the stock exchange.
Will machines take over? No, the people who own the machines will take over, at least so long as we let them. The notion of "we let them" implies governance, but the owners have already bought government. Repeat: have bought, past tense, unless you think Bernie Sanders stands a chance.
We are glum because we know we have lost; the revolutionaries at the country club have won, not with guns and guillotines but with receipts marked "paid." So long as the Most of Us concede power--not mere money, but the ability to make rules--to "owners," the game is over.
5
A society that is at peace with itself, and looks to the future with optimism, doesn't arm itself to the teeth with handguns, assault rifles and other arms.
A society at peace with itself isn't beset with paranoia about government "taking over" and enslaving citizens. Nor would it turn to bigotry and prejudice.
A society at peace with itself celebrates self-sacrifice for the common good, and values the the preservation and enhancement of nature.
A society at peace with itself and the world would honor public service and effective leadership. What our society has accepted, instead, is to outsource public service to the corrupt, the greedy and the fraudulent, who are bespoken to corporate and ideological interests.
A society at peace with itself is one that is confident without bluster, empathetic and courageous.
That's not us.
A society at peace with itself isn't beset with paranoia about government "taking over" and enslaving citizens. Nor would it turn to bigotry and prejudice.
A society at peace with itself celebrates self-sacrifice for the common good, and values the the preservation and enhancement of nature.
A society at peace with itself and the world would honor public service and effective leadership. What our society has accepted, instead, is to outsource public service to the corrupt, the greedy and the fraudulent, who are bespoken to corporate and ideological interests.
A society at peace with itself is one that is confident without bluster, empathetic and courageous.
That's not us.
5
I have been reading the news since 1968--not a very sunny or optimistic year--and I cannot remember a time when Americans weren't said to be anxious and pessimistic about the country's economy, its foreign policy, its fundamental direction, its educational system, and its moral and cultural foundations. When I look back beyond my own limited time horizon, I find that the twenties were a period of social instability, shocking intolerance, widening inequality, and extreme anxiety about culture and mores. In the thirties, of course, the country slogged through the Great Depression. For all of FDR's personal optimism, he was hated by many and the country struggled throughout the decade to to rebuild its economy. After the United States entered World War II, there were two years of great uncertainty and many setbacks before the war turned in our favor. The postwar period, like the twenties, saw considerable economic uncertainty and outbursts of terrible racism and political intolerance. Harry Truman is now seen as a fine president, but he wasn't very popular in his day. As for the 1950s, I doubt anyone was all that cheerful about hiding under their desks for nuclear attack drills. The point, Mr. Bruni, is that at every turn, we have doubted ourselves, amid a tangle of fierce challenges. Yet somehow solutions have emerged and the country has endured. There is nothing special or different about 2015.
4
"But in the background looms a crisis of confidence that threatens to become the new American way. Let’s hope for a candidate with the vision and courage to tackle that."
All the hoping and praying ain't gonna get the US there. Nor will the country get there with uninformed, apathetic and cynical voters. For starters, we'd need an educated, well-informed, attentive electorate voting not along party lines or for single hot-button issues, but always for the best candidates that can articulate, in clear language, the tough decisions that must be made - and have the integrity to follow through. We'd need a country that places knowledge, education, science, facts, reason and logic above partisanship, entertainment, opinions, faith/beliefs and irrationality. We'd need a population that understands it is not all or nothing: that the government can repair and build infrastructure and still tackle wasteful spending; that people can keep guns in the home while still allowing meaningful controls to prevent mass shootings; that we can fund schools and universities instead of building yet another stadium; that we can tax everyone at fair rates and still have a meaningful, basic safety net for the rainy days everyone is likely to occasionally weather. And we'd need jurists that understand that money facilitates speech, but money isn't speech. And so on... But in today's America? Good luck.
Although no survey has ever asked my opinion, I too question the current trajectory of this nation.
All the hoping and praying ain't gonna get the US there. Nor will the country get there with uninformed, apathetic and cynical voters. For starters, we'd need an educated, well-informed, attentive electorate voting not along party lines or for single hot-button issues, but always for the best candidates that can articulate, in clear language, the tough decisions that must be made - and have the integrity to follow through. We'd need a country that places knowledge, education, science, facts, reason and logic above partisanship, entertainment, opinions, faith/beliefs and irrationality. We'd need a population that understands it is not all or nothing: that the government can repair and build infrastructure and still tackle wasteful spending; that people can keep guns in the home while still allowing meaningful controls to prevent mass shootings; that we can fund schools and universities instead of building yet another stadium; that we can tax everyone at fair rates and still have a meaningful, basic safety net for the rainy days everyone is likely to occasionally weather. And we'd need jurists that understand that money facilitates speech, but money isn't speech. And so on... But in today's America? Good luck.
Although no survey has ever asked my opinion, I too question the current trajectory of this nation.
6
This article argues for a 20th Century politician like Reagan who would serve the masses some opiate of patriotic hope to get everyone feeling good. No doubt, that elixir would contain messages about economic and military superiority--old world ideals in the face of an a new, automated society. That may get someone elected, but it will not be the solution for a healthy, functioning society.
What we need is more socialism in the face of this increasingly automated world. As robots take jobs, income increases for the one-percent, and decreases for the 99. The answer lies in taxing that one-percent, and re-distributing that robot money to the people. The 21st Century American president must not prey on old world 20th Century capitalist ideology, but offer a new design that understands the automated economy. The government will have to create "jobs" out of thin air, while at the same time spread concentrated wealth around. All whole new economic system will need to emerge. That Reagan spin may make people feel good, but it's a lie. What we need is a truth-telling socialists like Elizabeth Warren who will confront the rabid concentration of wealth and offer creative, healthy avenues for redistribution.
What we need is more socialism in the face of this increasingly automated world. As robots take jobs, income increases for the one-percent, and decreases for the 99. The answer lies in taxing that one-percent, and re-distributing that robot money to the people. The 21st Century American president must not prey on old world 20th Century capitalist ideology, but offer a new design that understands the automated economy. The government will have to create "jobs" out of thin air, while at the same time spread concentrated wealth around. All whole new economic system will need to emerge. That Reagan spin may make people feel good, but it's a lie. What we need is a truth-telling socialists like Elizabeth Warren who will confront the rabid concentration of wealth and offer creative, healthy avenues for redistribution.
2
There is a Prehistoric theme park in Holland where, 25 years ago, a young guide dressed in nothing but skins to protect himself from the harsh Dutch spring (50 degrees and raining) mourned the loss of hunting and gathering as a way of life, when, he explained to us, humans had short bursts of labor followed by quiet that gave them the opportunity to invent wheels and polish up grammar. Agriculture created a different human, more organized and linear. Individuals adapted, disappeared, or became chronically unhappy with the change, but the species continued. Other technologies have created similar displacements, most recently 200 years ago. We think of inventions as being "improvements" and "progress," but we're not really headed anywhere, we're just changing; while upheavals are hard for those living through them, the species itself reaches a stasis point that becomes the norm. Fortunately, our life spans are 100 years long and no one will (or should want to) be alive 500 years from now to lament conditions we would consider as inhumane as our ancestors would consider our present conditions (be it homosexual marriage or living in boxes without reference to plant life). Only our reputations will remain of us, the age that turned over problem-solving to machines and disconnected humanity from the satisfaction of a thought well thought and a job well done. Perhaps everyone will be a philosopher king, but that seems highly unlikely.
1
In 2008 the American voters were ready for hope and change and they elected a president they thought would carry out those changes. Instead, monied and close minded parties began a quite successful holy war to keep America mired in deeply entrenched ruts and their vision of utopia. Our crisis in confidence stems from the plain reality of what we see our leaders suggesting is best for America and knowing it is wrong.
Our true course now is to strengthen our Democracy so that it functions as it was intended to function towards a healthy America for the populace instead of the few, for a healthy planet and a renewed vision for our place in the world. For a true democracy to work, the people's voices must be heard, encouraged and acted upon, however, our current Supreme Court and Congress have a recent history of silencing those voices and selecting which voices to hear. The populace is not being truly represented.
A president, no matter his or her vision and courage cannot change the country alone. Voters must put people into office who will support bold, new opportunities for a future instead of letting fear keep us in place. In order to do that, they need correct information, opportunities to make their voices heard and a renewed sense of citizenship and the duties that come with those rights and privileges.
If someone has the courage to fight for democracy ( one person, one vote) and the support to lead our country through fear and change we might get somewhere.
Our true course now is to strengthen our Democracy so that it functions as it was intended to function towards a healthy America for the populace instead of the few, for a healthy planet and a renewed vision for our place in the world. For a true democracy to work, the people's voices must be heard, encouraged and acted upon, however, our current Supreme Court and Congress have a recent history of silencing those voices and selecting which voices to hear. The populace is not being truly represented.
A president, no matter his or her vision and courage cannot change the country alone. Voters must put people into office who will support bold, new opportunities for a future instead of letting fear keep us in place. In order to do that, they need correct information, opportunities to make their voices heard and a renewed sense of citizenship and the duties that come with those rights and privileges.
If someone has the courage to fight for democracy ( one person, one vote) and the support to lead our country through fear and change we might get somewhere.
2
I know people say elections are all about the economy, but if there's a strange, new American pessimism at work--a "sense of American drift," as Mr. Bruni puts it--maybe it comes from something other than the perception that the economy is sluggish. Maybe it comes from a growing anxiety that in the end, the economy is a sideshow compared to the fast-growing destruction of our planet.
Economies are always about the present--or at most, about the short-term future. They're never about the things that matter in the very long run, such as global warming, pollution, water shortages, or human destruction of animal species. For many decades now, these things have all seemed to belong to the far-off future. Almost suddenly, it seems, that future is now.
Because none of the candidates can possibly win by centering a campaign on any of this (or even talking much about it), the upcoming election will be a depressing case of every candidate fiddling while the planet burns.
As for the election itself, everyone who cares about this issue should note that Obama did a fair amount for the planet, but nothing on the scale that's really needed. His recent decision to let Shell drill in the Arctic shows that oil continues to hold sway. If a Democrat follows oil, what hope do we have if a Republican is elected?
Economies are always about the present--or at most, about the short-term future. They're never about the things that matter in the very long run, such as global warming, pollution, water shortages, or human destruction of animal species. For many decades now, these things have all seemed to belong to the far-off future. Almost suddenly, it seems, that future is now.
Because none of the candidates can possibly win by centering a campaign on any of this (or even talking much about it), the upcoming election will be a depressing case of every candidate fiddling while the planet burns.
As for the election itself, everyone who cares about this issue should note that Obama did a fair amount for the planet, but nothing on the scale that's really needed. His recent decision to let Shell drill in the Arctic shows that oil continues to hold sway. If a Democrat follows oil, what hope do we have if a Republican is elected?
2
The robotic future which you encapsulate has already broken ground, the foundation poured, the basement constructed. The Few, the Proud, the Billionaires are consolidating their wealth. Work is fast becoming servant/drudgery, the plantation being the nearest image, except the plantation is the planet. The Few will consolidate that power in a technological holocaust draining society of individual dignity, worth, or use. Also of resources, sustenance, water, and oxygen.
This vile state will last a decade or two, and then the inevitable boomerang of the real Boss Lady in all this, Mother Nature, will render her final judgment: "Your species no longer has my support. Good day, sir. I said, good day!"
This vile state will last a decade or two, and then the inevitable boomerang of the real Boss Lady in all this, Mother Nature, will render her final judgment: "Your species no longer has my support. Good day, sir. I said, good day!"
4
It all comes down to how we fund our elections. If elected officials are beholden to their benefactors for their seats, then we get a skewed set of priorities that help the monied interests, specifically. The taint of money runs through all political calculation and forces closed all national conversation. Freed from this burden, would legislators not see that saddling young graduates with crushing debt is counterproductive, or that revamping the tax code would lead to a better sense of national fairness, or that the proliferation of guns is a plague on society? It's all about the money in politics.
4
I blame it on Republican office holders in Washington who place partisan interests above those of the country. Well, when Mitch McConnell said that Obama would be a one-term President at the beginning of his first term, he thought that turning the Republicans in Congress against the President would finish him off by 2012 and the Republicans would be back in the Oval Office. Instead he reduced the whole country's power and influence, not just the President's. As yet the Republicans still have not grasped that our government requires the enthusiastic cooperation of the Executive and Legislative branches to be effective, that private power and influence, even of huge corporations just do not address the same sort of issues which the government can.
5
Why not listen to people like Jeremy Rifkin who advises the EU very successfully! He gives sound advice about building new paradigms of energy transportation and communication. While other parts of the world are doing this what are we doing? Continuing to burn fossil fuels and fight all over the world clandestinely as well as out in the open to protect theses businesses..that's what we do! What do theses guys do for America? A big fat zero, that's what!
1
We have a system where inequality is growing and economic mobility is decreasing. Why wouldn't people become pessimistic as they become more aware of that reality?
People still want to believe that the USA is exceptional, the land of freedom and opportunity. There is a powerful public relations industry out there trying to shape our opinions. They have been very effective at creating a political system based on the idea that people deserve what they get. We have think tanks, lobbyists, media outlets and not[-for-profits dedicated building the idea that dependency is the culprit. Things will get better if people will only take personal responsibility and make good choices. If you're poor, it's your own fault.
As the middle-class shrinks, there's a psychological effect. Hope for change aren't enough to change the trajectory.
Capitalism "defeated" communism. The free market disciples of the Chicago School of Economics told us that unfettered markets would determine the best use of resourcs, but they didn't mention the human misery that would happen along the way.
When technology replaces human labor, there are many casualties. We saw that in the first Industrial Revolution. It's happening again, and we needd to think about how economic Darwinism affects society. What do freedom and democracy really mean?
People still want to believe that the USA is exceptional, the land of freedom and opportunity. There is a powerful public relations industry out there trying to shape our opinions. They have been very effective at creating a political system based on the idea that people deserve what they get. We have think tanks, lobbyists, media outlets and not[-for-profits dedicated building the idea that dependency is the culprit. Things will get better if people will only take personal responsibility and make good choices. If you're poor, it's your own fault.
As the middle-class shrinks, there's a psychological effect. Hope for change aren't enough to change the trajectory.
Capitalism "defeated" communism. The free market disciples of the Chicago School of Economics told us that unfettered markets would determine the best use of resourcs, but they didn't mention the human misery that would happen along the way.
When technology replaces human labor, there are many casualties. We saw that in the first Industrial Revolution. It's happening again, and we needd to think about how economic Darwinism affects society. What do freedom and democracy really mean?
121
Betsy...good subject for 100 columns, but not this one. Economic Darwinism and its rationalizations in the media to get votes is the top of our times. At least comments brings it up. But this is a column about current polls, not getting into the topics of our times. Polls reflect the distortions of engineered media messages. Then we read columns about them.
First, as Bruni writes, new technologies sideline workers; unlike earlier technological changes, they don't absorb workers at anything like the rate they displace them. They create a much smaller cadre of elite workers, leaving the rest either as lowly-paid drones to service their needs, or out of work.
Secondly, we have economic and "trade" polices that also sideline workers.
And third, social policies that used to provide a safety net are being deliberately dismantled.
So three factors come together to create a perfect storm. We can't uninvent technology, but the second and third factors can be changed by political decisions; if they are not, and people are abandoned to the mercies of the laissez-faire market place, I predict that there will be little for anyone to look forward to except for the aforementioned cadre of elite workers and the financiers who profit from their labors.
Secondly, we have economic and "trade" polices that also sideline workers.
And third, social policies that used to provide a safety net are being deliberately dismantled.
So three factors come together to create a perfect storm. We can't uninvent technology, but the second and third factors can be changed by political decisions; if they are not, and people are abandoned to the mercies of the laissez-faire market place, I predict that there will be little for anyone to look forward to except for the aforementioned cadre of elite workers and the financiers who profit from their labors.
3
Back in the 80s sometime there was a cartoon I saw that said YODUMP in it. It stood for Young Downwardly Mobile Professional. I laughed but I couldn't help feeling that it was coming true and that at some point many of us would be Middle Aged Downwardly Mobile Professionals and then we would just be poor, period.
It doesn't seem to matter who we vote for in America. There hasn't been any investment in our infrastructure, any improvement in our safety regulations, any upgrading of our research or any actions taken to improve the lives of working Americans. We've watched as lobbyists have defeated every effort to regulate their respective industries, as our finances were ravaged by a crisis that was caused by the financial industry, and we've paid the price. Too many haven't got enough money to survive three months without a paycheck, will never be able to retire because of bouts with prolonged unemployment, medical bills, or other life events. We're told this is the richest, greatest country on earth. Sure it is, if you're born rich or come into a lot of money. Otherwise we're reverting to a nasty brutish and anxiety filled existence which is not worth anything but an early death. I never thought that my country could change so much for the worse in 35 years but it has. All that seems to be left is to write the epitaph.
It doesn't seem to matter who we vote for in America. There hasn't been any investment in our infrastructure, any improvement in our safety regulations, any upgrading of our research or any actions taken to improve the lives of working Americans. We've watched as lobbyists have defeated every effort to regulate their respective industries, as our finances were ravaged by a crisis that was caused by the financial industry, and we've paid the price. Too many haven't got enough money to survive three months without a paycheck, will never be able to retire because of bouts with prolonged unemployment, medical bills, or other life events. We're told this is the richest, greatest country on earth. Sure it is, if you're born rich or come into a lot of money. Otherwise we're reverting to a nasty brutish and anxiety filled existence which is not worth anything but an early death. I never thought that my country could change so much for the worse in 35 years but it has. All that seems to be left is to write the epitaph.
15
"And the presidency may well be determined not by any candidate’s fine-tuned calibration on hot-button issues or by cunning electoral arithmetic. It may hinge on eloquence, boldness and a bigger picture."
I disagree. We already voted - twice - for Obama, a man filled with soaring, eloquent rhetoric, apparent boldness and a great vision of the bigger picture. What we got was the first president to open up drilling in the Arctic, a refusal to go after 1%ers even when Dems held both houses of Congress for 2 years, an illegal war in Libya that has destabilized SubSaharan Africa and caused dangerous migration of tens of thousands to Europe, a crusade to hunt down Snowden for telling the truth, increased domestic spying, drone bombing that has killed thousands of innocent women and children, and a new super-secret trade deal that we're supposed to unquestioningly accept because Obama says it's good. Who says Obama isn't the same type of cowboy as W was?
I disagree. We already voted - twice - for Obama, a man filled with soaring, eloquent rhetoric, apparent boldness and a great vision of the bigger picture. What we got was the first president to open up drilling in the Arctic, a refusal to go after 1%ers even when Dems held both houses of Congress for 2 years, an illegal war in Libya that has destabilized SubSaharan Africa and caused dangerous migration of tens of thousands to Europe, a crusade to hunt down Snowden for telling the truth, increased domestic spying, drone bombing that has killed thousands of innocent women and children, and a new super-secret trade deal that we're supposed to unquestioningly accept because Obama says it's good. Who says Obama isn't the same type of cowboy as W was?
16
The lease on an arctic oil patch was granted by Bush in 2008. Obama stalled approval as long as legally possible. Bush, the gift that goes on giving.
1
Voting for Barack Obama twice and expecting a different outcome...
You ought to see the beauty we had before ...
This is correct about the problem. This is correct about the potential for a candidate to run away with the election by finally speaking to the voters' feelings about this.
However, this understates those voter feelings, "a mood of overarching uncertainty and profound anxiety."
We are far past mere uncertainty. We know. It's bad, and nobody has any doubts anymore that it is bad.
We are far past anxiety. We know. Anxiety is to fear it might be. It is something more to know that it is, and we know.
These confirmed opinions are what offers such power to a candidate who finally faces what Americans know. It is this that gives power to Bruni's prediction that we await a candidate to step up and take over from the failed politics of past vs past.
However, this understates those voter feelings, "a mood of overarching uncertainty and profound anxiety."
We are far past mere uncertainty. We know. It's bad, and nobody has any doubts anymore that it is bad.
We are far past anxiety. We know. Anxiety is to fear it might be. It is something more to know that it is, and we know.
These confirmed opinions are what offers such power to a candidate who finally faces what Americans know. It is this that gives power to Bruni's prediction that we await a candidate to step up and take over from the failed politics of past vs past.
19
What if we were all to stop whining and went to work at the grass roots to fashion support for specific national improvements (infrastructure, education, employment, research) that might brighten our future? And what if we did this outside the strangling influence of political party "bases"?
Mark Thomason, in reading your comments, I was reminded forcefully of the depressive language used by the late Paddy Chayefsky's screenplay for the movie "Network". No offense intended, but I sorta expected Howard Beale to start speaking in a youtube video.
1
TerryReport com -- None taken. Thanks.
We need a new war to unite us-let's get it right this time.
4
We need to end all wars and make the earth safer and more livable for people.
... and you'll be the first to sign-up to do the fighting & dying and/or encourage your kids and your neighbors and/or their kids to do likewise, right?
How about on poverty,climate change, and injustice?
We’re blue in ways that have nothing to do with party.
We're red in ways that have nothing to do with party.
We are all Americans, red, white and blue!
We're red in ways that have nothing to do with party.
We are all Americans, red, white and blue!
4
Yes, and while countless millions are loathe to admit it, we are black, too,
some of us, and every bit American.
some of us, and every bit American.
"We are all Americans, red, white and blue!" indeed. maybe we should program 535 + 1 computers with this single line of code and let them run the country.
A welcome comment!
Mr. Bruni makes a common mistake: he thinks all the people who believe America is on the "wrong track" agree on what the right track is. If you ask me whether America is on the right track, I'd say no: too many people of color are suffering too much; the nation puts its money in all the wrong places; corporations and their executives make too much money and have too much power; and so on. Ask a conservative and she'll probably say exactly the opposite. We've become seriously polarized, and we don't listen to each other. The prognosis is bad.
226
Nowhere in this article does Mr. Bruni suggest that there is any agreement among people who think America is on the "wrong track" as to what the "right track" is. The differences may well be as you define them, and Mr. Bruni would not, I think, disagree. But he hasn't gone there in this column.
Welcome to Pottersville.
62
Pottersville: this is much more profound than the space it occupies.
It is the triumph of greed and speculation, the very real commoditization
of the human spirit, that seems to increasingly and relentlessly
dominate all our of nation's major actions and decisions.
Trading lives and treasure for access to oil supplies in the Mideast;
rationing access to doctors and stuffing the pockets of insurers and
drugmakers under the Big Brother rubric of "Affordable Care"; making
the sacred right of free speech the equivalent of the right to buy elections, votes, and politicians -- every element of our community is increasingly
defined by how much more easily we can be bought and sold than we could
the day, the week, or the year before.
Once, we were stardust. Now, we are all meat.
It is the triumph of greed and speculation, the very real commoditization
of the human spirit, that seems to increasingly and relentlessly
dominate all our of nation's major actions and decisions.
Trading lives and treasure for access to oil supplies in the Mideast;
rationing access to doctors and stuffing the pockets of insurers and
drugmakers under the Big Brother rubric of "Affordable Care"; making
the sacred right of free speech the equivalent of the right to buy elections, votes, and politicians -- every element of our community is increasingly
defined by how much more easily we can be bought and sold than we could
the day, the week, or the year before.
Once, we were stardust. Now, we are all meat.
I prefer Hooterville.
Put everything up for national referendum. Health care, the defense budget, immigration reform, etc. People are not confident in the direction of the country is going because they know their votes don't count.
35
Call me an elitists, and some surely will, but frankly, Redweather, I don't have confidence that the average voter knows enough about these issues to make an informed voting decision. Many voters rely on what they are fed by their favorite pundits, news outlets and like-minded friends. Many others simply pay no attention and never read a column by Frank Bruni or any other reliable columnist, progressive or conservative. What's left is a small tribe of critical thinkers who are far out-numbered. A national referendum would simply go to the largest mob gathered by those whose ideas are best displayed on bumper stickers. As to their votes "not counting", they do at election time but voters don't have much say in who's running in that election and that's where big money has rigged the system.
When people are told 24/7 how bad everything is, how bad government is, how terrible Obama is etc. at some point they begin to believe it. Most people have a gripe or two about something and it is so easy to project that into a gripe abut everything- thus the country will always be heading in the wrong direction. Right direction? Sorry you can't get there from here.
Right. Let's have a referendum on the value of pi. Any advance on 22/7?
Unless our political class is willing to address the malaise caused by systematic economic policies favoring the 1%, what is left of the middle class, now defined as nearly poor, will see the American dream drift away. Beginning with Reagan the starve the beast (reduce and eliminate government) mentality of both Republicans and Democrats have left those middle with little hope of sending a child to college, addressing a bad health report, or looking for a decent raise in pay. Thanks to a well heeled special interest congress, we now have replaced the government beast with the free market beast ----who is quickly devouring pensions, salary raises, and public services.
76
The sunny platitudes that you suggest are the path to 2016 glory are a sure way to make things worse. Two words prove my point: Ronald Reagan.
What we need is realism: That we don't need more; That justice requires sacrifice; modesty and humility are not profitable; the Earth needs us to use less, have less and love more.
That message, which might save our sorry world, is a sure loser in our land of delusional exceptionalism.
What we need is realism: That we don't need more; That justice requires sacrifice; modesty and humility are not profitable; the Earth needs us to use less, have less and love more.
That message, which might save our sorry world, is a sure loser in our land of delusional exceptionalism.
132
That message was Jesus's--until soi-dise "christians" perverted it. Long before "trickle-down" Reaganomics (with apologies to urolagniacs), there was Bruce Barton's "The Man Nobody Knew." That book, written by an advertising executive, characterized Jesus as the world's greatest business executive.
That message was not only Bernie Sanders's but also Franklin D. Roosevelt's.
I can't believe that American can't produce someone of the needed caliber when it needs it most--out of over 300 million people.
That message was not only Bernie Sanders's but also Franklin D. Roosevelt's.
I can't believe that American can't produce someone of the needed caliber when it needs it most--out of over 300 million people.
I don't understand your Pont about Reagan. Do you see his policies as positive or negative?
When's the last time you heard a Republican talk about an 'idea' aside from lowering taxes, bombing the world or eliminating regulation ?
America and the world have real and present dangers with wealth and income inequality, overpopulation and environmental destabilization.
The Republican response to all of those real problems is 'greed is good', abstinence, war and guns, and denialism.
Supporting Republicanism is effectively supporting the 'end times' as their favored policies of economic and military/gun violence merely accelerates modern feudalism, medieval wars and global toasting.
Republicanism is prima facie evidence of exceptionally American selfish tribalism that refuses to realize that we are members of society that requires societal public policies, not policies that entrench greed, violence, medieval war, religion and idiotic 'we're #1' stupidity as our guiding principles.
The betterment of society requires a healthy degree of socialism, which is the primary factor that has caused this country and the Western World to flourish in the modern age.
The USA would be nowhere if it weren't for public education, public roads, public roads, public infrastructure, public libraries and strong public laws preventing the wreckage of the water, air and land, paid for by taxes.
At least there will be one 2016 candidate who understands the basics of socialism in the great Bernie Sanders, as opposed to all of the others who seem wedded to the coins of destructive greed.
America and the world have real and present dangers with wealth and income inequality, overpopulation and environmental destabilization.
The Republican response to all of those real problems is 'greed is good', abstinence, war and guns, and denialism.
Supporting Republicanism is effectively supporting the 'end times' as their favored policies of economic and military/gun violence merely accelerates modern feudalism, medieval wars and global toasting.
Republicanism is prima facie evidence of exceptionally American selfish tribalism that refuses to realize that we are members of society that requires societal public policies, not policies that entrench greed, violence, medieval war, religion and idiotic 'we're #1' stupidity as our guiding principles.
The betterment of society requires a healthy degree of socialism, which is the primary factor that has caused this country and the Western World to flourish in the modern age.
The USA would be nowhere if it weren't for public education, public roads, public roads, public infrastructure, public libraries and strong public laws preventing the wreckage of the water, air and land, paid for by taxes.
At least there will be one 2016 candidate who understands the basics of socialism in the great Bernie Sanders, as opposed to all of the others who seem wedded to the coins of destructive greed.
488
Obama's TPP looks exactly like "greed is good". Selling weapons to Middle Eastern dictators looks like "greed is good". Opening up the Arctic for commercial drilling looks like "greed is good". Selling out Americans who could have easily had single payor but got Obamacare, a windfall for BigHealth/BigPharma looks like "greed is good". Obama is just as greedy and in the pockets of Wall Street as the Repubs. Both parties have become frighteningly the same. If we don't acknowledge this, we will simply elect another Obama who then acts a lot like Bush.
6
Self serving is not always destructive. Public education, public roads, public infrastructure, public libraries, have all advanced because self serving people have seen advantage in their implimentation. The arguments today are who controls, and how we pay. One would think we could sort this out.
Your statement that we "could have easily had single payor but got Obamacare" exaggerates. There is no way that Congress would have passed a single payor health care law. As it is, opponents of any federal health care law muddied the water so badly with their misstatements and outright untruths that the American people wouldn't have gone for it, unfortunately.
1
The response to the "right track" versus "wrong track" question can be interpreted any way one pleases. It can mean anything from our cultural indicators (what is popular among the media outlets), to the often cartoonish behavior of our political class, to the stark realities of capitalism and competition in a world that is getting more crowded. These poll questions would do more than provide content for the media if they were actually insightful and could help identify problems that can be remedied.
If politicians are simply going to adapt a winning strategy by evoking empathy, then that is just marketing. The more important matter is identifying the real problems and implementing a solution to these problems.
If politicians are simply going to adapt a winning strategy by evoking empathy, then that is just marketing. The more important matter is identifying the real problems and implementing a solution to these problems.
18
Good morning Rip Van Winkle. We know what the problems are, they aren't awaiting your discovery. But thanks for paying attention.
For me, it's more than economic. My true sadness, a sadness that I feel and have felt since our disastrous response to 9/11 - both for the world and for us - is about losing our democracy. We live in an Oligarchy on Steroids which is sucking up our very breath of life. I feel like America is on life-support, in a coma, not dealing with keeping our freedoms intact, just struggling to stay alive.
The first thing we could do to help with such malaise is to end the Patriot Act and Citizens United. That would be a beginning. Then maybe we could take a deep full breath and get on with the rest of the work we have to do. But as long as the 1% own us - and if the TPP (which our 'progressive/marxist' president wants so badly) the multi-nationals will have no allegiance to any country, especially not America. They'll just want the 'best deal' for themselves. It is very depressing to be a surveilled serf when I was born into freedom.
Can't wait for the first Shell spill in the Arctic. That'll make for good cable entertainment.
The first thing we could do to help with such malaise is to end the Patriot Act and Citizens United. That would be a beginning. Then maybe we could take a deep full breath and get on with the rest of the work we have to do. But as long as the 1% own us - and if the TPP (which our 'progressive/marxist' president wants so badly) the multi-nationals will have no allegiance to any country, especially not America. They'll just want the 'best deal' for themselves. It is very depressing to be a surveilled serf when I was born into freedom.
Can't wait for the first Shell spill in the Arctic. That'll make for good cable entertainment.
145
"The first thing we could do to help with such malaise is to end the Patriot Act and Citizens United."
We are doing this to ourselves.
It is not inevitable. It is not some outside implacable force of nature. It is our own laws, our own failure to step up and govern our own country.
We are doing this to ourselves.
It is not inevitable. It is not some outside implacable force of nature. It is our own laws, our own failure to step up and govern our own country.
16
"We" aren't doing anything.
Those of us in this country who didn't vote for Obama, who know the Constitution and are good citizens of the USA opposed both of these things from the start.
Drives me crazy when an individual makes a mistake, regardless of warnings, and then says "what are we going to do?"
Those of us in this country who didn't vote for Obama, who know the Constitution and are good citizens of the USA opposed both of these things from the start.
Drives me crazy when an individual makes a mistake, regardless of warnings, and then says "what are we going to do?"
1
Shell already tried to drill near Alaska. Couldn't even get the rig set up and ran it aground. Let's see how they fare in the Arctic. Not good, not good at all.
1
We created the Pax Americana but we can no longer afford to pay for it. Asian and western European nations slough off a substantial part of their defense costs onto us and spend those funds on health, education and infrastructure instead.
Then we merged, outsourced and privatized everything and anything, slaves to the quarterly results and stock price that we are.
Now the automation revolution is displacing multiple jobs, long before we can figure out how to replace them.
Clearly, we are in decline. No wonder people see a bleak, even dystopic future.
Glad I am to be amongst the AARP set. I probably won't be around to see the worst of it.
Then we merged, outsourced and privatized everything and anything, slaves to the quarterly results and stock price that we are.
Now the automation revolution is displacing multiple jobs, long before we can figure out how to replace them.
Clearly, we are in decline. No wonder people see a bleak, even dystopic future.
Glad I am to be amongst the AARP set. I probably won't be around to see the worst of it.
19
We are not in decline, but we are in an era of great change. I have great faith in our ability to evolve. Do not dispair.
Very well put.
Scott Walker has proven his ability to go after Democrats and destroy them. He will stand up to the leftwing propaganda machine if he is given the opportunity. His qualities are inspiring. With Walker, real Americans would have a fighting chance to go after the people who are destroying America and rid them from our national institutions.
7
Walker would bring us Koch Brother inspired policies and ALEC style legislation. No thanks.
1
Who, exactly, are you referring to in the last sentence? This is the kind of lashing out that solves nothing and further undercuts e pluribus unum. Or is that not your motto?
1
Rick!!! Do you even hear the sweeping simplistic-ness of yourself? You are talking about "destroying" your own fellow Americans!!! That's your solution? Really? People like you are the most un-patriotic traitors to this country. You CANNOT call yourself an American with a straight face. The Founders would throw you out of the country if they could hear you speak as you do. You should be ashamed of yourself. Brainwashed fool!!!
1
You step up to a kiosk. You touch a number of images on the screen. An automated voice encourages you to buy more. You touch another couple of images, then touch "Finish and Pay." A burger elaborately customized to your specifications plus fries and a shake gently descends from a chute to your table. Yours are the only hands that touch the food. A robot cleans the table after you leave. You look at the beggars on the sidewalk outside and shake your head in disgust.
14
"You look at the beggars on the sidewalk outside and shake your head in disgust"
The beggars are former fast food workers who automated themselves out of existence by demanding $15 to $20 / hour for unskilled work.
The beggars are former fast food workers who automated themselves out of existence by demanding $15 to $20 / hour for unskilled work.
1
Perhaps those beggars should improve their skill set beyond flipping burgers?
Remarkable column, Frank. Fact is, it makes not a damn bit of difference whether we are brimming with "confidence" or its opposite. Policies that might halt or offset the decline of the middle class, the technological obsolescence of labor, and the looming climate catastrophe, are simply unavailable because our political apparatus is wholly owned by people who profit from those trends. And yet this obvious fact makes no appearance in your column.
Instead, we hear you call for a candidate with a confidence pill. You tell us we need some "eloquence," some "vision," some "world leadership." I give up on you, Frank. You're no better than Brooks.
Instead, we hear you call for a candidate with a confidence pill. You tell us we need some "eloquence," some "vision," some "world leadership." I give up on you, Frank. You're no better than Brooks.
27
Stop or at least restrain and reduce the unsustainable growth of financing the retirement of public sector workers. No one wants to hear it or talk about it, but this needs to be addressed. The status-quo is simply unsustainable. Also, yes, tweak the tax system, imposing a larger share on the high-income earners and pass the savings to the middle-class (at least what's left of us).
3
Wipe out more pensions. That will fix everything. More poverty. More earned benefits relied upon but then stolen away.
12
Businesses shafted all their workers by turning defined benefit into defined contribution. Now conservatives work furiously to turn those shafted employees against public workers. If we can't have it, neither can you. Who trusts Wall Street to invest their little retirement pot? Not me. Wall Street has made it so complicated that ordinary citizens don't understand. Plus they game the system. Look at them fight against the fiduciary rules! The financial crisis was caused by the psychopathic (not meant as hyperbole) Wall Street crowd. Crashed home values and retirement accounts. Then walked away with a bailout and enriched themselves. The beleaguered middle class is scared and rightfully so. They see the shaft coming again and realize virtual serfdom is where they're headed.
2
Public sectors workers are not the problem. Neither are retiring boomers. There are millions of millennials desperately wanting and needing to take the jobs the boomers leave. However, the jobs will disappear along with the retirees lucky enough to make it to retirement while still working.
The problem is lack of jobs. Find the cure for that, tax rich corporations and individuals, stop corporate inversions, stop the endless wars that drain the public coffers while transferring it to military contractors, and prosperity will return.
The problem is lack of jobs. Find the cure for that, tax rich corporations and individuals, stop corporate inversions, stop the endless wars that drain the public coffers while transferring it to military contractors, and prosperity will return.
1
It's not 'confidence', it's reality. Real, working Americans see and feel the crashing quality-of-life. And, that's the whole of the industrial world. We've been had by the wealthiest. We've been used as pawns and now closer to low-wage slaves. Whenever we awake politically, we can overcome and create a better state and living standards. Somewhat like the best western European countries, we will be more committed to the body politic, the common good, the community. We can do this. We've chose not to.
Basically, love is caring for others. This is the only way to more perfect unions. There is a path.
Basically, love is caring for others. This is the only way to more perfect unions. There is a path.
15
"If one of the aspirants can give credible voice to Americans’ insecurity and trace a believable path out of it, he or she will almost certainly be victorious."
BERNIE SANDERS is that voice.
BERNIE SANDERS is that voice.
73
I am continually amazed at the question whether the country is moving in the wrong direction. Without specifying the direction, one is bound to get high numbers. The extreme right wingers plus the ones who fear their agenda predict this result. What do the pollsters think they are measuring? Don't they care? Be a mensch for us, Frank, and dig into this nonsense.
29
"Without specifying the direction, one is bound to get high numbers."
Except that was not always true. America used to answer that differently. It is the shift from optimism to pessimism that is measured by this question.
Why so pessimistic? Well, we are not fools. There IS really something wrong.
Except that was not always true. America used to answer that differently. It is the shift from optimism to pessimism that is measured by this question.
Why so pessimistic? Well, we are not fools. There IS really something wrong.
9
We will really be doomed when robots replace the gazillion OCD bureaucrats in Washington who are feverishly cranking out more and more federal regulations to hamstring our economy. Forget cutting the budget, if you really want the economy to ignite, just scrap half the federal register.
3
Of course, some of that ignition will come from actual fires and explosions, since you've just scrapped half the industrial safety regulations.
Also, in the real world, it's worth noting that fewer new regulations have been put forth under Obama than under any recent president.
Also, in the real world, it's worth noting that fewer new regulations have been put forth under Obama than under any recent president.
1
Ted,
You are forty years too late. We did that. It does not work. Let's repeat that very important and frequently overlooked point: It does not work.
Capitalism functions best when it is guided and directed along a path that promotes the common good. When left to itself, it stifles innovation and competition. It essentially commits suicide through overeating.
You are forty years too late. We did that. It does not work. Let's repeat that very important and frequently overlooked point: It does not work.
Capitalism functions best when it is guided and directed along a path that promotes the common good. When left to itself, it stifles innovation and competition. It essentially commits suicide through overeating.
1
Eliminate as many useless, parasitic, self serving bureaucrats as possible, the more the better.
1
We may not want to recognize it, but in spite of all the selfish wars, racism, bigotry and economic manipulation, the United States of America still functions quite well- especially in comparison with so many lost countries that are completely overwhelmed by ignorance and poverty. Perhaps we have finally evolved to point where we no longer need to be dancing at the center of an "international stage". Maybe we have learned that we are a poor example for ourselves, let alone others. Maybe it's time to stay home, dance around the kitchen, and work on the house.
21
So long as the ignorant and selfish continue to send replicas of themselves to Washington, this country hasn't a chance.
Ahem!!! Love and charity begins at home. For US CITIZENS THAT MEANS RIGHT HERE. Be good neighbors and mind our own business. Meddling gets you a nasty bloody nose and enemies.
It's nice that you're only interested in the affairs of your own country; unfortunately forces outside your country are very, very interested in you and the physical things you have, and they would like to take those things away from you. You can deal with them now, or you can deal with them later, when they are stronger and you are weaker.
Frank, there's no question that America is in decline - but it is a decline that could easily be reversed, if only Americans collectively summoned the will to do so; but if we sincerely wish to do so, the place we must begin is with ourselves.
The reality is that the American voter is as easy to distract or wholly mislead as any on earth. He regularly votes against his own interests, assuming that he even bothers to vote at all - and later experiences disgust or pessimism over the direction the nation. Isn’t that special?
Frank, there’s an old adage: “Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me”. Far from imagining ourselves some kind of exceptional people, Americans must stop being the living embodiment of a “shame on me” people.
Americans must do a better job of understanding the nuances of public policy, – which is absolutely our responsibility in a democratic republic – insist that the national interest come first in any instance that it can be honestly ascertained, and then be willing to remove any candidate from office who refuses to align themselves with it, at the earliest opportunity.
In short, we need to first hold ourselves accountable, and then hold our politicians accountable.
The change we seek ultimately begins within.
The reality is that the American voter is as easy to distract or wholly mislead as any on earth. He regularly votes against his own interests, assuming that he even bothers to vote at all - and later experiences disgust or pessimism over the direction the nation. Isn’t that special?
Frank, there’s an old adage: “Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me”. Far from imagining ourselves some kind of exceptional people, Americans must stop being the living embodiment of a “shame on me” people.
Americans must do a better job of understanding the nuances of public policy, – which is absolutely our responsibility in a democratic republic – insist that the national interest come first in any instance that it can be honestly ascertained, and then be willing to remove any candidate from office who refuses to align themselves with it, at the earliest opportunity.
In short, we need to first hold ourselves accountable, and then hold our politicians accountable.
The change we seek ultimately begins within.
29
The problem goes round and round in a circle moving faster and faster,so fast that no one can see the problem to begin to deal with it. So what is the national interest. The faster and faster spinning wheel of a problem is just where we are now. The 1% have won this battle, they tell and buy what is the national interest-what is best for them. Back to ground zero and the band plays on while our collective hearing fails to be able to hear because of the loudening heart beat of fear, anger and anxiety over taking our middle class lives and souls.
To use a computer acronym: "GIGO".
Garbage in, garbage out.
Continue to let money dictate our lives:
billion dollar elections; politicians unable to do what is best for most citizens; income inequality; fear of the other.
The candidate who will best be able to exploit our fears will win.
After said candidate takes office, it will be business as usual.
A house divided against itself cannot stand. We sure look pretty from the outside; our foundation, though, is rotting.
Garbage in, garbage out.
Continue to let money dictate our lives:
billion dollar elections; politicians unable to do what is best for most citizens; income inequality; fear of the other.
The candidate who will best be able to exploit our fears will win.
After said candidate takes office, it will be business as usual.
A house divided against itself cannot stand. We sure look pretty from the outside; our foundation, though, is rotting.
45
It's clear that Frank was writing specifically about Kevin, who gives all indication of having given up the ghost. We've ALWAYS been a House Divided, by one set of issues or another -- yet, despite that, we've had our moments. We can have them again.
1
Yes, Richard, please see my reply to your Friedman comment.
We can be great again, if we remember what FDR said about fear.
We can be great again if we take-on the economic royalists and their water-carriers.
We can be great again if we turn-off Fox News and ignore Pamela Geller and others of her ilk.
We can be great again if we stop voting for the current crop of Republicans and ignore the Richards of America with their obsessive quest for more and more mammon at the expense of the masses.
We can be great again, if we remember what FDR said about fear.
We can be great again if we take-on the economic royalists and their water-carriers.
We can be great again if we turn-off Fox News and ignore Pamela Geller and others of her ilk.
We can be great again if we stop voting for the current crop of Republicans and ignore the Richards of America with their obsessive quest for more and more mammon at the expense of the masses.
18
We have not always been a house divided against itself. That phrase certainly applied to the decade leading to the Civil War when the institution of slavery threatened to take the nation on a path away from the notion of freedom and equality.
For many decades, the two major parties held to similar goals for what America was and could be. The difference between them was about how to achieve those goals.
Compromise was from the beginning the lubricant that enabled our system to work. By in large, the ability for intelligent people of reason to come together and negotiate the differences enabled the political system.
Today, the two major parties lack intelligent leadership. The Republican Party behaves like a criminal conspiracy, it's candidates a crowd of clowns. The Democratic Party seems feckless, more prone to eating its' own candidates than supporting them.
For many decades, the two major parties held to similar goals for what America was and could be. The difference between them was about how to achieve those goals.
Compromise was from the beginning the lubricant that enabled our system to work. By in large, the ability for intelligent people of reason to come together and negotiate the differences enabled the political system.
Today, the two major parties lack intelligent leadership. The Republican Party behaves like a criminal conspiracy, it's candidates a crowd of clowns. The Democratic Party seems feckless, more prone to eating its' own candidates than supporting them.
The vast majority of pessimists I know are conservatives. Most surveys in my red state confirm this hypothesis and even with a fully Republican legislature and executive branch, over 70% of conservatives still think we are headed in the wrong direction, albeit just a barely smaller percentage than when we had a Republican president. A majority of them always think the country is headed in the wrong direction no matter who is in power in Washington.
29
Right. And the wrong direction is always into the future, not back to the past.
7
We don't really need to feel that anxious.
The fix is simple: tax the fat cats. Reduce outrageous and unjustified inequality until, in the words of Grover Norquist, you can "strangle it in the bathtub."
The fix is simple: tax the fat cats. Reduce outrageous and unjustified inequality until, in the words of Grover Norquist, you can "strangle it in the bathtub."
60
Here's a 2-step solution - the twenty hour work week and thirty dollar an hour minimum wage. Doing so eliminates unemployment. We should relish the elimination of drudge work on assembly lines and in law offices, but only if we figure out how to redistribute wealth to take advantage of the bounty created by the use of computers and robots. Pie in the sky nonsense? Redistribution is better than an economy of billionaires and serfs.
60
As a school child, my class assembly was told that the future held leisure for us all, not poverty. We were told that the energy from nuclear power plants was "too cheap to meter". (Obviously, they fixed that problem.) It would bring us thirty hour work weeks. Families would thrive, spend time together, go on vacations in our new cars.
Funny how that worked out. One thing I did learn from it was never to believe any message brought to you by a corporation - especially the fossil fuel industry.
Funny how that worked out. One thing I did learn from it was never to believe any message brought to you by a corporation - especially the fossil fuel industry.
Uh huh. Ask the French how it is working for them, and that's only a 35 hour work week. They have massive unemployment, especially among immigrants in bandies. Many people are forced into miserable contract work positions.
$30 an hour wages would create more poverty, not less, as companies would automate and hire fewer people.
$30 an hour wages would create more poverty, not less, as companies would automate and hire fewer people.
A 20-hour week and $30 / hour minimum wage would result in massive inflation and after a few years nothing would change.
1
If the problem is being driven by increasing use of technology, why don't we address it at that point in this process? Do people developing technology know that the end result of what they do makes our society both happy and miserable?
10
Diana, if you put your head in the sand the technology will just be developed by other nations, adding to their wealth rather than ours. You can't "stop" technology and go back.
2
That isn't a realistic suggestion.
The purpose of any development and innovation is to find efficiencies, reduction of human contact and expansion of what humans can't do.
It is a more valuable use of time for Americans to learn how to adapt to the technology we demand.
The purpose of any development and innovation is to find efficiencies, reduction of human contact and expansion of what humans can't do.
It is a more valuable use of time for Americans to learn how to adapt to the technology we demand.
1
Something may be a difficult thing to do and yet be the thing that serves the greatest good.
We can keep doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. We can rationalize. We can "make a desolation and call it peace." We can do all kinds of things. The universe and its structure will not bend to our will. We may know a lot scientifically, but sometimes a little knowledge can be a dangerous thing.
We can keep doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. We can rationalize. We can "make a desolation and call it peace." We can do all kinds of things. The universe and its structure will not bend to our will. We may know a lot scientifically, but sometimes a little knowledge can be a dangerous thing.
"It is a crisis of confidence." Jimmy Carter, 1979.
It is interesting to watch President Carter's so-called Crisis of Confidence address from 1979 and hear the same issues we face today. Carter brings up greed, corruption, malaise (as the address is often called), avarice, and Washington’s incompetence. In fact, he describes Washington as "incapable of action...twisted and pulled in every direction by hundreds of well-financed and powerful special interests."
Carter then goes on to prophetically describe two paths the nation can take--one to renewed strength based on the citizenry serving as the rulers and shapers of our democracy. The second, a path of "fragmentation and self-interest. Down that road lies a mistaken idea of freedom, the right to grasp for ourselves some advantage over others. That path would be one of constant conflict between narrow interests ending in chaos and immobility. It is a certain route to failure."
That is part of what makes the kabuki theater of our political system such a bitter backdrop. It is not that the issues are not clear--it is the power of well-financed special interests that undermines the confidence of the electorate to affect change. I am afraid any candidate with the vision and guts to tackle the current crisis of confidence will be run out of town on a rail financed by the Koch brothers--after all, the current system is working fine for them.
Link:http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/jimmycartercrisisofconfidence.htm
It is interesting to watch President Carter's so-called Crisis of Confidence address from 1979 and hear the same issues we face today. Carter brings up greed, corruption, malaise (as the address is often called), avarice, and Washington’s incompetence. In fact, he describes Washington as "incapable of action...twisted and pulled in every direction by hundreds of well-financed and powerful special interests."
Carter then goes on to prophetically describe two paths the nation can take--one to renewed strength based on the citizenry serving as the rulers and shapers of our democracy. The second, a path of "fragmentation and self-interest. Down that road lies a mistaken idea of freedom, the right to grasp for ourselves some advantage over others. That path would be one of constant conflict between narrow interests ending in chaos and immobility. It is a certain route to failure."
That is part of what makes the kabuki theater of our political system such a bitter backdrop. It is not that the issues are not clear--it is the power of well-financed special interests that undermines the confidence of the electorate to affect change. I am afraid any candidate with the vision and guts to tackle the current crisis of confidence will be run out of town on a rail financed by the Koch brothers--after all, the current system is working fine for them.
Link:http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/jimmycartercrisisofconfidence.htm
266
The problem is that you can't depress people while you are leading them.
Truth is very difficult to swallow, especially a difficult forecast.
I have personally learned this the hard way.
We need to find ways to inspire each other and our society to tackle problems and get behind leaders, elected leaders and policy makers who have solved problems.
I see alot of bios of many leaders and they rise due to anything but solve problems.
Truth is very difficult to swallow, especially a difficult forecast.
I have personally learned this the hard way.
We need to find ways to inspire each other and our society to tackle problems and get behind leaders, elected leaders and policy makers who have solved problems.
I see alot of bios of many leaders and they rise due to anything but solve problems.
1
That speech led directly to Carter NOT being elected.
Who wants a leader who tells you that you have a "malaise"? and are unworthy of success? and need to wear a sweater in a cold house, while you eat organic vegan food? Americans voted and made their voice loud and clear "NO WAY".
Who wants a leader who tells you that you have a "malaise"? and are unworthy of success? and need to wear a sweater in a cold house, while you eat organic vegan food? Americans voted and made their voice loud and clear "NO WAY".
The boom which began after WWII and lasted until around 1980 is over as the landscape shifted from an ideal of we're all in this together to I've got mine so sit down and shut up if you didn't get yours. It gained a brief resurgence in the 1990s due to advances in technology as this briefly re-leveled the playing field allowing outsiders and their ideas to prosper.
After 2000 and the burst of the first Internet bubble the US slipped into economic malaise through deregulation of the financial markets and cronyism which almost sank the economy of the entire world in 2008
by allowing a $30 trillion bubble of worthless derivatives peddled by American investment institutions to go international.
Although there have been efforts of the recent administration to once again right the ship they have been too little and too late and the slide continues due to inaction in Congress for any meaningful reform. The average worker now has such little purchasing power that only major reforms which neither party will support can stop the slide into irrelevance.
The economy certainly cannot be maintained upon the jobs and earnings from the armaments industries which is the only place current legislators will allocate funds. If this is further exacerbated by American adventurism abroad such as attacking Iran, the American economic system will be bled dry. Any type of lasting recovery in our lifetimes will be no more than a pipe dream regardless of which party steers the ship of state.
After 2000 and the burst of the first Internet bubble the US slipped into economic malaise through deregulation of the financial markets and cronyism which almost sank the economy of the entire world in 2008
by allowing a $30 trillion bubble of worthless derivatives peddled by American investment institutions to go international.
Although there have been efforts of the recent administration to once again right the ship they have been too little and too late and the slide continues due to inaction in Congress for any meaningful reform. The average worker now has such little purchasing power that only major reforms which neither party will support can stop the slide into irrelevance.
The economy certainly cannot be maintained upon the jobs and earnings from the armaments industries which is the only place current legislators will allocate funds. If this is further exacerbated by American adventurism abroad such as attacking Iran, the American economic system will be bled dry. Any type of lasting recovery in our lifetimes will be no more than a pipe dream regardless of which party steers the ship of state.
31
Interesting but many of your facts are incorrect. There was not a lasting economic boom from post WWII to around 1980 but rather the period was noted by recessions as well as booms. In 1976 through 1981 the economy was marked but stagflation, an economic problem not before encounter and to this day the biggest economic problem since the Great Depression, followed through the rest of the 80s and 90s with exceptionally strong economic growth. The Internet bubble of 2000, the result of technology promises unfulfilled
and grossly overstated, and insane stock valuations of the 1990s proved to rather contained and another garden variety recession. The Cronyism in 2008 was part of the long serving relationship between Washingtom and Wall Street, which exists to this day. Finally, it is too simplistic to look only at the 30 trillion derrative bubble since the fuel for this greed was the result of insane public policies directing the underlining housing disaster.
In fact it is only since 2008 has growth slowed to a point not seen since the Great Depression. The reasons why center around technology, a global economy and too much government involvement and regulation.
and grossly overstated, and insane stock valuations of the 1990s proved to rather contained and another garden variety recession. The Cronyism in 2008 was part of the long serving relationship between Washingtom and Wall Street, which exists to this day. Finally, it is too simplistic to look only at the 30 trillion derrative bubble since the fuel for this greed was the result of insane public policies directing the underlining housing disaster.
In fact it is only since 2008 has growth slowed to a point not seen since the Great Depression. The reasons why center around technology, a global economy and too much government involvement and regulation.
1
It seems to me that we need to understand the problem before we start developing a "vision" about what should be done. After WWII the world was in ruin, and we were essentially the last man standing. We had tremendous backlogs of demand for products, and access to markets abroad that had been decimated by war. Since then Europe and Japan have rebuilt and become economic players in their own right. Russia and China have backed off their economic models and become more capitalistic and competitive on the world stage. Looking back at history is not going to do much, but make us feel sad that our dominance no longer exists, and there is nothing that American politicians can do to change the world stage. We are further hampered by the fact that we have a dysfunctional political system that will not allow us to work effectively as a nation out of fear that the opposing party might get some credit. The Koch brothers and Sheldon Adelman could care less about the overall well-being of the country. Optimizing short-term profits and accumulation of wealth by the 1 percent is not a solution either. We need to be focused on boosting demand by sharing wealth more effectively, and rebuilding the physical, intellectual, and digital infrastructure to be the dominant economy in the world. We are never going to be able to compete for low cost manufacturing when Indonesia has an hourly pay rate of 37 cents.
33
Of all the comments so far, 66hawk seems the most on track toward a solution. The key structural challenge is going to be to "boost demand by sharing wealth more equitably." But how to do that? How put money (and dignity) into people's hands without creating "jobs" that they get paid for? This is going to be the world's challenge, not just ours. Technology indeed will result in fewer and fewer "jobs" as we have defined them, but it will also drive an increasingly rapid growth of world GDP. The visionaries and economic technocrats we need (hopefully ones that can win elections) are those that will solve the problem of income vs. jobs.
1980 was also a bleak time for American self-esteem. Into the picture came a sunny fraud from California with a simplistic economic policy: slash taxes, break unions, cut social services, and let the magic of the marketplace transform America. By 1984 Reagan's team was proclaiming that it was "morning in America". By 2015, it's become clear to many that Reagan had indeed transformed America by opening the way for the reign of the .01%. So, times of low esteem are indeed opportunities for politicians with quack policy recommendations--cue Rand Paul, Jeb Bush, Ted Cruz, Carla Fiorina, and the rest. If, as Marx said, history repeats itself, first as tragedy and then as farce, then the Republican field is perfectly suited for their parts.
90
Using Marx as your standard, how well did his economic system work? How well did it perform for the masses? Did an elite 1% group exist? Well, I guess we could at the former Soviet Union, East Germany and Cuba for the answer.
"“We can’t do much about this,” Samuelson wrote, citing the retirement of baby boomers and the spread of new technologies that could sideline workers." What pure nonsense!
I suppose never before in the history of the United States did a large generation of Americans ever retire! I guess we also never had technologies sideline workers, either. (See "horses and buggies".)
How about this: non-stop moronic wars since WW2. Now, most of the world hates Americans and intends to destroy us. (Nice foreign policy. But don't lose the faith: we can reverse this if we simply reverse our foreign policy.)
And this: a voluntary "free trade" exported millions of good American jobs. Just admit that our politicians and the economists they cited were idiots, and raise tariffs.
Finally, this: the Republican Party and its sycophantic "economists" told us over and over that low taxes on the rich was good for us. Sure. That makes sense - NOT! So, let's raise the taxes of the rich to where they were under Eisenhower - 92%, including estate taxes.
If we had leaders more interested in telling the truth than in worshipping failed ideologies, we could quickly reverse the steep decline we are in.
I suppose never before in the history of the United States did a large generation of Americans ever retire! I guess we also never had technologies sideline workers, either. (See "horses and buggies".)
How about this: non-stop moronic wars since WW2. Now, most of the world hates Americans and intends to destroy us. (Nice foreign policy. But don't lose the faith: we can reverse this if we simply reverse our foreign policy.)
And this: a voluntary "free trade" exported millions of good American jobs. Just admit that our politicians and the economists they cited were idiots, and raise tariffs.
Finally, this: the Republican Party and its sycophantic "economists" told us over and over that low taxes on the rich was good for us. Sure. That makes sense - NOT! So, let's raise the taxes of the rich to where they were under Eisenhower - 92%, including estate taxes.
If we had leaders more interested in telling the truth than in worshipping failed ideologies, we could quickly reverse the steep decline we are in.
166
"I suppose never before in the history of the United States did a large generation of Americans ever retire!"
Never in the history of the United States has this large a generation retired. Never has technological innovation happened so widely and so fast.
See, yours is what's called a "rhetorical statement". Mine is what's called "facts".
Never in the history of the United States has this large a generation retired. Never has technological innovation happened so widely and so fast.
See, yours is what's called a "rhetorical statement". Mine is what's called "facts".
1
Thank you!
Cassandra, nobody ever paid 92% in income taxes -- NOBODY. It was a sop to liberals even at that time. There were a zillion deductions and loopholes to ensure the wealthy paid nothing remotely like this amount. It was pure fiction.
If you believe that somehow, sometime rich people were cheerfully handing over 92 cents out of every dollar -- well, you are spectacularly naive.
If you believe that somehow, sometime rich people were cheerfully handing over 92 cents out of every dollar -- well, you are spectacularly naive.
Even if there were such a perfect candidate to inspire Americans, the media is only interested in cartoon characters. Hillary is a corrupt harridan; Sen. Sanders is a crank. I remember very well 2004 when a man who volunteered for Vietnam, served honorably and was injured, was painted as a liar and a coward. The media didn't ask right away, is it true? They asked, is this smear working? They never asked too much either about the liar who led us into a bloody, useless war, a coward who ducked real service to strut on an aircraft carrier.
We need George Orwell or Jacob Riis; we have the equivalent in political commentators of Hedda Hopper and TMZ.
We need George Orwell or Jacob Riis; we have the equivalent in political commentators of Hedda Hopper and TMZ.
184
Citing our current President as evidence, candidates who inspire Americans with hope for the future during their campaigns often do a quick reversal once they are elected. Another word for it is pandering. No wonder people no longer have much confidence in their elected officials.
The technological changes mentioned in the article surely will affect the rest of the world, not just the U.S. If robots replace American workers, the same should happen in Germany, China, South Korea and elsewhere. This trend would undermine demand throughout the industrialized world and would threaten the labor-cost advantages of emerging countries. This strikes me as an unsustainable development, especially in countries that still qualify as democracies. The current dilemma appears to parallel somewhat the one that accompanied the first industrial revolution, where the benefits of rapid technological change accrued primarily to a new class of businessmen. Political corruption exceeded the current level. And yet the American people found a way to reform both the political and economic systems. Our ancestors were not giants and we are not pygmies. The only question is do we have the will to act?
25
Mr. Bruni, the "great crisis of confidence that looms in the background" can be traced to the Roberts Court. Not only did this body give us G. W. Bush as our 43rd president (granted the Chief Justice was William Rehnquist), but you see my point. Citizens United was merely the template for this reactionary Court's judicial agenda. The power of ordinary citizens, as well as the unique concept of Ameticsn citizenship (as opposed to American exceptionalism) has been corroded by the acid of obscene wealth and privilege. The Roberts Court has viewed the laws of this country through the narrow lens of exclusivity and corporate wealth. The cries of Mr. or Mrs. Main Street have been silenced by the insistent, pervasive necessities of those who have money. The Lords of Industry offshore their profits to avoid paying their "fair share" for the country's maintenance and upkeep, yet they load up 36 state legislatures, a majority of the House and Senate and the presidency (when held by a Republican) with people hostile to the concept of a minimum wage. Republicans, Mr. Bruni, are the barrier to prosperity in America. They hold the keys to unlock galloping wage disparity and its attendant ills: psychological depression, social hopelessness, pervasive economic stagnation, crushing school debt. The Republican Party and its pit-bull mastiff, the Tea Party, have gained control over the public conversation.
113
You dishonor the noble pit bull in so characterizing it...
2
It would be nice if we finally woke up. After the 1973 oil embargo and consequent 1974 stock market crash, a sensible populace might have considered not only nuclear technology but also clean alternatives to buying dirty fuel from Jed Clampett and his concubines.
Other empires have been more honest in their efforts to extract the world's resources on the cheap. We talk a good game, but really we defend any government that suits our corporations' efforts and characterize even popularly-elected governments as variations on oh my God it's a Commie Red whenever American businesses feel discomfited.
The Class War that was begun by Ronald Reagan in the 1980's has also taken a spiritual toll. Back then, workers might have performed mindless jobs, but they were paid enough to buy a home and start a family. Now that union representation has essentially been destroyed, workers are paid as the cogs they probably are.
Do we favor a society in which there are big winners and 99% losers or one in which human dignity is respected? The culture conjured by cable news has been that the other guy is getting a better deal than you, and you can put an end to that by electing some dunderhead politician who takes his orders from Big Corporate (I'm looking at you, Scott Walker).
So, we are roiled in an oozing mess that we have made but may be powerless to clean up. Our intellectual laziness and moral malleability have brought us to this point. Is there any wonder we're depressed?
Other empires have been more honest in their efforts to extract the world's resources on the cheap. We talk a good game, but really we defend any government that suits our corporations' efforts and characterize even popularly-elected governments as variations on oh my God it's a Commie Red whenever American businesses feel discomfited.
The Class War that was begun by Ronald Reagan in the 1980's has also taken a spiritual toll. Back then, workers might have performed mindless jobs, but they were paid enough to buy a home and start a family. Now that union representation has essentially been destroyed, workers are paid as the cogs they probably are.
Do we favor a society in which there are big winners and 99% losers or one in which human dignity is respected? The culture conjured by cable news has been that the other guy is getting a better deal than you, and you can put an end to that by electing some dunderhead politician who takes his orders from Big Corporate (I'm looking at you, Scott Walker).
So, we are roiled in an oozing mess that we have made but may be powerless to clean up. Our intellectual laziness and moral malleability have brought us to this point. Is there any wonder we're depressed?
129
Let's not forget Marco Rubio's billionaire benefactor.
3
As long as we are talking about conjured cultures as in those of cable news, may we also talk about the conjured culture that began when a multi-week sit-in by barely more that one-millionth of the of the U.S. population in Zuccotti Park became a front page news story for days on end?
Where are the great leaders who can fashion then drive a grand vision? Sadly, history is a monotonous morass of mediocrity punctuated by these brief discontinuities when such rare individuals present themselves.
But the confidence that Americans once had in their futures, driven by steady and muscular economic growth, doesn't need to be a thing of the past. True, we have structural issues, in my mind partly the snowballing obsolescence of human labor at the hands of automation; but, frankly, we could have a lot of sunny days still in front of us before we needed to solve that challenge if we understood what it was that made sunny days.
In the 1990s, Bill Clinton was forced, kicking and screaming, to dramatically reduce federal expenditures. This reduced the need for T-bills and forced capital to go looking for riskier investments in order to earn. That capital found the Internet and broadband, cellphones, new drugs ... and we couldn't fill the demand for jobs. We MANUFACTURED demand by offering products developed on spec that people wanted more than they wanted to keep down personal debt. But our immense nanny state makes reducing federal and even state expenditures very difficult.
What's quite certain is that we can't have both. If we want increasing or even stagnant levels of dependence, we can't also have the robust economic growth that drives confidence. If someone could articulate that choice clearly, he (or she) would have a leg-up in 2016.
But the confidence that Americans once had in their futures, driven by steady and muscular economic growth, doesn't need to be a thing of the past. True, we have structural issues, in my mind partly the snowballing obsolescence of human labor at the hands of automation; but, frankly, we could have a lot of sunny days still in front of us before we needed to solve that challenge if we understood what it was that made sunny days.
In the 1990s, Bill Clinton was forced, kicking and screaming, to dramatically reduce federal expenditures. This reduced the need for T-bills and forced capital to go looking for riskier investments in order to earn. That capital found the Internet and broadband, cellphones, new drugs ... and we couldn't fill the demand for jobs. We MANUFACTURED demand by offering products developed on spec that people wanted more than they wanted to keep down personal debt. But our immense nanny state makes reducing federal and even state expenditures very difficult.
What's quite certain is that we can't have both. If we want increasing or even stagnant levels of dependence, we can't also have the robust economic growth that drives confidence. If someone could articulate that choice clearly, he (or she) would have a leg-up in 2016.
2
You are talking about the 'nanny state' and proceed about 'increasing or even stagnant levels of dependence' akin to being Armageddon for the economy.
Germany, for example, has both universal healthcare plus tuition free higher education, and is - according to all - doing just fine being while being such a terrible nanny state.
Germany, for example, has both universal healthcare plus tuition free higher education, and is - according to all - doing just fine being while being such a terrible nanny state.
9
Histories great leaders have managed to kill a lot of people. Spare me the great leader syndrome and give me an informed and capable populus.
43
The Leadership Principle is a human cultural artifact that does not serve us well. It posits that Daddy Will Save Us. This ain't gonna happen.
3
I'm delighted to see you support Bernie Sanders.
24
There IS one candidate who is staking out a vision that is markedly different than the mainstream, the vision that we should emulate (gasp!) Scandinavia instead of muddling along with the unregulated capitalism that the billionaires insist is the right direction to take. Maybe if voters are given the opportunity to familiarize themselves with Bernie Sanders ideas they might see that he is the only candidate with the vision and courage to tackle the crisis of confidence in our country.
94
The anxiety is about economic opportunity. We need someone who can challenge the elite without getting tangled in hot-button issues.
10
Bernie Sanders is our man for real change!!!
46
He would only be building on Obama's foundation....
5
What is most crucial to the election is voter participation. Polls mislead with their 62 to 28 percent numbers. Voting is so low in this country one wonders how many of those 62% who think we're on the wrong track have voted in a recent election. Yes, I've lost confidence, but mostly I've lost confidence in my fellow citizens. You lose your right to whine and complain if you don't participate.
47
Many of those who don't go to the polls ARE voting. Their vote is "none of the above."
The distinction is important because it means many of those voters would return to the polls if they had someone they wanted to vote for.
Voting against isn't the same, when against both isn't an option. Least worst isn't an option when both are too bad to accept.
There are many potential votes for the right candidate in that 62%, including many of those who haven't been voting.
The distinction is important because it means many of those voters would return to the polls if they had someone they wanted to vote for.
Voting against isn't the same, when against both isn't an option. Least worst isn't an option when both are too bad to accept.
There are many potential votes for the right candidate in that 62%, including many of those who haven't been voting.
I participate, every election including primaries. Whee. There is really no one to vote for, only against. We get a choice of two pre-vetted selections acceptable to those with money. That is all. I don't blame the people who don't vote. It really does only encourage them.
1
The US media and political environment is the modern Tower of Babel - everyone talking in different languages right past one another, and no one talking about in a unified voice about the one thing that really matters - and that is caring about one another and caring about our planet. The one issue which we all need to unify around is climate change, yet the top editorial today about the Arctic drilling does not even mention this threat to all of us. And never mind dealing with that; the US Congress is still fighting over healthcare and refusing to face the fact that some major corporations, who pay little to no taxes, also pay people so little that they qualify for foodstamps. How does a CEO of a company like that even sleep at night? How do members of Congress sleep at night? No wonder people are anxious - people fear that those with the most power care nothing about communities, about the planet, or about the fact we are all in this together.
74
"How does a CEO of a company like that even sleep at night?"
In a giant house with illegal labor-manicured grounds on a huge pile of money?
In a giant house with illegal labor-manicured grounds on a huge pile of money?
2
62 to 28 suggests a national consensus that we're on the wrong track. What those numbers conceal is that there are deep and profound divisions about what the right track should be. How can we as a country find a way forward with those divisions defying a resolution?
33
The first step in agreeing to do something is the agreement that something new must be done.
We're agreed on that much. Now it is a question of what. That is important progress.
Our candidates don't offer anything new. It is more of the same, past vs past. That leaves an opening, much like FDR filled in 1932.
We're agreed on that much. Now it is a question of what. That is important progress.
Our candidates don't offer anything new. It is more of the same, past vs past. That leaves an opening, much like FDR filled in 1932.
There are a number of issues where conservatives and liberal/progressives agree, and the interests of the .1% lie in keeping us divided. Returning the 4th amendment against spying on Americans, not fast tracking the TPP, increased minimum wage, certain gun provisions, reducing medical costs, strengthening social security all have huge numbers supporting them from both sides of the aisle. A little obfuscation and we fight with each other, and don't demand that our politicians do what we all agree we want.
2
After 6 years of Obamanomics people have given up hope and it has been become the great decline. No 2% economic growth is not acceptable, and it is not the new norm, and it has nothing to do with retiring baby boomers. The middle class has been hammered by low growth. All overtime is gone. Some businesses are just surviving. We are our the enemy, and it starts from the top. The tax code influences people's behavior more than anything else the Government controls. Ours is approaching 30 years since the last major change that created income passthroughs, now the most prevalent business structure. The world has changed. Ironically both sides of the aisle talk about it, but no one wants to jump in. Remember Obamas' tax reform commision? What happened? It is the economy stupid.
6
Curt (below) is right about the Republicans and Fox News being powerfully at fault for the national malaise, and what goes around comes around as self-fulfillment. However, Obama does not share the malaise, and has toiled to turn the country into a paradigm-shift, away from the Old Paradigm of 20th-century nationalism toward a New Paradigm—multilateral, collaborative, truly global, technological revolution-driven, progressive, century. All the winning 2016 candidate has to do is build on that. Do we see this coming out of the Republican/Fox side? Don't think so.
32
He has also showed us how to coddle Wall Street and assure that no torture backer or apologist will ever be punished. He just redirected us from the twin messes instead of doing the difficult work of cleaning it up.
He has now shown his allegiance to big oil by permitting drilling in the Arctic and on the Powder River. (Note: he is not planning to retire in either area.) He betrayed the faith placed in him by those committed to turning away from fossil fuel and healing the environment, home to us all.
He has now shown his allegiance to big oil by permitting drilling in the Arctic and on the Powder River. (Note: he is not planning to retire in either area.) He betrayed the faith placed in him by those committed to turning away from fossil fuel and healing the environment, home to us all.
1
Mr. Bruni, with all due respect, there is precious little evidence that suggests "the clash of personalities" is "crucial to the outcome of the election" although it definitely "commands the lion's share of our attention." What matters is economic and income growth, roughly from Q3 2015 through Q2 2016, at which point, barring something like the significant, sudden downturn in 2008, which made plain the recession to all, the cake is baked and voters know how they feel about the economy. It's also true that wars and length of White House tenure can drag down the numbers for the incumbent party. Because we do not yet know the economic and foreign policy climates for mid-2016, it is fair to say that the 2016 election is a toss-up.
Unless something truly strange happens in the GOP primary, however, Republicans will nominate someone from the middle of their party, someone perceived to be competent in campaigning, raising money, debating, etc. That individual, many of us believe, needs an economic stalling or downturn or some *real* Obama administration foreign policy disaster, in order to capture the presidency. He's not going to win by anything positive that he does, short of turning on the right so soon after being nominated. That is implausible.
Hillary, too, will do as well as the president's approval ratings, how people feel about the economy, and a few other factors that have nothing to do with whether she is seen as being inspiring or diminishing our crisis of confidence.
Unless something truly strange happens in the GOP primary, however, Republicans will nominate someone from the middle of their party, someone perceived to be competent in campaigning, raising money, debating, etc. That individual, many of us believe, needs an economic stalling or downturn or some *real* Obama administration foreign policy disaster, in order to capture the presidency. He's not going to win by anything positive that he does, short of turning on the right so soon after being nominated. That is implausible.
Hillary, too, will do as well as the president's approval ratings, how people feel about the economy, and a few other factors that have nothing to do with whether she is seen as being inspiring or diminishing our crisis of confidence.
4
"Made in the U.S.A" is not something that you see often these days. The clothes we wear, the appliances and gadgets we use, etc. are all made abroad. Therein lies the problem.
Technological products (phones, computers, etc.), though invented in the USA, are mass-produced at lower costs abroad and sold in the USA at exhorbitant mark-ups.
Pharmaceutical companies patent life-saving drugs in the USA and sell them cheap abroad but at unaffordable prices in this country, contributing to the high health care costs.
If some of these trends aren't reversed, furture discussions won't be about whether the USA is at a crossroad but on the the wrong road.
Technological products (phones, computers, etc.), though invented in the USA, are mass-produced at lower costs abroad and sold in the USA at exhorbitant mark-ups.
Pharmaceutical companies patent life-saving drugs in the USA and sell them cheap abroad but at unaffordable prices in this country, contributing to the high health care costs.
If some of these trends aren't reversed, furture discussions won't be about whether the USA is at a crossroad but on the the wrong road.
22
Pharmaceutical companies also manufacture abroad and keep selling at exorbitant prices in the US.
10
A key turning point was when from autos to electronics, "made in America" not longer meant better quality than "made in Japan."
Our corporate leadership failed us, yet it is the only part of the country profiting from its failure.
Our corporate leadership failed us, yet it is the only part of the country profiting from its failure.
3
And in this way the US consumer pays for all the research, and provides the monitary insentive that goes into developing these drugs. If we were not there with our wallets we would still be subject to the bubonic plague.
The era of great American expansion is obviously over -- they country populated coast-to-coast, no homesteading any more. In honesty the inscription at the Statue of Liberty that reads "“Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to..." should be shrouded over ... if not chiseled off.
The old American economy created new wealth for ordinary people. The new American economy is slowly impoverishing them.
America is now the land of finance, the land of rentiers. Labor and personal industry are of little value. Ordinary people can no longer raise children without hardship, privation, and low expectations for them ... and so they aren't.
The birth rate in the US is far below ZPG, it is in fact illegal immigration which is keeping the US from remarkable shrinkage. But illegal immigration is down, because the economy in the US is now so poor for those with few skills that the major impetus is no longer individual advancement, but simply to escape the violence of failing countries to our south.
The US economy is headed toward a grand banana republic. The mystery is not why it is happening; it is why large numbers of voters want it that way.
The old American economy created new wealth for ordinary people. The new American economy is slowly impoverishing them.
America is now the land of finance, the land of rentiers. Labor and personal industry are of little value. Ordinary people can no longer raise children without hardship, privation, and low expectations for them ... and so they aren't.
The birth rate in the US is far below ZPG, it is in fact illegal immigration which is keeping the US from remarkable shrinkage. But illegal immigration is down, because the economy in the US is now so poor for those with few skills that the major impetus is no longer individual advancement, but simply to escape the violence of failing countries to our south.
The US economy is headed toward a grand banana republic. The mystery is not why it is happening; it is why large numbers of voters want it that way.
62
The wrong track despair of many Americans will take years to lift, if ever again. We are smart enough to know and experience the lack of resources for the most basic community needs; health care, housing, roads, and education, but the long wars and the long years of wage stagnation pale any cheer and we are tired. If American voters believe the game is rigged, cynicism prevails, good people withdraw, billionaire power structures remain unchecked, and the nation continues to decline. Caring about your neighbor cannot be a punch line for weakness.
A vision, from any one of these candidates that states, "we are all in this together and we will only be better together" has to be believed again. We are better than this, and who, realistically, leads us to the next generation of national grace and ingenuity, will win the next election.
A vision, from any one of these candidates that states, "we are all in this together and we will only be better together" has to be believed again. We are better than this, and who, realistically, leads us to the next generation of national grace and ingenuity, will win the next election.
19
If there is a national malaise and hopelessness, blame the Republicans and Fox News. When half of a two-party system tells an electorate for 35 years that government is the problem, not the solution, and does everything in its power to dismantle an educational system and an infrastructure that gave US citizens the hope that if they worked hard then they could succeed, people could be just a tad demoralized. We won't even talk about allowing the banking sector to wreck the economy and actively wrecking our international reputation with torture and unilateral war.
Then, for the last 6+ years the same people have been spreading the message that the president is corrupt and incompetent ("you lie!").
All the folks who believe the Fox News nonsense are demoralized and scared into voting Republican. Speaking for the folks who do not believe the nonsense, I am demoralized simply by the huge number of people who *do* believe the nonsense.
Obama got it right in 2008. We need a message of hope ("yes we can!") from the next president.
Then, for the last 6+ years the same people have been spreading the message that the president is corrupt and incompetent ("you lie!").
All the folks who believe the Fox News nonsense are demoralized and scared into voting Republican. Speaking for the folks who do not believe the nonsense, I am demoralized simply by the huge number of people who *do* believe the nonsense.
Obama got it right in 2008. We need a message of hope ("yes we can!") from the next president.
448
It feels like that "yes we can" message is the only thing President Obama got right. Everything else of real substance he's touched is now a grease fire:
The economy - totally flat
Stock market - propped up by cheap rates and companies flush with cash because they're afraid to invest while this guy is in office
Foreign Policy- the Middle East is on fire, now Europe is swamped with refugees
Zero coherent enegery policy
Zero coherent immigration policy
And on, and on
You're right, it's a Fox News issue.
The economy - totally flat
Stock market - propped up by cheap rates and companies flush with cash because they're afraid to invest while this guy is in office
Foreign Policy- the Middle East is on fire, now Europe is swamped with refugees
Zero coherent enegery policy
Zero coherent immigration policy
And on, and on
You're right, it's a Fox News issue.
3
We need much more than a message of hope. May "we can", but he couldn't. We need it from someone with the gravitas, the experience, to deliver the goods and the ability to deliver the message about specifically what is wrong and specifically what needs to be done to correct it. Bernie Sanders has that ability.
None of those qualities exist on the right where they are trying to outdo each other in boasting about how much they are "not a politician" and "not a scientist". I just wish they would also admit they are "not a gynecologist", either.
None of those qualities exist on the right where they are trying to outdo each other in boasting about how much they are "not a politician" and "not a scientist". I just wish they would also admit they are "not a gynecologist", either.
2
Curt, decent points. Just like the other replies, many parrot what they hear on Fox news regardless of the facts and don't bother to check the veracity. As to malaise, hopelessness and fear, that is why some keep voting for Republicans.
3
America has entered the Age of Malaise. We are witnessing the eradication of the American promise of a better future.
At the core of this illness is money -- the economy -- greed. People can work hard but the better portion of their productivity goes to benefit a handful of people who are greedily striving to own the earth. Their greed exceeds fair competition as America witnessed in the theft of wealth that began in 2007 and went unpunished by an impotent government.
More recently the Roberts court put a yard-sale sign on our democracy and greed has has rushed in to snap up politicians to serve their interests.
America is a turning point and most Americans worry about the direction in which the country has turned. What does a 2016 election signify if government is in reality the strong-arm of a small but powerful number of people whose ultimate purpose in life is to own the air we breathe?
America needs another Teddy Roosevelt running in 2016.
At the core of this illness is money -- the economy -- greed. People can work hard but the better portion of their productivity goes to benefit a handful of people who are greedily striving to own the earth. Their greed exceeds fair competition as America witnessed in the theft of wealth that began in 2007 and went unpunished by an impotent government.
More recently the Roberts court put a yard-sale sign on our democracy and greed has has rushed in to snap up politicians to serve their interests.
America is a turning point and most Americans worry about the direction in which the country has turned. What does a 2016 election signify if government is in reality the strong-arm of a small but powerful number of people whose ultimate purpose in life is to own the air we breathe?
America needs another Teddy Roosevelt running in 2016.
96
Bread and circus'. Keeping the populace distracted with silliness, like deflategate and other stupidities, will only provide a temporary smokescreen for the great unraveling. Soon when the horde feels the inequality of an empty stomach they will demand their Democracy again. For too long those who have stolen from the people will be replaced by those who want to give to the people what is rightfully theirs. When wealth is seen as obscene, and mean, and shame will be brought to bear on those materialist who defecate perpetual desire.
27
Imagine for a moment that the trillions of dollars wasted on near perpetual war in the Middle East had been spent here, building high speed rail, world class mass transit, switching over, as we must, to clean, infinitely renewable energy, free University education and for universal healthcare.
Our society and outlook would be quite different.
Our society and outlook would be quite different.
600
I totally agree with you, but the sad thing is that doesn't happen. We have plenty of money to address all those improvements to our civic life, had someone the will.
There is too much profit to be made in blood & war and everything that goes along with it - munitions, planes, boats, guns, and their support systems.. and those that profit are in metaphorical bed with too many of our policy makers.
There is too much profit to be made in blood & war and everything that goes along with it - munitions, planes, boats, guns, and their support systems.. and those that profit are in metaphorical bed with too many of our policy makers.
5
"Imagine for a moment that the trillions of dollars wasted on near perpetual war in the Middle East had been spent here"
But it never would have been. It would have gone to the line the pockets of the corporate oligarchy at the expense of the working people. The war was only a way to funnel money to the masters of the universe. It had nothing to do with anything beyond that principal function. If not the war, the powers that be would have found another way to rob from the poor and give to the rich.
There is money available now to work on these crucial societal issues. But we can't cut corporate welfare or tax the wealthy appropriately. That would be... "unamerican."
But it never would have been. It would have gone to the line the pockets of the corporate oligarchy at the expense of the working people. The war was only a way to funnel money to the masters of the universe. It had nothing to do with anything beyond that principal function. If not the war, the powers that be would have found another way to rob from the poor and give to the rich.
There is money available now to work on these crucial societal issues. But we can't cut corporate welfare or tax the wealthy appropriately. That would be... "unamerican."
8
Indeed, the sheer waste of money (not to mention about 5,000 young American lives and unknown numbers of Middle Eastern lives) in the recent resource wars is enough to make one despair.
Just think if our government had taken the trillions (yes, trillions!) of dollars it has spent on Iraq, Afghanistan, and fighter jets that don't work, and spent them on repairing our existing infrastructure, building high-speed rail and mass transit between and in every major city (reserving plane travel for cross-country and intercontinental trips), low-income and middle-income housing, universal health care, free tuition at state educational institutions with incentives for shortage occupations, livable old-age pensions, and scientific research into alternatives for all uses of petroleum and coal, so that resource wars become unnecessary.
Years ago, unfortunately before the Internet, so I can't find the article, someone published a list of what could have been done with Reagan's increase in the military (I refuse to say "defense" for a system that has been used mostly for meddling in other countries) budget. It included providing clean drinking water for every village in sub-Saharan Africa. That's how large the increase was.
We have a lot of catching up to do after 35 years of tragic waste.
Just think if our government had taken the trillions (yes, trillions!) of dollars it has spent on Iraq, Afghanistan, and fighter jets that don't work, and spent them on repairing our existing infrastructure, building high-speed rail and mass transit between and in every major city (reserving plane travel for cross-country and intercontinental trips), low-income and middle-income housing, universal health care, free tuition at state educational institutions with incentives for shortage occupations, livable old-age pensions, and scientific research into alternatives for all uses of petroleum and coal, so that resource wars become unnecessary.
Years ago, unfortunately before the Internet, so I can't find the article, someone published a list of what could have been done with Reagan's increase in the military (I refuse to say "defense" for a system that has been used mostly for meddling in other countries) budget. It included providing clean drinking water for every village in sub-Saharan Africa. That's how large the increase was.
We have a lot of catching up to do after 35 years of tragic waste.
11
It's not a coincidence that the decline of western civilization has paralleled the rise of the smartphone. We used to go to the movies, mail letters, watch TV, and buy records and play them on the stereo. Now we do all of these things with one convenient device. It's generally made in modern-day sweatshops overseas. It replaces tangible goods and manufacturing jobs and our attention spans with something called The Cloud. Evil lurks in The Cloud, which hacks our computers and steals our credit card numbers and invades our baby monitors. We don't notice, because we're watching funny cat videos.
The smartphone has also made the world smaller. Unfortunately the world is a hot mess, and making it smaller means we're closer to the heat. We watch wars unfold, and hold horrible images in our hands. Teens don't haltingly enter puberty titillated by a glimpse of a bathing-suit cutie. They have access to 4X porn, around the clock. Nobody reads a book anymore, at least not the kind that employs printers and bookstores and clerks.
Into the economic and intellectual vacuum this technology has abetted has rushed politicians, who exploit the 10-second sound-bite news cycle. Nobody moderates, and anyone can be a source. Walter Cronkite is replaced by Fox news, where we learn about Obamacare's lies and the Benghazi cover-up.
Some unfortunate people walk off of cliffs while staring at their phones. Who knew this was a metaphor for how the 21st century would end?
The smartphone has also made the world smaller. Unfortunately the world is a hot mess, and making it smaller means we're closer to the heat. We watch wars unfold, and hold horrible images in our hands. Teens don't haltingly enter puberty titillated by a glimpse of a bathing-suit cutie. They have access to 4X porn, around the clock. Nobody reads a book anymore, at least not the kind that employs printers and bookstores and clerks.
Into the economic and intellectual vacuum this technology has abetted has rushed politicians, who exploit the 10-second sound-bite news cycle. Nobody moderates, and anyone can be a source. Walter Cronkite is replaced by Fox news, where we learn about Obamacare's lies and the Benghazi cover-up.
Some unfortunate people walk off of cliffs while staring at their phones. Who knew this was a metaphor for how the 21st century would end?
203
Recalls to mind Ted Kaczynski's manifesto about the threat of technology to society. The cellphone is the epitome of technology that has changed our lives in unforeseen and too often unfortunate ways.
12
Thanks, Gemli....And now we have what I call " the D..... Watch!" "I've Given Up My Search For The Truth....And I'm Looking For A Good Fantasy" (Ashleigh
Brilliant)
Brilliant)
1
You forgot to say "and you kids get off my lawn!"
2
"But in the background looms a crisis of confidence that threatens to become the new American way. Let’s hope for a candidate with the vision and courage to tackle that."
There is one: http://www.cnn.com/2015/04/29/politics/bernie-sanders-announces-presiden...
Bernie Sanders does have the answers: Stop the destruction of the New Deal and start promoting the middle class instead of transnational corporations. The main problem he faces is the corporate media's dogged insistence that he is "not serious", whereupon they ignore him as much as possible, creating a (corporate interests hope) self-fulfilling prophecy that he can't win.
Do not count Bernie out. If his message can get out, he can win--and we sorely need him to do just that.
There is one: http://www.cnn.com/2015/04/29/politics/bernie-sanders-announces-presiden...
Bernie Sanders does have the answers: Stop the destruction of the New Deal and start promoting the middle class instead of transnational corporations. The main problem he faces is the corporate media's dogged insistence that he is "not serious", whereupon they ignore him as much as possible, creating a (corporate interests hope) self-fulfilling prophecy that he can't win.
Do not count Bernie out. If his message can get out, he can win--and we sorely need him to do just that.
278
I agree with you that Bernie Sanders has the right priorities. He also has integrity, intelligence, and vision. Notice however, how he is completely ignored by the mainstream media, including this newspaper. The elites have already decided that it's Hilary's turn for the Democrats and whoever's billionaire donates the most for the Republicans. America is not just on the wrong track-- it's off the rails.
254
I like Bernie Sanders a great deal. Bernie has his finger on the middle class, but Bernie doesn't have the love of the underclass. Hillary panders to the minorities, lots of votes there. In America the candidate that gets the so called underclass liberal vote will win. The Dems promise free money but never actually give enough. We turned into a nation with no new ideas that were the hallmark of President Roosevelt's era.
5
You might want to notice that this paper isn't saying much about HRC either. In fact this paper isn't saying much about anyone but the Republican clown car. I think they even do that for entertainment value not information.
3
Lesson from a macroeconomics 101 class I took at SF City College in 1972.
Upon the completion of the GM Lordstown, Ohio plant, at the time the most automated auto assembly plant in the world, the CEO of GM was showing it off to the president of the United Auto Workers.
Chided the GM CEO, "Let me see you collect union dues from these robots."
"Let me see you sell these robots Chevys." responded the union president.
In the new economic model where human labor is obsolete, but human consumerism isn't, Uncle Karl Marx comes back to life to ask, "Who will own the robots?" If the people don't own the means of production, and share in the profits, then only the few capitalists will have any money and they will be able to feed off each other for only so long. At that point capitalism ceases to function and Uncle Karl has the last laugh.
Upon the completion of the GM Lordstown, Ohio plant, at the time the most automated auto assembly plant in the world, the CEO of GM was showing it off to the president of the United Auto Workers.
Chided the GM CEO, "Let me see you collect union dues from these robots."
"Let me see you sell these robots Chevys." responded the union president.
In the new economic model where human labor is obsolete, but human consumerism isn't, Uncle Karl Marx comes back to life to ask, "Who will own the robots?" If the people don't own the means of production, and share in the profits, then only the few capitalists will have any money and they will be able to feed off each other for only so long. At that point capitalism ceases to function and Uncle Karl has the last laugh.
373
I suspect more people are involved making and selling and buying and fixing cars today than 30 years ago, as car production has skyrocketed somewhat faster than productivity has increased. The difference today is most of these people are now living and working outside Europe and the United States. Our manufacturing activity is shrinking because it's simply not that competitive. If it were, the world would gladly buy our cars and the car carriers that land in Baltimore and LA would be full on their outbound legs.
Frank Bruni's observations are spot-on: our collective leadership has spent several years trying to re-inflate the asset bubble, thinking the way to make the voters happy was to enable them to get another second mortgage and spend it on neat stuff. I'm hopeful this malaise continues until a more durable concept of happiness and a more inspiring set of leaders emerges.
Frank Bruni's observations are spot-on: our collective leadership has spent several years trying to re-inflate the asset bubble, thinking the way to make the voters happy was to enable them to get another second mortgage and spend it on neat stuff. I'm hopeful this malaise continues until a more durable concept of happiness and a more inspiring set of leaders emerges.
5
Reflexively using the words 'communist' and 'socialist' to connote evil is stupid. The people who spit 'socialist' at President Obama because they would really like to call him "murderer" or "rapist" but can't, should ponder the fact that we have four states that call themselves the Commonwealths of Kentucky, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, and Virginia. In their very names, these states proclaim the goodness of the basic socialist idea that government should be concerned with the welfare of everyone, and not the GOP's get-out-of-the-way-everyman-for-himself-and-the-devil-take-the-hindmost. Maybe we should start referring to the indelibly red states as the Dog-eat-dog of Texas, or the Feudalness of Utah.
4
Bravo! Production without a market for the product is a dead end street.
4
Adding to the massive manufacturing retrenchment where America now manufactures goods with only 9 percent of human work force, we dropped the FCC fairness doctrine, so that the promotion of anxiety, fear, and anger directed at our government now performs the profound "educative" effect of greating a nation of angry cynics.
50
We grow our food with only 2% of our workforce, but everybody eats.
If only 9% manufactures, it is our choice who shares the products.
The balance of the economy is a political decision. Right now that decision is to squeeze out the middle class, leave behind those below them, and just wallow in profits at the top.
That is wrong. It won't even function, entirely apart from morality. It wipes out the demand side of the domestic economy.
If only 9% manufactures, it is our choice who shares the products.
The balance of the economy is a political decision. Right now that decision is to squeeze out the middle class, leave behind those below them, and just wallow in profits at the top.
That is wrong. It won't even function, entirely apart from morality. It wipes out the demand side of the domestic economy.
11
Higher wages and shorter work week,
Could have the answer we now seek,
Do Repubs who, at best,
Greater cuts still suggest,
Offer boldness, or of meekness reek!
Could have the answer we now seek,
Do Repubs who, at best,
Greater cuts still suggest,
Offer boldness, or of meekness reek!
42