Category: Political Science & Economics

An Empire Eaten From Within

Category : Political Science & Economics
Posted on by

In a recent edition of the Economist, Ariana Huffington claims we face a stark choice as Americans.  We can continue going down our current path and turn into a third world country, a shell of our former selves, or Americans can demand more from their leaders and start to take the lead in their own lives to restore the US back to previous heights.

The US is already starting to resemble a third world country in many ways:  The gap between the rich and the poor is growing toward South American levels.  City and state governments are making decisions to cut school teachers and school days, turning off street lights and deciding to let some roads return to nature.

Our infrastructure is beginning to crumble and we’re developing an underclass of unskilled, unemployable people in addition to the abundance of service jobs like nannies, maids, restaurant workers and farm work that are being filled on one side by over educated workers and on the other illegal immigrants.  Our deficits are some of the highest per capita in the world and our national debt is the biggest in the history of the world.  All the while, we demand more.

The rich want to pay lower taxes, but still get the benefits of the state.  Bankers want to be able to play in their casino and if they screw up, they cry to be bailed out from the public coffers.  Public unions want to retire in their 50s or early 60s with a full pension and health care, while contributing hardly anything toward these benefits while they are still working.  Republicans want to keep spending huge amounts on the military and continue to spend on bases in 75% of the world.  Democrats want to spend more on transfer payments, regulation and social programs and nobody is willing to compromise.

Economist say that people are “motivated by self interest,” but I think we’ve crossed the line from self-interest to plain old selfishness.  Most Americans want theirs and don’t seem to care about the rest of the country.  They think (and sometimes say), “as long as I get mine, fuck the rest.”

America’s rich are starting to realize that they don’t really need us anymore.  They can live the good life in the United States while producing and selling their products in developing markets around the world.

I’ve written extensively about how Americans have lived the good life off of debt, but it seems like the rest of the world is starting to see through our profligacy.  People want to continue to live in McMansions with the latest cars and electronic toys and spend outrageous amounts of money on the military, health care and social security, without feeling any of the pain of actually paying the bills.

I haven’t really proposed any solutions, mostly because I don’t really see any that have a chance of working.  It will take a huge change in America’s mindset.  I don’t generally subscribe to the “great leader” theory of change, but they do come around every once in awhile.  Ghandi, Martin Luther King , Nelson Mandela and others have inspired huge, national movements that changed the world, but most change comes from within, from smaller movements.

I think the only way we will see the change necessary to save America from it’s current trajectory is a leader or a movement that is willing to tell it like it is.  Americans need to be told:

  • Manufacturing jobs are not coming back
  • Americans need to be able to compete with people in the rest of the world, so you need to try in school.  A college degree with no skills does not cut it anymore.
  • Our standard of living is going to fall, we need to downsize our lives
  • We ALL need to make sacrifices and many of these sacrifices will be painful.
  • You can’t always get what you want.  If you’re demanding 100% of your agenda, you’re being selfish and damaging the country.  Even if you’re demanding 75% you’re still probably doing it.

We need to paint people who are being selfish (not self interested) as the selfish people they are.  Public unions can’t continue to live like they have.  Bankers cannot continue to speculate and gamble with our money.  The military will have to be scaled back and bases will have to be closed.  We’ll have to examine legalizing marijuana and releasing non-violent offenders.  We’ll have to look at privatizing portions of social security.  We’ll have to demand that Americans take personal responsibility and get in shape (economically and physically).  This will lower health care costs for us all.  We’ll need to back off the ledge of our 24 hour, soundbite, black vs. white “news” cycle and go back to actually solving problems.

We need to create a common sense movement to tell our leaders they are on the wrong track.  It’s not a Republican/Democrat issue.  It’s a systemic problem.  The current crop in both parties are part of the problem.

We need to turn inward and take a long look at ourselves and start to take responsibility.  We have the government (and the media) we deserve.  It’s a selfish government, catering to the needs of special interests, rather than the greater good.  We need to demand that our government tackles the big problems, not the politically expedient ones.  If we don’t, we’ll continue down the path we’re on.  Nobody will do it for us.  It’s on us.

If we don’t, we’ll end up an empire eaten from within.  And it will be our fault.

Do you agree?

Julian Assange is a Hypocrite, Not the Leader You’ve Been Looking For

Category : Political Science & Economics
Posted on by

I haven’t written about Wikileaks at all yet because I’ve been trying to figure out where I stand on the issue.  I’m not comfortable with the response to the controversy from pretty much anyone so far.  I don’t like that the US and other governments around the world are going after Julian Assange for doing the same thing the NY Times did in 1970.  The Supreme Court ruled that the Times could publish the Pentagon Papers and I don’t see how this is any different.

Additionally, Assange’s partner papers, including the Times, Guardian, El Mundo, Der Spiegel, published the same information and the government is not going after them.  Just because Assange is the first one to break the story doesn’t mean he doesn’t deserve freedom of the press.  With the way the Internet has developed, bloggers deserve the protection of freedom of the press.

The US would never have gone after the NY Times or another respected publication if they had broken the story because the Times would not have buckled and there would have been public outcry about the 1st amendment.  Assange is one person, so it’s easier to pick on the weaker person.  I don’t like the implications that if the US doesn’t like a blogger’s writings, they can throw him in jail, say he should be killed or that he is a terrorist.

On the other hand, I’m not comfortable at all with Assange the person or many of his extremely loyal followers.  I believe that diplomats around the world need to be able to share the truth with each other without fear that this information will become public.  For example, I never really use Facebook Chat because I assume that some day, everything I wrote will be public.  Instead, I use gchat off the record if I want to talk with my friends.  People need the ability to talk candidly and our diplomats are no different.

Additionally, I don’t agree that transparency is ALWAYS a good thing.  Many times it is, but not in every situation.  It seems to me that Assange and his followers believe it is.  I also don’t like his selective release of documents.  He seems to love the spotlight, rather than the truth.  Instead of releasing all 250k cables at once so that people will know the truth, he’s selectively releasing a few at a time.  Hardly the mark of transparency.

He’s also holding back on “large cache of bank documents” about a big investment bank.  Many people believe it is Bank of America and it’s share price fell last week because of the rumors.  Assange said:

Mr Assange said he had enough material ready to destroy the bosses of one of the world’s biggest banks…which it intends to release early next year. Shares in Bank of America recently fell after speculation spread that it was the target.

“We don’t want the bank to suffer unless it’s called for,” Mr Assange said. “But if its management is operating in a responsive way there will be resignations.”

Two things.  First, when did Assange become the arbiter of truth and justice?  Why is he judge, jury and executioner?  By not releasing these documents immediately and holding onto them, he’s just trying to put himself into the spotlight.  I’m not comfortable at all with this morphing role.  Assange’s stated goal is transparency and holding people in power accountable.  Now, he’s deciding their fate.

Second, he’s also basically blackmailed the bank into doing what he wants.  It’s a tactic he’s used multiple times. He’s told world governments that he would leak unredacted cables that could potentially put people in harm’s way if he was arrested.  Some would call that an insurance policy, others would call that terrorist.  Some have.  I’m not sure where I fall on this continuum, but he’s seeming more like a megalomaniacal Bond super villain every day.

Which brings me to my next point.  After Assange’s release, he lashed out at the Guardian for publishing leaked details from the police report detailing the rape allegations made against him by two women.  He said:

The decision to publish incriminating police files about him was “disgusting”. The Guardian had previously used him as its source for hundreds of leaked US embassy cables.  Mr Assange is understood to be particularly angry with a senior reporter at the paper and former friend for “selectively publishing” incriminating sections of the police report, although The Guardian made clear that the WikiLeaks founder was given several days to respond.

“The leak was clearly designed to undermine my bail application,” he said. “Someone in authority clearly intended to keep Julian in prison.”

Ok, so selectively leaking classified US government material and information to bring down a big bank is right, noble and for the greater good, but it’s disgusting when it happens to you?  Assange is not for transparency.  He’s only for it when it furthers his political or personal goals.  He has a political agenda and is using the guise of freedom of information to push it.

I actually believe that Wikileaks on balance has been a good thing.  I’m hoping that other similar sites start to “compete” with Assange’s Wikileaks.  It’s not good when someone has this much power, especially when it appears to me that he’s not all that stable.  Other competing websites will also damped government’s ability to go after individuals who publish information that the government does not like.

Competitors will also give Wikileaks supporters the ability to ditch Assange and his hypocritical, megalomaniacal behavior.  Absolute power corrupts absolutely, whether it’s big governments like the US or one guy with a ton of documents and a grudge.  Or as Kanye West puts it, “no one man should have all that power.”

I’m hoping this post will stir some discussion, so please tell me what you think.  I still haven’t made my mind up on many parts of the issues here, but as time goes on, my opinion of Assange the person gets lower every day.

The American Economy and The Future

Category : Political Science & Economics
Posted on by

There are two Americas: those with skills and those without.  And by skills, I don’t mean those who have a college degree: I see tons of college grads looking for work who don’t really have any skills.  If you want to be successful in our economy, you must be creative, innovative, hard working and on the cutting edge.  You have to work harder and be more innovative than workers in other countries.  Or you must be willing to do jobs that nobody else wants, but require skills (plumber, electrician, etc).  Simply getting a college degree doesn’t guarantee you anything anymore and may in fact be harmful to many people since college costs so much these days.

Right now, people with skills are doing ok, and in many cases really well, but those without are not.  The demise of the US factory worker has been well documented, but I think we are now seeing the demise of the midlevel, but well paid, white collar worker.   Because of a convergence of technology, globalization and higher productivity, companies are realizing that they can get along fine without as many people in house.  I think the days are gone where you could come out of college, follow orders and keep your head down and make a good living.  Seth Godin says that there are two recessions, one that is cyclical and the other that he describes below:

This is the recession of the industrial age, the receding wave of bounty that workers and businesses got as a result of rising productivity but imperfect market communication. In short: if you’re local, we need to buy from you. If you work in town, we need to hire you. If you can do a craft, we can’t replace you with a machine. No longer.

The lowest price for any good worth pricing is now available to anyone, anywhere. Which makes the market for boring stuff a lot more perfect than it used to be. Since the ‘factory’ work we did is now being mechanized, outsourced or eliminated, it’s hard to pay extra for it. And since buyers have so many choices (and much more perfect information about pricing and availability) it’s hard to charge extra.

Thus, middle class jobs that existed because companies had no choice are now gone.

It started with factory work, but has moved into accounting, medical transcription, IT and a whole host of other industries.  I think it’s pretty clear that Godin is right.

So what does that mean for us?

We’re living through a time of tremendous upheaval.  People are scared because they don’t think they can control their lives anymore.  Many don’t believe that if they work hard, they will be successful. They might even find themselves on the unemployment line.  Global forces of competition are hitting Americans at a time when we’ve become fat and lazy (literally and figuratively) and accustomed to living the good life on credit.  We’ve gotten to a point where many Americans believe that a large percentage of jobs are “beneath” them.  Most people who are alive today have never lived through hard times and now 1 in 6 Americans receive some form of government aid.

Our government is filled with a political class on both sides of the aisle that are pretty much the same.  The current republicans may claim that they want less government, but their actions don’t demonstrate it.  Both parties just want to stay in power.  They raise hot button issues like don’t ask don’t tell, gay marriage, abortion and other red herrings to gain political points, but don’t tackle problems like our massive federal debt, unfunded liabilities like Medicare/Medicade and the Social Security Ponzi scheme.  They don’t make sensible policy changes because neither side can score political points. Instead, they spend and borrow from China.

The tea party is a reaction to people being scared of our changing times and I don’t blame them one bit.  It’s a classic reaction to changing times.  There’s been tremendous upheaval over the last 10-15 years, culminating the recession that started in late 2007.  We’ve lost our manufacturing base.  China, India, Brazil and others are growing in strength.   We’ve commoditized human labor for a huge percentage of our workforce.  Unemployment is over 10% and we (government, citizens, businesses) have spent trillions of dollars that we don’t have.   People want to believe that the good life is coming back, but deep down, I think they know that our standard of living can’t be as high as it was through the 90s and 2000s when we lived the high life on credit.

When people are scared and don’t believe that they have any say in their lives, they can lose hope and sometimes turn to violence.  Muslim terrorists are generally well educated, just like you and me, but lack any outlet for their protests other than violence.  Repressive regimes forment violent opposition because they take away all other forms of protest.  The US system is not repressive because the government is taking over our lives.  Instead, because our politicians all want to stay in office and follow their own self interest, our government has become dysfunctional.  Nothing gets done and people are losing hope.

So how do we fix this?

We need a leader who is willing to tell Americans the truth and use common sense to get us back on the right track.  We need someone to tell us that we need to sacrifice if we want to continue to be a world leader, rather than pander to interest groups.  We need a leader who is willing to enact policies that will piss off teachers unions, the military, trial lawyers, the intelligence community, wall street banks, public employee unions and other interest groups equally.  We need someone to simplify our government and reign in spending and align our incentives so that innovators can create jobs.   Even though I didn’t vote for him, I was hopeful that Obama might be the right guy, but he hasn’t been (I didn’t vote for McCain either).  His policy is to exert more government control and then spend our way out of problems.  I don’t see anyone in the republican or tea party besides maybe Paul Ryan who is willing to tell it like it is, but he’s been marginalized by the party of no.  We can’t just keep the status quo or we’ll be bankrupt.

What do you think?  Am I right, wrong, crazy?  What do you see in the US’s future?

Where Are All The Sullen Teenagers?

Category : Political Science & Economics
Posted on by

I went to the mall for the first time in awhile yesterday to pick up a few things I needed for the office.  I was immediately struck by how different the employees looked.  Walking around, I hardly saw the stereotypical sullen teenagers working at the cell phone kiosks, food courts and clothing stores.  The foodcourt was completely staffed by immigrants and even at some of the younger stores, most of the employees were middle aged.  It was strange to walk into a clothing store for people my age and find it staffed with 55+ women, when 2 years ago it was staffed by high school and college aged workers.

My guess is that young people who want jobs are getting pushed out of the market by older, more experienced and more reliable employees because of unemployment in other areas of the economy.  With unemployment near 10% and underemployment much higher, people are starting to support their families with mall jobs.

I think the other factor in play is that many middle/upper class teens now don’t want to get jobs.  They’d rather get internships rather than work a job that they believe is “beneath” them or they’d rather do nothing at all and hang out with their friends all summer.

It does make sense though.  Teens are generally more unreliable than older people who need the job to support themselves or their families and the immigrants working the foodcourt seem to work (much) harder than the average high school junior.  It’ll be interesting to see how this plays out as the recession continues.  Will older workers stay in the workforce longer and prevent younger people from being hired?  Will younger people (even those with college degrees) have to accept “lower status” jobs?  I think it’s likely.  The only way out is for companies to start creating more jobs, which I don’t see as being likely on a mass scale in the current economic climate.  It’s going to be an interesting next few years.

What do you think?  Do you see the same phenomenon in your area?