What Women’s Marchers + Trump Supporters Agree On
We shall overcomb!
The Women’s March… the Trump inauguration… Sanders voters… Trump voters…
All huge, passionate crowds of people who SHARE this goal:
We ALL want our government to work for working people.
Yet cultural issues divide and conquer us.
Trump voters desperately want good-paying jobs. And they want government to work for us instead of just the moneyed elite.
Progressives want the exact same thing. But without the xenophobia that creeps up among some Trump voters. (Most people who voted for DJT aren’t sexist and racist, I’m sure.)
Divide and conquer working people
Did I say that cultural issues divide and conquer us?
If the moneyed elite want government to work for them, but they are not the majority of Americans — being elite and all — whatever can they do?
Why, they can use cultural issues to make us hate each other.
The selfish sector of the moneyed elite push government to rip up banking protections (aka Wall Street regulations). And then ordinary people are hurt by the financial crisis that ensues.
If our new banking protections are trashed once again (looks likely) the 2008 crash will be only the beginning.
But who gets blamed?
Not the wealthy.
Thanks to scapegoating — southern strategy style — “lazy black and brown people” were blamed in 2008 for “buying homes they couldn’t afford.” Even though plenty of white people were tricked into buying homes they couldn’t afford, too.
“Not usually a sign guy but GEEZ”
Meanwhile, “lazy black and brown people” are also accused of stealing hard-working (white) people’s money via welfare. Even though whites are the biggest group on the welfare rolls. And even though black women have a very high rate of workplace participation. (Due to racial discrimination black women have historically needed to work to make ends meet.)
Plus, public assistance is humiliating.
Or, women are blamed for taking “men’s jobs.” Because apparently a man has more right to a job than a woman does.
And of course, a lot of folks are mad at Mexicans and the Chinese.
Redistribution of wealth from the middle-class to the rich
It might seem like women and minorities or foreigners are taking your jobs. But really, the notion is used to distract you from the source of your real problem.
And to divide and conquer working people.
What’s actually happening is a huge redistribution of wealth from the middle-class to the rich.
Over the last 40 years almost all of our economic gains went to the top 1%, thanks to automation.
And thanks to — yes — policy that rewards offshoring jobs. But also policy that rewards union-busting and failing to raise the minimum wage (which lifts all wages). And then there’s tax policy that favors the rich: loopholes, tax shelters… and bigger tax cuts for the wealthy.
But we don’t blame them. We blame one another.
Why fight each other? We will all be overtaken by bots
I’m all for fair trade deals. But why fight each other when eventually we will all be taken over by bots?
Even if Trump keeps jobs in America, most work today is lost to automation. And it won’t be long before technology takes over most of our work.
Once the bots take over we will really need the government to help figure out how ordinary Americans can do productive work and get paid, whether through retraining, aiding entrepreneurs with college courses and healthcare for all, or supporting the arts, for instance.
If government doesn’t facilitate the move to technology then even the moneyed elite will be hurting when their sales and profits evaporate. (Who can buy anything when “no jobs” means “no money”?)
Ok, I’m using signs from the Women’s March – but they were funnier!
And can you imagine the political carnage from frustrated Americans who can’t survive?
Well, maybe we can fight automation. But every country would also need to do that, otherwise American companies will go under. Plus, giving over menial jobs to technology could free us to live interesting and productive lives in new ways.
The “Crips” States versus the “Bloods” States
With our cultural divide Americans are growing tribal. Kind of like the Sunni and the Shia. Or the Bloods and the Crips.
And it’s potentially just as self-destructive.
I comment on the the wall of a “red” Facebook friend and get hate (usually from my red friend’s red friend). And from people who won’t even read what I wrote! And even though I want her to get a good paying job just as much as she does.
Or, my blue friends don’t want to unite with red people where we have common ground because they feel alienated by the racism and sexism.
And so we talk past each other.
We must start having conversations and begin to see what we have in common. And unite for the greater good.
There’s something happening here
As I watched joyful Trump voters at the Inauguration, or as I marched with other fearful but determined women and men, a Buffalo Springfield song kept running through my head:
There’s something happening here…
I wasn’t the only one. Check this out. Women’s March vis-a-vis Trump inauguration. Set to Buffalo Springfield’s “For What It’s Worth.”
Morning Joe For What It’s Worth
Related Posts
- Wealth of 1/2 US population = 20 richest people
- American Hunger Games
- Conservatives Want Less Inequality
Share this:
Posted on January 25, 2017, in politics/class inequality and tagged Divide and conquer the working class, Morning Joe For What It's Worth, Red states and Blue states, Redistribution of wealth from the middle-class to the rich, The Women's March, Trump inauguration, What Women's Marchers and Trump Supporters Agree On. Bookmark the permalink. 42 Comments.
BroadBlogs 
Yeah, you make some good points. I think some men do this purposefully to make themselves feel superior. I think other times it’s just unconscious. Our culture sends messages that men are better and most of us unconsciously internalize those messages, creating an unconscious bias.”
Then you also probably factor in Peer pressure. Even if guy’s don’t believe that’s right to act with women, they may feel to act that way to fit in. Just like fraternities, or jocks for sports teams. Where it’s a place with status among men, and competition setting. It such setting can create such thoughts. Usually guy’s grow out of it after school, but then I think, human beings are very social so if there is a setting that resembles or re-creates such atmostphere even for guys out of college. They can get this boys will be boys motto again from this hot shot, status settting where it’s very ego driven and showing off to each other. Like the stock brokers and careers like that, which is male dominated. But these guys have the money, take risks and learn to live in the edge and feel they are hot shots and amongst other guys and feel the need to show off to other guys or throw their arrogance around and show how “they can talk to women in such way or get women to do such sexual acts, etc and be cocky about it”. I mean we’ve heard the audio of Trump talking to Billy Bush was it? Rich guys even though they are old, they got in a frat like mindset or because of their wealth and status they brag about their conquests and talk or treat women in such way.
The whole peer pressure thing is interesting since part of the so-called masculine role is to be courageous and yet as they pretend to be courageous by demonstrating an ability to harm women they are actually showing cowardice in a failure to follow their conscience.
This may not be about trump, but I thought my post would be better related to this post than the other one’s I’ve seen without having to scroll back too far. Anyway, I saw an article posted from a facebook friend. And I found it interesting. Granted it’s anecdotal, but despite that, I couldn’t help but feel it’s not some isolated thing and more of it happens than men may think or want to know. It seems so considering the girl who posted it wrote something like “so accurate it’s obnoxious” in relation to the article, meaning she’s dealt with lack of respect and sexism from work too. It definitely seems the more male dominated the field, the more often too. Especially if the boss is like that. Because then women have less of a voice. It’s one thing if the boss isn’t sexist, then he or she can condemn other managers or supervisors being pricks to female co workers. Check this out though.
http://www.attn.com/stories/15518/creative-sexism-experiment-female-co-worker
That’s so interesting. I may have to write a blog Post on it. Thanks!
You’re welcome. I know you’ve probably written in past posts about it, but it’s been awhile. But, I think it’s cool to talk about all different avenues that effect women and well men too. And well there are many things, but obviously the workplace is still one it seems. I know the money women make compared to men is a big one, but that seems always focused on in debates in general, but I think this is just as important as far as not pay, but what women can deal with in the workplace as far as lack of respect, harassment still, especially in the more male dominated fields or work places. Like you said the more partiarchal a culture the less women are valued.
So it seems that it makes sense that sometimes the more male run careers or companies can be like bad ‘frat guys or jocks” trying to prove to each other how awesome they are, but also degrade women they work with in the process or talk about women in such way in front of female co workers, whether employees or managers throwing their weight around. Wasn’t there something like about stock brokers you wrote where, because it’s ego driven and a guy club thing, there was sexism like with wall street or high shot guys. It makes sense. After seeing the movie, Wolf of Wall Street with Leonardo Dicaprio…that was a crazy movie, funny too. lol. But I could see this “boys will be boys attitude with a lot or some of the male workers because of the environment created, where they feel they have free reign to act how they want and like this “boys club” mentality.
Yeah, you make some good points. I think some men do this purposefully to make themselves feel superior. I think other times it’s just unconscious. Our culture sends messages that men are better and most of us unconsciously internalize those messages, creating an unconscious bias.
After WWII soldiers came back thinking they can just go take any job from any women without a say. Women are now facing the same exact maltreatment. Men are blaming women for taking what was rightfully theirs according to them. Men think they have the right to do what they want with women even in the work field because they are superior to women. In the photo of the guy holding up the sign that reads “Melania, Blink twice if you need HELP”, send a strong message to the public along with the accusations that they are making about Trump. They are accusing him of domestic violence and not letting Melania speak for herself. In a couple of interviews they both had, he did not let her speak even though the questions where directed to her. Due to Trumps actions, he demonstrates that he does not believe women have a say or even a mind of their own to speak on it. Because women focus on other differences such as race, color or religious beliefs, they forget sometimes that we are ALL fighting for the same thing, equality and justice for all.
Disempowered groups are often taught to attack each other instead of those with higher status. Like the working class attacks one another. White working class men blame women and minorities for their problems. Which makes women and minorities angry at these men.
High status groups have more power over ideas and sometimes they deliberately deflect criticism from themselves by blaming other powerless groups.
Excellent post, Georgia. For years now, in the spirit of John Stuart Mill, I’ve gone to Right wing political and religious sites in an effort to foster civil debate and, as you say, find common ground. I’ve found it rare, however (and growing ever more rare) that I’m met with the same goal from the Right.
Mostly, I try to promote the notion I posted some time ago as my permanent lead on The Benevolent Thou (the golden rule). I get no response at all from that. I am assuming that most folks agree with it, but since it does not attack them, or offer civil but logical contradictions to their claims, they seem to be uninterested.
A common theme on the religious right is that any attempt to keep them from pushing religious laws is seen as “anti-religion” or an attack on religious liberty (religious being meant as Christian only). If I try to explain the origin and function of the Establishment Clause, I get hate filled ad hominems in return.
Unfortunately, there are those on the Left who have the same tendency to incivility.
I still try, however, believing that a few others, not so territorial, will read and see the logic; probably not offering comment for fear of getting the same treatment from their peers.
I was very skeptical of Trump when he won the nomination and like virtually everyone else on the Left, never thought for a moment that American voters would take him at his word on economics but blind themselves to his anti-worker history, his belligerence, incivility and lack of respect for truth and integrity.
So much for that. Trump has given his blessings to Incivility and hostility.
I recall watching one of his rallies where, encouraged by Trump, a protester was attacked, punched, and dragged out to cheers and jeers. It reminded me of another large rally back in the 1930s where the very same thing happened in Germany. Can history repeat itself here? I don’t think so, but it still sends shivers up my spine.
There’s something happening here… is the very song that’s been replaying in my mind since Trump won the electoral. As I watched the crowds and even participated in a local women’s march demonstration, I couldn’t get that song out of my mind. I’ve never had more fear for the future of our nation–even during the Bush-Cheney Administration.
The path on which common ground lies now appears to be impassible, glutted by blocks, stones and other senseless things.
All I can think to do is to continue encouraging civility despite the hostility.
Interesting how many people have that song running through their mind lately. For me it comes up especially with all of the protests.
Love the golden rule. That’s what my morality is based on: treat others as you would like to be treated; Do no harm.
“A common theme on the religious right is that any attempt to keep them from pushing religious laws is seen as “anti-religion” or an attack on religious liberty (religious being meant as Christian only).”
Yeah they are really trying to take away other peoples liberty. I have written on that before a few times, like this post: Should Organized Religion Have More Rights Than Women?
https://broadblogs.com/2011/11/30/should-organized-religion-have-more-rights-than-women/
Basically they argue that their religion should trump the religious rights of others.
I agree that the left can do things like go against free speech from time to time, Which does bother me.
And I believe that Congress will pretty much have to do something to create less economic inequality. For two reasons: political instability and and business instability.
The lack of money in peoples pockets is holding down sales and profits. And business lobbyists don’t like that.
It’s also creating political instability. The Republican establishment fears both Trump and Sanders, And they know they can’t survive if they keep doing what they have been doing without political turmoil arising and them losing their jobs. So I’m quite confident that they will do something.
I just hope that, Long term, racist people will start to realize that their racism back fires on them by dividing working people. And that the left won’t keep racist idiocy from doing it what’s right for the middle class. I agree with Sen. Schumer: keep to your values of non-racism but also make sure that everyone can support themselves.
Great article! It’s absolutely good for the United States if people, whether red or blue, white or color, can discuss and share conversations to get the goods. But this seems hard for Americans nowadays. I have both Democrats friends and Trump’s supporters. It is interesting that Democrats friends can always express their point of view freely while my friends who support Trump don’t want to argue too much why they support.
According to my friends who are middle class and supported DJT, said the Obama care made them pay more tax, one of them said he paid 3% higher due to this policy, but he would rather put the money on his family and children’s need as priority. Another friend said the current military expenses are too high and not make sense, he prefers the government to put more money to help domestic economy and the Americans who need help. I am still a college student, so I am not sure how the current government policy affected the middle class people, but seems some of them really want the government pay more attention to them because they paid lots of tax but can’t enjoy any of the benefits.
Another point in the article about automation is definitely something I want to share with others. “Giving menial jobs to technology could free us to live interesting and productive lives in new ways” is just so true. Humans are smart. So, they will make use of the automation to allow them save time for doing more meaningful and useful things. Just like we study to absorb the knowledge of others so that we do not need to start from zero. That’s definitely good for people. So, I don’t understand why people afraid of it. With the increased popularity of Internet, we can learn lots of things for free now. It is time to upgrade ourselves!
Interesting thoughts.
Mostly Obama decreased taxes on the middle class. But taxes for things like tobacco went up. And people at upper income levels had an increase in taxes to support the affordable care act, which allowed people without insurance to get some. Seems fair enough to me.
I keep trying to explain that to people around me who ask why would Trump win this election (even though I wonder that myself at times, too). I had noticed that similarity between the two different voters in this year’s election. Trump really appealed to all the working people and had explained throughout his campaigns what he would be doing as president and had come up with reasonable solutions, whereas Hillary tried to be more neutral on things and was trying to show that she should be respected, that she can be assertive and a good, fair leader.
And you’re probably right, not all of Trump voters’ are racist etc, but to me a president should not be allowed to say the things that he says and show as much temper as he has shown this far. (That was my reason I went to the womens’ march in San Jose that weekend)
I was at the women’s March too, for the same reason you were.
But the working class needs to stop being divided by cultural issues. Both sides end up hurting themselves and the middle class.
When we are searching for an answer for a problem, we can always look back to history. History is always a mirror reflecting the reality. A a Chinese, somehow I deem that the “trump situation” is sort of like what China in the last century. America seems to eager to build a wall(either visible or invisible) in order to protect itself from the outside world, which is exactly what China did the last century that caused China left behind by the western. Keeping self isolated does can protect the inside society, but only in short term effect. Like what China did, it did protect China from being attacked by the foreigner for a while, but after that, because of the isolation, China was blind from all the new information and finally left behind the western. Same thing is happening here, what trump is doing, may help the local to get better paid and so on so forth, but that is never a solution for the problem. When people start to be xenophobic, and be hater of the different colors, the country will never be great again since its culture is being teared apart. In my point of view, what makes America success is its acceptance of difference, its magic of unifying all the power together, no matter which from the outside of the country or the different color. And also, I don’t think that fighting against the automation is really the direction, since it is the future of the world. All we can do is to cooperate with it, change our mind set with it, like what we have done for the so many times through the history of all time.
Thanks for offering a new perspective on this. I don’t really see how a wall would even keep people out since people can always make ladders. And then you have to pay people to police the wall all the time. It seems like an enormous waste of taxpayer money.
And make Mexico case for it? If Mexico could pay for it we wouldn’t need a wall.
People are always separated by different social issues when everyone should work together. I believe that’s truly what people want, but emotions get the best of everyone. There should have never been “parties” because then people are forced to chose sides and not actually see the issues but competition. In the end, society wants the same thing economically, except if someone needs to give up social power. I wonder if the scapegoating of stereotypes based on groups are used to separate groups to control money. If social groups that are seen as certain races/gender/sexuality can be stuck in a stereotype, it would be easier for them not to climb up the social ladder which is not okay. But that could be a possibility with or without knowing. The “without knowing” could be the people who support a social issue by being an extremist and not openminded to the opposing viewpoint(s). People do alienate themselves by not trying to see both sides of situation.
The fact that “(Most people who voted for DJT aren’t sexist and racist, I’m sure.)” shows that people’s views are respected even if they are different from someone else’s. It would be generalizing to say that all Donald Trump supporters were sexist and racist and would make that supporter want to listen to the opposing view that person was trying to say. No one likes to be called bad names. Both sides need to be recognized to be able to work together.
Yes. And there are some real divisions between the parties but its especially sad when they’re divided even when they agree.
^ I really appreciate this post because it brings up many good points such as above. Earlier this week I read an article about a Pro-Life person who attended the Women’s March because although she was pro-life she was not anti-abortion, and anti-rights (women’s rights) to make a choice. Politics are not black and white, and although a person may take a stance on an issue, sometimes there is more to the backstory than just the surface level. I also liked when the author wrote about “men thinking they have more rights towards a particular job than a woman.” We have just as many rights/privileges to be working as men do. It’s awful to think that there is a superiority complex over us and are deemed “unstable, hormonal, and weak.” What is great about this Women’s March is that there are commonalities between the oppressed colored/cultural people and women and together we are stronger, smarter, and in full force to fight for each other.
Thanks for your thoughts on this. Interestingly I’m also pro-life personally but not anti-abortion since laws against it don’t stop it. Girls and women just end up dying trying to do it themselves.
Are you involved with this stuff? I hope these protests work as far preventing that 6 week abortion thing, which is BS and horrible. I do not like abortion like many, but I have empathy for women too and I don’t like women being in prison for that and 6 weeks, many women don’t even know there pregnant sometimes until almost 6 weeks. It’s crazy.
I have a lot of “red” friends and have noticed a lot of misunderstanding about the purpose of the march among them. But pretty much all of my “blue” friends — women and men alike, participated.
We worry about abortion becoming illegal — which doesn’t have much affect on the abortion rate but causes a lot of girls and women to die trying to do it themselves or go to illegal abortion providers.
Worry about Mother Nature too with anti-EPA Guy heading EPA. I worry about climate change which cannot be reversed, and we will pay with more and more severe weather like tornadoes, hurricanes, coastal flooding, droughts. We will have to pay the costs so that big oil can make big profits.
Anti-labor Labor Sec’y?
Also don’t want to normalize sexism, racism, xenophobia.
And more.
Strong sentiments! Powerful words and I am sure all right-minded persons can understand them so well.
Despite that when I say let’s hope for the best, keep your hope alive, what comes to my mind is Abraham Lincoln’s letter to his son’s teacher and I must share a quote from what he said, “Teach him that for every enemy, there is a friend. He will have to know that all men are not just, that all men are not true. But teach him also that for every scoundrel there is a hero, that for every crooked politician, there is a dedicated leader.”…
Great quote. Thanks!
I do hope that left and right in America can start to have a conversation.
Fantastic post! It’s so important to understand that we all have the same basic ethics, and the manipulations of those who profit from our division are not a credo.
For more on understanding how we forgot this, I highly recommend episode 59 of Hidden Brain: The Deep Story, if you haven’t heard it already. http://www.npr.org/podcasts/510308/hidden-brain
Thanks! Looks like a great article.
Thank you for “What It’s Worth” reloaded.
Love it! You’re so welcome.
The article claims that the rich 1% are the people to be blamed for the 2008 economic bubble and furthermore economic disasters. I just don’t know how much is “1%” and how much money do they really control. If our citizens generate 1 billion dollars a year, does this 1% take almost all of them? What exactly is “almost all of them”? How many people are in this “1%”? I can only think of Steve Jobs, Mark Zuckerberg, Bill Gates, and many more.
Thought this article brought out a very true and interesting point, our population is divided gravely. Democrats are criticising Donald Trump online everyday and the Republicans just “secretly” praise Trump in their homes and at the voting polls. As a nation, we are greatly divided and it is only harming the country more and more.
Thanks for your thoughts. Here is a little clarification:
Actually, I didn’t say that the 1% were to blame for the lack of unity among the working class. (It’s not an economic bubble but a redistribution of wealth from the middle class to the top.)
I said “the selfish sector of the moneyed elite” were to blame.
And that as a result nearly all of the economic gains of the last four years went to the top 1%.
Americans had to have about $435,000 in adjusted gross income to be part of the Top 1%.
As the Wall Street Journal reported “Some 95% of 2009-2012 Income Gains Went to Wealthiest 1%”
http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2013/09/10/some-95-of-2009-2012-income-gains-went-to-wealthiest-1/
I forgot that that info wasn’t common knowledge for everyone or I would have referenced it.
That’s what bothers me. It’s amazing how so many smart people are hoodwinked. This has been happening for the longest time, but just more extreme now. That’s probably why the media isn’t trusted. But you have all this fabricated news about this drama or lazy people taking away this and it being shown through media. And all these distractions that divert people’s attention away and toward each other. You know political cartoons? This image pops up in my head when I think of the elite, and some feel the top media outlets on the payroll of such elite. I don’t know how far for everything, but I’ve heard of the name Rothchild before and control. I see like the elite as like puppet masters and the image of people arguing and like in wizard of oz. There’s the big image and what they are paying attention and distracted by what he says. But nobody sees the man behind as he’s smiling about the distraction he’s creating so people aren’t coming after him, and leaving him free.
A lot of people don’t trust the media these days, So I recommend reading a variety of media sources and checking actual congressional and Supreme Court records against what the sources say to figure out who to trust.
Check voting records for who to vote for.
Who historically has wanted the list below? And are they shifting in a more populist direction? (I know from meeting with Congress members that the Dems have historically been more for the people. But Sanders + Trump are now pushing Republicans to be a bit more populous now. But keep comparing their records keep an eye on them.)
Bigger tax breaks for rich than the middle class?
Drop financial protections for citizens to boost Wall St profits (Wells Fargo… Main Street bails out Wall Street… Consumer Protection Agency. Wall Street regulations.)
Allow loopholes and tax shelters for the wealthy?
Reward outsourcing, offshoring, union-busting?
Vote against a living wage? Vote against overtime and a healthy and humane work environment?
Tax cuts for the wealthy funded by turning Social Security and Medicare into vouchers?
First you say,
“But without the xenophobia that creeps up among some Trump voters. ”
Then,
“Most people who voted for DJT aren’t sexist and racist, I’m sure.”
I mean…what is the point..? Why suggest some of us are xenophobic. Hell every group is going to have fringe elements. The Left certainly has its crazies too. It’s a given on each side.
Sometimes I really do not recognize this country anymore. In 1980 I was a student a Georgetown. Ronald Reagan was just elected. I attended his inauguration. A very bitter cold day. I can still remember it it ever so clearly. I took so many pictures ans still have them. I even attended his funeral and seeing the love his way Nancy had for him.
My point is we had Communist who came to speak at the university. We had members of the PLO we came to speak at the university. We had a KKK march through Washington DC, majority Black city at the time with a Black mayor who granted them a permit AND a Black Police Chief who provide protection. Yes there were protesters. But we ALL agreed that all of these organizations had free speech and the right to demonstrate.
Today, thanks to the progressive Left, this framework and set of values no longer exist. It’s downright shameful. Now such organizations are labeled as engaging in “hate” speech. They are now being banned from colleges and universities which were once suppose to be places where free ideas and thoughts were actually encouraged. Now, they have become “safe spaces” and other silly things.
No, there is no such thing as hate speech. There is only free speech. There is free speech. And it must remain so.
This notion that those who do not share the ideas and thoughts of others can be shamed, bullied, and even violently attacked and labeled as racist, xenophobic, or whatever is asinine. It will be fought and opposed. It will not stand.
“But without the xenophobia that creeps up among some Trump voters. ”
Then,
“Most people who voted for DJT aren’t sexist and racist, I’m sure.”
I mean…what is the point..? Why suggest some of us are xenophobic. Hell every group is going to have fringe elements. The Left certainly has its crazies too. It’s a given on each side.
Yes Huggy, that is exactly my point: both the left and the right have crazies, But they aren’t the whole, or even the majority, are they?
But what happens is that the crazies on the right scare the crazies on the left and that divides people.
And I share your worry that some people on the left are shutting down free-speech. I think that that is scary too.
Excellent post.
Division, scapegoating and the use of “othering” are prominent methods employed by the UK Government.
We have a lot of think tanks funded by rich libertarians who feed ideas through right-wing media that people of color (and often, women) are the enemy. Instead of wealthy interests who push to create policy that ends up redistributing wealth from middle class Americans to themselves.
I talk about that more in this post:
Vote to Help the Rich, Hurt Yourself
https://broadblogs.com/2012/11/02/vote-to-help-the-rich-hurt-yourself/
For all of the talk about jobs in this Presidential campaign the issue of automation seems to have been conveniently ignored by both candidates. I guess you don’t raise the question when you don’t have any answers.
Maybe it’s too scary to raise the question at this point.
Some people have been looking at it. I’ve been relieved to find many (non-libertarian) conservatives thinkers saying that we might need to have some minimum salary provided by the government that is low enough to encourage people to do something productive but high enough that we still have sales and profits and people aren’t out on the street trashing the place with their anger.
Where does the wage come from? Basically, with automation there would be a huge redistribution of wealth from middle-class workers to the owners of capital as the owners automate everything they can and workers lose their jobs. So then you would tax that excessive income to make sure everyone has a basic being wage. And it works for the owners too because otherwise no one has any money and sales and profits plummet.
Well said.
Thank you! I’m hoping to get conversations people share their thoughts on how we can unite instead of being divided.
Let not all the ammunition be exhausted now as there may be more in the pipeline to train guns on, or, even though unlikely from the way events appear to be as of now, things to cheer about several months down the line. It will be worth a retro after nine months.
There’s a lot of fear out there among the Progressive left. I wasn’t quite so worried immediately after the election as I was after I saw the picks for the cabinet, Which look very hard right to me rather than unifying. I mean a labor secretary who is anti-labor?
I could be wrong but I feel like Trump is being pulled in two directions.
On the one hand, even though he works with Breitbart, Steve Bannon seems to sincerely care about the working class and the Inaugural Address was clearly written by him. He really does seem to want to get government to work for the people and not the wealthy interests. I have also seen a speech he gave years ago at the Vatican which shows that he really is concerned about the wealth not all going to the top 1%. And I have gone to Breitbart and seen that the posts he writes are not racist. So I am somewhat hopeful. (Maybe I’m hoping against hope.) But he can seem extreme, unbalanced and exclusionist, which worries (scares!) me. I have a theory that he went to Breitbart because that’s where the people who were most voting against their interests are. And he did manage to get them to realize that the GOP has been ignoring them for years. Hence the calls that government serve us instead of elites. Here’s the Vatican transcript: https://www.buzzfeed.com/lesterfeder/this-is-how-steve-bannon-sees-the-entire-world?utm_term=.fdBX1BMjB#.wjPpVjL9j
On the other hand, when Trump was running for president he asked John Kasich to be his vice president with the offer that he could run domestic and foreign policy. JK asked what DJT would be doing? DJT’s son responds “He would be making America great.” Apparently by tweeting and doing rallies. Instead, far-right Mike Pence became VP and the cabinet picks look far right like him.
And some say that there is just so much to do and Trump is so overwhelmed that Paul Ryan — who Steve Bannon hates — is feeding Trump all sorts of executive orders that Trump is ordering. And that Paul Ryan is very happy with things so far. Not a good sign for those of us who want government to serve us and not the elites.
We’ll see what happens.