The 2008 Presidential Campaign (was Obama Phenomenon 2)

[solicitr]

Sorry, Ethel. You said:

Take another look at that chart you posted. Most years show a growth in US manufacturing output (though honestly, and I checked this, in most years less than GDP)--but an even larger growth in manufactured imports. Note the scale. The Y axis (manufacturing output percentage growth) increments by 2 points; the X axis (manufacturing import percentage growth) increments by 4.

But you're rather missing the point, which is that, contrary to myth, domestic output rises and falls with imports. If the myth were correct, the relationship would be inverse and the slope negative.

It's a question of adding value. Manufacturing takes something cheap--say silicon--and turns it into something valuable, like computer chips.

And a service industry creates value out of *nothing at all.*

[sauronsfinger]

Solicitr -
you keep telling people that they miss the point.
With all due respect, it seems that you either miss the point, or ignore the point or simply could not care less that several million good paying manufacturing jobs have left this nation over the last decade. Is it enough for you that the manufacturers themselves are holding their own and you simply do not care about the workers losing their jobs and the economic and social implications for our nation?

[sauronsfinger]

hal - I heard that NAACP speech and heard nothing of the kind. What he said is a twofold message. Individuals have to do their part and claim responsibility for their individual lives and what they can do in their own families. Government has to do their part in what they can do for the larger society as a whole.

[Padme]

heh I thought the same thing listening to Obama talk to the NAACP.

Saying the government could do everythin for us, but we still need personal responsability... mixed message anyone?

Hal I can see where his speach could be interpreted as that, but to me it says more about personal responsiblity and having the government being held responsible.

Anyway I am not going to continue this much longer as I do my politics in RL now and try to stay away from this stuff on the net. In other words, I don't want to fight with you But if you ever make it my way I'm the lady with the local DNC newsletters, working the booth registering voters, handing out watermelon to Union members at the picnic, and stuff.

[solicitr]

Is it enough for you that the manufacturers themselves are holding their own and you simply do not care about the workers losing their jobs and the economic and social implications for our nation?

Is it not enough for you that those workers have seen their real incomes constantly increase, in whichever sector they work?

Prosperity is not restricted to GM's and US Steel's payrolls.

I think caring about "economic and social implications for our nation" is entirely inconsistent with desiring to lock in an inefficient allocation of resources. This is what the Brits tried 1945-75, and it lead to the brink of total economic collapse (and the death of British heavy industry).

[solicitr]

Incidentally, Obama is now proposing a 25% hike in the capital-gains tax. Yeah, that will sure help with the credit crunch and our dismal savings rate........l..

[yovargas]

So...there are across the board solid standard of living increases, manufacture has become more efficient and productive, and unemployment is still very low...what is the problem exactly?

[sauronsfinger]

The problem is that millions of people who used to be employed in manufacturing jobs that were displaced because they actually believed the bilge that if they were more productive they were protecting their jobs.

What fools they must now think they were. Or at least that is what solicitr has told us is the cause of their dismissal.

[solicitr]

Suronsfinger, you seem to be fixated on the idea that heavy industry is the only place good-paying jobs are to be found: but it just ain't so. Plainly those displaced factory workers have found other good-paying jobs elsewhere.

[yovargas]

Considering the low unemployment and increasing wages, it would look like as a group they were "displaced" into better paying jobs. I imagine most don't mind that.

[Primula Baggins]

Where is the increase in real wages being reported? That's a question, not a challenge. Last time I dug into this, last year, real household income was stagnant or slipping a bit in the lower quintiles. I'd like to know where these newer numbers are—or whether we're talking about apples and oranges, since household income often depends on more than one income source.

[Alatar]

Doesn't Capital Gains tax apply to investments? And you only pay the tax when you realise a profit. And that profit is being taxed at 25%.

So, you object to people paying 25% tax on the profit they made on an investment after taking into account any losses made on other investments.

Cry me a river...

[halplm]

hal - I heard that NAACP speech and heard nothing of the kind. What he said is a twofold message. Individuals have to do their part and claim responsibility for their individual lives and what they can do in their own families. Government has to do their part in what they can do for the larger society as a whole.

Sure, you can interpret it that way, but the reality is, there is no personal responsability if hte Goverment takes care of you. You can't have it both ways. We've proven exhaustively, that people will take from the government, and not give from themselves, if they can. You can preach personal responsability all you want, but if you turn around and vote for every entitlement program you possibly can (ie. Obama), you're not practicing what you preach.

If Obama really believes in his Personal responsability rhetoric, he should be a Republican. His past proves otherwise.

[sauronsfinger]

from solicitr

Plainly those displaced factory workers have found other good-paying jobs elsewhere.

I stand patiently awaiting the statistical evidence of this boast.

[halplm]

Doesn't Capital Gains tax apply to investments? And you only pay the tax when you realise a profit. And that profit is being taxed at 25%.

So, you object to people paying 25% tax on the profit they made on an investment after taking into account any losses made on other investments.

Cry me a river...

This view is so extremely naive and wrong, I don't even know how to respond. He said RAISE 25%. And the vast majority of this money is in people's retirement funds and savings, not speculators and stock brokers.

[sauronsfinger]

from hal

but the reality is, there is no personal responsability if hte Goverment takes care of you. You can't have it both ways.

It seems to me that in the real world, it certainly is both ways. We want people to assume personal responsibility for their lives. That is the ideal. Obama is asking people to do that. But we all know that everyone will not measure up to the ideal. Some will fall short for a variety of reasons ranging from their own stupidity, laziness, and sloth to institutional racism, environmental conditions and just plain bad luck. Or maybe some from column A and some from column B.

That is where society and government come in.

I join you in wishing everyone lived up to the ideal. But only someone with blinders on would ignore the consequences of those who do not.

[Primula Baggins]

What part of Obama's past proves that he takes no personal responsibility?

[halplm]

from hal

but the reality is, there is no personal responsability if hte Goverment takes care of you. You can't have it both ways.

It seems to me that in the real world, it certainly is both ways. We want people to assume personal responsibility for their lives. That is the ideal. Obama is asking people to do that. But we all know that everyone will not measure up to the ideal. Some will fall short for a variety of reasons ranging from their own stupidity, laziness, and sloth to institutional racism, environmental conditions and just plain bad luck. Or maybe some from column A and some from column B.

That is where society and government come in.

I join you in wishing everyone lived up to the ideal. But only someone with blinders on would ignore the consequences of those who do not.

So, because the government provides for people who ignore personal responsability, those people further rely on government, and have even less personal responsability... which is then a problem only government can fix, by providing more for these people?

You'll forgive me if I don't think that makes any sense.

And Prim, I didn't say he had no personal responsibility, I said he's never voted in any way for people to take personal responsibility.

[sauronsfinger]

Hal - its this way.
What we want is for everyone to assume personal responsibility. That is the goal and the ideal.

What we know is that there will be people who fall short of this ideal. And we know that many of these people have children and others who they are suppose to be responsible for.

So society, through government, steps in to help these people - not as the main choice in lifestyle, but because we are civilized society who will not allow children to starve and die on the streets.

I certainly see no contradiction between espousing high values and ideals and asking people to strive for them and the acceptance of reality that some people will not achieve them.

Or do you believe in human perfection that needs to help?

[halplm]

I believe that when people need help, other people will help them. The US has never had problems providing charity to people that need it.

The problem is, the Government wastes more than they help. If they are the ones doing the helping, it reduces the need and capability of other charities, and it provides a lower level of help for those in need. Furthermore, it creates a level of help, that a larger group will use than actually need it, because it treats all of us equally. Thus, you have the government breeding non-personal responsability.

Telling people they need to be personally responsible, and then providing government programs that remove the need for that personal responsability, is what's called a mixed message.

Telling people they need to be personally responsible, and providing government programs ONLY for those that truly need help... or you know, letting the private sector take care of it, and supporting the private sector in that task, is the only way it can truly work... as history has proven.