Guru, the alter ego who views humanity and the universe from somewhere around Neptune, predicted during the first Obama administration a Donald-like bowling ball. Not that Guru is a genius – many predictions are whimsy – but Guru hit the bullseye on this one. The federal government had become irrelevant to citizen reality. The election process, indeed the daily ritual once elected, was tightly wrapped around raising money rather than pursuing the American dream. Ex-senator Al Franken confessed on a late night TV talk show that the first five hours of every day were spent calling donors and lobbyists to raise money not just for Al but for the Democratic Party. It was the same with the republicans.

Campaigning had become a traveling carnival complete with snake oil salesmen who did not base rhetoric on problem solving but rather reinforced the insecurities of the electorate should something actually change. Meanwhile, the electorate reality was indeed changing; the economy was slanted toward shareholders and investment, leaving actual labor investment in the dust. Ignoring the wellbeing of the electorate – especially their economic wellbeing – is a recipe for populism. Elected officials were about as useful as bowling pins.

Along came Donald. A bowling ball made to order. Pick any analogy: a bull in a china shop, a landslide blocking the highway, a spilled garbage can. As has been widely reported, three rustbelt states took advantage of the Electoral College to overthrow the popular vote in the 2016 election. Populism took charge via Donald.

What is good about populism is that it forces instability; it disrupts the status quo; it makes things uncomfortable for the irrelevant processes of a stagnant culture.

What is bad about populism is its mindless destruction; it throws out the good with the bad; it wounds the culture in a way that will take time to heal; it ignores opportunity in order to sustain disruption.

The days of the guillotine have passed. Fortunately, the United States is isolated between two oceans and inherited an immense wealth in a newly discovered continent. Otherwise, one wonders whether war, destruction and murder, as observed today in other parts of the world, would be the process for US populism.

Guru still is concerned whether the ship of state and the state of the electorate will be stable enough to receive a turbulent century of unknown disruption to society, economics, environment and day-to-day survival.

– – – –

TO BE NOTED:

Havin’ a heat wave ♪

[The Washington Post] In what has become a seemingly monthly entry, this past July was not only the hottest July but also the hottest month on Earth in recorded history. It was so hot that wildfires ravaged millions of acres of the Arctic and swaths of Europe set record highs, including 108.7 degrees in Paris. July 2019 “beat” July 2016 — a month further warmed by “an extremely strong El Niño” — by about 0.07 degrees, according to the European Union’s Copernicus Climate Change Service.

Ancient Mariner

Everyone must know by now that the twenty-first century is a century of unbelievable change. Much more upheaval to society than had by taming horses, discovering electricity, inventing gunpowder, defining economic theories, the internal combustion engine, or plastic. War is changing from gunpowder-driven murder to electronic invasion. The weather is changing. The biosphere is in the midst of crumbling. Think of something; it will change – if it still exists by 2100.

Even jobs will change. In fact, the reader must imagine that they’ve never heard the word. Or that particular meaning of the word ‘work.’ Mariner has presented the statistics in earlier posts. Just a few examples that soon will disappear are truck drivers, motel employees, white collar employees, primary care physicians, many creative writers and musicians, many fiction authors. Of course, the list is endless. Truth be told, how the entire economy functions will change.

For the purpose of this post, the word ‘value’ will replace the word ‘job.’ A sample of how to use value was proffered by mariner years ago in a post that said a mother deserves recompense (cash will be gone, too) for raising children. One could ask, “What’s your primary value?” “Raising my children,” she would reply. This is not a new idea.

In 1935 President Roosevelt (AKA FDR) signed into law a bill creating the Works Progress Administration (WPA). It was during the depression and money just wasn’t to be had because the public, in general, wasn’t ‘working’.

“While FDR believed in the elementary principles of justice and fairness, he also expressed disdain for doling out welfare to otherwise able workers. So, in return for monetary aid, WPA workers built highways, schools, hospitals, airports and playgrounds. They restored theaters–such as the Dock Street Theater in Charleston, S.C.–and built the ski lodge at Oregon’s Mt. Hood. The WPA also put actors, writers and other creative arts professionals back to work by sponsoring federally funded plays, art projects, such as murals on public buildings, and literary publications. FDR safeguarded private enterprise from competition with WPA projects by including a provision in the act that placed wage and price controls on federally funded products or services.”[1]

A few things to place in mind: FDR taxed income above $25,000 ($460,000 today) at 100%; the Green New Deal legislation in the House today uses this WPA idea to create jobs that return manufacturing to the economy except it uses private companies to bid for contracts; FDR had no choice but to underwrite WWII in the depth of the depression (the war, however, launched the US into a new economy).

Returning to employment value, it may be that significantly more people will contribute to local projects, volunteer for special needs and create home services and homemade products that improve the value of community life or provide government services similar to the WPA. This interpretation of value for pay can only succeed if government provides a livable base of income for all citizens. True, many if not most individuals still will provide value through typical employment for pay. Even today with a growing number of elderly and retired individuals, and millennials already putting off normal life expectations, a significant percentage of citizens would have a more stable lifestyle if government paid a stipend today.

Two financial conditions must be in place to ease the move from ‘job’ to ‘value’: The tax code must be transformed and cash must be transformed.

TAXES. Everyone will agree that paying taxes is a silly, expensive game. And game is the right word because the complexity is nothing more than years and years of fixes by the wealthy, corporations, banks and lobbyists. Taxes should be nothing more than a statement sent to each individual. In other words, an individual’s taxes are paid through their place of employment – ‘paid’ not withheld. The stipend would not be taxable. In fact, employers would be taxed by size and number of employees as well as by profit.

CASH. Today cash already has started to fade. Increasing numbers of companies will not handle cash – especially retail stores. The next item that should be removed is credit cards. Banks relish being in the middle of a person’s assets, liquid or invested. Banks make huge profits for being nothing more than bookkeepers.

Politics certainly will interfere when the role of banks is challenged but modern technology is so fast and so intricately connected that big banks aren’t needed in the future. The reader may already have come across the term cryptocurrency. Unlike banks, cryptocurrency is one single database called a blockchain that keeps track of every individual’s financial activity. Once cryptocurrency is de rigueur, money will be no more than an electronic transaction called a bitcoin. Historically speaking, humans have progressed from paying bills with chickens and bags of flour to pieces of metal or shells to pieces of paper called money to not having to carry anything to perform financial transactions. Just ask Ethiopians – they’ve been doing it for many years.

The redefinition of job to value, the reinvention of taxes and the conversion to electronic money each will take decades if not generations to be accomplished. But, we have a whole century . . .

Ancient Mariner

[1] https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/fdr-creates-the-wpa

While seminal insights are available on television, they are relatively rare. However, within 24 hours two interviews of authors with intellectual insight, unspun perspective, factual interpretation and a superior understanding of recent American history were presented on television.

First, Cspan2 BookTV broadcast an interview with Tim Alberta, a seasoned, persistent correspondent for Politico, describes the Trump phenomenon with a comprehensive understanding of the federal government and the social times the nation is exploring; Alberta suggests Trump did not create his opportunity, he was inevitably drawn into it by a dissonant Congress.

Second, this past Sunday 60 Minutes on CBS broadcast a segment that interviewed Ray Dalio, a relatively unknown billionaire who has joined those billionaires who have committed half their net worth to social causes. He is the author of “Principles” published by Simon and Shuster, 2017. Dalio describes cogently the failure of the capitalist model that has been in place since the last century. He analyzes the political/economic reality with realism and humanism and, like Alberta, casts aspersions on the lack of relative importance by government.

Buy the books for a clear understanding of our times. Otherwise, the interviews can be found at the following links:

Tim Alberta, author of American Carnage, Harper Collins July 2019

https://www.c-span.org/video/?462768-1/american-carnage

Ray Dalio, author of Principles, Simon and Shuster, September 2017

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ray-dalio-explains-his-principles-60-minutes/

The reality and intelligence provided in these interviews will, if nothing else put TV news in the trashcan.

Ancient Mariner

[Citylab] In California, the debate between NIMBYs and YIMBYs—that’s Not In My Backyard and Yes In My Backyard, respectively—doesn’t usually involve actual backyards. It’s about housing: By one estimate, the state is short 3.5 million homes to accommodate current and projected demand. In cities like San Francisco, this gap has raised rents to some of the highest in the nation, fueling a homelessness problem that the United Nations recently labeled a human rights violation.

Mariner lives in a small town in the middle of corn fields. Even in his town house values are rising. Aside from stock market investment, houses are the most common investment for individuals. The day when housing was a practical necessity has become a day when the house is a safety net against old age and infirmity. This dilemma compounds itself as more and more profit in the US economy is banked by oligarchs while common salaries have languished for decades. It is difficult for the average individual to grow an estate value with the imbalance of investment vis-à-vis low salary. The only source for family security is the family home.

The unbalanced economy is not the only influence on the critical shortage of housing. As seniors live longer, the rollover of ownership to younger generations is delayed. The average lifespan of a citizen in 1900 was 47.3 years; the average in 2000 was 77.5; the average in 2018 was 78.7; in 2025 it will be 80. This increment suggests that for each calendar year more seniors will survive than the previous year! It is a popular point that there are more centenarians alive each year.

Demographic studies indicate that the US population is decreasing. Ironically, this does not help with housing because in a decade or two, the common age of the entire population will be close to retirement years – where house value is still the security blanket for post-retirement life.

Another issue is the lack of affordable housing for lower incomes. This is the most significant impact of the NIMBY attitude. Historically, less expensive neighborhoods could be found in the cities but gentrification has driven out low income individuals – and again NIMBY prevents a reintroduction of affordable housing. It should be noted that the common view of suburbia is not true any longer because the suburbs have absorbed citizens of every income level and every race as well.

Another factor is cost of living and upscale employment in places like tech centers and corporate home offices. Mariner noted in an earlier post that teachers in Silicon Valley could not afford to live near their schools. The impact is that the need for homes is uneven across the US as young people go where the jobs are.

The key requirement is for US federal and state governments to enact legislation that requires percentages of housing across income lines.

Housing is a growing problem today – not taking into account the issues of climate change. 2030 seems to be a target year for many issues not accounted for today in society, economics or government.

Before one votes, one must do homework so as not to waste one’s vote.

Ancient Mariner