Category Archives: Politics

Clipart

Posted on by
Reply

A guest column has been trimmed a bit to highlight important clipart and merged with mariner’s comments.

Posted by Alex Greer

According to a July Gallup poll, public approval of Congress has fallen to near-record lows. On average, 34% of the population approves of a given Congress. The current 114th Congress has a 17% approval rating.

Americans have reason to be concerned. … The last two Congresses have enacted fewer laws than any other Congress since 1947. And the 114th Congress may just surpass them all in terms of doing nothing. … Some members have been exceptionally unexceptional. Using data from GovTrack  I [Alex Greer] created an Effectiveness Score to determine the least-effective members of Congress.

The effectiveness score is the percentage of bills sponsored by each congressperson over their time in office that went on to pass committee. The score does not factor in the percentage of bills that turned into law because such a small number of proposed bills and resolutions actually become laws.

These are the 35 least-effective members of Congress. See if your representatives make the list:

http://members-of-congress.insidegov.com/stories/5278/least-effective-members-congress?utm_medium=cm&utm_source=outbrain&utm_campaign=ao.cm.ob.dt.5278&utm_term=dt#Intro

Yes, Steve King R-Iowa, 4th District is on the list. Steve holds the dubious honor as the least effective person in Congress. The Iowa Representative has served in congress for 12 years and has yet to sponsor a single bill that has passed committee – let alone become actual law. Further, a committee effectiveness survey scored him at zero.

Don’t feel left out, Maryland. Representative Donna F. Edwards (D) is virtually tied at the bottom with Steve. Elected in 2008, Donna has sponsored 10 bills. Of these bills, 10 have died in committee.

clipart: Americans are getting poorer. According to a study by the Russell Sage Foundation , net worth for the typical American household has been decreasing steadily since 2008. The median household net worth in America is now $56,000, down from $87,000 in 2003. From 2012 to 2013 alone, the median household net worth in America dropped by about 20%.

Not for congresspeople. From 2012 to 2013, average net worth more than doubled—and in one case, grew by more than ten times.

The mariner suggests repeatedly that every voter should consider carefully who to vote for on the undercard – even good ol’ buddy Steve King and antiquity in residence Senator Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa). The mariner also suggests that the US is dealing with a 1968 Congress. Old wood needs to be cut out and replaced with congressmen/especially women who understand and still participate in American culture in 2016; a term limit requiring congressmen to step down if their next term includes their sixtieth birthday is about right.

Let’s hope the next President really does something to help Senator Elizabeth Warren break down the bank monopoly in the US economy. Did you know that the Federal agency fought for and created solely by Senator Warren (Consumer Protection Agency) has sued banks to return illegal fees and charges to customers totaling more than four billion dollars in only four years of existence?

This is an unusually important election. Consider where you want your nation to go from here. Someplace where democracy can restore citizen equality.

Ancient Mariner

The World around Us

Posted on by
1

Anticipating that few readers follow the mariner’s comments further by pursuing the related links, the mariner has copied in full an article from Fareed Zacharia’s online GPS:

http://globalpublicsquare.blogs.cnn.com/2011/07/21/who-owns-america-hint-its-not-china/

04:30 PM ET Share this on: Facebook, Twitter, Digg, del.icio.us, reddit, MySpace, StumbleUpon

Editor’s Note: The following piece comes from Global Post, which provides excellent coverage of world news – important, moving and odd.

By Tom Mucha, Global Post

Truth is elusive.  But it’s a good thing we have math.

Our friends at Business Insider know this, and put those two principles to work today in this excellent and highly informative little slideshow, made even more timely by the ongoing talks in Washington, D.C. aimed at staving off a U.S. debt default.

Here’s the big idea:

Many people — politicians and pundits alike — prattle on that China and, to a lesser extent Japan, own most of America’s $14.3 trillion in government debt.

But there’s one little problem with that conventional wisdom: it’s just not true. While the Chinese, Japanese and plenty of other foreigners own substantial amounts, it’s really Americans who hold most of America’s debt.

Here’s a quick and fascinating breakdown by total amount held and percentage of total U.S. debt, according to Business Insider

  • Hong Kong: $121.9 billion (0.9 percent)
  • Caribbean banking centers: $148.3 (1 percent)
  • Taiwan: $153.4 billion (1.1 percent)
  • Brazil: $211.4 billion (1.5 percent)
  • Oil exporting countries: $229.8 billion (1.6 percent)
  • Mutual funds: $300.5 billion (2 percent)
  • Commercial banks: $301.8 billion (2.1 percent)
  • State, local and federal retirement funds: $320.9 billion (2.2 percent)
  • Money market mutual funds: $337.7 billion (2.4 percent)
  • United Kingdom: $346.5 billion (2.4 percent)
  • Private pension funds: $504.7 billion (3.5 percent)
  • State and local governments: $506.1 billion (3.5 percent)
  • Japan: $912.4 billion (6.4 percent)
  • U.S. households: $959.4 billion (6.6 percent)
  • China: $1.16 trillion (8 percent)
  • The U.S. Treasury: $1.63 trillion (11.3 percent)
  • Social Security trust fund: $2.67 trillion (19 percent)

So America owes foreigners about $4.5 trillion in debt. But America owes America $9.8 trillion.

And to bone up on China’s debt – another potentially big global economic headache — check out this interview with brainy-yet-coherent Northwestern University economist Victor Shih, who spoke with GlobalPost’s David Case.

End Excerpt

This list of US indebtedness by nation is hard to find. Further, to have easy access to two of the highest regarded specialists on debt and international economics is comparable to achieving a minor in international studies.

We may as well stay with Fareed; he had an excellent show today (6/5/16).

Two books are recommended as well which are contemporary to the extent that the content is almost newsworthy on the daily news channels. The first book is Zachary Karabell’s The Leading Indicators: A Short History of the Numbers That Rule Our World.

The second book was mentioned on GPS. (the mariner watched an interview on CSPAN with author Anja Manuel, This Brave New World: India, China and the United States by Anja Manuel, Hardcover. $20.25.) One cannot be prepared for our near future without reading Manuel’s book (received 27 outstanding reviews). For instance, India is about to have more citizens than China; the battle for economic supremacy between China and India depends on who has more toilets – a point raised by Fareed when he quoted her book on GPS. Anja Manuel writes that toilets have become an economic indicator that influences the degree of worker health, improves travel from other countries, and improves quality of life generally – not to mention improvement in water quality and infrastructure.

Between the Tom Mucha post, the interviews with Diamond and Shih, and the CSPAN interview with Manuel, one will likely know enough to be their own expert. At least, maybe, know as much as Donald!

Speaking of candidates for the Presidency, a new player has been picked up by our ever alert news media: Gary Johnson – the Libertarian candidate for President. Johnson is polling at 10% and could be a real spoiler for Donald – and Hillary as well although her odds for surviving Donald and Gary are less troubling.

What makes Gary potent is he sounds intelligent, stable, and defends a very liberal social policy. Perhaps a sign of concern is his classic Libertarian position on the economy, taxes and government. His sense of government obligation is military. That’s it – military. Forget anything that hints of discretionary programs, special assistance (Social Security? No). Global Warming is Earth’s problem. Yet he comes across in TV interviews as a sensible person who does not advocate military action around the world; something that is soothing in contrast to the Obama/Clinton doctrine and whatever Armageddon Donald has planned.

Gary once was the Governor of New Mexico. He didn’t fit well. US voters must remember that the conservative branch of the Republican Party will not vote Libertarian because economically the conservative republicans are too liberal. Let’s hope there are a number of three-way debates. It should be interesting.

Ancient Mariner

 

 

Economic Outlook

Posted on by
Reply

The mariner is no expert on the economy. Instead, he gets most of his data and insights from recommended books, business sections of newspapers, erudite talk shows, and news channels like Bloomberg. It wasn’t long ago that only money grubbing naysayers wanting ones’ money were predicting a financial Armageddon.

Yet common news sources in centrist magazines and television shows now talk about troublesome circumstances such as “the US has run out of jobs,” or, “the stock markets have never recovered from the 2008 recession: an expected jump in the world’s economies has not occurred.” Bloomberg statistics show that two-thirds of part-time workers are former full-time workers; only the health sector added jobs in the last four months; only 51% of veterans are employed. Erik Shatzker, a Bloomberg reporter, said job creation has fallen off a cliff and threatens US recovery.

In Europe, “Brexit,” the vote to withdraw Britain from the European Union, looms ahead with a close vote indicated. If Brexit succeeds, Britain will have a recession. In the OPEC nations, there are signs the organization will not hold together, disrupting the global oil trade as a means of international political stability. The US remains the healthiest economy in the world at the moment. However, too many national economies (including the US) are coming into the same station carrying inadequate assets.

The mariner senses there is a shakeup of some kind due in a year or two – perhaps as soon as the November election. Having watched Surviving Progress, half of the world not owned is already in debt to the other half. Perhaps the pump is running dry.

REFERENCE SECTION

A bit of postscript to the post on Heavy Seas. LiveScience has an article that explains the ice age side of things. It turns out that the Earth’s axis tilt wobbles a maximum of 40°. At the maximum tilt, more sunlight reaches the ice-laden poles causing the ice to melt. Further, a longer cycle of about 10,000 years shifts the axis from Polaris, the North Star, where it points today, to the star Vega and back again. Whenever the vacillations complement one another, an ice age occurs – lasting as long as 120,000 years!

See: http://www.livescience.com/6937-ice-ages-blamed-tilted-earth.html

Ancient Mariner

Heavy Seas

Posted on by
1

The Weather channel provides special reports from government agencies (FEMA, NOAA) and environmental/ecological studies (seminars and University studies) that teach us how to respond to heavy storms, sustained heavy rain patterns, and hurricanes. It seems that the first thing flood victims want to do is wait until it is too late to evacuate. This is understandable given all the possessions and entrenched lifestyles. Still, arranging for offsite storage, moving or securing extra vehicles like RVs, boats, lawn tractors, arranging for creatures from pets to livestock, and avoiding the final highway gridlock, require more than one hasty trip when water is around one’s ankles. Wait, didn’t we have a teenager?

Sooner than later the failure of local electrical substations and erratic current across surrounding grids occurs. Virtually everyone except the non participating elderly and the poorest underclass depend heavily on electrical appliances, cell phones, GPS and Internet games to live from one hour to the next. Oh my! Now we can’t track where our teenager is. What do you mean the TV doesn’t work?

The human experience of global warming is a conflict between incremental change that seems normal and longer effects requiring two or three lifetimes before the weather definitely is different – apparently permanently – and coastlines have suffered irreparable damage to industry and housing. Some change will continue for as long as 100,000 years. Again, flooding victims think there is plenty of time because rising ocean levels are measured in an inch or two per year. Take note, however, that ecological scientists have discovered that the oceans are rising faster each year: somewhat like creeping inflation where each year includes the rise of all previous years plus the current “2.5 inches”.

In a lifetime, the long term rise in the oceans is expected to be a minimum of nine feet and as much as thirty feet – the guesstimate rises with each later evaluation. Most predictions say the warming of the planet will continue and likely will accelerate. Oceans likely will continue to rise as well, but predicting the amount is an inexact science. A recent study says we can expect the oceans to rise between 2.5 and 6.5 feet by 2100, enough to swamp many of the cities along the U.S. East Coast. More dire estimates, including a complete meltdown of the Greenland ice sheet, push sea level rise to 23 feet, enough to submerge London.

By 2100, the plains states are not immune. The Mississippi River will rise as much as the oceans do. It is true that the land is not equal in altitude. The mariner’s home town has an elevation around 700+ feet. Yet the Mississippi is only 10 miles away. The southern states (Louisiana, Arkansas) will have permanent flooding similar to the Texas floods in today’s news. The southeastern states (Florida to the Mississippi and on to the Texas/Mexico border) will have a dramatic change in coastline. New Orleans’ new lock and berm system already is proving to be inadequate in today’s weather patterns.

Global warming is not an issue subject to personal, political or corporate opinion. Many politicians and the corporate money that supports the politicians are opposed to additional regulatory policies that will impose on profits and investment. It is the same pattern of priority as the flood victims who wait until water is around their ankles. Add to this group those who insist any further government involvement in anything is taboo. These motives are understood – but irrelevant to a planet moving into a warmer phase of its slowly evolving history.

What can we do about global warming? Nothing. It will continue no matter what we do. What can we do to prepare for the effects of global warming? Plenty. The ecology of the Earth is changing fast enough for humans to notice. It is time to listen to climate experts; to elevate their influence in the news and in government committees; to work harder to implement international policies – other nations will suffer more than the US. What areas of the US will suffer rises in the sea? Climatologists have a handle on a lot of this information already. If you want to spend a night in Mar a Lago you should call Donald soon.

Ancient Mariner

President Donald

Posted on by
Reply

The mariner has a working career that spans both corporate and government management. There is a distinct difference. Most notable is that corporate culture is measured solely by the ratio between cost and income, namely, profit; the greater the profit, the more successful the corporation. The antithesis is lack of control over process.

As to government, its culture is measured by how safe, economically sound and fair, and – an aspect easily overlooked – how well the government supports the general culture in a way that allows its citizens open expression and a sense of achievement. The citizen is the product. The antithesis is ill fitting ideologies like oppressive capitalism, plutocracies, suppressive policies, democratic imbalance and disregard for the Constitution (racism et al).

Also, a distinct difference between corporate and government management is the attitude of managers. Corporate managers are hired and rewarded for things like control, efficiency, accuracy, and predictability. Government managers are rewarded for sustaining rational public policy while at the same time allowing flexibility and transition as various politicians hold sway over general public policy.

Whereas a corporation has a Chairman of the Board, Board of Directors, Chief Executive Officer, Chief Operating Officer, Chief Financial Officer, and independent divisions for operations, material management and product development, governments have publicly elected Presidents, Governors, cabinet members overseeing public policy in associated departments, publicly elected legislators, and courts. Should Donald be elected, this difference will be obvious.

Donald has run his campaign for nomination as a business entrepreneur would: He has ignored policy protocol, particularly those relating to race, international relations, military circumstances, and even republican/democratic ideologies. The important issue is votes in a republican primary. Donald intuited that sufficient dissatisfied republican voters have been cut out of their party by those who continued to garner wealth – making the Republican Party a good ol’ boys club for rich folks. With the aid of Citizens United, plutocracy has taken over. This separation between party establishment and citizen is the only important issue to Donald during the primaries. Notice (the mariner is sure you have) that Donald did not respect the premise that a candidate should not insult a voter but rather appeal to arguable precepts that may appeal to that voter. Donald need only count on his fingers to estimate that the number of disenfranchised republicans was large enough to carry a plurality in republican voting and of an ilk to vote for outside restructuring of a do nothing Congress. Foregoing an accounting of the primaries, it may be of interest to see how Donald will manage the republican leadership team in an effort to parlay the republican plurality into a general election majority and an Electoral College victory.

Donald will not stand at the center of public policy, leading the charge of change like Mel Gibson in Braveheart. Donald will be at the center of power. Donald will not bother himself with lesser tasks like Constitutional law or civil rights or union issues or religious conflicts or pipelines versus green house policy or discretionary governance. Donald will control the reconciliations of these issues once a solution has been proposed. Donald will accept reconciliations if he approves of them – else negotiations and solutions simply will not be enacted.  Despite Donald’s readiness to distribute managerial authority for all items that cross his desk, the final resolution must fit his vision. His knowledge base will create a much different economy, a new international isolationist relationship, and a harsher interpretation of humanism. Donald will behave as though people are more trouble than they are worth. The problem with government is it lets the citizens get in the way.  There’s room only for one vote around here: Donald’s.

REFERENCE SECTION

Apologies about the lapse in posts. Life has many distracting turns. At this point of the Presidential campaigns, it may be helpful to refocus your thoughts to higher levels of vision than offered by the news media. Either view on Netflix, rent the movie, watch on Youtube, however the reader can accomplish it, watch the following in its entirety: Surviving Progress  https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Surviving+Progress+Full+Movie&Form=VQFRVP 

Ancient Mariner

Liftoff to the General Election

Posted on by
Reply

Many readers may have heard the news media touting two pieces of news: first, Hillary’s staff implied Bernie was being considered as a possible Vice President; Bernie said he would be open to the Vice Presidency on Hillary’s ticket; second, Bill Kristol can’t find anyone to be an establishment figurehead to run on a third ballot – meaning Donald is in charge until the Republican Convention and further to election day in November.

These two pieces of news eliminate every calculable solution other than the weirdest, outlandish guess possible – like one of the candidates dies or a devastating meteor strikes the Earth over Washington DC.

Bernie said in effect that he knows he has lost and would accept an offer to be VP on the Hillary ticket. This does two things: it allows Bernie’s army to “lay down their arms.” Further, it puts Hillary in a position of “I won! Bernie said so!” but now Hillary must find a way to bring Bernie on board that seems collaborative. In any case, there will be no contested Democratic Convention in Philadelphia. The democrats should easily unify behind a Hillary nomination as the campaign rolls into Election Day – including as many independents, progressives, college-educated and students who will actually vote. Nevertheless, Bernie will push for his legislative goals to the very end of the convention.

William Kristol should do his homework. Third party campaigns never work and elect the opposite party’s candidate who otherwise may not have won (Jimmy Carter for example). Without a third party option, the role of republican establishment is limited to trying to save down-ballot elections they can in Congress knowing that no self-respecting candidate will join the coattails of Donald in a close local competition. If it becomes true that Donald walks into the Republican Convention with a delegate lock on the nomination, it will be a non-event although entertaining to watch media cover behind-the-scenes scrambling.

Donald apparently likes lieutenants with a harsh style. His campaign manager is Corey Lewandowski (most famous for assault charges at a rally).  Former New Hampshire Republican Party Chairman Fergus Cullen said he thinks Lewandowski is drawn to a “burn the boats, blow up the bridges campaign.” To deal with the early lapse in delegate management, Donald hired Ken McKay (ex-Chris Christie) to fix things. Bobby Jindel said, “This is not a guy who wastes his time going on cable TV and running his mouth. Trump hiring Ken McKay is a bad thing for the Ted Cruz campaign; I can assure you of that.” Just recently, Donald hired Steve Mnunchin to lead the general election fund raising campaign for the Republican Party and other republican candidates running for office.

Steve Mnunchin is the ringleader of a small group of billionaires who bought IndyBank, a relatively large bank, as it was preparing to file bankruptcy. One of the earlier bank bankruptcies in the recession, IndyMac had a loose mortgage lending policy that quickly filled with bad mortgages. Mnunchin changed the bank name to OneWest and (many say fraudulently) foreclosed on all the mortgages.

If Hillary and Bernie are campaigning together, they will make hamburger of Mnunchin by selling him as an example of the 2008 recession abuse of family mortgages foreclosed on by mortgage banks – throwing families out on the street homeless. The shady forcing of foreclosures turns mortgages into huge profits. In this case, Mnunchin made $1.6B in less than a year with the FDIC paying for all the losses!

A postscript: Mariner finds he tires of nothing but Donald on broadcast and cable; mariner seeks other national and world news, quite important but not covered, by scrounging the Internet. Does the reader think all the dominance by Donald in the long run will bore the citizen in the coming months? The mariner is more interested in the post-election economic and budgetary priorities than in the romper room antics of the Donald general election campaign.

Ancient Mariner

So Here We Are

Posted on by
Reply

The odd reality of it all casts a strange light across the land. We fear a tornado of some kind during the general election. Donald has captured the spirit of the Republican white disenfranchised. Hillary already has demonstrated she has the nonwhite disenfranchised. Both angry, populist classes are warming to the confrontation as well as their counterparts, the super wealthy and the old school establishment.

Then there’s Bernie’s army: a mixed bag of volunteers, mostly white, many independents, progressive democrats, and a decent slice of the young professionals, the educated, and the trapped college students. How will Bernie’s army vote in the general election? Will the young liberals move toward Hillary? Will the disenfranchised democrat working class move to Donald?

If the situation weren’t so important and if the wellbeing of so many humans weren’t at stake, the mariner would feel like he’s settling down to watch an enjoyable evening of Summer Olympics. Donald reminds mariner of George Patton’s attitude toward armed conflict: It’s all about winning. Donald was interviewed recently about the bloody trail of insults and accusations: “You do what it takes to win,” he said. Donald apologized to all his former combatants saying they were fine fellows and professionals who will (to some extent) reunite to “win” the general election.

We may be in for some surprises from Donald – character assassination aside. Have no doubt he is a pragmatist to the bone and will be as flexible as an octopus, retuning his persona and policy position at will. If he wins the election, Katy bar the door!

Hillary may have the fight of her life in the general election. As disrespectful of the “establishment” as Donald is, Hillary, by the manner in which she has pushed away Bernie and his army, has embraced status quo governance. What the three populist movements (disenfranchised republicans, democrats and Bernie’s army) have in common is a firm distaste for establishment government. In general, the democrats have not demonstrated party enthusiasm in this election except for Bernie’s army which may be prone to not voting or if angry enough, switching to Donald’s populists.

Hillary demonstrated her fortitude by enduring an eleven hour cross examination by the House committee on Benghazi. It was quite a demonstration of her concentration. There was nothing to fear because the Benghazi issue had no untoward evidence and had dragged on too long. It was like flying trapeze with a net. Donald will force Hillary to take the offense outside the tactic of better documented policy.

The Presidential Election will continue to be a circus. Donald will see to that. As almost always is the case in US elections, neither candidate is perfect.

The mariner has a feeling the undercard may be the more important part of the 2016 election. If there is no shift of majorities in the House or Senate, or if there is no shift of majorities in a State’s legislature or Governorship, not much will change. Two very important historical moments are at play: Who will appoint at least two Justices to the Supreme Court? The next Presidential election in 2020 will be the next chance to change state districting to correct gerrymandering. Only one path will lead to eliminating party access to redistricting: A Supreme Court amenable to the idea.

So here we are. Every elected position in the nation affects how we will govern and how we will prepare ourselves for a truly different future. It will take appropriate victories in all three branches of the Federal Government and a change in conservative/liberal philosophies in all branches of state government.

By all means, we need rational, responsible voters.

 VOTE

 Ancient Mariner

 

Just One Election in a Series

Posted on by
Reply

Many have said the 2016 election is an unusual one that forebodes further unrest. For context, one must go back to points of recent unrest in 1964 (Civil Rights marches), 1968 (Chicago riots), 1970 (67 rounds fired by the National Guard into a crowd killing four and wounding thirteen Kent State students during protest of Nixon’s incursion into Cambodia), 2000 (Supreme Court elects George W. Bush), 2007-9 Great Recession (8.9 million jobs lost; housing market collapses), 2010 (Supreme Court rules that first amendment protects money as a form of speech).

Given the mariner’s lifespan in history, he has watched the United States crumble slowly. The nation has lost its core value. Like a giant old tree that slowly grows rotten and hollow or an ash tree infected from within by ash borers, but still looks like a tree, the United States casts the shadow of a nation but it is closer to catastrophe than the inhabitants of the tree suspect.

In the spirit of W. Edwards Deming and Peter Drucker, two internationally renowned management theorists, every organizational structure is under pressure to change constantly. Efficiency is volatile if not carefully managed; employee performance drops the moment employees cease to be the most important product; the reason for existence at best is invisible but is more important to maintain than any other aspect of organization.

Deming in particular placed successful organization in the hands of employees who personally felt part of and believed in the reasons the organization exists. The reason for existence must be holistic and satisfy employee need to be content and valuable; it must deliver meaningful products, services, events and growth. Importantly, as Deming described in his writing about paradigms (holistic models), the organization must allow both for restorative and rapid change. The metaphor: If the tree is in its earlier years, perhaps there should be a plan to sustain the tree’s health with nutrients, pesticides and good environment; maybe remove faltering limbs. If the tree has grown older, perhaps it is time to invest in a new tree planted nearby to take over when the old tree is dying. Deming’s point being that a paradigm shift must begin outside the old organization.

When planning has not taken into account the subtle but growing dysfunction, and does not invest in a new reason to move forward accordingly, the organization reaches extreme dysfunction with no way to let go of old dependencies and step over to new paradigms.

Interestingly, the slow transition of US governments to newer, contemporary paradigms was disrupted. Instead, the old paradigm was reinforced but with artificial reasons for existence and did not consider visible political shifts that had been growing since Jack Kennedy was President. It didn’t help that Jack, Martin and Bobby were assassinated in close order.[1] Living in that year, the shutdown of momentum toward a new age was palpable. The Reagan patch delayed and worsened the old paradigm’s ability to have a slow transition to newer governance and predetermined that in 2016 the US would have seventeen republican candidates for president, a liberal democratic candidate who represented the established paradigm and a populist progressive candidate. Further, one of the republicans is a populist nonpolitician – all of them facing a runaway oligarchy, a hollow Federal Government, and an oppressed citizen class. The core of the nation’s purpose is in shambles.

The mariner believes certain behaviors occur during changes in cultural demand. One of the last to occur is populism, when the old paradigm has hung around too long. Populism also occurs when social pressure has nowhere to discharge and generates enmity. The idea of democracy, as it emerged over a few centuries, was to prevent enmity. It is easy to see that power over others grows stronger over time; the core purpose is compromised. This is the state of affairs in 2016. Who is opposed to term limits – a constraint that maintains the original role of a citizen statesman within in his own era? How could an 18th century racist bigot still hold an important role in a culture that has changed drastically over his 87 years (Jesse Helms)? The mariner’s flavor of term limits is based on age rather than terms. He suggests not being eligible for office if the official passes the age of 60 during that term.

Political parties, they are not government agencies, play the role of a charlatan automobile mechanic. The parties, in just a short amount of time, try to put the party choices in elected positions hoping to fix things better from the party’s perspective. In 2016, the primary/caucus voter has virtually no democratic role; it is a false vote. It is party politicians who maintain control with loosely bound “delegates” – the voter’s delegate may represent the voter’s choice but by the time delegates vote for delegates who vote for delegates, the odds are against the original voter’s choice ever being represented – especially in times of active change.

Power plays like gerrymandering, big money from who knows who, corporate ownership of representatives, and a plethora of financial privileges that are illegal for common citizens, well, one can imagine why populism has emerged.

REFERENCE SECTION

Leave it to LiveScience to throw quick facts at the reader that will provoke new inquisitiveness. The web site has a feature called “50 things you didn’t know about….” There’s a feature focused on the Earth that blows some dust off old information. See: http://www.livescience.com/19102-amazing-facts-earth.html?li_source=LI&li_medium=most-popular

Dedicated watchers of cable news will notice that the new phrase used by correspondents, and which spreads across channels as fast as a plague, is, “….That being said…” Fortunately, the abuse of the word “existentially” is on the wane.

Ancient Mariner

[1] When Ronald Reagan was elected in 1981, he and his kitchen cabinet put together a list of 10-12 policies that would draw influence away from populist control of political processes. This was the beginning of the mini-republican age that dominates at the present time.

Whence Jobs?

Posted on by
Reply

Guru has been catching mariner’s attention more frequently, predicting a significant shift in economic growth and a change in the definition of what “job” means. For the first mariner comment on the future of work, see the post, “The Future of Work III – When Jobs will End. July 12, 2015.” Significant credit for that post’s analysis is due to an article published in Atlantic, August 2015.

Guru has been pointing out subtle events that don’t reach the front page but nevertheless identify trends in an economy that has been diminished, permanently, as computerization grows more capable and efficient at replacing human labor and even many vocations considered ‘specialized’ today; the mariner perceives that general practice lawyers will be replaced by a red box in McDonald’s. Further, the international corporate freedom to acquire even greater wealth with little control by national governments will further regionalize labor, technical and even top drawer scientists and executives, by relocating to the least expensive nation who also packages benefits – making ‘jobs’ at any level less expensive. Further, regionalization of work will create pockets of unemployment on a national scale for nations who do not in some manner restructure ways to create national income, e.g., steel workers: China won the contract to build Chicago’s new light rail system.

The mariner lived in Taiwan for awhile. He was impressed with a government and culture that kept small business operating by preventing horizontal or vertical business growth from expanding beyond small, often family run businesses. For example, it took three different small businesses to print large flyers: one to make paper, one to design and print the flyer, and one to finish the flyer in any manner required for distribution. Each operation was family owned. A large corporation was required to have the Taiwanese government own 51% of the Corporation. As a result of this policy, there were only two classes: the wealthy, who gained wealth slowly as their families climbed generation by generation and the working class which seems low to Americans but there was no destitute or deprived underclass.

If one had a relative – even a cousin once removed – one had a job with the family’s business. The pay may not be the best but one had a role in generating income for and promoting the family, and had a source for room and board. Interestingly, Taiwan had no unemployment insurance but the government paid a rebate to the family business based on gross taxable income for the ‘business.’ The Taiwanese economy is greatly dependent on a culture of family-based income models which avoids an elaborate, form-driven individual ‘welfare’ dole. Needless to say, it took 3,000 years of separate cultural development for Taiwan to develop and sustain a family economy; perhaps the West can never evolve away from its capitalistic, individual, wealth-based society.

At the time, Taiwan was the seventh wealthiest nation in the world in terms of assets per capita. The assets underwrote the Bernie Sanders model: controlled corporate and income taxes, free health, free education through graduate school, fairly distributed retirement, and – in a fashion unfamiliar with American job description, assured close to full employment. Avoiding the disruption of both Bernie and Donald, the government held tight control of trade agreements. If an island nation of less than 24m Taiwanese can do it, why can’t the United States?

When it comes to economics and fair profit from a nation’s economy, capitalism is more interested in unfair profit. Even a hint of socialist attitude is anathema to capitalism. The mariner first read about capitalism as a competitive religion to Christianity’s morality. It was in a book written by Methodist pastor Paul Tillich at a time when it was a new thought to call certain governments ‘religions.’ Written in 1961, the title is Christianity and the World Religions. The reader may find it in an old section of a library; it also may be purchased through an Internet search engine.

With capitalism still in charge of the most capitalistic culture and most capitalistic nation in the world, citizens have a long road ahead before the culture shifts enough to redefine jobs and the economy. International corporations already see change coming and are spreading themselves over as many economies as possible so that no one nation can draw from their profits to support a socialist or Christian responsibility.

The world must gravitate more toward international unification to have the clout to care for their citizens.

REFERENCE SECTION

It seems almost hackneyed to mention it but the mariner recommends becoming comfortably familiar with the economics and the culture of Denmark. It is the most successful model in the world to transition from top down politics to a stable and successful democratic socialism. Americans will be proud to know the citizens overthrew the government!!

Ancient Mariner

Of the People

Posted on by
Reply

In response to the disassembled nature of society and war in 1770 to 1815, the founding fathers achieved a new form of government “of the people, by the people, and for the people.” To be assured that “of the people, by the people and for the people” prevailed, the fathers created three branches of Federal Government: Executive, Legislative (with two houses), and a Supreme Court. Further, the fathers kept the power to make money, fight wars, impose taxes and officiate over foreign treaties. Everything else more or less was left to the parochial wisdom of the states. To elect candidates for the Presidency, a democracy is required to allow citizens to vote for their preferred candidate. However, states were left to devise their own methods for deciding who their favored candidates may be. This created a party system and, while each state was free to have its own selection methods, a national party was responsible to have a runoff vote at a party national convention.

Along the way, the National Government added citizen rights, adjusted roles of the branches of government, and begrudgingly accommodated civil rights to citizens of color. But for sure, it has never overseen how a state elects favorite sons. An unintended effect, perhaps not, is that state election procedures for President serve as a front line defense for the “establishment” as it is identified in the current campaign. It is virtually impossible for populist campaigns to acquire a party majority. The 2016 election campaign is truly unique in that is has three populist campaigns who lead two establishment campaigns in citizen voting: The democrats have Bernie Sanders (a democratic socialist); the republicans have Ted Cruz (religious authority) and Donald Trump, (a populist). Each of these populist campaigns draw unusually large audiences to their events, yet while all three are popular in their following, they have a difficult time converting popularity to political clout.

In his colorful but often blunt way, Donald expressed his frustration clearly. “Look at Bernie Sanders,” he said, “Every morning you hear the headline: Bernie wins but Bernie loses; Bernie wins but Bernie loses, Bernie wins but Bernie loses… the primary/caucus system is crooked!” Actually, as a representation of state citizenry, it isn’t so much crooked as unconnected to popular vote. Citizens in the states have their preferred candidate but if that candidate isn’t qualified by arbitrary rules, any votes for that preferred candidate are thrown out. To further burden the process, if the citizens still want to participate, they must select another candidate thereby inflating the second candidate’s numbers – without underlying actual preference by the citizens who initially preferred another candidate.

There are many arguments for these questionably unfair and highly politicized delegates. Two million citizens cannot go to a convention; by using delegates to reduce attendees, ferret out dozens of minor candidates, and to have rules that free delegates after one vote, it is possible to identify one person who will win the party’s nomination. So doing, a Presidential nominee quite likely can be elected within a reasonable time.

However, the independent freedom of a state allows it to nominate a favorite son in any way imaginable: Indiana Governor Mike Pence appointed all 57 delegates, prominent republicans, well before the primary vote – the prominent question is why hold an election? Mississippi and Alabama close select voting centers to minimize black and college voter turnout; many southern states have made voter identification difficult and confusing; several states have secondary requirements like winning targeted Congressional Districts before delegates can be assigned to a candidate. But what makes delegates irrelevant to citizen opinion is that delegates in no way represent the popular state election. When one listens to old pols, they find nothing wrong with ignoring the popular vote; primaries don’t vote for candidates, they vote for delegates. The two are not associated with election percentages.

The overall effect of this folderol – an original fear that colonies would hesitate to join the Union, has turned into a political tool to prevent change to the “establishment.” The fact that three strong populist campaigns are demonstrating for change indicates to the mariner that something needs to be changed in American Governments. On April 18, however, Bernie will lose to Hillary (an establishment avatar) and in the final stand down, we have a Choice between Hillary, Ted, a tea party conservative or Donald – a man of the people – wise or not.

Mariner believes that populist movements don’t occur until genuine, longstanding abuse is imposed by the governments and by abusive backers supporting those governments. It looks like 2016 populist movements will have little effect on the manner of governance. Maybe next time. Donald’s implication of violence may have more influence in 2020 – which is our first chance to depoliticize redistricting. Where is Joan when you need her?

Ancient Mariner