Letters to the Editor
-
No, Check *Your* Calendars
the hemorrhaging of jobs and deficits began under bush.
Wrong. It's been going on for years. A quick visit to the Bureau of Labor Statistics shows that, just from the raw numbers:
Mfg
Employment 1/
Year (000)
1979 19,426
1980 18,733
1985 17,819
1990 17,695
1995 17,241
2000 17,263
2001 16,441
2002 15,259
2003 14,510
2004 14,329
2005 (1st Qtr) 14,258(p)
Keep in mind our population has grown substantially since 1979, so these numbers are even more alarming. They also don't reflect the quality of the jobs - we've traded a lot of heavy industry with highly-skilled, highly-paid labor for really low-skilled, low-paying jobs, like the assembly of manufactured components or frozen food factories (yes, Virginia, the cheeze poof factory workers who dump MSG into the bag are considered part of the "manufacturing" sector).
Trade deficit figures have been even more grim, for two decades now. So have personal, local, state and federal budget deficits, in spite of some accounting trickery and raiding the Social Security trust.
-
Thanks for the coverage
Thanks for posting all three speeches with some analysis. We can discuss what the candidates are actually saying.
-
Readling the Laws (and Constitution) would be helpful
Clinton keeps talking about freezing interest rates - last time I checked the Federal Reserve determines that. I'm hoping that she or others don't think a President can get into office and independently set controls for banks and an entire industry. One plus for Obama is he may actually understand the Constitution. Greenspan caused the problem (i.e. happened on his watch and he required little or no oversight of the lenders). But punishing all lenders for a few bad loans seems like an overreation. Real estate bubbles always burst. Our government can't keep lending out money it doesn't have. I received my notice of the refunds from the IRS - perfect example of all the time and money wasted by the gov't. It was generic, didn't say if I'd get one or not (and I won't) - so not only did it waste my time but made me less likely to spend just because I'm annoyed. People have gotten spoiled by the excessive profits of the last 15 years- unfortunately an adjustment is going to be needed. Punish the offenders and let the economic nature otherwise take its course (hopefully in a new direction). All of the candidates should remember Bush Sr.'s "No new taxes" decree and how that cost him - they shouldn't make bold p[romises they have not way of keeping.
-
Yea BUT
Mr. Leonard said:
"For those deluded souls who might still think there is no significant difference between the two major parties in the United States, a review of McCain and Obama's speeches this week is in order."
I might be one of those souls. I'm supporting Obama, but I don't yet have reason to believe he could single handedly extricate the democratic party away from the All Unifying Corporate Party. And I'm not even sure that is his plan. But it doesn't matter; I want the guy in the oval office.
But just to say: I think those "deluded" souls of which Mr. Leonard speaks are basing their notion of "no real difference" on the actual functioning of the parties. There have been so many incredible and insightful speeches and notions mentioned over the last 50 years by democrats (especially around elections), but until they make the kind of actual break that perhaps Mr. Obama is aiming towards, I think the delusion is in those who dreamily enjoy the apparent difference between how the two parties function economically. That said, I really do recognize that even little steps in the right direction are worthy of praise and effort (and reward)
-
Sunspot
With all due respect, Reagan's vision and policies helped to get us into the mess we're in.
-
@sonofloud
the hemorrhaging of jobs and deficits began under bush.
I don't have to check, I was there. The great outsourcing binge began when the dotcom bubble collapsed. I worked for Lucent, which was one of the big business casualties of the dotcom collapse.
The symptoms got really bad during Bush's term, but the disease had already set in while Clinton was still in office.
-
The Vision Thing
"Are you suggesting that Ronald Reagan's changes in politics and economics were good for the country and that Obama promises Reagan-like change?
If so, we are doomed, plain and simple."
-- ethics_professor
Sunspot beat me to it (ya rascal), but comparisons like this between Reagan and Obama ARE NOT a bad thing, unless you are so reflexively partisan as to learn nothing from the other side's tactics. (Another useful adjective would be idiotic.) You might argue all day that every one of Reagan's policies was bad for the country. (I would argue that only the Puritans screwed up this country more than Reagan.) But you're flat out in denial if you think Reagan had no bearing on the country's direction. He was able to set the agenda. Once he got the ball rolling in the direction he wanted it to go, it was easy to keep the momentum going. Reagan in 1980 bequeathed Shrub, 2000. No Reagan, no Shrub, that simple.
Progressives need someone with a long-term goal who can sell that plan--get the ball rolling in a new direction--not just someone with a few quick-fix schemes that might work in the short run but be easily rescinded and countered once a new GOPer takes control. Obama might not be as progressive as many either think he is or would like him to be, but he might well be the best one to get the ball rolling back in the right direction. (And only a minute's worth of policy searching will tell you that Obama's direction sure as hell ain't Reagan's.) Clinton supporters would be happy to tell you their candidate could do that, too, and better, and please show me the evidence that that would be true, but from what I've seen, the case seems to be lacking.
I guess that's why I decided on Obama once my first candidate bowed out of the race early: I want the long-term solution. The problem of course is that it's harder to sell, because long-term solutions don't come without short-term problems that need to be fixed as they sprout. I just want to be addressed like a grown-up and told what that entails rather than have someone just tell me to go shopping and everything will be fine.