General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsAmericans Seem To Buy Into "Dog Eat Dog" Economy With No Safety Net.
If Americans really believed in a shared society where there is a health safety net for all, Bernie Sanders would beat everyone hands down by large margins. Trump's popularity, RW inroads in shredding the safety net, anti unionism and support for other anti progressive policies seem to show that libertarianism is quite popular.
Our mental mind set could be part of desperation that is so widespread. And maybe corporate propaganda has been very effective. We are destined to hand and fail because we seem to have lost common goals.
The fact that workers are not kicking back on the new 1099 model of the economy where jobs are just temporary and day labor jobs is hard to understand. There is no future for workers in a largely "task rabbit" economy. Employment anarchy is the only result of such a model.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
brooklynite
(94,502 posts)...so there was never a violent upheaval of the social order.
There certainly are class hierarchies, but the perception that one can aspire to greater things is fairly heavily ingrained.
GeorgeGist
(25,319 posts)KingCharlemagne
(7,908 posts)Eleanors38
(18,318 posts)Lizzie Poppet
(10,164 posts)...is a sin against high, holy capitalism is perhaps the most loathsome of the many toxic fables promulgated by the right wing.
This is what happens when "free enterprise" becomes progressively less regulated: radical concentration of capital at the tip-top of the wealth pyramid, corporate control of the legislative process allowing what little regulation of labor remains to heavily favor corporate interests, the reduction of the working class to just another fungible commodity.
I consider this situation to be unrecoverable, at least for the nation as currently constituted. A break-up into regional polities, some of which might actually be less overtly hostile to 95% of their population, can't happen too soon. I fear that if it doesn't, a far more radical (read: bloody beyond imagination) "correction" lies in our not-too-distant future.
RKP5637
(67,104 posts)It is, because the wealth of this country also holds the power structure. And that is extremely entrenched no matter who the president is. The choice is, with some elected presidential hopefuls it will get even worse IMO. What is troubling, is so much of the population IMO does not comprehend how they are used to their disadvantage. That said, it would take a huge upheaval IMO in the US to change the current paradigm.
Eventually the breaking point will happen and many will not give a F about anything they are collectively so desperate. I don't know if, how or when that might happen, but I think the US is treading on thin ice, and it's a damn shame. And with the arms in this country all hell could happen.
We'll have a better idea after the 2016 election. ... but I just can't imagine congress voting for a more equitable distribution of wealth in the US. Far too many are also part of the problem. And 'King of the Mountain' capitalism is entrenched in this country at many layers/levels and getting worse.
When I was a kid I thought the US was great, although I did surely know it had a lot of problems with equality and equal opportunity. Now, it grows more fascist everyday. And frankly more scary!
pampango
(24,692 posts)There in little sign that our society will take the steps we took in the 1930's under FDR to deal with the concentration of wealth and power but it is not impossible any more than it was back then.
KentuckyWoman
(6,679 posts)The vast majority of people I know were union members until their jobs were shipped off to some slave labor country or else the company started "in-sourcing" short term labor from temp services at lower wages.
The unions at national level didn't see fit to organize to stop it. The government that allowed it and even passed laws to make it easier simply told the workers to quit being moochers and lazy bums and spend $1000s in debt (at a nice fat interest rate) to go get a college degree...... and then promptly rewarded companies who shipped college jobs out or imported cheaper labor.
People have just gotten to the point where they don't trust anyone but themselves. The expect the government to fuck them out of whatever small savings or safety net they've been able to cobble together....... home equity, IRAs, SSI, Medicare..... you name it. And when a candidate comes along and says the reason your safety net is in trouble is because of all these moochers over here, and if we cut them all off you will be safe...... well it rings a bell...... or rather a dog whistle.
Now a guy like Bernie comes along and says the reason your safety net is in trouble is because we've handed the "job creators" the nation's wealth on a platter and spent OUR money on weapons to kill kids and grandmas on the other side of the world they are very skeptical. They are convinced what little they have, in the form of a paycheck, will vanish if we dare offend the money people AND the one avenue of semi-security for them or their kids - a career in the military - might vanish as well.
The mantra people are voting against their interests is not accurate from what I've seen. The truth is more like people have become convinced the Democratic talking point that government can help is a lie....... based on what they consider life experience to date. Not that they trust the GOP any better.
GummyBearz
(2,931 posts)This must be one of the best posts I've read in quite a long time
RKP5637
(67,104 posts)
CTyankee
(63,903 posts)that THEY will come out winners in a contest between winners and losers in our economic system. That most of them don't doesn't seem to register, probably because they think that "they" will. That dream dies hard.
RKP5637
(67,104 posts)harder. People are bred into this mindset consequently not realizing the house is often rigged against them. So, they struggle and struggle seeing the few wins as meaning they are just about to win ... and they don't. Really, it's much like a gambling obsession in a rigged Casino. The OP really coined it well, a "task rabbit" economy.
The wealth distribution is so skewed it's stunning, and it will only get worse, and the wealth at the top multiplies like rabbits.
I really don't see how the current paradigm is going to change no matter who is elected president and some will make it drastically worse. The problem is the "task rabbit" economy is so ingrained. And in no way is congress going to vote for a balanced distribution of wealth in the US, many are part of the problem. And many in the electorate can't seem to comprehend the problems, so, many rally for example around Trump like individuals.
2016 will be interesting, but I'm not getting my hopes up for major change for the better.
CTyankee
(63,903 posts)system works, they say, but for the MINORITIES, the people who don't work hard but just rely on the taxpayers hard earned money to get freebies.
RKP5637
(67,104 posts)one another. I see 2016 as a major fork in the road and one direction is going to be very dangerous IMO for the future of the US. Some of my friends tell me I'm ridiculous, that it will work out for the best. I tell them to study history. Some countries in history have taken very dark paths into the future. There is no guarantee the US will just plod along into the future and everyone will feel good. What I find troubling is so many taken in by the hostilities of the RW.
CTyankee
(63,903 posts)Always point to the "other" who is causing all your problems. It is "them" that keeps you down, poor, and struggling.
Sad history...
RKP5637
(67,104 posts)see that same strategy playing well today. Lessons NOT learned!
treestar
(82,383 posts)they get bitter and blame the government or those who received benefits from the safety net for it.
safeinOhio
(32,673 posts)The main points of neo-liberalism include:
THE RULE OF THE MARKET. Liberating "free" enterprise or private enterprise from any bonds imposed by the government (the state) no matter how much social damage this causes. Greater openness to international trade and investment, as in NAFTA. Reduce wages by de-unionizing workers and eliminating workers' rights that had been won over many years of struggle. No more price controls. All in all, total freedom of movement for capital, goods and services. To convince us this is good for us, they say "an unregulated market is the best way to increase economic growth, which will ultimately benefit everyone." It's like Reagan's "supply-side" and "trickle-down" economics -- but somehow the wealth didn't trickle down very much.
CUTTING PUBLIC EXPENDITURE FOR SOCIAL SERVICES like education and health care. REDUCING THE SAFETY-NET FOR THE POOR, and even maintenance of roads, bridges, water supply -- again in the name of reducing government's role. Of course, they don't oppose government subsidies and tax benefits for business.
DEREGULATION. Reduce government regulation of everything that could diminsh profits, including protecting the environmentand safety on the job.
PRIVATIZATION. Sell state-owned enterprises, goods and services to private investors. This includes banks, key industries, railroads, toll highways, electricity, schools, hospitals and even fresh water. Although usually done in the name of greater efficiency, which is often needed, privatization has mainly had the effect of concentrating wealth even more in a few hands and making the public pay even more for its needs.
ELIMINATING THE CONCEPT OF "THE PUBLIC GOOD" or "COMMUNITY" and replacing it with "individual responsibility." Pressuring the poorest people in a society to find solutions to their lack of health care, education and social security all by themselves -- then blaming them, if they fail, as "lazy."
Http://Www.corpwatch.org/Article.php?Id=376
TeamPooka
(24,221 posts)Baitball Blogger
(46,700 posts)Learn something about the way social networking and small government overrides the democratic process and you will begin to understand why it might appear that they're flying without a safety net.
tblue37
(65,333 posts)Some people would rather starve than see someone they despise get a morsel of food, too. And since so many in this country feel virulent hatred for minorities, the dread that a black person or a hispanic person might benefit from the safety net or from well-funded schools or accessible higher education causes them to rail against such things, even though they themselves need the help as well.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)racial hatred being deliberately stoked by TPTB ... I struggle to wrap my head around it.
TPTB, did not create Davis (the heterosexist Clerk), nor did the create Dylan Roof; likewise, they can not destroy their mentality. Heterosexism, racism, misogyny, and all the other social ills, can only be destroyed by the non-PTB.
frizzled
(509 posts)
loyalsister
(13,390 posts)showing how deeply embedded competition is embedded in our culture. Sports, awards, rankings, etc. are all expressions of a competition and meritocracy ideology that ultimately serves as an evaluation of people in terms of performance and general worthiness.
The2ndWheel
(7,947 posts)when everyone wants to be an individual.
KingCharlemagne
(7,908 posts)TeamPooka
(24,221 posts)
gratuitous
(82,849 posts)That pot of gold is coming to them, they just know it. Probably after the next big storm. Just you wait and see! They also fancy themselves as the dog doing the eating, not the dog being eaten.
The required remedy, however, is highly distasteful. It means getting along with detestable persons who would rather live in squalor than move off of square one to better their lot. They're presently okay, perhaps hanging on by their fingertips, but any action could result in their situation getting even worse. It will get worse on the current path, but that's a concern for another day. As long as it happens slowly enough, they'll adjust. Witness the remarkable hostility to the Occupy movement from the very people who stood the most to gain from the reforms Occupy advocated. That didn't happen by chance; people just getting by were carefully taught to fear and hate the people who were barely scraping by.
Fixing things will mean that if you're just getting by, you have to resist the dominant message that your greatest enemies are the people below you on the economic ladder (particularly if they're of a darker skin than your own). And that's a very tough sell.
