3 ms·

I don't think any non-radical person would be a proponent of 0 regulation capitalism. That is basically anarchism. The problem is not with radicals, they will

by blahi 10y ago

I don't think any non-radical person would be a proponent of 0 regulation capitalism. That is basically anarchism. The problem is not with radicals, they will always exist. The problem is that people in the middle are getting tripped up and supporting radical measures. The problem, and why I felt I had to submit this, is that there actually is a threat to capitalism. Things are better than ever, and at the same time people feel wronged. So wronged that Obama actually thinks that there is a real threat to capitalism and we might be at the verge of changing political and economic systems. This is very frustrating and scary. And I see no way to make people realize what they are doing.

amelius 10y ago
We can always change economic systems with a dial, and turn the dial back when things turn bad.
- eloff 10y ago
  You make it sound simple, painless. It's not. There could be decades of suffering and chaos. People would literally die. Look at Venezuela for an example.
  - amelius 10y ago
    That is an unfair comparison, because they didn't implement the change continuously.
    - eloff 10y ago
      I'm not sure I agree with that, but any comparison would be unfair because all situations are different and the real world is very messy. But that's just the problem.
- AnimalMuppet 10y ago
  No, we can't. It's Congress that's going to have to do the changing. That means each iteration of your "changing it with a dial" is going to be larded with pork, poorly-thought-through rules and regulations, general incompetence, and political grandstanding. Then it's going to be frozen in time for a year or a decade or a century, until Congress decides to tackle it again.
psyc 10y ago
Do you believe the poor and lower middle class are mistaken in being discontent with table scraps and a clearly disproportionate struggle? How should they react to perpetual promises of change that never materializes for them? Assertions that prosperity is rising ring hollow to this large segment, and rightly so. "The system is working; you just can't see it."
badsock 10y ago
If you're talking about the median American, and about essentials such as housing, education, medical care, and job security, I don't think you can claim that things are better than ever.
jnbiche 10y ago
> Things are better than ever, and at the same time people feel wronged... And I see no way to make people realize what they are doing. This right here is why Trump has a fighting chance to win this election, much to my chagrin. So many people in wealthy East and West coast cities have no idea how much the majority of the country is suffering still. The recovery has not touched the majority of poor and lower-middle class Americans.
- blahi 10y ago
  I am talking in terms of much longer spans of time than 5 years.
matt4077 10y ago
For many, probably most, people, times aren't the best they have ever been. Part of it is inequality in the distribution of the spoils of growth in productivity. Another part is that subjective well-being isn't perfectly correlated with economic facts. Maybe it's the fact relative wealth has more psychological impact than absolute wealth. Maybe they see others struggling and are empathetic. Many middle-class people may suffer from the constant fear that the loss of a job could mean an immediate and permanent drop in social standing and quality of life. Usually, countries can react to common problems: if people are willing to forgo some income for security they can strengthen social system etc. In the US, for some reason, people with identical experiences came to two different conclusions. The left advocates for policies "kicking up" - basically redistribution from top to bottom. The right chose to "kick down", basically trying to strengthen their competition by eliminating the competition from those considered lower than them. These sides have fought each other to an almost perfect standstill, thanks to a few quirks in the constitution like first-past-the-post-voting and a three-legged legislative. As nothing happens, people get more frustrated etc. pp. rinse repeat.

by blahi 10y ago

amelius 10y ago

We can always change economic systems with a dial, and turn the dial back when things turn bad.

eloff 10y ago
You make it sound simple, painless. It's not. There could be decades of suffering and chaos. People would literally die. Look at Venezuela for an example.
- amelius 10y ago
  That is an unfair comparison, because they didn't implement the change continuously.
  - eloff 10y ago
    I'm not sure I agree with that, but any comparison would be unfair because all situations are different and the real world is very messy. But that's just the problem.
AnimalMuppet 10y ago
No, we can't. It's Congress that's going to have to do the changing. That means each iteration of your "changing it with a dial" is going to be larded with pork, poorly-thought-through rules and regulations, general incompetence, and political grandstanding. Then it's going to be frozen in time for a year or a decade or a century, until Congress decides to tackle it again.

psyc 10y ago

Do you believe the poor and lower middle class are mistaken in being discontent with table scraps and a clearly disproportionate struggle? How should they react to perpetual promises of change that never materializes for them? Assertions that prosperity is rising ring hollow to this large segment, and rightly so. "The system is working; you just can't see it."

badsock 10y ago

If you're talking about the median American, and about essentials such as housing, education, medical care, and job security, I don't think you can claim that things are better than ever.

jnbiche 10y ago

> Things are better than ever, and at the same time people feel wronged... And I see no way to make people realize what they are doing. This right here is why Trump has a fighting chance to win this election, much to my chagrin. So many people in wealthy East and West coast cities have no idea how much the majority of the country is suffering still. The recovery has not touched the majority of poor and lower-middle class Americans.

blahi 10y ago
I am talking in terms of much longer spans of time than 5 years.

matt4077 10y ago

For many, probably most, people, times aren't the best they have ever been. Part of it is inequality in the distribution of the spoils of growth in productivity. Another part is that subjective well-being isn't perfectly correlated with economic facts. Maybe it's the fact relative wealth has more psychological impact than absolute wealth. Maybe they see others struggling and are empathetic. Many middle-class people may suffer from the constant fear that the loss of a job could mean an immediate and permanent drop in social standing and quality of life. Usually, countries can react to common problems: if people are willing to forgo some income for security they can strengthen social system etc. In the US, for some reason, people with identical experiences came to two different conclusions. The left advocates for policies "kicking up" - basically redistribution from top to bottom. The right chose to "kick down", basically trying to strengthen their competition by eliminating the competition from those considered lower than them. These sides have fought each other to an almost perfect standstill, thanks to a few quirks in the constitution like first-past-the-post-voting and a three-legged legislative. As nothing happens, people get more frustrated etc. pp. rinse repeat.