3 ms·

> I'm claiming that the 50s, 60s, and early 70s were the peak So before computers kicked off unprecedented productivity increases, and before standardized ship

> I'm claiming that the 50s, 60s, and early 70s were the peak So before computers kicked off unprecedented productivity increases, and before standardized shipping containers enabled manufacturing to be relocated globally. But sure, go ahead and blame Ronald Reagan.

toss1 3y ago
I can hold recognize that things are not all good or bad, and I don't place 100% of the blame on anyone. That's not the same as saying they're absolved or irrelevant either. I strongly supported (still do) Reagan's vision of the city on the hill, the global champion of democracy, and strengthening of the military to meet those goals and challenges. But his strong pro-corporate actions (stopping anti-trust enforcement and union busting) also did huge damage to the middle class, the legacy of which is still here. Similarly, undoing the fairness doctrine instead of extending it to cable (which also use public infrastructure) and weakening laws on maximum ownership of media, also lead to the insane polarization of media we have today. While microcomputers increasing productivity and shipping containers obviously have some influence, productivity still occurs in the context of workers having rules (or not) that support their bargaining position, and shipping containers in the policy of global trade. Reagan certainly damaged the former, and I don't recall him either much exacerbating nor helping prevent the problems of the latter. Similarly, Obama did some great things, including a major step towards universal healthcare, but he also failed to respond to Russia's invasion of Crimea and actions Syria, both of which directly emboldened Putin to start his current genocidal war on Ukraine. Neither Reagan nor Obama are solely to blame for these serious problems, but they also bear some real responsibility for their major (mis-)steps in the wrong direction.

toss1 3y ago

I can hold recognize that things are not all good or bad, and I don't place 100% of the blame on anyone. That's not the same as saying they're absolved or irrelevant either. I strongly supported (still do) Reagan's vision of the city on the hill, the global champion of democracy, and strengthening of the military to meet those goals and challenges. But his strong pro-corporate actions (stopping anti-trust enforcement and union busting) also did huge damage to the middle class, the legacy of which is still here. Similarly, undoing the fairness doctrine instead of extending it to cable (which also use public infrastructure) and weakening laws on maximum ownership of media, also lead to the insane polarization of media we have today. While microcomputers increasing productivity and shipping containers obviously have some influence, productivity still occurs in the context of workers having rules (or not) that support their bargaining position, and shipping containers in the policy of global trade. Reagan certainly damaged the former, and I don't recall him either much exacerbating nor helping prevent the problems of the latter. Similarly, Obama did some great things, including a major step towards universal healthcare, but he also failed to respond to Russia's invasion of Crimea and actions Syria, both of which directly emboldened Putin to start his current genocidal war on Ukraine. Neither Reagan nor Obama are solely to blame for these serious problems, but they also bear some real responsibility for their major (mis-)steps in the wrong direction.