I hate to tell you this now-But I gotta point out we are NEVER going to regain a strong middle class

[Boxerfan]

Without a strong manufacturing focus here in America.

I've said this so many times I feel silly pointing it out again...And we will only get it back when our wages level out to a low 3rd world poverty wage. And we are headed there at warp speed.

Am I just nostalgic or doesn't the concept of protectionism & TARIFFS sound like a more reasonable method?.

TARIFFS


TARIFFS


TARIFFS

I just can't stress enough how much we need fair trade-not "free" trade.

We are headed down a dark path no matter who gets the election this year-the cake is baked. There is no way in hell any reasonable approach will be allowed to go through House Senate & Potus....We can't even pass the most basic legislation to help get Americans back to work. And we will continue to be blocked as long as the Republicans can scam a ever more gullible America.

Like I said-Not a chance in hell...If the Republicans take power it just goes into corporate overdrive & good paying jobs will be a thing of the past you can bet on that-Greed has a very straightforward self motivation-and its not for a better America and they have no empathy for the whole of society as long as they got theirs


It is really hard to be positive about Americas future...Quantumn shift need-apply within!

[immoderate]

1. Not enough to save the middle class.

Even with manufacturing, automation would take the jobs.

Work needs to be rationed.

--imm

[limpyhobbler]

5. ^^^^This ^^^^

With all the automation, we ought to be able to keep the same standard of living but work less.

[reformist2]

7. Yep. I feel like this idea is spreading at the speed of light.

[limpyhobbler]

9. I was going to say the speed of jello.

Everybody, and I mean everybody, is always focused on getting people back to work.

The idea of reducing working hours, and just paying more, is not on the mainstream political map.

[immoderate]

15. You ran the numbers...

Automation increases, productivity multiplies, what's going to happen?

No work for people, no money, but plenty of production...

What will happen?

--imm

[limpyhobbler]

17. Well this is some futuristic stuff I guess.

But hopefully we can reduce the amount of work that people are expected to do.

We forget that there is is nothing magical about 40-hour weeks. That was a number that was settled on as the result of a historical fight between workers and owners. There is no particular reason why 40 hours work should continue forever as the standard week.

[immoderate]

20. My eight hour a week estimate is based on some economist's estimate

of what it would take to produce what humans need to survive.

Can't produce the data, but it makes sense. I was pushing for a twenty hour week years ago.

--imm

[abelenkpe]

27. Cloud atlas corpocracy. Nt

[immoderate]

8. Yup. Eight hours/week/person to produce all we need to consume.

--imm

[limpyhobbler]

13. Let me check your math....

..........
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Yes your math is flawless. We should be able to work much much less and still live quite comfortably.

We would live better actually.

[Selatius]

18. This is built on the assumption that such wealth being generated is spread fairly evenly.

It won't be. People who currently control and monopolize the political process need to be dislodged from power. Until then, most of that wealth being generated is simply going to be concentrated onto a small group of individuals.

[limpyhobbler]

21. So lets dislodge them already.

Sounds like fun. We haven't had a good dislodging in a while.

Will it be hard to do? Or will it be easy once we get started?

[Selatius]

24. When you challenge people with a lot of money, it usually gets bloody and messy quickly.

They'll play dirty, too. These guys aren't above breaking the rules to take you out if you challenge their power.

[Amonester]

25. Got to work with, or (if necessary) build Unions. n/t

[kath]

28. The French figured out how to do a good dislodging a coupla hundred years back...

just sayin'

[Incitatus]

10. In theory, yes

but in reality it results in less money for workers and more for owners. Eventually, something has to give. But when?

[limpyhobbler]

14. hmmm.... Yes the owners are absorbing all extra value from productivity gains into their profits.

That's not fair.

Greedy bastards.

[Selatius]

16. It is hard to conceptualize a life where work isn't the primary motivator to waking up.

I think the ultimate end of technology is the automation of most everything we do that is necessary to survival. Imagine the process of growing and distributing food being fully automated. Imagine many things being automated to that degree. Hunger and disease could be eliminated with that level of resources and energy at our disposal. Homelessness, too.

The hope is that people would have time to do other things like bettering themselves, learning about other cultures, finding hobbies, things that enrich ourselves and the people and world around us. We could learn to stop hating each other. We would have the time to understand that greed, the need to accumulate things, isn't the ultimate goal of living.

Of course, I don't think any of that is possible. We lack the energy sources to have a society where survival functions are automated to that level. If we ever found a source of energy that is far and away more plentiful than what we currently use, it might be doable one day.

[limpyhobbler]

19. I've always wanted to learn the banjo.

Maybe if we build more solar panels or something, and if we take reusable sacks to the grocery store, some day it will be possible.

For now maybe we can talk about gradually working less ?

Lots of people are not working at all but they want to. While others are working two jobs when they would rather have just one. Maybe we could balance them out a little, and compensate people more equitably, or something like that?

[Romulox]

2. On the contrary--I believe the government can afford to buy each of us a KIA SOUL! nt

[reformist2]

3. There's plenty of wealth - it needs to be shared.

[TexasBushwhacker]

4. Tariffs just make things unaffordable for the middle class

Tariffs won't bring jobs back. Even if they did, people want to buy their big screen TVs for $500. We cannot compete with 1 billion Chinese living in poverty who fight to work like slaves in factories that are heavily subsidized by the communist government. Obama asked Steve Jobs when would the jobs come back to the US. Steve was honest. He said, "They won't." I'm not bashing Apple. ALL electronics are made overseas, as well as most of our clothes and plenty of other goods. But we have infrastructure that needs rebuilding and maintaining. We have buildings and homes all over the country that could be retrofitted for energy efficiency. There is work to be done, but I'm not sure that we will ever be able to bring much manufacturing back.

[Boxerfan]

30. Here's the response I expected earlier...I disagree completely-its quality vs quantity in more

ways than one...


I have resorted to shopping at thrift stores for items like fans blenders & other household goods. I can get a quality product that has already outlived one generation & is at least serviceable/durable. Compared to the crap we get from outsourcing-the stuff is cheap & it breaks.

We would be better off & save money by making a quality product-here in America. The benefits overall are multi fold.

We get a generation of workers who have hands on experience . That can't be duplicated by text & simulators. These are the skills that lifted us as a nation to go to the moon. The potential for creativity & new designs are then result of people who knew the problems hands on.

And of course there is the pride of work...Thats pretty much gone when you work under tyrannical bullies at slave wages. But it is what employers should use as a motivation. Henry Ford showed that by paying better than average wages he gained a better product & more sales-Fact. And such a simple concept but it flies smack in the face of corporate ideology.

I'm all for a new WPA & CCC to jump start our stagnant work force. But like I said-in the America of today that would be impossible to get passed and even more unlikely to be properly implemented-in a equitable fashion for the general good..

So-Just woke up & wanted to reply to your post-sorry I'm late.

[reformist2]

6. It sounds crazy, but we need to start planning for an economy where not everyone needs to work.

[immoderate]

12. It's called "automation socialism."

It' a well developed theory.

[reformist2]

22. Apparently not so well developed.

[immoderate]

23. What's missing?

--imm

[AnotherMcIntosh]

11. Here's the let's-send-jobs-to-foreign-countries "free-trade" agreements that have been signed >

so far which have allowed Rmoney and others like him to send American jobs to foreign countries:

1994 - NAFTA

2001 - Jordan – United States Free Trade Agreement
2004 - Australia-United States Free Trade Agreement
2004 - Chile - United States Free Trade Agreement
2004 - Singapore – United States Free Trade Agreement
2005 - Dominican Republic–Central America Free Trade Agreement (DR-CAFTA; incl. Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, and the Dominican Republic)
2006 - Bahrain – United States Free Trade Agreement
2006 - Morocco - United States Free Trade Agreement
2006 - Oman – United States Free Trade Agreement
2007 - Peru – United States Trade Promotion Agreement

2011 - Panama - United States Trade Promotion Agreement
2011 - Colombia - United States Trade Promotion Agreement
2011 - Republic of Korea (South Korea) - United States Free Trade Agreement

Let's hope that we have enough Democratic Senators to return traditional capitalism to the U.S. and vote against the pending job-transferring "free-trade" agreement.

In the meantime, everyone should know that Rmoney supports the pending let's-send-even-more-jobs-to-foreign-countries "free-trade" agreement. Some are calling it the NAFTA of the Pacific.

Trans-Pacific negotiations have been taking place throughout the Obama presidency. The deal is strongly supported by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the top lobbying group for American corporations. Obama's Republican opponent in the 2012 presidential elections, Mitt Romney, has urged the U.S. to finalize the deal as soon as possible.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/13/obama-trade-document-leak_n_1592593.html

[WCGreen]

26. It's very simple...

Free trade benifits the people with all the money, the investment class, if you will.

[HiPointDem]

29. The 1%-ers have already decided the shape of the 'new economy' and have been putting the

pieces in place for some time.

"If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stomping on a human face -- forever."