« Corporate Power & Responsibility | Main | what i learned from drumming, so far »

May 11, 2018

Comments

More from LGM on smug libruls:

Why a picture of a cheesesteak at the link? It confuses me. It's Philly, a large NE corridor city. But it's working class food, I guess. But lots of non-white people eat them, so not necessarily white working class. And snooty kids who go to Penn eat them when they're drunk at 2 AM, so maybe not so working class.

Maybe they should try a corndog next time.

Why a picture of a cheesesteak at the link?

Dude, that's obviously a Cheez-Whiz cheesesteak. Real Americans eat Cheez-Whiz cheesesteaks. Snotty liberal faux-Americans eat cheesesteaks with Swiss or mozzarella.

Snark aside, I don't really mind money flowing to those places. They need it. I just wish it would be used to create conditions that would allow those places not to need those federal dollars in the future.

I've spent essentially my entire adult life living in places that were startup hotspots and generated lots of jobs. Observations (feel free to disagree, of course):

Somehow, one way or another, all of them had acquired an anchor. Things that served that function: a large corporation with monopoly stability; national laboratories of various sorts; and being a state capital. The anchor did more than one kind of thing in the same geographic area.

In all cases there were one or more universities with good-or-better programs relevant to the anchor in the immediate area. In multiple cases, the anchor and the university programs swapped faculty-level folks back and forth to some extent.

All of the areas eventually developed a service infrastructure keyed to the needs of the anchor and the university. That's more varied than it may sound. Eg, the kind of people who work at national labs want access to local orthodontists to straighten their kids' teeth. From what I could gather about the history in each place, the emergence of that infrastructure is when mild positive feedback kicks in.

What I have absolutely no idea how to do is to jump-start that process, or anything like it.

What I have absolutely no idea how to do is to jump-start that process, or anything like it.

My sense is that you have to start with the college/university. Not as a specific support for something; more as a general idea of valuing education and an educated population.

Once you've got that, you have a chance to jump-start the economy. Maybe someone from the university starts a company based on their PhD research. Maybe some folks come up with an idea while just sitting chatting -- bright people playing with new ideas. Probably several of the above. But one (or more) of those takes off -- that's where the "anchor" comes from.

It probably doesn't happen fast. Unless you get lucky on some existing anchor-type company deciding to expand into your area because costs are low there. But once it happens, folks from there not only, as Michael says, switch back and forth between the anchor and the university, they move along to start their own companies. (As an example, see how many IT companies in Silicon Valley can trace their lineage, sometimes in a dozen or more steps, back to Hewlett Packard.)

But it all traces back to a community (or state, if you will) deciding that they care about educating their people. And educating them in something that is firmly grounded in the real world.

I suppose that the cheese steak is a reference to Kerry's ordering the sandwich with swiss.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/2003/08/13/steak-raises-stakes-for-kerry-in-philly/f59dd0f7-20fc-4309-85fc-ac63cec7a123/?utm_term=.18a80a52f88d

So yeah, as the post says

And, as David Roberts notes in this thread, the mainstream media is also strongly committed to the narrative that liberals are coffee-drinking, mustard-using urban elitists. It’s baked in.

Johnny Unbeatable fantasies aside, there is no Democratic presidential nominee who will be able to go through an entire campaign without saying something that can be yanked out of context or ordering a salad with anything in it but iceberg lettuce or something else that can be used repeatedly to show that he or she despises white working class voters. Emperor Perez cannot impose message discipline that prevents any college sophomore from heckling a professional conservative race-baiter or calling the poke special at the cafeteria cultural appropriation. The only winning move is not to play.

Speaking of cultural appropriation, while I tell my students I'm from Mississippi, it's a bit more complicated than that, My family moved to Mississippi when I was in JHS and I went to uni there. In addition, we lived on the Mississippi Gulf Coast so I'd probably be referred to as a dreggy coast rat rather than a Mississippian. In addition, we moved from the North, so I'm still a damn Yankee. I would not be surprised if most of the folks here don't really have a hometown, and only say they are 'from' a place out of convenience.

I would not be surprised if most of the folks here don't really have a hometown, and only say they are 'from' a place out of convenience.

Certainly I have always been an anomaly, especially among Californians, because I am actually living in the town that I grew up in (the whole time from birth thru high school). Of course, it was a little farm town back then (pop 2000), and now it's a suburb (pop 50000+). But it's the same location. Very odd.

I would not be surprised if most of the folks here don't really have a hometown, and only say they are 'from' a place out of convenience.

That's interesting. I'd be curious to see how many people moved around when they were kids, and how many were relatively stationary.

By my definition of "hometown" I have one: it's in Ohio, and I spent the first 18 1/2 years of my life there. I never lived there after that, but I go there once or twice a year because I still have family there, and I could still find my way around in my sleep.

My definition of being "from" someplace is a little more wobbly. In one sense I'm "from" Ohio, but since I've lived 46 of my 68 years in New England, the past 31 of them in Maine, I tend to say I'm "from Maine" when meeting new people, and "I grew up in Ohio" to mean the other thing. (To true Mainers I'm of course "from away," not from Maine.)

Unlike wj's, my hometown has lost about a third of its population since I was a kid. Northeastern Ohio has not been a hotbed of economic development in those decades, to put it mildly.

More details about me. Elementary school was in Prince George country, MD, an area which, because the DC metro line terminus was located in Montgomery county rather than PG county in the 80's, property values dictated that African Americans moved to PG county while more affluent whites moved to Montgomery county after we had moved away. When I went to a conference in DC about 25 years ago, I rented a car and went back to my old neighborhood. I was shocked that I had enough memory (muscle memory, I suppose) to remember where I was going, based on trips in the back of the family car. My elementary school had been turned into a community center (privatized, I think) and the JHS that I went to before I moved was now a private Christian school. So, even if I could have stayed, the place would have changed enough so I would say that I wasn't really from there.

I could still find my way around in my sleep.

Janie's comment reminds me of a passage in John Irving's Hotel New Hampshire about Freud, a Viennese Jew who is blind and he takes the main character on a tour of Vienna, but Freud remembers the city pre-war and describes all these landmarks of Viennese Jewish life that are no longer there.

Where you are from is usually a place that doesn't exist anymore.

What I have absolutely no idea how to do is to jump-start that process, or anything like it.

it's dead easy. go back 100, or 200, or 400 years. start a university and set up some basic infrastructure.

then wait 100, or 200, or 400 years.

done.

if you need it in *your* lifetime, a much harder problem.

I suppose that the cheese steak is a reference to Kerry's ordering the sandwich with swiss.

and here I thought I was making a joke.

it's getting harder and harder to make jokes.

permission to speak freely: if you vote based on what somebody else is eating for lunch, you need to go sit yourself down somewhere and think some things through.

just saying.

I would not be surprised if most of the folks here don't really have a hometown

i went to a different school every year from 1st to 6th grade. in 3 different states. my sister went to 3 different schools in 6th grade.

and my old man wasn't even in the service.

i've been living in my current house since 2002. so, 15 1/2 years.

that is more than twice as long as I have ever lived in any other one place, in my entire life.

I'm 61.

lj: Where you are from is usually a place that doesn't exist anymore.

I guess this makes me an outlier. I'm from New York (City) and it's still there (although parts have changed dramatically, Times Square for instance). Moved to Silicon Valley where the computing biz was (and is).

Silicon Valley history is interesting. HP was there in the famous garage, but Varian Assoicates was there too. Perhaps Stanford University was the seed.

Interesting hatefest for the "white" working class in defense of the Democratic Party. I am sorry, but for this socialist the current differences between the conservative neo-Liberal Democratic Party and the reactionary Neanderthal Republican Party is one of degree, not of kind. Both feed shark-chum to their chumps base, or better say lie, maybe pass some legislation on social issues while further sending evermore wealth to the already wealthy.

Get mad, keep referring to the "white" working class in the same as the Southern supporters of apartheid referred to the "colored" or "negro", or "that" word.

As for me, I'll just keep working to get actually leftists, and maybe some uncorrupted, honest conservatives in office.

I'm from New York (City) and it's still there

Well, sure, but NYC today and NYC 30 years ago are different enough to be different places from some (well, my) perspective. I guess one of the graces of building monumental structures (like Grand Central Station and such) is that they act as anchors for memory.

But that anchoring of memory is a double edged sword. When I first came to Japan, Ueno Park was overrun by Iranians, because Iran and Japan had a special visa agreement. However, in 1992, there was a severe crackdown and now, not an Iranian to be found there. In my memory, I still can't process the fact that it is so different, and if 'your' neighborhood suddenly changes, I have some empathy for the reaction, but really no sympathy.

The wikipedia page about Iranians in Japan is pretty interesting
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iranians_in_Japan

Oh, home. Umm, 25 years Great Lakes, 45 years Dallas area, with ten years overlap and traveling.

Dallas is not my "home" in the sense I had one as a kid, but I was a kid. Kids especially are attached and dependent and consumers of traditional and institutionalized social structures. Your classmates at school are a different kind of relationship than fellow workers, your school is often more attached to a place than your factory. These are to a degree imposed coercively on a kid, and ritual loyalty more enforced...yet these are felt to be natural, even chosen.

Even though I now lack those "traditional" and historic ties, DFW still feels like "home." These may now be mostly about habit and comfort, the pleasures of order and predictability. The arrangement of aisles at my grocery store, the way my furniture and refrigerator are arranged, the people I see on the morning walk.

Consumption, we create our homes as consumers. There is of course production in consumption.

But "home" as a kid was something received and imposed while I was taught the process of imagined community formation and especially reproduction. Material conditions and capitalist acceleration largely meant that the reproduction didn't take, I abandoned my trad community, and didn't create a new one.

But I think the kids in my hood still have one.

I would not be surprised if most of the folks here don't really have a hometown

yeah. i can never answer when someone asks "where are you from?" without giving what i feel is an inaccurate answer in the name of brevity.

where was i born, or where my SSN says i'm from, or where did i go to kindergarten, or where i went to each of the three 4th grades i attended, or where i graduated HS, or college, or which state i've lived in the most, or where i live now?

Interesting hatefest for the "white" working class

In case your comment is in any way directed to me, perhaps some clarification is needed.

I have no animus toward the white working class or any other working class.

In my very humble opinion, folks who belong to the white working class, or pretty much any class of any color other than maybe hedge fund managers, who voted for DJT acted foolishly.

Because also in my very humble opinion, that decision is not going to work out to their advantage. And also in my very humble opinion, it will be damaging to the nation as a whole.

My only real issue with folks in the "white working class" at anything like a personal level is their apparent and frequently expressed desire to shoot people like me. It makes me somewhat less interested in trying to have a conversation with them.

Their obsession with my preference in lettuces also seems peculiar.

If you can find some real leftists and/or honest and uncorrupted conservatives to vote for, please let us know, I'm sure many of us would be glad to join in.

New American Aristocracy Atlantic

"Every piece of the pie picked up by the 0.1 percent, in relative terms, had to come from the people below. But not everyone in the 99.9 percent gave up a slice. Only those in the bottom 90 percent did. At their peak, in the mid-1980s, people in this group held 35 percent of the nation’s wealth. Three decades later that had fallen 12 points—exactly as much as the wealth of the 0.1 percent rose.

In between the top 0.1 percent and the bottom 90 percent is a group that has been doing just fine. It has held on to its share of a growing pie decade after decade. And as a group, it owns substantially more wealth than do the other two combined. In the tale of three classes (see Figure 1), it is represented by the gold line floating high and steady while the other two duke it out. You’ll find the new aristocracy there. We are the 9.9 percent."

See, what the 90% and WWC understand is that it is the 10%, the elite that doesn't exist, that was the mechanism to funnel wealth from the 90% to the 1%. Why? Read the article.

"But around the world and throughout history, the wealthy have advanced the crystallization process in a straightforward way. They have taken their money out of productive activities and put it into walls. Throughout history, moreover, one social group above all others has assumed responsibility for maintaining and defending these walls. Its members used to be called aristocrats. Now we’re the 9.9 percent. The main difference is that we have figured out how to use the pretense of being part of the middle as one of our strategies for remaining on top."

When it comes to hometowns, I have one. I was not born there, but I moved there before I was one, and went to school there, graduating from senior high. In my current location, I am actively trying to become a local, which is helped by the fact that my old hometown is only 30 miles away. It seems to be working. I've been invited to stand in local elections (and refrained from soing that), and been asked to join organisations with some exclusivity. So it seems I am becoming an established member of local petty bourgeoisie. :-)

"The counties that supported Hillary Clinton represented an astonishing 64 percent of the GDP, while Trump counties accounted for a mere 36 percent. Aaron Terrazas, a senior economist at Zillow, found that the median home value in Clinton counties was $250,000, while the median in Trump counties was $154,000. When you adjust for inflation, Clinton counties enjoyed real-estate price appreciation of 27 percent from January 2000 to October 2016; Trump counties got only a 6 percent bump."

Tony P,

Your snark about God revealing himself only to a couple of herdsmen is factually incorrect. None of the Abrahamic religions is really a nomadic religion.

Judaism has a mythology that ties its conception to a set of nomadic patriarchs and to a group of nomadic herdsmen conquering the Land of Canaan. Yet, there is very little archeological evidence for the conquest of Canaan ever occurring. Instead, the earliest Hebrews seem to have been Iron Age farmers in the mountains west of Jordan. If there ever was an influx of nomads there, it was probably a small ruling caste whose mythology was assumed by the main population. Anyhow, Judaism as monotheistic religion only developed after the Babylonian exile, in the most urbanised area of the world. Essentially, Judaism can be seen as a goup of farmers, merchants and scholars consciously acting according to a reconstructed set of nlmadic taboos.

If anything, Christianity is the most urban of all Abrahamic religions. It is a synthesis of Hellenistic philosophy, Jewish mythology and a saviour personality that combines god-king worship with the popular mediterranean fertility rites of Tammuz-Horus-Dionysios-Ishtar-Isis-Magna Mater-axis. Chriatianity was, for the first four centuries of its history, almost exclusively practiced by urban dwellers.

Islam, as the third Abrahamic religion, was invented by Muhammed, who was a merchant adventurer. While the religion is eminently suited for the practice in desert environment, its first adherents were also city-inhabitants.

So, calling any Abrahamic religion a religion of nomads means essentially subscribing to its own internal mythology.

"Their obsession with my preference in lettuces also seems peculiar."

Yeah, the right wing homies in Arizona and Texas who underpay immigrant stoop labor to harvest our lettuces and then sell it to we elites for a tidy profit margin have a lot of gall antagonizing their customers.

Not many people know (much of anything) that mp's nicknaming of Kim Jung Un as "Little Rocket Man", is yet another right wing dog whistle aimed at we arugula eaters.

Rocket is what arugula is called.

Russell, wait until they find out about your man bag.

I have no problem with the white working class ... I've been one of them from time to time ... upending an aerosol can of Cheez Whiz and shooting it directly down their gullets without even raising a polite pinkie, so they can back the eff off on the lettuces.

The working classes use to pelt the elites with cabbages in public.

You haven't made the big time until you've taken the sharp end of a radicchio right in the eye from close range.

are we just using 'working class' to mean people who make an average, give or take, living?

because the classic def'n of 'working class' includes everyone who doesn't own the machines. so, that includes a lot of people who make a lot of money.

This is the only white working class the conservative movement* gives a crap about, and they are about to be put upon big time once they are black-balled from any further employment in America because of their ties to the largest criminal and treasonous enterprise in American history:

https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/politics/2018/05/15/putting-white-house-resume-less-boost/BSNVmebfnTFzjzoxB77bII/story.html?et_rid=1822198182&s_campaign=todaysheadlines:newsletter

*And the traditional Democratic Party has taken the white working class for granted.


Sometimes bob mcmanus seems like Neo, and we're all living in the Matrix. Or maybe he's more like Morpheus, and one of us is Neo, but doesn't know it yet.

Can I be Neo? I want to fly our of phone booth to Rage Against the Machine!

So, calling any Abrahamic religion a religion of nomads means essentially subscribing to its own internal mythology.

Isn't that what the adherents do? Isn't Tony P. simply considering them under their own terms?

I've decided the mp travesty is the Washington D.C. political version of the book and movie "Get Shorty".

"Other things to remember: you don't "take a meeting" anymore, you say you have "a two-thirty at Tower." If a studio passes on a script, you don't say "they took a Pasadena." That was out before it was in. Like "so-and-so gives good phone." ... There were a lot of terms you had to learn, as opposed to the shylock business where all you had to know how to say was "Give me the fuckin' money."

other than maybe hedge fund managers . . .

Because also in my very humble opinion, that decision is not going to work out to their advantage.

Even (or maybe especially) for hedge fund managers, I suspect that it will work out very much to their disadvantage. At least in the long run . . . although I suppose that they are so accustomed to concentrating on the short term (specifically the next quarter) that it wouldn't occur to them to consider that.

Some excerpts from bob m's (long!) Atlantic link, focusing on things other than money:

The fact of the matter is that we have silently and collectively opted for inequality, and this is what inequality does. It turns marriage into a luxury good, and a stable family life into a privilege that the moneyed elite can pass along to their children. How do we think that’s going to work out?

(...)

In 19th-century England, the rich really were different. They didn’t just have more money; they were taller—a lot taller. According to a study colorfully titled “On English Pygmies and Giants,” 16-year-old boys from the upper classes towered a remarkable 8.6 inches, on average, over their undernourished, lower-class countrymen. We are reproducing the same kind of division via a different set of dimensions.

Obesity, diabetes, heart disease, kidney disease, and liver disease are all two to three times more common in individuals who have a family income of less than $35,000 than in those who have a family income greater than $100,000. Among low-educated, middle-aged whites, the death rate in the United States—alone in the developed world—increased in the first decade and a half of the 21st century. Driving the trend is the rapid growth in what the Princeton economists Anne Case and Angus Deaton call “deaths of despair”—suicides and alcohol- and drug-related deaths.

(...)

In America today, the single best predictor of whether an individual will get married, stay married, pursue advanced education, live in a good neighborhood, have an extensive social network, and experience good health is the performance of his or her parents on those same metrics.

(...)

Inequality necessarily entrenches itself through other, nonfinancial, intrinsically invidious forms of wealth and power. We use these other forms of capital to project our advantages into life itself. We look down from our higher virtues in the same way the English upper class looked down from its taller bodies, as if the distinction between superior and inferior were an artifact of nature. That’s what aristocrats do.

(...)

The skin colors of the nation’s elite student bodies are more varied now, as are their genders, but their financial bones have calcified over the past 30 years. In 1985, 54 percent of students at the 250 most selective colleges came from families in the bottom three quartiles of the income distribution. A similar review of the class of 2010 put that figure at just 33 percent. According to a 2017 study, 38 elite colleges—among them five of the Ivies—had more students from the top 1 percent than from the bottom 60 percent. In his 2014 book, Excellent Sheep, William Deresiewicz, a former English professor at Yale, summed up the situation nicely: “Our new multiracial, gender-neutral meritocracy has figured out a way to make itself hereditary.”

(...)

The mother lode of all affirmative-action programs for the wealthy, of course, remains the private school. Only 2.2 percent of the nation’s students graduate from nonsectarian private high schools, and yet these graduates account for 26 percent of students at Harvard and 28 percent of students at Princeton. The other affirmative-action programs, the kind aimed at diversifying the look of the student body, are no doubt well intended. But they are to some degree merely an extension of this system of wealth preservation. Their function, at least in part, is to indulge rich people in the belief that their college is open to all on the basis of merit.

New American Aristocracy Atlantic

I'm pretty much one of the Atlantic's 9.9%. I more than recognize that that is a position of extraordinary privilege. I hope that I never take it for granted.

There is a solution to the inequality dilemna:

PAY PEOPLE MORE.

The people who get in the morning and go to work. Pay them.

"Get Shorty"

I love Elmore Leonard. And I really really love that movie.

Note: Those are excerpts I took after only being a bit more than half way through the piece.

Is she a conservative or a liberal?

https://twitter.com/KaitMarieox/status/995699996212322304/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Ftalkingpointsmemo.com%2Fnews%2Fkent-state-university-graduate-kaitlin-bennett-rifle-graduation-photos

The bullet-headed dick on the thread says its her God-given right to carry that military weapon anywhere she wants.

God's not going to make it stop.

Vermin conservatives posit a God that gave her the right to carry deadly force in public, but would have her arrested if she was carrying the weapon while buck baked with bubbles with her dog hairs fully visible.

I'm going to shoot that God in the head.

https://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2018/05/forget-laurel-and-yanny-take-the-animals-test-instead/

All American republican conservatives are animals.

The bullet-headed dick on the thread says its her God-given right to carry that military weapon anywhere she wants.

Does he happen to explain why God took so very long to get around to creating guns, if it is everyone's "God-given right" to carry one? Inquiring minds want to know....

I'm sure there are atheists who are strong 2nd-amendment advocates. They should have a debate with bullet-headed dick.

Does he happen to explain why God took so very long to get around to creating guns, if it is everyone's "God-given right" to carry one? Inquiring minds want to know....

Time does not exist for God.

Lurker, it says much that the Christian words for 'non-members' are derived from words for rural people. Pagans = pagani = people from the pagus, the open country where the flocks feed; English: heathens = people from the heather, the uncultivated land; German: Heiden (the same as English).

also:
villains : people from the village (as opposed to the estate)
vulgar : common

So Christians were the original urban elitists. Good to know!

Note: Those are excerpts I took after only being a bit more than half way through the piece.

Agree. I'll have to return and finish the article over lunch break.

Thanks, mcmannus, you dirty commie.

The article touches on other things, such as the ways in which our professional class has employed guild-like structures to protect such professions as doctors and lawyers from market forces that grind up others (cf Dean Baker on this). Thomas Frank's Listen, Liberal made similar points.

more from the latest communist manifesto in The Atlantic:

"You see, when educated people with excellent credentials band together to advance their collective interest, it’s all part of serving the public good by ensuring a high quality of service, establishing fair working conditions, and giving merit its due. That’s why we do it through “associations,” and with the assistance of fellow professionals wearing white shoes. When working-class people do it—through unions—it’s a violation of the sacred principles of the free market. It’s thuggish and anti-modern. Imagine if workers hired consultants and “compensation committees,” consisting of their peers at other companies, to recommend how much they should be paid. The result would be—well, we know what it would be, because that’s what CEOs do."

Simply absolutely correct.

——-All American republican conservatives are animals.————

Count me-a-Demon,

If I said all blacks are animals, I would be marked as a racist. Even some racists might accuse me of hyperbole. It is also the same thing one can hear on “conservative” talk radio. Comments like “all liberals are garbage” are spoken there.

Saying such stuff merely strengthens the reactionaries in the Republican Party and the pseudo-liberals who now run the Democratic Party.

our professional class has employed guild-like structures to protect such professions as doctors and lawyers from market forces that grind up others

It may be notable, however, that such structures also protect, for example, hairdressers. Who hardly count as part of the top 10%.

Perhaps matters are not quite as crystal clear as assumed.

more from the article:

The raging polarization of American political life is not the consequence of bad manners or a lack of mutual understanding. It is just the loud aftermath of escalating inequality.

This.

wj...the merest of reviews of the incomes of hairdressers should be enough to demonstrate beyond all reasonable doubt that the barriers to entry erected by this particular association are, shall we say, easily surmountable.

——Because also in my very humble opinion, that decision is not going to work out to their advantage. And also in my very humble opinion, it will be damaging to the nation as a whole.—-

I agree. Clinton’s best point was that she was the lesser evil. Both blasted parties have been saying “vote for us, we’re the lesser evil” followed by some crumbs that they deign to toss on their chump supporters. This has been happening for around forty years now and life for most Americans has been going down as least as long.

At some point, you have to say enough. I refuse to be a sucker anymore. Either help the country or go. That is why Sanders and Trump arose. Unfortunately, we have President Trump not President Sanders (or even Clinton. “ shudder”)

It may be notable, however, that such structures also protect, for example, hairdressers. Who hardly count as part of the top 10%.

Only if you use "such structures" in the most generalized way. It's not that hard to get a hairdressing license. There's no Grand Council of Hairdressers maintaining control over the requirements to make hairdressers scarce enough to drive up their labor rates to absurd levels.

Or what bobbyp said. Refresh before posting!

and the pseudo-liberals who now run the Democratic Party.

so, generalizations are cool when you make them ?

It's not that hard to get a hairdressing license.

Granted, it might not be that difficult for you (or me) to jump thru the necessary hoops. And yet, we still see people getting criminal prosecutions due to their taking money for doing hair (sometimes nothing more than braiding cornrows). So perhaps not as trivial for everyone.

so, generalizations are cool when you make them ?

They have the virtue of lacking the entertainment value of performance art, so probably.

Posted by: bobbyp | May 17, 2018 at 02:43 PM

I almost threw that one in, too, but my comment was getting long as it was. But, yes, simply absolutely correct.

So perhaps not as trivial for everyone.

If you take money for doing hair, you have to have a license, as required by whatever state. If you don't get in trouble for doing it without a license, there's no point in requiring the license. That some number of people choose to take that risk doesn't make it anything like a bar association.

And I would imagine far more people get away with doing hair for money without a license than people do practicing law or medicine without the required credentials.

To obtain a license to be a hairdresser, barber, and a number of other occupations require a lot more time, money, and hoop jumping than for emergency medical technician or security guard. The latter has a greater potential impact on health and safety than the former.

The latter has a greater potential impact on health and safety than the former.

Which is entirely beside the point. Perhaps the bar should be higher for EMTs and security guards. It doesn't make hairdressers doctors or lawyers.

Luckily there's an organization that fights to remove constraints that prevent people from bettering their lives.

Institute for Justice - Economic Liberty: The Institute for Justice Files Lawsuits Nationwide to Defend Honest Enterprise

Luckily there's an organization that fights to remove constraints that prevent people from bettering their lives.

Hmmm. The only thing I've ever felt constrained by is the lack of a trust fund.

Which is entirely beside the point. Perhaps the bar should be higher for EMTs and security guards. It doesn't make hairdressers doctors or lawyers.

I don't think anyone said it did. Certainly that wasn't my intention.

What I was trying to say is that the same sorts of restrictions on who can practice exist for some jobs ("professions" seems excessive) which are not the sorts which get someone into the top 10%. (And I defy anyone to come up with a rationale for the restrictive barrier to entry for hairdressers. Unlike any of the other examples listed.)

Which, at least to me, says that restrictions on practice are not exclusively intended to protect the incomes of the elites -- which was the position I was attempting to argue against.

The only thing I've ever felt constrained by is the lack of a trust fund.

I always thought that it might be pleasant to become a remittance man. But somehow my family was never interested in bribing me to stay far away. Alas!

Hey, hairdressers work near people's vitals with sharp implements, and who does not think of Sweeney Todd while sitting in the chair occasionally?
Security guards only handle firearms that, as we have heard ad nauseam, do not kill people and are under constitutional protection.
I demand a court challenge by an unlicenced hairdresser or barber that uses a razor attached to a firearm in the bayonet position for his work.

I always thought that it might be pleasant to become a remittance man.

Thanks, wj. I'd never seen that term before.

There is a commonly employed wry reference up here in the northwest to the many hippielike creatures observed in Eugene, Oregon, as "trustifarians". Is this term used elsewhere esteemed peanut gallery?

HSH @ 3:14,

The conclusion of the article is even better.

I urge all here to read the whole thing.

bobbyp

There is a commonly employed wry reference up here in the northwest to the many hippielike creatures observed in Eugene, Oregon, as "trustifarians".

Most def., here in gentleman's farmland.

bobbyp: trustafarian is very common usage in the UK.

From CharlesWT's link:

Unfortunately, all too many entrepreneurs find that this dream is under constant attack by unreasonable licensing, permitting and other requirements that stand in the way of honest competition.

Eye of the beholder.

The coffin seller thing was an interesting touch. If you knew anything about the inside of the funeral business, you would likely not have a lot of objections to their being licensed.

All of that said, I don't mind if hair braiders are freed from the fell hand of the oppressive state.

It ain't a perfect world, what can I say.

trustafarian

quite common in New England

bobbyp: trustafarian is very common usage in the UK.

A SciFi reference to a remittance man: Alfred Bester's the Starcomber a.k.a. 5,271,009.

CharlesWT,

There is no such thing as an entrepreneur who believes wholeheartedly in "honest competition". Bill Gates' whining missives about 'free software' in his early days before striking it rich due to being granted a government monopoly are a classic example.

"Hey, hairdressers work near people's vitals with sharp implements, and who does not think of Sweeney Todd while sitting in the chair occasionally?"

Plus headlice, ringworm, and other nasty things that can all too easily spread from person to person.

A modicum of job-specific training is desirable.

Bill Gates learned that you have to buy politicians before you need them, not afterward.

—so, generalizations are cool when you make them ?—

Not really no. And I do have to double check myself often. Anyways, I was referring to that subset that is its leadership. They seem more like the economic conservatives of forty years ago rather than any sort of liberal, nevermind an actual leftist.

They seem more like the economic conservatives of forty years ago rather than any sort of liberal, nevermind an actual leftist.

Seems like labeling is your thing.

Let me know what about Hillary Clinton's platform you objected to. Or was it "the speeches".

WHO MOVED MY LETTUCE??????????????????????

Pretty sure JBird lost the thread when s/he had to say something other than soshalism.

Bill Gates learned that you have to buy politicians before you need them, not afterward.

if i had bill gates' money, i might buy a couple myself. polish them up, keep them on the mantle.

I'd make them give my money away.

hairdressers

anecdota:

long ago, when I had enough hair to actually require something that could be described as a "haircut", I prevailed upon a college friend to give me one of her $5 dorm-room stylings.

it sucked.

I don't mind the idea that people who cut hair are required to demonstrate proficiency sufficient to get a license.

i'm sure you can find somebody who will drape a bedsheet around your shoulders and give you a handyman special at the kitchen table if you really want to stick it to the man.

They seem more like the economic conservatives of forty years ago rather than any sort of liberal, nevermind an actual leftist.

in the US, Elizabeth Warren is a liberal and Bernie is a socialist.

so, yeah.

welcome to ObWi JBird, thanks for chiming in. don't be a stranger.

So, open thread and all, and continuing with my support for "establishment Democrats" and my putting it in with them generally:

Mark Warner.

I expressed my dismay a few days ago, when I heard about his support for Haspel. I called his office, which I do on a regular basis (pro,mostly, but occasionally con).

On Haspel, it was a definite con.

Then, there was the whole Senate Intelligence Committee report, and release of documents the next day. I thought about it, called Warner, and expressed my thanks. (Also for the Net Neutrality vote.).

Ummm. What is it like to try to keep the Senate Intelligence Committee somewhat honest? The freaking Senator Warner has to work with the freaking Senior Senator Burr. Okay.

Senator Warner, I said, you have my back. I get it that you have to work on this thing.

JBird: They seem more like the economic conservatives of forty years ago rather than any sort of liberal, nevermind an actual leftist.

russell: in the US, Elizabeth Warren is a liberal and Bernie is a socialist.

so, yeah.

So no.

I was actually twenty-one years old forty years ago, and quite knowledgeable about what the f' was going on. "Economic conservatives" were Reagan / Arthur Laffer people, so tell me that that's where Democrats are.

You are absolutely full of shit.

Hope that I won't be banned,, but look it the fuck up.

By the way, JBird, russell is a front pager, and a good guy. He welcomes you.

I am not a front pager and an oftentimes persona non grata. I think you're a troll.

Do what you wish with that.

Senator Warner, I said, you have my back

well done, and thank you.

Hope that I won't be banned

?!?!?!?!?!

if anyone ever gets banned from ObWi for telling me I'm full of shit, I will ban myself for life.

seriously, no.

you are correct. i was thinking more along the lines of Dwight Eisenhower. which is, i realize with alarm, not forty but sixty years ago.

i've got the better part of a bottle of a nice provencal rose under my belt, because i have a man bag and i tie my french scarf in a hacking knot and that's just how i roll, and i have become innumerate.

i stand corrected. you are right, i am wrong.

no more math for me, tonight.

Democrats shifted to the right on economic issues during the Clinton era. People bragged about how smart it was, how New Deal liberalism was outdated, and so forth. There was an organization— the DLC? I am forgetting the name. They never shifted as far right as Reagan. Even Obama spent part of his first term talking about Grand Bargains. Fortunately the Republicans were so unwilling to cooperate that nothing came of it.

Sorry, russell. I get a bit overzealous.

Donald, yeah. Clinton needed to get elected. He won in the primary because people thought there needed to be that message. And he won. And it was good.

I know it's annoying for people to not get their pony. Maybe people are now ready for the real soshalist pony! I'd vote for it!

The angst is about the fact that although a lot of people might have voted for it, it wouldn't have won. Russ Feingold didn't win in Wisconsin. Sometimes we have to settle. Sad, but not as sad, never as sad, as Republicans.

it's like this.

we're all a semi-happy family here on ObWi. we got Marty, and now and then McK, and whenever he can stand the sheer annoyance of it all slarti. all basically conservative. wj holds down the moderate conservative position.

but mostly we're liberal, or left-ish. even a token marxist or two, he said without meaning any disrespect by the word "token".

not everyone agrees with us. many of the folks who don't agree with us vote.

if the guy that can get elected is bill clinton, or mark warner, work with that and be happy it's not some knothead.

"knothead" in the literary sense, rather han the perjorative one. of course.

also:

Sorry, russell. I get a bit overzealous.

NO WORRIES. you're good.

time to go to bed before i get my threads mixed up and start posting about the brilliance of tony williams on "nefertiti" and the wonders of molded cheeses.

nite all.

Sometimes we have to settle.

Exactly. The loss of that willingness to take half a loaf and celebrate the win, rather than insisting on all or nothing and getting nothing. That is the tragedy of American politics today.

The yearning for absolute purity has always been there, on both the right and left. But once it was fringe, and now it has gotten tragically far towards the center. Further, for the moment, on the right -- which is being useful to those on the left of similar absolutist persuasion.

I think one could debate whether Clinton had to go as far to the center as he did, to the wild cheering of our “ liberal “ media. I have seen people debate it, but I am forgetful of the arguments and don’t feel in the debating mood anyway. But the pony argument gets overused. There are varying shades of lefties and I read some folks who go third party without agreeing with them on that point. I would go third party if I thought it would accomplish something. But one can criticize Democrats from the left on various subjects without wishing for ponies, believing in green lanterns, or whatever other bloggish cliche comes to mind.

Re: Clinton and neoliberal economics.

I think the one problem was that the people who were caught in the 1920's bubble and the following Great Depression were moving off the stage of history.

That generation learned, the hard way, not to trust hyped up financial shenanigans issuing from Wall Street, and that when your broker/banker/CEO absconded with your life's savings, that having government programs as a backstop was a really good alternative to destitution.

Those who ignore the lessons of history, etc, etc.

JFK seemed to be a classical liberal. Or liberal in the European sense.

Bill Gates learned that you have to buy politicians before you need them, not afterward...

Amusing Gates story...
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/may/18/bill-gates-donald-trump-difference-hiv-hpv
Gates is hardly known for his comic timing but he frequently prompted laughter from the audience at the foundation event. In one anecdote he said: “When I walked in, his first sentence kind of threw me off. He said: ‘Trump hears that you don’t like what Trump is doing.’ And I thought, ‘Wow, but you’re Trump.’ I didn’t know the third-party form was always expected. ‘Gates says that Gates knows that you’re not doing things right.’”..

JBird:

Welcome to OBWI!

I was going to leave this alone, and these remarks are mine only and do not reflect the OBWI Zeitgeist, but ...

"If I said all blacks are animals, I would be marked as a racist. Even some racists might accuse me of hyperbole. It is also the same thing one can hear on “conservative” talk radio. Comments like “all liberals are garbage” are spoken there."

As Johnny Carson would respond to Tommy Newsom, the latter filling in for bandleader Doc Severinsen, after being informed that Doc was on vacation: "I did not know that," while adjusting his tie and looking around and mugging for the studio audience.

"Saying such stuff merely strengthens the reactionaries in the Republican Party and the pseudo-liberals who now run the Democratic Party."

What, did you just come in out of the rain from the intellectual dark web?

You mean, if I respond in kind to thug conservative rhetoric generalizing about the Other, I create ANOTHER Nazi because ... what? .... snowflakes melt to form new, racist fascists who emulate this lout of a President.

Fine, who's next? It's a big sidewalk. Lots of room to kick ass physically if the right-wing cowards want to go there.

As to the Democratic Party, I have no doubt that taking the high road, questionably with Clinton-lites, or with Sanders-lites, or with some new statesman-like wunderkind who peels off a few republicans, will fail miserably to moderate the monstrosity called the republican party.

I want that cancer destroyed. I don't even want it to be in minority remission and live to metastasize again.

I don't want another republican Alien or Jurassic Park sequel.

I think one could debate whether Clinton had to go as far to the center as he did

One could, and armchair quarterbacks do. But it might be better to ask: "Did what he did do the job?" That is, did it get the Democrats back in power, when they had lost the last 3 Presidential elections -- and arguably more, if you see Carter as the result of special circumstances?

Similarly, one could ask whether Gingrich needed to go as far right as he did in order to get Republicans control of Congress.

But note that, in both cases, the question ignores the possibility the the folks involved went was far as they did because their actually beliefs were there. It just assumes that political expediency drove everything. Not to say that politicians don't act from expediency. But sometimes they are moved to shape their expediencies to their beliefs.

I think one could debate whether Clinton had to go as far to the center as he did

It's worth considering that maybe Clinton (i.e., Bill) didn't "go to the right". Maybe that's actually who he was, and what he actually believed and thought was good.

Maybe it wasn't a calculated political jedi mind trick. Maybe he is, really and truly, socially basically liberal but mostly a politically middle of the road technocrat who supports and sees value in a vigorous public sector.

Believe it or not, that is neither a specifically liberal or a lefty position.

The yearning for absolute purity...

Seriously?! Donald voted for Clinton IIRC, evangelical Christians voted for Trump...

Oh, I think Clinton was right where he wanted to be for the most part, though he did make that comment about fracking bond traders early on. I would have to refresh my memory on all the details, assuming I wanted to get into a big argument, but I don’t. Not on this.

On a different subject, I didn’t even know about this and it has already passed the House overwhelmingly.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/05/08/politics/protect-and-serve-act/index.html

I urge all here to read the whole thing.

Yes. I just finished it. There was a discussion about the more-pronounced economic sorting that's going on, particularly in and sometimes near major cities. Instead of trying to express my thoughts on that subject, it would be easier to refer people to that article.

(There's a reason I'm not a professional writer of any sort. Or more likely a number of reasons.)

More dead kids in HS shooting.

At this stage I would repeal the second amendment. More politically pragmatic suggestions are welcome, but I have nothing.

At this stage I would repeal the second amendment.

I can think of a number of amendments that might be useful. (For just one example, one clarifying that corporations are NOT persons, save for a very narrow range of specific and limited purposes. Of which speech and political action are not among them.)

Desirable as junking the 2nd Amendment (as it is currently interpreted!) might be, is it really the highest priority?

Um, I was reacting to the school shooting news. It was an emotional response. Do you want me to put “ stopping school shootings” on some sort of priority ranking list?

I'm all for stopping school shootings. (And others, come to that.) Although I suspect that it will take quite some little time after a 2nd Amendment repeal to reduce the number of guns sloshing around the country to the point of doing so.

And some other changes might also make doing so more politically viable.

Read Savage War of Peace a while back history of Algerian Independence and man's inhumanity to man was amply confirmed therein but shit man, at least the assholes had a purpose. This everyday nihilism of a world with school shootings we rubberneck and pass by is dispiriting

In this country try to take away the guns to the degree shootings like this are minimized and they'll use them until the ammunition's gone.

What may happen is that all we lose privacy as they try to predict and prevent. I am not sure that will hurt* the marginal and abject and different more the normies will also get hurt but they wont notice as much even grow to love big brother. Then they can get the guns.

I know my current illegal activities (cough) are permanently recorded archived noticed marked flagged...I just have to be sure I don't give them reason to care.

This is one future. Expensive to arrest, try, imprison. Real expensive. Save that for systemic dangers. Just record everything, let them know we know, let it all slide unless until...keep em guessing. But mostly they're on their own cause we gateds can't give a fuck.

Like we're gonna spend the money and capital to save a few kids, Break gimme.

Reset your "too soon" clocks, I guess.

And that's why it ain't fascism, not even close.

Fascism is in a way cheaper cause it is your neighbor the elementary teacher beating you up saves training but requires excessive looting and stealing and extorting for so many enforcers and runs out of victims and so requires expansion which gets expensive. But fascism is every direct everyday stret violence as politics and economics.

We are probably just headed into anarchism and warlordism, been a strong state for so long we can't see statelessness. Well, unless we watch MENA news. Libya and Syria is our future.

I know my current illegal activities (cough) are permanently recorded archived noticed marked flagged...I just have to be sure I don't give them reason to care.

(jocular sarcasm) We know the temperature of your shit, bob. The rest? Meh. We could care less.

Yours sincerely,

THE (really, really) DEEP STATE, esq.

(/jocular sarcasm)

The comments to this entry are closed.

Blog powered by Typepad