Evil Geniuses, part three. Let's try something different. Let's each propose a discussion question based on part three. Here's mine.
- Was the Reagan Revolution revolutionary, evolutionary, de-volutionary, reactionary, or what? Could there have been a Trump era, if there had not first been a Reagan era? Did it represent the ultimate triumph of political advertising and marketing in America? (See Mad Men...)
- Please add yours
COMMENT?:
- "See, if you pay less in taxes--and only if you pay less in taxes--America's economic prosperity and stability will be restored. It's not selfishness, it's patriotism." 103
- "His actual name is Rich Fink." 112
- "Rush Limbaugh led the way..." 114
- Key changes... 118-22
- "originalism became a crude and self-justifying meme..." 127
- "a patina of academic respectability..." 133
- "So if you happen to think it's a good idea for judicial decisions to also consider fairness or moral justice... Law and Economics says you're a fool." 134
- "we now spend ten times on prescription drugs, in real dollars, what we spent in 1970..."144
- "Greed is right. Greed works." Gordon Gecko 147
- "ostentatious personal wealth was now the only American Dream that mattered." 151
- "The best test of a morally legitimate social contract is a thought experiment... John Rawls..." 153
- "while the fox did not start guarding the henhouse, he was definitely now employing and training the guard dogs" 159
- "Americans' personal debt excluding home loans increased twelvefold..." 160
- "If you really want to help the poor, help the rich." William Simon 163
- "shameless greed had been normalized... it'd be fine to increase inequality to staggering new levels." 174
- "The number one responsibility became...making the stock price get higher today" 175
- "being a shareholder is really not like being a citizen..." 180
- "the damage to the human spirit that comes from making everything everyone is or does literally and strictly reducible to dollars and cents...A finance-obsessed society makes us each a little less human..." 183-4
- "Around 1980, the Great Uncoupling of the rich from the rest began." 190
- "nearly half of Americans...said they worried a lot about being laid off"207
- "Since 1981 states have cut their funding of public colleges and universities by half" 209
- "Political equality is meaningless in the face of economic inequality"-FDR, 1936. 214
"we now spend ten times on prescription drugs, in real dollars, what we spent in 1970..."144
ReplyDeleteThe crazy part about having all this evidence presented in chronological order is that I want to time travel and warn loved ones to the repercussions of television and the internet’s lack of regulation, but like walking into a house with multiple cats and getting hit in the face ammonia, I know they are the blissfully unaware and infatuated with their surroundings. It’s hard to fathom that over my lifetime we’ve accepted spending ten times as much on prescription drugs, until you factor in the escapism that television and the internet provide. With the rapid expansion of programming available to families in American household it’s understandable that many did, and still do, put up with just about anything to enter an alternate reality with endless entertainment possibilities. When you add the existing skepticism that many citizens held for government of the 1970’s, it makes sense for regulation to set up camp right next to “the man” we’d been told was our opponent.
Even with the occasional enlightenment we may be inspired to share, usually through social media or other non-committal means, the determination to remain an informed citizen and spread knowledge of injustices is something which takes a backseat to the issues we’re all facing in surviving a gig-economy, unprecedented debt, social injustices, and rising housing insecurity during the pandemic. When regulation is more of a voluntary policy for corporations, and we’re left to rely on free-market solutions public education, healthcare, and employment, I worry that we lack the focus and resources to fight back what has clearly become a rigged game of class warfare. But I’m hopeful this last year of isolation and loss will, for all those previously uninvolved in political discussions, serve as a spotlight on the vulnerability of our safety/security and awaken a spirit of civic engagement to direct the conversation moving forward.
Not sure I get the connection between amusing ourselves with endless escapist entertainment and drug prices, unless it's just that we're too distracted to notice or care.
DeleteThat's pretty much the feeling that I was having about how this has all evolved into a bit of a monster, one we've been tolerating while entertaining ourselves in front of screens.
DeleteIt's just one piece of the puzzle obviously, and I'm sure there's a better way to analyze our acceptance of such out of wack prescription prices, but I think the media's marriage with pharmaceutical advertising and our endless consumption of both play a significant role.
In your opinion, how much blame does Bill Clinton and the prosperous decade of the 90's bear for our current political and democratic stasis? Is the "supreme self-satisfaction for America's educated upper middle class" the epitome of the "American Dreams"?
ReplyDeleteIs "blame" the word?
DeleteAccording to an article in the Wall Street Journal in 1993 what did billionaire funded academic Charles Murray suggest should be the punishment for unmarried welfare mothers who had another child? What was Bill Clinton's reaction to this proposal?
ReplyDeleteInteresting, but can you reformulate this as a discussion question?
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteDo you feel that welfare mothers, or or any American citizen receiving government subsidies, should be subject to disqualifying terms and conditions related to human occurrences such as pregnancy or drug addiction?
DeleteWhat are your thoughts on the American Social Contract for CEO compensation? Do you think that CEO's actually produce 30-60 times more work causing them to earn that much more pay? Since they are at the top, is it an ethically sound payment ratio compared to the average employee?
ReplyDeletePer Kurt Anderson, "...so by 2003 those three top bosses quadrupled, so that by 2003 those three top bosses on average were earning 219 times as much as their average employee. The ration between the pay of the average worker and that of the CEO climbed even higher and remains close to three hundred."
This model seems to have crept into the academic sphere, when coaches (and some university presidents) are paid multiples of staff/faculty.
DeleteNow I understand why President Bush called it voodoo economics.Reagan believed that magically all the tax problems and inflation of the 1960’s and 1970’s would just go away if he passed legislation giving tax breaks to the wealthy Americans . By doing so Reagan hoped that the rich would put their extra cash flow back into the economy creating jobs and stabilizing the economy and controlling the sky high inflation rate. This didn’t not happen at all. The rich got richer and the poor and middle class were strangled out of existence. Out of this struggle for survival by the middle class came the rise of the Right. With Reagan their would not be a Trump I don’t believe.The conservative right a by product of Reaganomic.
ReplyDeleteWhat's strange is that so many True Believers still believe in the voodoo. They take it on faith, apparently.
Delete"Political equality is meaningless in the face of economic inequality"
ReplyDeleteI have to agree with this, as we see some people pushing to disenfranchise voters who live in poorer communities and limit mail in voting (it is worth mentioning that they are also working to quell voting on Sundays, when many African American churches organize voting drives). But it seems they are trying to limit voting in these areas and by these people because it is may be harder for them to get off of work to go vote. They say they are doing this in the spirit of a free and fair election, but to do it after what has been called by multiple sources "The most secure election in our history," it sure looks like they are just trying to limit those people who may not vote for them.
In Arizona they're still planning a recount, presumably (and cynically) to rationalize further voting restrictions.
DeleteOh goodness gracious. But Unity, right?
DeleteIf you really want to help the poor, help the rich."
ReplyDeleteThe modern world is full of people focused solely on their interests. However, the price of selfishness is high, because it is through mutual tolerance, and by supporting each other, much more can be achieved in a much better atmosphere. Every one of us has a crisis in which help from another person is invaluable. Sometimes the simple possibility of an honest conversation with another person can bring remarkably positive results. We should also learn to show empathy ourselves and support others in difficult times. It should be remembered that selfless helping a poor or a rich is often a source of enormous satisfaction, which leaves a smile on our faces. Many people do not want to help because they are dissatisfied with their lives. Such people often think that once they are wealthy and fortunate, they will start supporting others. However, it should be remembered that this pattern of thinking can be very deceptive. Even when we are not the happiest people in the world, helping others can release an immense amount of positive energy in us. Help without thinking about your benefit, but for the feeling of joy of fulfillment and happiness that will fill your heart, even a little good kindness, compassion, or interest shown to another person can relieve suffering and be radiant come for a moment, if somebody's sad and gray life needs help not only by people but also by those animals and nature, we must take care of our planet so that the future generations can still enjoy the beautiful wealth that the earth offers. We ought to remember none of us live only for ourselves, but we live for others, and let's leave the world a little better than we discovered it.
Live for others, indeed. Ayn Rand tried to discredit that, but Einstein trumps Rand.
ReplyDelete“Strange is our situation here on Earth. Each of us comes for a short visit, not knowing why, yet sometimes seeming to divine a purpose. From the standpoint of daily life, however, there is one thing we do know: that we’re here for the sake of others, above all for those upon whose smiles and well-being our own happiness depends; and also for those countless unknown souls with whose fate we are connected by bonds of sympathy.”