Showing posts with label economy sucks. Show all posts
Showing posts with label economy sucks. Show all posts

Sunday, June 8, 2025

Making Work Manly Again: Rethinking Trump's Rust Belt Chic

<Remember this guy? What he's doing today -- 
or not -- may surprise you 
(see East Village Magazine link below)>

<i.>
From rock stars to rapscallions, researchers, and everything in between, I can safely say that I've done many fascinating interviews over my decades-long career. Some of the most interesting ones, though, have happened locally, especially when some aspect of the encounter can tie in with the present.

About a decade ago or so, I interviewed Robert, one of our longtime city commissioners, who recalled how he'd started out. Having served about 30 years on the commission, Robert was regarded as its unofficial dean, since he's sat on other local boards, as well. He's not currently on the commission, but I believe he's serving as the chairman of the Housing Commission.

Like most Black men of his era, Robert went straight from high school to the foundry floor, where he became a union representative, serving on the bargaining committe, and eventually, president of his local union. Over time, he developed a parallel career as an organizer, which took him nationwide to other foundries and forges, where he advised new or existing unions about their issues.

That wasn't the hook for the story, which focused on his personal resilience -- as someone who raised about a dozen children between two marriages, including a couple who weren't his own biologically, but accepted into his family. But I couldn't resist asking Robert -- retired after 45 or so years, at several foundries -- what he thought about the decline of manufacturing, once it accelerated during the '80s.

"Man, are you kidding me?" Robert just let out a booming laugh, and shook his head. "When I started, they told us, "You'll all be out of here in two years. This plant will be gone!" That's because the foundry bought castings from Mexico, among other parts -- even in the 1950s, he noted.

When I asked how the union addressed those things, Robert shrugged. "I just took it as a challenge. We worked with the plant, they worked with us. Not everybody got what they wanted, but it was a give and take. That's how the system worked, and everybody accepted it."

As Robert pointed out, he felt fortunate to spend his whole life working in one job -- enough to provide a good pension, care successfully for so many children, and buy the small house where our interview took place, and sufficient time to serve his community. "I don't have any regrets," Robert said. "I've done the best I could, with whatever I've had."

<Found on Threads: The pitch 
that's already launching a thousand jokes...>

<ii.>
Presumably, it's the Roberts of the world that President Trump's self-dealing Commerce Secretary, Howard Lutnick, seemed to be invoking when he recently called on Americans to stand shoulder to the wheel, as it were, in gritting through his boss's on-again, off-again tariffs, cloaked and crafted in the name of reviving American manufacturing:

"You go to the community colleges, and you train people! It's time to train people not to do the jobs of the past, but to do the great jobs of the future. You know, this is the new model, where you work in these kinds of plants for the rest of your life, and your kids work here, and your grandkids work here."

You can find any number of variations on this pitch, such as Lutnick's sitdown on CBS's Sunday morning show, "Face The Nation" in April, where he said: "The army of millions and millions of human beings screwing in little screws to make iPhones—that kind of thing will come back...it's going to be automated...the tradecraft of America, is going to fix them, is going to work on them."

Got that? This is the Trumpian vision of Domestic Manifest Destiny, apparently -- no higher calling, it seems, than a lifetime spent making T-shirts and socks. Of all the goofy visions floating around Trumpworld, Lutnick's upbeat imagery of "screwing in little screws to make iPhones" ranks among the goofiest.

It's especially goofy, when you start with the obvious -- the politicos who lionize the factory floor the loudest just happen to have never spent any time there. Certainly not Trump, nor his fellow plutocratic bros like Lutnick, whose estimated net worth is $1.5 billion. Thanks to his ownership -- and subsequent sell-off -- of the financial services firm, Cantor Fitzgerald, it's safe to say he won't be making anybody's 
T-shirts and socks any time soon.


<The documentary that revived a genre, 
and launched a million others:
Front and back DVD covers
(DVD Exotica Blog)

<iii.>
There's a simple reason why such an inward-looking, retro-driven regime is peddling all this Rust Belt Chic, as Reason magazine's piece (see link below) suggests: "Some of the 'bring back the Rust Belt' sentiment surely has to do with a misplaced nostalgia for Main Street and all it represents more than an actual preference for work on factory floors..."

Nor are politicians the only ones who've caught that Rust Belt Nostalgia bug. Rockers like Big Country, Bob Seger, Billy Joel, John Mellencamp and Bruce Springsteen are some of the more obvious examples of artists who spent significant chunks of time chronicling the working man's anxieties and miseries, alongside a host of lesser-knowns (Joe Ely, Henry Lee Summer, The Iron City Houserockers, The Michael Stanley Band). Still other bands nod to the subject, without overtly commenting on it -- whether it's Devo's yellow-suited industrial look, or peers like the Rubber City Rebels, whose name plays on the rubber industry's prominence in their hometown (Akron, OH).

Examples of this phenomenon abound in other realms, too, such as in the '80s hit sitcom, "Roseanne," Michael Moore's breakout documentary film, Roger & Me (1989), and the writings of his close friend, Ben Hamper -- whose best-selling book, Rivethead: Tales From The Assembly Line (1992), chronicles the follies and foibles of his 11-year stint on the General Motors assembly line, from 1977 through 1988.

All this artistic earnestness has even birthed a perverse sub-genre of "ruin porn," as its detractors call it, one commonly characterized by the exploitation of industrial decay, and lacking any real context. It's a term that's often given to TV shows like VICE's "Abandoned" -- whose baseball cap-wearing, skateboarding host, Rick McCrank, points out that he does interview people, as part of exploring the impacts of his shuttered sites on the locals -- and the YouTube videos of Nick Johnson, who's earned a reputation for parachuting to various cities, their images seemingly chosen -- deliberately or not, you decide -- to fit the Trumpian narrative of decaying blue America.

Still, it's striking to see such a nostalgically-driven administration getting the basic details so consistently, and drastically, wrong. Even on a show like "Happy Days," which offers a sunny portrayal of its '50s-era time period, you never see its star character, the Fonz, urging anyone to join him at the garage where he works so tirelessly on all those cars. Quite the opposite, in fact.

How do we know? Just watch "Graduation," which aired February 8 and 15, 1977. We learn that Fonzie is secretly attending night school, so he can graduate with his longtime circle of friends -- Richie Cunningham, Ralph Malpn, Potsie. The two-parter climaxes in a stirring speech that Fonz gives at the ceremony -- once he's allowed to join -- about the importance of education: "Staying in school is cool!"

Aaayyy! Does that sound like someone resigned to a lifetime on the factory floor? Hardly. In "Live And Learn," which aired during Season Eight (11/18/80), Fonz -- fresh from a trip to Italy -- becomes a shop teacher at Jefferson High, and even flirts with growing a beard! Aaayyyy! Sit on that, Leonardo, you Renaissance nerd!

The same spirit exemplifies the major "Happy Days" spinoff, "Laverne & Shirley." Much of its comedy stems from its blue collar setting (Shotz Brewery, Milwaukee, WI), and characters engaged in various states of occupational denial. It's the type of setting where Carmine, the resident heartthrob, dreams of becoming a singing sensation, and Lenny Squiggy are angling for some kind of wider fame, well, beyond their spit-curled strangeness.

Not to be outdone, Laverne and Shirley attempt various Lucy and Ethel-style schemes to shed themselves of their jobs, too. One minute, they're humiliating themselves on a game show (the aptly-titled, "Be Silly For Dollars"), as they chase after some big cash prize. The next, they're trying to gatecrash some hoity-toity modeling agency without a portfolio, let alone a headshot.

I'm running on the stuff of teenage memory here, but Shirley's response to the snooty agency denizen's question ("Where's your portfolio?") is pure comedy gold. "We lost it," Shirley replies coolly, with all the screw-you-too poise that any seasoned fake-it-to-maker can muster. 

It's a moment that any punker, hip-hopper or DIY culture make can appreciate, for obvious reasons. But never do you hear her, or any of the gang from Arnold's Drive-In, ever say, "Wow, Shotz Brewery! What a job. I hope it never ends."


<A man and his motorboard:
Arthur "The Fonz" Fonzarelli 
ponders his factory floor-free future
(YouTube capture)>

<iv.>
Needless to say, there's a lot of reasons why Trump's Rust Belt Chic just doesn't add up. But let's start with another obvious point. Has anybody even bothered to ask the groundlings how they feel about this messianic vision of rote manual labor for life? 

I took the liberty of doing an online search, fueled by a relevant keyword phrase ("The reality of factory work/Reddit"). Here's an economy tour of what I found, with minor punctuation edits, starting with the this thread ("Why Are Factory/Warehouse Jobs Considered Bad"):

"While I am not an operator and my tasks are not physically demanding, the constant observation from management, the lack of upward movement, more punishments than bonuses or privileges, and doing the same over and over again, are literally frustrating, and kill your drive.

"Some of my seniors literally work every single day (including Saturday and Sunday), 50+ hours weekly, and do the same thing every day. If they mess up or fail to meet the prerequisites from the marketing department, they're the first to be blamed."

Or maybe you should listen to this desperate-sounding person, whose only experience is janitorial or production work ("Factory Work Is Misery"):

"This factory has pretty much given me the worst years of my life, and that's saying a lot, considering I've suffered from near crippling depression for as long as I can remember. It's broke me down both physically and mentally. It gets harder and harder to get out of bed everyday. I know I should look for something else but I live in the middle of bumfuck nowhere, it's either, here, construction or retail, and unfortunately, this place pays the best by a significant margin."

And, last but not least, this observation, from a former 14-year manufacturing engineer, who doesn't see his bygone field as the place to be ("CMW: Why Manufacturing Jobs Are Not Good Jobs").

"It is largely dependent on politicians pulling some odd strings to try and recreate jobs that are obviously being replaced by automation and AI and the realities of the global economy, which is outside of any one country's control, so even if you have a job today, your chances of still having that job 5 years from now are drying up REAL fast."

Granted, this is a small sampling of the sentiment out there. But honestly, though, after a couple hours of dedicated keyword searching, beyond the usual neutral-sounding, bet-hedging non-observations -- "Depends what industry, and what plant," that sort of thing -- I have yet to find a ringing endorsement of Lutnick's vision, such as it is.


<"Oh, Jeez, Shirl, we'll never crack 
the stadium circuit, looking like this!"

"No worries, Laverne. We're fictional characters, 
so it doesn't matter. We're gonna live forever."

One of the Milwaukee duo's many bids for fame...
...doin' that "Supermarket Sweep"!
(YouTube capture)>

<v.>
But let's take the premise behind Trump's tariff blitz at face value. If American manufacturers come home, we can make more goods here, right? And if the goods come home, so will the jobs, and all the economic detox will have been worth it.  Right? Wrong, for five major reasons.

First, it's important to remember the realities of reshoring. It's a process that requires major upfront investments in property and people -- which can take one to five or more years, assuming all the ducks are in order. That's one thing to do, when prices are stable -- quite another, amid the current zigzagging on tariff policy. In the end, as experts like Kimberly Clausing tell the New York Times (see below), "I think it will just make a lot more sense to make the entire thing somewhere else, and just pay the tariff once." So much for the purpose of the mission.

Second, the look of manufacturing has changed markedly -- as you'll see in the Reddit threads, and the Reason piece, where the Economist's editor-in-chief notes the overall proportion of manufacturing workers with PhDs has risen by 50 percent since 2016: "Manufacturing is increasingly a high-skill, high-end activity." It's not a prognosis that bodes well for the "poorly educated" that Trump professes to love so dearly.

Third, the continued emphasis on AI and automation -- not only as a driver of boosting corporate profits, but also, the speed and efficiency of routine tasks -- makes any prospects of mass reshorting in the US remote. A factory that needed 500 workers can now run with 10 to 50 workers, depending on the operation. Even if "some jobs" return, that'll never happen in sufficient enough numbers to make up for the losses that happened from 1980 through 2000, when an estimated two million manufacturing jobs evaporated.

Fourth, if we really want "the good jobs" to return, we'll have to find ways of boosting union membership -- which typically drives other employers to pay higher wages. But only six percent of US workers belong to unions, which is a truly meager percentage, even compared to fellow industrialized laggards like France (10.3%), Spain (12.4%), and Australia (12.5%). 

Finally, we also need to start having honest conversations about what kind of work people want -- especially once Trump's deportation apparatus cranks to full strength, and starts emptying the construction sites, meat packing plants, orange groves, and other hard, grinding jobs that native workers typically give a pass. With unemployment running at 4.2%, it's hard to imagine diehard MAGA voters lining up to pick fruit in triple-digit temperatures -- or, for that matter, jiggling screws into iPhone plates, as Lutnick envisions:

"But millions of Americans returning to the factory floor, with flip phones in their pockets, doesn't seem like a recipe for widespread fulfillment and economic flourishing to me, nor a viable political strategy for the GOP. My hunch is that people don't like it when their living standards get drastically worse."


That reason, more than any other, is why Trump's Rust Belt Chic doesn't add up, and never will. On the bright side, Robert can still enjoy his retirement, and the Fonz can teach shop in perpetuity -- since reruns can't be offshored, nor do they ever need to be reshored, so it's a win-win all around, right? Aaayyy! --The Reckoner


Links To Go
East Village Magazine:
Ben Hamper Remembers Rivethead
:
https://www.eastvillagemagazine.org/2021/06/12/profile-30-years-later-ben-hamper-remembers-the-rivethead-his-legacy-of-that-one-story-that-one-guy/

Newsweek: Howard Lutnick's Remarks

New York Times: Why Trump's Tariffs Won't Work
https://archive.ph/ewKIM



Thursday, February 27, 2025

Mad King Watch (Take III): Join The 24-Hour Economic Blackout Friday!

 

    Suggested Soundtrack: 
"People Have The Power" (Patti Smith)/
"Wait For The Blackout" (The Damned)

Nothing better sums up our current malaise than this Rolling Stone headline that recently caught my attention: "The Oligarchs Are Done Pretending To Care." Well, guess what? So am I, and should you, which Friday's request from People's Union USA is all about.

For the relevant nitty-gritty, go right to the bottom. Short, sweet, and straightforward, like all direct action should be, right? Don't spend any money for 24 hours, but if you must, make sure that it only goes to small local businesses. Above all else, don't use credit or debit cards. The next chapter comes with a one-week boycott of Amazon (March 7-14), which will kick off a series of others. We'll feature those details here, once they become available.

As the collateral damage of Trump's restoration continues laying waste to our government and our constitutional heritage, it's encouraging to see The Resistance, however we define it, taking on a more concrete shape. Presumably, People's Union USA recognizes what observers have pointed out from the beginning -- namely, that lawsuits and "pressers" (press conferences) will only accomplish so much.

Nonviolent direct action, on the other hand, can accomplish even more, because it doesn't require permission from any political establishment to proceed. A guiding principle is that the people lead the movement, not the other way around. Every time I hear Democratic mastodons like James Carville, who hasn't worked a domestic election in decades, advise us to "play possum," "wait for Trump to punch himself out," "wait for the MAGA Republicans to implode," I just want to upchuck! Trump and his trusted hatchet man, Elon Musk, didn't wait for us to react, so why should we return the favor? That makes no sense!

But there are no shortage of other reasons to launch the Blackout. As Newsweek's commentary points out, occupying buildings is risky, and hard to sustain for long, while overt acts of violent resistance can backfire, resulting in severe blowback that can stop a movement dead in its tracks. Street demonstrations can work wonders, if enough people show up to support them, if the media covers them, and if the powers that be heed them -- until they don't. What then?

That leaves the power of the purse -- our power. Stripping Trump and Musk of their aura of invulnerability is the key to slowing, then stopping, their so-called "shock and awe" campaign. The more we interrupt its momentum, the less likely it is to succeed. Once it stops doing either of those things, shock and awe has no relevance anymore. 

Starving their businesses of revenue is the most practical ways to show our disapproval of their traitorous power grabs, and pursuit of real and imagined enemies. Consider it a reverse tax, if you like, on the enormous wealth that our so-called political system allowed them to accumulate at such a rapid pace. Of course, the same scarlet letter applies to all the oligarchs who bent their knees to King Donald -- like Amazon's resident Dr. Evil, Jeff Bezos, who thinks nothing of killing political cartoons that might anger his new master, yet happily forks over $40 million on a proposed documentary about the First Lady. Need we say more?

Succeeding with a nationwide campaign like the 24-Hour Blackout sill also give the lie to the mass media's repeated attempts to bury the Resistance, as their star anchors and higher-ups strive hard to demonstrate how obedient they are, in advance. And, frankly, we can find no shortage of independent causes and organizations that could put our hard-earned dollars to so much better use.

Most relevantly of all, pulling off the Blackout also puts these businesses jockeying for Trump's favor on notice, that we can take our dollars elsewhere, even if it means sticking them in the safety of our pockets for 24 hours. If they heed disapproval, then find a different sort of customer who doesn't care, or doesn't mind. Either way, it's not our issue. 

Withholding our dollars -- and our consent -- also lets these corporate entities know that it's time to change how they treat us. Too many of them have grown too imperial-minded for their own good, as they continue to cut back employees, options, and services, always with an eye toward fattening up their bottom line.

You see it in the grocery stores, when they herd customers into one or two endless serpentine lines, even as they claim, "Nobody wants to work." You see it on retail shelves, all over, as business methodically eliminate smaller priced items in favor of more wallet-straining alternatives. You see it in the tech space, where its overdogs want you bundled, defaulted, and layered into infinity, which works well for them, but not so much for us.

One of the lasting legacies of punk rock, and the DIY indie movement that it birthed, is the simple notion that who you support matters as much as what you support, and why. As bitterly as people denounce the '90s-era major label signing gold rush, there wouldn't have been bands to scoop up -- without the Dead Kennedys, Black Flags and Circle Jerks that made it possible in the first place. 

The longer we can hang onto that cusp, the better off we are, and the more empowered we become. With that in mind, let your heart be your guide, and let your dollar speak your mind. See you Friday. -- The Reckoner



The 24 Hour Economic Blackout

As our first initial act, we turn it off.
For one day, we show them who really holds the power

WHEN:
Thursday, February 27th,
 From Midnight Till
Friday, The 28th, Midnight
(A full 24 hours of the 28th):
12:00 AM To 12:00 AM

WHAT NOT TO DO:
Do not make any purchases
Do not shop, online or in-store
No Amazon, No Walmart, No Best Buy
Nowhere!

Do not spend money on:
Fast Food
Gas
Major Retailers

Do not use Credit or Debit Cards
For non-essential spending

WHAT YOU CAN DO:
Only buy essentials, if absolutely necessary
(Food, Medicine, Emergency Supplies)
If you MUST spend: 
ONLY support small local businesses.

SPREAD THE MESSAGE!
Talk about it, post about it,
and document your actions that day!


WHY THIS MATTERS!

~ Corporations and banks only care

about their bottom line.

~ If we disrupt the economy for just ONE day,
it sends a powerful message.

~ If they don't listen (they won't) 

we make the next blackout longer (We will)

 

This is our first action.

This is how we make history. 

February 28th

The 24 Hour Economic Black Out Begins.




Sunday, February 23, 2025

Mad King Watch (Take II): The Most Beautiful Word In The Dictionary...Until It's Not

 

<https://www.downwithtyranny.com/>

“The most beautiful word 
in the dictionary: tariffs!”~ Donald Trump

Suggested Soundtrack (tie): 
"Up, Up, And Away"/
"Which Way To Nowhere"
The Fifth Dimension

Day One has long since come and gone, and guess what? To nobody's great surprise, prices are arcing, like the song says (see links below) -- "Up, up, and away, in my beautiful, my beautiful, balllooonnn!" Suffice to say, historians will likely file Trump's signature campaign promise -- that prices would "start going down, on Day One" -- as one of the worst examples of election-era pandering, like the middle-class tax cut that President Clinton abruptly stopped dangling out to the masses, the minute he won his second term in 1996.

I'll just simply note where prices stand in my neck of the woods, namely, eggs and gasoline, two commodities that people seem to have seized on, as symbols of their struggles. First, the pump. Self-serve gas prices started at $2.93 per gallon last week, and finished at $3.09 per gallon, for a jump of 16 cents. It took $15 to keep the tank roughly half-full. All in all, not the worst outcome I've seen, but a definite upswing over the week before, with prices averaging $2.83 per gallon.

And now, to the eggs. Matthew's, our area grocery store chain, began imposing a limit on how many you can buy, as many other stores have done nationwide. No surprises there, right? As of 2/18, egg purchases are limited to one carton per customer (12 or 18 eggs, makes no difference).

Last night, the Squawker asked me to buy some eggs, to keep those breakfasts humming. Luckily for me, I snagged an 18-egg carton of Eggland's Best, for $5.56 -- good thing, too, because there was just one other carton, containing a couple of smashed eggs, leaking a fair amount of yolk. Ick! Think I'll give that one a miss, then.

Had I tarried a moment or two longer, though, I'd have surely been out of luck, because the cheapest cartons now start at $6.95, and rapidly escalate to $8.29, and $9.85, depending on how fancy you wish to get (brown? caged? free range? organic?). What does next week's price frontier hold? Time will tell, but it's not looking good, now that Trump's made good on his threat to impose 25% tariffs on Canadian and Mexican imports.

There's just one slight problem, though, for those who aren't paying attention. Here's a few relevant facts that I found, using the magic of Google searching, in answer to this question: "What percent of our food, overall, comes from Canada and Mexico?" Here's what my screen spat back at me:

  • In 2020, Mexico accounted for 77% of fresh vegetable imports to the US, while accounted for 11%. Mexico's share dipped in slightly in 2023, to 63%, which still gives them a pretty healthy market share, by any measure.
  • Mexico is the largest source of US horticultural imports, including fruit, vegetables, and alcoholic beverages.
  • Mexico accounted for 47% of US fruit and imports in 2023.
  • Between 2017 and 2021, Canada and Mexico ranked as the first and third largest suppliers, respectively, of US agricultural products.
  • Canada accounted for 16.3% of total US agricultural exports, ringing up $174.8 billion in sales.
  • More than 30% of meat and meat products consumed in the US hail from Canada. 
Two takeaways stand out here, to any reasonable observer. First, Canada's chances of ever becoming the 51st state look rather remote. (Besides, Washington, DC and Puerto Rico should get first dibs on that privilege, snark, snark, snark. They've been waiting a bit longer for it.) Second, all things being equal, we'd miss our Canadian and Mexican brethren at the dinner table a hell of a lot more, than the other way around.

My own sense is that a targeted middle ground approach works best. Unrestricted free trade is bad, because it often leads to job losses, and the hollowing out of local industries -- who typically make way for corporate chains, with all the imperial dog-eat-dogism that such a tectonic shift implies -- one that opens the door to other hobgoblins, like loss of intellectual property, weaker environment regulations, and worker exploitation.

Yet rampant trade wars also yield mixed results (see link below) -- since it's consumers, not importers, who pay for those hefty tax hikes on their products. The notorious Smoot-Hawley Tariff, imposed in 1930 over President Herbert Hoover's objections -- which slapped punitive tariffs on over 1,000 products -- is considered the textbook example of blunt instrument protectionism that backfired, for its role in kick-starting the Great Depression internationally.

By and large, trade wars aren't something that any rational politician would do, though it's not hard to see why they periodically resort to them. Trade wars offer an easy way to push buttons, and play to emotions, without ever having to do anything about the problem that's causing so much economic queasiness.

This is the essence of populism, as alternative political satirist Jonathan Pie has observed -- promising the Moon, then handing you a copy of the Apollo 13 DVD. Not that this inconsistency slows Trump down -- as he zigzags between blaming his predecessor ("Inflation is back -- I had nothing to do with it"), and vague promises of fighting "every level of inflation," whatever that means. It's what he does; when confronted, double, triple, quadruple down, if necessary. Facts be damned, and public opinion, too.

Yet Biden is long gone, so whatever's happening under Trump's watch is his nut to crack, his problem to solve -- fair or unfair, like it not -- and he should be held accountable, obviously. But so should the party -- and the voters -- that  enabled him, and this particular brand of madness. Because "concepts of a plan," at least, as this incumbent defines them, offer cold comfort at the cash register. --The Reckoner


Links To Go (Hurry, Hurry, 
Before Those Eggs Cost 15 Bucks A Carton):
CNN: Trump Is One Month In, And Already,

CNN: Trump Says DOGE Could Return

History.com: Seven Contentious Trade Wars In US History:
https://www.history.com/news/7-trade-wars-boston-tea-party-smoot-hawley

The Fifth Dimension: Up, Up, And Away (Official Audio):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UKkNlwpajNk


The Fifth Dimension: Which Way To Nowhere:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zfGHZzumXJ4

Tuesday, October 1, 2024

By Popular Demand: Vice Presidential Debate Bingo!

 



Well, now, doesn't look like a barrel of fun? With less than three hours to go before the sole vice presidential debate of this campaign, your friends at the AFL-CIO have released a "bingo card" -- the better, presumably, to keep track of the latest verbal outrages that Trump's poodle of a running mate, J.D. Vance, will unleash on the nation.

Childless cat ladies, beware! Men in skirts, take cover, and put your hands over your ears! Stockholm-destined sex changers, screen all your calls! Fellow atheists, Druids, Wiccans, and alternative believers of all stripes, run for cover, before J.D., the man's man, smashes a styrofoam display of the Ten Commandments over your ungodly heathen head! 

Watch out, godless commie lovers! He's taking names, but he's not taking any prisoners...so let's hear it, for the man who wears poverty, like others put on makeup! Put your hands together...for -- Mr. -- J --  D -- Vance!

Oh, yeah, right. We're talking about the same J.D. Vance who posed, not so long ago, with an AR-15 rifle -- in front of a stack of firewood that obviously looks like it's been planed and machined by non-human hands. It's as genuine as those so-called Amish craftsmen ads I'd see late at night, with actors whose fake bears seem...well, glued on.

And yet, he wants you to believe that he's not weird. Yeah, right. Anyway, you can read the basic PR rationale from the union below, and while you're at it, don't forget to download your own card here -- who knows, it looks like a readily convertible piece of art, for other occasions, and it might make a great conversation topic opener some day:

"We’re looking forward to the country getting to know our union brother, Gov. Tim Walz. Walz is the governor of Minnesota, as well as a former public school teacher, football coach and union member.

"Walz has a track record of standing up for working people, our families and our unions, and he’s helped working families in Minnesota and all over this country. He knows the power of a union and the strength of working people standing together to fight for what’s right.

"We also hope you’ll learn more about Donald Trump’s running mate, JD Vance, a corporate lawyer turned Silicon Valley venture capitalist who has spent his two years in public service catering to corporate interests.

"While he pretends to respect workers and our unions, Sen. Vance is the lead co-sponsor of the Teamwork for Employees and Managers (TEAM) Act, Sen. Marco Rubio’s anti-worker bill that would allow employers to create sham unions that would undermine worker power. And Vance opposed the Protecting the Right to Organize (PRO) Act, the labor movement’s landmark bill to protect workers’ right to join a union."


As far as the PRO Act goes, I have some doubts about it, from the self-employed/IC (independent contractor) standpoint, but I'm on board with the rest of this statement. It would certainly feel odd --given Trump's refusal to entertain a second debate with Harris, an understandable reflex, given the verbal drubbing that she gave him -- ends up being the last word in that arena.

But then, as we all know, nothing about this campaign season has looked, nor felt, remotely normal. In any event, don't forget to tune in at 9 p.m. EDT (Eastern Daylight Time), and bring the popcorn. Oh, and a cat, if you happen to have a feline keeping you company. --The Reckoner



Wednesday, September 18, 2024

Weimar Analogy #101: Will Democrats Finally Ditch Austerity Economics?

 

<"Alas, Mein Herr, that overdue library book 
will cost you five more marks a day now...":
Heinrich Brüning, circa 1930,
stares down his detractors: Wikipedia.com>

<i>
Heinrich Brüning (1885-1970): unless you're a student of German history, his name probably won't ring a bell. Yet it's worth revisiting the less than stellar career of  Germany's notorious "Hunger Chancellor," especially after the stunning flipflop of the Democrats' electoral hopes -- and see if there's a correlation to their previous face plants, that's worth exploring.

Who was Heinrich Brüning, and what makes his story relevant today? Well, with so many historians sifting through the tea leaves of Weimar-era analogies amid fears of a potential Trump restoration, Brüning's misfortunes serve as a powerful reminder of the perils of austerity economics, and how they often grease the skids for autocrats.

Brüning emerged on the German national stage in March 1930, when President Paul von Hindenberg appointed him Chancellor, following the collapse of the so-called "Grand Coalition," led by his predecessor, Hermann Müller. Nevertheless, the Müller government did manage to implement some fairly impressive baseline progressive reforms, before its own political fortunes came crashing down.

Those reforms included the introduction of nationwide, state-controlled unemployment insurance (1928), the addition of 22 occupationally induced diseases to accident insurance coverage (1929), and the creation of a special pension for jobless people at age 60 (1929). Note the year of the last two examples -- 1929, when the US stock market crash triggered the worldwide agonies of the Great Depression.


But once the Depression took hold, most of these reforms essentially came undone by the summer of 1930, as Brüning's government -- hobbled by the increasing headwinds that it faced -- uncorked a series of harsh economic policies, characterized by steep wage and salary cuts, and a significant tightening of credit. However, Brüning lacked the votes to pass them in Germany's main legislative body, the Reichstag. It had become an increasingly dysfunctional body, whose largest parties -- Communists and Nazis -- traded insults, punches, and threats on a daily basis. So Brüning relied on emergency decrees to impose his legislative will, a move that would soon become his go-to response to the adverse situations that he continually faced. 

Predictably, the unemployed suffered the harshest blows, as the Brüning government sharply curtailed eligibility criteria, jacked up taxable contributions, and shrank the length of time for claiming benefits. By December of 1931, unemployment would max out at 20 weeks, thanks to the last of Brüning's five emergency decrees, a move that left many of the jobless scrambling for basic survival.

The results were as inevitable as they were predictable. By June 1932, an additional 3.31 million Germans, or roughly 9% of the work force, joined the jobless ranks (see Econstor link below). Gross Domestic Product also shrank by 4.5%. By then, these problems were longer 
Brüning's concern. He stepped down in May 1932, after von Hindenburg -- offended by a series of land reform proposals that would have impacted his own large estates, and those of his aristocrat buddies -- brusquely demanded his resignation.

Harsh as his policies were, Brüning argued that he needed them to deal with the burdens of reparations payments imposed after World War I, and keep the economy on some sort of operational footing. Although Germany's obligations had been reduced under the Young Plan, brokered in 1929, they continued to remain a major drag on the economy, one that also chilled foreign investment. 

For millions of voters, however, it was business as usual. With no obvious end to their hardships in sight, a starving nation ignored 
Brüning's stern admonitions to just continue eating their spinach. Like any good normie politician, Brüning proved incapable of meeting the moment, and unable to grasp why popular resentment now ran so visibly and strongly against him -- to the point of stones being hurled against his personal train and motorcade, as he campaigned for von Hindenburg during the March 1932 national elections.

The results ended in a runoff, with von Hindenburg narrowly denying Hitler the chancellorship, and the enormous power it represented. In spite of this setback, however, the Nazis emerged as the Reichstag's largest party, which made their presence in the government seem inevitable, if not its eventual masters. 
If you've seen the movie, you know how it ended, as von Hindenburg -- aided and abetted by operators like the notorious Franz von Papen, and Brüning's replacement, Kurt von Schleicher -- opened talks to bring Hitler into the government.

Even after the Nazis finally slithered into power in January 1933, after Hitler's appointment as Chancellor, Brüning could not shake his addiction to "lesser evil" logic. Why else, it's fair to ask, did he join the Centre Party that he continued to lead in supporting the aptly-titled Enabling Act, that finally gave Hitler the dictatorial powers that he'd craved so openly, and for so long? 

Like many of his peers, Brüning couldn't grasp the existential threat that such a measure represented, even at this particular eleventh hour. The rigors of party discipline required it; indeed, his political self-identity as "the adult in the room" demanded it.

Brüning's reward for impoverishing his fellow Germans was to end up being marked for death, once Hitler unleashed the Night of the Long Knives against his political enemies in June 1934. Seeing the danger, Brüning finally fled Germany, and fled to America. He returned to his academic roots at Harvard, where he taught from 1937 to 1952.

One anecdote sums up Brüning's legacy better than any other. In 1945, as Germany tasted the ashes of total defeat, a claque of Brüning supporters approached Allied officers, with a proposition: would they consider bringing back the former Chancellor? Who better, they argued, than the "adult in the room," who'd done his best, however ineffectual it had been deemed, to stem the Nazi tide?

Back came the reply, terse and dismissive, as soon as the suggestion had been made: "We were afraid you would mention him." And there, we will leave it.


<Doing his political duty: 
Brüning campaigns for von Hindenburg,
1932, at the Berlin Sportpalast: 
Bundesrachiv, Bild 192-13229>

<ii.>
Now that President Biden has finally admitted that he's finishing his term on December 31, it becomes easier to see why his re-election prospects looked so dim -- even against an opponent like Trump, with all his Grand Canyon-sized baggage, Still, if the race was neck and neck, the commentariat fretted, how could polls consistently show an outsized advantage for Trump over Biden, on whom voters trusted better to handle the economy?

The answer is simpler than they may want to admit. From the get-go, Team Biden banked heavily on conventional economic indicators to anchor their 2024 strategy, as this statement released from the President in April suggests: 

"The economy has grown more since I took office than at this point in any presidential term in the last 25 years -- including 3% growth over the last year -- while unemployment has stayed below 4% for more than two years. But we have more work to do. Costs are too high for working families, and I am fighting to lower them."

All well and good, right? Biden, like his predecessors, was filling his role as cheerleader in chief; otherwise, why would anybody follow him over the top? The problem lay in the glaring disconnect between the C-suite's narrative, and what those on the ground are enduring behind the scenes. Because, for the most part, their struggles go unreported, and therefore, unnoticed. 

Two-thirds of Americans, for example, say they couldn't find $500 to resolve an emergency, while half of all renters are cost burdened, meaning that 30% or more of their income is going to housing. (If that figure is 50% or more, you're considered severely cost burdened.) If this is really how the world's richest nation is doing, what does mean for poorer or middling ones?

And that's before we get to the relentless squeezing of the masses, whether it's happening at the kitchen table, or on basic monthly bills. My phone, for example, has rocketed from $70 to $115; electric, from $120 to $170; and cable, from $170 to $240 per month, all within the last two years.

It's the same story for smaller bills, like laundry, which has jumped from $1.50 to $2 per load for washing, and $1.25 to $1.75 per load for drying. It all adds up, and not in your favor -- because, in most cases, you're either getting the same, or way less, than you did previously, for your dollar. The last thing anybody wants to hear is how well the stock market's doing. "You mean, more make believe money, for those who've already socked away too much of it? Who's ready to party?"

Oh, wait. What about that unemployment metric, or Biden's claims of creating 400,000 new jobs per month? Well, there's a black joke making the rounds, that goes something like this: "Mr. President, I'm glad you're creating so many new jobs, because I have three of them." Pause for the punchline. "And they still don't pay my bills!"

It's a familiar refrain that leaves millions drained and defeated at the box office. Life loses any semblance of meaning when you're spending most of it trying to outrun the folks at the finish line, waiting with their hands held out. It's the kind of climate that leaves bank accounts as little more than polite fictions, since you don't get to keep most of the green paper that you struggle to accumulate, anyway. Someone else has already figured out a different use for it, so you might as well cough it up, and be done with it.

But it's a lesson that Biden -- much like his bygone German counterpart -- seemed hellbent on learning the hard way. When you insist, "Just keep on eating that spinach, and staring straight ahead, I don't exactly know when the hamburgers and steak dinners are coming yet," people begin tuning out the message, if not the messenger. And, of course, as we've detailed -- seeking out alternatives, no matter how extreme they may sound, to those who see through them.



<"Timely Reminder"/Take I:
The Reckoner>

<iii.>
Of course, it's simplistic to attribute Biden's exit from the Presidential race solely on the economy -- we're giving the "Cliff Notes" version here, to keep things moving -- but it definitely played a major part. So did the ongoing concerns about his age and overall condition, as well as his inability to hold the Democratic coalition, which had begun to fracture over those very issues.

In many ways, BIden proved a more consequential President than anyone could have expected, despite the constraints that he faced. The tragedy is that, like most established politicians, Biden didn't go bolder, when the opening presented itself. Quitting as he did -- right on the eve of the Republican convention -- marked the most punk rock thing that Biden ever did. 

It's a pity that Biden didn't apply those punk rock instincts to other dilemmas that bedeviled him, like the Supreme Court's dismissal of his student debt forgiveness plan. What would have it cost Biden to flip the bird to Extreme Supremes like Alito and Thomas, and say on national TV, "We're doing it, anyway, folks! Send the Supreme Court Police to arrest me, if you don't like it!"

The same goes Biden's belated embrace of a Supreme Court reform package -- including term limits, and an enforceable code of ethics, a notion that raises undeniable anxiety in the likes of  Alito and Thomas, who have gleefully accepted an eye-popping array of goodies from their billionaire bro buddies. 

However, like most of the punk rock thinking that Team Biden finally embraced, it came too little, and too late, to have any hope of saving his bacon. For progressives, Biden's refusal to entertain any regulation of the same court hellbent on kneecapping him marked one of his more puzzling lapses -- the Extreme Supremes being the only public figures with consistently lower approval ratings than his own. Failing to capitalize on such discrepancies seems like political malpractice, though again, Biden won't be the last established politician to commit it. 

Heinrich Brüning has also gone down in negative terms as a shy, reserved policy wonk, whose earnest approach and economics doctorate marked him as a poor fit in an age that had little patience for either, as Benjamin Carter Hett notes, in his Weimar autopsy, The Death Of Democracy:

"As chancellor, he was always trying to bring reasoned arguments to people who would never be reasonable, who in fact had no interest at all in facts or logic. 
Brüning's problem was that he was too reasonable to grasp such unreason." 





<iv.>
All right, then. With the sun slowly setting on the Biden era, it's worth asking, will the eleventh hour ascent of Vice President Kamala Harris take us to a better place? Perhaps, although so far, the initial evidence is inconclusive. 

On the plus side, Harris has staked out some strong markers through the various economic proposals that she's floated, starting with the need to crack down on price gouging. Everybody can get behind that one, right? Because, quite frankly, we've seen how well the gougers police themselves: 

It -- Doesn't -- F#cking -- Work!

She has thrown out a slew of proposals that are sound, and desperately needed, starting with cost of living: crack down on mergers and acquisitions that entrench monopoly power. Slap a ceiling on how much food producers and grocers can continue to charge.

Housing? Build three million more units. Cut bureaucratic red tape that's stifled the construction of affordable housing, and led to the explosion of McMansions. Ban the use of algorithms that landlords and property management companies to keep prices in line with each other, and frozen at permanent stratospheric levels. Promote new homeownership by making up to $25,000 in down payment assistance available. 

Taxes and medical costs? Cancel up to $7 billion in medical debt for three billion qualifying Americans. Expand the Earned Income Tax Credit, one of the few financial lifelines that working people get, by up to $1,500. Restore the child tax credit that gremlins like Joe Manchin ostentatiously tossed on the junk heap, once they declared "normalcy" back in fashion, by up to $3,600, plus a new credit (up to $6,000) for families with newborns. Speed up a Biden-era effort that would allow for regulation on drug prices, and lower them for everybody.

Once again, all well and good, right? On the worrying side, we've heard all this before -- until the Austerity Gumps, as I like to call them, pop up from their hiding places, wringing their hands, and unreeling their standard issue mantras: "Ooh, that's too expensive." "What's wrong with you? Do you really want the overclass going out in the cold and snow?" And so on, and so forth. Wash, rinse, repeat.

I bring this up, because we're looking at the potential fourth cycle of a Democrat coming in, to sweep up the enormous messes left by Republican predecessors (predators?). What happens, though, once the initial wave of excitement subsides? Every time the Democrats claw back into power, they lose their nerve, and fall back on standard lines -- which makes this particular nugget, marbled in Harris's nomination acceptance speech, sound suspiciously familiar:

"That’s why we will create what I call an opportunity economy. An opportunity economy where everyone has a chance to compete and a chance to succeed.”

As idealistic as this catch phrase sounds, it's really just the latest variation on similar mantras that I recall hearing in the Obama ("We are the people that we have been waiting for") and Clinton eras ("not a hand out, but a hand up"). Creating more opportunity sounds wonderful, until you realize that the United States has worked quite hard at becoming the world's most socially unequal society. All the high-flown vows won't mean anything, if Harris follows her predecessors, and remains content to tinker around the edges of an undeniably broken system.

How will we know if, or when, she finds the nerve? It might help to lift a page or two from the past, such as the approach that President Harry Truman undertook to jolt his Republican rivals -- and reset expectations among a public that largely written off his chances of winning a second term in office.

I leave you with these words from a radio address that Truman gave on October 13, 1948, in St. Paul, MN, during his celebrated "whistle stop" speaking tour of the nation. They feel every bit as relevant now, as they did then, especially when you consider what it takes to fight for truly transformative change, and bring it about:

"Republicans approve of the American farmer, but they are willing to help him go broke. They stand four-square for the American home — but not for housing. They are strong for labor — but they are stronger for restricting labor's rights. They favor minimum wage — the smaller the minimum wage the better.

"They endorse educational opportunity for all — but they won't spend money for teachers or for schools. They think modern medical care and hospitals are fine — for people who can afford them... They think American standard of living is a fine thing — so long as it doesn't spread to all the people. And they admire the Government of the United States so much that they would like to buy it."

Let's hope that Team Harris gets that message, too, and puts out the word, once it does, and follow those intentions with some old school direct action. For a handy reminder, look no further than the slogan on any DOA record sleeve:

"Talk - Action = 0."

I rest my case, Your Honor. Even though the defense, mind you, never rests. Because there is always so much work to do.--The Reckoner


Links To Go (Food For Thought --
Figuratively, And Literally)
Econstor: 
Brüning's Austerity Policies...:
https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/261405/1/1811659055.pdf

Naked Capitalism: The Rebellion Will Not Go Away:
https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2016/03/gaius-publius-the-rebellion-will-not-go-away.html

[Written on the eve of the 2016 election, with many comments that seem eerily prescient of our current malaise]

[Well written- and reasoned summary of our current malaise...]


Peterson Institute For International Economics: