Comments by "DXR" (@MrDXRamirez) on "Status Coup News"
channel.
-
1
-
If we want a Green New Deal superimposed on this troika of industries, i.e., auto, oil, and government, than the GND must be funded from the economic surplus this troika generates for itself, that is capitalized into profits for and by the owners of this troika. Profit is the privatization of the economic surplus naturally being produced by labor and capital regardless of their proportions in production is true for all industries of all types. Replacing the machinery that runs on oil with machinery that runs on sun power does not stop the process of production, to the contrary, new cars that run on alternative energy are produced and this eliminates the need for oil and the need for an oil oligarchy. I say this because the New Deal was funded on taxing the rich higher rates, thus a transfer of wealth, from the rich to the poor, creating a Welfare State, we all want to avoid in the future. The New Deal did not involve a new source of energy and therefore did not have to do away with a generic social class over which every industry has its own oligarchy, thus, many oligarchies as a generic class become ' a thing of the past' if all industries each generate their own economic surplus that can fund their own conversion. If a product can not be adapted to a new use even if its conversion has happened the industry will disappear. Government's role would be to identify what industries will perish in the new society and which ones will succeed and invest into its population coping with those changes. The only role government should have in society is defense, health, education, disaster recovery and conservation/renewal of the environment. With oligarchy a thing of the past the conflicts are social not both economic and social with oligarchs in place. New energy will call up new products and government subsidizing the rich or the poor, is a return to the past not a leap into the future.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Bernie's speech in the Senate in 2010 of the loss of manufacturing jobs in the US is a dismal picture of the death of the industrial blue collar American working class. Their children misguided by neo-fascists on line, are lashing out with violent rage at the neoliberal order for destroying their future was an unforseen sociological consequence the democrats missed when they ran Hillary Clinton. That was the time to push legislation on the tech industry to root violent tendencies out of the internet to protect impressionable minds. The neglect in government is corruption serving itself as they say. A whole generation lost historical context and sense of belonging fell prey to the tech industry in search of belonging and context Trump was only too happy to provide a scapegoat. Corresponding to all that going on wages were sinking, as Bernie said and the trend continues. The blue collar working class is decimated, gone, and now the average working class jobs we see people doing around us everyday pay is minimum wage. Employers have a perfect economic situation to exploit, as their companies grow larger and larger from higher rates of productivity of workers inside the offices, warehouses, shops, distribution centers, they own they can hire more labor for the lowest amount in payment in wages to move more product. The worker's share of this product is nothing.
Textile industry was the first to export production from the US and with the rise of industrial production in China, a huge chunk of American general production went offshore to China.
The democrats failed to take certain steps to protect the working class from the sociological dimensions of losing a job, a career, a family, a middle class lifestyle. It would be an asset if more sociologically minded people ran for office, sociologists themselves, they have certain insights that regular politicians do not, they learn from experience what not to do. Insight in Bernie makes him so special, he has a sociological mind the general consciousness of the public does not. The Public does nt have much imagination we can call a universal awareness of its own common calling, that is why we have Popes, presidents, kings, monarchs, princes, and oligarchs, injecting ideas into our heads the class struggle and the concept of working-class emancipation as a self-emancipation is not real!
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Manhattan is where all the social action happens.
Its a place for the young and young at heart.
But life north of 14 St. is a place for the old.
People forget that places like Chelsea, Park Ave, West Side, East Side, Harlem, Jackson Heights were individual towns within the city. Settled by early immigrants and divided along class lines of rich and poor these places became city neighborhoods when more of the grassland was taken up by building construction they became little towns reflecting their immigrant origins. More people, more apartments, more buildings they lost their early town feel and became city neighborhoods. The entire world is packed into an island today.
The real action all happens above Wall Street and below Union Square. This is where all the social experimentation is made. Creative people, wide open, and on the edge.
Take a historical tour of the Village you’d be surprised to know who were in those buildings, cafés.
Rich history of individuals from every era. City life and suburban life are opposites.
Narrow and slow, a bar and church, the lodge...a mall...meeting your every need.
Society should close the gap between town and country.
I would imagine a car protest would do that.
1
-
1
-
If workers owned the product they would never allow their product to be damaged or ruined by a strike. If the workers owned a share of the market value of the product they would never stop production. By the same token if workers owned a share of the product (i.e., the factory, trucks, cement, sand, machines and tools, etc.,) they would never destroy that investment which is partially their source of income and employment. But as long as workers do not own a share of the product (i..e, factory, machines, etc.,) or a market share of the product it is the vast number of consumer-buyers who are made dependent, therefore, live precariously, on that industry for its necessaries and who suffer if that industry cannot work or function. I think workers should build a movement for more ownership of the means of production and half ownership of the market share of the products they produce and which corporations sell on the world market despite what the Supreme Court rules. Such a movement would be more powerful than the state’s repressive resources and make any decision of the SCOTUS ineffectual, because such a movement changes the relations of property of a particular social contract to a more general social contract that no longer engulfs employment and industries into a social conflict. Wages and salaries can be a thing of the past.
1