Pres. Obama’s popularity with working-class white Americans increasingly grows during presidency?

Stereotyping? Perhaps? But Is it inaccurate? The world is changing fast and people need to keep up too. Government help is need for those who want to change, but peopld need to recognize that the good old days are gone forever.



This so call crisis started decades ago. The world is moving to a smarter economy. In China, rural working adult rush to cities as the jobs are there, often leaving children to be take care by grandparents. There are social consequences, but that's how China modernized, by embracing urbanization and forcing the rural area to change.

With factories moving away from China, the rural population squating in cities are now used to build the largest express delivery which all the meals and shopping apps used to great effect.

"Stereotyping? Perhaps? But Is it inaccurate? "

Are you defending stereotyping? And there is no "Perhaps" in that, it was exactly that. All stereotypes may have a grain of truth in them, nonetheless, they paint everyone in that category with an extremely broad brush, negating individuals accomplishments, education, expertise, and marginalizing them completely.

"here are social consequences, but that's how China modernized, by embracing urbanization and forcing the rural area to change."

WHY do WE need to change to continue enriching Transnationalists and people who don't care a whit about us? We have had great migrations here for people seeking jobs, blacks from the south, Appalachians on at least three occasions, but in each of there was hope for a better future. That no longer exists, and there quite simply aren't enough well paying jobs around to gainfully and fruitfully employ the mass of people. Considering the number of photos I've seen of Chinese workers living quarters consisting of a bed less the size of a shipboard bunk covered in steel screen to keep others out, I don't think China is a successful example. Social consequences are often not seen until a generation has passed, and then its too late to get the genie back in the bottle and society as a whole suffers.

Barry I don't think your defending stereotyping. I am angry, we were sold a bill of worthless goods with NAFTA, then CAFTA, the "Drug War" and a slew of others, I remember sacrifices made by us in uniform, I see the hurt in the nation now, my fellow citizens suffering, and my blood boils.
 
What jobs can be created though? Factories is going to be more automated and service jobs are going to be focused in cities.

What is interestinh why there is no massive move of rural population to urban areas, just like what happened in Chins.

That occurred here from the 1880s or 1890s to the 1940s. The tipping point where the population was split 50/50 was in the 1920s. By the 1950s less than 20% were truly rural, as opposed to small town dwellers on towns between 10,000 & 50,000. While they don't have as many Starbucks the town dwellers in the current under 50,000 population centers are exposed to the same entertainment media, education, core services, food, ect... as those in the multi million pop. centers. I work in a number of midwestern rust belt cities and smaller towns. While the general prospects in Frankfort, or New Castle Indiana are dim for many people the perception is the quality of life & prospects to struggle along are better than in Indianapolis, Cinncinatti, or Chicago region. Folks will move to the bigger city if they have a specific opportunity, but the days of packing off to the big town on a hunch are largely over. There is also a reverse movement of people back to smaller towns or cities where there is a specific opportunity for them, or where they feel safer. In the latter groups are early retires who sell their condo or upscale suburban house & head down state to a small town where residences & property taxes are extremely cheap, at least up front. I've done some residence rehab for exactly those people opting out of the high cost cities.
 
I’ve also read that manufacturing itself is a shrinking pie, but would like to see a graph regarding this.

As far as number of workers thats true. Automation is replacing foreign labor as the employee eliminator. Perhaps it already has in a previous decade? It seems manufacturing requiring high skill/tech has been moving back to the US, or remaining here. It just does not employ people with the same skill levels as in 1910 or 1940, or even 1980. Even the construction industry is slowly automating
 
Last edited:
. . . WHY do WE need to change to continue enriching Transnationalists and people who don't care a whit about us? We have had great migrations here for people seeking jobs, blacks from the south, Appalachians on at least three occasions, but in each of there was hope for a better future. That no longer exists, and there quite simply aren't enough well paying jobs around to gainfully and fruitfully employ the mass of people [Emphasis added by GeographyDude]. . .
A lot of people have trouble accepting this.

As an example, this article:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.theatlantic.com/amp/article/542439/
It’s says even medium-income workers have difficulty moving to New York or San Fran because housing and rent is just so damn expensive. And this is because of housing and land regulations which many of the upper middle-class homeowners are all in favor of because it protects their single biggest investment.

So, it’s the metaphor of plenty of jobs, just certain obstacles to be gotten around.
 
Last edited:

youtube: The Rise of the Machines – Why Automation is Different this Time

This is the metaphor I accept. We can look at actual events in the slow erosion of manufacturing jobs since the late ‘70s, maybe sooner. And look at 8:30 into this video. Between 1998 and 2013, total labor hours in the U.S. remained the same, even with a healthy increase in productivity and more than 40 million persons added to the United States. And yes, four years after the Great Recession, should have seen more of a recovery.

I am very open-minded toward an investors’ society version of an Universal Basic Income (UBI). With no means testing, it will have less potential to rub people the wrong way regarding images of other people potentially edge-cheating (as social monkeys, we are very attune to this).

We still be a tough sell politically. And, if I had my choice, I’d rather not put all my eggs in this one basket.
 
"Stereotyping? Perhaps? But Is it inaccurate? "

Are you defending stereotyping? And there is no "Perhaps" in that, it was exactly that. All stereotypes may have a grain of truth in them, nonetheless, they paint everyone in that category with an extremely broad brush, negating individuals accomplishments, education, expertise, and marginalizing them completely.

"here are social consequences, but that's how China modernized, by embracing urbanization and forcing the rural area to change."

WHY do WE need to change to continue enriching Transnationalists and people who don't care a whit about us? We have had great migrations here for people seeking jobs, blacks from the south, Appalachians on at least three occasions, but in each of there was hope for a better future. That no longer exists, and there quite simply aren't enough well paying jobs around to gainfully and fruitfully employ the mass of people. Considering the number of photos I've seen of Chinese workers living quarters consisting of a bed less the size of a shipboard bunk covered in steel screen to keep others out, I don't think China is a successful example. Social consequences are often not seen until a generation has passed, and then its too late to get the genie back in the bottle and society as a whole suffers.

Barry I don't think your defending stereotyping. I am angry, we were sold a bill of worthless goods with NAFTA, then CAFTA, the "Drug War" and a slew of others, I remember sacrifices made by us in uniform, I see the hurt in the nation now, my fellow citizens suffering, and my blood boils.

There's an argument to be made that Trump's election in 2016 was, in considerable part, driven by people who wanted to go back to what they imagined to be the halcyon days of the 1950's and 1960's when they themselves were young. They're now finding out, though, that not only were things not the way they imagined, but even if they were, those days are never coming back, and they don't know how to deal with those two unpalatable facts.

Because the force of technology and market is moving silently but relentlessly forward like the sea, one either sink or move with it. China reformed itself from a developing backward country to a booming economy in only 30 years. Social consequences are aplenty, but economic growth smooths over a lot of things. As Deng Xiaoping said, "To get rich is glorious."

One thing to remember is that deindustralization is not something unique to USA. Hong Kong start to deindustralized 20 years ago when China opened up, all the HK factories moved back to China. The local factory workers either laid off/ retired, moved back to China a technicians, or change to service industry, often with poorer pay. But HK and China as societies got richer and some of the benefits did trickle down, albeit there are tregadies.

As for China, there is a rust belt in China too:https://www.forbes.com/sites/gordon...ina-is-the-worlds-next-rustbelt/#18fe82c876df

The laid off young unskilled workers from factories, often coming from poor rural areas but proficient in use of IT techs, become the backbone of the express delivery industry that now supports the numerous consumer apps that rely on cheap labour. However, occupational safety does improved by virtue of the less dangerous nature of the service industry. Such new "internet plus economy", as named by the PRC government, offered escape routes to young unskilled people when building industry stalls and factories closed down, as the white-collar people earn more and need more service industry. One does not need the wallet anymore in China, the smartphone can order and pay for everything.

https://technode.com/2017/10/20/apps-for-living-in-china/

how-to-use-meituan.jpg


American manufacturers, in short, are gaining on the Chinese. Boston Consulting Group has predicted that around 2015 it will become more economical to manufacture in the U.S. than China in seven industrial sectors. American workers are more productive and less likely to strike than their Chinese counterparts. Moreover, as suggested above, transportation costs are much lower and delivery times far shorter when goods are made here. And energy is substantially cheaper in America.

Of course, these trends do not mean all manufacturing will come back to America. “As far as my industry is concerned, I don’t see production moving out of China to the U.S. in the foreseeable future,” said Willie Fung Wai-yiu of undergarment maker Top Form International to the South China Morning Post. “Our trade is labor intensive.”

Yet some labor-intensive garments are now being made in the U.S., as my wife's stroll around our local Walmart, located in Manville, New Jersey, revealed yesterday. There, for instance, she found Mainstays bedding with U.S. labels.

Chinese goods were hard to find. She saw that every piece of clothing in Walmart’s house brand, George, was made in Bangladesh. Items with the Hanes label came from Guatemala and El Salvador, Wrangler jeans from Nicaragua, Fruit of the Loom from Honduras. Danskin apparel was imported from Jordan, Egypt, and Kenya. If you want to know where Simply Basic sleepwear comes from, fly to Cambodia.

A lot of people have trouble accepting this.

As an example, this article:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.theatlantic.com/amp/article/542439/
It’s says even medium-income workers have difficulty moving to New York or San Fran because housing and rent is just so damn expensive. And this is because of housing and land regulations which many of the upper middle-class homeowners are all in favor of because it protects their single biggest investment.

So, it’s the metaphor of plenty of jobs, just certain obstacles to be gotten around.

The local Starbucks now require decent English skills as their target customers included large number of expats, so those do poor in school can't even get shitty service industry jobs.

Given the unavoidable trend, a good government should assist those want to change and upgrade themselves. Benefits should be provide to those who cannot or do not want to change so that they have a decent life. Doing neither is abandoning the mandate to govern.
 
Last edited:
I wish these guys all the best! The first guy doesn't look at that young, the third guy a little younger. The plastic face plates I guess are for insects or kicked up rocks?

A server in a restaurant can make good money if they know how to cheat the system just a little bit for the benefit of the customer. I imagine it's the same for these delivery riders. There's a lot of luck, some days are definitely better than others.

But no way is risking road accidents safer than working in a factory.
 
Last edited:
The local Starbucks now require decent English skills as their target customers included large number of expats, so those do poor in school can't even get shitty service industry jobs.

Given the unavoidable trend, a good government should assist those want to change and upgrade themselves. Benefits should be provide to those who cannot or do not want to change so that they have a decent life. Doing neither is abandoning the mandate to govern.
Ah, this is the two sides of the coin.

Look, I'm all in favor of people learning a lot just to learn a lot. Just like all the work we do here at Alternate History, and all for scot free.

But it quickly gets to the point where I say, a meritocracy isn't good enough. That is, if an economic system says in the future, "True, we only have medium-good and really-good jobs for 10% of our people, but we're eminently fair about who gets that 10%" <— that's nowhere near good enough!
 
Last edited:
President Obama's State of the Union Address, Jan. 25, 2011

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Sta...-union-2011-full-transcript/story?id=12759395

.

.

' . . . This is our generation's Sputnik moment [Emphasis added]. Two years ago, I said that we needed to reach a level of research and development we haven't seen since the height of the Space Race. In a few weeks, I will be sending a budget to Congress that helps us meet that goal. We'll invest in biomedical research, information technology, and especially clean energy technology – an investment that will strengthen our security, protect our planet, and create countless new jobs for our people. . . '

.

.

I think this is fine. In fact, I think it's pretty good.

The only thing I might add is that people believe in infrastructure so much that it's important to spell out the costs and limitations.
 
Last edited:
I think this is fine. In fact, I think it's pretty good.

The only thing I might add is that people believe in infrastructure so much that it's important to spell out the costs and limitations.

In part its because the cost of poor infrastructure is visible. Here in Indiana cities like Lafayette made a effort to keep up the infrastructure. that seems to connect to the assorted new manufacturing built here between 1970 & 2017. Mainline rust belt cities like Kokomo or Richmond have been dominated for the 20th Century by fiscally 'responsible' conservatives and they have a lot less to show in terms of cars vs weeds in the old factory parking lots. Iknow correlation does not reliably indicate cause. But, when a city council passes on a multi million dollar stimulus grant from the Feds and won't even fund the demolition of the burnt out meth houses on each block you have to wonder if the place has any future at all.
 

Ian_W

Banned
There's no polite way to put this.

With the endemic racism in American society, there is no way an exceptionally smart, socially mobile constitutional lawyer can have the support of working class white Americans if he's black.

Like Bill Clinton, Obama was a get along to go along politician, except that he was from Chicago rather than Arkansas. His instinct was to cut deals, but regrettably he was dealing with the rancid remains of Nixon's Southern Strategy, which meant that there were no deals to be cut in the Senate with a black President.

The man literally saved the lives of tens of thousands in Appalachia and the rest of the districts inhabited by what used to be called "poor white trash". And they still hated him.

Because he was smart, and successful, and black.
 
. . Mainline rust belt cities like Kokomo or Richmond have been dominated for the 20th Century by fiscally 'responsible' conservatives and they have a lot less to show in terms of cars vs weeds in the old factory parking lots. .
I think every since Bush, Sr., cut a deal with Congress to raise taxes along with spending cuts. It may even have been a good deal for the sake of the deficit, but he was seen by the Republican rightwing as compromising far too early in the process and as going back on his campaign promise of “Read my lips: no new taxes,”

well, a certain strain of conservatives would almost rather the house burn down, than raise taxes under any circumstances!

I wish a city would tax a little bit more during good times and maybe even build up a slight reserve, and then during bad times we could more confidently and more aggressively deficit-spend and maybe even hire a couple of extra employees and thus get some of the counter-cyclical Keynesian approach going. Yes, even on the city level! :)
 

Ian_W

Banned
This is specifically illegal in most of the US, with local governments required to run balanced budgets. Even if that is not true, then if a local government runs a deficit, the money is spent at the local WalMart (or wherever), and then leaves the district - Local Keynesiansism runs into a current account problem rather quickly.

As well, this Paul Krugman column may help.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/30/opinion/the-gamblers-ruin-of-small-cities-wonkish.html
 
There's no polite way to put this.

With the endemic racism in American society, there is no way an exceptionally smart, socially mobile constitutional lawyer can have the support of working class white Americans if he's black. . .
Yes, racism has echoed through American presidential politics since Nixon’s “southern strategy” in ‘68. But no, if you ask a particular voter, he or she will swear up and down that they’re not being racist.

Look, people over-emphasize what a president can do. And then when there’s a slow recovery of jobs — HUGE ISSUE — by around 2010 or 2011, people perceive malice rather than simple incompetence or limited good options (this last one being closer to the truth). They then thrash around desperately for an all-in-one answer such that Obama’s a socialist or an elitist. And the more extreme citizens decided very early on that he was a Kenyan or a Muslim. Not that there’s anything wrong with being a Muslim instead of a Christian or a Buddhist or a Hindu, but if someone kept getting my religion wrong as part of some kooky conspiracy theory and/or public insult, I think I’d get pretty pissed off. In my universe, President Barack Obama showed admirable forbearance throughout his eight years.

————-

PS We here at AH also over-emphasize presidents and talk about them much more than Congress, economic trends, cultural movements, etc. That is, we subscribe to the “great man” or “great woman” version of history, we do so in practice whatever we say in theory. And I do this, too.
 
Last edited:

Pax

Banned
With the endemic racism in American society, there is no way an exceptionally smart, socially mobile constitutional lawyer can have the support of working class white Americans if he's black.

That's a...bold claim.
 
I think every since Bush, Sr., cut a deal with Congress to raise taxes along with spending cuts. It may even have been a good deal for the sake of the deficit, but he was seen by the Republican rightwing as compromising far too early in the process and as going back on his campaign promise of “Read my lips: no new taxes,”

well, a certain strain of conservatives would almost rather the house burn down, than raise taxes under any circumstances!

Theres more than a few rust belt cities that have been doing that for decades. Some notable exceptions exist. My home base Lafayette In is one. Ironically dominated by the Democratic party four decades its a island of new factories and warehouse/distribution operations. Some people attribute this to the university present, but Muncie has a well respected technology school (Ball State) but has fewer square meters of new manufacturing or service industry construction per capita. The difference seems to have been the willingness back in the 1960s-80s of the city and county governments to pay forward on infrastructure. Another difference is the local factories still have a high portion of Union labor, which is very counter intuitive.

Theres also been a perhaps related problem of the tax base being outside the cities. The municipal boundaries have been slow in following suburban growth The highest potential residential property tax and business tax revenue stream lie outside the municipalities, where they are taxed at a far lower rate. There is for obvious reasons resistance to annexation into the larger municipal entities resulting in a fragmented, inefficient administration and a tax revenue stream lower than the requirement for a early mid 20th century level of infrastructure investment.

Again there are exceptions. In the latter 1960s the State legislature rammed UniGov through the opposition in Marion County, allowing Indianapolis to more efficiently distribute services and infrastructure investment. This waived away the effect of several decades of White Flight to the suburbs, and allowed a consistent development policy/plan across the entire urban region.

I wish a city would tax a little bit more during good times and maybe even build up a slight reserve, and then during bad times we could more confidently and more aggressively deficit-spend and maybe even hire a couple of extra employees and thus get some of the counter-cyclical Keynesian approach going. Yes, even on the city level! :)

Some do, but its not common. The growth of activist anti tax, anti spend, and reduced government factions in the last few decades have made 'savings' more difficult. Rather than have a obvious savings or rainy day fund astute city administrators will fudge around with the next years budget and sandbag extra funds inside project accounts and roll the surplus around to another pending project. Locally the Tea Party member of the county council was lacking in any business or basic bookkeeping knowledge so he never caught on to what he was looking at in the county budget/finance reports.
 
This is specifically illegal in most of the US, with local governments required to run balanced budgets. . .
Well, um, it's a stupid law and we ought to change it! :p In particular, if I was a city council member, I would not want to lay off city employees during an economic downturn.
 
So what should Pres. Obama have done?

He should have used the phrases "President Franklin Roosevelt" and "New Deal" in his Inaugural Address, thereby pulling from what people are already familiar with and comfortable with. This would have been both good policy and good politics.
 
. . . Theres also been a perhaps related problem of the tax base being outside the cities. . .
A lot of this is driven by parents wanting to live in "good" school districts, and yes, race is definitely one factor. I think my United States missed a tremendous opportunity to start making all schools equally good, hopefully post-Sputnik late '50s and into the '60s, but this didn't happen.
 
Top