Hint of Racism?

When you see the candidates put up by the administration and sometimes confirmed by the Senate, you have to wonder does anyone actually look into these guys?

Forget about their political beliefs but when candidate after candidate has questionable issues in their background that indicate they may have been engaged in a racist activity or maybe sexual abuse, why not find someone without those issues?

It seems like they just don't care or at least the administration doesn't.

The explanation is that the qualities they look for are more about loyalty than character and qualifications.

If you have been a loyal member of the party or loyal to the dontard, a nomination is your reward.

Now patronage of this sort has always been a part of politics, although over the years attempts have been made to reduce it.  The success of those attempts are obviously limited.

Prior administrations generally tried to present candidates who could survive a background investigation into their character, at least a legitimate one.

That is part of the problem as the explosion of cable news and Internet sources have led to many bogus conspiracy and character accusations.

If you entertain the idea that some prominent democrats ran a sex ring our of a pizzeria in Washington D.C. (they didn't), these accusations seem tame.

It is hard to determine what is valid vs what isn't with all the bogus stuff being tossed about.

There is plenty of fake news, its just not published by the reputable news agencies.

CNN or the New York Times may have an editorial opinion but what they broadcast or publish is consistent with journalistic standards.  The same can't be said for many others who express unfounded opinions which have no foundation.

Unfortunately, this is often mistaken for actual news when it isn't.

It creates a kind of smoke screen for the actual issues.

Boom Eonomy?

Is the Economy booming?

There are a lot of positive measures and if you are in the top groups you are doing pretty well.

This is a reflection of the ongoing economic trend where skills get rewarded and robots replace the rest.

So we see a concentration of wealth at the top while the middle shrinks and the poor generally get poorer.

This is not an unusual model in world economies, just a bit unusual for this country.

For most of our history we had a labor shortage, not just a shortage of skilled workers but workers for unskilled positions as well.

This enabled those workers, with the help in many cases of unions to win pay raises and benefits for doing, well robotic type work.

The factory used to have many jobs for able bodied people who had few skills, and it paid well.

Then two things happened.

One of the great trends in the last 25 years or so was outsourcing of subassemblies.

Not so long ago, at least it doesn't seem that long ago, a major manufacturer would build everything in plant with some exceptions for specialized items.

Then we saw a realization that parts could be outsourced, at first domestically and later internationally for less then it cost to build them, partly because of the pay and benefits of employees.

So non-union domestic shops started taking jobs from union workers in the old manufacturing plants.  This expanded to non-union and non-domestic shops as we saw shipping costs reduce and trade barriers disappeared.

The second thing was the advent of automation.  Robots could weld, turn bolts, cut parts and move objects with a vey small amount of human intervention.  I remember years ago in IT, the goal was to have a lights out environment for the servers meaning no people needed to be involved.  We are getting close to that in many of our manufacturing plants.

If you see pictures of an auto assembly plant (they are assembling all those outsourced parts) you see robots and generally no people.

Of course it was more than just manufacturing, automation has impacted every aspect of our lives.  New jobs were created, primarily in service areas and generally lower paying with fewer benefits, if any so we see low unemployment rates but little growth in disposable income, for these people.

The profits increased as payroll decreased and those profits went to the owners and managers as well as the fewer skilled workers still needed.

Most of the prior workers got left out.

So booming?  If you are one of the fortunate ones, it is.

But to quote an old song, for a lot of the country, "It ain't me".

Future Jobs

We see a lot of outrage over the recent announcement by GM that it was closing a number of auto plants in the US and laying off a significant number of employees.

This was of course an economic decision in line with decisions made by many other plants and factories in recent years.

It is designed to increase profitability and shareholder value.

Our favorite dontard is outraged and it clearly demonstrates that his promises to reverse this trend and keep and increase jobs in these industries is simply meaningless.

Its a promise he had no way of keeping and the economy is way too complex for him to understand.

Now, there may even be a face saving press release that will act like the plans were revised, but whatever it says it will not interrupt the economic forces that led to the decision.

During the campaign we saw photo ops at a number of plants the dontard claimed to have saved, but most of them went ahead with their plans anyway.

They were based on economics, not rhetoric.

In fact the uncertainty of the tariffs from the dontard will almost definitely encourage more off-shore production.

The US market is a very profitable one, but it is also a mature one.  Population and wage growth are low and that limits growth for most existing products.  Yes, if someone develops something new, like say the I-Phone, you might see explosive growth, but we already have plenty of cars.

You need to compete in emerging markets and you need to incorporate low cost imported parts.

Our trade policy becomes a problem.

Our future prosperity needs to be tied to future products, renewable energy, solar panels, technology, services, etc.  A policy that tries to bring back the past is simply short sighted and doomed.

Mississippi Senate Race

My only actual experience with Mississippi is that some flights I took had stops in Jackson.

Images of the State are generally not very good, at least to most people from the North as it was the deepest of deep south states with a history of slavery, Jim Crow, chain gangs, school segregation etc. etc.

It is now about to elect a Senator in a runoff and the odds are they will elect the Republican.

That wouldn't normally be much news except this one has displayed either outright racism or at least a strong hint of it with comments about public hangings, the confederacy, and is the embodiment of the white establishment in the start.

She might not actually be a racist, at least by her standards, but I'm pretty certain she grew up in a way that distinguished between white people and non-white people.

This is by no means unique to Mississippi or southern states, we have enough of it in the north.

Its just not as blatant.

It would be a real sign of change if the republican lost, although it isn't very likely.

Mississippi has the largest percentage of black people of any state.

Sooner or later they will have a strong say on the future of the State.

Maybe today is a place to start.

Increase Spending, Reduce Taxes, Deficit?

It seems the current administration has a problem with math.  If you reduce income and increase spending it turns our you have less money, not more.

Of course the fuzzy logic was that the growth rate was going to explode and increase revenue even with the reduced tax rates.

Problem with this was the country was already well into the recovery and growth could at best be tweaked.

If we had had a large number of unemployed, we might have seen users turning into contributors but we already had low unemployment.  The bigger issue was that many of the jobs were low paying service jobs as opposed to high paying manufacturing jobs.

Those jobs aren't coming back in the numbers that would be required and in fact, more and more of them will fall victim to automation.

The well paid jobs require skills or at least an entrepreneurial spirit.

However, being employed but making minimum wage or something close to it, does not solve the deficit problem since it doesn't result in much in taxes, and may keep you on some benefit programs.

When you consider the tax reductions mostly ended up in the pockets of wealthy individuals who didn't increase anything that would create jobs, the fuzzy math gets fuzzier.

Meanwhile the spending on mandatory programs like Social Security and Medicare as well as increased spending on defense, border security and infrastructure with a increase in the cost of money has led to a skyrocketing deficit.

It is of course a mathematical certainty, but not to this group.

If they were asked to do a math problem with one train traveling east and the other train traveling west, the answer would be the trains colliding.

Embedded Government

One theme that recurs with the current administration is how they like to portray themselves as victims .
This plays well with their base which also considers themselves victimized by the powers that be, apparently themselves.
Ignoring the theme of denied self entitlement, this administration faces the same checks and balances as every other administration has.
Government doesn't reboot itself when a new administration gets elected.  First we have 235 years of previous history where laws and the constitution guarantee certain behaviors by Government employees.
Some things can be changed by Executive Orders, but, that is limited by the division of powers.
To think anything about this is unique is of course part of their victim mentality.
The business of government is by its very nature a bureaucratic thing and it requires planning, hard work, and compromise, all areas not strong points with this group.
They think that they can push things through by public announcements and attacking this with different opinions
It has led to a lot of public bluster but few actual lasting changes.
Considering the  policies they tried to enact that's not the worst thing.

Science or Opinion?

Not everything is a matter of opinion.

For example, we know when water boils, and if you want to hold a different opinion you are just wrong.

The age we live in has in some ways allowed certain people to treat everything as relative.

Most things aren't.

It often doesn't matter when people decide to reject certain facts.  If you want to believe the Earth is flat, go ahead.  You are demonstrably wrong, but who cares?

If on the other hand you fail to vaccinate your children because you believe the proven fallacies of the dangers of vaccination you are risking them and others to dangerous diseases.

Are vaccinations risk free?  Well nothing is risk free really, but the risks are not related to the wild rumors on the Internet, they are extremely rare.

Similarly, the impact of man on the climate is no longer a matter of opinion if it ever was.

Clearly pumping tons of pollutants into the air is not a beneficial thing and while we had trouble measuring the full impact at one time, science can now determine its impacts and consequences.

Science likes to express some facts as ranges, because even when the data is clear, the calculations almost always include some variables that can change the prediction.

The change is a matter of range, not of reversal.

So if the prediction is that something bad will happen in 50 to 60 years, it is not unsettled science, it is the nature of future variability.

The federal government issued a report after detailed studies which spells out the catastrophic consequences of climate change if we don't do something.  In some cases it is probably already too late.

Denial is not really an option and the results are sound science, not opinions.

You can't wish them away.

The Refugee Problem

One of the success stories of western civilization and western economics is that it attracts so many people from poorer countries.

It is of course also one of its problems, the number of people who are attracted to the better life it promises.

Most of the western world has consumer based economies where the production of consumer items employs many at good wages leading to more money to spend on consumer items.

Underlying this economy is of course certain fundamental industries, but as we see consumer spending growing every year it becomes a bigger percentage of the economy as a whole.  It is currently a little over 70% of the economy, as measured by GDP.

To people living is poor, war ravaged areas where clean drinking water is a real concern, seeing images of people ordering exotic coffees or any of the million other consumer items we hardly think about is an image of a paradise they want to be a part of.

Obviously not all of them but enough that it becomes a problem for many western countries, or at least a perceived problem.

It obviously varies country by country and some of the poorer European countries with high unemployment can hardly afford thousands of more needy people.

On the other hand the United States actually has plenty of work for them once they get acclimated and the objections are generally more related to social issues, and rhetoric.

The nature of the issues tends to define the areas hardest hit, so the southern tier of European countries are generally the most accessible to most of the new refugees and ask for help from richer northern European countries.

It is however more of a worldwide issue that should probably be dealt with via consensus, although of course we are currently not interested in such arrangements.

It really is a much more problematic issue elsewhere but it is a tale of human misery which impacts all of us to at least some extent.

Happy Thanksgiving

There are many things to be thankful for and we should probably remember that more than once a year.

Still I guess once a year is better than never so I hope everyone has a wonderful day and considers all the things that are good instead of just focusing on some of the bad.

There is plenty of days to focus on the bad things around.

Happy Thanksgiving.

2020 Will We See Better?

Was looking at some poll results and our dontard manages to get over 50% on the economy but much lower numbers in every other category.

These polls were speculating about re-election scenarios and whether his "glowing" reviews on the economy will be enough to get re-elected.

Not sure how scores just over 50% are glowing, but they are at least on the plus side.

I think any speculation about 2020 is premature, but that's not going to stop me from expressing some views.

Clearly, as the polls pointed out, the electoral college works to his favor as many smaller population rural states have extras representation.  Since we are not going to get rid of the college easily this has to factor in to any campaign strategy.

One issue facing both parties is that the democrats have become associated with coastal elitism while republicans appeal to less educated white men and to a lesser extent white women.  We saw in the recent mid-terms that college educated voters were strongly against the republican party as it is today.

The reason for this is partly because the power structure and economics are changing in a way that has resulted in some erosion of what is white privilege, viewed by them as reverse discrimination.

So the issue is to somehow overcome the fake news network which paints this picture and show that rising opportunities for all is not a bad thing and that the economy is not a zero sum game.

Unfortunately, they were hit by economic forces related to automation and in some cases trade but these are not because the jobs and opportunities were funneled to immigrants and minorities, but because the owners made more profits.

Who is best to convey this message remains to be determined, but the message has to be that they are part of the future, not just relegated to the past.

Infighting

It always seems that success leads to distractions in politics.  The Democrats have taken control of the House but the big story concerns the revolt against Nancy Pelosi.

She has significant baggage since she was the speaker of the house the last time the Democrats were in charge.

She has a big role in passing the affordable care act but at the time she took a lot of criticism.

Any politician in a position of power is going to get criticised but th criticisms of Pelosi have taken on a life of their own.

She has been a staunch supporter of Democratic policies and equal opportunity, but she has had to make compromises over the years.

Compromise is not acceptable to some of our newly elected Progressives but they should realize compromise is the oil that gets things done.

Moving the party further left is fine but taking extreme positions isnt.  It's also important to choose the right battles and fighting over the leadership after an electoral victory probably isnt.

Government Distrust

One of the things that has always been somewhat confusing about the American democracy is how many people think the Government is their enemy.

This tracks back to our earliest days when mistrust of the Government led to the Bill of Rights, a protection from the Government oppressing us.

If we are a Government of the people, why so much mistrust?

Governments in general tend to restrict what you can do, at least the way we perceive it.

We tend to forget that without Government, a lot of things we take for granted would be problematic.

For example, we all know that the various parts of the Government provide law enforcement, which, assuming you are law abiding, is a positive thing.

The problem generally is that the Government protects the many, who take it for granted, while making the few toe the line.

So a business owner told by OSHA that he has to incur costs for the safety of his workers is not going to be happy, and probably his workers won't care or may feel their jobs are being threatened.

Food processors like to stamp their products as Government approved, but they don't like when the Government costs them money.

Almost all of us, at least those who work, feel some pain from the payroll deductions to pay for all this, and inherently feel we pay too much, even thought we don't actually pay the full costs.

The point I am making is that the benefits of Government are spread over a large number, in effect making it almost invisible, while enforcement is much more targeted.

We pay too much and get too little and every so often the Government bothers us, making us get permits, or licenses, or possibly giving us a ticket or even arresting us.

We could do without it, except of course without it there would be anarchy.

Its just so annoying.

Party Politics

When you consider the political landscape most Americans end up being poorly represented.

Having been in a job that takes you to many different areas of the country and being able to talk and listen to what people want it generally comes down to pretty similar things.

The problem is that we have, for want of a better term, the lunatic fringes.

So a few people want to remove all restrictions on gun ownership and a few want to ban guns completely but the vast majority want reasonable restrictions to make sure gun owners are not likely to go out and shoot up a crowded concert.

Most issues have a position that the majority, in some cases the vast majority of Americans can support, but party politics and our primary system push the parties further and further apart.

There isn't a short term solution for this, until at least we face a real crisis such as a financial collapse or a major war where party politics might be forgotten.

The answer of course is to get more participation, not just in the general elections but in the primaries.

Making it easier to vote in both would be a good start but in man states the trend is just the opposite as fallacies about voter fraud are used to restrict voting.

With the technology we have we should be able to assure every citizen gets to vote, without looking for ways to invalidate citizen's ballots who you might disagree with.

That should be bipartisan.

The Grater Good

If you consider politics, at least in a democracy, the people trying to win your vote argue that they represent the greater good.

Of course what the greater good is may not be agreed upon.

Much of our politics can be broken down into two visions of how to achieve it.

One vision is a belief that it takes leaders to move us forward and that to encourage these leaders they must be rewarded for their efforts.

Its a pretty simple premise, especially when you look at how it worked in the past.  Starting an enterprise is risky and to encourage that risk taking you need sufficient rewards.  Enterprises generate jobs and trade and many benefit form them in addition to the original owner.

The general concept is hard to argue with, with the only issue being what level of reward is enough?  We see income inequality growing greater and greater as technology and the global economy has resulted in less actual "trickle down".

The other view is similar in that it wants economic growth, but the source of that growth is not rewarded as much.  Using a progressive tax system, the reward diminish as they grow with the taxes being used to help the needy.

There is of course a third system where you effectively eliminate the entrepreneurs and do everything communally, but that isn't really something being considered in this country.

Its of course further complicated by the fact that most large enterprises are now publicly held so owners re not always easily identified.

Still, does the owner of Amazon care whether he has a few billion more dollars?  Maybe he does or maybe after some point it is simply a game to see where he is on the richest peoples list.

Certainly people with that much money can decide to use it for "good" but is that better than letting society decide where the money is most needed.

These are the questions we struggle with in this country and there is no clear answer.

We know that in the past when the inequality exceeded certain levels it led to uprisings and revolution.

That is certainly not the greater good.

Economic Concerns

There is a rising level of evidence that the short term policies that have been stoking the economy under the current administration are starting to run out of steam.

The tax breaks didn't translate into a lot of high paying jobs and the deficit has grown.

The FED has interpreted the flare up as a potential inflation indicator and has started raising the cost of money.

The elimination of some regulations have enabled some companies to make extra profits but once again this has not led to an explosion of new jobs and taxes so the deficit continues to grow.

Further dampening the economy is the terrible trade policies which will result in higher prices and less exports for the economy.

What is important to note is that the developed countries are, well, developed, meaning that they are nearly at the maximum for consumption.  They have had the most money and were clearly the most important markets, and will remain important markets for a long time.  However they are not where the dramatic growth is.

The most growth is going to be in the countries that are still developing as they increase their per capita incomes and become greater consumers.  American companies need to capture some of those markets to have the sort of growth that ultimately creates jobs.

If the components needed to complete products get more expensive because of tariffs, the end products produced here will be non-competitive.  The reason the components are made elsewhere is because the costs are significantly less than here and increasing the cost in this market is not going to change that for the rest of the world.

So America needs a trade policy that allows us unrestricted access to these markets and one that keeps our products competitive.

The spiteful nature of our current policies may hurt others but it is going to be more harmful to us in the long run as we lose market share in developing markets that will be hard to recapture.

This is all pointing to an economic downturn that may have already started.  The market seems to think so.

Blndering Policies

There are no magic wands.  Some issues are simply complicated and difficult.

For example, if you want to create new jobs going forward, the logical approach would be to identify the industries that will be creating those jobs and supporting them.  Of course that requires some idea of what those industries might be.

The long term answer isn't to wistfully look at the past and try to recreate the jobs that used to exist, as we are apparently trying to do.

Coal is old renewable is new.

If someone could actually find a way to economically use coal in a non environmentally damaging way, it would be wonderful since we have so much of it, but the odds of that are slim. It also wouldn't create a lot of new jobs since most coal mining is now much more dependent on machines than people although of course people are still somewhat involved.

Building up renewable energy sources like wind and solar would require significant development and new technology, both of which translate into jobs.

Speaking of development, we need to develop or repair our infrastructure to move forward.  This would create a lot of jobs, but after we gave the tax cuts to the industries that would benefit from infrastructure improvements we don't have the money to do it.  Using it to build a wall instead of internal infrastructure would be insane. the wall has not long term economic benefit.

Something that does have long term economic benefits is trade.  The more trade the better and yes the trade should be conducted on a level playing field.  However trade is also a complex issue.  Actions taken often have multiple consequences, many of them unintended.  Increase the cost of some components used by an industry that exports goods, it may make their cost too high, leading to loss of market share and reduced exports.  Retaliatory actions also are problematic.

Trade generally requires less government involvement, and the involvement needs to be surgically precise.  Is China stealing trade secrets?  Address that issue with specific actions, don't start a trade war that hurts many Americans (and Chinese too).

We seem ill equipped to approach most issues as we conduct policy based on late night thoughts, that are almost always a poor substitute for good analysis.  Almost always.

Bad Decisions?

If you want t make a good decision the best way is to gather all the data you can, analyze it and evaluate the potential outcomes choosing the option that results in the most  overall benefits.

Or you can throw darts at a dartboard.

Sometimes the second method works just as well because today's data may not be tomorrow's data.

If you think about the business failures we see, and some American icons are falling by the wayside, you wonder how did they let themselves get so bad.

Surely when a company like Sears or Toys-r-Us was riding high, they could afford some of the best talent or hire consultants to make good decisions.

Still they obviously made bad ones while other companies made good ones.

Its likely that every decision was supported by a significant amount of data and demonstrated how it was going to lead to long term success.

It didn't.

I don't have all the data I would need to analyze why they failed, but I suspect it was related to the usual culprits, taking n debt for a project that didn't pay off, say the acquisition of K-Mart.

Sears actually saw its competition growing and knew how they were doing it.

It was at first Wal-Mart and then Amazon.

Their attempts to compete were at best misguided and ineffective as they lost market share and had higher and higher fixed costs.

Toys-r-Us faced the same competition and failed faster.

There are a lot of other details that will come out but ultimately the final nail is always when you don't have enough free cash to pay your debtors.

Decisions made years ago failed to accurately predict the future.  They often do.

Two More Years

It has been two years since the dontard got elected and it feels much longer.

He's managed to move the republican party to the right, making it a home for racists and bigots while getting evangelicals to hold their nose and support his anti-abortion stance.

He may have tainted the Supreme Court for the next few decades with our second sexual abuser on it.

He's managed to give his rich cronies a nice tax break while spreading a few crumbs around for most of us, that were eaten up by the increased prices on imports due to his trade policies.

He has made enemies of our friends overseas while toadying up to the Russian Dictator

He is perceived as something between a buffoon and an out of control toddler carrying an automatic weapon.

His administration is unable to put together competent appointees as he seems to take advice from whomever he talks to last.  His acting attorney general is either a fine man who he knows very well, or someone who he has never met who he apparently appointed by throwing darts.

Possibly both if it turns out his mental disorder goes that way.

Democrats taking the house was almost a complete victory, not sure if he remembers what party he is in.

Our deficit is ballooning and he wants to increase it further with more tax cuts and more spending.

He has delayed our progress on cleaning up the environment, since he doesn't think the millions and millions of metric tons of carbon released every day is causing any problems.

We are taking steps back in guaranteeing equal protection under the law and have gone after long time residents who have done nothing wrong except being here.

The jobs being created are fine but they are the same type of jobs that have been created under the new normal, lower paying service jobs, not high paying manufacturing jobs, for the most part.

Of course, his state of the union address will tout a lot of imaginary achievements and probably blame the democrats for what didn't happen.

Two more years.

Political?

There are some things that don't seem like they should be political, but they are.

Take climate change.

Its hard to imagine why anyone would object to reducing pollutants of any type except some businesses that it might add cost to.

Those types of things can be addressed by using regulations or taxes to level the field but we see people attacking the science, which is pretty irrefutable.

The solution is a cleaner world and less greenhouse gases, can't we work commonly towards that?

It isn't some conspiracy to hurt America, the facts and figures are available to all.

Similarly, I'm not familiar with anyone who thinks innocent people getting gunned down is a good thing.  Solutions to that problem don't require confiscating peoples guns but it might involve restricting the types of guns available without special background checks.

Once again the only ones who actually oppose these restrictions are the companies that profit by having unrestricted gun sales.

Profit is not an acceptable substitute for living and life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness are also guaranteed.

What w don't protect is people's right to vote.  Some states have tried to do everything they can to suppress the wrong type of voter.

Of course the ones they consider wrong varies and the justification, usually related to voter fraud is unfounded.  Every citizen should be able to vote and they shouldn't be denied because they might vote for the wrong candidate.

We currently see attacks being made irresponsibly about recounts in some close elections.  Those recounts are observed by both parties and are not fraudulent or manipulated.

Count every vote is really not something we should be disagreeing about.

Its democracy.

The Great War

It seems odd to think that World War 1 or the Great War ended 100 years ago.  It always seemed to be more distant than it actually was to me. probably because the second World War was so much closer.

I don't remember knowing any veterans of the first one, although it seems inevitable that I must have met at least one.  Of course I did meet lots of veterans from all the subsequent wars.

The Great War was certainly not great for anyone and it introduced horrors we still worry about today, such as poison gas, tanks, air wars.

We can romanticize some of this, especially the air war parts, but we shouldn't forget they resulted in people dying.

The war was long and bitter and the American part in it was bad enough, but of course the Europeans saw a generation get decimated.

The world that emerged after that war was very different from the one that entered it, with Imperial empires gone in most of Europe and the concept of war as glorious pretty much destroyed.

Unfortunately the peace only lasted long enough for the next generation to go through their own hell 20 years later.

We honor our veterans today and that is something we should do.  We honor our war dead on Memorial day so this is a day to commemorate those who survived.

It is of course also the 100th anniversary of the end of the Great War, so that needs to be commemorated.

The war was so horrible and fought so bravely that it should be commemorated.

It was a significant event that changed the world.

However the peace didn't last and we had a more horrible one too soon after it.

Saturday Musings

Mass shootings, as horrible as they are, have become routine enough that start to rate them as being more or less horrible than each other.  Innocent people or children get gunned down, they can't lose their shock value.

I see a lot of talking heads on TV ignoring what really happened in 2016 and predict that our current dontard will get re-elected in 2020.  He didn't even really win in 2016, it was simply a few states that swung the electoral college and no one is going to take them for granted going forward.  Of course elections are a bit hard to predict but he's not wining any popularity contests.

The economy is fine in many ways but the issue of high paying manufacturing jobs going away and unequal distribution of income hasn't gotten better, maybe worse.  A lot of old manufacturing areas are still in recession if not depression and will need to reinvent themselves.

When you consider energy, our dependence on oil and coal is diminishing as people switch to renewable or natural gas.  Oil consumption has recovered some since the recession but is still lower than it was in 2008.  Its not happening fast enough but its starting.

One of the not so secret problems in America is how much racism had worked its way into our culture over the years.  It's certainly better than it was but its why the term politically correct is so onerous, it suppresses these learned behaviors.  The dontard is part of the generation that grew up with all these racist stereotypes and it just seems normal to him.

Its actually ingrained into some of our news reports.  I see a lot of them talking about how "white" people will become a minority in a certain number of years.  Well, as long as we are all Americans, what difference does it make?

Once again we have a democratic congress that has to deal with a tremendous deficit from a republican administration.  Who is the party of big spenders again?

Adult Governance

How much of an impact the democratic controlled congress will have on certain issues remains to be seen.

It clearly isn't able to pass legislation without buy in from the senate and the administration, so its ability to start new initiatives is going to be limited.

It can however impact the other sides initiatives in a similar fashion meaning that to get things passed, legislation will have to include some concessions to them.

This is in fact called democracy where negotiation becomes more important then rhetoric.

Some of the areas where this will have the most impact include social issues.

It can protect things like freedom of choice, health care, social security which were targeted to reduce the deficit.

Maybe the most important role it has is to be reasonable and not pave the way for a reversal in two years.

The last two years have seen the appointment of two conservative judges to the Supreme Court who will influence day to day American life for decades.  Other seats will inevitably come up and if not in the next two years certainly in the four after that.

There is a pretty clear demographic trend that indicates America becoming more progressive.  It looks inevitable but the inevitable part of it may take years.

Having a federal judiciary that is going to prevent progress would be a lasting legacy of intransigence we don't need.

Adult leadership that doesn't chase windmills but doesn't abandon progressive causes is what's need.

There has been a real absence of that recently.

Voting Thougts

As we enter our first ever lame duck ala orange period, it will be interesting what the approach is.

For the next seven weeks the republicans still control both houses of congress but traditionally, when we were more civil, the outgoing congress did not so things they know the incoming congress would oppose.

However we are not in an era of actual animosity where its more likely that common courtesy is a forgotten thing.

Maybe civility will actually return.

One of the things the last few elections showed us is that races can be lost before any voting takes place.

Looking at the 2016 election and the mid-terms certain races were decided by less votes than the votes suppressed by restrictive measures.

In North Dakota, they tried to suppress native American votes by requiring a street address, something many of them don't have, although in the election it probably didn't impact the outcome.

In many states, including Georgia and Florida, voter suppression efforts may have actually changed the election outcome.  It's hard to actually count those who don't vote because of these efforts, but when the elections are so close, you know every vote mattered.

It seems like the sort of thing we should be able to agree on, giving every citizen the ability to exercise the franchise, but for some that is a path to defeat and they will do what they can to avoid it.

We have two years to make sure the next election is more democratic, its important.

What Next?

Some of the votes are still being counted but the Democrats are now the majority in the House of Representatives while the Senate stays Republican, in fact they picked up some seats.

Politics is not horseshoes, you either win or lose, but, some losers get recognition despite losing.  It remains to be seen how two of the Democratic contenders who were viewed as future leaders fare after narrow defeats.

Still we sometimes lose sight of the fact that the objective of elections is to elect people who will represent the people of America and work together to move the country forward.

In some cases we may disagree about what "moving forward" means and that's OK, but we generally agree on most of the important issues.

Whether the new congress will be able to compromise on issues and get legislation passed is of course the question.  Some of the most radical attempts to gut the ACA or waste money on walls along the border should be over now.

The congress needs to take its oversight responsibility seriously and not engage if silly investigations that go no where and accomplish nothing except to provide fodder for the media.

More substance, less meaningless rhetoric.

Sane, honest responsible government, It would be refreshing.

Get Out and Vote

I guess we will see from the results today whether the last minute campaign push by the dontard helps or hurts republicans overall.

His message is so secular that it is only designed to appeal to the people who are already true believers, and he is trying to get them out to vote.

However, they represent a minority of the voters and his controversial visits might very well incite the opposition to get out and vote.

These rallies are more entertainment events than places to spread a message, since the message is so partisan.

The results will be in by tomorrow and its not clear if they will show if he helped or hindered his party.

His alarmist views seem to have given a few democratic senators a bump in the polls but we know that many of them were in very difficult races in states they normally support republican candidates.

Of course republican candidates used to be more centrist, but in the current situation they have to adopt the radical policies of the administration regarding immigration, abortion, guns, etc.

Some of this plays well, some of it doesn't and when you consider how farmers are being hurt by the trade policies and tariffs, we may see a shift in some of the voting.

The turnout is probably the biggest issue today, lets hope its huge.

Another Election

Tomorrow is election day although millions have already voted in early voting in the states the allow it.

The good news is the the electoral college is not a factor,

The bad news is that the gerrymandered congressional districts are a factor, although probably not enough of one to stop the House from changing.

The Senate was very unfavorable this year since most of the seats up for election were held by democrats and the odds of holding all of them and picking up two more was a difficult task.

Still it all depends on who turns out to vote and it looks like we will have a very high turnout for a midterm election.

Of course that is still going to be a pretty low percentage if you think about it of everyone who could or should vote.

Voting should be convenient and easy for citizens who want to exercise their fundamental right.

We have certain interests who prefer some people not vote so we throw up impediments.

The idea that we have any significant voter fraud has been debunked over and over but some still use it to put up restrictions aimed at certain minorities.

Democracy is dependent on the will of all the people, not just some of them.

The really good news is that so far we in America still respect the rule of law and accept the results.

The last time some didn't in 1860 it didn't go very well.

Vote and move America forward.

Campaign Ads

We changed the clocks back to standard time although I think we observe daylight savings time longer. Maybe we should vote on this.

The election is coming up and all the reports indicate turnout is way up.

I heard a lot of political ads driving up from Virginia yesterday and the vast majority are pretty negative.  I'm not familiar with all the candidates and I didn't take notes, but the negative ones stood out.

We apparently have a lot of incumbents who have accomplished nothing or only accomplished bad things.

We also have people running who want to ruin the economy, increase taxes and open the borders to everyone.

Oddly many of the people running the most vicious ads are also the ones who can work with the other party to get things done.

I find that unlikely.

I did hear a small number where an incumbent talked about his accomplishments and they sounded ok until you heard his challenger's ad which was usually close behind.

I have to say I've lived through a lot of elections and many of them have also been contentious, but this one seems to be more so.

Of course the ads that haven't changed much are the signs stuck everywhere with a candidate's name on them.

Think the color scheme gives away the party affiliation but that's about it.

Guess they are going for name recognition before you vote.

Immigrants, run for the Hills!

A group of ragtag refugees trying to escape poverty and violence has terrified our commander in chief and sending troops at some significant expense to guard against nothing at all.

His characterization of this group as an invasion is simply rhetoric that is designed to incite some voters before the election coming up.

He may or may not know better, who cares.

He also, despite controlling both houses and of course the presidency for two years now blames this on the democrats because he likes to just make things up.

Immigration to this country both documented and undocumented has overall been a benefit, not a detriment.

Each wave of course has had bad characters, the Irish gangs, the Italian mafia, the Russian gangs but this is a tiny percentage greatly offset by the much greater number of hardworking families who have made America great.

People haven't changed and despite the rhetoric about who may or may not be travelling in this caravan, the one thing that is certain is that they are people.

Wages

The economy continues to transition but we have not seen any fundamental changes in the last few years.

The need for skilled workers at high wages continue while the need for unskilled labor  is pretty much stagnant.

This has led to the lack of wage growth we have seen over the last decade or longer as the jobs available actually pay less than the jobs lost.

We are however going to reach a tipping point where everyone is transitioned and wage growth is measured on an apples to apple basis, meaning you had a low paying job last year and you still do.

The impact of that is that any raise you get actually increases average wages and you also will see some natural progression as workers seek promotions or higher paying jobs.

Wage growth is approaching 3% year over year and may exceed it this report, but while 3% is clearly better than 0% its being added in many cases to a suppressed wage rate.

Suppressed from the heavy manufacturing years for the ex factory workers an others impacted by the push to automation.

The economy is growing but the rewards are still top heavy and yes there is some pressure in some cities to increase wage or automation (note ordering kiosks in fast food restaurants) it isn't a return to the 1950s where high paying factory jobs with strong unions and good benefits were plentiful.

Low paying, no unions, no benefits is more the norm for non-skilled workers.

Its not changing anytime soon.

Vote Against Hate

With Halloween behind us we move into the holiday season with the two big holidays on the horizon.

Of course its often considered the happiest period of the year but a season of giving thanks and celebrating the spirit of Christmas is going to be marked by fear mongering about immigrants and racism

The racism message is clear enough, hidden as make America great again.

The so called great years weren't really that great for many Americans, but in a sort of Normal Rockwell way we have built them up to some idyllic vision, at least for some.

What is always appealing, to  some extent, are the memories of our childhood, which good or bad made us what we are today.

That idea of family was often false but pervasive and for most of us at least somewhat true as we did celebrate the holidays as best we could.

The fact that the rest of the year was in fact a struggle was usually not something we talked about at Thanksgiving but instead celebrated that we had made it through.

I'm not sure this has changed as much as some think, but we do have the hate mongers who feel that they need to enforce some cookie cutter idea of how to live on everybody else.

Families today may look very different or very much the same as they once did, but to the extent they can celebrate the holidays together it isn't different at all

The message of the season is love and thanks, it is not that hard.

Some candidates are running on a platform of fear.  Its not the message of the season.