American Politics Discussion Thread

[darrelljs]

Uber certainly created jobs. They raised capital, created a valuable platform that generated revenue from people eager for the service, and that revenue in turn funded jobs. Uber is an example of a company that definitely exploited their workers, however.

The government can use tax revenues to fund public works that wouldn’t otherwise get done, I’m not arguing against that as both necessary and beneficial. I just don’t see how that’s creating a job since its being funded not by economic activity but by taxation. I suppose the fed could print money and that kinda, sorta creates jobs. I’d be interested to here from an economist on that.

Darrell

[GeneralKilCavalry]

Uber certainly created jobs.  They raised capital, created a valuable platform that generated revenue from people eager for the service, and that revenue in turn funded jobs.  Uber is an example of a company that definitely exploited their workers, however.

The government can use tax revenues to fund public works that wouldn’t otherwise get done, I’m not arguing against that as both necessary and beneficial.  I just don’t see how that’s creating a job since its being funded not by economic activity but by taxation.  I suppose the fed could print money and that kinda, sorta creates jobs.  I’d be interested to here from an economist on that.

Darrell

So our famous forum postal worker superdeath has work but not a job? (I’m assuming USPS, I forget the details)

[darrelljs]

Actually the US govt kicked the post office to the curb, they are funded by selling their services.

Darrell

[Woden]

Uber certainly created jobs.  They raised capital, created a valuable platform that generated revenue from people eager for the service, and that revenue in turn funded jobs.  Uber is an example of a company that definitely exploited their workers, however.

Overall, did they? They disrupted an existing market, doing it "better" and cheaper than was currently done but there was already taxi drivers and car services around and many of those jobs are lost. With out knowing the numbers, I would think it has a negative impact on the job market because you are taking what was previously done by many companies, is now done by a few. 

Amazon is a better example for what I am talking about. How many big box stores, bookstores, and mom and pop stores went out of business because Amazon can provide their services cheaper? It is a net negative to the job market; the dollars that supported many now only supports a few.

[Miguelito]

Also an overseas outsider, but some general points here were raised that I would like to know people's perspective on:

Thing is, it hasn't.  It's trendy to talk about the social issues, but at the end of the day people vote their own interest more than anything else.  Jobs if they have one, handouts if they don't. 

I would expect for people who have jobs to be interested in increasing their gains from the ones they have, why would they want there to be more of them? The historically effective way for the vast majority of working people for that to happen would be organized labour, but I get that the Democratic Party is not too hot on that either? (Nor are Social Democrats here; there hasn't been a promise/plan of a better future for working people ever since I can remember, just globalisation fatalism, and "maybe with us it will not be as bad as fast". Their voting share is more than halved from 20 years ago, go figure)

Remember the "blue wave" of 2018 that didn't happen?  Same goes again this year.  There's a lot more than the 3%-4% cited upthread whom Republican policies serve better, and the Democrats' self-inflicted obliviousness to that is why they can't figure out how to actually make progress.

From 2016, the story was, "how did the Republicans become the party of the working class?"  The answer is the Democrats chose to become the party of the nonworking class instead.  Like the "we'll put the coal miners out of work" comment and then they lost the coal mining states.  I'm no ideologue, if the Democrats can figure out how to appeal to my interests, I'm all welcome for that... but they don't even try.

Didn't the Democrats flip the House by a wide margin? What would have been the blue wave then?
And if they are really appealing to nonworking people only, and Trump "created" jobs like nobody before him, how come?

Only the greatest accomplishment since WW2, in winning the Cold War, by leading by economic example until the Soviet Union fragmented and collapsed.

I often read that often from US Americans, and always find it belittling towards the citizens of the eastern bloc who actually did the job (ftr, I'm living in, but am not from, former East Germany). There were and remain scores of people living in far greater misery and oppression, who have not managed to rid themselves of either.
Also, to the extent it is a US accomplishment, that involved increasing the probability of a nuclear world war, and today we know that on several occasions you and my elders were just lucky.

[ipecac]

Oh, for fuck's sake.

1) Uber hasn't turned a profit. The whole point is to wreck small competitors who don't have billions by a form of dumping. Amazon was similar in its early years.

2) The biggest government jobs program is the US military with all the associated industries. The Republicans have historically been the biggest job creators with all the bloody warmongering.

3) The inevitable consequence of technology improving productivity means that less people are required for actually productive economic activity. This necessarily means a rise in 'parasites' and bullshit jobs.

4) Of course Trump downplayed it or lied. That was obvious 6 months ago, and the principle of preventing panic is generally correct. The only reason why this famous supposed truthteller is releasing it now and not when it could have made a difference is not because he cares about the truth either, but to increase book sales.

[darrelljs]

Uber certainly created jobs.  They raised capital, created a valuable platform that generated revenue from people eager for the service, and that revenue in turn funded jobs.  Uber is an example of a company that definitely exploited their workers, however.

Overall, did they? They disrupted an existing market, doing it "better" and cheaper than was currently done but there was already taxi drivers and car services around and many of those jobs are lost. With out knowing the numbers, I would think it has a negative impact on the job market because you are taking what was previously done by many companies, is now done by a few. 

Amazon is a better example for what I am talking about. How many big box stores, bookstores, and mom and pop stores went out of business because Amazon can provide their services cheaper? It is a net negative to the job market; the dollars that supported many now only supports a few.

These are great points, you have to look at the downstream impacts for sure.  But then there are those apparently apocryphal stories of French workers sabots into the machines to disrupt production.  While there may have been short term disruption I don't think anyone would argue that the productivity gains of the Industrial Revolution weren't a net positive.  Well, it's The Internet some I'm sure someone would .  Anyway, it gets complicated fast, doesn't it?  Now I'm not so sure...

Darrell

[superdeath]

So our famous forum postal worker superdeath has work but not a job? (I’m assuming USPS, I forget the details)

Actually the US govt kicked the post office to the curb, they are funded by selling their services.

Darrell

Post office has more or less ran on its own profits since roughly 1971. Until they were mandated to pre-pay 70+ years in advance for future postal workers retirement/healthcare ect. Hell, we actually made a profit till that mandate hit us. And that mandate is basically there to make us look bad so that they can privatize the USPS.

I can answer any postal related questions if need be  

[AdrienIer]

2) The biggest government jobs program is the US military with all the associated industries. The Republicans have historically been the biggest job creators with all the bloody warmongering.

It's crazy : the largest employer here is the education ministry. Talk about priorities...

[DaveV]

Trump fans: how is that "jobs and economy" thing working? Businesses are closing, unemployment is still at 8.4%, and the outlook is pretty grim, all because the Coronovirus was so badly mishandled. Most of that can be laid directly at the feet of Donald Trump. He started by lying about the severity and infectiousness of the virus, pressured states to reopen prematurely, and somehow made face masks a political statement. Now he continues to hold rallies and campaign events where few if any face masks are evident. Almost every other country in the world has done a better job handling this virus than the US. What will be the next crisis where the US is deeply damaged by Donald Trump's greed, cronyism, impulsiveness, egotism, and refusal ever to admit a mistake? Competence matters.