The Tragic Death of the Democratic Party - Page 235 - Politics and Economics

Ryan Cooper is doing a series of "how did we get here and where do we go from here?" in regards to economic policy and the Democratic Party

http://theweek.com/articles/725419/d...medium=twitter

Interesting article. If you see future parts, please post them too.

01-08-2018 , 12:02 PM

#5853

Trolly McTrollson

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Oct 2010 Posts: 36,794

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kafja

so yeah, looks like 8 years of trump

Comments are gold.

01-08-2018 , 12:04 PM

#5854

+rep_lol

banned

Join Date: Sep 2013 Posts: 14,900

wtf are they even doing

01-08-2018 , 12:09 PM

#5855

Kafja

adept

Join Date: Dec 2013 Posts: 941

just killing time until the inevitable landslide election of President Oprah and VP Zuckerberg.

01-08-2018 , 12:15 PM

#5856

Huehuecoyotl

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 29,257

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trolly McTrollson

Comments are gold.

There are lots of good ones, and this one isn't trying to be a good comment but I laughed at the fatalism of it

01-08-2018 , 12:20 PM

#5857

Kafja

adept

Join Date: Dec 2013 Posts: 941

01-08-2018 , 12:20 PM

#5858

eyebooger

Join Date: May 2010 Posts: 58,712

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trolly McTrollson

Comments are gold.

I see I was ponied on the Steve Buscemi pic.

01-08-2018 , 07:54 PM

#5859

Paul D

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Dec 2011 Posts: 14,689

Quote:

Originally Posted by Loki

First, I’d love to hear from economics scholar Paul D on the veracity of claims in that article.

I don’t recall a time I’ve been so mad at Bill Clinton and Barack Obama simultaneously. Granted, I think Bill was in a worse situation than Obama, given the congress he had, but it doesn’t seem like he would have done much differently given who he was working with at the time.

It’s time to go Kylo Ren on neoliberalism in the Dem party: let it die, kill it if we have to.

I think people are idiots if they think globalism and capitalism
(which seems to what people mean when they say neoliberalism in those articles) are going away any time soon.

01-09-2018 , 07:24 AM

#5860

+rep_lol

banned

Join Date: Sep 2013 Posts: 14,900

Quote:

Originally Posted by Huehuecoyotl

Ryan Cooper is doing a series of "how did we get here and where do we go from here?" in regards to economic policy and the Democratic Party

http://theweek.com/articles/725419/d...medium=twitter

I shared this article with my mom and she responded with what i think is good analysis and a little critique of ryan's style of writing-

Quote:

Good article overall. I I have read material by Ryan before, and I think he is a pretty good analyst, but he has a tendency to describe situations and history so that it corresponds with his conclusions. He has a good grasp of what has happened and why; I just think sometimes he draws conclusions and applies them with a bit too much abandon In order to prove his point. Just a few thoughts... I would like to know what you think about this:

The Dem Party elite doubled down on neoliberalism during the Obama years primarily because of the money flowing into Congress and State houses from lobbyists and big business. Money Talks. Democratic leaders had no more reason than Republican leaders to turn off the money faucets and so neoliberalism continued to thrive. This is an example of the terrible price we are paying in letting the wealthy buy our political system. It is corrupting everyone.

I don't think anyone can argue against the fact that Democrats dropped the ball in 2008 when they had an opportunity, and perhaps the votes, to reintroduce a New Deal policy in this country. In my opinion, this was a terrible failure of the Democrats.

The author's argument that the 2008 crash created "excess capacity (and) there was no catch-up growth" is too simplistic and therefore erroneous. The economic situation in 2008 was horrendous thanks to George Bush and his War, as well as tax and economic changes brought by the Republicans. It took a number of years during the Obama Administration to recover from this and the housing debacle resulting from the deregulation of financial institutions. To say that the crash freed up capacity to grow completely ignores the fact that before you can grow you have to crawl out of the hole. I agree with the author's conclusions about Eric Holder's failure to pursue the institutions that caused the housing crisis et al., but once again our economy was horribly fragile and, right or wrong, I believe it was the Obama administration's belief that the less the justice department tore institutions apart and prosecuted individuals, the more quickly our economy would recover. Whether you believe this to be reasonable or not, I think the author downplays the critical situation in which the administration had to decide whether to focus on prosecution or place its entire focus on recovery.

As for the economy today, Ryan says "Even 10 years after the start of the recession, there is every sign that the economy is still depressed." While there IS terrible economic disparity, and wages are stagnated, every sign shows that the economy is NOT still depressed but is actually growing. Whether it is growing at acceptable rates, or whether the growing economy is producing what we want to see in terms of creating wealth or a middle class is an important question for us to consider. But the author makes this claim to draw a connection: historically, following neoliberal policies inevitably leads to economic stagnation / depression, and while that final conclusion may be correct, he is arguing that we should accept that conclusion based on statements that simply aren't true. (Support your arguments with facts. Not opinions.)

Ryan also criticizes the Dodd-Frank legislation that was passed after the Republicans swept the house and the Senate in 2010, only two years after Obama's initial election. He seems to place the blame here on Democrats for the continued growth of financial institutions and big banks. Remember, though, that the Republicans controlled Congress at this time. The fact that the Dodd-Frank Bill actually became law is because Democrats cut back a number of provisions from the bill to get it passed in a republican-controlled congress. If a finger is going to be pointed at anyone for the weaknessof Dodd-Frank and the resulting growth of big financial institutions , the blame I think needs to be laid squarely at the feet of the Republicans.

All in all, I don't disagree with many of Ryan's conclusions. I just have some trouble with the arguments he constructs to prove his points. I will be interested in reading the next three articles on the subject. Did I tell you I subscribe to The Week? I really do enjoy it.

I pointed out that i dont think his argument is that neoliberalism inevitably leads to crashes and depressions but that those are natural business cycles whose recoveries are mired by prolonged stagnation resulting from the inequality created by neoliberal economics- remember there was some emphasis on how important yet still incomplete the stimulus package was (a new deal style policy)

01-09-2018 , 07:36 AM

#5861

adios

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 22,530

Quote:

Originally Posted by Huehuecoyotl

Ryan Cooper is doing a series of "how did we get here and where do we go from here?" in regards to economic policy and the Democratic Party

http://theweek.com/articles/725419/d...medium=twitter

One thing we know after reading the first few paragraphs, Ryan Cooper is neither an economist nor a historian.

01-09-2018 , 07:47 AM

#5862

+rep_lol

banned

Join Date: Sep 2013 Posts: 14,900

solid thoughtful analysis as usual adios

01-09-2018 , 09:06 AM

#5863

AllTheCheese

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 11,898

@rep: Your mom's second to last paragraph is mistaken. When Dodd-Frank passed, Dems had the House and 59 Dems in the Senate.

01-11-2018 , 06:28 AM

#5864

spaceman Bryce

anything you guys want

Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 20,646

Agree with the any and all d voting sentiments aorn. Dems are second right now. Second in senate, second in the house, second in judiciary, no presence in the executive branch. Every d vote is important. The senate will be close. The house will be close.

01-11-2018 , 05:35 PM

#5865

thenewsavman

old hand

Join Date: Nov 2012 Posts: 1,546

Quote:

Originally Posted by Huehuecoyotl

Ryan Cooper is doing a series of "how did we get here and where do we go from here?" in regards to economic policy and the Democratic Party

http://theweek.com/articles/725419/d...medium=twitter

This is an excellent summary; I fully expect it to be rejected, mocked, etc. by the 'left' in the US.

01-11-2018 , 05:41 PM

#5866

thenewsavman

old hand

Join Date: Nov 2012 Posts: 1,546

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul D

I think people are idiots if they think globalism and capitalism
(which seems to what people mean when they say neoliberalism in those articles) are going away any time soon.

Neoliberalism, like most words, has a definition.

Also a simple Ctrl-F shows that not once was the word globalism even uttered in the article. Capitalism only appeared once at the head and it wasn't to say capitalism == neoliberalism.

01-11-2018 , 05:46 PM

#5867

thenewsavman

old hand

Join Date: Nov 2012 Posts: 1,546

Quote:

Originally Posted by +rep_lol

I shared this article with my mom and she responded with what i think is good analysis and a little critique of ryan's style of writing-

I pointed out that i dont think his argument is that neoliberalism inevitably leads to crashes and depressions but that those are natural business cycles whose recoveries are mired by prolonged stagnation resulting from the inequality created by neoliberal economics- remember there was some emphasis on how important yet still incomplete the stimulus package was (a new deal style policy)

That's an excellent response from your mother. Thanks for posting it.

Is your mom an academic by chance? She seems extremely well informed and well versed at communicating her thoughts in an organized and clear manner.

01-11-2018 , 11:57 PM

#5868

Paul D

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Dec 2011 Posts: 14,689

Quote:

Originally Posted by thenewsavman

This is a silly response. Name Democrats specifically who are neoliberals and look at the definition of the word. I have even seen Krugman called a neoliberal on 2p2. Which is extremely LOL. People have whittled down that word to nothingness.

01-12-2018 , 03:03 AM

#5869

goofyballer

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 70,719

Today's NSA extension came with the help of 55 (!) Democrats, who could have passed an amendment to restrict some of the warrantless surveillance on Americans if only 26 of them didn't vote with Republicans.

01-12-2018 , 04:16 PM

#5870

estefaniocurry

adept

Join Date: Apr 2017 Posts: 1,165

Most of the Democratic Party has been sold out to the same people as the Republicans for 3-4 decades.

Only hope is to start over again with some new party, but that'snot happening.

01-12-2018 , 04:30 PM

#5871

goofyballer

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 70,719

Quote:

Originally Posted by estefaniocurry

Only hope is to start over again with some new party, but that'snot happening.

This could theoretically work somewhere like California, at a state and congressional level, due to top 2 primaries. You could run progressive candidates from a separate party without worrying about splitting left-wing votes and letting a Republican sneak into office.

01-12-2018 , 04:37 PM

#5872

otatop

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 12,721

A much more realistic alternative is to just take over the Democratic party from the left and drive all the "centrists" out like the Tea Party did with the Republicans.

01-12-2018 , 05:17 PM

#5873

Loki

binary duo

Join Date: Nov 2015 Posts: 12,772

Quote:

Originally Posted by otatop

A much more realistic alternative is to just take over the Democratic party from the left and drive all the "centrists" out like the Tea Party did with the Republicans.

Yeah, only problem there is that the pinko commies needed to vote in primaries could give a **** about showing up

Tea party worked because all the old wackos on the right already had nothing better to do than whine about a black president

01-12-2018 , 05:24 PM

#5874

goofyballer

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 70,719

Quote:

Originally Posted by otatop

A much more realistic alternative is to just take over the Democratic party from the left and drive all the "centrists" out like the Tea Party did with the Republicans.

...did they, though? Didn't the Tea Party ultimately get co-opted by mainstream Republicanism? Seems like it was a nice branding movement (though they certainly wanted to be more at the time) that helped them win a bunch of seats in 2010 without actually doing or changing much.

01-12-2018 , 06:12 PM

#5875

otatop

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 12,721

I think the Tea Party's failure to do anything was more because they
1) Mainly just wanted to oppose Obama
2) Had no ****ing clue how to actually pass legislation

They seem to have been successful in pushing the Republicans further right towards the crazies.

Page 235 of 318

First

35 135 185 215 225 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 245 255 285

Last

...

Page 235 of 318

First

35 135 185 215 225 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 245 255 285

Last