Friday, July 30, 2010

A BIG HOUSE AND JOB AND...

Having been broke many times in my adult life while at the same time raising kids mostly on my own for most of it, living the life of a poet, and a nonacademic one at that, and later a TV and film actor and film writer but one incapable of schmoozing and guilty of what an early educator of a school I got kicked out of called "brutal honesty" in my dealings with the powers that be in Hollywood and the academy etc....

...I know something about how to overcome the odds to put food on the table and a roof over the heads of my children and wives and others. It ain't easy. But it is possible. I worked hard to get some college degrees while holding down various parttime jobs, and I worked hard at the creative endeavors as well, especially writing for hire which I did for many years, from newspaper reviewer and columnist to ghostwriter and screenplay writer etc.

But I never had to face some of the obstacles many folks I've know have had to face. And even though no one has to starve ito death n this country, a lot of people end up homeless. Even I did once. My kids always argue that we weren't homeless back in the 1970s in New York when we lost an apartment due to a gangster landlord fighting a rent strike by us tennents which the others let me opt out of since they had all moved in with their respective lovers and friends while the landlord removed plumbing and used other tactics to get us to give in.

We ended up staying with friends, my kids with one friend and me with another, until I could find us a place to live, which ended up being an apartment we'd lived in before, which became available during the three months or so we were without an actual address. But we weren't forced to live in our car (I didn't own one then) or a cheap drug and prostitute ridden motel like some are. I'm thinking of a documentary I don't know the name of that my twelve-year-old was watching the other day in which homeless single mothers with kids were living in a less then inviting motel near Disneyland where the mothers worked but didn't make enough to be able to rent an apartment, one of the women had formerly worked for Wal-Mart which is when she became homeless because she didn't make enough to pay the mortgage on the home she'd had etc.

I didn't catch the name of the documentary and only saw a few minutes of it because we were on our way out. But it stuck with me, especially when I think of the way kids I've known (and taught years ago) from poor environments where there is no money, and the education is often lacking, who nonetheless have these dreams, beliefs really, that they will someday own a big house and have a big important job and make lots of money and spend it on fancy cars etc. And what that makes me think of is...

...the way so many of my fellow citizens seem to have this same kind of magical thinking that somehow someday things will be the way they imagine rather than the way they really are. I used to think this might be limited to only some kinds of people, people with particular mental or social issues. But I now think it is simply a result of the ways in which our society, especially the entertainment business and the media, distort or exploit reality for a profit.

The right has a stake in convincing people that anyone can end up becoming a CEO, or somehow making the kind of money the right never wants to tax because those who spend big bucks promoting the rightwing agenda ARE making that kind of money and want to protect it and make it "grow" by not paying their fair share. (There are tons of sites where you can find tons of graphs by economists showing that when the rich paid a higher percentage in taxes this country was better off in almost every way economically, especially in terms of the wealth being spread out more evenly and benefiting more people and therefore contributing to a better economy etc.).

But this kind of magical thinking isn't confined to the right. The left right now is doing much the same thing when it ignores or objects to so much of what Obama and the Democratic Congress have achieved that has benefited more people than the alternatives (continued Bush/Cheney policy or any other Republican's stated policy plans etc.). Yes Obama and the Dems deserve to be pushed harder to achieve more, especially to cut back on the military budget by closing bases around the world and ending the two wars we're explicitly fighting.

But I have known many poets who were among those I would consider the greatest of our times and yet they never got recognition, never won an award, never even got the paltry reading fees (which usually start at nothing and go up to measly for most poets but can reach the thousands for the famous and recognized). I have known actors who were incredibly talented and original who never or hardly got any work that paid anything or any real recognition, etc. and in all these cases I have also known the opposite: people who have been rewarded beyond what most people could expect for mediocre or even bad work.

This is true in businesses and corporations as well, as we see all the time and we all know, and suffer the consequences of.

It is not easy to get a plumber who knows what he's doing and is efficient and reasonable, let alone an entire army or economy or healthcare system etc. I have the belief that it is progress rather than perfection that is the realistic goal in most things in life, and I am grateful for that. I have made progress since my brain surgery, obviously, but am still not the same as I was in terms of the way my brain works, my writing, my thinking etc. but I'm grateful for the progress and do not expect perfection.

I do not defend Obama and the Democrats because they are perfect or their solutions are or the policies they offer or enact etc. Obviously not. From everything I've read Bush Junior made progress in the fight against AIDs in Africa, for which he deserves credit. He also made progress as an individual, from a spoiled Yalie drunk to getting the presidency (because he himself and those he surrounded himself with were willing to do pretty much anything to win and to hold on to power, unlike Gore and most Dems, except for Bill and Hilary Clinton who knew and know how to give the Republicans a fight though even they refuse to go to the lengths the right is willing to go to—Vince Foster, impeachment etc.).

In most areas—the gap between the rich and poor, the decline in real wages, the trade deficit, the national debt, the economy, employment, civil rights, citizens rights, constitutional rights, unaccountable hundreds of millions spent in Iraq, support of corrupt politicians and governments, etc. etc—no progress was made under Bush/Cheney but in fact the opposite was true, in most areas that matter this country was set back, put in reverse, heading in not just the wrong direction but backward! (and deliberately, as the goal was stated outright many times, to diminish the federal government to the point where it would be too broke and too broken to be able to regulate an kind of profit-making scheme the funders of the right might come up with, from fake oil crises to raise prices or wars to increase demand etc.

But in the past year and a half progress has been made by Obama and the Democrats in Congress, in healthcare, in saving jobs that would have been lost had the economic policies of BUsh/Cheney continued any longer (3.5 million), financial reform, etc. etc. Did they do enough or take it far enough for me? Absolutely not. Do I need to be pushing them to do more? Well I already do with the few contacts I still have and in my writing and speaking, but for the most part there's plenty of writers and communicators doing that all over the internet and cable and radio etc.

If the Dems had a big enough majority in the Senate and in the House they would achieve more progress, but they don't, and they won't if they lose seats this Fall. But it will not be because the right wins the elections, it will be because the Dems lost them by allowing the right's constant message of disappointment in all politicians and how they're all useless and corrupt etc. (though they mostly only attack and try to defeat the Dems) to keep so-called "swing" voters and many Dems themselves from voting because "it doesn't matter" and "a pox on both their houses" etc.

That's how the right first took over this country under Reagan, and it's been doing it successfully for the most part ever since, (and interestingly all the main economic indicators—jobs, wealth gap, wages, etc.—have declined ever since except for a short-lived reversal during Clinton's time in office).

Today's rightwing ploy I notice (it's already in today's comments added to yesterday's post) on the radio news and on CNN is that the revised economic figures shows growth was even slower in the second quarter of this year, 2.4%. The rightwing is trying to blame that on Obama and the Dems even though the Recession, i.e. no or negative growth, occurred under Bush/Cheney and as a result of their policies and in fact, what they didn't say in the mass media so far today that I've heard or seen is that if you eliminate the trade deficit which grew, the growth amounted to 5% which would be its highest in many years!

And the trade deficit is partly the fault of factory jobs going overseas and us not manufacturing much in this country anymore. A trend that started under Reagan as corporations were let off the hook for sending jobs out of this country, something Obama and the Dems have been trying to rectify and I believe will, if they have the power to, which doesn't come from magical thinking but from savvy politics and convincing the public and voters, which they have become pretty lame at as if they're still playing by some long gone rule book (like Warren Christopher's advice to Gore during the Bush attempt to steal the presidency to be statesmanlike and not lower himself to the level of street fighting that the Bush crowd not only was actively doing but relishing in, as they obviously still do, no matter how many of the rest of us get hurt).

12 comments:

Jamie Rose said...

Oh Lals. Right on. Thanks for writing this.

Jame

JIm said...

The miracle that is America, the oldest Democratic Republic in history, has survived and prospered beyond any society in human history because of freedom of opportunity not a guarantee of equal outcome. That guarantee of equal opportunity has unleashed the human spirit and resulted in incredable freedom and prosperity. It is not unusual for the poorest Americans to have tvs and autos. The poor in America would be middle class in many other societies. The left, socialist, statists, communists have wrought much death and destruction in their desire to make every one equal in outcome. Witness, Europe in the 30s and 40s, the French revolution, Cuba, Venezuela (sp). No matter the nobleness of intention, socialism continues to fail. Observe the death spiral of European socialism, the roll back of the health care system in the UK and road to insolvency in the liberal states run by Democrats for generations.

In America we currently have a combination of free enterprise and socialism. The socialism part is responsible for the fiscal crisis we are currently in. The struggle for supremecy between the two systems has swung back and forth for 80 years. The radical socilists Obama/Pelosi/Reid have increased socialism way beyond the comfort level of the 40% of Americans who are conservative. With only 20% of Americans being liberal, the pendalum is about to swing back. It will be intersting to see if Obama's excesses have set up a real readjustment with reinvigorated Tenth Amendment, limiting federal powers.

Robert G. Zuckerman said...

So Jim, do you honestly believe that before President Obama took office the county and world were in good shape economically and hope-wise?

JIm said...

Robert, The question is why is the recovery a jobless one? The US economy, for that matter, any economy, constantly goes through periods of expansion and contraction. This past contraction was severe, but we have had severe contractions in the past and have come back. This recovery is hampered by Washington's war on business and employment. When an employer knows that their tax, health and regulation costs are going up but do not know by how much, they are reluctant to hire because of that uncertainty.

Anonymous said...

hey jim, when i was growing up in the 50's a man out of high school could get a job, like delivering groceries in a truck, that would cover the expenses of: food, clothing and shelter, for a family 0f 4, without his spouse having to find a job.
the desintegration of the family is one of the favorite issues that conservitives use for the devolving of our societies mores, but they don't seen to be bothered when capitilsts in their unbridled pursuit of money, abandon communities, or hold labor over a barrell with the choice, do you want the job , or don;t you. it's your choice.
we're back to the trap sung about in that tennessee ernie ford classic, ' the company store'.
how much longer can an economy besed on monry last, when money no longer reflests anything of value, or substance, and when it's pursuit leads to the destruction of irreplaceable treasure?

Anonymous said...

things went down-hill when we went off of the gold standard that backed our dollar then things were further exacerbated when we went off of the silver standard..

now it costs more to make a penny than the penny can buy
and the dollar is worth about 35 cents..

hell, one egg costs that!

no longer is cost of energy cost of housing cost of food figured into the equation when figuring the inflation rate...

the main reason we are suffering? because suffering/fear/anger/hate/ignorance sells

the other "anon" because I do not wish too much traffic heading to my web-site or to me ... personally

now on to the Chelsea Wedding that is costing $4 + million dollars in today's worth of the dollar.

JIm said...

Butch,
We can bemoan the change in economies and the loss of unskilled jobs to lower cost overseas labor or we can adapt and innovate. You mourn the loss of blue colar jobs of the fifties and I suspect that techies are not amused by folks in India being the support network for American technology. America's strength has been in innovation and technology. Not even the Obamasiah and and the much touted socialism by Democrats can bring that back. Unleashing the animal spirits of economic activity by lessening the heavy hand excessive regulation and tax costs of government on free enterprise has in the past and will again when the present anti business government is swept away.

Butch in Waukegan said...

You’ve laid out your position in this well-written post. I don’t agree with you about the Obama’s and the Democrat’s accomplishments, but that’s not new.

To focus on the upcoming election we will, once again, see:
Party in power: “All the problems were caused when we were out of power. Anyway, look at this graph, things are getting better!”
Party out of power: “Hey, it’s not our fault, we don’t have power. Vote for change, vote for us!”

This is the 2 Party Ballet that’s performed every election.

The Democrats will most likely lose seats, but not because people believe right wing propaganda. (All polls indicated Democrats are still the more popular party.) People have real problems, problems that are getting worse, and they don’t see anything being done about them by anyone in power.

Every “progress” you cite, when examined closely, is minimal, and in many cases illusory. In keeping with the role choreographed for the party in power, Obama spends his time cheerleading, telling the us that things are getting better. For instance, he traveled to Detroit the other day to give his “Mission Accomplished” speech. ABC titled its news story ”President Obama Hails Auto Industry Recovery in Michigan.”

So General Motors can build a new truck factory in China with bailout money, and the stockholders in GM are pleased and, despite 13% unemployment in Michigan and 20% in Detroit, this is recovery? This just-around-the-corner propaganda isn’t going to cut it. The Democrats will lose on their own merits.

Alex Cockburn has a good assessment of Obama’s style and the predicament he created:

The man who seized the White House by fomenting a mood of irrational expectation is now facing the bitter price exacted by reality. The reality is that there can be no “good” American president. It’s an impossible hand to play. Obama is close to being finished.

[snip]

It is not Obama’s fault that across 30 years more and more money has floated up to the apex of the social pyramid till America is heading back to where it was in the 1880s, a nation of tramps and millionaires. It’s not his fault that every tax break, every regulation, every judicial decision tilts toward business and the rich. That was the neoliberal America conjured into malign vitality back in the mid 1970s.

But it is Obama’s fault that he did not understand this, that always, from the getgo, he flattered Americans with paeans to their greatness, without adequate warning of the political and corporate corruption destroying America and the resistance he would face if he really fought against the prevailing arrangements that were destroying America.  He offered them a free and easy pass to a better future, and now they see that the promise was empty.

It’s Obama’s fault, too, that, as a communicator, he cannot rally and inspire the nation from its fears. From his earliest years he has schooled himself not to be excitable, not to be an angry black man who would be alarming to his white friends at Harvard and his later corporate patrons. Self-control was his passport to the guardians of the system, who were desperate to find a symbolic leader to restore America’s credibility in the world after the disasters of the Bush era. He is too cool.

So, now Americans in increasing numbers have lost confidence in him. For the first time in the polls negative assessments outnumber the positive. He no longer commands trust. His support is drifting down to 40 per cent. The straddle that allowed him to flatter corporate chieftains at the same time as blue-collar workers now seems like the most vapid opportunism. The casual campaign pledge to wipe out al-Quaida in Afghanistan is now being cashed out in a disastrous campaign viewed with dismay by a majority of Americans.

Butch in Waukegan said...

You’ve laid out your position in this well-written post. I don’t agree with you about the Obama’s and the Democrat’s accomplishments, but that’s not new.

To focus on the upcoming election we will, once again see:
Party in power: “All the problems were caused when we were out of power. Anyway, look at this graph, things are getting better!”
Party out of power: “Hey, it’s not our fault, we don’t have power. Vote for change, vote for us!”

This is the 2 Party Ballet that’s performed every election.

The Democrats will most likely lose seats, but not because people believe right wing propaganda. (All polls indicated Democrats are still the more popular party.) People have real problems, problems that are getting worse, and they don’t see anything being done about them by anyone in power.

Every “progress” you cite, when examined closely, is minimal, and in many cases illusory. In keeping with the role choreographed for the party in power, Obama spends his time cheerleading, telling the us that things are getting better. For instance, he traveled to Detroit the other day to give his “Mission Accomplished” speech. ABC titled its news story ”President Obama Hails Auto Industry Recovery in Michigan.”

So General Motors can build a new truck factory in China with bailout money, and the stockholders in GM are pleased and, despite 13% unemployment in Michigan and 20% in Detroit, this is recovery? This just-around-the-corner propaganda isn’t going to cut it. The Democrats will lose on their own merits.

Alex Cockburn has a good assessment of Obama’s style and the predicament he created:

The man who seized the White House by fomenting a mood of irrational expectation is now facing the bitter price exacted by reality. The reality is that there can be no “good” American president. It’s an impossible hand to play. Obama is close to being finished.

[snip]

It is not Obama’s fault that across 30 years more and more money has floated up to the apex of the social pyramid till America is heading back to where it was in the 1880s, a nation of tramps and millionaires. It’s not his fault that every tax break, every regulation, every judicial decision tilts toward business and the rich. That was the neoliberal America conjured into malign vitality back in the mid 1970s.

But it is Obama’s fault that he did not understand this, that always, from the getgo, he flattered Americans with paeans to their greatness, without adequate warning of the political and corporate corruption destroying America and the resistance he would face if he really fought against the prevailing arrangements that were destroying America.  He offered them a free and easy pass to a better future, and now they see that the promise was empty.

It’s Obama’s fault, too, that, as a communicator, he cannot rally and inspire the nation from its fears. From his earliest years he has schooled himself not to be excitable, not to be an angry black man who would be alarming to his white friends at Harvard and his later corporate patrons. Self-control was his passport to the guardians of the system, who were desperate to find a symbolic leader to restore America’s credibility in the world after the disasters of the Bush era. He is too cool.

So, now Americans in increasing numbers have lost confidence in him. For the first time in the polls negative assessments outnumber the positive. He no longer commands trust. His support is drifting down to 40 per cent. The straddle that allowed him to flatter corporate chieftains at the same time as blue-collar workers now seems like the most vapid opportunism. The casual campaign pledge to wipe out al-Quaida in Afghanistan is now being cashed out in a disastrous campaign viewed with dismay by a majority of Americans.

Butch in Waukegan said...

You’ve laid out your position in this well-written post. I don’t agree with you about the Obama’s and the Democrat’s accomplishments, but that’s not new.

To focus on the upcoming election we will, once again, see:
Party in power: “All the problems were caused when we were out of power. Anyway, look at this graph, things are getting better!”
Party out of power: “Hey, it’s not our fault, we don’t have power. Vote for change, vote for us!”

This is the 2 Party Ballet that’s performed every election.

The Democrats will most likely lose seats, but not because people believe right wing propaganda. (All polls indicated Democrats are still the more popular party.) People have real problems, problems that are getting worse, and they don’t see anything being done about them by anyone in power.

Every “progress” you cite, when examined closely, is minimal, and in many cases illusory. In keeping with the role choreographed for the party in power, Obama spends his time cheerleading, telling the us that things are getting better. For instance, he traveled to Detroit the other day to give his “Mission Accomplished” speech. ABC titled its news story ”President Obama Hails Auto Industry Recovery in Michigan.”

So General Motors can build a new truck factory in China with bailout money, and the stockholders in GM are pleased and, despite 13% unemployment in Michigan and 20% in Detroit, this is recovery? This just-around-the-corner propaganda isn’t going to cut it. The Democrats will lose on their own merits.

Alex Cockburn has a good assessment of Obama’s style and the predicament he created:

The man who seized the White House by fomenting a mood of irrational expectation is now facing the bitter price exacted by reality. The reality is that there can be no “good” American president. It’s an impossible hand to play. Obama is close to being finished.

[snip]

It is not Obama’s fault that across 30 years more and more money has floated up to the apex of the social pyramid till America is heading back to where it was in the 1880s, a nation of tramps and millionaires. It’s not his fault that every tax break, every regulation, every judicial decision tilts toward business and the rich. That was the neoliberal America conjured into malign vitality back in the mid 1970s.

But it is Obama’s fault that he did not understand this, that always, from the getgo, he flattered Americans with paeans to their greatness, without adequate warning of the political and corporate corruption destroying America and the resistance he would face if he really fought against the prevailing arrangements that were destroying America.  He offered them a free and easy pass to a better future, and now they see that the promise was empty.

It’s Obama’s fault, too, that, as a communicator, he cannot rally and inspire the nation from its fears. From his earliest years he has schooled himself not to be excitable, not to be an angry black man who would be alarming to his white friends at Harvard and his later corporate patrons. Self-control was his passport to the guardians of the system, who were desperate to find a symbolic leader to restore America’s credibility in the world after the disasters of the Bush era. He is too cool.

[snip]

The straddle that allowed him to flatter corporate chieftains at the same time as blue-collar workers now seems like the most vapid opportunism. The casual campaign pledge to wipe out al-Quaida in Afghanistan is now being cashed out in a disastrous campaign viewed with dismay by a majority of Americans.

Anonymous said...

'demublican' at 1st appears to be a democrat, but after a while is a jackass like a republican

Lally said...

Guess I'm adding to the thread when I said I wouldn't, but can't help pointing out that to a person working for GM who had lost their job or was heading toward that to have a factory in the Midwest scheduled for closure now not only try open but add jobs thanks to actions taken by Obama and the Dems, that person at least isn't thinking how limited Obama and the Dem's actions have been in their helpfulness. Nor am I when I get the benefits I have experienced as a result of Democratic administrations past (G.I Bill, Social Security, minimum wage, etc.) and even some Republican policies (handicap access—not that I need it now or permanently but when I have—etc.). Sometimes limited or incremental change or progress feels like a failure to live up to expectations or projections or desires or needs or even necessity, but it doesn't change the reality for those who benefit from it and in the case of most Democratic policies those benefits are more widely spread among different groups and not just reserved for the wealthy, that's a difference that is and has been totally clear for almost a century now and anyone who wants to argue there's no difference between the parties re: that difference is ignoring reality and the facts.