Updating the New Deal

Robert Reich on the New Deal:

Recalling old lessons from the New Deal, Marketplace: On the anniversary of President Roosevelt's first inaugural address, ...Tess Vigeland speaks with ... Robert Reich about how New Deal principles could be applied to our current economic situation.

Tess Vigeland: ...Let's listen to this clip from the beginning of that address as FDR was taking office:

Franklin D. Roosevelt: This nation will endure as it has endured, will revive and will prosper. So first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is fear itself.

Vigeland: Bob, of course, this is one of the more famous lines in recent history, but I think a lot of people out there may not realize that it was indeed referring to the economy, not foreign aggression.

Reich: Yes, the great fear at that time was that the economy would continue to do badly... Remember, there's a psychological component to economics. When people don't trust banks to keep their deposits, when the don't trust that the economy is really going to be there for them, people act in ways that almost create a self-fulfilling prophecy and that's what FDR was eluding to. It wasn't just psychology obviously; it was also some other inconvenient facts, such as the monetary system wasn't working -- the Federal Reserve Board was not pumping out nearly enough money; nobody knew the importance of generating a lot of additional liquidity in a situation like the Great Depression -- and of course, the stock market was still completely frozen.

Vigeland: So, in very basic terms, what was the New Deal? Why was it so radical at the time?

Reich: Nobody before 1933 conceived of the federal government as having a major role to play in regulating or in stimulating the national economy. The dominant political and economic philosophy was laissez-faire, just leave it alone. Well, that changed pretty rapidly. People knew something dramatically had to be done. ...

There wasn't one proposal... It was much more trial and error ... -- there was no precedent for this. They started kind of an alphabet soup of agencies: the WPA -- Works Projects Administration, the Securities and Exchange Commission, National Labor Relations Act. They enacted a whole bunch of social safety nets: Social Security, unemployment insurance. All of these were kind of groping in the dark for some answer to what could possibly be done to get the economy going again. ...

Vigeland: Let's go to another clip, and I have to say, this seems particularly relevant today:

Roosevelt: There must be a strict supervision of all banking and credit and investments. There must be an end to speculation with other people's money and there must be provision for an adequate and sound currency.

...Reich: Sounds like it could be any one of our candidates. You see, you have to understand some background. Leading up to the great crash of 1929, there was huge debt -- the United States and many, many individuals, corporations very, very deeply indebted, a great concentration of wealth and income larger than it is today and also rampant speculation and these three conjured up a very dangerous brew which ultimately blew up. Roosevelt understood that something had to be done to end speculation. There was no regulation to speak of. One of his goals was to make the market work, not to replace the market.

Vigeland: Bob, we often hear that the New Deal is dead. Do you think that's true?

Reich: Well, it's certainly dead in terms of some of the agencies -- the National Recovery Administration was struck down by the Supreme Court, the Works Projects Administration was ended by World War II. Also, I think it's fair to say that Americans today feel they have less need for and certainly have less confidence in government, but there are certain legacies that nobody can deny. Not only Social Security, unemployment insurance, agencies like the Securities and Exchange Commission, but there's also ... the notion that when things get very bad, government has to be there as a kind of last resort. We're seeing the debate now with regard to the housing crisis, the credit crunch. The question in Washington and around the country and indeed, around the world is what should government do to make the markets work better. That probably is the enduring legacy. ...

Suppose you had the power to alter the New Deal however you want. Some of you would abolish it all together, and shame on you, but for those who would choose to keep it around, how would you change it? What issues should an updated New Deal address? Perhaps:

• We need to provide health and dental insurance that doesn't end when a worker changes or is between jobs.
• We should recognize that it is normal for both parents to work outside the home. Child care that is affordable, reliable, and that helps children to get off to the best possible start needs to be available to all parents. For many parents, this is a big problem.
• We are much more geographically mobile than we were in the 1930s. If we expect a flexible workforce, we need to do more to support geographic movement of workers and their families.
• I would redefine poverty as a relative rather than an absolute standard and ensure that everyone has what they need to fully participate in society. And if my powers do not extend that far, I would at least raise - substantially - the absolute poverty threshold and then make sure nobody falls below it. Right now, it's too low. Along these lines, an expansion of the EITC is needed as well.
• The existence of large speculative bubbles - first in the stock market then in the housing market - threatens to undermine the stability of the economy and put an end to "The Great Moderation." We need to reexamine the regulatory structure of the  financial sector to be sure we are doing all we can to prevent destabilizing bubbles from emerging. If the consequences were confined to participants in these markets this wouldn't be necessary, but they are not. Problems in financial markets spread through the economy more generally and impose costs on people who had nothing to do with the creation of the problem.

What else?

Comments

[gordon]

As a refinement of your final (fifth) point: Glass-Steagall. "Transparency" isn't enough and doesn't work.

Some kind of industrial policy with actual objectives would be good. As I commented recently, the US already has a de facto industrial policy, but it is the resultant, so to speak, of a range of expedients adopted piecemeal and often without any real attempt to achieve any identifiable benefit except perhaps garnering political support from some vested interest. So there are subsidies, tax breaks, earmarks, military contracts and tariffs/quotas and trade deals with interesting fine print which together constitute some kind of Federal policy towards industry, but I would be surprised if anybody knows exactly what the outcomes of this policy soup are, let alone whether they are beneficial.

And then of course at the State level there are, I believe, various policies designed to attract businesses and/or to develop them within particular States. That is another layer of expedients and political rewards with some kind of impact on US business and industry, but again I doubt if anybody can estimate the impacts or evaluate their value.

Having some kind of industrial policy can assist with development of immigration, education and labour policies which, in the absence of industrial policy, may rest on no more than policy platitudes.

Finally, a more Union-friendly legislative environment should be seriously considered, unless Federal and State Govts. want to find themselves effectively fixing wages via minimum wage laws.

[gordon]

I don't know whether there is any link here with the New Deal, but stop invading and threatening to invade and bullying foreign countries.

[nocountry]

A funded version of Social Security.

[Alex Tolley]

1. Free education to bachelor level for all citizens.
2. Minimum living stipend for everyone from the age of 16 or 18 until death.
3. Ensuring the constitution is not parked at the front door of institutions and businesses.

[Inflation Adjustment]

Inflation adjust PBGC pensions so workers who lose their jobs to foreign trade don't also lose their pensions to inflation. Someone with decades in a bankrupt pension plan is too old to put 30 years in another company to get a decent pension.

I second the funded version of Social Security, and national health care.

I'm not so sure both parents working should be so readily accepted as the norm. My sister would have much preferred to stay at home to raise her children, but was forced to work by the low purchasing power of her husband's wages. I don't think everyone really wants to work, and have someone else raise their children. (Those who do fine, but it should be a choice.) Increasing the purchasing power of workers wages by allowing production efficiencies to increase the purchasing power of the dollar might be a better way to go. Wages are too sticky for workers to benefit now. The Fed does not control nominal wages, it only controls the purchasing power of those wages.

[Denis Drew]

I would MANDATE elections (not voting) for union participation in all businesses. (I would really prefer to mandate unionization like Germany -- but not membership like Germany.) It is time that the need for checks and balances for the existence of economic democracy is recognized the way the same has been recognized for two centuries as needed for the existence of political democracy.

[Bruce Wilder]

MT: "If the consequences were confined to participants in these markets this wouldn't be necessary, but they are not. Problems in financial markets spread through the economy more generally and impose costs on people who had nothing to do with the creation of the problem."

I think we should recognize that "imposing costs" is by design.

When the financial industries are allowed to sell fraudulent securities to city and state agencies, charge 33% interest on credit cards, exploit the working poor with 400% payday loans, and on and on, while 25 hedge fund managers pay themselves as much or more than the grossly overpaid CEOs of the Fortune 500, something is desperately wrong.

[Gene O'Grady]

Public works jobs.

I fail to understand the notion that telemarketing for some sleazy business has a social and economic value beyond (for example) catching up on deferred maintenance in public parks.

[esb]

Mark Thoma writes " ... to be sure we are doing all we can to prevent destabilizing bubbles from emerging."

Well, one thing that you can do is to change your supportive position on Bernanke's looser than loose money gambit which has fueled the bubble in all commodities which we are now painfully enduring.

First, equities. Then residential property. Now, well, everything tangible except residential property.

When this (commodities) bubble pops, it will be no "slow-motion train wreck" such as the residential property mess now occupying so much of the attention of so many.

Everyone will be introduced to a funny little term very well understood by those in the commodities side of the IB firms ...

"lock limit down."

Lock limit down. Sounds like a phrase that will make an appearance on a Business Week cover a lot sooner that you might imagine.

[Winslow R.]

Establish efficient markets for all asset classes. Just as autos and homes have structured markets, create real markets for patents, copyrights, trademarks, stocks, bonds, futures, etc. where prices can be discovered, ownership determined, and then taxed.

[Winslow R.]

Relegate fiscal rebate checks to times of extreme economic despair by replacing the $1000 rebate with a Fed funds loan at the current Fed funds rate.

Surprised?

First, reexamine how national banks (and international banks) evolved to gain their monopoly access to Fed funds and determine whether that monopoly should be maintained given their demonstrated ability to abuse the privilege time and again.

Realizing infinitely scalable technology has made bankers mostly unnecessary, abolish their monopoly (not banks) by providing citizen access to the Fed funds market through the TAF. Extend the Taylor rule monetary mechanism directly into the pockets of every citizen so that it actually works as advertised.

Allow free and open TAF markets, composed of the citizens of the U.S.A. and banks, determine the unlimited quantity of reserves that are created each day at the price set by the Fed.

[Lafayette]

Carpe diem

gordon: the US already has a de facto industrial policy, but it is the resultant, so to speak, of a range of expedients adopted piecemeal and often without any real attempt to achieve any identifiable benefit

You are right to describe the present "policy" as a purely random quilt work of no particular design whatsoever.

The key to an effective National Policy is to coincide Industrial Policy with Social Expenditures. Both go hand in hand, provided that funding is available. (Which becomes available by increasing taxation in a focused manner, not reducing it.)

Social Expenditures collaborate with Industrial Policy by enhancing both skills and individual productivity. They do so by being focused upon where they are most effective. The glaring necessity for America is a more healthy and more talented work-force. That challenge is clear.

It takes two forms:

1a) The challenge: The rate of obesity has reached alarming proportions -- of around a quarter of the population. Its precursor, over-weight, is at 64%. Research has proven that obese and over-weight people are not as productive as the average. They are also major contributors to illness and therefore augment Health Care expenditure.

1b) The response: A system of Health Care that is prevention-focused, that is, spots the onset of obesity in youth and young adults -- and remedies it. Consider obese adults as a recognized "sickness". Offer these adults a disciplined regime, together with nourishment training. Prevent unhealthy food advertisement on TV.

2a) The challenge: The hardest hit by unemployment are the un- and semi-skilled individuals who are either untrained or not trainable in new skills/aptitudes. This is caused by insufficient discipline in secondary-schools, where laxity has created a whole generation of ineptness, most of it fit for only the minimum wage or worse. Also, the throughput from secondary to higher education is inadequate at 32%. It should be closer to 50% -- and could be with the right effort.

2b) The response: Flexicurity that allows the unemployed to maintain a level of income whilst being retrained. Require companies to invest in OJT for their staff. Close supervision of secondary-school education, by specialized staff, to assure that, indeed, no child is left behind.

The above challenges are not transient phenomenons. The economic paradigm of the last half of the 20th century, which we carried forward into the present millennium, has changed definitively. We must respond to that change vigorously or the country's decline will become permanent.

Let's not assume, however, that Market Economy will provide the necessary responses ... abracadabra. It wont because it can't.

To believe that it can, simply because we think it has in the past, is begging the question. The past is not the future. The past was a special time under special circumstances ... and they are gone forever.

Time is being wasted. The moment is mature for a New Deal Version 2.0 that results in a profound reform, that brings America back up to a world-class standard of economic performance. Done correctly, it can result as well in a more just society.

Carpe diem.

[reason]

Number one of the list should be reform American democracy to reduce the level of corruption to something like standard OECD levels.

[Bruce Wilder]

I'd like to see some aggressive infrastructure spending -- really aggressive.

Particularly where building out the 'last mile' of fiber optic for really decent internet, the country has been slowed down by its dependence on the oligopoly of Verizon and AT&T, and the decrepit cable companies, all of which are holding the future hostage to their worthless debt.

Let municipalities build the fiber optic net, and wholesale access to competing providers of content. Net neutrality is built into that kind of industry structure -- it is not a simple rule, to be repealed in an instant by some future Republican fascists.

[Icarus]

Alex Tolley?

Minimum living stipend for one's entire life? Are you serious?

You want to finance people sitting at home, watching tv? And, with money from people who actually work?

It's no wonder that neo-liberal rule is so easy for the masses to swallow.

[Icarus]

Inflation Adjustment...

Perhaps the issue with your sister/brother in law isn't that his wages aren't sufficient, but, instead that they had a child before they had secured a safe wage rate.

People complain about the social whole, when the roots of their problems usually stem from imprudent financial decisions. It is each of our responsibilities to ensure our financial security...and only then incur the cost, and risk of raising a family. We have no constitutional right to a family. It is a choice.

Your sister may want to stay home...so do I. But, I have to work in the marketplace to afford the life I want. So should she. If a couple wants a child, or two, a home, 2 cars, and all the rest of the modern 'needs', they have to make a plan, and execute. The rest of us should not be financing family life (more than we already are, with schools, and such).

[Icarus]

Reason...

The problem with an indice like "corruption" is that it doesn't have a workable global definition, which takes national differences into account.

In the US, we officially bribe our politicians through lobbies and corporate financing. It can lead to incredibly 'corrupt' policies, such as our support for the colonial regime of israel. To many in the globe, the EU and the US are the nerve center of corrupt, and morally bankrupt policies.
Moving towards OECD standards may be tough to sell.

But, yes...in many developing societies, 'corruption' is rampant on the ground. Only salaried employees pay taxes, for example, in India. Nearly half the economy is 'black'.

That said, the sense of 'corruption' is hard to standardize. It's just a different mindset. To this day, traffic police accept (demand) bribes from people to evade tickets. It's 'corrupt'. But, in their social context, that officer doesn't earn enough from the state to live a basic life, so, they often see it as normal and required.

In a strange way, it encourages responsibility on the ground. People feel connected to the less fortunate, and sometimes a 'bribe' (in western terminology) is a required payment for the poor wages people earn.

And, in any dialogue involving standardizations between nations, I always wonder if nations in the OECD are open to advice, criticisms, and demands from developing societies about things like corruption, militia, trade, emmissions, etc.
As usual, it ends up being a monologue from the 'west' to the 'east'...a list of demands...a path towards a 'modernity' which may not be in the interest of all.

[Icarus]

Lafayette...

Do you fear that we're essentially talking about increasing the cost of labor in the US, and, that will exacerbate the problem of creating jobs, and preventing further hemorraging of jobs to offshore locations?

I'm a bit surprised you desribed the obesity and under-education problem to a certain laxity, or insufficient discipline. I agree completely...I just don't think the solution to this comes from government initiatives.

At the end of the day, the population of the US has to understand it's comptetitive position in the global economy. Every citizen in the US begins life with a certain advantage over most people in the globe (certainly most people in the developing world).
That advantage has to be harnessed. K-12 schooling, great roads, decent plumbing. These are all luxuries in many societies (who are also competing for good jobs in the global economy).

Obesity and under-education are a sign of sloth, not just marketing. How do we address that sloth (beyond vilifying commercials)?

[Inflation Adjustment]

Icarus..."Perhaps the issue with your sister/brother in law isn't that his wages aren't sufficient, but, instead that they had a child before they had secured a safe wage rate."

I can see your point. However, in an age where the median wage is not sufficient to support a family, this suggests that over half the population does not make enough money to have a family. This is a very high number of people not earning a safe wage rate.

The Amish manage to support their families using ancient technology. Amish males even retire at age 50, after raising a family. Surely we can do better than that using modern methods. Something is taking away the fruits of what the median person makes, leaving them with insufficient resources to support their families. I am not suggesting gov support, but rather just letting people keep a bit more of what they produce. As it is now, regulations, regressive taxes, inflation, etc... take too much of it away. They may all be well intentioned, but together they drive the cost of living up to unreasonable levels.

[anne]

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/18/opinion/18herbert.html?ex=1271476800&en=9f23787f95925a8f&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss

April 18, 2005

A Radical in the White House
By BOB HERBERT

Last week - April 12, to be exact - was the 60th anniversary of the death of Franklin Delano Roosevelt. "I have a terrific headache," he said, before collapsing at the Little White House in Warm Springs, Ga. He died of a massive cerebral hemorrhage on the 83rd day of his fourth term as president. His hold on the nation was such that most Americans, stunned by the announcement of his death that spring afternoon, reacted as though they had lost a close relative.

That more wasn't made of this anniversary is not just a matter of time; it's a measure of the distance the U.S. has traveled from the egalitarian ideals championed by F.D.R. His goal was "to make a country in which no one is left out." That kind of thinking has long since been consigned to the political dumpster. We're now in the age of Bush, Cheney and DeLay, small men committed to the concentration of big bucks in the hands of the fortunate few.

To get a sense of just how radical Roosevelt was (compared with the politics of today), consider the State of the Union address he delivered from the White House on Jan. 11, 1944. * He was already in declining health and, suffering from a cold, he gave the speech over the radio in the form of a fireside chat.

After talking about the war, which was still being fought on two fronts, the president offered what should have been recognized immediately for what it was, nothing less than a blueprint for the future of the United States. It was the clearest statement I've ever seen of the kind of nation the U.S. could have become in the years between the end of World War II and now. Roosevelt referred to his proposals in that speech as "a second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all regardless of station, race or creed."

Among these rights, he said, are:

"The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation.

"The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation.

"The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living.

"The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad.

"The right of every family to a decent home.

"The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health.

"The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident and unemployment.

"The right to a good education."

I mentioned this a few days ago to an acquaintance who is 30 years old. She said, "Wow, I can't believe a president would say that."

Roosevelt's vision gave conservatives in both parties apoplexy in 1944 and it would still drive them crazy today. But the truth is that during the 1950's and 60's the nation made substantial progress toward his wonderfully admirable goals, before the momentum of liberal politics slowed with the war in Vietnam and the election in 1968 of Richard Nixon.

It wouldn't be long before Ronald Reagan was, as the historian Robert Dallek put it, attacking Medicare as "the advance wave of socialism" ....

* http://www.feri.org/common/news/details.cfm?QID=2088&clientid=11005

[anne]

http://www.feri.org/common/news/details.cfm?QID=2088&clientid=11005

January 11, 1944

Message on the State of the Union
By Franklin Roosevelt

It is our duty now to begin to lay the plans and determine the strategy for the winning of a lasting peace and the establishment of an American standard of living higher than ever before known. We cannot be content, no matter how high that general standard of living may be, if some fraction of our people—whether it be one-third or one-fifth or one-tenth—is ill-fed, ill-clothed, ill-housed, and insecure.

This Republic had its beginning, and grew to its present strength, under the protection of certain inalienable political rights — among them the right of free speech, free press, free worship, trial by jury, freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures. They were our rights to life and liberty.

As our Nation has grown in size and stature, however — as our industrial economy expanded — these political rights proved inadequate to assure us equality in the pursuit of happiness.

We have come to a clear realization of the fact that true individual freedom cannot exist without economic security and independence. "Necessitous men are not free men." People who are hungry and out of a job are the stuff of which dictatorships are made.

In our day these economic truths have become accepted as self-evident. We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all — regardless of station, race, or creed.

Among these are:

The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the Nation;

The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;

The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;

The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;

The right of every family to a decent home;

The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;

The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;

The right to a good education.

All of these rights spell security. And after this war is won we must be prepared to move forward, in the implementation of these rights, to new goals of human happiness and well-being....

[hari]

The above interventions overlook the fact that it's the structure and function of gov which defines society...all the way back to Roman times.

US Congress has become the problem, and may be also the solution, if the trigger can be used by the sovereign (voters).

It's role of the public/private institutions not just to propagte their ideological platform but also drive the society towards to a more just and good governance.

Regulatory lapse by Fed is the principal reason for the current credit crunch - implying the laws are NOT being enforced! May be there is need to strengthen the framework of SEC and its oversite role.

In comparative economic analysis, US must/should start learning a bit more from its OECD competitors, for example, as illustarted by the (divergent) Social Indicators (courtesy of Lafayette).

No society can continue to produce and sustain itself without a solid foundation; and, like a home, it must also be "refurnished" from time to time in order to withstand the inevitable erosion and decay.

So, in final analysis, you guys need to focus on the framework in which gov must supply the services (not goods alone!) for the system to work and succeed.

At the moment, the entrenched notion of laissez-faire economic thinking is the overiding obstacle to a more just society.

[hari]

Now that HRC has become the "comeback kid", I suspect the tide is going to carry her to the finish line. Which means there's a good chance to deal with the ills of not only the last 8yrs but lose of American comparative advantage in manufactures and technological transformation.

[save_the_rustbelt]

We should recognize that it is normal for both parents to work outside the home.

Whether or not this is really good for the children, quality day care or not, is a question researchers have avoided, or have approached with idealological spins.

Developmental psychology may be getting closer to answers perhaps.

I don't know the answer, but I suspect I know the answer, and lots of folks won't like it.

[save_the_rustbelt]

Creating "rights" is a dangerous exercise, not only are most not found in the Constitution, but many cannot be guaranteed by government, too many cross currents (if I do something for the farmer it may hurt someone else, etc.).

Many good and desirable outcomes will never be "rights."

[anne]

"Whether or not this is really good for the children, quality day care or not, is a question researchers have avoided, or have approached with idealological spins.

"Developmental psychology may be getting closer to answers perhaps."

What nonsense; what is proper care for pregnant women and infants and young children is known to all who care to know. Simply compare parental leave programs in any other developed country, and day care-early childhood education programs in other developed nations, and health care protections for pregnant women in developed nations.

[anne]

Simply look to the provision of days with pay for personal or family illness in any other developed nation, or provision of any vacation days. We are the least possible family-friendly nation.

Developmental psychologists may be getting closer to answers, perhaps.

[groucho]

"you have to understand some background. Leading up to the great crash of 1929, there was huge debt -- the United States and many, many individuals, corporations very, very deeply indebted, a great concentration of wealth and income larger than it is today and also rampant speculation and these three conjured up a very dangerous brew which ultimately blew up."

Mark, the game's a bit different now as compared to the 30's.

The current global capital arbitrage game, particularly BW2(esp SWF development)has allowed the supply/demand imbalance to reach a far greater level than what transpired with the 20's boom and 30's commodity and debt deflation.

This time international arrangements will be needed to avoid the mercantilist trade wars and the eventual natural resource wars that are now looking likely.

Clearly the US is now in the mercantilist camp with it's continuing dollar depreciation scheme.

A BW3 is the most likely outcome going forward. The current trade recycling scheme causes way too many dislocations and some sort of caps will have to be put in place to slow capital movements.

In the US either productive claims will have to be recycled to those at the bottom or natural deflation should be allowed to run its course; increasing the standard of living for jobbers.

The golden opportunity that existed after the fall of communism to develop sustainable civilian economic development may have waned, considering Russian and Chinese expanding military developments.

In an overconsuming, credit consumption based economy as the US, DEFLATION (with default encouragement) is the preferred
method to re-align lifetime assets and liabilities....REAL WEALTH.

Health care is the one area that market forces will not be able to resolve. Expansion of medicare into the general population will be the most likely route for this area.

[anne]

"Creating 'rights/ is a dangerous exercise...."

Amazing nonsense; like sort of kind of creating the right for all people to be free, for African Americans to vote, for women to vote, for public facilities to be integrated, for a school lunch for a hungry child, for medical care for a pregnant women, and on and on.

Social Security is a right, Medicare is a right, and those are only a beginning.

[anne]

The golden opportunity that existed after the fall of communism to develop sustainable civilian economic development may have waned, considering Russian and Chinese expanding military developments.

No question; the Chinese will soon be marching through the streets of Boston (actually their students already are) carrying Chinese bayonets an wanting to steal our lobsters. Be afraid, be very afraid. Wooooo.

[gordon]

Icarus: "You want to finance people sitting at home, watching tv? And, with money from people who actually work?"

Why the surprise? Isn't that what any independently wealthy person does (though they may not watch TV all day)?

[anne]

We will have military spending of more than $725 billion in the coming year in the midst of our insane $3 trillion in spending on wars and occupations but the problem is the Chinese and Russians. I know, I know, let's why not even like build an anti- anti- missile missile system in Poland to protect against the dread Iranians. Wooooo.

[Lafayette]

MT: What else?

How to pay for it all.

America is simply not accustomed to the idea that BigGovernment should tax and spend (except for Defense). This will take a sea change in mentality.

I frankly do not know how it could be done, nor does any seasoned politician -- which is why neither Clinton nor Obama talk about it.

Yet, it is fundamental. As I explained earlier, taxing and spending on highly focused programs incentivizes the Market Economy to respond -- but in different ways than if the incentives were not there.

There seems to exist, however, a Mental Block against taxation amongst Americans. They've got little taxation, comparatively, already but they want still less? (Every time in the past three decades that America reduced taxes, it was typically on the upper-classes -- who hoard it rather than spend it.)

AND, they want as well a better life for their children? Those notions are at antipodes of one another. Social Expenditures will improve well-being only if funded by higher taxes.

It would be possible (after the election, when President-elects unloosen their tongues) to prepare for enaction a tax increase focused on the upper income brackets, with the justification that it will create durable/decent jobs by means of expenditure on badly needed Economic and Societal Reforms. Then skilfully detail those reforms, aiming them to please.

The PotUS would have to sharpen his/her pedagogical skills in order to sell it to a suspecting public.

[paine]

"I don't think everyone really wants to work, and have someone else raise their children"

"their children"
right of origimal producers
to ownership of off spring
with rights of transfer and rearage till majority

what a dated notion

what a fate for most raw folks
who had no choice
in their birth hole into this world

btw
"their " 0 to 6 year old "children "
are more often far far better off
with a 40 hour per week
dose of outside "raising "

most home cookin ain't up to
pay for it standards

vouchers please !!!!!

as to stay at home ....moms or dads

get a job you bums !!!!

eitc oughta be huge and run up
with a graceful taper as far as 100k per jobbler

and the wage min oughta be set optimallly
and linked
to average value added

as to a living stipend
not so long as one can job hold
then for sure

convert by stages
the ssi payments
from a retirement system
to a life time jobvac stipend system
funded out of a vat tax

future retirement system ???
65 healthy and broke ??
no loans without a death insurance off set
since debtors debts die with em .....

but want to retire ???
go ahead make my day
but buy
a tax credit based
annuity plan .... real early on

healthy old people can job hold too
for christ's sake
and its good for em too
the old parasites

[Cyrille]

A truly massive infrastructure program, that would (among other goals) dramatically improve energy efficiency.

That would be a real bonus to the economy.

[paine]

what a cruel senseless
hu-world we tol-erate
now
if i were made benign despot ...
oh ya
that's jesus' job
come .....The Day

i can't wait
can you ???

[paine]

A truly massive infrastructure program
with community plans worthy of calvin

ya lets put every one in america
by residence zoning
into 1000 model cities each one averaging
9 miles square ie ~ 35k per square mile
think of the ground rent tax on those puppies

[paine]

winslow

single lender is the nuts

its twin to single payer health
and sinbgle payer pension
i'm for it
so lets
go for it babe

we need to use
the us postal system's
friendly gray facilities
as the ready to rock
bricks and mortarrrr here
build an instant
parallel national depository
and funds transfer system
and use the neighborhood
local loan office
for the few meat to meat transactions

the rest as you imply
is virtual anyway

lets
put the privateering
rent seeking banksmanships under
but by a fair and square competition

they're now just
excess baggage
looking for a cut

useless
artificial agggggglommerations
of limited liability
credit issuing power

all power to the credit soviets

[paine]

the problem is the Chinese and Russians

what problem are these remote giants
for the likes of me anne
and job holdin nits like me ??

[paine]

laff
be careful how you toss around

" Mental Block(s) "

[paine]

" MANDATE elections (not voting) for union participation in all businesses"

lovely lovely lovely idea drewish one

vote on labor day every three years
ie each year one third of all firms
with over 15 hu-heads
and hu-hand pairs on payroll

[paine]

"holding the future hostage to their worthless debt"

welcome to the world of private capital

[reason]

Paine
35,000 per square mile = 55 people per acre - i.e average block (3 per house) 1/20 acre (c 200 m2).

Dense enough. But 1000 * 9 miles square, 9 miles square is hardly walkable. Why not 9000 * 3 miles square? (9 * 35000 = 315000) with clusters of cities to allow for the satisfaction of niche interests.

[paine]

bruce the red

"something is desperately wrong "

says...

reason
its a deal !!!

[reason]

Paine - the reason I push this. I grew up in Sydney. Its a great city, but hell to get out of (on long weekends) or back into. Where I now live Bad Homburg near Frankfurt/Main, is a great city because I can not only walk to the town centre which provides almost everything I need (or I can commute to Frankfurt) but I can walk out of town (to forest and fields). At 9 miles square, lots of people need to take a care to get out of the city (though most could walk to the city).

[reason]

Paine - the reason I push this. I grew up in Sydney. Its a great city, but hell to get out of (on long weekends) or back into. Where I now live Bad Homburg near Frankfurt/Main, is a great city because I can not only walk to the town centre which provides almost everything I need (or I can commute to Frankfurt) but I can walk out of town (to forest and fields). At 9 miles square, lots of people need to take a car to get out of the city (though most could walk to the city).

[paine]

"The glaring necessity for America is a more healthy and more talented work-force"

"healthy "
and "talented "
i love it

put in healthy talented jobblers
work 40 for 50 for 45
and if they make it thru the gauntlet
get out
wrecked jobbler hulks
neither talented or still healthy

this laff
shows no sense
beyond bentham and becker

not even the deeper reaches
of the market velt

get thee past
the heckle and jeckle
of supply and demand

[paine]

reason
you --as usual on your georgian home turf---
are quite right

but as potentate of hu-lag 17
i'll need a sedan chair anyway

[paine]

god i love it

hobby horses on parade

[paine]

the Chinese will soon be marching through the streets of Boston (actually their students already are) carrying Chinese bayonets an wanting to steal our lobsters.

lovely

[paine]

You want to finance people sitting at home, watching tv? And, with money from people who actually work?

no icarus
lets tax the zillionaires
to pay for this idleness by design

after all
its their reserve army of the unemployed

an army they deploy
an army
that by its mere existence
and size cycle deters
those wageling greed heads
trying to grab
for a bigger piece of the extra vat
their profiteer bosses
just put into the mark up

[reason]

Hell paine,
I'm not a Georgian, I'm a Georgian sympathizer!

[hari]

This is, so far, a poor reflection of your good intentions and intelligence required to shift the focus of national discourse - to a more just and equitable society.

Let me propose to MT (and all of you), and inspite of myopic perspective on Russia and China, I'd sue for global PEACE! And make it the front line of political discourse.

Anne would love that; won't you, Anne? Because by suing for peace and peaceful coexistence (with yr antogonists!) it's possible to trigger the release of economic factors for the good of national reconstruction (similar to what FDR did - but it must be relevant to current social/economic inequality).

Under Bush Sr. there was a lot of dicussion on so-called "peace divident" when Soviet Union collapsed (1989) and Berlin Wall came dumbling down. US foreign policy ended up bungling in the Balkans and rest of the story you know....

Of course, the military-industrial complex will NOT take it sitting down but fight tooth and nail for their share of military hardware and, of course, the militarization of the industrial base (due to Chinese recurrent military budget) and demand quid-pro-quo and whatnots.

However, China's national interest and that of Russia would readily subsume a peace divident by NOT having to cope with cost of American military hardware and its stratgic development. Russia did exactly that after SU disbanded...and the result was American hegemony of not only NATO but the extension of its defense beyond European theatre of war....

So, you've a choice now either (1)sue for Peace or (2) believing in your military hardware continue to impose the military-industrial complex and its strategic thinking on the rest of the world.

Doesn't matter if it costs 3 Trillion dollar or whatnot, Uncle Sam does what it must!

[Callahan]

If the big guys don't soon give the little guys a break, then seems to me the big guys may start to feel a pinch themselves, for obvious reasons if not more.

I mean if a grocer depended on his employees to purchase his groceries, but his employees became so impoverished that they could no longer afford his groceries, then what would the poor grocer do?

[groucho]

"NORFOLK, Va. -- At the Naval Network Warfare Command here, U.S. cyber defenders track and investigate hundreds of suspicious events each day. But the predominant threat comes from Chinese hackers, who are constantly waging all-out warfare against Defense Department networks, Netwarcom officials said."

Chinese DoD attacks are old news, in the civilian world FINANCIAL attacks will be the weapon of FIRST choice. China wants it's day in the sun and it's using it's leverage to get it's way.

HK, Macau; Taiwan is next on the hit parade. Be rest assured financial warning shots will be fired FIRST, before any military attempt to retake Taiwan.

As far as Russia, we "Sachs-anized" them and the blowback is Putin. We(US) deserved that one.

[hari]

@ Callahan -

Have you ever come across a Tribe that willingly agrees to handover its advantage?

You must be living in a fools paradise or what?

[hari]

@ Graucho -

If I'm not mistaken - you'd qualify to join a fascist club.

[Andrew]

in the civilian world FINANCIAL attacks will be the weapon of FIRST choice. China wants it's day in the sun and it's using it's leverage to get it's way.

Our Eagle Style is no match for their monetary Tai Chi.

[paine]

"HK, Macau; Taiwan is next on the hit parade"

what ??
china wants to grab taiwan??
taiwan and hk and singapore and hanoi
too i guess

but g
over seas chinese bizwacks
already grabbed up most of the prc

they out right own it share it
or have options on it

the politbureau
is their local bailiff

poor groucho
must be operating from a remote mountain region
where news goes by short wave
but fresh framing notions
get air dropped
only once every twenty years

[wjd123]

I want to regulate against contagion in the global market place. Make sure rating agencies have competition. For instance, a rating agency paid for by the EU can rate the raters. It could insist on greater transparency where information is withheld. Where transparency is thin global raters could say that not enough information is available for them to confirm a rating. The "not enough information" category should lead to restrictions on some EU entities such as mutual funds and pension funds from buying such assets.

This would be an example of global competition for information leading to a healthier global financial market instead of one where biased ratings and secret dealings risk the outbreak of a global pandemic.

With everyone looking over everyone else's financial shoulder investors would soon sort our where the most unbiased information is coming from.

If financial institutions don't like this much scrutiny, accuse them of being against competition in the marketplace.

If this much scrutiny ends up destroying the global financial market place because countries retaliate rather than comply with transparency requests it will just be an indication that it needed destroyed before it destroyed us.

[paine]

as to financial combats
meaning
the great wall vs the street wall

M.A.D. finance policy
is the only kind
dear soul

the us dollar
is the global doomsday machine

attack the dollar
and you'll sink yourself and all
market dependant earthlings
right along with it

[Willliam Smith]

1. Free, quality education for all and make it a right. 'Quality' is the key word; it would require a minimum level of support and funding that just using 'free education' wouldn't.
2. Guaranteed substantial investment in infrastructure, for both the upkeep and expansion of all manner of infrastructure.
3. WPA/CCC-type program that guarantees employment chances, even if they are crap and pay minimum wage, that are more useful than make-busy work but still work, rather than simple unemployment.
4. Make the minimum wage "living" at the least.

[paine]

i notice all these new reg outfits
u folks envision

regulators
either get flat out "appointed "
by the regulated
as with the fed
or at best
down stream captured by the regulated

so go ahead reg em up

but like kong
when they get pissed enough
they will brake
your chrome steel chains any how
or like houdini
sneak in and out of em all along

[paine]

"WPA/CCC-type program that guarantees employment chances, even if they are crap and pay minimum wage, that are more useful than make-busy work but still work, rather than simple unemployment"
i like ..
totally hear ya wild bill

[paine]

one old frame fits perfectly however

"As far as Russia, we "Sachs-anized" them and the blowback is Putin"

bull's eye

[robertdfeinman]

What if's are a pleasant intellectual exercise, but the New Deal is dead and gone.

The real question is what to do in the future. There are several factors that make a new New Deal inappropriate.
1. Worldwide overpopulation and continuing population growth
2. Looming resource shortages
3. Looming climate change
4. The creation of an international money system with no effective controls and (apparently) no one who even understands how it works
5. Widening disparity between the poor and the wealthy, both within countries and between them
6. A permanent state of insurrection in weak states around the world
7. The widespread availability of weapons of "mass destruction" - including chemical, biological, conventional and nuclear

Certainly the US needs to rebalance the wealth disparity and improve it social support system. It also needs to refocus on infrastructure rebuilding and decrease militarism. These will only help it transition to the role of former empire a little more smoothly, not allow it to remain the "world's only superpower".

There are no supra-national mechanisms to resolve conflicts over resources, when the dogs start fighting over the last bone, the biggest one will "win". If this means that we will bomb weak states back into the stone age, then we will. It's what the American people want, although they won't admit it (even to themselves).

The problem will arise after we have reduced a place to rubble and still can't make free use of their resources - Iraq is a taste of what is to come.

[anne]

Hari:

"Let me propose to MT (and all of you), and inspite of myopic perspective on Russia and China, I'd sue for global PEACE! And make it the front line of political discourse."

Yes; and, of course, a legacy of Franklin Roosevelt was to be the founding of the United Nations in June 1945, but develop the thinking.

[William Smith]

I don't like reposting or adding anything later, but here's one that popped up in context of the new crack-cocaine sentencing guidelines:
1. A fully-funded judiciary that can expand to meet the caseload imposed on it.

A current problem with our justice system is that it is under-funded on all sides and, as a result, justices have to invent new methods and tests for keeping people out of court to save their caseload...

[Alex Tolley]

BW:

"I'd like to see some aggressive infrastructure spending -- really aggressive.

Particularly where building out the 'last mile' of fiber optic for really decent internet, the country has been slowed down by its dependence on the oligopoly of Verizon and AT&T, and the decrepit cable companies, all of which are holding the future hostage to their worthless debt.

Let municipalities build the fiber optic net, and wholesale access to competing providers of content. Net neutrality is built into that kind of industry structure -- it is not a simple rule, to be repealed in an instant by some future Republican fascists."

I'm inclined to agree that the communications infrastructure is too important to leave in the hands of game-playing corporations. Unfortunately I also remember the crappy British Post Office that used to run the telephone system in Britain. The organization that manages this infrastructure should be carefully considered.

There are lots of other infrastructure projects that need doing, including basic rebuilding and repair of the highway system. How about a rebuilding Amtrak rails so we could have high speed, maybe even just decently fast, train service instead of just aircaft?

[anne]

"As far as Russia, we "Sachs-anized" them and the blowback is Putin"

Please tell me who wrote this superb line, which I did not notice before Paine noticed?

I am reminded of shock treatment, which is a Milton Friedman sort of preferred treatment, and which has been repeatedly found devastating beyond the shocking. Economists were little pleased with Naomi Klein's "Shock Doctrine," but the work was an important revealing of what shocking amounts to.

[Alex Tolley]

Hari:

"Let me propose to MT (and all of you), and inspite of myopic perspective on Russia and China, I'd sue for global PEACE! And make it the front line of political discourse."

With whom? Everybody? One problem with peace is that it prevents the use of violence to change unacceptable conditions, doesn't it? Wouldn't that have prevented the American War of Independence? Even, possibly, the French revolution?

[reason]

Wouldn't that have prevented the American War of Independence?

Are you sure that wouldn't have been a good thing?

But yes I understand your principle. But revolutions are something different than external violence, and the logic of violence with WMD is troublesome. I remember reading "Einstein on Peace" and found his ideas interesting. It is a shame that book is not in print anymore. Peace is out of fashion.

[Alex Tolley]

rdf:

If this means that we will bomb weak states back into the stone age, then we will. It's what the American people want, although they won't admit it (even to themselves).

I thought Americans believed "might makes right".

The problem will arise after we have reduced a place to rubble and still can't make free use of their resources - Iraq is a taste of what is to come.

We might hope that after our $3T war, that maybe, just maybe, we have learned that there are cheaper ways to secure important resources. More importantly, maybe we could start learning how to run a modern civilization w/o resorting to extraction of limited resources. If we don't the "Collapse" scenario will happen sooner or later.

[Alex Tolley]

reason: "But revolutions are something different than external violence".

The French Revolution was entirely internal. I don't really buy that with the American War of Independence. The Russians have made a great deal out of Chechnya being an "internal affair" to justify their military actions. Wouldn't the threat of an external force to prevent internal violence or to overthrow truly nasty regimes be useful in these situations.

Hari should explain further how peaceful only means could improve the lot of individuals in whatever situation they find themselves. What would be the organization? The rules? What sanctions for enforcement?

[reason]

Alex of course you are right, but the winner in any fight isn't always the good guy. Keeping the might on the side of right is not an easy problem.

[swells]

A modest proposal vis a vis problems that spread thru the economy and impose costs on those that had nothing to do with the creation of the problem. I would means test having children. Unless someone could demonstrate that they were reasonably capable of providing for the children they bear, they should be regulated and denied procreation rights.

[Alex Tolley]

"Hari should explain further how peaceful only means could improve the lot of individuals in whatever situation they find themselves. What would be the organization? The rules? What sanctions for enforcement?"

On further reflection, Hari may not be implying the abrogation of violence or warfare, just that we stop all fighting now and see if we can seriously negotiate between the various sides and factions.

I would further this and ask that our internal police forces do the same - stop with the killing or tazering of suspects, even innocent people. Just watching US tv and movies is a lesson in how much popular culture revolves around the idea of a "justified" killing. This sanitized view of killing extends to the real world. We conduct videogame-like air wars, use professional armies in armed combat, even surrogates - anything so that we do not actually have to dirty our own hands. I'm reminded of the study that showed that during WWII, most soldiers did not shoot at the enemy, but over their heads. It took the brainwashing training of Vietnam to change this, essentially turning people into sociopaths.

Might as well ask for the pony too. ;-)

[paine]

rf

nice sober stuff

but lets fight the good fight

[anne]

Alex Tolley:

"One problem with peace is that it prevents the use of violence to change unacceptable conditions, doesn't it?"

Since I do not properly understand what it is to be a pacifist, I have no proper answer. I do not know that Martin Luther King ever directly answered such a question. Gandhi would seemingly have answered "yes," but I never have understood why.

Since I know such a question is sincere, I am fairly sure conflict with a party asking such a question as a national entity is not a party prone to violence.

There need to be more.

[hari]

@ Alex Tolley + Anne -

Sorry! I was out until now and it's getting a lot colder this night - if you're on a bicyle!

Anne's request his deeper but could be answered in terms of turning "swords into ploughshares": recall this was part of a text book written soon after signing of UN Treaty in SF.

So, yes, my argument would be based on the fact that US is a world hegemon (Chirac's terminology!), and therefore can afford to take drastic initiative to enforce principles enshrined in the formation of UN....Recognizing that there's no country today with the deterrence capacity to challenge the military might of US. So, to borrow from a song, US would've nothing to loose but its hegemonic power!

Alex wants a more detailed dissertation on how to achieve such a peace and security framework, so that even what we ridiculously label as "war on terror" can be contained...

Alex, I recall writing a term paper for a renowned prof in Bay Area (at his instruction) on "world peace under world law" (1959 or so!) Dag Hammershold was then UN SecGen. Since I was notably interested in his job(!), our Prof got me to write the above paper...[I still keep it because the damn thing is not so bad]. You will of course need a world police force to enforce law and order...a good investment!

Let me preface it by saying that if Korean War had not intervened, it'd have been possible to interest US to implement all the stuff which was agreed in SF. What we got instead was the Cold War!

Forward to now...French Revolution and American War of Independence are historical facts and we can quarrel about it today. However, 21st Century provides us with a fanstastic technological opportunity to sue for peace - if we really desire it! Because I think it's feasible given all the horrednous objections which we can list or conjure up against such an ideal world.

US must want to avoid another 9/11. What's happening under GWB is that we're defeating the whole purpose of our true goal to promote peaceful coexistence between anatagonistic forces. Yet, if US really wants/desires peace, it can have the support of the whole civilized world to sue for it. I've no hesitation to conclude that EU-27 would even consider a budgetline to promote it, if it's genuine.

Organization...it's not practical to create new setups when we can, if we really want, to use UN/SC to do a whole lot more today then we're doing presently. I've chaired a meeting of the "young Model-UN on Palestine" in which us teenagers were required to discuss and come to a solution of the problem. The conflict has exacerbated and needs finally to be settled...and I'm confident it can be!

Remember...Where there is a will There is a way!

[hari]

MT proposes a redistribution from top down principally because the middleclass - backbone of US - has languished the last three decades or so. While other OECD countries have done better - since their military budget is dismally small percent of GDP - class conflicts may be rekindling in US heartland sooner than later.

What I gathered from the onslaught of the primary in Ohio is daunting for any political leader, since the masses are down-right fed-up. It's not just NAFTA. They've no other recourse...but to revolt against established order (eg. Paris 1968).

So, my idea - to fulfil Marks wish - is to sue for Peace!

[paine]

"Let me preface it by saying that if Korean War had not intervened, it'd have been possible to interest US to implement all the stuff which was agreed in SF. What we got instead was the Cold War"

hari
we got the kold war because
by no later then 1947
both party cores wanted one

[paine]

btw i mean our two party cores
not the dems and the politbureau
as you suggest as hegemon
it was up to us
instead we made the soviets into
a perminent opponent
shrewd
as is the gwot now

[hari]

Once Acheson was gone, the accumulated wisdom was lost on those who saw real threat from Soviet Communist domination, as was becoming real possibility in Rome and
even Paris. So, yes, ideology impaired the antagonists to find solutions - inspite of being Allies against Hitler!

[James Killus]

We might tip our hats in the direction of Lyndon Johnson's grave, as it was he, not FDR that created Medicare, which serves as a grand example of how government backed health insurance can run. I give the old devil his due despite his having tried to kill me and so many of my generation (technically, of course, he wasn't trying to kill me, just get me drafted, then killed).

I'll again note that I believe that the VA medical system should be expanded to include emergency coverage from coast-to-coast. Such a system could also serve as an emergency public health system during disasters, etc. There is no excuse for anyone in the country being farther than an hour away from a functioning ER. You'd think that the rich folk would understand that it doesn't matter how gold plated your health insurance if you have a bad accident on a back road in New Mexico hours away from an ER, but apparently many do not.

Also, every nuclear power plant in the country should be nationalized, as should most of electric power generation and delivery. I float this idea not because I think it either necessarily good or practical, but to remind people that timid imaginations result in even more timid policy changes. And our policies need a lot of changing.

[Alex Tolley]

Hari: "You will of course need a world police force to enforce law and order..."

And presumably international law to go with that. All well and good. Perhaps a first step would be to have the US (and other countries) actually recognize the importance of international law and not treat it depending on convenience. Most countries have police forces and there is international cooperation to a point, Interpol being a good example. Why not strengthen those ties? Don't Nato troops play a similar, although more limited, role in armed conflicts?

My sense is that we need to find better ways of negotiating agreements than using the threat of big sticks, by strengthening the benefits of talk. Somehow the costs of war should be made more evident up front, so that parties are less likely to start a conflict that leaves everyone a loser.

[Alex Tolley]

James Killus:

Also, every nuclear power plant in the country should be nationalized, as should most of electric power generation and delivery.

Have you ever lived with nationalized industries? Our space program is nationalized and look at how inefficient, and unsafe, it is. I think it is better to create a system that encompasses different players, encourages efficiency, following the rules and is difficult to game. Not easy perhaps, but surely not that difficult.

[hari]

Alex Tolley -

I couldn't agree more with you on making the cost of war evident in conflict situations. We've a lot of institutions around the world dealing with conflicts and conflict resolution.

I was on founding staff of SIPRI (funded by Swedish Riksdag or Parliament) which today is primarily focused on nuclear weapons and issues related to trade in arms and whatnots.

But you see, Alex, the economics of Iraq War is not lost on GWB - when he claimed in Africa - that it's facilitating employment and growth in the economy.

We've to consider how to change the mental paradigm of thinking, if we're to get away from conflicts and war-mongering.

[gordon]

MArk Thoma: "We should recognize that it is normal for both parents to work outside the home">

It is certainly very common. I feel sorry for the women whose real ambition is to be wives and mothers, and who are forced into the workforce by a combination of financial pressure and (less excusably) the denigration of non-working women by other women. Frankly, I would like to see the return of the "homemaker" option for more women. We may never again see as many non-working women as in the first part of the last century, but I believe that more women would welcome the option than is currently believed. And the benefits to family life would be enormous.

[anne]

The conversation on pacifism * is most helpful to me.

* Should we even use the term, as I would wish? I am not sure and just thinking.

Where Franklin Roosevelt was continually thinking of structuring peaceful institutions that might in turn bring progressively greater peace, I find George Bush thinking continually of setting institutions of war to bring peace in a way that seems self-contradictory. We seem to know only the actual spreading of arms to counter suppose arms, or the blocking of arming by economic sanctions that seem to breed arming.

[anne]

Please do continue the discussion on the practicality and implications of pacificism, hopwever little we are so inclined I want to understood the i9mplications far more clearly even at a time when the very notion seems to absurd to even be subversive.

[paine]

Acheson ???

hari he was as much as any one man can be
the author of the kold war

[Michael Cain]

Also, every nuclear power plant in the country should be nationalized, as should most of electric power generation and delivery.
==========
I think it is better to create a system that encompasses different players, encourages efficiency, following the rules and is difficult to game.

Consider that in the 1990s, multiple potential producers looked at the situation and all made the same choice: natural gas fired turbines. At least from the simple perspective of prices for consumers, ten years on they had all made the same wrong bet. There seem to be some aspects of the overall problem -- eg, assured fuel diversity -- which require, if not nationalization, at least a heavily regulated market.

It certainly appears that the US is underspending on grid reliability and sufficient well-controlled baseload generating capacity. This would seem to suggest that these are public goods, and significant regulation may be needed to insure the optimal level of supply.

[Alex Tolley]

MC:

Consider that in the 1990s, multiple potential producers looked at the situation and all made the same choice: natural gas fired turbines. At least from the simple perspective of prices for consumers, ten years on they had all made the same wrong bet. There seem to be some aspects of the overall problem -- eg, assured fuel diversity -- which require, if not nationalization, at least a heavily regulated market.

Firstly, from the late 1980's natural gas was very cheap. The gas bubble. Secondly, gas powered plants are used for higher priced peak loads, not base loads. There is no reason to believe those decisions were bad bets.

Why do you think nationalization will provide the desired diversity? There will be one planning agency, which will probably make decisions that ally with government concerns - Virginia's need to mine coal, siting plants as pork projects in congress people's districts, union employment concerns. Britain was almost entirely powered by British coal. Even when it was cheaper to import open cast mined Australian coal with the proverbial "each lump wrapped in gold leaf" we stuck with local coal to keep the unions happy. I want to see case studies of successful nationalized anything before I would accept that as a possible solution.

BW: was talking earlier about telecomms infrastructure. I am a huge supporter of municipal WiFi, but the majority of these projects have ended badly. I consider these examples of "nationalization" at the city level, and they have not been roaring successes. Maybe they could be, I hope so, but they are not yet.

[Cyrille]

cough *electricity generation in France, or train system for that matter* cough

[Alex Tolley]

"cough *electricity generation in France, or train system for that matter* cough"

The trains are very good. But how good is the electricity really? Mostly nukes. How democratic is the siting of the power stations? What is the reliability of the system. Do the French power workers never go on strike?

[Alex Tolley]

Oh, I forget, striking train workers. And just in time for elections too. No politics involved here, no sir. :-)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3416541.stm

Lafayette says...

The US could take a few lessons from France

Cy: A truly massive infrastructure program, that would (among other goals) dramatically improve energy efficiency

It would be a mix of programs that are necessary, and the US could take a few lessons from France.

First of all, France opted for Nuclear Energy in the 1970s, which is one of the most judicious decisions ever taken by French leadership. France is now a major source of Technology Transfer in the matter of Nuclear Energy and is reaping the fruits of its original investments. (Westinghouse should take note.)

Second, France instituted tax breaks of up to 50% on ALL geothermal systems installed. New housing including heat-pumps are burgeoning across France. (I have installed one. It's great.) Similar tax write-offs exist for renovations that improve insulation of the house, where a great deal of energy is wasted.

Wind farms are popping up everywhere, but I don't see this becoming a major source, except in highly rural areas. They ruin the landscape and are noisy as hell. New technologies for harnessing hydro-electricity should be announced this year, allowing their placement in smaller streams and making unnecessary large withholding damns.

It can be done, but the context between the US and Europe is very different. Energy generation is being privatized in Europe, but at a very slow pace. Europeans do not trust private companies for their energy needs, having seen what has happened in the US to wild energy price increas