AOC: To get the virus under control, we need to pay people to stay home.

Homepage | Forums | Main Forums | General Discussion | AOC: To get the virus under control, we need to pay people to stay home.

Viewing 13 reply threads
  • Author
    Posts
    • #379700
      JonLP
      Participant
      • Total Posts: 3,496

      Let this radicalize you rather than lead you to despair - Mariame Kaba

      Like many public systems, GOP want to rip the battery out + say the whole car doesn’t work, so they can sell it for parts - AOC

    • #379707
      Utopian Leftist
      Participant
      • Total Posts: 718

      Over 10 million people will lose their unemployment benefits the day after Christmas. Worse (and OH! SO conveeeenient for the neolibs), the eviction moratorium ends at the end of this year.

      So, damn straight! We can’t expect anyone to stay home without financial assistance.

      "All fascism is a result of a failure of the left to provide a viable alternative." ~ Trotsky
      “It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society.” ~ Krishnamurti

    • #379711
      xyzse
      Participant
      • Total Posts: 1,790

      Honestly, if Government took over most of payroll, we wouldn’t be getting all these businesses shuttering down.

    • #379715
      Cold Mountain Trail
      Participant
      • Total Posts: 12,932

      @xyzse

      If they let the people decide, they’d get a better result most of the time.  It’s only the ‘special interests’ (which are rich people and their combines) that screw everything up.

    • #379720
      Ohio Barbarian
      Moderator
      • Total Posts: 21,914

      Too bad she gave all of her leverage away back in March when she didn’t fight the CARES Act and endorsed Joe Biden. The neoliberals running the Democratic Party don’t care. The Republicans don’t care. Trump doesn’t care.

      And winter is coming.

      It is better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.--Eugene Debs

      You can jail a revolutionary, but you can't jail the revolution.--Fred Hampton

      • #379730
        JonLP
        Participant
        • Total Posts: 3,496

        It had flaws but I don’t buy Dore’s criticism. I doubt he could have done a better job because he wouldn’t even be able to get elected they would use his false statements against him. It would be way worse than when Cenk tried to run in a primary.

        As far as the endorsement I understand that but she did that to maintain her influence you know how much they hate her, they would hate her even more if she didn’t endorse Biden. She did that so she can say this using her leverage.

        Let this radicalize you rather than lead you to despair - Mariame Kaba

        Like many public systems, GOP want to rip the battery out + say the whole car doesn’t work, so they can sell it for parts - AOC

        • #379774
          Ohio Barbarian
          Moderator
          • Total Posts: 21,914

          I believe I said so at the time, though Dore happens to agree with me. It was also Krystal Ball’s and Kyle Kulinski’s back then as well. The progressive Democrats made, IMO, an incredibly stupid mistake by going along with the largest transfer of wealth to the top in human history, and I will never forget that.

          It is better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.--Eugene Debs

          You can jail a revolutionary, but you can't jail the revolution.--Fred Hampton

          • #379780
            JonLP
            Participant
            • Total Posts: 3,496

            However, that is exactly what AOC is doing now. She is calling out the Republicans out for not supporting the bill she is talking about because it doesn’t have corporate welfare in it.

            Let this radicalize you rather than lead you to despair - Mariame Kaba

            Like many public systems, GOP want to rip the battery out + say the whole car doesn’t work, so they can sell it for parts - AOC

    • #379724
      Charles
      Participant
      • Total Posts: 1,660

       

       

       

      Bernie: "Not Me. Us"

    • #379728
      Cold Mountain Trail
      Participant
      • Total Posts: 12,932

       

    • #379777
      doh1304
      Participant
      • Total Posts: 1,707

      After we pay people to stay home we’ll then have to pay people to go to work – but only people we really need (ie. line workers at the meat packing plant yes, “bullshit jobs” – read the book, watch the videos – no) Then we’ll have to pay them more, proportionate to criteria such as how necessary their already stipulated to be necessary is, how dangerous it is, etc. Then we will have to admit that the more necessary a job is the more dangerous it is and the lower on the social scale it is. Then we will have to admit that we only need about a quarter as many workers as we have.

      And then think of the social problems from the new inequality. When your next door neighbor the meat packing line worker makes $100k and three of you are permanently unemployed. It’s the sort of thing we should take generations to sort out.

      • #379996
        Cold Mountain Trail
        Participant
        • Total Posts: 12,932

        “Then we will have to admit that we only need about a quarter as many workers as we have”  @doh1304

        –I disagree.  It’s my experience that nearly *everything* (except Wall street, tax lawyers for the rich, military contractors & lobbyists) in the US is seriously understaffed.

        So much so as to endanger worker & citizen’s health & safety, customer satisfaction, environmental safety, US disaster preparedness & on and on.

        Small examples one from private business, the other from govt.

        1.  I have to hunt for a teller when I’m ready to check out at the grocery store, and hunt for a worker who knows where X is at Target.  Not only that, at Target, if I come at the wrong time of day there is no option but self-check-out (which resulted in my leaving my potential purchase at the counter as I didn’t want to do self-checkout.  Target is profitable enough.
        2. I had to wait 6 months to get a minimum-wage tax refund returned this year.  Six months is a hell of a long time to wait.  Emailed via their site but never got a response.  Could not find a number to talk to someone real (& instructions were you had to wait X months before attempting to talk to someone, if you were able to find a good number lol)
        3. Won’t even go into infrastructure, firefighting (in the national forests/etc) — it’s obvious when chain gangs are fighting major fires somethings wrong.

         

        • #380010
          doh1304
          Participant
          • Total Posts: 1,707

          When I was a taxi driver there was only enough ridership in San Francisco to support maybe 800 drivers. (since there were two shifts make that 1500, 1600) Today there are 40,000 Uber drivers. (their flexible time system is more efficient, but not that much)

          There are many occupations we need more people for – senior/disabled assistants, nurses, teachers to name just a few. and there are many that are badly understaffed – customer support is the most obvious. But this pales compared to the number of people who should be or will be replaced by automation or the hordes who have jobs only to stroke the ego of management (most of whom are themselves unnecessary)

          • #380024
            Cold Mountain Trail
            Participant
            • Total Posts: 12,932

            @doh1304

            automation is a red herring pushed by tech

            there has been no increase in automation & unlikely to be unless wages go up substantially

            So long as its cheaper to sweat labor

             

            The Robots Taking the Jobs Industry
            February 08, 2019
            CEPR

            The endless scare stories of robots taking all the jobs, or the threat of automation, fit this model. While this is a recurring theme in major media outlets, it basically makes zero sense.

            Replacing human labor with technology is a very old story. It’s called “productivity growth.” We’ve been seeing it pretty much as long as we have had a capitalist economy. In fact, this is what allows for sustained improvements in living standards…

            The basic story of robots taking our jobs is one of a massive increase in productivity growth. Instead of people driving taxis and trucks, stocking store shelves, and working checkout counters, all this work and more will be dealt with by robots. There are three problems with this story:

            -It has not been happening;
            -No one involved in designing policy expects it to happen;
            -It would likely mean more rapid wage growth and improved living standards if it did happen.

            On the first point, instead of accelerating to new highs, the rate of productivity growth has actually been very slow in recent years. We did have a period of strong productivity growth from 1995 to 2005 when the average annual rate was just under 3.0 percent. However, this period of strong growth ended abruptly in 2006 for reasons that are not well understood.

            Since 2006, productivity growth has fallen to less than a 1.3 percent annual rate. While some (including me) had hoped that a tighter labor market would lead to a pickup in productivity growth, to date we are still not seeing it. Over the last two years, productivity growth has averaged less than 1.2 percent.[1] Long and short, there is absolutely zero evidence that we are seeing any mass displacement by robots, automation, or anything else.

            The second point is that we do have projections about future rates of productivity growth from folks like the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), the Social Security Administration (SSA), and other forecasters. None of these organizations see any sort of massive acceleration in productivity growth.

            In its most recent projections (Table 2-5), CBO put the rate of potential productivity growth at 1.8 percent annually over the next decade. This is somewhat better than we have seen over the last 13 years, but hardly a story of massive labor displacement. The 2018 Social Security Trustees Report puts the long-term economy-wide rate of annual productivity growth at 1.68 percent. Since the economy-wide rate tends to be approximately 0.2 percentage points lower than the rate in the non-farm business sector, this would translate into a rate of productivity growth of just under 1.9 percent in the non-farm business sector. Again, this is somewhat of a pick-up from current levels, but not very different from the CBO story.

            We could look at other projections from places like the OECD and I.M.F. and other organizations, but they all show pretty much the same story. None of them show the massive uptick in productivity growth that would be associated with the robots taking all the jobs….

            So, long and short, we do not now see any evidence of massive job loss due to robots, automation, artificial intelligence, or anything else. That could change in the future, but there is little reason to believe it would lead to massive job loss…

            In short, nothing about the robots-taking-our-jobs story makes sense. It hasn’t been happening, no major governmental agency or international organization expects it to happen any time soon, and if it did, it should be a good story for workers. If the robots turn out to be generating inequality it will be because of our robot policy (economic policies that favor patent & other monopolies), not the robots.

            Yes, I write about this one a great deal. This is because the robots-taking-the-jobs story is constantly appearing in places like The New York Times, The Washington Post, and National Public Radio. They shouldn’t be taking the argument seriously, but they do. Which means those of us who care about reality have to do what we can to counter it.

            [1] Productivity data can be found at the Bureau of Labor Statistics data portal https://www.bls.gov/data/#productivity.

            https://www.cepr.net/the-robots-taking-the-jobs-industry/

             

             

            • #380144
              doh1304
              Participant
              • Total Posts: 1,707

              So declining wages are the reason people are not being replaced by automation? And that’s a good thing? That’s why there are 40,000 Uber drivers in San Francisco, because there are so many jobs out there with no automation.

              My best friend from college was one of 28 programmers at his company, Two years later the other 27 were gone, replaced by off-the-shelf software (but that’s not automation, right?) a year later he disappeared.

              Jeremy Rifkin did an analysis of NAFTA, giving an example: GM closed a plant in Detroit that produced a million cars a year and employed 20,000 workers.  Ten years later (His example was actually pre NAFTA, so this would be mid 1990s) they closed the replacement plant in the Maquilladora and moved back to Tennessee – building a plant that produced 1.5 million cars a year while only employing 2000 non union workers.

              When I started at Yellow Cab I was shown the dispatch office. There were two dispatchers and ten phone answerers. When my body gave out we had one dispatcher and three phone answerers, who spent their time eating donuts because the reservation system (wasn’t!) automated.

              Amazon is testing robots to stock shelves in their warehouss and to carry packages from their driverless trucks to your door. In Phoenix they’re already using delivery drones.

              Automation has not come as quickly as I’d presumed, but the pace will accelerateif the price goes down and the benefits (to shareholders ONLY) build up.

              • #380153
                Cold Mountain Trail
                Participant
                • Total Posts: 12,932

                “So declining wages are the reason people are not being replaced by automation? And that’s a good thing?”

                –no one said it (declining wages) was a good thing.  evidence says there is no evidence that automation has been on the increase since 2005, over the last 15 years.  Nor any anticipated in economic forecasts

                and ubi, as i understand it, is intended to replace all other income supports, in the plan of the tech giants

                not to supplement what’s already in place

                which means it would not be a gain for anyone on social security & many on disability

                 

                 

    • #379809
      incognito
      Participant
      • Total Posts: 4,574

      But, unless they want to deliberately crash the economy, they have to keep businesses going too.
      They could have done that instead of throwing billions to their corporate buddies. This could have ended long ago.
      We’re at the point where this really is DO OR DIE. Literally.

      RIP the bandaid off and just do it. UBI for every citizen and business. Get the pain over with so this country can heal.
      Biden doesn’t have the will or balls to do the right thing.

    • #379845
      closeupready
      Participant
      • Total Posts: 2,688

      Assuming, of course, they value getting the virus under control.

      The opinions and personal views expressed herein are solely those of the author, and should never be taken seriously.

    • #379899
      Fugitive Birdie
      Participant
      • Total Posts: 319

      I regret that some people are condemning her for being part of the Democratic Party. Of course that is at the time the easiest way to get a seat in Congress to advance our values.

      I wish I can remind Jimmy Dore to punch up and not sideways.

    • #380007
      djean111
      Participant
      • Total Posts: 6,580

      perhaps our government, BOTH parties, is not all that interested in getting the virus under control as yet.  So much money is being made out of this.  Corporations not having to pay people, but getting subsidies, vaccine development,  politicization and divisiveness – again, BOTH parties – beyond  a political consultant’s wildest dreams.  Bleeding out the Social Security fund, as a nice little side benefit – no salaries, no matching contributions.  Basically a reset.  Housing, debts, health care, education.  Mailed in votes – no inconveniently large groups of people voting, and sorry, but it is just as easy to fuck with mailed in ballots as it is with machines.   Easier to impose things like curfews and crowd restrictions.  Not having to explain why one candidate gets huge crowds and another gets seven people.  Really, lots of things to consider.  I mean, Pelosi does not give one shred of a fuck – she can eat her ice cream and casually say no checks because that might make Trump look good.  Once the humanity is gone, anything is possible.  I feel like both parties are just watching things play out, and accumulating campaign pandering material.

      Just some random thoughts.

      America is not a country, it's just a business. (Brad Pitt, Killing Them Softly)

      Everything I post is just my opinion, and, honestly, I would love to be wrong.

    • #380026
      FedUp
      Participant
      • Total Posts: 672

      Hell, I’ve been staying home for well over a year taking care of my 97 year old mother with zero compensation. There are a few programs out there that throw pennies at family caregivers, but I don’t qualify because my mother isn’t destitute. She lives on Social Security and a very modest pension, just enough to cover the bills. The system is rigged so that if the recipient of the care has anything, the caregiver is screwed. UBI would be such a help, especially now, but it will never happen. Politicians would rather kill people or starve them than help them.

    • #380059
      sadoldgirl
      Participant
      • Total Posts: 1,377

      How convenient for AOC to make that claim now against

      the Repugs. She does not want to admit apparently that

      Pelosi could have tried to make a deal before the election,

      but refused to do so. So did AOC vote for another term for

      Pelosi? Ah no, it is always the turtle’s fault. Let’s not even talk

      about her vote for the CARES Act, which was an Act of

      Cowardice.

      • #380069
        Fugitive Birdie
        Participant
        • Total Posts: 319

        Attacking Pelosi viciously before the election would have nullified any chance of her having a strong platform to do what she is doing now.

        I agree we need a new party, but until the MPP is ready we have to play the hand we have.

        AOC is on track.

Viewing 13 reply threads
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.