The election of Donald Trump or as I call him, Il Douchebag-in-Chief, was the call to arms that the working class made to revolt. Not exactly the lock her up, grab your muskets that was heard at rallies this past year. Then we have the rise of the Fascist white supremacists or the aka "alt right" who are sure this is their moment in the sun. Careful white people too much sun you can get burned.
And this week the reality has to be somehow setting in that Il Douchebag has no intention of changing the status quo with the richest whitest male cabinet in modern history who are climate deniers, religious zealots, minimum wage objectors and military generals that round out a group that have little to no experience in running government and closely parallel that of again my favorite parallel - Latin America. General Noriega anyone?
This week the New York Times had numerous articles on what defines income inequity and the reality that unless an actual revolution does occur this is the way of life for the present and the future. Whatever the American Dream was is no longer.
The first article is here, it is by my favorite writer on the subject matter of Economics, Eduardo Porter, and it is lengthy and discusses the result of another Pinketty study with regards to income inequality and the reality of what it will take to resolve this immense income gap - war.
The next is another discussion on the subject and how it can be resolved and frankly there are no Politicians in State or Federal Government willing to change the status quo. Well Portland, a liberal bastion is trying, good luck with it. I do find it interesting that the debate of getting money out of politics and the co-dependent relationship the body politic and the rich have is not discussed. The concept of Citizen United is so far off the table it is clearly back in the kitchen but it cannot be overlooked as part of the problem and could be a part of the solution if this was outlawed. Money in politics is large contribution to why the policies remain to ensure income inequality.
Then we have another column here by Dave Leonhardt regarding the decline of American Dream and the unicorn concept of meritocracy. I know this from personal experience as a tail end boomer by the time I finished College in 1981 the economy was shit and I spent a decade wandering from temp job to temp job and it changed how I viewed work, the way women were treated and set into motion my future/current occupation as a Substitute Teacher. Being invisible, being lowly paid and being treated like shit is what the reality is for women of the working class and men as well who finally found that door closed on them a decade later, welcome to the club white dudes!
There are band aids, possible means in which to alleviate some of the problems facing the working class. But all Trump peddles is propaganda and lies akin to his bullshit University, Condos and Golf Courses only now its Voter Fraud and other grandiose statements that are utterly untrue. Hand me a Trump wine to swill down and black out with. Oh wait it tastes like shit, not surprising.
Here in Nashville and Tennessee we could eliminate right to work laws, unionize, raise pay and in turn offer benefits for those working a minimum of 30 hours a week. There are ways to stop the ever growing monopolies by business that could have a positive effect. None of those things are here. Hell they barely recycle here and it shows. If Trump is going to build an infrastructure well the TVA has a history and they could start here building sidewalks, cleaning school buildings and having mass transportation. BWHAAHHA! Never going to happen. The people here are stupid. Read this article about the Trump voting class, it explains it quite clearly. Being stupid and frustrated as well as ignorant is a state of mind here in the deep red sea.
This editorial offers some ideas and again it would require people actually getting up and revolting. It will not happen, we are lazy, complacent and largely resigned people. So the best we do is the worst thing we can do and we elect a con artist who will do nothing to help anyone but himself and the trickle down econ plan is directed to his kind.
How to Help Working People
By THE EDITORIAL BOARD
THE NEW YORK TIMES
DEC. 5, 2016
The fate of the Obama-era labor reforms is in the hands of President-elect Donald Trump. What he decides to do will affect the pay and working conditions of tens of millions of people, making those decisions far more consequential — practically and politically — than striking a deal to keep 800 factory jobs in Indiana. If Mr. Trump chooses to meet the needs of the people who elected him, he will retain the reforms.
A defining issue emerged shortly after the election when a federal judge in Texas blocked the Obama administration’s new overtime-pay rules from taking effect as planned on Dec. 1. The ruling denied extra pay for extra work to as many as 12.5 million salaried workers — those earning between $455 and $913 a week — including 7.3 million who live in the 30 states that went for Mr. Trump. If Mr. Trump defends the new rules through the appeals process, he will be sticking up for those people. If he doesn’t, he’ll be supporting the agenda of establishment Republicans and their corporate allies.
Mr. Trump won, in part, by appealing to people who feel left behind economically. Trade pacts that have failed to protect jobs are one reason for their discontent, as Mr. Trump has noted. Stagnating wage growth is another. For the past 35 years — as the minimum wage, overtime pay, unions and other labor protections have eroded — worker pay has barely budged, while income at the top has soared. The overtime rules are the farthest reaching of the Obama-era reforms that seek to redress that imbalance, but there are others that also will need Mr. Trump’s support to survive.
THE GOVERNMENT AS MODEL EMPLOYER Mr. Obama has issued executive orders to raise pay and improve conditions at companies that do business with the government. The orders, which require contractors to pay employees at least $10.10 an hour, provide paid sick days and report wage-and-safety violations to procurement officials, have value beyond helping federal contract employees. They also set an example for the entire private sector to follow.
As president, Mr. Trump will be free to ditch these executive orders. As a private employer, his own approach to low-paid labor indicates that model-employer orders would be the first to go. But in his new job, Mr. Trump will be the nation’s chief executive. Does he want to be known for lowering basic standards?
GUIDELINES FOR THE GIG ECONOMY The Labor Department has issued clear, common-sense guidelines for employers on how to follow the law when classifying workers as either employees or independent contractors. The guidelines are needed. There is ample evidence that employers routinely misclassify employees as independent to sidestep employee-related costs, including overtime pay and business taxes that finance unemployment benefits. The guidelines apply to all industries but are especially relevant to companies like Uber whose business models rely on independent contractors. Guidelines, however, do not have the force of law or regulation — and thus can be withdrawn by the Trump administration. That would be a step backward.
THE FUTURE OF UNIONS Mr. Trump’s nominees for secretary of labor, the National Labor Relations Board and the Supreme Court will greatly affect union organizing. The N.L.R.B. is in the midst of cases that could require more employers to engage in collective bargaining. The Supreme Court is all but certain to hear a new case on the long-established right of unions to collect dues or fees. Mr. Trump’s choice of a decidedly anti-union nominee for education secretary, Betsy DeVos, who has long tried to weaken the power of teachers’ unions, is not a good omen for those other selections. Nor is his selection for transportation secretary, Elaine Chao, who was an anti-union labor secretary under President George W. Bush. An administration hostile to unionism does not bode well for wage growth and would invite greater income inequality. Research shows that declining union membership worsens inequality by depressing worker pay; from 1973 to 2007, as the share of the work force in a union fell sharply, inequality in hourly wages increased by over 40 percent.
In his interview on “60 Minutes” shortly after the election, Mr. Trump said his victory was not a rejection of what Mr. Obama has stood for, but a “repudiation of what’s been taking place over a longer period of time.” Worker pay has lagged for a very long time. The Obama-era reforms help to make up lost ground. If Mr. Trump wishes to act in the interest of all working people, he will preserve those reforms.