Bannon's capitalism.

[Cowpoke]

I know little about this guy or his alt right movement. I spent a couple of hours reading his speeches and interviews last night. His views on capitalism are interesting, and different, but not very clear. He says they are the very center of the alt right movement... but I'm not sure I get it.

He hates cronyism, which is what we see in Russia, China and other countries where the state and corporations are closely tied together and the wealth stays with those in power. Says we see it here in America as well with large corporations and politicians that lick on each others bungholes and fill each others pockets.

What I haven't seen is any answer as how to do anything about that?

He says he hates that in America that so much of the corporate money stays at the top of the food chain. But again, I never found any plan to counteract that. Is he planning on limiting executive pay or something?

He says he hates "Ayn Rand Capitalism", which sees employees as commodities to be bought, used, traded, and dumped as needed. What are his answers to combat this?



I don't think his complaints are wrong, I agree that these are the bad side of capitalism in America. But whats the plan?

 

[NZ Poke]

Good on you for spending a couple hours researching him.

You are demonstrating the kind of independent critical thinking we need.

Just chiming in....

 

[imprimis]

He says he hates "Ayn Rand Capitalism", which sees employees as commodities to be bought, used, traded, and dumped as needed. What are his answers to combat this?

Disband pro sports?

 

[aix_xpert]

I know little about this guy or his alt right movement. I spent a couple of hours reading his speeches and interviews last night. His views on capitalism are interesting, and different, but not very clear. He says they are the very center of the alt right movement... but I'm not sure I get it.

He hates cronyism, which is what we see in Russia, China and other countries where the state and corporations are closely tied together and the wealth stays with those in power. Says we see it here in America as well with large corporations and politicians that lick on each others bungholes and fill each others pockets.

What I haven't seen is any answer as how to do anything about that?

He says he hates that in America that so much of the corporate money stays at the top of the food chain. But again, I never found any plan to counteract that. Is he planning on limiting executive pay or something?

He says he hates "Ayn Rand Capitalism", which sees employees as commodities to be bought, used, traded, and dumped as needed. What are his answers to combat this?



I don't think his complaints are wrong, I agree that these are the bad side of capitalism in America. But whats the plan?

Personally, I think you solve this with 2 base actions.

1) You limit immigration so employee values can't be so easily subsidized via foreign labor. The theory of capitalism is that if there aren't enough programmers to meet the demand, then the value of programmers will increase and thus the salaries should increase, thus leading to more people becoming programmers. But instead, these tech giants have lobbied to simply import workers at that existing salary level thus artificially filling that supply void and repressing the natural salary growth (and thus the resulting supply growth). This is true even at the illegal immigrant level. Construction jobs would pay significantly more. Service jobs would pay significantly more. Cost of goods would go up, but you'd have a real middle-class again.

2) You adjust taxes to treat all income equally, and close the absurd loopholes around capital gains, expenses, etc. We have a progressive tax code, but it fails to work progressively because the top has too many mechanisms to shield their earnings that simply aren't available to the average 'employee'. This means that millionaires and billionaires end up paying the same 16-18% that I do. Our tax code is very favorable to 2 citizen classes: Wall Street elite and entrepreneurs. But the vast majority of Americans are just 'employees'. Progressive tax rates are the right answer, but they have to be enacted in a manner that lets them work properly. Ours simply don't.

 

[CowboyJD]

Personally, I think you solve this with 2 base actions.

1) You limit immigration so employee values can't be so easily subsidized via foreign labor. The theory of capitalism is that if there aren't enough programmers to meet the demand, then the value of programmers will increase and thus the salaries should increase, thus leading to more people becoming programmers. But instead, these tech giants have lobbied to simply import workers at that existing salary level thus artificially filling that supply void and repressing the natural salary growth (and thus the resulting supply growth). This is true even at the illegal immigrant level. Construction jobs would pay significantly more. Service jobs would pay significantly more. Cost of goods would go up, but you'd have a real middle-class again.

2) You adjust taxes to treat all income equally, and close the absurd loopholes around capital gains, expenses, etc. We have a progressive tax code, but it fails to work progressively because the top has too many mechanisms to shield their earnings that simply aren't available to the average 'employee'. This means that millionaires and billionaires end up paying the same 16-18% that I do. Our tax code is very favorable to 2 citizen classes: Wall Street elite and entrepreneurs. But the vast majority of Americans are just 'employees'. Progressive tax rates are the right answer, but they have to be enacted in a manner that lets them work properly. Ours simply don't.

The theory of capitalism is open markets for everything including labor. Limiting the labor market solely to Americans is anti-capitalist. It may or may not being good public policy for America, but it isn't a capitalist notion at all.
.

 

[aix_xpert]

The theory of capitalism is open markets for everything including labor. Limiting the labor market solely to Americans is anti-capitalist. It may or may not being good public policy for America, but it isn't a capitalist notion at all.
.

Agreed. But in that case, America has no poor. Every American citizen is upper class when compared to a pool of all 7Billion people on earth. Given that we certainly don't want to race to equality with the 3rd world, restricting labor competition to within the existing US pool is reasonable (if uncapitalistic).

Justin

 

[Cowpoke]

The theory of capitalism is open markets for everything including labor. Limiting the labor market solely to Americans is anti-capitalist. It may or may not being good public policy for America, but it isn't a capitalist notion at all.
.

Agreed. But in that case, America has no poor. Every American citizen is upper class when compared to a pool of all 7Billion people on earth. Given that we certainly don't want to race to equality with the 3rd world, restricting labor competition to within the existing US pool is reasonable (if uncapitalistic).

Justin

I've been thinking a lot about this very thing lately. It applies to trade as well obviously. Pure capitalism and free trade is a great (and equalizing) thing for the entitity in which it is contained.

 

[aix_xpert]

I've been thinking a lot about this very thing lately. It applies to trade as well obviously. Pure capitalism and free trade is a great (and equalizing) thing for the entitity in which it is contained.

Yep. This is why multi-national, unilateral trade agreements are generally going to be bad for the US. Most of our trading partners lack the ability to trade equivalently, and thus we are forced into trade deficits, which in effect, work as investment to the foreign country and as economic outflow for the US. Now some will argue that the benefit of the trade is greater than the cost of the deficit, but thats only true in terms of efficiency gained. And are the benefits (more stuff cheaper) worth the final outcome (exportation of workforce and erosion of the middle class)? The challenge is that labor isn't some amorphous object that can be shaped as needed. The 20-year steelworker can't suddenly become a C programmer. This is where the academia analysis of the trade benefits break down.

 

[07pilt]

we are forced into trade deficits, which in effect, work as investment to the foreign country and as economic outflow for the US.

How exactly does more goods and services coming into than out of the US work as investment in a foreign country and as economic outflow for the US? Only an idiot would complain they aren't giving up as much in a trade as their counterparty is. A trade deficit is a measurement of how much we are ****ing over our trading partners.
This line of thinking persists because jobs are scarce. If we had full employment no one would be bitching about Japan sending us two Toyotas for every Ford we send them.

 

[Medic007]

How exactly does more goods and services coming into than out of the US work as investment in a foreign country and as economic outflow for the US? Only an idiot would complain they aren't giving up as much in a trade as their counterparty is. A trade deficit is a measurement of how much we are ****ing over our trading partners.
This line of thinking persists because jobs are scarce. If we had full employment no one would be bitching about Japan sending us two Toyotas for every Ford we send them.

Please tell me I'm hallucinating and you didn't just try to discuss trade deficit as "sending us two Toyotas for every Ford we send them." If I'm not hallucinating, I'll assume you got a little extra "hash" in your hash browns this morning.

 

[CBradSmith]

Excellent thread.

 

[07pilt]

Please tell me I'm hallucinating and you didn't just try to discuss trade deficit as "sending us two Toyotas for every Ford we send them." If I'm not hallucinating, I'll assume you got a little extra "hash" in your hash browns this morning.

Go through it in your head. What does it mean to have a trade deficit?

 

[Cowpoke]

Personally, I think you solve this with 2 base actions.

1) You limit immigration so employee values can't be so easily subsidized via foreign labor. The theory of capitalism is that if there aren't enough programmers to meet the demand, then the value of programmers will increase and thus the salaries should increase, thus leading to more people becoming programmers. But instead, these tech giants have lobbied to simply import workers at that existing salary level thus artificially filling that supply void and repressing the natural salary growth (and thus the resulting supply growth). This is true even at the illegal immigrant level. Construction jobs would pay significantly more. Service jobs would pay significantly more. Cost of goods would go up, but you'd have a real middle-class again.

2) You adjust taxes to treat all income equally, and close the absurd loopholes around capital gains, expenses, etc. We have a progressive tax code, but it fails to work progressively because the top has too many mechanisms to shield their earnings that simply aren't available to the average 'employee'. This means that millionaires and billionaires end up paying the same 16-18% that I do. Our tax code is very favorable to 2 citizen classes: Wall Street elite and entrepreneurs. But the vast majority of Americans are just 'employees'. Progressive tax rates are the right answer, but they have to be enacted in a manner that lets them work properly. Ours simply don't.

1. I agree on Illegal immigrants, though it would be interesting to see what the net effect is of forcing people to hire more expensive workers. You know what cracks me up about this? The thought is that if you get rid of the illegal workers, more Americans make more money, and while the small business will have to pay out more, they will be ok because there will be a better off consumer base. Sounds fine. I dig it. R's love it D's don't. You know what other issue presents this exact same situation except R's and D's completely flip their tone on right?

Legal immigration and integration into the US work force doesn't bother me a ton. I get, and am impacted by the consequences of it, but atleast they are spending some of that money within the US, have the same set of eyes on their actions as citizens, most are very bright and help the companies they work for, we learn from them and a positive vibe goes back to their families in their home country. I don;'t think we need to limit the immigration itself. I think we need to up the minimum wage that corps must hire them at (say equal or above that of a US worker with 8 years of experience (maybe this already happens?)). This forces them to make these hires based more on quality than cost savings. They will still bring them in, but will be more focused on bringing in experts which opens up more jobs for younger IT workers.

We DO need to sharply curtail the outsourcing of jobs though. This is nothing but pure corporate greed. It sends money outside of the US, lowers everyone's wages, opens up all sorts of IT security holes, and often the talent sucks.


2. Taxes. I agree with all of that. Trumps plan touches on some of that. I don't know enough about the tax loopholes to know if his plan effectively closes these or no. It says it does... but I don't know. I'm not a fan of the fact than his tax rate decrease seem heaviest for the really rich. If he really does shut down tax holes that make up for that drop, fine.. But 39% to 25% is a large cut when the rest of us are going to get about 6-8 % cut (according to my redneck math).

 

[anon_xl72qcu5isp39]

and close the absurd loopholes around capital gains, expenses, etc.

So tax capital gains like income tax? You know that's a tax hike that would get a liberal instantly smeared as socialist?

I've never understood why sitting on one's ass and cashing a check from their trust officer should warrant a lesser tax rate than if one makes the same money working. It's just a sellout position. I'll take advantage of it gladly, but it makes no sense from a policy position.

 

[Alpha Poke]

We have to morph to make up for the # of jobs being removed from the pool by automation.

People will get serious when it starts eating white collar jobs. The first big yelp will be when they phase out all the Wall St jobs. Those guys are basically call center pricks right now.

 

[aix_xpert]

1. I agree on Illegal immigrants, though it would be interesting to see what the net effect is of forcing people to hire more expensive workers. You know what cracks me up about this? The thought is that if you get rid of the illegal workers, more Americans make more money, and while the small business will have to pay out more, they will be ok because there will be a better off consumer base. Sounds fine. I dig it. R's love it D's don't. You know what other issue presents this exact same situation except R's and D's completely flip their tone on right?

Legal immigration and integration into the US work force doesn't bother me a ton. I get, and am impacted by the consequences of it, but atleast they are spending some of that money within the US, have the same set of eyes on their actions as citizens, most are very bright and help the companies they work for, we learn from them and a positive vibe goes back to their families in their home country. I don;'t think we need to limit the immigration itself. I think we need to up the minimum wage that corps must hire them at (say equal or above that of a US worker with 8 years of experience (maybe this already happens?)). This forces them to make these hires based more on quality than cost savings. They will still bring them in, but will be more focused on bringing in experts which opens up more jobs for younger IT workers.

We DO need to sharply curtail the outsourcing of jobs though. This is nothing but pure corporate greed. It sends money outside of the US, lowers everyone's wages, opens up all sorts of IT security holes, and often the talent sucks.


2. Taxes. I agree with all of that. Trumps plan touches on some of that. I don't know enough about the tax loopholes to know if his plan effectively closes these or no. It says it does... but I don't know. I'm not a fan of the fact than his tax rate decrease seem heaviest for the really rich. If he really does shut down tax holes that make up for that drop, fine.. But 39% to 25% is a large cut when the rest of us are going to get about 6-8 % cut (according to my redneck math).

Excellent reply. Agree on #2. Not sure what Trump's plan will do. I imagine it won't actually fix the issue, but thats because a plan that significantly changed how capital gains was taxed (as income) wouldn't get a vote from Congress. They all make their own money through cap gains, and they certainly aren't voting in a tax increase for themselves.

As for immigration, I've been for legal immigration. We are a country of immigrants and having a controlled mechanism for bringing in talent from across the world is beneficial. However, I've come to realize that while the intention behind it is good, the impact has been mostly negative to the 'native' population. Its kind of like a nude beach. Sounds great in theory, but in practice, not so much.

Justin

 

[aix_xpert]

So tax capital gains like income tax? You know that's a tax hike that would get a liberal instantly smeared as socialist?

I've never understood why sitting on one's ass and cashing a check from their trust officer should warrant a lesser tax rate than if one makes the same money working. It's just a sellout position. I'll take advantage of it gladly, but it makes no sense from a policy position.

I agree Sys, although I disagree that its socialist (although it is liberal). The use of that tax money to then grow the government would make it socialist, and that's what I'm against. If all income was taxed equally (interest, cap gains, div, earnings, etc), then you could lower the overall tax rates significantly.

Now if you have that, you can even go super progressive, and set escalating tax scales (we have this now) that kick in at some measureable number...say 10000% (100x) the median income level. That's how you fix income inequality. Unfortunately, the current liberal positions attempt to address wage inequality rather than income equality, which pits the poor against the middle and lets the real offenders (the elites) off the hook.

 

[Cowpoke]

This has been a great discussion... but I'm a bit concerned that nobody that is really excited about this administration, has explained what Bannon's ideals are.

What are his plans to force the corporate elite to share their money with their employees? Higher taxes on them for the government to spread around?

How is he going to separate corporations from the Republicans? New lobbying rules?

How is he going to get rid of Ayn Rand Capitalism?

What exactly does Judeo-Christian Capitalism mean?

Great discussion so far about our personal ideas of what needs to happen. But what are his?

And to answer the question before its asked..Yes I believe he is the man in charge right now.

 

[CBradSmith]

This has been a great discussion... but I'm a bit concerned that nobody that is really excited about this administration, has explained what Bannon's ideals are.

How is he going to separate corporations from the Republicans? New lobbying rules?

You're an educated fellow and this discussion has unfolded piece by piece in this thread by people willing to explain and an audience open to listening.
Do you know how hard it would be to convey this level of detail through any channel today? It's time intensive, I'd assume approx half of the people would be hostile to hearing it, and a good chunk of the population aren't educated or experienced sufficiently to find this discussion edifying.

Also, signaling where you want to go in detail opens you up for mischaracterization and demonization.

I'm with you in that I'd like to see more specifics for the structure of how this Administration wants to address these issues. My hope is that he and those around him are forward looking enough to see much of what has been discussed here (I know they are) and genuinely want to MAGA...and that is primarily through the safety of the populace and addressing it's income and job security.

 

[davidallen]

Agreed. But in that case, America has no poor. Every American citizen is upper class when compared to a pool of all 7Billion people on earth. Given that we certainly don't want to race to equality with the 3rd world, restricting labor competition to within the existing US pool is reasonable (if uncapitalistic).

Justin

Your presumption is that the labor of the first and third worlds are on the face of it equivalent. They are not for reasons traceable to education, culture, and location convenience. If we cede our educational advantages then indeed over time labor rates would equalize.

Labor price equilibrium will happen any way as capital will eventually flow to the most efficient location in spite of state efforts to retard it.

 

[CowboyJD]

Agreed. But in that case, America has no poor. Every American citizen is upper class when compared to a pool of all 7Billion people on earth. Given that we certainly don't want to race to equality with the 3rd world, restricting labor competition to within the existing US pool is reasonable (if uncapitalistic).

Justin

As I said, though uncapitalistic, it may or may not be good public policy.

So I wasn't implying it was unreasonable....if it appeared I was, mean culpa.

 

[CowboyJD]

I've been thinking a lot about this very thing lately. It applies to trade as well obviously. Pure capitalism and free trade is a great (and equalizing) thing for the entitity in which it is contained.

I've been re-examing my pure capitalism and free trade principles recently with respect to individual national interests.

I'm honestly in a state of flux on the issue at this point.

 

[CBradSmith]

I've been re-examing my pure capitalism and free trade principles recently with respect to individual national interests.

I'm honestly in a state of flux on the issue at this point.

I went through this 12 to 18 months ago.

I am somewhat changed.

 

[davidallen]

I went through this 12 to 18 months ago.

I am somewhat changed.

You pansies! Get back in line and tow this rope!

 

[CBradSmith]

You pansies! Get back in line and tow this rope!

The results on the field are suboptimal!

 

[davidallen]

The results on the field are suboptimal!

I like this because it is funny and somewhat true, but I disagree with its conclusion... so you have that going for ya!

 

[aix_xpert]

Your presumption is that the labor of the first and third worlds are on the face of it equivalent. They are not for reasons traceable to education, culture, and location convenience. If we cede our educational advantages then indeed over time labor rates would equalize.

Labor price equilibrium will happen any way as capital will eventually flow to the most efficient location in spite of state efforts to retard it.

With the expansion of technology, the education gap continues to shrink, particularly for those away from the cutting edge. Yes, America has better educational opportunities than Bangladesh, but those opportunities aren't easily applied to existing workforces. As I stated, you can't take a 20 year steal worker and expect that he's going to easily become a computer programmer.

As for your second point, while I agree in principle, I do think there are fair practices that can be enacted (whether via tarriffs, environmental regulations/internaltional standards, etc.) that can be used to provide a more level playing field with our trading partners. I've always found it amazing (and hypocritcal) that we regulate all these environmental protections but then gladly import products that are then made elsewhere with zero concerns for those regulations. As if causing global warming in Shanghai was better for the planet than causing it in Cleveland.

This is a very challenging topic. Because not all job losses are directly applicable to outsourcing issues. Enhanced automation also drives job constriction in many of these same industries. It won't be due to China, but how will America handle having 3.5 Million Truck drivers put out of work by 2030 due to the implementation of automated semi-trucks. These are average (or lower) educational tiered individuals who many won't have the capacity to shift into equivalent paying field.

 

[07pilt]

I went through this 12 to 18 months ago.

I am somewhat changed.

Wow what an own goal by the Dems. At the moment in time people are questioning free markets and free trade they run Hillary.

 

[CBradSmith]

Wow what an own goal by the Dems. At the moment in time people are questioning free markets and free trade they run Hillary.

What's that again Clark?

 

[twiza]

Here is my perspective/story as a programmer:

I see job description all the time that are simply unrealistic. Being a programmer, you always have to be willing to learn. There are plenty of companies out there that do not want to invest in training. My company has paid for 1 training for my team in 9 years. Half of our IT department turned into consultants from India. Instead being given opportunities to advance my skill set they bring in someone that doesn't know our business and that I basically have to train in most everything they do on the project just b/c they "claim" to have all this experience. It is also crazy, the number of people that don't know how to do what is on their 12 page resume.

I recently tried to move departments to get in a Data Analyst role. I have people in HR that found out that the real reason I didn't get even an interview was b/c I didn't have marketing experience. However, they are wanting to interview people who are still in college and that would need SPONSORSHIP and no experience at all. I have even been on the business side of this company.

My recommendation is close all the special interest tax bullshit and make the hiring American workers so beneficial from a tax write off stand point that it is crazy not to. The country is better off having a large company hiring tens of thousands employees and paying no tax than to support the job market of other countries and only getting 13% effective corporate tax.

Last Comment but important. We need to put more money into Science and Technology in our education system. There is literally no reason at all some of these kids can't be certified in a programming language or discipline by the time they are out of college or even high school. We focus to much on trying to get kids to regurgitate information rather than build any skill sets including critical thinking.

Sorry this was so long!

 

[CBradSmith]

Here is my perspective/story as a programmer:

I see job description all the time that are simply unrealistic. Being a programmer, you always have to be willing to learn. There are plenty of companies out there that do not want to invest in training. My company has paid for 1 training for my team in 9 years. Half of our IT department turned into consultants from India. Instead being given opportunities to advance my skill set they bring in someone that doesn't know our business and that I basically have to train in most everything they do on the project just b/c they "claim" to have all this experience. It is also crazy, the number of people that don't know how to do what is on their 12 page resume.

I recently tried to move departments to get in a Data Analyst role. I have people in HR that found out that the real reason I didn't get even an interview was b/c I didn't have marketing experience. However, they are wanting to interview people who are still in college and that would need SPONSORSHIP and no experience at all. I have even been on the business side of this company.

My recommendation is close all the special interest tax bullshit and make the hiring American workers so beneficial from a tax write off stand point that it is crazy not to. The country is better off having a large company hiring tens of thousands employees and paying no tax than to support the job market of other countries and only getting 13% effective corporate tax.

Last Comment but important. We need to put more money into Science and Technology in our education system. There is literally no reason at all some of these kids can't be certified in a programming language or discipline by the time they are out of college or even high school. We focus to much on trying to get kids to regurgitate information rather than build any skill sets including critical thinking.

Sorry this was so long!

Thanks for sharing. Good examples.

 

[Cowpoke]

You're an educated fellow and this discussion has unfolded piece by piece in this thread by people willing to explain and an audience open to listening.
Do you know how hard it would be to convey this level of detail through any channel today? It's time intensive, I'd assume approx half of the people would be hostile to hearing it, and a good chunk of the population aren't educated or experienced sufficiently to find this discussion edifying.

Also, signaling where you want to go in detail opens you up for mischaracterization and demonization.

I'm with you in that I'd like to see more specifics for the structure of how this Administration wants to address these issues. My hope is that he and those around him are forward looking enough to see much of what has been discussed here (I know they are) and genuinely want to MAGA...and that is primarily through the safety of the populace and addressing it's income and job security.

But I'm talking about Bannon, not Trump. Your reasons make sense for Trump. He hasn't been at this long enough to detail his philosophies, hasn't had a medium to communicate it with any depth, and would be worried about any blowback because he needed votes.

None of this is true for Bannon. He has been integral in the alt right movement for years. He states that the principles I outlined earlier are at the very heart of the alt right movement and that Breitbart is "THE platform for the alt-right". So he's had years, and a massive outlet that LOVES blowback, to really deeply explain his ideas and philosophies. The reason I started this thread was I figured there we some Bannon/Breitbart fans on here that could really explain some of his deeper level ideas for changing America's form of capitalism, beyond lower taxes and keep foreigners out. Those are just typical republican ideas. It seems Bannon envisions some sort of marxist capitalism, that possibly puts caps on the wealth generated within it, and some how redistributes that wealth to the working class.

How does he want to do this? And do Trump fans understand WHAT he actually wants?