The faux corporate dichotomy of current politics.

[Felya]

Howdy,

Currently, we are bombarded with rhetoric of insurmountable division. If there is one thing that all media seems to agree, from Fox to NBC to infowars, is that we are being divided. Which thankfully for them, is the exact sort of thing that gets them clicks and sells out their archaic newspapers. Well... I want to take a quick glance at what I think is going on. You won’t find links to this, as I am not regurgitating something I can just link. But, if you read something similar... hook me up...

First, I want to take a look at the supposed dychotomy. The middle America vs Coastal states. As we have seen in more recent rhetoric, we are told that we even have corporations taking sides. We have the IT giants, vs natural resources including real state. This should seem strange to anyone that has been around longer than 10 years. When did corporations begin to split from the previous dychotomy of Corporations vs common folk. From Bad Religion to Hank Williams, it has always been common folk... regardless of the part of country... vs the money bags... regardless what industry was the big dog. It was we the people, as recently as 3 years ago...

So, I want to get through the mud to show what is really going on. This is media, pop culture, from the early 90s to late 80s:

Music (Nirvana and NWA):
https://youtu.be/hTWKbfoikeg
https://youtu.be/TMZi25Pq3T8

Film (Slacker and Juice):
https://youtu.be/hGzbYcQyzTw
https://youtu.be/KlmfRuXxuXo

There was a common theme for youth in the early 90s. It’s the reason no one on Seinfeld had a real job and many early episodes are about unemployment. Remember, even on Friends, no one had a job. That was the reality of early 90s and late 80s that all this media was trying to appeal to. While this was happening, here is what was going on in middle America, which should explain the lack of jobs for youth:

Roger and me:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_%26_Me

America was facing a double whammy, not only was there a large and growing population of youth unable to find employment. The existing manufacturing jobs that their grand parents were lifers in, were not being turned over to them, but even their parents being laid off. The issues with coal, farms and manufacturing existed in the 80s. So... what happened to stop the rope from burning on both ends?

Simply put... IT... it was the internet, the gaming and general infrastructure boom. Jobs were created from getting clerical work into databases to web sites that needed designers, developers, sales, HR, publishers, administrators, project managers and shit ton of other people. Not only did this provide an opportunity for those willing to take it, it relieved the valve on middle America. Those who took advantage, as it always been, was the youth. IT industry is largely a youth movement from people who were not rich in the first place. But, it also indirectly helped manufacturing and coal miners, by removing competition for labor. Those grandkids, were not sticking around to take jobs from existing employees, for jobs that were leaving anyway.

So... what is actually going on now? Unemployment went from 3 consecutive years of increasing, to top out at 7.5 in 1992, to then have 8 consecutive years if unemployment falling to 4.0. A time so remarkable, that even Trump called it the best economic time in history. The NYC fixture of the debt clock on daily news, disappeared, since the scary number wasn’t moving as fast. This was now 20 years ago, were we already had the IT bust, then a rebirth with social media. These are no longer common folks they were when Amazon was a book store and eBay was a beanie baby shop. These were now giants on the level of Ruport Murdoch, Donald Trump and our friends in natural resources... which is the actual problem... the giants part.

These new money giants are no different to common folks. The distance from us to them is insurmountable to the extent where their difference from our perspective, should be negligible. It’s an Oligarch vs new money fight and they are trying to put us, the common people in the middle. Why is new money such an affront to oligarchs... because it negates a fundamental belief of oligarchs, that is reflected in Atlus Shrugged. If not for the oligarchs, society is supposed to fall. What happens when Trump disappears, as the oligarchs did in Atlus Shrugged, but Zuckerburg swoops in and buys his propertys and continues to run them, like nothing changed? Is that a problem for us... the common people... no... and if you think about it, it’s an opportunity. The problem is squarely in the affluent not being too big to fail. Because if we can survive or prosper on new money, it halves the power of oligarchs.

Again, this conflict is meaningless to us... we are not competing with either of them. We should just get as much protection from when either one fucks us, as possible. If you were on fire and either Zuckerburg or Trump had their Bently break down next to you, while they had to piss or their dicks would explode, they wouldn’t let their butler point their dick at you while they piss.

Just wanted folks to understand this... this is the division you are actually a part of, when you either pick sides or dictate that a dychotomy exists. It’s not about you... it’s not about the country... it is just about money of the super wealthy. There is nothing wrong with being rich... just FYI... but, division in the country over this bullshit, should be a problem. IT industry hurting, isn’t going to help you. That millennial in an IT job, trying to take your coal miner job, isn’t what you really want. In the same sense, you don’t want to be dealing with a bunch of people that are board and desperate, because their manufacturing and natural resource jobs are going away. This should not be dividing us... we want the same thing and the difference is negligible from our perspective.

I did mean to go on a rant...

[Deja Thoris]

Yea, everybody on Friends had jobs. So while you are trying to use this as a backdrop to set the scene, you sorta failed at the first hurdle. (Praise google). So ugh, lol.



Joey: All acting jobs considered in one heading(soap opera, broadway, movies), Waiter (Central Perk), Processor (Chandler’s Office), Christmas Elf, Christmas Tree Seller, Cologne Sampler, Museum Tour Guide, Waiter (Alessandro’s)

Ross: Paleontologist, Professor

Rachel: Waitress (Cental Perk), Assistant (Fortunata Fashions), Buyer & Personal Shopper (Bloomingdale’s), Executive (Ralph Lauren)

Monica: Chef, Caterer, Waitress (Moondance Diner), Head Chef (Alessandro’s), Head Chef (Javu’s)

Chandler: Data Processing & Statistical Reconfiguration for Multi National Corporations, Junior Advertising Copywriter

Phoebe: Masseuse, Musical Atrist

[Felya]

Yea, everybody on Friends had jobs. So while you are trying to use this as a backdrop to set the scene, you sorta failed at the first hurdle. (Praise google). So ugh, lol.

Joey: All acting jobs considered in one heading(soap opera, broadway, movies), Waiter (Central Perk), Processor (Chandler’s Office), Christmas Elf, Christmas Tree Seller, Cologne Sampler, Museum Tour Guide, Waiter (Alessandro’s)

Ross: Paleontologist, Professor

Rachel: Waitress (Cental Perk), Assistant (Fortunata Fashions), Buyer & Personal Shopper (Bloomingdale’s), Executive (Ralph Lauren)

Monica: Chef, Caterer, Waitress (Moondance Diner), Head Chef (Alessandro’s), Head Chef (Javu’s)

Chandler: Data Processing & Statistical Reconfiguration for Multi National Corporations, Junior Advertising Copywriter

Phoebe: Masseuse, Musical Atrist

Here is the fun part... break those down by seasons. What year did the seasonal and waitress jobs stop? When (Jesus fucking christ) did she become an executive? Friends was in 1994... it only caught the tail end of it. You are actually pointing out the progress from early to late 90s.

[Deja Thoris]

You said, remember on friends, noone had a job. It's kinda the premise that sets the scene for your rant and its built on a false premise.

[Sunseeker]

You said, remember on friends, noone had a job. It's kinda the premise that sets the scene for your rant and its built on a false premise.

So is your argument. His is a flaw of language. "Noone had a job." when what he meant, and what you are nit picking is his wording should have been "Through most of the beginning of the series noone had a job."

Your argument against his exists out of nothing but a need to be contrary. @Felya is correct. You are also correct. But you are purposefully obfuscating by implying the employment that only existed in the latter part of the series was constant through it all.

So let me put it this way: While Felya may be technically incorrect you are purposefully lying.

[Felya]

You said, remember on friends, noone had a job. It's kinda the premise that sets the scene for your rant and its built on a false premise.

No, here is rap from 1997:
https://youtu.be/eL03THMxea0

Signfeld also lasted long enough for everyone to get jobs. If sitcoms didn’t show progress through seasons, my point would actually be moot. By the time the second season of Friends aired, we already had 3 years of unemployment numbers dropping. By the 3rd season, the previous 3 year losing streak, would be overcome by a 4 year winning streak. By the time the show ran its course... a waitress became an executive... a guy doing seasonal jobs as Santa, was on soap oprah. A line cook, was an executive shelf. Even the street musician, got a job... that’s the point. You are looking at the decade span of a show, within a singular time. But, if I am pointing at progress, which began in 1993, the show that started in 1994, would have to show a drastic change... like being an executive.

[Deja Thoris]

So let me put it this way: While Felya may be technically incorrect you are purposefully lying.

I'm really not trying to purposefully lie, I just think its a poorly constructed post. Since the OP spends half of his life dissecting the post truth Trump era he can at least have the smarts to make an unambiguous, factually correct post.

[chazus]

is that we are being divided

Not as much as you think. It's mostly vocal minorities. Yeah, there's stuff going on, and people have opinions. But most of what you see is vocal minorities that end up in the news that you were saying enjoy this.

what I think is going on.

Because we were eagerly awaiting some single person's opinion on something. I'm not saying you aren't important, but.. You know. Few individuals are important. I'm certainly not. Whoever posts after me certainly isn't. In fact, I'm fairly certain 99.9% of the people on this forum aren't important, on a 'grand scheme of things' level, or even on the level of this thread topic.

First, I want to take a look at the supposed dychotomy. The middle America vs Coastal states. As we have seen in more recent rhetoric, we are told that we even have corporations taking sides.

Y... yeah? I mean.. That's... been a thing for decades.

This should seem strange to anyone that has been around longer than 10 years. When did corporations begin to split from the previous dychotomy of Corporations vs common folk.

What? Why would it seem strange? This has been common for, again, decades.

I feel like it's some kind of thing where someone woke up on January 1, 2017, and went GUYS GUYS, WE MIGHT HAVE A BLACK PRESIDENT. Well, yeah. Where' have you been? The dichotomy isn't what you think it is (this isn't some 'woke' statement or something. It's never really been 'middle vs coast'). Corporations have always had a hand in things. The only thing that's really changed is how much people are getting involved, and the increased communication.

[Felya]

I'm really not trying to purposefully lie, I just think its a poorly constructed post. Since the OP spends half of his life dissecting the post truth Trump era he can at least have the smarts to make an unambiguous, factually correct post.

lol you didn’t lie... the whole Friends unemployment thing is one of those “did you know” moments that gets debated on forums a lot. That debate is more of what constitutes a job, where pointing at selling Christmas trees, is technically a job... but it’s seasonal... helping my point.

- - - Updated - - -

Not as much as you think. It's mostly vocal minorities. Yeah, there's stuff going on, and people have opinions. But most of what you see is vocal minorities that end up in the news that you were saying enjoy this.

I’m just talking about media in general. The people repeating it, are just pawns.

Because we were eagerly awaiting some single person's opinion on something. I'm not saying you aren't important, but.. You know. Few individuals are important. I'm certainly not. Whoever posts after me certainly isn't. In fact, I'm fairly certain 99.9% of the people on this forum aren't important, on a 'grand scheme of things' level, or even on the level of this thread topic.

No, I am not important at all. I give my self the title of Random Internet Poster... the acronym is edgy... RIP...

I do think we in general are waiting for a leader... which is why it’s easy to fall for the dychotomy. We want Trump and Zuckerburg to solve all of our problems. I think that’s a big problem... it’s why you cannot be against Trump, without also having an issue with the faithful. It’s why I like to drop things like... we the people... I get the plight of those who support Trump, my issue is with him being the final solution. There is no reason that some shmuck like me, should be getting upset that Trump hit another scandal... your plight is as much their concern, as paying off hookers NDA should be yours.

Y... yeah? I mean.. That's... been a thing for decades.

No, it really hasn’t. What was the equivalent industry in the 80s? Gordon Gekko?

What? Why would it seem strange? This has been common for, again, decades.

Because it seems to be new. I will need examples from the 80s. Because unemployment numbers is what I am using to show the shift.

I feel like it's some kind of thing where someone woke up on January 1, 2017, and went GUYS GUYS, WE MIGHT HAVE A BLACK PRESIDENT. Well, yeah. Where' have you been? The dichotomy isn't what you think it is (this isn't some 'woke' statement or something. It's never really been 'middle vs coast'). Corporations have always had a hand in things. The only thing that's really changed is how much people are getting involved, and the increased communication.

Yes, corporations have always had control. It wasn’t that there was the east coast corporations were in a political struggle versus middle American companies, where crux is a NYC oligarch. It’s unique because it’s not just corporations, it’s which corporations.

[chazus]

We want Trump and Zuckerburg to solve all of our problems.

What? No we don't. Who thinks that? That's like... Literally a new concept.

it’s why you cannot be against Trump, without also having an issue with the faithful.

I literally don't understand this. You can definitely be against Trump, or anyone, really, without having any question of 'faithful' or 'patriotic'

There is no reason that some shmuck like me, should be getting upset that Trump hit another scandal... your plight is as much their concern, as paying off hookers NDA should be yours.

We get upset about trump (not that this discussion is about him, just the example), because of actual awful things. Not some silly thing.

No, it really hasn’t. What was the equivalent industry in the 80s? Gordon Gekko?

Corporations have had sway in politics a long time... Even since the late 1800s. Just because there wasn't TV and Internet to tell everyone about it, it was still a thing.

Because it seems to be new. I will need examples from the 80s. Because unemployment numbers is what I am using to show the shift.

What does unemployment rate have anything to do with the issue?

Yes, corporations have always had control. It wasn’t that there was the east coast corporations were in a political struggle versus middle American companies, where crux is a NYC oligarch. It’s unique because it’s not just corporations, it’s which corporations.

So.. You're saying different corporations have different agendas. ?_?

[Deja Thoris]

I give in, your whole OP is just a fever dream of pseudo-intellectual babble where people can cherry pick the parts that resonate with them or dismiss the ones that don't.

What was your actual point?

[Cthulhu 2020]

1) Yes, it's better for the ultra elite if all of the common folk are busy fighting with each other over party differences, rather than the common people fighting against the elite for amassing huge amounts of wealth that ultimately harms our economic flow.

2) No, because this division among the American people is good for the ultra elite does not lend credence to the idea that the leaders and ideologies of both parties are the same.

I realize you may not be saying "Both parties are the same", but that's what a lot of people might take away from this. At the end of the day, most people in America, the majority "middle" don't care about the divisions that make both parties different, and some even go so far as to say that both parties are the same. It's only because, for all the issues they personally care about, both parties are the same... But if your concern is unemployment or underemployment (waitressing, other minimum wage shit jobs) then no, both parties are not the same. The left has been trying for years to make higher education and better employment easier for everyone.

[Pann]

Chandler: Data Processing & Statistical Reconfiguration for Multi National Corporations, Junior Advertising Copywriter

Are you sure? I thought that Chandler worked as a transponster.

[Vineri]

The unemployment rate is really just individuals who claim unemployment benefits. It does not account for those who gave up searching for jobs once benefits ended. Or retire early. Or find cash in hand money elsewhere.

Putting wealth back into America should be the top priority of Americans. Trump is doing fine to engage in tariff wars with China and other countries. This benefits all Americans. This is something Bush avoided, and Obama stuck his head in the sand over. Trump is doing it.

I think Hilliary would have buried not only her head but her whole body in this circumstance.

Bernie would have set similar Trump goals. He was never a believer in TPP anyways. This is the natural next step. (fun fact - Hillary used to love cheap low quality possibly counterfeit goods from China shipped near-free to compete with US real goods .. when Bernie was against it, a few days later so was she .. what a political waffle!)

When the country has weath again, those non-taxpayers just scimping along, start getting real money and paying taxes again. Happened after the great depression, will happen again.

When groups try to keep the US Poor, by contracdicting the president, or stiffing the economy with illegal immigration costs, this is only a major setback. The US can abosrb so many immigrants per year and there is a waiting list. When people jump the line and gain sactuary, this is an unwarranted burden. 100 is OK. 10 Million is not cool.

Sanctuary cities are crime ridden and bankrupt. How can this possibly succeed if the Federal Government needs to keep pouring money into them?

If the US government is being financially strangled with illegal immigrant costs, how can it flourish OP? If another crash happens, the poor and this dichotomy won't matter. Money will be worthless, and if money becomes worthless, raking a field will cost a large portion of the wealthiest assets. Or some food. Which is going to cost $1000 per loaf to anyone not willing to do physical labor.

Imagine that.

[Cthulhu 2020]

The unemployment rate is really just individuals who claim unemployment benefits. It does not account for those who gave up searching for jobs once benefits ended. Or retire early. Or find cash in hand money elsewhere.

Putting wealth back into America should be the top priority of Americans. Trump is doing fine to engage in tariff wars with China and other countries. This benefits all Americans. This is something Bush avoided, and Obama stuck his head in the sand over. Trump is doing it.

I think Hilliary would have buried not only her head but her whole body in this circumstance.

Bernie would have set similar Trump goals. He was never a believer in TPP anyways. This is the natural next step. (fun fact - Hillary used to love cheap low quality possibly counterfeit goods from China to compete with US real goods .. when Bernie was against it, a few days later so was she .. what a political waffle!)

When the country has weath again, those non-taxpayers just scimping along, start getting real money and paying taxes again. Happened after the great depression, will happen again.

When groups try to keep the US Poor, by contracdicting the president, or stiffing the economy with illegal immigration costs, this is only a major setback. The US can abosrb so many immigrants per year and there is a waiting list. When people jump the line and gain sactuary, this is an unwarranted burden. 100 is OK. 10 Million is not cool.

If the US government is being financially strangled with illegal immigrant costs, how can it flourish OP?

Sanctuary cities are crime ridden and bankrupt. How can this possibly succeed if the Federal Government needs to keep pouring money into them?

Speaking of burying heads in the sand, tariffs are only hurting American businesses, not helping, and Trump has overseen more jobs shipped overseas than many of his predecessors saw in their first two years. All of those deals he made early in his administration, like with Carrier, et al. never even stayed in America. They were given TAXPAYER MONEY to stay in America another 2-3 months and then shipped overseas anyway.

Rated against inflation, wages have gone down for yet another year, with record levels of minimum wage jobs making our unemployment numbers look good.

[Vineri]

Speaking of burying heads in the sand, tariffs are only hurting American businesses, not helping, and Trump has overseen more jobs shipped overseas than many of his predecessors saw in their first two years. All of those deals he made early in his administration, like with Carrier, et al. never even stayed in America. They were given TAXPAYER MONEY to stay in America another 2-3 months and then shipped overseas anyway.

Rated against inflation, wages have gone down for yet another year, with record levels of minimum wage jobs making our unemployment numbers look good.

I'm pretty sure the tariffs in question now are more in the benefit of the US, than those which did not benefited anyone in the past.

I'm personally tired .. Sick and tired... of seeing all this low quality Chinese garbage in stores. Why are we seeing it? Because people can't afford much. Why .. Because the past couple presidents were hell on this country.

American's can't make this stuff? Well it's mostly plastic, including the furniture, so China is fitting. What happened! Well retailers buy this stuff from China for pennies, shipped under TPP for pennies, because of corrupt China to US shipping agreements via USPS. What a sham. It's cheaper to ship something from China to the US, than it is to ship state to state USPS. Bullshit.

Retailers make a fortune. Consumers buy garbage and think it's quality.

Dichotamy .. hehe !!

Tariff laws are good.
Also A new trade agreement needs to be made. Sure it's nice to get plugs and wires practically free from China but it's not free. The US picks up that $50 shipping tab.

And people are so worried about Video Game companies in the US not making enough money. I'd rather the US makes money, not some greedy Video Game company. People should be worried about some company raking in money at the expense of US internal value, such as from China. Anyone who likes where they live should be concerned., regardless of color, religion, sex, background, sexual orientation, or whatever CNN or Warren tries to insinuate.

[Machismo]

I'm pretty sure the tariffs in question now are more in the benefit of the US, than those which did not benefited anyone in the past.

I'm personally tired .. Sick and tired... of seeing all this low quality Chinese garbage in stores. Why are we seeing it? Because people can't afford much. Why .. Because the past couple presidents were hell on this country.

American's can't make this stuff? Well it's mostly plastic, including the furniture, so China is fitting. What happened! Well retailers buy this stuff from China for pennies, shipped under TPP for pennies, because of corrupt China to US shipping agreements via USPS. What a sham. It's cheaper to ship something from China to the US, than it is to ship state to state USPS. Bullshit.

Retailers make a fortune. Consumers buy garbage and think it's quality.

Dichotamy .. hehe !!

Tariff laws are good.
Also A new trade agreement needs to be made. Sure it's nice to get plugs and wires practically free from China but it's not free. The US picks up that $50 shipping tab.

And people are so worried about Video Game companies in the US not making enough money. I'd rather the US makes money, not some greedy Video Game company. People should be worried about some company raking in money at the expense of US internal value, such as from China. Anyone who likes where they live should be concerned., regardless of color, religion, sex, background, sexual orientation, or whatever CNN or Warren tries to insinuate.

Then don't buy it. Stop wanting the government to do your work for you, you are being lazy.

[Vineri]

Then don't buy it. Stop wanting the government to do your work for you, you are being lazy.

There is not a made in USA equivalent. It's difficult, I understand for someone calling others lazy.

[Machismo]

There is not a made in USA equivalent. It's difficult, I understand for someone calling others lazy.

You are quite literally choosing government intervention, because you are too lazy to take responsibility for your own actions.

[Felya]

What? No we don't. Who thinks that? That's like... Literally a new concept.

You do... this what that was in response to:

Because we were eagerly awaiting some single person's opinion on something.

—

I literally don't understand this. You can definitely be against Trump, or anyone, really, without having any question of 'faithful' or 'patriotic'

You can... but, not without having an issue with his faithful. If you are saying something negative, a lot of people who claim not to support Trump, will defend him as if you are attacking conservative values. We have at least 3 threads active now, where Trump being a corporatist, is being defended as if it’s an attack on middle America.

We get upset about trump (not that this discussion is about him, just the example), because of actual awful things. Not some silly thing.

Sure, then the issue is what is considered silly. I think defending the fact that Trump fucked around and spent millions for his wife or public not to know, is a very silly thing to defend in your ideological savior. I think it’s not only counterproductive if you support Trump, it really provides a clear view of what extent his support is willing to go. To me, it’s proof that the issue is not ideological, but protecting an Oligarch in his fight vs new money. They just don’t realize it...

Corporations have had sway in politics a long time... Even since the late 1800s. Just because there wasn't TV and Internet to tell everyone about it, it was still a thing.

Yes, I’ve said as much. The dychotomy I am claiming exists now, that is unique, is not common folk vs corporations that has been going since way before the concept of corporation was a thing. The dychotomy I am pointing out, is the new money (Zuckerburg) vs oligarchs (Trump). It’s different because the break splits the population based on who is employed or simply supports which corporation. It’s not the same as it was even as recent as 2015, when the biggest shot against Obama subsidizing new industry, was a mater of picking winners. With Trump, due to him being an actual oligarch, that battle is now part of the political spectrum. Before Trump or even if Hillary won, president as proxies for corporations and not actual corporations, they were swayed by lobbying. There was at least some sort of guise where it impacted corporations as a whole. The change is a stone through away from candidates having corporate sponsors... this campaign brought to you by McDonald’s... want to keep your job, vote Dwayne Johnson... if it’s good for scorpions, it’s good for us! Free red white and blue scorpion king toys in your happy meal! Here is the campaign song:

What does unemployment rate have anything to do with the issue?

Showing when new money started and the impact it had on federal unemployment, including competition for manufacturing and energy jobs.

So.. You're saying different corporations have different agendas. ?_?

No, I am saying we are being divided to represent those agendas... not our own.

- - - Updated - - -

No, because this division among the American people is good for the ultra elite does not lend credence to the idea that the leaders and ideologies of both parties are the same.

No, parties and ideologies are not the same, but in the context of haves and have not, they are the same. I don’t even think both political parties are rally interested in the fight. It’s more cost effective for NRA or Trump to support one party, but it is far more cost effective for the party it self, to seem at least pliable on any issue. We will take the NRA and oligarch money, we will also take gun control and social media money... in that sense they are the same... but, not ideologically... which is why having a political debate be a dychotomy of two types of corporations, doesn’t help ideologically nor help the common man. We are simply pawns...

I realize you may not be saying "Both parties are the same", but that's what a lot of people might take away from this. At the end of the day, most people in America, the majority "middle" don't care about the divisions that make both parties different, and some even go so far as to say that both parties are the same. It's only because, for all the issues they personally care about, both parties are the same... But if your concern is unemployment or underemployment (waitressing, other minimum wage shit jobs) then no, both parties are not the same. The left has been trying for years to make higher education and better employment easier for everyone.

Yeah, I don’t want this to be about parties. That’s the opposite of my point. I am just trying to show that these corporations are not representing us. I am saying that saying Trump is an asshole, should not offend republicans. The response should just be... yeah, just like all other corporations... Trump organization does not give a shit about the people... or as @chazus put it... it’s been going since 1800s...