Detroiter walks 21 miles in work commute

[Boreas]

Originally Posted by finnbow

Sure. Is his employer responsible for the high cost of a move?

It seems that you're still trying to assign some sort of blame here, Pat.

John

[Tom Joad]

Originally Posted by finnbow

Do you know that the owner of the business he works for is a 1 percenter? If so, how?

That's irrelevant.

The point is it's the one percenters that are primarily responsible for the sad state of our economy today, where millions of workers have been marginalized to the point that they are unable to lift themselves out of poverty even if they are out there busting their asses every day like James Robertson. And they don't give a flying rats ass either. In fact they have bought the Republican party and have given them their marching orders to go after Robertson's Social Security and Medicare so that they can have even more money in their tax sheltered offshore accounts. As far as they are concerned him and millions of others in the same boat as he is can keep busting their asses for shit wages until they drop dead.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by Boreas

It seems that you're still trying to assign some sort of blame here, Pat.

John

Not me. I just said that it wasn't the employer's fault that Mr. Robertson's car broke down and he chose to take the bus and walk. You're the one who seemed to be blaming the whole feckin' country in your earliest post and TJ reflexively wailed away on the one percenters.

I'm just not as willing to overreact to one anecdote about a guy in Detroit who had car trouble as you seem to be.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by Tom Joad

That's irrelevant.

The point is it's the one percenters that are primarily responsible for the sad state of our economy today, where millions of workers have been marginalized to the point that they are unable to lift themselves out of poverty even if they are out there busting their asses every day like James Robertson. And they don't give a flying rats ass either. In fact they have bought the Republican party and have given them their marching orders to go after Robertson's Social Security and Medicare so that they can have even more money in their tax sheltered offshore accounts. As far as they are concerned him and millions of others in the same boat as he is can keep busting their asses for shit wages until they drop dead.

I'd say it's more the fault or blue collar right-wingers voting against their own best interests. Corporations will always try to maximize profits and shareholder wealth because it's their fiduciary responsibility to do so. It is the job of the political system to balance this against societal needs.

[Boreas]

Originally Posted by finnbow

I'd say it's more the fault or blue collar right-wingers voting against their own best interests.

And they reached this point entirely on their own too. Whadda buncha dopes!

John

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by Boreas

And they reached this point entirely on their own too. Whadda buncha dopes!

John

Both parties do what they can to influence voters to vote in their favor. The fact that the GOP is able to convince people to vote against their own best interests says at least as much about the poor messaging of the Dems as it does effective messaging by the GOP.

[donquixote99]

Finn, I think this whole 'is the employeer responsible' bit is a red herring. No one has suggested the employeer is responsible for anything, other than operating in the current customary way in our capitalist society. That is, paying some sort of market wage and not feeling obliged to concern themselves beyond that.

In the microcosm, James Robertson's case is just one individual case. He has reasons, whatever they are, to stay put and not move closer, not to change to a closer job, and not to operate a vehicle. He has been dealing with his individual situation in a way that strikes most of us as extraordinary--using up many hours a day walking. If his work also requires physical exertion, the sum of his daily efforts is surely way above and beyond the ordinary call of industriousness. So people feel he has earned recognition and tangible support.

Maybe you disagree. But your contrarian stance seems to be a defense against an attack made only in the most general terms here, the basic feeling that 'something is wrong' in general. Mr. Robinson's particular and unusual hardships thus become symbolic of less extreme but more general hardship--a widewspread feeling that the rewards to labor are often not just, that the marketplace disfavors labor too much, and the system offers no opportunity to redress this.

Your defensive stance, as Joad points out, really amounts to a defense of the right of the owners of capital (the 1%, or less) to be unconcerned with either Mr. Robinson, or with the larger systemic issues. But who is the economy for? Are reforms in favor of the mass of workers automatically undesirable? Are all criticisms of the system as it exists to be rejected out-of-hand? I think there are ideas worth exploring, in the face of ever-mounting inequality. The system as it exists may not be the best possible, after all. It may be unstable and headed for one kind of blow-up or another, for one thing....

[Tom Joad]

Originally Posted by finnbow

I'd say it's more the fault or blue collar right-wingers voting against their own best interests. Corporations will always try to maximize profits and shareholder wealth because it's their fiduciary responsibility to do so. It is the job of the political system to balance this against societal needs.

I see. So we should let people like the Koch Brothers and the Wall Street Bankers off the hook because it's their duty in accordance with the word of God to try to fuck as many people in the ass as possible in pursuit of profit maximization?

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by Tom Joad

I see. So we should let people like the Koch Brothers and the Wall Street Bankers off the hook because it's their duty in accordance with the word of God to try to fuck as many people in the ass as possible in pursuit of profit maximization?

Unless and until they do something illegal, there's nothing to let them off the hook from. If you find any CEO's who aren't trying to (legally) maximize profits, you've found CEO's on their way to being fired by their board (as they should be).

[Boreas]

Originally Posted by donquixote99

The system as it exists may not be the best possible, after all. It may be unstable and headed for one kind of blow-up or another, for one thing....

It has reached a point of unsubstainability. Gated communities and privatized cities won't protect the oligarchs. We've gone from a time when the middle class comprised around 50% of the total population to today when it is a mere 20%. That means that the working poor make up over half of the total population and there is every indication that things will get worse.