One thing we will see in the 2010s is the recognition of the currently under-the-radar leftist insurgency in the U.S. It's there, it's powerful, and its influence will be felt in the next two elections, but since it operates primarily through new media (blogs, email networks, Twitter, Facebook) it's so far fairly invisible to the old media (TV and newspapers). That will change. By the end of this decade, nobody will be describing America as a "center-right" country politically.

About Henry Ford: Ford could pay high wages because he had in effect a monopoly. Monopoly is like dictatorship: more often bad than good, but if the monopolist happens to be enlightened and benevolent it can be better than a free market. (That doesn't make it a good idea on balance, of course.) Once Ford had serious competition, he had to cut wages at his auto plants or be hurt by competitors who had lower production costs.

Only government policy (immigration policy, trade policy, tax policy, and labor law and regulation) and worker empowerment (unions) can boost wages across the board. Competition in business tends to drive them down, so business can't do it voluntarily, even if some business owners are enlightened enough to want to.

Originally Posted by '58 Flat

Up to now I have resisted accusations - mostly from the right - that the BLS may be inherently biased.

But now even I'm beginning to wonder: Blaming February's net job loss on the blizzards?

Possible. At the least, business that must consume more fuels devour what might otherwise be profits. Retail activity shrinks during blizzards because people are less likely to do the mindless shopping that they otherwise might do. People are less likely to look for work during heavy, dangerous snowstorms, so potential jobs in such areas as retailing don't get filled. But that has its rebound. Weather systems move, and so does unseasonable weather.

More significantly, bad weather shuts down much construction work that might otherwise appear in the winter during unseasonably-warm or even normal weather. That itself creates unemployment. Again, there is a rebound.

Originally Posted by herbal tee

Happy new decade. :

First, a link to the past.

Perhaps it is a little bit ambitious to start a thread that is intended to cover a whole decade in real time. I certainly hope that others here will feel free to contribute as event unfurl. This is the decade that should prove to be a true proving ground for the theory. We should hit rock bottom sometime before the year 2020 arrives.
And that is saying a lot all in itself. For now I'm going to take leave and observe the decade which should prove to be our heartland of the winter.

Right on!

Something profound tells me though that nothing is really going to happen this coming decade that will be remembered for anything, and in fact, if Howe and Strauss were right (I'm reading this spectacular book right now), we should be well inside the 4th Turning crisis already. But we are not. Yes I know, the banking system, the housing market and a few national markets have crashed and tumbled since 2007, but that does not matter as long as the basic Zeitgeist is the same and I would argue we are still very much locked in an Unraveling mode.
We still feel culturally exhausted and fed up, Lady Gaga does anemic pop music, retro nostalgia rules our minds (and secret dreams) and we are still fighting the same Boomer defined culture wars (immigration/racism, free market/statism, feminism/middle aged white evil men) that we have for decades. Not least, the Boomers and/or the ideas they invented are still on top of society's every value officialdom (free market liberalism, for example).
Sure, the dollar is an inflated world wonder, Peak Oil is about to hit any minute and western women aren't producing enough babies to sustain the population. Meanwhile, masses of Muslims are pouring into Europe due to a complete mental breakdown among the politico-cultural elite (68'ers again), but somehow, that big elucidating, clear and crisp crossroads crisis, that culture cleansing catastrophe never seem to actually declare itself.
One wonders why, given there is such ample reason for it, and I mean that in the most sincere, non ironic way.
It is as if though we were offered a single prepared crisis moment at the start of the last decade that would set off the world on a specific trajectory the PTB thought fit for us, but since we repudiated their staged event as nonsensical to the world's actual problems and tribulations, they have decided we are not worthy of another! Instead, after a brief single performance in the real (the real estate bubble), every potential catastrophe, as Baudrillard would say, is immediately banished to the endless orbit of the unreal and virtual, never to be heard of or seen again, but for reruns on a TV screen.

Originally Posted by Brian Beecher

But many on this board have compared the past decade to the Roaring 20's, and that decade was heavily romanticized during the 1950's and early 1960's; so much so, in fact, that the decade had its own TV show for a time. So, three decades hence, the naughts might yet receive their share of nostalgia.

Personally, I don't think so. The 20's were heavily romanticized already in the twenties. Ever read the works of F. Scott Fitzgerald? The metaphorical power of unravelings only go so far. If anything, the 20's above all resemble the 80's to some extent, not the insipid 90's/00's. Or what else would you call this guy, the 90's very own Great Gatsby?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hTWKbfoikeg&feature=fvst

Originally Posted by Tussilago

We still feel culturally exhausted and fed up, Lady Gaga does anemic pop music, retro nostalgia rules our minds (and secret dreams).

To me these seem more like signs of Crisis culture. Meh...

Originally Posted by Rose1992

To me these seem more like signs of Crisis culture. Meh...

Culture exhaustion? - Anything Goes - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P5wcLl13a8s

"Times have changed, and we've often rewound the clock, since the Puritans got a shock, when they landed on Plymouth Rock! If today, any shock they should try to stand, instead of landing on Plymouth Rock, Plymouth Rock would land on them. In olden days a glimpse of stocking, was looked on as something shocking, but now god knows, anything goes!"

Anemic Pop Music? - On the good ship, lollipop - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1r4bbgv1If8

Need I quote anything?

Annoying Pop Stars? - see above

Overt Sexual References? Gold Diggers of 1933 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vnpv1qXMnaM

"Pettin' in the park, bad boy. Pettin' in the dark, bad girl. First you pet a little, let up a little, then you get a little kiss. Pettin' on the sly, oh my! Act a little shy, oh why? Struggle just a little, then hug a little, cuddle up and whisper this: 'Come on, I've been waiting long, why don't we get started?' 'Come on, maybe this is wrong.' 'Well, gee, what of it?' 'We just love it.' Pettin' in the park, bad boy! Pettin' in the dark, bad girl! Whatcha doing honey? Well I feel so funny. Pettin' in the park with you!"

Retro Nostalgia? 42nd Street - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SuqJJMSK15U

"Little niffies from the 50s, innocent and sweet. Sexy Ladies, from the 80s, who are indescret, oh! Side by side, they're glorified! Where the underworld can meet the elite, forty-second street!"

All the above links are from the 1930s.

~Chas'88

Originally Posted by Chas'88

Overt Sexual References? Gold Diggers of 1933 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vnpv1qXMnaM

"Pettin' in the park, bad boy. Pettin' in the dark, bad girl. First you pet a little, let up a little, then you get a little kiss. Pettin' on the sly, oh my! Act a little shy, oh why? Struggle just a little, then hug a little, cuddle up and whisper this: 'Come on, I've been waiting long, why don't we get started?' 'Come on, maybe this is wrong.' 'Well, gee, what of it?' 'We just love it.' Pettin' in the park, bad boy! Pettin' in the dark, bad girl! Whatcha doing honey? Well I feel so funny. Pettin' in the park with you!"

They tolerated language that that in the 30s? Jeez, that sounds exactly like the 30s equivalent of Lady Gaga's "Love Game" song...

Originally Posted by Brian Rush

One thing we will see in the 2010s is the recognition of the currently under-the-radar leftist insurgency in the U.S. It's there, it's powerful, and its influence will be felt in the next two elections, but since it operates primarily through new media (blogs, email networks, Twitter, Facebook) it's so far fairly invisible to the old media (TV and newspapers). That will change. By the end of this decade, nobody will be describing America as a "center-right" country politically.

Can you provide some examples or web articles on this insurgency please. I'm surrounded by US Millennials who constantly complain about how bad the Democrats are now, plus lots of Indian IT professionals who seem to know little about US politics and culture beyond Hollywood.

Originally Posted by jpatrick

Can you provide some examples or web articles on this insurgency please. I'm surrounded by US Millennials who constantly complain about how bad the Democrats are now, plus lots of Indian IT professionals who seem to know little about US politics and culture beyond Hollywood.

It's almost all web-based. Start here: http://www.dailykos.com/

This is a site devoted to progressive blogging for the most part, but in it you will find lots of links to other things, including calls for activism of various kinds. Check out some of those links and you will see what I'm talking about.

You'll also find plenty of people, some of them Millennials, complaining about how bad the Democrats are. But the complaints come from the left.

Originally Posted by Brian Rush

It's almost all web-based. Start here: http://www.dailykos.com/

This is a site devoted to progressive blogging for the most part, but in it you will find lots of links to other things, including calls for activism of various kinds. Check out some of those links and you will see what I'm talking about.

You'll also find plenty of people, some of them Millennials, complaining about how bad the Democrats are. But the complaints come from the left.

Daily Kos is a good site for keeping up with the left, however, it is mostly a site for boomers/Xers. If you look at the demographics of who visits the site, 49% are over the age of 50, 91% are caucasian, 62% are male. Only 24% are under 35. Perhaps most interesting - 86% have no children.

http://www.quantcast.com/dailykos.com

James50

Originally Posted by Rose1992

To me these seem more like signs of Crisis culture. Meh...

Originally Posted by Chas'88

Culture exhaustion? - Anything Goes - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P5wcLl13a8s

"Times have changed, and we've often rewound the clock, since the Puritans got a shock, when they landed on Plymouth Rock! If today, any shock they should try to stand, instead of landing on Plymouth Rock, Plymouth Rock would land on them. In olden days a glimpse of stocking, was looked on as something shocking, but now god knows, anything goes!"

Anemic Pop Music? - On the good ship, lollipop - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1r4bbgv1If8

Need I quote anything?

Annoying Pop Stars? - see above

Overt Sexual References? Gold Diggers of 1933 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vnpv1qXMnaM

"Pettin' in the park, bad boy. Pettin' in the dark, bad girl. First you pet a little, let up a little, then you get a little kiss. Pettin' on the sly, oh my! Act a little shy, oh why? Struggle just a little, then hug a little, cuddle up and whisper this: 'Come on, I've been waiting long, why don't we get started?' 'Come on, maybe this is wrong.' 'Well, gee, what of it?' 'We just love it.' Pettin' in the park, bad boy! Pettin' in the dark, bad girl! Whatcha doing honey? Well I feel so funny. Pettin' in the park with you!"

Retro Nostalgia? 42nd Street - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SuqJJMSK15U

"Little niffies from the 50s, innocent and sweet. Sexy Ladies, from the 80s, who are indescret, oh! Side by side, they're glorified! Where the underworld can meet the elite, forty-second street!"

All the above links are from the 1930s.

~Chas'88

An amazing selection of 30's pop culture there, Mr. Chas. Man, I feel like learning how to tap dance. Too bad I couldn't find a tube video with an audio track of "Shanghai Lil" from the Footlight Parade to further complete the set of depression era music film amoralities.
Well indeed, what to make of these movies? Two possible explanations come to mind. 1) They are simply to be regarded as cultural extensions lingering on from the previous Unraveling era, now though delivered with sound and more spectacular sets than ever. 2) They fulfilled a much cited function of popular escapism in a social environment that all of a sudden had turned a lot more bleak and urgent.
As for the Shirley Temple clip, that supposedly does not belong here. Shirley Temple, mostly popular in the late 1930's if I recall, is meant to be exactly that kind of harmless, wholesome, family oriented entertainment required in a Crisis. One should also mind that there was a before and after the introduction of the "Hay's Code" of 1934, effectively censoring vice and immorality in American film until 1965. When it was introduced, the 4th turning had only lasted for 5 years, tops (and we are still looking for an equivalent of the Hay's Code if indeed we live in a Crisis right now).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motion_...roduction_Code
In any event, to demand a notable change/clean up of popular culture as the Crisis hits is not my argument. It's S&H's. In The Fourth Turning they repeatedly claim things along the lines of: "With crises have come camp songs and marches, and more recently swing and big bands" or "A Fourth Turning brings new interest in the rational and classical, in simplicity, restraint, and decorum..." (p. 115).
Yet, the worn out pop culture of today is almost exactly the same as in the days of Britney Spears' 1990's late Unraveling. There is simply no evidence of a 4th Turning having arrived yet as judged by mainstream pop culture. That's all I was saying.

Originally Posted by James50

Daily Kos is a good site for keeping up with the left, however, it is mostly a site for boomers/Xers.

That's why I said it was a starting point. Following the links from there is the next step.

Originally Posted by Brian Rush

Only government policy (immigration policy, trade policy, tax policy, and labor law and regulation) and worker empowerment (unions) can boost wages across the board. Competition in business tends to drive them down, so business can't do it voluntarily, even if some business owners are enlightened enough to want to.

It depends on how interchangeable employees are. The more specialized a person's talents, the more likely that competition will drive wages up. The more we move away from assembly line employment the more that individual knowledge (sometimes referred to as "human capital") becomes crucial to effective production.

Even in a factory environment, the supposed interchangeability of employees is a myth borne from large firms. In practice, the line workers have all sorts of idiosyncratic knowledge specific to their particular machines and the particular workers they interact with. The larger a firm, the harder it is for management to even be aware of this knowledge. So, they'll downsize and make the profit numbers look good in the short term, but long term production declines from the information loss will hurt the firm overall.

If you have hundreds of firms in a field, employees have considerable bargaining power. It's very easy to find a new firm to work with, so one's ability to turn dissatisfaction into leverage is larger. Relying on "one big firm" with an idealist at the helm is wishful thinking. This is especially true since Ford (your example) was very controlling of his employees personal behavior. The wages were good, but Ford was a nosy, prudish jerk to work for.

Competition in the labor market (on the demand side) is quite beneficial. We need more of it.

Originally Posted by Kurt Horner

It depends on how interchangeable employees are. The more specialized a person's talents, the more likely that competition will drive wages up. The more we move away from assembly line employment the more that individual knowledge (sometimes referred to as "human capital") becomes crucial to effective production.

Even in a factory environment, the supposed interchangeability of employees is a myth borne from large firms. In practice, the line workers have all sorts of idiosyncratic knowledge specific to their particular machines and the particular workers they interact with. The larger a firm, the harder it is for management to even be aware of this knowledge. So, they'll downsize and make the profit numbers look good in the short term, but long term production declines from the information loss will hurt the firm overall.

If you have hundreds of firms in a field, employees have considerable bargaining power. It's very easy to find a new firm to work with, so one's ability to turn dissatisfaction into leverage is larger. Relying on "one big firm" with an idealist at the helm is wishful thinking. This is especially true since Ford (your example) was very controlling of his employees personal behavior. The wages were good, but Ford was a nosy, prudish jerk to work for.

Competition in the labor market (on the demand side) is quite beneficial. We need more of it.

You've ignored the single biggest reason that this no longer works: monetary policy. As soon as unemployment reaches some mythical minimum, the Fed tightens money to prevent inflation, and the job market responds immediately. I guess this has some benefit to employers. It certainly benefits capital. It consistently harms people trying to get ahead.

Look at the results over the last 30 years as tight money has pushed the Gini Index ever higher. We're still responding to the oil crisis of the '70s by pushing people out of work. At the same time, we've overcompensated capital by lowering capital gains taxes to the bare minimum, when capital is not under stress. Work is under stress.

Kurt, I was certainly not advocating monopoly, merely pointing out that the fact Henry Ford had one is the only reason he was able to pay high wages. On balance, all things considered, monopoly is a terrible idea.

However, competition hurts wages much more often than it helps them. The only time it helps is when we are faced with labor shortages, so that employers compete with each other for scarce labor and must pay premiums. As long as labor is plentiful, companies compete by lowering costs and increasing efficiencies without unacceptably damaging product quality, so that wages are kept suppressed.

The key factors as I said are government policy and labor organization. Government policy is important because it affects the supply of labor through lax or tight immigration rules and trade policies that encourage or discourage outsourcing, and labor regulations that set a floor. Labor organization and collective bargaining are important for obvious reasons.

I'm looking at Generations right now ... they mention the "Crisis of 2020". Maybe we're just wanting things to hurry up too much. I think when the Crisis comes, we'll all know it.

Originally Posted by Tussilago

An amazing selection of 30's pop culture there, Mr. Chas. Man, I feel like learning how to tap dance. Too bad I couldn't find a tube video with an audio track of "Shanghai Lil" from the Footlight Parade to further complete the set of depression era music film amoralities.
Well indeed, what to make of these movies? Two possible explanations come to mind. 1) They are simply to be regarded as cultural extensions lingering on from the previous Unraveling era, now though delivered with sound and more spectacular sets than ever. 2) They fulfilled a much cited function of popular escapism in a social environment that all of a sudden had turned a lot more bleak and urgent.
As for the Shirley Temple clip, that supposedly does not belong here. Shirley Temple, mostly popular in the late 1930's if I recall, is meant to be exactly that kind of harmless, wholesome, family oriented entertainment required in a Crisis. One should also mind that there was a before and after the introduction of the "Hay's Code" of 1934, effectively censoring vice and immorality in American film until 1965. When it was introduced, the 4th turning had only lasted for 5 years, tops (and we are still looking for an equivalent of the Hay's Code if indeed we live in a Crisis right now).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motion_...roduction_Code
In any event, to demand a notable change/clean up of popular culture as the Crisis hits is not my argument. It's S&H's. In The Fourth Turning they repeatedly claim things along the lines of: "With crises have come camp songs and marches, and more recently swing and big bands" or "A Fourth Turning brings new interest in the rational and classical, in simplicity, restraint, and decorum..." (p. 115).
Yet, the worn out pop culture of today is almost exactly the same as in the days of Britney Spears' 1990's late Unraveling. There is simply no evidence of a 4th Turning having arrived yet as judged by mainstream pop culture. That's all I was saying.

Yeah I know about the Hayes code. I kinda wish it hadn't been passed. Princeofcats67, Odin & I have all agreed, that the only way something akin to it would ever come into existance would be if we allowed the right to gain power again and push through some social referrendums that would completely destroy our social liberties. Well, the thought wasn't specific to the Hayes code, but I find it applicable to what we were talking about (protecting social liberties).

I did find this from Footlight Parade: By a waterfall - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=707VxB-ek4Q

And it does fulfill the anemic music quota asked for. Now if only I could find an example of an anemic pop star... wait, I might be a traitor for this, but Ruby Keeler seems to be sticking out like a sore thumb now that I'm looking at some scenes where she's acting. She can tapdance & sing a bit, but her acting isn't up to the same par as the other actors. I think I just might have found an equivalent to the anemic popstars of today.

Shirley Temple started in films in 1932 @ the age of four. You are correct though that she really didn't take off in her popularity until after the code. Her popularity started soaring in 1934. So I wouldn't say the late 1930s, but post-code, definately.

This is where I disagree with those who say the 4Ting started in 2001, because obviously the culture has not turned or changed. I'd say that we've been in it since 2008 at the very least. Arguments for 2007 & 2005 (not Katrina, but the set up of what would puncture in 2008--it's like arguing IMO, that 1925 was the start of the Crisis, because 1925 set up the stock market crash of 1929) could possibly be made.

Culturally I feel we're in the early 1930s--the pre-code days as you'd say--although everyone else wants to disagree and say we're almost half-way through with the Crisis, probably because they want the Crisis to be over with as quickly as possible & possibly because they can't imagine how things could possibly get any worse.

~Chas'88

Originally Posted by Odin

They tolerated language that that in the 30s? Jeez, that sounds exactly like the 30s equivalent of Lady Gaga's "Love Game" song...

Sometimes they did, sometimes they didn't:

The following lyrics were banned on network radio -

"We have necked, tii I'm wrecked,
Won't you tell me what you expect?"

Let's Begin, from the 1933 Broadway hit Roberta (by Jerome Kern)

Originally Posted by Odin

They tolerated language that that in the 30s? Jeez, that sounds exactly like the 30s equivalent of Lady Gaga's "Love Game" song...

And yet somehow the rest of the board doubts we're in the equivalent of the early 1930s...

Yeah, that was before the Hayes Code was fully enforced.

~Chas'88

More pre-code 1930s clips that remind me of things we deal with today:

"Bend down sister, if you wanna keep thin!" - crazy dieting & obsession with body size. It also reminds me (only a tiny bit) of the Legally Blonde scene of "bend & snap".

"Clean as a whistle, fresh as a daisy!" - oh those lovely feminine curves...


Contrast the above with when the code was enforced, here.


EDIT: Something else I found.

Oh my god, 1970s clothing fashion 50 years earlier!

And of course I can't post the above without providing a link to it's parody that was written 30 years later: here. & here.


~Chas'88

Also just to give people an idea just watch the college professor's remark to the nature of the swing craze at the end of this Betty Boop Cartoon.
Back then swing was considered very provocative by the older generations.

Question for Chas: Do you think something like the Hays code might happen in the 2010s? Maybe 75 years from now someone like you will be citing LoveGame as an example of the risque in this decade, and there will be remarks of utter shock.

Oh yeah and the part with the chimps in the Pettin in the Park video reminds me less of Love Game and more of this.

Originally Posted by Rose1992

Also just to give people an idea just watch the college professor's remark to the nature of the swing craze at the end of this Betty Boop Cartoon.
Back then swing was considered very provocative by the older generations.

Question for Chas: Do you think something like the Hays code might happen in the 2010s? Maybe 75 years from now someone like you will be citing LoveGame as an example of the risque in this decade, and there will be remarks of utter shock.

Oh yeah and the part with the chimps in the Pettin in the Park video reminds me less of Love Game and more of this.

As POC, Odin, & I have said, if the Social Conservatives ever manage to regain control of things they'll probably pass something equivalent to the Hayes Code to take away all of our social freedoms. It'll make the Patriot Act look like peanuts. That's a scary thought indeed, isn't it?

Oh the new decade is still young and risque, but who knows what'll happen, we've got a decade to go to find out. I don't know about you, but I don't look forward to fast forwarding to being 32 & losing 10 years of my life just to find out.

Thanks Rose, I'm really laughing at that last link. "I appreciate your input"

~Chas'88

Rose, I'll see your "The Bad Touch" and raise you one "Stacy's Mom" & one "Girl all the Bad guys want" & one Boom, Boom, Boom, Boom!! & one 1985 & finally one The Real Slim Shady.

I had to throw the 1985 in there since it is BFS' most well known label.

~Chas'88

Originally Posted by Chas'88

As POC, Odin, & I have said, if the Social Conservatives ever manage to regain control of things they'll probably pass something equivalent to the Hayes Code to take away all of our social freedoms. It'll make the Patriot Act look like peanuts. That's a scary thought indeed, isn't it?

Believe it or not, I was thinking less social conservatives and more political correctness police, and "concerned" Xer parents. In a sense, the latter has already happened; compare '90's cartoons to now for an example. IMO political incorrectness is the new sexual deviancy, because it's the issue that this Prophet generation chose to make a big fat deal about.

I would agree. The overtone of decency and family values is a general constant over time, and would flare up in different forms depending on the sort of thing that suddenly happens, like a wardrobe malfunction.

Otherwise, they won't result in a tremendously lasting impression, and those spikes tend to wane over a short period of time. That is the norm.

The big issue would be when fashionable thought is applied as a policy, such as the development of Political Correctness in the latter end of the 20th century. Those ideas, by virtue of being relatively new, also has in its wake very vocal proponents who would seek nothing more than to make the idea into law or some other kind of regulations. This is where the most probable threat to any general form of freedom would appear in the near future. It's easy to define what is considered PC and un-PC, but at the same time it is arbitrary, so doing so will impinge on 1st Amendment Rights.

A good example of this sort of situation would be the Prohibition Movement from the late 19th century coming to a head in the early 20th century, until the government came to their senses in the 1930s.