Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
At The Economist’s Open Future festival in New York on September 15th, Steve Bannon was interviewed by Zanny Minton Beddoes, The Economist’s Editor-in-chief, in front of a large audience with a simulcast in London before another large audience.
Politics and economics: Bannon talked about his work in Hungary's and Italy's populist nationalist movements, revealed he wanted the GOP Tax Cut bill to give workers more money while taxing people who made over $5M at 44% but he was out voted by Steve Mnuchin and Gary Cohn (Progressive Democrats). Talked about tariffs and free trade, the danger of China, how Trump won the votes of workers and lots of economy related topics as you'd expect.
A surprising tidbit Bannon revealed was that he's been reading The Economist since age 12! One boy in the audience who asked a question was about that same age, might be headed down the same path -- scary smart, posh accent, probably goes to Eton and will be prime minister one day.
Half an hour, very lively discussion between two very intelligent people who disagree. So refreshing in these days of tabloid TV news.
Steve Bannon also said his world view about Muslims was formed by events that never happened according to the itinerary of his ship and his superiors.
Steve Bannon is pushing an agenda for what he would like to see which is fine, but he is using lies as a basis to promote and rationalize it which is why I stopped listening to him.
He dresses like a homeless man to pretend he is not elitist, but every once in a while he slips and lets people know what he really feels about the lower and middle class. I remember when he belittled Doug Jones for going to the University of Alabama and not Harvard like he did. Whoops
You are right about 2 intelligent people having a conversation and that lady was no Pelosi. One of the themes that Bannon hits on is the workers race against automation as a huge threat world wide. From what I gathered his solution is the workers uniting and getting a bigger piece of the pie from the capitalist. His method of bringing it about is controlling all immigration where the labor pool is not over saturated with workers which keeps wages low playing in the hands of the capitalist.
He also talks a lot about a countries sovereignty, re negotiating trade deals where the supply chain is not so heavily favored towards China, and even said out loud that those making over $5million he fought for a tax rate of 40%. But Bannon supported the corporate tax rate being reduced to bring capital back to U S shores. I support most of these ideas but in reality none of these together is going to stop the automation wave.
Bannon I think knows that because he said to audience their the ones who won't have to deal so much with automation as a problem but it will be their children and grand children. It makes me think that the populist movement is no more then " the workers getting a piece of the pie while there is still a pie". I guess it beats the democratic socialist answer to automation where every body working or not gets a piece of the pie through gvt, basic income, free tuition and health care, etc.
Bannon's "economic nationalism" has grave flaws. The idea that the U.S. as a whole is locked into a zero-sum economic competition with other countries or that average Americans can become wealthy at the expense of foreigners is complete nonsense. At best, it is a confusion about relative versus absolute living standards. At its worst, it is a con job that distracts middle and working class Americans from real questions about domestic distribution of economic resources by casting aspersions on a foreign boogeyman.
We should use the benefits of trade to help those (relatively few) who are hurt by it. Trade boosts growth and thus raises gross domestic product. We need domestic and fiscal policies that help those whose jobs, earnings and communities have been hit by foreign competition. Such policies include sectoral employment training (training workers for existing or future jobs in their communities), apprenticeships (earn while you learn) and direct job creation.
In the best of times, isolationist impulses among the populace and rent-seeking by business must be aggressively resisted. Where the gains to economic liberalization are diffuse—cheaper products and more advanced technology—they are taken for granted. There is no natural constituency for a free, open, and level playing field. This is the opening the populists have exploited.
We need domestic and fiscal policies that help those whose jobs, earnings and communities have been hit by foreign competition. Such policies include sectoral employment training (training workers for existing or future jobs in their communities), apprenticeships (earn while you learn) and direct job creation.
In the best of times, isolationist impulses among the populace and rent-seeking by business must be aggressively resisted.
Trump is not isolationist. Trump administration has encouraged businesses to offer training and retraining and there was a large meeting at the White House a few months back where CEOs of a few dozen major companies pledged x amount of new jobs or retraining. You can see it on the White House youtube channel
Ivanka is in charge of the apprenticeship-community college-vocational school partnership with businesses. You can also see at least two videos of meetings on the White House youtube channel.
You will never see this reported in opposition propaganda media because they censor and under report. Even Fox News doesn't cover everything but at least it gets mentioned.
This is actually a very busy White House and administration but fake news has zombies believing all Trump does is play golf. This website isn't up to date but has a helluva lot more information about accomplishments so far http://www.magapill.com/
Bannon's "economic nationalism" has grave flaws. The idea that the U.S. as a whole is locked into a zero-sum economic competition with other countries or that average Americans can become wealthy at the expense of foreigners is complete nonsense. At best, it is a confusion about relative versus absolute living standards. At its worst, it is a con job that distracts middle and working class Americans from real questions about domestic distribution of economic resources by casting aspersions on a foreign boogeyman.
We should use the benefits of trade to help those (relatively few) who are hurt by it. Trade boosts growth and thus raises gross domestic product. We need domestic and fiscal policies that help those whose jobs, earnings and communities have been hit by foreign competition. Such policies include sectoral employment training (training workers for existing or future jobs in their communities), apprenticeships (earn while you learn) and direct job creation.
In the best of times, isolationist impulses among the populace and rent-seeking by business must be aggressively resisted. Where the gains to economic liberalization are diffuse—cheaper products and more advanced technology—they are taken for granted. There is no natural constituency for a free, open, and level playing field. This is the opening the populists have exploited.
Actually you miss the point here. Its that as citizen, deriving benefit from and supporting the government IS a zero-sum game. So is living in any nation. There are finite amounts of resources available to a government, and to the people living in their nation. So zero-sum economics are most definitely in play...not just for nations, but also implicated in international trade (there are finite amounts of things to exchange, so that's zero sum), and in things like "global warming" where there are finite amounts of resources from which to derive energy and finite limits on what can be extracted or processed or consumed without having dire consequences.
What economic nationalism allows for is the protection of the citizens against most, not all, external forces, which they themselves cannot control or influence. That's one of the benefits of economic nationalism.
The same argument can be made in defense of stricter controls on migration. These are things that protect the citizens.
The guy is full of **** and you're foolish if you buy into. Populist talking points are used in a manner where they blame everyone else and that's what people like.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
