News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Populism and the Economics of Globalization [pdf] by Mikeb85 on Wednesday June 21, 2017 @01:10PM (#14605743)
So fix it then. There's this cycle in American politics of simply regurgitating talking points and not fixing problems. And yes, minorities in the US often live in poor neighbourhoods. But there's also a large, poor white working class too.

Keep in mind that under Obama, the relative wealth (percent share of aggregate wealth) of minorities and the white working class actually decreased.

While I have no doubt racist policies have contributed to the misfortune of some, when you look at wealth distribution in the US the problem is far bigger than most people think, and spans all races.

Re:Populism and the Economics of Globalization [pdf] by soundwave106 on Wednesday June 21, 2017 @02:15PM (#14606448)
Ultimately the question is whether US politics can break out of their current tribalism. Agreed that it is not fair to throw around the racism word casually, but it is absolutely worth noting that both parties in the United States have used tribal type tactics (including racial-based appeals) to obtain votes from various groups.

Regarding poverty, the GOP is currently (roughly speaking) an alliance between working class whites and business interests. Economically, the business interest side heavily dominates GOP policy at the moment. As far as poverty reduction goes, if you believe in either government oriented safety net solutions or other collective type structures (eg unions), this current political relationship sticks out like a sore thumb as being very counterproductive towards poverty reduction. Unfortunately, it appears that tribalism triumphs economic policy as a motivating factor at the moment.

I will say an additional thought: With the recent vote in France, I am wondering if the situation is somewhat more dynamic and fluid than this paper lets on. The Netherlands and France were only mentioned in passing, but it seems like the recent result in France actually produced an "anti-establishment" movement that also happened to be "pro-globalization" and "liberal" (in the classic economic sense). This sort of "populism" doesn't seem to be reflected in the paper.