What does a BIDEN Presidency look like?

[Grey Fox]

I thought the internet would help revitalize small towns but so far it has only enriched the cities more than ever.

But hey we will see.

I mean if you get 200 of your friends to follow you, you can achieve total political control of Loving County Texas.

Because, as usual, americans let private enterprise dictate development priorities.

[alfred russel]

I actually wonder if remote working won't do this to some degree.

I have several coworkers who are moving out of the Big City and into small towns. They'll be spending their Big City money in those small town shops. That's going to help. Those dying small towns are suddenly not dying. They're growing and thriving.

This isn't a policy thing, though. It's just a shift in economic reality. But I do think that if the shift is big enough, there's a chance that it will have a direct impact on how rural folks vote.

There are small towns that will probably be helped, but there are a LOT of small towns. City dwellers may move to that quaint town in the mountains or by the lake, but no one is going to relocate from NYC to some random dot on the map in Kansas or Oklahoma.

[viper37]

Everywhere they thought they could flip, the Dems didn't.

So far we have flipped three districts. Can't we at least wait until all the races are finalized before announcing our big sweeping conclusions?

The GOP has gained 4 seats in the House.
So far, the Senate is neutral, 1 gain, 1 loss each side, Georgia remains for January, but somehow, I doubt it will flip to the Dems.  But we'll see.  As a foreigner, I'll be happy for you if the Dems gain at least 1 of those seats

Trump scared the centrists. As we saw there are not just a ton of centrists left.

Well, yeah, he demonized the party by using the left wing of your party and he managed to convince voters he was right.  If you can't counter the message, there is a problem.

This country seems to be growing more radical at both ends. I am not so sure centrism has a strong future, the Republicans sure as fuck have no use for it.

You are right about the Republicans.  But I still think the future of the Democratic party is at the center-right.

[viper37]

Because, as usual, americans let private enterprise dictate development priorities.

Here, the government dictates where electricity goes.  Lots of people, including me, even though I ain't that far from civilization, have constant problems with electricity.  In the last few months, I've lost my microwave, my pellet stove broke, my dishwasher keeps freaking out and I have a bathroom light that will often burn because of a power surge.  I've had to buy UPS units for all electronics and computers in the house because I lost two power supply and one motherboard.

For some of my clients, they fought tooth and nail with Hydro-Quebec to get them to recognize they had a parasitic problem.  Millions of $ in lawyer fees to get your government to fix something.

At least, with the private, there's some competition.

[viper37]

There are small towns that will probably be helped, but there are a LOT of small towns. City dwellers may move to that quaint town in the mountains or by the lake, but no one is going to relocate from NYC to some random dot on the map in Kansas or Oklahoma.

I feel all these moves may be temporary.  Sure, people like the quietness of the countryside.  But then, they want everything they left in the city: veganism, reserved bike lanes, lights everywhere, asphalt everywhere, no trees that block their view, etc

[The Brain]

What exactly is the problem with the countryside? That there aren't enough jobs? Or that there are few high-paying jobs? Other?

[Josquius]

I feel all these moves may be temporary.  Sure, people like the quietness of the countryside.  But then, they want everything they left in the city: veganism, reserved bike lanes, lights everywhere, asphalt everywhere, no trees that block their view, etc

There's definitely something to this to an extent. The draw of the city, particularly for the young, is just as much in the life as the jobs.
We already have a bit of a trend in the UK with everyone (without their dog) moving to London immediately post uni as its the only way to get started in a professional career, then as soon as they can over 30 moving out to breed.

Fix rural income insecurity & you'll see change.

Rural areas are fucked. You don't need many people to work on farms, and whatever low cost manufacturing used to be available has generally evaporated.

No one is going to fix rural income insecurity because the immediate future is with urbanization.

I actually wonder if remote working won't do this to some degree.

I have several coworkers who are moving out of the Big City and into small towns. They'll be spending their Big City money in those small town shops. That's going to help. Those dying small towns are suddenly not dying. They're growing and thriving.

This isn't a policy thing, though. It's just a shift in economic reality. But I do think that if the shift is big enough, there's a chance that it will have a direct impact on how rural folks vote.

A bit different in the UK with the scale of the move being less but I do suspect this trend might happen here too. More remote workers only going into the office in the city a few times a week, the rest staying in their small town.... Leaves a lot of opportunity for more of an upmarket economy in the small towns with cafes et al.

A big business idea I'd be curious to do some research into if I had anything like the funding for such a thing is to look into flexible meeting spaces in small towns outside the big cities- if you've a meeting with 5 people who all live SW of the city then why treck into the office just for that, why not just meet in the small town SW of the city that is closer and more convenient for you all?

[Grey Fox]

Because, as usual, americans let private enterprise dictate development priorities.

Here, the government dictates where electricity goes.  Lots of people, including me, even though I ain't that far from civilization, have constant problems with electricity.  In the last few months, I've lost my microwave, my pellet stove broke, my dishwasher keeps freaking out and I have a bathroom light that will often burn because of a power surge.  I've had to buy UPS units for all electronics and computers in the house because I lost two power supply and one motherboard.

For some of my clients, they fought tooth and nail with Hydro-Quebec to get them to recognize they had a parasitic problem.  Millions of $ in lawyer fees to get your government to fix something.

At least, with the private, there's some competition.

If it was private you wouldn't have electricity from them. You would have it from a small local coop, because Hydro-Bell refuses to lay down hundreds of km of line to service 5 households. So sorry.

[grumbler]

Because, as usual, americans let private enterprise dictate development priorities.

Here, the government dictates where electricity goes.  Lots of people, including me, even though I ain't that far from civilization, have constant problems with electricity.  In the last few months, I've lost my microwave, my pellet stove broke, my dishwasher keeps freaking out and I have a bathroom light that will often burn because of a power surge.  I've had to buy UPS units for all electronics and computers in the house because I lost two power supply and one motherboard.

For some of my clients, they fought tooth and nail with Hydro-Quebec to get them to recognize they had a parasitic problem.  Millions of $ in lawyer fees to get your government to fix something.

At least, with the private, there's some competition.

If it was private you wouldn't have electricity from them. You would have it from a small local coop, because Hydro-Bell refuses to lay down hundreds of km of line to service 5 households. So sorry.

Hydro-Bell seems to be a type of culvert design so probably not interested in laying down any kind of power lines under any circumstances.

[fromtia]

How would they do that?  They had Obamacare, and they got slapped in the face right after that.
They fixed the China problem by isolating them, Trump wins, flipping Democrat bastions.
It seems everything they do short of giving money away like Trump did, they get hated for it.

Campaigning and organizing are always a good place to start in a democracy. What do most people want? I think most people want more or less what I want, I want to be left alone and I want the opportunity to make as much money as I can because that solves most of my other problems. If we can address the calamitous cost of housing, education and healthcare then that ties into the money thing. That's the broad approach I would take. The economic cares and concerns of ordinary people. Trump won in part because he gave people the false hope that he was addressing those concerns by talking about China and NAFTA.

The ACA is unpopular (although some small parts of it are popular) because it's a moderates answer to the healthcare problem - arcane and complicated, it overpromised and under delivered. Buy some health insurance you can barely afford with the help of a government subsidy - perhaps for the first time in your life, use it and get fucked with a bill for $10,000 including hidden out of network and facility fees you knew nothing about. Don't buy it and get fined by the IRS. I'm not surprised people were mad, before the GOP and Fox etc had demagogued it to death on the national stage.

[fromtia]

Yes, but they were all in relatively safe districts.  Everywhere they thought they could flip, the Dems didn't.  McConnell, Graham and Collins are still Senators, no gains there.  Being re-elected in a place where 60% of voters picked Dems the last time ain't such a great achievement.

They scared the centrists away, so now, they want to go further left to piss off the rest of the voters.

I'm not sure this is accurate. I know the traditional calculation is that if Democrats run left then its McGovern* all over again and doom is imminent because the American voter only cares about firearms(or something). Personally I think this is out of date. I do think that if you run on some kind of vapid identity politics of a leftish sort that's a mistake though, I think people rightly hate that. 



*In one of several Zelig like moments in my life I had the opportunity to wait on George McGovern in his later years. He was very polite. He ordered the special.

[viper37]

What exactly is the problem with the countryside? That there aren't enough jobs? Or that there are few high-paying jobs? Other?

both.  And they're Christians.  conservative Christians.  You talk to them about immigrant rights, lgbt rights, people changing sex, it's like the Apocalypse has begun.  Many aren't still over that whole freeing the slaves thing, so we have to give them time
Seriously, there are the jobs thing and the fact that people have a huge mistrust of government interventions in private lives.  It's even worst in the US than elsewhere.

[viper37]

If it was private you wouldn't have electricity from them. You would have it from a small local coop, because Hydro-Bell refuses to lay down hundreds of km of line to service 5 households. So sorry.

We have internet services from a couple of providers, which disproves your point.  So long as competition is allowed to flourish, it ain't much of a problem.  Whenever it's a monopoly though, private or public, it's the same.

[viper37]

Campaigning and organizing are always a good place to start in a democracy.

IIRC, they were supposed to do that after the 2016 defeat and it got them a House win for 2018.I figured they were still doing it, but it's quite possible I am mistaken.

What do most people want? I think most people want more or less what I want, I want to be left alone and I want the opportunity to make as much money as I can because that solves most of my other problems.

That's a problem right there.  Anything the government will do will cost money, and while in the US there is a lot of room to re-tax the super rich, at some point, anything that requires fixing will require more taxes and be a break on your opportunity to make as much money as you can.

If we can address the calamitous cost of housing,

That's mostly for States/Cities, though.  I can't really see the Fed gov having much to do about it given the vast differences between the various States and cities.

education

That means increasing the taxes.  Never popular.

and healthcare then that ties into the money thing. That's the broad approach I would take. The economic cares and concerns of ordinary people. Trump won in part because he gave people the false hope that he was addressing those concerns by talking about China and NAFTA.

China must be dealt with, but the US can't go at it alone since it's a global problem.NAFTA made the US much richer, it's only been used as a scapegoat for the loss or productivity in the US.  Which ties to education who happens to be a local issue, mostly.  Colleges are one thing, but there are good jobs to be had with non college education too.  But you still need some professional training.

The ACA is unpopular (although some small parts of it are popular) because it's a moderates answer to the healthcare problem - arcane and complicated, it overpromised and under delivered. Buy some health insurance you can barely afford with the help of a government subsidy - perhaps for the first time in your life, use it and get fucked with a bill for $10,000 including hidden out of network and facility fees you knew nothing about. Don't buy it and get fined by the IRS. I'm not surprised people were mad, before the GOP and Fox etc had demagogued it to death on the national stage.

Well, yeah, the ACA was a compromise that got gutted by red States enabling restrictions on it from what I understand.
Medicare for all would likely be a solution, but that is unacceptable to a majority of the people who currently vote Republican and they are in the countryside...  I think it's a dead-end for the Democrats like AOC to insist on this.  Imho, as Berkut pointed out a while ago, it'd be better to extend coverage while keeping private insurances around, at least for a while, because Americans are scared about losing their actual coverage.

And nothing will ever get done on the ACA side of things as long as people in the countryside who want this fixed vote GOP...

[Grey Fox]

If it was private you wouldn't have electricity from them. You would have it from a small local coop, because Hydro-Bell refuses to lay down hundreds of km of line to service 5 households. So sorry.

We have internet services from a couple of providers, which disproves your point.  So long as competition is allowed to flourish, it ain't much of a problem.  Whenever it's a monopoly though, private or public, it's the same.

The cost of building a network of telecommunications is vastly inferior to the one of building an electricy distribution system. Especially when it's heavely subsidized.

You have 2 backbone provider, Telus & Cogeco, maybe.