Posted on 08/06/2013 9:52:29 PM PDT by ckilmer
It's no secret that both political parties are struggling to connect with voters. Strategists dream up marketing plans to increase their party's appeal to this constituency or that group. Sometimes they work, and sometimes they don't. But they never establish a deep and lasting connection with voters.
That's because most of what the parties talk about is yesterday's news and is largely irrelevant to the realities of the 21st century.
Consider the top issue before the nation -- the economy. President Obama wants to raise taxes and increase government spending to boost the economy and create jobs. Republicans disagree. Voters root for their political team but see little connection between rhetoric and reality.
A better understanding of where the economy is headed comes from far outside of official Washington. One way to get a sense of what is taking place is to pick up a copy of "Makers: The New Industrial Revolution" by Wired magazine editor Chris Anderson.
If you've never heard of or seen 3-D printing, the book will change everything you think you know about economics and day-to-day life. Anderson argues that "the collective potential of a million garage tinkerers and enthusiasts is about to be unleashed, driving a resurgence of American manufacturing."
If you are familiar with the potential of 3-D printing, you will have to consider Anderson's claim that "a generation of 'Makers' using the Web's innovation model will help drive the next big wave in the global economy."
It's unlikely that everything Anderson describes will play out as he envisions, but at least he's discussing the 21st century economy. He is addressing both the hopes and fears of millions who recognize that the new technology has already changed the economy in a fundamental way.
Jaron Lanier, the father of virtual reality, also addressed those issues in his book, "Who Owns the Future?" Lanier initially thought that the digital networking world would improve life for everyone. Now, he fears that those networks will eliminate middle class jobs. In Lanier's view, the problem is that everybody is giving away so much personal and professional content for free. He sees the ultimate winner in such a world as the person with the biggest computer to mine that data.
As with Anderson, you don't have to agree with everything Lanier says to recognize that he's addressing reality far more than either political party in Washington.
Even more, whether Anderson and Lanier have it right, the forces they describe are going to do more to shape the global economic future than all the rhetoric about fiscal policy, stimulus, minimum wage, union rules and regulation.
For those activists who cling to the view that politics drives the future, consider the 1970s, when politicians grappled with an energy crisis, Watergate, high inflation, high unemployment and more. The policy debates led to the tax revolt and the election of Ronald Reagan as president.
During that time, unknown to the world at large, Bill Gates dropped out of Harvard to found Microsoft. Steve Jobs left school to work for Atari and attended the Homebrew Computer Club with Steve Wozniak. Those two men started Apple Computer.
Without taking anything away from Reagan's accomplishments in the 1980s, it was Gates and Jobs who shaped the future.
Today, the future is being shaped in America, not Washington.
The job of government is to provide the environment where free enterprise can flourish. And then get out of the way.
BUMP for excellence in posting.
Good stuff.
“Bipartisanship” just doesn’t cut it. Bipartisanship always means that the GOOBers side with the ‘RATS with sticking it to the American people. This is the first time in 43 years that the Republicans can’t count on my vote. It’s not automatic anymore.
This was Reagans stated vision. It appeared to have worked. Until Goverment re-closed the window anyway.
Ping
What, Rassmussen, the pollster, isn’t getting enough love, so now HE has to jump on the overhype-3D-printing bandwagon?
Guys who run telephone sweatshops are telling us what the future is going to be like...yeah sure.
Reagan deserves just as much credit as Gates and Jobs do for enabling high tech’s future. When Reagan won the Cold War, the defense industry no longer needed so many engineers and tech workers. So these engineers and tech workers went to work in software and computer hardware instead.
In Obama's view, government's job is to smother free enterprise. Then, turn a failed concept over to a crony capitalist to exploit with taxpayer dollars.
“...Obama wants to raise taxes and increase government spending to boost the economy and create jobs...”
BullSqueeze!
Benghazi Barry wants/IS using the Cloward/Pive Strategy to collapse America—he—I should say Valerie Jarrett— doesn’t want more jobs or a better economy!!! They want America on her KNEES.
Cloward/Pive=Cloward/Piven-—anger makes me spell incorrectly.
No, they didn’t.
The high-tech industries - Silicone Valley and the Silicone Forest - didn’t want them because they were too old. They wanted literally hundreds of thousands of newly degreed engineers from China and India.
I was laid off from the engineering department of a nuclear plant in early 1993. I remember hundreds of thousands of electrical engineers here, in the USA, who couldn’t get jobs yet lots of visas were requested by Microsoft and other firms.
President Bill Clinton, being the whore for political donations, would do anything for money. He screwed over the Americans looking for work. You bet those firms got their H1 visas!
…and incorrect spelling makes you angry!
It's a horrible, terrible cycle!
Ack! Sorry to hear it. I just knew many people in the early 90s who were studying engineering with the expectation of going into defense, but most of them pivoted into high tech when the defense jobs dried up. Many found lucrative work in high tech. But yes, they all eventually competed with the H1Bs.
Yep. They want "paybacks" for a country that has let them become elevated to positions of prestige and power.
Against whom, for what, I fail to understand, but anyone in that position (POTUS or Chief Adviser) who holds animus toward any significant segment of the population is certifiably nuts.
I still think Obama chose Biden as VP candidate for job insurance.
I would argue that Gates hurt technological advancement. During the earlier years there was a ton of competition in PCs and PC ops. When Gates gained a strong footing he started eating the competition. There are many creative organizations that Gates purchased and then put in a closet so they could not compete against Microsquash.
First I've heard that Gates and Jobs and Woz and their employees were looking for defense work and couldn't find it. LOL!
How many yachts does your average defense worker own?
Defense workers happen because of G, J, and W, not the other way around!
We are getting the first smartphone manufacturing plant in the nation down here because of low regulation, low taxes, no mandatory unions, competitive wage rates...and a desire to build a quality product by the employees.
This in opposition to “make my 8 hours” and “give me more money and benefits regardless of how I do my job” in the old industrialized, highly unionized states.
The work ethic and desire to do somehthing new is still alive, just not in Washington and the Northeast.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.