Stop Me Before I Vote Again

It's like he really doesn't understand what this would entail:

My hope is that 100 years from now values of liberal cosmopolitan humanism will be more widespread, both here at home and globally.

His cosmopolitanism is a veneer. And I think he honestly doesn't know it. Or, he's worthy of the comparison to Klein, for knowing it and failing to grasp the shreds of his humanity, and weave them into a semblance of human skin.

Liberal cosmopolitan humanism has been delivered across the globe at the wave front of bomb blasts and finance schemes. It's the fucking credo, or anti-credo, of the homogenized elite. That he mistakes it for a world historical modus, well...

My fear is that they won’t. And my view of Ron Paul is that in these terms, he’s very much a conservative.

And what he cannot bear to admit in quite so honest terms, one imagines, is that the desperately conservative and reactionary Paul would refrain from such shenanigans for long enough that the blast radius and wave front of destruction, which allows the local elite an historical moment in which to homogenize themselves, would diminish.

I find it helpful to think of Yglesias as a salesmen. His writing on liberal cosmopolitan humanism functions as a loss leader for the Democratic Party. It's a good one too. The salesmen and customers can safely believe in its ideals without risk of embarrassment.

Corporate compartmentalization allows the sales department the luxury of sincere hand-wringing. They're not the ones in charge of implementation. It sucks that it does indeed entail cluster bombs and whatnot, but... well... implementation isn't specified in their job description. They share the dismay and they urge their customers to contact the senior management task force in charge of receiving contact.

When they do so, they should keep in mind that there are rent walls and other market barriers to the successful introduction of new products and services. There are also some really awful and/or unrealistic customers out there who, through a corollary to Gresham's Law, drive out demand for good policy by their demands for shitty policy.

Damn, Al. That made more sense than most anything else posted to the highway of tubes.

The corporate template is a handy tool. I recall when MJS went to one of the Netroots shindigs. He found lots of very nice, bright, well behaved and often personable people—engaged in very nice, bright, well behaved and often personable support for enormity. As far as I can tell, that's the corporate ideal. Those are the self-starters. They can be disciplined with a bit of hope-filled hackery and finger-wagging scolding.

Does Yglesias think himself the Democrats' conscience? A void seeking to fill a vacuum. Enough to make a cat laugh.

His cogitation reminds me of emails I get several times daily: Tell the President, entreat Congressperson Ratfucker that we, the undersigned, are seriously alarmed and dismayed about the proposed legislation to [fill in the latest degradation of humanity]. It's hard to say who they're more delusional about - the politicos or themselves. Every success, however minuscule or derisory, is hip-hip-hurrahed as if it were the end of a world war. How do they keep it up? Obama was their Viagra; but that shit can't last forever, can it?

Al's right: they're sales reps informing the crowd of the way to the egress. What's that? It was only the exit door? I'm afraid I don't know anything about that; you'll have to speak with Mr. Barnum in Customer Service.

As carny barkers, however, they're singularly lacking in pizzazz. They just don't make shills like they used to. An actual charlatan, knowing that the product is bunk, treats the sale as a spectacle. He amuses himself as well as the crowd. Hacks like Yglesias, so dreadfully in earnest, are merely the tone-deaf balladeers of doggerel. If someone like him can be inspiring to many, then we really do need to get better voters.

I hate salesmen.

antonello,

You're absolutely right about the dreariness of the pitch. It's distressing that it works at all; that it works as well as it obviously does is thoroughly depressing. It's deadly shit. The effort to suspend disbelief must take incredible fortitude.

There's some solace to be found in the "apathy" of half the potential electorate. I wish it were a much higher percentage and more actively contemptuous, but I can settle for calling them the better voters. Given a false choice, they choose to give it a miss. From what I've read and experienced of the vanishing voter phenomenon, compared to the enthusiasts they're on the whole better informed and have a better understanding of the actually existing system.

Drunk Pundit,

The hacks are cold call salesman with a natural talent for tripping over corpses without noticing.

American foreign policy is much less casually violent than it was during the Vietnam War.

Whaaa-aaaaAATT? WTFF?

I need to find out where Matthew Yglesias lives so I can go over to his house and smack the shit out of him. Wotta fuckin' dope.

About Matthew Yglesias
Matthew Yglesias is a Fellow at the Center for American Progress Action Fund. He holds a BA in Philosophy from Harvard University...

Bachelor of Arts in Philosophy... from Harvard?

Figures. One more reason not to feel too badly about being an art-school dropout from a 6000-student no-name state college.

Dumb motherfucker.

Mike,

Legacy Harvard, IIRC.

What's sort of ironic, or maybe not, is that daddy wrote the screenplays for "Les Miserables" and "Death and the Maiden."

I think of this every time I read history and I think it’s common sense for anyone who reads about foreign countries.

I wonder if liberalism woodchuck-style is better understood as a case of arrested development. Children can have an elaborate set of proprieties without really understanding them in any depth.

Some commentary on Yggie Snoredust:

Over time we’ve had more religious tolerance

It is wise to tolerate religions, especially the ones with a foot on your neck. The more we empower the religious, the more they accuse us of oppression. "But we've given you all this power." "My power."

and fewer dynastically motivated wars of conquest.

Our dynastic wars of conquest are no longer monarchical but entrepreneurial. Confronted by all the puissance of an international conglomerate, the piggy eyes of Louis Quatorze would moisten with envy.

Policy matters, of course, as do contests for power.

What oft was thought, but ne'er so well embalmed.

But over the long term political progress is really driven by better values.

Bigger and better contests for power.

People take the idea of women’s equality more seriously than they did 50 years ago, but not seriously enough.

Such a good boy, our Yggie. A consoling hand on a woman's shoulder. "I take the idea of your equality seriously." "But seriously enough?" "I seriously hope so."

We’ve made enormous progress in taking the idea of racial equality seriously.

Here is our apparent idea. Every young black man in America deserves his own jail cell. We will not cease our struggle until this equality is achieved.

American foreign policy is much less casually violent than it was during the Vietnam War.

We strive to be more deliberately and methodically violent. Doubtless here is progress as Yglesias imagines it, in his own reassuringly unreadable way.

Violence in Vietnam was sadly casual. Oh, yes, we bombed the almighty hell out of them - but it was messy. Our violence was like a toy on the rug; we kept tripping over it. We are now grown up. We have put away childish things. Even our bombs are smart, except when they are not. But it's all good. Violence ought to be random and indiscriminate. Keep them all guessing: enemies, allies, whoever. This is not to be confused with casualness, which suggests ineptitude and is disturbing to the Yglesias mindset.

My hope is that 100 years from now values of liberal cosmopolitan humanism will be more widespread, both here at home and globally. My fear is that they won’t.

Ah, he fears! Nostradamus looks into the mystic waters and sees... himself. Oops. Better luck next time.

http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2011/09/what-to-do-about-jobs.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+BradDelongsSemi-dailyJournal+%28Brad+DeLong%27s+Semi-Daily+Journal%29

This whistles along like the kettle of last stop fatuity

Please read

Brad escapes behind the line

"well we were all wrong "!!!!!!!!

------------
Of course as of say 1995 this was almost true
Yes the econ con polis
Of the academy in orthodox concert had long since abandoned
discretionary
Fiscal levers for
Macroeconomic steering

However there were two camps among the oaths that held off

The ones like Stiglitz that simple threw the oath models pro teem out as junk

And the ones like p kroooooooogman
That realized japan in the 90's was demonstrating
The monetary only macro policy was impotent under
certain possible
and right then happening in japan
states of the system

Brad was at the time and well into the grenspan contrived lot bubble
Explaining it all as the acceleration of ground rents
We reached at the end of the commute limit
Of about one hour. That certain regions hit in the early 90's

That and sucking powerful tail pipe has ever been the brad's MO

I share flap jacks regard for the shaman Schumann
touch
LCH requires it's acolytes stick to their cubicles

The predator operator and the Regrettitor reporter
Never share the same bars and love toys

Attachments, pictures and links in this message have been blocked for your safety. Show content
Jobs Report Message: Now Obama Has Zero Choice But To
Go Bold On Jobs

By Isaiah J. Poole
Campaign for America's Future
September 2, 2011

http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-entry/2011093501/jobs-report-message-obama-has-no-choice-go-bold-jobs

Zero. That was the number of net jobs produced by the
economy in August, according to the Bureau of Labor
Statistics.

Zero is the number that looms above President Obama as
he delivers his address Thursday to a joint session of
Congress.

The imperative for the president is now more clear than
ever. He must present a bold, visionary plan to address
today's jobs emergency, or risk delivering to the
nation's unemployed ... zero.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics this morning reported
that the unemployment rate remained at 9.1 percent,
with 14 million out of work and another 8.8 million
working part time when they really want to work full
time. The meager net increase in private-sector jobs,
17,000, was entirely offset by a loss of 17,000 pubic-
sector jobs, which were especially acute at the local
government level.

Today's unemployment report amplifies the pressure
President Obama should feel to present a game-changing
jobs proposal. In a statement released this morning, [
http://tinyurl.com/3blak99 ]The Campaign for America's
Future's Roger Hickey wrote, "The policy of our
government is systematically undermining the recovery.
Public sector layoffs are undermining consumer buying
power, crippling the ability of the private sector to
sell products and services. Clearly, President Obama
must reverse this downward spiral by creating jobs
directly, putting money in consumer's pockets, and
helping small and large companies to find buyers and
invest in growth."

That encouragement has also already been coming from
Obama's progressive allies:

The Campaign for America's Future joined a
coalition of 68 progressive groups in a letter to
President Obama calling for him to move beyond
"half-measures designed to appeal to a narrow
ideological minority" and instead announce a
program that would be "big, bold, and create jobs
directly."

The co-chairs of the Congressional Progressive
Caucus, Reps. Keith Ellison and Raul Grijalva, sent
a letter to the president Thursday calling for
"significant emergency jobs legislation to put
Americans back to work now." Some Progressive
Caucus members have been backing legislation that
would spend $227 billion over two years to create
more than 2.2 million jobs. The letter also called
for the creation of a National Infrastructure
Development Bank to help fund rebuilding projects
to "boost our economy and create badly needed
jobs."

The AFL-CIO asked its members Thursday to sign an
"America Wants To Work Pledge." "America needs good
jobs, and I pledge to do all I can as an activist
to demand that our leaders create them," the pledge
begins. In a video launching the campaign, AFL-CIO
President Richard Trumka says, "It's our job to
demand that our leaders, local and state officials,
and the president, take big, bold action now to
create good jobs and put Americans back to work."

Add to all of this the administration's own economic
projections, released Thursday, that predict
unemployment above 6 percent well into 2016, with
unemployment still near 9 percent in 2012. With
economic growth projected to not average above 2.5
percent for the next several years, the case becomes
stronger for the federal government to step in where
the private sector has not. The alternative is having
the number of long-term unemployed-now around 6,2
million-grow even higher, and the labor force
participation rate, now at 64 percent, continue to
hover at historic lows.

The specifics of what progressives would consider a
"bold" jobs plan are spelled out in "Big Ideas To Get
America Working," a series of posts published on
OurFuture.org in August. Most of the key elements are
also summarized in the AFL-CIO's six-point agenda for
good jobs:

1. Rebuild America's schools, roads, ports, airways
and energy systems.

2. Revive U.S. manufacturing and stop exporting
good jobs overseas.

3. Put people to work in communities doing work
that needs to be done by directly creating millions
of jobs.

4. Help state and local governments avoid more
layoffs and service cuts by increasing federal
Medicaid funding during periods of high
unemployment. Ensure that we have our priorities
straight so we can fund essential federal
government functions-not slash them to the bone.

5. Help fill the massive shortfall of consumer
demand by extending unemployment benefits and
keeping homeowners in their homes.

6. Reform Wall Street so it helps Main Street
create jobs by encouraging lending to small
businesses, enacting a financial speculation tax
and ending Wall Street cheating and fraud.

The progressives pushing President Obama for this kind
of bold jobs agenda have been criticized for ignoring
political reality, citing polls that suggest majorities
of the public will not support extensive spending
programs to create jobs. But while it is true that the
conservative spin machine has had significant success
in misrepresenting the facts about the administration's
stimulus efforts, there is also this poll of 2008 Obama
voters commissioned by MoveOn.org that the president
should consider. In that poll, released Thursday, 81
percent of respondents agreed with the statement that
"Obama should lay out a broad plan to create millions
of jobs and hold Republicans accountable if they block
it." Only 16 percent said the president should "focus
on smaller measures that Republicans have supported" in
order to assure some victories in Congress.

It is rarely a good idea for a public official to
ignore the people who elected them, especially when 81
percent of them are on one side of an issue. And in
this case, that 81 percent is joined by leading
economists, a goodly number of Wall Street analysts,
and even such Republicans as Bruce Bartlett, who has
been openly critical of tea-party obstructionism and
economic hostage-taking.

The imperative is clear: President Obama next week must
break out of the political constraints imposed by
congressional conservatives and inside-the-Beltway
pundits. We have a jobs emergency, and the proposal
that President Obama presents to the nation next week
must be as bold as the seriousness of the crisis

___________________________________________

Portside aims to provide material of interest to people
on the left that will help them to interpret the world
and to change it.

Submit via email: portside@portside.org

Submit via the Web: http://portside.org/submittous3

Frequently asked questions: http://portside.org/faq

Sub/Unsub: http://portside.org/subscribe-and-unsubscribe

Search Portside archives: http://portside.org/archive

Contribute to Portside: https://portside.org/donate

More Sunday morning fun

Not the collective pwog cut out cry

No more half measures

That is like NAMBLA crying
No more school boys

At any rate

By Isaiah J. Poole
Campaign for America's Future
September 2, 2011

http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-entry/2011093501/jobs-report-message-obama-has-no-choice-go-bold-jobs

Zero. That was the number of net jobs produced by the
economy in August, according to the Bureau of Labor
Statistics.

Zero is the number that looms above President Obama as
he delivers his address Thursday to a joint session of
Congress.

The imperative for the president is now more clear than
ever. He must present a bold, visionary plan to address
today's jobs emergency, or risk delivering to the
nation's unemployed ... zero.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics this morning reported
that the unemployment rate remained at 9.1 percent,
with 14 million out of work and another 8.8 million
working part time when they really want to work full
time. The meager net increase in private-sector jobs,
17,000, was entirely offset by a loss of 17,000 pubic-
sector jobs, which were especially acute at the local
government level.

Today's unemployment report amplifies the pressure
President Obama should feel to present a game-changing
jobs proposal. In a statement released this morning, [
http://tinyurl.com/3blak99 ]The Campaign for America's
Future's Roger Hickey wrote, "The policy of our
government is systematically undermining the recovery.
Public sector layoffs are undermining consumer buying
power, crippling the ability of the private sector to
sell products and services. Clearly, President Obama
must reverse this downward spiral by creating jobs
directly, putting money in consumer's pockets, and
helping small and large companies to find buyers and
invest in growth."

That encouragement has also already been coming from
Obama's progressive allies:

The Campaign for America's Future joined a
coalition of 68 progressive groups in a letter to
President Obama calling for him to move beyond
"half-measures designed to appeal to a narrow
ideological minority" and instead announce a
program that would be "big, bold, and create jobs
directly."

The co-chairs of the Congressional Progressive
Caucus, Reps. Keith Ellison and Raul Grijalva, sent
a letter to the president Thursday calling for
"significant emergency jobs legislation to put
Americans back to work now." Some Progressive
Caucus members have been backing legislation that
would spend $227 billion over two years to create
more than 2.2 million jobs. The letter also called
for the creation of a National Infrastructure
Development Bank to help fund rebuilding projects
to "boost our economy and create badly needed
jobs."

The AFL-CIO asked its members Thursday to sign an
"America Wants To Work Pledge." "America needs good
jobs, and I pledge to do all I can as an activist
to demand that our leaders create them," the pledge
begins. In a video launching the campaign, AFL-CIO
President Richard Trumka says, "It's our job to
demand that our leaders, local and state officials,
and the president, take big, bold action now to
create good jobs and put Americans back to work."

Add to all of this the administration's own economic
projections, released Thursday, that predict
unemployment above 6 percent well into 2016, with
unemployment still near 9 percent in 2012. With
economic growth projected to not average above 2.5
percent for the next several years, the case becomes
stronger for the federal government to step in where
the private sector has not. The alternative is having
the number of long-term unemployed-now around 6,2
million-grow even higher, and the labor force
participation rate, now at 64 percent, continue to
hover at historic lows.

The specifics of what progressives would consider a
"bold" jobs plan are spelled out in "Big Ideas To Get
America Working," a series of posts published on
OurFuture.org in August. Most of the key elements are
also summarized in the AFL-CIO's six-point agenda for
good jobs:

1. Rebuild America's schools, roads, ports, airways
and energy systems.

2. Revive U.S. manufacturing and stop exporting
good jobs overseas.

3. Put people to work in communities doing work
that needs to be done by directly creating millions
of jobs.

4. Help state and local governments avoid more
layoffs and service cuts by increasing federal
Medicaid funding during periods of high
unemployment. Ensure that we have our priorities
straight so we can fund essential federal
government functions-not slash them to the bone.

5. Help fill the massive shortfall of consumer
demand by extending unemployment benefits and
keeping homeowners in their homes.

6. Reform Wall Street so it helps Main Street
create jobs by encouraging lending to small
businesses, enacting a financial speculation tax
and ending Wall Street cheating and fraud.

The progressives pushing President Obama for this kind
of bold jobs agenda have been criticized for ignoring
political reality, citing polls that suggest majorities
of the public will not support extensive spending
programs to create jobs. But while it is true that the
conservative spin machine has had significant success
in misrepresenting the facts about the administration's
stimulus efforts, there is also this poll of 2008 Obama
voters commissioned by MoveOn.org that the president
should consider. In that poll, released Thursday, 81
percent of respondents agreed with the statement that
"Obama should lay out a broad plan to create millions
of jobs and hold Republicans accountable if they block
it." Only 16 percent said the president should "focus
on smaller measures that Republicans have supported" in
order to assure some victories in Congress.

It is rarely a good idea for a public official to
ignore the people who elected them, especially when 81
percent of them are on one side of an issue. And in
this case, that 81 percent is joined by leading
economists, a goodly number of Wall Street analysts,
and even such Republicans as Bruce Bartlett, who has
been openly critical of tea-party obstructionism and
economic hostage-taking.

The imperative is clear: President Obama next week must
break out of the political constraints imposed by
congressional conservatives and inside-the-Beltway
pundits. We have a jobs emergency, and the proposal
that President Obama presents to the nation next week
must be as bold as the seriousness of the crisis

___________________________________________

Portside aims to provide material of interest to people
on the left that will help them to interpret the world
and to change it.

Submit via email: portside@portside.org

Submit via the Web: http://portside.org/submittous3

Frequently asked questions: http://portside.org/faq

Sub/Unsub: http://portside.org/subscribe-and-unsubscribe

Search Portside archives: http://portside.org/archive

Contribute to Portside: https://portside.org/donate

More Sunday morning fun

Not the collective pwog cut out cry

No more half measures

That is like NAMBLA crying
No more school boys

At any rate

By Isaiah J. Poole
Campaign for America's Future

" Zero. That was the number of net jobs produced by the
economy in August, according to the Bureau of Labor
Statistics.

Zero is the number that looms above President Obama as
he delivers his address Thursday to a joint session of
Congress.

The imperative for the president is now more clear than
ever. He must present a bold, visionary plan to address
today's jobs emergency, or risk delivering to the
nation's unemployed ... zero.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics this morning reported
that the unemployment rate remained at 9.1 percent,
with 14 million out of work and another 8.8 million
working part time when they really want to work full
time. The meager net increase in private-sector jobs,
17,000, was entirely offset by a loss of 17,000 pubic-
sector jobs, which were especially acute at the local
government level.

Today's unemployment report amplifies the pressure
President Obama should feel to present a game-changing
jobs proposal. In a statement released this morning, [
http://tinyurl.com/3blak99 ]The Campaign for America's

Future's Roger Hickey wrote, "The policy of our
government is systematically undermining the recovery.
Public sector layoffs are undermining consumer buying
power, crippling the ability of the private sector to
sell products and services. Clearly, President Obama
must reverse this downward spiral by creating jobs
directly, putting money in consumer's pockets, and
helping small and large companies to find buyers and
invest in growth."

That encouragement has also already been coming from
Obama's progressive allies:

The Campaign for America's Future joined a
coalition of 68 progressive groups in a letter to
President Obama calling for him to move beyond
"half-measures designed to appeal to a narrow
ideological minority" and instead announce a
program that would be "big, bold, and create jobs
directly."

The co-chairs of the Congressional Progressive
Caucus, Reps. Keith Ellison and Raul Grijalva, sent
a letter to the president Thursday calling for
"significant emergency jobs legislation to put
Americans back to work now." Some Progressive
Caucus members have been backing legislation that
would spend $227 billion over two years to create
more than 2.2 million jobs. The letter also called
for the creation of a National Infrastructure
Development Bank to help fund rebuilding projects
to "boost our economy and create badly needed
jobs."

The AFL-CIO asked its members Thursday to sign an
"America Wants To Work Pledge." "America needs good
jobs, and I pledge to do all I can as an activist
to demand that our leaders create them," the pledge
begins. In a video launching the campaign, AFL-CIO
President Richard Trumka says, "It's our job to
demand that our leaders, local and state officials,
and the president, take big, bold action now to
create good jobs and put Americans back to work."

Add to all of this the administration's own economic
projections, released Thursday, that predict
unemployment above 6 percent well into 2016,
with
unemployment still near 9 percent in 2012. With
economic growth projected to not average above 2.5
percent for the next several years, the case becomes
stronger for the federal government to step in where
the private sector has not. The alternative is having
the number of long-term unemployed-now around 6,2
million-grow even higher, and the labor force
participation rate, now at 64 percent, continue to
hover at historic lows
The specifics of what progressives would considered

"bold" jobs plan are spelled out in "Big Ideas To Get
America Working," a series of posts published on
OurFuture.org in August. Most of the key elements are
also summarized in the AFL-CIO's six-point agenda for
good jobs:

1. Rebuild America's schools, roads, ports, airways
and energy systems.

2. Revive U.S. manufacturing and stop exporting
good jobs overseas.

3. Put people to work in communities doing work
that needs to be done by directly creating millions

of jobs.

4. Help state and local governments avoid more
layoffs and service cuts by increasing federal
Medicaid funding during periods of high
unemployment. Ensure that we have our priorities
straight so we can fund essential federal
government functions-not slash them to the bone.

5. Help fill the massive shortfall of consumer
demand by extending unemployment benefits and
keeping homeowners in their homes.

6. Reform Wall Street so it helps Main Street

create jobs by encouraging lending to small
businesses, enacting a financial speculation tax
and ending Wall Street cheating and fraud.

The progressives pushing President Obama for this kind
of bold jobs agenda have been criticized for ignoring
political reality, citing polls that suggest majorities
of the public will not support extensive spending
programs to create jobs. But while it is true that the
conservative spin machine has had significant success
in misrepresenting the facts about the administration's
stimulus efforts, there is also this poll of 2008 Obama
voters commissioned by MoveOn.org that the president
should consider. In that poll, released Thursday 81
percent of respondents agreed with the statement that
"Obama should lay out a broad plan to create millions
of jobs and hold Republicans accountable if they block
it." Only 16 percent said the president should "focus
on smaller measures that Republicans have supported" in
order to assure some victories in Congress.

It is rarely a good idea for a public official to
ignore the people who elected them, especially when 81
percent of them are on one side of an issue. And in
this case, that 81 percent is joined by leading
economists, a goodly number of Wall Street analysts,
and even such Republicans as Bruce Bartlett, who has
been openly critical of tea-party obstructionism and
economic hostage-taking.

The imperative is clear: President Obama next week must
break out of the political constraints imposed by
congressional conservatives and inside-the-Beltway
pundits. We have a jobs emergency, and the proposal
that President Obama presents to the nation next week
must be as bold as the seriousness of the crisis

___________________________________________

I must admit the recession and UE triggered full uncle take over of Medicaid payments makes excellent sense

And of course stop exporting jobs is perfect humane nationalism
Of course it violates the prime directive of demo party entwined
pwog flacks

"ever more cosmo be our brand of liberal humanism "

I must admit the recession and UE triggered full uncle take over of Medicaid payments makes excellent sense

And of course stop exporting jobs is perfect humane nationalism
Of course it violates the prime directive of demo party entwined
pwog flacks

"ever more cosmo be our brand of liberal humanism "

I pleeeeed I pad for the mosh mash redundant duncery

I've known, and know, many salesmen. I like most of them and usually enjoy their company around the proverbial water cooler.

I don't know a single one who has had much success with this pitch: "This product is awesome. You dumb shits (read: customers) are just too stupid to see it."

I know many salesmen and like most of them. I usually enjoy their company around the proverbial water cooler.

Have never known a salesman who's had much success with this pitch: "My product is awesome. Too bad you dumb shits (read: customers) are too dim to get it. Maybe someday I'll get smarter customers."

(Sorry for the near repetition above. Thought the first one hadn't posted.)

CZ,

Good salesmen know that almost all of their customers will be treated disrespectfully many times during the course of an average work day. For some of the customers, the only time they'll be treated as valued adults is when they're buying something. A little empathy, a little kindness goes a long way towards securing a deal.

In non-competitive markets, however, the salesmen are arrogant shits. The customer can either buy, or do without. The sales force reflects the bosses' attitude and they're hired as part of boss self-flattery. Unleashing a monstrous anus on the world makes the boss feel good.

Al,

I am immediately reminded of a particular salesman in a non-competitive market who referred to his captive customers as "fucking retards."

I understand that that salesman has been promoted to management, Midwest region.

Such is reward of successfully monstrous anuses. They get their own little fiefdom to play with.

We're entering the political pecking party season again. The vigilantes will be auditioning for paying gigs. I suspect that the worst of the Democratic hacks will get kicked upstairs to make room for a few of them.

As a salesman myself since my fall from the grace of ownership

I agree boss hounded fear of
professionalizes the caring gimmick
Oddly humans at least a good sized minority sense real caring or at least
Delight in a novel soul entering their personal sphere
I like the interaction myself
Much as a politician oughta like kissing baby asses

Of course I grew to like firing people too when it was my
Responsibility to trim the hours fat

I then and now figured. I demonstrated more respect for the trimmed
if I was heartless in affect
To sympathize let alone empathize strikes me as a vicious self deceit

A very sentimental hag ridden jury seems to have found that notion of mine
Loathe able

At any rate
Sales particularly commission sales is all about caring
And real caring even if in a cocktail with self interest is rewarded

A certain rough justice in that

As to those who sell to a captive customer base

Not selling it's simply some blend of transacting and servicing
It's not been my experience these outfits are uniformly staffed
By ogres
Examples:
The local social security office here treats me fine
And the various and numerous helping agencies
Treat my partners
Defective brother quite well

There's much more in Humans I've discovered
then found in my philosophy

Al the reward for petty caster oiling ought to be a job in a failing election campaign one filled with the back biting recriminatory atmospherics of a doomed ship of knaves
But alas one or other twiddle party must win so the former ad hoc squadristi in some number are always rewarded
Is that so wrong ?
The road to personal hell may be paved
with well earned rewards
For unsolicited viciousness and the occasionally shrewd
progress halting spirit smother

The contemporary market place has to carry a lot of capitalist baggage
Largely of the corporate kind

Jeffersonian distain for commerce is indeed well deserved even if the gain in trade is a product of one peddlers guile
Ie where it's the rifling of a customer that gets the moral spot light
Not the exploitation of an actual producer who had the misfortune to get born into a capitalist wage based production system

My point ?

And I guess it's a way into the left libertarian stance
Progress on
Markets are about reform not abolition
Despite the rampant venality of commerce

In this market forms are
Unlike for profit corporations

Off set
too rigid a focus on the transcendental evils of "for profit"
May miss the possibly greater systemic long run horrors
of say a non prof hospital system

Troll
Thesis
We need to run our hospital system thru a profit wringer

I over-generalized. Transactional relationships, to borrow a phrase, don't necessarily lends themselves to odious outcomes and some notionally odious outcomes may be exactly what's needed to curtail systemic long run horrors. But I get mulish after acknowledging that. Building the wringers of the future, while making my way through the ones that exist now, is like hiking through epistemic tar sands.

And collaborative relationships?

'epistemic tar sands' - nice, even catchy, phrase.