“permanent political class”—a “networked layer of high-income people,”

[vnatale]

I am reading this book written by an ultra-Progressive. One cannot be more progressive than this author is.

Capture.JPG (11.79 KiB) Viewed 521 times

But it seems that many here would agree with these two paragraphs that I just read:

"Obama has taken a different approach, one that is consistent with his earlier history, and also consistent with the findings and argument of a remarkable, under-read study by the University of Kentucky political historian Ron Formisano. In Formisano’s highly detailed but under-appreciated account in American Oligarchy: The Permanence of the Political Class (2017), U.S. politics and policy are under the control of a “permanent political class”—a “networked layer of high-income people,” including congressional representatives (half of whom are millionaires), elected officials, campaign funders, lobbyists, consultants, appointed bureaucrats, pollsters, celebrity television journalists, university presidents, and executives at well-funded nonprofit institutions. This “permanent political class,” Formisano finds, is taking the nation “beyond [mere] plutocracy” into “the hegemony of an aristocracy of inherited wealth.”

Formisano documents the top concern of politicians and the politically connected in the age of American oligarchy: watching out “for me and mine.” Over the years, elected officials have become adept at monetizing their public service, turning years of dutiful obedience to the possessing classes while in “public office” into ladders on which they climb into the nation’s oligarchy. “Public service” has become an avenue to private wealth for the permanent political class, their family members, and friends."

[Mark Leavy]

Write a synopsis of the {Vinny's cut and paste} using language that a five year old child would understand.

Obama is trying to make sure that a group of powerful people don't have too much power. They are called the 'permanent political class', and they include people like senators, people who give money for campaigns, people who work for the government, and people on TV. This group is trying to make sure that their friends and families are taken care of, but Obama wants to make sure that doesn't happen.

How credible is the argument presented?

The argument presented is credible because it is based on the findings of an extensive study conducted by a respected political historian. The study, American Oligarchy: The Permanence of the Political Class (2017), provides detailed evidence to support the argument that the “permanent political class” has taken the nation “beyond plutocracy into the hegemony of an aristocracy of inherited wealth.” Additionally, Formisano’s study documents the top concern of politicians and the politically connected in the age of American oligarchy: watching out “for me and mine.” This further supports the argument that elected officials have become adept at monetizing their public service, which could lead to the perpetuation of an oligarchy.

What is the solution to this problem?

The solution to this problem is for elected officials to prioritize the needs of the public over their own personal gain. This could be achieved through increased accountability and transparency, as well as additional measures to limit the influence of money on politics. Additionally, the public must be willing to hold elected officials accountable for their actions and be aware of the potential for oligarchy in the political system. Ultimately, the solution to this problem is for the public to take charge and ensure that their interests are being represented in the political system.

[vnatale]

The book author also shares my dislike of Biden (the book was written about 2 1/2 years ago -- so prior to Biden being elected president):

"Good luck! Obama’s 77 year-old 2020 candidate is the absolute opposite of bold and progressive. Is Joe Biden suffering from dementia, as many observers familiar with aging and cognitive decline contend? Such an assessment is beyond the professional purview of the present writer. Biden has exhibited behaviors consistent with the diagnosis: confusing New Hampshire with Vermont during a campaign stop; not knowing the name of the college where he just spoke; incorrectly thinking that he met with Parkland school shooting victims when he was vice president; invading the centrist MSDNC host Joy Reid’s physical space to claim that she advocated “physical revolution;” serial incidents of inappropriate public touching (and sniffing); confusing his wife with his sister on stage; forgetting thoughts in mid-sentence; saying that the Dayton and El Paso mass shootings took place in “Michigan” and “Houston;” telling a bizarre and meandering story about a supposed adolescent confrontation with a Black tough named “Corn Pop” outside a segregated swimming pool; calling an Iowa voter “fat” and “too old to vote for me;” claiming that he would have “beat up Trump in high school;” calling a young woman voter in New Hampshire “a dog-faced pony soldier.”

Celebrating a big primary victory in Texas this March, Biden briefly turned Super Tuesday into “Super Thursday” before horribly mangling the Declaration of Independence. “We hold these truths to be self-evident,” he started off and then collapsed into “All men and women created by...go...you know...you know the thing!”

For some politicians, and Biden appears to be one of them, age is a relevant voter concern. Obama is quite aware of this, which may be part of why he waited to endorse Biden in the presidential primary until it was clear that none of the former vice president’s considerably younger and more articulate moderate challengers (especially Kamala Harris) would seize the nomination. “When a Democratic donor raised the issue of Mr. Biden’s age late last year,” the New York Times reported this June, “Obama acknowledged those concerns, saying ‘I wasn’t even 50 when I got elected, and that job took every ounce of energy I had.’”"

[boglerdude]

Term limits
Ranked choice voting
Maybe random selection for certain positions, from qualified pools
No stock trading by congress or family

[vnatale]

Term limits
Ranked choice voting
Maybe random selection for certain positions, from qualified pools
No stock trading by congress or family

I'd be 50 / 50 on terms limits. No one has the right to be re-elected but everything is so stacked in favor of the incumbent.

Yes to ranked choice voting.

Random selection -- somewhat intriguing.

Definitely no stock trading. Or, at least all the same restrictions on them as exist for the rest of us.