Thursday, December 22, 2011

A fb response to an article about criticizing Obama.

A response to a facebook friend who wrote this about the article: http://www.addictinginfo.org/2011/12/22/the-strategic-failure-of-the-purist-lefts-persistent-attacks-on-president-obama/


'Amen. 'Purists' of any type don't win elections - or continue to win elections. Don't think for a moment that Obama's actions wouldn't have been different thus far, if we lived in a world where doing every last thing he believes in would allow him to continue in office, doing a better job there than anyone else. We all know that we live in a world where appearing Far Left would jeopardize his re-election... and where would we be then? President Romney?? None of it is worth anything if he can't stay another term.'

I'm no purist, but I do think Obama deserves criticism for his failure to negotiate on tough issues. Like David Brooks and others have noted extensively, he caves before negotiations start.

This is quite different than the example set by Ury and Fisher, two most noted experts on negotiation:

"Any method of negotiation may be fairly judged by three criteria: It should produce a wise agreement if agreement is possible. It should be efficient. And it should improve or at least not harm the relationship between the parties. (A wise agreement can be defined as one that meets the legitimate interests of each side to the extent possible, resolves conflicting interests fairly, is durable, and takes community interests into account." 'Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In' -- Ury, Fisher and Patton

I think that Obama does the latter two things well. I think he is an efficient pragmatist who works to improve relationships between his party and the other. But I don't believe that he is very skilled at interest-based bargaining. And he often resorts to positional bargaining.

When he does, he often takes a position then gives it up without much debate or discussion. He is usually the first to concede, and continues to do so until the essence of the original interest is lost.

Instead, he ought to negotiate from a position of combined interests, like with the payroll tax extension, where both parties wanted the same thing. They really couldn't afford not to find a common ground on which to stand.

The President ought to be better able to discern where that is, and work toward it. For whatever reason, Obama hasn't been able to do so, and I don't totally fault him for that. But I do fault him for giving up the things which the American people supported (like a public non-profit option for health insurance) before the dirty work of negotiation actually began.

And I am no lefty. I'm a left-leaning centrist, recovering hard-right religious conservative. Seriously.

Sunday, December 11, 2011

A response to Milele Coggs:

In reply to the question of how to create jobs:

Corporate personhood and the dominance of lobbyists must be eliminated from the political process. The economy needs regulation, and that's been prevented by powerful forces which represent what caused the economic divide to become the unsustainable one which exists today.

The corporations always want to make bigger profits, maintain current living standards, even when their workers are stretched to their limits to create an artificial productivity which is also unsustainable. We're doing three jobs now just so people who run these businesses can maintain a boon-level profit margin.

So while Exxon Mobil has made the biggest profits in the history of the world (twice in two quarters in the past few years), they've cried hardship and been granted benefits as if they were struggling to create jobs.

We need economists and elected officials to remind businesses that without a vibrant middle class there is no market for their products. There is no economy which will remain viable. Then again, the long-term business plans of corporations do not really consider the long-time health of this economy. They build for the next quarter.

Regulation can change that.

We need to keep the top market for U.S. goods as the local one. Yeah, exports are great, but without our priority on our own we've got less natural accountability for these corporations. They can build the Chinese ports and economy--knowing that they'll have an emerging market for goods which we won't be able to afford over here.

So we need to shepherd these corporations toward three things:

1) Realizing the new profit-margin reality. Accepting the new normal, and hiring more employees to ease the burden on their employees.

2) Building for the long term. Reminding them that this is their primary market and they should invest in the health of our nation. This should lead to ending outsourcing.

3) Identities as businesses, and not as people. They do not deserve human rights. Humans do.