Lou Dobbs

[barbaro]

Below is an Op-Ed piece by David Brooks on Lou Dobbs. Dobbs has noted many things he considers disturbing in the US. Immigration, outsourcing, deficit spending, and debt.The article below is a bit shallow and Brooks doesn't agree with Dobb's take on the current situation in the U.S. How influential is Dobbs, and do you agree with some of his opinions?

Op-Ed Columnist
Follow the Fundamentals

By David Brooks Published: November 27, 2007


Lou Dobbs is winning. He’s not winning personally. He’s not going to start winning presidential awards or elite respect. But his message is winning. Month by month the ideas that once prevailed on the angry fringe enter the mainstream and turn into conventional wisdom.


Once there was a majority in favor of liberal immigration policies, but apparently that’s not true anymore, at least if you judge by campaign rhetoric. Once there was a bipartisan consensus behind free trade, but that’s not true anymore, either. Even Republicans, by a two-to-one majority, believe free trade is bad for America, according to a Wall Street Journal/NBC poll.


Once upon a time, the fact that hundreds of millions of people around the world are rising out of poverty would have been a source of pride and optimism. But if you listen to the presidential candidates, improvements in the developing world are menacing. Their speeches constitute a symphony of woe about lead-painted toys, manipulated currencies and stolen jobs.
And if Dobbsianism is winning when times are good, you can imagine how attractive it’s going to seem if we enter the serious recession that Larry Summers convincingly and terrifyingly forecasts in yesterday’s Financial Times. If the economy dips as seriously as that, the political climate could shift in ugly ways.


So it’s worth pointing out now more than ever that Dobbsianism is fundamentally wrong. It plays on legitimate anxieties, but it rests at heart on a more existential fear — the fear that America is under assault and is fundamentally fragile. It rests on fears that the America we once knew is bleeding away.


And that’s just not true. In the first place, despite the ups and downs of the business cycle, the United States still possesses the most potent economy on earth. Recently the World Economic Forum and the International Institute for Management Development produced global competitiveness indexes, and once again they both ranked the United States first in the world.

In the World Economic Forum survey the U.S. comes in just ahead of Switzerland, Denmark, Sweden and Germany (China is 34th). The U.S. gets poor marks for macroeconomic stability (the long-term federal debt), for its tax structure and for the low savings rate. But it leads the world in a range of categories: higher education and training, labor market flexibility, the ability to attract global talent, the availability of venture capital, the quality of corporate management and the capacity to innovate. William W. Lewis of McKinsey surveyed global competitive in dozens of business sectors a few years ago, and concluded, “The United States is the productivity leader in virtually every industry.”


Second, America’s fundamental economic strength is rooted in the most stable of assets — its values. The U.S. is still an astonishing assimilation machine. It has successfully absorbed more than 20 million legal immigrants over the past quarter-century, an extraordinary influx of human capital. Americans are remarkably fertile. Birthrates are relatively high, meaning that in 2050, the average American will be under 40, while the average European, Chinese and Japanese will be more than a decade older.


The American economy benefits from low levels of corruption. American culture still transmits some ineffable spirit of adventure. American students can’t compete with, say, Singaporean students on standardized tests, but they are innovative and creative throughout their lives.



The U.S. standard of living first surpassed the rest of the world’s in about 1740, and despite dozens of cycles of declinist foreboding, the country has resolutely refused to decay.


Third, not every economic dislocation has been caused by trade and the Chinese. Between 1991 and 2007, the U.S. trade deficit exploded to $818 billion from $31 billion. Yet as Robert Samuelson has pointed out, during that time the U.S. created 28 million jobs and the unemployment rate dipped to 4.6 percent from 6.8 percent.


That’s because, as Robert Lawrence of Harvard and Martin Baily of McKinsey have calculated, 90 percent of manufacturing job losses are due to domestic forces. As companies become more technologically advanced, they shed workers (the Chinese shed 25 million manufacturing jobs between 1994 and 2004).


Meanwhile, the number of jobs actually lost to outsourcing is small, and recent reports suggest the outsourcing trend is slowing down. They are swamped by the general churn of creative destruction. Every quarter the U.S. loses somewhere around seven million jobs, and creates a bit more than seven million more. That double-edged process is the essence of a dynamic economy.


I’m writing this column from Beijing. I can look out the window and see the explosive growth. But as the Chinese will be the first to tell you, their dazzling prosperity is built on fragile foundations. In the United States, the situation is the reverse. We have obvious problems. But the foundations of American prosperity are strong. The U.S. still has much more to gain than to lose from openness, trade and globalization.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/27/op...hp&oref=slogin

[raycarey]

dobbs is exploiting the economic uncertainty that many middle class americans are feeling with a craftily hidden form of xenophobia.

without the hard work of the undocumented non-nationals, the US economy would be in worse shape than it is now.

[Tchiowa]

dobbs is exploiting the economic uncertainty that many middle class americans are feeling with a craftily hidden form of xenophobia. 

Bullshit , He is one of the only levelheaded TV commentators currently on air.

without the hard work of the undocumented non-nationals, the US economy would be in worse shape than it is now 

More bullshit , those wetbacks do nothing when it comes to paying taxes or the hospital bills they rack up - let alone all the kids they have in the public school system

A great film was the one with Robin Williams playing a character named Dobbs who became US President.

[barbaro]

^ I agree with Dobb's position on illegals. We need them, yes. They should also have protections. But there are now too many. It's about numbers.

More and more companies are hiring illegals, and undercutting companies that follow the rules (in the same town, e.g.)

I honestly don't see the exploitation of the fears of the middle class. I believe (IMO) that he's genuinely concerned about the middle class (and its decline) and I think he believes in what he says.

[raycarey]

He is one of the only levelheaded TV commentators currently on air.

'level-headed' is a subjective term.

bullshit

you didn't address the point i made, but rather brought up a few new ones....along with a highly pejorative and bigoted slur.

what do you think would happen to the US economy if every undocumented non-national were to suddenly disappear from the workforce?

[raycarey]

I believe (IMO) that he's genuinely concerned about the middle class

IMO the only concern lou dobbs has about the middle class is that they keep watching his program.

[barbaro]

I believe (IMO) that he's genuinely concerned about the middle class

IMO the only concern lou dobbs has about the middle class is that they keep watching his program.

Well, he's competing for ratings, no doubt about that. Unfortunately that entertwined with the way the US media works. He has his positions. I don't know if his latest book, "War on the Middle Class" was polemicist-like, but I suspect it was.

[Norton]

what do you think would happen to the US economy if every undocumented non-national were to suddenly disappear from the workforce?

About the same if every illegal Burmese were to leave Thailand but on a grander scale. A drastic reduction in economic output and loss of jobs to competing countries.

[Boon Mee]

Lou Dobbs is a hack and one of only two newsreaders - Anderson Cooper being the other - on CNN with even the slightest modicum of common sense.

But...he's still a hack. Anything's better than Wolf Striesand or that clown, Jack Cafferty.

[Tchiowa]

Lou Dobbs is a hack and one of only two newsreaders - Anderson Cooper being the other - on CNN with even the slightest modicum of common sense.

But...he's still a hack. Anything's better than Wolf Striesand or that clown, Jack Cafferty.

But Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reilly are OK in your book?

Or do you want to duck that one also?

[Boon Mee]

Lou Dobbs is a hack and one of only two newsreaders - Anderson Cooper being the other - on CNN with even the slightest modicum of common sense.

But...he's still a hack. Anything's better than Wolf Striesand or that clown, Jack Cafferty.

But Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reilly are OK in your book?

Or do you want to duck that one also?

Well, let's put it this way. Politics is like Religion - it all depends on your viewpoint, eh?

[Boon Mee]

TIM RUTTEN ON CNN'S YOUTUBE DISASTER: "In fact, this most recent debacle masquerading as a presidential debate raises serious questions about whether CNN is ethically or professionally suitable to play the political role the Democratic and Republican parties recently have conceded it. . . . In other words, CNN intentionally directed the Republicans' debate to advance its own interests."

Couldn't have elucidated it better my self!

Thanks to Instapundit.com

[raycarey]

Couldn't have elucidated it better my self!

i can't imagine anyone here would disagree with that statement. heh

[Tchiowa]

Lou Dobbs is a hack and one of only two newsreaders - Anderson Cooper being the other - on CNN with even the slightest modicum of common sense.

But...he's still a hack. Anything's better than Wolf Striesand or that clown, Jack Cafferty.

But Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reilly are OK in your book?

Or do you want to duck that one also?

Well, let's put it this way. Politics is like Religion - it all depends on your viewpoint, eh?

So you chose to duck the question then.

Typical answer from you ;-)

[Boon Mee]

Couldn't have elucidated it better my self!

i can't imagine anyone here would disagree with that statement. heh

Well, we can't all be Wordsmiths like yourself ray.
BTW - which is worse - CNN or FOX.
Both suck these days...

[Texpat]

I agree. So what is Lou Dobbs, a politician with a platform and an agenda or an objective newsman?

Can't be both.

[barbaro]

I agree. So what is Lou Dobbs, a politician with a platform and an agenda or an objective newsman?

Can't be both.

Neither, as you know.

If Lou Dobbs remained an objective newsman he's be blandly telling you what "happened today," with a peppering of some proponents and opponents viewpoints on the issue.

I'm not saying advocacy journalism is good. I don't think it is.

But in a way, Dobbs is a single and lonely viewpoint in a sea of spin doctors.

And I don't think he's a spin doctor.

[Texpat]

I tend to agree with what Dobbs says about immigration. I saw a Larry King interview with him a few days ago. But I don't like any reporting that isn't objective -- indeed, by my definition, it's not journalism.

[barbaro]

I tend to agree with what Dobbs says about immigration. I saw a Larry King interview with him a few days ago. But I don't like any reporting that isn't objective -- indeed, by my definition, it's not journalism.

No, definitely not journalism.

So called advocacy journalism has become very common in the US.

Not the subtle tilt, but full-on.

And no, Dobbs is not a journalist anymore.

[raycarey]

on his CNN program, does dobbs label himself as a journalist or newsman?

i see him more of "analyst"...in the mold of hannity/o'reilly. they have no credibility as they're simply throwing out red meat to their base.

[Boon Mee]

on his CNN program, does dobbs label himself as a journalist or newsman?

i see him more of "analyst"...in the mold of hannity/o'reilly. they have no credibility as they're simply throwing out red meat to their base.

You haven't answered my question...

[raycarey]

what question?

[raycarey]

BTW - which is worse - CNN or FOX.
Both suck these days...

ahh.....this one?

well booner, you see that key to the left of the 'shift' key....put that after questions, and people might respond.

and even reading it now, it seems rhetorical. but if i had to choose which is worse, definitely fox. cnn is crap, but fox is entertainment for some and a waste of time for most....it's not even close to news in the real sense of the word.

[GooMaiRoo]

How influential is Dobbs, and do you agree with some of his opinions?

Dobbs makes a lot of sense, but he's a bit of a one-trick pony harping on about immigration on every show. Perhaps his job at CNN makes him reluctant to take on corporate America or the neo-con (pro-Israel) foreign-policy hawks. After all, illegal Mexicans are pretty defenseless to ruin Dobbs' career. Another traditional conservative/populist, Pat Buchanan, has a much more profound and comprehensive view about what's wrong with America. Buchanan also isn't afraid to offend the powers-that-be. Dobbs would make a strong presidential candidate if he had the balls to take on powerful interests the way Buchanan does.