No, it isn't what you think. PSOL is Psychological Standard of Living.
Bonddad seems to have annoyed many people on DKos with his diary about the inevitability of globalization, and the necessary corollary, a drop in the Psychological Standard of Living, as defined by the goods and services we think we need for our psychological comfort.
More under the quilt (made in China)...
The diary is based on math and economics.
Sure, it's upsetting, and it also happens to be what has been clear to me since the oil shock in 1973, which I (correctly, it seems) interpreted as "when the United States and the high standard of living nations will have to start paying for energy instead of stealing it."
From there the economic logic is inescapable. Standard of living goes down. Sorry. But it's the psychological standard of living we're talking about, without ever acknowledging it, because if we did, we'd have to change the way we see things as status objects, and a lot of people would have to realize that their goals and status were wrong and phony.
So some say we should elect legislators that will redistribute the money in the United States so the middle class has more. BZZZZT!
Dummy buzzer. Do the math. There still won't be enough goods and services produced in the United States at competitive prices to cancel our terminally-dangerous trade deficit, and that can't go on.
Bad solution: Kick the can down the road to someone who agrees with the incorrect economic analysis, which is that standard of living is not based on energy and payment for it.
I disagree with Kucinich on this point. Unions won't solve the problem.
The next presumption, also wrong, is that technology can break the law of physics that energy can neither be created or destroyed, only changed in form.
Well, technology can increase the efficiency of the toys we call our standard of living, but if we refuse to adopt those new efficient means, and give them the name of "high standard of living", then we are stuck back in the inescapable economics of energy.
We have members of Congress calling smaller cars "Purple People Eaters." And the new CAFE standards are trivially better.
Now we also have global warming, which limits standards of living based on energy consumption, like big this and big that, SUV and McMansion and far-away vacations and jetskis, powerboats, motorcycles and all kinds of (energy-intensive) clothing to match the (higher standard of living) sports.
In "Brave New World" the World Controller explains carefully that the games the children and adults are conditioned to play must always require bigger and more expensive equipment to play with, to "keep the economy going" but Huxley didn't have global warming on his radar.
I was very cheered to hear an MSM commentator yesterday attack carbon credits (Terrapass) as indulgences, money paid to engage in sinful behavior. That's a tremendous advance in economic understanding and honesty in the MSM.
Here's what I'm getting at: All citizens of the USA must learn to embrace and add status to the idea of
Smaller and Simpler and more energy efficient is Good.
Big and Flashy and Consumptive is BAD
Think. There have been societies where status was precisely disconnected from goods and services wasted.
We could bring that to pass, planet-wide. Just start making fun of conspicuous consumptions of goods and services and energy. Scorn the parasites.
If you disagree, please back up your statements with more than a tantrum about your favorite toy: big house, big car, unnecessary travel, extra everything.
Try numbers, physics, energy terms (exajoules is good).
Yes, we can produce nuke and solar and wind electricity, heat our water with solar, and live with less of everything, AS LONG AS we get status for it.
As someone said very wisely in a comment a little while ago on DKos, it's easier to get people to change their idea of status than to engage in war about who has status.