Saturday, December 31, 2011
Sunday, December 4, 2011
DA=W GA+W=X=DA
Let's cite an example of the formula in action...
You hear the GOP claiming to want to do something different than the status quo all the time. For instance, end the Environmental Protection Agency as it is "job killing". Here's the formula in practice.
Democratic Action (DA) was done for a reason, so what is that reason (W for Why?)
GOP Action (GA) is to do something different, in this example, kill the EPA. So how does this new GA solve for W (Why the DA was created in the first place?)
Usually the answer is X, and in most cases there is no answer or thought behind it.
Therefore the only rational solution is to maintain DA, the status quo.
So, the same example in prose now.
Democrats created the EPA for many reasons but one was an agency to make policy to prevent one state from polluting their neighboring states. So DA (creating EPA) was (W) to prevent state pollution of other states (and much more). So what is the proposed GOP Action (GA)? And how does this proposed GA action solve for W (Why the EPA was created in the first place)? Usually the answer is, it does not solve for it. Therefore status quo is the better idea in our meritocracy.
So in the end DA=DA. If you're idea is NOT better, it loses.
Simple.
Saturday, December 3, 2011
The (current) worst GOP lie: 1% are job creators
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-12-01/raise-taxes-on-the-rich-to-reward-job-creators-commentary-by-nick-hanauer.html
Friday, November 4, 2011
Economist Jeffrey Sachs talks to Occupy Wall Street
Economist Jeffrey Sachs spoke to Occupy Wall Street protesters at Zuccotti Park on October 7, 2011. Here's a transcript of his remarks:
First I want to say thank you. You are changing the direction of this country. And this country's direction needs changing. And you're the first to do it in a very long time. You got the right message. We are the 99%. We really are the 99%. And the 1% doesn't get it yet. So keep telling them the truth. They are a little slow, but they'll get it eventually.
I wanted to tell you a little bit about the 1%. I've been studying the 1% for a while. It's quite a story. You know there was a long time in this country when the 1% were under control. They were still well to do but they didn't own everything and they didn't run everything. And this country started to split around 1980.
So here are the basic facts, which I'm sure you know very well. In 1980, the top 1% took home 9% of the household income. Now, the top 1% takes home 23% of the income. The top 1% of wealth holders has more wealth than the bottom 90% of this country. The top 0.01% - that's 12,000 households - take home 6% of the household income. That's more than the poorest 20 million in this country. The last time America had this level of inequality was in 1929. And you know what happened then. It led to disaster. So we have to head off disaster.
How did we get to this miserable situation? It started in the 1970s when globalization began and that was good for many poor countries. It was good if you were rich in the United States. But if you were an average worker, you started to find that your income was squeezed. All of a sudden you were facing competition from halfway around the world. Now those were poor countries halfway around the world, and they started to get wealthier, which was all to the good in my view. But this country left the people who were hurting.
If you had a high school education and you were working in a factory, you could say goodbye to your job. It was going somewhere else. If you wanted to keep your job, they were going to bust your union or cut your benefits or cut your wages. A civilized country would have done something about this. We would have helped people get more skills, more training, more education. We would have helped our factories to be more productive. That is why we have a government after all. It was supposed to help.
In 1981 a very strange thing happened. A man was elected. He came the first day of office and he said "Government is not the solution. It is the problem." Now a man who believes that should not be our President. He should have stayed on TV and left us alone. We need presidents who believe that government is the solution for all of us. But what Ronald Reagan did was he cut the taxes at the top and cut the benefits below and put our country on the path of inequality.
Now here's the sad news. It is not news to you because you figured it out before everybody else. It wasn't just Ronald Reagan. It wasn't just the Republicans. It was both the Republicans and the Democratic Party. They figured if they cut taxes for the rich, the rich would give them campaign contributions, and they could all live happily ever after. They could all live happily ever after. Not us. They are the 1%. We're the 99%.
This has gone on for 30 years now. The corporate lobbies have owned our government - even Barack Obama, who I supported and I voted for and I want to succeed. He's having dinner with rich people all the time, but he's not having dinner with the 99%. If you have to pay $35,800 a plate, the 99% are going to go hungry. Every week, President Obama is having a campaign dinner. $35,800 per plate. Who do you think he's meeting? Who do you think he's listening to? The 1%. We need to elect a government for the 99%.
What are we going to do when we get it? We are going to reestablish government for the people. The people need help and the government is there to help. So with all that income of the 1%, there's some pretty good things to do. We are going to go for at least 1% more of GNP in income tax, 1% of GNP in a wealth tax, 1% of GNP in a corporate tax, 1% of GNP in enforcing our tax laws so that people pay what they owe, so they don't hide it in the Cayman Islands. No offense to the Cayman Islands, but stop hiding our profits there.
Now when we have those 4% of GNP, we are going to add 2 more percent immediately because we are going to get out of Afghanistan and Iraq and we are going to close these military bases and stop wasting the fortune of this country.
Now you have 6% of GDP. We can get our budget in shape. We can invest in our young people. We can invest in our infrastructure. We can invest in our schools. We can invest in sciences to solve problems of disease and hunger. There's nothing that this country can't do. This is still a great country. This is a country of great talent. This is a country of great ingenuity.
Except the 1% are lazy and they've stopped trying and they're not paying their share. It's not a choice anymore. Tell them they're paying whether they like it or not. No more excuses. It's not a favor. If they don't like this country, they have to do something else. They can't be here and take the privileges and not pay for civilization.
I leave it to you ladies and gentlemen. You are doing a magnificent job. This is how history is made. This is how this country is going to turn. Anything I can do, I'm going to be with you to support you. Keep it up. We're going to take back this country and we're going to make it great again.
650,000 Americans Joined Credit Unions Last Month — More Than In All Of 2010 Combined
Article from Think Progress on this powerful movement.
Robt. Reich nails the disconnect between #OWS and government
The biggest question in America these days is how to revive the economy.
The biggest question among activists now occupying Wall Street and dozens of other cities is how to strike back against the nation's almost unprecedented concentration of income, wealth, and political power in the top 1 percent.
The two questions are related. With so much income and wealth concentrated at the top, the vast middle class no longer has the purchasing power to buy what the economy is capable of producing. (People could pretend otherwise as long as they could treat their homes as ATMs, but those days are now gone.) The result is prolonged stagnation and high unemployment as far as the eye can see.
Until we reverse the trend toward inequality, the economy can't be revived.
The GOP is hopelessly lost in a quagmire of economic ideas that are old, proven ineffective (how many more times do we have to cut taxes for the wealthy to see that does not cause job creation?). These ideas are reasonable, but they have been proven to not only fail, but are even counter-productive to building (or rebuilding) a strong middle-class.
Until we can end the nonsense of theories like "Trickle Down Economics" wherein all tax breaks go to the top wage earners and corporations, and back to more sensible economic policies and theories, a more progressive tax code with less (or no) loopholes, we will continue to see rising anger in the disenfranched, unemployed, and highly educated youth of our nation.
How bad does it have to get before GOP leading thinkers notice and change course - becoming more progressive not more conservative? Because changing the course of GOP doctrine and dogma is the only choice - our nations large middle-class (the 99%) will no longer sit idly by and let these misguided lawmakers hammer the middle-class, pamper the elite, and destroy the American dream.
Will it take riots in the streets, and physical violence. Let's hope not, but know this - change must occur within the GOP or the current peaceful protests might get much less peaceful over time. That is something no one wants - and it's not necessary. But change is not optional for the GOP.
Saturday, October 29, 2011
My book, for the cost of a written review (optional)
I have been trying to sell my book on Amazon, and I've done pretty well, but I can't really afford any more marketing. So, given I am a professional marketer at the height of my skills <smirk>, I thought I'd get creative. Download my book for free; just comment on this post and include your email and I'll send you a link. If you like it (or frankly even if you don't) though, you must agree to go to Amazon (http://www.amazon.com/dp/B004S2U0JC) and write an honest review.
OK? Cool.
Enjoy
Chris Hayes is a genius
Love it.
It makes so clear how deeply moronic and dysfunctional the current GOP position on economics and taxes is that I can't stop watching it. Love the Woody Allen bit and the snarky swipe at fictional Ayn Rand Libertarian hero 'John Galt'...which is always sporting. By the way, aren't all Libertarian heroes fictional?
More on Chris' Inequalistan here.
Friday, October 28, 2011
Scathing rebuke of GOP economics from Eugene Robinson
Good read.
Fallon/Williams Slow Jam the Occupy Movement - Oh Yeah
Oh Yeah.
Who knew Brian Williams was so funny.
Colbert nails the GOP stupidity on immigration
When will GOP voters realize it feels good to rail against immigrants, but it's actually pretty pointless. When will they stop allowing GOP lawmakers to BS us about "securing the border first" and realize that a federal migrant worker program is only logical, gets tax revenue from migrant workers and allows farmers to hire the labor they need to pick their crops.
Why are you voting Republican? Beats me. Have you even thought about it?
Thursday, October 27, 2011
Young, Angry, and right
Who will answer the call?
Morning Joe gets it, why can't Boehner-McConnell
What amazes me is that Joe sounds like a Democrat; Reform Wall Street, Get Control of Campaign Finance, Adjust the Tax Code to encourage investment in real business, not just Wall Street "financial instruments" that create nothing but risk for the vast majority.
Right Joe, that's called Glass-Steagall, the Warren Buffet Rule proposed by Obama, and the Constitutional Amendment proposed by Occupy Wall Street to make all elections Public and remove all private money.
Go Joe! You've seen the light!!
Occupy protesters need a national leader
It must be someone young, educated, articulate, knowledgeable of the rules of peaceful protest, charismatic, and fearless.
Who is it? Is it you? Why not you?
The Class War has begun
We simply must regulate these industries, and I believe force banks out of gambling with our money (Glass-Steagall) and back to making money from banking alone. I also believe we must break up these banks and create smaller, less risky (small enough to fail) entities.
These steps alone are not negotiable - and are at the heart of the Occupy Wall Street anger. Time for Obama to tie this movement to his moniker of Hope and Change.
Think Global, Act Local: I for one am moving my money from a large bank to my local credit union right away - in solidarity with the movement.
Wednesday, October 26, 2011
Too big to fail = too risky to exist
"I doubt the president will be condemning the Street's antics, or calling for a resurrection of Glass-Steagall and a breakup of the biggest banks. Democrats are still too dependent on the Street's campaign money.
That's too bad. You don't have to be an occupier of Wall Street to conclude the Street is still out of control. And that's dangerous for all of us."
...which is why the #1 most important demand of Occupy Wall Street is...wait for it...public funding of all elections, the overruling of Citizens United with a Constitutional Amendment, and the removal of private money from all federal elections. Amen brother.Tuesday, October 25, 2011
Ya' can't fix stupid
Gavyn Davies of the Financial Times pegs it at about $6 trillion in lost output, even if the U.S. economy grows at 3.8 percent clip between now and 2016 (which is an awfully sunny forecast):
“GDP will remain far below potential for several more years, and the unemployment rate will remain considerably above the structural unemployment rate. Put simply, there will be a massive further wastage of economic resources. A rough calculation suggests that the cumulative loss of GDP from the Great Recession of 2007-16 will amount to $5,900 billion, of which about $2,200 billion is still to come in the next five years.”
The U.S. Commerce Department will release its report on third-quarter GDP on Thursday.
Friday, October 21, 2011
Cain 9-9-9 and now Perry Flat Tax disasters
Monday, October 17, 2011
The struggle for who we are as a nation
Do we insist on low taxes on the wealthy? After all, as Americans partaking in the great American dream, we too might one day be wealthy and will want our taxes low. Do we buy into the argument that raises anyone's taxes is a bad idea? Do we buy into the argument this it is especially bad to allow the Bush tax cuts to end and let rates return to Clinton-era averages? Do we care that the middle-class is under attack and that large percentages of the middle-class are falling back into poverty. Do we care that the wealthy have taken the lion's share (and then some) of income and done so well this past 20 years, yet we refuse to force taxes higher on this group to ease us back out of recession?
Do we want to pay down the cost of our safety nets by removing social programs that have given a level of security to Americans who don't get wealthy? Or is it more important that most of us can work hard, save as best we can, and retire without the threat of homelessness or poverty, in other words are social safety nets worth the very real costs they require?
Reasonable people can disagree about this and both be right. But there are limits to this view. No safety nets is immoral, selfish, and foolish (for the wealthy). When in the past greed has ruled the writing of our policy, the poor always climb up and force change from the wealthy - restoring a semblance of equity - at least for a time.
I read David Brooks recent column on empathy and find myself wondering where people like Brooks live - what planet, what conscious plane. I fear it is a place where other people don't matter, only they and those like them.
Mr Brooks sees Nazi soldiers weeping when they slaughter innocents, and instead of blaming the authority that commanded them to do it, he blames their own empathy. Something is deeply wrong with this mindset, and Brooks is not alone.
Here's a particular coherent comment on the article.
Mr Brooks--a Republican--has perhaps here articulated a fundamental flaw in the worldview of the present-day American conservative movement. He equates empathy with money. Empathy is compassion. Parents feel empathy for a distressed child, but so do strangers. I do not have to have a physical handicap to feel empathy for someone who does--it comes naturally. This makes me a larger human being--because I can relate to another human being who is not myself. And this is what makes human beings good. Republicans mock compassion as a weakness. This disavows the single greatest basic tenet of Christianity(or Buddhism etc). A homosexual who serves in the US military is booed by Republicans because he is homosexual. This is the way to savagery. This essay by Mr Brooks is both prescient and disturbing. I walk to work to save 80 cents every morning to save money for a Novice Monk named Onsi in Laos. My empathy makes his life better. In return, I get a form of grace. Grace, and a friendship that is beyond money, beyond corporations, beyond politics. Is is plausible to posit that Republicans are verging on becoming evil? Evil means unhuman. Empathy makes us human.
Who are we going to be, as Americans, 10 years from now. Do you care?
The beautiful word "Compromise"
Dana Milbank of the Washington Post posits that the 2012 election will not end the gridlock. I think he's right, but I also think we are starting to see the emergence of a theme for the 2012 election. This theme is embodied in the Occupy Wall Street anger, has similar origins to what began the Tea Party, and can even be glimpsed in some of the views of lawmakers in Congress. People want our elected officials to fight the good fight, but in the end they MUST come to a conclusion that moves us forward. That means compromise.
My own view is that the GOP has made compromise a dirty word - at least they have made compromising with Democrats a "sin" (in their own parlance) and therein lies the problem. The GOP chose to make a full-stop in legislation after the 2010 mid-terms. Can you name a single bill that the House has passed? Almost all of the House bills die because they are symbolic base-stirring BS - bills which allow them to point to the "fight" they are fighting on behalf of extreme ideologies of the GOP base - mostly around abortion limits, and the GOP has taken the filibuster to records in terms of invoking it. This latter effort means that even if the GOP gains the Senate, the GOP has set a precedent that the minority party can block anything and everything with the filibuster. This is not governance, this is an insurgency that sacrifices the country in favor of extreme partisanship and fringe ideology. This from Milbanks' article on this topic:
Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell seems to grasp this in his more candid moments. He has argued that a divided government provides “the best time, and some would argue the only time, to do really hard things, because really hard things done on a partisan basis cannot be accomplished” without creating “a wipeout in the next election.”
That’s certainly true: If Republicans were to win the White House and the Senate and then use that power to rewrite Medicare and Social Security without Democratic support, the backlash would make the Tea Party look genteel.
But just as often, McConnell gets swept up in the wait-’til-next-year logic, as when he said that defeating Obama is “the single most important thing we want to achieve.”
Similar wishes drove Paul Ryan, the House budget committee chairman, to forgo a debt compromise with Democrats in favor of a partisan plan that cuts spending without tax increases. “We need to accentuate” differences, Ryan said, “to give the country a real clear choice” in 2012.
But Americans have already made a clear choice, repeatedly: They want their representatives to compromise. In the new Washington Post-ABC News poll, 64 percent said lawmakers should attack the debt problem with a combination of spending cuts and tax increases. But only 25 percent thought that lawmakers will agree on a plan.
The lack of faith that lawmakers will do the obvious, necessary things goes a long way toward explaining why Congress enjoys an approval rate of 14 percent. In this case, good things do not come to those who wait.
The Tea Party started because people were angry at the Wall Street bailouts. Occupy Wall Street has very similar seminal roots. Americans are polled repeatedly that they want our lawmakers to compromise. Given the GOP intransigence, isn't it time to vote these extremists out of office? I think it is.
Friday, October 14, 2011
Regulations costing billions of jobs
But the larger point is this; regulation is certainly a factor in job creation, but clearly the ONLY real problem is lack of aggregate demand. One can read literally dozens of economists who agree; one can read recommendations from a group of leading CEO's published recently who agree. For the love of Pete, even the staunchly-GOP-favoring National Chamber of Commerce agrees.
The GOP simply MUST stop talking about this minor issue, and focus on driving demand - which is what the White House Jobs Act does.
Shut up and pass it.
Thursday, October 13, 2011
Summary of GOP candidates ideas
So let’s see: The solution to large-scale abuses of the financial system, a breakdown of the private sector, extreme economic inequality and the failure of companies and individuals to invest and create jobs is — well, to give even more money and power to very wealthy people, to disable government and to trust those who got us into the mess to get us out of it.
That’s a brief summary of the news from the Republican Party this week. It’s what Republican candidates said during the Post-Bloomberg debate Tuesday night, and it’s the signal Senate Republicans sent in voting as a bloc against President Obama’s jobs bill. Don’t just do something, stand there.
When will this lack of willingness to move the country forward hurt the GOP?
Thursday, October 6, 2011
Occupy Wallstreet is mainstream
The answer to all of that above appears to be "yes". This is the popular uprising from the disenfranchised, under attack, the real victims of class warfare, the middle-class - taking back their fair share of the American dream and of their piece of the financial pie.
Will it help Democrats and hurt Republicans if the current entrenched positions of GOP leaders in Congress persist? I think it will and I think these insurgent GOP lawmakers, whose only goal seems to gain power, even at the expense of the country, know it will hurt them if they don't moderate their positions and help create jobs and fix this economy now. Not later, now.
Wednesday, October 5, 2011
Debunking the GOP business confidence meme
Mishel coherently points out that [believing] this “regulatory uncertainty” argument requires its proponents to have a particularly peculiar form of amnesia, given that the worldwide economic collapse we are now experiencing is due to a failure to sufficiently regulate financial markets.
http://www.epi.org/publication/regulatory-uncertainty-phony-explanation/
Sunday, October 2, 2011
Book Review: This Land is Their Land
I am in the middle of reading a book that gets my blood boiling. It's called This Land is
Why is that ok with you?
In the first chapter already, sentences like this make me want to quit my job and run for public office. Well, ok perhaps not that extreme just yet. But it does make me want to share this book, its message, and to do my part to re-estabilish our society as one where everyone can live without fear of hunger and homelessness, while maintaining the right of those who can to create great wealth for themselves. That is the balance we want, we need, and we still have if we work to save it.
"It wasn't just a "shift", of course, governed by impersonal geological forces. The rude hand of human intervention could be felt in 2001...in [a series] of deft upward redistribution of wealth, the adminstration cut taxes for the wealthiest Americans while cutting back on services and programs, such as financial aid, for everyone else. We had never had a gang in Washington as noisily committed to "Christian values," and yet they had managed to stand core bibilical teachings on their head."
and further on...
I read on, I recommend you read it too. It's not too late for us to restore balance, to temper the greed, to save the middle-class, and for all of those uber-rich, and even the merely affluent like myself, we will save not only our nation, but ourselves."There was a connection, as most people suspected, between the massive buildup of weath among the few and the anxiety and desperation of the many. The money that fueled the explosion of gluttony at the top had to come from somewhere or, more specifically, from someone. Since no domestic oil deposits had been discovered, no new seams of uranium or gold, and since the war in Iraq enriched only the military contractors and suppliers, it had to have come from other Americans. In fact, the greatest capitalist innovations of the decade were in the realm of squeezing money out of those who had little to spare: taking away workers' pensions and benefits to swell profits, offering easy credit on dubious terms, raising insurance premiums and refusing to insure those who might ever make a claim, [outsourcing millions of jobs with tax credits to boot], downsizing workforces to boost share prices, even falsifying time records to avoid paying overtime."
Buy the book at Amazon:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0805090150?ie=UTF8&tag=washpost-opinions-20&linkCode=xm2&camp=1789&creativeASIN=0805090150
Friday, September 30, 2011
Krugman points to the lack of fact in GOP economic arguments
The good news: After spending a year and a half talking about deficits, deficits, deficits when we should have been talking about jobs, job, jobs we’re finally back to discussing the right issue.
The bad news: Republicans, aided and abetted by many conservative policy intellectuals, are fixated on a view about what’s blocking job creation that fits their prejudices and serves the interests of their wealthy backers, but bears no relationship to reality.
The GOP is quite united in their willingness to take a completely false talking point and repeat it so often that people begin to think it must be true. This lack of integrity in our politics is a HUGE part of the problem of our federal government. It will only end when GOP voters insist their leadership tell the truth.
Read the full article here: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/30/opinion/krugman-phony-fear-factor.html?_r=1&smid=tw-NytimesKrugman&seid=auto
Effective Tax Rates Worldwide
With all the GOP bluster about US taxes at "job-killing" rates, a logical listener would surmise that US tax rates must be very high as compared to other top economies globally. The Economist magazine just posted an analysis of Effective Tax Rates (after deductions) for many top economy countries. Would you guess, given the GOP rhetoric, that the US would be near the top? You'd be wrong, we are near the bottom.
 |
| Effective (after deduction) Tax Rates top global economies, The Economist May 2011 |
Wednesday, September 28, 2011
Bad Lip Reading of Rick Perry
This is what I hear when Perry speaks. Uh...what? As someone born in Texas, leaving when I was 26, I can honestly say, "Texans - sick of them aren't you?"
Big Picture: US Economy, boiling it down
First, it's clear our debt is too high - almost no one disagrees. Second, almost no competent economists think we can or should cut our debt too fast, as it will greatly slow the economy.
So, from that baseline - yes we need to cut debt, but not too fast - what are the big buckets to accomplish that?
Bucket #1: Cut Social Programs, especially Medicare
The GOP is laser-focused on cutting social programs as the sole means of balancing our budgets. It is true that these programs (especially Medicare) are a huge part of our spending, but what are the Pros and Cons of doing this?
Pros: It's a big bucket, so cutting it will indeed save money
Cons: Cutting support for retirees and future retirees (who after all could not get insurance from the free market before Medicare) will cause immense pain for millions of Americans
Impact Score: Let's call this one massively painful depending on the level of cutsBucket #2: Increase Taxes where we can
The Democrats are pushing back (much more firmly of late) on the GOP plan to balance the budget on the backs of the middle-class alone and pushing for a return to the tax rates for the top 10% of wage earners to Clinton-era levels (from a top rate of 35% to 39.6% - a massive increase of 4.6%
Pros: Certainly a small increase, as proposed by the Democrats of 4.6% for the wealthy, essentially returning the rates to Clinton-era percentages (a time of great growth), was not a dis-incentive to investment, it was one of the fastest expansions in GDP in our nations history. Raising this rate would create more than $4Trillion in income for the government that could be used to reduce debt
Cons: Careful attention to increasing taxes without slowing growth must be made. If increased taxes reduces growth, that would be bad of course, however most economists agree this is not likely on what is proposed, despite GOP demagoguery
Impact Score: If we do as Obama proposes, it's clear we can call this one manageable in terms of pain impact and to potential economic downsidesBucket #3: Cut Defense Spending
A reduction of Defense Spending, which has skyrocketed of late is certainly achievable and broadly believed that it would not lower US defense readiness.
Pros: The budget is massive and has grown markedly over the past few years, so the potential is certainly there for positive impact if reduce
Cons: Careful attention to increasing taxes without slowing growth must be made. If increased taxes reduces growth, that would be bad of course, however most economists agree this is not likely on what is proposed, despite GOP demagoguery
Impact Score: If we do as the Defense department wants it won't have an impact, if we are bold and reduce it to reasonable amounts as a percentage of spend from a few key countries, this one is impactful and is unlikely to harm readiness. Time to get out of Afghanistan and Iraq for sure - even GOP lawmakers and candidates agreeConclusion:
Clearly cutting Social Programs is the most painful. Raising Taxes less so, and cutting defense spending also manageable. Clearly a balance between all three would lessen the impact of cuts in any program. If the choice is between raising taxes on a few tens of thousands of VERY well-off individual whose incomes have grown substantially over the past few years, versus cutting the social safety net for millions, it's a pretty easy argument that the cost of raising taxes is far lower than cutting social programs - isn't it.
Clearly the most rational outcome is spreading the pain around.
Why is that so hard for the insurgent GOP lawmakers to agree to? Could it be that by not agreeing things stay bad and that makes the GOP more confident they can eject Obama from office? Exactly. Cynical, but obviously true.
What's the opposite of Country First? GOP 2011
Saturday, September 24, 2011
Michael Keegan: The Imaginary Class War
A huge share of the nation's economic growth over the past 30 years has gone to the top one-hundredth of one percent, who now make an average of $27 million per household. The average income for the bottom 90 percent of us? $31,244
Michael Keegan sums up perfectly what the vast majority of Americans know when the words "Class Warfare" are invoked. They know that the upper class is waging this war on the middle class - and the have been for decades. Worse, clearly the rich are winning and the GOP is continuing to ensure they keep winning. When do we stand up to this outrage?
From Keegan's article:
The Republicans' "class warfare" accusation is both ironic and cynical.
It's ironic because, in the midst of the current economic and jobs crisis, where a huge number of Americans are desperately hurting -- with homes underwater, with unemployment insurance running out and health insurance gone, with kids in over-crowded classrooms in buildings that are decaying -- the rich are getting richer and large corporations are sitting on record profits. Income inequality in the U.S. is at its highest since the precarious days of the late 1920s. One third of Americans who were raised in middle class households can fall out of the middle class as adults. A political elite beholden to the wealthiest CEOs has pursued policies that take money out of the pockets of the neediest to create ever-larger tax breaks for the wealthy. The richest one percent of Americans now earn almost a quarter of the country's income and control 40 percent of its wealth -- a level of inequality not seen since the days before Social Security and Medicare and the social safety net as we know it. If there is "warfare" going on between the "haves" and the "have nots" it's pretty clear who is waging war on whom.
Even more, this claim of "class warfare" that Republicans are touting is something quite dangerous. It's an expression of a deeply cynical vision of our country, in which everyone is out for themselves, the suffering of the least fortunate is of no consequence to the most fortunate, and the American dream is off-limits to those who have lost their footing in a devastating economy.
Fortunately, this is a vision that most people wholeheartedly reject. The task of our elected officials is to stop assuming the worst about their constituents' insensitivity to the plight of their fellow Americans, to stop trying to pit us against each other and to start working toward an economic policy that works for everyone. Struggling Americans don't want to take the American dream away from those who have achieved it and successful Americans don't want to see their fellow citizens slip into permanent poverty.
The "class warfare" Republicans decry is all in the heads -- and the destructive policies -- of a small number of political leaders. While all but a few Republicans in Congress have signed a pledge to never raise taxes on corporations or the wealthy, the majority of Americans are much more pragmatic. According to a recent New York Times/CBS News poll, a whopping 71 percent of Americans -- including 86 percent of moderates and 74 percent of independents -- think that any plan to reduce the deficit should include both spending cuts and tax increases. 56 percent, including large majorities of moderates and independents said that wealthier Americans should pitch in and pay higher taxes to help reduce the deficit. A Gallup poll this week found that 53 percent of Republicans and Republican-leaners support the president's plan to eliminate corporate tax loopholes (a major element of the alleged "class warfare"), and majorities of GOP respondents supported spending that extra revenue on hiring public employees, funding public works projects and cutting payroll taxes on small businesses.
The Republicans' invocation of "class warfare" is a political ploy that the vast majority of Americans want no part of. Warren Buffett is not alone.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)