That is what one blog reader thinks I am. After reading my last blog in which I echoed the thinking of one of the great commentators of our time, David Brooks, the reader wrote:
"I wish I could believe in your optimistic vision of a groundswell movement that will arise and renew and re-energize the best American values and cure the ills of our political system. My experience of the American system is that it swings from one extreme to an another and it manages to balance out the extremist views only over long periods of time and only after much distress and pain.
Ameirican industrialists fought for half a century against the right of workers to organize to fight oppresively low wages and horrible working conditions yet by mid 20th century, after a World War and a Great Depression, when unions finally gained legal rights, labor used their new found power to force their employers into accepting unreasonable settlements that hastened the decline of American industry and ultimately led to the bankruptcy of the American automobile industry.
Now the pendulum has swung in the opposite direction. The weaslth of the nation is once again in the hands of 1% of the population, just as it was in 1929 before the crash. This time however, big business and other private interests have built a powerful fortress to protect their dominance including a network of Lobbyists who spend vast sums of money to support politicians who support their self-seeking interests,"grass roots" organizations financed by ulta-conservative billionaires and a nationwide media empire powerful enough to dwarf the bully pulpit of any sitting president. In the process they have created a political party that has moved so far to the right they are convinced that the business of the United States is business and nothing else matters. Any position that conflicts with this ideology is trash, compromise is out of the question and the opposition party is an enemy to be destroyed if possible and defeated at all costs.
Yet, to my great astonishment, in the wake of the worst economic upheaval since the Great Depression - the American voter has overwhelmingly rejected an administration that has struggled against intractable opposition to right the ship and protect the interests of the middle class and the planet on which we all live. Sorry Ted, I cannot believe that help is on the way and the nation will right itself anytime soon. The American people have spoken and they have said, things will have to get a lot worse before we figure out what to do about it".
Like to know what you think. I remain optimistic and believe that out current president can take us through. He does need our support and that of the feint hearted democrats in Congress. The predictions are that the republicans, afraid of the tea party, will move right and continue to blockade progress on jobs, energy, immigration and climate change. We, friends can not let that happen. Please think how you may get involved to have your opinions count!
HAPPY THANKSGIVING
and
MAY GOD BLESS AMERICA
Wednesday, November 24, 2010
Monday, November 15, 2010
The Choice is Ours to Make
The only thing we have to fear is fear itself. Ever hear that? Well, folks I think it is all about attitude from here on in. We either pull together or we are doomed to third rate former empire status.
David Brooks from the NYTimes says it very well below. Are we to have two years of meaningless congressional investigations? Two years of "just say no" so that the president has no chance to move an agenda or be reelected? Two years of failing to enact both an immigration policy or energy policy? Is this what we mean when we say less government, less regulation, less taxes?
Here is a thought. What if climate change is not man caused? Does that mean that we should let the oceans rise 3 feet in the next 15 years? Wouldn't that have devastating effects on the coast lines and people along them on every continent in the world? Say goodbye to New York City, Venice and the Netherlands to name a few.
Here is David Brooks in yesterday's NYTimes:
"So we continue on the headlong path toward a national disaster. And along the way our dysfunctional political system will leave all sorts of other problems unaddressed: immigration, energy policy and on and on.
Yet, I’m optimistic right now. I’m optimistic because while our political system is a mess, the economic and social values of the country remain sound. My optimism is also based on the conviction that serious, vibrant societies don’t sit by and do nothing as their governments drive off a cliff.
Over the past few years, we have seen millions of people mobilize — some behind President Obama and others around the Tea Parties. The country is restive and looking for alternatives. And before the next round of voting begins, I suspect we will see another mass movement: a movement of people who don’t feel represented by either of the partisan orthodoxies; a movement of people who want to fundamentally change the norms, institutions and rigidities that cause our gridlock and threaten our country.
You can’t organize a movement like this around pain — around tax increases and spending cuts. But you can organize one around a broad revitalization agenda, and, above all, love of country.
It will take a revived patriotism to motivate Americans to do what needs to be done. It will take a revived patriotism to lift people out of their partisan cliques. How can you love your country if you hate the other half of it?
It will take a revived patriotism to get people to look beyond their short-term financial interest to see the long-term national threat. Do you really love your tax deduction more than America’s future greatness? Are you really unwilling to sacrifice your Social Security cost-of-living adjustment at a time when soldiers and Marines are sacrificing their lives for their country in Afghanistan?
Like the civil rights movement, this movement will ask Americans to live up to their best selves. But it will do other things besides.
It will have to restore the social norms that prevailed through much of American history: when narcissism and hyperpartisanship was mitigated by loyalties larger than tribe and self; when competition between the parties was limited and constructive, not total and fratricidal.
This movement will have to build institutions to support the leaders who make the hard bargains. As in the civil rights era, politicians won’t make big changes unless they are impelled and protected by a social upsurge.
Most important, this movement will have to develop a governing philosophy and a policy agenda. Right now, orthodox liberals and conservatives have their idea networks, and everybody else is intellectual roadkill. This coming movement will have to revive the American System: a governing philosophy that believes in targeted federal efforts to arouse growth, social mobility and responsibility.
Like the chairmen’s report, this movement could demand that Congress wipe out tax loopholes and begin anew. It could protect federal aid to the poor while reducing federal subsidies to the upper-middle class.
The coming movement may be a third party or it may support serious people in the existing two. Its goal will be unapologetic: preserving American pre-eminence. It will preserve America’s standing in the world on the grounds that this supremacy is a gift to our children and a blessing for the earth.
David Brooks from the NYTimes says it very well below. Are we to have two years of meaningless congressional investigations? Two years of "just say no" so that the president has no chance to move an agenda or be reelected? Two years of failing to enact both an immigration policy or energy policy? Is this what we mean when we say less government, less regulation, less taxes?
Here is a thought. What if climate change is not man caused? Does that mean that we should let the oceans rise 3 feet in the next 15 years? Wouldn't that have devastating effects on the coast lines and people along them on every continent in the world? Say goodbye to New York City, Venice and the Netherlands to name a few.
Here is David Brooks in yesterday's NYTimes:
"So we continue on the headlong path toward a national disaster. And along the way our dysfunctional political system will leave all sorts of other problems unaddressed: immigration, energy policy and on and on.
Yet, I’m optimistic right now. I’m optimistic because while our political system is a mess, the economic and social values of the country remain sound. My optimism is also based on the conviction that serious, vibrant societies don’t sit by and do nothing as their governments drive off a cliff.
Over the past few years, we have seen millions of people mobilize — some behind President Obama and others around the Tea Parties. The country is restive and looking for alternatives. And before the next round of voting begins, I suspect we will see another mass movement: a movement of people who don’t feel represented by either of the partisan orthodoxies; a movement of people who want to fundamentally change the norms, institutions and rigidities that cause our gridlock and threaten our country.
You can’t organize a movement like this around pain — around tax increases and spending cuts. But you can organize one around a broad revitalization agenda, and, above all, love of country.
It will take a revived patriotism to motivate Americans to do what needs to be done. It will take a revived patriotism to lift people out of their partisan cliques. How can you love your country if you hate the other half of it?
It will take a revived patriotism to get people to look beyond their short-term financial interest to see the long-term national threat. Do you really love your tax deduction more than America’s future greatness? Are you really unwilling to sacrifice your Social Security cost-of-living adjustment at a time when soldiers and Marines are sacrificing their lives for their country in Afghanistan?
Like the civil rights movement, this movement will ask Americans to live up to their best selves. But it will do other things besides.
It will have to restore the social norms that prevailed through much of American history: when narcissism and hyperpartisanship was mitigated by loyalties larger than tribe and self; when competition between the parties was limited and constructive, not total and fratricidal.
This movement will have to build institutions to support the leaders who make the hard bargains. As in the civil rights era, politicians won’t make big changes unless they are impelled and protected by a social upsurge.
Most important, this movement will have to develop a governing philosophy and a policy agenda. Right now, orthodox liberals and conservatives have their idea networks, and everybody else is intellectual roadkill. This coming movement will have to revive the American System: a governing philosophy that believes in targeted federal efforts to arouse growth, social mobility and responsibility.
Like the chairmen’s report, this movement could demand that Congress wipe out tax loopholes and begin anew. It could protect federal aid to the poor while reducing federal subsidies to the upper-middle class.
The coming movement may be a third party or it may support serious people in the existing two. Its goal will be unapologetic: preserving American pre-eminence. It will preserve America’s standing in the world on the grounds that this supremacy is a gift to our children and a blessing for the earth.
Saturday, November 6, 2010
Food for Thought
The election is over and the people have had their say. It is said that for the democrats, the election was theirs to lose and they did. The one thing the democrats really can not stand, it seems, is to have the opportunity to achieve their agenda. Our president, as I and others I have published here have pointed out, failed to either recognize the depth of this recession or lacked the courage to do what needed to be done to stimulate the economy.
He seems to be a pragmatist rather than a balls out leader. I am hoping he finds his cojones now that he has nothing more than a second term to lose.
Our president can also not call the wars in Iraq or Afghanistan Bush's wars any longer; nor can he explain why we are in Afghanistan at all at the cost of $200 mm dollars a day. I am a supporter of this president; but I have been saying for some time that he missed the severity of the recession and should already be out of Afghanistan.
It is also clear that while he had both houses he was abandoned by the independents and the so-called blue dog democrats. For example, good old Ben Nelson from Montana rode his horse in, had his mask on, his guns out and held up the president till he got what he wanted. Great support Mr. Senator! Along the way he made himself and the president appear as though they are wheelers and dealers willing to compromise beyond propriety and good sense.
There were and are three issues: Jobs, Jobs, Jobs!
The president, using the advice of the trio who brought us the recession, Summers, Geithner and Paulson, under estimated the recession and simply did not create a large enough stimulus package. And the one he did create never reached the ordinary working person. Stimulating the economy really amounts to spending money until business, which is sitting on $2.5 trillion in retained earnings, invests in its companies again. Thereby creating jobs, thereby putting money in peoples' pockets, who then spend it and voila, the economy is stimulated.
Now we shall see the likes of Rove, Cheney, the American Enterprise Institute, McConnell, Palin, Bachman, Boehner and Paul run the country. Here is their mantra: reduce the size of government( agencies that regulate- hmmmm been there done that haven't we!), cut all discretionary spending across the board, keep the Bush tax cuts intact, and repeal the health care reform law.
Couple of hints on what this means. Cut discretionary spending means cutting everything but Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security and Defense( 70% of the budget). This means cutting education, monies allocated for research and development grants, monies for infrastructure projects. Anybody seen the shape New York City's East river bridges are in lately? And, cutting monies dedicated to alternative fuels. Oh well, we don't need them anyway since climate change is a political ploy invented by liberals. Every one agrees they can cut earmarks which frankly amounts to a rounding error considering the size of the U.S. budget.
Here is the light at the end of the tunnel: the republicans put up Palin as the presidential nominee in two years. Need I say more? Meantime we go to hell in a hand basket and the American people see that. Watch this next one. We are about to go through redistricting which means with a republican house the democrats will be screwed until at least the next census.
Keep hope alive, please, and push back every where you can. Demand that the platitudes the Tea party and Republicans have been expounding be fleshed out with specifics on what they will do to end the recession and reduce expenses.
A little scary when the republican leadership says their agenda is to be sure President Obama is a one term president. Therefore, they will offer nothing constructive hoping he fails. Then when we have another republican in the white house, we can go back to the care and feeding of the wealthy and perhaps eight more years of Rove, Cheney, a Bush-like president so we can run up eight more years of deficits and find other countries to invade and spread democracy.
Gary Tomei offers a thought:
There are differences between us and every other country, and I'm not prepared to advocate any other country's system, but this does provide food for thought. We should not assume that we can not learn anything from any source that does not originate from within our borders.
Capitalism Uber Alles: How the American Working Class Got Brainwashed
. . . Our country has long been admired for its extraordinary social mobility, but as Arianna Huffington points out in Third World America, Canada, Germany, Denmark, Norway, Finland, Sweden, and France now have greater social mobility -- university education is free, or at minimal cost in Western Europe. Compared to other advanced industrialized countries which all provide universal health care, we are at the bottom in life expectancy and infant mortality. Americans have three months unpaid parental leave -- Swedes have 13 months, paid. Unlike Western Europeans, we have no government legislated paid vacations. In Germany, the world's largest exporter after China, workers get 6 weeks a year off. Americans average 13 days.
American conservatives delight in predicting the imminent demise of socialistic Western European benefits. But these benefits are part of the social contract within which all major European political parties, including conservatives, operate. While large national debts are leading to some cuts in benefits, these cuts do not represent reneging on that contract, just as cuts to education in the U.S. do not represent reneging on government funding for education -- which is part of our social contract.
A look at the divergence in political thinking between Western Europeans and Americans provides much of the answer to why we lag so far behind. . . .
☞ Think about it: We are more than triple their population – and we have all those amazing agricultural exports – yet Germany, with its 6-week vacations, universal health care, and strong labor unions, outcompetes us in the world market. How can that be?
We’re number one! But in obesity. China now has the world’s fastest supercomputer.
Can the solution really be to borrow $700 billion to extend tax cuts on income above $250,000? Get rid of the minimum wage and social safety net, cut back on education, deregulate polluters, and increase military spending?
Food for thought.
=
He seems to be a pragmatist rather than a balls out leader. I am hoping he finds his cojones now that he has nothing more than a second term to lose.
Our president can also not call the wars in Iraq or Afghanistan Bush's wars any longer; nor can he explain why we are in Afghanistan at all at the cost of $200 mm dollars a day. I am a supporter of this president; but I have been saying for some time that he missed the severity of the recession and should already be out of Afghanistan.
It is also clear that while he had both houses he was abandoned by the independents and the so-called blue dog democrats. For example, good old Ben Nelson from Montana rode his horse in, had his mask on, his guns out and held up the president till he got what he wanted. Great support Mr. Senator! Along the way he made himself and the president appear as though they are wheelers and dealers willing to compromise beyond propriety and good sense.
There were and are three issues: Jobs, Jobs, Jobs!
The president, using the advice of the trio who brought us the recession, Summers, Geithner and Paulson, under estimated the recession and simply did not create a large enough stimulus package. And the one he did create never reached the ordinary working person. Stimulating the economy really amounts to spending money until business, which is sitting on $2.5 trillion in retained earnings, invests in its companies again. Thereby creating jobs, thereby putting money in peoples' pockets, who then spend it and voila, the economy is stimulated.
Now we shall see the likes of Rove, Cheney, the American Enterprise Institute, McConnell, Palin, Bachman, Boehner and Paul run the country. Here is their mantra: reduce the size of government( agencies that regulate- hmmmm been there done that haven't we!), cut all discretionary spending across the board, keep the Bush tax cuts intact, and repeal the health care reform law.
Couple of hints on what this means. Cut discretionary spending means cutting everything but Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security and Defense( 70% of the budget). This means cutting education, monies allocated for research and development grants, monies for infrastructure projects. Anybody seen the shape New York City's East river bridges are in lately? And, cutting monies dedicated to alternative fuels. Oh well, we don't need them anyway since climate change is a political ploy invented by liberals. Every one agrees they can cut earmarks which frankly amounts to a rounding error considering the size of the U.S. budget.
Here is the light at the end of the tunnel: the republicans put up Palin as the presidential nominee in two years. Need I say more? Meantime we go to hell in a hand basket and the American people see that. Watch this next one. We are about to go through redistricting which means with a republican house the democrats will be screwed until at least the next census.
Keep hope alive, please, and push back every where you can. Demand that the platitudes the Tea party and Republicans have been expounding be fleshed out with specifics on what they will do to end the recession and reduce expenses.
A little scary when the republican leadership says their agenda is to be sure President Obama is a one term president. Therefore, they will offer nothing constructive hoping he fails. Then when we have another republican in the white house, we can go back to the care and feeding of the wealthy and perhaps eight more years of Rove, Cheney, a Bush-like president so we can run up eight more years of deficits and find other countries to invade and spread democracy.
Gary Tomei offers a thought:
There are differences between us and every other country, and I'm not prepared to advocate any other country's system, but this does provide food for thought. We should not assume that we can not learn anything from any source that does not originate from within our borders.
Capitalism Uber Alles: How the American Working Class Got Brainwashed
. . . Our country has long been admired for its extraordinary social mobility, but as Arianna Huffington points out in Third World America, Canada, Germany, Denmark, Norway, Finland, Sweden, and France now have greater social mobility -- university education is free, or at minimal cost in Western Europe. Compared to other advanced industrialized countries which all provide universal health care, we are at the bottom in life expectancy and infant mortality. Americans have three months unpaid parental leave -- Swedes have 13 months, paid. Unlike Western Europeans, we have no government legislated paid vacations. In Germany, the world's largest exporter after China, workers get 6 weeks a year off. Americans average 13 days.
American conservatives delight in predicting the imminent demise of socialistic Western European benefits. But these benefits are part of the social contract within which all major European political parties, including conservatives, operate. While large national debts are leading to some cuts in benefits, these cuts do not represent reneging on that contract, just as cuts to education in the U.S. do not represent reneging on government funding for education -- which is part of our social contract.
A look at the divergence in political thinking between Western Europeans and Americans provides much of the answer to why we lag so far behind. . . .
☞ Think about it: We are more than triple their population – and we have all those amazing agricultural exports – yet Germany, with its 6-week vacations, universal health care, and strong labor unions, outcompetes us in the world market. How can that be?
We’re number one! But in obesity. China now has the world’s fastest supercomputer.
Can the solution really be to borrow $700 billion to extend tax cuts on income above $250,000? Get rid of the minimum wage and social safety net, cut back on education, deregulate polluters, and increase military spending?
Food for thought.
=
Sunday, October 24, 2010
In Case you Missed This,,,,,,
Gail Collins writes a column for the NY Times. If you missed this last week it is worth reading. If the stakes were not so high the hypocrisy she points out would be amusing. I reprint it for you below.
October 20, 2010
The Fury Failure
By GAIL COLLINS
Rage is not working out.
In Delaware, the Republican voters were so angry that they rejected a popular congressman and gave their Senate nomination to an apparently unemployed 41-year-old woman whose major life success had been an ongoing performance as Wacko Conservative Girl on late-night talk shows. In Alaska, they were so mad that they tossed out their incumbent senator for Joe Miller, a lawyer who believes unemployment compensation is unconstitutional, except when his wife is receiving it.
So now in Delaware the unangry Democrat candidate is way ahead. In Alaska, Miller keeps dropping in the polls, which made him so mad that he had his private security guards take an inquiring reporter into custody.
That did not go over very well even in Alaska, an extremely angry state that hateshateshates all forms of government, despite the fact that 40 percent of its economy comes from government aid, and the state’s oil-revenue-sharing program gives families thousands of dollars in payments every year. “Unemployment has never been lower; there is no housing crisis; banks are solvent. We just got Permanent Fund Checks — and, boy, are we pissed off!” said Michael Carey, an Anchorage Daily News columnist.
Really, people, rage never gets you anything but overturned garbage cans and broken windows. If you want to do rage, go to France.
We are talking here about undifferentiated anger, which creates nothing but a feeling of moral superiority on the part of the irate. It’s natural to get furious at specific things: a tax increase or an unfaithful spouse or a blown tire. Or, in the case of the Republican nominee for the U.S. Senate in Kentucky, Rand Paul, a debate opponent who asks: “When is it ever appropriate to tie up a woman and have her kneel before a false idol that you refer to as Aqua Buddha?”
This involved a college prank that Paul told reporters he doesn’t remember. You can see why he was angry, although it does sound hard to forget.
It’s the difference between Joe Manchin, the Democratic candidate for the U.S. Senate in West Virginia, who has ads showing him metaphorically shooting a bullet into the heart of the cap-and-trade bill, and the unsuccessful Republican candidate for Congress in Arizona, who had herself filmed spraying machine-gun fire all over the place while an announcer said: “Pamela Gorman — conservative Christian and a pretty fair shot.” Even if you don’t agree with Manchin’s position, you have to admit that Gorman would probably be more difficult to work with.
In New York, Republicans were so full of free-floating rage that they nominated Carl Paladino, a hotheaded developer from Buffalo, for governor. For a while this summer, upstate New York was littered with “I’m Mad As Hell, Too, Carl!” lawn signs.
Paladino quickly developed a gender gap the size of the Grand Canyon. A recent Siena College poll showed that 71 percent of female voters preferred his opponent, Andrew Cuomo, while 21 percent supported him, demonstrating yet again that women will not vote for a guy who yells.
The Republican nominee got into fights, promised to “take out” one reporter and insulted gays. He trotted out his poor wife, who gave interviews recounting how she had forgiven Carl for fathering a 10-year-old daughter after he broke the news while she was getting ready for their son’s funeral.
Cuomo, meanwhile, has not only refrained from yelling, he’s barely had to leave his office.
On the rage-o-meter, this week’s gubernatorial debate in New York was not quite as stirring as Kentucky’s, possibly because it involved seven people, some in alarming get-ups, sitting on uncomfortable chairs in a line. Actually, it looked less like a debate than a tryout for some particularly embarrassing reality show.
Several third-party candidates, including a former Black Panther in a Nehru jacket, were more experienced in the politics of unproductive rage than Paladino. In a late-breaking attempt to change the tone, Paladino announced that he was not actually angry but simply “passionate.” Unfortunately, the world will remember his performance only for the part in which he had to run off to go to the bathroom before his concluding remarks.
The person who got the most postdebate attention was Jimmy McMillan of the Rent Is Too Damn High Party. McMillan wore black gloves and had a moustache that wound around his head like a ribbon, and a goatee that looked like two little fuzzy gerbils hanging from his chin. He was very, very, very angry. Particularly about the rents, which he pointed out were too damn high.
Afterward, Sarah Maslin Nir of The Times tracked him down in Brooklyn and discovered that McMillan’s own personal rent is, he said, zero. His landlords, he added, are “like family. They don’t want me to pay any money at all. I am basically living rent free.”
Which doesn’t mean he can’t be ticked off about it.
Remember to vote November 2 so we can "keep" our country!
October 20, 2010
The Fury Failure
By GAIL COLLINS
Rage is not working out.
In Delaware, the Republican voters were so angry that they rejected a popular congressman and gave their Senate nomination to an apparently unemployed 41-year-old woman whose major life success had been an ongoing performance as Wacko Conservative Girl on late-night talk shows. In Alaska, they were so mad that they tossed out their incumbent senator for Joe Miller, a lawyer who believes unemployment compensation is unconstitutional, except when his wife is receiving it.
So now in Delaware the unangry Democrat candidate is way ahead. In Alaska, Miller keeps dropping in the polls, which made him so mad that he had his private security guards take an inquiring reporter into custody.
That did not go over very well even in Alaska, an extremely angry state that hateshateshates all forms of government, despite the fact that 40 percent of its economy comes from government aid, and the state’s oil-revenue-sharing program gives families thousands of dollars in payments every year. “Unemployment has never been lower; there is no housing crisis; banks are solvent. We just got Permanent Fund Checks — and, boy, are we pissed off!” said Michael Carey, an Anchorage Daily News columnist.
Really, people, rage never gets you anything but overturned garbage cans and broken windows. If you want to do rage, go to France.
We are talking here about undifferentiated anger, which creates nothing but a feeling of moral superiority on the part of the irate. It’s natural to get furious at specific things: a tax increase or an unfaithful spouse or a blown tire. Or, in the case of the Republican nominee for the U.S. Senate in Kentucky, Rand Paul, a debate opponent who asks: “When is it ever appropriate to tie up a woman and have her kneel before a false idol that you refer to as Aqua Buddha?”
This involved a college prank that Paul told reporters he doesn’t remember. You can see why he was angry, although it does sound hard to forget.
It’s the difference between Joe Manchin, the Democratic candidate for the U.S. Senate in West Virginia, who has ads showing him metaphorically shooting a bullet into the heart of the cap-and-trade bill, and the unsuccessful Republican candidate for Congress in Arizona, who had herself filmed spraying machine-gun fire all over the place while an announcer said: “Pamela Gorman — conservative Christian and a pretty fair shot.” Even if you don’t agree with Manchin’s position, you have to admit that Gorman would probably be more difficult to work with.
In New York, Republicans were so full of free-floating rage that they nominated Carl Paladino, a hotheaded developer from Buffalo, for governor. For a while this summer, upstate New York was littered with “I’m Mad As Hell, Too, Carl!” lawn signs.
Paladino quickly developed a gender gap the size of the Grand Canyon. A recent Siena College poll showed that 71 percent of female voters preferred his opponent, Andrew Cuomo, while 21 percent supported him, demonstrating yet again that women will not vote for a guy who yells.
The Republican nominee got into fights, promised to “take out” one reporter and insulted gays. He trotted out his poor wife, who gave interviews recounting how she had forgiven Carl for fathering a 10-year-old daughter after he broke the news while she was getting ready for their son’s funeral.
Cuomo, meanwhile, has not only refrained from yelling, he’s barely had to leave his office.
On the rage-o-meter, this week’s gubernatorial debate in New York was not quite as stirring as Kentucky’s, possibly because it involved seven people, some in alarming get-ups, sitting on uncomfortable chairs in a line. Actually, it looked less like a debate than a tryout for some particularly embarrassing reality show.
Several third-party candidates, including a former Black Panther in a Nehru jacket, were more experienced in the politics of unproductive rage than Paladino. In a late-breaking attempt to change the tone, Paladino announced that he was not actually angry but simply “passionate.” Unfortunately, the world will remember his performance only for the part in which he had to run off to go to the bathroom before his concluding remarks.
The person who got the most postdebate attention was Jimmy McMillan of the Rent Is Too Damn High Party. McMillan wore black gloves and had a moustache that wound around his head like a ribbon, and a goatee that looked like two little fuzzy gerbils hanging from his chin. He was very, very, very angry. Particularly about the rents, which he pointed out were too damn high.
Afterward, Sarah Maslin Nir of The Times tracked him down in Brooklyn and discovered that McMillan’s own personal rent is, he said, zero. His landlords, he added, are “like family. They don’t want me to pay any money at all. I am basically living rent free.”
Which doesn’t mean he can’t be ticked off about it.
Remember to vote November 2 so we can "keep" our country!
Tuesday, October 5, 2010
Suggested Fixes for the Economy
As promised the following are the suggested fixes for the economy taken from the best minds* who are thinking, writing and speaking on the subject. At issue is whether Joseph Stiglitz( 10% unemployment may be the new normal) is correct and if so can we alter that outcome.
We need to learn from our major competitors to combine the forces of private enterprise with long-term government strategies and assistance to produce growth and prosperity.
America needs to change its perspective and theory about how our economy(or any economy works). All the models to date fail to account for one important element: Trust. People do not only behave or make economic decisions based upon macro or micro accepted Keynesian or Adam Smith theories. People also make decisions based upon their "gut instincts" for good or bad!
The government must stimulate the economy with enough money to kick start a growth cycle. An analysis of both the TARP and The Stimulus Package(TSP) reveals they were both on target, necessary and if anything not large enough. We must use the power of the Federal Reserve Bank and Congress to change the present course.
TARP which had $700 billion to be loaned actually spent $540 billions on 829 applicants. To date $194 billions have been paid back.*
TSP is working and when combined with the extension of unemployment benefits, the Small Business Stimulus Bill just enacted, letting tax cuts expire for those earning more than $250,000 a year will continue to keep growth from going negative or staying flat.
Wall Street and the Banks have not been reigned in and continue to behave badly(foreclosure scandal now hitting) They have proven that they can not police themselves. The government must use all of its powers to monitor and regulate their activities.
Is flat or going negative good enough?
Growth requires a different strategy. Business must come on line and invest the trillions of dollars held on their balance sheets. It is not a chicken and egg strategy, it is a cause and effect tactic. If business provides long term jobs, people will earn and put the money back into the economy.
Here is one that will send many of you into orbit: deficit spending is not going to hurt us long term. Getting our industries back to work, having them actually produce something and then selling the output world-wide will keep us from sliding into a third rate nation status behind China,India and even Germany who propers at the expense of its European neighbors.
President Obama has set the tone and direction. He is poised to spend us, yes I said spend us, to a kick-started economy. The existing political structure is unwilling to support such a plan. Demagogues from all segments with opinions based upon platitudes rule the day. Misinformation and an uninformed( by choice)electorate all have a say.
Examine the use of Targeted Credit. That is, credit should be extended to those who under normal conditions would be economically capable of using it and qualify for it.
Restructure Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae to break the dream of every one in America can own a home.
No one of these tactics will in it self fix the economy. It requires a change of perspective, a willingness on the part of the electorate to sacrifice and become informed, an ability for the political structure to put aside partisan demagoguery and to understand that what is broken in the nation is Trust
Please support our president and our government. Have they done it all right? No. Have they had the foxes guarding the hen house? Yes? But the foxes are leaving and the president is showing courage and clear thinking on a range of issues.
Vote on November 2
* Sources
Joseph Stiglitz, Robert Shiller, Paul Krugman, George Akerlo, David Brooks and Noriel Roubini, The Wall Street Journal, The NY Times.
We need to learn from our major competitors to combine the forces of private enterprise with long-term government strategies and assistance to produce growth and prosperity.
America needs to change its perspective and theory about how our economy(or any economy works). All the models to date fail to account for one important element: Trust. People do not only behave or make economic decisions based upon macro or micro accepted Keynesian or Adam Smith theories. People also make decisions based upon their "gut instincts" for good or bad!
The government must stimulate the economy with enough money to kick start a growth cycle. An analysis of both the TARP and The Stimulus Package(TSP) reveals they were both on target, necessary and if anything not large enough. We must use the power of the Federal Reserve Bank and Congress to change the present course.
TARP which had $700 billion to be loaned actually spent $540 billions on 829 applicants. To date $194 billions have been paid back.*
TSP is working and when combined with the extension of unemployment benefits, the Small Business Stimulus Bill just enacted, letting tax cuts expire for those earning more than $250,000 a year will continue to keep growth from going negative or staying flat.
Wall Street and the Banks have not been reigned in and continue to behave badly(foreclosure scandal now hitting) They have proven that they can not police themselves. The government must use all of its powers to monitor and regulate their activities.
Is flat or going negative good enough?
Growth requires a different strategy. Business must come on line and invest the trillions of dollars held on their balance sheets. It is not a chicken and egg strategy, it is a cause and effect tactic. If business provides long term jobs, people will earn and put the money back into the economy.
Here is one that will send many of you into orbit: deficit spending is not going to hurt us long term. Getting our industries back to work, having them actually produce something and then selling the output world-wide will keep us from sliding into a third rate nation status behind China,India and even Germany who propers at the expense of its European neighbors.
President Obama has set the tone and direction. He is poised to spend us, yes I said spend us, to a kick-started economy. The existing political structure is unwilling to support such a plan. Demagogues from all segments with opinions based upon platitudes rule the day. Misinformation and an uninformed( by choice)electorate all have a say.
Examine the use of Targeted Credit. That is, credit should be extended to those who under normal conditions would be economically capable of using it and qualify for it.
Restructure Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae to break the dream of every one in America can own a home.
No one of these tactics will in it self fix the economy. It requires a change of perspective, a willingness on the part of the electorate to sacrifice and become informed, an ability for the political structure to put aside partisan demagoguery and to understand that what is broken in the nation is Trust
Please support our president and our government. Have they done it all right? No. Have they had the foxes guarding the hen house? Yes? But the foxes are leaving and the president is showing courage and clear thinking on a range of issues.
Vote on November 2
* Sources
Joseph Stiglitz, Robert Shiller, Paul Krugman, George Akerlo, David Brooks and Noriel Roubini, The Wall Street Journal, The NY Times.
More on The Economy
I am pleased that so many of you are being thoughtful and willing to share your views. My sense is that if we do not express our views, find common ground we can not coalesce behind the political leadership we need to keep America from sliding into third rate nation status.
I received the following and offer it for your consideration:
Comments on the Current Economic/Political Situation in America
Sam Ginsburg / October 4, 2010
Americans tend to limit their vision of the world to the borders of the United States and to a time no earlier than the last election, or in some circles, to the last quarter. In a world that is being globalized at an every increasing rate, this near sightedness and lack of historical perspective is foolhardy and perilous to the future of this country.
America received a wakeup call warning us of the impending impact of economic globalism in the 1970’s when the Arab oil producers nationalized their oil, raised oil prices and threw the American economy into a tailspin that did not end until Paul Volcker brought rampant inflation under control by inducing a recession some ten years later during the Reagan years. Reagan then promptly dismissed Volcker so he could introduce the Free Market - Anti Regulation -Trickle down ideology espoused by his fellow Republicans. During this period, Japan grew its economy to become the second largest in the world by becoming the largest exporter to the United States by closely managing its government protected industries to increase exports while restricting imports. At about the same time, after the death of Mao-Tse-Tung, China began, what now can be seen, as the greatest national economic expansion in the history of the world – an expansion based on exports that has yielded double digit GDP growth over decades and has yet to show any sign of slowing down – a record of historical dimension totally orchestrated by a government, not private enterprise, and a Communist one no less.
The result of these changes and that of other “exporting” nations in Asia and the oil and gas producing countries of the world has been the greatest transfer of wealth and of jobs in the history of the world – from the Western, free nations, of the world to the exporting, nations of the world. Americans were told, not to worry when our industrial base shrunk from 60% of GDP to less than 10% - we were now transforming into an “information technology” economy and we would grow jobs in cleaner, safer, environments. Americans compensated for the loss of high paying factory jobs by sending their wives to work thus transforming the adage that two can live as cheaply as one to two workers can earn as much as one.
Every decade since the 1970’s has seen increasing erosion to the American way of life, most Americans aspire to, by countries outside of the United States. Clean office technology jobs began to be outsourced to other countries where the labor costs were less. High paying construction jobs have been decimated by alien workers from Mexico. Today, highly skilled legal, medical and architectural services are being outsourced to countries like India and China. And 30 years of ever increasing trade deficits with China and Japan has transformed the mighty American state into a debtor nation and 30 years of Free Market economics has brought us to the brink of another Great Depression from which no one knows when we will exit.
The argument about whether business or government is better at creating jobs in the country or which should be put in charge of getting this country back on track has to be seen in its historical context. The history of the last several decades has clearly proven that the free market, anti regulatory policies of the past have failed and new strategies are needed to address the reality that state-controlled foreign nations have exploited the American version of free market competition and have seriously impacted our economy and our labor force and that private corporations cannot possibly fix this problem. Nor can private corporations solve the numerous other problems confronting our nation such as global warming, alternative energy, heath care and education without the guidance of a government as effective as the Chinese state. We need to learn from our major competitors to combine the forces of private enterprise with long-term government strategies and assistance to produce growth and prosperity.
Having arrived at this conclusion, I am sad to say that America’s government no longer works. It is torn between two parties that can no longer work together and whose goals are limited to the next election. As for large business, their goals are limited to the force that fuels capitalism, Greed - defined by the results of the upcoming quarter and/or the goals prescribed by their executive’s bonus agreements. Tom Friedman, of the NY Times, in his latest editorial talks about the dysfunction of our government and the possibility of a third party entering the forthcoming presidential election. I wish I could believe this was possible. Instead I believe that, for years to come, America will continue to fumble from election to election and quarter to quarter and the nation will continue to decline as a world power and its influence will decline as our European partners seek to replace the dollar as the international currency and strengthen their connections to China and Russia and to the other extravagantly rich Sovereign wealth fund nations of the world who are sitting on rapidly expanding troves of trillions of dollars of private equity capital flowing to them from us and the rest of the western world who continue to import their products on a massive scale.
I received the following and offer it for your consideration:
Comments on the Current Economic/Political Situation in America
Sam Ginsburg / October 4, 2010
Americans tend to limit their vision of the world to the borders of the United States and to a time no earlier than the last election, or in some circles, to the last quarter. In a world that is being globalized at an every increasing rate, this near sightedness and lack of historical perspective is foolhardy and perilous to the future of this country.
America received a wakeup call warning us of the impending impact of economic globalism in the 1970’s when the Arab oil producers nationalized their oil, raised oil prices and threw the American economy into a tailspin that did not end until Paul Volcker brought rampant inflation under control by inducing a recession some ten years later during the Reagan years. Reagan then promptly dismissed Volcker so he could introduce the Free Market - Anti Regulation -Trickle down ideology espoused by his fellow Republicans. During this period, Japan grew its economy to become the second largest in the world by becoming the largest exporter to the United States by closely managing its government protected industries to increase exports while restricting imports. At about the same time, after the death of Mao-Tse-Tung, China began, what now can be seen, as the greatest national economic expansion in the history of the world – an expansion based on exports that has yielded double digit GDP growth over decades and has yet to show any sign of slowing down – a record of historical dimension totally orchestrated by a government, not private enterprise, and a Communist one no less.
The result of these changes and that of other “exporting” nations in Asia and the oil and gas producing countries of the world has been the greatest transfer of wealth and of jobs in the history of the world – from the Western, free nations, of the world to the exporting, nations of the world. Americans were told, not to worry when our industrial base shrunk from 60% of GDP to less than 10% - we were now transforming into an “information technology” economy and we would grow jobs in cleaner, safer, environments. Americans compensated for the loss of high paying factory jobs by sending their wives to work thus transforming the adage that two can live as cheaply as one to two workers can earn as much as one.
Every decade since the 1970’s has seen increasing erosion to the American way of life, most Americans aspire to, by countries outside of the United States. Clean office technology jobs began to be outsourced to other countries where the labor costs were less. High paying construction jobs have been decimated by alien workers from Mexico. Today, highly skilled legal, medical and architectural services are being outsourced to countries like India and China. And 30 years of ever increasing trade deficits with China and Japan has transformed the mighty American state into a debtor nation and 30 years of Free Market economics has brought us to the brink of another Great Depression from which no one knows when we will exit.
The argument about whether business or government is better at creating jobs in the country or which should be put in charge of getting this country back on track has to be seen in its historical context. The history of the last several decades has clearly proven that the free market, anti regulatory policies of the past have failed and new strategies are needed to address the reality that state-controlled foreign nations have exploited the American version of free market competition and have seriously impacted our economy and our labor force and that private corporations cannot possibly fix this problem. Nor can private corporations solve the numerous other problems confronting our nation such as global warming, alternative energy, heath care and education without the guidance of a government as effective as the Chinese state. We need to learn from our major competitors to combine the forces of private enterprise with long-term government strategies and assistance to produce growth and prosperity.
Having arrived at this conclusion, I am sad to say that America’s government no longer works. It is torn between two parties that can no longer work together and whose goals are limited to the next election. As for large business, their goals are limited to the force that fuels capitalism, Greed - defined by the results of the upcoming quarter and/or the goals prescribed by their executive’s bonus agreements. Tom Friedman, of the NY Times, in his latest editorial talks about the dysfunction of our government and the possibility of a third party entering the forthcoming presidential election. I wish I could believe this was possible. Instead I believe that, for years to come, America will continue to fumble from election to election and quarter to quarter and the nation will continue to decline as a world power and its influence will decline as our European partners seek to replace the dollar as the international currency and strengthen their connections to China and Russia and to the other extravagantly rich Sovereign wealth fund nations of the world who are sitting on rapidly expanding troves of trillions of dollars of private equity capital flowing to them from us and the rest of the western world who continue to import their products on a massive scale.
Sunday, October 3, 2010
The Economy
Here is how one of you caring, thoughtful people responded to the Economy blog.
I disagree with the premise that only business can create jobs. Though I certainly agree that we need more business investing and spending to aid the country in getting back on track, it seems to me that, more importantly, we need the government to take the lead and act as the engine to lead us on the road to recovery. The enormous public works projects of the Roosevwelt era did create jobs and stimulate the economy, but as Paul Krugman, in the November 10, 2008 edition of the NY Times, points out: the Roosevelt plan to end the Depression was not successful because it did not go far enough. It was Roosevelt's own cautious approach that almost undid him. Krugman writes, And F.D.R. wasn’t just reluctant to pursue an all-out fiscal expansion — he was eager to return to conservative budget principles. That eagerness almost destroyed his legacy. After winning a smashing election victory in 1936, the Roosevelt administration cut spending and raised taxes, precipitating an economic relapse that drove the unemployment rate back into double digits and led to a major defeat in the 1938 midterm elections.
Though Obama is not (contrary to Republican claims) raising taxes, he and the Democarats are exhibiting the same type of cautiousness, and, unfortunately, it seems to be yielding the same results:continued unemployment and a potential defeat in the coming elections.
As in the '30s there are numerous areas in which the government should invest. Our infrastructure is crumbling: roads, bridges, dams and schools all must be build or reconstructed, and we need, enormous government investment in, among other areas, clean energy, medical research and, of course, job retraining.
We need the bold leadship and bold change that we were promised. I do not fault President Obama for failures along these lines. He has put forth constructive plans and a stimulus package which was significantly cut back by the " just say no" right wingers in both parties. If the "Stimulus Package" hasn't lived up to its promise, a significant part of the reason is because of the those cutbacks, and not because it has proven too expensive. This is why I firmly believe we should be pushing for further govenment investment in the economy, not less.
Gary Tomei
-----
I disagree with the premise that only business can create jobs. Though I certainly agree that we need more business investing and spending to aid the country in getting back on track, it seems to me that, more importantly, we need the government to take the lead and act as the engine to lead us on the road to recovery. The enormous public works projects of the Roosevwelt era did create jobs and stimulate the economy, but as Paul Krugman, in the November 10, 2008 edition of the NY Times, points out: the Roosevelt plan to end the Depression was not successful because it did not go far enough. It was Roosevelt's own cautious approach that almost undid him. Krugman writes, And F.D.R. wasn’t just reluctant to pursue an all-out fiscal expansion — he was eager to return to conservative budget principles. That eagerness almost destroyed his legacy. After winning a smashing election victory in 1936, the Roosevelt administration cut spending and raised taxes, precipitating an economic relapse that drove the unemployment rate back into double digits and led to a major defeat in the 1938 midterm elections.
Though Obama is not (contrary to Republican claims) raising taxes, he and the Democarats are exhibiting the same type of cautiousness, and, unfortunately, it seems to be yielding the same results:continued unemployment and a potential defeat in the coming elections.
As in the '30s there are numerous areas in which the government should invest. Our infrastructure is crumbling: roads, bridges, dams and schools all must be build or reconstructed, and we need, enormous government investment in, among other areas, clean energy, medical research and, of course, job retraining.
We need the bold leadship and bold change that we were promised. I do not fault President Obama for failures along these lines. He has put forth constructive plans and a stimulus package which was significantly cut back by the " just say no" right wingers in both parties. If the "Stimulus Package" hasn't lived up to its promise, a significant part of the reason is because of the those cutbacks, and not because it has proven too expensive. This is why I firmly believe we should be pushing for further govenment investment in the economy, not less.
Gary Tomei
-----
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
