September 30, 2011 10:00 AM
In other words, it's absolutely a given that Bank of America not only retain its current profit margin, it should be able to grow it off the backs of their overburdened customers. Free markets rock!
The nation's beleaguered banking industry, which has been raising fees and doing away with free services, has a new target: debit-card users.
Bank of America Corp. is laying plans to charge millions of customers a $5 monthly fee to use their debit cards, and other big banks are expected to follow suit. The industry says it needs the fees to recoup revenue it will lose because of new government regulations that cap what they can charge merchants for debit-card transactions.
Bank of America, the largest U.S. bank by assets, disclosed the plan on Thursday in a memo to its senior staff. It intends to begin collecting the fees nationwide early next year.
Several other large banks, including J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. and Wells Fargo & Co., are testing or plan to test similar fees in some states. Regions Financial Corp., a Birmingham, Ala.-based lender, has said it will start charging a $4 monthly debit-card usage fee on certain accounts on Oct. 1.
Read More: Here
Friday, September 30, 2011
Wednesday, September 28, 2011
Fact! Unions Were and Are The Architects Of The Middle Class
Increasing Union Membership Would Boost Middle-Class Incomes: Study
The Huffington Post Jillian Berman First Posted: 9/27/11 04:26 PM ET Updated: 9/27/11 04:26 PM ET
If the incomes of the union rank-and-file rose by just a tenth, middle-class incomes would go up $1,479 per year -- even for those who aren’t members, according to an analysis of Census data from the Center for American Progress.
The boost in income, while slightly lower than if college-attainment rates went up by 10 percent, is higher than if the unemployment rate dropped by four percentage points -- a scenario that would increase middle class incomes by $772 per household, according to the study.
The share of income going to the middle class is below average, in the states with the lowest unionization rates, The Center for American Progress also found.
Union rights have come increasingly under fire as unemployment remains high and companies and municipal governments look to curb spending. In August, a Gallup poll found that approval of unions was just above its lowest-recorded level, dating back to the Great Depression, while union membership dropped to a 70-year low in 2010, according to The New York Times.
In a February poll by the Pew Research Center, though, the number of respondents saying unions have a negative impact on the availability of jobs was the same as those saying they have a positive effect. Opinions like these may be why union influence is dwindling in states including Wisconsin, where last week major state employee unions lost their official status, according to Reuters.
The waning influence of private-sector unions, such as the United Auto Workers, could have something to do with their dwindling numbers, according a Harvard University and University of Washington study. The researchers found that private-sector union membership dropped to 8 percent from 34 percent among men between 1973 and 2007 and to 6 percent from 16 percent for women during the same period.
The effect? A more than 40 percent increase in wage stratification, according to the study.
Here's where a boost in unionization would most help middle-class incomes, according to the Center for American Progress:
Here's Where A Lot Of The Money Went
As Unions Weaken So Does the Middle Class
New Census Data Shows the Importance of Unions to the Middle Class
SOURCE: AP/Bebeto Matthews A coalition of New York City unions rally for a "March for the Middle Class" across the Brooklyn Bridge to City Hall on Wednesday, June 15, 2011 in New York.
New state income data released yesterday by the U.S. Census Bureau shows the importance of unions to boosting incomes for all middle-class households—union and nonunion alike. The 2010 income data makes it clear that strong unions are a critical factor in creating a middle-class society. Restoring the strength of unions would go a long way toward rebuilding the middle class.
The states with the lowest percentage of workers in unions—North Carolina, Georgia, Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, Oklahoma, and Texas—all have relatively weak middle classes. In each of these states, the share of income going to the middle class (the middle 60 percent of the population by income) is below the national average, according to Census Bureau figures.
Mapping the Census data that has been released this fall to previous years also shows that over time the strength of the middle class and the strength of the union movement have tracked closely together. In 1968, the share of income going to the nation’s middle class was 53.2 percent, when 28 percent of all workers were members of unions. Since then, union membership steadily declined alongside the share of income going to the middle class. By 2010, the middle class only received 46.5 percent of income as union membership dropped to less than 12 percent of workers.
As unions weakened, the lion’s share of the economy’s gains have gone to the wealthy. The share of pretax income earned by the richest 1 percent of Americans more than doubled between 1974 and 2007, climbing to 23 percent from 9 percent. And for the richest of the rich—the top 0.1 percent—the gains have been even more astronomical. Their share of income quadrupled over this period, rising to 12.3 percent of all income from 2.7 percent.
Without strong unions, the middle class has lost out to the wealthy.
To be sure, unions can sometimes act in an overly self-interested manner. But the core of what they do helps all workers and fuels a strong middle class. Unions make the middle class stronger by giving it a bigger say in our economy and our political system.
Reah More: Here
Friday, September 23, 2011
Day in the Life of Joe Middle-Class Republican
By John Gray
Joe gets up at 6:00am to prepare his morning coffee. He fills his pot full of good clean drinking water because some liberal fought for minimum water quality standards. He takes his daily medication with his first swallow of coffee. His medications are safe to take because some liberal fought to insure their safety and work as advertised.
All but $10.00 of his medications are paid for by his employers medical plan because some liberal union workers fought their employers for paid medical insurance, now Joe gets it too. He prepares his morning breakfast, bacon and eggs this day. Joe’s bacon is safe to eat because some liberal fought for laws to regulate the meat packing industry.
Joe takes his morning shower reaching for his shampoo; His bottle is properly labeled with every ingredient and the amount of its contents because some liberal fought for his right to know what he was putting on his body and how much it contained. Joe dresses, walks outside and takes a deep breath. The air he breathes is clean because some tree hugging liberal fought for laws to stop industries from polluting our air. He walks to the subway station for his government subsidized ride to work; it saves him considerable money in parking and transportation fees. You see, some liberal fought for affordable public transportation, which gives everyone the opportunity to be a contributor.
Joe begins his work day; he has a good job with excellent pay, medicals benefits, retirement, paid holidays and vacation because some liberal union members fought and died for these working standards. Joe’s employer pays these standards because Joe’s employer doesn’t want his employees to call the union. If Joe is hurt on the job or becomes unemployed he’ll get a worker compensation or unemployment check because some liberal didn’t think he should loose his home because of his temporary misfortune.
Joe gets up at 6:00am to prepare his morning coffee. He fills his pot full of good clean drinking water because some liberal fought for minimum water quality standards. He takes his daily medication with his first swallow of coffee. His medications are safe to take because some liberal fought to insure their safety and work as advertised.
All but $10.00 of his medications are paid for by his employers medical plan because some liberal union workers fought their employers for paid medical insurance, now Joe gets it too. He prepares his morning breakfast, bacon and eggs this day. Joe’s bacon is safe to eat because some liberal fought for laws to regulate the meat packing industry.
Joe takes his morning shower reaching for his shampoo; His bottle is properly labeled with every ingredient and the amount of its contents because some liberal fought for his right to know what he was putting on his body and how much it contained. Joe dresses, walks outside and takes a deep breath. The air he breathes is clean because some tree hugging liberal fought for laws to stop industries from polluting our air. He walks to the subway station for his government subsidized ride to work; it saves him considerable money in parking and transportation fees. You see, some liberal fought for affordable public transportation, which gives everyone the opportunity to be a contributor.
Joe begins his work day; he has a good job with excellent pay, medicals benefits, retirement, paid holidays and vacation because some liberal union members fought and died for these working standards. Joe’s employer pays these standards because Joe’s employer doesn’t want his employees to call the union. If Joe is hurt on the job or becomes unemployed he’ll get a worker compensation or unemployment check because some liberal didn’t think he should loose his home because of his temporary misfortune.
Its noon time, Joe needs to make a Bank Deposit so he can pay some bills. Joe’s deposit is federally insured by the FSLIC because some liberal wanted to protect Joe’s money from unscrupulous bankers who ruined the banking system before the depression.
Joe has to pay his Fannie Mae underwritten Mortgage and his below market federal student loan because some stupid liberal decided that Joe and the government would be better off if he was educated and earned more money over his life-time.
Joe is home from work, he plans to visit his father this evening at his farm home in the country. He gets in his car for the drive to dads; his car is among the safest in the world because some liberal fought for car safety standards. He arrives at his boyhood home. He was the third generation to live in the house financed by Farmers Home Administration because bankers didn’t want to make rural loans. The house didn’t have electric until some big government liberal stuck his nose where it didn’t belong and demanded rural electrification. (Those rural Republican’s would still be sitting in the dark)
He is happy to see his dad who is now retired. His dad lives on Social Security and his union pension because some liberal made sure he could take care of himself so Joe wouldn’t have to. After his visit with dad he gets back in his car for the ride home.
He turns on a radio talk show, the host’s keeps saying that liberals are bad and conservatives are good. (He doesn’t tell Joe that his beloved Republicans have fought against every protection and benefit Joe enjoys throughout his day) Joe agrees, “We don’t need those big government liberals ruining our lives; after all, I’m a self made man who believes everyone should take care of themselves, just like I have”.
By John Gray
Thursday, September 22, 2011
This Is The Voice Of Your Neighbor, You'll Never Hear On The Air, See In The Paper Or Hear Referenced By A Politician.
Not long ago, diarist Corwin Weber wrote:
I'm tired, people.
I'm tired of being rejected over and over again.
I'm tired of being rejected and not even actually hearing that I was rejected.
I'm tired of stress.
I'm tired of constantly being broke.
I'm tired of depression.
I'm tired of elected officials telling me I'm just lazy.
I'm tired of unhelpful 'suggestions' from well-meaning people that are beyond my means.
[...]
I'm tired of watching people who have a clear, demonstrated solution to the problems we're facing today do everything in their power to avoid using that solution.
And frankly, I'm just fucking exhausted.
I've been unemployed almost two years now and I want my goddamn life back.
Only the most educated 3% saw wage gains between 2000 and 2010
Welcome to another edition of Charts that Speak for Themselves. This one shows that we live in a country in which the 97 percent of the population without education beyond a master's degree
experienced declining income over the past decade. A master's degree! Enough said?
experienced declining income over the past decade. A master's degree! Enough said?
(Matthew Slaughter/Dartmouth College)
All right, I have one thing to say. Remember this next time you hear about how union members or public employees or middle class taxpayers or pretty much any person who's not already at the top of the income and wealth ladders just needs to sacrifice to set everything straight in our economy.
Wednesday, September 21, 2011
Watch Out! The Woman Is On The Loose And Speaking Truths.
I hear all this, you know, “Well, this is class warfare, this is whatever.”—No!
There is nobody in this country who got rich on his own. Nobody.
You built a factory out there—good for you! But I want to be clear.
You moved your goods to market on the roads the rest of us paid for.
You hired workers the rest of us paid to educate.
You were safe in your factory because of police forces and fire forces that the rest of us paid for.
You didn’t have to worry that marauding bands would come and seize everything at your factory, and hire someone to protect against this, because of the work the rest of us did.
Now look, you built a factory and it turned into something terrific, or a great idea—God bless. Keep a big hunk of it.
But part of the underlying social contract is you take a hunk of that and pay forward for the next kid who comes along.
IT'S NOT PERSONAL, ITS JUST BUSINESS
Let the Banks Eat Cake
- 09.19.2011
- Michael N Cohen
THE ECONOMY-It’s time to stop them from devouring us.Have you wondered why so many people, underwater on their mortgages, soldier on under mountains of debt? While in reality to save our cities and towns and the American worker they must do the unthinkable.
“You want to fix this economic crisis? You want to put people back to work? You want to light a fire under the economy? The fastest way to fix this mess is to see tens of millions of homeowners default on their mortgages and other debts, and millions more file for bankruptcy”, advises Brett Arends of MarketWatch
Sure, it ticks some off that people got to borrow all that money and won't have to pay it back. It does me. I trudged along for some 15 years paying off my mortgage. But you know what? “The time to stop that happening was years ago, when all that money was being lent.”
It's kaput, gone to what money managers call “money heaven. “
And Chapter 11 by the average Joe and Jane is, by far, the least painful solution to get the USA moving again.
Why?
“Because the real cause of our economic slump isn't too much government or too little government. It isn't red tape, high taxes, low taxes, the growing divide between the rich and the poor, too much government debt, too little government debt, corporations, poor people, "greed," "socialism," China, Greece, the sign of the Zodiac, or the legalization of gay marriage.”
It isn't, in short, any of the things all the various nitwits say it is.
IT'S THE DEBT STUPID!
The private debt owed by us, the American consumer. Not the USA sovereign debt (which, by the way, 2/3 is held by ourselves, we Americans) that was a distraction and political football recently. That doesn’t have jack cheese to do with it.
“We're hocked up to the eyeballs, and then some. We're at the bottom of a lake of debt, lashed to an anchor. The root cause of the financial crisis and the great recession that followed was excessive household debt, which doubled from 2000 to 2008, peaking at nearly $14 trillion, a quadrupling in a generation. We owe more than any other nation, ever.
“More than a quarter of American mortgages are underwater. Many are deeply underwater. In states like Nevada and Florida the figures are astronomical.”
The key thing to understand is that most of these debts will never, ever be repaid in real money. Not gonna happen, no way, no how.
Think! - Corporations when they get into trouble – do what? They get their expensive attorneys to explore the benefits of defaulting on contracts and … bankruptcy, tah dah!
“Illustration: When Company A whose assets and earning capacity will only repay, say, $300 million on a billion dollars in debt? Does Company A soldier on with $1 billion in debt it can never repay? Do the stockholders send back their dividend checks? Do they and management sell their homes to pay off the Company’s bonds?
Not a chance. The company goes through Chapter 11. The creditors fix it real fast. They write down the loans and take what’s left of Company A and move on.”
Why not ditto for homeowners as well?
(NOTE: At the time of this article (9/16/11) according to Bloomberg News citing four unnamed sources, “Bank of America Corp. (BAC) would consider filing bankruptcy for its unit Countrywide Financial Corp. if litigation losses threaten to cripple the parent.”)
If a company defaults, the stockholders get wiped out. If a homeowner defaults, the bank takes the home.
“Some will say the financial impact would be terrible. But the banks would just be facing up to reality. And a lot of these mortgages are already trading at distressed levels.”
“Some will say, 'Why should people get away with borrowing imprudently'?"
“The response: Why should the banks get away with lending imprudently?” says Arends
“There's no point telling people not to borrow money. They always will. Have you seen or heard of a Wall Street executive or Corporate CEO executive turn down free money? Me neither. I have yet to see a company in an IPO say, ‘Don't give us so much money!’ People like money. They will take as much as they are offered.”
In a free economy, the people who are supposed to ration the loans are the lenders. Banks are supposed to lend carefully and responsibly. What else are they paid for? Accepting deposits? You could hire people on minimum wage to do that.”
Some will say, "It’s immoral" for borrowers to default and some may even wistfully recall debtors’ prisons. Sadly though, most of these people are being at worst disingenuous or at best inconsistent.
“ They are usually the first ones to defend a company when it closes down a factory and ships the jobs to China, or pays the CEO $50 million for doing a bad job, on the grounds that this ain't morality, pal, this is business!"
But when Main Street wants to do the same thing, they start screaming "Morality! Morality!"
Hey listen up” “We don't live in an economy based on morals and fairness. “
T Mobile, my wireless carrier, doesn't charge me what's "fair" each month. They charge me according to my contract. And, BTW, their current “deals” beat my existing contract with them by a lot and they won’t let me switch without paying a hefty penalty. And no doubt if the other wireless providers started eating their lunch they’d either sell out or default on their debt as well.
If you ask the boss for a raise so you can pay your bills don’t expect anything but a laugh and maybe shown the door out. You get paid what you’re worth to the company in our capitalist economy.
Did high flying executive Dick Grasso, the former CEO of the New York Stock Exchange who was given a controversial deferred compensation package worth $140 Million, subsequently give back his bonus?
Did Bob Nardelli give back his bonuses and golden parachutes at Chrysler, Home Depot and GE? And who, not so incidentally, was named by CNBC as one of the "Worst American CEOs of All Time"?’
Did Dick Fuld, CEO of Lehman Brothers? - Who received nearly half a billion dollars in total compensation from 1993 to 2007 - Over $22 Million in 2007 alone, just before the company went bankrupt. The list goes on and on.
“We operate in an economy based very firmly on contracts, and nothing else. Companies, and the wealthy, live by the letter of the law. American mortgage contracts allow for default.
“Half of the states in this country are "non-recourse," which broadly speaking means you can send in the keys and walk away from a bad loan.
“The other half are sort of "semi-recourse." The bank can come after you for any shortfall, but only in a limited way.”
Your retirement accounts are generally untouchable. You can keep some personal possessions and typically keep your car, personal effects, life insurance, and annuities.
OJ Simpson had a personal judgment of some $30 Million + against him but his creditors couldn’t touch a penny of the retirement annuity that Simpson acquired during his football career.
“Most of the people who are deeply underwater don't have that much anyway.
“And the banks knew this. When they were lending $500,000 to a bus driver with $1,000 in his checking account, they knew that their loan was only guaranteed by the value of the home.
“If they didn't know it, they should have. Their incompetence is their problem, not ours.
“We have tens of millions who cannot repay their debts. But they are all trying to. That sucks huge amounts of money out of the economy. And that means these people cannot function properly as consumers or workers. That's the reason more people aren't coming into restaurants or haven't hired you to redo the kitchen or do a host of other things.
“And so tens or hundreds of millions of perfectly responsible business owners and employees are also suffering from this slump. That's the big, really big reason we have a shortage of demand and why there is little hiring.”
Even worse: People who are underwater on their mortgage, but who do not want to default, make the job market “sticky”. They simply are not able to pick up and move to where the jobs are. They are stuck in town along with their home
Wouldn’t you agree that we should clean the slate, start over by putting the loans back to the banks by going Chapter 11? So we can face a tomorrow where the good guys and gals get their lives back?
I do not say this lightly. I own financial stocks, Bank of America, Wells Fargo. If homeowners follow the prescription bank valuations may decline sharply. So be it, because what are the alternatives since Banks are unwilling to be proactive and write down mortgages and reduce interest rates across the board? If they had many more homeowners would have had a chance at keeping their homes.
That would have the immediate effect of feeing up their discretionary income which would go back into the economy – which is, after all, 2/3’s of America’s GDP – and not into bank officers’ bonuses.
Or maybe you think we should employ: “Government cutbacks, higher taxes, and a balanced budget? - in a normal economy, fine. But in this situation, when the private sector is also slashing its spending, that could lead to absolute catastrophe. That's what happened in the Great Depression and we’re poised to see that happen again.” Arends goes on.
“And our debt levels are worse than in the Great Depression.”
Government borrowing? "The consumer can no longer borrow like a crazy person," says the Keynesian Economist, "so Uncle Sam has to do so instead." It's just transferring private madness to public madness.
Inflation? Inflation is achieved by printing money, which monetizes the debt and decreases the value of each buck in circulation.
In 2005 the government was on a wild money printing binge to reduce the trade deficit imbalance and to help pay for the Iraq and Afghanistan wars which were consuming massive amounts of cash.
By March 2006 the problem had become so severe that they stopped reporting the M3 money supply numbers! (Note: M3 is broad measure of our money supply) and our deep recession has continued running the printing presses.
“But frankly, that is the least bad alternative to save the country if done in real earnest. But it's just default by another name. And instead of taking money from the imprudent banks that caused the problem, it robs widows and orphans and grandmas of their income and savings.”
Twice before, advanced economies have gone through what we are going through now -- namely a massive hangover after a massive debt binge.
The first was the U.S. in the 1930s; the second was Japan in the 1990s.
The U.S. didn't get out of it until the 1940s unleashed inflation and reduced the debt's value in real terms.
Japan still hasn't gotten out of it. They have deflation, while government debt has skyrocketed.
The correct moral hazard is to punish the banks who lent imprudently by making them eat their own losses. “
Still don’t get it? Well how about this reported in the Dow Jones News Wire on Friday:
“According to a report from the Department of Labor, the whistleblower's investigation in Boston, conducted in 2007, found ‘egregious fraud spread throughout the entire region,’ including forgery of loan documents, manipulation of borrowers assets and income, manipulation of the company's automated underwriting system and destruction of valid documents. The report, which was reviewed by Dow Jones, says the investigation led Countrywide to close three-quarters of its Boston branches and fire about 44 employees.”
Also B of A, Wells Fargo, and Goldman Sachs are being sued by the government for various bad actions (fraud?) and procedures. Likely they will be paying big fines. But don’t expect any of that money to actually help bail out homeowners.
So let’s get on with the cure and swallow the medicine. And you know what? Another long term benefit maybe those banks will think twice by selling us out in the future and maybe treat us all a bit better.
You and I may not like the prescription but the alternatives look worse, far worse for all of us.
(Michael N Cohen was formerly a financial advisor with PaineWebber and United Bank of Switzerland. He is a Board Member of the Reseda Neighborhood Council, and is an occasional contributor to CityWatch. Thanks to Brett Arends of MarketWatch for his insight /quotes, and to Dow Jones, Bloomberg as an information source.) -cw
Tuesday, September 20, 2011
Actions Speak Louder Than Words
--
By David DeGraw
Oh yes, campaign Obama is back! He is once again fighting for the average American and calling for higher taxes on millionaires. Are you falling for his campaign propaganda again?
In a sane world, you would think that millionaires would already be paying at the same tax rate as middle class citizens. However, in banana republic USA, billionaires like Warren Buffett are only paying a 17% tax rate. And why are they paying a lower rate than middle class workers? Oh yeah, that’s right, because Obama recently signed a bill that gave these billionaires a tax cut.
“But, but,” cry the Democratic Obama faithful, “he’s serious now.” After all, billionaires all over the world are getting scared and are calling for tax increases to keep the angry and rioting masses at bay. Yes, that is true, and that is exactly why this call for higher taxes on the wealthy is just a ruse to maintain the tyrannical status quo.
Here’s the deal: if Obama cared about the average American, he would have already broken up the big banks, clawed back banker bonuses and sent Wall Street executives to jail, along with his Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner and Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke.
Has he done any of those things? No, not even close. Instead of holding people accountable, he has rewarded the people who crashed the economy and looted the country.
If he was truly serious about fixing this mess, first and foremost, he would be focused on two things:
1) Breaking up the “too big to fail” banks
2) Ending the system of political bribery (campaign finance, lobbying, revolving door)
Any other talk is meaningless propaganda and a desperate attempt to rearrange the deck chairs on the Titanic. So, if you are still delusional enough to believe that Obama is going to fight for the American public against global bankers and corporate oligarchs, I got some news for you, ignorance will not be bliss for much longer.
mpedStReport )))
Obama’s Plan to Tax Millionaires: Fool You Twice? |
Oh yes, campaign Obama is back! He is once again fighting for the average American and calling for higher taxes on millionaires. Are you falling for his campaign propaganda again?
In a sane world, you would think that millionaires would already be paying at the same tax rate as middle class citizens. However, in banana republic USA, billionaires like Warren Buffett are only paying a 17% tax rate. And why are they paying a lower rate than middle class workers? Oh yeah, that’s right, because Obama recently signed a bill that gave these billionaires a tax cut.
“But, but,” cry the Democratic Obama faithful, “he’s serious now.” After all, billionaires all over the world are getting scared and are calling for tax increases to keep the angry and rioting masses at bay. Yes, that is true, and that is exactly why this call for higher taxes on the wealthy is just a ruse to maintain the tyrannical status quo.
Here’s the deal: if Obama cared about the average American, he would have already broken up the big banks, clawed back banker bonuses and sent Wall Street executives to jail, along with his Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner and Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke.
Has he done any of those things? No, not even close. Instead of holding people accountable, he has rewarded the people who crashed the economy and looted the country.
If he was truly serious about fixing this mess, first and foremost, he would be focused on two things:
1) Breaking up the “too big to fail” banks
2) Ending the system of political bribery (campaign finance, lobbying, revolving door)
Any other talk is meaningless propaganda and a desperate attempt to rearrange the deck chairs on the Titanic. So, if you are still delusional enough to believe that Obama is going to fight for the American public against global bankers and corporate oligarchs, I got some news for you, ignorance will not be bliss for much longer.
Monday, September 19, 2011
Will Anyone In Washington Call Out Congress For Telling Lies About Job Creation?....Chirp...Chirp
Boehner Peddles Republican Job Creators Myth
Credit: Center for American Progress
On Thursday, House Speaker John Boehner peppered his address to the Economic Club of Washington with a dozen mentions of America's so-called "job creators." But in claiming that high taxes and unnecessary regulations have "pummeled" his supposed job producers, Boehner willingly misrepresented the source of and solutions to the nation's economic problems. After all, recent surveys show that regulations and taxes are not killing small business. With corporations flush with cash and the total federal tax burden at a 60 year low, the U.S. instead faces a demand crisis fueled by staggering household debt.
But John Boehner perpetrated the biggest fraud of his address when he declared, "Job creators in America are essentially on strike." If so, they've been on the picket line for a decade. As it turns out, George W. Bush's tax breaks for the wealthy sadly coincided with the worst period of job creation of any president since Herbert Hoover.
Like his lieutenant Eric Cantor, John Boehner has been regurgitating the "job creators" talking point for months. (Arguably, the sound bite dates back to 1993, when Republicans deployed the same "job killing" language against the Clinton upper-income tax increases that preceded the 1990's economic boom.) In May, Boehner served up the "job creators" line seven times in a speech to the Economic Club of New York. Contending that "the mere threat of tax hikes causes uncertainty for job creators -- uncertainty that results in less risk-taking and fewer jobs," Speaker Boehner explained that same month just who his magical job creators are:
"The top one percent of wage earners in the United States...pay forty percent of the income taxes...The people he's [President Obama] is talking about taxing are the very people that we expect to reinvest in our economy."If so, those expectations were sadly unmet under George W. Bush. After all, the last time the top tax rate was 39.6 percent during the Clinton administration, the United States enjoyed rising incomes, 23 million new jobs and budget surpluses. Under Bush? Not so much.
On January 9, 2009, the Republican-friendly Wall Street Journal summed it up with an article titled simply, "Bush on Jobs: the Worst Track Record on Record." (The Journal's interactive table quantifies his staggering failure relative to every post-World War II president.) The meager one million jobs created under President Bush didn't merely pale in comparison to the 23 million produced during Bill Clinton's tenure. In September 2009, the Congressional Joint Economic Committee charted Bush's job creation disaster, the worst since Hoover:
Read More: Here
Sunday, September 18, 2011
Financial Terrorists Strike Again:
AmpedStatus Report )))
Federal Reserve (US Taxpayers) Bail Out Big European Banks Yet Again |
It’s deja vu all over again, again. How many times are we going to throw trillions of dollars at the “too big to fail” banks before someone, anyone in a position of power realizes that they have to be broken up? The Fed and the Obama Adminstration, all the King’s horses and all the King’s men, keep trying to put Humpty Dumpty back together again. Hello, the global Ponzi players had quite the run but it’s O-V-E-R.The fraud has been exposed to too many people now. So please stop throwing our economic future into the abyss. The Eurozone is absolutely imploding and once again we are being thrown under the bus in attempts to prop up an insolvent banking system. This is all so absurd! Enough is enough already.
Ok, let me back up a bit and explain this latest attack. Let’s start with this video from Dylan Ratigan:
View: Here
Coordinated Central Bank EU Bailouts
(If you’re pressed for time, jump to the 6-minute mark.)
Saturday, September 17, 2011
Perry Brags About Texas’ Tax System That Charges The Poor Four Times As Much As The Rich
Texas Gov. Rick Perry (R) was on the campaign trail in Newton, Iowa today, reviving his stump speech promise to make government “as inconsequential in your life as I can.” At one point, Perry bragged about the Texas tax system and its light burden on “job creators”:
We had a tax policy in place that allowed for our job creators to not be burdened, still delivering the services that the people desire in the state of Texas. So have a tax policy that is as light on the job creators as we can.Watch it:
This isn’t really surprising, considering that Perry believes that the poor and seniors don’t pay enough in taxes. At the same time, Perry has admitted that higher taxes on millionaires and billionaires “isn’t going to affect anything” in terms of economic growth.
Robert Reich Debunks the Six Big Lies About The Economy
From The Uptake -- Reich Debunks Six Big Lies About The Economy:
Is Social Security a Ponzi scheme as Republican Presidential candidate Rick Perry claims? Noted author and former U.S. Labor Secretary Robert Reich debunks that claim and five other lies the right-wing tells about taxes, government and the economy. The lies Reich debunks:
1) Tax cuts to the rich and corporations trickle down to the rest of us. (No it doesn't and it never has.)
2) If you shrink government you create jobs. (No, you get rid of jobs that way.)
3) High taxes on the rich hurts the economy. (No, the economy grew when the US did this under Eisenhower.)
4) Debt is to be avoided and it is mostly caused by Medicare. (No, if debt is properly used to grow the economy, it becomes a smaller part of the budget because of increased revenue and Medicare has the lowest overhead of any health insurance plan out there.)
5) Social Security is a Ponzi scheme (No, its solid for 26 years. Rick Perry is "lying through his teeth" says Reich. Social Security is solid beyond that if the rich pay the same percentage in social security taxes as the rest of us do.)
6) We need to tax the poor. (This is what Republicans have been proposing when they say any tax reform needs to involve all Americans because poor people pay no income tax. The poor have no money and taxing them will not solve our budget problems.)
The worst thing is, because these "facts" from the right-wing are repeated over and over, the media repeats them without challenging them and people accept them as truth. Reich says this is intentional.
"The greatest enemy we have is mass cynicism", said Reich. "When people really get to the point where they think nothing can be done, the other side wins. That's what they want, by the way. That's what they want. They want government because it is starved for money, because it is going to be underfunded - all the regulatory agencies - they want government at all levels to function so badly that people say 'Well government can't work. I told you.' And they also want politics to be so bad and so paralyzed that most Americans say 'Nothing can be done. I'm going to give up on our democracy'."
Reich was speaking at the Summit For A Fair Economy in Minneapolis, Minnesota on September 10, 2011.
Thursday, September 15, 2011
Obama a Committed Supply Sider, Tries to Prove That After Ten Years of Failure, Tax Cuts to The Wealthy Will Finally Spur Economic Growth. Good Luck With That.
Reposted from Triple-B in the Building 
The Center for American Progress crunched the numbers and discovered:
Yet, despite this fact, we've seen poll after poll indicate that people still believe President Obama has raised their taxes.
Two things:
1. The idea that tax cuts bring economic growth should be thoroughly debunked by now. But it isn't.
2. It has to be political injustice of the worst order to be the biggest tax cutter ever and not get any credit.
With the huge Recovery Act tax cuts and the enormous December 2010 tax cuts combined, President Obama has already signed into law tax cuts amounting to more than $900 billion from 2009 through 2012. Even after accounting for legislation that the president signed that increased revenue during that period, President Obama has cut taxes by more than $850 billion in his first term, or approximately 1.5 percent of GDP.That is compared to the $474 billion in tax cuts enacted by George W. Bush in his first term. If the latest tax cuts included in President Obama's American Jobs Act are passed, he will be the biggest tax cutter of the modern era. Bigger than Reagan. Bigger than Bush. That's saying something!
Yet, despite this fact, we've seen poll after poll indicate that people still believe President Obama has raised their taxes.
Two things:
1. The idea that tax cuts bring economic growth should be thoroughly debunked by now. But it isn't.
2. It has to be political injustice of the worst order to be the biggest tax cutter ever and not get any credit.
Wednesday, September 14, 2011
SPECIAL NEWS FLASH!!! Elizabeth Warren: I'm Running!
I'm Running!
Posted: 9/14/11 06:45 AM ET
I'm running!
Today, I am launching my campaign to represent the people of Massachusetts in the United States Senate. After listening to people all across our state who know that we can do better, folks who are frustrated like I am that Washington just doesn't get it, I'm running for the Senate so I can fight every day for Massachusetts families.
I hope you'll take a minute to watch this short video:
Washington gives some of the biggest corporations in the world special loopholes and tax breaks, while middle-class families and small businesses struggle.
That is wrong. Our hard-working families deserve someone who believes in them, someone who is going to stand up and fight for their interests.
That's why I'm running for the United States Senate.
I've fought all my life for working families, and I've stood up to some pretty powerful interests. Now those interests are sure to line up against our campaign -- and that's why I'm asking you to help me build the grassroots support we need to beat them.
Please click here to watch my announcement video - and while you're there, be sure to sign up to join our campaign.
Then I hope you'll share my announcement video on Facebook or Twitter.
We have a chance to help rebuild America's middle class. We have a chance to put Washington on the side of families.
We can do this - together.
With Record Number Of Americans Falling Into Poverty, Rand Paul Says The Poor Are Getting Rich
Rand Paul
Census data revealed today that a record 46.2 million Americans were living in poverty in 2010. But in an aptly-timed hearing entitled “Is Poverty A Death Sentence,” Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) flat out rejected the idea that poverty in the U.S is worrisome. As the Ranking Member of the Senate Health subcommittee, Paul offered a dissertation-length statement on how the correlation between poverty and death is only found in the Third World and to claim such a connection within the U.S. is nothing more than “socialism” and “tyranny.”
Stating that “poor children today are healthier than middle-class adults a generation ago,” he even blamed the poor for their own health problems, suggesting “behavioral factors” like a higher incidence of smoking, obesity, or weak family support structures as the only correlation between poverty and health.
Citing the deficit as a primary priority, Paul questioned whether federal low-income programs are “creating unnecessary and unhealthy dependence on government.” He unequivocally declared that “poverty is not a state of permanence” and that “the rich are getting richer, but the poor are getting richer even faster.”
PAUL: We also need to understand that poverty is not a state of permanence. When you look at people in the bottom 5th of the economic ladder — those at the bottom — only 5 percent are there after 16 years. People move up, the American dream does exist…The rich are getting richer, but the poor are getting richer even faster.
First of all, then notion that the poor are getting richer faster than the rich requires an impressive level of ignorance. Currently, income inequality in the United States is greater than that of Pakistan and Ethiopia and higher than at any other time since the Great Depression. Indeed, thanks to exceedingly low tax rates, the rich are getting richer, with the richest one percent earning nearly 25 percent of the total income in the country.
Meanwhile, nearly one in three middle-class Americans is slipping down the income ladder as an adult. And with stagnant wages and the purchasing power of the minimum wage at a 51-year low, it’s hard to see how suddenly “the poor are getting richer faster.”
Read More: Here
How the rich became the über rich
This is worth a repost after just posting about the rising poverty rate. WAKE UP AMERICA!
NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- There's a growing income gap in America, but it's not necessarily between the rich and the poor.
It's between the super rich and everyone else. Or as George W. Bush once quipped at a swanky campaign dinner, "the haves and the have-mores."
Income trends among 90% of Americans are relatively unchanged over the last decade. Nearly all segments of the population are moving relatively in proportion. Which is to say, they're barely moving at all.
But look at the top 10th percentile and a different story begins to emerge. The super wealthy are getting much richer, as everyone else's incomes are practically stagnant.
In 2009, the richest 10% of Americans accounted for about half the nation's wealth. Narrow that focus a bit further, and the trend is even more alarming. The top 0.1% -- those who make at least $2 million each year -- controlled 10% of the economy.
That's a far cry from the 1950s, when the suburban American dream ruled: the bottom 90% of Americans controlled about 68% of the economy.
READ FULL ARTICLE BELOW:
How the rich became the über rich
NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- There's a growing income gap in America, but it's not necessarily between the rich and the poor.
It's between the super rich and everyone else. Or as George W. Bush once quipped at a swanky campaign dinner, "the haves and the have-mores."
Income trends among 90% of Americans are relatively unchanged over the last decade. Nearly all segments of the population are moving relatively in proportion. Which is to say, they're barely moving at all.
But look at the top 10th percentile and a different story begins to emerge. The super wealthy are getting much richer, as everyone else's incomes are practically stagnant.
In 2009, the richest 10% of Americans accounted for about half the nation's wealth. Narrow that focus a bit further, and the trend is even more alarming. The top 0.1% -- those who make at least $2 million each year -- controlled 10% of the economy.
That's a far cry from the 1950s, when the suburban American dream ruled: the bottom 90% of Americans controlled about 68% of the economy.
READ FULL ARTICLE BELOW:
How the rich became the über rich
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)