Deficit Hawks Ignorant

 

 

Paul Krugman, Laureate of the Sveriges Riksban...
Paul Krugman, Laureate of the Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel 2008 at a press conference at the Swedish Academy of Science in Stockholm (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

 

Deficit Hawks Ignorant

 

I’m now 57 years old and the tale of imminent fiscal catastrophe begins with my awareness of its use by Reagan who ran on fixing the deficit and then cut taxes, of course, increasing the debt. And that is how it has always gone. It’s always a apocalyptic event closing in on us like a relentless tsunami, unless there’s an opportunity for a tax cut, in which case, the deficit hawks or deficit scolds (whatever term you prefer) go silent. They are only loud when talking about cutting social programs. They maintain a studious silence when tax increases are discussed. And do you know why, because deficits can be a problem but for these people, it’s a good problem because it’s a club they can pick up or put away as need arises. When there can be tax cuts, the club is put away and when there can be cuts in the safety net, the club can be wielded fiercely and recklessly.

 

They’re not ignorant. They know exactly what they’re doing. It’s just a tactic.

 

James Pilant

 

Krugman: Deficit scolds “literally have no idea what they’re talking about” – Salon.com

 

http://www.salon.com/2013/10/25/krugman_deficit_scolds_literally_have_no_idea_what_theyre_talking_about/

 

Noting the continued endurance of low levels of inflation and low interest rates, which should contradict the expectations of anyone buying into the looming fiscal catastrophe narrative, Krugman ridicules his opponents for having been so wrong for so long, seemingly without ever giving their beliefs a second thought. “It’s actually awesome, in a way, to realize how long cries of looming disaster have filled our airwaves and op-ed pages,” Krugman writes. He then goes on to cite an Alan Greenspan op-ed in this vein, one that was written nearly three and a half years ago, but that for all intents and purposes could have been published just yesterday.

 

via Krugman: Deficit scolds “literally have no idea what they’re talking about” – Salon.com.

 

From around the web.

 

From the web site, Duane Graham.

http://duanegraham.wordpress.com/2013/02/26/ben-bernanke-channels-paul-krugman/

I have been watching Ben Bernanke, chairman of the Federal Reserve Board, testify this morning before the Senate Banking Committee.

 

He has sounded a lot like Paul Krugman.*

 

Krugman, an economist of distinction who also happens to be a liberal, has been telling anyone who will listen that all the scary talk about the national debt is misplaced, considering that we have a genuine jobs crisis going on right now.

 

Bernanke said this morning:

 

High unemployment has substantial costs, including not only the hardship faced by the unemployed and their families, but also the harm done to the vitality and productive potential of our economy as a whole.

 

Ya think? He also said—again sounding like Paul Krugman:

 

In terms of the near-term recovery, there is a sense in which monetary and fiscal policy are working at cross purposes. To some extent, the fiscal policy decisions being made are mismatched with the timing of the problem. The problem is a longer-term problem, and should be addressed over a longer time frame in a way that, to the extent possible, it does no harm to the ongoing recovery.

 

In other words, the actions of Congress (fiscal policy—focusing only on long-term debt) are working against the Fed’s actions (monetary policy—buying government bonds now in order to help stimulate the economic recovery) and the result of those “cross purposes” is sluggish growth and needlessly high unemployment.

 

 

 

Pope Acts Against Greed!

Pope Francis met with media
Pope Francis met with media (Photo credit: Catholic Church (England and Wales))

Pope Acts Against Greed!

I’ve been talking about developing a growing respect for the Pope. But now the Pope has acted directly against a major official for his greed. I’m amazed and delighted. The last two Popes fired and replaced left wingers and came down hard on nuns doing social work. The last two Popes fired and investigated sexual predators with the greatest reluctance and the word, coverup, fits the actions of the Church more accurately than investigation. And yet, a Pope just canned somebody for their ostentatious life style. Am I dreaming?

I don’t think I am easy to impress and this new Pope is definitely more than I expected.

If you consider the Catholic Church in some sense a business, this is proper business ethics in practice. I like it.

James Pilant

Pope suspends German ‘bling bishop’

Bishop Franz-Peter Tebartz-van Elst of Limburg ordered to leave his diocese amid scandal over his alleged lavish spending

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/oct/23/pope-suspends-german-luxury-bishop

His new private residence will cost €31m and include a €15,000 bathtub, furnishings worth €380,000 and a garden that came with a €783,000 bill. But the “bling bishop” of Limburg is unlikely ever to enjoy the benefits of his luxurious new home, after he was temporarily suspended from his post by the pope yesterday.

In a press statement, the Vatican said it had been confronted with a situation in which Franz-Peter Tebartz-van Elst “could not follow his duty as bishop” and had decided to allow him “some time outside the diocese”. A final verdict on the bishop’s future is expected after the completion of an internal investigation into the Limburg building project.

Tebartz-van Elst has come under increasing criticism since the estimated cost of his new residence – described by some newspapers as “palatial” – rose to €31m (£26m) earlier this month.

He is also facing legal action for allegedly lying under oath about a first-class flight to India, in a row with the news magazine Der Spiegel.

It is hard to imagine a greater contrast between the alleged luxurious living habits of the German bishop and the ascetic style of the Argentinian pontiff, who, from his first hours in office, has made clear his desire for “a poor church … for the poor”. Shunning the large and opulent apostolic palace, the pontiff has chosen instead to live in the simple surrounds of the Domus Sanctae Marthae, a Vatican guesthouse. He often travels in used cars and has urged priests to do the same, telling them: “If you like the fancy one, just think about how many children are dying of hunger in the world.”

From around the web.

From the web site, Silent Voice.

http://silentmaj.wordpress.com/2013/10/24/pope-francis-suspends-bishop-of-bling/

Pope Francis means Business….Days of the So called princes’ of the Church seem to be numbered..The Laity will Certainly Stand by you, in this fight against corrupt practices within the Church, Dear HOLY FATHER…..

GREG

Thomas Friedman Gets Entitlements Wrong

English: In the United States, Social Security...
English: In the United States, Social Security benefits for married workers with stay-at-home spouses. According to author Joseph Fried, this graphic uses information from: C. Eugene Steuerle and Adam Carasso, “The USA Today Lifetime Social Security and Medicare Benefits Calculator,” (Urban Institute, October 1, 2004), from: http://www.urban.org/publications/900746.html. Note: The calculator does not include the value or cost of the Social Security disability program. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

 

 

 

Thomas Friedman Gets Entitlements Wrong

 

Sorry Kids, Thomas Friedman Is Not Very Good at Economics

 

http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/sorry-kids-thomas-friedman-is-not-very-good-at-economics

 

Many young people may have been mislead by Thomas Friedman’s column, titled “Sorry Kids: We Ate It All,” which implied that our children might somehow suffer because we are paying so much to seniors for Social Security and Medicare. The reality of course is that if our children and grandchildren do not enjoy much higher standards of living than do current workers and retirees then it will be because the rich have rigged the deck so that they can accrue most of the gains from economic growth.

 

This is easy to show. For example, if we look at the Social Security trustees report we see that average annual wages are projected to grow at more than a 1.3 percent annual rate between now and 2050. As a result, the average before tax wage will be more than 60 percent higher in 2060 than it is today. If our children and grandchildren get to share equally in these gains then they will be far richer than we are today.

 

It’s true that we will have a higher ratio of retirees to workers in 2050, just as we have a higher ratio of retirees to workers than we did in 1970. Just as the increase in the ratio of retirees to workers over the last 4 decades did not prevent an increase in average living standards over this period, there is no reason to think it will prevent an increase in average living standards over the next four decades.

 

I heartily agree with Dean Baker of the Center for Economic and Policy Research. The generational theft storyline has been running around for a while and it is both wrong and unconvincing. Let’s take me for instance, I have my form in the mail from the Social Security Administration telling me what to expect. If I wait all the way until I’m 70, I will receive, $1,440 a month. I’m a little curious? When did that become a princely sum? Is this the kind of money that will enable me to go the sand and surf of Hawaii or does it more look like I’m going to have trouble paying for a place to live and basic groceries. I’m leaning toward the latter conclusion. Even in Arkansas, 1,440 dollars a month is not going to pay for a mansion. I might add that I have been paying in on that all of my working life, so it’s not free as far as I am concerned.

 

Well, what about Medicare? Well, it’s obvious to me although not to Friedman, that medical patents are being abused, that not allowing prescription drugs to either be bargained for by the federal government or purchased overseas is creating dramatically high medical costs and there are a bundles of other good choices we have to reduce out medical costs instead of telling seniors, “It’s just too bad, you got old while Thomas Friedman was considered an expert.”

 

Where do these people get the gall to tell the great middle class to go without pensions and health care when they have expressed no willingness to fix the nation’s problems? Why do we have a system where capital gains is taxed at less than wages? Why do we have no financial transaction tax to discourage the speculation which has wrought havoc all over this nation and the world?

 

 

 

James Pilant

 

From around the web.

 

From the web site, Okieprogressive.

 

http://okieblog.wordpress.com/2013/05/29/social-security-and-medicare/

 

Social Security and Medicare are programs that are needed relevant and necessary!

 

The economy is slowing repairing itself but we still have those on the right who want to deep-six any social safety net that would protect our seniors, the poor and disadvantaged, the sick, the halt and the lame. These are very people whom even Jesus Christ said should always be protected and aided. People like Tom Coburn don’t agree with Jesus on that, even though Coburn professes to be a follower of that Jewish Rabbi from Nazareth he had publicly stated that Social Security and Medicare are programs that we really don’t need to continue. Tom must have read a different Bible from all the ones I have read.

 

But, that is the current mantra for a lot of neo-cons and they are influencing a lot of neo-newbies who are coming and have come into the workforce over the past decade. These are people most of whom have never known any toil or strife in their lives because of safety nets like Social Security and Medicare were there for their parents and grandparents. They are the very ones buying to the neo-cons who claim most of the people who are poor don’t try hard enough or don’t or are lazy and shiftless and don’t really want to work. It’s a completely asinine idea, but they are buying hook line and sinker. When you have never known what is to be hungry or out of work I guess it is difficult to understand that, that is something that doesn’t necessarily mean you caused it.

 

 

International Implications of Shutdown

United States Capitol, Washington, D.C., east ...
United States Capitol, Washington, D.C., east front elevation (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

 

 

 

 

International Implications of Shutdown

 

Did you notice how odd it was that during the shutdown and the subsequent debt ceiling game of chicken that there was precious little discussion of the international implications? I did. It worries me.

 

Thinking that the United States is invulnerable like Superman might make you confident but it can also make you dead.

 

What other nations think and do matters? How much was put at risk overseas by actions here? Did we put our allies at risk and give our enemies an advantage?

 

A few brains in Washington would be good, some working ones anyway.

 

James Pilant

 

BERLIN: Europeans agog at Americans’ inability to compromise, aghast at likely long-term impact | Politics | McClatchy DC

 

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2013/10/18/205712/europeans-agog-at-americans-inability.html

 

No one was amused, however. The United States, after all, is not a bit player on the international stage like Greece. It is the unquestioned global leader. And while after a decade of controversial war it’s not so unusual for Europeans to express hostility toward the United States, many were shocked to see how hostile Americans seem to be to one another – and disinterested in how their internal fight might affect the rest of the world.“This is pure domestic politics,” said Xenia Dormandy, an expert on the United States and its place in the world at the London think tank Chatham House. “Nobody cares about any of the international implications. There’s a lack of desire to even think about the repercussions.”The discord will have long-term consequences, even if the United States is able to see its way through this crisis to yet another battle over spending and the debt ceiling that will come early next year, some predict.

 

via BERLIN: Europeans agog at Americans’ inability to compromise, aghast at likely long-term impact | Politics | McClatchy DC.

 

From around the web.

 

From the web site, Phoebe Rees, JN 325.

 

http://phoebereesjn325.wordpress.com/2013/10/07/7-british-misconceptions-about-the-us-government-shutdown/

 

On Tuesday, the US government shut down. If you’re a fellow Brit like

me, you might be thinking, “how can this happen – can Democrats and

Republicans not even be charged with the simplest task of keeping the

government open?” undoubtably leading to “the system has collapsed, the

apocalypse is now!” Alas no, this isn’t some sort of Anarchist utopia,

it happens reasonable frequently and can be explained a lot more simply

than you think. Here are the most common misconceptions about the US

government shutdown answered.

 

1. The government has shut down. Does this mean that the system has collapsed? 

 

No. Constitutionally, congress must pass laws to spend money. If they

can’t agree on a spending bill, they don’t have the authority to spend

money. Most of the ‘system’ is still in place, but non-essential

services such as gun licensing, zoos and national parks will close for

the duration of the shutdown. So basically, no guns and no zoos for the

foreseeable future. …

 

Ireland Tax Haven for American Corporations

[Howth and Ireland's Eye. County Dublin, Irela...
[Howth and Ireland’s Eye. County Dublin, Ireland] (LOC) (Photo credit: The Library of Congress)

Ireland Tax Haven for American Corporations

Is it ethical to have a company in the U.S. base a subsidiary in a nation like Ireland to avoid paying taxes here? The company being discussed here is Apple. Do you suppose since they used this tax haven to pay an effective two percent tax on their profits, that perhaps they are not acting responsibly in regard to their duties? Are the roads, bridges and communications systems the company uses free or do they cost tax money? Are educated workers free or do schools have to be financed to educate them? Does the fire department, the police and the military defend Apple and all of its possessions on a charity basis?

It must enhance the profits of a company immensely to sit inside a highly developed nation with elaborate communication hubs, educational systems and complex legal protections and pay virtually nothing for any of it.

Well, if they don’t then who does? I’m sure you can make a guess, my average reader is probably paying a far higher proportion of their income in taxes than the two percent Apple wound up with.

Is that fair? Is it ethical to shirk your responsibilities to your country?

I’ve heard it said that all taxation is a form of theft. That’s an interesting theory. It conveys a certain sense of righteousness in not paying taxes because, after all, you are preventing a robbery. However, I am a great reader of history and i am unable to discover any successful civilization that did not use shared burdens to develop and maintain their nation.

James Pilant

Ireland To End ‘Stateless’ Tax Avoidance Gimmick, Leave Others Untouched

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2013/10/16/2791501/ireland-corporate-tax-change/

The scheme Noonan wishes to stop became famous this spring when a Senate investigation found that Apple had paid nearly zero taxes on around $100 billion in sales revenue. Apple’s arrangement, which even critics say is a completely legal exploitation of a poorly designed global tax system, relied upon three subsidiaries incorporated in Ireland but not “resident” there for tax purposes. Noonan said Tuesday that his budget proposal would “ensure that Irish-registered companies cannot be ‘stateless’ in terms of their place of tax residency,” adding that “we don’t want to incur any reputational damage.”

While Noonan’s move would end this particular form of tax evasion, a more common form that uses shell companies registered in Ireland will go untouched. A company can still register in Ireland but avoid paying its 12.5 percent corporate tax rate by declaring tax residence in some other country with lower corporate rates, Bloomberg reports. While Apple-style tax statelessness is relatively rare, Irish subsidiaries registering to pay taxes in Bermuda, Luxembourg, and other tax haven countries is not. Google, Yahoo!, LinkedIn, eBay, and Microsoft all use such schemes to avoid taxes by moving global revenues from points of sale to Ireland, and then from Ireland to another tax haven. Ireland’s proposal is therefore “a very small step” and “relevant only to Apple,” former Joint Committee on Taxation chief of staff Edward Kleinbard told Reuters.

From around the web.

From the web site, Venture Beat.

http://venturebeat.com/2013/05/22/ireland-were-no-tax-haven-but-yes-apple-did-pay-2-tax/

This is a stumper.

The head of the Irish agency designed to promote foreign investment in the country strongly denied that Ireland is a tax haven. But when questioned by Ireland’s RTE News, he could not deny that Apple has paid an effective tax rate of just two percent, much as Senator Carl Levin (D-MI) said yesterday in hearings on Capitol Hill.

Which, frankly, sounds pretty tax haven-ish.

“There is global competition, and tax happens to be one of the areas [where] Ireland competes for global investment,” IDA Ireland Chief Executive Barry O’Leary told RTE this morning.

That also sounds suspiciously like a tax haven. That’s what Senator Levin believes, as well.

“You are able to shift profits to places where you, an American company, don’t pay taxes,” Levin said yesterday to Apple CEO Tim Cook. “That is not right … that a company could shift its value to a tax haven, which is what Ireland is.”

Read more at http://venturebeat.com/2013/05/22/ireland-were-no-tax-haven-but-yes-apple-did-pay-2-tax/#gXo2Y2xGqeHZji3x.99

Josh Barro Clobbers Niall Ferguson

 

Josh Barro Clobbers Niall Ferguson

 

In spite of our dramatically different political views, Josh Barro is beginning to grow on me. Certainly, this is just delightful, some good rhetorical punches are being thrown here!

 

James Pilant

 

Panelist Economic Historian Niall Ferguson at ...
Panelist Economic Historian Niall Ferguson at “Special World Debate” (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

 

Niall Ferguson uses Twitter science to prove he’s better than everyone.

 

http://www.slate.com/blogs/business_insider/2013/10/15/niall_ferguson_uses_twitter_science_to_prove_he_s_better_than_everyone.html

 

The reason Ferguson wants to talk about civility is that he can\’t talk about not being full of crap. Ferguson trades on his academic credentials to write popular articles that contain misleading and false claims. His writing causes readers to come away with a worse understanding of the economy than they entered with. He is changing the world for the worse.

 

My contention is not that we haven\’t been uncivil to Ferguson. We definitely have. My contention is that he deserves it.

 

via Niall Ferguson uses Twitter science to prove he’s better than everyone..

From around the web.

From the web site, The Inverse Square (This is a fun web site – please go visit. jp).

https://inversesquare.wordpress.com/2013/10/10/very-serious-person-niall-ferguson-haz-a-sad/

Too much to do today to go all John Foster Dulles on Harvard’s Folly, but I can’t leave this without noting that if Niall’s honestly not scared of Krugman (he is), he should be.

 

Cases in point here and here and here and here.  This isn’t a fair fight.  Ferguson has the debate chops and the accent, but nothing else. Krugman has both technical skill and the willingness to engage actual data to gut the Harvard Bully Boy on the actual merits of the argument.  That Ferguson plays better on TV is his reason for being, but not a recommendation.  (BTW — for a devastating synoptic view of Ferguson’s style and (lack of) substance — and his pure nastiness in the service of the 1%, check out this overview.)

 

 

Subverting Pensions for Profit

English: The corner of Wall Street and Broadwa...
English: The corner of Wall Street and Broadway, showing the limestone facade of One Wall Street in the background. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

 

 

 

 

Subverting Pensions for Profit

 

There are real plots, real conspiracies. It’s a sad thing that people sometimes unite not for ethical or moral principles but for the destruction of people’s lives, for predation, for money at any cost.

 

One of the constant themes in the lust for profits has been the conversion of public goods into private possessions: public and charity hospitals often run by churches converted into private property; parks, highways, parking meters, converted into private ventures, America’s public lands opened up for fracking in the one of the greatest land grabs in all of recorded history … I can go on and on.

 

Here is another one, public pension funds being converted into Wall Street Piggy Banks, looted with fees and then fed into speculation for anyone’s profit but the pension fund’s. It is as if the national looting of the last generation, the conversion of pensions into the predatory and vicious 401K’s didn’t generate enough profit, we must never stop looting, never stop stealing, never stop creating fictitious crises to be exploited.

 

Maybe this one can be stopped. I would like to see that.

 

James Pilant

 

The right’s sinister new plot against pensions – Salon.com

 

http://www.salon.com/2013/10/10/the_rights_sinister_new_plot_against_pensions/

 

As state legislatures prepare for their upcoming sessions, you will no doubt hear a lot about public pensions. More specifically, you will hear allegations that states are going bankrupt because of their pension obligations to public employees. These claims will inevitably be used to argue that states must renege on their pension promises to retirees.This is what I’ve called the Plot Against Pensions in a report I recently completed for the Institute for America’s Future. Engineered by billionaire former Enron trader John Arnold, championed by seemingly nonpartisan groups like the Pew Charitable Trusts and operating in states throughout America, this plot is not designed to strengthen pensions or to save taxpayer money, as its proponents claim. It is designed to slash public employees’ guaranteed retirement income in order to both protect states’ corporate welfare and, in some cases, enrich Wall Street.Consider the math of state budgets. According to Pew’s estimates, “The gap between states’ assets and their obligations for public sector retirement benefits (is) $1.38 trillion” over 30 years. As the Center for Economic and Policy Research notes, this gap was not caused by benefit increases, as conservatives suggest. Data prove that most of it was caused by the stock market decline that accompanied the 2008 financial colla

 

via The right’s sinister new plot against pensions – Salon.com.

From around the web.

From the web site, Brave New World.

http://bravenewworldnews.com/2013/10/01/the-plot-against-pensions/

Finding: Conservative activists are manufacturing the perception of a public pension crisis in order to both slash modest retiree benefits and preserve expensive corporate subsidies and tax breaks.

 

States and cities have for years been failing to fully fund their annual pension obligations. They have used funds that were supposed to go to pensions to instead finance expensive tax cuts and corporate subsidies. That has helped create a real but manageable pension shortfall. Yet, instead of citing such a shortfall as reason to end expensive tax cuts and subsidies, conservative activists and lawmakers are citing it as a reason to slash retiree benefits.

 

Finding: The amount states and cities spend on corporate subsidies and so-called tax expenditures is far more than the pension shortfalls they face. Yet, conservative activists and lawmakers are citing the pension shortfalls and not the subsidies as the cause of budget squeezes. They are then claiming that cutting retiree benefits is the solution rather than simply rolling back the more expensive tax breaks and subsidies.

 

According to Pew, public pensions face a 30-year shortfall of $1.38 trillion, or $46 billion on an annual basis. This is dwarfed by the $80 billion a year states and cities spend on corporate subsidies. Yet, conservatives cite the pension shortfall not as reason to reduce the corporate subsidies and raise public revenue, but instead as proof that retiree benefits need to be cut.

 

Finding: The pension “reforms” being pushed by conservative activists would slash retirement income for many pensioners who are not part of the Social Security system. Additionally, the specific reforms they are pushing are often more expensive and risky for taxpayers than existing pension plans.

 

 

A Progressive Plan for Action

English: Depiction of the Senate vote on H.R. ...
English: Depiction of the Senate vote on H.R. 3590 (the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act) on December 24, 2009, by state. Two Democratic yeas One Democratic yea, one Republican nay One Republican nay, one Republican not voting Two Republican nays (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

 

 

 

 

A Progressive Plan for Action

 

Michael Lind’s article, The South is Holding America Hostage, strikes me as compelling. Certainly, the history of the South and my personal experiences living in that part of the country provides support for that point of view. And he is also right that like an army on the offensive, they have their opposition constantly fumbling around trying to set up some kind of last minute, patchwork, cobbled together defense.

 

Lind offers a set of goals to put what he calls the “Southern Autonomy Project” on the defensive. I find many of them good choices.

 

I would like to add as goals, a nationwide system of high speed rail, a system of free college education and implied in that a total and complete end to the student load system and a repair of America’s failing infrastructure.

 

James Pilant

 

The South is holding America hostage

 

The Tea Party’s not crazy — they had a plan. Now liberals and progressives need one, too

 

 

http://www.salon.com/2013/10/13/the_south_is_holding_america_hostage/

 

Setting political difficulty aside, it is intellectually easy to set forth a grand national strategy that consists of coordinated federal policies to defeat the Southern Autonomy Project.

 

A federal living wage.  At one blow, a much higher federal minimum wage would cripple the ability of Southern states to lure companies from more generous states which supplement the too-low present federal minimum wage with higher local state or urban minimum wages.  (Strong national unions could do the same, but that is not a realistic option at present.)

 

Nationalization of social insurance.  Social insurance programs with both federal and state components, like Medicaid and the Affordable Care Act (“Obamacare”), allow Southern states to be stingier than many other states, creating more desperate workers who are more dependent on the mercy of employers and elite-dominated charities. Completely federalizing Medicaid (as President Ronald Reagan suggested!) and other hybrid federal-state social insurance programs would cripple the Southern Autonomy Project further.

 

Real voting rights.  Using the authority of the Fifteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, Congress should completely federalize voting requirements for all federal, state and local elections, making it as easy as possible for U.S. citizens to vote — over the objections of kicking and screaming neo-Confederates.

 

Nonpartisan redistricting.  Partisan redistricting by majorities in state legislatures should be replaced by nonpartisan redistricting commissions, as in California, New Jersey and other states.  The redistricting commissions should be truly nonpartisan, not “bipartisan” arrangements in which incumbent Republicans and incumbent Democrats cut deals to protect their safe seats from competition. (Electoral reforms like instant run-off voting and proportional representation are struggles for a more distant future).

 

Abolish the Senate filibuster.  The filibuster is not part of the U.S. constitution. It has been used by Southern white conservatives from the nineteenth century to the twenty-first to preserve Southern white power and economic privilege. This relic of premodern  British parliamentary politics should be abolished. Democracy means majority rule. If the Southern Right loses a battle in Congress, it can try to round up allies and win next time. It should no longer be able to paralyze the Senate, the Congress or the federal government as a whole.

 

Abolish the federal debt ceiling completely.  The federal debt ceiling is another institution like the filibuster which has now been ruined by being abused by Southern conservatives. Now that the Southern right is trying to turn it into a recurrent tool of hostage-taking when it loses votes in Congress, the federal debt ceiling should be abolished. The federal government should be authorized to borrow any amount necessary to fund spending appropriated or authorized by Congress, if there is any shortfall in tax revenues.

 

From around the web.

 

From the web site,

 

http://ukiahcommunityblog.wordpress.com/2011/01/19/the-progressive-liberal-agenda/

 

The Progressive Liberal agenda has always

been about caring for and empowering the least among us (Matthew 25),

and setting a secure floor under our citizenry. Teddy Roosevelt’s Square

Deal: a living wage, a basic safety net; Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal:

Social Security; Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society: the elimination of

poverty and racial injustice, and Medicare/Medicaid. It’s been about

building America from the ground up using government only for what is

absolutely necessary and providing a basic standing point: free public

education, free medical care, and care for the needy and elderly as in

all other developed countries in the world. And, yes, tax the wealthy

and very wealthy more than the middle class folks who

are just working every day. Why? Because the wealthy benefit more from

the commons and thus should pay a higher percentage of their income for

it.

 

Every positive step forward in this

country has been brought by the Progressive Left… and the Right’s agenda

has been to say No. Progressives brought us the 50-hour work week, then

the 40-hour work week. The Right said No. Progressives brought us the

Minimum Wage. The Right said No. Progressives brought us the right to

unionize the workplace. The Right said No. Progressives brought us

worker safety laws so people don’t die in factories or offices which

used to be one of the leading causes of death in the US, but not

anymore. The Right said No.

 

 

Poor People Having Air Conditioning Offends Fox News

Fox News Channel
Fox News Channel (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

 

Poor People Having Air Conditioning Offends Fox News

 

I’m originally from Oklahoma and we often have weeks of above 100 degree temperature. In fact, one year Oklahoma City had fifty one days in a row of above 100 degree temperature.

 

So, I find air conditioning to be a necessity for many people not to mention those like me with serious allergies. And, of course, air conditioners are now mass produced to the extent that new ones are less than one hundred dollars and used ones much less. So, even poor people can often acquire one. It does not make me angry that poor people have them.

 

Should poor people have to actively suffer so that Fox News commentators can feel better about themselves? I hope not.

 

Being poor is hideous. Every expense is a problem that may not be solvable. Every day is another day of not having things other people take for granted; having things like food. Apparently the reality of food insecurity in this country is not taken seriously by Fox News.

 

  • In 2010, 17.2 million households, 14.5 percent of
    households (approximately one in seven), were food
    insecure, the highest number ever recorded in the United
    States 1
    (Coleman-Jensen 2011, p. v.) 
  • In 2010, about one-third of food-insecure households
    (6.7 million households, or 5.4 percent of all U.S.
    households) had very low food security (compared with 4.7
    million households (4.1 percent) in 2007.
    In households with very low food security, the food
    intake of some household
    members was reduced, and their normal eating patterns
    were disrupted
    because of the household’s food insecurity
    (Coleman-Jensen 2011, p. v.,

    Nord  2009
    , p. iii.) .

 

I’ll let them have air conditioning. It doesn’t diminish me.

 

James Pilant

 

Hasselbeck Says People On Welfare Shouldn’t Have Air Conditioners

 

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2013/10/11/hasselbeck-says-air-conditioning-entitlement-video/

 

When the right-wing talks about welfare and ‘entitlements,’ their not-so Christian attitude becomes abundantly clear. They have all sorts of stories about how welfare recipients experience all of the finer things in life and clearly they are abusing the system. Welfare recipients are not supposed to have nice clothes; they should wear rags instead so that Republicans are satisfied that they are indeed poor. Recipients are not allowed to have a decent looking car, who cares if it was bought before they fell on hard times. People on welfare should never, ever buy junk food. Oh that cake was for your kid’s birthday? Too bad, celebrate with mud pies. A welfare recipient has a phone? Well they shouldn’t! Poor people shouldn’t have phones! Well now Elisabeth Hasselbeck and her fellow co-workers over at Fox News have new items to add to the list of things poor people should not own or use: televisions and air conditioning.

 

Hasselbeck Says Welfare Recipients Don’t Deserve Air Conditioning

 

Yes, you read that right. Hasselbeck thinks that if a person is on government assistance they are not entitled to a television in their home — or an air conditioner.

 

via Hasselbeck Says People On Welfare Shouldn’t Have Air Conditioners.

 

From around the web.

 

From the web site, Poverty and Policy.

 

http://povertyandpolicy.wordpress.com/2011/08/09/how-many-poor-people-in-america-heritage-foundation-says-damn-few/

 

Seems that the Heritage Foundation has dusted off some old rhetoric and shaped some new data to fit it. Thus it proclaims, much as it did
in 2007, that “many of the 30 million Americans defined as ‘poor’ and
in need of government assistance” are actually doing very nicely, thank
you.

 

First, a word of clarification. The reference to 30 million is just sloppy blogging. The Foundation’s actual report says “over 30 million.” Technically accurate, but minimizing. The latest Census Bureau income and poverty report tell us that there were nearly 43.6 million people in poverty in 2009.

 

As I (and many others) have written before, this figure is based on a rather primitive and woefully outdated measure, i.e., the inflation-adjusted cost of what used to be the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s cheapest meal plan.

 

The Census Bureau is developing an alternative measure based on recommendations from the National Academy of Sciences.

 

But the Heritage Foundation doesn’t care for that — indeed, has
delivered its latest blast in part to argue (again) that the new measure
is a sneaky scheme by the Obama administration to advance a “spread the
wealth” agenda.

 

Its main goal, however, is to give aid and comfort to Republicans in Congress who want to slash spending on public benefits.

 

 

▶ Slavery in Brazil, A Tragic History

English: Slavery in Brazil, by Jean-Baptiste D...
English: Slavery in Brazil, by Jean-Baptiste Debret (1768-1848). Español: La esclavitud, de Jean-Baptiste Debret Deutsch: Sklaverei in Brasilien, Jean-Baptiste Debret (1768-1848). Português: Escravidão no Brasil, Jean-Baptiste Debret (1768-1848). (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

I was surprised to find that slavery in Brazilian history was quite likely to have been more savage and more laden with death and torture than American slavery. Blacks couldn’t catch a break in either North America or South America.

James Pilant

From around the web.

From the web site, Latin American Musings.

http://latinamericanmusings.wordpress.com/2009/05/13/today-in-latin-america-brazil-abolishes-slavery/

Today in 1888 (121 years ago) Brazil officially abolished its slave trade – the last nation in the Western Hemisphere to do so.

Slavery and the slave trade dealt exclusively with Africa and
persisted for nearly 400 years. Brazil lasted longer than any other
Western Hemispheric nation, although the US South had the highest
concentration of slaves that the world has ever seen – 6 million on the
eve of the Civil War in 1860. Brazil never reached those heights, but it
used slaves in the same fashion as white southerners did. Not only was
slavery economically essential to parts of Brazil, but it also created
castes of human beings that persist today.