Posts Tagged ‘job creation’

In the video below, President Franklin Roosevelt talked about the powerful wealthy vested interests that had taken over the USA government prior to his election in 1932. FDR proposed and signed into law legislation that curbed the power and influence of those vested interests in government at all levels, including a 90 percent top marginal tax rate. That reduced the influence of corruption in government, by reducing the money the corrupting people possessed.

President Carter was the last president under the old regime of anti-corruption established by FDR, which is why the US government never fired a missile, or a pistol, or dropped a bomb on another nation during his reign, which, coincidentally, is looking better and better every time we look back at it.

The Reagan tax cuts for the rich unleashed the power of the rich to corrupt government, and that is precisely why, as FDR said in 1936, corporate interests now consider the US government to be a “mere appendage to their own affairs. We know now that Government by organized money (corporate interests) is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob (organized crime).” Parenthesis mine.

This is why the US government,

1. demands state wide testing, because it’s highly profitable for the publishing industry, and it redistributes income from local and state taxpayers to rich investors of the publishing industry.

2. wages constant war, because it is highly profitable in that it redistributes income from the taxpayers to the rich shareholders of the war industry.

3. gives fewer grants to university students, because it forces college students to take out more student loans, which redistributes income from the 99 to the 1 percent. Wall Street banks purchase the loans, and then issues bonds against the loans to rich investors. Students pay back the loans, but a large portion of their payment goes to the rich bondholders.

4. raised student loan interest rates from 3.4 to 6.8 percent on all new loans a year ago. Republicans and Democratic lawmakers supported this because it forces students to pay more interest to rich investors.

5. negotiates trade treaties, which are nothing more than income redistribution scam. The treaties pave the legal way for corporations to ship and create jobs overseas, and the difference between the old higher US pay and the new lower third world pay goes straight into the wallets of the 1 percent via higher corporate profits, surging dividends and rising share prices.

The list goes on and on. The federal government is totally corrupted to the core, as are many state and local governments. This corruption is the only cause of the income inequality that has occurred in the USA over the last thirty-five years, whereby 1 percent of the population stole 8 percent of the total income produced in the USA when Carter was president, but now rob the rest of us blind by stealing 37 percent of all income produced in the USA. Since President Obama took office, the 1 percent have been stealing 95 percent of all income growth.

That’s why President Carter created on average more jobs per year with rising real wages than every president since him. That’s why Carter was one of the great presidents in US history. The 99 percent earned 92 percent of all income back then, and were able to purchase goods and services in sufficient quantities to create more jobs per year, and with rising real wages every year, than during the reign of any president since then. And that’s precisely why the propaganda machine known as the corporate news media, politicians like Wall Street Senator John McCain, and rich parasites are always putting President Carter down, and call him weak and a bad president, If we look back at the economy of Carter, and his foreign policies, we would call his era the last golden age of the American dream.

Today’s economy is the weakest in history by any measure, including wage and job growth. That’s because the 99 percent now receive only 63 percent of all income in the US. Those people can no longer afford to purchase the goods and services necessary to sustain a strong economy, and those in business and political offices know this is the problem that vexes this economy, but they won’t do anything about it due to the massive corruption.

Excerpt from FDR’s speech:

“For twelve years this Nation was afflicted with hear-nothing, see-nothing, do-nothing Government. The Nation looked to Government but the Government looked away. Nine mocking years with the golden calf and three long years of the scourge! Nine crazy years at the ticker and three long years in the breadlines! Nine mad years of mirage and three long years of despair! Powerful influences strive today to restore that kind of government with its doctrine that that Government is best which is most indifferent.

For nearly four years you have had an Administration which instead of twirling its thumbs has rolled up its sleeves. We will keep our sleeves rolled up.

We had to struggle with the old enemies of peace‹business and financial monopoly, speculation, reckless banking, class antagonism, sectionalism, war profiteering.

They had begun to consider the Government of the United States as a mere appendage to their own affairs. We know now that Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob.

Never before in all our history have these forces been so united against one candidate as they stand today. They are unanimous in their hate for me‹and I welcome their hatred.”

Read Full Post »

The Intelligent Economics Behind Raising the Minimum Wage

Read Full Post »

It should also be pointed out that tax cuts for the rich destroy jobs, because the rich take their ill gotten gains, and purchase legislation from politicians to ship jobs overseas, which does not create jobs, but destroys them, at least here in the United States. That’s just one of the ways tax cuts for the rich destroys jobs. There is not one iota of evidence that any tax cut for the rich has ever created a single net job in US history.

Read Full Post »

It should be pointed out that the rich use the money from their tax cuts to corrupt government at all levels, and rig the economic and political markets against the 99 percent, and push for legislation that redistributes income from the 99 to the 1 percent. It should also be pointed out that all of the evidence says that tax cuts for the rich destroys jobs, rather than creates them, and for the reasons mentioned above.

Because tax cuts by the wealthy are used to corrupt government, which then passes treaties and legislation that redistributes income from the 99 to the 1 percent, which in turn weakens the demand for goods and services on the part of the 99 percent, and leaves the once healthy economy staggering like a drunk sailor, it can be stated with a high degree of certainty that tax cuts for wealthy wreck economies, and suppress the demand for goods and services, something that President Franklin Roosevelt understood. See the video below.

Now that demand is weak due to tax cuts, US corporations are forced to sit on $6-7 trillion in the US, and another $6-10 trillion overseas. That money is not creating jobs, it’s destroying jobs by not being used to purchase goods and services. If that money were being spent by the 99 percent, the economy would be humming like it was the 1960’s again.

For an example of how tax cuts for the rich destroy an economy, what has occurred in the United States over the last thirty-four years of giving tax cuts to the rich is an excellent example.

Read Full Post »

The Oregonian writer Steve Duin wrote a nice piece about teacher cutbacks at Franklin High School coming in the next few months. He only told the effects, and I asked him to write about what has caused these cutbacks. Below is a link to his well written column, and below that is my response.

At Portland's Franklin High School, the Bell Tolls for…Them

Dear Steve Duin,
I appreciate your nice, but short-sighted, story titled, “At Franklin, the bell tolls for…them.” You quote teacher Portia Hall as saying, “’I’ve been teaching for fifteen years, and I’ve never had a year when we didn’t cut. Even when times were good.’”

Why don’t you tell the whole story about school funding and teacher cut backs? Why don’t you write about how free trade treaties have shipped jobs and much of the tax base overseas? Why don’t you write about how those treaties make it more profitable for American businesses to create jobs in other nations rather than here? Why don’t you write about how the difference between the old higher wages in the US and the new lower wages over there go into the pockets of Wall Street fat cats and other rich people via higher corporate profits, enhanced dividends and rising share prices? The people that lose those jobs wind up searching for work. That’s not a very good trade. This leads to a good question.

What are the federal government and the American economy for? Is it to redistribute more income to the already rich at the expense of working people? That’s been happening for the last thirty years.

These agreements are the primary reason why the rich are getting richer. They’re why the one percent received 93 percent of total US income growth from 2009 to 2010.

Why is the tax base crumbling? Why are teachers being laid off three years after the official end of the recession? Why can’t the economy create over 12 million jobs with rising real wages nowadays, like it did when Jimmy Carter was president and the economy and the population were only about 60 percent the size of what they are now? Why have only 4 million jobs with declining real wages and salaries been created in the twelve years since George W. Bush took office? Why is the economy so weak?

Free trade “income redistribution” agreements are the greatest reasons the one percent receive nearly 25 percent of the total US income nowadays compared with about 8 percent under Carter. The result has been devastating to the 99 percent in lost jobs, declining real income, demand too weak to create jobs in the US at previous levels, evaporating tax bases, teachers voting to strike in Gresham-Barlow and the Parkrose districts. These agreements are also the primary reasons why Portia Hall has never seen “a year we didn’t cut.”

Just open your eyes and look at those free trade treaties and ask yourself what the upcoming Trans Pacific Free Trade Agreement is going to do to 99 percent of Americans. If it’s implemented, the agreement is going to redistribute even more income to the one percent from the 99 percent, leading to more jobs shipped overseas, jobs created in other nations rather than here, shrinking tax bases, cutbacks in education, police, firefighters and all kinds of government positions and programs that the 99 percent rely upon. Are these the results we want from our federal government and our economy? I don’t think so, but that’s what we’ve got.

So I ask you again, Why don’t you write about the causes, as well as the effects? Why don’t you tell the whole story?

Warmest Regards,

John Hively

Read Full Post »


BEST THING I HAVE HEARD YET…..From a senior citizen around 80 yrs. of age, back in 2012.

We aren’t useless yet.


There recently was an article in the St. Petersburg , Fl. Times. The Business Section asked readers for ideas on:

“How Would You Fix the Economy?” I think this guy nailed it!

Dear Mr. President,

Please find below my suggestion for fixing America ‘s economy. Instead of giving billions of dollars to companies that will squander the money on lavish parties and unearned bonuses, use the following plan.

You can call it the “Patriotic Retirement Plan”:

There are about 40 million people over 50 in the work force. Pay them $1 million apiece severance for early retirement with the following stipulations:

1) They MUST retire. Forty million job openings – Unemployment fixed.

2) They MUST buy a new AMERICAN Car. Forty million cars ordered – Auto Industry fixed.

3) They MUST either buy a house or pay off their mortgage – Housing Crisis fixed.

It can’t get any easier than that!!

P.S. If more money is needed, have all members in Congress pay their taxes..

Mr. President, while you’re at it, make Congress retire on Social Security and Medicare. I’ll bet both programs would be fixed pronto!

If you think this would work, please forward to everyone you know.
If not, please disregard.

Read Full Post »

The incredible shrinking Obama

Politico By Glenn Thrush, Carrie Budoff Brown | Politico – Wed, Sep 7, 2011

The once-muscular presidency of Barack Obama has undergone a dramatic downsizing – in power, popularity, prestige and ambition – to the point where even Obama die-hards are starting to question his ability to right the economy or win reelection.

Three polls in a single day Tuesday all told the same sorry tale – the avatar of hope and change, the slayer of Osama bin Laden, the president with dreams of a billion-dollar reelection campaign – is losing popular support and bleeding political power fifteen months ahead of Election Day.

“He has sort of lost the sense of power and mystique of the presidency,” says longtime Obama ally Andy Stern, former president of the powerful Service Employees International Union. “There’s also a sense that people aren’t scared of him. That’s very dangerous.”

That makes Thursday’s high-stakes jobs speech before a joint session of Congress all the more critical for the White House. It’s not only Obama’s last chance to take a big, bold stroke at spurring employment, it might be his final opportunity to reassert the dominance he lost last November to congressional Republicans, who seem united on nothing other than the desire see him fail.

It hasn’t been pretty. Last week, hours after Obama acceded to Republican demands he move his speech to a joint session of Congress on jobs from Wednesday to Thursday, his press secretary felt compelled to reassure Americans that no, the speech wouldn’t preempt the NFL’s Packers-Saints season opener.

The speech will now start at the un-presidential hour of 7 p.m., just to make sure no one misses a single pulled hamstring.

“If the address is done by kickoff,” joked one veteran reporter in the White House briefing room on Thursday, “does that mean he sees the speech as the pregame show?”

To Obama, this speech is anything but a joke. Obama’s advisers, wary of leaks and preemptive attacks, haven’t been sharing details of the proposals he will make with members of Congress in either party. But sources tell POLITICO he is considering some new approaches, including the possibility of drafting his proposals as an actual bill, something he hasn’t done much in the past.

And the White House seems genuinely eager for fresh ideas, with aides laying out the framework of his speech to columnists on Tuesday in the Roosevelt Room, and then to a gathering of top Democratic strategists that included former Clinton chief of staff John Podesta, former Clinton press secretary Joe Lockhart, super-lobbyist and former Dick Gephardt aide Steve Elmendorf and Porter Novelli executive Kiki McLean.

The jobs speech, aides say, will be filled with action items, from new infrastructure projects, to the extension of the payroll tax credits — and possibly, according to one senior congressional source, an attempt to provide additional local funding for teachers at a time when they are being laid off by the thousands.

But to critics and allies alike, the fact that the president of the United State has to tip-toe around Aaron Rodgers and Drew Brees for the privilege of delivering a plan for putting Americans back to work is a measure of just how far he’s been humbled by an unforgiving economy, unyielding GOP and an unnerved, underemployed nation.

“He’s allowed the Congress to manhandle him, said one top Democratic ally of Obama’s. “Every time he’s put his foot down they’ve kicked him in the shin. It’s goddamn embarrassing. He’s losing power. He needs to grab it back.”

For some, Obama’s slide has brought to mind the infamous 1992 Time cover on “The Incredible Shrinking President” that described the political death spiral of President George H. W. Bush, who went from a 80-plus approval rating in the aftermath of the first Gulf War to the private sector a year later.

White House officials say that Obama isn’t interested in his image and is willing to do anything, including occasionally losing face, to strike the appropriate balance between job creation and deficit reduction.

If Obama has a power problem, his aides say, it’s only because he has to share it with House Republicans, who have shown a suicidal willingness to push the country to the edge in pursuit of political gain and ideological purity.

“[Obama] fully understands the anxiety that is out there among the American people about the economy [and] the frustration at the pace of growth,” White House press secretary Jay Carney told reporters Tuesday.

On Thursday, when a reporter asked Carney if he felt the president “has gotten the respect from Congress that the office of the presidency deserves” he shot back, “The White House spends zero time worrying about that.”

Maybe they should. Dickinson College political science professor Andrew Rudalevige, who studies the modern presidency, says Carney’s attitude reflects Obama’s antipathy to the imperial vision of the executive branch embraced by President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney.

“Bush and Cheney did everything they could to see that the prestige and power of the office was never diminished — even though it was, through their actions…says Rudalevige. “Obama hasn’t objected to exercise power — look at Libya — but it’s not a priority with him.”

Polls paint an increasingly dark picture of how voters view the impact of what Obama has done.

Almost three in four Americans believe the country is headed in the wrong direction, according to the POLITICO/George Washington University Battleground Poll — a sharp spike in pessimism since May when 60 percent shared that view.

Since the start of the summer, Obama’s own approval rating, especially among independents and swing-state voters, has plateaued at the lowest level of his presidency, dipping to all-time lows in the Gallup daily tracking survey and other polls, from a once-rock steady low-to-mid 40s to the high 30s now.

An overwhelming majority of Americans, 74 percent, still like the president personally, according to the POLITICO/GW survey. But voters are far less confident than early months of his administration that Obama possesses the “right set of characteristics” or policy goals to be president, according to the NBC News/ Wall Street Journal Survey. More than 60 percent of those surveyed say they disapprove of the way the president is handling the economy, according to a third poll – this one by the Washington Post and ABC News – that came out Tuesday.

The graphs that plot Obama’s political fortunes mirror, nearly percentage by percentage, the country’s declining economic confidence. August’s flat employment growth was the latest indication of how the economic recovery has stalled and the Office of Management and Budget’s predicted last week that the unemployment rate will likely remain at 9 percent through next November.

“The data behind it is overwhelming,” said Whit Ayres, a Republican pollster who is working for former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman’s presidential campaign. “It is clear that Americans are settling into the view that President Obama has not been the strong leader and the unifying leader that they hoped for and that his performance, particularly on the economy, is severely lacking.”

Obama has also made history, but not in a good way: He has presided over the first-ever downgrade of the country’s credit rating by Standard & Poor’s, and he was the first president to see his request for a joint session of Congress rebuffed.

Then there was his performance during the recent battle over the deficit. House Speaker John Boehner pulled out of negotiations for one terrifying week, preferring to transact business with Senate Democrats and, ultimately, Vice President Joe Biden. At one point, the speaker wouldn’t even return Obama’s call.

One thing the president isn’t reluctant to do: Give a big speech, even if critics warn that the pulpit isn’t quite so bully as it once was.

“Obama is still suffering from the Speech Illusion,” New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd wrote last weekend. “The idea that he can come down from the mountain, read from a Teleprompter, cast a magic spell with his words and climb back up the mountain, while we scurry around and do what he proclaimed.”

And there is some evidence the speeches aren’t quite having the impact they used to.

Obama’s May 1st announcement of Bin Laden’s death was the most-watched TV event of his term, with 56.5 million staying up til midnight to hear the news. But other speeches haven’t been so well-received.

His two last nationwide addresses, discussing the draw down of troops in Afghanistan and the Libyan intervention ranked 13th and 14th among his prime-time addresses, attracted about 25 million viewers each, and some Democrats questioned the wisdom of staking his prestige on yet another big speech.

“The question isn’t what will the speech say. The question is what does he do after the speech is over,” asks a Democratic aide.

But Obama’s allies say he’s been through the fire before and will emerge stronger once the contrast between his jobs policies and those of the Republican field become clearer.

“They were using the ‘Incredible Shrinking President’ thing against Bill Clinton too, and what did he do? Win re-election by a landslide,” said Neera Tanden, chief operating officer with the liberal Center for American Progress.

Zachary Abrahamson contributed to this story.

Read Full Post »

%d bloggers like this: