Posts Tagged ‘new deal’

Like Republican Party politicians, politicians of the Democratic Party sell their legislative favors to the big money boys for campaign contributions, cushy jobs after they leave office, and millions of dollars in speaking fees. Unlike the Republican Party, the Democratic Party is rapidly fading away.

In fact, it’s reasonable to call the Democratic Party a cash raising machine rather than a political party. As a political party, the corrupt Democratic Party maybe a spent force in national and state elections. So what’s the problem with the Democrats? Let’s begin at the top.

Wall Street President Barack Obama is trying to deliver the biggest income redistribution scam to Wall Street and large corporate donors in time for the Democratic Party to maximize campaign donations just in time for the 2016 election, according to Matt Taibbi of Rolling Stone. Even though Obama might deliver the goods, the beneficiaries of his largeness might not pony up the cash for a dying political party.

The scam is called the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP), which is falsely being marketed as a trade agreement.

The TPP will redistribute massive sums of cash to big corporate donors stolen from the 99 percent. Hundreds of thousands, and likely multiple millions, of jobs will be exported from the USA to lower wage nations due to the TPP. The difference between the old higher US wages will and the new lower foreign wages will go straight into the pockets of the uber rich via higher corporate earnings, share prices and dividends.

This will be a massive boon for the 1 percent, if it comes to pass, but the TPP is likely the death blow to the remains of the Democratic Party. The reason is simple.

In order for the Democratic Party to be relevant in national and state politics, the Party must be able to muster votes. However, the Democratic base is the thing income redistribution agreements, like the TPP, hurts the most. This isn’t lost on the base, so the base is quietly and quickly fading away. Look at the numbers.

In 2008, the base rallied to President Obama and the Democratic Party under the “Hope and Change” hype of candidate Obama. When Obama took office, the Democratic Party controlled 60 US senate seats for a short while and fifty-nine for many months afterward. The Democrats held 237 US House of Representative seats, compared to 178 Republican held seats.

When he became president, Obama did his best to enrich his Wall Street benefactors at the expense of the 99 percent. He began by letting Health Insurance executives write a health care law that compelled the taxpayers to guarantee their profits into infinity. No public option, however miniscule, was on the table. Obama was also desperate to give Wall Street the South Korea income redistribution agreement, which he falsely labeled a trade agreement. Obama was also willing to reduce social security payments to the elderly in order to continue the Bush tax cuts for the rich. And these were just a few things that smelled bad to the base. Obama was a bitter disappointment for many Democrats for this and other reasons during his first two years in office.

The result was simple; the Republicans took the US house in 2010, and reduced the Democrats majority in the US senate. The corporate press lied to us and said this was normal. In fact, it was anything but normal.

Franklin Delano Roosevelt (FDR) was elected president in a landslide in 1932, as the Great Depression rolled along. The Democrats also enlarged their numbers in the US senate, from 48 in 1930 to 60 in 1932. And the Party took control of the US house that year, with a massive 313 members, compared to only 117 Republican representatives.

FDR took his job seriously, established the New Deal; he worked to end the Great Depression, but he also worked to curb the economic and political power of the wealthy. FDR came from a rich family, but then, he wasn’t called a “traitor to his class,” for nothing.

So what happened in the elections of 1934? With a president and congress working for all the people, rather than a tiny wealthy minority, as has been the case with Obama, the Democratic Party increased its numbers in the senate to 69, and 322 members in the US house.

What happened under President Obama? Well, many members of the political establishment, such as Wall Street Senator Ron Wyden, worked harder and harder to deliver more and more financial goods for the corporate establishment at the expense of the 99 percent.

In 2012, the Republicans gained more seats in the US house, 242 to 192. The Democrats, along with two independents who caucus with the Democrats, still held the US senate, but their majority was reduced to 53.

As the rich got richer under Obama and the Democrats, as their power and influence dwindled due to their obvious ties to Wall Street, and as the TPP became more well known through leaked documents, a larger section of the Democratic base stayed home during the 2014 elections.

In 2014, the Republicans swept to commanding majorities in the senate (with 54 seats) and the US house (247 seats compared to 188 Democratic representatives). The base stayed home, and most likely, permanently.

The Democratic leadership is rapidly becoming the leader of nothing, since the Democratic Party base is rapidly evaporating with every income redistribution scam the Party leadership can concoct.

Instead, the base is rallying to Bernie Sanders, while abandoning the latest Wall Street Democratic presidential candidate, Hilliary Clinton. She refuses to mention anything about the TPP lately, although she has publicly supported it in the past. Around election time it’s best to stay mum about her TPP position since getting their jobs sent overseas isn’t very popular with the Democratic base, what’s left of it anyway.

The Democratic leadership has only one thing to sell Wall Street; government power. The Democrats need to win elections in order to offer this product to Wall Street, and it needs votes in order to achieve these aims. But nowadays, votes are something in short supply for the Party the more they sell government favors to their Wall Street parasite friends.

The Trans Pacific Partnership has galvanized the base against the Party more than ever before. The base is rallying to independent presidential candidate Bernie Sanders, who looks a lot like what Democrats once stood for.

The TPP most likely means permanent minority status for the Party, and likely extinction in the future.

Read Full Post »

US Senator Elizabeth Warren is, of course, is describing a government corrupt to the marrow.

The corruption of the US government goes way back, but a relatively small wave held in check by the New Deal turned into a tidal wave of corruption beginning with the tax cuts for the rich of President Ronald Reagan. That money was used by the 1 percent to stimulate corruption at all levels, and which in turn purchased legislation that redistributes income from the 99 to the 1 percent. That’s why we have inequality and its growing.

Read Full Post »

In Truthout.org, economist Richard Wolff writes that since the New Deal, president after president rolled back New Deal programs and were supported by conservative groups, major corporations and the rich in doing so. Wolff wanted to know if President Obama did the same thing. So he wrote,

“More importantly, by symbolizing a kind of social arrival/acceptance of African-Americans generally, might he (Obama) neutralize likely popular oppositions to the next steps in rolling back the New Deal? Capitalism’s crisis since 2007 could have been blamed on the conservative coalition and the system itself. The economically worst-victimized – especially African-Americans – might well have revitalized a new labor-radical coalition (like during the New Deal), absorbing the mass energies visible in the Occupy movements.

The new, young, different African-American president deflected, deterred and at least delayed all that. Obama’s proven reliability as outsider president extraordinaire is his administration’s economic significance.

Yet continuing crisis makes ever more Americans shed lingering illusions and hopes for better economic futures. So-called “recovery” affects only a small minority. Most people and many businesses face deteriorating jobs and lives. As the most outside of outsider presidents, Obama presided over the awakening of millions to economic declines they find oppressive and unjust. They are not buying the outsider president strategy any more. The outsider mask has lost further political usefulness for the conservative coalition.”

In other words, so far as I can tell, Wolff concludes that President Obama is wearing the mask of an outsider president in order to continue redistributing income and wealth from the 99 to the 1 percent. This is something Obama has been doing quite well, and it doesn’t take a mental giant to figure it out. All one has to do is look at President Obama’s giant Trans Pacific Partnership, which is a corporate trade treaty, the largest in history, which will jack up the prices of goods and services for the 99 percent, push wages down, potentially limit Internet freedom for the 99 percent, and limit any regulations of Wall Street fiancial transactions. There are plenty of supporters of this in the US House and Senate, such as Wall Street Senator Ron Wyden.

President Obama and Senator Wyden are playing a simple game of rigging the game against the 99 percent on behalf of the 1 percent. That’s what Democrats do nowadays, along with Republicans, such as Wall Street Senators Orrin Hatch and Mitch McConnell, as well as Congressman John Boehner. All of these boys are on the ideological payrolls (at the very least) of the Koch Brothers and Wall Street investment banks such as JP Morgan and Goldman Sachs. These guys are all class warriors, fighting for the 1 percent.

Click on the link below for the complete story.

Is Richard D. Wolfe’s Assessment of the Economic Significance of President Barack Obama Correct?

Read Full Post »

The first and most important reason the US economy sucks is that the middle class is being gutted by legislation championed by Wall Street, and the rest of the 0.05 percent, which redistributes income from the 99 percent to the 1 percent. That process continues during this so-called economic recovery. Nobel Prize economist Paul Krugman has correctly labeled the so-called recovery a “Low-grade depression.” Legislation such as the South Korea free trade treaty (2012), the Affordable Care Act, and several others continue this redistribution process.

What Krugman and other people in power don’t say, however, is that only the New Deal and deficit spending are holding the economy up. The economy would die in a flash if you took those two things away. Mass poverty would ensue, and the 99 percent would begin to organize–with guns. In the long run, that might be the thing that needs to happen in order to restore the American dream. In other words, only New Deal socialism has prevented the complete collapse of the US capitalist economy. (It should be pointed out that the current US economy does not resemble in the least the theoretical capitalist economy presented by Adam Smith in The Wealth of Nations).

The reasons for the screwed up economy are as follows.

1. The middle class and its spending power is decreasing. “A Pew study this spring found the number of Americans defining themselves as “middle class” has slipped from 53% to 49% since 2008, while those identifying themselves as “lower class” went from 25% to 32%. Actual class slippage mirrors this finding almost exactly: the 2011 census found that since 2007, the share of working families with an income less than double the federal poverty line (the government’s definition of “low income”) rose from 28% to 32%.”

Corporate trade legislation, commonly and incorrectly called “free trade treaties,” is mostly responsible for this. These jobs freely trade higher wage jobs for the unemployment line. They legislatively pave the way for exporting jobs, (which includes a giant part of the US federal, state, and local tax base that supports the jobs of teachers, police officers and other government workers), and creating jobs overseas that would otherwise not be possible to do, and the difference between the higher wage jobs lost in the US due to the treaties, and the now lower wage jobs overseas, goes straight into the pockets of the rich via higher corporate profits, rising share prices and soaring dividend payments; these primarily go to the 1 percent, and especially the top 0.01 percent.

Anybody notice the rise in the Dow Jones Industrials and other stock market indexes? This rise is caused by the shipping of jobs overseas during this low-grade depression. According to the Federal Reserve, between one and three million American jobs have been shipped overseas every year since 1990. That doesn’t count the jobs created US corporations were able to create overseas due to the treaties. This process has probably accelerated during the last five years, which is why the top 1 percent are able to steal over 90 percent of all income growth during the last four years, which means they’ve gone from taking about 21 percent of all US income five years ago, to about 32 percent nowadays. This is up from 8 percent in 1980, before the regime of corporate trade treaties gained full control of the US government. The 99 percent now earn 68 percent of all income compared to 92 percent thirty-three years ago. Income for the 99 percent sucks, and that’s why demand for goods and services sucks. This redistribution process is also why the 1 percent is prospering.

Those whose jobs have bee shipped away get the unemployment line, which pays nothing unless the job losers qualify for unemployment insurance.

The government under President Obama and Wall Street Senator Ron Wyden intend to pass more income redistribution corporate trade treaties so that Wall Street and the 1 percent prosper by sucking the 99 percent dry even more.

The breakdown below of what has occurred might make your blood boil. The corrupt government has rigged the financial game against the middle class.

2. The recession caused a massive decline in consumer demand, but the culprit wasn’t just a loss of housing wealth. Wages for most workers are either stagnating or declining. In fact, real median wages fell by about 2.8% between 2009 and 2012. That’s bad for workers and bad for the economy. It’s also insulting because the drop happened even as productivity increased 4.5%. So much for the sharing economy.

What’s worse, lower-wage workers – who are already struggling to keep up – saw bigger declines than those in the middle and higher end. Those earning between $10.61 and $14.21 per hour saw real wages drop by 4.1% on average.

As Reuters’ Felix Salmon points out in his crafty analysis of the data, hairstylists and cosmetologists earned $12 an hour on average in 2009. But by 2012, they earned just $10.91 an hour – a drop of more than 9%. Restaurant cooks lost 7.1% over the same period. The difference between the old wages and the new has gone toward higher corporate profits, rising share prices and skyrocketing dividend payments for the 1 percent.

As jobs are shipped overseas, unemployment goes up, thereby increasing competition for even low wage jobs. This has pushed wages down.

The same holds true for undocumented immigrants. Politicians of both major political parties seem to love them. It’s as if politicians consciously made a decision to export jobs, while simultaneously letting low wage workers flood the US market for jobs that can’t be exported. The undocumented have increased the labor supply, and put downward pressure on labor rates in the process. This has helped to redistribute income from the 99 to the 1 percent in the same way as corporate trade treaties, which has helped to push the Dow Jones Industrial, corporate profits, share prices and dividends up.

In other words, in passing the South Korea, Panama and Colombia free trade treaties, the government of President Obama has decreased the number of jobs available to Americans, while millions of undocumented immigrants, as well as legal immigrants, have swelled the labor force. In fact, over the last two decades, 95 percent of all US population growth has come either directly or indirectly through immigration to the US. The result has been a downward push on wages, which has resulted in less demand than would otherwise be the case, and this has helped to depress job creation.

Now Wall Street’s Obama team is negotiating the Trans Pacific Partnership, the biggest free trade treaty of them all. The effects will be continued redistribution of income and wealth from the 99 to the 1 percent.

Part 2 coming soon.

Read Full Post »

Truthout.org has an interesting analysis that starts like this;

“President Franklin Delano Roosevelt gave his fourth and final State of the Union Address in 1944. Because the defeat of fascism in Europe was in sight, FDR could frame a peacetime vision for the nation. He saw that the full realization of political freedom depended upon the elimination of material deprivation. FDR realized that the nation’s future well being would be undermined if some fraction of our people – whether it be one-third or one-fifth or one-tenth – is ill-fed, ill-clothed, ill-housed, and insecure.

Roosevelt understood that true individual freedom can not exist without economic security and independence. ‘Necessitous men are not free men.’ People who are hungry and out of a job are the stuff of which dictatorships are made. He saw these economic truths … as self-evident and called for an Economic Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all — regardless of station, race, or creed.

Back then the nation’s emerging safety net was blatantly discriminatory. The progressive New Deal legislation did not cover the occupations open to Americans of color. Agriculture workers and domestic servants were exempted from social security, fair labor standards, minimum wages and the prohibition on child labor. Because some of these programs only covered full time workers, women (who were then and are now concentrated in part time work) were functionally excluded. Our inclusion in full-time paid employment was only tolerated while the war machine was marching along 24/7. Such overt discrimination is no longer tolerated. But we’ve made far less progress — if we’ve made any at all –on women’s fundamental economic rights.”

Let’s examine the eight economic rights enumerated by FDR in 1944 in light of women’s contemporary economic situation. Click the link below for more on the story.

Obama: Stop Coddling Wall Street. Bring on the Second New Deal–truthout.org

Read Full Post »

Everybody with half a brain knows we in the US are better off than four years ago. The US was on the verge of an economic collapse four years ago, thanks to Republican policies. The policies of President Obama and the Federal Reserve saved the day. Under the Republican plan, which Wall Street Mitt the Twit Romney and his running mate Paul “Complete Idiot” Ryan plan to resurrect, the US economy was on the verge of a complete collapse, like during the Great Depression.

On the other hand, the US remains on the verge of collapse and Obama and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke have no intention of doing anything about it. And it’s worse than I make it out to be. With over 93 percent of all US income growth going to the 1 percent, it’s only a matter of time before the economy continues to collapse.

Only the federal deficit, the Great Society programs like food stamps, and the New Deal (Social Security, unemployment insurance, etc…) have kept demand at a high enough level to stop the coming Great Collapse.

Click the link below for why the Democrats should celebrate Obama’s successes, but not his failure.

Is the USA Better Off Now Than Four Years Ago? The Guardian UK

Read Full Post »

In Europe, there is a rising view that the US economic recovery, from the most recent recession that was exacerbated by the disastrous housing bubble, income redistributing Clinton and Bush free trade treaties and the Bush tax cuts, is a mirage. That may well be true. And it may not be true. From my point of view, however, the US economy is in a slow motion collapse.

The only thing slowing the arrival of a new Great Depression is FDR’s New Deal programs, like Social Security, Unemployment Insurance and the Minimum Wage, and LBJ’s Great Society Programs, like the food stamp program. Those legislative feats are keeping the demand for goods and services higher than would be normal without the programs. They’ve also lifted GNP.

The US economy is already dangerously teetering on the cliff of another Great Depression. It’s not like Democratic and Republican Party politicians care, because they don’t. Their job is to use legislation to redistribute income from the 99 to the 1 percent. That’s what the 1 percent pay their good lap dogs for, plutocrats like Senator Ron Wyden and Congressman Earl Blumenauer, for example.

Unfortunately, that legislative redistribution of income and wealth continues. President Obama, for example, is pushing for the Trans Pacific Free Trade Treaty, which the Nation magazine calls “Nafta on steroids.”

For more on how some Europeans view the US economy as a “mirage,” click the link below.

The Guardian–UK "US Economic Recovery is a Dangerous Mirage

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »

%d bloggers like this: