Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘redistribution’

Paul Krugman is a typical, and often correct, critic of President Barack Obama. He’s been right on policy decisions on a number of occasions, and most notably, when President Obama has been wrong.

In a new story in Rolling Stone, Krugman has done an about face on Obama and the president’s historical significance.

“When it comes to Barack Obama,” Krugman writes, “I’ve always been out of sync. Back in 2008, when many liberals were wildly enthusiastic about his candidacy and his press was strongly favorable, I was skeptical. I worried that he was naive, that his talk about transcending the political divide was a dangerous illusion given the unyielding extremism of the modern American right. Furthermore, it seemed clear to me that, far from being the transformational figure his supporters imagined, he was rather conventional-minded: Even before taking office, he showed signs of paying far too much attention to what some of us would later take to calling Very Serious People, people who regarded cutting budget deficits and a willingness to slash Social Security as the very essence of political virtue.”

“And I wasn’t wrong. Obama was indeed naive: He faced scorched-earth Republican opposition from Day One, and it took him years to start dealing with that opposition realistically. Furthermore, he came perilously close to doing terrible things to the U.S. safety net in pursuit of a budget Grand Bargain; we were saved from significant cuts to Social Security and a rise in the Medicare age only by Republican greed, the GOP’s unwillingness to make even token concessions.”

All of this is true, and everything Krugman writes in the Rolling Stone appears on surface to be true, but Krugman misses a major point.

Under President Obama, income and wealth equality has skyrocketed. 95 percent of all income growth in the USA over the last four years has gone into the pockets of the 1 percent. Record levels of income and wealth are now in the hands of the 1 percent, which accounts for much lower demand for goods and services, lower job and wage growth, and slower economic growth, all of which hurts the 99 percent, and all of which serves the 1 percent.

The policies the president has championed have played a major role in this.

Free trade treaties, for example, are negotiated with an eye toward shipping US jobs overseas with the difference between the old higher wages and the new lower wages going into the already fat wallets of the super rich via higher corporate earnings, rising share prices and soaring dividends. Right now, as we speak, the president is championing the Trans Pacific Partnership, the largest income redistribution scam of all time. It is a so-called free trade treaty that has been negotiated to jack up prices on goods and services, and lower wages, all of which redistributes income from the 99 to the 1 percent.

Under Obama, student loan interest doubled, and the payments of millions of student loans goes straight into the pockets of those who possess bonds backed by student loans: hedge funds and the rich. With a little work, the president might have stopped this madness.

Obama is not stupid, he knows precisely what he is doing. He’s redistributing income on behalf of his largest campaign contributors, the largest investment banks on Wall Street, hedge funds, and the largest investors of the 1 percent. This is precisely why the president refused to unleash his attorney general against the crimes of Wall Street that brought about the tanking of the world economy five years ago.

And these are just a few of the things Obama has done to redistribute income from the 99 to the 1 percent, something Krugman doesn’t want you to know about.

So while Krugman makes his points in his article, and with passion, his defense of Obama is in very narrow terms.

By the way, despite my critic of Obama, he hardly rates among the worst of presidents. That distinction goes to George W. Bush, the man who created the worst mess in US history. Warren Harding, as well as several others, would have to rate below our current president, as well.

rollingstone.com/politics/news/in-defense-of-obama

Read Full Post »

81cbf10e6b474c0190a59504574da6fb

In four years under President Jimmy Carter, the US gained more than nine million private sector jobs, and with rising average real wage rates. That’s better per year than job growth under President Ronald Reagan.

More jobs were created under Jimmy Carter than under President George W. Bush and President Barack Obama combined. Under the later two, family income dropped $7,000 a year because they focused (along with Reagan, the first Bush and Bill Clinton) mostly on passing legislation that redistributed income from the 99 to the 1 percent, such as deregulation scams and free trade schemes.

Meanwhile, during the thirteen years under Obama and Bush, out of pocket health care costs soared 85 percent, tuition and fees at colleges and universities rocketed 86 percent, child care costs rose 37 percent, housing jumped 28 percent, and the median net worth of middle class families has fallen 17 percent since 2010.

Is it any wonder job creation is so bad in the US compared to the good old days? Massive amounts of income from the 99 percent have been redistributed to the 1 percent, curtailing demand for goods and services. The rich, meanwhile, spend their money on stocks, bonds, gold, politicians, corrupting government and both major political parties, and other things that do not create jobs, but actually destroys them.

Back in the good old days of Jimmy Carter, the 1 percent stole only about 8 percent of the total income produced in the USA. Nowadays, depending on the figures you use, they’re stealing 22-32 percent. They’re also stealing 95 percent of all income growth during the last four years. Thank you President Obama. Thank you Republican Party Plutocrats, such as US House Leader John Boehner.

That means the middle class is being ground down and pounded into a pulp even more under President Obama than under President George W. Bush. And Obama, with his henchmen like Wall Street Senator Ron Wyden, wants more of your income redistributed to the 1 percent via the Trans Pacific Partnership, the largest income redistribution treaty of all time.

Makes you wish we lived under the rule of the great President Jimmy Carter. He was the last president that ruled for all the people, not just the 1 percent. He probably was the last great president, though the corporate press dutifully vilifies him for not pushing for more legislation that would have redistributed income from the 99 to the 1 percent.

Read Full Post »

ObesityGMOs

I lost twenty pounds from April to September 2014: I didn’t diet, and I barely exercised. I never went hungry, for anything. I ate so much food my girlfriend Z kept telling me I was eating too much. What did I do? I switched from GMO to organic foods. I had been eating about 50 percent organic prior to that, but something I read prompted me to see if there might be a relationship between GMOs and the obesity epidemic. The answer was yes.

The average US male has gained 22 pounds since 1994, while the average female has added 16 pounds. GMO’s entered the US food chain in a big way in 1996, even though US Food and Drug Administration scientists warned of potentially bad health impacts from them. This included risks for allergies, as well as worse things. However, the political appointees (i.e. Monsanto influenced hacks) running the department decided the profitability of the chemical corporations and their shareholders of the 1 percent were more important than the health of the 99 percent.

So I decided to try this personal experiment. I lost weight despite eating somewhere around a pound of organic chocolate (mostly sweet dark) each week. I also ate organic chips, and desserts and drank non-organic wine and beer on occasion. On the road, occasionally I was forced to eat GMO food at restaurants. The girlfriend and I discovered GMO food made us hungrier, and so we craved more of the poison. Luckily, a quick organic meal or a simple organic banana killed that hunger. By the way, my girlfriend went from 113 pounds to 107 in about one and half months eating 95 percent organic foods.

There was also another side effect to eating 95 percent organic food.

I had had an allergy to a cat named Sabina for years. She was the only cat I’d ever been allergic to. My friend Shawn owned her, but he was moving and needed a temporary place for the fat, evil, foul mouthed, bad tempered thing to stay. She moved in with me. I washed my hands after every time I touched her, because every time I’d visited Shawn, and Sabina had gotten close to me, the allergic reactions set in and made me miserable for hours, despite taking allergy pills. One day after the evil feline moved in, I found her in bed with me! I didn’t have an allergic reaction. That allergy was gone.

Back in 98, I got my first allergy. It was to carpet dust. That allergy has also vanished.

I should mention one other thing. Shawn came to visit Sabina. He noticed Sabina had lost weight. We had gotten her off of the GMO diet, and let’s face it, virtually all cat food has the poison in it, or at least I would think so.

So I can say from experience that the weight and the allergies left me when I banished GMOs from my personal food chain.

Additional testimony below.

removing-junk-foods-and-gmos-improved-children’s behavior–Dynamic Health Now

Read Full Post »

95 percent of all income growth in the United States during the six years of the reign of President Obama has gone to the 1 percent, and most of that has gone to the top 1/10th of 1 percent. The 1 percent have used their ill gotten gains to corrupt government and enact legislation that redistributes income from the 99 to the 1 percent, such as privatization scams, deregulation schemes, and free trade treaties. The government also refuses to raise the minimum wage to follow such economic factors as productivity gains or inflation. The result of all of this is a downward pushing of wages of the US jobs that haven’t been shipped overseas. The difference between the old wages (or rather what they should be) and the new lower wages goes straight into the pockets of the rich via higher corporate profits, rising dividends, and surging share prices. That’s how income inequality has been created. That’s why the US economy is a rigged game in favor of the 1 percent.

That’s precisely why US worker pay as a percentage of Gross Domestic Product is at an all time low, and this depresses the demand for goods and services, and that is why the US economy is so historically weak; income inequality.

President Obama and Wall Street Senator Ron Wyden have been getting ready to serve up more of this inequality via the Trans Pacific Partnership, the largest income redistribution treaty of all time. They’re calling it a free trade treaty.

Read Full Post »

Modern inequality began with the tax cuts for the rich of President Ronald Reagan. That gave the rich enough money to purchase the government and begin their war against the middle class. Those tax cuts created income inequality and massively corrupted government at all levels, as well as both major political parties.

Who who has the gold makes the rules. That’s how government operates. That’s why the US federal government passes legislation championed by conservatives, such as Wall Street Senator Mitch McConnell and liberals such as Wall Street Senator Ron Wyden, are always sponsoring such legislation, such as free trade treaties which legally pave the way for corporations to ship jobs overseas. The difference between the old wages in the USA and the new lower wages overseas, goes straight into the pockets of the rich.

The result of all of this is that the 1 percent have stolen about 31 percent of all income created in the USA compared to about 8 percent when Ronald Reagan became president of the USA.

The result is a massive drop in consumer demand per capita, stagnant wages, and weak job growth. This is the weakest economic recovery in US history and we owe it all to President Ronald Reagan.

Tax cuts for the rich destroy jobs. Tax increases on the rich creates jobs by providing the rich with less money to corrupt government.

Read Full Post »

Inflation redistributes income from the 99 percent and delivers said income to the 1 percent. This is a no-brainer, making inflation nothing more than an income redistribution scam that those on the right and those on the left lie about, although maybe they just don’t know, which is unlikely. Case in point is a Paul Krugman op-ed below.

Krugman claims there is little inflation nowadays, while his right wing opponents claim there is ton’s of inflation and its caused by the Federal Reserve. They’re both right and they’re both wrong, kind of, but not really.

Krugman claimed in his op-ed that inflation is close to zero, and that’s true, kind of. In reality, inflation is currently closer to 8 percent if it was measured as it was back in 1980. Since then the government has switched the way it measures inflation twenty times, and all of these changes show less and less inflation. That is why inflation as measured today is less than 3 percent when it’s probably slightly above 8 percent. The purpose of doing this was to keep people from protesting and getting mad about their loss of real spending power, such as happened back in the 1970s.

Conservatives rightfully claim the inflation numbers are understated, which is remarkably true. However, Republicans claim this is caused by the Federal Reserve and its massive printing of money, which is perhaps a tad true, but mostly false.

Inflation mostly comes from corporate planning. Publicly traded limited liability corporations must always have rising share prices, which is largely a product of increasing profits and dividends. The best way to ensure these constantly increasing returns on investment is for corporate competitors to gather together and plan price increases. Thousands of corporations plan their prices rises in tandem, for the most part, and that’s why we have inflation.

When corporations raise their prices in tandem, it’s called a conspiracy in restraint of trade, a violation of the law, but the government almost always looks the other way, which is a function of corruption. This is not to suggest that to some degree competition doesn’t exist in the corporate world, because it does, but it’s a minor nuisance to our captains of industry which is quickly eliminated when the competition gets too hot, and saner minds quickly impose a truce on any hostilities since the primary enemy of the corporations are their unwitting customers.

Guess who pays the cost of this non-competition? You do. When the price of tuna, or lettuce, or gasoline, or cars, or airline tickets rise due to corporate planning, the difference between the old prices and the new higher prices goes from your pockets into those of rich shareholders.

That’s what the politicos and corporate fat cats don’t want you to know, so they keep the argument within unrealistic and narrow lines of debate.

See Krugman’s op-ed below.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/07/opinion/paul-krugman-conservative-delusions-about-inflation.html?_r=0

Read Full Post »

On July 18, thousands of people marched in Detroit to stop water shutoffs by a private company that manages the city’s water system.

The city of Detroit went bankrupt many months ago, thanks to the federal (and state government of Michigan) enacting legislation championed by Wall Street Senator Ron Wyden and many other class warriors of the 1 percent ensconced in congress.

The result has been a massive shipment of jobs overseas via free trade treaties. When jobs are shipped overseas, and Wyden is not the dumb dumb he pretends to be on this issue, the difference between the old higher US wages and the new lower overseas wages is redistributed to the 1 percent via higher corporate profits, rising dividends and surging share prices. It also redistributes the tax dollars those shipped jobs once supported in the USA straight into the pockets of the rich, leaving schools, fire, police, road maintenance and other government services crippled, which is why Detroit went bankrupt. Thank you Wall Street Senator Wyden!

These legislative policies have left the people of Detroit poor, and let’s face it, Detroit was once one of the great manufacturing cities of the world until Wyden and others in congress shipped the jobs overseas. However, Wyden’s actions have generated massive income and wealth inequality via his income redistribution actions.

That’s the ultimate reason why many people in Detroit can’t pay their water bills, why the city went bankrupt, and why the Dow Jones and other financial markets are surging. It’s a rigged economic and political game. The problem with the people in Detroit is that all, or almost all, the democracy in the state and federal governments have already been purchased in the political markets.

For more on this story, click the link below.

thirsting-for-democracy-in-detroit-activists-resist-water-service-shutoffs-wall-street-and-privatization-Truthout.org

Read Full Post »

These folks protesting Obama in the pictures above and below are not Tea Party folk. They’re labor unionists, environmentalists and other citizens deeply concerned about Obama’s financial ties to the 1 percent, most notably Big Pharma, Big Oil, Big Publishing, the Genetically Modified Poison Industry, and Wall Street tycoons. This protest is taking place in LaJolla, California. President Obama was at a fundraiser, getting representatives from Big Pharma, Big Oil, Wall Street and lesser financial interests to pony up some big campaign contributions. The political fundraiser took place at the La Jolla home of Qualcomm co-founder Irwin Jacobs.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi was scheduled to join Obama at the $10,000-per-person lunchtime fundraiser in La Jolla to benefit the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. Couples who donate $32,400, the legal maximum, will be invited to a VIP reception and photo opportunity.

Jacobs, whose estimated net worth is $1.6 billion, was one of the top five financial supporters of Obama’s reelection campaign in 2012. He stepped down as chairman of Qualcomm — the mobile chip maker — five years ago.

Needless to say, the protesters couldn’t afford to contribute so much money, and so they weren’t going to get their voices heard, except by standing outside with signs.

Obama’s not happy his big income redistribution scam known as the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) is stuck in congress, due to grass roots activism, like that pictured above and below. The TPP will redistribute income from the 99 to the 1 percent by raising the prices of pharmaceutical drugs, reducing regulations on Wall Street, wiping out numerous American industries (like the remains of the US textile industry, sending millions of jobs overseas, and driving millions more undocumented immigrants into the USA, thereby pushing wages here lower. And these are just a few of the things that have been leaked from this secretly negotiated trade treaty, which is much to Obama’s liking, since the treaty negotiations are operating under his orders. By the way, a lot of Democrats in the Senate and the US House of Representatives, as well as all of the Republicans, like the terms of this treaty. This is especially true of Wall Street Senator Ron Wyden.

Read Full Post »

Pope Francis called for “the legitimate redistribution of economic benefits” on Friday, arguing that the Bible demands an economic system that cares for the “poorest and those most excluded.”

“In the case of global political and economic organization, much more needs to be achieved, since an important part of humanity does not share in the benefits of progress and is in fact relegated to the status of second-class citizens,” Francis said.

Francis grounded his argument in biblical the story of Zacchaeus, a rich (and likely corrupt) tax collector who dramatically altered his economic behavior after encountering Jesus Christ. According to Luke 19:1-10, Zacchaeus was overcome by Jesus’ kindness, prompting the wealthy man to publicly proclaim that he would give half his possessions to the poor and pay back anyone he defrauded four times over.

“…Zacchaeus made a radical decision of sharing and justice, because his conscience had been awakened by the gaze of Jesus,” Francis said of the story. “This same spirit should be at the beginning and end of all political and economic activity.”

The problem with the Pope’s position is that the US economy is grounded in Wall Street, which is a Ponzi scheme. Redistribution of wealth would led to the utter collapse of Wall Street.

Pope Francis Says the Bible Calls For the Redistribution of Wealth–Thinkprogress.org

Read Full Post »

Most People Are Getting Screwed

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »

%d bloggers like this: