Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘Republican’

Advertisements

Read Full Post »

US Senator Elizabeth Warren is an honest politician. And she sounded like a champion of the 99 percent during an interview with Salon.com when she bashed President Obama for kowtowing to the interests of Wall Street ahead of the American people.

Warren praised Obama for the creation of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, a federal agency aimed at enforcing consumer protection laws. However, Obama’s financial ties with the elites of Wall Street came under closer review.

Warren told Salon that “there has not been nearly enough change” in the wake of the U.S. financial crisis.

“He picked his economic team and when the going got tough, his economic team picked Wall Street. …They protected Wall Street. Not families who were losing their homes. Not people who lost their jobs. Not young people who were struggling to get an education. And it happened over and over and over.”

On lobbyists: Banks spend millions on “armies of lobbyists and lawyers,” she told Salon, but there are few people at “the decision-making table” representing the concerns of everyday Americans.

“And when that happens — not just once, not just twice, but thousands of times a week — the system just gradually tilts further and further.”

Under Obama, during the greatest crisis since the Great Depression, in which massive fraud and money laundering for drug cartels and other crimes were committed by Wall Street executives and their employees, not a single person was charged by Obama’s Justice Department. “I’m the only one standing between you and the pitch forks,” Obama told a group of Wall Street executives during the height of the crisis. He was right, and he did his job for them. Goldman Sachs was the largest of his campaign financiers.

Under George W. Bush, people actually were charged with crimes in corporate scandals, and sent to prison, such as the Enron and Worldcom scandals. Under President George H.W. Bush and President Bill Clinton, over a thousand people were convicted of felonies for their parts in the savings and loan scandal.

This indicates how corrupt to the core the government of the United States has become, and  it’s not just Obama. It’s both major political parties, all Republicans in congress, and 90 percent of all Democratic lawmakers. The system is awash in money and corruption, all the way to the corporate wing of the US Supreme Court. The political and economic games are completely corrupted and rigged against the middle class.

For the complete interview, click on the link below.

Elizabeth Warren on Barack Obama: “They protected Wall Street. Not families who were losing their homes. Not people who lost their jobs. And it happened over and over and over”–Salon.com

 

 

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 »

The GOP has just set a new world record for “Insidious.” The Republicans have cut food stamps for the poor – only in Democratic states.

Here is how they did it. Food stamps, a/k/a the Food Supplement Program, is limited to the needy. Neediness is calculated based on family income. Income is calculated after subtracting deductions. One of those deductions is the “Full Standard Utility Allowance,” or FSUA, which is $644. Families who receive Low-Income Heating Assistance Program (LIHEAP) payments are automatically eligible to take the FSUA deduction. That reduces their income, and makes them more likely to qualify for food stamps.

In the farm bill that just passed the House, the sole GOP food stamp cut was a change in the qualification rules to prevent LIHEAP recipients from automatically qualifying for the FSUA deduction. This is a $9 billion cut.

What do Vermont, New York, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, Illinois and Maine have in common? They’re cold, and they’re Democratic. What do Alabama, Louisiana, Texas and Mississippi have in common? They’re warm, and they’re Republican.

Are you starting to get the picture?

In fact, Democracy for America has calculated that 97% of this cut in food stamps falls on blue D.C. and 15 blue states: the New England states, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Michigan, Wisconsin, Montana, Washington, Oregon and California. All of them but Montana voted for President Obama twice. Twenty-eight of their 32 Senators are Democrats.

So basically, the GOP Farm Bill cuts food stamps for lots of Democrats, and only some Republicans. And those impoverished Democrats now have to choose between heating and eating.

First the GOP allegedly shuts down access to the busiest bridge in America, to punish a Democratic mayor who wouldn’t endorse a Republican governor. Now they cut food stamps, but just in Democratic states.

Read Full Post »

History shows that tax cuts for the rich destroy jobs in any number of ways. Tax cuts are used by the 1 percent to put pressure on CEO’s to cut jobs in order to raise profits. They also buy politicians, who then enact legislation on behalf of their financial benefactors to destroy jobs through corporate freely trading your income to the 1 percent treaties, as well as a myriad of other scams.

Read Full Post »

Back in 2009 and 2010, we were told the yearly US debt was too high, that if the total US debt went over 90 percent of yearly GNP, it would inhibit economic growth, increase interest rates, and lower GNP and job growth by 2 percent. All of these claims were the opposite of what history shows us. These claims ignored decades of Economic 101 teaching and practice. The people mass producing these lies knew this.

A new study by University of Michigan economists Mile Kimball and Yichuan Wang shows that sequestration, (the term used for automatic cuts to the yearly deficit via a deal reached between Republicans and our dumb-dumb president who apparently didn’t realize the Republicans were trying to use deficit cutting as a weapon to reduce job growth and sabotage the economy so that Mitt Romney could win the presidency in 2012), has reduced GNP growth by 2 percent per year.

If the debt had been run up, the economy would be stronger, albeit still historically weak. As far as interest rates, they’re still at or near historic lows. In fact, the US spends about the same amount of its tax dollars on paying the national interest (as a percentage of GNP) as it did under President Ronald Reagan, about 3.25 percent. That’s because interest rates are so low.

Interest rates and not the debt is the real issue, a fact conveniently ignored by the corporate propaganda machines, erroneously called the corporate media. That’s because the US debt is a revolving debt. The US Treasury Department sells bonds to cover the yearly deficit. Whenever the bonds come due, the government sells more bonds to pay up, but it uses tax dollars to pay the interest due on the bonds.

Sequestration has inhibited job growth for the 99 percent, reduced demand, weakened the economy, created mass suffering, and all for political gains on behalf of the 1 percent and Wall Street.

During this Sequestration period, real interest rates have been negative at times. In other words, the governmennt has been paying 1 percent interest or less on its debt, but the inflation rate has been 1 to 3 percent, and the real effect has been negative percent interest. That means heavy deficit spending could have accomplished massive works projects on roads, bridges and rails on the cheap, all to the benefit of the 99 percent. 

So why would President Obama agree to this stupidity?

According to a recent story in Mother Jones, Wall Street and the 1 percent benefit from Sequestration by keeping unemployment high and wages down. Goldman Sachs has been Obama’s biggest campaign contributor over the last two election cycles. The rest of Wall Street and many big corporations whose stocks and bonds trade on various financial markets benefit from this in the same way.

In other words, Sequestion is another way of rigging the game to ensure income and wealth is transferred from the 99 to the 1 percent.

 

 

 

Read Full Post »

Although President Ronald Reagan did some things wrong during his presidency, such as the Iran-Contra Scandal and lowering the top tax rate on the rich, he also did some things right, such as saving Social Security. Many people think of him as being a constant tax cutter for the rich. But that wasn’t always the case. In fact, taxes were raised 11 times during his eight years in office, but always on the middle class. However, his attitude toward taxes carried some degree of fairness as the video and poster below show.

Nowadays, the Republican Party is controlled solely by a faction of the 0.05 percent, as is 80 percent of the Democratic Party. These members of congress and their president in the white house are class warriors for different factions of the 1 percent, all waging war against the 99 percent of US citizens. Once you listen to Reagan below, it kind of makes you think that he might be on our side today, and it is highly unlikely he would be allowed into the Republican Party today.

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »