EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
- 'The Gilded Age' Statistics Corporations Don't Want Workers, or Anyone, to See
- As Death Toll Rises Beyond 500, Garment Factory Disaster 'Worst in World History'
- Report: Toxic Chemicals Found in Thousands of Children's Products
- Pregnant Anti-War Soldier Sent to Prison
- The Sick Madness of Tom Friedman's Culture
Popular content
Today's Top News
Republicans: A Party of Unemployment
From now until 2 November, the Republican party will be the party of unemployment. The logic is straightforward: the more people who are unemployed on election day, the better the prospects for Republicans in the fall election. They expect, with good cause, that voters will hold the Democrats responsible for the state of the economy. Therefore, anything that the Republicans can do to make the economy worse between now and then will help their election prospects.
While it may be bad taste to accuse a major national political party of deliberately wanting to throw people out of jobs, there is no other plausible explanation for the Republicans' behaviour. They have balked at supporting nearly every bill that had any serious hope of creating or keeping jobs, most recently filibustering on bills that provided aid to state and local governments and extending unemployment benefits. The result of the Republicans' actions, unless they are reversed quickly, is that hundreds of thousands more workers will be thrown out of work by the mid-terms.
The story is straightforward. Nearly every state and local government across the country is looking at large budget shortfalls for their 2011 fiscal years, most of which begin on 1 July 2010. Since they are generally required by state constitutions or local charters to balance their budgets, they will have no choice except to raise taxes and/or make large cutbacks and lay off workers to bring spending and revenue into line.
State and local governments have cut their workforce by an average of 65,000 a month over the last three months. Without substantial aid from the federal government, this pace is likely to accelerate. The Republican agenda in blocking aid to the states may add another 300,000 people to the unemployment rolls by early November.
The blocking of extended unemployment benefits promises similar dividends. As Paul Krugman rightly notes this week, unemployment benefits are not just about providing income support to those who are out of work, they also provide a boost to the economy. Since unemployed workers generally have little other than their benefits to support themselves, this is money that will almost immediately be spent. The benefits paid to workers are income to food stores and other retail outlets.
Unemployment insurance provides the sort of boost to demand that the economy desperately needs. That is why neutral parties such as the congressional budget office or economist Mark Zandi, a top adviser to John McCain's presidential bid, always list unemployment benefits as one of the best forms of stimulus.
Republicans give two reasons for opposing benefits. First, they claim that benefits discourage people from working. Second, they object that the Democrats' proposal will add to the national debt.
On the first point there is a considerable amount of economic research. Most indicates that in periods when the economy is operating near its capacity, more generous benefits may modestly increase the unemployment rate. However, they are less likely to have that effect now. The reason is simple: the economy does not have enough jobs. The latest data from the labour department shows that there are five unemployed workers for every job opening.
In this context, unemployment benefits may give some workers the option to remain unemployed longer to find a job that better fits their skills, but they are unlikely to affect the total number of unemployed. In other words, a $300 weekly unemployment cheque may allow an experienced teacher the luxury of looking for another teaching job, rather than being forced to grab a job at Wal-Mart.
However, if the teacher took the job at Wal-Mart, then this would simply displace a recent high-school graduate who has no other job opportunities. That might be a great turn of events in Republican-econ land, but it does not reduce the overall unemployment rate, nor does it benefit the overall economy in any obvious way.
The other argument the Republicans give is that these bills would add to the national debt. For example, the latest extension of unemployment benefits would have added $22bn to the debt by the end of 2011. This means that the debt would be $9,807,000,000 instead of $9,785,000,000 at the end of fiscal 2011, an increase of the debt-to-GDP ratio from 65.3% to 65.4%.
It is possible that Congressional Republicans, who were willing to vote for hundreds of billions of dollars of war expenditures without paying for them, or trillions of dollars of tax cuts without paying for them, are actually concerned about this sort of increase in the national debt. It is possible that this is true, but not very plausible.
The more likely explanation is that the Republicans want to block anything that can boost the economy and create jobs. Throwing people out of work may not be pretty, but politics was never pretty, and it is getting less so by the day.
- Posted in
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...
86 Comments so far
Show AllIs there anyone left (no pun intended) that actually thinks that anything the Obama administration or this democratic Congress has done created any real jobs or did anything but exacerbate unemployment and befoul our economy?
If so, you are the republicans best friend.
Obama's too small stimulus directly gave work to people I know. So I KNOW it helped. But it was too damn small. Democrats are typically weak-ass pieces of crap. I only wish Republicans could rise to half the level of integrity of Democrats. Maybe then we would have a chance.
By failing to lower the age of Medicare eligibility below the age of 65 as part of the Obamacare Program, the Democrats have caused many 55-64 year olds to delay retirement from their family-wage jobs, thereby diminishing employment opportunities for younger Americans and assuring that the unemployment rate will stay high for many years.
True, true, true. But guess what? Not once in all these comments does anyone say what will be the true result of this b.s.: premature death certificates for people who'll never live thru this depression if actions are not taken. I blame both parties and every politician for murder-by-neglect. Why can't one nat'l leader of either party step up to the microphone and say this undeniable truth? We are going to kill people of all ages with these policies. The cynic in me wants to make a wisecrack about both parties finally coming up with a viable population control plan but that isn't funny, is it?
ray, link, good points.
Yep!
Helped in a momentary way perhaps, but meant nothing in the end. I frankly at this point am confused about their real purpose, but what I am sure its NOT, is rebooting our economy, producing an enviornment complete with the needed laws, rules and regulations to produce real, lasting jobs or to restore our manufacturing base and wean us off foreign carbon energy OR real governance.
"I only wish Republicans could rise to half the level of integrity of Democrats."
Darn Greg, could you possibly set the bar any lower! (LOL)
...set the bar any lower... I believe the cockroaches can still slide under just fine.
Let me get this straight. A political party whose policies resulted in the greatest economic collapse since 1929 wants to regain power in 2010 to continue the same policies that led to the collapse. Another party that aided and abetted that same party is now claiming that they are substantially different from said party. Americans are surely stupid if they allow this situation to continue.
Some of us will be stupid enough to "allow this situation to continue."
Others, realizing the truth of what you wrote about both parties, will be coerced by the anti-democratic either-or electoral system in most states to be limited to voting for either a Democratic Corporatist-Militarist or a Republican Corporatist-Militarist. There are no other real alternatives on most ballots.
Some, but very few, will have the opportunity to vote for a true Third Party candidate, such as the Green Party, or even to write in a name.
But our electoral system, like the rest of our political-economic system, is intentionally designed to keep the Ruling Class in power so they can maintain the reality of the Empire under the APPEARANCE of "democracy".
That's a main reason why fewer and fewer people bother to vote in this country. We realize how the system is rigged, we know we can do little to change it, so we will no longer participate in the farce.
I think I have a good visualization for what is going on. Say you have two buildings that are about 10 feet apart. They are 100' tall and the walls of the buildings that face each are brick and have no windows. Label one wall the democrats, and the other republicans. Label the ground 'final collapse'. Take a super ball and label it the american voter.
Now stand on top of one of the buildings and throw the ball as hard as you can at the other buildings wall. The ball will bounce from one wall to another. But each time it gets closer to the ground, and it does this at an ever accelerating rate, until there is one final bounce where the ball fails to reach the other wall and lands on the ground instead.
So each time the american voter bounces from one party to the other they continue their journey to the ultimate conclusion of the madness, final collapse. My guess is we have very few bounces left before we land on the ground and it's 'game over'.
If McCain had won, there would have been NO unemployment benefit extensions just like under Furher Bush. So yes, the Obama plans stink to high heavens but still a far sight better than the Rethugs would have foisted on us. That said, I still don't see much hope or change coming from this administration. The only differnence between the parties is the Dems sometimes give you a little kiss before they screw you.
Sometimes that little kiss can keep u alive..
Doesn't the Democrat Party control the White House, the Senate, and the House of Representatives? If so, why do the Republicans seem to be in control of everything the Left wants to pass?
That's easy because there is no left on the left. Obama is a right winger and Corporatist. Do you see Barry out here advocating for the poor or unemployed these days? He's part of the elite just like the guy he replaced. The Dino party is just as much a captive of the Fortune 500 as the other so called party, so we can expect no help from any of these people any time soon. Why? because they don't give a damn, they have theirs.
You have to seem like your for whatever corporations have in mind, pro-war and anti-regulatory just to be in the political game.
When the Repugs take over control of Congress at the end of this year Obama will use it as an excuse to move even further to the right.
Because money and the ruling capitalists control the U.S.
Because they are backed by the capitalist's dollar and the police state's gun.
Because there is only one real party.
The Corporatist Party?
Its name is "The Democratic Party", you twit! Only nasty partisan trolls refer to it as "The Democrat Party." Your bias is clearly showing. And, the Republicans seem to be in control because of the present arcane rules of the Congress are such that if a Republican congresscritter just lifts his little pinky, a filibuster is in effect. What happened to the days of standing at the lectern 24/7, reading War and Peace, peeing in a bottle, and eating standing up? THAT'S what filibustering should be. Until we have a simple majority as the ruling vote, we will not have a functioning government because the Republicans' sole aim is to bring down the Obama Administration, and they don't care what they do to the country, as long as they can get back in power and complete their 30 year reign of terror and destruction on this country.
And they will continue to vote NO on anything and everything the Obama Administration tries to introduce to benefit average Americans because they're almost there. The Republicans don't give a damn about America.....just about their pockets overstuffed with cash and the prospect of again ruling the United States with an iron fist.
"glogrrl"
Let's see.
First, you use namecalling (republican tactic). Then, you forget to mention that the dumbocrats are the ones who make sure the republicans get what they want WITHOUT having to actually filibuster.
You prefer to defend the Enablers of the Frauds and then cry out "Vive la difference?"
"You twit" is namecalling? Then I suggest you go to a Republican or Tea Party rally to refresh your "namecalling" vocabulary. A twit is just someone who is a silly, annoying fool...and if the twit fits......
Come on, glogrrl. You say, "What happened to the days of standing at the lectern 24/7, reading War and Peace, peeing in a bottle, and eating standing up? THAT'S what filibustering should be." and you're right, that's what filibustering should be.
The reason that it's not happening, and the reason that all that a filibuster now means is that a Republican "lifts his little pinky," as you say, is because DEMOCRATIC Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid wants it this way. He could insist on the traditional form of filibustering, but doesn't. Because he's actually a Republican at heart, too.
Reid could make the Republicans stand at the lecturn for day after day trying to explain their votes on behalf of bankrupting everyone but the corporations, but he doesn't want to, because he and his fellow "Democrats" are just as corrupt. Reid's job is to give his fellow crooks cover and deniability, and he does it well.
Agreed. My passion got the best of me...there are Dems who are equally guilty, but I don't think it's just the "corrupt" part completely....they fear that if they change it, then when the Republicans are back in power, the Dems will have to adhere to the difficult passage, rather than the "pinky-lifting" rule. I'm just so damned demoralized that there are not more Dems like Al Franken, Alan Grayson, Anthony Weiner and (I) Bernie Sanders. 30 years of constant Republican beat-downs have made pantywaists of what should be proud liberal Democrats.
I thought you did rather well for your passion. If most Americans could share your passion, trust me, we'd be a hell of a lot better off now.
Jason Jordan
Sandpoint, Idaho
Jimmy, the Democrats are just a backup party for the Republicans. When people get tired of the Republican Party, the Democratic Party lies and steps in pretending to be different. Once in control, all they have to do is copy the Republicans and create a victim game just like the Republicans did when they were in power. The Republicans accused the Democrats of "obsctructing" their agenda but the Democrats were actually enabling it and those who didn't vote for it just sat there and complained. Where were the Democrats when we needed them to filibuster the Bush Tax Cuts, Patriot Act, Iraq War Resolution, Partial Abortion Ban aka Laci and Conner's Law, FISA, corporate tax cuts, Bush's move to force the tube back into Terri Schiavo at the expense of FL taxpayers, pork barrel spending for corporate and religious bigots, etc... ? The Democrats are just as much a party of NO as the Republicans.
PS. - Please name us issues the Democratic Party fought for that we can be proud of.
KIRSTEN: Well-argued points. Gracias.
"the Left wants to pass"
Define "left"? It seems that the "left" in your sense is the general public, at least anyone that doesn't follow nonsense, decades long failing, junk economics.
Anyone who knows economics knows that in a deflationary spiral, which we are in, cutting back government spending will further decrease aggregate demand. The only hope, in that situation, is for private PRODUCTIVE investment (employing workers who actually make things, the real economy, and not the fictitious financial economy) to increase. Do you see ANY evidence that private investment is doing this? Who in their right mind will invest if they know that demand for what is produced will not be there, especially when there's already over capacity?
The only hope, if REAL economics matters to you, is to give working people good paying jobs to pay off the debt, to increase local tax revenues (so teachers are still employed, libraries are still open, local services in general aren't cut). That wouldn't be good for finance capital though.
We are now at a crossroads not only with neo-liberal capitalism but capitalism itself. There was and is, without a doubt, a profitability crisis in the real economy, where rents and wages were and are squeezing profits. Started in the early 1970's, lasts within the West to this day. There isn't a China or India out there to further depress wages and increase profits. Finance was the key to capital accumulation, and now finance is further harming industrial capital and workers. Where can we go, within the system called "capitalism", if we want working people to have a decent standard of living? I'm not even talking about having more next year than this year, that is impossible over the long run. I'm talking about having a system that takes care of necessities (health care, education, the environment, pensions) and jobs for people capable of doing them. Or a world in which inequality isn't huge and growing. Capitalism has no chance of doing this.
I'm not a Marxist, but I agree with him that no system is eternal. Every system has contradictions and over time the contradictions as well as the progression of society make the current system incapable of solving societies problems, and the contradictions aren't possible to be resolved within the current system. The problem now is that while there are many progressive, anti-capitalist experiments the world over, there ARE coherent alternatives to capitalism (the radical economist Robin Hahnel has created one with Michael Albert, participatory economics) they haven't come together to pose a coherent alternative, or at least people haven't rallied around any alternatives. In the US, social groups that brought people together in the past like unions are much weaker than the past and there are no mass social movements pushing from bellow. The alternatives that exist are ignored by the dominant media, most people don't know about them. History will not move beyond capitalism until this changes, we seem to be ready for a transition to something other than capitalism but because there are no mass social movements and ideas taking its place the transition could be to something even worse (if that's possible). It's possible too that we can just regress back into a quasi feudalism too, where land owners dominated, rents (whether they be monopoly rents or rents in land) were king and working people were under the boot of the land owners. At least then there was communal land, now we have no direct control over and don't own the very resources needed for survival.
I'd like to make the Republican party the party of "unemployed" CONGRESSMEN!!!! VOTE THEM ALL OUT!!!!
Dean Baker does a great disservice with this misleading article.
Perhaps you will tell us what is misleading. Everything in the article seems correct.
I think it's misleading because it fails to point out that the DEMOCRATS are in the majority. And the Democratic majority has turned out to be meaningless because enough of them vote with the Republicans to insure that the Republicans always win. Not only that, but we have seen that the Democrats take turns voting with the Republicans, to give themselves deniability at the same time they ensure that the Republicans win.
And our Dear Leader Obama does and says nothing, though he was quick to bring down the hammer on the Democrats who (in accordance with the Democratic party platform) advocated for single payer healthcare. Obama is functionally a Republican, too.
Obama and the blue dogs have done a masterful job of disempowering and discouraging a whole generation of voters who actually believed Obama's campaign promises. Now we will see more and more articles like this, trying to whip up enthusiasm for voting for the Democrats. I'm betting, myself, that people either won't waste their time voting, or will vote a straight anti-incumbent ticket.
There comes a time when people just can't buy the lies any more. Just as there comes a time when the battered wife just can't make herself believe again that this was the last time he'll ever beat her up.
"petrkrop"
Thank you for a very good response.
as I said before, that Democrats have a majority does not mean they can do anything, because they need 60% to invoke cloture in the senate. Its not Democrats fault that the unemployment renewal failed, as well as a list of other things such as reversing the medicare payment cuts which is basically just a way to kill Medicare by the Republicans and set in motion with Republicans sociapathic mad laws in the 90s, as well as the inaction on clean energy (which Republicans say if people wanted to use them the market would cause their adoption, but this would only happen i believe later on in rhe more severe parts of an energy shortage, and in fact the major coordinated infrastructure revamp requires planning, and that by the time that high gas prices and shortages in oil become apparent it will be too late to avoid serious problems as the renewables will take years to develop. Also the investments must also be in conservation, which we need now anyway and will simply allow us to use les energy). Renewables may not be as cheap as oil, but it is better than doing nothing so when oil becomes scarce we instead have economic chaos, or risking global warming ane environmental disasters. We need to make the first stimulus entirely for job creation on renewable energy and then the same with the second, instead of spending any on roads
WHat is needed is to reform FICA, turn it into a progressive bracketed tax, put the funds into lockbox to fund non time limited unemployment, social security health care, and food stamps, and affordable housing, and require the fortunate wealthy help us save the lives of those less fortunate and get them back on their feet, which helps us create a stronger better society and a healthier and better educated population. This would help keep funding for these programs outside of the general budgeting..
As far as health care, I supported a public option, and I felt that Obama and others will indeed betray the need for non profit health care if they continue to refuse to advocate for this. I tend to support multipayer and give people a choice between payers, and gaurantee by law that people will either be on medicaid, medicare, or they will be given a voucher for a non profit plan, eliminating coverage gaps. This as well, is beneficial if one payer should become corrupt, there are other payers available and would avoid an attack on a single non profit payer system if there should happen to be a corruption problem in parts of the system, which could cause a reversion to for profit system, instead there should be multiple non profit payers, non profits are less likely to be corrupt but you know republicans, private insurers are far more corrupt but Republicans always attack the public system more viciously than the high profit corporate one. Some waste is in the insurance system, but also it may be elsewhere such as with drug companies, we need a collective bargaining pool that insurance companies, individuals and companies can join to bargain down the price of these as in canada.
>>Its not Democrats fault that the unemployment renewal failed<<
You are correct. The democrats and republicans share the blame equally.
People need to get over the divide and conquer "two party system" nowhere mentioned in the constitution. Do not vote for Republicans or Democrats unless you approve of the status quo, which, of course, many of you do, because YOU HAVE YOURS!! Never any mention of poor, working class people. It's always the middle class this the middle class that. Well god damn it there are a hundred million working poor in this country. I. Am. Getting. Pissed. And, when that happens I become very unpredictable. I am liable to lash out at the nearest "authority".
The Republicans never needed 60% to get their agenda passed. Why do you feel proud that the Democratic Party is the party of NO when they should be filibustering the Republicans but the party of YES for their agenda?
"sheepherder"
Please see my response to "WJM" above.
Birdbrain, this article is spot on. Republicans cynically want the economy to suck in November. I am ever so glad Baker has made it a point to directly talk about the pure evil of the Republican position to undermine America. While Democrats are a true mixed bag of good to bad, Republicans can generally be counted on to do their worst. If they take over the House this fall we will see the greatest theatre of the absurd ever witnessed in the halls of government with endless "investigations" of the supposed criminal Democrats.
"GregR"
Please see my response to "WJM" above.
It's a much bigger "spot" than Mr. Baker would have us believe.
If you're going to make such a statement, then back it up. As it is, you are nothing but an idiot, the kind that isn't helping a GD thing in this country. If you have something to say, then say it. As it is, you come across like nothing but a shill for the right. And that should earn you a trip out back for a quick "talking to".
Be part of the solution or shut up. You have added NOTHING.
"WJM"
You are correct. I was unclear.
The misleading by Mr. Baker was by his omission of the fact that most of the democrats share and enable the same corruption which he pretends should only be attributed to the vile and pathetic republicans.
Many of the worst aspects of "republican" ideology have been implemented and expanded (NAFTA, Repeals of banking and environmental regulations, expanded militaristic domination, illegal spying, detention and murder without trial, rabid support of Israeli viciousness, PRIVATIZATION of all aspects of society,...) by the administrations of Clinton and Obama and the current fraudulent democrats congress.
I apologize for being "nothing but an idiot."
>>detention and murder without trial<<
Obama claims the authority to murder anyone anywhere anytime. He is just a human being. Oh, sure, there are lots of obscure markings on various papers and documents called a constitution, a legal system, etc., but they are all artificial constructs in the end. What we have is one person, one individual human being, claiming the authority to murder. He is nothing but one person out of 7 billion, no better or worse than any other, just one human being claiming the authority of life over death. Guess what, Obama. Set by your own example, so are many others liable to claim such authority. I'm considering it myself in fact, although I have not yet decided to do so. You are not exceptional. The country of which you are its president is not exceptional. You have no more rights, privileges or obligations upon the face of this earth, in this seething mass of humanity, than any other individual. Claiming the right to murder anyone anywhere anytime? In the immortal words of that Dick, Cheney, GO FUCK YOURSELF.
Well stated!
No need to apologize, we idiots are a proud group.
Seriously, you need a trip to the mountains, which is part of the solution in vacating your insulting posts for at least a week or two.
What kind of people are we? Are we for Wall Street greed or the common well-being?
Read Naomi Klein's Disaster Capitalism. I guess the resulting increase in crime caused by an out of work and out of money population will be blamed on our current president.
If it happens. So far, crime is down (who know why??)
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/prelimsem2009/index.html
Preliminary figures indicate that, as a whole, law enforcement agencies throughout the Nation reported a decrease of 5.5 percent in the number of violent crimes brought to their attention for 2009 when compared with figures reported for 2008.
...
This no real right, left divide. The real divide is a class divide.