Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
As the Obama Economic Team Bails, the System Fails to Generate Jobs. Are the Causes, Um, 'Structural'?
In Washington, the Obama economic team has sprung a leak. First, Budget Director Peter Orszag, the calculating numbers savant, bailed. And now, "distinguished" economist Christina Romer, the only woman in that inner circle boys club has quit too. (Would you want to be around Larry Summers all day long?)
Why this crew of losers wasn't fired eludes me despite their claims of having prevented a worse collapse. No doubt, they know more than they are saying, and, perhaps, now that they are no longer selling, they may be willing to do some telling on just how bad it is and what went wrong.
Who's next? Could Ben Bernanke be leaving the Fed for Fed-Ex?
Economist Max Wolfe has none of the political restraints of power. At the news of another 131, 000 jobs gone, at all the talk of permanent unemployment as the "new normal," he sighed with a tinge of optimism:
"We have been in the present labor market swoon since December 2007. We are 30 months into the process. Nearly everything is not getting worse fast. Most economic indicators have seen slow, uneven progress. We are a weary nation and hope, is running low. All lethality is dosage and we have received a massive dosage- an overdose- of bad economic news since the winter of 2007. Things are getting ever so slightly less bad in the aggregate.
"The sheriffs of this rough economic neighborhood are running low and out of ammunition. The populace is fed up. Our Sheriffs are The Treasury and The Fed and they have spent, cut taxes, slashed rates, bought securities and ballooned their balance sheets. They have made the bad less worse, but not appreciable better enough for many. All that economic toxin still pumps the blood of this economy. Now, the state is having a contractionary direct impact on employment."
"Contractionary"? I am a first-time contractionary word user so I will leave it to Stephen Colbert to take that term apart, but it can't be a good thing.
The bigger surprise is being buried. The more serious problem is more systemic and rooted in the structure of our economy. These structural problems used to be referenced to show how deep the rot goes and why more fundamental reforms are needed, but now, as Paul Krugman has argued, this very idea is now being used to encourage acceptance of the problems because they are beyond repair, as in, "we can't change that because it is, so, um, 'structural'!") Thus, the existing power relations can't be questioned because they are the existing power relations
Makes sense, doesn't it?
Part of the problem is that while the livelihoods of workers and homeowners are sinking, the economic and political elite is doing just fine, as the Automatic Earth Website explains:
"Perhaps what we witness is an ongoing and deepening chasm that divides the world of finance and politics on the one hand and the world of everyday people on the other, as Rasmussen Reports indicates: 67% of Political Class Say U.S. Heading in Right Direction, 84% of Mainstream Disagrees. This chasm was greatly facilitated by governments relying on policies based on the notion that too-big-to-fail -financial- institutions needed to be bailed out at any cost. Later in the year, as a direct consequence of these policies, we will see another round of insane banker and trader bonuses, just as citizens' sentiments and incomes fall, and unemployment and poverty keep rising."
When you create and enable a casino economy, the public becomes a player too, taking risks they shouldn't at the behest of bankers and finance companies who assure them all is fine.
Last week, Countrywide, the country's mortgage fraud factory, reached a settlement with the SEC for more than Goldman Sachs settled its last complaint for a whopping $600 million. Their shark-in-chief, Anthony Mozillo, still facing a criminal investigation, later said he was pleased when the federal regulators admitted that the investors were not defrauded, because they knew what kind of projects they were funding. How reassuring!
So the circle of complicity widens. We now learn that the companies and individuals that invested in the subprime/subcrime mortgages KNEW people were being ripped off but did it anyway because there was so much money to be made.
And because security laws only protect investors, who were defrauded, many have no case. What about the borrowers, the homeowners now facing foreclosure? They are apparently not worthy of protection. This is comparable to the Madoff investors who profited in his illegal scheme and knew his returns were too good to be true but shoveled money to him anyway. They became partners in the ponzi, not just "victims" trying to be made whole.
Is anything changing? The banks say they will not change the way they finance mortgages so it is still buyer beware. The Wall Street Journal reports another instant crash of the markets is possible. And General Motors that was down and on the way out is back thanks to the government's largesse but sniping at its rescuers, insisting an end to government ownership would be good for their image and "employee morale." Huh?
"We want the government out period," blusters GM's ungrateful CEO Edward E. Whitacre Jr. This same company recently spent $3.5 billion buying a new subprime lending company to replace GMAC, the GM lender whose bad loans sunk GM. On top of that, these geniuses just produced The Volt electric car that sells for $40,000, hardly a brilliant move in this economy. Of course they blame all their problems on the government, never themselves.
Like so many others, they seem to be banging on Obama, everyone's target of choice. If that's your inclination, let's blame him also for what he has not done.
He hasn't led a consistent push back against Wall Street, perhaps because he hopes in vain that big business will create private sector jobs and wants to show naysayers how pro-business he really is. This has turned him into an inversion of FDR.
As Ezra Klein of the Washington Post observed: "The reality is that America's supposedly anti-business president has led an extremely pro-business recovery.
Businesses are sitting on about $2 trillion in cash reserves. Business spending jumped 20 percent last quarter, and is up by 13 percent against 2009. The Obama administration has dropped taxes for small businesses and big ones alike."
So much for that canard.
Is there anything to be done? There is no shortage of proposals for jobs programs and taxes on transactions, for tougher rules on derivatives, and imposed compensation limits. In most cases the US, with pressure from Wall Street and its political allies, has opted for easily maneuvered around and malleable regulations.
One small reform has been proposed by the much-maligned Ralph Nader for those of us who live in the appropriately named "Empire State," one that currently shelters a Wall Street where hedge fund managers make billions.
Nader notes, "Low-moderate and middle-income New Yorkers already pay a higher percentage of family income in state and local taxes than do the richest one percent of New Yorkers!
"Surprisingly, there is a simple way to eliminate the state deficit and prevent tens of thousands of layoffs and large service cutbacks.
What most New Yorkers do not know is that for about a century there has been a state stock transfer tax on purchases of securities. This year, this tax, similar to ones imposed in 30 other countries, will amount to about $16 billion. Amazingly, since 1979, this tax has been instantly rebated by New York State back to the brokers or clearinghouses who paid it. A 100% rebate every year for the bailed out industry that caused the recession and its immense human damage."
Putting a stop this sleazy practice could be as important in phasing out the Bush tax cuts but so far it's not on anyone's agenda, Dems, Repugs or Media.
Maybe because they think of it as "structural."
52 Comments so far
Show AllYou are no to them!!
Poor economic advising maroons... so helpless, so naive...
The economic foolery of Washington goes unabated. Obama shoots hoops while America collapses. Swishhhhh, another hundred thousand jobs lost....chalk up 3 points. The rarified bullshyt that flows from his lips is toxic. His attitudinal oblivian is boundless. Who knows, perhaps he will choke on an air ball. His magnificence is so owned by economic elites that nothing is left but a lying baffoon. Even the coming political arce kicking will not shake him. His Achilles heel is mocking laughter. He's making it easy for us. Let the laughter begin.....
It has begun! Nice summation of Obamanomics.
Needs repeating:
Capitalism didn't fail - it succeeded unexpectedly.
Most of us have more than enough food, clothing, shelter, and stuff. That was the goal of Capitalism - a better way of life for as many as possible (theoretically.) Mission Accomplished. As a matter of fact, mission so accomplished that we're obese both physically and materialistically.
Not only are we obese, but the 'thrill of shopping' drug no longer gets us high. It was fun while it lasted, but as with most drugs, effectiveness eventually wanes. On top of that, there's rarely anything new or exciting to buy anyway, aside from yet another phone every 6 months...
Our economy is 70% consumer-driven. Nobody ever planned for the moment when the majority of said consumers stopped consuming.
A crazy conspiracy theorist might suggest that the Plutocratic Plan now is to strip as much stuff from the 'middle class' as possible - homes, pension funds, retirement, safety net, belongings, soul - then sell it all back once they decide it's time for 'the recovery' to 'pick up steam'...
Or not...
In every way that things get worse we are advised that it's the new norm. Get used to it, it's just the "way things are".
So we "settle" for the way things are and hope they don't get any worse. In the same way we "settle" for the Lesser of Two Evil candidates. Stay with Obama or you might get (gasp) an evil Repub like (gasp) Palin! So things do get worse and we do get evil repub policy...even when the Dems win.
Things might actually start to Improve if we stopped accepting the way things are and stopped accepting the lesser of two evils. How about a Revolution? A Revolution of Rising expectations!
"A Revolution of Rising Expectation!"
What a brilliant concept and exactly what this country needs in so many areas. Less apathy and demand more for the common good.
"67% of Political Class Say U.S. Heading in Right Direction, 84% of Mainstream Disagrees."
Let them eat cake ...
Structural indeed!
Legal Tender is a legal contrivance, and when issued in the form of debt is nothing more than a pyramid/ponzi scheme. The quantification of debt wrongfully applies the algebraic concept of exponential growth - compounding interest - upon money. The distinction between usury and interest is an arbitrary legal determination with no basis in mathematics. Nothing can grow forever at an ever-increasing rate. As time moves on, the emphasis of ever-increasing growth becomes omnipresent, is quantified and institutionalized in the societal structure, encouraging over consumption, over development, and excessive expectations, pushing economic stress to its upper limit of expansion, eventually inciting conflict and spawning War to insure growth.
http://theformofmoney.blogharbor.com/blog/_archives/2005/9/18/1236759.html
What happens if the societal emphasis changes from ever-increasing growth to an actual decrease in growth with less consumption, less development, etc.? Although it seems hard to fathom at this point in time, what if Americans in large numbers began to recognize the destruction we are doing to this planet and each other and became "enlightened" enough to actually want a better society? Which will come first...a total collapse of this country or people demanding better?
Bailout is the new euphemism for corporate welfare.
Failure to generate jobs. Are the causes structural?
Only if you consider structural to be the dismanteling of our economy and its protections by Bush and his administartion using the tools gifted to them by Clinton and his administaration.
If you also include Obama and his adnministrations refusal to make any move to restore the protections and oversight to our economy, heal our trade and tax policies, stop the neo-cons foreign "adventures",their looting of our treasury and corrupt practices.
Lastly if you consider the Congress's involved in all of this, their betrayal of America and its citizens, their corrupt self interested un-American criminal actions as part too.
Then the answer is yes. Its structural.
Hey, that's how Capitalism works buddy. If you don't like it, why don't you move to Norway or the Netherlands or some other country that has embraced democratic socialism?
That's a pretty good idea, I'm going to look into that...
There was never going to be a big jobs bill. There was never going to be a new massive New Deal-type initiative. I think it was sometime last week I read in an article -- or blog -- that Larry Summers was against anything like this from the beginning. To me that said it all. I don't know if the article was on HuffPo or here. Maybe someone here caught this line. When you read something like that, though, it has a way of having is all make sense -- Obama's seeming timidity and lack of boldness on creating real jobs -- really putting Americans to work. It was the plan from the get-go.
How many got to digest this bit of info yesterday -- nice little item buried in the HCR bill? I know my son's dad was pretty much freaking out about this as a very small two-person business:
http://www.businessweek.com/smallbiz/content/may2010/sb20100526_855178.htm
talk about a small business killer and a job killer. For example, if I spend over $600 in yarn over the course of a year for my very, very tiny business on Etsy I have to give that business -- be it Michael's, A.C. Moore's, or any online retailer -- a 1099. It's really, really crazy. It goes into effect in 2012.
I heard about this 1099 for $600 a few weeks ago. Sounds like it's time for a tax revolt. If enough small businesses don't file what would happen?
It could be the start of something, finally?
A little personal antidote. As the "stimulus" packages were being put into place to help create jobs, a former employer of mine was in the final stages of outsourcing the remaining American jobs to India.
So as .gov tries to stimulate the economy, .com keeps shipping jobs overseas. Anybody besides me see a major disconnect here?
The thing I cant quite determine for sure is:
Are these people truly stupid?
Do they think we are stupid?
Have drunk their own Kool-Aid?
Or maybe all of the above?
On a different note, one thing I gotta give Dubya credit for was his attempt at being viewed as a common man even though he came from mega money. Just before the first election he buys a ranch in rural Texas so he has to a place to go to drive an old pickup and cut brush for his 8 years in office. Once he left office he Dumped Camp Crawford and moved to Dallas, to live in a situation that better fitted him and his wife's preferred lifestyle. But hey you at least have to give him an "A" for effort.
The Obamas on the other hand can't quite get that whole down home thing quite figured out. I guess fancy vacations to fancy places while so many are struggling kind of demonstrates the irony, or would hypocrisy be a better word, of life as a "Public Servant" in DC now a days.
The Obamas on the other hand can't quite get that whole down home thing quite figured out.
Barack and Michelle are the Emperor and Empress of the Roamin' in the Gloamin Empire, aka the United States. Tell them you're worried and ask them to tell you the truth about things and they'll respond with the motto of the USA which took effect under Bush/Cheney: "Fuck you!"
Actually, shooting hoops is the most productive thing done by Obama to create jobs. More centralized planning will continue to fail. Spending money on "jobs programs" will siphon off needed funds from the private sector and increase the perception that we must increase taxes to pay for the waste. Get ready for some serious inflation.
Free enterprize is not just a matter of "lassiez faire". Free enterprize requires "confidence" more than any other ingredient. Confidence in the future is at an all time low in the US. Socialists will never understand that Keynes was wrong, Lenin was evil and the UN is NATURALLY corrupt.
.. America used to work well because the government was mostly restrained. That is history.
Note: Do you think that's why all those anti-capitalist refuge types risked their lives to come here and leave their peoples utopian corruption behind them. No, they wanted SSI benefits. They can't suck blood from a corpse, so they came here and registered democrat.
Well the boat is now sinking under your progressive incompetence. Golf anyone? Where next Michelle?
Well, here's from Ben Fuller at HuffPo:
"Here in the place where Bush, then Texas governor, launched his successful run for the White House, in a state Obama lost handily to Sen. John McCain two years ago, the president did the job that takes up much of his time these days.
Politics.
Obama raised up to $1 million for the Democratic National Committee at a hotel in Austin, where the mantra of his midterms – "Are we going to move forward, or are we going to move backwards?" – played well to his lunch crowd." And it goes on ...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/08/09/obama-republicans-have-fo_n_676118.html
I was wondering what folks here thought about Michelle's trips. I read the commentary in "The Daily News" online and, I have to say, as much as I understand that is a mainly Repub rag, I had a hard time disagreeing.
Obama shooting hoops? I heard in passing my radio this morning -- tuned to WSHU, hence NPR -- a story of Obama shooting hoops with a bunch of NBA stars.
I'm not saying that other Admins haven't good, expensive party times at the WH. It's feel it's been getting increasingly overboard, as our President and First Lady are now more and more treated like royalty (we seem to have an unnatural fetish for royalty, which I find strange considering our revolt so many years ago). Chelsea's wedding, for instance. Chelsea was described -- again, on NPR -- as the closest we come a Princess. Oh, good grief.
So, back to Michelle? How do we feel about the extravagance? The O-bots, of course, think this is just the best thing ever and they should take advantage. From my vantage point and seeing all the suffering around me it feels tacky at best.
http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2010/08/04/2010-08-04_material_girl_michelle_obama_is_a_modernday_marie_antoinette_on_a_glitzy_spanish.html
Here's a question for you. How do WE feel about all this endless yappy partisan gossip and posturing from republicrats when there are real people suffering all around us?
It's very simple, to get jobs and economic recovery you have to spend...smartly. Now that there is world overcapacity, banks are not lending, and consumers are saving, it makes abundant sense to stimulate demand. Why not invest in green energy and green infrastructure like railroads, and green energy? Why not enact single payer since health care costs are crippling small and medium sized business, and making them less competitive in world markets? Why not re-enact usury laws and real bankruptcy laws so people can get out of debt and start spending again? These last two things cost nothing to the government and save money over time.
The last thing you want though is Ben Bernanke getting into his helicopter dropping money on everyone because there is deflation. (When will he realize there is deflation!?) Also, paying people for hundreds of weeks to be unemployed or supplying them with free food is not a great way to keep things running smoothly.
Think!
Tim Geithner wrote an article in the NY times titled 'Welcome to the Recovery'. Upon which Robert Kuttner wrote: "This is Geithner's variation on Marxist economics-- in this case Groucho, who famously said in the movie Duck Soup, 'Who are you going to believe, me or your own eyes?' " *chuckle* Classic.
This piece gets to the core of our economic self-destruction. Strangely, it is Paul Krugman -- an apologist for the Democratic Party, Clintonomics and the Clintons themselves -- who has been raising the issue lately, in,of all places, the New York Times.
More significantly, Bob Herbert of the Times, who is not a Nobel laureate economist, but is a damned fine reporter and columnist, has been blowing this whistle for some time. And he has been roundly ignored, of course.
The key is this: as long as we discuss the economy as being in recession, or even depression, we are merely talking about cycles in a model that has up and downs, but eventually works ok for almost everybody.
That is absolutley the wrong model. About 1975, the U.S. economy (and therefore the global economy which depends on it)began severe restructuring from an industrial capitalism model (which had plenty of its own faults) to a post-industrial capitalism model, often (correctly) called a "casino economy." Real wealth is detached from financial wealth which is bought, sold and traded in the casino we call "markets."
The casino is regularly pumped with new capital from schemes and scams that deplete real wealth, or direct injections of liquidity from the federal reserve, various governmental agencies, etc. Where do they get this liquid capital? Through unfair taxation, juice loan interest rates and limitless fees, excess profits and the ability to print money on whim.
So the discussion, if the world is to survive the lords of the casino (a rapidly declining group as "wealth" becomes more concentrate by the milisecond through computer trading, etc.) should revolve around building enough power to unseat the lords of the casino and then return (at the very least) to regulating both industrial and financial capital based on real wealth.
Obviously, various forms of socialism are much better models for human beings and other living creatures, and they should be preserved and promoted as well: i.e., social security and medicare in the U.S., municipal and state ownership of utilities, social control of resources, etc.
The privatization of the mass murder we call warfare is a target that can and must be taken on through reinstuting a draft, creating a universal national service, financial transparency and strict limits on contracting out. The U.S. Marines are plenty capable of protecting U.S. embassies and other fortresses at home and abroad.
And of course our worldwide-occupation network of hundreds of bases and thousands of military facilities must be dismanteled in an ecologically responsible manner, no mean task.
Clearly, reinstuting Glass-Stegall and winning national health insurance for all, fit into any power-building scheme. As do public financing of elections, outlawing lobbying, taking redistricting out of the hands of political parties, etc.
But to be able to wrap our collective arms and minds and hearts around any of this, we need delete false notions of recessions, or even depressions and take a hard look at the economic structures that now dominate the increasingly-polluted and devestated landscape.
Nothing less than the fate of human life on this Earth is at stake. The final irony of casino capitalism is that it eventually destroys the casino and the lords who run it; but the destruction is so horrific and the downfall (which we are now well into) is so totally destructive, that there will be nary one of us left to witness the final curtain of the final act, not even Ishmael -- unless s/he is a cockroach.
With all due respect to Max Wolfe, we've been in this "structure" since the end of the Clinton administration. The early Bush recession, followed by a jobless "recovery" then left a few million without any jobs available except for mcjobs and blackwater (2002 and beyond). What blurred that whole debacle is the housing bubble where millions of Americans started spending their homeowner's equity because that was their only source of cash, since wages were falling and jobs were gone. That surge of money velocity upheld the jobs numbers, falsely, until the bubble went kablooey in 2008.
Now the structural sodomy of the middle has nothing more to blur itself from prying eyes... if there were any looking.
At some point, when hollowing out something, there isn't any more of that something to hollow. They you're just left with empty air and a small pile of dust.
I'm sorry redwriteman, but there will never be progressive change again(in the U.S.), not even after a great depression that lasts 100 years and kills off 90% of the population.
I've been on the same page for some time now. In my opinion, the ugliness we face will be highly dependent upon where we live. We've been 5% of the world's population consuming 25% of the world's resources and part of that is on credit. Unsustainable is just that, it is only a matter of time, but I don't think you'll have to wait long. If you haven't seen it yet, check out "Crash Course" on Youtube or go to chrismartenson.com
I've known this day was coming for a long time, but I'd hoped for more time to prepare. Barring some event that disrupts the already severely weakened economy (and we may have just witnessed such an event in the Gulf) we have a couple of years maybe. But it wouldn't take much to send our economy permanently off the cliff tomorrow: hostilities with Iran, a big resurgence of swine flu, an earthquake, who knows what all. The budget shortfalls in most of the 50 states is a ticking time bomb, and there are countless others as well. Peak Oil point has likely already been hit, the only reason we aren't seeing fallout from this is the slowdown in the world economy. We aren't going to bounce back from this one. We may be able to create a more sane, egalitarian and peaceful world if we wise up, but things may get a LOT worse before they get better.
A great metaphor for where we are as a nation (and in the industrialized world in general) is Wile E. Coyote after he's run off the edge of the cliff, just before he looks down.
If you live near a big city, get your ass out ASAP. I live in the country in Western North Carolina on 2.5 acres, with lots of other farmland around me. I wouldn't worry so much about ammo, as I would about arable land and a network of friends and neighbors. Getting through the hard times to come in one piece is going to be about working together. All the same, I'd spend a lot of time thinking about how to survive without cash, and get as many books on basic living skills as you can get your hands on.
"Getting through the hard times to come in one piece is going to be about working together. All the same, I'd spend a lot of time thinking about how to survive without cash, and get as many books on basic living skills as you can get your hands on."
You are on the right track. Before he became the economics Czar of the U.S., Larry Summers proved his bona fides by reducing the S.U. (soviet union) to economic rub(b)le. In those days everyone had, or quickly got a Dascha, a small landholding like yours to grow food on, and it meant the difference between eating and not eating.
Without environmental laws, toxic waste was everywhere. Without police, bands of roving thugs murdered for hire and plunder. Without transportation infrastructure, many people were malnourished, and couldn't fight off the diseases gotten from the toxic waste. Other people just killed themselves. As a result the average life expectancy went down to 50-something.
The smart people emigrated early.
"The question I am putting to my CommonDreams compatriots is this: Can you see ANY WAY real progressive change can happen WITHOUT having to go through a 1930s like upheaval?"
I believe we CAN have progressive change without a 1930's like upheaval but it will take some major structural changes from within our country.
A. Complete change of leadership away from the neo-conservative and neo-liberal corporate friendly first beliefs.
B. A citizenry that demands more from the media instead of the lies and half-truths from our current monopolistic corporate media.
C. A citizenry that WANTS to educate themselves on what is happening in their country and be involved, especially at the local level.
D. Maybe it is time to address the "activist" judges within the Supreme Court and the current system which results in judges staying on the court almost until the day they die.
E. Since Congress is unable to bring about Campaign Finance Reform, perhaps we need to make this a legal matter in which they have no choice.
F. Address head on:
1. Military dominance - is it absolutely necessary? What are the consequences to what our country is doing not only to ourselves but to the rest of the world?
2. Corporate monopolies taking over financial institutions, media, and government. As long as this continues we can't even "pretend" to have a "democracy".
Without real leadership with progressive principles, we will continue on the current path to collapse.
You forgot
G.) A citizenry who turns off the T.V., increases their IQ by 50 points, and deprograms their brainwashed brains. In the process they get and apply critical thinking skills, and grow a spine.
What you haven't given sufficient attention to redwriteman, is that the oligarchy has already planned out a further step beyond the destitution of everyone else (1930's style if you will.) Naturally people will try to rise up, make things more progressive, and their plan is to use that energy to tighten the noose even tighter. They will not make the same mistake again of allowing another FDR to be elected, although world war is definitely on the table.
"how can you, as a realist, envision the Structural Changes you mentioned coming to pass without a citizenry roused to the point of violent revolution? How can you see it happening."
As someone who has been around long enough to have experienced demonstrations against wars and protests about civil rights issues, it appears that APATHY is the biggest road block we have in this country now. To be honest, I'm not even sure whether a 1930's style scenario would even rouse people. It might incite people to commit greater crimes against each other just to feed themselves or their family, but how many will actually say "ENOUGH".
How many will stop buying from Walmart and instead purchase from a small local family business...how many will purchase food from a farmers market instead of big box grocery stores...how many are willing to turn off their television for an extended period to make a point against Comcast (as an example)...how many will simply just stand up and state their beliefs? I could go on, but, I think you get the point. Why aren't the 20 and 30 somethings in the street getting angry about what will be their future and the decline in the middle class?
I took your original question at face value. Yes, there could be change...it is possible. Is it likely without major structural changes, probably not. But, the one thing I do know in this life...apathy and giving up will NOT change anything. If the current "leaders" in this country are driving us to ruin, then we need to fight for better leaders. WE need to change our behaviors so that corporations can't afford to ignore the citizens.
Even if somehow induced to wake up out of their torpor, U.S-ians are not savvy enough to prevent themselves from listening to people (like the fake left) who will deceive them into shooting themselves in the foot.
In other words: no, not in today's America.
I completely agree with you, it needs to get a whole lot worst before it gets better. A point you made was right on target, times like those produce the Hitlers and Mussolini, what then? However, I too am anticipating the worst. Funny thing is when Bloomberg ran for Mayor of NYC in 2001 I thought to my self why? why a billionaire? Then it dawned on me that he knew this day was coming and he was preparing NYC for the worst by repopulating it with the wealthy. Well NYC is probably the most expensive city in the US and the wealthy continue to pour in while the poor flee. I fear the worst is yet to come.
Pablo, that's just gentrification spurred on by concentrating wealth in the wealthiest all over the world, who buy some New York real estate just because it's fashionable, or seen as more stable than real estate in their own country.
I don't think the wealthiest people in the world are looking at New York as some kind of haven from popular uprisings, or some kind of refuge to prepare for the worst. For one thing, the U.S. allows people to own guns, whereas most other countries don't.
But I do see some business opportunities in bulletproofing cars (a big industry in Brazil) and armed security for affluent suburbs and suburban homes.
You have a point however, in NYC guns are illegal. As for the new apartments in nyc the median price is $2 million and thousands are being built throughout NYC leading me to believe that this is more then just gentrification. Just a thought.
Well, it's time to think crazy, or laugh yourself to death, and at least die with a smile on your face.
O.k. here's the scenario; next time the" assholes of evil "call a limo, the limo fills with noxious gas and knocks them out.
When enough limos are filled, the "persons" are deposited on a plane and flown to the border between Mexico and Arizona.
While unconscious, the" assholes of evil "are dressed in boarder guard clothing and dumped as they are recovering, right next to the drug cartel highway. Then, just let evil natures take their course!
In a short time, the streets of WALL would be as empty as those on Main St! Poetic justice is so refreshing, and very "structured!"
Well, I feel so much better now. AHHHHH.
"Samalabear:
There was never going to be a big jobs bill. There was never going to be a new massive New Deal-type initiative. I think it was sometime last week I read in an article -- or blog -- that Larry Summers was against anything like this from the beginning."
Exactly, and this is key, smoking gun evidence that the Democrats of 2010 are far to the right of Democrats of 1930-1935. Whether Democrats of 2010 are to the right of Republicans of 1930-1935 is an interesting question, a close call, and would require a historian to answer it.
Democrats of 2010 are largely elitist, spoiled brats (spoiled by the lobbyists of huge Corporations) who have proven to be complete failures and frauds on multiple levels and in multiple areas. Whereas Democrats of 1930-1935 were very heavily rewarded for their relatively progressive actions during that depression era, the Democrats of 2010 are scheduled for November to be hammered for their regressive actions (and regressive inaction) during this depression era.
Republicans are not fraudulent but they are of course far right and you can't deal with them unless you are rich or unless you believe in the cultist type beliefs of the far right.
The bottom line here is that you should not be voting for either Democrats or Republicans. If you vote for any of them, you are contributing to the suffering of people who have been kicked to the curb by the system (the tens of millions of homeless, jobless, and people behind bars.) You could end up in one of those groups, so if you vote for Democrats or Republicans you might for example be in effect voting for your own future homelessness.
There are in theory people who would finally act to get some kind of new party organized if and only if a lot of people did their civic duty and quit voting for Democrats or Republicans, if in other words they removed themselves from the good cop, bad cop US political ritual. If in other words it became obvious that a new party would instantly command tens of millions of votes, they would act to create that party. In nature and in politics a vacuum very rarely lasts for long.
In other words, since Americans are too politically lazy and too brainwashed about the alleged advantages of their system, they are not at this time, despite conditions about as bad as 1930-1935 but with no solutions being offered, motivated to make political changes that would be made virtually overnight in many other countries. But a multi-step process might work. Step one is a lot of people stop voting for Democrats and Republicans. If that number becomes politically significant, then the next step is that a new political party is made.
By the way, the American right wingers have NOT got a head start on a new party with their "Tea Party". This organization is a joke because legally it is not a party, but rather a trojan horse type of organization representing the Republican Party, which is of course very legal and very viable. If you vote "Tea Party" you have in most cases actually and legally voted Republican, regardless of what fantasy you believe.
"You could end up in one of those groups, so if you vote for Democrats or Republicans you might for example be in effect voting for your own future homelessness."
As so many millions will.
"... since Americans are too politically lazy and too brainwashed about the alleged advantages of their system, they are not at this time, despite conditions about as bad as 1930-1935 but with no solutions being offered, motivated to make political changes that would be made virtually overnight in many other countries."
Total bullshit.
What tremaine is doing here is what liberals, progressives and the rest of the fake left have all decided to do: blame the American people.
Which is convenient because it takes the focus off the fact that these same liberals, progressives and the rest of the fake left have no meaningful response to the actions of those more popularly known as being on the right.
Truth is, they're ALL on the right.
That's the problem. And it's why those like Paul Krugman and the writer of this article etc. believe the currrent system is fixable:
"These structural problems used to be referenced to show how deep the rot goes and why more fundamental reforms are needed..."
More bullshit.
The current system is not broken. It's "working" the way it was designed to work.
So the idea that:
"we can't change that because it is, so, um, 'structural'!"
is actually true.
Reform of the current sytstem--no matter how "fundamental" you decide to call it--is not going to work.
If you want real change you have to change the system.
Something those on the right--including liberals, progressives and the rest--are not prepared to do.
When it comes to blame, start with them.
Why would they want to change the system when the system is working so well for them (and they don't care about anyone else)?
They may care. But maybe they don't fully appreciate the extent to which bias (when it comes to the interests and privileges of class) and lack of independence come into effect on their outlook.
That's why the kind of blame the victim thinking tremaine espouses is so catchy.
Those that do care get bummed out when they see the gross inequality and deplorable conditions of the poor and vulnerable. It's a downer. Not at all up lifting. Not all that progressive in a going forward and upward sense.
But a lot the guilt and anquish associated with those feelings can be alleviated if not erased if you just take the convenient outlook that--those who suffer do so because it's there own fault. They didn't "push" Obama enough.
It takes you off the hook and elevates your truly evolved status at the same time!
Plus, it presciently sets the stage and mental mindset for the coming austeriy measures and their resulting greater numbers of people marginalized and suffering.
Common Dreams is nice but it does have a few peculiarities that might be offensive to the very sensitive, such as where someone actually agrees with you but mistakenly claims he disagrees (just to seem so, I don't know, decisive? pure?).
I said I don't want people to ever again vote for Democrats or Republicans and yet I have been accused of simply wanting to reform the existing system rather than "change it". Not voting for the existing parties anymore is minor reform? Laugh out loud, another Common Dreams classic...
Since you could not read between the lines, I'll tell you that a new, popular party would ideally completely change the system if and when it did things like ban almost all lobbying and almost all private campaign contributions. And there are hundreds of other things that a new party could do that would be nice and that would most definitely constitute completely changing the system.
Strange as it may sound, those who are really and truly on the right are virtually as opposed to the marriage between the big Corporations and the politicians as people here are.
Even the "minimum set of accomplishments" that a "third party" could easily get would be very, very worthwhile, such as some relief from depression conditions and single payer health care. It is times like these that prove the huge value of having a party like the NDP in Canada hanging around, even if it never wins huge. Thanks to NDP for example, Canada right now has single payer health care and has a much better labor market than exists in the States. Canada is much better off with the NDP being a semi-viable National Party than it would be if the NDP was like the Greens in the US, who never ever win any national seat and can't even win many local seats.
Right now the US is gradually sinking into depression conditions and yet the Democrats want to pretend there is a recovery and the Republicans like to fantasize that eventually the “free market” will ensure a good recovery for one and all (laugh out loud). Both viable parties are too far to the right to allow for direct government hiring for infrastructure, public works, etc. This is what as known as a huge problem for the economy and for people in it.
On another point, I did not blame "the American people" unless you think they should have been smart enough to avoid being brainwashed by Reagan and many other far right cultists. I said they were brainwashed, which is exactly and literally what many of them are. Being brainwashed is a serious thing, and once it has happened you are not very responsible for what you do or fail to do in that state.
By contrast, most Europeans, East Asians, and also Canadians are NOT brainwashed into thinking that the government almost always does more harm than good and into thinking that the private sector is invincible and worthy of worship. Hordes of Americans are brainwashed this way and they have about the worst government in the world as the self fulfilling prophesy result. Americans have a government that loves to micromanage and to heavily regulate, but refuses anymore to actually give any real assistance to people and businesses in need. It’s all stick and no carrot.
Sorry, President Obama, the dangling of tax incentives for hiring when sales are down 30-60% does not constitute real assistance to businesses. Tax credits don’t help when you are half out of business. Subsidies and tariffs are real assistance. And sorry, at the person level, food stamps as the only near universal social welfare program (other than working for the Pentagon) does not constitute real assistance.
But to get back to my very important point I made initially, if you are in the US, look around you. Do you see any existing viable party to vote for that will not continue the status quo? No, you don't. The status quo is far to the right and both parties are on the right. Do you see any party that might at least move the country to the center being formed? No, you don't.
Yet Americans are desperate for one, thus my plan, which is, again, that you start by not voting for any Democrats or Republicans. Then when it becomes obvious that there is a critical mass of non-voters, most of whom would vote for a newly formed party, that new party will finally appear. (Whereas in many other countries, given the same situation, the new party would form without needing such extra motivation.) It’s a Plan B because Americans can’t seem to do the Plan A.
Now, I realize there are other possible plans to deal with depression conditions that the existing parties will not deal with, C, D, and so on. Comparing and contrasting many plans would require a book and is grossly beyond the scope of this comment.
And sorry, it could take me a month or two to respond again if called on to do so. I've pretty much used up my unfortunately limited "Common Dreams time" for awhile. Later, Dreamers.
"Since you could not read between the lines..."
Oh but I do--and I did with regard to your posts, especially this last one. It's just chock full between the lines!
What I love about what your doing there?--is how you distance yourself from the now dreaded Democrats without actually making a break from liberals, progressives and the rest of the fake left.
In fact, you don't even mention liberals, progressives and the rest of the fake left!
As if, somehow, the ideas and thinking of liberals, progressives and the rest of the fake left were not inextricibly blended with Democrats.
Like those now dreaded Democrats just popped out of nowhere and started being meanies all of a sudden!
Laugh out loud! I love that.
And then, just to bring the absurdity one step further, to suggest something of an alternative is possible without--once again--even acknowledging the role liberals, progressives and the rest of the fake left play in maintaining the status quo.
Appreciative clapping and calls for encore.
ps
regarding your comment: "It is times like these that prove the huge value of having a party like the NDP in Canada hanging around..."
read this:
Canada’s Liberals press for extension of Afghan occupation
By Vic Neufeld 11 August 2010
http://wsws.org/articles/2010/aug2010/cana-a11.shtml
"And because security laws only protect investors, who were defrauded, many have no case."
And while President Obama claimed that the new financial reform bill would increase transparency, it doesn't come close to doing any such thing.
"Under a new provision of financial regulatory law, the SEC is now exempt from Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests."
How's that for increased tranparency and a Democracy of, by and for the People? The SEC can now hide every aspect of their incompetence and/or secret dealings with the slime on Wall Street. Here it is: http://www.thedailycrux.com/content/5404/SEC. Get ready, folks, the empire is collapsing and the powers that be don't intend to give us any notice to prepare!
"In a world of economic warfare, we have to see the strategy behind each play in the game." - Catherine Austin Fitts
As David Stockton recently explained, "two-thirds of the profits reaped in the 2002-2006 Wall Street bubble went to the top 1 percent of Americans.."
The 'economy' is tricked-out to concentrate wealth. Money only goes up. If they wanted to heal the economy, rather than stoke the top with even more loot, they would just distribute the printed billions at the bottom of the economic system, and it would rise up through the whole thing healing everybody.
Poor people don't send their money off-shore.
Presently, it's just slow-motion, thinly veiled LOOTING.