Get News & Views Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Chicago to Wall Street: Pay US Back!
While the Occupy Wall Street movement is sweeping the country and peaceful arrests are mounting, Chicagoans took to the streets this week to hold the big banks accountable for crashing the economy and to demand city, state and federal policies that work for working families.
For many, the goal was stopping the foreclosure mill and telling the big banks it was time to Pay US Back! for the $4.7 trillion bailout. For others, the demands focused on the bailout from the financial crisis including contentious contract negotiations with the administration of Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel.
For most, the range of issues were inextricably linked.
Emanuel Goes to Bat for the Big Banks
At the height of the financial crisis in March of 2009, a new president was grappling with an unprecedented meltdown. Huddled with his closest advisers, his instincts were sound.
As described Ron Suskind’s riveting new book, Confidence Men, Obama wanted to restructure the largest insolvent banks to “strike a blow for prudence” and “change the reckless behavior of Wall Street to show accountability flows in both directions.”
His economic advisers chewed it over, discussing the pros (Larry Summers and Christina Romer) and cons (Tim Geithner) of breaking up a big bank, but when the President left the room for moment, his chief of staff spoke up.
“Listen, it's not going to fucking happen. We have no fuckin' credibility. So give it up. The job of everyone in this room is to move the President, when he gets back, to a solution that works,” said Rahm Emanuel. Emanuel's last foray into the global economy was as President Clinton’s point man on NAFTA, a trade agreement that cost the United States some 700,000 manufacturing jobs.
After this display of tough love and a subsequent trillion dollar bailout, Wall Street bonuses are bouncing back. The U.S. economy, however, remains in a in a dead stall with zero job creation, massive foreclosures and rapidly rising poverty.
Take Back Chicago!
Now that Rahm Emanuel is Mayor of Chicago his team is working hard to balance budget deficits on the back of public workers. Rahm and his CEO of Chicago Public Schools (really, that’s his title) want the teachers union to forgo a contractual raise and do 30 percent more time for the same salary.
Why create sweatshops abroad when you can do it at home?
On Monday, 10,000 Chicagoans marched in the streets to tell Emanuel and his friends on Wall Street that enough is enough. Under the rubrik of “Take back Chicago,” community, labor and faith groups rallied for jobs, homes and schools. Occupy Chicago voted to endorse the march and were smart to target the big money at a futures trading conference.
While a banner fluttered off the Michigan Bridge declaring “Wall Street: Steals from the 99% to Give to the Rich. Let's Take it Back!" a merry band of protesters from National People's Action dressed as Robin Hood kayaked up the Chicago River chanting “We are the 99%!” within earshot of the annual meeting Mortgage Bankers Association (MBA). The MBA represents the big banks that created the housing bubble, crashed the economy and are now working hard to speed every foreclosure.
"The Crimes Against the Working People Have Mounted Up"
While some media pundits have complained that the protests breaking out across the nation lack a unified theme, former U.S. Russ Feingold appears to hear the protesters loud and clear.
“The crimes against the working people of this country have mounted up… This is not a time for cautious politics. This is a time to fundamentally identify the crooked way this country is being run, the corruption of Wall Street, the ridiculous notion that very wealthy people are saying that they shouldn't have to help solve our problems. It's time to take it up a few notches,” Feingold told Keith Olbermann.
Feingold and the 99ers know all these issues are interrelated. Wall Street crashed the economy, killing jobs, tanking state and local tax revenues. Mayors like Emanuel should be taking it out of the hide of the 1% before asking the 99% to make more sacrifices.
Tax Wall Street & Start with the Chicago Merc
The folks in Chicago are kicking it up a notch. But they are not just complaining, they are also laying down some concrete plans on how to create jobs and rebuild our economy.
The Chicago Political Economy Group (CPEG) released a plan to create 40,000 jobs in the Chicago area. The jobs plan is funded by a tiny $.25 speculation fee, to be paid by every buyer and seller of derivatives contracts on the Chicago Mercantile Exchange and the Chicago Board Options Exchange. The group estimates that the tiny tax will generate nearly $1.4 billion per year in direct funding for jobs.
Similarly, a growing list of groups is campaigning for the United States reinstate a financial transaction tax on Wall Street trading. A diverse array of groups including, the Rebuild the American Dream Movement, Americans for Financial Reform, AFL-CIO, SEIU, the National Nurses Union, and the New Bottom Line Coalition (over 1,000 faith and housing groups) are throwing their weight behind the idea of a federal financial transaction tax to force Wall Street to help pay for the damage it has done to the economy. Such a tax would raise an estimated $176 billion in revenue.
Internationally the issue is rapidly gaining traction, with the EU proposing a 10 cent per $100 dollars in stock trades and the G-20 set to take up the issue in November.
Click here to send a simple message to Congress that enough is enough. NO CUTS. TAX Wall Street!
- 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...





66 Comments so far
Show AllGod, how I miss Chicago.
Rahm's success at being elected mayor proves Chicago is as corrupt as ever.
If Obama had a progressive bone in his body he would have appointed Nomi Prins, rather than Tim G. to head Treasury, would have appointed Jerry Brown, rather than Rahm as chief of staff. You get the point...there were no shortages of qualified progressives to appoint in 2008 who would have given Team Obama the credibility that Rahm correctly told the world they lacked, and continue to lack as Team Obama's composition gets more right wing with each new appointment.
He might have been picked by the diebold machines, instead of the people? Just wondering. I can't believe anyone would vote for that P.O.S. thug.
Maybe, but one never feels old in Chicago.
Mary - pedaling her tricycle around the block.
Trylon
Maybe so, Trylon, but is that any worse than pedaling a unicycle through the comments threads?
I call it a =theme=. Did you read the basis for the tricycle analogy?
My position - which anyone is at liberty to dislike or debate - is that the only present expression of a so-called =can do= people is to declare the United States as a =late= nation, but have the courage and intelligence to form a new one. The excitement of Wall Street protest - Chris Hedgesism - is suicide by Hope.
And, so far as I'm concerned, if we CANNOT rise like a Phoenix, it confirms my contextual position that Homo sapiens is a failed experiment with a self conscious great ape. The zenith of our success was Monty Python.
There is a loud silence from Bill Moyers - who had the courage to announce the total theft of American Democracy years ahead of the pundits whose work gets published here with such frequency.
Trylon
Sorry - bad analysis - feingold DOES NOT GET IT!
The attempted co-optation continues - read this article if you want a clearer picture of what's truly happening.
http://ampedstatus.org/exposed-david-degraw-works-for-a-soros-cia-obama-socialist-front-group-that-is-secretly-controlling-the-ows-99-movement/
What does Common Dreams have against ampedstatus to the point where it never carries one of their articles?
I don't know what you've been looking at, Mary, but the arrests I've seen have been anything but peaceful. What I've seen is thugs in uniform using excessive, even brutal force, on those who object to being raped by Wall Street and the Oligarchs, who've seen their incomes remain stagnant or fall over the last 30-plus years while corporate malefactors, with the collusion of their paid lackeys in government, pay no taxes and in fact get huge refunds while our cities and towns have been decimated. These corporate criminals have shut down the factories and businesses here to outsource them in foreign countries that pay slave-wages, have no labor protections, and encourage a race to the bottom, all with the collusion of the equally culpable criminals on Capitol Hill. Yes, Wall Street and the Merc are guilty as charged, but they would've been unable to have done so without the corporate criminals infesting The White House, the Congress, and the Supreme and lesser Courts.
Yes, I noticed that oxymoronic "peaceful arrests" as well.
ditto
Maybe the 99% should baker act the psychos and force them into treatment they so badly need. . . since we lack a constitution and/or oath abiding public servants to lock them up for their criminal behavior
As analyzed here several days ago the transaction tax should not be tiny, but should be substantial. May not end reckless and destructive speculation but would raise a lot of revenue.
To put it in words that even he can understand: Rham you are such a slimy fucking creep.
Yes he is, and I can't believe the people of Chicago were stupid enough to vote for him.
After all the damage Daley did, they then voted in his protege.
For all those that voted for Rahm, you get what you deserve. For those that didn't, I feel for you.
The same goes for all those that vote for the Republicans first, and then the Dems. But mostly for those that vote for the thugs. They have shown how much they hate women, blacks, gays and poor people.
I realize the Dems are just as worthless, but they are not trying to take away Women's rights.
At least Daly threw the working class a few crumbs.
You better get used to living in a tent because the way the economy is going that will be your next McMansion. If occupy itself elects the next President and he/she jails the bankers, gets rid of all free trade agreements, taxes whoever they want by however much they want; the economy won't improve a whit. In fact it will free fall faster. Government is the problem whether you like it or not doesn't matter. As a nation we compete with the rest of the world, and security from a large military and/or a large social safety net is making our people poorer and less competitive with the rest of the world.
One more note, teach your children that they are great and remind them that with hard work/education and the confidence to take risks they belong in the 1%. Saying I am the 99% is accepting defeat.
You have been indoctrinated, and it is rotting away your capacity for critical analysis, sense of fairness, compassion, and basic connection to anything close to reality.
The 1% has won, and the devastation is the result. But you would have us do more of the same. You are insane.
Anybody who thinks the US military provides security for US citizens is delusional.
Conservatives believe the Military gives them security. I believe the military budget is way too large and should be cut substantially.
Government has no more compassion for you then a corporation. Fairness was/should be a process, not an outcome. That is why historically lady justice is blind; progressives want justice to be about emotion.
Why would anyone want their children to become part of the 1% who are raping the rest of us? The 99% will ultimately be victorious if we don't aspire to such criminality.
How did Steve Jobs, and/or Bill Gates rape you? They have gotten filthy rich from society, but the trade (money for products/services) was voluntary without coercion. They helped and contributed mightily to society.
How did Google and Face-book rape you?
I use Google all the time, and believe they have contributed greatly to society.
"If occupy itself elects the next President and he/she jails the bankers, gets rid of all free trade agreements, taxes whoever they want by however much they want. In fact it will free fall faster. "
-- The problem is that all of the policies of free trade, financial liberalization, lowering taxes on the wealthy and corporations, not holding gov't officials and bankers accountable that has been implemented since 1970's has NOT WORKED!!! We have been living for over 30 years now with the BULLSHIT that you espouse and things have gotten far worse. We have been abiding by your BULLSHIT memes of deregulation, free trade, financial liberalization, lower taxes on the wealthy and drowning certain regulatory sectors of gov't in the bathtub, while increasing other sectors of gov't (police state). And guess what? The economy is in FREEFALL!
So please SHUT THE FUCK UP!!! Your bullshit memes and the crappy policies listed above have been running the show for over 30 years now... and it isn't working! We are tired of your bullshit! So take a hike in the woods, get lost and never come back.
Hello Eric.A.Blair
For the first 120- 130 years the US had no personal income tax and became the world's economic super power. The governmental share of GDP has increased in the last 30-50 years not decreased, and that is our problem.
Government has gotten bigger not smaller, there are more regulations not less, and because the gov has more power, they have created more loop holes for the politically connected sponsors.
The pres is breaking bread with financial supporters like wall street on a daily basis, he does not know you and will not invite you to break bread with him.
Do not give power/money to those who have not directly invested in you! They will use it to their ends not yours!! That is common sense!!!
"For the first 120- 130 years the US had no personal income tax and became the world's economic super power."
-- Yeah, and during these 120- 130 years the tariff was the main source of revenue for the US govt, accounting for as much as 75% of federal tax dollars collected. So when free trade was first promoted (1913) they said that the US consumer would benefit with getting imported goods for cheaper.
So if you eliminate the tariffs, that brought in 75% of the govts revenue, and promote free trade, then how will the US govt find a way to collect the lost revenue? Hmm... create a constitutional amendment to levy a personal income tax (1913). So did the US citizen really save money?
Kind of interesting how so many political economists avoid talking about this piece of inconvenient information as they so happily promote free trade...
So don't kid yourself if you think that during these 120-130 years the US became an economic super power because it adhered to free market principles. The US has had EXTENSIVE state intervention in the economy from the start and it has not stopped to this day. The US had high protectionist tariffs from the beginning, and this was done to keep out British goods - which in turn helped developed US industrialism. As Chomsky said, "We would be exporting fur right now if we were following the principles of comparative advantage."
And fine... you want free trade? I'm okay with it as long as it only occurs with nations who have similar wage rates as the US. Otherwise business will gain the absolute advantage in the market. The problem of your 'free market' principles is that you adhere to a formula that isn't based in reality anymore. Labor is now becoming more immobile, while capital has become highly mobile because of technological changes. This has allowed capital to be able to seek absolute advantage and play one national workforce against another... and because of this it is driving EVERYBODY'S standard of living down.
So free trade needs some restrictions... do you agree?
Hello Eric.A.Blair,
"So did the US citizen really save money?" No the US citizen did not save money, the US citizen lost money and the government got bigger, more powerful and had much more money to spend. If 75% of the federal government's resources came from tariffs and income tax was still outside the law, I for one would not be complaining.
"So free trade needs some restrictions... do you agree?" If we got rid of the income tax, you could tariff away! I think government takes away from the productive portion of the economy and therefore should be small. Government is important, but it is like an IT group in a non IT organization (a University or Ford motors for example). If the IT group gets too big in a University or Ford Motors the whole organization suffers.
"The US has had EXTENSIVE state intervention in the economy" No, I disagree with that statement. The government share of GDP was very small, and the gov didn't have the resources to do the damage it does now (large military for those on the right, large social programs for those on the left).
The gov has gotten enormously powerful playing to our fears and desire for security. Many on the right believe without a large US military complex the world will fall; and many on the left believe without a large US social safety net society or justice will fall. I think our desires for security are destroying our opportunities and ability to compete.
Lastly I think politicians left and right love to promise us security with other people's money.
"...His economic advisers chewed it over,..."
appointed by..?
rahm emmanuel appointed by...?
sure oourprez's "instincts were sound" but in the service of who?
is he a liar? is he bought and paid for? is he a WAR CRIMINAL? oourprez! usa! usa!
or is he a house slave who does the lynching instead of being lynched.....
We are many, they are few. But they have the guns and we don't. Why not?
One of the oligarchy's greatest propaganda triumphs is to convince liberals and progressives not to have guns.
“One man with a gun can control 100 without one. ”
Vladimir Lenin
Over 100,000,000 people own hundreds of millions of guns here. They are definitely not all right-wingers (even many of those so-called right-wingers can be easily turned away from the koolaid). I own one (three actually), and EXPRESSLY for the pupose of the 2nd ammendment (we the people ARE the militia), NOT for hunting (I'm vegetarian). So don't panic. Go buy a gun.
Actually, I suggest you melt your gun down, and forge it into something useful.
Actually the REAL use of gun ownership is its' deterence effect (this is true, statisically,in self-defense use against criminals, AND collectively against enemies foreign & domestic). To simply OWN the gun is to achieve the task. That is WHY wallstreet has to pursue its' "madison avenue" bullshit campaign, with decades of careful planning, to implement a "stealth" fascist regime on us, and not simply knock us over with an overt, straight-forward coup. Fortunately, 100,000,000 citizens ( millions of whom are capable veterans who side with the people) didn't take your advice. And you're welcome (for "we the people" providing you this useful service, without firing a single shot in anger).
Excellent post
Irony I tell you. The irony is thicker than the iron wielded by small penis men who worship violence.
"To simply OWN the gun is to achieve the task. That is WHY wallstreet has to pursue its' "madison avenue" bullshit campaign, with decades of careful planning, to implement a "stealth" fascist regime on us, and not simply knock us over with an overt, straight-forward coup. Fortunately, 100,000,000 citizens ( millions of whom are capable veterans who side with the people) didn't take your advice."
Figure out the irony, if you can.
I see there is no point in responding to the flinging of howler monkey feces (judging from your series of responses here). Have an enjoyable time in the exercise of your pitching arm.
You have just presented, so much red meat for those who would like to see this peaceful movement get discredited.
"Look! Here is proof.....on a leftist forum, they are quoting Lenin in advocacy of getting guns and fighting with them"
You disingenuously insinuate that Lenin quote, is Lenin advocating gun ownership.
THIS IS A NON VIOLENT MOVEMENT!
Owning a gun is meant to stop violence against you. It doesn't follow that owning a gun makes one violent.
"No matter how one approaches the figures, one is forced to the rather startling conclusion that the use of firearms in crime was very much less when there were no controls of any sort and when anyone, convicted criminal or lunatic, could buy any type of firearm without restriction. Half a century of strict controls on pistols has ended, perversely, with a far greater use of this weapon in crime than ever before.
-- Colin Greenwood, in the study "Firearms Control", 1972
"...Virtually never are murderers the ordinary, law-abiding people against whom gun bans are aimed. Almost without exception, murderers are extreme aberrants with lifelong histories of crime, substance abuse, psychopathology, mental retardation and/or irrational violence against those around them, as well as other hazardous behavior, e.g., automobile and gun accidents."
-- Don B. Kates, writing on statistical patterns in gun crime
"False is the idea of utility that sacrifices a thousand real advantages for one imaginary or trifling inconvenience; that would take fire from men because it burns, and water because one may drown in it; that has no remedy for evils except destruction. The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes."
-- Cesare Beccaria, as quoted by Thomas Jefferson's Commonplace book
"Are we at last brought to such a humiliating and debasing degradation, that we cannot be trusted with arms for our own defence? Where is the difference between having our arms in our own possession and under our own direction, and having them under the management of Congress? If our defence be the *real* object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands?"
-- Patrick Henry, speech of June 9 1788
"If you talk to any of my Democratic colleagues who lost that year, they would tell that gun control was one of the major contributory factors in the loss of their seats. "
John Dingell
So the OWS protesters should just start packing heat and that will back the police right off using their pepper spray and mace. Serve 'em right!
It worked for the Teabaggers
Make no mistake. This is a WAR. But the absolute LAST move in this chess match (if needed, hopefully not though) are hot, shooting gun battles across the nation. That would actually represent a FAILURE of strategy, and an attempt to recover & reclaim the momentum for the cause. The widespread ownership of weapons ALREADY works to DETER a "tianenmen square" incident. Such an incident HERE, would automatically lead to "revolution/civil war II". The weapons, right now, are words and ideas, to persuade the people to support the cause. Since one-in-three U.S. citizens already own guns, some occupiers already are "packing heat" (at least at home). Notice how they leave them there. The time for "mustering into companies" is NOT here yet.
If you have it in your head to carry a gun "just in case" you are asking for trouble. In case of what? If a law enforcement officer asks for your gun you can hand it over without further argument or shoot him. The former choice deprives you of some property, the second choice deprives you of your life. Five more officers will ask for your gun and you will not shoot them all.
Your point of view may be that you were merely defending your second amendment rights. I strongly doubt that the evening news will report the incident that way. If you know you will be in a position of needing to defend your rights against the system you will stand a far better chance of making your point if you do not depend on a gun to back up your argument.
I carried a gun for many years when I lived in a high crime area. People were being held up at gunpoint in businesses around mine. Some were shot and killed. My gun was visible and I never had a problem. Fortunately or no, whether they are petty, major, or political criminals, they all respect other people with guns.
"An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life."
-- Robert A. Heinlein, "Beyond This Horizon", 1942
I've enjoyed your posts for years Nietzsche and you are smart enough to consider that if the oligarchy wanted to keep their jackboots on our necks, the first thing it would do is convince us that having guns is wrong. Then we would disarm ourselves and become defenseless and powerless.
Since most liberals and progressives are disarmed, defenseless and powerless, protesters are being arrested, beat up and imprisoned by the thousands when armed Teabaggers demonstrating in front of the WH were not.
Wow, you really are a sick puppy. Your utopian dream, is a society that behaves itself, because everyone is looking at the other's god damn gun. Unreal.
"Okay, here you go little Kelly my precious daughter.....I want you to go learn how to be civil in school, but don't forget your gun, because that's what makes society civil."
Certifiable gun nut.
"Wow, you really are a sick puppy. Your utopian dream, is a society that behaves itself, because everyone is looking at the other's god damn gun. Unreal."
Your utopian dream of a society that behaves itself without guns, or weapons for that matter, has never existed. We adapt or die. Who actually benefits from having an unarmed public? That is the question we might be asking.
"Certifiable gun nut."
People carry guns for defense or offense. Whether they like carrying guns or not is beside the point.
There are plenty of societies on this planet, that have very few if any guns in the hands of the citizenry, and they exist peacefully.
The US has probably the largest gun ownership per capita on the planet, and our society is steeped in violence. Violence that permeates our culture, and our sick violent gun worshipping culture exports their violent excrement to the rest of the world.
That you have to walk around with a freaking gun on your hip, doesn't make you a civilized human being. Quite the contrary, it renders you a human being that is spiritually deficient, such that you have willingly welded your sense of well being to an instrument of violence.
And the pure mythology, that so-called, "responsible" gun owners never become irresponsible and shoot their neighbor, or their kid, or brother, or sister, or go haywire and go shoot up a salon, is just that…a mythology shared by your ilk, to your ilk.
If you ever start slipping into deep depression, or become mentally ill, or otherwise severely despondent, as a "responsible gun owner", make sure you turn yours in.
Oh wait, you'll be too crazy to do so, right?
You're right, EZ. I forgot the actual statistics. It went something like this; in over half a million incidents of an attempted crime, in one year, they were foiled by a victim who had a gun. In well over 95% of these cases, the victim had to merely refer to the gun (like yelling through the door "Back off. I've got a gun"), or merely showing it (as in your case; you've probably foiled crime attempts without even knowing it. Thank you.).
The protesters must proceed this way to succeed. They must offer up their bodies as a sacrifice for the cause. It must clearly be seen who is drawing first blood. It gives the reality to the gievances they are seeking to have redressed. The wallstreeters are nervous because we, the hundred million who own guns, will be persuaded to believe in the rightness of OWS's cause, and will support them. The 800 lb. gorilla in the room are the guns, and wallstreet dares not enrage the owners of them. They must proceed with their sophisticated campaign of lies. OWS will not let them get away with that. Checkmate mate.
I totally agree. Well said
I've been held up at gunpoint twice. Twice I had a gun pointed to my head, and twice I survived. Had I possessed a gun, in both instances, I probably would have been shot, because in effect their gun had been drawn first.
Go ahead and keep your stinking gun. See if I care. If you had a stinking gun on your person, any where near me, I would definitely walk in the opposite direction.
I wouldn't want my children around you, and if you have guns in your house, I would never darken your door.
Enjoy your love affair with the brute cowardice of a device that shoots hot lead at a distance because deep down inside, you are a wimp, afraid of everything.
I mean, gun loving sociopaths now insist on packing a gun when they go hiking in a National Park. How cowardly can you get?
"I've been held up at gunpoint twice. Twice I had a gun pointed to my head, and twice I survived. Had I possessed a gun, in both instances, I probably would have been shot, because in effect their gun had been drawn first."
If the criminals saw that you had a gun, it is very likely that you would not have been held up in the first place. They like easy prey.
"Enjoy your love affair with the brute cowardice of a device that shoots hot lead at a distance because deep down inside, you are a wimp, afraid of everything."
Guns in public hands are meant to deter the gun totin' wimps that are afraid of everything, the cowardly bullies, criminals and oligarchy thugs that prey on us all.
"I mean, gun loving sociopaths now insist on packing a gun when they go hiking in a National Park. How cowardly can you get?"
This I hesitate to endorse. One can envision lots of dead wildlife, shot "accidentally". If they say they need it for grizzly bear protection, they can carry bear spray or stay out of certain areas the park rangers designate as dangerous.
Your love of guns, and your gun centered philosophy is sickening.