Who knows what those Liberal Democrats will do? They saw fit to form a coalition with the Conservative Cameron thus elevating policies they opposed. However, Murdoch's own Sky News reported that Rebeka (close friend of Cameron's) Brooks was "sickened" to hear that the News of the World had tapped the voice mail of a murder victim's family, a shameless act worthy of a sociopath. At that time, Nick Clegg, Liberal Democratic leader and Sancho Panza to Cameron, was "appalled" by the allegations.
Rebekah Brooks, the embattled chief executive of Rupert Murdoch's News International, personally commissioned searches by one of the private investigators who was later used by the News of the World to trace the family of the murdered Surrey schoolgirl Milly Dowler, The Independent can reveal.
Well, that's quite a revelation! Brooks must be "sickened" by activity she ordered herself. Clegg conditioned his outrage based on proven allegations. We're close and Clegg is now demanding that Cameron gal pal resign.
Is he the guy who was riding that Japanese motorbike across the desert in the TV ads? Hardly my idea of a "made in the USA" white knight. Another "cut entitlements, cut taxes, privatize Yellowstone, and export jobs" type of the Peter G. Peterson clique. Where do we find such men? If the American political system fails, this will be the reason.
There is so much analysis out there which shows the previous tax holiday did nothing for jobs, the U.S. economy. I know I overviewed one here.
NDD used to write here but (not I) another writer really got into it with him over "green shoots" and we had "call out wars". I'm not into that at all but assuredly the "green shoots" is now laughable. Mired in mud at best.
But I think this latest unemployment report will hopefully bring it home that we had corporate corrupt disaster in our politics and it's destroying the U.S.A.
It wasn't that he and New Deal Democrat were perpetually bullish - they are entitled to their opinion and they could have been right - it was, as you said, that they mocked anybody who didn't view this as a traditional recovery. They are still not on board completely, however. Hale Stewart is calling for a tax holiday for the big corporations that have tax-exempted their way to record profits, and now want to "repatriate" their tax-free earnings back to the US. Disgusting. They don't see these tax cheats as part of the problem.
The classic Chinese strategist, Sun Tzu, advises that the best way to win a war is by conquering the enemy without the enemy even realizing that he has been conquered.
The best thing for the U.S. to do is to stop playing the game of neo-mercantilism. The people of the U.S. support protectionism. Protectionism is good, not evil. Protectionism is the American way.
We should immediately impose an across-the-board tariff. Such a tariff can work to balance trade and the budget. It would not be anti-Mexico or anti-China -- it would just be pro-America. It would not stop trade across our borders -- it would just alter the terms of trade in favor of our survival as a nation.
We probably can co-exist with China, we probably must do so. But if we continue to allow the nation to be run by internationalists and foreign interests (including "our" MNCs), we will continue to be exploited.
Yes, of course, there are problems surrounding the U.S. medical care delivery system ... and no one seriously addresses these problems aside from a few dedicated physicians and public health specialists. (And you won't hear their voices in your MSM!)
First, we have to take down the lobbies. We still prevent Medicare from negotiating directly on pharmaceuticals, yet MSM echoes the lie that Part D is underfunded. Yes, there are many, many leaks in the ship -- and there are some who work hard to patch those leaks. But demands to scuttle the ship or to scrap and jettison it piece-by-piece are ill-advised. Overall, Medicare runs a tight ship and we should build on it, not abandon or sabotage it.
At this time, the medicare trust fund hasn't run out and, in my opinion, the brouhaha over medicare, cutting Part D, etc., is a charade to disguise the obvious fact that U.S. military and war expenditures are disastrously bloated and unnecessary, essentially playing into the hands of our "potential adversaries" (aka 'enemies').
The concept of full employment as a sustainable expectation for America has been eroded over the decades -- since the Full Employment Act of 1946 and other full-employment legislation over the years. The idea of a full-employment policy needs to be brought out and repeated many times -- by members of Congress, by the White House, on every news channel. How can young people U.S.A. today even imagine such a policy?
Currently, Rep. John Conyers, Jr., (D-Mich.) is promoting renewal of the Humphrey-Hawkins Full Employment Act, which was enacted during the Carter Administration and codified under the Full Employment Act of 1946. Conyers, well known as Dean of the Congressional Black Caucus, was first elected to Congress in 1964 and, so, has been around long enough to recall the good old days. (Conyers' endorsement of candidate Barack Obama was a key event in Obama's successful 2008 run for the Democratic nomination and for the presidency.)
Conyers explains the idea as follows: "Wall Street was responsible for the financial crisis that began in 2008 and continues to affect us today. Having already received significant assistance from the federal government, it is only fair that Wall Street now pay Main Street back by helping put America back to work.”
Humphrey-Hawkins, like the 1946 Act, was based on a pump-priming (Keynesian) theory of economics. That's okay, as far as it goes, but the reality is that Keynesian methods cannot possibly work within the current world-system of globalized finance capitalism, without some kind of protectionism -- unless you think that the U.S. is capable of underwriting full employment for the entire planet. The word "training" in Conyers' bill probably goes back to the Clinton administration which approached unemployment as essentially a "training" problem, so that what might have been called "full employment" legislation was described in terms of the need of American workers to be retrained due to rapid changes in technology. The "retraining" projects were paid out of general funds or out of unemployment taxes and (as "free" trade agreements came into effect) by funds alloted by Congress for workers who had been "temporarily" displaced as a result of "free" trade.
IMO, a full employment policy for the U.S. must begin with a 15% Across-the-Board tariff (or VAT, if you prefer). Having said that, Conyers' legislation probably could be helpful as a short-term measure. Of course, it has the chance of the proverbial snowball in a hot place.
(Yes, I am aware that Greece's VAT, now increased, has hardly prevented the collapse of their economy. The tariff or VAT must be part of a general reform of the financial, tax and monetary system. Greece is a very interesting case, as is the entire thing about the Euro, but I don't think we should generalize it to the United States.)
All sort of blends together doesn't it. I agree and, no offense, I sincerely hope that we're both wrong. Maybe it's like science - you can't predict the major shifts, scientific revolutions, that improve and expand everything. How's that for convoluted wishful thinking. Maybe we'll win the cosmic lottery;) I think I know the "white knight" waiting in the wings to bring order to a "divided nation". Huntsman, the Republican former governor of Utah, former Ambassador to China (appointed by Obama),
BEHOLD Jon Huntsman
Huntsman got his Money Party Eagle Scout badge under Obama and earned his off shoring spurs while serving in China. An unknown from Utah with some JImmy Carter and who knows what else. He has a huge advantage in the soon to implode Republican lineup. He appears to be perfectly sane;) Oh, thank the Lard, we're going to be saved by this white knight, this man of mystery. The media will adore him.
Once he's in, we'll be reminded that the bailout authority is international, not US specific, just in time to bailout the Chinese when their house of cards collapses.
The key to Chinese policy is the hoarding of foreign exchange, especially US dollars.
The $500 Billion per year hoarded by China is money taken directly out of the US economy, driving down prices and causing, in itself, 5 million unemployed in the US, and driving many US manufacturers to and over the brink.
If the Chinese spent the money on US production, there would be no problem, but the CHINESE ARE AT WAR WITH THE US.
Their talk and bluster are just moves on the battlefield. Unfortunately, WE are governed by idiots, guided by the myopic. They do not see 5 million unemployed as casualties of war. They do not see idled and closed factories, an eroding tax base, and a decaying infrastructure, as damage inflicted by the enemy.
Until they acknowledge that they’ve been stupid, they cannot get smart. Assuming they are merely stupid, and not treasonous.
Chinese mercantilist policies are responsible for a great deal of our grief. Until we acknowledge that the destruction of our domestic production capabilities is a problem, nothing will happen
Austerity will leverage the situation, causing disproportionate contraction of US productive interests. China will increase US market share, as US market shrinks.
They talk about new jobs but those are really replacements for the millions lost.
They adamantly ignore the negative job growth since 2000, no net new jobs since then.
We're the test bed for all of their failed ideas.
I agree with you - the perpetrators need to feel the pain, get worried, and wonder if their time in power is over forever. It should be. If any of us had a business of any size with employees like our rulers, we'd fire them quickly and list "not for rehire" in their files. It wouldn't take much thought. "There's the door!"
the direct attacks on so many I really stopped paying attention.
Now is the time to attack Congress and this administration. Case in point claiming those bad trade agreements are going to create jobs. What hog wash! Which I will write up soon.
Hey, just yesterday they were all saying things were good due to the ADP report. Wall Street really wants to put blinders onto the real economy and esp. Americans.
Now I’m really scared! Is there such a thing as an economic bomb shelter? I want one!
The Bonddad blog which has made has been ‘mocking’ (literally) the so called “doom and gloomers’ (i.e. those who see the economy from the material conditions of the working class as opposed to charts and graphs of selective anecdotal corporate/political data) is starting to see what we have been talking about for two years. See “Where Will Growth Come From in the Second Half?” and “Employment Report: Sucks Wind”.
The real ideological "argument" in current U.S. political circles is how much of the national wealth will be redistributed, to whom, and by way of what channels -- the public sector, the private sector, or some combination thereof. It is not about goosing the economy or creating jobs.
Both U.S. parties have displayed unseemly eagerness to starve domestic, non-military/police expenditures. They have repeated various propagandized as reasons for doing this. Both parties use such messaging to conceal the underlying agenda of relinquishing public sector power to redistribute wealth at home so as to permit the private sector (or some P3 combination) to exert even more control in national wealth distribution. Historical economic data evidences to what end of the distribution tail that private wealth tends to flow absent strong public investments, progressive taxation, and regulations.
The only political argument playing at the MSM of your choosing is whether, or by how much, federal tax revenues will be boosted, i.e., how fast the public sector will permit increased flows of wealth to one end of the tail. The political tactics of both parties are designed merely to avoid taking the blame for what will be in the end, bad joint decisions for most of us being shoved to the other end of the economic tail.
According to the MSM, neither side is negotiating ways to create jobs (let alone good jobs) or to boost the real economy, although spokespersons from each side will graciously bend over backwards to convince anyone who asks about such goals that by maintaining their unquestioned adherence to public deficit reduction messages, they will most certainly have fixed all and every problem known and unknown, including jobs, education and housing. I wait with great anticipation to see who will next be honored with "Man of the Year" recognition, or with a Nobel Peace prize.
It should attract attention that this austerity cover is being used in Europe, too. Public austerity measures and attendant propaganda on both sides of the Atlantic, is a concerted political effort to shift the costs of bailouts of the FIRE sector losses in the U.S. and Europe to the great unwashed public body.
You’re right – and in fact Osellout may be the greater danger – he pretends to represent the Progressive Democratic ideals but then he gives the extremist Right and its corporate Stepford politicians, the “compromises” / objectives for which there is no political support and which they would have no chance of obtaining on their own.; i.e. in a movie, he would seem to be the classic “Inside Man” (for the corporatists here). And in most movie plots, the Inside Man may not be doing much for the group’s (country’s) future but he’s building his nicely.
Of course nobody says that but that's precisely what's going on. Because no one will tackle reducing inflation of medical care costs, all this cutting is taking money from a host of programs and people and feeding into the excessive medical costs machine.
We're paying too much already and the costs for 2011 and 2012 are predicted to go up around another 8% each year, as I recall.
In other words, at that rate medical care cost will double in ten years. Who's going to stop the insanity?
At this rate, how much longer will it take for full employment?
Do you know if there are any current and publicly available official estimates on that?
Or is everybody with the data available to make the calculations afraid to run it? What assumptions would they use -- new job creation of 25,000 a month, with new labor entrants of 150,000? Would that produce the answer of never?
What will happen is Obama is now exposed as a corporate lobbyist puppet and will lose.
To be replaced by another corporate lobbyist puppet who is even worse and a Congress out to destroy Americans, middle class, America at all costs.
Who knows what those Liberal Democrats will do? They saw fit to form a coalition with the Conservative Cameron thus elevating policies they opposed. However, Murdoch's own Sky News reported that Rebeka (close friend of Cameron's) Brooks was "sickened" to hear that the News of the World had tapped the voice mail of a murder victim's family, a shameless act worthy of a sociopath. At that time, Nick Clegg, Liberal Democratic leader and Sancho Panza to Cameron, was "appalled" by the allegations.
About the same time, The Independent reported this:
Rebekah Brooks, the embattled chief executive of Rupert Murdoch's News International, personally commissioned searches by one of the private investigators who was later used by the News of the World to trace the family of the murdered Surrey schoolgirl Milly Dowler, The Independent can reveal.
Well, that's quite a revelation! Brooks must be "sickened" by activity she ordered herself. Clegg conditioned his outrage based on proven allegations. We're close and Clegg is now demanding that Cameron gal pal resign.
Where does that leave us?
Things look grim for Cameron.
In my view, nothing ever happens when that person has enough money and power.
Evidently the tap dancing last Dec with the tax cuts renewal didn’t cause too much uproar among the peons, so they’ve rolled out a sequel.
Is he the guy who was riding that Japanese motorbike across the desert in the TV ads? Hardly my idea of a "made in the USA" white knight. Another "cut entitlements, cut taxes, privatize Yellowstone, and export jobs" type of the Peter G. Peterson clique. Where do we find such men? If the American political system fails, this will be the reason.
There is so much analysis out there which shows the previous tax holiday did nothing for jobs, the U.S. economy. I know I overviewed one here.
NDD used to write here but (not I) another writer really got into it with him over "green shoots" and we had "call out wars". I'm not into that at all but assuredly the "green shoots" is now laughable. Mired in mud at best.
But I think this latest unemployment report will hopefully bring it home that we had corporate corrupt disaster in our politics and it's destroying the U.S.A.
It wasn't that he and New Deal Democrat were perpetually bullish - they are entitled to their opinion and they could have been right - it was, as you said, that they mocked anybody who didn't view this as a traditional recovery. They are still not on board completely, however. Hale Stewart is calling for a tax holiday for the big corporations that have tax-exempted their way to record profits, and now want to "repatriate" their tax-free earnings back to the US. Disgusting. They don't see these tax cheats as part of the problem.
Put the standard entry into the personnel file -- "Unfit for command".
The classic Chinese strategist, Sun Tzu, advises that the best way to win a war is by conquering the enemy without the enemy even realizing that he has been conquered.
The best thing for the U.S. to do is to stop playing the game of neo-mercantilism. The people of the U.S. support protectionism. Protectionism is good, not evil. Protectionism is the American way.
We should immediately impose an across-the-board tariff. Such a tariff can work to balance trade and the budget. It would not be anti-Mexico or anti-China -- it would just be pro-America. It would not stop trade across our borders -- it would just alter the terms of trade in favor of our survival as a nation.
We probably can co-exist with China, we probably must do so. But if we continue to allow the nation to be run by internationalists and foreign interests (including "our" MNCs), we will continue to be exploited.
Yes, of course, there are problems surrounding the U.S. medical care delivery system ... and no one seriously addresses these problems aside from a few dedicated physicians and public health specialists. (And you won't hear their voices in your MSM!)
First, we have to take down the lobbies. We still prevent Medicare from negotiating directly on pharmaceuticals, yet MSM echoes the lie that Part D is underfunded. Yes, there are many, many leaks in the ship -- and there are some who work hard to patch those leaks. But demands to scuttle the ship or to scrap and jettison it piece-by-piece are ill-advised. Overall, Medicare runs a tight ship and we should build on it, not abandon or sabotage it.
At this time, the medicare trust fund hasn't run out and, in my opinion, the brouhaha over medicare, cutting Part D, etc., is a charade to disguise the obvious fact that U.S. military and war expenditures are disastrously bloated and unnecessary, essentially playing into the hands of our "potential adversaries" (aka 'enemies').
The concept of full employment as a sustainable expectation for America has been eroded over the decades -- since the Full Employment Act of 1946 and other full-employment legislation over the years. The idea of a full-employment policy needs to be brought out and repeated many times -- by members of Congress, by the White House, on every news channel. How can young people U.S.A. today even imagine such a policy?
Currently, Rep. John Conyers, Jr., (D-Mich.) is promoting renewal of the Humphrey-Hawkins Full Employment Act, which was enacted during the Carter Administration and codified under the Full Employment Act of 1946. Conyers, well known as Dean of the Congressional Black Caucus, was first elected to Congress in 1964 and, so, has been around long enough to recall the good old days. (Conyers' endorsement of candidate Barack Obama was a key event in Obama's successful 2008 run for the Democratic nomination and for the presidency.)
Conyers has named the bill (pending without a chance in the current House) "Humphrey-Hawkins 21st Century Full Employment & Training Act" (HR 870) It's described by Conyers as "deficit neutral" by way of being "fully funded by a tax on Wall Street speculation."
Conyers explains the idea as follows: "Wall Street was responsible for the financial crisis that began in 2008 and continues to affect us today. Having already received significant assistance from the federal government, it is only fair that Wall Street now pay Main Street back by helping put America back to work.”
Humphrey-Hawkins, like the 1946 Act, was based on a pump-priming (Keynesian) theory of economics. That's okay, as far as it goes, but the reality is that Keynesian methods cannot possibly work within the current world-system of globalized finance capitalism, without some kind of protectionism -- unless you think that the U.S. is capable of underwriting full employment for the entire planet. The word "training" in Conyers' bill probably goes back to the Clinton administration which approached unemployment as essentially a "training" problem, so that what might have been called "full employment" legislation was described in terms of the need of American workers to be retrained due to rapid changes in technology. The "retraining" projects were paid out of general funds or out of unemployment taxes and (as "free" trade agreements came into effect) by funds alloted by Congress for workers who had been "temporarily" displaced as a result of "free" trade.
IMO, a full employment policy for the U.S. must begin with a 15% Across-the-Board tariff (or VAT, if you prefer). Having said that, Conyers' legislation probably could be helpful as a short-term measure. Of course, it has the chance of the proverbial snowball in a hot place.
(Yes, I am aware that Greece's VAT, now increased, has hardly prevented the collapse of their economy. The tariff or VAT must be part of a general reform of the financial, tax and monetary system. Greece is a very interesting case, as is the entire thing about the Euro, but I don't think we should generalize it to the United States.)
All sort of blends together doesn't it. I agree and, no offense, I sincerely hope that we're both wrong. Maybe it's like science - you can't predict the major shifts, scientific revolutions, that improve and expand everything. How's that for convoluted wishful thinking. Maybe we'll win the cosmic lottery;) I think I know the "white knight" waiting in the wings to bring order to a "divided nation". Huntsman, the Republican former governor of Utah, former Ambassador to China (appointed by Obama),
BEHOLD Jon Huntsman
Once he's in, we'll be reminded that the bailout authority is international, not US specific, just in time to bailout the Chinese when their house of cards collapses.
OK, I'm done now;)
China needs to be delt with.
The key to Chinese policy is the hoarding of foreign exchange, especially US dollars.
The $500 Billion per year hoarded by China is money taken directly out of the US economy, driving down prices and causing, in itself, 5 million unemployed in the US, and driving many US manufacturers to and over the brink.
See: http://anamecon.blogspot.com/2010/04/effects-of-unbalanced-trade.html
If the Chinese spent the money on US production, there would be no problem, but the CHINESE ARE AT WAR WITH THE US.
Their talk and bluster are just moves on the battlefield. Unfortunately, WE are governed by idiots, guided by the myopic. They do not see 5 million unemployed as casualties of war. They do not see idled and closed factories, an eroding tax base, and a decaying infrastructure, as damage inflicted by the enemy.
Until they acknowledge that they’ve been stupid, they cannot get smart. Assuming they are merely stupid, and not treasonous.
Chinese mercantilist policies are responsible for a great deal of our grief. Until we acknowledge that the destruction of our domestic production capabilities is a problem, nothing will happen
Austerity will leverage the situation, causing disproportionate contraction of US productive interests. China will increase US market share, as US market shrinks.
They talk about new jobs but those are really replacements for the millions lost.
They adamantly ignore the negative job growth since 2000, no net new jobs since then.
We're the test bed for all of their failed ideas.
I agree with you - the perpetrators need to feel the pain, get worried, and wonder if their time in power is over forever. It should be. If any of us had a business of any size with employees like our rulers, we'd fire them quickly and list "not for rehire" in their files. It wouldn't take much thought. "There's the door!"
the direct attacks on so many I really stopped paying attention.
Now is the time to attack Congress and this administration. Case in point claiming those bad trade agreements are going to create jobs. What hog wash! Which I will write up soon.
Hey, just yesterday they were all saying things were good due to the ADP report. Wall Street really wants to put blinders onto the real economy and esp. Americans.
Now I’m really scared! Is there such a thing as an economic bomb shelter? I want one!
The Bonddad blog which has made has been ‘mocking’ (literally) the so called “doom and gloomers’ (i.e. those who see the economy from the material conditions of the working class as opposed to charts and graphs of selective anecdotal corporate/political data) is starting to see what we have been talking about for two years. See “Where Will Growth Come From in the Second Half?” and “Employment Report: Sucks Wind”.
The real ideological "argument" in current U.S. political circles is how much of the national wealth will be redistributed, to whom, and by way of what channels -- the public sector, the private sector, or some combination thereof. It is not about goosing the economy or creating jobs.
Both U.S. parties have displayed unseemly eagerness to starve domestic, non-military/police expenditures. They have repeated various propagandized as reasons for doing this. Both parties use such messaging to conceal the underlying agenda of relinquishing public sector power to redistribute wealth at home so as to permit the private sector (or some P3 combination) to exert even more control in national wealth distribution. Historical economic data evidences to what end of the distribution tail that private wealth tends to flow absent strong public investments, progressive taxation, and regulations.
The only political argument playing at the MSM of your choosing is whether, or by how much, federal tax revenues will be boosted, i.e., how fast the public sector will permit increased flows of wealth to one end of the tail. The political tactics of both parties are designed merely to avoid taking the blame for what will be in the end, bad joint decisions for most of us being shoved to the other end of the economic tail.
According to the MSM, neither side is negotiating ways to create jobs (let alone good jobs) or to boost the real economy, although spokespersons from each side will graciously bend over backwards to convince anyone who asks about such goals that by maintaining their unquestioned adherence to public deficit reduction messages, they will most certainly have fixed all and every problem known and unknown, including jobs, education and housing. I wait with great anticipation to see who will next be honored with "Man of the Year" recognition, or with a Nobel Peace prize.
It should attract attention that this austerity cover is being used in Europe, too. Public austerity measures and attendant propaganda on both sides of the Atlantic, is a concerted political effort to shift the costs of bailouts of the FIRE sector losses in the U.S. and Europe to the great unwashed public body.
You’re right – and in fact Osellout may be the greater danger – he pretends to represent the Progressive Democratic ideals but then he gives the extremist Right and its corporate Stepford politicians, the “compromises” / objectives for which there is no political support and which they would have no chance of obtaining on their own.; i.e. in a movie, he would seem to be the classic “Inside Man” (for the corporatists here). And in most movie plots, the Inside Man may not be doing much for the group’s (country’s) future but he’s building his nicely.
Of course nobody says that but that's precisely what's going on. Because no one will tackle reducing inflation of medical care costs, all this cutting is taking money from a host of programs and people and feeding into the excessive medical costs machine.
We're paying too much already and the costs for 2011 and 2012 are predicted to go up around another 8% each year, as I recall.
In other words, at that rate medical care cost will double in ten years. Who's going to stop the insanity?
At this rate, how much longer will it take for full employment?
Do you know if there are any current and publicly available official estimates on that?
Or is everybody with the data available to make the calculations afraid to run it? What assumptions would they use -- new job creation of 25,000 a month, with new labor entrants of 150,000? Would that produce the answer of never?
What will happen is Obama is now exposed as a corporate lobbyist puppet and will lose.
To be replaced by another corporate lobbyist puppet who is even worse and a Congress out to destroy Americans, middle class, America at all costs.
Lovely.
Pages