Congress

U.S. Trade Agreements Offshore Outsources Jobs so Congress Passes More of Them

Submitted by on

We know bad trade deals have cost millions of American jobs. We have a jobs crisis with no growth in site. So, why in God's name would Congress pass more of the same? The South Korean trade deal has been analyzed to lose 159,000 jobs. The Panama trade agreement creates corporate tax havens that will be completely out of reach by the United States. Add in the Columbia trade deal and we've lost 214,000 jobs.

The U.S. Congress Joint Economic Committee held a hearing, aptly titled, Manufacturing in the USA: How U.S. Trade Policy Offshores Jobs. The title says it all, eh? Unfortunately the actual hearing didn't have the right economists who would show amply with statistics and facts, the overall hearing title is oh so true.

Contained within is the obligatory other side of multinational corporations, and the real agenda of this hearing is some token retraining for U.S. workers who will lose their jobs as a result of these bad trade deals.

Workers are not alone in wondering why our government sells us once again down the river on jobs. Small businesses, especially small U.S. manufacturers are asking the same question.

Decline and Fall - Why Would Anybody Believe Standard and Poor's?

Michael Collins
sp1.png
We are in the midst of a bum's rush - the quick eviction of a less than desirable in an unpleasantly abrupt fashion. The problem is we're the bums. Our eviction from the political process is all based the word of a firm that helped fuel the housing bubble, trigger the financial collapse, and found itself indicted by the State of Connecticut for "unfair, deceptive, and illegal business practices" in 2008.

Killing Us Quickly - Ryan's Medicare Proposal

Michael Collins

We're not worth having around after 65, says Michael Collins. Why else would they want to kill us off?

House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-WI) proposed a Medicare plan that combines Social Darwinism and a bailout for health insurance carriers, even larger than the one provided by the president's health care reform legislation.

The specific features of the program are less important than the overall effect. In summary, Ryan proposes a plan that will starve most of those sixty-five and older of health care. Here are the numbers, based on Congressional Budget Office projections and elaborated by Dean Baker and David Rosnick (in 2011 dollars) (Center for Economic and Policy Research, April 2011)

crack1.png

The Crazies versus the Sleepwalkers - Big Budget Showdown

By Michael Collins

netnew.png

The Republican crazies are in a celebrity death match with sleepwalking Democrats. It is a fabricated drama amounting to not much of anything in terms of the nation's well being. The stakes are supposedly the shutdown of the United States government at midnight this Friday. But the most pressing issue isn't discussed on Capitol Hill.

Why can't anyone in a position of power mention the unmentionable? There have been no net new jobs in the United States since 2000. There were 137 million employed citizens that year. There are 139 million employed citizens today. This comes into clear focus when you consider the size of the workforce for 2000 and 2010; 143 million versus 154 million respectively. There are actually fewer jobs in proportion to the workforce.

Isn't this a worthy topic? Shouldn't the story be carried nightly on a major network with a title like: Jobless America, Day 4000

Obama's Grand Betrayal

Michael Collins

Previously, Economic Populist brought the internet the startling news - Obama to Change Party. That was satire, at least on November 14. Just three weeks later, satire becomes reality. In the past few days, President Obama has traded away $620 billion in tax revenues in order to get a $56 billion, 13 month extension of unemployment benefits. Of course, the lost $620 billion will make any further unemployment benefits, or for that matter, any other productive social programs pipe dreams as the deficit explodes over the next two years. (Image: Banksy)

The Obama deal is a long way from the original position of ending Bush tax cuts for the highest earners and simply extending unemployment benefits, as called for by economic and social circumstances.

It started when President Obama sent his vice president to negotiate with Republican leaders on Capitol Hill. Since the president still has a majority in both chambers of Congress, you might wonder why he's negotiating. The House Democrats are ready to rock to show that they're not to blame for the past two years of inaction. There are enough Democratic Senators with either the inclination or the compromised background to strong arm a majority.

The Money Party Deficit Reduction Scam and Social Security

Michael Collins

President Obama announced the new National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform on February 18 to address astronomical federal budget deficits. There has been considerable speculation that this commission will target current and future benefits for Social Security recipients to achieve its goals.

Why would this be the case? We need look no further than the treatment of major retirement funds over the past 20 years to get the answer. When the mob needed cash, it looted the Teamsters retirement fund. When large corporations or government entities get in trouble, they effectively borrow from their employee retirement funds by delaying required payments or otherwise gaming the programs. This provides a source of ready cash, a quick vehicle to cover management errors, or jack up their bonuses.

Think of the Social Security Trust Fund (trust fund) as the most lucrative retirement fund in the country, the ultimate pot of gold, and you'll immediately understand why it is that for decades, big business has plundered the trust fund. How does this happen?

The Biggest Retirement Fund Rip Off Ever

ForclosureGate and Real Estate Armageddon

Michael Collins

I wrote the story below in response to an outrageous trick Congress just tried to play on the public. As many of you know, the Senate passed 0/congress/bills/111/hr3808/text">HR 3808 The Interstate Recognition of Notarizations Act of 2010 unanimously on September 27. The bill was a carefully crafted, stealth "silver bullet" for the big banks to deal with their increasing legal problems with foreclosures. President Obama exercised a "pocket veto," which means he let it die after Congress adjourned. (Image)

While my story focused on the process and contempt shown to citizens by Congress in that process, I became aware of a much broader issue. We may well be on the verge of a real estate value meltdown as a result of very bad behavior, illegal in many cases, by the big banks combined with the legitimate push back of mortgage holders.

If banks can't foreclose and people can do a strategic default and walk away (0r live free in their residence), what will happen to real estate values?

The larger question emerged in reviewing bank bad behavior.

If there are fundamental flaws in many, maybe most mortgage, flaws of a serious legal nature, what if a strategic default movement spreads beyond just those facing foreclosure? That's where Armageddon comes in

Beware of the Manager's Amendment

Submitted by on

Beware of the Manager's amendment! Today it was announced Senators Chris Dodd and Richard Shelby are putting a manager's amendment into the Financial Reform bill currently before Congress.

Manager's amendments are notorious. They are often massive, no one gets to read them before a vote. Literally they can gut the very bill being crafted and voted on for months in a matter of seconds.

According to the Huffington Post, a number one corporate lobbyists' priority is being considered for the manager's amendment.

Senator Dodd seems lukewarm at best on the question of state authority and has refused to rule out including a version of Carper in his manager's amendment

The Carper amendment would block states from enforcing consumer protection laws.

To introduce a massive bill, under the guise of a manger's amendment, at the last minute, which no one has read, is common. When the financial reform bill was passed out of committee, Chris Dodd introduced a manger's amendment then, at the last minute.

House Financial Services Committee Chair Barney Frank did the same thing.

The Populist Pub is now open.

 

Petit Julien welcomes you back to the Populist Pub.  

Earlier this week, we passed a milestone of sorts. The Obama administration marked its first 100 days in office. In 1933, FDR, facing a full blown depression, made numerous and transformative changes in his first 100 days. Since then, the accomplishments of the first 100 days of every new administration have been symbolically compared. That is, until this year.

On Thursday, Day #101 of the Obama administration, Steve Lendman, author, blogger, radio co-host and activist, who lives in Chicago, wrote an excellent article contrasting the first 100 days of FDR to BHO. This was effectively a follow up to a scathing article he wrote two weeks earlier. In that article, published on April 18th, Steve Lendman was highly critical of the Obama economic team especially. It was provocatively titled Barack Obama: Crime Boss.

Pages