Savage Inequality

Back when I was a complete Libertarian Asshole - not a Progressive Just-Partly-An-Asshole like I am now - I hated unions.

I was absolutely sure they'd outlived their usefulness, and that they were doing far more harm than good. And I was more right than wrong at the time.

That was then and this is now.

Here's Ari Melber being brilliant.

Overheard Revisited

Whenever I hear "conservatives" whining about "how do we pay for all this stuff?" - and how providing help for regular people is going to "ruin the economy" - I just substitute "rich people's yacht money".

"How can we possibly respond to the pandemic without sacrificing rich people's yacht money?"

"Saving the environment sounds great, but what about rich people's yacht money?"

"Medicare For All would complete destroy rich people's yacht money."

"Yes, we all want good schools and broadband for everybody, but all that federal spending will cut into rich people's yacht money."

The Full Rant

John Oliver excerpted from this at the end of his show last night - it's good to hear the whole thing.

Kimberly Jones:

You Don't Get One Without The Other

Zeeshan Aleem at Vox:

Democrats, not Donald Trump, are the real populists on trade in Washington. 

That’s the major takeaway from the Democrats’ bold new trade platform that they unveiled on Wednesday morning, the second rollout of their “Better Deal” messaging agenda in the runup to midterm elections in 2018. 

It's a collection of proposals aimed at protecting American workers from foreign competition — and it’s designed to edge out Trump's own messaging on how he's going to transform US trade to help bring back jobs to America.
The first 34 items on the 2016 Democratic Party Platform are all about helping everyday American Workin' Folk get a better chance to participate (to a slightly greater degree) in a system that actually fucking depends on their participation.

Don't gimme no shit about how the Dems fucked up by not addressing the problems of middle America.

If people missed it, then they weren't listening, cuz Hillary and Bernie and Tim all hit it plenty hard every time they stepped into the box last fall.

And maybe this had something to do with how we've been missing the point for 30 years:

The idea of evaluating foreign investment to ensure it doesn’t pose a threat to American jobs is bound to be incredibly controversial in Washington.

-snip-

That kind of scrutiny and interference with foreign investment would be unprecedented for the United States, says Edward Alden, a trade expert and senior fellow at the nonpartisan Council on Foreign Relations. “The US has had a very open stance on foreign investment — it’s only restricted if it’s considered a national security threat,” he told me. (*)
'Scuse me, Mr Alden - the health of our economy kinda depends on Americans having jobs that pay them enough to live on, so it seems pretty important to ask, "When did you decide a fucked up US Economy was somehow disconnected from a threat to US National Security?"

Confirming What We've Known

I got your Equal Opportunity right here, motherfucker.

This is not news to any of us who've been watching things like this - and it's certainly not news to anybody who's been on the short end their whole lives.

What continues to be news is that so many of us are still hot to swallow the malarkey that "we" have to lose everything in order to make it possible for "them" just to get one lousy shot at winning any-fucking-thing at all.

The more money the "unwashed of the low-born" have in their pockets, the more money they're likely to spend on whatever weird shit you carry in your little hobby-career boutique solidly entrepreneurial job-creating noble-rich legacy-schmuck powerhouse bidness.  

So grow the fuck up, Dilbert.

Today's Quote

"When wealth is passed off as merit, bad luck is seen as bad character. This is how ideologues justify punishing the sick and the poor. But poverty is neither a crime nor a character flaw. Stigmatize those who let people die, not those who struggle to live."

--Sarah Kendzior

hat tip = Facebook friend LM-M

The View From Out There

Holding Hillary's feet to the fire is a political absolute.

We can fix this.

It Sounds Familiar

Way back in the old days, if the boss wasn't pretty watchful, one of the pranksters would sneak onto the mainframe and start some weird shit thing like:

10 PRINT TO SCREEN: HELP ME - I'M STUCK IN AN ENDLESS LOOP
20 GO TO: 10

And the terminal would eventually lock up and the supervisors would get all pissed off and we'd laugh and laugh cuz it'd take a good 20 minutes to clear the memory partition and restart the sector - or whatever magic the uber-nerds did to get it all back up and runnin'.

And somehow, we didn't know we were just being assholes.

Well, now we seem to have kinda the same thing going on in certain sectors of our politics.

We gave a lot of money to rich people to fix the economy, but it didn't work

So we gave a lot of money to rich people to fix that, but it didn't work

So we'll give a lot of money to rich people and see if that works

And somehow, they don't know they're just being assholes.

Think Of Something Better

And that kinda goes with a piece at WaPo:

The U.S. suicide rate has increased sharply since the turn of the century, led by an even greater rise among middle-aged white people, particularly women, according to federal data released Friday.

Last decade’s severe recession, more drug addiction, “gray divorce,” increased social isolation, and even the rise of the Internet and social media may have contributed to the growth in suicide, according to a variety of people who study the issue.

But economic distress — and dashed hopes generally — may underpin some of the increase, particularly for middle-aged white people. The data showed a 1 percent annual increase in suicide between 1999 and 2006 but a 2 percent yearly hike after that, as the economy deteriorated, unemployment skyrocketed and millions lost their homes.

“People [were] growing up with a certain expectation . . . and the Great Recession and other things have really changed that,” said Julie A. Phillips, a professor of sociology at Rutgers University who studies the demography of suicide. “Things aren’t panning out the way people expect. I feel for sure that has had an effect.”

Maybe That's It

We spend an awful lot of time and energy trying to figure out what's wrong up in this joint.  And for once, maybe looking to a nice simple bumper-sticker exlanation is all we need to do.

"You know that being American is more than a matter of where your parents came from.  It is a belief that all men are created equal and that everyone deserves an even break." --Harry Truman

"...everyone deserves an even break."  That's it.  So now all we have to do is figure out - do we have too many suckers, or do we have too many PT Barnums?

hat tip = FB friend VWE

Crushing On Elizabeth

From truthout.com:

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) introduced a bill addressing two of her top legislative priorities: The crushing burden of student debt and tax loopholes that allow the wealthiest Americans to shell out a smaller share of their incomes than do many of those in the middle class. The measure would allow people who took out student loans at a higher rate than they could get today to refinance their debt the same way one might refinance a home mortgage. It would also give people with high-interest private loans to roll them over into the Federal Direct Loan program.

The measure would cut into the government’s revenues, and Warren would make up that shortfall by implementing the “Buffett Rule,” which would raise taxes on those making $1 million or more in income.

Seriously, I wanna have babies with that woman.

First Labor - Then Capital

Big hat tip to The KrugMan

This is kind of funny: Eric Cantor feels the need to explain to his fellow Republican legislators that most Americans not only don’t own their own businesses, they have no desire to own their own businesses. It’s a message he’s apparently having a hard time getting across.

But I’m surprised that none of the commentary I’ve seen mentions Cantor’s own infamous tweet on Labor Day 2012, when he took the occasion to honor … business owners:

   Today, we celebrate those who have taken a risk, worked hard, built a business and earned their own success.

 From The Washington Monthly link in Krugman's piece:

The deeper problem is that most conservatives simply do not believe wage-slaves contribute anything that matters to the economy. And this, as Paul Waldman notes at the Prospect today, reflects and reinforces a moral valuation of Americans as divided into producers and parasites:

   We all believe that some people are just more important than others, and for conservatives, no one is more important than business owners. Remember how gleeful they were when President Obama said “you didn’t build that” when discussing businesses during the 2012 campaign? Sure, he was taken out of context (he was talking about roads and bridges, not the businesses themselves), but Republicans genuinely believed they had found the silver bullet that would take him down. He had disrespected business owners! Surely all America would be enraged and cast him from office! They made it the theme of their convention. They printed banners. They wrote songs about it. And they were bewildered when it didn’t work….

--and--

But if your mindset is such that the only alternative to deification (Waldman’s term) of big business is deification of small business, it will be difficult for you to develop an agenda attractive to people who don’t own businesses at all, particularly if that requires acknowledgement that labor contributes as much to the success of enterprises as capital. Abandon that rampart, and before you know it, you’re acknowledging the legitimacy not only of government regulation of entrepreneurs on behalf of their empoyees, but of unions! And that way lies socialism, obviously.

Are We All Indians Now?

Nope - sorry - this isn't going to be a rant blasting The Lone Ranger.  I've heard lotsa bad things about it, and maybe I'll get to have some fun with it later, but right now I just  don't care much about some dumb movie.

This is about what's happened to the economic boom in India.  You remember - the one that Lil Tommy Friedman told us was the very model of this new fabulous economic system in which everybody becomes a plucky entrepreneur and go on to reap the riches of Croesus as we all thrill in "the race for the top" blah blah fucking blah.

From William Dalrymple at New Statesman, about a new book dealing with what's gone wrong:

...The economic boom, which began in 1991 and took off in the late 1990s, provoked a miniboom of New India books, some far better than others. First off the blocks was Gurcharan Das, a former CEO of Procter & Gamble, whose India Unbound in 2001 became an international bestseller and made a convincing case that the future was India’s: all that was needed was further deregulation and a stripping away of the economic coils – the “licence Raj” – that were tethering the Indian elephant to the ground and the country’s future as an economic superpower was assured.

You caught that, right?  Deregulation.  Git da gubmint out da way.

But of course, The Mustache of Understanding wasn't at all alone in his thinking.  And btw: these guys are never alone in their thinking - the herd is everything for these guys - as long as they're all wrong together, they never have to admit they have their heads all the way up their wealthy benefactors' asses.

Anyway, the thing goes on at length about how everybody was totes agog over the prospects of China and India overtaking the US as the world's economic superpower by mid 21st century.

But guess what?

Their thesis is simple: India’s failure to equal the success of China’s hyper-development is due in large part to the failure of the state to provide “essential public services – a failing that depresses living standards and is a persistent drag on growth”:

Inequality is high in both countries, but China has done far more than India to raise life expectancy, expand general education and secure health care for its people. India has elite schools of varying degrees of excellence for the privileged, but among all Indians seven or older, nearly one in every five males and one in every three females are illiterate . . . India’s health-care system is an unregulated mess. The poor have to rely on low-quality – and sometimes exploitative – private medical care, because there isn’t enough decent public care. While China devotes 2.7 per cent of its gross domestic product to government spending on health care, India allots 1.2 per cent.

So here's one take-away:  We were perfectly content to do fuckloads of business with China, even though we needed to be reminded to "hate" the Chinese government because of all the free stuff they kept giving their citizens under their dirty commie regime.  (they definitely have some pretty bad shit coming their way because of some of the fucked up government building projects, but that's a slightly different angle)

Meanwhile, the Indians were far more to our liking because they were doing it according to the Uncle Miltie Friedman formula - plus of course, if they could find jobs in Mumbai, maybe they wouldn't all be over here owning all of our 7-11 stores.

When Government is shut out completely;  when the people who are supposed to be doing the governing in a system of self-governance aren't allowed to do any actual governing, then we're volunteering for nothing less than to wear the chains of an old-style aristocracy from the 18th century that the flag-wavers and chest-thumpers keep telling us we're supposed to be so proud of having thrown off.

What the fuck, Murica!?!

Just A Tho't

(sparked by a bit in the Adam Curtis piece I posted yesterday)

"The Invisible Hand" has become the catch-all shield for anybody arguing for austerity and privatization, etc; or against Gubmint and social welfare or whatever evil rotten thing they find moldering in their fevered skulls.

The Invisible Hand (per Wikipedia):

In economics, the invisible hand of the market is a metaphor conceived by Adam Smith to describe the self-regulating behavior of the marketplace.[1] The exact phrase is used just three times in Smith's writings, but has come to capture his important claim that individuals' efforts to maximize their own gains in a free market benefits society, even if the ambitious have no benevolent intentions. Smith came up with the two meanings of the phrase from Richard Cantillon who developed both economic applications in his model of the isolated estate.[2]

From just a quick look at our own relatively brief history, I'm sure we could all come up with some good examples of bad results whenever The Invisible Hand was allowed to rule - the Slave Trade in America comes to my mind.  But maybe what we really need to consider is something a bit more ethereal, even tho' in a weird way it's right there in front of us.

Maybe "The Invisible Hand" is invisible because it isn't fucking there.  Not as a prospectively guiding force anyway.  My main problem with "market-based self-regulation" is that the regulatory function is always retroactive; it's remedial instead of preventative; and so any solutions or corrections always come after the fact, which means the whole mess is way more costly than it'd be if we'd had good regulations in place that were aimed at heading off problems before they become problems.

Looking at it thru the "Fuck Your Buddy" filter, the picture clears up a bit more.

BTW: "Conservatives" adhering to the (increasingly debunked) theories of Milton Friedman and John Nash and Friedrich von Hayek seem to be insisting that all the bad shit that seems always to happen with unregulated capitalism hasn't actually happened.  And that's all part of the revisionist bullshit theme that runs very strong in "Conservative" politics - start with your desired outcome, and then do whatever is necessary to fix the facts around that outcome.  (see Downing Street Memo for an excellent example)

Friedman's shock therapy gets applied in Chile and Argentina and Iraq and Greece and and and - and it's mostly pretty much all fucked up.

Nash's Game Theory gets played out with the secretaries at Rand Corp, and what happens?  The subjects insisted on cooperating with each other instead of fucking each other over all the time, so the experiment was a complete flop.  And of course, it wasn't because there were serious problems with the theory - it had to be because those stupid secretaries weren't behaving in the "appropriately rational manner".  So the theory didn't fail, those idiot biddies failed the theory.  Sound familiar?

Here's a little experiment we can try: whenever you hear somebody use the phrase "The Invisible Hand", substitute "the will of god", or "god's mysterious plan".  Now tell me if anything else that person says makes any real sense from the standpoint of what a "fully rational, pragmatic adult" might say - about economics or politics or actual human-type people.

If it's bullshit, then you're not being rude when you call it bullshit.

Picture This

The Repubs are known far and wide as the Party Of No.  But I have to wonder - since my default position is that "it's never really about what they say it's about", and since the GOP doesn't ever really do anything to push back against that perception - well, what's up widdat?

It's not so much that they wanna take the really stoopid ideas of the wingnuts and turn 'em into law (in spite of what seems obviously contrary to that statement - cuz you can dip me in shit and call me lonesome but there's a buncha Monumental Stoopid goin' on over there).  I'm just thinking the wingnut agenda is diversionary. It's there to keep everybody yappin' along about stuff that's never gonna happen.  The wingnuts are forever  being encouraged to get nuttier and nuttier, and "the left" / "the public" / "the rest of us" - the big squishy middle is always being pinged with all this nuttier and nuttier shit that we're supposed to think about / talk about / be upset about - but mostly send-money-to-somebody about.

Sump'm ain't right.

Crazy Theory Alert - proceed only if adequately equipped with NaCl.

It is my considered opinion that we're living in a time of transition (I am, if nothing else, a regular genius, eh?).  My guess is that what we're watching now in 2013 is more or less what is fairly easy to imagine was going on maybe 20 years before the opening scenes of Rollerball (the original - not that pocket lint remake).

But anyway - wanna see what that diversion looks like?  Here ya go:

Bachmann's been in office for 8 years, and the US has nothing to show for it.  She's raked in over $1 Million in salary, plus close to another 40% in Federal Bennies, plus Farm Subsidies (estimated at another $1 Million), plus whatever she's made in "Honoraria" and perks and what she's managed to "earn" trading on the inside info she gets because of her position in government.

And now, of course, we'll be further amused (ie: distracted) as we watch Ms Bachmann's excellent adventure with the Ethics Investigation.

And maybe it's just a good grift, but it seems like we watch the fluttering birds and the glitter showers and the crash scenes while everything we need to make life workable is either stolen outright or co-opted, commoditized, processed, repackaged and sold back to us at a price just slightly higher than what we're allowed to make in wages.

Welcome to the World Wide Company Store. 

Economic Climate Change

There are more hints every day that s storm of a slightly different variety is headed our way, but this one is something we can actually do something about - not that we will, but we could.

From truthout, a glimpse of things to come:

The incomes of 100 people out of the seven billion on the planet could fix that, and then fix it again, and then fix it again, and then fix it again. The exact total of the wealth of these individuals is actually something of a mystery, thanks to the tax havens they use to hide their fortunes. There are trillions of dollars squirrelled away in those havens - no one knows quite how much - and the subtraction of that money from the global economy has a direct and debilitating effect on the people not fortunate enough to be part of that elite 100.

In America alone, some $150 billion in tax revenue is lost each year because of these havens, money that could be used for education, food assistance programs, infrastructure repair and health care. Instead, Americans are told the country is going broke, and are force-fed austerity measures by the same politicians who passed the laws allowing the wealthy and corporations to wallow in treasure like Tolkien's dwarves hiding under their mountain.

Call it whatever ya wanna call it - I'll call it a storm because I think it's a very natural thing, and pretty much the standard scenario that's been replayed somewhere in the world every few generations since forever.

More and more power and wealth gets concentrated into fewer and fewer hands; while more and more people get pushed down towards the bottom, having less and less.  At some point, so many people have been left with nothing more to lose, all it takes to start some real shit is for some eloquent ambitious bastard to stir their resentment, and "suddenly" the mob rises up; they smash your gated community, and they take what they want.  And then of course, the whole thing starts over.

We have to do something to get some kind of balance back into the system, and the first thing we have to do is to learn (re-learn?) how to have a calm conversation about things like Economic Justice, and how we go about trying to fix the disparity problems, without all the knee-jerk reactions and overheated partisan rhetoric.*

So maybe we could tap into some of that American Exceptionalism we hear so much about.

*ed note: if you bring the standard crap that passes for "conservative" ideology these days, and I slam you for it - that's not what qualifies as overheated rhetoric.  That's just callin' it what it is.  Some people are stubborn, and really - about all you can do is hit 'em with a shovel til they loosen their grip on The Stoopid.

Yikes

--and--

We Need To Get Up

...and get mad.  And figure out what exactly we're gonna be mad about.



Great bit near the end about Tea Partiers and Occupiers needing to understand that they have something important in common (something I need to work a little harder at recognizing).

Solar Dreams

I've not confirmed this is real -

- but what a great idea.

Of course, the real problem is that once the utilities companies perceive any threat to their 19th-Century Profit Model, they put their Coin-Operated Politicians to work knee-capping anybody who dares to compete with them.

From The Mail & Guardian (Africa Edition):

But renewable energy has become politically divisive as businesses complain the shift away from nuclear power towards subsidised renewables is adding to consumer costs and jeopardising economic growth.

The government agreed last year to cut the level of feed-in tariffs – the industry's lifeblood as long as solar power is more expensive than conventional forms of energy to produce – in order to reduce the pace of installations.
Tariffs were cut by 2.5% a month between November 1 2012 and January 31.

Installation decrease
An Environment Ministry spokesperson said installed capacity in the last quarter of 2012 was less than a fifth of overall installations last year.

Above The Law

Elizabeth Warren is on 'em like the sun covers Dixie - and my mad crush on that woman continues unabated.

“Beginning in 2008, the federal government poured billions of dollars into AIG to save it from bankruptcy. AIG’s reckless bets nearly crashed our entire economy. Taxpayers across this country saved AIG from ruin, and it would be outrageous for this company to turn around and sue the federal government because they think the deal wasn’t generous enough. Even today, the government provides an ongoing, stealth bailout, propping up AIG with special tax breaks — tax breaks that Congress should stop. AIG should thank American taxpayers for their help, not bite the hand that fed them for helping them out in a crisis.“

The violence that some of these fuckwads did to our economy is criminal.  And while I'm trying to reform my hard-ass Ayn Rand reactionary self, I have to wonder: when do we get to hang a few of these jag-offs?