Doesn't Do Much Good to Cut Expenses When You've Got No Income

Has anyone else noticed that for all the trouble we're in we haven't had much in the way of revenue enhancement proposals? An extra 3% on the richest of us and that's about it. David Brooks is crowing about Obama "prowling around the White House prodding his staff to find budget cuts." What budget cuts? Why, Medicare and SocSec of course. What else?

Everyone is looking at the deficit and screaming about cuts. No one is looking at the deficits and screaming about the need to raise corporate taxes. President Obama did (if you can believe he was serious) make a strong pitch for closing some major loopholes in corporate tax law that would largely make offshore tax shelters pointless, and about time, too. But the BD/GOP Alliance seems to have buried that one under the compost heap in somebody's back yard, probably Barney Frank's.

Given that history - recent history included (Clinton anyone?) - shows that the economy grows when corporate taxes and the minimum wage go up, why aren't both of those the center of the Admin's economic plan? Why are we still talking only in terms of tax cuts and program cuts and budget cuts? Why are we willing to strip seniors of their security to pay off crooked bankers? Why are we still talking about the kind of tax policy that has failed - twice in the last 25 yrs - to create an economy that is good for all sectors of society, not just the rich?

Or did I just answer my own question?

Ronald Reagan isn't dead. He's running Obama's recovery team.

Obama Has Faith Tinkerbell Will Get Better If We All Clap Hard Enough

Yesterday I wrote about the carefully-couched offer of the major health insurance industry reps to cut 1.5% of their costs. I suggested that it was hooey. President Obama, however, got up in front of cameras at almost the same moment I was dismissing their lies empty promises "proposal" and told the world their proposal was the key to health reform in the US, or words to that effect. Even for WaPo Beltway stenographer Ceci Connelly, this was a bit much.

In his quest to transform American health care, President Obama appeared yesterday to put his faith in pledges from some of the interest groups that helped scuttle reform 15 years ago, but the industry's promises fell well short of the White House's expansive claims.

Ther chance that anything these convicted liars say may actually happen are lower than the chance that your pet goldfish will write a best-selling novel but that hasn't stopped Obama from assuming it. He has "faith" - always a dangerous strategy with hungry sharks.

What this actually seems to be is a concerted effort to convince everyone that the usual Kabuki actually has some substance this time, but of course it doesn't so all they've managed to do is put a sizable chunk of their credibility on a horse and send it galloping into the sunset. Which could be a good thing.

Continue reading "Obama Has Faith Tinkerbell Will Get Better If We All Clap Hard Enough" »

"All Roads Lead to Tax Reform" Says Rahm, But Whose?

Which taxes and who gets reformed? A couple of mild attempts to close corporate tax loopholes have stalled after counter-attacks by corporate lobbyists, and the Democrat Congress is all flummoxed because while it wants to approve Obama's popular agenda, it doesn't want to have to press its corporate donors for the money. So they're all, like, "We've got no options and we don't know what to do" and such.

President Obama is running into stiff Congressional resistance to his plans to raise money for his ambitious agenda, and the resulting hole in the budget is threatening a major health care overhaul and other policy initiatives.

The administration’s central revenue proposal — limiting the value of affluent Americans’ itemized deductions, including the one for charitable giving — fell flat in Congress, leaving the White House, at least for now, without $318 billion that it wants to set aside to help cover uninsured Americans. At the same time, lawmakers of both parties have warned against moving too quickly on a plan to auction carbon emission permits to produce more than $600 billion.

The unwillingness to embrace some of the major White House tax and revenue proposals has frustrated administration officials. They note that lawmakers, many of them supporters of the president’s ambitious agenda, clamor to hold down the deficit while balking at the proposals to finance his program.

The carbon emissions permit thing may be an environmental nightmare in the long run but as a short-term filler it's not a bad idea. Better polluters at least pay for what they spew than they get to do it for free. And the more they have to pay, the more attractive cleaner emissions start to look.

Continue reading ""All Roads Lead to Tax Reform" Says Rahm, But Whose?" »

Is Gregg a SocSec Signal? (Updated)

NH's Judd Gregg is what passes for a moderate in the modern GOP - he only voted with his party 82% of the time. My family lives in New Hampshire and they know Judd Gregg. They were, not to put too fine a point on it, appalled.

Judd is a neoconservative ideologue. He doesn't himself display the usual Pub whackoness, which may be why he stayed in the background acting, as Politico's David Rogers puts it, like "a trusted, behind-the scenes consigliore for every leader since the mid-‘90s, from Mississippi’s Trent Lott to Bill Frist of Tennessee and now Kentucky’s Mitch McConnell." Which means that even though largely invisible publicly, Gregg has had a hand in every GOP fiasco, meltdown, and sleezy trick of the last 15 years.

Continue reading "Is Gregg a SocSec Signal? (Updated)" »

It Turns Out that Elections Don't Have Consequences

I'm all about giving Obama the benefit of the doubt and waiting to see what he actually does and even telling people we should trust him because when he does things like put Social Security in play, he's just putting on the conservative sheep's clothing to cover up the progressive wolf - as Avedon puts it: trust him because he is a liar - I'm all about all of that.  But it's very hard to think that Lambert is wrong when he says this:

NOTE Having already stolen two trillion for Hank Paulson's golfing buddies, it's only natural that the Village would try to loot Social Security. It's the only big pot of money left.


Obama is a friend of Wall Street, which means that he believes the economic theory that says that we exist to create wealth so the elite can steal it.  That's what happened the last time SocSec was tinkered with in bad faith.  That's what will happen this time with not enough honest brokers on the floor and with the ones who are out there being too weak to matter.  He needs to be beaten back on this swiftly and forcefully.  I don't think that's going to happen to our Precious.

It's interesting to me that whenever Obama is criticized by someone from the left, he tells us to calm down because he's gotten this far without listening to us and anyway, we should trust him.  Except he hasn't gotten this far without us, as his hasty retreat on Social Security during the campaign showed us.  He's only here because the economy conveniently collapsed, McCain was a horrible candidate who ran a horrible campaign and Obama, in large part because of his opposition to the war in Iraq, had the early and overwhelming support of the youth and the left, which helped him beat Clinton.  The comment about Social Security, something he didn't need to do and so must be something that the guy believes, makes it very hard to feel like we aren't being played. 

Unsustainable. That's What You Are.

Doghouse is running a retrospective of our long national nightmare.  Don't miss it.  

In one of the posts, he quotes some of BushCo's inauguraizin':

We will reform Social Security and Medicare, sparing our children from struggles we have the power to prevent. And we will reduce taxes, to recover the momentum of our economy and reward the effort and enterprise of working Americans.

Looks like Obama is taking a page from that book: (emph mine)

President-elect Barack Obama said Wednesday that overhauling Social Security and Medicare would be “a central part” of his administration’s efforts to contain federal spending, signaling for the first time that he would wade into the thorny politics of entitlement programs.

...

Speaking at a news conference in Washington, he provided no details of his approach to rein in Social Security and Medicare, which are projected to consume a growing share of government spending as the baby boom generation ages into retirement over the next two decades. But he said he would have more to say about the issue when he unveiled a budget next month.

Should he follow through with a serious effort to cut back the rates of growth of the two programs, he would be opening up a potentially risky battle that neither party has shown much stomach for. The programs have proved almost sacrosanct in political terms, even as they threaten to grow so large as to be unsustainable in the long run. President Bush failed in his effort to overhaul Social Security, and Medicare only grew larger during his administration with the addition of prescription drug coverage for retirees.

Stupid, hysterical, stupid and misleading to boot!  But, since Obama continues to wake up Pandora, bonk her on the head and push her off her box so he can pry it open, it looks like we're doomed to keep having the same discussion about the sustainability of Social Security for the foreseeable future.   In the interest of time, here's the graph that should be taped to the forehead of every reporter and editor in the country no matter what section of infotainment is their domain. 

Photobucket

Linkety Link Link

The methods by which the Paulson Treasury will hand out $125B to regional and community banks is secret.  Add that to the pile of secret Treasury doin's.  (via Planet Money)

From way back in August, Dean Baker told us how to help homeowners who are underwater: Own to Rent.
Now he's updated the discussion of what it means to bailout homeowners.

I volunteer with a person who has been predicting that PA will be this year's Florida and Ohio.  My tinfoil hat starts buzzing when I read stories like this, which appear to be softening the ground for such an outcome. Bonus points: Our Ms. Bumiller wrote it!

I can't figure this out completely but it looks like Argentina has nationalized their version of "personal account" pensions.   

And more from the Book of Privatization: You can secede from your county, privatize your city and be sure your tax dollars only benefit YOU!  Grover Norquist is so happy.

What Brand of Dog Food is the Tastiest?

Read this 'Is My Money Safe' column at the NYT and then bookmark it.  It will come in handy for waving around the next time the lunatics start talking about privatizing Social Security again.  Money quote:

Q. But what if I am about to retire? Then what?

A. Leaving the work force at a time like this creates big problems. Not only is your portfolio down, but you need to start withdrawing from it. So you are essentially locking in your losses.

If your portfolio has taken a big hit, it may be time to seriously consider delaying retirement. Working just a few years more can make a big difference. Or, a part-time job may keep you from having to dip into your portfolio before it recovers.

Financial Sector in Disarray Due to Mortgage Crisis

The Washington Post reports that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the govt/private sector partnership that worked so well for so many years getting low income folks hooked up with their own homes (before Bush came along), are going into the dumper on the stock market, and that their future is in danger.

Investors dumped shares of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac yesterday based on worries that the two pillars of the housing market could be forced to raise $75 billion of capital, potentially confronting them with an overwhelming burden and crippling already struggling financial markets.

Fannie Mae's stock price plunged 16.2 percent, to $15.74, and Freddie Mac's fell 17.9 percent, to $11.91 -- their lowest since 1995.

***

At issue are trillions of dollars in mortgage guarantees that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac made but are not included on their balance sheets as assets or liabilities. FASB's proposed rule would require the companies to move the guarantees to the balance sheets, forcing them to hold additional capital to cover those obligations.

The two agencies would have to have $$$BIL$$$ more in their bank accounts than they have to carry now, the money provided by the Congress. With Bush's War taking us into double-digit inflation and quadruple digit deficits, a new housing appropriation that large is...unlikely. The hope is that, as quasi-public, non-profit institutions, the FASB will exempt the FM's from a rule made to prevent for-profit banks from swindling people, but if it doesn't thier stock becomes worth less and the money it can borrow, especially against the stringent new rules, will be significantly less, weakening the housing market even further.

It's not entirely accidental that the fallout comes because banks and mortgage-lending institutions decided they could compete with the two FM's and steal their low-income customers using deceit and trickery. The investor class has never liked the FM's for a variety of reasons, so if they go down because of the mortgage scamming business the for-profit banks invented and then ran off the end of the goddamn Earth with, that would be a plus for the commercial sector - a competitor destroyed. Never mind that they don't really want the FM's customers which is the reason they were created in the first place.

But if the problems of the FM's are Good News for commercial banks, other parts of the fallout aren't. For instance the news today that the Fed and the SEC have agreed to "share information".

Two top regulators reached a formal agreement to coordinate their oversight of Wall Street yesterday, as the government attempts to build a new system to guard against a meltdown of the financial system.

Leaders of the Federal Reserve and the Securities and Exchange Commission signed a memorandum of understanding that explicitly allows for the two agencies to share information about the inner workings of investment banks. The move formalizes what has been a reality since the rescue of Bear Stearns in March and marks an end to an era in which the two agencies held information close to their vests.

"It requires consultation between the SEC and the Fed in areas that the SEC had thought previously were its exclusive business. But the world has changed," said David Becker, a partner at law firm Cleary, Gottlieb, Steen & Hamilton and former general counsel at the SEC. "This mostly ratifies facts on the ground."

It's a fairly obvious move and one wonders, after almost a decade of corporations involved in phony accounting, corruption, theft, profits reported that didn't exist, shell companies, etc etc etc, why they didn't get around to it sooner, but - and I seem to be saying this a lot lately - BETTER LATE THAN NEVER, I GUESS.

Not that that helps the victims much. Treasury Sec Henry Paulson said today that despite the best efforts of govt, acres of foreclosures are inevitable.

Faced with record-high foreclosure rates, the Bush administration has been scrambling to keep people from losing their homes, but many are beyond help, Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson said Tuesday.

Lax lending standards that accompanied the once high-flying housing market allowed people to buy homes they could not afford, Paulson said.

"Many of today's unusually high number of foreclosures are not preventable," he said in prepared remarks to a mortgage-lending forum meeting in Arlington, Va. "There is little public policymakers can, or should, do to compensate for untenable financial decisions."

Paulson said 1.5 million home foreclosures started in 2007, and some economists estimate there will be about 2.5 million foreclosures begun this year.

(emphasis added)

I want somebody to show me proof that the bolded section is true because the only sector I see the Bush Admin "scrambling" to help is the investor class. In fact, Bush has threatened to veto the Housing Bill despite the "compromise" worked out with the Dem DLC leadership that gave him everything he wanted.

The problem is, of course, that everything, as bad as it looks, is really a lot worse. Kevin Phillips, in a new Harper's article titled "Numbers Racket: Why the economy is worse than we know", confirms much of what I've been saying for years - that the Bush Administration has been regularly and systematically fudging govt stats, first to support his neoconservative ideology and then to cover up the fact that those ideological policies not only weren't working but were actively counter-productive. (via TMiss)

The corruption has tainted the very measures that most shape public perception of the economy—the monthly Consumer Price Index (CPI), which serves as the chief bellwether of inflation; the quarterly Gross Domestic Product (GDP), which tracks the U.S. economy’s overall growth; and the monthly unemployment figure, which for the general public is perhaps the most vivid indicator of economic health or infirmity. Not only do governments, businesses, and individuals use these yardsticks in their decision-making but minor revisions in the data can mean major changes in household circumstances—inflation measurements help determine interest rates, federal interest payments on the national debt, and cost-of-living increases for wages, pensions, and Social Security benefits. And, of course, our statistics have political consequences too. An administration is helped when it can mouth banalities about price levels being “anchored” as food and energy costs begin to soar.

The truth, though it would not exactly set Americans free, would at least open a window to wider economic and political understanding. Readers should ask themselves how much angrier the electorate might be if the media, over the past five years, had been citing 8 percent unemployment (instead of 5 percent), 5 percent inflation (instead of 2 percent), and average annual growth in the 1 percent range (instead of the 3–4 percent range). We might ponder as well who profits from a low-growth U.S. economy hidden under statistical camouflage. Might it be Washington politicos and affluent elites, anxious to mislead voters, coddle the financial markets, and tamp down expensive cost-of-living increases for wages and pensions?

Indeed we might do more than just "ponder". We might be willing to break a few heads, especially those of conservatives in both parties who have not just enabled this vast deception but counted on it to cover up their economic and political crimes. Worse, they may have actually believed this shit because, again as I've been saying for years, economic "optimism" has become so rigidly demanded in this country that it has made many of us absolutely blind to truths right under our noses.

A short history of “pollyanna creep”

This apt phrase originated with John Williams, a California-based economic analyst and statistician who “shadows,” as he puts it, the official Washington numbers. In a 2006 interview, Williams noted that although few Americans ever see the fine print, the government “always footnotes the changes and provides all the fine detail. Nonetheless, some of the changes are nothing short of remarkable, and the pattern over time is what I call Pollyanna Creep.” Williams is one of the small group of economists and analysts who have paid any attention to the phenomenon. A few have pointed out the understatement of the Consumer Price Index—the billionaire bond manager Bill Gross has described it as an “haute con job,” and Bloomberg columnist John Wasik has dismissed it as “a testament to the art of spin.” In 2003, a University of Chicago economist named Austan Goolsbee (now a senior economic adviser to Barack Obama’s presidential campaign) published an op-ed in the New York Times pointing out how the government had minimized the depth of the 2001–2002 U.S. recession, having “cooked the books” to misstate and minimize the unemployment numbers. Unfortunately, the critics have tended to train their axes on a single abuse, missing the broad forest of statistical misinformation that has grown up over the past four decades.

(emphasis added)

Between the rosy forecasts we've demanded and the manipulation of statistics to make it look like we've been getting it - which we haven't - we've been fluffed with the idea that our economy is strong and flexible when in fact it's built on the sand of exploitation and lies. When the truth bubbles up to the surface, as it did during the Enron/WorldCom/Adelphia/etc messes, we deny the implications and insist that they're just "isolated incidents" when in fact they're symbols of an underlying rot.

As the stock action around the FM's shows, we're beginning to pierce the veil of spin and Good News, mainly because the roof is caving in and we don't have much choice. There are ways out of this swamp but none of them are pretty and all of them would require sacrifice, especially on the part of an investor class that doesn't intend to make any, even if that means the global economy becomes a sinkhole.

No single presence can fix this, but even if one could, we don't have one available. McCain is an idiot, Obama is a corporate DLC stooge, and the Congress - which has some good, smart people in it who understand the consequences of inaction - is being stymied by a handful of silver-spoon conservative Democrats allied with ideological Republican nincompoops who are determined to save the asses of their corporate bosses by sacrificing us.

Our time is running out, I'm afraid.

Wall Street Starts Paying for Its 7-Yr Party

It was, of course, inevitable. It was, of course, the end result of machinations and manipulations that were unethical at best and illegal at worst. It was, of course, what they were afraid of all along, why they fed themselves $$$300BIL$$$ worth of taxpayer bail-out money.

It finally happened.

All 30 of the stocks that make up the Dow Jones industrial average took a hit as the index dropped nearly 400 points on fears that high energy prices will extend and deepen an economic slowdown.

“The market is meeting its worst fears right now,” said Quincy Krosby, chief investment strategist at the Hartford, a financial services firm.

The Dow fell 3.13 percent, or 394.64 points, to close at 12,209.81. The broader Standard & Poor’s 500-stock index lost 43.37 points, or 3.09 percent, to 1,360.68, its lowest point in four months. The technology-laden Nasdaq composite index declined 75.38 points, or 2.96 percent, to 2,474.56.

(emphasis added)

When oil went to the previously unthinkable price of nearly $140/bbl, Wall Street finally seemed to realize that something had to give. The cowards (all investors are) abruptly ran for the hills, desperately trying to salvage something from the mess they had made in the name of short-term gains. Some undoubtedly did but it was at everyone else's expense, not that investors care about such things (like who pays the piper if they won't).

Investors’ recent hopes that the United States might yet skirt a recession sank swiftly in the face of gloomy indications that the economy is gripped by a slowdown and pressured by record fuel prices.

And food prices.

So now they're starting to woprry about what the rest of us have known was coming for months. *Yawn*

Took long enough.

Bang for the Buck: Boosting the American Economy

Compassionate Conservatism in Action

Molly


  • "We are the deciders. And every single day, every single one of us needs to step outside and take some action to help stop this war."

  • Photobucket

Zinn


  • "[O]ur time, our energy, should be spent in educating, agitating, organizing our fellow citizens in the workplace, in the neighborhood, in the schools. Our objective should be to build, painstakingly, patiently but energetically, a movement that, when it reaches a certain critical mass, would shake whoever is in the White House, in Congress, into changing national policy on matters of war and social justice."

Bono


  • "True religion will not let us fall asleep in the comfort of our freedom. Love thy neighbor is not a piece of advice, it's a command. ...

    God, my friends, is with the poor and God is with us, if we are with them. This is not a burden, this is an adventure."

The Reverend Al Sharpton


  • Ray wasn't singing about what he knew, 'cause Ray had been blind since he was a child. He hadn't seen many purple mountains. He hadn't seen many fruited plains. He was singing about what he believed to be.

    Mr. President, we love America, not because of all of us have seen the beauty all the time.

    But we believed if we kept on working, if we kept on marching, if we kept on voting, if we kept on believing, we would make America beautiful for everybody.

Marx


  • ''With adequate profit, capital is very bold. A certain 10 percent will ensure its employment anywhere; 20 percent will produce eagerness, 50 percent positive audacity; 100 percent will make it ready to trample on all human laws; 300 percent, and there is not a crime which it will not scruple, nor a risk it will not run, even to the chance of its owner being hanged.''

Join Us!


  • Member, Project Hamad

Happy 71st Anniversary Social Security!


  • Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

Countdown


Become a Proud Member of the Guppy Army


Blogroll

Count Me, Damnit!


Blog powered by TypePad
Member since 01/2004

Oh, I've Won Awards

alternative hippopotamus

Paperwight's Fair Shot

Your Liberal Media