How many minutes has it been since you heard someone call this the greatest country in the world? How many seconds? Did you agree? Ooops. Was it you saying that?

It used to be arguably true. We got accustomed to telling ourselves it was so. We believed it. Many of us, most of us still do.

What ruler do you use? How do we measure the relative greatness of the country? What statistics should we employ? Perhaps I should find a synonym for that last word.

Back when such a claim was believeable, we had a dynamic, growing middle class that was becoming ever better off financially. I can actually remember that far back. It began around the end of WWII. We began losing all that about 1973.

The initial kick in the stomach was the first oil embargo. Then came the second embargo in 1979. While the then price of a gallon of go juice now seems impossibly low, a sudden quadrupling of the price brought major economic disruptions and dislocations.

We weren’t prepared for the first and refused to learn any lessons before the second embargo.

Those economic inconveniences were caused by a bunch despots. They were the ones that we had forced upon people we didn’t care about in order to set our own price for stealing their only resource. We showed them that Americans could be even more destructive. The rise of own domestic neocons and the Chicago School of Tinkle Down Economics were able to accomplish what our protégés could not.

They are doing what the USSR failed to do. They are bringing us to our knees.

In 1981 we were the largest creditor nation. Now we are the largest debtor nation. Then, we were the largest exporter of manufactured goods. Now? The largest importer. Then, the largest importer of raw materials. Now, the largest exporter.

There you have it. The definition of a 3^rd-world country. Our biggest export is lumber. Georgia’s biggest export is probably white clay (I haven’t checked in the last few years). White clay? They export mostly to Japan. There it is used to make china. It’s sometimes known as kaolin, from which they also make a product like our Kaopectate.

Are We Treated Fairly?

Does our country treat its citizens fairly? The United States ranks dead last on almost all measures of equity because we have the greatest disparity in the quality of health care given to richer and poorer citizens. No. We do not have the best health care in the world. We dropped to 37^th.

That was in 2000. We dropped further but expressed out displeasure with the results, so the World Health Organization ceased embarrassing us. Money not only talks, it also can shut people up. By the way, are we still nipping at the heels of Costa Rica?

Well, how about financial fairness? Lets see. Oh. The United States ranked 64^th in income inequality (worse than Cameron, but just above Uruguay). Accounting for inflation, personal income reached its peak in 1973. Do you remember when most households needed only one wage earner?

How about freedom? According to Douglas Berman, an Ohio State law professor, “We live in a country conceived on the notion of liberty, but we lead the world in locking people up.” One of every four prisoners in the world is in our prisons. Cuba, Iran, North Korea, even China cannot match our version of freedom.

It’s Beginning To Smart

2+2=? Surely we’re the smartest, er, best educated people in the world. Out of 34 countries, the U.S. ranked 14^th in reading, 17^th in science and 25^th in math. Who was on top? South Korea. I was in Korea in the 1950s, 60s and 70s. In the 50s and some of the 60s the road from the capitol of Seoul to its international airport, Kimpo, was gravel part of the way and dirt the rest.

They have created their infrastructure almost from scratch since then. They now have the highest percentage of people with broadband and the highest internet speeds in the world. All this, and leading the world in education. We need to really work hard to come up with excuses for our performance.

The people of Minneapolis may appreciate that out infrastructure has not been one of our highest priorities. China spends 9% of their income on infrastructure. The European Union spends 5%. We spend 2.4%.

On and on, it’s the same story. it’s not easy to find something to brag about.

How Did This Happen? Why?

During the Eisenhower Adminstration the highest marginal tax rate was 91%. No one paid that much on their entire income, just on the amout above some number that few people even dreamed about.

Those “job creators” created jobs at a faster rate than at any other time. Well, at least the jobs got created faster. Those making extreme incomes don’t really create jobs. Big business doesn’t create jobs. Small business doesn’t create jobs. Government creates some jobs but consumers are the real job creators.

No business hires and invests in more production if there are no customers. The public forums are full of economic myths. Giving the wealthy and corporations more money so they will create jobs is one of the most popular, . . . and absurd.

Both parties have stocked Congress with economic geniuses. Their owners get such lunacies as NAFTA. They get tax breaks for moving jobs overseas. All this while entertaining us with campaign promises to restore good-paying manufacturing jobs.

With a few exceptions, we will not see a recovery in manufacturing jobs. They are too easy to outsource, even without tax subsidies. They are also very susceptible to loss to automation. Unless the Congress gets some members with 3-digit IQs, we will all be selling burgers and fries to each other.

If these policies are destroying the economy and not really benefiting the elite, why did they do this? It’s partly a matter of stupidity, largely a juvenile devotion to a perverted, misunderstood ideology – capitalism. We must not forget a visceral hatred of unions. They are maniacally focused on the destruction of unions.

The unions created the middle class. Even non-members profited from their employers having to compete with wages and benefits. People were able to consume. Businesses had more customers with more money. What terrible monsters those unions were.

While most were in decline, with many also losing retirement and health insurance benefits, between 1979 and 2007 the 1% increased 275%. Income disparity here is in the same range as banana republics, and worse.

How does this really benefit the elite? Do they feel safer? Is the economy more stable? While the numbers in their portfolios are larger, they are actually pissing in their own soup. Instead of owning stronger, more stable corporations, the elite are making their wealth by manipulating paper assets. Can we say, house of cards?

Our economy is consumer driven but Congress has the answer. Give the wealthy more tax cuts and impoverish the consumers.

How do the elite spend their tax cuts? They buy a private jet. Most private jets are made in Canada and Brazil. They send it to Swiss and Caribbean banks. They buy several more $7,000 British suits, $12,000 French watches, $100,000 European cars. They create jobs in the US – not.

I have heard the claim that American businessmen are very smart. We are even told we should put them in the Oval Office. Businessmen like George W. (remember his MBA)? Herbert Hoover? Four of every five businesses fail within five years. Now that takes smarts.

Kodak owned the world. They invented the digital camera. They were so smart they didn’t allow it to divert sales from their film products. Now, they are in bankruptcy court.

Those masters of the universe on Wall Street needed us peons to bail them out from the results of their intelligence. Take a few minutes and make a list of dozens of business failures caused by our super smart businessmen.

It need not be. The titans of the auto industry rewarded their own intelligence with enough to make Midas envious. They went down the tubes. With a little bit of bankruptcy, humility and government interference, a new crew was able to turn them around.

We have made too many clichés come true: our goose is cooked, we killed the goose that laid the golden egg, the chickens have come home to roost, we have seen the enemy and it is us. But we have discovered that money does not respond to the force of gravity. Rather, it responds to the force of greed.

.
.

.

Bookmark It

Hide Sites

Yes, you. You are the enemy.

Actually, it’s not you. It’s nothing personal. It’s your attempts to exercize those Constitutional rights you used to have.

With me, it is personal. I was once a commissioner of police. One of my grandfathers was a sheriff; the other was a chief of police. In tracing my ancestry I discovered several family members that served as sheriffs, even extending back to England.

One day my chief was speaking with one of our citizens. The person said to his child that he better behave or the police would come to get him. The chief admonished him not to engender fear of police in his child.

He stated that the police were there to serve and protect citizens. They were his friend. That lesson stuck with me but, today, that lesson seemingly has been largely lost.

What happened? Those riot cops don’t look all that friendly. They have been immitating the military, in both equipment and attitude.

They see themselves as being immune from the laws that give them warrant. They seem to be more the army of an invading enemy than our protectors.

This past year they have been more frequently the agents of disorder, rather than those seeking to exercise their rights of assembly, speech and petitioning for redress.

How many incidents just this past year have produced video for the media of unprovoked assault of peaceable, unarmed fellow citizens? It took several days before the media admitted there was a story.

Those imaginary liberal media, you know, the ones owned by super-conservative mega-corporations, waited until the “law enforcement” proved they didn’t know how to play bridge legally.

Do these policemen feel themselves in jeopardy? Are these the perpetrators of violence from whom we are being protected? Who is out of control? Who is menacing whom? Who is trashing the Constitution?

Once there was the occasional Rodney King atrocity. Now, almost every city with an Occupy presence seemed to be using the same handbook. The problem was, as a few courts reminded them, that these were citizens with rights, not their spouse’s paramours.

I was taught to respect the police. I complied, because I generally saw them as deserving that respect. Of late, I have had my doubts.

The Police Union?

The Occupy Wall Street movement is aimed at those responsible for, among other things, gambling away the retirement funds of untold millions. A large segment of those lost retirement funds belonged to unions and their membership. It was natural, therefore, that the labor unions supported the Occupy movement.

There was one little problem that nagged at me. The Wall Street casinos had also gambled away the retirement funds of the police unions. Surely, they weren’t stupid enough to support those who stole from them against their fellow victims. That’s just what they did. But, why?

My wife has a cousin who is a state legislator. He is also a captain of the fire department and former state president of their union. I asked for his take on why they would be so ready to break the law and violate the Constitutional rights of their fellow Americans, particularly their fellow unionists fighting for redress for them as well.

Mike admitted that the police union had almost always been a thorn in the side of the union movement. They see themselves as special. They see themselves as a breed apart. That seems in tune with the ‘law unto themselves’ demeanor that is far too frequently apparent.

As commissioner of a small town police force back in the 1970s, I never had to deal with that bullying attitude that fellow commsioners often lamented. I was aware that the profession particularly appeals to that mentality but had no first-hand experience in dealing with it. It is not by any means universal but it has always been there and seems to have grown into a significant problem of late.

Is This What a Free County Looks Like?

It’s difficult to watch a video of New York City’s phoniest and correlate that with the memories of those who served our city, or the respect, even love, shown my grandfather when I was a kid.

One grandfather died before I was born but the chief of police was also the city manager and in charge of the water department. He was more than fully employed during the Great Depression. One day he saw a man with some of his kids. They were all barefoot. He told the man to gather up the rest of his kids and bought them all shoes.

It had been payday. When my grandfather got home, my grandmother was waiting for the pay envelope. He finally admitted that he had bought shoes for the guy’s 8 kids. She reminded him that he also had 8 kids to provide for. He may have been in trouble at home but his kind of bond with the community won’t show up on the local news in Manhattan.

Okay. So things change. But, now all police misbehavior is excused as necessary. Homeland Security says so. Whatever fails to come under that umbrella, is serious enough to invoke the Patriot Act. I find the title ironic for a statute that violates so much of the Constitution.

You don’t need a copy of the Constitution if you have pepper spray, a helmet with face shield, jack boots, a big gun, body armor and an attitude. Are the police just simple minded or bullies. I think many are complex enough to qualify on both counts. If they were rational, acting on behalf of their own self-interest and devoted to upholding the law and the Constitution, they would be joining the protestors, not harassing them.

As a former foreign correspondent, I found the following interesting. Last week an international group that ranks press freedom around the world released their report for last year. Thanks primarily to the beatings, incarceration and other means of interference with the press with regards to the Occupy movement, the U.S. dropped from 20^th to 47^th.

Maybe it’s just one more of the burdens of getting old. You have a memory to compare with the present. I find it impossible nowadays to think of this as a country as free as the one I grew up in.

.

Bookmark It

Hide Sites

Lucky me. I first met Newt during his first unsuccessful run for public office, way back in 1974. He wanted to meet me and get my support. Even at that tender age I was smart enough to demur. Actually, turning him down didn’t require that much smarts.

I was serving as mayor of a town in Georgia’s then 6th Congressional District at the time. Newt was an instructor at what was then West Georgia College. It was obvious that he wasn’t remotely qualified for either position, though he was telling everyone how intelligent he was even then.

Many keep saying that Newt is the smartest one running for the Republican nomination. That, of course, is not all that flattering. Why do people say he is so smart? It’s because he has told everyone that for the past several decades. It isn’t because of any known evidence.

The candidates are pandering to the base to out-conservative each other. As with his putative intelligence, Newt has convinced many that he is a true conservative. Really? It might be beneficial to pay attention to what he actually says and his very public record.

Newt is whatever he wants to be. If he thinks a conservative stance will benefit him, so be it. More moderate? The same. Liberal? He wouldn’t use that term but he is quite willing to stake out such a position, at least temporarily, if he sees it as helpful.

It’s unlikely to be a profitable pursuit to find a responsible Republican who served in Congress with him that sees him as a conservative. People should pay heed to those who know him best.

Many call Romney the master of flip-flopping, but he merely follows the path trailblazed by Newt. Some have noted that they should stage a debate featuring Newt debating himself. Who would win? We would.

The graphic to the left is Newt’s coat of arms. The flip-flops point in all directions.

People have asked how Newt has changed. Is he different than he was back in the 70s? Sort of. Most people mature as they age. When it happens to Newt and vegetables, we call it rotting. Despite his attempts to portray himself as civilized, his personality is most often associated with bar brawls.

For a few seconds I saw his temperment leading him to a career in ultimate fighting. Then, I realized how inappropriate that would be for an ultimate coward.

Newt vs St. Ronny

Newt would have us believe he is Reagan’s first-born. He invoked the saint’s name 55 times during the debates. There is a problem with Newt’s attempts to grab Ronny’s coattail. It can only be accomplished if he can get people to believe his lies.

He has suggested that he and Ronny decided to end the Cold War. The reality? He called Reagan’s foreign policy “a pathetic failure.” Elliot Abrams, in the National Review, wrote of Newt that he, “spewed insulting rhetoric” and “was voluble and certain in predicting that Reagan’s policies would fail.”

There’s much more. Just a quick search of Lexus shows:

■ 1982: “Really, Reaganomics has failed. We must regroup. The national government is running amuck. Without a freeze, I don’t see breakout out of higher and higher deficits.”

■ 1983: “Beyond the obvious indicators of decay the fact is that President Reagan has lost control of the national agenda.”

■ 1985: Newt calls Reagan’s summit with Gorbachev, “the most dangerous summit for the West since Adolf Hitler met with Chamberlain in 1938 at Munich.” editor’s note: I’m glad he was not one of my history professors.

■ 1986: “Measured against the scale and momentum of the Soviet empire’s challenge, the Reagan administration has failed, is failing, and without a dramatic fundamental change in strategy will continue to fail.”

■ 1987: “There were two things that people felt they knew about Ronald Reagan. That he was fundamentally honest and that he was a strong American leader who would stand tall and not deal with terrorists,” Gingrich said. The Iran-Contra affair “violated” both parts of the trust, “and it has shaken people’s beliefs.”

■ 1987: “The sense of our overpowering belief in Reagan as the most effective president since FDR is probably not retainable.”

Clinton – Newt’s Forgotten Assistant

Newt sometimes forgets to acknowledge that Bill Clinton played a role in the government. Fron a campaign ad, “When I was speaker, our budget was balanced and 11 million jobs were created.” Does anyone else find it strange for someone who claims that government doesn’t create jobs to claim credit for the creation of 11 million jobs?

And there he goes again; reforming the welfare system. Newt didn’t realize it at the time but he had a bad habit of voting against policies that he now claims as accomplishments.

A historian? I find that personally insulting. How can a person claim to be an historian while harboring such a distain and disregard of facts. There is a glaring difference between an historian and a hypocritidiot.

Not a Rocket Scientist

Now that Jules, er, uh . . . Newt Verne is pandering in preparation for the Florida Primary, he’s guaranteeing multiple space stations and a permanent base on the moon. That moon station will hold a population of 13,000. Wow! What a visionary.

Realistic people know that such an effort, though technically feasible, needs scientific and political rationales. Newt can’t be bothered with reality. He seems to consider it sufficient as an expression of America’s destiny to be the greatest in every way.

This moon station can be paid for by decimating funding for education, taxing the unemployed, getting rid of food stamps, reducing medical care and eliminating taxes on corporations and the wealthy. There will be no more highway repairs but, with the necessary reduction of law enforcement, there will be no more speeding tickets. Think of it as a wash. We just have to let Newt set our priorities for us.

Speaking of food stamps, Newt intends to make them history. He calls Obama the food stamp president.He forgets that they were a Republican program. The intent was not to feed the needy. No, nothing so Christian in spirit. The program was designed to buy votes for Republican politicians in agricultural congressional districts.

Also, Newt ignores a couple of little facts. First, there were more people receiving food stamps under George W. than under Obama, despite lies by various politicians to the contrary. Facts seem to be inconvenient for some. Further, many of those receiving food stamps under Obama are a legacy from Bush. Once again, facts are irrelevant to the nation’s self-proclaimed greatest historian.

In which one is she wearing makeup?

Though I haven’t met Newt’s latest, it’s quite apparent she is no mental giant either. When Newt asked number 2 for an open marriage, that meant he didn’t want to marry her, even after 6 years in Newt’s version of the Lincoln Bedroom – the back seat of a Town Car. It still took another 2 years before he broke down and made her a legal migraine.

I don’t think there is too much of a chance that we will have to wrap our collective heads around his 3^rd lady being the 1^st Lady.

.

.
p.s. It seems that few are aware of the correct way to pronounce Newt’s surname. His family pronounces it as though the final letter were a ‘k’ – rick, not rich. Just an added benefit from the expert on almost everything.

Bookmark It

Hide Sites

There are some things that everyone knows but many refuse to admit. Then there are the cretins that have a critical gene missing that would allow them to absorb truth.

Fox doesn’t just make the occasional error. Their coverage on every subject, even those that might be considered non-political, is riddled with what might be generously characterized as “facts” created from whole cloth.

Fox News viewers are much more likely than others to believe false information about American politics, a new study concludes.

The study, conducted by the University of Maryland, judged how likely consumers of various news outlets and publications were to believe misinformation about a wide range of political issues.

Overall, 90% of respondents said they felt they had heard false information being given to them during the 2010 election campaign. However, while consumers of just about every news outlet believed some information that was false, the study found that Fox News viewers, regardless of political information, were “significantly more likely” to believe the following false information:

–Most economists estimate the stimulus caused job losses (12 points more likely)

–Most economists have estimated the health care law will worsen the deficit (31 points)

–The economy is getting worse (26 points)

–Most scientists do not agree that climate change is occurring (30 points)

–The stimulus legislation did not include any tax cuts (14 points)

–Their own income taxes have gone up (14 points)

–The auto bailout only occurred under Obama (13 points)

–When TARP came up for a vote most Republicans opposed it (12 points)

–And that it is not clear that Obama was born in the United States (31 points)

In addition, the study said, the greater amount of time spent watching Fox News, the greater the percentage of believing these false stories.

In other words, it isn’t necessary to read or watch the real news to actually know more about what is really happening. To stop looking so foolish, just stop watching Faux News.

Why is it that these people can’t understand that, if their positions on issues depend entirely on lies, it could be a hint that they should change their positions?

.

.

.

Bookmark It

Hide Sites

Thanksgiving is coming, in case you forgot. It has both a positive and a negative aspect for me.

Well, okay, there are two problems if you count staying on my diet.

My wife and I were married the Saturday before Thanksgiving. So, I always think of our anniversary as being on Saturday. Unfortunately, the 19^th (I verified this) doesn’t always fall on a Saturday.

I hope everyone reading this has a plate full of things for which they can be thankful. That is not the case for far too many Americans.

The bulk of this article will be extracts from one by Michael Snyder, who maintains a blog called, The Economic Collapse. It lists several statistics related to the poor and extremely poor in this country.

Michele Bachmann recently shared her Christian spirit with us when she said that a person that didn’t work shouldn’t eat. Her separation from the real world is great enough to be listed in the Guinness Book of World Records.

The reason for being unemployed is largely a factor of there not being enough jobs. Also, the majority of the poor are employed. A sizable percentage of the poor are seniors. I realize these facts don’t comport with her fantastical world view but that won’t be a consideration, once she realizes she is a former candidate.

Anyway, here is some food for thought:

The following are 19 statistics about the poor that will absolutely astound you . . .

#1 According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the percentage of “very poor” rose in 300 out of the 360 largest metropolitan areas during 2010.

#2 Last year, 2.6 million more Americans descended into poverty. That was the largest increase that we have seen since the U.S. government began keeping statistics on this back in 1959.

#3 It isn’t just the ranks of the “very poor” that are rising. The number of those just considered to be “poor” is rapidly increasing as well. Back in the year 2000, 11.3% of all Americans were living in poverty. Today, 15.1% of all Americans are living in poverty.

#4 The poverty rate for children living in the United States increased to 22% in 2010.

#5 There are 314 counties in the United States where at least 30% of the children are facing food insecurity.

#6 In Washington D.C., the “child food insecurity rate” is 32.3%.

#7 More than 20 million U.S. children rely on school meal programs to keep from going hungry.

#8 One out of every six elderly Americans now lives below the federal poverty line.

#9 Today, there are over 45 million Americans on food stamps.

#10 According to the Wall Street Journal, nearly 15 percent of all Americans are now on food stamps.

#11 In 2010, 42 percent of all single mothers in the United States were on food stamps.

#12 The number of Americans on food stamps has increased 74% since 2007.

#13 We are told that the economy is recovering, but the number of Americans on food stamps has grown by another 8 percent over the past year.

#14 Right now, one out of every four American children is on food stamps.

#15 It is being projected that approximately 50 percent of all U.S. children will be on food stamps at some point in their lives before they reach the age of 18.

#16 More than 50 million Americans are now on Medicaid. Back in 1965, only one out of every 50 Americans was on Medicaid. Today, approximately one out of every 6 Americans is on Medicaid.

#17 One out of every six Americans is now enrolled in at least one government anti-poverty program.

#18 The number of Americans that are going to food pantries and soup kitchens has increased by 46% since 2006.

#19 It is estimated that up to half a million children may currently be homeless in the United States.

As Michael notes, you don’t see the media giving this subject a great deal of coverage. He provided a link to the following video.

Regardless of how you feel about the subject of same-sex marriage, that is not the real point of the video. It’s merely a convenient conveyance. Please stay with the video through the 1:15 mark. The remainder makes the real point overwhelmingly.

Try to remember the poor at your holiday dinner but also think of things about the country of which you can be proud.

Best wishes,

.

.

.

Bookmark It

Hide Sites

My occasional resort to language of a somewhat bombastic flavor may lead some to believe that I generally take an aggressive stance on practically every issue. That’s not necessarily so, but in the matter of class war, I am a super hawk.

Oh, am I not being divisive? No. It’s several generations too late for that. The war has been in progress since before Old Hickory was president. And that’s just in this country. It actually began millennia ago.

For those who think that the prostitutes of the elite, otherwise known as politicians and media mouths, are on to something when they accuse the victims of fomenting class warfare, think again. Most people have failed to notice the war because they have not been drafted. The actual war has been deliberately obscured by an extensive, expensive, all-pervasive campaign of disinformation.

Wall Street was bailed out by John Q. Public in order to protect their multimillion dollar bonuses.

College students were not bailed out of their onerous student loans.

You thought you had a right of free speech? You’re getting that mixed up with the Supreme Court ruling that money is free speech. You don’t have enough money. Sorry.

Over 800 people of Occupy Wall Street have been arrested. No Wall Street executives, those creating the problem, have been arrested. Hmmm. How many arrests were made of Tea Party demonstrators that were making threatening statements and even carrying guns on federal park land? Well, anyway, we are all equal.

Homeowners who are victims of mortgage companies or the disappearance of their jobs, or both, are on their own, while the government turns a blind eye as the mortgage companies ignore the niceties and laws of foreclosure.

Have you selected your park bench for retirement?

If you think the country’s economy is the nirvana our beloved leaders and Wall Street guaranteed, go back to sleep. If you want to do something to improve the situation for yourself, your family and your country, get yourself a draft card. How’s that?

Replace your present credit cards and accounts with the Wall Street casinos with cards and accounts from local banks and credit unions. Obviously, there are a wide range of other measures you can take but his has to be a minimum, a first step.

Was the economic meltdown just one of those things? Was it something that periodically besets us that cannot be avoided? Was it an accident? Was it the result of a mistake? No. It was caused by the unbridled greed of simpletons that considered themselves and referred to themselves as Masters of the Universe. They actually thought they had triple digit IQs. If they are so intelligent, why do they worship such a simplistic ideology? How can intelligent people fail to see its absurdities?

Investment banking, if you consider it a necessary evil, cannot justifiably represent more than 3-4% of the national economy. It now represents over 20%. It rakes in 50% of all of the country’s profits. One percent of the people own as much as 90%. Four hundred people have as much wealth as 150,000,000. This represents a gross distortion of the economy. So what?

There was a similar distortion in 1929. In fact, every such major financial meltdown was preceded by this type of distortion. An economy cannot function properly when class differences are so pronounced.

The irony is that the elite are doing themselves a great deal of harm in their pursuit of this folly. They seem satisfied to be oligarchs in a banana republic. For some reason a strong nation with a vibrant economy isn’t appealing to them. By nurturing a large, healthy middle class, the economy is more stable. Business failures decline. Poverty declines. People claim to be more satisfied with their lives – people, not oligarchs.

These intellectual giants appear to be convinced that their happiness can only be based on the misery of the serfs and peons. Strangely, the elites’ happiness goes down as the people’s increases. I guess that’s okay, because the happiness levels of the majority of the elites never are positive.

If you won’t do it for your own benefit, get involved and participate in the class war for the 1%. We don’t want these brilliant people failing in 80% of the businesses they create in only 5 years. It might cause them to have self-esteem problems; problems that can only be remedied by wreaking havoc on the poor and the remnants of the middle class. They can only win the class war if they have no opponents, if you won’t fight back.

Since you persevered, I have a video for you as a reward. Enjoy.

.

Bookmark It

Hide Sites

Once upon a time we had a president that knew how to lead. Admittedly, he sometimes accomplished it by dragging congressmen by their nose.

Next we had a paranoid psychotic who thought he was a leader. Strangely, the public largely bought into his delusion.

Come the presidential election of 1976 and the people were weary of strong ‘leaders,’ the war, the economy, et al. The parties measured the mood of the public. That election cycle both parties offered non-leaders as candidates.

Four years later, the people decided they really did want a leader. Instead, they elected St. Ronny. He was a good enough actor to play the part of leader.

There is no explanation for George H.W. Bush. Perhaps people thought it was his turn. He certainly wasn’t a leader. The silver spoon in his mouth would look out of place in the mouth of a receptionist but it’s difficult to justify putting him in charge of other people.

Clinton was hardly a leader but he had consummate political skills aside from leadership. He depended on being the ultimate wonk combined with a charm offensive rare in today’s political world.

Then came The Decider. It was a delicate weaving together of the humiliation of being Cheney’s puppet with a lifelong mastery of the art of being a spoiled brat. Somehow that was perceived as leadership by an embarrassing number of Americans.

Though I still question the legitimacy of the count in 2004, the fact remains that at least a large percentage bought W’s claims of being a leader. Likely it was a matter of too many people having formed their concept of leadership based on television westerns. If it swaggered, you followed it.

The 2004 election appeared to make no sense. The polls showed the majority of the public disagreed with Bush on every significant issue. Then why would they vote for him? He claimed to be a leader and bulled on through with his positions. If the public can accept a psychotic, an actor and a wannabe cowboy as embodying leadership, it should be obvious that they have not set the bar too high.

The voters thought, or hoped, Obama would lead them to change. However, everyone has since learned that he hasn’t the temperament of a leader. His preferred milieu is the conference table, not at the vanguard of the insurgents.

He might be very effective as a negotiator if only he had someone willing to sit down and negotiate. We’ll never know.

A leader has to have a specific destination, a definite goal in mind. Negotiators work to see what they can get. And never the twain shall meet.

Surveys show that the people generally like Obama. They don’t, however, see him dealing with the problems successfully. His base is disheartened. They have lost their motivation. With extremely rare exceptions, no one leads everyone. Though the present threat to the nation is in the same range of magnitude as WWII, no one has convinced the public.

It is folly to expect to lead everyone. A leader selects those he wants to lead and gives them direction, motivation. He divides to conquer. You tell your base that their goals are sacred and tell the opposition to go to hell, or more genteelly, that they are inconsequential.

You gin up the emotion of your troops. You motivate them to get off their asses and work to get all of their allies to the polls. A motivated minority can easily outvote an unmotivated majority.

Can Obama transmute into a leader? There is no reason to expect so. He seems unaware that his present course leads only to failure. If he prevails in November of 2012 he will still not be able to accomplish the goals he holds dear.

If one looks at the presidency from an historical standpoint, successful second terms are very much a rarity, indeed, an oddity. Were it not for ego and delusions, presidents would not be inclined to seek second terms. More especially, they would not expect to accomplish in that second term what they failed to achieve in their first.

That last point is such a truism that it goes beyond the allotted two terms. In blue-skying various possibilities, it was suggested that Obama might step down for Hillary to run. The next question was whether she would be successful in getting a rational health care reform. The answer has to be that she would not even broach the subject.

She is considered to have been partially involved in its loss in the early nineties. She would not in another term, even though her own, be able to resuscitate that dead issue. Someone else can do it, but it will not be Obama or Hillary.

Obama, given another term, would be unable to get further significant changes in health care, another stimulus or anything else of consequence. The only foreseeable value of a second Obama term would be to preclude the dangers inherent in the election of any of his present potential opponents.

For some reason, as each day passes, I become more and more convinced that I am Cassandra’s biological brother.

As a special treat, I have added a presentation from former Secretary of Labor Robert Reich on what to expect from downgrades in the nation’s credit rating to various levels.

.

.

Bookmark It

Hide Sites

Don’t listen. They are all saying the same thing, so it must be wrong. There aren’t that many intelligent people in finance, politics and the media.

We are assured that the crash of the stock market is the result of our massive debt. Really? The market, whose computers are among the fastest in the world, took four days to react to the government’s failure to really address the debt.

Well, then the drop in the market was caused by Standard and Poor downgrading our government’s credit-worthiness. You haven’t been paying attention. That rating is supposed to tell you how good of a chance you have of getting your money back if you loan it to the government. It is not directly related to the equity markets.

Standard and poor are often referred to as average and below average.

When people sell their stock they usually buy another. That’s not what is happening right now. People are selling stock and . . . get ready for this . . . loaning it to the government. These capitalists actually think their money is safer with the government than with the private sector. Irony, thy name is capitalists.

Treasuries come in 3 forms. T-bills mature in 28 days to 1 year. T-notes mature in 1 to 10 years. T-bonds mature in 20 to 30 years. The 10-year note is the one usually referenced when the media quotes rates.

The Treasury holds auctions and the winner is, quite naturally, the one who makes the highest bid. The closer to 100 that one bids, the lower the effective interest. The government pays 100% of the face value. If the winning bid is $97, that is what the government gets.

So much money has been bidding up the prices that the last interest rate I heard, 2.14%, was an all-time record low. Lower rates mean that the government borrows money at lower interest rates. That’s to our advantage.

That was just a little side trip to educate those unfamiliar with the bond market. Despite what S&P may suggest, those putting their money on the line feel that the US Government is the safest bet. As T-bills are traded every day, it is also the most liquid asset one can hold.

The chart below is just a little further evidence that the size of our debt is not as critical as the debt hawks in Congress think it is. I removed some countries but left some that may make for interesting comparisons. There are other methods for calculating the relevant data, but in no case does the US rank higher than 6^th. If you are unconcerned about the futures of Japan, Germany, France and the UK, don’t lose too much sleep about the US debt.

Source: CIA World Factbook – updated 07-25-2011

.

.

Bookmark It

Hide Sites

Ah. The good old days are returning. If you can remember The Great Depression, get ready for déjà vu.

Eighty-odd, very odd, imbeciles have done more damage to this country than we can presently foresee.

You thought that you lived in a democracy. If you count Pakistan, Mexico and Iraq as models of democracy, then you’re right.

Didn’t we once have a democracy we were proud of? Now we know that an out of control minority can get their druthers by blackmail and obstruction of the democratic process.

Everyone paying attention knows that our foremost problem is the insufficiency of money flowing through the economy. So, Washington’s answer is to take another two and a half trillion dollars out of the economy.

The basic problem of too little money in the economy means the hole of unemployment gets even deeper. The only way to increase the amount of money in the economy in the long term is to create jobs. That’s important to the jobless but it is important to the country. Cut government jobs. Cut jobs of government vendors. Cut jobs where all of the newly jobless used to spend their money.

The estimates I’ve heard are for a million or so jobs lost. I think those people are wearing rose-colored glasses or have graduate degrees in wishful thinking.

The word seems to be that, even though the debt ceiling will be raised, interest rates will rise. I’m not quite certain it will but that is a possibility.

With unemployment definitely going to increase and the prospect of increased interest rates, the most obvious reaction will be a lot of red arrows in the bottom corner of your flat screen.

Stocks will fall. I’m admittedly not a fan of gambling in casinos where the house ensures you lose and counters your bets with their own. Even if you are far more reckless than I, you must realize that now is the time to cut your losses.

It would be easy to say that the direction of the stock market is irrelevant. That’s not true. It should be but it’s not. People have been trained to look at the Dow Jones. Emotion is the dominant factor in the market. That means the market reacts based on perceptions.

It also means that reactions of businessmen and the general public are dependent upon their perceptions of what the market is doing. These two aspects feed on each other. The market will go down. Businessmen and the public will be pessimistic. They will help push the economy lower.

A failure to raise the debt ceiling would have had a more immediate and obvious detrimental effect on the economy but not necessarily worse. Comparisons are not needed here because the policies being followed by Obama and most members of Congress are headed in the same direction. It seems now that a double-dip is unavoidable.

Who’s to blame? All of us. No, we’re not all as stupid as a Washington politician but we are culpable. We are not equally guilty but, in a democracy, we, the society, get the government we deserve. Perhaps we shouldn’t have tried to get education on the cheap. We have produced too many people unable to think for themselves, unable to discern nonsense, unwilling to put any effort into parsing the spiels of con men.

Well, at least we have The Housewives of Beverly Hills and the largest butts in the world. What more could you want?

Our national trait of assuming we are the greatest in all things is insufficient to maintain the illusion much longer.

Greece, Rome, France, England. They enjoyed centuries leading their worlds. The US will not get to spend a commensurate period basking in the sun.

Unless we are willing to discard those fun house mirrors and face reality, the middle class will atrophy to a point that it can no longer be the propulsive force of the economy. We will have to get used to eating the dust of those nations that respect education, intellect and other attributes that are alien to our politicians and our electorate.

.

.

Bookmark It

Hide Sites

It’s about time someone got serious. It obviously isn’t going to be anyone inside the Beltway.

The politicians consider their careers and their juvenile ideologies more important than the well-being of the nation and its people. Why are we not blanketing this country with recall petitions. Why are we not exhibiting a similar, reciprocal disdain for their jobs and their well-being?

Have they finally emasculated the American people? Have they accomplished what al-Qaeda failed to do?

Lets break this down into three parts.

Who is destroying jobs?

How do you create a job in the economy? By putting money into play in the economy. How do you destroy jobs? By taking money out of the economy.

So, what are our genius leaders doing? They are cutting the money that the governments put into the economy. They may end up having to eliminate some jobs.

To ensure that, if there are any jobs created in the future, they will not put much money into the economy, they are eliminating the unions.

For some reason those teachers, firemen, policemen and other government employees don’t spend as much money when they lose their jobs. That means that those places where they used to spend money can’t afford to maintain their full staffs. The business may even fail. Who woulda guessed?

The idiots are screaming for smaller government. They are claiming that the government has grown uncontrollably under Obama. The truth? The number of  federal employees is less now than under his predecessor. Am I confused about what smaller means?

Some might claim that smaller simply means spending less than previously. Well, salaries are a significant share of expenditures. This is the second of three years that Social Security is frozen. The broken economy’s only positive is that our interest payments on the debt are smaller. Maybe they could scream at a slightly attenuated decibel level.

There wouldn’t be too much of a problem in this hour of need if we had not lived on a credit card during more normal times. Instead of paying our troops’ way in various foreign wars, we elected carny hustlers who promised us we wouldn’t have to pay for anything.

Had we behaved responsibly back in those days, we would have plenty of credit to draw on to juice the economy now. The stimulus was less than half what it should have been and only about 40% was used effectively.

An estimate expects the loss of a million more jobs if the debt ceiling is not raised. My own guess would be far higher. Also, it would mean an increase in interest rates. That would be the same as a major tax increase but the money would be going to the banks, rather than to help the government pay its bills.

Who is refusing to make jobs?

Have you tried to get a loan lately? A car loan? Okay. A loan to start a small business? You’re kidding. A loan to expand a business? No way.

The banks have nearly $2 trillion dollars available. They borrow money from the Fed to purchase T-bills. Those T-bills don’t pay much interest but they’re doing enough volume to help create record profits. By the way, those investment banks want the debt ceiling raised so they can continue their “investments.”

The non-banking corporate sector is sitting on even more funds. They are using some of it to buy back their own stock. Some is also being used to acquire other companies at fire-sale prices. These mergers and acquisitions usually result in significant job losses.

While both the banks and major corporations are flush, by ensuring the general economy stagnates, they can use that as pressure to encourage further deregulation.

Who can create jobs?

There are two parties that can create jobs and help us recover from this mess. The first is the government. They have the ability to both create and borrow money. Most of that creation is through the auspices of the Fed. That needs to be changed. The Fed needs to be eliminated or so transformed as to be unrecognizable.

The newest estimate is that we need an investment of at least $3.1 trillion in infrastructure. Actually, that’s just in highway infrastructure. Why should we spend our money that way? Because it’s not our money. Our kids and grandkids will have to pay for it. Since they have to pay for it, let’s spend their money on something that they will be able to use – while we get some jobs now.

Depending on the government to get us out of this mess is necessary to get us started; a stimulus, if you will. There is another source of jobs. It is far and away the largest source of all.

What is this mysterious economic sector? Is it the big corporations? Absolutely not. Is it the wealthiest two percent of the population? Wait while I stop laughing. Is it small business? Far less than most people believe and far less than we need. So, who? It’s the middle class.

Our economy is known by the professionals as a consumer economy. Why? Because at least two-thirds of our entire economy is based on consumption. The more we consume, the greater the number of jobs required.

Politicians of both parties have either contributed to the decline of the unions or stood by while it happened. I have never belonged to a union but one must be blind or stupid not to see their economic importance and the role they played in creating the middle class. As the unions have declined, the middle class has declined. First, it lost the race with inflation, reducing its purchasing power. Recently, there has been a marked decline in the number of people composing the middle class.

.

.

Bookmark It

Hide Sites