Showing posts with label Economics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Economics. Show all posts

Monday, September 22, 2008

An Economic Patriot Act?


After watching the events of Washington/Wall Street for the past few weeks, I've been stumped by the lack of the WHY things are going south.

Now I'll admit that with my lack of formal education in economics it would be unwise to trust me with matters financial. Give me a few years and I'd probably cause an economic meltdown due to my ignorance. Oh. Wait. Somebody from Yale or Harvard beat me to it.

This so-called "rescue" plan of Treasury Henry Paulson is emitting a disturbing resemblance to the Patriot Act. Or I should say, the passage of the Patriot Act. Basically it is this: there is no TIME to review it. Pass it. NOW. IMMEDIATELY. Ask your questions later, but uh, by the way, you won't be able to ask questions afterwards because the law will prohibit it. Just do it. The world will end if you don't.

And another thing: take that Constitution and shove it. We don't need no stinkin' Constitution. Sorry for the series of emergencies the past 8 years, but we've got practice at this. There's a fire here people, so just shut up and pass the gasoline.

Let's take a little sidetrip to the 1920's. The "roaring 20's." The name for the decade was derived from the economic "boom," particularly in the stock market. Along came FDR in 1933 and started saving capitalism from its own excesses, and fought every inch by the "investing" class. It wasn't until the advent of World War II that Americans started making money...I mean a LOT of Americans. It produced the solid middle class that endured for 30 years.

Looking back with 20/20 vision, many economists realized that the 1920's weren't so "roaring" after all...at least for farmers and in particular, industrial workers. You see, productivity skyrocketed. A single worker on average was producing double or triple every few years what he or she was producing the year before.

But...but...where did those productivity savings go? To the top. It boiled down to the relatively simple observation that those producing goods and services were not being paid enough to purchase those same goods and services. Post World War II this problem did not exist. The middle class expanded and everyone got fat, dumb, and Republican.

Take a look, particularly in this decade, where productivity gains have gone. It's the same as the 1920's and has been so for several decades. Perhaps the subprime mortgage collapse came about more from underpaid workers than anything else. That is because Wall Street, with its golden blinders on, convinced itself that while Americans stretched their work hours, went deeper and deeper in debt, and saw their real wages fall while productivity increased...that this was as it should be.

The ultimate in chutzpah is Wall Street, over the weekend, devising a new myriad of schemes to profit even further from their galactic gambling. The last two investment banks got the Fed to agree to allow them to become holding companies. That way they can take deposits and pretend to be like a real bank. I remember what Will Rogers said in the 1930's.." A holding company is a thing where you hand an accomplice the goods while the policeman searches you. "

The is the ultimate Bush legacy: a Thelma and Louise, sans Constitution, flying off a cliff.

And we, fellow citizens, are locked in the trunk.

Monday, September 1, 2008

Sarah Palin & The 80%

Why would someone write about Sarah Palin but place an image of Marie Antoinette in the article?

Because Marie Antoinette was the quintessential "compassionate conservative." When informed that the people of Paris had no bread to eat, the empress is reported to have replied, "Then let them eat cake." The phrase has lingered in our language for several centuries now. And why? Because it's a perfect example of someone being completely out of touch.

Not out of touch with those within her "world," but those outside of her economic and social orbit. For someone enjoying the fruits of a fuedal-style form of life (at least on the rich side of it), keeping one's bearings is dependent soley upon checking the references of all those who live in nearby castles. The empress, if anything, understood her base.

The United States has had presidents who, although born into and raised with great wealth, fashioned a credible and sincere form of sympathy for the masses. Franklin Roosevelt and John F. Kennedy are two who come to mind. However, America has swung mightily towards the worship of wealth to the exclusion of government. The masses (as Coke Roberts likes to refer to us) don't exist. Oh, wait. Yes, at election time. But not at governing time.

Currently there is great swirl about Gov. Palin. The public conversation revolves around her inexperience, behavior as governor of Alaska, her NRA membership, her views on abortion, her physical appearance, et cetera......

What I haven't heard is that little "governing bit," which the Republicans still can't get the hang of in this century. It's not "the economy, stupid," but "economics, stupid." You don't have to have a professorship in the subject, just a decent grasp on reality. One needs to ask two important (actually critical) questions:

1: Who writes the rules for how we live in this nation?
2: Who enforces those rules?

Answer: The Congress. They write them....or their lobbyists do. And whatever president in power at the time enforces them. According the Constitution. If you believe in it.....ha ha ha. (hat tip to George W.)

Those said rules have changed...slowly but perceptively towards an America that is rich in both riches and poverty. At the current rate, each generation is going to have to accept lowered expectations than the generation before. That is, for the bottom 80%; those who don't really "count" to those accustomed to a plutacracy. A Kingdom of the wealthy unbeholden to anyone who is not.

During the Saddleback rodeo, John McCain jokingly answered a question as to what his definition of rich is by saying that anyone making $5 million a year or more. It is revealing...that sarcastic dismissal of what to me was the most important question asked.

John McCain has a similar approach to the healthcare of veterans. His plan is simple (as all "great" ones are): when you leave the service, find somebody really rich and marry them. By turning his back on his "comrades" McCain has proven in vote after vote that they were never comrades at all.

It is the votes that count. And how Gov. Palin approaches the subject of the general welfare is more important than any other topic that will be covered. Sadly, promoting the general wefare was a phrase used several centuries ago...and nowadays will be twisted by the Republicans (again) into a clarion alarm for getting deadbeats off the government teat.

Unless you're on acid and working at The Weekly Standard, you might figure out that the general welfare of the republic invovles everyone, not the top 20%.

There has not been enough sunshine in America for years. This election is either going to open the door to a new sunrise, or lead us into the shadows of twilight. Again.

Onto the stage of Karl Rove's Thousand Year Reich comes Sarah Palin. While charming, she does not appear to be deflected from the same banana republic agenda of the status quo. And if we should (God forbid) enter that economic darkness; should a President Palin ever be told that Americans don't have any bread, expect the predictable:

"Let them eat moose."