Find a show you like and click the 
button. The show will be added to your My Playlist page and updated 24/7 with new videos.
Search Results
0 Views
02:01:26 05/25/12
Myth McConnell
[LESS INFO] 0 VIEWS | ADDED 02:01:26 05/25/12
In the wake of the debt-ceiling crisis he helped manufacture last summer, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell boasted it was "a hostage that's worth ransoming" which "also is a new template" for the future. As it turns out, those threats were among the few true words McConnell has uttered. Because while he's promising once again to blackmail the White House over the debt ceiling, the Kentucky Republican claimed it's because "we'd like to do something about the nation's biggest problem, spending and debt, which of course is the reason for this economic malaise." Of course, as the data show, it's the very austerity policies here and in Europe which are costing jobs and hurting growth.
But Mitch McConnell's myth-making hardly ends there. On the economy, taxes, deficits, health care and so much else, virtually all of McConnell's talking points are tried - and untrue.
( Click a link to jump to the details for each below ):
* "Obama Made the Economy Worse"
* "No Evidence Whatsoever That the Bush Tax Cuts Actually Diminished Revenue"
* "Punishing Job Creators"
* "We Look a Lot Like Greece Already"
* Public Sector Layoffs Are a "Local" Problem
* 47 Million Uninsured Americans "Don't Go Without Health Care"
* The Public Option "May Cost You Your Life"
* Democrats Are "Sticking It to Seniors with Cuts to Medicare"
"Obama Made the Economy Worse"
For months, Mitch McConnell (for example, here , here and here ) regurgitated the GOP talking point that President Obama " made the economy worse ." Sadly for the trickle-down mythmakers of the Republican Party , the facts and the overwhelming consensus of economists - including John McCain's 2008 brain trust - prove otherwise. President Obama not only did not make the American economy worse; no thanks to obstructionist Republicans in Congress he saved the United States from "Great Depression 2.0" and put the nation on the path to recovery.
Start, for example, with the conclusions of the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO). Despite Republican mythmaking that the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) "created zero jobs," in November the CBO reported that the stimulus added up to 2.4 million jobs and boosted GDP by as much as 1.9 points in the previous quarter. As The Hill explained, the CBO has found that "President Obama's 2009 stimulus package continues to benefit the struggling economy": >
The agency said the measure raised gross domestic product by between 0.3 and 1.9 percent in the third quarter of 2011, which ended Sept. 30. The Commerce Department said Tuesday that GDP in that quarter was only 2 percent total...
By CBO's numbers, the $800 billion stimulus added up to 0.9 million jobs in 2009, 3.3 million jobs in 2010 and 2.6 million jobs in 2011.
Mark Zandi , an adviser to John McCain in 2008, was adamant on positive role of the stimulus. Federal intervention, he and Princeton economist Alan Blinder argued in August 2010, literally saved the United States from a second Great Depression. In " How the Great Recession Was Brought to an End ," Blinder and Zandi's models confirmed the impact of the Obama recovery program and other federal interventions dating back to 2008, concluding that "laissez faire was not an option": >
We find that its effects on real GDP, jobs, and inflation are huge, and probably averted what could have been called Great Depression 2.0. For example, we estimate that, without the government's response, GDP in 2010 would be about 11.5% lower, payroll employment would be less by some 8½ million jobs, and the nation would now be experiencing deflation.
"No Evidence Whatsoever That the Bush Tax Cuts Actually Diminished Revenue"
In his version of the Republican myth that " tax cuts pay for themselves ," President Bush confidently proclaimed, "You cut taxes and the tax revenues increase." As it turned out, not so much.
After Ronald Reagan tripled the national debt with his supply-side tax cuts, George W. Bush doubled it again with his own. (Reagan's performance would have been much worse, had he not raised taxes 11 times to help make up the shocking shortfall.) As a share of American GDP, tax revenues peaked in 2000; that is, before the Bush tax cuts of 2001 and 2003. As the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities concluded, the Bush tax cuts accounted for half of the deficits during his tenure, and if made permanent , over the next decade would cost the U.S. Treasury more than Iraq, Afghanistan, the recession, TARP and the stimulus - combined .
Nevertheless, as the Republican Party waged its all-out attack in 2010 to preserve the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy , the GOP's number two man in the Senate provided the talking point to help sell the $70 billion annual giveaway to America's rich. "You should never," Arizona's Jon Kyl declared, "have to offset the cost of a deliberate decision to reduce tax rates on Americans." For his part, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell rushed to defend Kyl's fuzzy math: >
"There's no evidence whatsoever that the Bush tax cuts actually diminished revenue. They increased revenue because of the vibrancy of these tax cuts in the economy. So I think what Senator Kyl was expressing was the view of virtually every Republican on that subject."
That may have been a view universally shared by virtually every Republican, but it happens to be wrong.
"Punishing Job Creators"
For years, Senator McConnell has been among the legions of Republicans wrongly arguing that even the slightest increase in taxes for the wealthiest Americans is tantamount to " punishing job creators ." As his colleague John Boehner put it: >
"The top one percent of wage earners in the United States...pay forty percent of the income taxes...The people he's [President Obama] is talking about taxing are the very people that we expect to reinvest in our economy."
If so, those expectations were sadly unmet under George W. Bush. After all, the last time the top tax rate was 39.6 percent during the Clinton administration , the United States enjoyed rising incomes, 23 million new jobs and budget surpluses. Under Bush? Not so much.
On January 9, 2009, the Republican-friendly Wall Street Journal summed it up with an article titled simply, " Bush on Jobs: the Worst Track Record on Record ." (The Journal's interactive table quantifies his staggering failure relative to every post-World War II president.) The meager one million jobs created under President Bush didn't merely pale in comparison to the 23 million produced during Bill Clinton's tenure. In September 2009, the Congressional Joint Economic Committee charted Bush's job creation disaster, the worst since Hoover.
That dismal performance prompted David Leonhardt of the New York Times to ask last fall, "Why should we believe that extending the Bush tax cuts will provide a big lift to growth?" His answer was unambiguous: >
Those tax cuts passed in 2001 amid big promises about what they would do for the economy. What followed? The decade with the slowest average annual growth since World War II. Amazingly, that statement is true even if you forget about the Great Recession and simply look at 2001-7... >
Is there good evidence the tax cuts persuaded more people to join the work force (because they would be able to keep more of their income)? Not really. The labor-force participation rate fell in the years after 2001 and has never again approached its record in the year 2000. >
Is there evidence that the tax cuts led to a lot of entrepreneurship and innovation? Again, no. The rate at which start-up businesses created jobs fell during the past decade.
The data are clear: lower taxes for America's so called job-creators don't mean either faster economic growth or more jobs for Americans .
As Jared Bernstein aptly put it earlier this month: >
"Tax cuts and job growth? They're just not that into each other."
"We Look a Lot Like Greece Already"
As their last round of hostage-taking of the debt heated up last summer, Republicans including Mitch McConnell warned, "We look a lot like Greece."
hile FactCheck.org was quick to conclude that "whatever it 'looks like' through Sen. McConnell's eyes -- the fact is that the U.S. is not yet a fiscal wreck of Greek proportions," its analysis hardly does justice to the scale of the Republican myth-making. The Washington Monthly's Steve Benen summed it up quite succinctly: >
New rule: every time a confused Republican lawmakers compare the United States' fiscal conditions to that of Greece, an angel loses its wings.
Look, the very idea is just crazy. The U.S. has extremely low interest rates and foreign investor are happy to loan us money; Greece has extremely high interest rates and no one is eager to loan the country money. The U.S. has our own currency; Greece has the Euro. We have a great credit rating (for now); Greece has an awful credit rating. We have a manageable debt; Greece has a debt crisis. We're a large country with an enormous economy; Greece is a small country with a small economy. We have one of the world's most stable systems of government (at least until six months ago); Greece's government structure is a little shaky.
For his part, Nobel Prize-winning economist and New York Times columnist Paul Krugman has been decrying the " Hellenization of economic discourse " for months. "Greece -- with a long history of fiscal irresponsibility, very high public debt, and a country without a currency -- doesn't bear much resemblance even to the other peripheral Europeans, let alone the United States."
>
Here's debt levels (if you ask me the IMF projections for Greece are too optimistic). >
Plus there's the having your own currency thing, and the fact that the interest rate on US 10-year bonds is 3.11 percent, on Greek bonds 16.82 percent. >
Otherwise we're exactly the same.
Public Sector Layoffs a "Local" Problem
Last fall, Minority Leader McConnell led the GOP opposition to President Obama's proposed $400 billion American Jobs Act. The loss of hundreds of thousands of police, firefighter, teacher and other public sector jobs, he insisted, was a "local" problem.
As it turns out, the 600,000 state and local government jobs already lost since December 2008 is very much a national issue. That " anti-stimulus ," it turns out, has added a full point to America's unemployment rate .
Last month, the Economic Policy Institute noted that the private sector had gained 2.8 million jobs while federal, state and local governments shed 584,000 just since June 2009. EPI concluded that the public sector job losses constituted "an unprecedented drag on the recovery": >
"The current recovery is the only one that has seen public-sector losses over its first 31 months."
Back in March, Paul Krugman expressed the same point , but with some inconvenient historical context for the Party of Reagan. "In fact, if it weren't for this destructive fiscal austerity," Krugman explained, "Our unemployment rate would almost certainly be lower now than it was at a comparable stage of the 'Morning in America' recovery during the Reagan era." >
We're talking big numbers here. If government employment under Mr. Obama had grown at Reagan-era rates, 1.3 million more Americans would be working as schoolteachers, firefighters, police officers, etc., than are currently employed in such jobs. >
And once you take the effects of public spending on private employment into account, a rough estimate is that the unemployment rate would be 1.5 percentage points lower than it is, or below 7 percent -- significantly better than the Reagan economy at this stage.
47 Million Uninsured Americans "Don't Go Without Health Care"
McConnell the " strict obstructionist " was naturally in the forefront of the all-out Republican effort to block health care reform at any cost. As he repeatedly put it in June 2009 , "all of us want reform, but not reform that denies, delays, or rations health care." To prove his point, McConnell didn't merely trot out a Canadian patient who came to the U.S. for special treatment, but insisted to NBC's David Gregory that no American does without health care now. >
GREGORY: Do you think it's a moral issue that 47 million Americans go without health insurance? >
McCONNELL: Well, they don't go without health care. It's not the most efficient way to provide it. As we know, the doctors in the hospitals are sworn to provide health care. We all agree it is not the most efficient way to provide health care to find somebody only in the emergency room and then pass those costs on to those who are paying for insurance. So it is important, I think, to reduce the number of uninsured. The question is, what is the best way to do that?
That President George W. Bush, Tom Delay and Paul Broun among other Republicans also claimed "people have access to health care in America...after all, you just go to an emergency room" doesn't make it any more true. As the numbers show -- 50 million uninsured, another 25 million uninsured, 45,000 unnecessary deaths, one in five Americans "self-rationing" care and 62 percent of all personal bankruptcies being related to medical bills -- the crisis is far worse than the one Mitch McConnell pretends doesn't exist.
The Public Option "May Cost You Your Life"
While Mitch McConnell insisted that the lack of insurance doesn't prevent anyone from getting health care, in 2009 he suggested having coverage could prove fatal . Months before the passage of the Affordable Care Act without the so-called "public option," Minority Leader McConnell said it would be deadly.
That irresponsible fear-mongering came during an appearance on Dennis Miller's radio show in October 2009. Blasting the "opt-out" version of the public option then being considered in the Senate bill, the Senator from the state ranked 45th in health care performance insisted access to coverage could kill you : >
MCCONNELL: Well, it doesn't make any difference frankly whether you opt-in or you opt-out, it's still a government plan. You know, Medicaid, the program for the poor now, states can opt-out of that, but none of them have. I think if you have any kind of government insurance program, you're going to be stuck with it and it will lead us in the direction of the European style, you know, sort of British-style, single payer, government run system. And those systems are known for delays, denial of care and, you know, if your particular malady doesn't fit the government regulation, you don't get the medication. >
MILLER: Right. >
MCCONNELL: And it may cost you your life. I mean, we don't want to go down that path.
As a Harvard Medical School study found, each year the path of no health insurance leads 45,000 Americans to the grave.
Democrats Are "Sticking It to Seniors with Cuts to Medicare"
For two years running, Mitch McConnell has been among the 40 GOP Senator voting for Paul Ryan's House budget plan to privatize and inevitably ration Medicare now used by 46 million American seniors. In the late 1990's, McConnell joined in Newt Gingrich's effort to slash almost 15 percent from the Medicare budget so that the program would "wither on the vine." But when the Affordable Care Act called for savings from the private Medicare Advantage program used by only 15 percent of elderly beneficiaries, it was Mitch McConnell who warned seniors about the mythical danger.
In July 2009, McConnell tried to scare America's 46 million Medicare beneficiaries by declaring, "The administration plans to use Medicare cuts to fund yet another new government program." Hoping to build on the momentum of the GOP's disgusting and demonstrably false " euthanasia " talking point, McConnell cautioned: >
"Some in Congress seem to be in such a rush to pass just any reform, rather than the right reform, that they're looking everywhere for the money to pay for it -- even if it means sticking it to seniors with cuts to Medicare."
That salvo comes just two weeks after McConnell promised to defeat health care reform in the Senate, warning America's highest turnout voting block: >
"They are going to pay for this plan by cutting Medicare, that is cutting seniors."
Those claims, the New York Times pointed out the day after the Republicans' overwhelming triumph in the 2010 midterms elections were misleading at best and false at worst. But, sadly, they worked .
And so it goes.
As Joshua Green documented last year in the Atlantic , "Mitch McConnell is a master manipulator and strategist" whose "relentless tactics have made his party victorious." But that doesn't make him a truth-teller, except on those rare occasions when he reveals his true motivations. During the debt ceiling stand-off last summer , McConnell briefly got weak in the knees at the prospect of U.S. sovereign default not because it would be a disaster for the nation, but because it could damage his Republican Party : >
"I refuse to help Barack Obama get re-elected by marching Republicans into a position where we have co-ownership of a bad economy. ... If we go into default, he will say that Republicans are making the economy worse and try to convince the public -- maybe with some merit, if people stop getting their Social Security checks and military families start getting letters saying service people overseas don't get paid. It's an argument he could have a good chance of winning, and all of the sudden we have co-ownership of a bad economy," he said. "That is very bad positioning going into an election."
Especially an election which marks the culmination of Mitch McConnell's work over the past three and a half years: >
"The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president."
(This piece also appears at Perrspectives .)
0 Views
19:00:09 02/05/12
GOP Debates Exposing Conservative Dislike of Romney, Not So For '08 Dem Field
[LESS INFO] 0 VIEWS | ADDED 19:00:09 02/05/12
So Romney and his PACmen spent over fifteen million dollars worth of smear ads against Newt Gingrich in Florida to seal the deal of beating him in the third primary. Romney was upbeat afterward, but many movement conservatives were not.
Jonah Goldberg: What is Wrong With This Guy? >
Congratulations to Mitt Romney for his big win last night. It was a win that, Romney supporters hoped, would help bury concerns about his ability to seal the deal to do what it takes. But I’m not so sure. If you’re a straight-laced grown-up with money to burn, burying Newt Gingrich shouldn’t be that hard. Romney talked about the economy, Newt about lunar statehood (which I favor!). Romney drowned Gingrich in negative ads and Gingrich supplied endless fodder for the accurate ones and plausibility for the inaccurate ones. Was that really the test of his political chops everyone is saying?As a bunch of us have been writing around here for a while, the under-emphasized dynamic in this race isn’t that Romney isn’t conservative enough (though that’s obviously a real concern out there) it’s that he’s simply not a good enough politician.
Jonah and many other conservatives are really pissed that Mitt on the next day said that he's ' not very concerned about the poor.' >
“I’m not concerned about the very poor. We have a safety net there,” Romney told CNN. “If it needs repair, I’ll fix it.
Oh, dear. That wasn't too bright. Bill O'Reilly was trying to downplay this flub on The Factor by saying the Democrats will seize on any single word by Mitt that they can take out of context to smear him. Nice try, Bill. It was a bonehead move. >
But great politicians on the morning after a big win, don’t force their supporters to go around defending the candidate from the charge that he doesn’t care about the poor. They just don’t.
You would think after all the rigorous training Mormons are known to subject their children to when it comes to speaking to large groups of people at a young age and then sending them out on two year conversion missions to hone their craft of convincing people to like them, Mitt is one big flop in that category. Unlike his father, who was legendary for his two years in European mission work, Romney just has a problem with connecting and he's making his base nervous.
A recent Pew Poll shows Mitt's unfavorable rating is up to 47% . I believe the GOP thought that having so many debates would give them a chance to constantly bash President Obama without supplying much substance other than lunar bases, hating the gay, electrocutions and building electric fences against Latinos, but what has happened is America is watching and the GOP is being hurt by the added attention. Many republicans really dislike Romney, but view him as the only one to able challenge Obama. I still am surprised by this poll since the country is suffering from the 2008 global financial meltdown. And before Florida's results were in the GOP elites were freaking out over Gingrich's rise and then his attacks of their anointed one.
I know many progressives are feeling very antsy right now with these GOP circus debates and primary days dominating the news cycles so I did a little research into how our base felt about our candidates to contrast the GOP contest at about the same time. Democratic voters were very pleased with the field of candidates that were running for election.
via Gallup Politics on 02/03/08 >
The new poll indicates that whatever the outcome, Democrats nationwide will be equally satisfied with their nominee. They show equal levels of enthusiasm for the prospects of Clinton and Obama each being on the ballot in November. In addition, they are no more likely to believe one of the candidates is more electable in the fall than the other.
Specifically:
Fifty-five percent of Democrats (including independents who lean to the Democratic Party) say they would vote for Obama "enthusiastically" in November were he the Democratic nominee; 53% say the same of Clinton.
Forty-five percent of Democrats think Clinton has the better chance of beating the Republican candidate for president in November; 43% choose Obama.
By contrast, Gallup finds more lopsided attitudes among Republicans -- working strongly in McCain's favor. Republicans are less enthusiastic about voting for each of the leading potential nominees than the Democrats are about theirs; however, McCain is the clear leader on this score over Romney. McCain also beats Romney handily in perceptions of which of the two has the better chance of winning in November.
In the Florida returns there is another troubling number that was revealed about Mitt and the rest of the current field. >
Another warning sign for Romney: Nearly 4 in 10 GOPers want someone else to run: And this also has to worry Romney and his team a bit, too: 38% of Florida Republican primary voters said they’d like to see someone else run for the GOP nomination, versus 58% who said they’re satisfied with the field. It’s a striking number, because these are Republicans who TURNED OUT and voted.
38% are hoping for a brokered convention I guess. Wow. Things are tough in this country and many on our side have been very disappointed, but if we elect a phony conservative like Romney at this point in time, the middle class may never, ever recover. GOP unrest is a good thing.
0 Views
02:10:36 12/10/08
A3458 Hearing Voting Machine Upgrade To Be Delayed Again To November 2010
[LESS INFO] 0 VIEWS | ADDED 02:10:36 12/10/08
This is a hearing of the NJ Assembly Appropriations Committee on A3458 http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/2008/Bills/A3500/3458_S1.HTMBriefly, this is an attempt to change the existing law requires a voter verifiable paper trail machine by January 0f 2009 so that that mandate is pushed to November 2010. As a smoke screen the law also calls for a pilot program that allows for the testing of the retrofit of the old Sequoia touchscreen machines so that they can print out the required voter verifiable paper trail...and it allows for testing some optical scanner type machines on a limited basis.This was just introduced on November 13th. If this bill is approved by the Senate committee on Thursday and then then passed in both houses and signed by Governor Corzine; we will have gone just about FOUR YEARS since the original bill to achieve these ends was passed in 2005.The original state agency tasked to get this done was the Attorney General's office. It got delayed when the original mandate was changed and now it's in the hands of the NJ Secretary of State's office. Meanwhile the vendor, Sequoia, has been (supposedly) working on this continuosly for all these years. Many millions of dollars have been spent....and we are now at a point where it seems we are virtually starting from scratch.The federal monies appropriated to get this done were in response to the 2001 Gore v Bush fiasco. Here we are 8 years later and New Jersey STILL doesn't have a truly secure machine that empowers voters to verify their votes by seeing them printed out on paper....which could, if required, be used as the basis for a credible recount. Meanwhile, other states have managed to resolve this in various ways and to have those ways certified.The questions arise.....Why has this taken so very long?Why has NJ been paying millions of dollars to a vendor to fail at meeting a legislatively mandated schedule?Where is the documentation of all the efforts made and who made them and when they were made?Project managers need to be brought before an investigative body and made to testify under oath on the particulars of just how and why this has taken four years with no certifiable system.Why was Sequoia given this open ended contract with no deadline and no consequeces for failing to meet that deadline?Why should they get paid for failure? Why are we retrofitting technology from the 1980's on a machine by machine basis in the first place?Imagine what it would cost to bioengineer an elephant into becoming a horse? Why not simply go out and buy a horse??? Meanwhile, from many reports, what Sequoia has come up with is a Rube Goldberg contraption that is STILL not ready for prime time. And, no doubt, the NJ taxpayers have been paying them millions of dollars for this "result"This is the whole hearing. If you have the time, watch it all.Apologies for the video and audio quality as this was shot in a large space with a very tiny Casio pocket camera...but much of it is audible if you crank up the volume.The testimony of the progressive activists will be put up separately.
2 Views
09:13:00 11/12/08
Imaginary Money Graveyard
[LESS INFO] 2 VIEWS | ADDED 09:13:00 11/12/08
Imaginary Money Graveyard by d-oo-b.cc Music: Ghosts by http://nin.com flickr.com/photos/arcorosca/sets/72157608868260247/show/w... www.flickr.com/photos/roxelo/3020310910 The recent Financial Global climate is affecting us all in some way. From mortgage prices to investments, businesses fail and people loose their homes, jobs and lives as a result. The severe lack of forsight by those in control this has led to the potential crash of the neo-conservatives. We now see the wealth of the world in a different light. An uncertain future is all we have to look forward to. Europe was caught out by the financial crisis and did not see recession looming, the head of the Eurogroup of nations conceded today, amid estimates that the EU has plunged into a downturn. OCt 08 'Recession awaits us, and we didn't think that recession lay in waiting,' euro zone chairman Jean-Claude Juncker told members of the European Parliament in Brussels. Oct 08 'We were badly mistaken with the different sequences of this crisis,' said Juncker, who is also the premier and finance minister of Luxembourg. Oct 08 The European Commission in early November 2008 warned that the worst financial crisis for generations has driven the EU economy into recession and that economic growth would come close to a standstill next year. "Increasingly, the signs point to a deep and synchronised global recession that began last quarter and has gathered momentum," said Bruce Kasman, an economist at JPMorgan Chase in New York. November 08 The eurozone’s second-biggest economy will grow by just 0.2-0.5 percent next year instead of the 1 percent previously predicted, Economy and Finance Minister Christine Lagarde told the Senate. The minister said the growth forecast for next year 2009 was “the lowest ever by a government in France” but that it was realistic. “The international economic outlook has deteriorated much more than was expected, which will impact growth in Switzerland over the next several quarters,” the Swiss National Bank said in a statement in October 08 The sharp falls came after the Dow Jones index slid 5.05 percent on Wall Street November 7th 08 as investors braced for a gloomy economic ride after the euphoria of Obama’s election victory faded. “Now that the event is over, investors are sobering up and looking at the economic gloom,” said Mizuho Investors Securities broker Masatoshi Sato. Billionaire philanthropist George Soros conceded in OCtober 08 that US influence was waning: "It has already declined. For the past 25 years, we have been running a constant current account deficit. The Chinese and the oil-producing countries have been running a surplus. We have consumed more than we produced. While we have run up debt, they have acquired wealth with their savings. Increasingly, the Chinese will own a lot more of the world because they will be converting their dollar reserves and US government bonds into real assets." Japan By James Kirkup and Julian Ryall in Tokyo Last Updated: 4:00PM BST 16 Oct 2008 Telegraph.co.uk "To cope with the current crisis, further steps may be needed," Mr Aso told members of the Japanese parliament. "However, I still believe this package will be effective to a certain degree." Mr Aso's budget package will be mean direct financial support for farmers and fishermen paying higher fuel bills, and for Japanese consumers. The emergency budget is part of a wider 11.7-trillion-yen package announced in August. The Bank of Japan also made another 300 billion-yen of emergency loans to Japanese banks, hoping to unblock the Tokyo money markets. The central bank has been offering extra liquidity on an almost daily basis for a month. euro Author: ČTK www.ceskenoviny.cz/news/index_view.php?id=338324 Prague - The current situation on financial markets will affect the agenda of Czech EU presidency in the first half of 2009, deputy prime minister for EU affairs Alexandr Vondra said. The financial crisis has become a new priority of the European Union, Vondra said. "When you are making preparations for a football match, you sometimes base your tactics more on offensive while another time you are more defensive. It is evident that in the economic situation in which Europe will be finding itself next year, emphasis will be rather placed on the protection and defence of what has already been attained," Vondra said. Posted by Kevin Anderson Sunday October 12 2008 06.50 BST Homelessness, the economic crisis and voting Homelessness is on the rise in the US, and the newly homeless could find their votes challenged. In Reno Nevada, joblessness has jumped 60% and a tent city of 170 people grew. Reno is trying to shut down the tent city and move people to newly opened shelters. CBS News has reported tent cities in Seattle, Portland, Fresno, Columbus, and Chattanooga. There are also reports of encampments in Seattle, San Diego, and Columbus, Ohio, Santa Barbara and Fresno California. The wave of foreclosures, which in some areas of the country disproportionately affect black voters, could also come into play. The Republican Party of Macomb County Michigan, one of three counties that make up Detroit, is planning to use list of foreclosed homes to challenge people who try to vote using those addresses. Republicans claim that they are trying to prevent voter fraud. Homeless and voting rights advocates are trying to make sure that people don't lose their homes and their right to vote. USA As veteran curator of that realm of American national power upon which all others ultimately depend, Greenspan has inspired remarkable deference. He long ago tamed the legislature, to the point that, instead of exercising oversight over his tenure, Congress has ritually idolized rather than interrogated him. Greenspan's aura has extended even to presidents of the United States. Bill Clinton went so far as to ask Greenspan in 2000 if he would like to be appointed to a fourth term as chairman, or whether he'd prefer to "go out now on top." The then 73-year-old replied: "Oh, no. This is the greatest job in the world. It's like eating peanuts. You keep doing it, keep doing it, and you never get tired." BY PETER HARTCHER American Interests www.the-american-interest.com Winter Issue “Those of us who have looked to the self-interest of lending institutions to protect shareholders’ equity, myself included, are in a state of shocked disbelief,” he told the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. Mr. Greenspan conceded: “Yes, I’ve found a flaw. I don’t know how significant or permanent it is. But I’ve been very distressed by that fact.” Mr. Greenspan said that he had publicly warned about the “underpricing of risk” in 2005 but that he had never expected the crisis that began to sweep the entire financial system in 2007. “This crisis,” he told lawmakers, “has turned out to be much broader than anything I could have imagined. It has morphed from one gripped by liquidity restraints to one in which fears of insolvency are now paramount.” NEW YORK TIMES (US) Greenspan’s sins return to haunt us By David Blake Published: September 18 2008 18:39 | Last updated: September 18 2008 18:39 Back in 2002, when his reputation as “The Man Who Saved the World” was at its peak, Alan Greenspan, former chairman of the Federal Reserve, came to Britain to pick up his knighthood. His biggest fan, Gordon Brown, now the UK prime minister, had ensured that the citation said it was being awarded for promoting “economic stability”. Even as things went completely wild, Mr Greenspan dismissed those who warned that a new bubble was emerging. It was just a case of a little “froth” in a few areas. Later, after waiting until 2007, two years after he left office, he conceded that “froth” had been his euphemism for “bubble”. “All the froth bubbles add up to an aggregate bubble,” he told the Financial Times...... Mr Greenspan realises that something big has happened and describes it as a “once in a hundred years” event. But then, you do not get Alan Greenspans coming along every day. Finincial Times (UK) Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2008 Neoliberalism, White (Male) Privilege & the Current Financial Crisis by Jessie on Sep 30, 2008 at 11:29 am Make no mistake, all the available evidence suggests that the American political economy is headed for a major crash. Some are even speculating that this is the end of American economic dominance in the world’s financial market. But don’t be deceived by the blame-the-victim rationalizing that’s being floated now. Let’s be clear about what policies and which people are behind the current financial crisis: neoliberal policies and the overwhelmingly majority of economically privileged white men (photo from same link) who created, implemented and benefited from those policies. Neoliberalism refers to a set of policies that encourage “less government” and unfettered (and unregulated) capitalism. The key elements of neoliberalism include: 1) the rule of the market, 2) reducing government expenditures on social services, 3) deregulation, 4) privatization, and 5) gutting the notion of “the public good.” The end result of neoliberal policies is that while a handful of people get very, very rich, these policies simultaneously exacerbate the suffering of just about everyone else and increase domestic and international instability. So, what we’re seeing now is just the logical, perhaps inevitable, result of these policies.
2 Views
09:13:00 11/12/08
Imaginary Money Graveyard
[LESS INFO] 2 VIEWS | ADDED 09:13:00 11/12/08
Imaginary Money Graveyard by d-oo-b.cc Music: Ghosts by http://nin.com flickr.com/photos/arcorosca/sets/72157608868260247/show/w... www.flickr.com/photos/roxelo/3020310910 The recent Financial Global climate is affecting us all in some way. From mortgage prices to investments, businesses fail and people loose their homes, jobs and lives as a result. The severe lack of forsight by those in control this has led to the potential crash of the neo-conservatives. We now see the wealth of the world in a different light. An uncertain future is all we have to look forward to. Europe was caught out by the financial crisis and did not see recession looming, the head of the Eurogroup of nations conceded today, amid estimates that the EU has plunged into a downturn. OCt 08 'Recession awaits us, and we didn't think that recession lay in waiting,' euro zone chairman Jean-Claude Juncker told members of the European Parliament in Brussels. Oct 08 'We were badly mistaken with the different sequences of this crisis,' said Juncker, who is also the premier and finance minister of Luxembourg. Oct 08 The European Commission in early November 2008 warned that the worst financial crisis for generations has driven the EU economy into recession and that economic growth would come close to a standstill next year. "Increasingly, the signs point to a deep and synchronised global recession that began last quarter and has gathered momentum," said Bruce Kasman, an economist at JPMorgan Chase in New York. November 08 The eurozone’s second-biggest economy will grow by just 0.2-0.5 percent next year instead of the 1 percent previously predicted, Economy and Finance Minister Christine Lagarde told the Senate. The minister said the growth forecast for next year 2009 was “the lowest ever by a government in France” but that it was realistic. “The international economic outlook has deteriorated much more than was expected, which will impact growth in Switzerland over the next several quarters,” the Swiss National Bank said in a statement in October 08 The sharp falls came after the Dow Jones index slid 5.05 percent on Wall Street November 7th 08 as investors braced for a gloomy economic ride after the euphoria of Obama’s election victory faded. “Now that the event is over, investors are sobering up and looking at the economic gloom,” said Mizuho Investors Securities broker Masatoshi Sato. Billionaire philanthropist George Soros conceded in OCtober 08 that US influence was waning: "It has already declined. For the past 25 years, we have been running a constant current account deficit. The Chinese and the oil-producing countries have been running a surplus. We have consumed more than we produced. While we have run up debt, they have acquired wealth with their savings. Increasingly, the Chinese will own a lot more of the world because they will be converting their dollar reserves and US government bonds into real assets." Japan By James Kirkup and Julian Ryall in Tokyo Last Updated: 4:00PM BST 16 Oct 2008 Telegraph.co.uk "To cope with the current crisis, further steps may be needed," Mr Aso told members of the Japanese parliament. "However, I still believe this package will be effective to a certain degree." Mr Aso's budget package will be mean direct financial support for farmers and fishermen paying higher fuel bills, and for Japanese consumers. The emergency budget is part of a wider 11.7-trillion-yen package announced in August. The Bank of Japan also made another 300 billion-yen of emergency loans to Japanese banks, hoping to unblock the Tokyo money markets. The central bank has been offering extra liquidity on an almost daily basis for a month. euro Author: ČTK www.ceskenoviny.cz/news/index_view.php?id=338324 Prague - The current situation on financial markets will affect the agenda of Czech EU presidency in the first half of 2009, deputy prime minister for EU affairs Alexandr Vondra said. The financial crisis has become a new priority of the European Union, Vondra said. "When you are making preparations for a football match, you sometimes base your tactics more on offensive while another time you are more defensive. It is evident that in the economic situation in which Europe will be finding itself next year, emphasis will be rather placed on the protection and defence of what has already been attained," Vondra said. Posted by Kevin Anderson Sunday October 12 2008 06.50 BST Homelessness, the economic crisis and voting Homelessness is on the rise in the US, and the newly homeless could find their votes challenged. In Reno Nevada, joblessness has jumped 60% and a tent city of 170 people grew. Reno is trying to shut down the tent city and move people to newly opened shelters. CBS News has reported tent cities in Seattle, Portland, Fresno, Columbus, and Chattanooga. There are also reports of encampments in Seattle, San Diego, and Columbus, Ohio, Santa Barbara and Fresno California. The wave of foreclosures, which in some areas of the country disproportionately affect black voters, could also come into play. The Republican Party of Macomb County Michigan, one of three counties that make up Detroit, is planning to use list of foreclosed homes to challenge people who try to vote using those addresses. Republicans claim that they are trying to prevent voter fraud. Homeless and voting rights advocates are trying to make sure that people don't lose their homes and their right to vote. USA As veteran curator of that realm of American national power upon which all others ultimately depend, Greenspan has inspired remarkable deference. He long ago tamed the legislature, to the point that, instead of exercising oversight over his tenure, Congress has ritually idolized rather than interrogated him. Greenspan's aura has extended even to presidents of the United States. Bill Clinton went so far as to ask Greenspan in 2000 if he would like to be appointed to a fourth term as chairman, or whether he'd prefer to "go out now on top." The then 73-year-old replied: "Oh, no. This is the greatest job in the world. It's like eating peanuts. You keep doing it, keep doing it, and you never get tired." BY PETER HARTCHER American Interests www.the-american-interest.com Winter Issue “Those of us who have looked to the self-interest of lending institutions to protect shareholders’ equity, myself included, are in a state of shocked disbelief,” he told the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. Mr. Greenspan conceded: “Yes, I’ve found a flaw. I don’t know how significant or permanent it is. But I’ve been very distressed by that fact.” Mr. Greenspan said that he had publicly warned about the “underpricing of risk” in 2005 but that he had never expected the crisis that began to sweep the entire financial system in 2007. “This crisis,” he told lawmakers, “has turned out to be much broader than anything I could have imagined. It has morphed from one gripped by liquidity restraints to one in which fears of insolvency are now paramount.” NEW YORK TIMES (US) Greenspan’s sins return to haunt us By David Blake Published: September 18 2008 18:39 | Last updated: September 18 2008 18:39 Back in 2002, when his reputation as “The Man Who Saved the World” was at its peak, Alan Greenspan, former chairman of the Federal Reserve, came to Britain to pick up his knighthood. His biggest fan, Gordon Brown, now the UK prime minister, had ensured that the citation said it was being awarded for promoting “economic stability”. Even as things went completely wild, Mr Greenspan dismissed those who warned that a new bubble was emerging. It was just a case of a little “froth” in a few areas. Later, after waiting until 2007, two years after he left office, he conceded that “froth” had been his euphemism for “bubble”. “All the froth bubbles add up to an aggregate bubble,” he told the Financial Times...... Mr Greenspan realises that something big has happened and describes it as a “once in a hundred years” event. But then, you do not get Alan Greenspans coming along every day. Finincial Times (UK) Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2008 Neoliberalism, White (Male) Privilege & the Current Financial Crisis by Jessie on Sep 30, 2008 at 11:29 am Make no mistake, all the available evidence suggests that the American political economy is headed for a major crash. Some are even speculating that this is the end of American economic dominance in the world’s financial market. But don’t be deceived by the blame-the-victim rationalizing that’s being floated now. Let’s be clear about what policies and which people are behind the current financial crisis: neoliberal policies and the overwhelmingly majority of economically privileged white men (photo from same link) who created, implemented and benefited from those policies. Neoliberalism refers to a set of policies that encourage “less government” and unfettered (and unregulated) capitalism. The key elements of neoliberalism include: 1) the rule of the market, 2) reducing government expenditures on social services, 3) deregulation, 4) privatization, and 5) gutting the notion of “the public good.” The end result of neoliberal policies is that while a handful of people get very, very rich, these policies simultaneously exacerbate the suffering of just about everyone else and increase domestic and international instability. So, what we’re seeing now is just the logical, perhaps inevitable, result of these policies.
