Good news. Just found out author Jared Bernstein can join us for a short time. Help me welcome Jared, a progressive economist at the Economic Policy Institute (EPI) here in Washington, D.C. Jared can discuss anything from "guns vs. butter," to "how the capitalists killed capitalism"—and make it understandable.
Economics is scary. Or boring. Or both. Say the word and watch people yawn.
But what’s going on around us right now—the U.S. mortgage crisis, skyrocketing oil and food costs, tanking wages and disappearing health care and retirement benefits, to name a few of our current traumas—makes the need for understanding a few fiscal fundamentals critical for most Americans.
So how do we dislodge people from watching "American Idol" long enough to see that the reason they are having trouble paying bills, affording health care or sending their kids to college is not because they are only working two jobs instead of three. Rather, there’s something really wrong with the way our nation’s economy is being run. And it’s in their interest—and the interest of all of us—to understand why.
Progressive economist Jared Bernstein takes a crack at making economics comprehensible and even (sort of) fun, in Crunch: Why Do I Feel So Squeezed? (And Other Unsolved Economic Mysteries). The book treats a single topic like "The Health Care Squeeze" in bite-sized chapters you can read while waiting for dinner to heat up in the microwave. And for those who can’t make it through each chapter’s four or five short pages, Bernstein handily sums up the main points of each in a single "Crunchpoint" graf.
Bernstein goes right to the heart of the matter in his first chapter: "If the Economy is Doing So Well, Why Do I Feel So Squeezed?"
We in the union movement long have been saying the economy is not working for America’s workers and their families. Yet, what the public is told is another story. As Bernstein writes:
Raise the issue of the squeeze, and many economists and policymakers will excitedly (and correctly) remind you that the stock market is kicking butt!…productivity is soaring!…unemployment’s historically low!…inflation’s down!
But as Bernstein points out, there are more pertinent facts behind these feel-good phrases, and most are only a mouse-click away. Such as:
- …the typical working-age household’s income was down 5 percent, or $2,400, from 2000 to 2006.
- After falling steeply in the late 1990s, the share of the population that’s officially poor rose from 11.3 percent in 2000 to 12.3 percent in 2006.
- Over the business cycle from 2001 to 2007, real wages were up 2.3 percent, compared with 18 percent for productivity….
- While inflation has been moderate since 2000…the costs of some of the key components of the middle-income market basket—health care, child care, college tuition, housing—have been growing much faster than the overall average of all prices taken together.
(Kevin Phillips, most recently the author of Bad Money, goes even farther, saying that inflation and other federal economic indicators have been progressively "Pollyanna-ed" by recent administrations of both flavors, meaning our current inflation is more like 6 percent or 7 percent, rather than the 2 percent cited.)
In short, writes Bernstein:
The name of the problem is economic inequality, and it’s been on the rise for decades.
Yet, with the complicit assistance of the corporate media, the nation’s economics debate has become "scarily unhinged," Bernstein said at an EPI book talk earlier this week. He cited the example of ABC News anchor Charles Gibson who moderated a recent debate between Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama. Both support an increase in the tax on capital gains (which essentially is cash earned on investments) to help fund critically needed programs. But Gibson framed the question to them as though a boost in the capital gains tax would sucker-punch the middle class. In fact, says Bernstein, the wealthiest top 10 percent make 90 percent of capital gains—making it a tax on the wealthy, not the middle class.
But few watching the debate would know that fact.
If people can get one thing from Bernstein’s book, it’s that the "economy" doesn’t just spin in neutral gear, fairly distributing economic growth. There are puppet masters holding the strings, and what they have that we don’t is power.
More so than in any recent period, those who hold a privileged position in the economic power hierarchy, the players who sit down at the poker table with a stack of chips reaching to the ceiling—the CEOs and the holders of large capital assets—are able to steer the bulk of growth their way. Then, using their political connections, they’re able to ice the cake with a nice bit of after-tax redistribution, as regressive changes in the tax code funnel even more resources their way.
Crunch is clearly written and the most accessible of books on bread-and-butter economics around. Give copies to your neighbors, friends, in-laws. It may not stand alone as a Mother’s Day present, but tuck it into the flowers and surprise Mom.
Because the more people who know why we’re being squeezed, the greater the chance they won’t vote to perpetuate Bush administration policies this election. And voting for Sen. John McCain would do just that.
At the EPI talk, Bernstein made a scary prediction: The first thing McCain would do after taking office is to go after Social Security and Medicare. Privatizing either or both would be a disaster for working people in this nation.
Related posts:





Spotlight







Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search

I have to admit, paying capital gains isn’t fun. I get nailed because I inherited some stocks and stuff from my mother (less than $200k). My income is 5 figures even with the gains (none of which actually go into my pocket; they’re all reinvested).
What I dread is getting into a situation where I’ll have to deal with the AMT also. That’s something that urgently needs fixing.
Zed. Tula!
Welcome to the Lake, Mr. Bernstein.
Which administration has been the most economically responsible in recent history, in your opinion?
What do we citizens need to do to put the “hinges” back on the economy?
Maybe AMT is something Jared can explain. I know every definition of it drips out my brain as soon as I hear it.
D’oh!
Welcome, Jared…
If you’re open to it, how do we transition from what appears (to this layperson) to be an economy built on war and military spending-dating back to the beginning of the Cold War-to a truly productive, peaccetime economy? Kind of out of left field, I know…
Hey folks–thanks to Tula for organizing this.
Re PJEvans, your point about how you don’t pay cap gains taxes on reinvested capital is important and underappreciated (you only pay taxes on gains from the sale of an appreciated asset). One attribute of a cap gains tax is too make capital a little more patient. Sometimes, realizations (where you sell the asset and then pay taxes on the gains) are motivated by changes in the tax rate, and not be any good economic rationale.
Of course, the other side of the argument is that if realized cap gains taxes are too high, folks will hold onto assets even when they and the economy would be better off if they sold them. So, you’ve got to strike a balance.
Both Clinton and Obama want to raise the rate back to somewhere around where it was in the Bill Clinton years, which makes a lot of sense to me.
My question is, these decision-makers are now so far removed from ordinary folks–how can regular folks take the power back from them so they become either accountable or irrelevant? Thanks.
Welcome Jared and Tula.
Sir, I have a simple question but one I have been unable to get an answer for. Why are fuel and groceries eliminated from the iflation caculation and included in the GDP equation. Does this or does this not make it appear as though there is “growth” when in fact the opposite is true.
Hi Jared, do you see a continuation of more income going from labor to capital despite increases in labor productivity? Do you see any change in the fundamentals underlying the nation’s production function that would let labor get a larger share of U.S. productivity gains?
I have heard that the Iraq war is the only war during which economic inequality between upper and middle classes increased, rather than decreased.
Can anyone confirm that observation?
Welcome Dr. Bernstein, how do we get our manufacturing sector back? What I am really after is, where do the jobs come from? Any perspective would be appreciated.
bom dia Tula and Jared
I wouldn’t say economics is boring, rather that I don’t have as much an appreciation for it as other folks (due in part to lack of understanding). I look forward to reading the questions, comments etc and walk away a little more informed and appreciative.
“don’t pay cap gains on re-invested capital”
I don’t think I understand this. If I sell an asset and re-invest (even in the same stock for example) then I pay capital gains- right?
I love that question, RonD.
I have a chapter on the military industrial complex in Crunch (MIC–not to be confused the MdIC, the medical industrial complex, whom I inveigh against in Crunch) wherein I make two broad points–roughly summarizing:
1) not only do we spend too many of our resources on defense, war, security, we spend the $ badly. We could be more secure for less $ (I have been moved by the work of Lawrence Korb, former Reagan defense dude, on this point.
2) the opportunity costs are high (duh, I know). Just look at recent debates on this: we scrimp on kids health care yet spend lavishly on the war (all borrowed $, btw).
How to transition? Easy, stop wasting $ on all this crap and start spending it on education, infrastructure, health care, social insurance, safety nets, and green tech.
Obviously, it’s the politics and the power of the MIC that are the barriers.
And on this point, the nation is where we are and where Obama is, not where McCain is. The question is can we stave off the fright/terror mongers who haven’t even begun to fight. They generally failed in the ‘06 midterms…so we’ll see.
http://www.nationaljournal.com…..7_8254.php
Link to interesting story on “Poblano’s model”—this model predicted the results of the primaries better than the polls- using only state demographic data- which tends to show that the campaigns have been irrelevant- all the ads- the rev Wright bullshit- none of it made a dime’s worth of difference.
Too many great questions!! I’ll try to answer a few at once, somewhat glibly, I fear.
I’m in the SF Bay Area. I’m approaching 50. I’ve lived through 3 ups and downs of various levels of pain. After the Dot.com crash I know lots of people who got kicked out of the corporate world who didn’t get back in. They are all “independent contractors” that are just limping by.
I often wonder how and where we are counted in the world of “jobs”. I think that we are undercounted or thrown in some other category.
Corporations often use cutting head count to look good to Wall Street and then buy back the resources from contractors. When the economy turns down more the corporation can just cut back on contractors and push newly laid off employees into a “independent contractor” life. This might be okay if you are young but more difficult as you age and worry about health care.
What do we have to do to get seen and our needs met?
here’s the proper method to frame progressive economic strategy;
“employers and corporations must pay their own bills, they cannot defer their cost of doing business on to anyone else”
bing
the cost of doing business includes cleaning the crap they dump out of the air, our water and back yard
it includes paying a wage where a laborer can provide healthy food on the table for their kids, their wife and themselves,
it includes paying a wage where the laborer can retire when they are no longer productive, where they can have health care if their wife and kids or themselves get sick or need their teeth fixed
and it includes paying for the roads people use to get to the place of business, the land used for power lines and water works
these are the expenses to businesses that they do not want to pay but they must, otherwise they are stealing and their profit margin is through that theft
when a business exports their labor to a country that allows businesses to steal from their labor force and our environment that product face a tariff to that will pay the difference between what the business thinks it’s saving and what it has neglected to pay”
that’s the way we need to frame the very discussion, that allowing corporations to do whatever they want without providing for the laborer their basic needs is allowing them to steal from the middle class
Speaking of basic needs…Maine stood up to Monsanto..good news:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/…..785/511777
I have heard that the Iraq war is the only war during which economic inequality between upper and middle classes increased, rather than decreased.
Can anyone confirm that observation?
I’VE NEVER HEARD THAT BUT IT MAY WELL BE TRUE (I’LL CHECK). I MEAN, I CAN TELL YOU THAT INEQUALITY DECLINED DURING WW1 AND WW2 AND WAS FLAT DURING VIETNA.
THIS IS ALSO CERTAINLY THE FIRST TIME WE’VE HAD BIG TAX CUTS FAVORING THE WEALTHY DURING WAR.
My question is, these decision-makers are now so far removed from ordinary folks–how can regular folks take the power back from them so they become either accountable or irrelevant? Thanks.
A GREAT QUESTION AND THE CENTRAL THEME OF CRUNCH. ANSWER: BY ELECTING THOSE WHO GENUINELY GET THE NATURE AND MAGNITUDE OF THE CHALLENGES WE FACE. BUT THIS IS A HUGE LIFT FROM WHERE WE ARE RIGHT NOW. A GREAT EG OF HOW SCREWED UP THINGS ARE WAS THE D’S DEBATE THE OTHER WEEK, WITH ALL THAT CRAP ON REV WRIGHT AND LAPEL PINS INSTEAD OF AN EARNEST DISCUSSION OF THE REAL PROBLEMS AND SOLUTIONS.
TIS SAID: IF THEY CAN GET YOU ASKING THE WRONG QUESTIONS, THE ANSWERS DON’T MATTER.
Sir, I have a simple question but one I have been unable to get an answer for. Why are fuel and groceries eliminated from the iflation caculation and included in the GDP equation. Does this or does this not make it appear as though there is “growth” when in fact the opposite is true.
ACTUALLY, FOOD AND GAS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CONSUMER PRICE INDEX, BUT THEY’RE OMITTED FROM WHAT’S CALLED THE ‘CORE’ INDEX. OVERALL INFLATION (WHICH INCLUDES THE FOOD AND GAS) IS RUNNING ABOVE 4% WHILE CORE IS AROUND 2.5%. BTW, THE MOTIVATION FOR THE CORE IS IN PART TO HELP THE FEDERAL RESERVE IN A WAY I CAN TALK ABOUT IF YOU’RE INTERESTED.
I feel that our economy has reached the “let them eat cake” point. Yes, I know, Marie Antoinette never really said exactly that, but still. In fact, I think we’ve passed that point already and the country is reacting and will continue to react more forcefully — peacefully perhaps, but more forcefully. We need a union..300,000,000 strong minus that elusive 28%.
Sir, I personally would love to hear you explore the Federal Reserve.
If you sell them yes…I (maybe mistakenly) interpreted the comment to be that the assets were not sold, just reinvested under by a different party (which would invoke some inheritance taxation).
“BTW, THE MOTIVATION FOR THE CORE IS IN PART TO HELP THE FEDERAL RESERVE IN A WAY I CAN TALK ABOUT IF YOU’RE INTERESTED.”
Please do!!
The model seems to be predicting the election of President McCain. Horrible.
The key question is whether this country is capable of sustained economic growth given our current position in the world..We are the world’s biggest consumers- but we put it all on the card. We manufacture less and less each year.
While different policies would distribute the wealth differently- that’s a short term solution if the pie is shrinking.
I agree. In addition, I think many of us are deluded into thinking that we are better off than we really are. That is “I belong to the upper middle class because I own a nice house and car and have a job. I don’t want to think that I am really hurting and belong to the class that might really need a helping hand.” Pride, iow.
When my kids ask me if we are rich or poor, I say we are comfortable. sort of. We do not belong to the class that can go for a “wheels up” golf game on a whim.
“predicting President McCain”
Where’d you get that? The model is only for the primaries as I understand it. I see nothing in the article about McCain at all..
The Fed looks at inflation to try to determine whether the economy is “overheating”–growing too quickly such that “resource utilization” is constrained (eg, we’re at, near, or over capacity in terms of labor or factory production). If they think that’s the case, they will raise interest rates and that will slow the economy’s growth and free up capacity, which in English can mean higher unemployment. Ergo the tradeoff between unemployment and inflation. There are big problems with this model which I articulate below.
But if inflation is coming from oil or food, that’s different. That typically has to do with supply of these commodities, global demand, the weather, the behavior of our favorite oil cartel (OPEC), and all sorts of itches the Fed can’t scratch. The Fed can’t do anything much about supply constraints or demand for food and gas in China/India. So they strip those out of the price index and look at the core.
I’ve got a chapter about this in Crunch, but as you may have noticed, there’s a bias against full employment (really tight labor markets) in the Fed’s model, and they have often prevent the job market from reaching levels of tautness that are needed to really help most workers.
se my 18 for the solution to this issue
That would be fine if that number was only used for the fed- but it’s used almost universally- and much is tied to it.
If we used the real inflation numbers, it would turn out, for example, that the stock market under Bush is negative- and there has been little or no REAL GDP growth, etc…
A lot of this is political-pure and simple don’t you think?
Yes, there has been a move in some firms, especially dot.coms, to scale back permanent hires, and just have a bunch of contractors hovering about the “core.”
One of the best ways to fight back here is through some kind of collective bargaining organizing. This is, of course, a major hurdle for independent contractors, but there are numerous groups that are forming to answer this challenge. One is “United Professionals,” a brain-child of Barbara Ehrenreich.
Look at FiveThirtyEight.com
It shows McCain ahead of Obama in electoral votes 272.4 to 265.6.
It shows McCain ahead of Clinton in electoral votes 280.2 to 257.8.
It takes 270 electoral votes to win.
Jared – welcome to Firedoglake !
have benefited from your distillation of wonky topics for a while now
Tula – Thanks for this
love the idea of Jared’s book – it is indeed an overwhelming subject, even when folks aren’t ‘bored’ , they’re self concious about sounding dumb
I mentioned Headzup yesterday, 30 second viral video zapped cell phone to cell phone -ignore the content for now and look at the platform – imagine millions of Americans having access to Jared’s insights in sound bite form
Hey, All. I think Jared has to rush to another meeting right now. A big thanks to him for taking time here!
Thanks Jared!
I share your concern re the loss of our manufacturing base, but–excepting the current recession-like conditions, which will hopefully be short-lived–the pie is growing, not shrinking! The American workforce was especially highly productive in recent years but has far too little to show for it.
Though growth was not as robust as in prior periods, especially re jobs, the problem in the 2000s, at least from the perspective of the Crunch, was distribution of growth than that of growth itself.
Thanks to you all and to Tula…’see’ you soon.
That’s actually based on current polling- not the model I believe (see the polls listed by state.)
Thanks Jared & Tula!
Hope you are right. Kevin Phillips has a very different take in his new book…
What IS the actual(real) growth in the economy for the last seven years if you use accurate inflation numbers?
Really interesting. That is sort of what I was saying in my #21. Some kind of huge union of both professionals and non-professionals…a powerful “national workforce union” not separated by individual businesses, but rather a union with one voice that really could have impact saying, “we’re not going to take this anymore”.
Really…we need a total overhaul of this country. It is madness, madness, madness.
I resent, personally, that the so-called “Feds” who are really private bankers with a little “fed” sprinkled in, are controlling our lives. That is not a free market at all.
Please excuse my economically ignorant rant. I just hate to see what’s happening, and it is so frustrating…
Pretty soon we’ll be serfs….*g*
If you’re on this side of the pond tomorrow morning Bert and I are doing the WMNF table at the Sat Morning Market at the end of 2nd Ave N. Rebecca Pulley and Lorna Bracewell due to entertain starting somewhere around 10. Market runs 9-2.
“multi-national workforce union”
SD, I must check my schedule with She-Who-Must-Be-Obeyed, but I think I might actually be able to do that. Thanks for the invite!
The fed uses the PCE. It’s a blended measure of inflation facing consumers. The CPI has an upward bias because it uses a fixed market basket of commodities that doesn’t change very frequently. The PCE uses a weigthed average of commodities and includes gas and food.
I cannot believe mccain or any republican can possibly poll higher then any democrat, the republicans are reviled and the democrats are mobilising more voters then ever before in history
even in the best case scenario for the republicans the bush elections were spectacular in how close, it cannot possibly be close now
these polls are gamed so the electronic flip will look realistic
these polls have to be flipped
LOL. Been there, done that.
Thanks- important information.
Thanks for the visit, Jared.
OT, but too good to pass up, notice the news item in the FDL news headline box:
Teh Irony, it burns.
Yeah!!
They wanted “globalization”….D’Oh…
How about the world’s populations actually “control” the corporations for a change….
Layers of lies.
I can, I’ve voted in Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, and now Louisiana-which should be a swing state. I can’t see anything but the bluest of blue states going for Obama. I know lots of those blue collar disenfranchised voters that are voting for Hillary and every one of them will vote for McCain. I’ve heard one after another say there is positively no way they will vote for Obama. Most are lifelong Dems. I didn’t want to vote for Kerry, but did any way, I’m tired of having to vote for the Dukkakis candidates… I want some one electable for a change.
Can Unions do anything to help their members gain more actual ownership in their own companies?
I worked for Chicago Northwestern Railroad when we (the employees) owned it, I don’t remember a lot about it, (35 years ago?) but I do know it was our union leadership who made the deal when the parent company wanted to sell out.
There were some wage concessions, but the ownership factor made up for a lot of that, eventually, when the company was resold to investors.
I have always wondered why the employees couldn’t keep the company, like the Hy Vee stores in Iowa. Employee ownership seems like a great idea.
What is the future of employee ownership, as far as the unions are concerned? Does if play into the future as an answer to outsourcing?
Seems like any group of long-term employees, if they are shoved out on the street after decades of loyal service, ought to be able and quite justified, even by the floating rules promulgated by these monopolists in capitalist clothing, to put together their own version of the same enterprise, and compete quite well in the management/ownership/cutthroat’s own game.
And who better than their own trusted unions might be the broker in that deal?
Too bad the leaders of Myanmar refused to pretend to play guitar. That worked well for our Dear Leader.
I think that the polling is probably correct at this early stage as well. The projection was a very narrow electoral advantage for McCain- based on him winning more swing states including:
Ark
La
Florida
Mo
NH
Ohio…
If Obama were to win Ohio- it all switches..
I still think that whoever wins Ohio wins the White House
there is no candidate that is electable when it comes to the republican spin machine, no matter who runs they will demonize that person
however this primary cycle we knew they were making us elect the two least electable candidates in our field
Aren’t commodities being gamed right now, too? Speculators don’t have many other places to put their money right now, since the financial industry is riddled like Swiss cheese with investments of dubious quality, real estate has tanked and will continue downward for at least another 1-2 years, and stock performance will be determined by consumption, which may be suppressed by increased commodity prices.
Is there some way by which the Fed could look at and use commodities pricing depending on price drivers, as an additional mechanism to assess and employ remedial action?
(I have a suspicion that the Fed can’t, that the real solution is legislative and goes to the subprime crisis…)
THe Democratic nominee needs to respond rapidly and strongly to any and all negative attacks, ads, etc.
Gawd…you know…it’s all just gambling…throw yer money on the 8 of spades…no, no..the 7 of hearts…no, no..the ace of diamonds….quick put it on the 2 of clubs…then the “pyramid” of cards starts teetering, and someone at the “base” just yanks any old card out…kaboom. It’s mostly just paper with something printed on them…but the card dealer can print more cards….
There appears to be a commodity bubble right now. There are a lot of speculators in commodities but many of the things going on with those markets are fundamental. The Fed has no control over that market at all. The only ‘commodity’ it really controls is money. The SEC is the police of the commodities market and has no ‘bailout’ type authority. The Fed can only step in to Financial Markets because of its charter.
Mr. Bernstein,
My contention is that the Right is more successful at organizing and aligning on message than the Left because the Right has a very simple motivation: money. Whether it’s lowering their own taxes or deregulating their own industries, much of what the Right does is about increasing their profit.
The challenge for the Left, in my opinion, is that altruism is not immediately profitable. Much of the Left seems to be motivated by concepts of justice, or long term investments in things like ecology, efficiency (fuel mileage), or fairness.
The Right has diverse roots but a common goal – profit. The Left has diverse roots and diverse goals.
How can we make longer-term economic drivers as compelling a tool as possible for organizing the Left as short term profit has been as an organizing tool for the Right?
Thank you for your time.
If the real solution is legislative, Republics retain too much power to allow a real solution to be implemented.
They have to buy stock in the companies and get a large stake for that to happen. Then they have to review the charters and make governance changes.
I’ve had that discussion with a number of union folks and local union leadership. Every time a certain auto part maker used to tell the UAW they were “valued partners at the table”, I told them this was bullsh*t smoke being blown up their shorts because the only valued partner has an equity stake and a majority interest where possible.
They didn’t understand that. That said, unions absolutely must stop taking knives to gunfights when dealing with corporations. I’ll point to the AFL-CIO as an example; they promote coursework as a method for improving the lot of workers, but the classes I’ve seen offered teach union members how to be better union organizers.
NO CORPORATION WILL SEE THAT AS A VALUE-ADDED PROPOSITION.
It’s also not a value-adder for union workers, either. Union members need to be able to read financial statements, need to understand Profit-Loss, EBITDA, need to understand all the language and data that businesses use to make decisions, simply to be better negotiators at the table during contract renewals. And it will be an absolute MUST if unions are to become effective equity-holding valued partners at the table.
That said, I can’t help but point to Calpers as an example of an effective combination of union members and their capital working in concert. Calpers can move the market — and yet because of Calpers’ diversification, union members are not excessively at risk due to overexposure to one business/industry. (Union members becoming majority owners of their own employer are overexposed to a single source of risk, all their eggs in own basket.) Calpers is the model to which the UAW, AFL-CIO, SEIU should aspire.
tax cuts and subsidizing those things
many of the democrats allow that to continue also … for example, in my state, my dem senators have supported the oil industry, the sugar cane industry, and the pharmaceutical and chemical industry for many of the same reasons the republicans do … we have just as many corporate democrats as we have corporate republcans, sadly
The real objective this November isn’t the White House: it’s a veto-proof Senate.
And lot of fresh, grassroots blood injected into Congress.
That’ll take care of the legislation problem.
My feelings exactly!
And SCOTUS
That’s a tall order- takes 2/3 to override a veto- and some of the dems are undependable depending on the issue.
Would probably take 75 seats
The Repukes are very adept at keeping their message simple…keep it simple stupid….smoke and mirrors.
Basically..you can keep more of your hard-earned money if you vote for us….but they never tell them that that’s all the hard-earned money they’ll ever get if it’s up to them.
You can have more cake if you vote for us (throw the people a fake bone)….(but cake’s all that will be left after we’ve bled you to death)…pretty cake…sweet, tasty…but no nutrition whatsoever…just keep working….”Work will free you”…remember Germany?
Yes.
Mr. Cbl — yes, at both fed and state level if you live in Michigan. [sigh]
rwcole — tall order, yes. Necessary? absof*ckinglutely.
Great post, Tula.
Great guest.
Great comments.
And, McDrat! I got here late.
‘Economics’ is a ‘game’.
A strong and healthy society knows this and behaves accordingly.
A ‘belief’ in capitalism is just as much an act of faith as a ‘belief’ in a Supreme Being.
Both ‘beliefs’ may be justified only by an appeal to unreason.
I’m am convinced that both forms of ‘belief’ do much mischief …
and bring about little actual ‘good’.
They sure as hell are!
The easiest thing to do in the short run is limit the amount of leverage these a-holes can use when buying oil contracts.
I don’t know what an acceptable level of leverage is, but I know 30 to 1 is killing us.
Why is our government allowing this madness?
The local news had a story last night re: gas prices and it was heartbreaking.
People were buying $2 to $5 dollars of gas @$3.79/gal. knowing the would have to be right back later in the same day for more, but it was the best they could do.
THe Republics also promise to keep you safe from all sorts of gay stuff.
Aren’t enough seats up in the senate this election to give dems 75 even if they won EVERY AVAILABLE SEAT.
It’s not going to be a short-term target. We have 30-plus years of damage to undo, going to take that long to undo it, and hope like hell we do not suffer any greater problems than a serious recession between now and the point of full remediation.
The chance for a depression is quite strong. A solid majority in the Senate and continued economic hardships may make more mid-term seats more likely to win.
Ditto for SCOTUS — we are stuck with Thomas, Roberts, Scalia, Alito for a very long time. We must replace any of the potential retirees with progressives during the next 4 years and beyond, but it won’t happen unless we sustain our efforts towards a progressive Senate.
Didn’t Calpers learn the hard way?
Some kind of huge union of both professionals and non-professionals…a powerful “national workforce union” not separated by individual businesses, but rather a union with one voice that really could have impact saying, “we’re not going to take this anymore”.
This sounds like what the Wobblies have been advocating for, oh, about a century now. Read about the IWW here, then join up.
Jared, I’ll look forward to reading your book. I wonder, do you explore the political dimension of falsifying the economic picture on the rosy side? It seems to me that if an individual can be convinced everyone else is doing pretty well, than if he/she experiences otherwise, the message is “quit whining, loser.” It is an obfuscation designed to destroy solidarity and collective action.
Are you referring to CDO’s?
Whatever. Most of Wall Street was pretty damned stupid.
Like Bear Stearns kind of stupid, only not fully disclosed to the rest of the market. This is exactly why I mentioned how close we are to a depression — and the public has no more idea as to the real state of our economy than seasoned investors have about CDO’s.
If it weren’t for Calpers, we wouldn’t have a banking system that has this much transparency, even as opaque as it is now.