We can’t sit by and wait for 2012 to roll around and hope that voters remember what happened during the budget negotiations in 2011. We need to act right now and get as many voters as possible onboard with our pledge to never vote for anyone who cuts social safety net benefits.
|By: Brian Sonenstein Wednesday July 20, 2011 11:29 am|
|By: Nancy Altman Monday April 18, 2011 12:30 pm|
The Social Security Solvency and Sustainability Act slashes benefits drastically but continues to require workers to pay the same level of contributions specified under current law. Workers’ paystubs would continue to show that they were contributing to Social Security, but that would be only partly true. Workers would be contributing $6.2 trillion more than what would be needed.
Graham, Lee, and Paul propose to “borrow” those excess contributions, all $6.2 trillion worth, the way a school yard bully borrows –with no intention ever of repaying the money. Like school yard bullies, the three Senators even bragged about the fraud. Their press release announcing their proposal describes “What the plan accomplishes,” and lists as the very first accomplishment, “Reduces debt held by the public by $6.2 trillion by 2085.” How can they reduce the debt held by the public? By “borrowing” $6.2 trillion from Social Security’s Trust Funds with no intention of ever paying as much as a penny back.
|By: Peterr Saturday April 9, 2011 9:30 am|
After watching the news last night, I couldn’t help but think of Eleanor Roosevelt and Marian Anderson. When it comes to hardball negotiations with entrenched interests, they sure could give the Obama Team a few lessons.
|By: Cynthia Kouril Saturday December 4, 2010 1:59 pm|
The country is in the grip of a great financial crisis. People face record unemployment.Wall Street executives are described as geniuses who are fully worth the exorbitant salaries and bonuses they are paid, but those salaries are coming out of money that should rightfully go to their shareholders.
|By: Blue Texan Thursday October 28, 2010 10:45 am|
President Obama sat down with some progressive bloggers yesterday for a Q&A, and this was one of his more puzzling responses.
|By: William Black Saturday July 17, 2010 2:00 pm|
Dr. Wolff is a prominent Marxist economist who teaches at U. Mass and The New School. The book is composed of scores of short essays he did for Monthly Review beginning in 2005. The publicity blurb sent to potential reviewers states that Dr. Wolff “predicted the economic meltdown years ago.” The book does not contain specific predictions of the meltdown beyond the omnipresent Marxist prediction that capitalism is inherently unstable. Dr. Wolff’s articles take note of the bubble and nonprime assets in the articles in the book after the collapse of the bubble and after the crisis in nonprime assets were obvious. Readers interested in the scholars that predicted the specific crisis should consult Jamie Galbraith’s article.
Dr. Wolff’s emphasis is explaining his overall Marxist critique of capitalism’s defects. The articles can be read easily by the general reader. No economic expertise is required and Dr. Wolff writes in English without the Marxist jargon that non-specialists find confusing.
|By: Mark Thoma Saturday July 10, 2010 2:00 pm|
It’s possible to give two very different interpretations of the Obama presidency so far. The first is a relatively positive interpretation. Proponents of this view argue that even though Obama has faced a united GOP willing and able to use filibusters to thwart initiatives, and even though he has had opposition within his own party to progressive initiatives, he has still managed to rack up an impressive list of achievements. Take health care as an example. The health care legislation wasn’t all that progressives wanted, not by a long shot. But the legislation is an impressive start and, importantly, it leaves the door open to further change. Though people forget, programs such as Social Security or Medicare weren’t perfect at first, but were improved substantially over time.
|By: Sanford Levinson Saturday April 24, 2010 2:00 pm|
Jeff Shesol , a former speechwriter for President Clinton, with this book, becomes one of our leading non-academic American historians, following his previous book on the tangled relationship between Robert Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson. Here he examines the attempt by President Franklin D. Roosevelt to “pack” the Supreme Court by making new appointments even in the absence of the retirement or death of current members of the Court. It was, of course, provoked by the adamant opposition of the Court—led by the four conservatives known as the “Four Horsemen” (of the apocalypse] who, by gaining the vote of either the Chief Justice, Charles Evans Hughes, or Justice Owen Roberts could control the Court’s decision making—to major programs of the New Deal. Key programs of the New Deal were unceremoniously declared to be unconstitutional as beyond congressional power, and others were in a state of virtual suspension for fear of the same fate. Some of the decisions, most notably the one shooting down the “blue eagle” of the NRA, were no doubt quite popular, as the NRA had become discredited among large swathes of the population going well beyond conservative critics of the New Deal. Other programs, though, were at the heart of the New Deal program and seemingly threatened proposed legislation, including, say, the Wagner Act that would serve to empower labor unions against their employers.
|By: Nomi Prins Wednesday June 17, 2009 3:30 pm|
Making alterations to lending, securitization and derivatives are positive steps, but giving the Fed more power, and shuffling the deck chairs of the regulatory arena, while leaving Wall Street’s landscape intact – is NOT an overhaul.