Showing posts with label free_trade. Show all posts
Showing posts with label free_trade. Show all posts

Monday, September 19, 2011

#takewallstreet #occupywallstreet

Some say occupywallstreet has not articulated their complaints clearly enough. I disagree. If you listen to what occupiers talk about in their live feed, or read what is on their website, occupywallst.org, or on the adbusters page devoted to occupywallstreet, or on the Facebook page, or the NYC General Assembly page, the motives of occupywallstreet become eminently clear. Those who don't understand, need to clear the scales from their eyes, as one old book put it.


It may be presumptuous of me, but here are a few ideas I think -- or have gathered -- the occupywallstreet protesters are sacrificing their time, and risking their safety for:
  • It's about greed-blinded corporatism, not genuine, free-market commerce
  • It's about free-market capitalism, not unlawfully-fixed-market capitalism
  • It's about fair trade, not job-stealing, free-trade empty promises of prosperity
  • It's about outsourcing jobs and offshoring profits and de-unionizing wage earners
  • It's about no healthcare for working poor, but bailouts for the rich -- cheers
  • It's about tax-free private-equity takeover and liquidation of mfg jobs & knowhow
  • It's about 15% cap gain regressive tax rewards for selling out the middle class
  • It's about regressive tax law that concentrate wealth among those who destroy us
  • It's about privatizing profit for 1% and socializing loss at the expense of 99%
  • It's about trading broad, tolerant prosperity for narrow, hateful oligarchy
  • It's about commodity speculation imposing de facto taxes on trampled wage-earners
  • It's about a securities transaction tax to quench speculation and fund prosperity
  • It's about a securities transaction tax to diminish speculation induced inflation
  • It's about educating the duped who don't know they've been duped
  • It's about saving agriculture from corporatist monoculture and toxic GMO's
  • It's about squandering more on defense than the next 18 big spenders combined
  • It's about Congress, the Executive, and Judiciary bought by corporate lobbyists
  • * It's about Constitution trampling, police-state, "Patriot" Act surveillance
  • It's about the impossibility of repaying usurious student loans if no jobs exist
  • It's about Constitution trampling, police-state, surveillance of citizens
  • It's about austerity measures during a depression leading to trickle down disaster
  • It's about gambling with and losing other people's money, then demanding charity
  • It's about people who drink corporatist Kool-Aid, and the rest of US get hungover
  • It's about lazy laggards who cling to lobbied-for-and-obediently-legislated-filthy-stolen-lucre

A modest demand: before the 99% votes for them, let's insist politicians register as independents & refuse corporate $$$


Read more about this artificially concocted "economic crisis."
Peace.


Update 10-Oct:
Former Rep. Alan Grayson (D-FL) concisely summarizes what he thinks Occupy Wall Street is all about (I think he is right, and I suspect most protesters would agree):

Update 3-Oct: I don't know what to call this except a big can of whoop-ass opened up on Fox News by a guy with some serious interview game. Hoo-rah for the man on the street. I'm mad as hell, and I'm not gonna take it any-f-ing more!








Watch live streaming video from globalrevolution at livestream.com

From Flux, Media Center, OccupyWallStreet, Zucotti Park -- give it a look, it's impressive:

Thursday, August 18, 2011

US VAT = Broad Prosperity

Senator Fritz Hollings, in the Huffington Post, offers a coherent, convincing argument in favor of a Value Added Tax (VAT):

Inconsequential Washington, August 16, 2011
Globalization is nothing more than a war for the economy, with production looking for a country cheaper to produce. Each country competes vigorously in this war for innovation, research, technology, development, production and jobs, each building its economy -- except the United States. President Obama stays bogged down in the hot wars, totally ignoring the cold or economy war. The president could easily recover by transferring the subsidy the U. S. gives to off-shore jobs and giving it to on-shore jobs: cancel the corporate income tax and replace it with a 6% value added tax. The VAT is easily implemented and administered with computers. 140 countries compete in globalization with a VAT and don't find it regressive or "a money machine." The VAT is rebated on exports, but the income tax is not rebated. With a VAT, the more you consume, the more you pay; the less you consume, the less you pay. The poor that must consume for food, health and housing, are given exemptions from the VAT. Last year, the corporate tax produced $194.1 billion in revenues. A 2010 VAT would have produced $700 billion. $70 billion exemptions for the poor, still leaves $630 billion to pay down the debt. Spending cuts can produce more to pay down the debt. The VAT promotes exports, creating jobs. With the corporate tax cancelled, Corporate America can invest its $1.2 trillion in off-shore profits to create millions of jobs in the United States. Since there are no loopholes in a VAT, we have instant tax reform. Since the VAT is self-enforcing, we can eliminate much of the Internal Revenue Service or cut the size of government. Since the average corporate tax is 23%, replacing it with a 6% VAT cuts taxes. So this tax cut stops the hemorrhaging of our economy off-shore, provides billions to pay down the debt, creates millions of jobs, and cuts the size of government.

But the president ignores the off-shoring of our economy. He campaigns around the country calling for stimulation and government "make-work," proving himself inconsequential on jobs.
 A VAT would encourage fair trade, domestic manufacturing, domestic savings, and wage growth -- all of which would lead to broad economic prosperity. We had such prosperity in the past, we could have it again if we take back what the bankers and corporate bag men stole. Besides, the corporate apologist Heritage Foundation is opposed to it (Value-Added Tax: No Easy Fix for the Deficit), so it must be good for the country. (Mr. Dubay's arguments are typical conservative misdirection: they focus on well-known faults that have negligible impact on the overall effectiveness of the VAT, which is why smart societies governed for the benefit of the majority continue to use it. The effect of the faults can be minimized and mitigated. And Senator Hollings suggests the VAT replace the current 35% corporate tax rate, not as an addition to it. And of that 35%, most corporations pay only 3% -- rampant fraud? And few are suggesting a 20% VAT as Mr. Dubay asserts. Mr. Hollings suggests a 5 or 6% VAT. Mr. Dubay is blowing smoke in our eyes, like nutty conservative think tanks always do.)

Friday, June 24, 2011

Platform of the Progressive Party

I borrowed this from the PBS page: 
American Experience: The Presidents: Theodore Roosevelt, 26th President

Good for them for posting it. Thanks, PBS.

Funny that this party platform comes from a former REPUBLICAN . My, how things change. And, how they stay the same of course -- witness the part about outsized and corrupt corporate influence. 

(The part about developing coal and other natural resources in the section labeled "Alaska" is a glaring exception to the relevance of this document today. That section is very modern Republican, and I guarantee Mr. Roosevelt would not stand by those assertions today -- the section labeled "Conservation" makes this clear to anyone but a modern Republican.)
 
Cheers, Teddy Roosevelt for your courage, and your convictions, both of which most politicians lack nowadays. Sad, that.

Anyway, with some minor tweaking, one could start a party on this plank tomorrow, and maybe even get elected, that is if the candidate was heard by anyone. Which is unlikely for lots of reasons. Maybe I'll resurrect the "Bull Moose" party. That would be a hoot!

August 7, 1912

Declaration of Principles of the Progressive Party

The conscience of the people, in a time of grave national problems, has called into being a new party, born of the Nation's awakened sense of justice. We of the Progressive Party here dedicate ourselves to the fulfillment of the duty laid upon us by our fathers to maintain that government of the people, by the people and for the people whose foundation they laid.

We hold with Thomas Jefferson and Abraham Lincoln that the people are the masters of their Constitution, to fulfill its purposes and to safeguard it from those who, by perversion of its intent, would convert it into an instrument of injustice. In accordance with the needs of each generation the people must use their sovereign powers to establish and maintain equal opportunity and industrial justice, to secure which this Government was founded and without which no republic can endure.

This country belongs to the people who inhabit it. Its resources, its business, its institutions and its laws should be utilized, maintained or altered in whatever manner will best promote the general interest.
It is time to set the public welfare in the first place.


The Old Parties

Political parties exist to secure responsible government and to execute the will of the people.

From these great tasks both of the old parties have turned aside. Instead of instruments to promote the general welfare, they have become the tools of corrupt interests which use them impartially to serve their selfish purposes. Behind the ostensible government sits enthroned an invisible government, owing no allegiance and acknowledging no responsibility to the people.

To destroy this invisible government, to dissolve the unholy alliance between corrupt business and corrupt politics is the first task of the statesmanship of the day.

The deliberate betrayal of its trust by the Republican Party, and the fatal incapacity of the Democratic Party to deal with the new issues of the new time, have compelled the people to forge a new instrument of government through which to give effect to their will in laws and institutions.

Unhampered by tradition, uncorrupted by power, undismayed by the magnitude of the task, the new party offers itself as the instrument of the people to sweep away old abuses, to build a new and nobler commonwealth.


A Covenant with the People

This declaration is our covenant with the people, and we hereby bind the party and its candidates in State and Nation to the pledges made herein.


The Rule of the People

The Progressive Party, committed to the principle of government by a self-controlled democracy expressing its will through representatives of the people, pledges itself to secure such alterations in the fundamental law of the several States and of the United States as shall insure the representative character of the Government.

In particular, the party declares for direct primaries for nomination of State and National officers, for Nation-wide preferential primaries for candidates for the Presidency, for the direct election of United States Senators by the people; and we urge on the States the policy of the short ballot, with responsibility to the people secured by the initiative, referendum and recall.


Amendment of Constitution

The Progressive Party, believing that a free people should have the power from time to time to amend their fundamental law so as to adapt it progressively to the changing needs of the people, pledges itself to provide a more easy and expeditious method of amending the Federal Constitution.


Nation and State

Up to the limit of the Constitution, and later by amendment of the Constitution, if found necessary, we advocate bringing under effective national jurisdiction those problems which have expanded beyond reach of the individual states.

It is as grotesque as it is intolerable that the several States should by unequal laws in matter of common concern become competing commercial agencies, barter the lives of their children, the health of their women and the safety and well-being of their working people for the profit of their financial interests.

The extreme insistence on States' rights by the Democratic Party in the Baltimore platform demonstrates anew its inability to understand the world into which it has survived or to administer the affairs of a Union States which have in all essential respects become one people.


Social and Industrial Strength

The supreme duty of the Nation is the conservation of human resources through an enlightened measure of social and industrial justice. We pledge ourselves to work unceasingly in State and Nation for:--
Effective legislation looking to the prevention of industrial accidents, occupational diseases, overwork, involuntary unemployment, and other injurious effects incident to modern industry;

The fixing of minimum safety and health standards for the various occupations, and the exercise of the public authority of State and Nation, including the Federal control over inter-State commerce and the taxing power, to maintain such standards;

The prohibition of child labor;

Minimum wage standards for working women, to provide a living scale in all industrial occupations;
The prohibition of night work for women and the establishment of an eight hour day for women and young persons;

One day's rest in seven for all wage-workers;

The abolition of the convict contract labor system; substituting a system of prison production for governmental consumption only; and the application of prisoners' earnings to the support of their dependent families;

Publicity as to wages, hours and conditions and labor; full reports upon industrial accidents and diseases, and the opening to public inspection of all tallies, weights, measures and check systems on labor products;
Standards of compensation for death by industrial accident and injury and trade diseases which will transfer the burden of lost earnings from the families of working people to the industry, and thus to the community;

The protection of home life against the hazards of sickness, irregular employment and old age through the adoption of a system of social insurance adapted to American use;

The development of the creative labor power of America by lifting the last load of illiteracy from American youth and establishing continuation schools for industrial education under public control and encouraging agricultural education and demonstration in rural schools;

The establishment of industrial research laboratories to put the methods and discoveries of science at the service of American producers.

We favor the organization of the workers, men and women as a means of protecting their interests and of promoting their progress.


Business

We believe that true popular government, justice and prosperity go hand in hand, and so believing, it is our purpose to secure that large measure of general prosperity which is the fruit of legitimate and honest business, fostered by equal justice and by sound progressive laws.

We demand that the test of true prosperity shall be the benefits conferred thereby on all the citizens not confined to individuals or classes and that the test of corporate efficiency shall be the ability better to serve the public; that those who profit by control of business affairs shall justify that profit and that control by sharing with the public the fruits thereof.

We therefore demand a strong National regulation of inter-State corporations. The corporation is an essential part of modern business. The concentration of modern business, in some degree, is both inevitable and necessary for National and international business efficiency. but the existing concentration of vast wealth under a corporate system, unguarded and uncontrolled by the Nation, has placed in the hands of a few men enormous, secret, irresponsible power over the daily life of the citizen--a power insufferable in a free government and certain of abuse.

This power has been abused, in monopoly of National resources, in stock watering, in unfair competition and unfair privileges, and finally in sinister influences on the public agencies of State and Nation. We do not fear commercial power, but we insist that it shall be exercised openly, under publicity, supervision and regulation of the most efficient sort, which will preserver its good while eradicating and preventing its evils.

To that end we urge the establishment of a strong Federal administrative commission of high standing, which shall maintain permanent active supervision over industrial corporations engaged in inter-State commerce, or such of them as are of public importance, doing for them what the Government now does for the National banks, and what is now done for the railroads by the Inter-State Commerce Commission.

Such a commission must enforce the complete publicity of those corporation transactions which are of public interest; must attack unfair competition, false capitalization and special privilege, and by continuous trained watchfulness guard and keep open equally to all the highways of American commerce.

Thus the business man will have certain knowledge of the law, and will be able to conduct his business easily in conformity therewith; the investor will find security for his capital; dividends will be rendered more certain, and the savings of the people will be drawn naturally and safely into the channels of trade.
Under such a system of constructive regulation, legitimate business, freed from confusion, uncertainty and fruitless litigation, will develop normally in response to the energy and enterprise of the American business man.

We favor strengthening the Sherman law by prohibiting agreements to divide territory or limit output; refusing to sell to customers who buy from business rivals; to sell below cost in certain areas while maintaining higher prices in other places; using the power of transportation to aid or injure special business concerns; and other unfair trade practices.


Commercial Development

The time has come when the Federal Government should co-operate with the manufacturers and producers in extending our foreign commerce. To this end we demand adequate appropriations by Congress and the appointment of diplomatic and consular officers solely with a view to their special fitness and worth, and not in consideration of political expediency.

It is imperative to the welfare of our people that we enlarge and extend our foreign commerce. We are pre-eminently fitted to do this because as a people we have developed high skill in the art of manufacturing; our business men are strong executives, strong organizers. In every way possible our Federal Government should co-operate in this important matter. Anyone who has had the opportunity to study and observe first-hand Germany's course in this respect must realize that their policy of co-operation between Government and business has in comparatively few years made them a leading competitor for the commerce of the world. It should be remembered that they are doing this on a national scale and with large units of business, while the Democrats would have us believe that we should do it with small units of business, which would be controlled not by the National Government but by forty-nine conflicting sovereignties. Such a policy is utterly out of keeping with the progress of the times and gives our great commercial rivals in Europe--hungry for international markets--golden opportunities of which they are rapidly taking advantage.


Tariff

We believe in a protective tariff which shall equalize conditions of competition between the United States and foreign countries, both for the farmer and the manufacturer, and which shall maintain for labor an adequate standard of living.

Primarily the benefit of any tariff should be disclosed in the pay envelope of the laborer. We declare that no industry deserves protection which is unfair to labor or which is operating in violation of Federal law.
We believe that the presumptions always in favor of the consuming public.

We demand tariff revision because the present tariff is unjust to the people of the United States.

Fair-dealing toward the people requires an immediate downward revision of those schedules wherein duties are shown to be unjust or excessive.

We pledge ourselves to the establishment of a non-partisan scientific tariff commission, reporting both to the President and to either branch of Congress, which shall report, first, as to the costs of production, efficiency of labor, capitalization, industrial organization and efficiency and the general competitive position in this country and abroad of industries seeking protection from Congress; second, as to the revenue-producing power of the tariff and its relation to the resources of government; and third, as to the effect of the tariff on prices, operations of middlemen, and on the purchasing power of the consumer.

We believe that this commission should have plenary power to elicit information, and for this purpose to prescribe a uniform system of accounting for the great protected industries. The work of the commission should not prevent the immediate adoption of acts reducing those schedules generally recognized as excessive.

We condemn the Payne-Aldrich bill as unjust to the people. The Republican organization is in the hands of those who have broken and cannot again be trusted to keep, the promise of necessary downward revision. The Democratic Party is committed to the destruction of the protective system through a tariff for revenue only--a policy which would inevitably produce widespread industrial and commercial disaster.

We demand the immediate repeal of the Canadian Reciprocity Act.


High Cost of Living

The high cost of living is due partly to worldwide and partly to local causes; partly to natural and partly to artificial causes. The measures proposed in this platform on various subject, such as the tariff, the trusts and conservation, will of themselves tend to remove the artificial causes.

There will remain other elements, such as the tendency to leave the country for the city, waste, extravagance, bad system of taxation, poor methods of raising crops and bad business methods in marketing crops.

To remedy these conditions requires the fullest information, and based on this information, effective Government supervision and control to remove all the artificial causes. We pledge ourselves to such full and immediate inquiry and to immediate action to deal with every need such inquiry discloses.


Currency

We believe there exists imperative need for prompt legislation for the improvement of our National currency system. We believe the present method of issuing notes through private agencies is harmful and unscientific.

The issue of currency is fundamentally government function and the system should have as basic principles soundness and elasticity. The control should be lodged with the Government and should be protected from domination manipulation by Wall Street or any special interests.

We are opposed to the so-called Aldrich currency bill, because its provisions would place our currency and credit system in private hands, not subject to effective public control.


Conservation

The natural resources of the Nation must be promptly developed and generously used to supply the people's needs, but we cannot safely allow them to be wasted, exploited, monopolized or controlled against the general good. We heartily favor the policy of conservation, and we pledge our party to protect the National forests without hindering their legitimate use for the benefit of all the people.
Agricultural lands in the National forests are, and should remain, open to the genuine settler. Conservation will not retard legitimate development. The honest settler must receive his patent promptly, without needless restrictions or delays.

We believe that the remaining forests, coal and oil lands, water powers and other natural resources still in State or National control (except agricultural lands) are more likely to be wisely conserved and utilized for the general welfare if held in the public hands.

In order that consumers and producers, managers and workmen, now and hereafter, need not pay toll to private monopolies of power and raw material, we demand that such resources shall be retained by the State of Nation and opened to immediate use under laws which will encourage development and make to the people a moderate return for benefits conferred.

In particular we pledge our party to require reasonable compensation to the public for water-power rights hereafter granted by the public.

We pledge legislation to lease the public grazing lands under equitable provisions now pending which will increase the production of food for the people and thoroughly safeguard the rights of the actual homemaker. Natural resources, whose conservation is necessary for the National welfare, should be owned or controlled by the Nation.


Waterways

The rivers of the United States are the natural arteries of this continent. We demand that they shall be opened to traffic as indispensable parts of a great Nation-wide system of transportation in which the Panama Canal will be the central link, thus enabling the whole interior of the United States to share with the Atlantic and Pacific seaboards in the benefit derived from canal.
It is a National obligation to develop our rivers, and especially the Mississippi and its tributaries, without delay, under a comprehensive general plan covering each river system from its source to its mouth, designed to secure its highest usefulness for navigation, irrigation, domestic supply, water power and the prevention of floods.

We pledge our party to the immediate preparation of such a plan, which should be made and carried out in close and friendly co-operation between the Nation, the States and the cities affected.
Under such a plan, the destructive floods of the Mississippi and other streams, which represent vast and needless loss to the Nation, would be controlled by forest conservation and water storage at the headwaters, and by levees below; land sufficient to support millions of people would be reclaimed from the deserts and the swamps, water power enough to transform the industrial standing of whole States would be developed, adequate water terminals would be provided, transportation by river would revive, and the railroads would be compelled to co-operate as freely with the boat lines as with each other.
The equipment, organization and experience acquires in constructing the Panama Canal soon will be available for the Lakes-to-the-Gulf deep waterway and other portions of this great work, and should be utilized by the Nation in co-operation with the various States, at the lowest net cost to the people.


Panama Canal

The Panama Canal, built and paid for by the American people, must be used primarily for their benefit.

We demand that the canal shall be so operated as to break the transportation monopoly mow held and misused by the transcontinental railroads by maintaining sea competition with them; that ships directly or indirectly owned or controlled by American railroad corporations shall not be permitted to use the canal, and that American ships engaged in coastwise trade shall pay no tolls.

The Progressive Party will favor legislation having for its aim the development of friendship and commerce between the United States and Latin-American nations.


Alaska

The coal and other natural resources of Alaska should be opened to development at once. They are owned by the people of the United States, and are safe from monopoly, waste or destruction only while so owned.

We demand that they shall neither be sold nor given away, except under the homestead law, but while held in Government ownership shall be opened to use promptly upon liberal terms requiring immediate development.

Thus the benefit of cheap fuel will accrue to the government of the United Stated and to the people of Alaska and the Pacific Coast; the settlement of extensive agricultural lands will be hastened; the extermination of the salmon will be prevented, and the just and wise development of Alaskan resources will take the place of private extortion or monopoly.

We demand also that extortion or monopoly in transportation shall be prevented by the prompt acquisition, construction or improvement by the Government of such railroads, harbor and other facilities for transportation as the welfare of the people may demand.

We promise the people of the Territory of Alaska the same measure of local self-government that was given to other American territories, and that officials appointed there shall be qualified by previous bona-fide residence in the Territory.


Equal Suffrage

The Progressive Party, believing that no people can justly claim to be a true democracy which denies political rights on account of sex, pledges itself to the task of securing equal suffrage to men and women alike.


Corrupt Practices

We pledge our party to legislation that will compel strict limitation on all campaign contributions and expenditures, and detailed publicity of both before as well as after primaries and elections.


Publicity and Public Service

We pledge our party to legislation compelling the registration of lobbyists; publicity of committee hearings except on foreign affairs, and recording of all votes in committee; and forbidding Federal appointees from holding office in State of National political organizations, or taking part as officers or delegates in political conventions for the nomination of elective State or National officials.


The Courts

The Progressive Party demands such restriction of the power of the courts as shall leave to the people the ultimate authority to determine fundamental questions of social welfare and public policy. To secure this end it pledges itself to provide:

1. That when an act, passed under the police power of the State, is held unconstitutional under the State Constitution, by the courts, the people, after an ample interval for deliberation, shall have opportunity to vote on the question whether they desire the act to become a law, notwithstanding such decision.

2. That every decision of the highest appellate court of a State declaring an act of the Legislature unconstitutional on the ground of its violation of the Federal Constitution shall be subject to the same review by the Supreme Court of the United States as is now accorded to decisions sustaining such legislation.


Administration of Justice

The Progressive Party, in order to secure to the people a better administration of justice and by that means to bring about a more general respect for the law and the courts, pledges itself to work unceasingly for the reform of legal procedure and judicial and methods.

We believe that the issuance of injunctions in cases arising out of labor disputes should be prohibited when such injunctions would not apply when no labor disputes existed.
We also believe that a person cited for contempt in the disputes, except when such contempt was committed in the actual presence of the court or so near thereto as to interfere with the proper administration of justice, should have a right to trial by jury.


Department of Labor

We pledge our party to establish a Department of Labor with a seat in the cabinet, and with wide jurisdiction over matters affecting the conditions of labor and living.


Country Life

The development and prosperity of country life as important to the people who live in the cities as they are to the farmers. Increase of prosperity on the farm will favorably affect the cost of living and promote the interests of all who dwell in the country, and all who depend upon its products for clothing, shelter and food.

We pledge out party to foster the development of agricultural credit and co-operation, the teaching of agriculture in schools, agricultural college extension, the use of mechanical power on the farm, and to re-establish the Country Life Commission, thus directly promoting the welfare of the farmers, and bringing the benefits of better farming, better business and better living within their reach.


Health

We favor the union of all the existing agencies of the Federal Government dealing with the public health into a single National health service without discrimination against or for any one set of therapeutic methods, school of medicine, or school of healing with such additional powers as may be necessary to enable it to perform efficiently such duties in the protection of the public from preventable diseases as may be properly undertaken by the Federal authorities; including the executing of existing laws regarding pure food; quarantine and cognate subjects; the promotion of appropriate action for the improvement of vital statistics and the extension of the registration area of such statistics and co-operation with the health activities of the various States and cities of the Nation.


Patents

We pledge ourselves to the enactment of a patent law which will make it impossible for patents to be suppressed or used against the public welfare in the interests of injurious monopolies.


Inter-State Commerce Commission

We pledge our party to secure to the Inter-State Commerce Commission the power to value the physical property of railroads. In order that the power of the commission to protect the people may not be impaired or destroyed, we demand the abolition of the Commerce Court.


Good Roads

We recognize the vital importance of good roads and we pledge out party to foster their extension in every proper way, and we favor the early construction of National highways. We also favor the extension of the rural free delivery service.


Inheritance and Income Tax

We believe in a graduated inheritance tax as a National means of equalizing the obligations of holder of property to government, and we hereby pledge our party to enact such a Federal law as will tax large inheritances returning to the States an equitable percentage of all amounts collected.

We favor the ratification of the pending amendment to the Constitution giving the Government power to levy an income tax.


Peace and National Defense

Progressive Party deplores the survival in our civilization of the barbaric system of warfare among nations with its enormous waste of resources even in time of peace, and the consequent impoverishment of the life of the toiling masses. We pledge the party to use its best endeavors to substitutes judicial an other peaceful means of settling international differences.

We favor an international agreement for the limitation of naval forces. Pending such an agreement, and as the best means of preserving peace, we pledge ourselves to maintain for the present the policy of building two battleships a year.


Treaty Rights

We pledge our party to protect the rights of American citizenship at home and abroad. No treaty should receive the sanction of our government which discriminates between American citizens because of birthplace, race or religion, or that does not recognize the absolute right of expatriation.


The Immigrant

Through the establishment of industrial standards we propose to secure to the able-bodied immigrant and to his native fellow workers a larger share of American opportunity.

We denounce the fatal policy of indifference and neglect which has left our enormous immigrant population to become the prey of chance and cupidity.

We favor governmental action to encourage the distribution of immigrants away from the congested cities, to rigidly supervise all private agencies dealing with them and to promote their assimilation, education and advancement.


Pensions

We pledge ourselves to a wise and just policy of pensioning American soldiers and sailors and their widows and children they Federal Government. And we approve the policy of the Southern States in granting pensions to the ex-Confederate soldiers and sailors and their widows and children.


Parcels Post

We pledge our party to the immediate creation of a parcels post, with rates proportionate to distance and service.


Civil Service

We condemn the violations of the civil service law under the present administration, including the coercion and assessment of subordinate employees, and the President' s refusal to punish such violation after a finding of guilty by his own commission; his distribution of patronage among subservient Congressmen, while withholding it from those who refuse support of administration measures; his withdrawal of nominations from the Senate until political support for himself was secured, and his open use of the offices to reward those who voted for his renomination.

To eradicate these abuses, we demand not only the enforcement of the civil service act in letter and spirit, but also legislation which will bring under the competitive system postmasters, collectors, marshals and all other non-political officers, as well as the enactment of an equitable retirement law, and we also insist upon continuous service during good behavior and efficiency.


Government Business Organization

We pledge our party to readjustment of the business methods of the National Government and a proper co-ordination of the Federal bureaus, which will increase the economy and efficiency of the Government service, prevent duplications and secret better results to the taxpayers for every dollar expended.


Government Supervision Over Investment

The people of the United States are swindled out of many millions of dollars every year, through worthless investments. The plain people, the wage-earner and the men and women with small savings, have no way of knowing the merit of concerns sending out highly colored prospectuses offering stock for sale, prospectuses that make big returns seem certain and fortunes easily within grasp.

We hold it to be the duty of the Government to protect its people form this kind of piracy. We, therefore, demand wise carefully-thought-out legislation that will give us such Governmental supervision over this matter as will furnish to the people of the United States this much-needed protection, and we pledge ourselves thereto.


Conclusion

On these principles and on the recognized desirability of uniting the Progressive forces of the Nation into an organization which shall unequivocally represent the Progressive spirit and policy we appeal for the support of all American citizens without regard to previous political affiliations.

Friday, March 18, 2011

Why Obama Isn't Fighting the Budget Battle

This is comment on the Huffington Post article by Robert Reich, "Why Obama Isn't Fighting the Budget Battle"

"So many jobs have been lost since Obama was elected and so many people have entered the workforce needing jobs that even if job growth were to match the extraordin­ary pace of the late 1990s, year after year, the unemployme­nt rate wouldn't fall below 6 percent until 2016. That pace of job growth is unlikely, to say the least."

These numbers are humbling, Mr. Reich. Thanks for another dunk in the icy water of reality.

IMHO, we need a Value Added Tax to suppress imports and encourage exports, an end to our lopsided free trade practices, and to roll back those nasty Bush tax cuts that feed the overfed. No more cuts, please. This is death by a thousand cuts, already.

more on the VAT here: http://com­pletelybak­ed.blogspo­t.com/sear­ch/label/V­AT

Peace out.

Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Thursday, January 27, 2011

To Manufacture or Not To Manufacture, Is That The Question?

The Huffington Post writer Phaedra Ellis-Lamkins posted an article titled, "The Economic Choice: Should America Hold onto the Past or Prepare for the Future?" I disagree with what seems to be the main premise: that the US should pursue the manufacture and installation of renewable energy sources to the exclusion of other manufacturing ventures. Here's my comment:

Couldn't we do both? An aggressive transition to renewable energy could create a net gain (after subtractin­g dirty energy jobs lost) of 4.3 million jobs. And add $4.7 to the US economy. But 4.3 million jobs are not enough. I appreciate the sentiment of your story, that companies like Koch Industries want to dismantle the EPA because clean air costs the Koch brothers precious money, but it is quite possible for "old" manufactur­ing to coexist with robust environmen­tal standards. We need to hang on to all of those machinists­, tool and die makers, steam fitters, electricia­ns, and factory riggers -- all the folks who enable an industrial­ized society -- we need to hang on to them and the skills they possess, or we will end up too ignorant to walk back the mistake of giving away our manufactur­ing base. The US should preserve the know-how to manufactur­e all of the things our society requires. OK, let's have competitio­n from abroad, but they have to play by the same safety, wage, pension, health care, and environmen­tal standards US manufactur­ers do. Or, we slap tariffs on importers that violate those standards. No one has the courage to stop savvy MBA's who cry "free trade" every time they shutter another American plant and sell off its assets for pennies on the dollar -- and pocket a princely commission­. If we do not change our trade rules, or at least enforce existing rules, the US will continue it's sad slide into impoverish­ed obscurity.

Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Wednesday, January 19, 2011

Duh, We're Dying On The Vine Here! Quit Coddling China, DC!

Saw this on a Yahoo Finance page this morning:
7:30AM A-Power Energy receives $10.2 mln government subsidy for its acquisition of Evatech (APWR) 6.22 : Co announced that it received a ~$10.2 mln cash subsidy on January 6, 2011 from the Liaoning Provincial Government in support for the acquisition in January 2010 of Evatech. The co's acquisition of Evatech qualified it for certain subsidies that the Liaoning Provincial Government makes available for the acquisition of non-Chinese enterprises that have important technologies and patents. The subsidy is equivalent to approximately 20% of the total cost of the acquisition. The acquisition, completed in January 2010, was valued at $49.9 million and was paid for with cash.
Evatech is a Japanese company, but the rules are the same for American companies. China cares not at all for any of the niceties of free-markets or free-trade. They care about the bottom line. And to insure they stay in the black for a long time to come, they intend to dominate every industrial sector. We already lost the global renewable energy market to China. Could we at least keep the US market? Probably not. We do not seem to have the courage to fight.

photo: NY Times
Another article, this one in the NY Times, aptly titled "To Conquer Wind Power, China Writes the Rules" offer a few -- OK, sorry, a lot of -- choice quotes:

[Chinese wind turbine manufacturers,] aided by low-interest loans and cheap land from the government, as well as preferential contracts from the state-owned power companies that are the main buyers of the equipment. ...have flourished and now control almost half of the $45 billion global market for wind turbines. ...
Chinese companies acquire the latest Western technology by various means and then take advantage of government policies to become the world’s dominant, low-cost suppliers. ...
So as Gamesa [a Spanish turbine company] executives see it, they made the right bet by coming to China. And they insist that they have no regrets about having trained more than 500 Chinese machinery companies as a cost of playing by Beijing’s rules — even if those rules have sometimes flouted international trade law. It is simply the table stakes of playing in the biggest game going.
“If we would not have done it, someone else would have done it,” said Jorge Calvet, Gamesa’s chairman and chief executive. ...
On July 4, 2005, China’s top economic policy agency, the National Development and Reform Commission, declared that wind farms had to buy equipment in which at least 70 percent of the value was domestically manufactured. ...
A top executive at a rival of Gamesa and Vestas, who insisted on anonymity for fear of business retaliation by Beijing, said that multinationals had another reason [besides the notion that being present in China would provide them with negotiating leverage] for going along with China’s dictates: “Everybody was too scared.”...
Within weeks after Beijing’s issuance of Notice 1204, Gamesa sent dozens of Spanish engineers to Tianjin. The engineers did not just oversee the construction of the assembly plant, but fanned out to local Chinese companies and began teaching them how to make a multitude of steel forgings and castings, and a range of complex electronic controls.
One Chinese supplier here became so adept at making a 10-ton steel frame that keeps a wind turbine’s gearbox and generator aligned even under gale-force conditions, and making it so cheaply, that the Spanish company now ships the Chinese frame halfway around the world for turbines that Gamesa assembles at its American plant in Fairless Hills, Pa. ...
It was not until the summer of 2009, when senior Obama administration officials started looking at barriers to American clean energy exports, that the United States pressed China hard about Notice 1204. The Chinese government revoked it two months later.
But by then, the policy was no longer needed. Some Gamesa wind turbines exceeded 95 percent local content. 

“The objectives of the local content requirement were achieved, and probably more achieved than anyone expected,” said Steve Sawyer, the secretary general of the Global Wind Energy Council, a trade group based in Brussels that represents wind energy companies from around the world, including China. ...
Li Junfeng, an official at the National Development and Reform Commission who oversees renewable energy policy, defended the local content policy.
“It was localization support,” Mr. Li said in an interview. China is a developing country, he said, and developing countries need to do what they can to foster industrial development. ...
But the United States investigation of China goes beyond local content, and the W.T.O. has other weapons at its disposal.
[WTO], for example, has authority to order the repayment of subsidies a government gives to its export industries to the detriment of foreign competitors. [A United States] steelworkers’ petition cites various forms of subsidies and support that China has given to its industries in potential violation of international trade rules. That includes low-interest loans from state-owned banks and grants of cheap or free land, as well as other perks not available to foreign companies operating in China. ...
Those policies — all potential W.T.O. violations, according to some experts — are an open secret. [against which the US fails to retaliate] ...
Sinovel [the largest Chinese wind turbine manufacturer] is among the Chinese companies now opening sales offices across the United States in preparation for a big export push next year. They are backed by more than $13 billion in low-interest loans issued this past summer by Chinese government-owned banks; billions more are being raised in initial public offerings led mainly by Morgan Stanley this autumn in New York and Hong Kong. ...
[At the China Wind Power conference:] “You cannot be called a winner if you are the leader for three or five years,” Mr. Li told the Chinese executives. “You can only stand on the top line if you are the leader for 100 or 200 years.”
The Chinese presidents sat quietly and respectfully, chins down. Senior executives from the foreign manufacturers — including Vestas, G.E. and Gamesa — sat alongside them, staring straight ahead in stony silence.

 Note the recurring themes:
  • China invites foreign firms to enter the Chinese market with imports.
  • China demands that products sold in China be manufactured from a large percentage of local content.
  • The foreign company trains Chinese companies to provide that local content (content that the foreign company had previously exported to China).
  • The Chinese companies trained by the foreign companies, once up to speed, compete with the foreign company while receiving illegal Chinese government subsidies.
  • The foreign company's market share in China dwindles to almost nothing while Chinese companies enjoy a boom.
  • China begins to export the newly acquired technology to the home territory of the foreign companies, undercutting the foreign companies in their native territory.
  • The foreign company goes bankrupt, and China owns the market segment.
  • Meanwhile, the US, European, and Japanese governments roll-over and take no WTO action, while Chinese officials argue they have the right to illegally subsidize their industrial sector because they are a developing nation -- all while claiming membership in the WTO (despite repeatedly flouting the rules), and receiving most-favored nation status from the US.
  • Conclusion: US trade negotiators are a bunch of feckless wimps. And we didn't even get to the lax environmental and labor standards in China that keep costs down...

Tuesday, January 18, 2011

Smoot-Hawley Argument Imports Red Herring

Comment on an article in Seeking-Alpha, “Free Trade: The Big Issue for Green Energy in 2011”:

Well said, Mr. Kanellos. Your detractors always seem to mention Smoot-Hawley, as though the economic malaise that followed enactment of that law proves conclusively that wide open free-trade with trading partners who mock every notion of free trade is the best thing that could possibly happen to the US economy.

You need only glance at the current state of the US economy and the decimation of our manufacturing sector -- along with the unions and the middle class it supported -- to see that we are heading into something substantially worse than what followed Smoot-Hawley (the Great Depression). But suggesting that Smoot-Hawley precipitated or even greatly worsened the Great Depression is specious.

Further, the most prosperous periods of US history (for industry, not speculators) occurred during the late 19th century and early to mid 20th century, when the US did impose tariffs on imports. (http://internationalecon.com/Trade/Tch20/T20-3.php)

Here's some fun quotes from Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smoot%E2%80%93Hawley_Tariff_Act
***********************************************************
Hawley & Smoot, 1929
Using panel data estimates of export and import equations for 17 countries, Jakob B. Madsen (2002) estimated the effects of increasing tariff and non-tariff trade barriers on worldwide trade during the period 1929–1932. He concluded that real international trade contracted somewhere around 33% overall. His estimates of the impact of various factors included about 14% because of declining GNP in each country, 8% because of increases in tariff rates, 5% because of deflation-induced tariff increases, and 6% because of the imposition of nontariff barriers. [So, Madsen concludes that of the total 33% international trade reduction, 8% was due to increased tariffs in many countries, not just the U.S. :completelybaked]
...
The new tariff imposed an effective tax rate of 60% on more than 3,200 products and materials imported into the United States," quadrupling previous tariff rates.
...
Imports during 1929 were only 4.2% of the United States' GNP and exports were only 5.0%. Monetarists such as Milton Friedman who emphasize the central role of the money supply in causing the depression, downplay the Smoot-Hawley's effect on the entire U.S. economy.
...
However, (after Smoot-Hawley was repealed) the American Tariff League Study of 1951 which compared the effective tariff levels of 43 countries found that only seven countries had a lower tariff level than the U.S. (5.1%). Eleven countries had effective tariff rates higher than the Smoot-Hawley peak of 19.8% including the United Kingdom (25.6%). The 43-country average was 14.4% ± 0.9% higher than the U.S. level of 1929.
***********************************************************

I do not suggest blanket tariffs of 60% on ALL imports! What I do suggest are tariffs on imported goods that are illegally subsidized, and manufactured in conditions that do not meet minimal environmental and worker safety standards. It's not like we will export much less. We hardly export anything now, anyway (except trash and raw materials, like coal and timber). Tariffs will give us a chance to restore our manufacturing base, and the good, union jobs that go with it.

There's lots of ways to interpret history, but I don't think what has happened to US manufacturing, and the middle class as a result of “free” trade are particularly ambiguous.

So, call me a mercantilist. 

What US Needs to Compete With China And Rebuild Middle Class


An article in the NY Times, “For Chinese Leader’s Visit, U.S. to Take a Bolder Tack” this morning (January 18, 2011) says, “President Hu Jintao of China is coming to town Tuesday, and American officials say President Obama will be taking a far more assertive stance as he greets his biggest global economic rival.”

Right. Based on historical precedents in the ongoing colonization of the US by China, it is clear that nothing positive will come out of this meeting.

If Mr. Obama were serious, he would loudly clamor for this:
  • A Value Added Tax, like every non-colonized industrial state has. A VAT promotes exports, discourages imports, discourages offshoring of corporate profits, and encourages domestic saving.
  • Impose tariffs on Chinese goods that are manufactured under conditions that do not meet our environmental and labor health and safety standards.
  • Impose tariffs on Chinese goods that receive government subsidies that confer a comparative advantage to Chinese manufactured goods (almost all of them).
  • And for good measure, eliminate US subsidies for fossil fuel suppliers, and grant more subsidies for a sustainable future with a real middle class: let’s subsidize our renewable energy industry just like China does, and create millions of well-paid, union jobs for Americans.
read more: free trade

Wednesday, January 12, 2011

Former Senator Fritz Hollings: Wake Up, America

From Senator Hollings on the Huffington Post -- December 20, 2010 (link below):
The United States was founded in a trade war. The Mother Country forbade manufacture in the colony and required exports from the colony to be carried in English bottoms. The Boston Tea Party that triggered the Revolution framed a Constitution calling for Congress to regulate trade -- not freeing trade. In fact, the forefathers agreed to regulate trade four years before they could agree on first amendment rights. The first bill to pass the United States Congress on July 4, 1789, was a protectionist tariff. We didn't pass the income tax until 1913. We financed and built the United States into an industrial power with protectionism for the first hundred years, causing Teddy Roosevelt to exclaim in a letter: "Thank God I'm not a Free Trader."
...
In globalization, the task is for the President and Congress to make it profitable to produce in the United States. Congress can make it profitable and jump-start the economy by eliminating the corporate income tax and replacing it with a 5% value added tax. The corporate tax estimate for 2010 is $156.7 billion in revenues. A 5% VAT reaps $600 billion. Exemptions for the low income for food, health and housing still leaves $350 billion to start paying down the debt. Since the VAT is rebated on export, it promotes exports. Canceling the corporate tax releases $1 trillion in off-shore profits that can be repatriated tax free to invest in creating jobs in the United States.
Cheers! Bring the VAT, Senator. I applaud your efforts. A VAT is a proven means to encourage exports and domestic savings, and discourage imports. Every serious industrialized nation has a VAT. We don't. Let's restore a manufactur­ing base in this country...­if we still have the know how. There's an awful lot of shuttered tool and die shops in my neighborho­od here in the Detroit suburbs. Used to be we had the know how. Now, it's no how. We are a pathetic shadow of our former selves...p­eace out.

Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Sunday, December 19, 2010

Commerce Group Exports Pollution and Disease To El Salvador

photo: Stop the Suits!


Under provisions of the Central American Free Trade Agreement, corporations are permitted to sue host nations for losses incurred due to environmental laws enacted by the host nation.

So, for example, the Wisconsin based Commerce Group mining company has been dumping toxic chemicals from its gold mine operations in the drinking water of Santa Rosa de Lima for the past forty years. In response, El Salvador revoked the company's mining permit in 2006. Now, Commerce Group is suing El Salvador for $100 million dollars in capital costs, and lost profit.

That's really a great trade deal there, and some fine upstanding individuals at the helm of Commerce Group.

If you're even a little bugged by this, call or e-mail your representatives in Washington, and tell them to back us out of CAFTA, which is a bad trade agreement. It undermines US manufacturing, and permits lawsuits like Commerce Group's. El Salvador can't afford the legal fees, much less a $100 million dollar award against them, and El Salvador should not be punished for protecting the health of its citizens. Help put a stop to this travesty.

Read more here: Press Release - Organizations Call on Commerce Group to Drop Lawsuit
and here: New campaign against Commerce Group gold mine, La Union El Salvador
Then act: Maybe an e-mail to President Obama would be a good start.

Here's a quote from the above linked press release:
Chapter 11 of DR-CAFTA, under which Commerce Group has filed its suit, remains one of the most controversial aspects of U.S. trade policy. The equivalent chapter in NAFTA, Chapter 10, has come under fire in recent years, including from President Obama. During his presidential campaign, Obama promised to “strictly limit” foreign investor protections in a renegotiation of NAFTA and to fully exempt any regulation protecting public safety.
Find the Pres, and your Reps at congress.org. And contact them.

What I don't get is how the people at Commerce Group go home each night and face people they love, and who love them, and say they had a good day at work. How can people who work for a company like Commerce Group face anyone?

Here's the soul-less fiends arguing their case:
video platformvideo managementvideo solutionsvideo player

Here's more from the same ICSID hearing: Commerce Group Corp. and San Sebastian Gold Mines, Inc. v. Republic of El Salvador (ICSID Case No. ARB/09/17)

Thursday, November 11, 2010

President Obama Fails To Secure A Trade Deal With S. Korea

Hoorah! The NY Times story, "In Setback, U.S. and South Korea Fail to Agree on Trade" reports that the US and S. Korea failed to sign a "free" trade deal initiated by the Bush administration in 2007.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce supports the S. Korea trade deal. That's reason enough for fair-minded citizens to oppose it. The deal will do nothing to promote broad prosperity in the US. When we are told that it will create economic growth for the US, they mean growth in the finance sector: bankers cutting deals with S. Korean firms who will, in turn, substitute S. Koreans for American manufacturing workers. Once again, the middle-class, unionized work force loses.

What the hell are you thinking Mr. Obama?

You can sign a petition to "Tell the Obama Administration that adopting Bush's Korea trade deal is political suicide" at Public Citizen's site, and read more about free vs. fair trade.

Not Your Mother's Conservatives

In reply to comment on an article, Not Your Mother's Conservatives, in the Huffington Post, that describes the disconnect between voters who elected conservatives, and ostensible conservative policies.

Well said. Except...there is no such thing as free trade in operation these days, which I suspect you don't need to be told. I say abolish the notion and take us back to prosperous mercantilism. And let's have a value added tax, while we're at it. Save the middle class...

BTW, here's a fun read if anyone's interested: http://www­.conservat­ivenannyst­ate.org/cn­s.html

Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Tuesday, November 9, 2010

Sen. Fritz Hollings Asks: What Went Wrong?

Senator Fritz Hollings, at the Huffington Post, writes:
After eight years of Bush borrowing and spending to the tune of $6 trillion dollars, tax cuts and stimulus, wars and off-shoring a third of the nation's manufacture, the voters wanted no more. But Obama gave them even more borrowing and spending to the tune of $3 trillion, tax cuts and stimulus, wars, and off-shoring our industrial backbone -- thus, the shellacking. 
What Went Wrong
Right on, Senator. The decline of the middle class will not be reversed until we restore our manufacturing base via protectionist trade measures. (Or fair trade for everyone, but that'll never happen.) Enforcement of trade laws, and the implementation of a VAT are necessary components of a prosperous industrialized society. But the reversal of decline will never happen as long as our politicians are beholden to bankers, and the free trade chimera.

Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Wednesday, October 20, 2010

What's the matter with America? Not competing, not producing

Thanks, Senator Hollings. Keep 'em coming!

I'll echo a bit:
"The Congress could easily lower taxes and eliminate the incentive to off-shore jobs by substituting a 5% VAT for the corporate income tax. The corporate income tax burden averages 27% on the cost of production, which is immediately lowered to 5%, and since the VAT is rebated on exports, gives President Obama's export initiative a real boost."

I agree, too, the US ought to enforce trade laws. And cancel our existing free trade treaties / shenanigans. Enough Economists have obtained their PhD's reinforcing the free trade delusion. It's time economics PhD candidates found a new, less destructive mule to flog.

Here's more:
http://com­pletelybak­ed.blogspo­t.com/sear­ch/label/f­ree_trade

Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Thursday, October 14, 2010

U.S. Is in a Trade War, Whether It Likes It or Not


Bravo, Sen. Hollings, again!


But will Congress or the President ever act if it's not in their political self-interest? Isn't campaign finance reform our #1 priority if we want to persuade politicians not to act exclusively on behalf of corporations engaged in offshoring?


How do we persuade voters to demand repeal of the corporate tax, and replacement with a 5% VAT? I agree with you, but how do ever get there?


How do we convince politicians that the pro free-trade counsel they receive day after day from clowns like Larry Summers, and so many other economists sheltered in ivory towers is a recipe for continued economic tragedy in the U.S.?


I'm sorry to say it, but I think real action on trade is a long, long way off. First, we need to prevent corporations from anonymously influencing political discourse. Then, we might find ourselves with a slightly better informed electorate. Second, we need campaign finance reform so that the politicians we elect based on their promises aren't thoroughly bought and turned against us by corporations.


Keep writing, Senator! We're listening.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Thursday, September 9, 2010

The Chamber of Commerce: Without Shame or Sense

Well said. What amazes me is that the Chamber doesn't even bother to be objective. If they did, they wouldn't shill for companies pitching antiquated, planet wrecking technologies. They'd shill for renewable energy, public transportation, unions (and not free trade), and nationalized health care. All things that would expand our economy by expanding prosperity to more of us, rather than fewer, as entrenched, capitalized conservatives would have it.

Let's start living in the 21st century. Let's build stuff here, pay people decently to do it, and give them the health care they need to live. We can't afford not to.

Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Sunday, August 15, 2010

A Conversation With VP Biden on Trade

Senator Hollings, you nailed all the high notes with your commentary on the Huffington Post. Thanks for your insight and persistence. I wish voters could catch your drift and quit buying into this business about free-markets and free trade.

Since May, I've been working way too much (a blessing) to read your posts, but I'm catching up now.

I have to quote a few key sections of your post, so they appear on my blog...they need emphasis.

"After adopting a seal, the first bill to pass the Congress in its history on July 4, 1789, was a protectionist tariff. And we financed and built these United States into an industrial power with "protectionism." We didn't pass the income tax until 1913. In 1900 the colony was richer than the Mother Country by $25 billion and had a GDP double the GDP of Germany and Russia combined, causing Teddy Roosevelt to exclaim: 'Thank God I'm not a Free Trader.'"
"The Obama Administration says the solution for jobs is educate, educate. We in South Carolina need a lot more education, but we have enough to create jobs -- producing the "ultimate driving machine" for BMW and the most advanced aircraft, the "Dreamliner," for Boeing. It's Washington that needs education."

And yes, bring on the VAT to promote domestic industry and exports.

Now, they're blaming President Obama for being anti-business and for not paying down deficits. He should eliminate the corporate tax and replace it with a 2% VAT. This will make him pro-business; bring in more revenues to pay down deficits, and promote exports. The vote in the Senate against McCain's VAT was an increase in taxes. The corporate tax beginning at 39% averages at 27%. A 2% VAT cuts corporate taxes for production 25%. And please call it for a vote. Now! Don't worry about a filibuster. Any voting against a 2% VAT to replace the corporate tax will be voting against the major reason to off-shore jobs; be voting against jobs; against cutting taxes; against promoting exports, against paying down the deficit, and against business. 

All truth, as far as I can tell. Why can't truth ever get traction in the morass of our political and media environment?

Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Saturday, August 14, 2010

While GM Brags About Its Comeback, Auto Workers Go Begging

Articles in the New York Times (Detroit Goes From Gloom to Economic Bright Spot), and the Economist (GM prepares its getaway), praise GM's recovery, but the truth is, GM chose to retreat, rather than to fight to recover lost ground in terms of market share, salaries, or wages. In other words, they favored shareholders and executives over hourly workers, the people who actually earn the profits GM is so eager to brag about.

The auto industry shed 330,000 US jobs since 2008. And how many did they shed back in the eighties and nineties? And how many supplier jobs were lost that aren’t counted here?. I live in the suburbs of Detroit, and I can drive for miles past shuttered tool and die shops, and manufacturing plants. You can't swing a dead cat without hitting a guy who had a well paid, skilled union job, and now he’s retired at fifty, or swinging a hammer for a living with no benefits. And these are the guys who actually know how to build things. Their fathers and grandfathers built our manufacturing base, and without their skills we’ll never re-build it. And if we don’t rebuild it, we’ll never have a real rebound in our economy that yields broad prosperity. We’ll just continue to get what we’ve been getting, a narrowing band of wealth at the top, and vast legions of un- or under-employed, under-skilled poor.

And now the big three brag they trimmed wages (starting wage in an American UAW plant is around $14). Adjusted for inflation, I bet that's less than the $5 a day Henry Ford offered workers when he reasoned that employees won't be consumers if you don't pay them a decent, livable wage.

The new CEO, GM board member, Dan Akerson, has worked recently for the Carlyle Group, the bottom feeding private equity firm that has spent the last twenty years burying US manufacturing firms in debt, and then selling off the firm's assets (asset stripping) for pennies on the dollar, to yield healthy profits for Carlyle's well-heeled, capitalized investors, and a decimated manufacturing base for the rest of us. What sort of future for GM's domestic employment does that portend?

So what does the average, hourly-wage, taxpayer get for their bailout of GM? More competition for fewer jobs at a lower wage. And who gains besides shareholders and executives? A skeleton crew of engineering and management staff who glance over their shoulders every day, with the grim expectation that their job has been outsourced to someone in India earning 1/100 as much.

Friday, August 13, 2010

No, NAFTA Was Not President Clinton's Idea

(A reply to a comment on an article, "Rebuild America, Don't Sack It," by Robert L. Borosage, at the Huffington Post.)

Yes, Clinton signed NAFTA into law, but it was largely an initiative by Republican politicians, with George H.W. Bush out in front signing the initial draft. Republican politicians then positioned NAFTA as do or die for the American economy, and anyone who opposes it is an un-American, big government, anti-jobs, socialist.


I'll quote a bit of Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NAFTA):
"In the U.S., Bush, who had worked to 'fast track' the signing prior to the end of his term, ran out of time and had to pass the required ratification and signing into law to incoming president Bill Clinton. Prior to sending it to the House of Representatives, Clinton introduced clauses to protect American workers and allay the concerns of many House members. It also required U.S. partners to adhere to environmental practices and regulations similar to its own."

And this was after the private equity, leveraged buyout, asset stripping frenzy of the tax and tariff-cutting Reagan years during which much of the U.S. industrial base was sold off for pennies on the dollar, and its jobs sent overseas by capitalized investors, who tend to vote Republican.


(And no, not everyone who votes Republican should be demonized, but it mostly Republican politicians who legislate in favor of a minority: capitalized investors; at the expense of the majority: hourly workers)
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Friday, February 5, 2010

Trade War vs. Culture War

A comment on Senator Fritz Hollings article in the Huffington Post, "Can we sustain?":

Bravo, Senator Hollings. I wish the President would impose that 10% tariff as Nixon did.

But with a feckless and cowardly Democratic Congress failing every time to get his back, I think there's little chance the President will succeed with any intelligent measures to combat the relentless offshoring of our prosperity and economic future. Too many greed-motivated bankers, and their Republican toadies, stand to benefit from it. Ever since President Reagan ran up record deficits and began the sell off of manufacturing jobs, we've been on this path toward impoverishment of the middle class, and concentration of wealth.

And still Republicans manage to align voters in their favor with division and distraction, while picking the pockets of wage earners and handing the ill-gotten gains over to the capitalized rich (as tax cuts). Middle class and poor Republican voters are being done to, but good, and Democrats still can't figure out how to tell that story. Trade wars just can't compete with culture wars in the minds of an intellectually lazy and ill-informed electorate.