Under the Bush administration you could just feel the shifting of wealth into the pockets of the wealthy. It started from the very beginning with Bush’s tax cut in 2001. This tax measure lopped off taxes primarily on the very wealthy and the result was an exponential increase in the amount of wealth at the very top of the economic spectrum. The middle class was being squeezed. Despite the wealth being funneled upward, businesses were reducing pensions and raises. Workers’ wages were not running parallel with the increase in inflation. The costs of health care were skyrocketing. The recent economic downturn was simply the heaviest strike from a succession of blows exacerbated by a failed right wing economic policy. In so many ways the 2000s were the faux Gilded Age.

The original Gilded Age occurred in the last half of the 19th century and was fueled by the Second Industrial Revolution. The Gilded Age saw America surge past the great powers of Europe in industrial might. But there were many victims. Child labor, women workers, and new immigrants from Europe’s underbelly and East Asia offered a cheap workforce. Labor laws favored the employers. Sixty hour weeks were not uncommon in factories that held all the brutalities the late 1800s had to offer. This was the era of the Robber Barons of industry. Huge icons of American business ran monopolies in steel, railroads, coal, oil and finance. Wealth, then too, was top heavy. The rich lived in opulence and the poor masses lived in tenements in America’s urban centers or eked out a living on farms. The Gilded Age was known for its corruption, both governmental and private.

The ills of the Gilded Age brought about a period of progressivism. The most famous of the political progressives was the Republican Teddy Roosevelt. Known as the “trust buster” Roosevelt inaugurated a period of fairness to the industrial sector. TR was also famous for his stance on conservation at a time when America’s forests were disappearing at an alarming rate and animals such as the bison were being hunted to near extinction. These progressives that were changing their world during the infancy of the 20th century were considered the pioneers of modern liberalism.

The current age is seeing a similar shift to the left. Government is again taking on the ills of the private sector. Only this time the weight of the nation’s (some would say the world’s) economy is in the balance. You would think by listening to the chorus being trumpeted from the right that what ails America is socialism. What ails America is the overextension of the capitalist powers that be. From delving out loans to those who could not afford them to issuing credit cards to risky users (with every incentive by the companies to snare the consumers in debt). The trading in commodities which created artificial bubbles and subsequent bursts became the name of the game; the last and greatest bubble and burst being the housing market.

  For eight years the nation’s infrastructure was sacrificed by President Bush due to his attention to necessary (Afghanistan) and fallacious (Iraq) wars. The government, as a whole, allowed the private capitalist system and the public sector to go unchecked. (see AIG, Citi Group, Bernard Madoff, no bid contracts, Freddy Mac and Fanny Mae, etc…) What is a president to do under such an environment? Barack Obama is a progressive. The right wing may not like his attempt to usher in a period of government intervention but this is what he ran on and this is what he is doing. Letting the banking system collapse or turning one’s back on the car companies would seem wise in the short run but disastrous to the economy in the long run. (Let’s not forget President Bush and the Republicans passed a bill that offered a sizable tax deduction to companies that bought the biggest SUVs and trucks on the market. Not exactly a strategy that helped the long term business plan of the auto makers.) President Obama’s budget contained measures intended to right the wrongs of eight years of neglect, from providing incentives for energy alternatives to giving the middle class a significant tax deduction for their kids’ college education. There is no doubt the cost of this is painful but we are simply paying for the neglect and errors of laissez faire economics. The lesson here is if you don’t want full scale progressivism, sprinkle in a little oversight on your free market capitalism.

Conservatives sure lack originality. All the great artists and designers are all liberals and it really showed yesterday. Let us first address the milieu of the protest name: Tea Party. That is no conservative sounding event. Without the Boston in front of it, it sounds, well, kind of dainty. Don’t you think? And having the tea bag as the symbol not only opens you up to a wide swath of criticism, from both a locker room humor perspective and from a visual perspective. The real radical patriots of the 18th century were dressed up like savage Indians and tossed entire crates of bundled tea into Boston Harbor. But we must remember, these original protesters were radical liberals not goofy Glenn Beck and Sean Hannity wannabes with a poor attempt at shouting slogans in unison. Let’s face it, conservatives just don’t know how to protest.

And what were they protesting anyway? Their acronym T.E.A. stands for Taxed Enough Already which seems a little out of place since they all got a tax break under Obama; unless of course they make over $250K. And most of the crowd didn’t look like they fit into that category. So they are blaming Obama. The guy that is trying desperately to right the ship that those before him have forced under water. It seems to me the protesters are just bitter from having lost the election. If they wanted to protest, why don’t they go down to Wall Street and go after the real perpetrators of this disaster. Let’s do this right. Get the left behind you. Let’s go dismantle the corporate offices of AIG, CITI Group, Bear-Sterns, and JPMorgan, et. al. They are the modern day equivalent to what the British Crown did to America. Let’s wheel in barrel fulls of tea and wash out their headquarters. Liberals know how to protest. In the tens of thousands we could surround the companies and demand the government find those responsible for bringing the world economy to the brink of collapse and try them in court.  But instead you have a bunch of  people who realize their party is a waste of space, no longer represents them and the only thing worse is the new guy in the White House who has them staring reality in the face that change has come to America. Well, over sixty percent of America is with the President. I think I will go have a cup of tea sans the bag.

There are an estimated 12 million illegal immigrants in the US today. More than half of them, roughly 57 percent come from Mexico and another 24 percent make their way here illegally from other Latin American countries. Many of these immigrants fill jobs that others are unwilling to do, or at least that was the case before the current economic crisis. We have no way of knowing how bad the economic situation will get, but if it continues to spiral our of control citizens will surely begin to take the jobs now done by illegals. Most of those who make their way across the deserts of the Southwest become hard working, law abiding citizens with strong family values. Their work ethic and dedication make them yet the latest immigrants to carry on the great tradition that has made the United States so vibrant. But now is the time to put an end to the flood of undocumented people crossing our borders. With unemployment rising above seven percent along  a trajectory that certainly will rise higher, there is no longer any room for illegal immigration.

Where once closing the border seemed necessary to protect us from terrorist attack, the more important reason now is an economic one. If Americans are having trouble locating jobs what will the climate be like for those without proper papers? Now is the time to secure our borders. Perhaps this goes counterintuitive with this lists number ten (to improve relations with Latin America) but steps can be taken to soften the blow of a border crackdown. Create a cutoff date, say 10 years at which an illegal immigrant can be allowed to purchase a green card as long as they are sponsored by an employer after which all employers will be heavily fined for employing illegal immigrants. All illegals who have been in the US less than 10 years will be required to return to their country of origin. Tightening the border would not be an impossible task, it just would take resolve; a resolve the government hasn’t mustered to this point despite the cry by conservatives. As the economic crisis deepens, the number of illegal immigrants who will require government assistance will surely climb and this is money we cannot afford. Taking preemptive steps before the coming storm only seems wise. This is why securing our borders comes in at number five on Obama’s to-do list.

Why can’t we come to the realization that Americans have lost the ability to make good automobiles? The answer to the current automobile crisis is to chop the head off of the American manufacturers and replace them with Japanese. If this sounds radical, well, it is but if these companies were run by our friends in the East we would see a revolution in American automobiles. Let’s face it, Honda and Toyota produce superior vehicles. Year after year they appear at the top of the ratings. Let the fat cat CEOs fly their Lier Jets into the sunset and lets get this sector of manufacturing moving again.

_____________________________________________

So the number two Al-Qaida leader Zayman Al-Zawahiri called our newly elected President a “house Negro”, but he really called him a “house slave” (in Arabic: Abd al-bait).  It was an insult which he gathered from Malcolm X, however it is obvious the bearded Egyptian has no concept of the Black experience in America. Calling Obama an Uncle Tom when 96% of African Americans voted for him literally is an insult to Blacks throughout America. Furthermore how can the owner of the plantation be called a “house Negro”? I guess when the “house Negro” drops a bunker buster on his cave, old Zayman will see that change has come to Pakistan also!! Yes we can!

_______________________________________________

Tonight I was checking my daily news sources and came across the headline on the Drudge Report. Is Obama Marxist? was the big header. Vice President Joe Biden was interviewed by one of those local shock factor news stations and the anchor was grilling the Senator with a series of harshly worded questions. It really has to be seen to be believed and I’m sure the right wingers were digging the nature of the questions but if they watch closely they will see how a true professional addresses each and every question. The real issue of this interview is how would Sarah Palin fare under such a grilling? My guess is she would melt like Alaska snow in the Miami sunshine if a radical left wing host would go at her with the same vigor as this anchor goes after Biden. I have to say, Joe Biden shows great restraint in dealing with such ridiculous questions.

It is hard to understand when Obama wishes to cut taxes on the middle class, the right sees socialism or even Marxism in the proposal. Bush cut taxes on the wealthiest Americans in 2000 and no one called him a Marxist for spreading the wealth upward. Now that Obama wishes to dial back those tax cuts and apply them to those of us who need it most all of a sudden it is socialism. Anyone who has studied modern history knows one of the greatest causes of the Great Depression was the uneven distribution of wealth. The tax policies introduced by Ronald Reagan with his “voodoo economics” as George HW Bush called them (or trickle down economics as they are better known) and revitalized under the current administration has created an uber-wealthy in this nation and has gutted the middle class that was so vibrant in the decades following the Second World War. As the nation’s treasure now exits the country in the form of foreign wars and a significant amount finds its way to the nation’s ailing banks, the middle class will once again be the target of America’s recession as layoffs and unemployment grip this nation in the months and years ahead.

For John McCain to base his tax policy on the same schematic that George Bush uses is not only unfair but economic suicide. It makes as little sense as using a plumber named Sam who makes $40,000 a year as your campaign figurehead and saying he will most benefit from McCain’s plan and be most punished by Obama’s. In microcosm this is the fallacy that the Republicans have created to get average Americans to vote for their party. The irony is McCain is calling him Joe and addressing the issue like the man makes $250,000. Wouldn’t it be more appropriate to use Joe the hedge fund manager as the ideal front for your campaign? Many people in the middle class whom I know would gladly do their patriotic duty (as Joe Biden says) and give up even their Obama tax cut if it meant eliminating the debt and winning the war faster so our boys can come home but unfortunately the Bush administration has so severely weakened this nation economically that the revenue generated from such a drastic step would not even balance the budget never mind chip away at the 10 plus trillion dollar deficit. The reality is we are already a socialist state. We stepped over that line when the government began buying interest in US banks. The true wave of what is occurring has yet to take hold in this country and I would just as soon have someone with the intelligence and temperament of Barack Obama as that of John McCain. After all when Bush leaves it will most likely be with a wink from Karl Marx and not from Sarah Palin.

60 Minutes tonight aired a piece about the market meltdown and its causes. Described as a “shadow market” the details of the crisis were revealed in detail and it told how millionaires were made on the backs of ill advised loans to scores of Americans who could not afford them and these loans were in turn bundled together and sold as commodities along with a deregulated form of insurance. When the borrowers reneged on their loans the house of cards came tumbling down. Much of this is well known but the intricacies highlighted in the program were enlightening. But what was not addressed in the episode was who we were actually bailing out. All those Wall Street and banking con artists who made a fortune on this corrupt business will not forfeit one dime of the wealth they have generated from the housing swindle. In essence we are taking over those bad loans from the wealthy who made a fortune on them.

Conservatives rail on the social welfare programs that reward the laziness of the poor with food stamps and the like but no hard working American would ever want to switch places with those who are destitute, no matter how much government assistance they received under the current system. Compare that to those who have reaped millions in the real estate scam that is ensuing. Is there one among you who would turn down 10 million dollars if you knew the government was going to come in behind you and bail out the mess? This is worse than communism. In essence, the bailout is the socializing of debt and the privatizing of profit.  Most Americans are seeing the disaster of fiscal policy playing out right before their eyes; $700 billion for the war in Iraq and a similar number for the bailout. Everyone is asking, for what end?

Joe Biden was criticized recently for stating that paying taxes was patriotic. He was referring to the wealthy who will be required, under Obama’s plan, to return to their tax rate they paid during Clinton’s administration. With the $700 billion bailout bill ($850 if you include all the pork) there was a tone to its passage that sounded a lot like Biden’s. It is the right thing to do for America we were told and all those wealthy people (and a lot of not so wealthy people who are heavily vested) heard the heavenly music upon its passage. But most Americans are not comfortable with the bill. Why didn’t the Democrats use their majority in Congress to simply pass the bill on their own? The reality is their constituents didn’t want them to pass it. Those who face tight races in their districts or states, whether Republican or Democrat, would have this vote as the last visual reminder of their voting record in Congress and thus they voted no to save their political hide. To some who voted yes it may be the last vote they ever make. We are told, despite the price tag, there is no guarantee the bill will stem the tide of the damage that has been done but what I am sure of is those who made a fortune off of the backs of us Americans are neither moral nor patriotic. But the sad thing is the bill may curb the golden parachutes of future CEOs of these institutions but for most, these criminals have already landed safely thanks to you and me.

Around the turn of the 20th century there began a policy to ensure safe food in this nation. Progressives began exposing the ills of the nation’s food supply which had been singled out in the great American socialist author and later politician Upton Sinclair’s novel The Jungle. Sinclair’s president at the time was Republican Teddy Roosevelt. Roosevelt not only signed the Pure Food and Drug Law into effect as a result of the outcry resulting from the Jungle but proceeded to assault the fat cats of industry who had garnered tight control of the nation’s wealth. TR quickly gained the nickname “Trust Buster” for his efforts. Teddy also realized industry was quickly destroying the beauty this great nation possessed through greed and despite resistance from Congress moved to set aside land for national parks. He understood that business and industry left unchecked quickly resulted in the destruction of those things Americans valued and were irreparably replaced by greed.

The modern Conservative movement that began with Ronald Reagan must be called out for the sham that it is. The tax and spend label, so easily put on liberal politicians has nothing on these guys. During Ronald Reagan’s eight years the national debt went from $700 billion to $3 trillion. One of the interesting contributors of the escalating debt during the 1980s was the Savings and Loan crisis which was caused by a key legacy of Reaganomics, deregulation. The parallels between the S&L crisis and the current debacle is amazingly similar. Without going into the minutiae of the S&L crisis the main cause of the massive bank failure was an elimination of regulations and the bodies that enforced their oversight. The price tag of the banks’ bailout to the taxpayers in the 1980s totaled $124.6 billion (which would be about $217 billion in today’s money).

With the S&L crisis behind them and no cops on the Wall Street beat the fiscal pirates began an unethical romp through the market knowing the government would ultimately cushion any major blow, just like they did in the 80s. When the dot-com bubble burst and investors shifted their resources further into real-estate, they brought their unsupervised ethics with them. Thus Wall Street was literally blended with Main Street as nefarious practices conducted by unscrupulous individuals in the banking industry blended the investments with mortgage loans. There was no problem as long as the housing bubble remained a bubble.

In all fairness it was Bill Clinton who signed into law an act that allowed commercial banks to branch out into other financial arenas but that bill was signed into law in 1999 and its effects were unknown as Bush, Jr. took office in 2001. What is known is the Bush Administration and his rubber stamp congress allowed Wall Street to go unchecked for seven years even though the signs of an impending crisis were swirling in the air like plastic grocery sacks. Bush, it seems, was focused on one money pit (the Iraq War) to concern himself with a probable second. Like his other two term Republican predecessor, Bush’s debt spiraled out of control. Under his watch the debt has risen from about $6 trillion to over $9 trillion today even though he was handed a surplus when he took office.

So here we are. With the legacy of Reaganomics staring us squarely in the face we proceed to bail out the fat cats. Due to the  desire of those on the right to practice unbridled laissez faire economics, socialism has come to Wall Street. Those guys who were gobbling up $30 million severance packages under the chutzpah that they deserved it because only a few people in America can do what they do turned out to be right, only what they did will cost the American tax payers between $500 billion and one trillion dollars. I wonder how far that amount of money could have helped make the entitlement programs of social security and medicare and Medicaid more solvent?

What we needed was a whole lot more Sinclair Lewises and TRs and a lot less Reagamomics. What we need are a lot more progressives and a lot fewer conservatives. This is unless in fact the foundations of our economy are sound.

Democrat, Republican, Conservative, Liberal, it doesn’t matter. On a day when oil prices rocketed to $140 a barrel based purely on speculation of future oil prices it is time to let your Congressmen know how you feel about this issue. You can guarantee I will be sending out some letters tonight.

From Wall Street Journal’s Marketwatch

Last update: 4:24 p.m. EDT June 23, 2008

Gas could fall to $2 if Congress acts, analysts say

Limiting speculation would push prices to fundamental level, lawmakers told

By Rex Nutting & Michael Kitchen, MarketWatch

WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) — The price of retail gasoline could fall by half, to around $2 a gallon, within 30 days of passage of a law to limit speculation in energy-futures markets, four energy analysts told Congress on Monday.

Testifying to the House Energy and Commerce Committee, Michael Masters of Masters Capital Management said that the price of oil would quickly drop closer to its marginal cost of around $65 to $75 a barrel, about half the current $135.

Fadel Gheit of Oppenheimer & Co., Edward Krapels of Energy Security Analysis and Roger Diwan of PFC Energy Consultants agreed with Masters’ assessment at a hearing on proposed legislation to limit speculation in futures markets.

Read More

Last week we saw McCain, Clinton and Obama all speak before AIPAC (American Israeli Public Affairs Committee). As a Presidential candidate, no matter your true feelings about Israel, it is imperative to have the Jewish lobby on your side. It is very similar to the fact you must proclaim to be Christian to be President of the United States (or hold significant office anywhere in the US). So there they were, all three, telling the group before them their intent to protect Israel. Even Obama promised to maintain Jerusalem in Israeli hands, an issue the Palestinians (and all Muslims) have a tough time swallowing. Jerusalem is, after all, the third most holy place in Islam. I have always contended that our marriage with Israel is bad foreign policy. By no means do I believe we should abandon the Jewish nation, but our overt support of the state over the Palestinians makes us less safe. Other than regional intelligence provided by MOSAD (the Israeli version of the CIA) Israel doesn’t offer much in the way of a strategic advantage for our support.

The danger of our commitment can easily be seen with what happened on Friday. Friday was a nexus of events and history that renders it significant. First off Friday was June 6th and for anyone who is worth their salt knows the day has historical relevance. June 6th was D-Day, the date the Allies stormed the beaches of Normandy in 1944 which began the liberation of Western Europe. D-Day is perhaps a pertinent phrase for what happened in terms of the economy yesterday. I’ll let Steely Dan provide some appropriate background music.

Yesterday could be labeled a nouveau Black Friday. Gas prices shot up $10 per barrel on Friday in the wake of a $6 increase the day before as the price topped $138 at the end of trading Friday. This sent the stock market tumbling 400 points. What caused these events?

It was largely caused by a statement that came out of Israel.

Israeli Transport Minister Shaul Mofaz said, "If Iran continues with its program for developing nuclear weapons, we will attack it. The sanctions are ineffective." This statement along with the weakening dollar set Friday in motion.

This leaves us with a couple questions. First, what would be the results of an Israeli attack on Iran? And second, why are we, the most powerful nation on the planet, in a position where a second rate Israeli minister can affect the US economy in such a way?

These days, a true patriot drives a small car. Current gas prices are now making this not just an option but a necessity.

"I don’t need this much space," McHugh said of his SUV. "It just seems ridiculous."

——Did it take a spike in gas prices to realize this?

Frustrated Owners Try to Unload Their Guzzlers

—Boston Globe—

After paying $75 to fill his black Dodge Ram pickup truck for the third time in a week, Douglas Chrystall couldn’t take it anymore.

Feeling pinched at the pump, and guilty as well, Chrystall, a 39-year-old father from Wellesley, is putting ads online to sell the truck, and the family’s other gas-guzzler, a Jeep Grand Cherokee. He knows it will be tough to unload them because he is one of a growing number of consumers downsizing to smaller, more fuel-efficient cars.

Americans are turning away from the boxy, four-wheel-drive vehicles that have for years dominated the nation’s highways. Sport utility vehicles and pickup trucks – symbols of Americans’ obsession with horsepower, size, and status – are falling out of favor as consumers rich and poor encounter sticker shock at the pump, paying upward of $80 to fill gas tanks.

Read the Rest