Showing posts with label jobs. Show all posts
Showing posts with label jobs. Show all posts

Friday, August 19, 2011

How the GOP Destroyed Detroit


by Len Hart, The Existentialist Cowboy

Muslims did not destroy Detroit! Nor was it destroyed by black people though bigots post pictures of the 'ruins' amid claims that Detroit is the 'victim' of a multi-racial society!

Who will bigots will blame next week? Hispanics? The Irish? Italians? I am Native American; will I be blamed though Detroit is probably the only large city in American that I have not set foot in?

Multi-racialism has nothing to do with an economic decline that is the result of Bush economic policies. It was the very worst administration to have ever exercised political power in the U.S. --Reagan, Bush and Bush Jr! Blaming 'Muslims' for this outcome is uninformed, perhaps bigoted!

The destruction of Detroit required help from phony and/or incompetent economists inside the GOP. The destruction of Detroit began with the deals Bush Sr cut with China as the U.S. tried to find an 'honorable' way out of Viet Nam. I have spoken with the Sr Bush about this personally. My questions were pointed: what deals were cut? What price was paid to get our asses out of Viet Nam with honor? GHWB was either incoherent or taciturn but never forthcoming. He preferred to tell stories about how he may have been 'duped' into eating 'dog lip' (presumably with sweet and sour sauce) at a formal dinner in the Forbidden City.

In footage and stills, much of Detroit looks like the aftermath of World War III. It was not Muslims nor black people who destroyed Detroit! Nor are Muslims to blame for gutting American industry, destroying or exporting jobs or the screwing over of the 'working man'. The U.S. --under GOP regimes --became a vassal state of China. [See: CIA's World Fact Book, Current Account Balance]
The gutting of American industry, the destruction of jobs, the export of jobs, the screwing over of the 'working man' --that's all the work of the GOP, a party that is utterly dependent upon bigots who make up a significant GOP constituency. [note: since Bush Jr left the Oval Office, the U.S. trade posture vis a vis China has improved somewhat!]

It was an economic 'scorched earth policy'. Reagan (the GOP in general) wanted to destroy unions and they did it! They did it by destroying jobs, and in some cases, the entire industry! Works every time. Those who lived through it, most certainly recall a "depression" lasting some two years.

Though I am not more enamored of Islam, I am quite sure that Muslims are still demonized by an uninformed segment of the U.S. population. For them, I have a clue: Muslims have nothing to do with the decline of Detroit. Nor do immigrants of any type or origin. Only bigots believe that to be the case.

Muslims are in America!! So what? We have been uninvited guests of Muslims ever since the U. S., running out of its own oil, discovered oil in abundance throughout the Middle East. Subsequently, the U.S. would, upon any pretext, con and/or steal it. If theft did not work, the U.S. would resort to duping the leadership of a foreign [Muslim] country to get it. Prior to the Senior Bush's decision to begin Persian Gulf War I, U.S. Ambassador April Glaspie had met with Saddam Hussein. According to the transcript of the meeting, she told Hussein that the U.S. had no position on 'Arab-Arab' disputes.
The official State Department discussion between Saddam and April Catherine Glaspie from July 25, 1990: Ambassador Glaspie:
“I have direct instructions from President Bush to improve our relations with Iraq. We have considerable sympathy for your quest for higher oil prices, the immediate cause of your confrontation with Kuwait. (pause) As you know, I have lived here for years and admire your extraordinary efforts to rebuild your country (after the Iran-Iraq war). We know you need funds. We understand that, and our opinion is that you should have the opportunity to rebuild your country. (pause) We can see that you have deployed massive numbers of troops in the south. Normally that would be none of our business, but when this happens in the context of your other threats against Kuwait, then it would be reasonable for us to be concerned. For this reason, I have received an instruction to ask you, in the spirit of friendship – not confrontation – regarding your intentions. Why are your troops massed so very close to Kuwait’s borders?”
President Saddam Hussein:“As you know, for years now I have made every effort to reach a settlement on our dispute with Kuwait. There is to be a meeting in two days; I am prepared to give negotiations only one more brief chance. (pause) When we (the Iraqis) meet (with the Kuwaitis) and we see there is hope, then nothing will happen. But if we are unable to find a solution, then it will be natural that Iraq will not accept death.”
US Ambassador Glaspie: “What solution would be acceptable?”
President Saddam Hussein: “If we could keep the whole of the Shatt al Arab – our strategic goal in our war with Iran – we will make concessions (to the Kuwaitis). But if we are forced to choose between keeping half of the Shatt and the whole of Iraq (which, in Iraq’s view, includes Kuwait), then we will give up all of the Shatt to defend our claims on Kuwait to keep the whole of Iraq in the shape we wish it to be. (pause) What is the United States’ opinion on this?”
US Ambassador Glaspie:
“We have no opinion on your Arab-Arab conflicts, such as your dispute with Kuwait. Secretary (of State James) Baker has directed me to emphasize the instruction, first given to Iraq in the 1960s, that the Kuwait issue is not associated with America."
--Transcript of the Glaspie-Saddam meeting that started the Gulf War
Hussein was given a green light to lower the price of oil, though this outcome was most certainly at odds with Bush's real policy --higher prices for oil! In short --we have no one to blame for this outcome but ourselves.

Earlier, Ronald Reagan and Bush Sr may have committed 'high treason' with respect to Iran/Contra. Both men lied about it! Both were architects of a scheme that armed enemies of the United States. In simpler times it would be called 'high treason'. It would be 'high treasons' today if a Democrat had done it! The GOP is apparently above the law!

I refer you to the final report of Lawrence Walsh, Prosecutor for 'Iran-Contra' matters. Walsh left no doubt! He believed that Reagan, Bush et al had committed treason! There was a time shortly after FDR had shepherded the nation out of the Great Depression that the U.S. manufactured products, employed people to make things and export the results to other nations. In other words, the U.S. created jobs.

We no longer create jobs. I can prove that that is the case with numbers from the CIA itself. As mentioned, China is at the top of the list with the World's largest positive Current Account Balance. That's because China makes things, employs its population and exports its product to the world --primarily U.S. via Wal-Mart. Go to Wal-Mart! Find just one thing that is made in the U.S. Since Reagan, the U.S. has made very little of anything and less has been exported. The CIA's list proves my point. When did this trend begin? It began shortly after George H.W. Bush went to China, set up Nixon's famous but largely ceremonial trip to the Forbidden City. The deals that were cut turned out to have been the price we paid to get our sorry asses out of Viet Nam --a dank swamp we had no business being in in the first place. One pays for one's sins.

But when ignorant asses raise strawmen, red herrings, propaganda to justify their hate and bigotry, I part company. That's what's really wrong with the U.S. No one has been safe since it was discovered that big bucks could be made by killing Indians [Native Americans, my ancestors], driving Mexicans (who were there first) out of Texas, stealing land, waging wars in general. It was Randolph Hearst who said just prior to the U.S. attack on Cuba --"...you give me the pictures and I'll give you the war!"

Like Rome before us --we are busted and are not creating jobs. A trip to Wal-Mart proves that. Who is to blame? Not immigrants --though I cannot fathom why anyone in his/her right mind would want to come here. I cannot imagine why anyone would want to swim or wade across the Rio Grande.

The alleged 'Governor' of Texas --Rick Perry is lying about the 'Texas Miracle'! There was NO Texas miracle. There was no net increase of jobs over the time period he cites. There was, rather, a huge net decline in job creation! That is to be expected. It is the GOP modus operandi! It is best described as a Texas Two Step: 1) subvert education 2) by doing so, ensure a growing prison population which --alone benefits from the corporate ownership of the prison system!

What will Houston look like when the oil companies decide that, as the U.S. has all but run out of oil, what's the point of maintaining spiffy, shiny 80 story office buildings in downtown Houston? Last time, I checked there was lots of high rise office space in Dubai.


Monday, August 15, 2011

Tell Rick Perry that there was NO 'Texas Miracle'

by Len Hart, The Existentialist Cowboy

As a fourth generation Texan, a descendant of Texas pioneers, I deny a favorite myth among the GOP inclined. There was no 'Texas Miracle' --a term cooked up in a GOP focus group, fly-by-night political consultants (perhaps from Chicago). Fact is --not only has education dropped off the radar, Texas has run out of oil that can be pumped profitably; real jobs are as scarce as hen's teeth.

Frankly, I am surprised to learn that --as economist Paul Krugman points out -- in June 2011 the Texas unemployment rate was ONLY 8.2 percent. I had expected that it would have been higher. About that, economist Paul Krugman asks: "...what does population growth have to do with job growth?" Krugman is right to ask! The point is made as only Krugman can make it! Indeed, if the 'Texas Miracle' had been real, Texas should not be boasting of unemployment rates as high as 8.2 percent.

But I am disappointed that Krugman has not mentioned the BUSH-PERRY scam about which I have screamed bloody murder! I believe that unemployment figures for TX would be much, much higher if those millions left behind by Bush-Perry neglect/subversion of public education were showing up in the stats. But --they are not! They are not showing up because those "left behind" are finding the only long-term employment that is available to them in the corporate-owned prisons, what I call the Bush-Perry Gulag!

This is not the result of GOP incompetence. It is, rather, the result of deliberate GOP crookery at the party-leadership level. This is the result of the GOP's deliberate neglect of education. It is one of several reasons the GOP is not a poltiical party; it is a crime syndicate, a kooky cult!

The only pockets lined by GOP largesse (pork) are the pockets of an increasingly tiny ruling elite now just 1 percent of the total US population. Official stats prove my assertions; those numbers can be found at the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the U.S. Census Bureau and the U.S. Commerce Dept-B.E.A. Be prepared to see proof that the GOP, Mitt Romney, Rick Perry et al are lying, distorting the effects of every GOP tax cut in U.S. history.

In each case, the cuts --enriching only the upper, upper classes and the corporate owners of prisons --are followed by recessions, depressions. ERGO: GOP tax cuts do not and have never stimulated the economy, have never created a single job! In fact, job growth has either declined or gone negative (net job loss) after every GOP tax cut. In fact, every recession/depression since 1900 has been the result of either GOP incompetence or crookedness or both.

It is for this reason primarily that BUSH-PERRY neglected education. A state that will not educate new generations deserves to pay for the privilege of neglect with much higher crime rates. But even that is not the point ---the point is that the GOP and the CORPORATE OWNED PRISONS benefit from the whole package: 1) LOWER HIGH SCHOOL GRADUATIONS 2) HIGHER CRIME RATES 3) HIGHER PROFITS FOR CORPORATE-OWNED PRISONS. It's the GOP formula.

Given what we know about the GOP record in Texas, we should not be surprised to learn that a failed governor from a 'gulag' state, a failed governor with more hair than brains, an inarticulate governor challenged to spell 'ed-joo-ka-shun' should wish to occupy the White House, a 'perch' from which he might prey upon the future of an entire nation and the futures of all the people who live in it.
So when Mr. Perry presents himself as the candidate who knows how to create jobs, don’t believe him. His prescriptions for job creation would work about as well in practice as his prayer-based attempt to end Texas’s crippling drought.

--Paul Krugman, The Texas Unmiracle
There was NO 'Texas Miracle'!

Unless you consider the rise of the prison system to be a 'miracle'! I don't! Nor am I impressed with pimples on the much larger curve. I grew up with the boom and bust 'oil industry' and consider it an utterly failed strategy akin to playing Blackjack or Roulette in the expection of, one day, hitting a jackpot! I cannot count the number of 'busts' that I witnessed growing up. And from each 'bust' only the very, very rich benefited. In any case, when it is deemed more profitable to attack and invade another Middle Eastern country, temporary 'bubbles' will always burst. But crime --as a result of the GOP/right wing sabotage of education --will ensure that the corporate run prisons are full. What a racket!!

GOP policy is anti-education! It was the evil axis of Bush-Perry that made of Texas the GULAG STATE!



Saturday, December 19, 2009

One Million Strong Against the GOP

by Len Hart, The Existentialist Cowboy

The GOP has been infiltrated by a kooky kult of korporatists! It is not the party of Eisenhower-like fiscal conservatives or of Progressives like Teddy Roosevelt anymore. It has become the party of the MIC and the big lobbyists on K-street. It has become the official party of the big corporations, the ruling one percent of the population which alone has benfefited from GOP fiscal policy.

Ronald Reagan doubled the national debt and tripled the deficit. While revenues declined as a result, Reagan compounded the problem by ramming through Congresss a TAX CUT from which ONLY the upper quintile benefited. It was a recipe for historic deficits, in fact, national bankruptcy. Concurrently, a trend, in which the rich get richer and everyone else poorer, did not abate until Clinton's second term. Under Bush the Shrub, the trend resumed with a vengence.

Today --as a result --just one percent of the nation owns more than about 95 percent of the rest of us combined. The inevitable result of transferring this wealth to the wealthy is that the net gain to the wealthy is, in fact, exported out of the economy and into offshore bank accounts.

That being the case --why were we surprised that the inevitable collapse occurred under Bush and carried over into the Obama regime. In effect, monies were removed from the economy --a contraction. Economists call this recession.

I have enough material on Reagan's irresponsible profligacy to fill several volumes, more data than I have time to 'twitterize'. Sometimes, you just have to read the long, dull story.

Bottom line: the GOP is just not credible when it claims to be fiscally conservative. The GOP is just not credible when it tries to trick you into believing that there is no difference between the GOP and Obama. The GOP has no legs when it claims to be fiscally conservative. Listening to goppers cry about Democratic 'deficits' is like hearing a million or more crocodiles singing the Hebrew Slave Chorus.

Because the big corporations dominate K-street, Americans inevitably get a ONE SIDED view, the GOP spin. The actual facts available from the Labor Dept, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Bureau of Economic Analysis and EVEN the conservative Brookings Institution paint a different picture.

It's hard to set the record straight on a TWITTERIZED net. Even so some key facts utterly disprove the GOP/Reagan myth. To wit:

Job Growth Per Year Under Most Recent Presidents

Johnson 3.8%
Carter 3.1
Clinton 2.4
Kennedy 2.3
Nixon 2.3
Reagan 2.1
Bush 0.6

--Bureau of Labor Statistics,
Current Employment Statistics Survey

The Reagan ERA was a period in which corporate PACs literally compelled Congress to pass pro-business legislation. According to supply-side theory, these actions should have nudged the economy in the right direction, not plunge it into the worst recession in 40 years. But that is PRECISELY WHAT HAPPENED.

The resulting 'depression' of some two years was the longest, deepest since Hoover's GREAT DEPRESSION triggered by the crash of '29, an event not seen again until Shrub's second term.

Given the economic 'crimes' committed by Reagan, Sr, and Shrub, the lame ass charges against Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi pale.

How the GOP --which ran up the highest debts and deficits in US history --can lay that rap on Democrats which had control of Congress just eight of almost 20 years is just plain ludicrous.

ANY Dem Prez beats ANY GOP Prez since LBJ. Now --I would say that JOB GROWTH --essential for a healthy economy --is reason enough to fire the GOP until it repents and gets down on its knees to beg forgiveness of the American People, until it pleads, on its knees, for political salvation. Say Hallelujah!!!

Addendum:
This article would not have been possible had not Steve Kangas braved the wrath of a crooked GOP! Given that background, I have a message for Richard Mellon Scaife: FUCK YOU!

The Who: Won't Get Fooled Again!

Additional Resource: One Million Strong Against the Republican Party
Why I moderate comments

  • SPAM: 'comments' that link to junk, 'get rich' schemes, scams, and nonsense! These are the worst offenders.
  • Ad hominem attacks: 'name calling' and 'labeling'. That includes the ad hominem: 'truther' or variations!

Also see:
Published Articles on Buzzflash.net

Subscribe

GoogleYahoo!AOLBloglines

Add to Google

Add to Google

Add Cowboy Videos to Google

Add to Google

Add to Technorati Favorites

Download DivX

Spread the word

Friday, November 06, 2009

How the Iraq War Destroyed the US Economy

by Len Hart, The Existentialist Cowboy

Wars reduce the GDP, destroy jobs, reduce productivity, and increase the trade deficit! If wars are 'bad' for the economy, then how are they sold so easily? The quick response: they are sold with focus group tested bullshit!

There's a 'living' in killing, we are told! There is a more opulent living in the commission of mass murder which requires the construction of tanks, smart bombs, and fighter jets --the MIC, in other words. But that's all just snake oil for idiots and Republicans!

That wars are good for the economy is just a bald-faced lie cooked up by the defense lobby for whom killing IS a living but only for the shrinking one percent who benefit: the Military/Industrial complex, truly MURDER INC. Fact is war is most often disastrous for the economy.
In fact, most models show that military spending diverts resources from productive uses, such as consumption and investment, and ultimately slows economic growth and reduces employment. In this way, military spending is comparable in most models to any other form of government spending, such as spending on public goods or improving the environment.

This paper shows the projections of the impact of an increase in annual military spending equal to 1 percent of GDP (approximately the actual increase in spending compared with the pre-war budget) of the Global Insight macroeconomic model (see Appendix). The Global Insight model was selected for this analysis because it is a commonly used and widely respected model.1 Other models will show somewhat different projections, but it is unlikely that the direction of the long-term impact on any of the key variables will be different. In fact, because of the structure of the Global Insights model, it likely understates the negative impact of military spending relative to other models.

--The Economic Impact of the Iraq War and Higher Military Spending>

At the link (a PDF file) look for Table 1 which shows the key differences in projections, at five year intervals, between the baseline model and the simulation assuming higher levels of defense spending.
The decline in GDP projected for the twentieth year in the high military spending scenario is $42.1 billion. This corresponds to a projected loss of 668,100 jobs. Inflation is projected to be 0.7 percentage points higher in the high military spending scenario, with the interest rate on the 10-year Treasury note 1.1 percentage points higher than in the baseline scenario.

The higher interest rate is associated with a reduction in industrial production of 1.8 percent compared with the baseline scenario. Car and truck sales are projected to be 731,400 in the high military spending scenario compared to the baseline scenario. Residential investment is projected to be 3.5 percent lower, which corresponds to 38,500 fewer housing starts and a reduction of 286,500 in the number of existing homes sold.

--The Economic Impact of the Iraq War and Higher Military Spending>
Given those facts, should anyone be surprised that the US is at the very bottom of the CIA's World Fact Book with the world's largest NEGATIVE currnet account balance. China, which props up the declining dollar, is not surprisingly on top with the world's largest POSITIVE Current Account Balance.

One should not be surprised when millions of jobs are lost as GDP declines. Yet, as a result of right wing/militaristic/jingoistic propaganda and FOX, many people still believe that war and military spending creates jobs. That may be true in the short-term. But, in the long run, increases in military spending cause job loss.
the policy would likely lead to a rise in interest rates and inflation, as higher levels of demand begin to push against the economy’s capacity. The rise in interest rates will lead to less investment, and less demand for cars and houses.
Higher interest rates will also push up the value of the dollar. This will increase demand for imports, since foreign-made goods will be cheaper for consumers in the United States, and decrease demand for exports, since U.S.-made goods will be more expensive for people living in other countries. The result will be that the United States will run a larger current account deficit. Over time, this will lead to a larger foreign debt.

--The Economic Impact of the Iraq War and Higher Military Spending>
As I have maintained for years --military spending is a waste. Millions spent building a tank, for example, is money sucked down a black hole. The rank returns nothing on the investment and will, inevitably, be blown up! We could just throw our dollars upon a heap, set fire to them, and cut out the middle man!

Military spending slows economic growth, increases the budget deficit, increases the trade deficit as can be seen, in fact, in US's NEGATIVE Current Account Balance, formerly called the 'balance of trade deficit'.
Why I moderate comments

  • SPAM: 'comments' that link to junk, 'get rich' schemes, scams, and nonsense! These are the worst offenders.
  • Ad hominem attacks: 'name calling' and 'labeling'. That includes the ad hominem: 'truther' or variations!


Also see:
Published Articles on Buzzflash.net

Subscribe



GoogleYahoo!AOLBloglines

Add to Google

Add to Google

Add Cowboy Videos to Google

Add to Google

Add to Technorati Favorites

Download DivX

Spread the word

Thursday, January 29, 2009

On the brink of a great depression, the GOP is still lying its ass off

There are two kinds of Republicans:
  • the rank and file stupid who don't know any better;
  • the evil bastards up top who know better and don't give a crap!
Senate goppers oppose what may be a last chance to save the US from the Bush/Reagan legacy of idiocy. GOP opposition to Obama's stimulus bill has lambasted a 'debt' that they say will be inherited by future generations.

Pinch me!

I did not hear those arguments when Ronald Reagan tripled the national debt and doubled the Federal Bureaucracy. I did not hear those arguments when Reagan's tax cut was followed quickly by a depression of some two years --the worst, longest and deepest since Herbert Hoover's Great Depression of 1929.

I did not hear a peep of protest from gops when, more recently, George W. Bush cut taxes for his increasingly tiny elite of support even as he ran up the deficits like a binge drinker, leaving even Ronald Reagan in the shade. Oh...I get it! It's bone headed if Democrats do it! But it is 'sound fiscal policy' if the GOP does it.

Bollocks!

Here's the difference. GOP deficits result from tax cuts from which only the rich benefit. Tax cuts do not work for the GOP because GOP tax cuts for the rich do not 'trickle down'. 'Trickle down' tax cuts did not work for Reagan. They did not work for Bush. The record is with Obama. Every Democratic President since WWII (or even much longer) has outperformed EVERY GOP President on every issue having to do with the economy. Here's why: the GOP believes that welfare for the rich will 'trickle down' but, in fact, it never does and never has. GOP tax cuts wind up offshore, in numbered accounts, tax havens and/or tax dodges. GOP tax cuts are --in practice --payoffs if not outright bribes for support of GOP candidates. The GOP is worse than the mob. The mob never had at its disposal nukes, ICBMs or cruise missiles.

The GOP fails --as a party --because GOP policies never put money into the hands of those who would actually spend it and, thus, create jobs. That wealth trickles up --never, ever down --is a demonstrable fact. A working person's tax cut will find its way back into the economy with purchases. Purchases added up equals 'demand'. It is 'demand' that drives the economy --not the idiotic 'stimuli' given to robber barons and offshore investors.

The GOP would rape a nation that is now poised to slide off into an economic black hole, in fact, a world wide depression that has the potential of making Hoover's GOP debacle look like a walk in the park. What Americans call the 'Great Depression' is often called the 'Great Contraction' because economies, in these times, literally 'contracts'. The US economy is currently 'contracting' at a rate of six percent per year, alarming and catastrophic if it is not restrained and soon.

Congressional goppers, however, propose to accelerate the decline with another impotent 'stimulus' benefiting only those who created the crisis in the first place --supply-siders, and slick talking get-rich-quick artists. It was this 'right wing' that must bear most of the blame for the Great Depression of 1929. Wealth did not trickle down then. It will not trickle down now. When there is no demand there is no economic growth. There is no demand when those who might have purchased are broke, unemployed or, worse, desperate. But facts mean nothing to goppers and there is little to be gained and much time to be lost by 'negotiating' with them.
What President Obama will soon discover (and I suspect is already well aware) is that negotiating with Republicans in Congress is a pointless endeavor unless you absolutely need their votes. This is particularly true of Republicans in the House of Representatives who, as I've written several times before, are a whole different breed of crazy. The last two election cycles have purged the House GOP of virtually all members who represent anything but the safest, reddest districts in the country. Those who remain are either unpersuadable ideologues or shameless partisans who can be counted on to act in bad faith at all times.

They may string you along for a while, but at the end of the day, these folks are not going to support any Democratic initiatives in significant numbers. I suspect that Obama (and Rahm Emmanuel especially) know this and are just trying to go through the motions now so they can later claim that they made a good faith effort at bipartisanship. Many are suggesting that is yet another example of Lucy pulling the football away from Charlie Brown at the last second. That may be true, but I suspect that the Obama team is knowingly playing that role. After all, everyone likes Charlie Brown and no one likes Lucy. And in this case, Charlie has his own holder as backup.

--Anonymous Liberal, Negotiating With Republicans
Democrats must be prepared to go to mat. They must challenge the GOP to put up or shut up! They must be challenged to dare oppose a stimulus that will never benefit working folk or create jobs. The GOP must be made to pay the price of lies and idiocy! Go ahead! Watch the economy collapse. Prove Karl Marx to have been right! Die of your own idiocy and good riddance to your sorry ass! I would say that were I not concerned about the fate of millions, eventually billions who will be ruined by GOP idiocy and systemic criminality.

Deja Vu All Over Again

The causes of the 'Great Depression' are many and in almost every instance analogies may be made to the current crisis. For example, the costs and debts incurred by World War I most certainly had catastrophic effects not unlike the huge debt the US has run up fighting an aggressive war in Iraq.

A world wide conspiracy of bankers was blamed for the Great Depression, often called the 'Great Contraction'. Certainly, the big banks and especially the FED in the US, control the currencies. The FED, for example, simply creates money, a 'loan' to the US sufficient to cover whatever level of spending that the government is inclined to indulge. No new currency is run off the press. No new stores of gold are mined or discovered.

At present, the US economy is contracting at an alarming rate of some six percent (projected) per year. This occurs at a time when the distribution of wealth is worse than that of the Great Depression when, in 1929, the richest 1 percent owned 40 percent of the nation's wealth. Today, as a result of GOP 'trickle down' economics, the richest 1 percent own more than 90 percent of the rest of us combined.

The worst is yet to come. Foreclosures are rising for a number reasons. Because of widespread job losses, millions cannot make their mortgage payments. It is heard to see how an utter collapse can be avoided unless some real purchasing power can be put into the hands of those who will spend it.

The lack of spending is a root cause of depressions. By robbing the spending classes, i.e, the middle and lower incomes of spending power, the GOP elites create recessions and, stupidly, cut off their own noses. The era leading up to the crash is remembered for the celebration and practice of unbridled 'laissez faire' or worse --what is now called 'supply side economics'. Laissez-faire is simplistically defined as 'economic freedom' but in practice it amounts to 'license' for the upper classes. 'Freedom' and 'license' must never be confused. 'License' is another set of rules for the rich. But if you are poor, 'freedom's just another word for nothing left to lose'! Apologies to Bobby Magee.

Supply-side economics is not a 'hands off' policy at all. It is, in fact, an active, deliberate distribution of wealth upward to an increasingly tiny elite. It is pseudo-economics touted to justify big tax breaks for the upper ten percent of the nation's income recipients and wealth-holders. Reagan's own budget director, David Stockman, called 'supply-side economics', a trojan horse.

If the US should slide off into another great depression, it will be because consumers of all classes and primarily the middle and lower classes do not have money to spend. Another great depression will result for two basic reasons:
  • the investor class has put their tax cut windfalls offshore causing net declines --not increases --in jobs;
  • The productive (working) class is taxed disproportionately effectively robbing them of the purchasing power which alone drives the economy.
It is easy to understand, then, why economies contract.
  • GOP supply-siders have a stake in promoting the simplistic 'thoery' that the great 'Stock Market Crash of 1929' was the primary cause of the Great Depression. As class warfare propaganda, this myth is matched only by 'supply side (trickle down) economics. Indeed, many believe that the crash of Black Tuesday, October 29, 1929 is one and the same with the Great Depression. In fact, there were many cases for the Great Depression and the contraction of the money supply among those who were most likely to spend is at the very top, perhaps the root cause. Nevertheless, the crash is significant. Stockholders lost more than $40 billion dollars within two months of the crash. The market had regained some of its losses by the end of 1930, but it was not enough to prevent the nation from entering what is called the Great Depression.
  • Bank Failures

  • More significant, is the fact that millions lost their 'savings'. People save to spend and it is spending that might have kept a viable economy afloat. Over 9,000 banks failed at a time when bank deposits were uninsured. Surviving banks stopped making new loans, reducing total amount of money in circulation. It was, indeed, a 'great contraction'! As a result of the crash, fears, and bad news, millions of all classes just stopped buyng, leading to sharp reductions in production and thus jobs. As unemployment increased, people fell behind in their installment payments; homes and items were repossessed. Inventories increased, sat idle, and could not be sold. Meanwhile, the unemployment rate rose above 25%. The jobless are, of course, unable at pre-depression levels if at all.

  • American Economic Policy with Europe
  • As businesses failed, it was hoped that the Hawley-Smoot Tariff of 1930 would protect American companies. The act charged a high tax for imports causing a reduction in US-foreign trade.

  • Drought Conditions.
  • While not a direct cause of the Great Depression, the drought that occurred in the Mississippi Valley in 1930 was of such proportions that many could not even pay their taxes or other debts and had to sell their farms for no profit to themselves. This was the topic of John Steinbeck's The Grapes of Wrath
GOP policies are clearly responsible for the income and wealth disparities that are at the root of every GOP recession/depression since 1900. Ronald Reagan's GOP tax cut of 1982 is the easiest target. Several points should be made about this improvident move. One --if 'tax cuts', the GOP panacea for every evil, were in any way effective against depression, then why did a depression of two years follow the Reagan tax cut?

The Reagan depression --at the time --was the deepest and longest since the Great Depression. I propose that GOP tax cuts neither prevent nor cure 'depressions' because, contrary to what you are told, GOP tax cuts effectively contract the economy. As have seen most recently, George W. Bush's 'bailouts' did not increase the supply of spendable money. The elites and the banking establishment simply squirreled the wind fall away in offshore accounts, tax havens, and other dodges about which they are expert. They did not increase the amount of money in circulation. They did not stimulate the economy with either purchases or new, 'job creating' investments. They did not increase purchases and thus the economy. They did not inspire the purchase of new homes. They did not increase the level of consumer spending. Rather --the economy, as a whole, is contracting at a rate of six percent per year.

The current crisis spotlights many weakness in a 'GOP economy' created by the GOP domination of US policies since 1980, most prominently, the 'balance of trade deficit'. Also called the 'current account', it measures the value of US imports vis a vis its exports. This ratio reflects the financial health of a nation. We've been 'sick' and vulnerable for quite a while.

According to the CIA, the US 'current account' balance puts the US at the very bottom of a list of nations with a NEGATIVE balance of $-731,200,000,000. That's NEGATIVE 731 BILLION dollars. China tops the list in the black with $ 372 billion. The US position mirrors that of China but more so! The steady decline of the value of the 'dollar' is evidence that China et al have been 'dumping' dollars perhaps over the last eight years. [See: Rank Order - Current Account Balance.]

This is not the first time the US has turned up at the bottom of the CIAs list of 'net debtor nations'. The difference now is the exponential rate at which the national debt is increasing. The current crisis is evidence that --because of GOP policies specifically --the US has crossed the event horizon into an economic black hole from which there is now no pulling back.
Yet this "indebtedness" actually results from a massive vote of confidence in the American economy by foreign investors. Strangely, when a business is actively pursued by willingly investors, it is taken as a sign of strength. When foreigners put their money in American industry, however, there is concern that the U.S. has become a "debtor nation."

--Heritage Foundation
Typical Heritage newspeak of the sort I never encountered in University level 'economics'!! Being a net 'debtor nation' is not a good thing when bad things follow from it, like, say the utter collapse of the dollar. Since Heritage issued its predictable apologia on behalf of Ronald Reagan, the nation has enjoyed but one fiscally responsible administration sandwiched between two incompetent Bushes. Things have changed precipitously.
If the U.S. net investment position continues to turn more negative, prospects increase that the positive U.S. net income receipts will turn negative as U.S. income payments overwhelm U.S. income receipts. In such a case, the U.S. economy will experience a net economic drain as income that could be used to finance new U.S. businesses and investments will be sent abroad to satisfy foreign creditors. Such a drain likely will be small at first relative to the overall size of the CRS-14 10 Weisman, Steven R., A Fear of Foreign Investments. The New York Times, August 21, 2007. economy, but it could grow rapidly if the economy continues to import large amounts of foreign capital.

--CRS Report for Congress, The United States as a Net Debtor Nation: Overview of the International Investment Position [PDF]
GOP strategy is simple and simple-minded: blame everyone but themselves and especially Democrats. The GOP blames Democrats not because the Democratic party is wrong but because they are right and have been demonstrably more successful since WWII. The GOP is critical of the Democratic party because the Democratic party succeeds and because it succeeds, the GOP looks like the incompetent failures and liars that they are!

For example, the GOP demonized Jimmy Carter in a planned effort to deflect attention from the new Augustus --Ronald Reagan. Reagan-heads still claim that Carter was responsible for "horrible inflation" and 20% interest rates. So what? Interest rates would be expected to decline under Ronald Reagan's depression of some two years as interest rates, in fact, decline in every depression. Carter, by contrast, presided over one of the most productive economies since WWII. Two years under Unca Ronnie changed all that and the US has not been the same since.

During Reagan's depression, the GDP declined at a rate of 2.2 percent, the biggest such decline since the Great Depression. Their was a brief respite under Bill Clinto but with the ascension of Geoerge 'Would-be-Caesar' Bush, the pernicious trend would resume as a matter of GOP policy. A failed policy! A policy that has --in fact --NEVER succeeded! Millions lost jobs and homes and with another 'great depression' just around the corner, the GOP will, typically, try to blame the new administration for the failures of George W. Bush --the very worst 'President' in US history.

In any case, it was the Federal Reserve Board that slashed interest rates and expanded the money supply, thus reducing prices. Ronald Reagan had nothing whatsoever to do with it! It was the Fed -- not Reagan, not GOP give-aways to the MIC --who was responsible for the following but short-lived recovery.

Under Carter, people were at work and productive, buying homes and buying cars. They were not leaving their homes under the threat of imminent foreclosure as was the case with Herr Ronald Reagan and, more recently, Herr George W. Bush.

It was no accident that as Reagan waged war on the trade unions, exported jobs and technology, the nation was plunged into his depression of two years --the very worst since Hoover!

Before Reagan, America had a steel industry. After Reagan, it didn't. Before Reagan, America had a viable automotive industry. After Reagan, the US bought its cars from Japan. Before Reagan, small retailers thrived. After Reagan, Wal-Mart began began to put small stores out business. Main street America was at one time very picturesque inspiring artists from Andrew Wyeth to Norman Rockwell. Now --main street is boarded up, abandoned, and photographed for its historical interest.

Let's take a look at the history before it gets re-written:
  • Any Democratic President has presided over greater economic growth and job creation than any Republican President since World War II.
  • When Bush Jr took office, job creation was worst under a Republican, Bush Sr, at 0.6% per year and best under a Democrat, Johnson, at 3.8% per year.
  • Economic growth under President Carter was far greater than under Reagan or Bush Sr. In fact, economic growth in general was greater under Johnson, Kennedy, Carter, and Clinton than under Reagan or Bush. Democrats always outperform a failed party: the GOP!
  • The job creation rate under Clinton was 2.4% significantly higher than Ronald Reagan's 2.1% per year.
  • The "top performing Presidents" by this standard, in order from best down, were Johnson, Carter, Clinton, and Kennedy. The "worst" (in descending order) were Nixon, Reagan, Bush.
  • Half of jobs created under Reagan were in the public sector --some 2 million jobs added to the Federal Bureaucracy. Hadn't he promised to reduce that bureaucracy?
  • Reagan, though promising to reduce government and spending, tripled the national debt and left huge deficits to his successor. Bush Jr's record will be even worse.
  • By contrast, most of the jobs created on Clinton's watch were in the private sector.
  • Put another way: any Democratic President beats any Republican President since World War II.
Everything posted above is based upon official, government stats from the Census Bureau, Bureau of Labor Statistics, CBO, and BEA among others. They are 'official' and irrefutable unless someone wants to make the outlandish case that the Federal Bureaucracy, the numerous agencies which keep these stats, is somehow biased. That argument is absurd in light of the fact that of those 20 years from the election of Ronald Reagan to the stolen election of 2000, Democrats had the Presidency in only eight of them.

Now --let us consign to the dust bin of history the stupid idea that the GOP 'tax cuts' will end recessions, prevent recessions, or cure recessions. They are, rather, the root cause of absurd, obscene banana republic inequalities and disparities. They are the cause --not the cure for recession/depression. Every dollar that is funneled into offshore tax havens is money taken out of circulation, taken out of the economy. The economy is already contracting. A GOP 'stimulus' for the upper class will only increase the contraction and hasten the end.

Ironically, it was the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 that created the Federal Reserve system, in which the 'Fed' would become a lender of 'last resort' thus providing the economy with a one-two punch: stability and liquidity. It doesn't seem to have worked out that way. If the 'Fed' had been functioning as it was intended, then why, in 1930, were large banks permitted to collapse throughout the South and the Midwest. Why were the 'runs on banks' permitted to spread? Why was the 'Fed' out to lunch?
By December, the bank of the United States in New York closed due [to the ] inability to meet depositors' demand for cash. The bank was sound, as evidenced by its ability to pay off depositors 92.5 cents on the dollar when it was liquidated during the worst of the depression. If the Federal Reserve had done its job, the bank would have remained open. The bank's size and official-sounding name frightened depositors all over the country and led to a general run on the banks. By the time it was over, hundreds of banks had failed reducing the money supply by the amount of their deposits.

--The Great Contraction
Hoover’s fiscal policy accelerated the decline. In December 1929, as a means of demonstrating the administration’s faith in the economy, Hoover had reduced all 1929 income tax rates by 1 percent because of the continuing budget surpluses. By 1930 the surplus had turned into a deficit that grew rapidly as the economy contracted. By the end of 1931 Hoover had decided to recommend a large tax increase in an attempt to balance the budget; Congress approved the tax increase in 1932. Personal exemptions were reduced sharply to increase the number of taxpayers, and rates were sharply increased. The lowest marginal rate rose from 1.125 percent to 4.0 percent, and the top marginal rate rose from 25 percent on taxable income in excess of $100,000 to 63 percent on taxable income in excess of $1 million as the rates were made much more progressive. We now understand that such a huge tax increase does not promote recovery during a contraction. By reducing households’ disposable income, it led to a reduction in household spending and a further contraction in economic activity.

--Great Depression, The Concise Dictionary of Economics
  • Herbert Hoover becomes President. Hoover is a staunch individualist
    but not as committed to laissez-faire ideology as Coolidge.
  • More than half of all Americans are living below a minimum subsistence
    level.
  • Annual per-capita income is $750; for farm people, it is only $273.
  • Backlog of business inventories grows three times larger than the year before. Public consumption markedly down.
  • Freight carloads and manufacturing fall.
  • Automobile sales decline by a third in the nine months before the crash.
  • Construction down $2 billion since 1926.
  • Recession begins in August, two months before the stock market crash. During this two month period, production will decline at an annual rate of 20 percent, wholesale prices at 7.5 percent, and personal income at 5 percent.
  • Stock market crash begins October 24. Investors call October 29 "Black Tuesday." Losses for the month will total $16 billion, an astronomical sum in those days.
  • Congress passes Agricultural Marketing Act to support farmers until they can get back on their feet.
  • --Timeline of the Great Depression
Clearly --the FED, the financial community, the big banks, the so-called 'elites' seem to have gotten off the hook. In fact, it is the combination of greed and incompetence that has brought the world to the brink of another great depression.
Let's imagine, for a moment, how different the public debate would be today if it had been unions that had caused the current economic turmoil.

In other words, try to imagine a scenario in which union leaders – not financial managers – were the ones whose reckless behaviour had driven a number of Wall Street firms into bankruptcy and in the process triggered a worldwide recession.

Needless to say, it's heard to imagine a labour leader being appointed to oversee a bailout of unions the way former Goldman Sachs CEO Henry Paulson was put in charge of supervising the $700 billion bailout of his former Wall Street colleagues.

My point is simply to note how odd it is that the financial community has emerged so unscathed, despite its central role in the collapse that has broughtt havoc to the world economy.

Of course, not all members of the financial communityy were involved in Wall Street's wildly irresponsible practices of bundling mortgages into securities and trading credit default swaps. But the financial communityy as a whole, on both sides of the border, certainly pushed heard to put in place an agenda of small government, in which financial markets largely regulated themselves and citizens (particularly high-income investors) would be spared the burden of paying much tax.

--Financial elite have no shame
It has been said that the 'Great Depression' changed the way we thought about economics, the nature of money, banking itself.

Really?

Admittedly, the Keynesian view dominated until the rise of Reaganomics. Richard Nixon famously said: "We all all Keynesians now" though Keynesian economics have not helped any Republican to the degree to which it helped Democratic regimes which are historically stronger than any GOP regime since the Great Depression. Even Nixon ranks among the 'worst performing Presidents' in terms GDP and job growth.

Now we are poised upon the brink of another Great Depression not because we followed Keynes but because we abandoned him for 'Reaganomics'. Stupidly, the GOP has learned nothing.

Those who will not learn are either evil or stupid.

The GOP is both.

It may be bad form and impolite but the fact is --I told you so. If the GOP thinks me impolite, fuck 'em! The following excerpt is from The Existentialist Cowboy, January 18, 2008:
We were warned. In 2005, Treasury Secretary John Snow acknowledged economic growth was limited to a small percentage of Americans. Bush's base? Some things never change. Only a tiny elite experienced what they alone have dubbed the Reagan prosperity. A "prosperity" so limited is not prosperity; it is merely a redistribution of dwindling wealth. If poorer folk lost ground, to whom did wealth trickle? The GOP knows that what it says about economics is wrong. They will say whatever they think they can get you to believe.

A statutory debt limit of $8.184 trillion was reached in mid-February of 2005. The total collapse of the US economy was averted but only because no other country wished to be sucked into the US black hole. The dollar actually retained some value amid fears of a worldwide economic catastrophe.

China had been propping up the dollar so that US consumers could continue buying cheap Chinese crap, primarily via WalMart and other monstrous legacies of Globalization. At the time, US debt was some $8.162 trillion dollars and has only gotten bigger. US credit abroad is strained to breaking or broke. The US credit crisis trickles down to bond markets world wide. No country is too small to remain unaffected. Investors in New Zealand, for example, have this month complained that their interest payments have been suspended, the result of fall-out from the US credit crisis. It would appear that there is no where to run, no where to hide.

--The Existentialist Cowboy, January 18, 2008


Wednesday, August 01, 2007

Appearing Now in a Neighborhood Near You: The Budget Deficit that Ate America or How Walmart Robbed 200,000 Americans of their Jobs

Wal-Mart makes a killing putting people out of work, depressing local economies, and lowering wages but it is globalization --an unholy alliance with GOP "trickle down" policies --that spawned Wal-Mart and sounded a death knell for the futures of American workers. Most recently, Wal-Mart's Chinese imports have displaced nearly 200,000 US jobs
China’s entry into the World Trade Organization (WTO) was supposed to improve the US trade deficit with China and create good jobs in the United States. But those promises have gone unfulfilled: the total US trade deficit with China reached $235 billion in 2006. Between 2001 and 2006, this growing deficit eliminated 1.8 million US jobs (Scott 2007). The world’s biggest retailer, US-based Wal-Mart was responsible for $27 billion in US imports from China in 2006 and 11% of the growth of the total US trade deficit with China between 2001 and 2006. Wal-Mart’s trade deficit with China alone eliminated nearly 200,000 US jobs in this period.

Robert E. Scott, The Wal-Mart effect
The Wal-Mart effect on US workers and manufacturing is typified by the effects seen in clothing --low-cost goods with a hidden higher price: lower wages, lost jobs. Underlying every sector, however, are unsupportable US trade deficits which benefit American consumers but only so long as they have jobs themselves.

As has been the trend at least since the regime of Ronald Reagan, manufacturing suffers most as Wal-Mart grows more intrusive, exploiting the trade deficit with its own undervalued currency. In effect, American consumers have financed China's economic boom.

Of some 133,000 manufacturing jobs lost in the US, sixty-eight percent were the direct result of Wal-Mart's "partnership" with China. The effect is devastating to US workers and the US economy overall. Manufacturing jobs, after all, have generally paid higher wages and provided better benefits.

The US-China trade deficits amount to more than $1 trillion in US Treasury bills and growing. It is fair to say that China has done this deliberately to rehabilitate its own economy on US backs. It has had the effect of lowering the cost of its exports to the United States and other countries.
The relationship between the dollar and the yen has been affected primarily by the adverse trade balance that we have with Japan. At the last summit meeting in London, for instance, we discussed the very high positive trade balance that Japan enjoyed then. The goal established by your own leaders was that this trade balance would be reduced. Instead, it's continued to go up.

I think, as the economic market leaders have recognized, the high export of Japanese goods and the relatively low imports into Japan of other goods, the yen has strengthened in comparison to other currencies, including, of course, the American dollar.

- President Jimmy Carter, Interview with Western European and Japanese Reporters, July 11th, 1978

My good friend, Matthew Stevenson, contributing editor of Harper's Magazine, wrote both an explanation and a history of our "indebted prosperity" in his review of a new book [The Money Men: Capitalism, Democracy, and the Hundred Years' War over the American Dollar] for the Texas Observer. As few have, Stevenson makes the connection between Alexander Hamilton's vision for America and our current Asian debt.
At almost every level, what is sustaining the US economic miracle is Hamilton’s beloved debt. The federal government balances its books with paper laid off to Asian bondholders under the Faustian bargain that they buy our securities and
we buy their exports. Domestically, the lender of last resort is not the Fed, but the US consumer, sadly as innocent about speculators as Abraham Lincoln.

-- Matthew Stevenson, The Best Government Money Can Buy, The Texas Observer

As I have often pointed out, the origins of current economic woes --exploding budget deficits amid the declining dollar --may be traced to what is called the "parlous economic stewardship of Ronald Reagan". Reagan cut the marginal tax rate for the very wealthy from 70% to 38% amid raised expectations that wealth would "trickle down". It didn't. The many presentations by Dr. Daniel Weinberger at the Census Bureau make the convincing case that the reverse occurred. Wealth did not trickle down. It flowed up!

Reagan's own Budget Director, David Stockman, later recanted. [See: Atlantic Monthly, The Education of David Stockman] Certainly, “supply side economics” produced the longest and deepest recession since the Great Depression. Stockman saved his most ascerbic comments for a "noisy faction" of Republicans who had promised an "orgy of investments" that would propel the US economy to new heights. I have no idea what Reagan, the GOP and Stockman had been smoking. Only prices and unemployment got high. Wages and living standards remained firmly tethered to terra firma if not the hole that had been dug for them. Many joined the growing ranks of the newly poor. A pernicious trend continues to this day. That is, the rich get exceedingly rich and the poor get even poorer. That has been the case since 1982 but for a brief interlude in Bill Clinton's second term.

Bush, hoping to bask in Reagan's fading stardom and Hollywood mystique, pushed through Congress a trillion dollars worth of tax cuts. Like Ronald Reagan, Bush has waged a "war on terrorism" during which acts of terrorism increased. The final numbers have not yet been tallied for Bush --but, again, like Reagan, the results are pedestrian but tragic, a war of mass distraction in Afghanistan, a quagmire in Iraq, and the budget deficit that ate America.

The phrase "debtors death spiral" is used to denote what happens when consumers borrow to cover only the interest on previous loans. New debt compounds old ones and bankruptcy may be around the corner. Many writers speculate that the US --under Bush --has already entered such a spiral. What keeps us afloat? A "Carvellian" quick response is simply: the rest of the world which cannot afford an American black hole. The US is kept afloat not because our economy is strong but because it is not. The US may be thought of as an empire but only because the rest of the world cannot afford not to keep us afloat.
Between 1989 and 2003, the ever-increasing US trade deficit with China has led to about 1.5 million jobs that either moved overseas or never were created in this country as production shifted to China, according to a report released Jan. 11, 2005, by the US–China Economic and Security Review Commission (USCC), a congressionally appointed panel. The pace of job losses has picked up since China joined the World Trade Organization in 2001, with about one-third of the total, or 500,000, occurring in the past three years.
Lower Wages for US Workers
By supporting foreign-made goods on such a massive scale, the company that trumpets its All-American image is creating incentives for corporations to destroy good jobs in the United States.

By purchasing such a large amount of goods produced in China, Wal-Mart indirectly supports continued workers’ rights abuses by Chinese authorities.

--Wal-Mart's Imports Lead to US Jobs Exports

Meanwhile, don't miss a Washington Post report that shows how Wal-Mart pits suppliers against one another and squeezes them for the lowest price. The result is that factories respond with longer hours and/or lower pay. Wealth, as we have learned the hard way, trickles UP --not down. The robber baron will always make up his losses out of your ass. In China, the workers have no choice: China forbids independent trade unions. That is a policy not unlike that of the US GOP and Ronald Reagan, specifically, who is not fondly remembered for his effective War on Labor and his ineffective war on terrorism and drugs. [See also: The Peace Tree]


    Frontline: Is Wal-Mart Good For America

    Do you get that? Through the Port of Long Beach alone, China exports some 36 billion dollars worth of manufactured goods for the American consumer market. But surely, the US now sells exports to the world's biggest market of some 1.3 billion folk, a promise held out when Bill Clinton signed the China trade agreement of 2000. Sadly, it just didn't happen. US exports through the port of Long Beach about 3 billion dollars worth of raw materials --not US "high tech". Largely because of China's undervalued Yuan, the "consuming world", the US primarily, is reduced to Third World status and losing ground. The US has no leverage on foreign money markets.

    Under Bush, we could not fight back if we wanted to. The dollar is vulnerable as long as Bush runs up the highest American budget deficits in history. The Iraq war alone might have bankrupted the US if China and Japan had not propped us up for the sole purpose of dumping cheap crap on our shores. Wal-Mart is the primary gateway into an economic black hole from which there may be no escape --lower prices, chasing lower wages, chasing still lower prices. Everyone but the GOP's ever shrinking elite are impoverished. There must be a word for this skullduggery, this betrayal of the working men and women of the US who want merely to have a good job and educate the rug rats.

    Until Michael Moore decides to take on Wal-Mart, we have Robert Greenwald who does a great job exposing Wal-Mart on this video.

    And Jon Stewart has his take.

    Additional ResourcesDiscoveries






    Why Conservatives Hate America




    Spread the word:

    yahoo icerocket pubsub newsvine