Record gap in US between rich and poor

And the Republicans want to fight over giving the richest Americans a tax cuts? Even worse, Democrats are afraid of this fight? The trickle down Reaganomics has been costly for most Americans, creating a Banana Republic-like economic environment. It's unfortunate that too few Democrats are making an issue of this problem. For all of the GOP talk about income distribution, it has been the Republicans (with the help of Democrats) who have mastered the issue.

The top-earning 20 percent of Americans — those making more than $100,000 each year — received 49.4 percent of all income generated in the U.S., compared with the 3.4 percent earned by those below the poverty line, according to newly released census figures. That ratio of 14.5-to-1 was an increase from 13.6 in 2008 and nearly double a low of 7.69 in 1968.

A different measure, the international Gini index, found U.S. income inequality at its highest level since the Census Bureau began tracking household income in 1967. The U.S. also has the greatest disparity among Western industrialized nations.

At the top, the wealthiest 5 percent of Americans, who earn more than $180,000, added slightly to their annual incomes last year, census data show. Families at the $50,000 median level slipped lower.

Read the rest of this post...

What 'small business' really means

While I've been traveling, much has happened; and much of it connects. So let's start here, with the concept of "small business" beautifully explored by Keith Olbermann in a brilliant Countdown segment late last week. First the video, then a few comments:



This looks like original reporting, or at least original research. Big kudos to Olbermann and his staff.

The video is rich; I want to make just a few points:

1. I've touched lightly on the concept of "replacement phrases" but not really explained myself. A replacement phrase is what you do to convert something said by Movement Conservatives (the "say anything to win" crowd) from something that makes no sense, to something that perfectly expresses what they mean.
   
   For example, if you take any statement containing the word "jobs" and substitute "profits", the statement is wonderfully transparent. Test it and see; "job creation" means "profit creation" every time, for instance (h/t Noam Chomsky for that one).
   
   So let's add to our library. New replacement phrase: When a Movement Conservative says "small businesses", substitute "billionaires".
   
   In the recent Pledge to Wipe Out America, for example, we have the statement "small business must have certainty that the rules won't change every few months". A quick substitution and you know exactly what they want. Don't go changing the rules on billionaires, especially those pesky tax rules we're just now discussing.
   
   
2. 3% of "small businesses" control 50% of small business gross profit. That's worth memorizing. For me this is the most stunning statistic of them all, and John Boehner, the Tan Who Would Be Speaker (hereinafter, "the Tan") offered it up on MTP without beginning to think he was giving away multi-decade language fraud. For that, thank you sir.
   
   And I'm not just referring to Republicans in that multi-decade deception. Clinton did quite a lot for "small businesses" as well. I'll bet they were ever so grateful.
   
   
3. The technical definition of "small business" makes this usage perfectly clear. It's worth memorizing as well. If you file taxes as part of an S corp, a partnership (LLC or law firm, for example), or a sole proprietorship, you're a "small business" — period. This means you get Form K-1 or 1099, and/or file income on Schedule C and Schedule E. That's it. In this definition, "small" has no relation to size (for a change), simply to type.

So let's apply Boehner's Rule to this world. The 3% that enjoy 50% of SB gross income are huge entities. They range from the Koch brothers to Bechtel ($31 billion in revenue), down to the KKR range (a paultry $445 million). A big chunk of the pie for a very small world. The rest of us, the other 97%, divvie up the remaining 50% (yep, I'm included here). This part of the pie is small, given the number of sharers. A struggling writer in Hollywood making $5000/year (a recent average of all WGAW writers) files a Schedule C. The woman who runs the restaurant near me files a Schedule C; I hope she survives the recession. Both Stephen King and Sarah D'Almeida (author of Death of a Musketeer, which few have read) file Schedule C or E for royalties. So yes, "small business" really does mean small business — when normal people say it. But when Movement Conservatives say it — and you're going to hear it a lot between now and when Congress caves* in December — just keep the replacement phrase in mind. "Small business" means billionaires who bought tax breaks from both parties for their partnership and S corp earnings. They paid for a service, and they want it delivered, or at least not stopped.

GP

*Yes, I think it's now certain that Congress will cave in December. I'll have more on that soon, but just ask yourself — if the rich-man fanboys (conservaDems & Repubs) are a risk to lay down even under hard pre-election populist scrutiny, how fast will they debase themselves when all the pressure is off?

I say if both houses don't vote now, it's a done deal. The only game left will be ID-ing the ones who pretend to stand straight in December when there's no risk the slimy deal will fail — but would fold in a minute if the deal were at risk. That list will be worth having, for later. Read the rest of this post...

Is JPMorgan really going to sue US government for WaMu money?

Enough is never enough for Wall Street. Once again they are showing the world why they should never, ever be helped without strings. They're also helping make the case for letting them all go under when the next crisis strikes. JPMorgan was of course not forced into this deal. There were a number of other banks from both the US and abroad who were interested in purchasing WaMu and having immediate access to new clients.

JPMorgan Chase has notified federal regulators that it may seek to recoup the money it used to buy the assets of fallen Washington Mutual, or even more.

The Wall Street bank told the Federal Deposit Insurance in letters that it may seek the money, a person familiar with the situation confirmed Monday.

The person spoke on condition of anonymity because lawsuits are pending between JPMorgan Chase and the FDIC in the WaMu bankruptcy.

Read the rest of this post...

Congress.org deconstructs the DADT lobbying effort. And it ain't pretty.

From Congress.org, via AMERICAblog Gay:

Many activists involved in the issue say a large part of the blame goes to the Human Rights Campaign, the most well-funded and politically connected gay rights group in the country. They say it did not act quickly enough, did not spend enough money on the issue and failed to pressure Democratic leaders to take action before the elections.

"If you're solely riding on being a voice at the table and remaining at the table, eventually you're going to have to show us results," said Servicemembers Legal Defense Network spokesman Trevor Thomas, a former employee of the Human Rights Campaign. "I don't know how you're going to do that when we lose the House to the Republican leadership."

For its part, the leadership of the Human Rights Campaign maintains that it worked hard to repeal Don’t Ask Don't Tell and believes the policy could still be overturned by Congress in the coming months.

Joe has a lot more about this on AMERICAblog Gay. Read the rest of this post...

AP: Markos and Aravosis on the White House strategy of scolding the base

For the past week or so, President Obama, now joined by Vice President Biden, have been trying to build electoral enthusiasm among the Democratic base by scolding said base for not being overly enthusiastic about the upcoming elections. The message is that Team Obama has done a lot, and those who aren't happy are gripers, groaners, whiners, etc.

The White House is not known for its crack communications operation. Far from it. So, inevitably someone had to ask if this latest messaging strategy, of motivating the base by antagonizing it, is working or is even helpful? AP took a look:

Several Democratic strategists privately fear that the strategy to motivate Democrats with sternness could backfire partly because it runs counter to Obama's carefully cultivated hopeful, uplifting image. There's also some concern that it could further alienate liberals and other Democratic critics who don't think Obama has done enough to pursue issues important to them.

"It's not helpful," said John Aravosis, the editor of the progressive AMERICAblog.com. "The base is depressed and they're depressing it even more, and it's not clear why."

Said DailyKos founder Markos Moulitsas: "They wouldn't be in this predicament if they delivered on their campaign promises, rather than waste the last two years putting bipartisanship above action."

Also, there was one other paragraph that warranted additional attention:

Democratic-leaning groups have largely been missing from the TV airwaves this fall as GOP-aligned organizations pummel Democratic House and Senate candidates with attack ads. Seeing allies outspent 6-1, White House aides recently decided to use that disparity to compel their base to vote.

The White House is part of the reason we're being outspent. Read this post where Mike Lux reminded us that the Obama brain trust shut down most of the outside groups in 2008, and redirected donors away from traditional advocacy groups, because Team Obama knew better than everyone else.  Now those outside groups don't have the money to help defend the Democratic majority in Congress.

The thing that really sucks is that there are many truly excellent Democratic members of Congress and progressive candidates on the ballot this year who should win. They're bearing the brunt of the Obama administration's failure to even try to deliver on its campaign promises. The good ones shouldn't suffer because of that. Read the rest of this post...

Northwest Passage increasingly an option for sea cargo ships

The good news for shipping companies is not good news for the planet.

Between 1906 and 2006 only 69 ships made the journey but in 2009 alone 24 vessels made the journey, according to Canadian maritime law expert Michael Byers, Germany's Der Spiegel newspaper reported.

Icelandic President Olafur Ragnar Grímsson recently claimed that the route was becoming a "trans-Arctic Panama Canal," the paper said.

Der Spiegel reported that new ships are being designed to cope with icebergs on the journey.

The MV Nordic Barents is due to arrive in the Chinese port of Lianyungang after a 3,500-mile journey through the Arctic Ocean from the Norwegian port of Kirkenes, the newspaper said. A Russian icebreaker sent to protect the ship, which was carrying iron ore concentrate, was not needed with broken ice floes only passing nearby twice.

Read the rest of this post...

Democrats to stuff 20 bills into post-election lame-duck session

The Defense bill, which includes DADT legislation, is one of the 20. I don't know anyone who's hopeful about anything good passing during the lame duck session. I suspect the Dems are announcing this list now to motivate, pre-election, the various Democratic constituencies affected by each piece of legislation. Hopefully, they're serious about pushing this list post-election. Read the rest of this post...

President calls 'FOX' destructive to America

Good.

Fox News pushes "a point of view that I disagree with. It's a point of view that I think is ultimately destructive for the long-term growth of a country that has a vibrant middle class and is competitive in the world," Obama said.

But remember the last time the White House stood up to FOX. A month later the President was giving FOX an exclusive interview to make up for all the bad blood. It's great that he's standing up to FOX. But he needs to sustain the criticism. Read the rest of this post...

Former NBA player, millionaire, Ivy League educated, GOP candidate for governor complains about waitresses making too much money

Priceless. So a guy who went to an elitist college, whose grandfather was a US ambassador, who made millions in the NBA wants to pick on a waitress who is trying to make a few bucks. What a complete pompous ass. Read the rest of this post...

Biden: Liberals need to 'buck up'

Vice President Joe Biden on Lawrence O'Donnell's show last night:

LAWRENCE O'DONNELL: Today you said that the base, your base in the Democratic party...

BIDEN: Yes.

LAWRENCE O'DONNELL: ...should quote "stop whining." I'm gonna give you an opportunity you used to have in the Senate, Mr. Vice President, would you like to revise and extend your remarks on that one?

BIDEN: Yes. What I think, what I mean... there's some on the Democratic base, not the core of it, that are angry because we didn't get every single thing they want. We got a health care bill that is becoming, every day it'll become more apparent how much it does for people and businesses in terms of costs and availability. But because there was no public option some of them are so angry they say "we're not gonna participate." They should stop that. These guys, if they win, the other team, they're gonna repeal health care, and I want them to tell me why what we did wasn't an incredibly significant move that's progressive and helping people. The same way with a lot of other issues. It's time to focus.

Biden goes on to argue that liberals need to "buck up." He adds, "there's a new majority in the Senate, 60 votes." And thus, per Biden, Obama couldn't get a lot of what he wanted.

Two problems with that line of argument. First, George Bush did just fine with a 55 vote, and even a 50 vote, majority in the Senate. Why couldn't Obama/Biden do just as well with 60?

Second, the reason there's a new majority in the Senate, 60 votes, is because Democrats let it happen. I remember a few months ago when one of the Republican Senators, Jim Bunning, was filibustering unemployment benefits for hundreds of thousands of American workers. Obama did a remarkable thing. Joe reported on it, here's what happened:

A few minutes ago on CNN, Ed Henry reported that he'd been tipped off by the White House that Obama was going to take "a jab" at Senator Bunning today when he got off Air Force One today in Georgia. Bunning certainly deserves the jab.

Didn't happen.

According to Henry, the White House informed him that the Bunning line was removed from the President's speech because Obama felt it would be too partisan. And, in any case, the brain trust at the White House doesn't want to involve the President in every minute detail of what the Senate does.

Bunning's filibuster has blocked benefits for hundreds of thousands of unemployed Americans. It's stopped construction projects. It's not a minor thing. Time after time, Republican filibusters have put the brakes on Obama's agenda. And, why not? There are no consequences. The President sure doesn't hold them accountable. What Bunning is doing is probably one of the most egregious filibusters to date. But, he's getting a pass from Obama.

It might be a good idea for the President to engage himself in the Senate's proceedings when the consequences are so enormous. People might like to know that their President is fighting for them instead of avoiding a fight.

The President refused to challenge someone standing in the way of his agenda. Sound familiar?

The reason the Republicans have been able to filibuster nearly every single piece of legislation, the reason we have a new majority in the Senate, is because Democrats - with Barack Obama at the top of the list - have enabled the Republicans every step of the way.

Rather than lecturing Democrats about how unreasonable they are to be upset with the President for constantly negotiating with himself, Biden would do better having a talk with his boss, and asking him why George Bush was so effective at passing his agenda, at kow-towing Democrats, and at thwarting opposition filibusters, when Bush had far fewer numbers than Obama has now in the US Senate.

60 is the new 50 because Democrats permit it be so. Read the rest of this post...

Obama FBI targeting anti-war activists

Some Saul Alinski protégé. If I were Alinski, I'd ask for the Double-Secret Ranger (no girls allowed) badge back. From Raw Story (h/t SCLiberal):

The FBI said it searched eight homes in Minneapolis and Chicago as part of a terrorism investigation on Friday, and two subjects said the agency is targeting leaders of the anti-war movement.

FBI spokesman Steve Warfield told The Associated Press agents served six warrants in Minneapolis and two in Chicago. "These were search warrants only," Warfield said. "We're not anticipating any arrests at this time. They're seeking evidence relating to activities concerning the material support of terrorism."

The home of Minneapolis anti-war activists Mick Kelly and Jess Sundin were among those searched, they told the AP. "The FBI is harassing anti-war organizers and leaders, folks who opposed U.S. intervention in the Middle East and Latin America," Kelly said before agents confiscated his cell phone. Sundin called the suggestion they were connected with terrorism "pretty hilarious and ridiculous."

Welcome to your base, sir. Bust 'em if you got 'em.

We're all just "seeking evidence." Got me? Midterm elections — check.

GP Read the rest of this post...

Most Americans still feel country is in a recession

It's hard to feel optimistic in this climate, so the results of the new poll are hardly surprising. CNN:

Seventy-four percent of Americans believe the economy is still in a recession, according to a new CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll. Only 25 percent think the downturn is over.

One-third of Americans say the recession is serious, while another 29 percent characterize it as moderate.

One small cause for optimism: the percentage of Americans who say the country is in a recession has dropped 13 points since August.

Read the rest of this post...

Tuesday Morning Open Thread

Good morning.

The President starts his day in Albuquerque, New Mexico. He's doing another backyard event to talk about the economy. Then, he's flying to Madison, Wisconsin. He's doing a DNC fundraiser, then a rally at the University of Wisconsin. This is part of the plan to generate excitement about young people. From there, he's heading to Des Moines.

Looks like we can expect an announcement from Rahm Emanuel that he's leaving the White Hosue to start his campaign for Mayor of Chicago this week. Just go already. And, Chicagoans, don't let it happen. Your city deserves better. Just look at the number Rahm did on Obama's presidency.

There's still some activity on Capitol Hill. The Republicans will probably block an outsourcing bill today in the Senate. Yep. That's how bold the GOPers are these days. Last week, they stopped a defense bill while we're fighting two wars. Today, they'll block a jobs bill while we're still reeling from the economic crisis created by the GOPers. It's stunning. If only we had a President who would use the bully pulpit to fight them (but asking for that might constitute griping or groaning or whining.)

We'll see what else unfolds...Five weeks til Election Day. Read the rest of this post...

Bank of England Deputy tells Brits to spend, not save

So is he suggesting people ought to sacrifice their own personal well being and future in the name of the country? Is that responsible? As Gaius mentioned yesterday, this is the situation that we're in today with no easy or pain free way out. Doesn't it sound odd that the dirty masses are being asked to sacrifice though the bankers who are all neatly pressed were not asked to do the same? Funny how that works. The Guardian:

Britons should go out and spend to help invigorate the UK's economic recovery, the deputy governor of the Bank of England has urged. In unusually unguarded comments for a banker, Charlie Bean yesterday discouraged people from building up cash savings which generate little income due to historically low interest rates.

Bean, who sits on the Bank's monetary policy committee that set the base interest rate, admitted it was being held down in the hope families would use their cash and thereby help reflate the economy.

Low interest rates could persist for several years, he said. They have been at 0.5% for a year and a half. The next monthly rate-setting decision is due next week.

Read the rest of this post...

Kim Jong-il appoints son as general

So what if he has no experience. There's a dynasty to maintain for goodness sakes. BBC:

The announcement about Kim Jong-il's third and youngest son is his first mention by name in state media and his nomination as a four-star general comes despite a lack of military experience.

The television announcer was quoted as saying that Kim Jong-il had been reappointed as general secretary of the Workers' Party as an "expression of absolute support and trust".

She said a "crucial" development was under way but gave no further details.

Little is known of Swiss-educated Kim Jong-un, who is thought to be aged 27.

Read the rest of this post...