Curb government waste through transparency not tax cuts and caps.

On a federal, state, and local level Americans need to know how their tax dollars are being spent. But often government budgets are hidden or when they are made public they have line items like "necessary annual expenses" therefore you won't really know how your money is being spent. Also there is a lot finagling with tax dollars through common high finance practices that you have be a CPA or tax attorney to understand.

The George Orwell novel, "1984" warned of the horrors of a totalitarian government where their leader "Big Brother" is always watching you. Well in a democracy in the digital age all citizens have the potential to be government's "Big Brother." Through the use of the Internet we have the potential ability to see how all of our money is being spent. I don't understand why there hasn't been a more vocal movement to do this. Instead you have politicians pushing tax caps which may control spending, but does nothing for potential corruption of tax dollar use. You also have right-wing yahoos like Grover Norquist getting politicians agreeing not to raise taxes through a pledge. Wouldn't it be great if someone could get congress members to sign a pledge to always act ethically, and keep all of their actions as transparent as possible. The recent insider trading scandal that the news program "60 Minutes" recently aired shows how politicians will take every opportunity to take advantage of their position and pay little regard to ethics. Therefore it would be an impossible task to get them to sign an ethics pledge.

There are federal laws on the books that encourage transparency of spending through the use of the Internet but there is little enforcement of this.

In conclusion, we have to stop looking at capping and restricting new taxes without first looking at how our money is being spent. We must control corruption before we look at controlling spending.

How do you stop the "Wall Street Occupation"? Turn it into a job fair!

I am glad the people occupying Wall Street have not given up in spite of the NYC's many efforts to remove them. I am upset at the police officers that have to intervene when the demonstrations get a little out of hand. I understand that they are just doing their job, what their superiors tell them to do, but I do not think they understand that they are on the same side as the Wall Street protesters. Soon their jobs will be in jeopardy as well, and maybe they will come to their senses and join the protest or start demonstrating themselves.
A lot of politicians have come to give a little lip service to this event, or events plural as they have sprung up in other cities as well, but still no one is taking any real action.
If the wealthy one percent really cared, what they should do is hold a jobs fair at Zuccotti Park and make sure all of the protesters have what everyone wants, a decent paying job and some dignity. But as you guessed, they don't care. These protests could swell to massive riots and they still wouldn't care. They know they have the politicians right in their pockets and that plutocracy with prevail.
Corporate America's profits are the only things swelling right now and yet they still have no interest in creating jobs in this country. Republicans, the purveyors of plutocracy, only propose more breaks for big business, small business and the wealthy. They have plenty of breaks, big business doesn't pay any taxes usually, and they still haven't created any jobs. You can give the top one percent all the breaks in the world, but it won't matter, they still won't do anything for the American economy in return. Republicans don't get it, there is no return on your money when you invest in the wealthy.
Again if they really cared, you would see a big job's fair in NYC, but they don't. That is why it is up to government to step in and create jobs for these people, but they won't either because the wealthy have the politicians in their pockets. The plutocratic powers-that-be will continue to shrink government leading to even more layoffs. Someone needs to take action, someone needs to come to our aide, to help out the Wall Street protesters, but no one ever will.

Job stimulus bill fails while a job crushing bill passes.

Although it is impossible for me to post here on a regular basis, I am compelled to write about the failure of the job stimulus bill that was recently voted on and rejected by the Senate and the free trade act with South Korea that sailed right through congress.

With all of the media coverage about the failed job stimulus bill and the Wall Street occupation, the media somehow forgot to cover the free trade agreement with South Korea that was just approved by congress. No one was on TV debating this issue, how disgusting.

Let me tell you something about South Korea, with this free trade agreement the United States will be importing tons of stuff from Korea, but the Koreans will probably import next to nothing of American goods. The Korean government will tell its people to only buy Korean made goods and don't touch American made products. In his book, "Bad Samaritans: The Myth of Free Trade and The Secret History of Capitalism" Korean-born economist Ha-Joon Chang illustrates how South Korea pumped up its economy by forcing its people to buy only Korean made products and nothing else. They did before and they most certainly will do it again. They couldn't care less about the collapse of the United States economy. They will flood our markets with tons of cheaper Korean made goods and they will not want to buy any American products in return.

I will be surprised if the Koreans will buy even one American car. But you are going be kissing even more manufacturing jobs good-bye, if there are any left in the United States to say good-bye to. And then this is only the beginning. South Korea is the starter county for free trade with all of Asia which will pretty much spell the economic end of the middle class as we know it. You think unemployment is bad now, just wait...

And while all of this is going on President Obama couldn't get much needed jobs stimulus bill passed because it increases taxes on the wealthy. Shame on the two democrats that voted against this bill. I hope they loose their Senate seats, of course the monsters who replace them will not be any better.

I just saw another article from npr that said that the Senate doesn't want to pass this bill because over 50 percent of them are millionaires themselves, and I believe that close to 100 percent of them have nothing approaching a conscience.

Congresses actions are just throwing gasoline on the economic collapse fire. This is why we so desperately need clean elections. Elections that are state run, where candidates cannot take money from outside sources for their campaigns. Everything is paid for by the state and everyone is given an equal shot to be elected.

Regardless of what your social studies teacher told you, the United States is not a democracy, it is a plutocracy, and these recent congressional actions prove it.

What would Apple do? Run a totally protectionist country that's what!

Earlier this month The Wall Street Journal ran an article about how Apple, the corporate computer giant, has more money that the US government and an opinion piece suggesting how Apple would run the United States government since they seem to be doing such a great job in running a profitable company.

First of all it upset me that there is a company, and probably lots of other US companies, that have more money at their disposal than the US government. Can't they pay for all of the wars in the Middle East and leave the US Government out of this?

The opinion piece upset me because the author cited all the things that he thought Apple would do to run a successful country, but he forgot some important aspects of the Apple business model.

Apple's brand is the cutting edge, because they operate in a country that made the cutting edge possible through a high standard of living. Living in the United States has had the same appeal as Apple products, because this is such a great place to live, everyone wants to immigrate here, just like everyone wants to buy Apple products because they can perform like no other products. They are always the first to market with innovative ideas, and the United States has traditionally been the first choice of many citizens of other countries looking to escape their less than desirable living conditions. Therefore, the United States has the cutting edge thing down pat, especially when it comes to quality of life.

The other thing that Apple does so well, which was completely overlooked by the WSJ author was that Apple's business model is totally protectionist. You have to buy all your apps, music, videos, and other content for Apple devices directly through their iTunes store. Apple hardware and software comes directly from Apple. There is no other competition. You buy from the iTunes store and nowhere else. There is no opportunity for free market competition. They set the price they want, they make the profits they want. That is what has made Apple so successful. That, the cutting edge thing, and nothing else.

If anyone dare suggest protectionism for the United States economy, they will be at the very least verbally drawn and quartered by politicians , the media and the wealthy lobbyists that control them. How can you isolate the United States in the new global economy? It would be such a step backward. It would be a step backward for wealthy people who want to bring labor costs down to nothing, and the American standard of living to unimaginable lows.

But this doesn't make any sense, don't you want to protect what you have? The wealthy want to protect what they earned by not paying any taxes. I wish this country could protect what it has through tariffs and limited trade, but Washington will not do this because it has its hands tied by big business and big money.

We must adopt the Apple model of protectionism if this country is to survive, and escape this bottomless pit of recession. Only this will save us.

Congress and Budget Blithering

I can't believe I haven't posted here at all this year. Just like many of the people who would take the time to read this post, I am a working stiff. I have work off-the-books overtime just to keep my job, and I have to enroll in courses and study just to prepare for the time when I may no longer have a job, which may be soon. The economy isn't getting any better, and I need to brace myself for when I have to start collecting unemployment just like many of you are or will be.

I am only posting here now because I am so upset about the banter between President Obama and Speaker of the House John "Bonehead" Boehner over raising the debt ceiling and passing a budget. President Obama has been very weakly trying to get across the message that we need to tax the wealthy, while Boehner very loudly states he just wants budget cuts, cuts and more cuts.

Boehner's Congressional District suffers over 9% unemployment just like the rest of the country, how high does unemployment have to get before someone runs against this Bozo and takes his seat away from the Nazi Republicans out to destroy this country.

Federal budget cuts will just amount to more unemployment. The government needs to step in an create jobs, not take more jobs away. Already the US Post Office plans to cut thousands of jobs, and if Boehner gets his way more Federal jobs will just disappear, but no one is calling him a "job killer" the label that House Republicans put on the health care reform bill. Let's face it private industry is not going to pick up the slack for all of the government jobs we are going to loose with the substantial budget cuts that Republicans pose.

Actually, private industry will wind-up suffering as well, as budget cuts result in the end of government contracting, and laid-off federal employees will stop spending money in the retail and food markets which will beget more lay-offs. The unemployment that the budget cuts will create will cause such a great feedback loop of more unemployment that the economy will have no other recourse but to crash again, this time probably harder than before.

In their book "Aftershock: Protect Yourself and Profit from the Next Global Meltdown," authors, David and Robert Wiedemar and Cindy Spitzer predict that government jobs will be a safe haven from the next big ecnomic downturn which they predict will befall us within the next couple of years. (They were right about the real estate bubble in a previous book published before the crash, but who couldn't see that coming?) With all of the Federal spending cuts coming their will be no save haven in Federal jobs or any government jobs for that matter.

Let's face it, there is a huge budget deficit and the only way to close the gap is raise revenue and tax the crap out of the rich and add large tariffs to imported goods, something Congress and the President are very reluctant to do because the rich have them in their pockets.

You know the wealthy have Boehner in their pocket because he comes from a fairly rural district with 9% unemployment. A few of his siblings are even unemployed according to Wikipedia. With his background he should really be a Democrat, but you know the wealthy and the corporate interests are bank rolling him, so he will keep fighting to run this country into the ground.

If the Republicans have their way and all we have is cuts, cuts and more cuts to the budget in a time where the Federal government really needs to step in and spend money to create jobs, you are going to see an economic collapse greater than the one we saw in 2008.

As predicted, the rich will continue with their tax breaks

I can't believe there was a double-team press conference with President Obama and former President Clinton, telling the American people that our economic stability depends on the rich retaining their tax breaks. Completely outrageous. How are we going to pay for the endless war in the Middle East? Not to mention the extension of unemployment benefits? Why is thought that by letting the rich hang on to their money, they will spend it to stimulate the economy and not horde it for a rainy day, and the forecast looks like nothing but blue skies ahead for the rich while it pours down on the middle class?

Government needs to take control of this horrible economic situation, and stop letting the rich, the plutocrats, run this country into the ground. Now more that ever it is easy to communicate with your congress representatives. Take the time to contact them and tell them that you do not want to see the rich continue their tax breaks.

Democrats and Republicans, the old two man con?

Here is a theory of mine that I would like to share with you. I think the American people are being set-up, with one of the oldest tricks in the book, the two man con. I think at some point after the FDR presidency the wealthy powers-that-be got together to figure out how they could stop the scourge that is the American middle class. Using their money and influence they financed the campaigns of both Republicans and Democrats and pulled the strings so that whoever was elected would be the candidate that would do their bidding.

Their first soldier was Richard Nixon who went to China to lay the groundwork for the mess we have now, the one where all of our manufacturing jobs are moving over there. After Nixon managed to engage himself in criminal activity, the American people wanted anyone but a Republican. What the proponents of plutocracy came up with was Jimmy Carter an inexperienced Georgia Governor from a peanut farming family.

President Carter did an incredibly poor job, especially when it came to handling the economy, it would almost seem that his policies help exacerbate the stagflation that lead to his ultimate defeat by super Republican, Ronald Reagan.

Ronald Reagan, a former B-movie actor turned puppet for the Republican party, did intentional and irreparable damage to social security, and drove the national debt sky high.

The gilded age he created was so great that he got his Vice President, George Bush, senior in for another term before the economy collapsed in in the late eighties and early nineties.

Then the proponents of plutocracy found Bill Clinton, who they assumed was another inexperienced Southern hick Governor this time from Arkansas. But, "Slick Willie" lived up to his nickname, and this Rhodes scholar was no hick by any means. He knew how to play ball like a Republican, so much so, one would wonder if he was a shill from the Republican party with his approval of NAFTA among many other very conservative policies. Also, thanks in part to the Internet economic bubble, he managed to even get elected for a second term.

The Republicans were not going to stand for three terms of Democrats. If they let this go on the United Stated could have the longest Democratic presidential run since FDR, and there was no way that was going to happen. The powers that be then stuck Al Gore with the unpopular Joe Lieberman which lead to a narrow defeat in Florida, by George W. Bush.

Bush appeared as clueless wonder, that relied heavily on his Vice President to make important decisions. Decisions that would ultimately lead to the financial mess we are in now. For his second term W. was virtually unopposed by John Kerry, another very conservative Democrat, that offered very little different from the Bush campaign, and therefore he was was easily defeated.

But W. who cared more about sending soldiers to the Middle East and sending jobs overseas did absolutely nothing to help the United States economy which had turned into one great Ponzi scheme.

Realizing that the no one in as single election term, Republican or Democrat could get the economy out the quagmire it had been placed in the purveyors of plutocracy knew that they had to get yet another inexperienced Democrat in office, to make sure that the Democratic party will look completely inept and they could have four years to find another Republican to at least appear to come to the rescue.

They found Barack Obama, who had about seven years of experience representing Illinois in the United States Senate, and that's it. Just as the powers-that-be have planned, he appears to be either taking no action or similar action that Republican president would have taken in reaction to the current economic crisis; like Nero, he just fiddles while Rome burns.

So there you have the basic pattern, aggressive Republican (Nixon) inept Democrat (Carter) aggressive Republican (Reagan & Bush), inept Democrat Bill Clinton (inept only in that he was a very economically conservative Democrat), aggressive Republican (George W. Bush, but it was really Dick Cheney), inept Democrat Barack Obama. Isn't there anyone else out there who thinks this pattern is not coincidence? Can we do anything to stop this? If we re-elect Obama will we get four more years of him doing next to nothing to further the economy along? Or will he be followed by another heroic looking Republican, who will pretend to be coming to save the day when he or she is actually just furthering along the destruction of the United States as we know it?