Recommended reading: "The Wrecking Crew" by Thomas Frank.

I am going to try to recommend books on this blog since there are many people who can understand and explain the predicament the United States is in much better than I can.  Even if you do not want to read my stupid blog, you should really check-out the authors that I will be recommending as required reading.

I am not a professional writer, I am not a professional anything really.  I am a poor working schlub who is disheartened by the current economic decline and how the wealthy bullies of the world have stacked the cards of the game of life against us.

I wanted to start a blog because I felt that not enough people are talking about these issues and the corporate controlled media is disturbingly silent about the causes of our economic decline. 

Also I felt that there are not enough people who are looking to help working class people and/or shine a light on the devious right-wing activities that have the United States as we know it on a path to ultimate destruction.

I have found an author who is trying to do just that, it is Thomas Frank.  And the only talk show that I have seen him on is on Bill Moyers Journal on PBS.  I wonder why he is not on more main stream talk and news shows.

In his book "The Wrecking Crew," Frank describes how the wealthy corrupt government with their money and then turn around and complain that the government is corrupt and must be reduced in size or come as close as possible to be eliminated altogether.  Ronald Regan and the two Bushes ran up big spending deficits, cut taxes on the wealthy and then complained that government spending was out of control and big government needed to be reigned in.   And as James Carville put it, "The rich want small government for the same reason criminals want fewer cops on the street, so they can get away with murder. [This quote I got from the Internet and is probably paraphrased]" 

Frank goes on to explain how the lobbyists of Washington DC's K Street are the ones who are truly running the United State government and through this abuse of the constitutional rights America has become a plutocracy.

He also tells of the horror story of Saipan, a small island that is a United States territory.  In the 1990's was turned into basically a corporate controlled labor camps where guest workers had no rights and extremely low wages.  And all to keep the "Made in America" label on clothing.  The factories were eventually shut down for humanitarian reasons.  I believe what happened in Saipan is what the rich have planned for all American citizens eventually.

You must read this book is order to see the horrors that right-wingers like John Boehner have planned for us.  Even if you do not care for my blog, Please read this book.   The link to purchase it from Amazon is below:

Buy a Copy of "Wrecking Crew" from amazon.com

Koch brothers' attempts to buy up major media.

It looks like the oil billionaire Koch brothers are allegedly trying to buy-up newspapers and such in major markets to, I would speculate, make them all right-wing, free-market, and supply-side economics propaganda machines.  I think this is something that Rupert Murdoch has been doing with Fox for quite some time now.

We are somewhat lucky that people get their news from so many different sources today, not just newspapers, radio and television, but also Internet sources like search engines, Facebook, and even blogs...

Say....if the Koch brothers wanted me to stop writing this blog, all they would have to do is pay me $300,000, chump change for them.  I could change it from "Middle Class Massacre" to something like "Plutocrat's Party."  And say things like,  "What we really need is more tax-breaks for the wealthy individuals, and large corporations, yeah, and have an open door to immigrants to keep labor costs down, and deregulating banks and letting Wall Street do whatever it wants is best for the economy, yeah that sounds good."    Or perhaps just stop writing it altogether.   I'll be waiting for my check...

Hopefully, the right-wing won't be able to buy up every possible media venue, but it is amazing what you can do with a lot cash and determination. 

The immigration reform and its potential impact on employment

A while ago, I was surfing the net to get more information about "The Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act of 2013" the latest in immigration reform, and one that has been touted by the media as good one.

You know who likes this bill, Grover (I wish he could be as nice as his namesake Muppet) Norquist.  I saw an opinion piece he wrote for the British newspaper, "The Guardian."  He says that the bill will be good for the American economy.

 

Why does he like the bill? For the same reason all the Republicans like the bill (but some do pretend to hate it), because it basically opens the flood gates for immigration.   With more available people to compete for jobs, wages will go down, it is the simply law of supply and demand.  Republicans will not be happy until Americans are making the same wages as the Chinese and Indians (of India not Native Americans).  

The bill does call for more border security, but only across Mexico as many of the states that border Mexico have pleaded for.  I do not believe the bill does much for the Canadian border or any other way someone can enter this country illegally.  

In times of economic prosperity, when America has a growth economy, it makes sense to allow for immigration, but in the shrinking economy that Americans are living in, it would make sense to freeze immigration until unemployment dips below 4% or so.

Australia, which has a very strict anti-immigration policy, and no countries bordering it, currently has only 5.6 percent unemployment as opposed to America's 7.6.

Wealthy Americans will not be happy until unemployment is around 26% as in Greece which would eventually enable them to drive wages down to a fraction of what they currently are at least as low as mainland China's. 

Then why are some Republican politicians opposed to the bill?  Perhaps it is to appeal to some of their racist constituents or perhaps they just want to keep President Obama from appearing to move things forward with immigration and by doing this they make him look even more inept than he already does.

President Obama is behind giving Visas to highly-skilled foreigners in order to help grow the economy, but I think this also hurts opportunities for American citizens.  If we had a strict anti-immigration policy, companies would be forced to pay to train Americans to fill the jobs they need.  This would benefit the American worker who would gain a useful skill set and make him employable as well in demand in the workforce.  It would also benefit the college or institution that has to train him.  The only one that looses out is the company that has to pay for the training.  It is much easier and cheaper to import foreign laborers that already have the skill sets that American companies need.  It is even cheaper if the company can off-shore the jobs altogether.

And then there is the issue of security.  While America has always been a country made great by immigrants who have left their oppressive countries to be free in the USA, the times have changed greatly.  While immigrants love to come here to enjoy a higher quality of life, there is much hate and envy of the United States.  We have to make sure that at all entry points,not just the borders, that we are not letting in foreign terrorists.  Any immigration reform act should have strict provisions for this, but of course it does not.

In summary I think we should keep the doors to immigrants closed as much as possible until our economy makes a full recovery.  I think that it is awful that there are liberal groups pushing for both lax immigration and raising the minimum wage, because the influx of cheap labor, especially in hard economic times, would only keep wages down.

 

The sequester

I know I should have chimed in on this weeks ago, but who has the time these days, and I really have to admit I don't understand the sequester on government spending.  Apparently it has something to do with a budget act that Obama had signed into law that calls for massive spending cuts that will result in the loss of around 750,000 jobs in a time when we cannot afford to loose one job. At least that's my understanding.  However, it does cut quite a bit from defense which is something that I think America should be doing now that the cold war is over.

If this was going to be problem, why did Obama sign it into law in 2011?  Government should be spending money now to create jobs rather than worrying about the deficit.  They should be acting as the employer of last resort in order to get Americans back to work. 

It seems that the Republican controlled House of Representatives wants nothing more than to be thorn in Obama's side, and make sure that there is complete gridlock when it comes to moving this country forward.  I hope the Democrats can take control of the House after the 2013 election, then there might be a slim chance of Obama making some progress in restoring this country's economy.

Bloomberg publishes internal memos leaked from Walmart...something is fishy....

Ok, I don't believe this.  Bloomberg news leaked internal memos allegedly from Walmart saying that February sales are the worst ever and they are trying to pin it on the payroll tax hike.  This sounds like phony journalism to me.

I went to Target today (as I do try to avoid Walmart like the plague, but it is not always possible).  I bought a couple of things, but I was prepared to buy more stuff, but it looks like a lot of their supply of certain things, especially toys hasn't been replenished since December.

How can consumers buy anything if there is nothing on the shelves?  Walmart's issue may be not meeting demand with enough supply or they have run out of supply particularly for the items that people want to buy.  Retailers anticipate slower sales and do not bother to restock too many items and sales slow down because shelves are empty not because there is a lack of people able or willing to spend money.

There is also a possibility that Walmart executives want to short-sell their stock, so they leak a couple of memos and a month or two later they will buy their stock back shortly before they announce that they had record profits in the first quarter of 2013.

Whatever the case may be, I don't like it.  It looks like the wealthy are trying to use the media to get Americans to join the GOP in their anti-tax rantings.  I do not think the payroll tax would have that big of an impact on spending so quickly.  I think mega-companies like Walmart are just promoting their anti-tax, anti-government and anti-middle class agenda. 

Social Security a simple solution.

With the recent grumblings of the Congressional GOP to cut Social Security and Medicare benefits left and right and the restoration of our Social Security deduction in our paychecks, I came across a fact that I was totally unaware of. 

The payroll tax that funds Social Security only comes out of the first $113,000 of income.  People earning more than $113,000 annually do not have to pay anything additional for Social Security.  All the government would have to do would be to extend the tax to apply to all income levels including those well beyond $113,000 and we wouldn't have to talk about cuts or Social Security running out of money after all the Baby Boomers retire. Unbelievable!

The wealthiest Americans have shown once again that they do not care about the common good.  For them common is bad and only rich is good.  They do not want to pick-up the bill for Social Security or anything else for that matter.  They would rather see the elderly poor and homeless. 

The fact there is not politician one getting behind extending the Social Security tax to all income levels is very disturbing to me.  It shows that both the Democrats and Republicans are merely puppets of the wealthy.

Already I have seen corporate controlled media blaming recent reportedly sluggish retail sales on the restoration of the Social Security payroll tax.  They are quick to point the finger at higher taxes causing problems, but always manage to fail to show how higher taxes particularly on the wealthy would create solutions.  Taxing the wealthy to pay for Social Security to would be a great solution to a looming problem.

The so called "fiscal cliff deal" and the connection between higher taxes on the rich and lower unemployment.

Well, they made a deal, but I am not sure of all of the ramifications.  I think it would have been better to go off the "fiscal cliff' instead of taking the miserable deal that President Obama agreed on.

Taxes will increase on people making over $400,000 and everyone will have to pay social security tax on the first $113,000 they earn every year. 

I heard a lot of rich people belly-aching that increase taxes on them will prevent them from creating jobs (perhaps in China, as we all know they are not creating any here). 

This is in spite of the fact that traditionally as taxes go up on the wealthy unemployment goes down.  While economists have not been able to find a logical correlation for this it still has happened historically.  I have a theory,  I think when the wealthy start getting extra-taxes dumped on them, they create jobs in order to have the tax burden shifted off of them and back on to the middle-class and poor. 

If my theory is correct and the increased taxes on people making over $400,000 a year is sustained, I think we could see unemployment drop within the next year or two.

I think things would have been even better if they had raised taxes on people making over $250,000 per year as originally proposed.  Unless you live in California or the Northeastern/Mid-Atlantic United States, $250,000 per year is a lot of money.  In any other place in the United States you would really be considered rich, because your cost of living is so low.

We will see how things will go with this deal, but frankly, I'm not very optimistic.