Posts tagged "Economy"

#WIGov: Scott Walker’s economic policies have wreaked havoc on the state. 

(via truth-has-a-liberal-bias)

(via Think Progress Economy: On Day DJIA Sets New Record, Conservative Group Floats Impeaching Obama For ‘Wrecking The Stock Market’)

Today, the Dow Jones Industrial Average closed at 15,056, an all-time record. For one conservative group, this can only mean one thing: it’s time to impeach President Obama.

That was the message Capitol Hill Daily, a conservative publication based out of Baltimore, sent to Citizen United’s listserv today. They accused President Obama of “wreck[ing] the stock market” and asked readers to take a poll about whether he should be impeached as a result.

From the email:

Dear Concerned Reader,

Fearing the very worst, the nation’s super-rich are unloading their stocks at an alarming rate.

Even more troubling, the wealthiest 1% of Americans, who typically know the most, are the ones most anxious to sell.

You see, Obama just allowed 13 new tax increases to further slow the economy, wreck the stock market and make it even harder on the 12 million Americans already looking for work.

The bigger question is this…

Is Obama’s Latest Tax Screw Up Grounds For Impeachment?

When Obama took office on January 20, 2009, the Dow Jones was at 7,949. Over the last 4 years, it has gone up approximately 90 percent before reaching a new high today.

(via prairiebadger-deactivated201305)

fuzzyhorns:

“A gigantic heist is being perpetrated against working people: they’re getting screwed on overtime, denied their tips, shortchanged on benefits, defrauded on payroll, and handed paychecks that bounce like rubber balls. A conservative estimate of unpaid overtime alone shows that it costs workers at least $19 billion per year.”

(via truth-has-a-liberal-bias)

Unfortunately, though, Congress has shown no willingness to provide similar relief for the families that are being hammered by sequestration in other ways. Here are 12 programs that have experienced devastating cuts because Congress insists on cutting spending when it doesn’t need to — and that have been ignored by the same lawmakers who leaped to action as soon as their trips home were going to take a little longer:

1. Long-term unemployment: There are 4.7 million Americans who have been unemployed for longer than six months, but sequestration cut federal long-term unemployment insurance checks by up to 10.7 percent, costing recipients as much as $450 over the rest of the year. Those cuts compound the cuts eightstates have made to their unemployment programs, and 11 states are considering dropping the federal program altogether because of sequestration — even though the long-term unemployed are finding it nearly impossible to return to work.

2. Head Start: Low-income children across the country have been kicked out of Head Start education programs because of the 5-percent cuts mandated by sequestration, as states have cut bus transportation services and started conducting lotteries to determine which kids would no longer have access to the program, even though the preschool program has been proven to havesubstantial benefits for low-income children. In all, about 70,000 children will lose access to Head Start and Early Head Start programs.

3. Cancer treatment: Budget cuts have forced doctors and cancer clinics to deny chemotherapy treatments to thousands of cancer patients thanks to a 2 percent cut to Medicare. One clinic in New York has refused to see more than 5,000 of its Medicare patients, and many cancer patients have had to travel to other states to receive their treatments, an option that obviously isn’t available to lower-income people. Rep. Renee Ellmers (R-NC) proposed restoring the funding, but the legislation so far hasn’t moved in Congress.

4. Health research: The National Institutes of Health lost $1.6 billion thanks to sequestration, jeopardizing important health research into AIDS, cancer, and other diseases. That won’t just impact research and the people who do it, though. It will also hurt the economy, costing the U.S. $860 billion in lost economic growth and at least 500,000 jobs. Budget cuts will also hamper research at colleges and universities.

5. Low-income housing: 140,000 low-income families — primarily seniors with disabilities and families with children — will lose rental assistance thanks to sequestration’s budget cuts. Even worse, the cuts could likely make rent and housing more expensive for those families, as agencies raise costs to offset the pain of budget cuts, and sequestration will also cut from programs that aid the homeless and fund the construction of low-income housing.

6. Student aid: Sequestration is already raising fees on Direct student loans, increasing costs for students who are already buried in debt. The budget cuts reduce funding for federal work study grants by $49 million and for educational opportunity grants by $37 million, and the total cuts will cost 70,000 college students access to grants they depend on.

7. Meals On Wheels: Local Meals on Wheels programs, which help low-income and disabled seniors access food, have faced hundreds of thousands of dollars in cuts, costing tens of thousands of seniors access to the program. Many of those seniors have little access to food without the program, but Congress has made no effort to replace the funding.

8. Women, Infant, and Children programs: WIC helps 9 million low-income women and children with nutrition and health care referrals. Among these women, the program has led to healthier births, a higher intake of important nutrients, and a strong connection to preventative services. Sequestration means that the program would have to cut off about 600,000 participants.

9. Heating assistance: The Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) helps nearly 9 million households afford their heating and cooling bills. Sequestration will cut the program by an estimated $180 million, meaning about 400,000 households will no longer receive aid. These cuts come on top of$1.6 billion in reductions since 2010.

10. Workplace safety: The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has long suffered from a lack of funds, which means its staff is so stretched that many workplaces go without an inspection for 99 years. The fertilizer plant that exploded in West, Texas, for example, hadn’t had a visit from OSHA since 1985. That will get worse, as sequestration will cut the agency’s budget by $564.8 million, likely leading to 1,200 fewer workplace inspections.

11. Obamacare: Sequestration cuts a number of important programs in the Affordable Care Act: $13 million from the Consumer Operated and Oriented Plan Program, or CO-OPs; $57 million from the Health Care Fraud and Abuse Control program; $51 million from the Prevention and Public Health Fund; $27 million from the State Grants and Demonstrations program; and $44 million from the Affordable Insurance Exchange Grants program, or the insurance exchanges.

12. Child care: Child care costs can exceed rent payments or college tuition and waiting lists for getting assistance are already long. Yet sequestration will reduce funds even further, meaning that 30,000 children will lose subsidies for care. For example, Arizona will experience a $3 million cut to funding that will force 1,000 out of care.

H/T: Think Progress Economy

wonkette:

Why Is Liz Warren Yelling At Bank Regulators Today? (Video)


Liz Warren came to Washington to kick ass and chew bubblegum, and she is ALL OUT OF BUBBLEGUM. Would you like to watch her tear into regulators about wrongful foreclosures? Specifically: why no one knows exactly how many people were wrongfully foreclosed on, and also, why wrongfully foreclosed upon people may have gotten as little as $300 for their troubles? Of course you would, these kinds of videos are the highlight of our week too, let us all sit back and relax and bask in the glory of Liz Warren, kicking ass at the Housing and Urban Affairs Committee, courtesy of ThinkProgress.


Read more at http://wonkette.com/511691/why-is-liz-warren-yelling-at-bankers-today-video#1XW2e8Pk6ZHgE7Fr.99

(via wisconsinforward)

Sen. Bernie Sanders proposed legislation today that would break up the big banks and financial institutions that crashed the economy. The ending of too big to fail would also open the door to criminal prosecutions.

Sen. Sanders called ending too big to fail a matter of justice, “We have a situation now where Wall Street banks are not only too big to fail, they are too big to jail. That is unacceptable and that has got to change because America is based on a system of law and justice. In my view, no single financial institution should have holdings so extensive that its failure could send the world economy into crisis. At the very least, no institution, no CEO in America should be above the law. If an institution is too big to fail, it is too big to exist.”

The legislation makes its intended purpose clear, “Notwithstanding any other provision of law, beginning 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Treasury shall break up entities included on the Too Big To Fail List, so that their failure would no longer cause a catastrophic effect on the United States or global economy without a taxpayer bailout.”

Too big to fail banks and financial institutions, which tanked the economy, are using their size as a defense against criminal prosecution. According to Sen. Sanders, the legislation would give the Treasury Department 90 days to identify commercial banks, investment banks, hedge funds and insurance companies whose failure would have a catastrophic effect on the stability of either the financial system or the United States economy without a government bailout.

This is a matter of both economic security and justice. The six largest financial institutions in the US control 2/3 of the country’s GDP. They hold 2/3 of all credit cards, half of all mortgages, and more than 40% of all bank deposits.

The same people who crashed the economy in 2008 now find themselves richer and bigger than ever. While people who now find themselves in poverty because of the Great Recession are being thrown into jail for missing a payment, the rich have gotten richer.

H/T: Jason Easley at PoliticusUSA

volumenometry:

I really like this guy.

p.s. Britain, please abandon David Cameron. 

By Christie’s deeds and his words, he is clearly committed to the death of the labor movement and every other sort of social progress.

Two years ago, Governor Scott Walker of Wisconsin introduced his falsely-named “budget repair bill.”  In doing so, he transformed himself from an obscure Midwestern Governor to the personification of a nationally-orchestrated, well-funded right-wing movement that was more – much more - than just an attempt to balance the budget on the backs of public service workers. His plan, concocted in quite public collaboration with the Koch brothers, was to gut public sector collective bargaining rights altogether.

The right had a new champion. Having weakened and nearly destroyed the private sector union movement in America over the last 30 years, it was time to hone in on a new target: public sector unions and, in fact, the very idea that a fair society requires a robust public sphere. (Hint: this is true for the non-wealthy, less so for people who can buy their way into private schools, private beaches, private jets and so on…).

As everyone knows, the people of Wisconsin fought back. Madison became our Tahrir Square. It was thrilling to watch, and the entire labor and progressive movement understood how important a battle it was. Tactics included civil disobedience on a scale rarely seen in the U.S. and an ambitious electoral recall of a handful of Republican State Senators and Walker himself. Several Senators lost their seats in the recall, but Walker won. Unfortunately, too many union members themselves voted for Walker, despite an enormous groundswell of progressive labor mobilization in the recall.  Walker’s re-election campaign in 2014 will be another “all or nothing” moment for labor and progressive forces as we learn whether Walker-Koch conservatism is here to stay.

Before we get to the 2014 re-match, however, there’s another Governor up for re-election in 2013 who is also in the public eye. I’m referring to the East Coast’s own version of Scott Walker. No one would confuse Chris Christie’s brash {pugilistic?} demeanor for that of a polite Midwesterner. But when it comes to strict adherence to right-wing ideology, Christie is every bit the match for Scott Walker — and in some cases, even worse. I’m from New Jersey, and it’s astonishing to me that someone this awful is the Governor of my home state. .

Before the dust had settled in Madison, Christie was pushing a similar package of collective bargaining “reforms” in New Jersey. Christie frequently made the comparison himself. During a series of press events in Wisconsin during the recall campaign, Christie rallied support for Walker by comparing and celebrating what he and Walker had done.The New Jersey Star Ledger reported it this way in May 2012:  

The Republican governor [Christie] drew no distinction between the pension and benefit reforms pushed through New Jersey’s Democrat-controlled Legislature and Walker’s near-elimination of collective bargaining rights for public-sector unions — actions that flooded the Madison statehouse with protesters and could make him Wisconsin’s first governor to be dumped during his term.

“You see what I’ve been able to do is give Scott and the people of Wisconsin a little preview of what good conservative governance can do for states,” Christie told several hundred people at a landscaping equipment maintenance shop near Milwaukee.

But Christie isn’t just hostile to working-class organizations. He has an all-encompassing right-wing philosophy that seeps into every aspect of his agenda. No matter the issue – minimum wage, marriage equality, climate change, directing public money to private corporations, lowering taxes on the rich – Chris Christie is a hard-right Republican. He may be a huge fan of Bruce Springsteen, but I can guarantee that Springsteen is not a fan of his.

So, as a public service for any progressive or labor-friendly voter who might have been disoriented by Christie’s post-Hurricane Sandy photo opportunities with President Obama, here’s a short dossier on why we should not be confused by this guy. Sadly, some New Jersey-based building trades locals have already endorsed Christie in his 2013 re-election bid. But hopefully everyone else will line up with his Democratic opponent, State Senator Barbara Buono. Christie is clearly the odds on favorite in the race– he’s got a ton of cash, his opponent is relatively unknown, and he taps into a deep well of suburban anger about stagnant wages and soaring property taxes. But he is in fact as bad as Scott Walker.  Period.

He’s firmly on the side of the 1%.

Last year, Governor Christie proposed a $1.2 billion tax cut, with the bulk of the cuts going to the top, even though the state faced enormous budget gaps. He has repeatedly vetoed Democratic legislative efforts to close those gaps by raising taxes on millionaires.  Romney would be proud, and surely, Christie’s wealthiest donors are too.

But here’s where it gets even more unbelievable.  Since taking office, Christie has awarded more than $2 billion in tax breaks to huge corporations like Prudential Insurance, Panasonic, and Goya Foods. They promise new jobs, but in fact just shuffle around existing ones. Prudential got a quarter billion just to move its headquarters a few blocks in Newark. Instead of investing precious tax dollars in actual job creation, New Jersey wastes it on hand-outs to well-connected corporations.

… and not the 99%

Meanwhile, he did raise taxes on one group: the working poor. Christie cut the Earned Income Tax Credit, a program with a long record of bipartisan support that puts more cash in the pockets of struggling families. And just for good measure, Christie also vetoed a modest $1.25/hr increase in the minimum wage.

Need to keep the beer cold?  As Jim Hightower would say, put it next to Chris Christie’s heart.

But isn’t he a social liberal?

People sometimes get the idea that Northeastern Republicans are “fiscal moderates and social liberals.” Not Christie.

On Marriage Equality: Christie is not only against same-sex marriage, he vetoed a bill that would have given equal rights to same sex couples.

On the DREAM Act: He killed it. This was a bill to allow the children of immigrants who graduated high school in New Jersey to attend state colleges at in-state tuition rates.  

On women’s health and abortion rights: He eliminated all funding for women’s health, cutting $7.4 million to Planned Parenthood and other clinics that offer contraception, cancer screenings and other essential services.

That’s not all.

Christie’s blind faith in trickle-down economics has left New Jersey with the seventh highest unemployment rate in the country (9.3%). Yet Christie single-handedly killed the biggest public infrastructure project in the country. The ARC tunnel would have connected New Jersey to New York and created 45,000 permanent jobs, but Christie blocked the project. He’s like one of those moronic Republican Governors who turned down high-speed rail money from the Federal Stimulus Act in Florida or, you guessed it, Wisconsin.

He’s also endangering New Jersey’s reputation as a state that cares about education. In his first year in office he cut $1.2 billion in state aid to public schools. The cuts were so deep that the state Supreme Court found they violated students’ rights. As a candidate, Chris Christie pledged to increase funding for higher education. But then he was elected. And he turned around and cut higher education funding 15%.  All the while, referring to the leaders of the state’s teachers’ union as a “group of political thugs” for opposing these policies.

But what about that great moment after Sandy? Doesn’t that mean anything?

No. Not really. Christie said he didn’t ‘give a damn’ whether global warming contributed to the storm. And while climate scientists agree that climate change will produce worse and worse storms, Christie pulled New Jersey out of the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative. The RGGI is a compact among the northeast states to limit carbon emissions, and is widely seen as a very smart policy. .

Christie is up for re-election this November. It will tough to defeat him, even as he richly deserves to go down. The media like him, and some Democrats in the State Legislature have on occasion made it too easy for him to look effective and far-sighted. If we tell the truth to ourselves, the truth is – right now, Christie is popular. The latest polling has him ahead of his likely Democratic opponent by 35 points. And he has a huge financial advantage.

Still more alarmingly, Christie has somehow secured support from some segments of organized labor, notably the laborers and plumbers unions. No doubt the leaders of these unions see themselves faced with a difficult choice. With Christie so far ahead in polls, it’s tempting to play the percentages and bet on the likely winner in the hopes of securing some small advantage for your members. Pragmatism has its place in politics. We get it.

But in this case, it’s deeply troubling.  

Sometimes, even when the odds are bad, you have to fight. The alternative is simply making an enemy stronger.

This isn’t the first time labor has made this mistake. There are many famous examples of letting short-term pragmatism blind you to a longer term reality. The Air Traffic Controllers backed Ronald Reagan for President in 1980, and he turned around and crushed them. Richard Nixon was backed by many construction unions in 1968 and 1972, and he then worked to undermine them. And of course in Wisconsin, the police and firefighters unions endorsed Walker in his first campaign, and have to know what a gigantic mistake that was.

Christie’s record speaks for itself, and his kind words for Scott Walker should erase any doubt: Christie is no moderate. His worldview should be an anathema to progressives everywhere.  He’s also dangerous, because he’s popular and is a strong contender for the Republican nomination in 2016. A landslide victory in 2013 will be a launching pad for his 2016 race—“I won a bi-partisan landslide in a blue northeastern state (one that Barack Obama won by 18 points and Bob Menendez won by 20 points), I tamed the unions, and I can make a conservative message work everywhere from New Jersey to New Mexico.”  Being able to point to labor support will only bolster his case.

h/t: AlterNet

(via Crooks and Liars: Fox News Tells Striking Workers to Get Two Jobs and ‘Expect to Get Paid the Minimum Wage’)

The hosts of Fox & Friends on Friday suggested that fast food workers should stop striking for higher pay and get a second job because the minimum wage “was never meant to be a career wage.”

On Thursday, hundreds of restaurant workers in New York City went on strike to demand a wage of at least $15 an hour. The current median wage of $9 an hour puts workers at about $4,500 lower that the poverty threshold of $23,000 for a family of four. The current minimum wage in New York City is $7.25.

“Here’s the deal, you’re a minimum wage worker, that’s an entry-level salary,” Fox News host Brian Kilmeade opined on Friday. “If you’re good, you’ll get a raise.”

“Minimum wage was never meant to be a career wage. If you work hard you will get higher — you will get more money. Here’s the other thing, as hard as it is in some cases, because you are a single mom or a single dad, you’ve got to get another job. You’ve got to get another job on top of that so you have two incomes.”

“Brian you hit on the nose, I think, the key thing,” co-host Steve Doocy remarked. “If it is a minimum wage job, expect to get paid the minimum wage.”

Liberals are mounting strong criticisms of President Obama amid news that his budget will include a Social Security benefit cut — an official endorsement of a policy compromise he’s offered Republicans for years — and warning Democrats not to dare vote to cut the cherished retirement program.

A trio of progressive advocacy groups issued scathing statements Friday in response to reports that Obama’s proposal will include a policy called “Chained CPI,” which would re-index Social Security cost of living increases to a lower rate of inflation — a benefit cut the president has included in deficit offers to Republicans since 2011.

“President Obama’s plan to cut Social Security would harm seniors who worked hard all their lives,” said MoveOn.org’s executive director Anna Galland. “That’s unconscionable. It’s even more outrageous given that Republicans in Congress aren’t even asking for this Social Security cut. This time, the drive to cut Social Security is being led by President Obama and Democrats.”

Stephanie Taylor of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee accused Obama of “proposing to steal thousands of dollars from grandparents and veterans” and threatened to subject any Democrat who votes for a Social Security benefit cut to a primary challenge.

“You can’t call yourself a Democrat and support Social Security benefit cuts,” Taylor said in a statement. “The President has no mandate to cut these benefits, and progressives will do everything possible to stop him.”

Obama’s decision to include Chained CPI in his budget, which is expected to be unveiled April 10, reflects his latest effort to entice Republicans into a grand budget deal that stabilizes the national debt at a level where it’s growing more slowly than the economy. Republicans have demanded Obama support significant entitlement cuts but have refrained from proposing such policies themselves. House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) responded Friday that Obama shouldn’t hold entitlement cuts “hostage” to tax increases, but Obama has steadfastly insisted that such cuts must be accompanied by higher taxes on the wealthy, to spread the burden of deficit reduction more evenly. Part of the administration’s calculus is that backing these cuts will illustrate Obama’s willingness to compromise and bring the GOP’s obstinacy to light.

h/t: TPMDC

robertreich:

PLEASE WATCH THIS VIDEO: WHAT’S THE “CHAINED CPI,” WHY IT’S BAD FOR SOCIAL SECURITY, AND WHY THE WHITE HOUSE SHOULDN’T BE TOUTING IT. 

The White House and prominent Democrats are talking about reducing future Social Security payments by using a formula for adjusting for inflation that’s stingier than the current one. It’s called the “Chained CPI.” I did this video so you can understand it — and understand why it’s so wrongheaded. 

Even Social Security’s current inflation adjustment understates the true impact of inflation on the elderly. That’s because they spend 20 to 40 percent of their incomes on health care, and health-care costs have been rising faster than inflation. So why adopt a new inflation adjustment that’s even stingier than the current one?

Social Security benefits are already meager for most recipients. The median income of Americans over 65 is less than $20,000 a year. Nearly 70 percent of them depend on Social Security for more than half of this. The average Social Security benefit is less than $15,000 a year.

Besides, Social Security isn’t in serious trouble. The Social Security trust fund is flush for at least two decades. If we want to ensure it’s there beyond that, there’s an easy fix — just lift the ceiling on income subject to Social Security taxes, which is now $113,700.

Why are Democrats even suggesting the inflation adjustment be reduced? Republicans aren’t asking for it. Not even Paul Ryan’s draconian budget includes it.

Democrats invented Social Security and have been protecting it for almos 80 years.They shouldn’t be leading the charge against it.

questionall:

A few weeks ago I put together  this handy chart of the various components of the GOP coalition. While we already know that the various factions have their own pet issues and causes, the current GOP civil war is exposing the actual distaste the various groups have for each other.

Jed already hit the Christian Right’s whining of Republicans abandoning them on marriage equality. But I want to refocus on Gary Bauer’s comments, because they go beyond simple grousing over a wayward coalition partner:

“If we gave our voters an accurate portrayal of our ideas, that we want to cut the rate of growth on Social Security, give tax cuts to billionaires and then the values issues, the values issues would be more popular than the economic agenda of the current Republican Party,” said [social conservative leader Gary] Bauer…

Ignore the fact that there’s nothing popular about the GOP’s “values.” Just note how he portrays his party’s economic agenda:

give tax cuts to billionaires

That’s how we liberals frame the Mitt Romney wing of the GOP. Economic conservatives might pretend that there’s more to them than tax cuts for billionaires, but even their own partners disagree. And Bauer can’t even be bothered to pretend otherwise anymore.

That’s not a characterization that suggests mutual respect and agreement, but one of barely disguised disgust. Theirs is a marriage of convenience—the Gordon Geckos don’t care for the Bible Thumbers, the Bible Thumpers don’t care for the Gordon Geckos. And now that their collective suck isn’t leading to White House victories, the knives are out.

Funny thing is, both those sides are equally to blame for the GOP’s woes. Mitt Romney conservatism (aka “tax cuts for billionaires”) is as unpopular as Rick Santorum conservatism (aka “hate the gays”). They need each other to amount to something, but that’s no longer a nationally viable party.

GOP factions splitting.

quickhits:

Walker blames protests for crap economy his policies have created.

Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:

Asked Thursday about new numbers showing Wisconsin lagging in job growth, Gov. Scott Walker pointed to the uncertainty he said business owners felt because of the political tumult that rocked Wisconsin early in his term.

Meanwhile, his critics said the governor’s policies had created a drag on growth.

“The first year we had a lot of protests in the state,” Walker said, during an appearance in Milwaukee to promote business growth in the city. “We had two years’, almost, worth of recalls. A lot of employers here I think can relate to the fact (that) uncertainty is one of the biggest challenges for employers big or small or anywhere in between. There was a lot of uncertainty. The good news is that’s passed.”

And that’s why no business ever hires in any democracy at all, right? I mean, you move your business to some state and then they go and have an election and you don’t know who they’re going to pick! The uncertainty makes for a completely terrible business environment. Every two years there’s a different government and the uncertainty caused by that just scares the living crap out of business owners.

Yeah, that’s not a very good excuse.

The better explanation is that trickle-down economics sucks as much as economists say it does. Walker’s been attacking workers and the poor, which amounts to a War on Consumer Demand. The message businesses have been getting out of Wisconsin isn’t “Ooh, we’ve got scary protests and the government might change someday. Too many elections, run away!” it’s “Come to Wisconsin, where taxes are low and customers are broke.”

“The plunge in job growth, compared with other states, coincides exactly with Scott Walker’s time in office,” says Jack Norman, one-time research director of the Institute for Wisconsin’s Future. “This is no mere coincidence… Act 10 led to large cuts in public workers’ take-home pay, which was a blow to the state’s economy.”

Slash workers pay = slash consumer demand. It’s cause and effect and it’s inevitable. Walker isn’t offering an explanation, he’s making excuses. And the fact that he doesn’t plan to change his fiscal course should tell you everything you need to know about how serious the Wisconsin Governor is when it comes to serving his state. He’s not. He’s serious about preserving his wingnut purity by serving a failed ideology. He’s serious about winning the Crazy Person in America contest that will be the 2016 GOP presidential primary.

[photo by Gage Skidmore]