Category Archives: economy

Congress to the hungry:

by

Eat Sh*t.  (Yeah, I know, I’ve said it before, but it speaks so well of the contempt of the poor).  As they debate the Farm Bill, once again they target the vulnerable and less able to fight back:  the food stamp recipients….giving them even less money for food that they can’t afford now…

I was watching CSPAN this morning with Rosa Delauro who is adamant on keeping the food stamp funds as is…and targeting the fraud in other areas that nobody speaks about.  You never hear the so-called conservatives, who love to kick the poor when they’re down, talk about this.   They try to categorize the Food Stamp program as full of fraud and waste….but never quite get around to putting facts out there.  Ronald Reagan started the “welfare queen” lie by taking a true story (a woman on welfare arrived to pick up her food stamps when they were still paper, in a Cadillac.  What Reagan and his ilk failed to report was that the woman was being given a ride by a wealthy lady so she could pick up her stamps.  Nice way to skew public perception to hate these lazy good-for-nothings that are driving around in luxury vehicles../snark.)  Good on Rosa when a woman caller called in spewing the conservative talking points that there was massive fraud and waste in the program.  A man also called in saying, “I don’t want to see anybody starve, but there are other ways for them to get food.  You have to cut these programs.”  Yeah, he doesn’t want to see people starving, so they best do it behind closed doors to soothe his conscience.

From the article:

Government audits and court records show hundreds of millions of dollars in losses due to fraud in a variety of farm programs, including crop insurance and subsidies that help agribusinesses promote their products abroad. The rate of food stamp fraud, on the other hand, has declined sharply in recent years, federal data shows, and now accounts for 1 percent of the $760 billion program, or $760 million a year.

~~~~~~~~~

It would be damn near impossible to commit fraud with the food stamp program.  (Note that the error rate is at 3 percent.  3 % !! ) You must give them employment information, bank statements, rent information, number in household, etc., and you are checked up on.  And if they see anything that doesn’t sound right to them, they will call you and question it.

For instance, when I told them how little I made when in FW, they were questioning me on how I could make it on that low amount.  I told them that I washed my clothes in the tub (with the exception of once a month washing my jeans and towels in the washing machines); I cut my own hair (with sometimes hilarious results); went without deodorant except for important things like job interviews; washed my hair every other day, even though it needs it every day especially in the hot weather; I walked nearly everywhere so I didn’t use gas;  I brush my teeth with baking soda,  I count the number of squares of toilet paper I use, and other things like using cloth pads (but I didn’t tell them that as it’s really none of their business).

Everything that I needed (thyroid and other supplements) my son helped pay for.  I am actually quite proud of myself for handling this as I have–this isn’t how I was raised and it’s been a learning experience.

A caller called in who said she was a former food stamp recipient but now has a college degree and is working.  But, alas, she says now that the program should be cut.  Hello?  It never ceases to amaze me how those who have made it forget how difficult it was and lose their empathy for those in that position. (As a side note:  it also never ceases to amaze me how quick conservatives are to take money for themselves at taxpayer expense, but still have the nerve to deny people something as basic as FOOD.)

And I have a college education, but look where I am now….done in by stupid amalgams put in my mouth that made me ill, and wages that stagnated (otherwise, I might have been able to keep from losing my home and weathered the storm until I got well…perhaps not, but it would have been worth the shot.)

They mentioned on CSPAN that most folks on food stamps are disabled.  A man in the building I used to live in said he only gets $16 per month in food stamps.  He’s in a wheelchair.    Others on disability are not living it up.  You can’t buy cigarettes and alcohol on food stamps.  You also can’t buy toilet paper, soap,shampoo, trash bags, and other necessities.  Some people were using the plastic grocery bags for their trash in my building…much to the disdain of the management (throwing them down the trash shoot created mega problems).

Also mentioned in the CSPAN program is the fact that good ole Teflon Bill Clinton had changed the Food Stamp program drastically…while signing away jobs per NAFTA….Reagan would have been sooo proud.  It wasn’t until 2008 that they had addressed it again.

This whole debate is nonsensical.  No one with a shred of conscience can seriously say that denying people a basic need such as food is something that “has to” be done…especially when there is so much corporate welfare out there and a bloated defense department.  (OMG, did she really say cut the defense dept?  Watch out for drones, dear…)

Helping ourselves

by

commondreams has this up.  Be sure to look at all the videos–well worth the time.

The idea is so simple it’s like “duh!”

I have a quibble, though, with Klein saying that it’s up to the Left to “seize the moment”.  There are those who are NOT in the Tea Party on the Right who also need and want to find a solution to the crashes around us.  I say this because the Left has not been of the same mind — I was shot down on a progressive website when I advocated buying American so we could put people back to work.  I knew that Washington wasn’t going to get off its collective duff and do anything about the job loss.  (NAFTA being a good example of monumental job loss.)

I just don’t think people have been given the skills or knowledge to feel confident enough to take over a business if the owners want to sell out.  I think it may be a case of learned helplessness?  Not believing in yourself can be such a huge obstacle that one stops before even getting started.

Perhaps the “teach-ins” of 2013 should be “Business 101:  how to own a business without going belly-up nor bankrupting the environment on your way to the bank…”

The Native Americans learned this a loooong time ago–nature was not a second thought.  They did not separate their actions from nature.

It’s still so incredibly stupid that business has ignored the laws of nature, as if we could exist without clean water, clean air and chemical free food…

Well…exist is probably a bad word choice…since we are existing right now…perhaps thriving  is the better word.  All one has to do is look at folks’ skin and see that we are not thriving, but existing.  The skin is such a barometer of what’s going on in the insides…not doing too well by that account.

Anyway, Washington isn’t going to help us…most likely profiting off of NAFTA…so, it’s up to us if we want to save ourselves.

 

 

 

 

Why Detroit Matters

by

I’m bopping around the web this morning reading up on Detroit….I just can’t get the dumping of petroleum coke out of my mind.

Whatever happens to Detroit happens to all of us….

Here’s a piece up on a refinery fire…by Marathon…where the residents were not even told what was going on.  It is just unconscionable that these folks were not told what was going on and that some were evacuated but others across the street were not.

This piece spouts the pro-corporate view that anything that supports the environment is bad for business.  Tell me, what good is business if so many are sick or even dead because of toxic overload?  Who will be left to buy your product?

From the article:

The document claims city planners fail to take into consideration that Metro Detroit’s poor and minority neighborhoods are already deluged with excessive pollution and contaminated industrial, commercial, and hazardous waste sites.

~~~~~~~~

Claims of “environmental injustice” (and environmental racism) are little more than catch phrases used by green activists to draw attention to the purportedly disproportionate negative effects of pollution in poor and minority communities. The accusation is that federal, state, and local governments have conspired to permit more pollution in impoverished black communities than in affluent ones.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

He goes on to say that there are the same health problems in more affluent neighborhoods.  He thinks the problem is their lifestyle rather than the toxic environment.  I think that’s too simplistic as it doesn’t take in the whole picture.  It is known that mercury damages a person’s DNA.  So…if the parents of affluent African Americans were poor and lived in these more toxic areas, being exposed to lead and mercury and arsenic, their DNA will be affected and pass that on to their children.  It gets worse with each generation.  Also, toxins do not stay in a particular geographical area, although it will be more concentrated in that area, it will drift, and also cause health issues (on a lesser scale) to those in affluent neighborhoods.

As far as environmental racism…it is a well known occurrence.  Probably should be better categorized as environmental “poor-ism” because it’s done towards the poor.  I say this with the thought in mind that it does not follow blacks whom have moved into more affluent neighborhoods.  Perhaps one can say that it is because whites also share that neighborhood.  Well….I guess you could say that, BUT then whites also share the poor neighborhoods with blacks….which leads me to conclude that it is against the poor rather than exclusively against blacks.

The last line about the gov’t allowing the poor to bear the brunt of toxins ignores the above~~you don’t see the petroleum coke being dumped on the Koch’s front lawn, do you?  When that happens, you can tell me that gov’t officials have not discriminated against the poor.

I notice that the author was once a commissioner….so I am left to wonder whether he, in his official capacity, willfully went along with poisoning the poor and is now trying to justify it?

On to the financial woes of Detroit, I found some interesting articles.

This one details the bad news. Note that they’re going after unions.  HUGE RED FLAG that Disaster Capitalism and ALEC are in the midst.  (related to this is a strike by fast food workers to form unions.)

This article on Slate paints a different picture of the stuff going on behind the scenes.  Note the link to the NY Times’ article on Dan Gilbert trying to make a fortune rebuilding the city…

The article talks about the cityscape with abandoned houses, empty spaces after demolition of houses, and the population dwindling from 2 million down to 700,000.    When reading that Gilbert’s solution is to bring business in, to spur people walking the streets (shoppers)…and it strikes me that there is so much opportunity here….but it feels like trying to fix the problem with the same old, same old…

With all the demolished houses…what about the urban farmer?  I know that would be difficult if the ground were polluted, as Detroit seems to be the dumping ground, but if the soil were not toxic, why not encourage that? It would help those in the inner cities to feed themselves as well as sell produce to earn income.

Why not encourage planting of trees to help the air quality?  As I blogged before, we need to include nature into our plans and stop ignoring the impact we have on nature and the colossal impact nature has on us.

It also ignores the devastating impact that Big Box stores have had on our local economies.  Walmart moves in….independent small businesses die…and entire downtowns are destroyed…not only do the businesses die, but our feeling of connectedness dies with them…

 

Tossed aside

by

The suicide rate has skyrocketed for one particular age group:  the over 50 crowd….the Boomers…

Susie Madrak has a post up on it here.

From the comments, which are really sobering:

dogjudge • 3 hours ago 

September, 2011. I get a phone call from friends of my (then) 83 year old aunt. She had just been saved by two friends. Both are nurses. She had sliced both arms about 35 times. When the dust settled, we found out that she had gotten over 10 grand in debt. Why? She and her husband had lost all of their money paying for hospital bills for his heart condition. He died about 10 years prior. Her only income was Social Security. Couldn’t afford to live on that. Long story short, she now lives with my wife and I.

And we get the Republicans wanting to make that situation worse for millions and a President who thinks that cutting Social Security is fine so that the wealthy in this country still don’t have to pay their fair share.

Isn’t this a great country, or what?

~~~~~~~~~~

The comments are heartbreaking.  And very telling.  There’s a lot of pain out there….and not a lot of hope that things will get better.

Are you listening, members of Congress? President Obama?

….probably can’t hear over the loud voices of lobbyists and campaign donors….

Ending Too Big To Fails…?

by

Center for Media and Democracy has this up at PR Watch.org.

From the site:

These banks enjoy an implicit government guarantee that has been quantified by economists as a hidden taxpayer subsidy that disadvantages smaller banks. Bloomberg recently pegged this subsidy at some $84 billion,

~~~~~~~

The Brown-Vitter bill wants the banks to be ready to give themselves a bailout when there is another shock to the financial system. The bill significantly raises the amount of high-quality (equity) capital that the big banks must hold – foreign banks operating in the United States included. Community banks would stay under the current rules, mid-sized and regional banks would be required to hold eight percent in capital to cover their assets, and megabanks – institutions with more than $500 billion in assets – would be required to meet a new 15 percent capital requirement, virtually double their current requirements.

~~~~~~~

Ab-so-freaking-lutely.

If you click on the Bloomberg link, the question of the year:  Why Should Taxpayers Give Big Banks $83 Billion Per Year?

From Bloomberg:

The top five banks — JPMorgan, Bank of America Corp., Citigroup Inc., Wells Fargo & Co. and Goldman Sachs Group Inc. – – account for $64 billion of the total subsidy, an amount roughly equal to their typical annual profits (see tables for data on individual banks)

~~~~~~~~~

Now, these banks wouldn’t be getting these NICE dividends because of campaign donations and lobbying, now would they…?  Nah, we *know* they are too honest, too upstanding, too ethical to do that…right…?  Pfft.

When I clicked on the massive bailouts to foreign banks, as well link, the site wasn’t that informative, and that is something I would reeeeallly like to know…how much are we paying out for other countries’ banks??

The bill is supposed to force the banks’ hand:  they either come up with the capital to cover their assets or they start divesting their mega corporations into smaller banks, which is what they should have done immediately after the crash in ’08.

 

 

 

More on Rogoff and Reinhart

by

Firedoglake has this up on the *cough* research of Rogoff and Reinhart.

From one of the commenters, letsgetitdone at 16:

I think, finally, that the RR study is an example of the corruption of social science in modern times. I believe that one can show that the study was not just guilty of calculation errors and errors of omission, but that these must be seen as part of a pattern of systematic bias that permeated their whole process of inquiry beginning with their selection of the problem, moving through every decision point in implementing the study, and ending with their evaluation of their evidence and their writing of the result. They made no attempt to do a scientific study maximizing fair comparison of alternative theories having policy relevance, but instead prepared what was essentially a legal brief supporting austerity policies and the Pete Peterson line. The social costs of what they did are strewn all over the globe. See this recent post at DailyKos.

 ~~~~~~~~
I agree that if R and R purposely left out data (and the concensus is that they did), then what they did was fraudulent and a deliberate attempt to persuade public opinion towards austerity.
This should be *sounding the bells*  as to how very, very important our public education system is….from  kindergarten through four year colleges….the public needs to be able to understand this stuff in the most basic terms.  And the financial gurus purposely make it difficult to understand for the Jane/John Does of the U.S., to give themselves the upper hand.  Like I said about the university I attended, they made math more difficult than it had to be –the only conclusion one can come to is that they were doing it on purpose to “weed out” people.  This, in turn, means fewer graduates with Math degrees to compete in the job market, enabling them to be paid more $$.  It also means that financial gurus can bullshit people and no one will be the wiser.  When the Wall St. meltdown happened, there were econ people who could not figure the mess out…how are Jane/John Doe supposed to?
With the Liberal Arts degree, I have a basic understanding of statistics from a political science class. We were taught to look for the reasons behind conclusions of research.  Who funded it?  What other work have these researchers done (looking at other work for biases)?  Who benefits from it (will a corporation use the data as an asset or use the data to knock down a competitor)?  If it was a poll, we were taught that anything more than 2% plus or minus of the margin of error was a flawed study–the questions asked were biased in some way or not thorough enough.
That is why one should always question absolutes in science or absolute truth that anyone espouses.  If more people were less intimidated and asked “why” and to say “I don’t understand” to someone trying to buffalo them, the financial gurus and others like them would not be able to get away with the stuff that they do.  Thank God for people like Herndon and the others who seek the truth and are not afraid to speak out.
I followed the link that letsgetitdone had in the comment to dailykos, which in turn had the link to the cepr.net website.
This quote from the cepr website says it all:
This is a big deal because politicians around the world have used this finding from R&R to justify austerity measures that have slowed growth and raised unemployment. In the United States many politicians have pointed to R&R’s work as justification for deficit reduction even though the economy is far below full employment by any reasonable measure. In Europe, R&R’s work and its derivatives have been used to justify austerity policies that have pushed the unemployment rate over 10 percent for the euro zone as a whole and above 20 percent in Greece and Spain. In other words, this is a mistake that has had enormous consequences.
~~~~~~~~~~
Minor quibble—as everyone is leaning to, this was not a “mistake”…but a deliberate attempt to misconstrue data to suit their political ideology, and that of Pete Peterson.

Hunger in America

by

…speaking of hunger:

http://www.worldhunger.org/articles/Learn/us_hunger_facts.htm

..an issue for the  poor whom are also Celiacs, would be made ill by bread and other commonly donated food.  Things get more difficult for the poor and sick when the efforts of those trying to help aren’t helping–and would instead make them sick—I’m sure many would seem ungrateful to those trying to help when they would refuse food.

 

 

Shining the light

by

PR Watch has a report up on the growing gaps between CEO pay and worker pay:   http://www.prwatch.org/NODE/12060

This is just wrong.  They’re closing factories and moving them overseas because, as they claim, American workers want too much –safe work conditions and a living wage…

…while CEO’s are making astounding salaries…

I have no words.