Wednesday, February 16, 2011

Data on the disparity in wealth and income.

David Cay Johnston, a tax expert and author of the book "Perfectly Legal", explains how the very top income earners are not only doing far better than everyone else, but are doing so at an increasing rate. Their doing so puts increasing tax burdens on the middle and lower middle classes. I have valuable information from his recent article further down in this post, and I will attempt to explain the ramifications on the rest of us.

I read a lot of different informational sources about economics and economic data. I have come across a site from a Ph.D economist that I find very useful and interesting.  This particular page discusses wealth and poverty. I recommend that you explore his entire site, which has many interesting tidbits of data and analysis.

Income, Wealth and Poverty


In addition, I recommend another good article on the topic of the disparity between incomes in the U.S.

The United States of Inequality


An excellent book is "Perfectly Legal" by David Cay Johnston. He also writes columns for Tax.com and other sites.   He makes clear how the people at the very highest income levels are reaping huge financial rewards - based in large part by influencing and manipulating the tax laws, at the expense of the rest of us.  Here is information from his recent article (as of Feb. 16, 2011), from  tax.com  

"

Tax Rates for Top 400 Earners Fall as Income Soars, IRS Data

David Cay Johnston* for Tax Analysts
The incomes of the top 400 American households soared to a new record high in dollars and as a share of all income in 2007, while the income tax rates they paid fell to a record low, newly disclosed tax data show.

In 2007 the top 400 taxpayers had an average income of $344.8 million, up 31 percent from their average $263.3 million income in 2006, according to figures in a report that the IRS posted to its Web site without announcement that were discovered February 16. 
 
The top 400's share of all income grew from 1.31 cents out of every dollar earned by all Americans to 1.59 cents. 

The annual top 400 report was first made public by the Clinton administration, but the George W. Bush administration shut down access to the report. Its release was resumed a year ago when President Obama took office. The Statistics of Income Division at the IRS created the top 400 reports at the urging of Joel Slemrod, a business professor at the University of Michigan.

The top 400 reports understate actual top incomes because of deferral rules. For example, managers of offshore hedge funds who deferred their gains may not be counted in the top 400 reports, which are based on the figure on the last line of the front page of Form 1040.

At least three hedge fund managers made $3 billion in 2007. It is not known how much, if any, of their income they deferred.  

Most of the income going to the top 400 tax returns is from capital. Salaries and wages accounted for only 6.5 percent of the top 400's income in 2007, down from 7.4 percent in 2006 and 26.2 percent in 1992. The average salary rose from 2006 to 2007, however, just at a slower rate than overall income growth."

This is a trend that has been gaining steam even since he published his book "Perfectly Legal".  The result is, the average effective tax rate  - meaning the tax ultimately paid, for the top 1% income earners, when all federal taxes are considered, including gasoline, beer and Social Security, is roughly 25% of their income, which is actually slightly lower than the average middle class individual. Then you factor in some of the economic benefits available to the top 1% that do not show up in the commonly available statistics, like the tax tricks developed by people like Jonathan Blattmachr, they are taxed more lightly than the middle class. (Blattmachr is a tax and estate planning expert that is identified in "Perfectly Legal". He has found sophisticated paths through the tax laws that enable the super-rich to avoid paying $millions in taxes that they would otherwise have to pay if the loopholes were not there.)

Hard to believe?  It shouldn't be; not if you are paying attention.  Please stop listening to the highly paid pundits from Fox News (and other disingenuous sources), and instead actually look at the data and  read books and articles from the folks who look at and analyze the data in detail; the ones who are telling the truth.

Of course, the trick is in distinguishing between disingenuous and honest sources. I am attempting to do just that with this blog. David Cay Johnston is one of the honest ones. There are others, and I will expose you to them as I find them by researching these issues.

49 comments:

  1. Lou Please feel free to use any articles on this very topic (of which there are many) from my site. I freely offer these essays to any who wish to download and use them for legitimate debate. www.jamesconvey.com

    Opinion:

    One learns with age hopefully, that there are "two sides to every story". It is therefore for me a sign of immaturity, and weakness of intellect, for one to not do ones best to learn as much about the two opposites, in order for one to form a sensible and well centered and reasoned opinion.

    If history has taught us anything, it is that if hatred in any form is allowed to enter the debates of man, it clouds the mind and causes nothing but fractious and stubborn resolution, with no hope of reaching any accommodation whatsoever. It is also a significant waste of energy!

    The only solution,( which argues strongly for the position of reasonableness in all debate), would be therefore, to simply declare war each time differences appear and settle the matter in a conflagration of death and winner takes all!

    I assume that those who hate would therefore be willing to die, for such hatred to have any validity whatsoever?
    James M. Convey

    ReplyDelete
  2. Another article to build on your view of the world

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703439504576116340050218236.html

    ReplyDelete
  3. My comment to Charles krauthammers piece in the Washington Post.

    ..........Still think we should have extended the Bush tax cuts Charles? There's a few billion you forgot about old chap! I am sure you have received adequate compensation for your support of their lobby?

    Also the republicans mindless focus upon minor budgetary issues is laughable! As the real money that is wasted on excess plane engines, maintaining military bases around the globe that are redundant, and allowing the wealthy corporatists to continue to steal the taxpayers money, through tax relief and transfer payments, goes forward without restraint! Rather it receives their full support!

    Wall street also continues to maintain "Black pools" of derivative trading and full speculative manipulation of the economy without a single word from Charles and his neocon pals. Billions are being stolen as we speak by these cretins and conspirators.

    Not a word from Charles about these realities.......
    No instead he highlights the real problem somehow as being the poor and the unionized public employees and their oh so criminal expectation, that they should receive a decent wage and a guaranteed pension at the end of their working lives? God forbid that this should be the American dream?

    What evil lurks in the hearts of these republican pundits such as Krauthammer. Not a single word about the real culprits that created and continue to accelerate the deficit, via their lobby power and avoidance of tax responsibilities and with the assistance of the U.S supreme court.

    It would appear that the real majority, the middle class and the poor don't stand a chance in this environment and this cretin Krauthammer, continues to hammer the "little people" as somehow responsible for expecting a reasonable living standard? What an exhibit of the uncaring elitist ethos. You truly are anti the American dream Charles!

    ReplyDelete
  4. Krauthammers piece was in the Post : "Obamas Louis XV budget" Feb 18th.

    ReplyDelete
  5. James,
    The Krauthammer article criticizes the Obama budget. There would be no reason to include “Black pools” & public employee unions in the discussion.
    It seems that the whole point of your comment is that the budget should be entirely balanced on increased taxes on the greedy and criminal wealthy. The math on this just does not work. Reduced spending needs to be part of the solution. This should include fixing Social Security, Medicare & Medicaid. Why no mention of this in the budget? What about tax reform to fix some of those problems you mention. In fact WHY NO MENTION OF THE DEFICIT COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS except discretionary spending??
    This budget is completely irresponsible and a very good example of why we will never again be able to use the term “American Dream”.
    Your comments on the public employee unions are off base. It’s not about wages. What we are trying to do is limit the destructive influence they have over the public finances. We don’t want them to take us the way of GM, Chrysler or the entire airline industry. Oh, and here in America James, virtually the only people that have guaranteed pensions are government workers. The rest of us have to take personal responsibility for our retirement.

    ReplyDelete
  6. @JohnC.
    I am sorry but it certainly appears you are "putting words in my mouth"? Where did I say "the budget should be entirely balanced on increased taxes on the greedy and the criminally wealthy"?
    I would like to see the offshore accounts of these good corporate and private citizens taxed as income, which is what it is! It represents billions of lost tax revenue over the years.

    Also nowhere do I say, that reduced spending is not a necessity? I just want to see honesty in journalism when it comes to the topic he covered? Krauthammer is a particular target of mine in this regard.
    Also, too many in the corporate and banking fraternity have been allowed to escape from any justice whatsoever, as regards their ability to continue to accumulate great wealth, while the rest of the nations populace is forced to confront cuts at all levels! Do you realize that not one banker in the US, has gone to jail? Of any that may hold blame for this financial catastrophe, it is surely the 'whiz kids' of wall street that are the most culpable? Don't you at least agree with this?

    They do continue, as I say, to trade in their Black arts! I can assure you of this from personal experience. As the rest of the nation basically faces personal bankruptcy, or at the very least a 40% decline in real asset values and the continued decline of the purchasing power of the US dollar. The American middle class may be under siege but not by the declining American worker in any shape or form!

    Which would make your focus upon Unions, as somehow the culprits behind the demise of the American Manufacturing sector, an indication of real economic naivete' . Anyone who studies economics, knows the downfall was directly related to the inability to maintain competitive technologies, and implement sound management techniques to offset Global competitive realities. Basically they built and designed crappy products! To quote GM's marketing theory "The American public will buy whatever we tell them to buy". The market simply dealt them the purist of lessons about supply and demand! Arrogance doesn't control markets, demand does!.....continued

    ReplyDelete
  7. cont; .......The American worker did not design or market the product he built on the assembly line, any more than the German worker or Japanese worker. Both earning similar wages on a per capita comparative economic scale, as with Mercedes Benz and Toyota. American corporatism acted in a purely 'socialist' manner in their approach to the expanding Global marketplace. They believed their own press!

    How you can place blame on the Unionized worker for this is laughable? Considering that union workers account for a small % (11% approx)of the entire US workforce? I am on the record as saying unionism has many faults, but certainly I am not foolish enough to believe that they are somehow the culprit for the decline of the American dream?

    If you eradicate Unions, all that will occur is the worker will no longer have any combined political voice in your nations election processes. I believe you are being "hornswoggled" if you believe this nonsense to be necessary! Right or wrong however, is for you as an American voter to decide. But do remember that something which is guaranteed to every corporation now by your supreme court, will in effect be eliminated for the workers Unions if they are destroyed. It would then be in essence, the individual versus the corporation as to influencing politicians. I will let you surmise who will win that game?

    As regards being critical of the present budget proposal. I am of the understanding that it is simply that, "a proposal"? And your system of debate in congress and the senate will ultimately massage and add and delete to it and hopefully arrive at a centrist moderate budgetary law? In this regard, my criticizing Krauthammer's radical critique, which is purely a follow on to his many, for me, maniacal attacks, upon your sitting president, would make me appear in retrospect as a sensible moderate, rather than some ideological pundit for either side of any extremisms?
    That I am a Canadian with love and respect for my southern cousins as individuals and people, makes me equally shocked that Krauthammer, (a fellow Canadian by the way), feels he can write his pietistic pettifoggery without some Canadian responding, if to only offer a counter point and protect our good names as Canadians and respectful neighbors.

    I have many essays on my site, opining from an outside and trained viewpoint, upon the American economic and political dynamic. Some are of course highly critical, but I do try to be truthful as I see it.
    As to the question of pensions; That is an ideological debate no more severe nor traumatic than healthcare and I believe should be left to another da

    ReplyDelete
  8. James,
    I did not realize I was stepping into a Canadian Catfight between you and Mr. Kreuthammer. I thought I was offering comments on the irresponsibility of the Obama budget. It may be a “proposal” but it is an irresponsible one.

    Just to clear up a places where you may have put words in my mouth.

    I said
    This budget is completely irresponsible and a very good example of why we will never again be able to use the term “American Dream”.

    You said
    I am on the record as saying unionism has many faults, but certainly I am not foolish enough to believe that they are somehow the culprit for the decline of the American Dream

    I said:
    Your comments on the PUBLIC employee unions are off base. It’s not about wages. What we are trying to do is limit the destructive influence they have over the PUBLIC finances. (Empahsis on PUBLIC added). We don’t want them to take us the way of GM, Chrysler or the entire airline industry.

    You said
    Which would make your focus upon Unions, as somehow the culprits behind the demise of the American Manufacturing sector, an indication of real economic naivete.

    GM, Chrysler and the entire airline industry = the American Manufacturing sector? hum

    I have no qualm with unions in the private sector. If they want to negotiate a company or corporation out of business more power to them.

    I have a completely different opinion about PUBLIC employee unions. They are negotiating with an elected official that they have a huge influence in electing. Who looses in that case? – the non-government taxpayer of course. The percentage of government workers that are unionized are 37.4%. There are now more government unionized workers than there are private sector unionized workers. They made the largest campaign contributions during the mid-terms - and are proud of it.

    I for one am happy to have corporations working for me in this case. It gives us non-government, non-unionized workers and taxpayers the "combined political voice" that public employees now have.

    ReplyDelete
  9. John and James, interesting point by both of you. Thank for carrying on a civil yet spirited debate. :)

    I often point out articles from writers when I think the article represents my position on a given issue. I'm going to list part of a recent article by one of my favorite writers, Robert Reich. The particular part of his article that I am pasting in here really points out the ideas that I am trying to articulate regarding how the union issue is directly related to the top 1% income issue.

    I will put a link to the entire article below. I hope you both read it and comment.

    From Robert Reich: "Last year, America's top thirteen hedge-fund managers earned an average of $1 billion each. One of them took home $5 billion. Much of their income is taxed as capital gains - at 15 percent - due to a tax loophole that Republican members of Congress have steadfastly guarded.

    If the earnings of those thirteen hedge-fund managers were taxed as ordinary income, the revenues generated would pay the salaries and benefits of 300,000 teachers. Who is more valuable to our society - thirteen hedge-fund managers or 300,000 teachers? Let's make the question even simpler. Who is more valuable: One hedge fund manager or one teacher?"

    Here is the link to the entire article:

    http://www.alternet.org/story/149981/exposing_the_republicans%27_3-part_strategy_to_tear_the_middle_class_apart_--_let%27s_stop_them_in_wisconsin?page=1

    ReplyDelete
  10. John,
    I believe if you look at the concentration of unionized labor you will rethink your 37% figure. State by state the number average per capita, is quite a bit lower. Closer to 11%.
    In addition you forget to mention that while they were for sure in the top 5 donators to campaign funding, corporations represent 7 of the top ten funders, the majority to the republican party, with the American Chamber of commerce as the largest single donator.
    I believe your fear of unionized public employees is again a "red herring" and a minor issue in the grand scheme of the American electoral process. Additionally and to your point of preference, I would caution you to not put too much faith in any "corporation" having your best interests as an American worker close to their hearts! I believe these socialist corporations to be the bane of free enterprise and entrepreneurial growth. Please see my comments on this in another post to you on this site.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Lou,

    I am familiar with Robert Reichs work. As an economic analyst one cannot help but be. I am in "his camp"as regards the failings of the American "corpus economica" to deal with the realities of the failed trickle down experiment of the last 30 years. I have written many essays on a similar theme.
    I believe Warren Buffets remarks as to the topsy turvy system America has fostered over this time, reflect somewhat what should really be a blanket mea culpa from the entirety of the American capitalist.
    Quote"".............I've worked in an economy that rewards someone who saves lives of others on the battlefield with a medal, rewards a great teacher with thank you notes from parents, but rewards those who can detect the mispricing of securities, with sums reaching into the billions! In Short, fates distribution of long straws is wildly capricious!..............."

    ReplyDelete
  12. John and Lou,

    Here is a piece from some time ago referencing the socialist corporate dynamic and it's basic conspiracy to control the totality of the American economy.

    http://www.jamesconvey.com/uploads/3/3/8/3/3383644/conspiracyofthecorporations.pdf

    ReplyDelete
  13. Lou,
    I am in agreement with Robert Reich regarding Hedge Fund managers. How they managed to get their plum tax break is amazing and it is even more astonishing that they manage to keep it. In some dark way you have to be humbled by their ability to manupulate the system this way.

    Where I part ways with Mr. Reich's comments is his philosophy that we must spend all the extra tax revenue we get from his suggestion. We really no longer have that luxary. We must control our deficit and debt.

    His comment also falls into the liberial mentality that as long as you throw money at a problem it makes it better. This is not always true. In the case of teachers I don't think the number of teachers is the issue -- its the qualitity of the teachers. We have been throwing money at education for years and the quality and results continue to deteriorite. This is why Obama's "race to the top" program is genius. This program has done more to improve inovation in education than any program that I know of -- and the cost is miniscule.

    ReplyDelete
  14. John C ............. I was hoping when I came to this site, for moderate and sensible debate. Could you please explain "WHY" and "HOW" we have to control our deficit and debt? And why we need to use such desperate measures as are being currently proposed by the new congress and several republican state governers?

    You also don't answer Lou's question? And you admire;"....... In some dark way you have to be humbled by their ability to manupulate the system this way......" Don't you realize that this system that allows for them and others to profit so, was due to the deregulation begun during the Reagan administration and continued "helter skelter" during the lst Bush administration! Have you been asleep during this whole period?

    It was the republican folly of the unfettered free trickle down marketplace nonsense that caused America and the world's, current economic problems. And this latest bunch of low brow intellects, appear to be, like yourself, unwilling to accept the facts and are going to try to rewrite history by blaming the unions, the democrats and the people? Are you really that naive?

    I would like to hear your counterpoint economic plan and reasoning before I comment on yours as to Reichs economic posit that he will in the usual Liberal folly as you say, "throw money" at the problem.....

    Which he doesn't say, but which it seems you interpret from his theory of what would be required for the sound economic management of the American economy? You seem to rejoice in using the time honored republican method of attacking liberal policies with " talking points" rather than sound economic proposals? It has been American republican economics by the way that has always historically thrown money at the problems and "out the window"? I have watched them do it for over 40 years!
    Please remember in my memory and in the historical record, that it was only under the Clinton administration that the US economy achieved a surplus, in recent times! From Reagan forward. Please check these facts for yourself.

    Equally you seem to avoid the issue of debating the actual economic solutions being proposed by republicans and how their "fixes" will work to stimulate growth and reduce joblessness.I see no sensible legislation yet being proposed by the republican congress, that will have any significant effect on the burgeoning deficits. This is also true of the proposed Obama budget, but as I said before it is only a political "proposal" and the final budget is a long ways off!.
    The Republican methodology seems to be to eradicate any and all entitlements and to leave the American worker out in the cold? Set the country;s clock backwards to the times of servitude status for the masses?
    Where are the job stimulus packages as promised? Their only plan appears to be to "throw the baby out with the bathwater" by tearing down, hard fought for, social improvements for the American majority, and to return the American worker into some form of third world entity?
    All this while cronyism and corporate malfeasance continues unabated and tax free! Really John where is your platform for progress?

    ReplyDelete
  15. John, Here is a segment of my essay on "a new economic format is required: previously recommended. This goes to my point about the republican parties culpability in the destruction of the American economy.

    ".....................The "trickledown" economists of the latter half of the 20th century, ( having it seems completely dismissed any and all social factors, as irrelevant in their economic theories), created a "boom" economic dynamic and environment, that could only be truly advantaged by the already wealthy top tiny % of their own society? The "trickle down", only went down so far, but never as far as needed, to enrich the whole society for any great length of time?

    The resulting social deficits and inequality of benefit, places the burden for the "human quotient", squarely upon the Governments shoulders, which in real terms means the people! Meanwhile the riches, created by the labors of that society over almost a century, remain squarely in the control of that same tiny % ! Most of the globes leading economies at the time (Western), followed this model of American enterprise and free market thinking, in what seems to have been in retrospect, blind obeisance to an unproven ideal?

    This is the same group, that now of course stimulate their lobbyist forces to rale against taxes on the rich, and also believe and propose, that social reform by any democratically elected government, will always be inefficient and wasteful, in implementing any form of leveling of opportunity, as well as attempting to balance fiscal responsibility?

    It is a curious event to witness the exiting of investment capital focus, from within the US for instance, as it escapes to ' friendlier climes ', China, India etc. This is not at all mentioned for some reason, by any of these "trickle down" economists, who continue to "blather on" about free enterprise and free markets, with absolutely no seeming sense of reality, about what is occurring at the grass roots level of their own society?

    Meanwhile the real capital and wealth is escaping, leaving in it's wake, devastated nations with long term deficits, that will encumber the
    next 2 generations at least! The robbers having escaped with the loot?

    It is indeed a strange American community, and indeed any community, that would allow these pundits of economic "flim flammery" to continue to hold authoritative positions within the discipline, when their very philosophy has led to the existential devastation of the beneficial aspects for society, of the entire capitalist system! Creating a new have not level of poverty, not seen since the great depression!..............."

    ReplyDelete
  16. I love when you pointy headed poindexters get into the game of class warfare, rich versus poor, union versus non union, clinton versus bush, trickle down versus trickle up economics to explain something that is as easy to comprehend as Rodney Dangerfield's explanation of factory building in Back To School!!

    Public Sector employees are compensated in wages and benefits at a higher rate than the people that actually pay those benefits. That can't last when bubbles are bursting.

    Civil discourse goes out the window from the Lib side...Lib politicians run to other states...teachers and union members further prove their inability to comprehend real world economics.

    I run a business...when income does not match outflow, I make less or the lights don't stay on.

    Keep quoting pundits and making excuses or living in the past. Meanwhile this broken system will never get fixed.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Kevin,

    I hope you will refrain from calling others with a viewpoint "pointed headed poindexters" simply because they can analyze more readily the depth and complexity of a problem, better than your simplistic approach.

    I too am a businessman. When income stalls I too look to reduce overhead, but I do not immediately presume to tear down the sources and bases of my industry and destroy the future security of my wealth? I attempt to identify the core issues that caused the problem and then eradicate it with sensible solutions. Attacking the American worker amounts to self destruction in this current crazy dynamic of union busting nonsense!

    ReplyDelete
  18. Kevin....... Additionally when you mention "teachers and union members", don't forget that included in this dynamic are police, firemen,emergency personnel, etc etc etc . How many "enemies of the nation" are you defining under your comment? How many Americans would you see punished for another's crimes? Especially since those that did cause the problem are comfy and cosy and out of the spotlight of this insanity! You know who I mean!

    ReplyDelete
  19. @Kevin "........ the original intent and the purposes of the Union movement, were as an essential cog in the arising of the great industrial power that the US became after the great depression.

    That this genesis has morphed over the last 30 years, and seemingly in particular in your California, into an abusive system of an "entitlement mentality" amongst its members, is simply another indication of the pendulum swings of extremism that occur, regardless of the ideological sectors or beliefs within your society. Right or wrong that is the truth as I see it?

    "Unfortunately the cure for this extremism, which would be sensible regulation and common sense adjustment through debate and discussion, has become instead a cause celebre' for disingenuous politicians from all sides. It may add spice to the debate, but very rarely offers sensible compromise solutions?"
    To reestablish protections for both the worker and the community should after all, not need such virulent animosity? The pathos of blame and search for 'scapegoats' has entered the debate!

    It appears that the American political realities of today are those of extremism and not common sense solutions? The 'moderate voice' as we all know is seldom heard, over this hate filled rhetoric from both sides. It frankly "doesn't sell papers", to use an old aphorism..........
    The polarization of the American community at present, is without doubt founded in very real and severe wealth disparities. Real fear has entered the dynamic of the American worker at all levels, allowing blame and ridicule to rule over any sensible solution seeking! And it will not allow for any change that is not seen to be formulated from an apparent and open "worker friendly" dialogue............

    The enemy in this dynamic is seen to be the right, and of course the right maintain their questionable and I believe, extreme approaches to economics, which also supports their insistence, that the masses of workers are too soft, non productive, overpaid, over entitled etc etc. In essence they attack the workers with excessive verbosity and blame. Hardly an issue solving environment?

    Unfortunately there are those politicians in your dynamic who have grown and matured under a system that permitted this great economic disparity to grow. The cries of the worker for a leveling of access to opportunity and security for them and their futures, are no less genuine in America, than those of young people and workers around the world.

    It is fear that drives this issue and for any politician to use attack dog tactics for political expediency, is inviting severe repercussions, hopefully short of violence!

    All of this being written, it is still a fact that the average American individual has for 30 years Union worker and otherwise, been the beneficiary of an unreal "excessively exuberant" (to quote Greenspan) economic boom, that has basically crashed, and impoverished the entire Global capitalist system, with a debt tsunami that has not yet fully run it's course!

    The new dynamics of the good old "trickle down" economics will obviously only trickle down to the lower levels, as the wealthy, although somewhat affected, are protected by their superior positioning over the boom period. Economic facts! The people, in this case representing the vast majority of Americans, will continue to see increasing costs, lower incomes, reduced buying power and a loss of leverage in the workplace.

    All this will of course serve the corporate purpose and one can then more easily understand therefore, the reasons for the right wings surge of evident confidence going forward. After all what choice do the people really have? Starve or work? It will be argued that a new competitive Global dynamic requires such sacrifice........

    ReplyDelete
  20. @John C first. I don't interpret Reich's comments to mean that we have to spend all of the money. The purpose of his comparison of 13 hedge fund managers vs. 300,000 teachers is just an example in relatively simple and stark terms, to show where the money is going currently and how we could rethink it so that the money is used more effectively.

    By putting the blame on unions, and characterizing any tax initiatives as wealth redistribution - as if the left is trying to steal their money, the right has framed the issue as a problem of too much spending and too much government. They like to blame average people, i.e., union workers.

    Instead, we should be talking about why there are such large deficits. It is most certainly as much a matter of too little input as it is too much output.

    There are many infrastructure projects that we should be working on that would benefit the country as a whole. The most recent events in the middle east is yet another example of why we have to get away from a reliance on oil. It's folly to assume that pure market capitalism will magically take care of this problem for us. There actually has never been pure free market capitalism, but that is a separate topic worth of its own discussion thread.

    @Kevin. The previous paragraph relates to your comments also, but I'd like to emphasize a point related to business. The reason why companies hire people is to meet demand for their product or service. When demand decreases, lay offs often follow. So the question you should be thinking about is, why is demand so soft?

    The reason is, people have less money to spend. Why? Because they have lost their jobs, and/or are worried about losing their jobs, and/or lost their job and found another one that pays less. Very simple.

    The reason why many people have lost their jobs is because - of the new flat world economy. Workers in India and China, among many others, increasingly can do the same job just as well for less wages.

    That gap had been hidden to a large degree by real estate and various other "bubbles" which were caused by debt, and by government spending - financed by deficits. If the government didn't fill in the gap, the severe recession we are in now, would have happened 20 or 30 years ago.

    It's a very complex combination of factors, such as when the U.S. became a debtor nation, importing oil, sending manufacturing jobs overseas, etc. It all added up. But any one of those factors could be justified at the time by the myopic self-centered views of businesses.

    It takes people like Robert Reich, David Cay Johnston, and even our own blogger here - James Convey, to consider and articulate the bigger picture.

    Did you know that 76% of all the jobs created in the last year pay between $8 and $15 an hour? That stat came from the business channel, CNBC. We are not going to build much of an economy moving forward if the 3/4 of all jobs average less than $15 an hour.

    Robert Reich recently said "it's easy to create jobs that pay a low wage; it's harder to create jobs that pay higher wages." It looks like we are taking the easy way out, thanks to the far-right's focusing on the wrong issues.

    ReplyDelete
  21. I was debating with myself on whether to post these comments in a new thread or continue it here. Since I'm using the comments from another site on this comment, I'll just continue it here.

    These comments are from Alternet.com. I think they make good points and should be a subject of debate from those who disagree.

    1. Weak Economies Need More Demand: Our economy is struggling and our state budgets are distressed because increased unemployment and falling home prices have reduced economic demand. Weakening the ability of any workers to negotiate fair pay and secure retirements will only weaken demand further, hurting the overall economy.

    2. Strong Standards Strengthen The Middle Class. When public sector workers can negotiate for fair pay, healthy workplaces and secure retirements, that puts pressure on private sector CEOs to do the same, or else they risk losing talent to the public sector. Making public sector work less inviting does nothing to make private sector jobs pay better. We need to raise the bar, not lower it.

    3. Decent Government Pay Means Decent Government: Most everyone wants our federal, state and local governments to function effectively. That means being able to attract skilled, productive workers with fair pay, healthy workplaces and secure retirements, all of which will be lost if public workers can no longer bargain for their compensation packages.

    4. Public Employees Are Not The Problem: Study after study shows the public employees do not receive extravagant compensation, and that the problems with state public pension systems are largely overblown. State budgets are reeling from an economic recession caused by reckless Wall Street speculators, top end tax cuts and corporate tax avoidance. The projected shortfalls in public retirement benefits derive mostly from skyrocketing health care costs thanks to private insurers, and poorly performing pension investments thanks to deregulated Wall Street firms.

    http://www.cepr.net/documents/publications/wage-penalty-2010-05.pdf

    http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=3372


    Furthermore, civil servants in Wisconsin and elsewhere have repeatedly said they are willing to make concessions regarding pay and benefits. Unlike conservative corporate executives, they have proven their willingness to share the sacrifices. What we can't negotiate is their right to negotiate.

    5. Scapegoating Lets The Culprits Get Away: Right-wing billionaires like the Koch brothers are pumping millions into a nationwide effort to break the public employee unions. Why would they bother? Because if they can get most people to blame public employees for the nation's economic ills, they won't hold irresponsible corporations accountable and force the ultra-rich to make any sacrifices, such as higher taxes and tougher regulations.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Kudos Lou for your latest postings. What becomes more and more obvious as time goes by, is the degree to which the average American worker and businessman, has been "flim flammed" into believing that todays corporations are bastions of free enterprise and are motivated by a social conscience?
    That they are in effect perfect examples of socialist pods of authoritarian style kleptocracies, is beginning to slowly dawn, upon their once most avid supporters. Those slightly right leaning centrists, who might have once believed and quite rightly, that American corporations were somehow different from other Global entities, and were therefore worthy of their support. As well as a full and free access to an "unfettered by any regulation marketplace", on the domestic front. I believe and hope that these people are beginning to awaken to the real truth!

    This current economic catastrophe and it's side effects are showing the true nature of these organizations, that live an ethos of "accumulation at any and all costs" . They neuter the ideological power of democracy with lobbying tactics, legal chicanery, and the dissemination of misinformation and lies, to deter the American voter from the real truth.

    Sadly the American people have been left behind by those very corporations that they once avidly supported and depended upon for their livelihood and future security.
    The American dream has become something of a sham, and practical reality still has not yet fully sunk in for some? Witnessed by the continuing and increasing condescending tones, from the various extreme right wing media pundits, who would rather issue personal attacks, to avoid debating the truth.

    That truth is, that the American people have been cheated out of their wealth by a few disingenuous borderline corporate criminals, who apparently will never be called to account for their culpability, in the recent destruction of the domestic economy of the United States! These men still continue to manipulate the press and the body politic to their own nefarious ends.

    Meanwhile the greatness of the American worker is called into question again and again by the political bought and paid for "shills" from what has become the extremist "born again" republican party!

    ReplyDelete
  23. The attached article describes how illinois had to issue bonds to pay their annual contribution to pension plans

    This is just so wrong

    wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703775704576162350542651930.html

    ReplyDelete
  24. John....You keep doing this....writing something without explaining your conclusions? At the risk of again being called "a pointy headed poindexter" by Kevin again I must call you on this.
    In order to debate and thus to learn, one needs to investigate and not just simply parrot other pundits ideological points of view. (Particularly the Washington journal) Certainly referencing single news articles is hardly a composite explanation as to why the issuance of bonds to service the needs of a state or a country is, to quote you " This is just so wrong"..... Could you please tell us why it is so wrong? Since it has always been the financial conduit or methodology used in all economic models for time immemorial, for the purpose of raising capital investment for states or nations in the history of capitalism?

    America and many of it's states, find themselves in a position of having to go to the bond market not only to service pension entitlement debt, but for a broad range of issues across the entirety of the economic spectrum. This is because they have declining tax revenues and continuing levels of state and national costs.

    What other methodology would you suggest? Simply canceling the entire social and defensive security operations of your country, and eliminating any support mechanisms, such as power and transportation etc etc etc, for your entire citizenry? Please understand that the 'purpose' may not meet with your approval, but you need to step up and explain what alternatives you as a citizen are willing to agree to, and dare say to go without, in order to forego the need to issue bonds?
    The consequences of defaulting on any sector of the nations debt and its commitments to its citizenry, needs to be fully understood. The ideological argument is simple to make, but the reality is a lot more complex! Somehow I believe you are again parroting what sounds good to you ideologically without learning the cause and effect dynamic that will result?
    You have a small sample in your state of Wisconsin at present that augers for the future of the simpletons approach to economic stability! Do you wish to see the people of Illinois marching in a similar manner to wsscononites? How many times are you willing to risk civil commotion and potential riots and violence?.......the floor is yours? Please convince us?

    ReplyDelete
  25. Thanks Jim for your cheery reply. I get the impression you are a fun guy to party with. We must do it some time?

    I would not presume that I could convince you or Lou of anything -- your ideas like a lot of mine are entrenched from our experiences in life. It is just nice to be able to type them ocassionally and I really enjoy your insults when answering -- keep them coming. But let me get back to the Wall Street Journal article.

    The problem with what Illinois is doing is that they are using long term debt to finance current and delinquent obligations. In this particular case they are borrowing 8 year money to make this year’s annual contribution to the pension program. Apparently, they have not made the annual contributions “for years” which goes back well before the current financial crisis so it seems that is not a convenient excuse.

    Debt obligations should match the useful life of what you are funding. In Lou’s new post he talks about infrastructure investment. This should be financed by long term bond issuance (assuming the money is available at a reasonable interest rate). When you by a car you finance it for 4-5 years. It does not make sense to finance a car for 10 years especially if you have to get a new one in 5. Your contributions to your IRA and retirement savings should be made for current income only – not borrowed. State pension plans should do the same.

    The Democrat Illinois Gov. Pat Quinn last week compared the pension fund's 43% unfunded liability to "a big, decades-long mortgage problem, a big risk.". He goes on to say that the funding problems will persist unless the state can increase the state pension contributions. Remember he is a Democrat. He mentions nothing about borrowing their way out of it.
    Finally, the Illinois director of capital markets said that Illinois has no plans to incur more debt to make its pension contributions over the next several year. Why would he say this if it was OK to do this in the first place.
    States issuing bonds is normal and healthy for long term obligations as long as they can make the payments. Issuing debt for current or overdue obligations is wrong.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Hi John, Thanks for the effort to explain your positions but you still don't answer the main questions I posed as to the alternatives? Frankly i don't care what politician from which party said what.

    I am long enough in the tooth @ 64 years old to form my own opinions based also upon my life time discipline as an economist. Your entire nation at both sate and federal levels have been operating on "unfunded liabilities" for years. (Since the Clinton administration) I would also see my new comment on Lou's new topic as to infrastructure etc. You say "issuing debt for current or overdue obligations is wrong" I repeat why is it wrong now when it was not wrong for the last 10 years? ... and my earlier query:

    "......... What other methodology would you suggest? Simply canceling the entire social and defensive security operations of your country, and eliminating any support mechanisms, such as power and transportation etc etc etc, for your entire citizenry? Please understand that the 'purpose' may not meet with your approval, but you need to step up and explain what alternatives you as a citizen are willing to agree to, and dare say to go without, in order to forego the need to issue bonds?........."

    ReplyDelete
  27. John,

    I am sorry if you perceive any of my commentary as insulting. I assure you there is no such intent and I apologize if you feel somehow slighted. My old Irish "IRE" still sometimes arises to a level that I am not always aware of... :-)... especialy when confronted with voodoo economics and criticisms without suggested intelligent solutions?

    ReplyDelete
  28. Jim,
    Loved the “voodoo economics” reference.

    It is unclear to me what you are asking. In my previous post I said that I had no objections to bond issuance if the term of debt coincided with the obligation and the state is willing to budget the interest payment and loan balance from current revenue. I therefore presume that you are asking about how to solve annual contribution to the pension fund without issuing bonds.

    My answer to that would be to find some combination of tax increases and spending cuts to balance the budget which includes this pension obligation. I also think it is reasonable to ask the people who will collect these pensions to kick in a little more as well. I can’t get any more specific than that since I do not live in Illinois and I have no plans to research what can and cannot be cut. I do know that here in California our new governor is planning to do just what I suggest after years and years of doing what is Illinois is doing now.

    After rereading my last sentence I meant to say “issuing [long term] debt to pay for current and overdue obligations is wrong”. If you disagree with this statement and my reasons in the previous post maybe you could explain why you feel it is OK to engage in this practice on a regular basis. That might clarify what our differences are. Just to be clear this practice was wrong 10 years ago and it is wrong today. I don’t know how you ever got the impression that I thought it was ever OK to do this.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Ah, Thank you John. Slowly you come to the practical reality as to the solutions and back to the origins of our debate in this stream, about the increasing wealth distribution gap.

    I note you include Tax increases in your comment. This gels with my own earlier comments to Krauthammer as to the billions left on the table by the renewal/extension of the Bush Tax cuts? Who and where in todays reality, will you find a right wing politician (who still currently hold the power) who will agree with your solution in this regard? I agree by the way that this is a more preferable solution to borrowing or bond selling. After all they made their wealth here and therefore, now that times are bad, they should ante up don't you think?

    Also why should those who have paid into pension funds over their entire working careers, be expected to sacrifice benefits? Especially if means tests for the wealthiest % of Americans are in essence freed from any and all focus in this regard? And what of the corruption on Wall street and in the corporate boardrooms of the nation?

    It becomes the age old ideological question as to who should pay the bills, for the folly of the few? People, such as yourself it seems, who so easily forget the proximate cause, and the very reason we are even brought to this stage of confrontation? Between the majority of the people and the small minority that has, through corruption of our capitalist and ideological model, over the last 30 years, continue to control the debate and the solution process, and somehow are able to convince some intelligent people, such as yourself, of the rightness of the wrongness of their economic ethos? That is why I call their economic plans "ideological nonsense!"

    Through their disingenuous abuse of the "free" press control of the message, and via their power lobbyists the control of the electoral outcomes, and the very ideological direction of the peoples government, all twisted to their own selfish ends.

    They direct the anger of the people away from the truth, and the real corruptive elements in your society. Their tired and familiar old talking points steer the debate away from the real culprits. Those that are the causal factors of America's current decline, not the people, or the workers, or the pension holders, or the members of unions, public or private. This attention amounts to nothing more than "Flim Flammery" and "pettifoggery"....!

    In summation, to not hold them accountable and apply sterner measures to reverse this dynamic, will see the American state at the street level, continue to deteriorate. Poverty, or at least a greatly reduced expectation of achievement and lifestyle, will become the truly present reality for the greater masses of the working people of America.

    In short America could well become a bland marginal society, controlled by special interests and ultimately resemble other kleptocratic regimes on the planet. I for one would not admire the American people so much, if these faux right wing extremist thematics, continue to deflect them from holding the real culprits to account.

    I am hopeful that the next elections, will see the people awaken with resolve to recapture their nation away from these corporate shills and charlatans! Good centrist moderate government, with a recommitting to the importance of the equality of the individual.I live in hope. It has been a pleasure sparring with you.

    ReplyDelete
  30. John....I forgot to highlight the history of Illinois and it's current condition, was as a result of the dissembling of the Automobile industry over the last 25 years, and the corporate failure of GM, Chrysler et al to act to save their position as the worlds leaders in transportation technology and products. As they focused their attention on greener fields and ever bigger bonuses for their boards and officials. Of course some would believe their arguments, that it was the Unions and the pension entitlements of a generation of American workers, that caused this? To me that is scapegoating> The workers didn't make the decisions!

    Illinois therefore stands alone as a good example of the early causal factors of the current American decline. And of course once again today "they" the corporatists, are blaming the Unions and the working masses as the culprits? I am not so easily fooled!

    ReplyDelete
  31. John and Lou, This article from the Financial times makes for some interesting reading as to the depths of corruption at the banking level and the amount of tax evasion by American corporations and wealthy individuals.Enjoy

    http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/88bc1474-42a9-11e0-8b34-00144feabdc0.html#axzz1FCpvfOwv

    ReplyDelete
  32. James,

    The pleasure is mine as well. Just want to clear up one thing least it be misrepresented in the future.

    I said the public unions should "kick in"/help make the Illonois annual contribution. I did not mean they should sacrifice benefits they have earned and are counting on in retirement. What I meant is that their annual contibution should be increased by some portion to help out. After all it is their benefit not the taxpayers.

    Also, it is to simplistic to blame only the inequality issue for the problems we face. There is enough blame to go around starting with regulators not doing their job and government inefficiencies and mismanagement. you of course realize that we have the best government money can buy regardless of whether it is the unions or corporation doing the buying (off).

    ReplyDelete
  33. I am trying to attach this in Lou's new post. I will see if it will attach here.


    I woke up this morning and read this cover story in the Los Angeles times. I think it works into this post. It also has elements of the bond issue and the corporate and the union (this time private) influence issue. It is a rather long article and it is the first in a series of six. The titles of the six parts are:
    1. Price of Poor planning, weak oversight
    2. Failing grade for new science complex
    3. Layers add millions to staffing costs
    4. Sports facilities can’t get to the finish line
    5. A family firm gets its share
    6. A costly lesson in the limits of green energy

    If you want to read it the website is
    http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-build1-20110227,0,1763444.story
    and the remaining parts will be on the latimes.com website if you want to read the series.

    The series is about a $5.7 billion bond measure to upgrade the Los Angeles Community College District infrastructure. The article does not mention the details of the bond measure except to mention that taxpayers will be paying them off well into the 2050’s. I venture to say that many of the projects constructed will be long gone by then.

    The first article of the series details the mismanagement and waste in the project. It is will documented and was discussed with all parties involved. It is a good bit of journalism and not a partisan article.
    This example and many others are why there is such frustration with increased public spending. Public spending should be as well managed as the private sector and there is good evidence that it is not. Politicians are great at getting elected and extracting money from the taxpayers but lousy managers of the public resources. This could be addressed by performance based budgeting and sun setting of agencies and major funding initiatives. My concern is that we are not getting the most efficient use of the funds we entrust to our government. I don’t think we have any mechanism to verify this and we should.

    ReplyDelete
  34. John and Lou.........From todays Washington Post. More independent analysis of the GOP's "voodoo economics".......:-)

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/02/28/AR2011022802634.html?wpisrc=nl_pmheadline

    ReplyDelete
  35. Your point is well taken John, "........ that we have the best government that money can buy......."
    If you truly believe this then the only government that has produced successful economics, (did what they were paid to do) over the last 30 years would be the Clinton Administration.?....:-) .....and you can see why I don't agree with the "voodoo economics" of this latest crowd?.......

    ReplyDelete
  36. James,
    I read most of the voodoo economics article. Of course it is silly to think that spending cuts will create jobs -- but I give my republican brothers credit for trying to fix the deficit and shedding a spotlight on reducing spending. I am wondering how you would suggest that the US deficit be fixed? do you think any spending cuts should be in the mix? Do you have any opinion on the Deficit Commission recommendations? Maybe you don't think the deficit is a problem.

    ReplyDelete
  37. John,

    I believe I have answered your questions several times over in my posts and in my own essays and articles, on the subject of macro economics, on my website.

    I believe as I have said before that the focus on "the deficit" as a domestic issue, is an ill timed and severely divisive ideological choice by the extreme right! And has nothing to do with what sensible, conservative economic planning, is required to activate the economy to grow and prosper again. It has everything to do it seems with elections and 2012, rather than to fix the desperate conditions facing the American people?

    Cuts should of course be made but in those real areas of excess. Americas years as the worlds policeman must surely come to an end? Isn't it time to cut back the tremendous burden of this unnecessary empirical expense? Do individual Americans really want or feel a need to rule the world? A change in that dynamic alone could easily manage the deficit going forward!

    Also there is no reason for the attack upon the people and their dreams simply to assure that a small % of wealthy Americans continue to dominate the economic party? I lost all faith in your "fellow republicans" when they forced the extension of the Bush Tax cuts for the wealthy. Again a figure that would have greatly reduced the deficit going forward.

    I also am disenchanted that, to the American Right, the existence of a few Insurance corporations, took precedence over the safety and healthcare of the entire American populace! Their economic programs are nonsense, and as time moves forward, I am hopeful that the intelligent people of America, will see these charlatans for what they have become.

    They are surely not "conservatives" by any stretch of my imagination, and are more akin to active paid for "shills", for a very narrow corporatist interest, within the overall body of your once great nation. That nation which once held the rights of the individual citizen above all other interests and as such, became the envy of the peoples of the world.

    Today America struggles to renew it's credibility as a nation to be admired, simply as a result of its activities during the Bush era and even before that. It seems this new right wing body politic, continues to get it wrong! I live in hope that common sense will return soon!

    ReplyDelete
  38. James,
    I must say that I disagree with you pretty severely on the deficit issue. I think is needs to be addressed. It is a political issue as you say but only because the matter has been ignored for so long and the American People – not just the extreme right -- are fed up with it. It would continue to be ignored except for my fellow Americans that happen to be Republican, Tea Party or fiscal conservative independents. I agree that their tactics could be better, but there seems to be some focus on the matter now that would not be there without them. I did not agree with extending the Bush tax cuts but they were extended when both houses and the President were in control of Congress in a lame duck session. They had nothing to loose by refusing to extend them -- except for the confidence of the American People.

    America is struggling to renew its creditability but I don’t think it is for the reasons you state. I think first and foremost with many many other nations focusing on austerity, our continued insistence to ignore the problem reduces our creditability. Our complete refusal to even talk about the Social Security and Medicare mess hurts it even more. We would gain so much more creditability if we addressed these matters and became a leader in it. The inequality issue is not one that most people think about or base their opinions of America on.

    I don’t know what the Canadian view of the American Dream is but the American Dream to me is that if you educate yourself, work hard and show initiative, think creatively and apply yourself you are well rewarded. When the term “American Dream” was coined our government facilitated this but did not bankroll it.

    ReplyDelete
  39. John, It is all about perception and practical reality!

    Other nations do not attack their citizens rights, to collective bargaining, or access to healthcare, or rights to pensions. America is viewed as being an anti people and pro corporation, pro war and American Global Corporate interests only "manifest destiny" nation, in it's interactions with the rest of the planet. In this century in particular.

    Perhaps you misunderstood my comment as to "the ill timed and divisive focus of the republicans on the deficit". Their voodoo economic proposals to solve the deficit problems, are at present making American economic leaders appear as idiots on the Global scene! Everyone in my discipline agrees, that their narrow minded focus upon what are really minor social ideological issues, and not upon economic fixes for the real issues confronting America, is a "dead wrong" policy approach!

    Those real issues, are the reenergizing of the most conspicuous consumer society in the world today. The rebuilding of the industrial heart of the nation, through research and development and stimulation of free enterprise and the entrepreneurial sector. Job growth through a renewal program, that upgrades the entire society's infrastructure and prepares it's educational segment to produce well educated youth to meet the challenges of the 21st century. Massive correction of it's out of control banking and financial services sector. Free trade with it's neighbors and the forming of a trade bloc that can compete for the future, with the Euro zone and the burgeoning Asian bloc dynamos of India and China et al. DO this and the deficit will look after itself!

    This mean spirited same old republican plan to divide the nations peoples against each other and break unionism, is counter productive to growth and a healthy community. Their ideologically side driven issues of illegal immigration, Gun control, healthcare, medicare and medicaid and birth control, pension entitlements and God knows what else, may all be legitimate issues for debate, but not at this crucial time when America teeters on the brink of financial disaster. Now is not the time to be initiating internal confrontation! Now is the time for cooperative planning and sensible connection to practical reality. Your nation and it's general populace is going broke, while the top 1% are still laughing........... all the way to the banks. Who are also still laughing!

    Their neglect of the true fiscal reality and abuse of power by the top 1% of the nation is seen as ludicrous by most external commentators. This left right nonsense in the body politic, is also unnerving the financial markets all over the world and American credibility is suffering accordingly. Investors are racing into Asia and Europe at an incredible pace. Meanwhile the republican party, the so called party of business is focused upon dismantling those very social systems and structures, that made America the most admired country on the planet in the last century. While they ignore the real problems that need immediate attention!

    Watching their agenda unfold is like watching history repeat itself. They have no new ideas. Everything they have in their plans is the same ideological nonsense they have been spewing forever. At least in my living memory. It didn't work in the past and it is doomed to failure again! This time America cannot afford it however! The pettiness has to stop and the real work of building a nation must be the priority for all of them in Washington!...continued

    ReplyDelete
  40. continued..............As an aside, our Canadian dollar which historically was always at or around 90 cents to the US dollar, is currently trading at $1.035. Our nation that I love, is 32 million people spread over a country 1/12 times larger (Land mass) than the continental U.S. I am not so big a fool as to believe this condition will continue, but perhaps, given the truth of the American political realities, I may be wrong and really should dump my US holdings? There are many people I am sure asking themselves the same question?......... When will they waken up and stop the Roman circus!

    ReplyDelete
  41. John, (I believe this compliments my positions and many commentaries on the need for sensible non divisive fiscal planning.)

    Comments from Reuters source: Bernanke's concerns.

    "............... The Fed chairman’s message is a mix of the two: Draw up a rigorous deficit-reduction program, but delay its implementation until the economy is comfortably on track.

    This also is the approach advocated by neutral observers of the U.S. situation, such as the International Monetary Fund and President Barack Obama’s debt-and-deficit commission.

    The idea is to keep the bond vigilantes at bay. If investors are reasonably confident that U.S. politicians are serious about the country’s fiscal problems, they will continue to lend the government money at reasonable rates..............."

    How does starting a war with labor follow this concept John?

    ReplyDelete
  42. My goodness James, I'm speechless (or the written equivalent). I can't find anything to disagree with you about in your March 3 posts. BTW I thought it was the top 2% you were concerned about not the top 1% but who is counting.

    ReplyDelete
  43. Hopefully this means you have joined the ranks of the disenchanted but still practica,l moderate conservative movement....:-)

    Welcome home!

    ReplyDelete
  44. 2% Globally 1% in the US....:-) cheers james

    ReplyDelete
  45. To James. Your comments are articulate and logical. Thank you for taking the time to write all of this stuff.

    I do have a request for you. Can you site any references for your following statements?

    "Their neglect of the true fiscal reality and abuse of power by the top 1% of the nation is seen as ludicrous by most external commentators. This left right nonsense in the body politic, is also unnerving the financial markets all over the world and American credibility is suffering accordingly. Investors are racing into Asia and Europe at an incredible pace. "

    I would love to be able to quote you and take your sentiments, which are also mine, into some Facebook conversations I have with some friends. But I would feel better about it if I could have independent references to back your statements about "most external commentators". I think I can find general references for the fact that "investors are racing into Asia" and such, but if you have specific references that you think hit the mark on that topic, please list them for us here.

    Thanks.

    ReplyDelete
  46. Lou,

    I subscribe to and am a member of many international sources on economics and politics. As regards the specific case you mention "most external commentators". I would refer you to the Financial Times. (Martin Wolf and other highly qualified economic commentators)
    In America I believe that Martin Weiss PHD, is the most honest source of opinion and detail on domestic economic matters. His "Weiss report" I have found to be the most reliable of it's kind over the years.I have communicated with Martin for several years. HIs father was extremely well known in his time also as an economic master.

    My own site as you know has free access to material and certainly I would be most honored if you found it to be of use, as that was my purpose for the website.
    I will be a little more aware as to including side reference data for future entries to this stream.....cheers

    ReplyDelete
  47. Lou,
    Here is an excellent article from the NY Times, and an American commentator, which goes to my overall theory, as to socialist style cadres at the highest levels of corporations and banks. I leave it to you to delve into the credibility of the American author. You may also need to access the Times' on line archives? Google Louise Story for access.

    BUSINESS DAY | December 12, 2010
    A Secretive Banking Elite Rules Trading in Derivatives
    By LOUISE STORY
    In theory, clearinghouses exist to safeguard the integrity of the multitrillion-dollar derivatives market. In practice, they also defend big banks' dominance...................

    ReplyDelete
  48. ".......And so the empire begins to dissemble from within. Attacked by those very men, who having honorably sworn before the Gods and the people, to protect its vitality and that of it's citizens, now in traitorous fashion and for only their own selfish welfare and motive, attack the very foundations of the republic and the central role of the senate and the peoples parliament......." Claudius Caesar"

    ReplyDelete
  49. @ John,........ Another item written and submitted to my board@ Ayiko GmbH, jan 2011. Also solution oriented

    http://www.jamesconvey.com/uploads/3/3/8/3/3383644/economic_opinion_2010to2015.pdf

    ReplyDelete