Third Party & Independents Archives

Couldn’t agree more. Our salvation will come only if we reform our tax system and once again make America the preferred place for investment, innovation and jobs. And…we must rid ourselves of this crazy entitlement frenzy that is destroying us.

RF, thanks. You are right. A host of other nations provided entitlements and don’t face the demise nor debtor nation status the U.S. does. It is how the U.S. mismanages them, and fails to adjust them in accordance with fiscally responsible measures, that is a huge problem here.

Simply enforcing the Medicare laws and substantially eliminating the waste, fraud, and abuse, would save billions.

Enforcing tax laws and collecting revenues legally owed would generate billions more per year. The Obama administration just finished the secret foreign bank account waiver of criminal penalties resulting in the addition of large sums of revenues coming into the federal coffers. Obama now has to enforce those same laws with criminal penalties, if the waiver period is to have any long term benefit, and get Congress to allocate those revenues to deficit reduction. Will he. I don’t know. We will see.

There is much to do, and lower priority items have to be sacrificed if we are to rectify our dire fiscal future. Congresspersons however, Republican and Democrat alike, are unwilling to let go of ANY spending items that benefit their constituents, fearing such losses to their constituents could cost them reelection.

I say, voters should kill their representative’s reelections on general principle, and take pork spending out of the equation with an anti-incumbent voter sweep across both parties, and mandate to their replacements to get our fiscal house in order.

I’ve been thinking about this post all day. The AIA predicts another 11% drop in construction in 2010.
Consumer credit has plummeted along with M1. The dollar is sinking.

Frankly, it seems to me that we are in need of a real stimulus, in terms of housing and infrastructure. The problem is both parties are now focusing on debt reduction, making a stimulus passage unlikely. Healthcare reform is stalled, as is financial reform. Even Obama has talked about a second dip. The stock market is overvalued based on real economic data. This is eerily reminiscent of the Depression. We find ourselves unable to politically respond to economic issues.

Is this planned? Is the political calculus to let more pain be felt, to motivate real political change? Is Obama planning an FDR 2012 campaign?

As to foreign investment, if the US consumer market is in the doldrums or falling over a precipice, who are the foreign markets going to sell to? China? I doubt if we take a dive they will thrive.

52K accounts were in question but a ‘deal’ was struck. UBS was asked to provide details on 4450 accounts. UBS has said they will process the US request.
lHere are some stats on corruption across 180 countries based on 13 different expert and business surveys.

Read rank, Country and Score:
1 Somalia 1.1
2 Afghanistan 1.3
3 Burma 1,4
4 Iraq 1.5
5 Sudan 1.5
161 United states 7.5
163 Britain 7.7
175 Switzerland 9.0
178 Sweden 9.2

Singapore 9.2
179 Denmark 9.4
180 New Zeland 9.4

Gergle, which conspiracy theory would you sign up to? Beck sems to be out in front with a theory of a marxist/socialilst takeover. He thinks Calif. will be the first state to go when the fed buys their debt in the coming year. I tend to like my theory wherein the Corpocracy wants a flat world where wages are the same, free trade reins sovereignty or protectionism are trashed. My theory is that of a pure and simple power grab brought about by the fall of the Soviet Union. One thing is clear, the middle class worker has been ulnder an all out assault for the last thirty years.

Roy,

I’m not a conspiracy theorist. I do agree the middle class is always under assault from the wealthy and powerful. Greed ain’t exactly new. Posturing in politics isn’t new, either. Wealth is occasionally gotten by innovation. Mostly it’s gotten by “sharp” deals and squeezing the less knowledgeable and powerful.

DR
I hope you are wrong about the indis being so foolish as to turn against the party that is actually trying to address the list you gave. That list is possible to tackle if the Dems get more support,not less.
I have a slim,cynical, reed to hold out for a third party effort that will help . Perhaps the immigration debate ,likely to convene early next year, will cause the formation of a popular third party. Maybe Lou Dobbs can become central to it.He needs the work.We are not going to get immigrant scapegoating from the Dems and the Reps will never actually move to deprive their corporate masters of cheap labor. That only leaves a third party effort to suck up all the xenophobic,rascist,fear lobotomized, sector. And there is plenty of those.Saddly there will be some draw from the Dems but most is likely to come from independants and the Reps.This would allow Dems to maintain and even increase our majorities and getting on with actually solving the nations problems.
Another good sign for the Dems is the extreme right wing purge of the Reps going on. They are pushing out thoughtful moderates. More power to them.
Of course the mid-term elections are BIG NEWS for only about two weeks,then its back to work.In our system the executive holds the most cards.

gergle asked: “…who are the foreign markets going to sell to?”

Answer: Global poverty has diminished 80% since 1970. There is the customer base for foreign markets, gergle.

They will sell to each other, supported by wealthy investment dollars of American investors moving their money into overseas corporations and government debt. Rather ironic, in light of the desperate need our own government will have for investments.

Our government will offer ever higher rate bond and certificate returns to investors, but, beyond a critical point, no amount of promised interest return will be credible. At that point, the bottom falls out and the threat of a bankrupt American government looms large. American investors with any sense, will have moved their investments overseas before that point is reached, exacerbating and hastening an untenable federal debt.

Can this be averted? Theoretically, yes. Practically speaking however, the country would have to unite behind such prophylactic measures, and it is clear today, such unity between the Left and Right is no where in sight. The Federal Reserve will do all it can to delay the inevitable, but, fundamentally, this is not a monetary road to ruin, but a fiscal one, requiring political consensus to avert. Hard to see that scenario in the cards at this time.

gergle said: “Greed ain’t exactly new.”

True enough. Unbridled license to greed by our culture and government, however, is new. Well, we saw the same unbridled license to greed peak in 1929, so, I should amend by saying it is new to those ignoring the Grapes of Wrath years.

Ironically, in a very real sense, it is Ronald Reagan and the conservative revolution in the 1990’s that resurrected this culture of unbridled greed (with many Democrat supporters), in the name of fiscal growth and development. Now, that corporate tentacles reach into and shape the halls of federal and state governments, even in times of great peril, our government is incapable of effectively countering this unbridled greed.

The proof of this being true is the banking sector bail out using tax payer dollars without even the condition being set that those banks lend those tax payer dollars, which of course, was the primary stated purpose of the bailouts in the first place. We have banks today who don’t do banking (lending), yet our government subsidizes their toxic asset balance sheets in the hopes they will lend to small business and create jobs and economic growth. Which of course, they won’t and don’t.

When our politicians take their policy advice, and campaign support and donations, from the corporate leaders and lobbyists, there will be only one group that will benefit while all others lose, and that is the corporate leaders. This is everywhere in our business news stories today, self-evident.

These corporate leaders are going to abandon America when they have drained the last of its greenback blood, and then move to China, India, Brazil, or Russia, or the Middle East as Haliburton did in deciding to move to Dubai this last year. The solution is to recognize this and legislate accordingly, raise corporate taxes, create penalties for corporations moving to foreign lands, and establish the contentious and adversarial relationship between corporations and government which should have prevailed all along.

Remember, these corporations are going to suck America dry and move overseas if we do nothing. So, there is nothing lost by reestablishing the adversarial relationship between government and corporations and making it painful as hell for their executives and boards to decide to leave America, which would at least meter the exodus and increase government revenues in the meantime.

Of course, increasing revenues is not much help if Congress refuses to curtail its profligate spending. For that to happen, the voters must be willing to accept LESS from their government and reduce the incumbent reelection rate from 90% to 45 or 50%, concurrently. That new face of Congress will then invoke the fiscal discipline those anti-incumbent voters demand before voting for an incumbent again.

It is a hard pill to swallow, but, democratically elected governments will ultimately succeed, or fail, as a result of the actions of the voters, not the politicians. In a democratically elected government, the politicians do what the electorate allows them to. There is no escaping this fundamental construct of democracies. Americans have become notoriously irresponsible with their democracy, partly because they have not been properly educated in their role and responsibility to routinely remove from power their representatives, which of course, is the primary purpose of the vote, in the first place.

King George could not be unelected, leaving King George free to abuse his power at will. The founding fathers remedied that situation in designing the processes of government with the vote at the center of those processes, and thus creating the ability to remove from power those following in the footsteps of King George.

Teach this to every student in elementary, junior and senior high school, and every university student seeking an Associate or Bachelor’s degree, and levy a tax penalty on those eligible and able to vote who don’t, and America’s future could once again become that light that shines the way for the world. The irony is, the voters must force this to happen upon their representatives. And the voters have not been so educated, despite growing numbers of independent voters realizing this for themselves.

bills said: “I hope you are wrong about the indis being so foolish as to turn against the party that is actually trying to address the list you gave.”

Trying OBVIOUSLY ain’t good enough. See my reply to gergle just above. Indies are not being foolish. They are discovering what every American should have been taught at every level of their education, but, weren’t.

I would like to see a discussion about the middle class on watchblog. Is all the middle class being damaged by the current government policies or are some in the middle class falling while others are rising? If the latter is true, which ones are loosing ground and which ones are gaining ground?

D.R., do you think investors bear any responsibility for the list of problems that you have presented?

What effect does investing in companies that hire illegal immigrants or companies that hire Chinese, Russian, or Indian labor have on our middle class?

Who benefits from Reganomics? Who doesn’t?

Mr. Remer wrote; “They will sell to each other, supported by wealthy investment dollars of American investors moving their money into overseas corporations and government debt. Rather ironic, in light of the desperate need our own government will have for investments.”

True…money always seeks safety and return on investment. The US dollar no longer provides safety and is one reason for the huge increase in speculation in commodities such as oil and gold. Many nations are buying huge quantities of gold right now and making enormous investments in oil leases and production.

Mr. Remer also wrote; “The solution is to recognize this and legislate accordingly, raise corporate taxes, create penalties for corporations moving to foreign lands, and establish the contentious and adversarial relationship between corporations and government which should have prevailed all along.”

Part False and part True. Raising corporate taxes is absolutely the wrong direction to take. Mr. Remer knows that corporations collect the taxes they pay from the folks who purchase their products. Increasing taxes on corporations is, in reality, an increase in taxes on every American who purchases something. The old adage; “You get less of what you tax and more of what you subsidize” is still true.

Lowering, or eliminating, corporate tax in America will attract investment from around the world. With that investment will come more jobs with more workers paying taxes.

Restoring the “contentious and adversarial relationship between corporations and government” is true and correct. Capitalism works when it is not unduly fettered by, and in collusion with, business. I maintain, but can not prove, that we would be much better off economically today had we not established the TARP fund and let markets dictate which business would survive and which would perish. Bankruptcy in business is a valuable tool in allocating scarce resources among those who would use them best.

Mr. Remer advocates punishment (in the form of higher taxes and penalties) as a means of keeping business in America. Where in the world has that ever worked well?

Give business a reason to stay on our shores. Make America business friendly thru low or non-existant taxation, thru reduced regulation that stifles innovation and expansion. We have not built a new oil refinery or nuclear power plant in the US in over 30 years primarily because of government red tape and regulation. We hobble our businesses with all kinds of unnecessary regulations that don’t make us any healthier, safer, or wealthier.

China, India, and all the other countries that send their products to our shores have an advantage in cheap labor. America can compete with innovation and invention in which we excel. We are more productive as workers than anywhere else in the world. It is governments heavy hand in regulation and taxation that stifles our ability to compete.

Mr. Remer writes; “For that to happen, the voters must be willing to accept LESS from their government…”

Absolutely correct. No further comment is needed. Self reliance is what built this country.

One only needs to look at California and New York to discover that high taxation of business causes business to leave. It’s a matter of survival and any successful business must look at their bottom line. Many states and cities offer business tax abatement to attract them and the jobs they bring. Payroll brings money to the state or city which benefits everyone.

These strategies have worked well in our past and will continue to work well now and in the future. And, it is no different on a national level. Create a better, more attractive, environment for business and they will come.

Royal Flush, changing the tax system and limiting entitlement programs are a big part of the problem. A flat tax system seems to be most fair and is least corruptible by government. The elephant in the tent is campaign finance. IMO, the only way to clean elections is through a 3rd party with a different political attitude. Through a reform agenda a third party could work to abolish or modify Corporate Personhood law and abolish Money is Free Speech law. Then a donation system could be established whereby donations were passed through a cutout agency so that the audit trail would be broken and then passed to a distributing agency to parcel out to either specified parties/candidates or split between the parties based on some criteria.
Also, favor removing tax burden from Corporations/businesses as they are simply passed along to the consumer. The tax code is of great value to Corporations, allowing them write off foreign advertising, relocating overseas, establishment of tax havens such as UBS bank, etc. A flat tax would relieve nigh 1M paper pushers to do productive work.
This is so sweeet, talking about solutions!! 2nd Am. Revolution, here we come!
jlw, IMO its way easier to discern who doesn’t benefit from the assault on the middle class. At this point in time its only the middle class and poor losing out. But the long term effect is bring the entire US economy into line with developing countries of the world. The corporatists elites decided on a new world order with a level playing field. Unfortunately the US had more to loose than most other countries. Seems the most realistic measure of a level playing field is the working wage. China has, by default, become the common denominator for labor cost. I think the correct figure is somewhere around $5-6/hr. That would be somewhere near the median between cheap labor, $1/hr and current US labor, say about $8-10/hr coming out of this recession/depression. So, initially the middle class worker and poor, $150k and below, will take the hit. But, as planned the upper crust will, by default, be forced to accept less reward for their efforts as well. So, in that sense all of the US will eventually be brought into line with the developing world. The corporatist will not be effected, as planned. Foreign based corporations are, and have been off the charts based on cheap, foreign labor. Talk about a pending percapita wage gap between the haves and have nots - - - no glass ceiling!

Otherwise, we have the government we deserve.

Goes without saying these megacorporations, conglomerates will use their bucks to stymie competition from any quarter. Going to take some strong laws to hold them at bay. They are in the courts trying to weaken US patent law and an inventor has no chance of getting a product to the market unless he plays ball with a conglomerate. Dire straits for competition. But, with a third party having a different political attitude we can fix it toute suite!

RF said: “Raising corporate taxes is absolutely the wrong direction to take. Mr. Remer knows that corporations collect the taxes they pay from the folks who purchase their products. Increasing taxes on corporations is, in reality, an increase in taxes on every American who purchases something. The old adage; “You get less of what you tax and more of what you subsidize” is still true.”

But, RF, if there is competition, some innovative corporation upstart is going to steal market share from competitors by holding their executive salaries and administrative overhead lower in order to under cut their competitor’s prices. Yes, some of the corporations WILL pass taxes on to their consumers, especially if they operate as an oligopoly. But, that is where the Government needs to step in adversarially, and bust those oligopolies up so they can’t act like a monopoly.

They won’t pass those taxes on to consumers if that means losing market share to another competitive corporation or entrepreneurial start up, upstart. This monopolistic and oligopolistic behavior by our corporations is a direct result of the tentacles corporations have into the legislative halls of government. It is why we no longer have the kind of competition we saw in the 1950’s and early 1960’s that created the largest middle class the world had ever seen with the highest standard of consuming capacity in the world.

By the 1970’s and 1980’s, the fix was in between corporations and Congres persons, and the age of monopolistic mergers and acquisitions dawned, culminating in financial institutions too big to fail, and auto companies too big to fail, and utility companies operating as monopolies, and pharmaceutical companies comprising a giant price fixing oligopoly with virtually no competition between them along product development lines.

RF said: “Lowering, or eliminating, corporate tax in America will attract investment from around the world.”

Yes, it would, because corporations overseas are taxed highly too. But, why not go the other route. Instead of cutting their taxes, why not lower their operating costs as most foreign nations have by providing single payer health insurance and relieving the nation’s businesses of the burden of health care costs? You are trying to go upstream. It is easier and more cost effective to go downstream, theoretically. On this point, the Democrats have it right.

That old Republican yarn about lowering taxes increasing revenues has proven now to be pure B.S. Our government needs to increase its revenues while cutting its expenditures, and to do both in the least compromising way for the economy, jobs, and education. No matter how you slice it, taxing a person with 1 billion dollars assets down to 750 million dollars net worth, still leaves that person obscenely wealthy, and the American people 250 million dollars less taxed, for it, and half of those people spend every cent they get, which is a boost to the economy in ways the billionaire’s use of 250 million would not.

There is no supply shortage hurting our economy today. There is a consumer demand shortage. Ergo, reducing capital by taxing wealth, WILL NOT constrain this economy. There is no rational argument to be made against raising taxes on the wealthy at this time. Well, I take that back. There is one. It does no good to increase taxes if wasteful spending by the government is going to increase commensurately. That is a valid argument.

So, cutting the waste, fraud, and abuse out of the Medicare Program is an enormous step in the right direct. Doing the same within our military budget is an enormous second step in cutting federal spending. The health care reform bill proposes this for Medicare, and Obama is already implementing the research on savings through the IG’s office in the military budget.

So, let’s get on with it already. But, you have the likes of Joe Lieberman out there working for himself, and lying his ass off trying to hide the fact. 68% of Connecticut residents (Quinipiac poll) want the public option in the reform bill. Lieberman is saying he will filibuster the reform bill if it contains a public option. What’s really going on? Lieberman intends to run for Pres. in 2012, and wants to shore up his right wing base for that personal goal, Connecticut constituents be damned.

Republicans of course, would vote to prevent the second coming of Jesus Christ if Democrats sent the invite. Personal and political objectives are preventing representatives from getting on with the nation’s business and needs. Independent voters know this and it is the glue that binds them, left and right, toward voting anti-incumbent. And make no mistake, nearly 3/4 of Americans agree health care reform is necessary for a viable economic future.

If this health care reform goes down in defeat, it will be another generation before it becomes politically possible to address again, and by then, our economy will have its back broke on health care inflation and mismanagement. A very large number of States and local governments are already in violation of their laws and Constitutions regarding balanced budgets. And it only gets worse from here without health care reform.

A very small window of opportunity is still open to rescue the nation’s people from that scenario. But, Republicans and Joe Lieberman, and conservative Democrats are pulling hard to close and nail shut that window. The irony is they think no one will notice, or worse, they won’t be tagged as the ones who killed health care and broke the nation’s future viability.

RF, I agree with you that eliminating corporate taxes would make our economy more viable going forward. But, that can happen only with the passage of a flat rate income tax plan, which is NOT in the political cards anytime soon. For all intents and purposes, tax reform has become another third rail of politics like entitlement programs and health care reform.

We have to deal pragmatically with the challenges facing us and with the cards we have been dealt. That means a Democratic president and Congress for the time being, and their approach. A politically divided government after 2010 makes such tax reform even more impossible.

Health care reform however, is very possible. Though, it appears to be getting more improbable as we move to the final steps of passing it, as the obstructionists dig in their heels backed by flights of fancy that they won’t wear that act like an albatross going forward.

A little bent out of shape this PM. My daughter, a 3.8GPA undergraduate with some age (experience) was denied entrace to two graduate study programs. ‘To many qualified applicants’. 50% of graduate students are foreign nationals. Are they so well off as to pay full tuition at US learning institutions? Are they subsidized in any way? We know the gov. takes care of the illegal healthcare, unemployment insurance and primary education. But, does the gov. subsidize college for illegals and foreign nationals? How about foreign govs and US and/or foreign companies? Something going on here, I do believe.

Otherwise, we have the government we deserve.

Mr. Remer makes some good points but fails to address the fact that the majority of American’s are employed by small business and higher taxes will hurt them the most.

It is also a fact that corporations are owned by its shareholders…consisting mainly of individual Americans investing or thru their retirement plans investing. As it is now, the corporation pays taxes and the shareholder pays another tax on the dividends and earnings when the stock is sold.

If there is $500 billion in waste and fraud in Medicare then our regulators who govern it should be thrown out for incompetence. If this kind of waste and fraud already exists in a program that has been around since 1965 what would make me believe that a new entitlement program will not be riddled with waste and fraud from the get-go?

Sorry, but this congress is playing games with the numbers on the health care bill in the house and senate.

From a unaminous person: “As a college student at Stony Brook University I was asked along with 300+ impressionable students to sponsor an illegal alien or offer them a room to them out of their very homes…FOR EXTRA CREDIT. If you didn’t you were verbally battered as a group by this professor as being a racist against illegals. This professor was himself and his wife and children sponsored by the university he said to be here in the states. Where do you think he lived? Not in Farmingville with all the illegals where we live but in the affluent area near the university since he wasn’t paying for it the school was!”

Getting close!

It’s nice to see Sara, the underdog, making a comeback. She seems like a super lady in all respects. But, just remove the first layer of the onion and I find it so, so,….depressing… shameful that the left and right wear their Party leader on their sleeve. As if Sara, or Bush or Obama can save them from themselves. If they can just find this perfect person who will vocalize a few of their beliefs then they can lift the world. All you need is a fair-haired person to take the helm and we will win, win, win.
IMO, it will take a new political party, founded in irrefutable, unbreakable laws that can put accountability into the political equation, advocate for a populist reform agenda, carry it out and keep it that way. Anything less is nothing better than your next fair-haired person coming down the pike.
If I can imbibe briefly from a little more tautology: The AARP received 18M in stimulus. Asked how they were creating jobs the response was that they had trained 500 people for jobs. THEY will do the training and pocket the $18M. Small change as they will pocket 10’s of millions in writing medi=gap policies for folks when the gov pulls $400B from medicare. Ain’t it nice to have friends in high places?

Fox viewership up 5%, CNN down 63%. Where is Lou when they need him?

Otherwise, we have the government we deserve.

Roy
It is time to get hold of Dobbs and others and activly try and start a third party to deal with those horrid aliens that are trying to pollute our precious bodily fluids.

RF
There was a period in modern history that is mostly ignored or denied by supply side economist and pundits. It does not fit their pre-conceptions. After WW2 we entered a period of prosperity that doubled the American standard of living in one generation. There were plenty of jobs. If you had one you could buy a house. Families earned enough with one breadwinner that most often one parent could stay home and care for the children.Outside of a few hobos, there were no homeless people. Education was well funded. Public colleges in some states were free or low cost.The great interstate highway system was constructed,openning up whole regions of the country to developement. In short,we had it pretty good. The reason the right denies this period was because it presents an anathema to their unfounded belief system. The primary economic structure was Keynesian in nature. Taxes were high,with top marginal rates at %90-70. There was rigorious government regulation of the financial industry and industry generally. There was much higher union representation.
We need to get back to that in many ways. The recitation of failed false supply side maxims like,” Most Americans work for small businesses”.(no they don’t) or high taxes on personal wealth are bad for employment or markets work better without government regulation are merely propaganda.They are lies. We cannot afford any more nonsense.There is too much at stake .

Carl Quintonia of CNBC this morning gets it. He asked David Walker (former Comptroller) if voters themselves are not responsible for government run amok because they keep reelecting them regardless of how badly government performs.

Three cheers to CNBC and Carl Quintonia for taking VOID’s rationale to the main stream media and public at large. Third party is needed, but very difficult to create. Every voter ALREADY has the power to improve government by voting for challengers and the incumbents out. Both parties will then get the message loud and clear, that the people are taking back the agenda in D.C. and they demand responsible, accountable, and effective government in exchange for their vote, otherwise, no politician seeking reelection will receive their vote.

Only good governance the people can approve of as a majority, will bring back the incumbent vote. That is the message American voters must send and independent voters are already sending.

RF, so who is proposing to increase taxes on small business? Not I. And not the Obama administration. Aren’t you creating a straw man argument here?

My references to tax increases were confined to shareholder corporations. The majority of small businesses are not corporations, and don’t issue public stock for capital investment.

RF said: “If there is $500 billion in waste and fraud in Medicare then our regulators who govern it should be thrown out for incompetence.”

There is 500 billion to be saved over 10 years in waste fraud and abuse in the Medicare system. A well documented and researched estimate. And yes, you are right, they should be thrown out. Welcome to the Vote Out Incumbents Democracy way of thinking.

The Congress is providing estimates. The CBO’s estimates however, are non-partisan and more objective than those of politicians. Republicans touted the CBO numbers when the first proposal was scored as 1.5 trillion dollars. Now, all of a sudden when CBO performs exactly the same scoring process on the Senate proposal coming in at 847 billion over 10 years and being deficit neutral and saving 10’s of billions of dollars in the first 10 years (albeit by delaying implementation another year), those on the Right don’t trust the CBO numbers anymore.

What hypocrisy. Cite CBO when their work favors the Right’s argument and poo-poo the CBO when their work favors the opposition. The Right has Palin syndrome. Which is a failure to acknowledge that their actions are responsible for their losing elections, not the other party, or the MSM, or the Devil, or the alignment of the planets. This kind of hypocrisy is NOT lost on the independent voters regardless of whether it is the Left or Right engaging in it.

You want to end waste, fraud and abuse, DO NOT VOTE FOR YOUR REPRESENTATIVE to be reelected. Enough voters take that position, I guaran damn tee you the waste, fraud, and abuse will end, some of which goes on with a wink and a nod by Congress persons now in office.

Committing 45 thousand Americans each year to death without health care by not passing this health care reform is hardly the answer to waste, fraud, and abuse. Are you pro-life or not, Royal Flush. This health care reform bill is pro-life. Why do you continue to rail against a pro-life bill?

Just in from CNNMoney.Com, over the next 10 years the CBO (Congressional Budget Office) estimates that 4.8 trillion dollars of the 9 trillion that will be borrowed, will be to pay for the interest on our growing national debt.

A couple trillion of those interest payments over the next decade will NOT recirculate in the U.S. economy, but, be paid to foreign government and bond holding lenders.

GW Bush’s administration is responsible for the lion’s share of this, overseeing a rise in the national debt from 5.65 trillion to nearly 11 trillion or, over $5 trillion, which includes the TARP rescue of the banking sector. Obama’s administration has overseen a contribution so far has been 1.5 trillion all directly related to saving the economy from a depression and saving jobs and unemployed workers and homeowners from bankruptcy.

Compare this to Bush’s 3 trillion increase in the national debt which had NOTHING to do with the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, Katrina or Rita hurricanes, 9/11, or any other national emergency, which accounted for a bit over 2 trillion of the Bush administration’s addition to the national debt.

Democrats are spending like there is no tomorrow, but, 10’s of millions of Americans will get health insurance in return, and keep their homes sitting on upside down mortgages, and keep their jobs funded in part by the Stimulus bill. What did Americans get for that 3 trillion increase in national debt during the Bush years having no connection to national emergencies or war?

There were religious charities which got a chunk of that debt increase, and of course, the very, very wealthy got enormous tax breaks accounting for a very large chunk of that 3 trillion, and African nations and some others received a small chunk of that debt to fight AIDS, and the middle class received a pittance in tax cuts along with dramatically rising health care costs, education costs, and energy costs, which ate through their tax cuts and dug into their savings and increased their personal debt.

So much for the past. It is plain to see that when America is adding 4.8 trillion dollars to its national debt to pay the interest on its debt, she is in very big trouble. Anyone who has to borrow to pay the interest on their debt, is only digging their debt hole ever deeper.

The first step in addressing this issue going forward is getting the economy back on its feet and putting Americans back to work. This increases federal revenues and helps enormously to reduce the amount we need to borrow.

The second step is to tax the very wealthy at pre-Bush tax cut levels. Don’t fret for them. They will still be billionaires and millionaires after the tax increases. Oprah will go from a 2 billionaire to a 1.something billionaire. Nothing to cry for her about.

Third, we need to get tough on our trade deficit and reduce it, which will allow more dollars to recirculate through our own economy, increasing tax revenues.

Fourth, but, not least, voters must reject their incumbent representatives in the House and Senate sending Congress the message, they won’t tolerate the any spending increases while the national debt is going up, instead of down. This of course, will be the most challenging step, as politicians lie their asses off playing Palin telling their constituents that everything that is going wrong is someone else’s fault.

No, it is their own fault. Either they are contributing to the debt rise directly with their votes, or they are INEFFECTIVE in persuading others in their party and Congress to reduce the spending.

Can America take these 4 steps to recovery? It can. The question is, will she? Except for the extremely wealthy, we are all going to sink or swim our way out of this, together. I say we swim, and not sink.

David,

While stats show you are correct, that the vast majority of small businesses are not incorporated, those are generally self employed contract workers without other staff.

Most small businesses, with staff, do incorporate for numerous reasons. This does not mean they are large operations at all. I think your discussion was in reference to larger businesses.

http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/sbrp-rppe.nsf/eng/rd02351.html

bills wrote; “After WW2 we entered a period of prosperity that doubled the American standard of living in one generation.”

I grew up in the 40’s bills and yes…it was a wonderful time to be an American. We didn’t have any Medicare or Medicaid and Social Security was just getting started, (with minuscule payroll deductions), on false promises made by FDR. The working person got to keep most of what they earned. Business was encouraged and was not hampered by unnecessary federal regulation. We didn’t have courts making new law and criminals were punished. Workers from south of our border came to help us grow and harvest our crops and went home when the growing season ended. Our schools taught Civic Classes and we said prayers in our schools. Liberals were nowhere to be found in large numbers and “entitleitis” had not yet been conjured up as a way to obtain and keep public office.

I could go on bills…and I wish everyone could have experienced those golden days as I did.

Mr. Remer wrote; “Why do you continue to rail against a pro-life bill?”

Thanks for the softball Mr. Remer. I rail against all government entitlement programs that spell certain death for our nation. I am for the life of our nation and that requires responsible government which we have not seen for many years.

“Liberals were nowhere to be found in large numbers and “entitleitis” had not yet been conjured up as a way to obtain and keep public office.”

Royal are you sure you were old enough to actually remember the ‘40’s or are you letting ideology cloud your mind again? If you recall FDR was president until 1945, his fourth term, and you would have us believe it was the conservatives that kept re-electing him?

From wikipedia:
“In the 1946 US Congressional election, the Republicans regained control of both the US Senate and US House of Representatives, as a result of President Truman failing to handle the vast post-war labor strikes.[26] The Democrats were able to retake control of Congress in 1948, thanks to the widespread support Democratic President Harry Truman gained from rural communities after he pledged to repeal the Taft-Hartley Act;[27] with this victory, the conservative coalition was also defeated and the liberal Democrats regained control of Congress.”

“The working person got to keep most of what they earned.”

Yes they did and they did so until the god of all things conservative came to power in 1981. Then it was tax the middle class (my definition of the working man) and cut income taxes on the wealthy. Yet you blame the liberals for all the problems of the country.

Seems we should all just want to toss the current governing officials, start with a clean slate and reform government through a third party with a different political attitude.

Otherwise, we have the government we deserve.

the god of all things conservative came to power in 1981.

With a still Democrat controlled congress, you know those guys, the ones responsible for the pursestrings and writing the tax code?

The fact is that both parties screw the middle class in this country, though neither party will accept that when it is pointed out.

If we are honest with ourselves we must understand that to insure an additional 35 million people in the health care bills now in congress there must be additional taxes. And, there must be cuts to Medicare which I believe are stated to be about $500 billion.

I wish to address just the proposed cuts to Medicare which are necessary to have a CBO neutral score to make it palatable to Mr. Obama and a congress wishing to keep their seats of power.

If we apply reason to this proposal one can come to a few conclusions. 1) There is a tremendous about of fraud and waste in Medicare that has not yet been addressed by congress or the regulators for some unknown reason. 2) That congress and the regulators are serious about reducing or eliminating this fraud and waste in the future…while they haven’t been serious about it in the past. 3) Why would we believe #2?

And, we must assume that the $500 billion is truly waste and fraud even though it has not been identified if it does in fact exist.

It is more likely that the $500 billion proposed reduction in Medicare will come out of the hide of Medicare beneficiary’s in the form of reduced services, higher deductibles, higher costs for medicine and higher costs for medical devices.

Does any liberal politician honestly believe that the millions of seniors on Medicare won’t notice or won’t care that their health coverage is being slashed? Would any liberal politician be so stupid as to believe they would retain their office once these cuts were made? Of course not and I believe the plan is to keep the cuts in the legislation, pass the bill, have a bill signing ceremony with Mr. Obama and then use future legislation to replace the funds for the cuts.

At that point, there will be no $500 billion savings which never existed in the first place and they believe no one will care.

I also wonder how liberals wishing to retain their seats in 2010 and beyond will explain to their constituents that the payroll and other taxes begin immediately but the proposed benefits will not begin until 2013. That should be fun to watch. Somebody get the tar and feathers.

gergle, yes. Even most of those that do incorporate, are not selling stocks for capital.

By larger businesses, though I did not specify this, I mean businesses which can afford lobbyists in Wa. D.C. since, that was the topic I was discussing. Especially oligopolies and monopolies with 100’s of millions to spend on lobbying efforts each year and more than that on campaign contributions or threats to campaign against a Congressperson or Senator. Small businesses have the ABA to lobby for them, to be sure, but, small businesses are not whom I am referring in my reply to the person who brought up businesses.

Royal Flush said: “I rail against all government entitlement programs that spell certain death for our nation. I am for the life of our nation…”

Ah, I see, so, you are for saving the bordered geography, and the people be damned. And here I though the nation referred to the people, not the geography. Government was set up to serve the people, not the geography, or so, I learned in school.

By my reasoning, saving the American people is saving the nation. To have allowed 7 million workers to fall into bankruptcy instead of extending their unemployment benefits is saving the people, and the economy, at once. We are after all, a consumer driven economy. Drop 7 million consumers over a span of 16 weeks, and a serious and cascading harm is done the economy, and the nation’s economic future if not righted.

I guess our main difference however, is your either this, or that, reasoning. Where mine is this and that, safety net spending and fiscal responsibility. However, on the health care issue, many other nations with smaller economies per capita, afford universal health care. We could too, except for the greedy wealthy power brokers make their profits off the illness, suffereing, and death of their fellow citizens.

Soc. Sec. needs to be reformed to its original FDR intent, a safety net insurance program, not an entitlement program. Given government’s role in foreign trade, currency management, contract enforcement and the courts, and monetary regulation, and the negative short term effects these can have on employment and ability of workers to pay remain solvent, I believe the government should amend for high unemployment, and American citizens should begrudge federal taxes which extend unemployment benefits in periods like this where clearly, the private sector and government screwed this economy off causing the 10.2 or 17% unemployment, whichever figure you chooose. It does after all, constitute Americans helping other Americans, as opposed to billions in foreign aid to help citizens of foreign nation, advocated by both Republicans and Democrats. Charity begins at home, a good Christian said once.

Rhinehold said: “The fact is that both parties screw the middle class in this country, though neither party will accept that when it is pointed out.”

Ain’t that the truth succinctly put?

Royal Flush, for the same reasons we have not gone to war on the underground economy which costs tax payers a large number of billions of dollars each year. It would mean going after a large number of voters and it would make large headlines which would pit government against the people, even though going after such folks, is actually saving the rest of the people from more tax hikes and failing future. It has not been politically expedient to go after Medicare and Medicaid Fraud. That means going after doctors, corporate executives, and a host of willing co-conspirators amongst the lower and middle classes.

As unpleasant as that may be, and as politically tenable as such action may be, it is what Obama has called for. The irony is that no Republican president has ever made that declaration and actually gone after it. Should be a moral imperative for Republican presidents, as such measures would reduce the cost, and even to some extent the size of government, after the waste, fraud, and abuse had been checked, and safeguards set in place against recurrence on such a grand scale.

Royal Flush said: “It is more likely that the $500 billion proposed reduction in Medicare will come out of the hide of Medicare beneficiary’s in the form of reduced services, higher deductibles, higher costs for medicine and higher costs for medical devices.”

I doubt that will be the case. But, for the sake of argument, let’s assume that becomes the case. What is your beef? You already said you don’t support entitlements, and such action would reduce entitlements. Logically, you should be FOR this reform if you believe as you say above that the bill would reduce entitlement spending on our Seniors.

I believe Mr. Remer is an intelligent guy and understands what I mean by nation and muddies up his response with geographical borders. When all else fails…change the subject…right?

He then goes on and tells us that emergency spending for unemployment benefits is a “never-ending” entitlement program, like SS, Medicare and Medicaid, by writing; “To have allowed 7 million workers to fall into bankruptcy instead of extending their unemployment benefits is saving the people, and the economy, at once..”

He also wrote; “It has not been politically expedient to go after Medicare and Medicaid Fraud. That means going after doctors, corporate executives, and a host of willing co-conspirators amongst the lower and middle classes. As unpleasant as that may be, and as politically tenable as such action may be, it is what Obama has called for.

I don’t believe Obama can do a dam thing about it even if he wanted to. That’s just fairy tale talk.

He wrote; “Logically, you should be FOR this reform if you believe as you say above that the bill would reduce entitlement spending on our Seniors.”

Silly, Silly, Silly. It is much simpler to not start a new entitlement boondoggle than to turn around this existing train-wreck. A new entitlement program will just hasten the day when all these bloated and God-awful programs fail.

I wonder if Mr. Remer has any predictions on when the MMGW legislation will be passed. Certainly with their majority, the dems can get this passed by the end of the year and put the final nail in the nation’s coffin. It could be their Christmas present to the people.

The Dems will put $100M into Louisana to persuade Sen. Lau. to vote yes for HC. Benchmarks being talked about for cost reduction in HC are out there at 10 and 20 years, plenty of time for people to forget who did what to who. The whole shell game is disgraceful, but par for the course in politics.
O’riley blessed Sara as being a whole person and politically astute. He intimated she may hook up with a 3rd party or conservative republicans.

David:

Nice post. I read your post from 2006 and Jon’s article that you used to support.

I do have a few questions.

Here is Jon’s conclusion:

If the market continues to stumble over the next five months, as I expect, then it will foretell at least a serious pause in economic growth on the six month horizon, though probably not an outright recession. My economic and investment models continue to forecast the potential for one last hurrah in stock prices this month before a precipitous decline in July through October. That’s potential, not a guarantee. But it’s enough of a potential to worry about.

So your source is saying that the market is likely to tumble from the date of his article june 14, 2006 for the rest of the year. He also says not recession on the horizon and potential for a bear market.

On June 14, 2006 the S&P500 was trading at 1230.06. Six months later the S&P 500 was trading at 1425.49

Jon was completely wrong in the article you quote. Maybe you can show me in the article where Jon makes a prediction of the last market meltdown, but his one doesn’t have any reference to it.

Also in reading your article from 2006 you said:

Jon Markman at MSN Money has some very wise advice for 401K investors with savings in stocks. While he is focusing in on market forces and indicators, there is a broader background to the Bear market that is upon us.

In the short term however, Jon Markman is right, now is no time to be in stocks. But America’s economic future also appears to be telling us, to watch closely and be very wary of very long term positions in stocks as well.

So you were predicting a short term market drop, when in fact the market rose sharply.

I think in your second article you were using a short term decline to encourage people to vote out incumbents but I don’t see any clear long term sell signal. So I don’t see that you ever made one, not if you used Jon’s article.

In your article in 2008 you quoted Greenspan as saying there is a 33% probability of a drop. You were clear that you were not saying the sky was falling. Well the sky fell!!!!!!!

Many many saw and continue to see the housing issue. It’s simple for me, I can show you were I have tracked it for years. It’s off of the PMI website. Great tool. It’s have this thing pegged for a very long time.

You were fine back then in your predictions David. You were not as right as you are claiming to be, but were no more wrong than the experts either.

I have always struggled with you giving any kind of investment advice in your articles because it is one size fits all. I still with you would not do give advice here. For instance, you have no idea how long the investor has until they need the dollars, nor the investors risk tolerance.

I think it’s fine to give your opinion as to what you think the markets are going to do, but I would encourage you to refrain from investment advice as a recommendation. If you have a third party read your articles who do not have a vested interest, and leave your name off the article and ask them how much the writer got right and how much you got wrong, you , (well I think all of us) would be humbled by our tea leafing the future.

The one I will give you credit on is March. You were still very cautious.

Smart 401K investors no better than to try to pick market bottoms and tops. Instead, when stock price growth is likely for a period of time, the smart investor moves their money into stocks in increments, taking advantage of significant dips in stock prices to add more money into stocks. Given that indications point to 2010 becoming the year in which much of the stimulus effects will be realized, and therefore the year in which pent up consumer demand gets fully unleashed, the time frame for incremental increases in stock funds begins now and should top out at around 80% in stocks and 20% in bonds by the end of this year.

So I am not sure of your recommendation from 2006 as it was a short term recommendation. But if a person were totally in Cash on Feb 4, 2009, and started buying incrementally on the dips, they would have currently be 60% stocks 15% bonds and 15% cash and have a reasonable return.

They would not be up 50% as your recommendation was incremental.

I do agree with you about the future. There is a gun to our head.

The best minds I read are saying that Obama is not the reason why the market is going up but rather the Fed. Remember the conundrum? Here is the current cunundrum. The Treasury market is forecasting dark times and the stock market rosie times. The treasury market through low rates sees gloom and doom. So how can gloom and doom (Obama bond market ) and happy days are hear again (Obama stock market) be in place at the same time?

It is simple, The fed is forcing money out of safe investments by keeping short term rates at zero. It is also keeping intermediate term rates low by buying US Treasury’s by the bushel. So if you force money out of short term instruments by keeping rates at zero, and you keep intermediate rates low by buying up the product before market where does the money flow? It has to flow to risky investments like junk bonds and stocks.
Basically Bernanke is forcing investors to do what you have recommended.

It is not Obama verses Bush on the current stock market but rather the fed pumping money into the market.

Let me give you an example. Let’s say you have a hose with three holes in it and you turn on the water. One hole is money markets and other short term instruments. the other is intermediate term like CD’s and investment grade bonds etc and the third is riskier investments like stocks and bonds, if you plug two of the holes, where does the money go?

So we take our eyes off of politics and put them on the fed and the fed’s actions it’s a better predictor. Oh and the fed has also said that this will remain on force for some time to come!!!

If you go back and look at Jon Markman today he is showing some pretty bleak stuff.

I will be happy to tell you I was wrong a few years ago when you and I were debating. At that time I thought we would turn a corner. I thought we would not drive off a cliff. I saw the same numbers that you saw, but since we all saw them thought that the people behind the steering wheel would turn the corner. Well here I am still waiting for someone to turn the wheel and we are so much closer to the edge now then we were then.

Ultimately I hope I was right back then that America will turn the wheel. Then I was relaxed with confidence, now I’m sitting in this care with a lot more caution.

No wheel turning needed Craig when the plan is to break the back of the middle class in order that the US might be able to compete in the global economy at some future date. I didn’t believe they would go over the cliff with it, but in 08, as our world was coming apart the government was in a ‘buy’ status. And, at this point in time they have done nothing to re-insert regulatory laws. They refuse to enforce the law of the land while building ports and border crossing checkpoints which tells me that NAFTA, free trade and the NAU are still on their front burner. While the government is confident of eventual success, as the EU and Asia are giving are coaching them and giving them high fives, I see a failed government, dangerous to the country.

Craig, you seem to be ignoring the import of another paragraph Markam wrote, which had far longer term consequences than later in his article when addresses short term market responses. I quote:

At present, the key underpinning of market success that has been kicked away is residential construction. Companies that built and helped build houses, sold and helped sell houses, and loaned money to all concerned, were on an epic roll last year. But now that outstanding, five-star movie is playing in reverse. Housing starts have been falling all year and were down to 1.85 million in April.

Amid slack demand, home prices are already declining or flat everywhere, with Midwest and South regional declines the worst. A collapse in home prices works its way deep into the economy. For one thing, declining sales tend to forecast declining consumer spending, with a lag of about nine months, according to ISI Group analysts. The data suggest consumer spending is on track to decline by 1.6% year-over-year. This is important because housing and consumer spending combine for 75% of total U.S. economic output.

It is this paragraph that I picked up on as a basis for my article in 2006, in which I warned:

Despite what politicians tell you, our national debt and the interest on that debt is seriously impinging upon our nation’s ability to bounce back from another major national fiscal hit, like 9/11 or Katrina. …

11 Trillion national debt will be unsustainable for workers from 2011 to 2075, for the following reasons. 1) Entitlement tax increases or entitlement cuts will diminish significantly consumers ability to bail us out of our next recession. Our last recession was mild and rescued by middle class consumers. Middle class consumers are, as a percentage, about to become inordinately represented by retired workers. …


As pensions continue to belly up, and either taxes increase or, entitlement checks get reduced, the purchasing power of this growingly significant portion of the consumer base will be left in no position to purchase the U.S. out of its next recession.

You are missing the forest for Markam’s trees in his short term forecast. Consumers, as I predicted, are not able to rescue this economy from this recession. The reason was right. Debt and a housing meltdown. But, in 2006, for brevity, I didn’t go into a long analysis of personal debt and how that too would impede recovery from the next recession. D.a.n had been making the argument frequently.

Instead, I focused on how the national debt was going to be a major factor in compromising the government’s ability to rescue the economy in the absence of a consumer led recovery. And this debt is in fact, what Republicans and conservative Democrats are now throwing up as objections to the stimulus bill, bailing out the auto companies, and using repaid TARP funds to bolster up the employment and consumer sectors of the economy.

I don’t reference an article I wrote in 2008. You do. What article are you referring to? Are you referring to my 2007 article? If so, my crystal ball on the future worked no better in calling the date and time of recessions and recoveries than it works today, nor on how deep or protracted that would to the month and day.

Yes, the sky fell. And I have written many an article here over the years warning that this potential exists given the looming national debt and the restraints it places on our government to respond to adverse situations requiring costly intervention, such as the next recession, which just passed.

When a person is right, they are right. I never make any claims or allusions to being a stock market investor. I am however, and have been for many years, a manager of my own 401K funds and advisor to relatives on theirs, and my advice has paid them handsomely. When you are right, you are right.

Investment advisors study markets and corporations. They do not study psychology, economic philosophy, or politics as I have. I therefore have advice to offer those who want it, that most investment advisors don’t have. I don’t accept money for my advice, so no one is worse for taking it, or leaving it as they choose.

I think it is odd that you raise this objection to advice on a debate web site in which many make prognostications regarding economics, markets, politics, cultural trends, statistics of all kinds, and a host of other estimates according to their experience and perception.

At any rate, I will continue to call them as I see them, and if folks want to object to my being right on those calls, so be it. We who weighed carefully my counsel and took it into consideration with their 401K investments, are better off than the majority who didn’t.

I have no intention of offering investment advice for pay precisely because that would make demands on my knowledge base which my knowledge base is not prepared to responsibly handle. What I predicted was OBVIOUS market responses to economic crises which were looming, which you, and I, and many others saw coming. I see nothing, absolutely nothing, wanting in my projections or counsel should those projections come to pass.

Your mileage may vary. Like I said, your comments belabor Markham’s article, which was cited only as as a source for bits of information about the macro economic condition which I subsequently wrote far more about than Markham addressed. I didn’t agree with everything Markham said in his article.

My only reference to his article was this: “The inevitable market collapse was visible in 2006, thanks to the keen eye of trend watchers like Jon Markham. “

Note that I reference only Markham’s trend watching which I refer to in my article as what was happening to the housing market. His article alerted me to conditions I had not researched before but which were obviously of importance. I took my own arguments from their and based on other research and citations.

You reply seems to project some greater reliance upon Markham’s article for my projections than what I have just outlined here. My subsequent writings had nothing to do with the bulk of Markham’s article, spent on short term market projections, which as we all know from bulls and bears, is a crap shoot and luck of the draw usually.

There was however a trend which I predicted which Markham obviously didn’t, regarding our economic condition and ability to respond to the next recession which the housing and mortgage sectors portended was looming ever larger. I gave no date when it would occur, because that was unknowable then. But, the probability of it occurring was high, as evidenced by the reality of its occurrence, making my projections spot on.

What else can I say, Craig? When a person is right, one can gracefully accede the fact, or, attempt to argue against the reality. I give credit where it is due, as I did to Markham. I think your comment could have done the same.

I can think of several reasons why that was not the case, but, that leaves the realm of political debate for the realm of psychology, which is not the focus for debate at WatchBlog. If you are interested, let me know, and I will email you with my projections on those possibilities.

Craig said: “But if a person were totally in Cash on Feb 4, 2009, and started buying incrementally on the dips, they would have currently be 60% stocks 15% bonds and 15% cash and have a reasonable return.”

Where are you getting cash from? I referred to fixed rate funds in 401K’s. I said nothing about being in cash before or, after Feb. 4, 2009. Cash is what I put in my wallet, not my 401K fund. The idea behind a 401K is to build earnings on savings for retirement. Cash positions don’t earn.

BTW, I think folks whose 401K contributions are not matched by their employer, could do much better with other investment vehicles like ETF’s. Not advice, just my opinion. ;-)

In Jan 2008 I put my 401k into a self directed IRA and started gambling with my retirement money in lieu of letting a money manager I didn’t know gamble with my money. About 2 weeks before DRR’s early 2008 post that suggested the time to get back into the market was approaching I was slowly getting back into stocks. As we know the market continued to fall in March and then started recovering and has been bumpy yet trending upward since then. Despite all the mistakes I made, Despite my day trader mentality without day trader smarts, despite the inability to sell at the right time I have made a return of 24% while never being more than 60 % invested in the market. I would have to say David’s post was spot on.