Third Party & Independents Archives

Excellent article David. These are unique times and following some previous policy to speed recovery from the great world recession is a bit precarious. This world recession was brought on, not by one stab to our economic heart, but several simultaneous stabs, each delivered by the ever growing corpocracy.

In part, spending may have been done to ward off a further downward spiral relative to the recession. However, IMO, the spending has served the interests of the corpocracy by forever indebting the US people. Lowering wages, wellbeing and expectations of the working middleclass ostensibly forever. Note that there has been no interest to control illegal immigration or reduce the number of temporary work visas by the corpocracy, even as more citizens and illegals lose their source of income due to the oil spill. IMO, the North American Union is alive and well.

I agree spending on infrastructure would have been a good thing. Perhaps some road repair was accomplished with stimulus and recovery dollars but I don’t see any major project resulting from that spending. I believe most of that funding was spent just maintaining the status quo, providing a soft-er landing for the working folks.

We didn’t just arrive here in a vacuum. It took 25 years of G20 type planning in the implementation of their ‘new world order’ (NWO) to deliver us to this situation. You seem to agree with the prognosis, just from a different perspective with this statement: “In other words, the Democrat’s approach has been to address in a small way, the immediate need for job growth and put a floor under a baseline of consumption activity, protract that spending out over 2 years to insure a more stable and consistent economic level activity during the recession’s comeback, and spending on long term job growth in new energy industries, technologies, and exports. However, this approach has been so spread out over time and unfocused in its targeting of specific job retention and creation (save for the auto industry), that its impact has left much to be desired by Americans worrying over the job situation.” It seems we both agree money was pissed away that could have used on the energy grid, mfctr of a fleet of modern merchant ships, etc. But, that wasn’t in the corpocracy plan in breaking down the middle class.

You wrote: “Our current economy is in a crunch zone. Consumption is needed to drive job growth. Unfortunately, combined with the public’s newfound discipline for saving more of what they earn, job and wage growth is needed to drive more consumption. This is a classic dilemma for most types of economic recessions.” The corpocracy is holding the key here. When people are willing to go back to work for $4-5/hr the economy will begin to come around to the extent we can compete with Asian labor at those rates.

You wrote: “Only if Democrat’s deficit stimulus spending is sufficient to bring the economy back to a 4.5 to 6% annual growth rate, will the economy make the kind of recovery that can justify and offset the deficit spending with increased government revenues derived from increased economic activity, in the shorter term. That however, is not in the cards, so far. Economic activity is running at or below 3% and there is no improvement in sight for the rest of this year. So, from an economics point of view, while Democrats and Hank Paulson and Ben Bernanke in the Bush administration did prevent our economy and the world’s from sinking into a deep depression, they have not managed to pull off a deficit offsetting economic recovery.”

Agree, and you wrote:

“And that is most troubling. The Medicare and Medicaid deficit spending are going to force a path to national bankruptcy by the end of this decade, and no movement has taken place to ameliorate that challenge facing our nation. The truth of the matter, however, is that both parties have had ample opportunities to put the American people and the nation’s future ahead of their special interests, their Party ideology, and the wealthy corporate interests. They have failed to do so. Every legislation since the Great Recession began has been compromised by giveaways to corporate and wealthy Party special interests, resulting in too little, too late, to remedy this economic malaise our nation is in, just prior to our great descent into bankrupting debt and deficits.”

An excellent analysis David, on which I agree except for one major point. You believe a set of economic circumstances occurred causing our economic recession. I believe it took 25 years of planning, beginning with the era of ‘greed is good’ to bring on our economic distress. And, as you can read in any daily newspaper, it ain’t over yet. The G20 is determined to see the ‘NWO’, a globalized economy, through to the bitter end. Pedal to the metal is their economic slogan.

Yes, we are hopeful that many incumbents will be voted from office in 2012. But, what are you holding against the incumbents David? Is it that they have become dyed in the wool Corpocratists? If so, do you believe running in another batch of elected one’s will solve the problem? Would they not soon become contaminated by the Corpocracy as well? I suggest going to the real source of our problems. We need to go back and right some wrongs from the past. The corpocracy came about through such laws as Corporate Personhood and Money Is Free Speech. Until those laws are abolished, removing the money influence from politics/gov’t, there can be no real reform of gov’t. Remove the money influence and we can then pass real reform such as campaign finance, a flat income tax policy and so on. Getting any real legislation through the corpocracy is akin to tossing roses into a cesspool, IMO.

Otherwise - - - -

Forgot the punch line: yes, we need to vote incumbents from office (www.voidnow.com) to weaken the corpocracy. And, we should support the effort to force congress and the supreme court to open up to Article V convention (www.foavc.org). But, to push REAL reform legislation through congress will require a new 3rd party with a different politcal attitude (www.republicsentry.com), etc.

Otherwise - - -

Excellent Post, David.

Roy, the only problem with anti Corpocracy movements is that they tend to be led by Socialists such as Evo Morales and Hugo Chavez.

gergle, you are way out of the sandbox with that statement. Any movement to abolish CP and MIFS will/must come from the center, populists, independents.

Check in on the current stock market and find that the world Socialist agenda is foundering on the rocks. The EU and rest of the world want have seen the light and want to begin reducing their debt levels. But ‘good ole USA’ intends to soldier on, ‘pedal to the metal’ with spending. The Corpocracy beleives globalization must proceed at full speed. It seems they are willing to take this country down to preserve NAFTA, AFTA’s and their WTO.

gergle, if you are pro-business you should want the Corpocracy removed or diminished. Business is at it’s best when there is competition and a fair playing field. The Corpocracy works to create monopolies, and stack the deck by buying the best government money can buy. Advocating for removal of the influence of money in politics/government does not mean anti-corporation, quite the opposite gergle.

A little more tautology from ‘cornered’ by Barry Lynn. A gist of his description of Corpocracy - structred monopolies have resulted in political arrangements similar to what we used to call ‘corporatism’. Our political economy is run by a compact elite, able to fuse the power of government and the power of corporate government in a way that allows the elite to offload the risks onto us, and to determine with almost complete freedom, who wins, who loses, and who pays. He writes about Paulson, as an ex-employee of Goldman Sacs working, as Treas Sec to fix his old banks and the banks of his friends. Of Simon Johnson, former chief economists of the IMF in writing of the ‘quite coup’ that had been staged by America’s ‘financial oligarchy’. Barry writes that our government used our money to broker and subsidize whopping mergers like Wells Fargo takeover of Wachovia, JPMorgan Chase acquiring Wash Mutual and Bear Stearns and Bank of American absorbing CountryWide Financial and Merrill Lynch. This despite the fact that in the years up to 2008 banks with over $1B in assets were seven times as likely to fail as smaller banks.
As to the financials promoting monopolization he writes that Citibank, Goldmans Sachs and Bank of American ponied up $22B of our money into the hands of Pfizer drugs to float a $68B takeover of Wheth, eliminating not only competition but also 19k jobs. These same banks ponied up $9B to merge Merck and Schering-Plough, further reducing competition and eliminating 16k jobs.

He describes some of the new monopoly’s, unlike the older horizontal monopolies where the winner takes all, as operating in a vertical plane. The real competition is between billionaires who make and wield monopolies like Wal-Mart and the people.

In that sense, corporations need our help to remove the tentacles of the Corpocracy.

Otherwise - -

Roy,

Perhaps,

TR did a good job of trust busting, and Obama has redirected and removed some CEO’s, but not nearly enough. There is still prosecution of several malefactors wending it’s slow path through justice. We’ll see what comes out of that. There are administrative bodies, if given enough teeth, that could deliver some serious reform on Wall Street and in banking. While I am not a fan of Andrew Jackson, Obama faces a similar threat from the banking interests. I DO NOT recommend Jackson’s action which threw us into a depression (Panic, as termed back then). Jackson was right about too much power in the hands of the banks, but did exactly the wrong thing.

Roy, you are right. This economic crisis has been paved by policies over the decades. No disagreement there.

Article V isn’t going to happen until the anti-incumbent voters have the Congress over the proverbial barrel where getting reelected is concerned, and then, only if the polls demonstrate that a majority of the American people demand an Article V Convention. Not impossible, by the way. Will take a couple more election cycles, however, if it happens.

On the EU countries like Germany, UK, and France calling for austerity measures to rein in debt, it is not so cut and dry as your comments to gergle imply, and here is why.

In many of the EU countries, and here, we have to think of deficit spending to spur economic activity beyond recessionary and deflationary levels as being on one side of the teeter totter fulcrum, and austerity measures to rein in national debt on the other end of the teeter totter. If a nation’s economy is stable and GDP is above 4%, that nation can afford to rein in debt by cutting public service spending and/or raising taxes, both of which will slow their economic activity. If done well, slowing economic growth by a half percent can potentially yield as much as a couple percent in deficit reduction, or surplus revenues (debt reduction), depending on the balance sheet of that particular country. Germany and France are fairly well poised to suffer as much as 1 to 1.5% reduction in economic activity over the next couple years to rein in debt or build surpluses (Germany), without worrying too much about sliding the economy back into recession, again.

The UK, and US, however, have not yet recovered their economic activity to a stable 4% or better growth, and hence, their economies risk much if austerity measures slow consumption pushing their anemic economies back into recession again. Raising taxes too much or cutting public services which underwrite basic consumption of their citizens, (food stamps, unemployment insurance, mortgage assistance) could wreak havoc on their already deflationary economy, pushing them back into recession, with all the consequent political upheaval that follow on election day.

Recovering from recession takes time, and rushing into recovery mode to recoup deficits can be self-defeating. If Cameron of the UK got everything he is proposing, (AND HE WON’T), the UK could easily be facing an economic Depression in the next 24 months. The U.S. is in a similar boat. There is a delicate balancing act to economic recovery from recessions. America’s problem is that its borrowing pad is stretching very thin over the next 8 to 9 years with the Medicare/Medicaid entitlements imposing ever deeper deficits on government budgets, regardless of whatever other measures are taken toward fiscal responsibility. The UK has the same problem.

If we were sitting at only a 7 trillion dollar national debt, we could fairly easily borrow our way out of this recession with another 1-3 trillion in deficits, and pay down that debt when the economy became much stronger over the next couple years. Combined with health care cost reduction policies like that which the Public Option would have provided, we could come out of this in OK shape. We, however, don’t have that luxury, in lieu of the Bush Administration and Congressional deficits from 2001 through 2009, putting our national debt at over 11 trillion dollars at the start of this Recession. Bush’s last budget carried over to Sept. of 2009, and his tax cuts carried over through this year.

Now, we are in one helluva pickle, with an anemic economy, rapidly growing national debt, and a brick wall between us and future borrowing to float this Titanic economy. That wall is being erected by Medicare/Medicaid unfunded mandates between now and 2019. And we are going to hit it full steam, if either, the economy doesn’t recover robustly in the next 2 years, or, we fail to dramatically slow the growth of health care costs to the federal health care programs. I see nothing, at this point in time, to indicate our federal government is capable, or willing, to take either of these paths.

Simply ending or drastically cutting Medicare/Medicaid programs will only create a host of other extremely costly consequences in terms of political turmoil, social unrest, and possibly even violent attempts at revolution. After all, doing so would traumatize the parents and other family members of working American voters, and they will revolt against such drastic measures, in very large numbers when the Medicare/Medicaid burden is shifted from the government on their own paycheck shoulders.

This is where income disparity comes into play. With 1% of the population holding more than 50% of the entire nation’s wealth, in coming circumstances where the working class will face shouldering the burden of their parents in their retirement years, class warfare is going to take on a dimension never seen in America before as the economy and government resources fail as a result of inaction and political paralysis, and drawing the curtain on our international borrowing by foreign investors.

Good point re Article V David. Based on that I’ve sent some ‘opinions’ to several newspapers stating that it’s important to vote incumbents from office in looking for a more favorable position from Congress re AVC.

I agree with your bleak picture of the US economy. Our situation is so unlike previous recessions. This is indeed the great recession. Who would want to be the next President? Why? Going to be some painful years for the middle class as we prepare to compete in the global economy. My question is, can the upper class folks hang on to their good fortune while the middle class signs up for $4/hr jobs? We know, since Regan, the income gap has consistently widened. I can’t imagine someone buying a house or having a baby at today’s prices while making $4/hr. I assume the domino effect would serve to lower wages/income across the board but the Corpocracy may have a plan to 3rd world the majority of us.

As I see it we have lost 25-30M jobs to foreign entities. There is no chance of new mfctring/industry startups as there is no way they can compete with lower wages. Any new technology development will quickly find its way to the cheap labor markets. The service industry is fully mature, no service request is going unfulfilled, so there is no room for growth there.

Either we go to $4/hr and compete or we set protectionists policy and scrap a lot of the ‘harmonized’ WTO rules of the road put in place over the last 25 years. Where is there any middle ground?

Roy, thanks for your reply. One thing to keep in mind about manufacturing, though. Import costs provide American companies a pad to counter foreign labor costs. Making products here for consumption here, have a much lower cost than the same product imported, wages being equal. Ergo, where the wage differential equals import costs, profitable manufacturing can take place here.

Second, quality concerns permit higher priced American products to do well here where import quality suffers. Toys are a prime example. Food products are becoming an example. Cars are also becoming an example in the wake of Toyota’s fiasco.

Despite the fact that steel manufacturing is considerably cheaper in Asia, American steel producers are still quite capable of sustaining themselves in the American market due to these very quality concerns. Add the cost of import transportation of such heavy and bulky products as rolled steel into the mix, and American steel manufacturers have seen a comeback in American markets.

Lastly, and woefully, there is a predisposition out there in the public to buy American, if it were only tapped and promoted by our media and government. Our elected officials so fear the concept of protectionism, they aren’t willing to promote buying American. Their campaign financial supporter lobbyists wouldn’t like that. But, that is just one more reason voting out incumbents is the only strategy that will end this fear by politicians of their wealthy campaign lobbyist supporters pulling the plug on that support. When the votes aren’t there regardless of how much an incumbent spends, then, the voters concerns will supercede those of the wealthy special interests buying power in elections.

I agree that ‘wages being equal’ we could compete globally. But, that’s far from reality. I like to cite the case where a US plywood mfctr can cut the lumber, ship it to China where they turn it into plywood sheets and ship it back to the US mfctr who puts the final finish sheet on and he can sell that sheet of plywood for $20 more than if the US mfctr manufactured the entire sheet of plywood. That’s the reality of it David. Wage differential is great in all sectors.
Your take on quality, and buy ‘American’ begs for more tautology, David. Post Regan the Italian eyewear company Luxottica began their march to monopolize the eyewear industry. In 1995 they purchased LensCrafters. In 1999 they bought the Ray-Ban brand from Bausch & Lomb. In 2001 they bought Sunglass Hut chain of 1900 stores. In 2005 they purchased Cole National, which owned Pearle Vision, as well as the optical depts. At Sears, Target, and JCPenney. They also run the optical depts. At Macy’s and other Federated stores. In 2007 they bought U.S. company Oakley for $2.1B, after years of using its control of retail outlets to choke Oakley to death. This brought Luxottica three more retailers including Bright Eyes and Suglass Icon. Luxottica sells its products under such names as Dolce & Gabbana, Donna Karan, Ralph Lauren, and Tag Hener. Even in Australia, Europe or China you are apt to buy your eyewear from Luxottica. Bottom line is, -from Barry Lynn’s ‘cornered’, “power structured in a way that determines what we buy and when and how. What does American made mean anymore David.
We’ve heard for years about China dumping ‘cheap’ steel/iron on the US market so I’m not so sure that shipping costs isolates us very much. The reason US carmakers are able to hang in somewhat is because of the efficiency gained in commonality manufacturing of car parts. Like the Vietnamese make all the dashboards and the S. Koreans make all the exhaust systems. When GM and Crysler were going bankrupt a few years back they were initially spared because bankrupting them would have hurt Ford all the worlds auto parts mfctrs as there is a 90% commonality among the suppliers. Most all the parts for cars around the world come from the same places. Hard to buy ‘American’ in such an arrangement.

Roy, you cite examples where we are not competitive, while IGNORING the incredible density and diversity of production and manufacturing which continues to make a profit in America without utilizing foreign labor. The trick is to model new industry and innovation after these successes. There are a million excuses for not succeeding or even trying. Germany is one of the soundest economies in Europe, and they manufacture a great deal, and their labor rates are higher than even ours for skilled labor. Doesn’t stop them from being an export manufacturing nation and a profitable and economically sound one at that.

There are a million excuses for failing, but only one reason, and that is not trying. It is too easy for Beck and others to make a living blaming others and outside agents like foreign cheap labor, and international corporations, creating excuses for our failures here at home. The bottom line is, we shouldn’t be listening to them. We should be out there doing what makes us more of what we can be. Against all odds, a private small donation educational company working solely in the worst neighborhoods of America is producing college bound students at rates that rival and exceed our best and wealthiest suburbs. There are a million excuses for why the head of that company should never have tried, but, there was only one reason why he succeeded, and that was that he cared about those students and their futures.

Instead of focusing on all the Beck and Limbaugh targets for hate, why not simply absorb the reality that despite the worst recession in 80 years, 90% of Americans who want to work, are still working and making a living for themselves and their families. They aren’t letting the recession, or Obama, or foreign labor costs, get in their way of living and going on with their lives. Martin Luther King was a man with a dream for humanity, and that dream has been realized for 10’s of millions of Americans today. I understand Beck is going to attempt to profit from that legacy by holding a political rally in front of the Lincoln Memorial for Black President haters who need more excuses for failing and reasons for being hateful.

Fine. The irony is, these dupes and dullards will not read or listen to the investigative reports that demonstrate that the primary beneficiary of the rally will be Glenn Beck and his bank account, despite his lying to them about the proceeds going to a veteran organization. In reality, an extremely paltry and small sum will ever be handed over to the veteran’s group. Beck will be profiting from the sale of all the campaign signs, paraphernalia, etc, sold to those in the crowd seeking excuses for failure. Beck profits, and thousands of others showing up will be a little poorer, have wasted a day on hate and vitriol and the only thing they will have gained will be more excuses for not having worked for themselves and their families on that day.

There are millions of reasons for failure, and we are them. To fail, all we need do is what we have been doing, blaming others for our failure. For several years I talked about writing a book and as long as the success of that book was the motive, I never sat down to write it, the success always being questionable and risky. Then one day, a few weeks ago, I got fed up with my intention never getter started and decided I don’t care if the book is a success or not, I want to write the book in order to be proud of the effort, regardless of whether others make it a success or not. I now write 1.5 to 2 hours every morning. No more excuses. No more depending on others to determine whether or not the book gets written. There are a million reasons for failure, and only one for success, the will to go after it.

The U.S. could be the world’s energy leader and provider. It is Americans standing in the way of that reality. The U.S. could be the world’s environmental leader, its technological and innovative center of the universe. Only Americans and their millions of excuses and foreign reasons stand in the way. America could be the least corrupt and most representative democracy of their people’s welfare for centuries to come. Only Americans stand between themselves and the realization of that reality. Foreign labor costs are nothing more than an excuse to fail or worse, not even to try.

David, I’m presuming the book has a political theme, but in what particular vein? Is this going to be about the VOID concept?

You’ll have at least an audience of one.

gergle, thanks. It ultimately provides the VOID strategy as an answer to the otherwise seemingly insurmountable failures and realities of political parties, candidate selection, big money and politics, and the ties between big money and elective politics as the source of failing governance in our modern times.

Obama gave what I regard as his greatest speech to date this monrning on the illegal immigration issues. My book goes along way in examining why such an approach of imminent common sense and sensible compromise and comprehensive approach, cannot succeed through Congress, outside the context of a large electorate rejection of both parties and incumbents over the course of several elections.

The book will point the way toward voters organizing around the anti-incumbent strategy to force both parties and Congress into acting on the people’s and nation’s long term behalf, instead of the short term special interest’s behalf, which is destroying our nation’s future.

It will be fairly short, less than 200 pages. It is being populated with some humorous metaphors and allegories, to keep it an interesting read, and fun write. But, the book offers a direct route from the failed system we are now experiencing, to something vastly better without changing our constitutional foundations, constructs, or principles.

75% of the book effort has and is being spent on the outline. The outline is nearly write the book itself. This approach creates a very tight and sound A to B to C logical construction leading to inescapable conclusions and prescriptions to act, (hopefully :-) I am enjoying the process immensely.

David, glad to hear about your book venture. A timely project IMO. We have major problems in government but the solution is simple in that we need a properly informed voting public. I think people are informed now, but improperly so.
Was watching FOX earlier discussing the selling of Obama’s Senator seat in 2008. Information on the tapes leads one to believe that Obama is dodging a bullet on that one. Were he not able to hide behind the FBI/Justic Dept he would be in hot water big time, IMO.
Also, heard that the NY Times recently reported that the Census takers are signing up about 40% fraudulent vote. That means I can’t vote for Nader in 2012 but will vote Republican instead.
I didn’t hear Obama’s speech but he seems to be pandering to the Latino population. As I see it the Dem’s can’t force amnesty unless they can identify some ‘crisis’ to attach with amnesty. So, Obama will make some waves pandering to his base for the next couple of years. Obama isn’t going to risk his shot at re-election in 2012 by pushing for amnesty anytime soon. He just doesn’t have the political capital. I think the Census taker’s offer Obama the best shot at re-election. I would think the Republicans would run a TEA Party favorite who should win by a landslide, IMO.
David, your right that I am pessimistic on our economic future but am highly optimistic on government reform. Two more years of bad news should help the public to vote out incumbents. A ‘more worthy’ congress might be more amenable to sanctioning an Article V Convention. And, surely there is hope for a new 3rd party in the mix somewhere.

Otherwise - - -

Roy said: “I didn’t hear Obama’s speech but he seems to be pandering to the Latino population. “

A more prejudiced comment I have never read, before. You didn’t hear his speech, but, he seems to be pandering to the Latinos. Thanks for the chuckle, Roy.

There was something in it for everyone to hate, including Latinos, and it offered the one course of action that actually has a chance of resolving this crippling issue for good. I strongly urge you to listen to it, or read the transcript. Obama has an acute understanding of the issues and the host of differing interest groups opposed to ANY KIND OF POLICY approach on this issue, including those in his own Party.

The Fed could fine businesses that hire illegals.
The Fed could stop guns from crossing the border south.
The Fed could stop drugs from crossing the border north.
The Fed could stop illegals from crossing the border.
But, they don’t. Has something to do with the North American Union and the Trilateral Commission, IMO. /

Roy, fining businesses is in the proposal by Obama. STIFF fines. It is up to Congress to pass Obama’s proposal, and Republicans aren’t passing ANYTHING through the Senate with Obama’s fingerprints on it. Obama said in his speech, point blank, yesterday that the Democrats MUST have a few Republican votes to pass the Immigration Reform bill. It is a simple matter of Arithmetic. Republicans refuse! There is only one culprit in the failure to make progress on this issue, and that is the Republicans at this point.

Obama IS moving forward with the Border Barriers, surveillance, and interdiction program, with more money, more materials, and more personnel. There is however, a limit on what can be done by the Congressional budget authority.

As long as the borders are porous, there is NO STOPPING the drugs, the guns, and the illegals. Even IF the borders all had barriers, the barriers alone would not be sufficient as smugglers can be as creative as law enforcement, and even moreso, often. Obama also acknowledged these facts in his speech.

Obama cannot be blamed on this issue. It is in the Congress’ court to do more and authorize more. As Obama said, a 50 state solution with each state pursuing its own illegal immigration cessation programs will be a patchwork system through which guns, traffic, and illegals can exploit at will. A comprehensive approach is needed. Obama has put forth such an approach. It is now up to Republicans to either get off their lard butts and ACTUALLY DO SOMETHING FOR American for a change, or continue their failed strategy of killing America in order to tarnish Obama’s legacy and reelection chances.

It is up to Republicans, and they don’t give a rats ass about America, the American people, our nation’s future, or anything else except revenge for Obama and Democrats having won in the last elections. That is the truth, the reality, and the fact of the matter.

David:

I think the state solutions will have a positive impact through touble.

On a news channel I saw clips of President after President of both parties promising action on illegal immigration. Here Arizona sits. They have heard it all before.
Words seem to matter very little from US Presidents on this matter.

So I would expect that the good that will come from states like Arizona is that it will move Washington DC to enough action to solve the problem.

If I were from Arizona, I would simply assume Obama is doing what former presidents have done. TALK!!

Do the math, David. Think ‘Corpocracy’ that has facilitated illegal and legal immigration for the last 25 years. Think Regan’s first amnesty and broken promises. Think outsourcing millions of better paying industrial jobs. Think only country with an anchor baby policy. Think North American Union. Think cheap labor force. Add up all the ‘thinks’ and they total the ‘new world order’, equivalent to ‘globalization’.

FOX reports that Washington State apple/cherry growers had to lay off 500 illegal pickers last season because of the Fed. This year they have hired 300 of the 3000 Jamaicans here on H2A visas. Said they couldn’t find US workers for $11/hr. Says labor is 20% of the production cost. Seems they could easily go to $20/hr, approaching a living wage, and still sell plenty of product. Growers are paying $2600 air fare (probably a tax write off) to bring in a picker.

Immigration has little to do with Dem’s and/or Rep’s and everything to do with the Corpocracy.

Craig, our President cannot legislate. Obama is cracking down on businesses hiring and exploiting illegals through the Justice Dept. The border barrier construction continues.

The only thing he isn’t doing is bringing the troops home to conduct a national manhunt for illegals and deporting them all, which is one of the most divisive and controversial ideas within this issue debate.

To do more, Congressional authorization is needed. Unlike Bush Jr., this president has some respect for law and Constitutional separation of powers.

I am with you, though, on defending Arizona’s law. That was one reference Obama made in his speech that I took some exception to when he alluded to that law being a prelude to unconstitutional racial profiling in the detainment of America citizens. That argument doesn’t hold water anymore than the fact that some citizens will cheat on their taxes is a justification for eliminating taxes altogether.

Arizona’s drafter of their law were very careful to insure that the language in the law did not cross constitutional boundaries or infringe on anyone’s civil rights as written. What some bad cops do with the law is irrelevant to the issue of whether the law is justified and constitutionally defended in its language.

Roy said: “Think cheap labor force. Add up all the ‘thinks’ and they total the ‘new world order’, equivalent to ‘globalization’.”

I agree with your statement, Roy. We are witnessing a globalization of markets which WE OURSELVES promulgated from the end of WWII forward. We now have what worked for so many decades as a nation to achieve, viable markets and competition and democracies populating the globe. There is no conspiracy here. There is but the natural consequence of the U.S. having won the Cold War against communism, and having exported democratic elections and free enterprise market ideas around the world.

I am sure there were a great many American Idjuts from the 1950’s through the 1990’s who never dreamed that America would pay a competitive price for all these ideological exports, but, the writing was on the wall at the close of the Cold War for anyone the ability to project out the consequences of exporting free enterprise markets and democratic governments, married at the hip, like ours are.

There is no conspiracy here. Those who believe in exporting democratically elected governments partnering with private sector corporate and business growth to elevate the quality of life for the citizens of other nations have only themselves to blame for the U.S. now facing extreme competition from overseas for every marketplace dollar, yen, yuan, ruble, and sheckle.

David:

This is a long and protracted problem. We have had every combination of Democrats and Republicans in the white house and congress, and still states are struggling.

Clinton has both a Democratic congress and a Republican congress during his presidency,and couldn’t solve the problem.

I don’t accept Republicans as an excuse for inaction.

Agreed, Craig. It is only the lack of integrity and political will that prevents our Congress from resolving this issue permanently. Every nation has both a right, and an obligation to secure its borders against illegal entries. It is one of the first obligations of government, and has been a mandate since our first treaties with native Americans, which we renegged upon, again and again.

Americans are far too arrogant for their track record as far as good governance is concerned. We have taken a great beginning and time after time throughout our history fought against living up to the promises of our founding.

We have the greatest idea for government on the planet. It is time the American people began demanding that our politicians deliver on those ideas. And the way to do that is by voting against incumbents until their replacements begin to deliver.

David:

If my memory is correct, the first president on the news clip with Richard Nixon. Then they showed every president since then promising action.

Hopefully, our current Congress and President will get it don.

David wrote: “We have taken a great beginning and time after time throughout our history fought against living up to the promises of our founding.”

Yes, Glen Beck’s Founder’s Fridays makes that point very clear. Ink was hardly dry on the Constitution before politicians began to change things. Glen points out that the Southern states were given 20 years to end slavery, that many blacks served in the war and in various government jobs following the signing, that women managed the farm and business while the men were off to war, that they were strong in their faith to God, that it was not unlike a civil war between the British and Americans, that New Jersey immediately gave women the right to vote. Then, with the Progressive activists and Wilson, around 1903 we began to move away from the Founder’s and the Constitution. Now, a small number are taking a look into the past, wondering why the Constitution isn’t working for us so well of late.

Most realize that making the US subservient to the WTO is a violation of our Constitutional sovereignty, but few complain. Over 5k Mexican nationals have been killed along the border, drugs running, people smuggling, related crime yet the border remains open. Another Constitutional violation. The more the document is trashed the less relevance, just what the Corpocracy wants, IMO. Read today where we need a ‘global financial safety net’ administered by the IMF. Your tax dollars ‘unconstitutionally’ at work.

No a conspiracy David, just the American taxpayer being played for the fools we seem to be, IMO.

Otherwise - - -

Nine years in Afghanistan and now the talk is a ‘political solution’. How many lives lost and how much taxpayer money down a rathole in the middle of a great recession to end up with a corrupt Afghan President and a failing police action. I assume the Corpocracy wants us to hang is as I’ve heard recent talk of the riches to be found beneath their soil.

Roy, it really isn’t a conspiracy. Pres. Eisenhower saw what was coming, having had to work with the corporate - military relationships that provisioned WWII. He was acutely aware of their cheating tax payers out of a fulfillment of defining purpose, profit. And Pres. Eisenhower warned all of America present and future to guard against this unholy alliance between government officials and the military. Americans allowed that relationship to pervade throughout the entire government and with all manner of corporations, today.

The answer of course is about voting them out, until this unholy alliance is broken and legislation is passed that puts a firewall up between elected officials and agency bureaucrats and the private sector. Dylan Rattigan did an excellent half hour on this yesterday advocating voting out the incumbents as the means of breaking this intimate relationship between corporations and government. He offered concrete provisions to set it right. It was truly inspiring and reinforcing to hear him on MSM singing VOID’s tune and outlining exactly what VOID has been advocating for years.

The VOID strategy is reaching far and wide these days and making sense to ever more people. I remember when first writing about voting out incumbents here at WB, how it made no sense to hardly anyone here and the notion was considered unAmerican and inappropriate to our system.

We have come a long way and your advocacy along aside many others is increasingly having the desired effect. Thank you, and continue to do what you do so well.

Trying to turn the hands of the clock back to the 18th century is neither a strategy nor a realistic goal. In every way, we are no longer that nation. But, we can make this nation today vastly better than what we have now with nothing more than the voters coalescing around the anti-incumbent strategy.

Roy, thankfully we have a president who understands the necessity of withdrawing from Afghanistan after all attempts at achieving an undefined victory have failed. A president cannot force the people to change their minds, but, he can lead them to embracing the errors of their ways, and correcting them. Obama’s master stroke of appointing Petraeus gives those supporters of the Afghan war their last chance to prove there is a winning strategy. They have until Aug. of next year to evidence that strategy, afterwhich, and failing that, we will begin drawing down in Afghanistan. There simply could not be a better approach given the divisions over that war amongst the electorate and in the government.

David:

Obama I hope is a supporter of the war in Afghanistan. I assume the Democratic party is a supporter of the war in Afghanistan.

Your post implies that this is not quite so.

David,

We have passed the deadline for withdrawal from Iraq. The problem always is the consequences of withdrawal. While Obama did not create the situation of Iraq or Afghanistan, like Johnson, and Nixon he is stuck with the possibility of images like the evacuation of Saigon. Politically, that is anathema.

Craig, the war in Afghanistan was about taking out al-Queda, responsible for the 9/11 Attacks. That mission is now over, with less than 100 al-Queda left in Afghanistan. If we cannot take care of 100 al-Queda between now and August of 2011, then we have no business being there AT ALL !!!!

Obama and some Democrats say that a contingency or back-up force will have to remain after the withdrawal, to insure that al-Queda do not return to control the Afghan government, and to keep the Taliban forces from overwhelming the central government. That of course will become a contentious issue for next year when the draw down of troops begins.

But, clearly, there is no justification for our remaining there in force with targets on our soldier’s backs just to insure that al-Queda does not return to establish American soil planning attacks, again. Al-Queda has grown beyond that and Afghanistan. We need to grow and adapt as well, to do otherwise is act STUPIDLY while al-Queda has acted intelligently to grow and decentralize their organization, in response to our actions.

“Obama cannot be blamed on this issue.”

Obama can and should be blamed on this issue. He is a co-conspirator along with the rest of government.

Eisenhower did not just warn us about the Military Industrial Complex. He also warned us about the illegal immigration government/business alliance.

From wikipedia: “The rise in illegal border-crossing by Mexican “wetbacks” (rooted from the watery route taken by the Mexican immigrants [Mexican Nationals] across the Rio Grande) to a current rate of more than 1,000,000 cases a year has been accompanied by a curious relaxation in ethical standards extending from the farmer-exploiters of this contraband labor to the highest levels of the Federal Government.

[Mexican Nationals] is my addition.

Eisenhower used the INS to deport 1.3 illegal Mexican Nationals in 1954.

Hoover deported approximately 1 million illegals at the beginning of the Great Depression.

The government/business/corporate alliance has exploited the people for long enough. Unfortunately, the people have supported this corpocracy in every way needed. We have supported it with our hedonistic consumption and with our votes.

Celebrating our Independence, where (and the French, Indians and others) put hot lead to the British to gain our own country, our sovereignty, etc. Being a populist/centrists, moreso than anything else, I recognize there was a time in our history where we had room for immigrants, not that we NEEDED them, but had an economy up and running whereby immigrants could be supported until they gained a foothold. Today, in the midst of the great recession, hinging on a great’er depression, with 20-25% unemployed, 5300 Mexicans killed over drug and people smuggling, etc, I see no need for immigrants, legal or otherwise. With the better industrial jobs having been removed to Asia why do we need to import high-skilled workers into this country? Can you tell the difference between white and black, day or night, etc. I believe that if the farmers (archer-daniels-midland) don’t won’t to pay a living wage to workers then they should deport themselves to Mexico or China where the fields are fertile and cheap labor plentiful.
So, on this Independence Day, I am rather ashamed of our government that, in spite of the border situation, the economic situation, will not secure the southern border. ‘Let em fight, die and rot on the border but keep the pressure on US wages at all cost. Globalization must prevail.’ Hail to the International!

Otherwise - - -

26% of our adult population doesn’t know that we fought the British to gain our independence.

Roy, we can’t prevent globalization nor should we want to.

The real question is, will We The People decide the terms of globalization or will the bankers and the corporations set the terms?

We The People have decided to allow the bankers and corporations to set the terms and we will continue to do so unless they make life a lot harder for us.

As it exists we should fight globalization to the death. Conglomerates, monopolies, trading companies controlling what products come to market, price setting, stomping out competition, etc. A long term protracted war on the middle class; dumping foreign products on US markets, outsourcing the better paying jobs, flooding illegal and legal cheap labor into US markets, etc. Sweat shops, unregulated health and safety isssues, etc. Subjecting the US to International law, imposing regional trade laws that violate our Constitution, sovereignty.

IMO, this great recession is nothing more than an extension of the ‘harmonizing’ of world trade. If the US worker would quit fighting it and accept $4/hr wages the Corpocracy would get off our backs.

Meanwhile, the Corpocracy continues to maintain the best government money can buy. Our government officials jet setting around the world while selling the ‘people’ out with their PAC’s and Leadership Pac’s and quid pro quo’s.

I want no part of it and will work to set some wrongs right. If apples are left to rot in a barrel what is the end product, jlw?

In other words, you are right, jlw.

Otherwise - -

Roy, to fight globalization is to oppose international trade. We are dead as an economy without international trade. jlw is right. We need to shape and regulate our participation in the globalization of markets for our own net long term gain. Removing incumbents until our economy is restored to health and prosperity for our middle class and the future of their children is how that can be accomplished.

I am of the opinion that we need fair trade vs free trade. Like buying drugs from foreign markets. Like getting auto, fire, and healthcare insurance from foreign competitors. Also means that if a country has a resource we will help them develop that resource in exchange for trade. If Africa will grow some veggies for us we will put a food processing facility(s) there whereby they can process some foods for their own country(s). Or, is Africa still under some quasi unwritten colonial rule? I wouldn’t buy into any trade venture where the US is subservient to the WTO/IMF. There is a better way, IMO.

I, like many, have lost trust in government. I don’t believe our borders are open for the ‘huddled masses yearning to breath free’. I question the government about every thing. Like, why did the government choose a foreign company to build the next generation of air tanker? Why was a foreign company given a 50 year lease on one of our Interstate highways, paid for with taxpayer money, to operate and develop as they see fit? Why is the renamed NAFTA highway being constructed by a foreign firm? And, this latest one observed in Sunday’s Washington Post.
“Towards increasing solar power production the Administration is making a $1.85B loan available to two solar power companies. The funds will come through the U.S. Energy Dept and “will create hundreds of thousands of jobs in the future.” Abengna Solar, a unit of the Seville based engineering company will receive a $1.45B loan to construct a solar power plant in Arizona that will create 1600 constructions jobs and 85 permanent jobs according to the Administration. The plant could power 70k homes. Then, Abound Solar, a “closely held” Colorado company will receive $400M in guaranteed loans to expand a solar manufacturing plant in Longmont, Colorado and open a plant in Tipton, Indiana. The two plants “when fully operational will produce millions of state-of-the art solar panels each year”, Obama said. End quote.

I can only assume the government is following some WTO guideline. Makes little sense to me to dole out loans and contracts to foreign entities while the US economy is on the ropes. And, who is making the decision on who gets to compete and on what basis? is it our job to hold Spain up during the great recession? While I can understand government intervention in large domestic issues, like the TVA, or national power grid, I don’t approve of the government making winners and losers over such mundane issues and solar power plants, production of solar panels, leasing of highways, etc. Sends my meter tilting toward the Socialists side.

Otherwise, - - -

Also, don’t like

Roy, who should govern international fair trade, to insure it is fair for Americans? The first question required to establish a better way.

Requires several pages of keystrokes to answer that one, David. In a nushell, let’s pose some questions relevant to the big picture. We have a finite world with finite resources, water, land, minerals and the like. Then we have the people who, if left unattended, can generate high populations on productive regions of the world. This results in spillover to less productive (less resources) areas. Question is, what rights do these two groups of popultions have in this country or in any other country? Does the oversexed majority always rule? Can the less populous areas restrain the influx of the majority since ‘they were there first’?

In today’s Wash. Post we read that Kenya is thinking about another civil war. The Majority want a new Constitution to establish courts based on British/Kenyan law but the great influx of Somalies want to retain Sharia law as it was practiced under the old Constitution. The majority say they want unity under a new Constitution. They don’t want two courts for two populations of their people.

Relative to International trade, it’s not that much different. In today’s Wash Post we have the Jewish population opposing a metrorail construction contract awarded by Virginia Railway Express (VRE) to a French company, Keolis Rail Service. Keolis Rail is part owned by the French gov’t and is known to have transported some 77k people to death camps in the Holocaust era.

Keolis has submitted a bid on a 5 yr contract to the Maryland Transit Admin to operate the MARCH Brunswick and Camden lines now under CSX control. Keolis is seeking to run a rail service in Calif in addition to the two MARC lines.

Further, is it acceptable to run in millions of foreign peoples for the purpose of reducing the quality of life for the majority; income, health, elbow room, etc?

Is it acceptable for one state to demand water from another state so they can grow in number beyond what their current resources will support? When you build a highway someone must support it. Who will be responsible for forever delivering water to the needy State? Does it make sense to populate an area beyond its resources?

That should be enuff tautology to now come up with an answer on Intl trade.

IMO, we should respect the sovereignty of a locality, county, state, and nation. If the middleeast chooses to live under Sharia law they should be allowed or facilitated in so doing. If the Somalies choose to live in Kenya they should learn Kenyanize and respect Kenyan laws and courts. Otherwise, locate to a country amenable to their culture. Now, over a hundred or two hundred years or so the Somalies and Kenyans may find they can accomodate each other. But, forcing a civil war or civil unrest because some International politically correct group wants to globalize everything and everywhars is bigtime wrong, IMO.

And, who is driving population in the productive areas? The US working family settled in at about 2.1 people growth years ago. The majority are not looking for population growth. The answer is found with the same entity running in the millions to break the back of the middle class - big business, the Corpocracy.

The majority of people are not interested in ‘growth’ as it relates to GDP or business startups. But, business seems unable to sustain itself without ‘growth’, a bigger customer base, monopolize to control price and beat out the competition. Business gives a whit about overpopulating, resultant spillover, civil wars, etc. They want more efficiency, harmonize the laws between Arabs and Christians, let’s have a one world culture so’s we all wear the same style of shoe and clothing. Brings efficiency to the marketing system. Not that Corporatists are bad people. It’s just the nature of mankind to be competitive. A business is not restrained by self government. Indeed, if growth is not sustained somebody will get fired pdq. They will push growth to the nth degree, till only one or two monopolies stand if left to their own good works.

So, some regulation is called for. Let’s have fair trade vs free trade. Let’s do away with the WTO/IMF and stop subverting the US Constitution with illegal trade laws. Let’s stop the merging of monopolies, conglomerates and trading companies. Let’s have bilateral agreements with each country as to trade. How do you think Antanarivo is making out in the globalized world? Why not discern their products and natural resources and work out an agreement whereby we import their wares and in turn we will provide them facilities such as an agribusiness, mining operation, railroad system or whatever infrastructure. We would operate the system, train the locals and turn it over to them whereby they would manufacture whatever and export same to us and use some for their own development.

In that way we don’t need to harmonize cultures, laws, one sytle of shoe fits all, etc. Nor do we need 10% growth or go shoot somebody every year. Nor do we need millions of - here I go - Antanarivions washing up on our shores looking for work. I think I got pretty close to an answer David.

Why do you think globalized ‘free’ trade is better?

Forgot my punch line. We kain’t get no ‘fair’ trade until the Corpocracy is defeated. Requires removing the money influence from politics/government. Which requires the abolishment of Corporate Personhood and Money is Free Speech law. Further, requiring a 3rd Party with a different political attitude that can reform government and keep it that way. Campaign finance reform, flat income tax, and focus the Congress on the people vs conglomerations.

Otherwise - - -

Roy said: “Then we have the people who, if left unattended, can generate high populations on productive regions of the world.”

Roy, all evidence contradicts your statement. The higher productive nation’s incur lower population increases, than lower productive nations. So, most of your argument is nullified by the real world facts of the situation.

One of the advantages of globalization of markets is that productive nations don’t need to increase their own population to maintain productivity and growth. Foreign markets provide the customer base. America stands as testament to this fact with its increased productivity gains while the labor force shrinks during this recession. The downside to that of course, is that when consumer demand increases, employment opportunities may not, as automation replaces those workers.

Why all this talk of foreign nations laying claim to American resources? It isn’t happening, with only a handful of exceptions like Mexico’s treaty claim to Colorado River water, which is legitimate, btw.

Why do you assume I think globalized trade is better. I certainly never said that, nor even implied it. What I did say is that globalization of trade was a natural evolution of America’s exporting free-enterprise doctrine and ideology over the last 75 years.

I personally think our nation would have been far better off insuring independence from foreign markets as much as possible over the last 75 years, which would have slowed our economic growth somewhat, but, left us with a vastly more sustainable economic future in the long run with fewer negative and environmental and financial consequences. But, that is irrelevant. History took the turns it did, and there is no turning back history and its evolutions, incarnate in our present.

Globalization of markets was inevitable with the export of democratic elections and free enterprise doctrine. It is what it is. The challenge now is how to regulate it for the best of all who are now inter-dependent upon it and each other for their economic survival.

David wrote: “Roy, all evidence contradicts your statement. The higher productive nation’s incur lower population increases, than lower productive nations. So, most of your argument is nullified by the real world facts of the situation.”

Well, New York and other major cities must have been productive somewhere along the way to attract population growth.

David wrote: “America stands as testament to this fact with its increased productivity gains while the labor force shrinks during this recession. The downside to that of course, is that when consumer demand increases, employment opportunities may not, as automation replaces those workers.”

Can you take that to its next logical step or two?

David wrote: ” Why all this talk of foreign nations laying claim to American resources?”

Didn’t allude that David. Just the opposite, we and other nations are exploiting the resources of poor nations, tantalum for capacitors, etc.

David wrote: ” Globalization of markets was inevitable with the export of democratic elections and free enterprise doctrine. It is what it is. The challenge now is how to regulate it for the best of all who are now inter-dependent upon it and each other for their economic survival.”

Seems we agree that globalization has been harmful to the U.S. and many other countries, developing countries especially. But ‘it is what it is’ for no other reason than the U.S. voting public has slept through the last 25 years. Or, better said, worked their ass off to take care of family and paying little attention to politics, feeling its hopeless anyway.

Hopefully, they will learn how to remove the Corpocracy government we have so we can at some point restore our Republic/democracy and get on with it.

Republic Sentry Party applies - - -