Third Party & Independents Archives

Globalism Requires World Consensus

From a WaPo article we learn that local and foreign governments are among those slamming the Volcker Rule. The Volcker Rule, part of the Dodd-Frank financial regulation package, is designed to provide for monitoring of banks when they act as both buyer and seller for a customer.

These regulations cover billions of dollars worth of municipal securities including bonds issued by foreign governments. State and local gov'ts say such regulation could make it more expensive for them to raise money from investors. European govt's warn that the regulation could further impact their debt crisis. The EU and Japan sent officials to Washington to lobby regulators last week
Michael Barnier, representing the EU executive arm, called the provisions on gov't debt "unilateral and protectionist." He noted that the new rules would complicate efforts by EU and the US to synchronize the adoption of other new financial regulations.

Some are suggesting that either muni bonds and sovereign debt be exempted or, relax guidelines for what banks may do with bonds covered by the Volcker Rule.

An unfortunate, but expected result of globalism and the 'harmonizing' of commerce, law, security, etc, has brought us to a point where US gov't will have a hard time acting unilaterally in any sector. But, that won't keep the corpocracy from pushing for 'seamless' law and regulation as it relates to commerce or finance and corporate law.

Foreign gov'ts argue that the reach of the new rules extends far beyond US borders. Foreign banks would have a choice of closing US branches or subsidiaries, or restructuring their business to comply.

Congress has tried to hedge on sovereign issues as it relates to the World Court, IMF and WTO. But, increasingly, with pressure by the corpocracy and little impediment from the silent majority, they are giving in while we lose our freedom and liberty little by little. Europe has no trouble with monopolizing and socializing but it doesn't bode well for our Republic.

Otherwise - - -

Posted by Roy Ellis at March 2, 2012 10:03 PM
Comment #337569

Globalism and associated corpocracy iaremost frustrating to the man on the street as there is so much information to sort through, good and bad, and one is never sure where the truth lies. A good example is trying to sort out the root cause for the gas price roller coaster. Ask 10 politicians and you will get 15 different answers, etc.

And, while politicians are going to ‘create jobs’ one never hears a politician relate to future globalism. So, we could say politicians are proffing little white lies around gas prices and jobs but what can we say about their silence on globalism? This url offers perhaps a clearer view of our globalist future.

Fewer jobs means less revenue for the Corpocracy. We could reduce the tax burden by moving to a flat tax, dropping Freddie and Fannie, and streamlining a number of federal and state agencies. Reducing the gov’t payrolls should be seen as a positive in the globalised picture.

But, when have you heard a politician talk about losing a couple of billion jobs? Are we being told the straight skinny? Here is a possible explanation for the high gas prices.

I suspect that sometime last fall the President sent a correspondence that went something like this:

TO: Big Oil
From: The President

Dear CEO’s

You may be aware that I will be running for President in the 2012 elections. I know that gas prices generally peak in the heavy driving season and that would coincide with the November election. Therefore, I would like you to set your peak price season for early spring in 2012 leading to moderated pricing by fall.

I will work to shave a point or so off oil margins and maybe work in an equivalent tax break.

President, etc.

Otherwise - - -

Posted by: Roy Ellis at March 3, 2012 1:30 PM
Comment #337571

Say it ain’t so, Joe!!

from wiki: “n 1933, Roosevelt became President and appointed Morgenthau governor of the Federal Farm Board. Morgenthau was nonetheless involved in monetary decisions. Roosevelt adopted the idea of raising the price of gold to drive down the value of the dollar, thereby raising the price of all goods — especially farm goods. The idea came from Professor George Warren of Cornell University, and despite the opposition to the idea, Morgenthau was willing to help him. When Roosevelt told Morgenthau he was thinking of raising the price of gold by 21 cents, his entourage asked him why. “It’s a lucky number,” Roosevelt said. “Because it’s three times seven.” As Morgenthau later wrote, “If anybody knew how we really set the gold price through a combination of lucky numbers, etc., I think they would be frightened.”

Not really, we’re used to floating gas prices, etc.

Posted by: Roy Ellis at March 3, 2012 2:18 PM
Comment #337572

The sad thing Roy is we are going down this road with barely a whimper from the conservatives. In fact just the opposite, they defend the corporations pushing for this one world corporate government. The applaud as regulations put in place by state and local governments are challenged by other countries and declared to be in violation of the WTO agreement.

Conservatives use social issues as a smoke screen, telling us their rights are violated yet nothing when our sovereignty is at stake, why is that?

Posted by: j2t2 at March 3, 2012 3:52 PM
Comment #337576

Because corporations are very good to us. They give us choice, convenience, and wonderful material goodies. Things that are worth relinquishing power to have.

J2t2, conservatives also are resistant to certain aspects of corporate globalism, the (Globs), such as open borders and the freedom to move large populations of low wage workers into higher wage countries, the demand to allow to big to fail to actually fail, and the relinquishing of U.S. sovereignty.

So, I see conservatives as a lot like liberals in this respect in that they resist while enabling.

Globalization is well on it’s way to completion. The social issues reflect the real battle, what the finished product will eventually look like. This battle encompasses Americans from the top to the bottom of the economic ladder. Perhaps we could call it the Murdockians Vs. the Sorosians even though neither one of them is an American.

Posted by: jlw at March 3, 2012 6:32 PM
Comment #337589

jlw, Despite the good side of corporations they are not benevolent leaders. That is the problem. Globalization is not necessarily a bad thing, the problem with it is how it is being implemented. I still do not see any difference between where we are headed and Fascism. In fact I don’t see much difference between conservatism as practiced and Fascism. I still believe conservatives are like the Germans of the 20’s.

The way I see it, in a nutshell, libertarians are cheerleaders and avid corporate globalization advocates. Conservatives are corporate globalization advocates. Liberals are on the fence, kinda sorta ok with it, and progressives are dead set against corporations and globalism.

The finished product is as you say the issue. The way it looks to me future generations will look back and wonder what we were thinking. The issue of course is the loss of sovereignty we will experience for the economic gain and efficiency of corporations and the wealthiest few. Corporate governance will not work well for the people of this Country.

Posted by: j2t2 at March 4, 2012 2:00 PM
Comment #337604

Well, we might look again at the present globalist posture. We are aware that the price of sugar in the US is double other countries. Has been so longer than the WTO is old. From a WaPo article today on healthcare cost we find that the cost average for the US customer is two to three times and more.

The article relates that in 2009 Americans spent $7960 on HC while Canadians spent $4808, Germans $4218 and the French $3978. The US spends more on HC without providing more services than other countries. “This suggest that the difference in spending is mostly attributable to higher prices of goods and services.”

We learn that the Canadians and Brits prices are set by the gov’t. In German and Japan providers and insurers set the price with gov’t interceding if no agreement can be reached. In the US providers charge what they can get away with.

Pharmas profit margins are around 20 %, exceeding that of the financial sector. 12% is returned to R&D. The US customer is subsidizing the world for the development of new HC products. By paying high cost for HC we are shorting education, infrastructure, research, defense, etc.

Aren’t insurance, pharma and big med’s multinational? Haven’t heard anything from the WTO as it relates to ‘free trade’ or ‘fair trade’ on this issue.

Otherwise - - -

Posted by: Roy Ellis at March 4, 2012 9:58 PM
Comment #337619

Roy, We pay many times over the cost of defending our country in the military budget each year.

Health care in this country is expensive because we use the free market system for health care. A single payer system has proven to be cost effective and overall a better system for the majority of people yet we continue to debate it in this country. We can’t even negotiate with with big pharma over the coast of medication. It is called by conservatives “reform of Medicare”.

Posted by: j2t2 at March 4, 2012 10:18 PM
Comment #337643

So, if I have this right, leftists fear that people with money are using government to create a fascist state so that they can control our lives?

Posted by: kctim at March 5, 2012 10:35 AM
Comment #337656

Kctim, have you ever heard of a group called King George and the Aristocrats and their companies like the East India Co.?

When hasn’t the wealthy tried to force or buy control, power and wealth for themselves?

By comparison, workers uniting to challenge the authority of wealth and make demands of wealth is the new thing in the world.

At this very time in our history, wealthy interests are using a coalition of mainly workers united under the Republican banner to wage an all out counter assault on the programs that workers have supported to relieve the propensity of wealth for a feudalistic workforce.

There are no poor people because the poor all have air conditioning and cell phones.

Workers don’t need collective bargaining, they need right to work.

We don’t need to regulate corporations because corporations can police themselves.

Voter suppression is a good and necessary thing.

The middle class is under assault because a large voting middle class is the backbone of democracy; and while democracy can be used to support wealth, it has a greater potential for checking the power of wealth.

We can cut government spending in half and still increase funding for the military and the Internal Security Forces.

The G20 WILL NOT be meeting next month to finalize plans for a Social Security retirement plan and Universal Health Care plan for all the workers of the world.

If you have doubts about a large segment of wealth having a particular interest in fascism you need to read about how a significant number of wealthy Americans supported and contributed to the Nazi fascist cause.

No matter who has the power, they are going to run the system to their advantage just as much as they possibly can, often so much so that the people rise up against them.

As Globalization gains momentum, so to are the protests against it gaining momentum. It is happening in China, in Africa, in the Middle East, In South America, in Europe and right here in the U.S.

J2t2, while I agree with most of what you have said, I would not characterize the Democrats vote of 42 yea and 8 nay on GLB as fence sitting. Money does the talking in Washington and the Democrats need those corporate dollars just as much as the Republicans and they have been competing for it.

It is basically as Obama has said, If the majority of the people think the country is on the wrong path, it is they who must change the path.

Posted by: jlw at March 5, 2012 2:31 PM
Comment #337657

I am just trying to better understand the leftist rhetoric that leads them to believe Wal-Mart is taking over the world. IMO, leftist have promoted dishonest propaganda for so long that they are now starting to believe it to be the truth.
Only leftists claim free choice to be part of a union or not, means those on the right want to ban collective bargaining. Only they claim smart regulation means no regulation on corporations. And only they claim proving you can vote equals voter suppression.
And to be honest, it is mainly leftists who claim we are a democracy instead of a Constitutional Republic. Which is funny because the majority rules BS is why we are in the position we are in right now.

This is what gets me though:

“No matter who has the power, they are going to run the system to their advantage just as much as they possibly can, often so much so that the people rise up against them”

If you truly believe this, then why in the hell would you want to give “the system” so much control over your private life?

Posted by: kctim at March 5, 2012 3:01 PM
Comment #337682

I mite like sum ‘cheap juicy coture’ - - what is that?

Some notes from an NBCdateline project. Recently MERC was find 5B for harmful effects from VIOXX. Pharmas use ‘Institutional Review Boards’ as gate keepers on clinical studies re new drugs. IRB professionals are not certified or vetted and their reports are reviewed by the FDA. Their survival depends on $$ from big pharmas. According to Dateline, the FDA has never shut down an IRB.

Dateline redacted some old VIOXX data and sent proposals to three IRB’s. Two declined and one offered to conduct research/study for $1800. Human guinea pigs in the US cost about $1500/day. So, many big pharmas are having the R&D conducted offshore where human guinea pigs cost about $200/mo. 80% of drug testing is conducted in foreign countries where middlemen review the data to be submitted to the FDA.

Dateline went to India and found that since 2008 more than 1500 have died there from serving as human guinea pigs. Many sign consent forms with a fingerprint as they can read or write. Many are involved in more than one study at a time.
Just one more example where the big corporation has escaped a lot of red tape/regulation by going global and hiring the cheapest labor in the world. Result is that the FDA, USDA, other similar agencies are finding they must fight such problems on a world wide basis with the same or less funding.

I like cheap fish, etc, but I want to know where they came from and who put the stamp of approval on the package. Or, am I at risk here? Globalism 445, Joe Citizen 0, IMO.
Otherwise - - -

Posted by: Roy Ellis at March 5, 2012 8:11 PM
Comment #337721

Kctim, I don’t speak for the left as much as I speak for myself, but I will make a stab at the sentiments of the left as it relates to WalMart.

Walmart has a lot of power over supply and their suppliers, and they have used that power to conduct a policy towards their suppliers which IMO, is not in the best interests of the country and our way of life.

It is a race to the bottom line for WalMarts suppliers if they are to get shelf space. Suppliers say, we have cut cost as much as possible, We haven’t given our workers a raise in ages. We have trimmed our workforce to the bare minimum. We are using cheaper materials, we have demanded lower prices from our suppliers. There is little else we can do to lower costs.

WalMart says, yes there is something else you can do, you can move your production to a low wage country and supply us at the price we are willing to pay.

In addition, WalMart is, I believe, the largest employer in the country, or one of them, and as such probably has the most workers that are also qualified for government assistance because of their low incomes and lack of benefits.That is convenient for WalMart because without the government assistance the company would probably be having labor problems and not just in the urban and suburban settings.

And, the price bandit has been laid off.

It is the example of the business model that the right is promising to elevate to the normal and it will have a big impact on the American workers and the American way of life.

It is no secret that the right wants to decrease wages and benefits in this country, that they want to reduce the size of the middle class, reduce the size of government by slashing entitlement spending and deregulating, that they want to suppress the number of voters as much as possible. And they do this while proclaiming that it will create some great new golden age.

Anyone who has interest in history knows what that business and government business model will produce. Anyone that looks at the third world conditions knows as well. Quite a number of workers who don’t bother to know these things can be persuaded by the rhetorical propaganda of the right into believing and acting against their own best interests.

The American people have just gotten a good taste of what this globalization/financialism corpocracy is capable of doing and yet there are still a significant number of working class people who believe the rhetoric willingly.

Just today, I read an article about a woman in Ohio who’s pet grooming business took a downturn with the economy. She listens to talk radio, all day long, every day, to keep informed about what is happening. Really? Get yourself indoctrinated by Rush Limbaugh while your pet is being groomed?

“If you truly believe this,”

Here is what I believe, I have lived 62 years and 2 days in this country. I worked for 40 of those years. There have been times in my life when the government made things inconvenient, but over all, the benefits I have enjoyed from living in this country and the assistance, GI Bill and others, that the majority of We The People have created through government has enhance my freedom far more than it has hampered it.

The fact is that the people do rise up in this country and they do it, for the most part without violence, at the voting booths. When the majority feel that the system is unfair, that injustice is prevailing, they have voted for programs, policies, and regulations that reduce the unfairness, the injustices.

There are people in this country that have every right to and do disagree with the majority on the definition of injustice and they have a right to try to persuade. It is just a shame that so much of the debate is centered around propaganda and taking advantage of ignorance rather than a factual discord.

Today, many Americans do believe that the system has reverted and that injustice is growing because of more than three decades where the emphasis has been on government support for the interests of wealth while the people have been experiencing wage stagnation, financialization, inflation and a loss of jobs, with the majority of jobs being produced being the low income service variety that is non-supportive of the American lifestyle.

Wealth has lost it’s majority support for it’s policies. Those policies have led to a collapse of the economy at the bottom of a double digit trillions debt and the attempt to blame entitlements programs and regulations has failed.

Do Rush and Shawn have enough magic left to turn the situation around and get the wealth/conservative counter revolution back on track? Time will tell.

We Americans rejected the Tory argument as well as King George and the Aristocrats, but their back.

Despite living in a country where conservatives stymie progress in the name of choice, there is no other country I would rather live in. Even though I am often frustrated by it, I enjoy being a part of this great experiment in democracy.

IMO, this is a Christian nation and the majority of the Christians have seen to it that their secular government reflects their values, while supporting wealth to the degree possible in the pursuit of a more perfect union.

I am well aware of, from historical reference, what the right wing Christian hierarchy, especially the Baptists think of other Christian organizations and ordinary Christians that the right labels as secular Christians.

Roy, in a free market system there is no FDA, no need for a USDA because in a free market system the government is not responsible for the quality and nutrition of products.

In a free market system, if a company kills it’s customers to quickly it will go bankrupt.

In a government/corporate fascist system, government agencies like the FDA and the EPA become shells with architecturally pleasing facades.

Posted by: jlw at March 6, 2012 5:50 PM
Comment #337728

Well blogged, jlw. Yes, I’m aware of the corpocratic FDA, USDA and other so-called regulatory agencies. I’ve wrote a number of articles on WB to that effect.

Also, have been labeled a ‘conspiratist’ ? for espousing many of the same feelings you have re globalism. You do have to break some eggs to make a cake. And, what about this guy John Guise, I believe is correct, that is suing the federal gov’t? But, otherwise, we go around trying not to notice that the emperor has no clothes, etc.

Here are some words I picked up on net today:
To paraphrase Shakespeare, when you prick a corporation, it cannot bleed. If you tickle it, it will not laugh. If you poison it, it will not die. However, if you wrong it, it will often seek revenge. One characteristic out of four does not make it a person. Most people would call that a monster.

Otherwise - - -

Posted by: Roy Ellis at March 6, 2012 9:04 PM
Comment #337794

‘Pink Slime’ is back in the news. Some of the major burger houses have sworn off using pink slime, but now we hear that the USDA has bought 7M lbs to be mixed with hamburger for the kids school lunches. At one time pink slime was used in animal food but now it’s supposedly good enough for the kids too.

An ex-Chief regulator lady for the USDA approved pink slime, retired and went to work for the corporation producing pink slime. It all sounds too good to be true but it is…

Need I say it again - - - a 3rd party with a diff pol att would throw cold water on political careers like hers.

Otherwise - - -

Posted by: Roy Ellis at March 7, 2012 8:03 PM
Comment #337922


I only used Wal-Mart as an example of the unsubstantiated fear the far-left has of scary evil corporations. Truth be known, I could have mentioned just about any corporation that does not treat its employees as the left wants and the rhetoric would be the same.

I think your condemnation of the right is based on propaganda and that has caused your opinion to be somewhat misguided.

There is no plan to decrease wages and benefits. Just because a person doesn’t want to raise the minimum wage or does not want to be a part of union, does not mean they want people to work for pennies or reduce the size of the middle class.
Entitlement spending and unnecessary government regulations contribute to the debt. Out of control debt is very bad for our country if it wishes to continue on as a free nation.
Asking people to show ID in order to vote is not suppressing the vote. I personally don’t care if I have to show ID to vote or not. I have to show it to cash a check, buy beer, buy tobacco and for just about every other aspect of my life, so my attitude is if you really don’t deserve to smoke, drink, vote or whatever if you are too lazy to follow the rules and do what it takes to be able to. But to say this is equal to wanting to suppress votes is ridiculous.

IF you talk to people on the right, the desire is not some ‘golden age,’ it is a Constitutional Age. Some Americans need to “progress” out of the Constitutional fully, while other Americans believe it is worth saving. That doesn’t give support to the ridiculous fantasy that Republicans desire fascism and we will be a fascist state in the near future.

“Anyone that looks at the third world conditions knows as well.”

If our Constitutional Republic has not turned us into a third world nation over the last 200+ years, why do you believe it will if we don’t drastically change it?

“Quite a number of workers who don’t bother to know these things can be persuaded by the rhetorical propaganda of the right into believing and acting against their own best interests.”

Quite a number of people DO know how things can be if corporations ruled the world JLW, but they also understand that government is the only entity with the power to take away their rights. That doesn’t mean people want no government though.
And I hate to tell you this, but you have no idea what is in anothers best interest or not. We all have different things we hold true to and those shape what we believe is in our best interest for ourselves.
For instance, you may take a guess and believe it is in my best interest to be a Wobbly, but since I know being a part of any union, let alone the IWW, is something that would not serve my interests, I would choose to be without a job instead.

“The American people have just gotten a good taste of what this globalization/financialism corpocracy is capable of doing and yet there are still a significant number of working class people who believe the rhetoric willingly.”

Lets be honest here, the majority of American people do not see the dire straits you do. Most work a decent job with decent pay and can pretty much go out and buy necessities as needed. Not all, but most. They are treated well at that job and they really don’t have a desire or need to be unionized. It goes on and on.
I’m not saying there are no problems, but come on man, things are not half as bad as some say and Republicans aren’t hiding behind the every corner waiting for the day when we all report to Wal-Mart for food and money.

“that the majority of We The People have created through government has enhance my freedom far more than it has hampered it.”

So what about those of us who believe the opposite is true? Who understand that it is wrong to take freedoms from one in order to enhance “freedom” for another?

“When the majority feel that the system is unfair, that injustice is prevailing, they have voted for programs, policies, and regulations that reduce the unfairness, the injustices.”

Yes they do and I fully support that. But there is a process that was supposed to be followed and it has been sidestepped. What is fair or an injustice is defined differently by each and every one of us. That is one of the reasons why we are a Constitutional Republic and not a democracy. In order for the majority to rule in our country, it was supposed to be basically a super majority of all the states.

“It is just a shame that so much of the debate is centered around propaganda and taking advantage of ignorance rather than a factual discord.”

Like claiming an issue is about denial when it really is only about where? I totally agree.

“Today, many Americans do believe that the system has reverted and that injustice is growing…”

Yep, and many Americans also realize that we are in this position because of three decades where the emphasis has been dependency on government for personal lives and beliefs.

“Despite living in a country where conservatives stymie progress in the name of choice”

Progress to you is not progress to everyone. And well, to be quite honest, freedom of choice is a pretty big deal to at least half of this country and our founders.

“there is no other country I would rather live in. Even though I am often frustrated by it, I enjoy being a part of this great experiment in democracy.”

Me either, and I have lived in over a dozen.

As an atheist, I really don’t know much about the Christian hierarchy and all of that. Never really cared. All I can say is that there is no religion being forced upon me in any way so I don’t believe there is any reason to live in fear.

Posted by: kctim at March 8, 2012 3:35 PM
Comment #338125

Kctim, propaganda? In a since, but it is not necessarily the right wing propaganda that forms my opinion of conservatives, it is that so many of them are willing believe the propaganda without question.

In Mississippi, 52% of Republicans believe Obama is a Muslim. I imagine that number may be as low as 25%-30% in some states.

Just because conservatives don’t support the minimum wage and because they support right to work, doesn’t mean they want to make people work for less or want to reduce the size of the middle class.

I agree when it comes to many working class conservatives, but, as a whole, they have very little knowledge of history. It is that lack of historical perspective that causes us the inability to learn from mistakes of the past.

When I see that the people overwhelmingly support Social Security and Medicare, it makes me think that many conservatives are like the German people when it came to the Nazi’s. The Germans just knew that the Nazi’s really wouldn’t do all those terrible things they said they would do. Many conservatives seem to think they can elect a tea party Congress because they don’t really mean what they say about those programs and won’t try to change or eliminate them.

I know exactly where you are coming from when you talk the Constitution, I just totally disagree with conservatives and agree more with the common people, of that time, who weren’t impressed with what they thought was an elitist document.

It seems to me that conservatives want to forget that the conservatives were the ones that did not want to revolt against King George. Or, they want to believe that those conservatives were different than conservatives of today. Some of the causes have changed but not the conservative attitude.

Even the Founding Fathers disagreed and had different interpretations of what the Constitution meant. A strong central government vs. states rights and small government. Northern bankers, manufactures and merchants vs. the Southern Aristocracy, etc. With both groups dictating to the common people.

We know what those Southern aristocrats did to this nation in defence of their personal liberty and personal property.

When the common farmers and workers finally had a belly full of the capitalists, they took it upon themselves to change things. The capitalists should be grateful that cooler heads prevailed and we chose progressive solutions rather than socialism.

Conservatives can propagandize unconstitutional all they want, but it is not.

Social programs can contribute to the deficit when the economy is in bad shape, but they are in no way responsible for the massive debt. Kudos for that go to Reagan for tax breaks and star wars, to Clinton for trade laws and deregulation, to Bush for tax breaks, deregulation, and unfunded wars.

Two ways of looking at progress, the way the wealthy see it and the way the people see it. Environmental regulations were demanded by the people and fought by wealthy interests.

I see choice as basically an illusion.

The evangelicals haven’t quite connected the dots when it comes to capitalism, an amoral economic system is atheistic. But they do know where atheists go on their hit list and they rank above liberals.

I bet that many conservative Christians don’t believe that those Iranian Mullahs and the terrorists aren’t conservative Muslims.

It is the conservatives of these religions that cause all the tension.

IMO, the difference between the Democrats coalition and the Republican coalition is that the Republicans don’t like eachother slightly less than they don’t like everyone else.

Posted by: jlw at March 14, 2012 12:48 AM
Post a comment