Tuesday, February 24, 2009

Fiscal Responsibility




So they got together at the White House yesterday to go over the concept of Fiscal Responsibility and Entitlement Reform. Everyone had a grand time and Republicans got to bloviate the way they do about how Democrats are Spending Our Children's Future!!!, which is always good for a teevee soundbite or two.

Digby and Jane have been keening and rending their garments about how this whole thing is all about cutting Social Security, which doesn't have any kind of fiscal problem for decades, if then, while the Boy's Club, including Josh Marshall who did yeoman work to prevent the Bush Regime from fucking with Social Security, have either been silent or have been telling the Girls to pipe down, nothing is going to happen to Social Security. It's about reforming Medicare and Medicaid.

Only Helen Thomas broke the silence in the White House Press Room when she said, "Why are you messing with Social Security now?" And Gibbs, the White House spokesman, was tongue tied. Could not even issue a denial-denial.

We are so screwed, as they say.

See the chart up top? It's been making the rounds for some time now, and it shows how after World War Two, the Big One, wages and productivity tracked one another pretty well until about 1978. It was during that period that the Great American Middle Class was established on the premise that workers who were paid enough to make a decent living would in turn boost economic well-being for all. And so it was.

Then around 1978, wages and productivity diverged sharply, the gains from increasing productivity suddenly no longer reflected in paychecks. You will note that the wages graph is essentially flat after about 1978, with some periods of decline, especially during the Reagan/Bush years, while productivity gains continue to rise.

American workers were not being rewarded at all for their productivity increases, yet productivity continued to rise. This would ordinarily indicate that Americans were facing a reduction in their standard of living, but in fact, that isn't what happened, at least for most households. Instead, they mostly maintained their standard of living or even improved it during this time of flat or declining real wages.

They did so by putting more and more people into the workforce. The two income household is now standard, whereas during the Post-War period it was a rarity. One income, during the period that wages and productivity gains were tracking fairly well, was generally sufficient for a household's decent standard of living.

It's almost impossible now.

And now that we are deep into an economic recession that looks fair to become a global depression, two income households are becoming less and less feasible as employers shed workers by the millions.

Maintaining a decent standard of working- and middle-class living is becoming more and more difficult.

And yet the rich are still swimming in more money than they know what to do with.

It happened because all the economic benefit of the productivity gains of the last 30 years have gone to the upper 2% or 3% of the wealthy. Everyone else has been taking it in the shorts. Or going very deeply into debt (a problem I have addressed in other posts.)

Most have never grumbled, never complained, but now that it's becoming harder and harder for workers to find work of any kind, and it is more and more difficult for workers to maintain -- let alone improve -- their standard of living in any way, grumbling is starting.

And the Rich, for their part, see a Disaster Capitalist way to improve their own economic standing at the expense of everyone else, how drôle, by stealing Social Security funds outright, and by restricting or reducing access to entitlements like Medicare and Medicaid. In Crisis there is Opportunity.

The fact that workers allowed the situation to deteriorate this far is telling. The union movement ground to a halt and reversed course, workers didn't demand better pay for increased productivity, and too many became content to use debt to finance what their incomes didn't allow them to pay for right away. So long as the illusion could be maintained that they weren't really being robbed, workers were happy enough most of the time.

But now that the veils are falling away, workers are feeling put upon. The fact that reductions to Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid are On The Table for discussion and potential action, while there is no talk at all of redressing the historical imbalance of wages vs productivity gains is illuminating.

There is an active generational theft going on, but it is not theft by the boomers from their offspring, far from it. It is theft by the rich from the present and from the future of everyone and for many generations to come.

Rather than discussing cutting Social Security and other benefits at a time like this, the discussion should be focused on increasing benefits substantially, doubling SS payments for example, and extending Medicare-type coverage to everyone.

This would start the process of recovering the productivity gains that have been stolen from workers during the last 30 years.

The economy would not necessarily "recover" -- which is to say, go into another unsustainable bubble phase -- but would start to settle down and stabilize. There would still be a problem of excess workers which could be partially addressed by lowering the retirement age to 55, and increasing wages for workers.

Two things are called for: confiscatory taxation for the rich, significantly increased wages and benefits for workers.

And an end to boom-and-bust bubble economies.

Americans would be consciously reducing the workforce to reflect and respond to a changed economic reality; they would be ensuring that the generational theft of productivity gains we see reflected in the chart above was recompensed by increasing Social Security payments and extending basic medical care benefits to all Americans. They would ensure economic stability over the long term by increasing wages immediately and maintaining wage levels in the future that track with overall productivity gains.

Saturday, February 21, 2009

Bovine Indifference



After a while, it all becomes completely surreal.

I think it is fair to say that the economic situation is perilous for millions of Americans and becoming so for millions more by the day. Our Betters are very busy looting whatever remains of the treasury before the final crash. They are doing it with the active connivance and contrivance of the Congress of the United States of America, an institution which long ago lost any viable connection with the People of the nation. It serves its own interests first, the interests of the Plutocrats and Oligarchs second, the Presidency third. The People? Not at all. Well, except to fool them and pretend to be their friends.

And for the People's part?

Bovine indifference.

Except for the little sparks of faux populism, like the foolish ranting of CNBC's boy on the trading floor, Rick Santelli. Oh, that gets plenty of play, all over the cablenets, broadcast teevee, the hate radio dial, and the blogosphere both left and right, because this is the ONLY form of "populism" anyone will be allowed to see or express.

You have to hate the Middle and Lower-Class Losers, even if you know you're being robbed by the Plutocrats.

It's a brilliant ploy and it is working.

Maybe bovine indifference to it all, and airy surrealism to boot, is the right answer to the chaos forming all around us.

Dali, anyone?


Tuesday, February 17, 2009

Next up on the NeoLiberal chopping block



Social Security and Medicare, of course.

There is an Entitlement Reform confab hosted by the White House on February 23, featuring such long time friends of Social Security as Jim Cooper, Judd Gregg, Kent Conrad, and so forth, to be spearheaded by Peter Orszag, OMB Director, whose plan for SS has long been to cut benefits and raise retirement ages.

No doubt the privatizers will re-emerge from their long hibernation (at least since George Bush's failed effort at privatization in 2005), and once again, Josh Marshall will lead the charge to "Leave Social Security Alone!" Right? Right?

This "Reform" confab has been on the agenda for quite some time, and yet, oddly, Josh has been almost completely silent on the issue. Quite the contrast to his constant drumbeat against the Bush Privatizers. Digby and Jane have been the clearest and loudest -- and most suspicious -- voices in the Blogosphere regarding the Obama campaign for "reforming" entitlements.

But the NeoLiberal plan pretty much requires the gutting of Social Security, the elimination of Medicare. It's all part of the package of Restructuring.

The bovine indifference to what is going on -- despite all the people running around with their hair on fire -- is truly astonishing...

More to come.

Monday, February 16, 2009

So the Big Guys are finally figuring out

that there's a Big Problem at the American Household level. (h/t to bystander at Greenwald's Place).



Reference material:
  • Krugman's NYT clolumn "Decade at Bernie's"

  • "Tracking the Household Balance Sheet" at the Baseline Scenario

  • Bill Moyers' disscussion with Simon Johnson

    [It's really impossible to overstate the blind indifference and the gross incompetence of what passes for most of our Economic haute monde.]


    Throughout this economic meltdown, it has been astonishing to me how utterly and completely -- and apparently deliberately -- ignorant economists and economic policy makers and general commentary about the economy in the blogosphere has been about the growing plight of American households.

    That plight is easy enough to quantify, and it's been in plain view to anyone who would deign to look for years: household income has been flat or declining, household savings has been zero or negative, household debt has exploded -- based largely on phantom assets in real estate and pensions.

    Real estate foreclosures have been a leading indicator of the household debt problem for years. And years.

    And nothing is done about it. Nothing (much) is in the works.

    Yet trillions and trillions and trillions of dollars are being paid or pledged to bail out the banks, and now hundreds of billions are pledged to be paid directly to corporate contractors as part of the "stimulus."

    It is alleged that $50 billion is being set aside to deal with the foreclosure problem, but we've heard similar allegations over and over and over again throughout the tumult, and ultimately nothing is done on behalf of homeowners facing foreclosure, except that many of them get fleeced yet again. So people have a right not to believe any promise they hear now that "help is on the way." More than likely it isn't and it won't be.

    And yet, as some are coming to realize -- too late, oh well, ha ha -- had there been help at the household level when the crisis first emerged, many of the titanic global issues (not all of them by any means) that we're facing now would have been mitigated or eliminated.

    Of course Americans have to reduce spending, and they have done that smartly and substantially. Lack of household spending will continue for so long as households are crushed under a massive debt burden with no increase in income and no debt relief in sight.

    That's where we have been stuck for (seemingly) years.

    What to do about it? Easy:

  • increase household income substantially ($7.50 a week won't do it), and/or

  • relieve household debt.

    Neither of which is in the cards in our lifetimes.

    Or so the graybeards insist. And why is that?

    Is there a serious economist in the building who can explain why household incomes cannot rise substantially (say so that they can make up, even partially, for the productivity gains of the last 30 years?) and why household debt cannot be substantially relieved (say on a scale equivalent to the gambling debt relief being applied to the banks and Wall Street?)

    Most economists won't even deal with the question at all let alone provide an answer. The notion of doing something to ease economic distress at the household level doesn't even occur to them, so they have no answers, cannot rationally contemplate the issue.

    It is too foreign to them.

    And that, ladies and gentlemen, is largely due to the Triumph of Milton Friedmanism and Neoliberalism -- which, in circular fashion, has brought us to this crisis.

    And that is why conditions will continue to deteriorate for the middle and working classes, and why the economic predators will continue to be fed and funded and treated like Royalty.

    Well, they are. Aren't they?
  • Saturday, February 14, 2009

    Neo


    photo by Brett Kaffee for MRzine, 2005

    During the Bush regime, we were under constant assault by the NeoCons whose world-view and principal interest was frankly imperialist, corporatist, and warmongering. The United States was attacked by shadowy forces, whether domestic or foreign (ie: the Anthrax Attack was almost certainly domestic, and from within the government itself, no less; the whole question of what really happened on 9/11 is so filled with murk and mystery, we'll probably never know, any more than we "know" the full story behind the assassination of President Kennedy.) The United States thence entered into an overt imperialist phase, which strangely and strongly resembled the nation's late 19th Century imperialist adventure, including mindless torture and slaughter of Natives, mass detention camps, and the overthrow by force of foreign governments.

    Corporations thrived as never before; the stock market soared, no-bid contracts to service the various wars ensured favored companies enormous profits, and pallets of $100 bills were flown around and handed out with abandon, the fabled "Money for Nothing."

    Back home, American households seemed to do relatively well, though not quite as well as during the Clinton Era, but much of the seeming prosperity at home was driven by two things: immense government deficit spending on war and security, and an almost unprecedented housing bubble that enabled millions of people to either purchase homes (that subsequently they found out couldn't be paid for), or to take out equity that had built up in their homes as prices rose to help them afford to maintain a "decent" lifestyle.

    Interest rates were low, unemployment was relatively low, wages were pretty much static, inflation stayed low (except for a number of energy price spikes that foretold what was to come), taxes were cut again and again, the defict ballooned, the wars were far away and plasma teevees kept the masses entertained and passive.

    Economic trouble was on the horizon. Many observers in and out of the dismal profession of economics issued dire warnings, but few were listening, and even those that did listen were trying to cash in before the crash.

    And now the crash has come.

    We're in the opening scene of what looks to be a very long play. Where's Eugene O'Neill when you need him?

    Neocons managed to get us into imperialist wars, and for all practical purposes, they succeeded in changing our form of government to an Autocracy with dependent though ostensibly co-equal legislative and judicial branches.

    Now that we're well into the crash, however, the Neoliberals are on the rise, and just as the Neocons got away with murder, so will the Neoliberals attempt to.

    And so far, they're doing just fine.

    Rather than having me go into a long dissertation on the Neoliberal transformation of the United States, I'll let some others explain it better than I can.

    The picture above is from a 2005 article that describes how the defeat of the Sandanistas in Nicaragua enabled the imposition of Neoliberal economic "restructuring" which led to the delightful scene above. It's well worth reading to brush up on Neoliberal practices in the Americas that caused so much disress and fostered so much evil in the name of "freedom," until the People had had enough and mostly threw off the shackles of privatization and reclaimed the social good.

    To follow on, watch or listen to this Democracy Now! segment from Friday, February 13, 2009, featuring Robert Kuttner and Michael Hudson discussing how the United States' "financial recovery" really depends on the institution of Neoliberal economics, and how at root, it is all completely fraudulent.

    And then, take some time -- quite a bit of time -- and digest this long article by Michael Hudson in Counterpunch, from February 12, 2009, that very clearly describes how we got here, who many of the players were, what is planned for "recovery," and what will really be necessary to revive and stablize the economy.

    We're in a fine pickle.

    Friday, February 13, 2009

    All this high stepping and baton twirling....




    ...for what?

    Public enthusiasm continues to be constrained for this Stimulus Bill. In fact consumer confidence has plumeted. And people expect the Depression to last at least five more years.

    Why?

    Could it be that this Stimulus simply doesn't acknowledge the dire straits so many households are facing. All it provides is (perhaps) $15 a week this year and $7.50 a week next year to workers who can't qualify for the AMT "fix".

    But AMT "fix" beneficiaries will receive anywhere from $500 to $5,000 (in addition to the $400 in payroll witholding reduction); first time homebuyers, $8,000; $2,500 tax credit for college tuition and expenses.

    The Earned Income Tax Credit will be increased $600 in 2010.

    There is no incentive, at all, for working class people to spend significantly; in fact, given the way this stimulus is set up, all the incentive is concentrated at the high end, primarily in corporate board rooms, secondarily in the households of the upper-middle class. The working class, if they are smart, will hold on to every dime they can get their hands on for absolutely as long as they can.

    Combine that with the bailout of the Financiers, to the tune of several trillion dollars, mostly to pay off their gambling losses, and we have a perfect storm of -- continued decline, right into Depression.

    How is it that the Stimulus Managers completely missed the plight of the working class and the lower middle class? How could they be so blind?

    Much cleverer people than me point out that they didn't miss anything. They don't want to give any kind of spending support to the working class right now, they don't want average household spending to pick up for the most part, because it would be inflationary.

    Furthermore, macroeconomists insist that substantial payments to households do not spur spending; instead, such households typically pay down debt or squirrel the money away in savings. The brainiacs use the experience of last year's stimulus payments as examples.

    Only their example is flawed. At least in my own household, I can tell you exactly what happened to the $1,500 we got in stimulus funds.

    $300 went to pay debt (primarily incurred to cover previous house and car emergencies -- some of which were documented on this blog.)

    $1,200 (and quite a bit more) went to pay increased expenses, including doubled cost of gasoline, higher insurance premiums, and 30% - 50% higher food costs.

    In other words, there was inflation last year, substantial inflation of gasoline and food prices -- basics for most households -- and people had to pay the higher prices, they had no choice. As it happens, they had some money to do it with.

    Nothing was added to savings in our household; more than $3,000 net was taken from savings last year to pay higher expenses, despite our efforts to economise, and we've still got a substantial debt load -- though not as high as many people's because we have always lived rather frugally.

    Yet macroeconomists will insist -- no matter what -- that the $15 a week per worker starting in July will have the greatest simulative effect of any of the other tax breaks in the stimulus bill because workers will spend the money immediately without thinking.

    The unemployment insurance extensions, the food stamp supplements, the welfare supplements, the state stablilization funding, the educational funding, and some of the other direct program support in the stimulus will all help individuals -- as they fall through the holes in the shredded safety net -- and that's a good thing for those who have the opportunity to make use of those things.

    The spending and infrastructure programs in the stimulus will help the economy keep going at a reduced but potentially sustainable level (cf: Japan) for some time, barring the unforseen (Israel attacks Iran, an asteroid collides with Colorado, etc.)

    But there will be nothing substantive to encourage spending by households, at least not any time soon, so as to at least try to curb the inflationary pressure increased spending would have at this time. Also, nothing substantive will be done to relieve household debt loads, at least not in the near term.

    And many more trillions are still going to be paid to the banks and the Wall Street swindlers.

    So despite all the high stepping and baton twirling by the administration and the Congress over the Wonderful Stimulus they've managed to craft and pass, the People are not buying it.

    Most of them won't see or feel any benefit.

    Nothing to cheer about.

    Wednesday, February 11, 2009

    $10 $7.50 a Week!



    Well.

    Geithner's "Plan" to give more trillions of dollars to the banks and Wall Street to pay off their gambling losses is a real dud, apparently. It is a Big Rock Candy Mountain for the economic predators who have been effortlessly feeding on the passive American People, but it comes with some strings, including "transparency," and -- as we know -- the Masters of the Universe cannot stand exposure of any kind.

    The markets tanked.

    The reviews were one big Raspberry.

    Meanwhile, you and I will be privileged to accept the $10 $7.50 a week in payroll tax withholding reduction as our share of the Recovery. If we can keep a job, that is. And assuming the reduction remains in the Congressional bill once the conference committee gets through cutting out more pork and nonsense.

    "Entitlement Reform" is next on the chopping block, meaning that the Social Security and Medicare problems will be dealt with, no doubt through some form of privatization and benefits cuts and restrictions that will help ensure the continued impoverishment of the masses for the benefit of the rich and the well-connected.

    The wonder of all of this Neo-Liberal economic restructuring that's proceeding apace is that the American People are so passive, whereas peoples all around the world are rising in anger, bringing down governments, forcing the Masters of the Universe -- so intent on further looting and pillaging -- to back off.

    Even if it is only temporary, it is something. Naomi details some of the turmoil below.

    But in the United States, it's become almost unheard of to take action of any kind against the predators who believe they have a Constitutional and God Given right to plunder at will.

    The Geithner "plan" will ensure these people have endless plunder so long as the nation endures, and the Obama "Recovery plan" will ensure that favored corporate and financial interests will have guaranteed profits for the forseeable future.

    Some people will be put back to work or will stay on their jobs to be sure, but many more will not. There simply will not be enough work for so many people to do. Wages will likely decline further, yet consumer level prices may continue to increase, even though producer prices may fall more than they already have. One of the ironies of this situation that is barely noticed by the economic brain trust that's operating the levers of the Machine is that despite all the falling wages, falling demand, and falling producer prices, the cost of living -- consumer prices -- which started up in earnest last year, continues to rise. So the average household is getting squeezed from both ends: falling income, higher costs.

    The fallout is terrible and is spreading. In my own neighborhood, numerous small businesses have closed, and a whole slew of car dealers are simply gone. For Lease signs are everywhere, and finding retail and office tenants is almost impossible.

    Unlike many areas around here, the foreclosure crisis hasn't severely impacted housing in this neighborhood. Most of the impact here happened a year or more ago, when a few houses went to foreclosure and auction, but everything else stayed relatively stable. Home prices in this neighborhood have actually increased slightly despite the downturn, but that all may change suddenly if the State of California continues its spiral into insolvency, which looks to be certain given the intransigence of the Republican caucus in the Legislature.

    It may be a financial tightrope for those who have homes, but the number and the presence of homeless is growing substantially. Little encampments are springing up everywhere there's any shelter from the weather, and there are far more ragged people trudging the streets. Services are being cut back everywhere, despite the charitable inclinations of so many people who still have money and time to give.

    The city and county are laying off people; the State has instituted unpaid furloughs two days a month and will send out layoff notices to 20,000 or more workers starting next week -- assuming there still is no budget.

    The State budget is expected to be cut in all sorts of areas -- if there ever is a resolution to the impasse in the Legislature -- and one of the most prominent areas of cuts is expected to be in In Home Support Services, a program that provides needed services to the elderly and disabled throughout the State at relatively small cost to the State and localities. Workers are paid between $8 and $12 an hour, depending on locality, to take care of people who can't take care of themselves in their own homes rather than in institutional care. It costs something like $10,000 a year or so on average to provide In Home Support Services to elderly and disabled residents in their homes, whereas institutional care costs $55,000 a year per patient or more.

    But for some reason, the Governor and members of the Legislature -- and the media -- have glommed on to this program as a money drain that must be plugged. They want to cut the hourly rate of pay, further restrict the number of hours workers can be paid for, and they want to make qualifications much stricter for individuals who use the program.

    It's part and parcel of the Neo-Liberal Restructuring, no doubt. The old and the incontinent are simply a drain on everyone else. If they can't carry their own weight or pay their own freight let's let nature take its course.

    Still, as more and more individuals and households are pushed out into the cold, I'll bet the People will not rise.

    One of the most astonishing aspects of the Reagan Revolution and its aftermath is that the People of the United States, once feisty and obstreperous, became pacified, to the extent that even when they took the streets in great numbers -- as they did in 2002 and 2003 to protest the coming Iraq War -- they did so with extraordinary courtesy so as not to disrupt the comfort and convenience of their rulers.

    Practically no other people on Earth are as passive as Americans today.

    But why should they get upset? $10 $7.50 a week adds up, you know. And that Big Rock Candy Mountain could be just around the corner.

    Sunday, February 8, 2009

    Oh Moon of Alabama



    What Naomi said:

    Its message was simple enough. You--politicians and CEOs huddled at some trade summit--are like the reckless scamming execs at Enron (of course, we didn't know the half of it). We--the rabble outside--are like the people of Argentina, who, in the midst of an economic crisis eerily similar to our own, took to the street banging pots and pans. They shouted, "¡Que se vayan todos!" ("All of them must go!") and forced out a procession of four presidents in less than three weeks. What made Argentina's 2001-02 uprising unique was that it wasn't directed at a particular political party or even at corruption in the abstract. The target was the dominant economic model--this was the first national revolt against contemporary deregulated capitalism.

    ...Here in Canada, politics is markedly less YouTube-friendly--but it has still been surprisingly eventful. In October the Conservative Party won national elections on an unambitious platform. Six weeks later, our Tory prime minister found his inner ideologue, presenting a budget bill that stripped public sector workers of the right to strike, canceled public funding for political parties and contained no economic stimulus. Opposition parties responded by forming a historic coalition that was only prevented from taking power by an abrupt suspension of Parliament. The Tories have just come back with a revised budget: the pet right-wing policies have disappeared, and it is packed with economic stimulus.

    The pattern is clear: governments that respond to a crisis created by free-market ideology with an acceleration of that same discredited agenda will not survive to tell the tale. As Italy's students have taken to shouting in the streets: "We won't pay for your crisis!"


    Greenwald suggests on Bill Moyers' program that "disruptive" tactics might be necessary in the face of the burgeoning economic crisis.

    And I put up a video of a Kurt Weill classic, "Alabama Song", to get us into the mood...

    Show us the way to the next whiskey bar.
    Oh don't ask why...

    Clunk


    The Susan Collins Plutocrats' and Kleptocrats Rescue and Relief Bill of 2009 is wending its way through the Senate with passage expected by Tuesday. Conference committee with the House is already meeting, so it is expected to be approved by the House with only minor tweaks the same day or by Wednesday, then go to the White House for the President's signature with much fanfare, bi-partisan comity, and everybody will pat themselves on the back for a Job Well Done and go on Holiday.

    And of course, this bill won't solve the economic crisis. But we're told it is better than nothing, a first step only, and we should get behind it.

    More and more citizens are saying, "No."

    As I've explained many times, the problem is very simple: the economic crisis is largely the result of the collapse of household spending that is due to households' crushing debt burden, flat or declining household income, job insecurity and/or job loss, and for many people, housing insecurity. Households can't and won't spend on non-essentials under the circumstances even if they have disposable income, which fewer and fewer do.

    The first step in fixing this problem is to "rescue" household finances. I have proposed it be done through a substantial direct payment -- a minimum of five figures, six figures would be better -- to every household to be used for specific purposes, including paying down debt, purchasing fuel efficient vehicles, weatherizing and improving energy efficiency of homes, etc. Any amount not spent for these purposes in six months reverts to the government for recommitment.

    Macroeconomists insist that paying down household debt doesn't serve any useful -- ie: stimulative -- economic purpose, and they would be right if only small amouts are ever made available to households for that purpose. I'm proposing a large amount be made available per household, enough, hopefully, to clear most if not all debt households currently struggle under. Assuming these households still have income (not an easy assumption in times like these), clearing all or most of their household debt would then free up hundreds or in many cases thousands of dollars a month now spent on debt service to be used to purchase goods and services that these households cannot purchase now due to their debt burden and other matters.

    If individual household spending increases by hundreds or thousands of dollars per month quickly, the overall benefit to the economy would be massive and immediate. The plunge we're experiencing right now would halt and quite possibly would begin to reverse. Relieving household debt starts the process of recovery. It isn't the recovery itself, nor is it the entirety of what needs to be done.

    The objection that increasing household spending power quickly is inflationary has some merit. Last year, for example, households received varying amounts of stimulus payments, from $300 to $2000 or so, and during the period these payments were being distributed, commodity prices, food prices, and particularly gasoline prices went up by substantial amounts. For many people, these higher prices for food and fuel, generally considered necessities, consumed the entire stimulus payment and then some. Yet despite those facts, economists insist that most people actually used their stimulus amount to pay down debt or squirreled it away in savings. Maybe when those checks came, that's what they did with them, but they were spending an equivalent amount or more to cover the higher costs of food and fuel. In other words, inflation was eating up all the stimulus payments and more.

    And there is certainly a risk that providing much larger additional payments to households will be even more inflationary.

    But we're in a deflationary spiral right now, and from a Keynesian point of view, that's much worse, both short term and long term. Inflation can often be controlled. Deflation is another matter.

    Ironically, deflation has not reached the household level, where many prices for goods and services are still rising. Yet household income is declining, and household spending has collapsed.

    Susan Collins' Plutocrat and Kleptocrat rescue bill will cut taxes for people on top of the economic pyramid (again!) but will do almost nothing for the masses in the short term, and it will provide only the potential for improving the lot of the masses in the long term through reemployment on some of the infrastructure projects that will be funded, or through derivative reemployment. What it ensures is that certain reliably Republican sectors of the economy (ie: the rich, big business, heavy construction, nuclear power, coal, etc.) receive substantial tax cuts, contracts and subsidies in both the short and the long term, while the People are allowed to Hope things will get better for them... eventually.

    The most economically disastrous features of Mrs. Collins scrub bill are the removal or sharp reduction of funding for education and supplementing budgets of states and localities, which, if not corrected immediately, will cause additional millions to be thrown out of work and cause many educational, social service and medical programs operated at the state and local levels to shut down.

    I assume Mrs. Collins knows these are the immediate disastrous consequences of the removal or reduction of state and local educational and budget supplement funding, and I assume those are the consequences Mrs. Collins wants. But lets not just blame Mrs. Collins. The White House had a hand in this revision, too, and it is said that Rahm Emanuel, Chief of Staff to the President, personally rewrote the bill to remove or substantially reduce state and local budget supplement funding. Thanks Mr. President!

    That being so, the bill that will emerge next week, hailed as a Bi-Partisan Rescue and Recovery bill, will actually be an economic restructuring plan, a Shock Doctrine project, intended to shift as much wealth as possible as quickly as possible from the masses to the Plutocrats and the Kleptocrats while doing as little as possible to relieve the suffering of the masses, and in many cases actually deliberately increasing that suffering on the theory that doing so will make them even more domesticated and compliant.

    When people realize what's really going on here, the anger that is seething under the surface may well explode. Our rulers believe that there is nothing the People will ever do, nothing they can do, to overcome the Powers That Be, and so far, they've had no reason to think otherwise. But as the economic pressure grows on the masses, the ruling class could be in for a real surprise.

    What's so very disheartening about all of this is that the Obama administration and the President himself, have so badly bungled leadership, and they have shown themselves to be fully and completely in the tank for the interests of Plutocrats and Kleptocrats. To some people, that's not a surprise. To many others, it's devastating.

    This is not the Change we can believe in.

    Thursday, February 5, 2009

    Oh Fiddle De Dee



    It's sad.

    The so-called stimulus plan has stalled in the Senate where, as we speak, Susan Collins is leading a crack bi-partisan team of Senators to "scrub" the bill of all "unnecessary" spending, pork, and frivolity.

    Meanwhile, public support for it has collapsed, and a desperate plea has gone forth from the White House to activate the Obama List and generate massive grassroots support to call and fax and email the Senators to back the bill. Please.

    A little late. In fact, probably too late.

    Some sort of bill will pass, to be sure, but given the way the stars are aligned, it will be a Republican bill primarily designed to protect the rich and to enhance corporate interests, secondarily to screw The People.

    Same as it ever was.

    Yesterday, I spent some time at various sites putting forth my considered opinion of what was wrong with the so-called stimulus bill and what was necessary to gain public support for doing something.

    The problem, as I see it, is that the bill -- whether the House or the Senate version, and most definitely what will emerge from Republican (erm, excue me, "bi-partisan") surgery -- doesn't deal with the situation millions of households are facing, more every day, as the economy tailspins into oblivion. They are being crushed under a increasing burden of debt -- even if they don't buy anything else on credit -- and they fear losing their jobs, their homes, and any shred of dignity they might have left.

    No bill so far proposed does anything about that in the short term.

    Meanwhile, more trillions are proposed and pledged and paid to the banks and to Wall Street to pay off their gambling losses -- essentially without strings.

    The People see this and throw up their hands in dismay.

    I was accused of being an ingnernt slob for proposing that the priority should be household debt relief not banker and Wall Street debt relief. I was told that anything the Government spends is "stimulus" by definition. I was told that because I obviously knew nothing about macroeconomics, and therefore could not appreciate the beauty and truth of the stimulative properties of the massive spending programs in the stimulus bill, I had nothing to contribute to the discussion but "more BS."

    "More BS" because I was focusing on the situation American households are facing, and how to deal with that to gain substantial public support, and not on what economic theorists believe is the "best practice" -- which generally ignores households and ordinary people in favor of a Grand Plan of some sort.

    There's nothing necessarily wrong with the spending plans that are being proposed, as long as we understand they are essentially long-term economic restructuring programs, not "stimulus" programs for the short term.

    Household economic distress has been building for years, ever since the forclosure crisis reared its ugly head, and for all these years, despite repeated and growing pleas, nothing has been done about it. Nothing is being proposed in the current bills to do anything about it, apart from a really insignificant payroll tax witholding reduction amounting to about $10 a week. That's it.

    People who are burdened with crushing debt, in danger of losing their jobs, their homes -- or maybe they've already lost them -- rightly say, "WTF?!"

    Especially when the Congress and the President are preparing to unload yet another few trillion and change on the banks and Wall Street and they are rightly furious.

    The brainiacs who put together the programs under consideration have no clue.

    What is needed is to deal with the household situation first, and they won't do it. They want their Grand Plan for Economic Restructuring adopted, and then, "maybe next year," they'll consider household relief.

    Or maybe not. No, make that "probably not," because macroeconomic theory says that "debt relief" is not stimulative and doesn't help in economic restructuring in any case. Macroeconomic theory doesn't deal with households (even though their spending is 70% of the overall economy), consequently, what happens to American households is of no immediate interest or consequence for Grand Planners.

    When I pointed out to one of these brainiacs that household debt relief (as opposed to banker/Wall Street debt relief) can potentially free up thousands of dollars a month per household immediately for them to spend on goods and services they can't purchase now, and that this is a priori "stimulative", I was told that stimulating spending at the household level is absolutely not what is wanted right now. That would run the risk of "reinflating the bubble," in other words, inflation, and we can't have that. No, what is wanted is the overall restructuring of the economy, and the Best Practice is to spend massively on programs and infrastructure that will serve the eventually restructured economy -- and let households drown.

    At least a shred of honesty appeared for a moment.

    This explains rather clearly why there has been no substantive effort at all at the policy level to stem the tide of foreclosures, to maintain employment, to relieve household debt, and so on, while there has been extraordinary effort to make sure that the gambling losses of the banks and Wall Street are covered, and to ensure that only certain aspects of the economy are propped up -- ie: those that support the rich and corporate interest, first; favored affinity groups second.

    And now the Senate bill is being massaged to take out even the affinity group support, and it will probably pass and then be reconciled with the House bill, on Senate Republican parameters, and then go to the White House, where with much fanfare, the Incoming will declare a Bi-Partisan Triumph, and no one will be happy (except the rich and the powerful, who will chuckle at how they once again pulled the wool over the rubes' eyes), and the economy will continue to be sucked into the typical corporate Shock Doctrine Black Hole.

    plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose...

    Thursday, January 29, 2009

    Waiting


    The Incoming has arrived, and he has had a number of soirées to attempt to appeal to the Better Angels of the Republicans, with the upshot that not one of them voted for the Economic Recovery package in the House of Representatives the other day. Not one.

    Clearly all the fine verbiage and social contact isn't working with this rump assembly of... fine American patriots... ha! Their unanimous refusal to put the People and the Country before their Party in this instance, despite being given several concessions on tax breaks for the rich and the well-connected and on matters they consider "frivolous" like the National Mall and contraception funding, shows that the split between them and the rest of the country may not be bridgeable.

    President Lincoln faced something worse, far worse, in that some of the states had already seceeded when he took the oath of office. But the unanimity of today's rejectionists, the refusniks, is a sign of where we are headed.

    It seems to me that Obama has been bending over backwards and jumping through all kinds of hoops to bring these miscreants in out of the cold, provide them with succor, with hope, and with courage to do the right thing. They reject all of it, with a snot-nosed brat's contempt and a gleeful nyah, nyah to boot.

    After all, their Leader, Rush Limbaugh, has declared that he hopes Obama will fail, and he will do what he has to to ensure that happens.

    Bless his cystic ass.

    To the extent he thinks he can, the Incoming is ruling by decree, Imperial Ukase as it were, what we call EO's, while Congress sorts itself out. Some serious sortage has to go on, for in addition to the fact that not one House Republican voted for the economic package, eleven House Democrats voted against it. Sigh.

    Here we go again, with Democrats in Congress lining up to be butt-boys for the Rs. It just reeks. And it has been going on for years, with ineffective Democratic "leaders" in the House and Senate unable -- unwilling? -- to whip their caucuses into shape.

    So where is this all leading? What are we waiting for?

    I've been very impressed with Obama's political acumen. He knows how to move people sufficiently to move them to action, and he knows very well how to give them enough rope to hang themselves. He did it over and over again during his two year campaign for the Presidency, to rather startling effect, and it looks like he is doing it as President as well. It's a risky business, but from appearances, he is doing everything to allow and require Republicans in the Congress to do themselves in, by being as pleasant and gentle and social and accommodating as he can, and letting them rail and rant and fuss and refuse all they want. The People see this and turn their backs on them. Support for Obama grows. It's now in the 70's and moving up.

    Republicans end up self-pwning -- again.

    That's the politics of this current phase, but we're waiting for the moment when they have nothing left. When not even as a rump assembly can they function, and no one pays them any attention at all. Not even with their Democratic followers and toadies.

    And then?

    Who can say.

    Friday, January 23, 2009

    Well.



    The interregnum is over. George W Bush was dismissed the other day to a chorus of lusty boos -- boos that were covered over by the sounds of clomping in the hallways of the Capitol on most of the tee vee coverage of the Inauguration, but not, apparently, on MSNBC. The video at the end of this post is from the crowd's perspective and it is even more of a rebuke to Bush.

    The People despise him. They despise what he has done, what he has said, what he has believed.

    Yet throughout his Regime of error, disaster, death, destruction, and multiple dashed hopes and dreams, he was preserved from experiencing the depth of the People's disgust with him and his policies.

    Until Tuesday.

    When finally the pent up loathing of the People for this man and all he has wrought was let loose for a few minutes of spirited popular contempt. "Bad form. Bad form," say the gasbags.

    Yes. To them, to the Courtiers who have infested the Palace the last eight years, it's all about form. There is nothing but form in their minds, and all they ever really wanted was to keep things on an even footing, following the rules of etiquette, keeping things civil. Even when, as was so often the case, the level of outrageousness -- and complete contempt for the basic rules of civilization itself -- by the White House and its denizens was almost beyond comprehension.

    "Nah nah nah nah, hey hey hey, Good Bye!"

    Sunday, January 18, 2009

    The Carnage Stops for the Moment


    Image of white phosphorous falling inside the UN school in northern Gaza where a woman and a child were killed on January 17.

    So they've stopped for the moment. Snipers have no doubt fanned out to liquidate/exterminate the usual "pockets of resistance," but for the moment "quiet" has descended on the smoking, blood-drenched ruins of Gaza.

    Hamas, so far as we can tell from afar, didn't fight. There was no resistance to Israeli tanks and bombs and bullets. The entirety of Gaza was an Israeli free-fire zone, and there was no where at all for Gazans to find safe refuge within Gaza, no way at all for non-combatants to flee. They are trapped, encaged, without succor, without hope, to be slaughtered at will by the dartk forces of death and destruction arrayed against them.

    All the European heads of state are assembled at Sharm el-Sheikh to assure Israel that they support its right to defend itself against the perfidy of the Palestinians, that they are determined to get humanitarian aid to the Gazans as quickly as possible, and (according to Gordon Brown) to provide counseling services to children who have been traumatized by the struggle.

    Mouin Rabbani comments on the proceedings that it is breathtakingly inconceivable that not one of these glittering heads of state has mentioned the word "occupation". How can they discuss what's happened without mentioning the occupation? Rabanni's counclusion? The Two State Settlement is dead. The very notion of "negotiations" has been discredited.

    Rabbani opines that the next step is not a One State Solution, as that ideal is unlikely in our lifetimes. The next step is more likely an extistential struggle. He doesn't describe it, not yet. But given past history, the "extistential" solution is the elimination of the Palestinians by force.

    Monday, January 12, 2009

    Warsaw/Gaza

    Throughout the current Israeli Aktion against the Gaza Strip, observers who wish to incite Zionist Israel defenders have compared the Israeli operations to the Nazi liquidation of the Warsaw Ghetto in 1942-43.

    The comparison is not exact, of course. For one thing, the Germans and their allies didn't use air power against the Ghetto inmates, at least not to any great extent. They didn't have helicopters, and their fighter planes and bombers stayed on the ground. There were only about a 1000 Jewish fighters in the Ghetto, and their numbers were reduced smartly and consistently by the Germans and their allies.

    The Germans had been emptying the Ghetto for months before the Uprising in 1943, and there were only about 55-60,000 people left in the Ghetto by that time. Deportations continued during the Uprising, the point being, of course, to remove all the inmates and obliterate the Ghetto.

    By contrast, Gaza is sealed off completely, and there has been no effort whatsoever to get people out of there. The cordon is complete. At best, no more than a few hundred wounded and civilians with foreign passports have been allowed to leave. 1.5 million Palestinians are trapped in Gaza with no means of escape. There is no safe place, no refuge at all anywhere in the Gaza Ghetto. The Israelis bomb and shell at will, and they are using horrific weapons like White Phosphorous shells, "bunker busters", and possibly DIME (Dense Inert Metal Explosive) weapons as well.

    For its part, Hamas has been a pathetic defender of Gaza and its people. While there are supposed to be some 15-20,000 Hamas fighters in the enclave -- a small number in proportion to the population -- they have been utterly unable to defend against he Israeli onslaught. Their rocket squads have never been an effective assault mechanism, and the number of Hamas rockets fired from Gaza has been reduced to no more than a few per day. From the sketchy reports out of Gaza, mostly on Al Jazeera, it appears that there is sporadic guerilla action from Hamas, but very limited, and hardly even noticed by the Israeli Death Machine.

    Israel claims that every military aged male in Gaza is a "terrorist," and so all the dead male adolescents and adults are by definition "Hamas Terrorists" in their eyes. But the casualty figures, right now being reported on Al Jazeera as 905 dead and over 4,000 injured, indicate that at least 40% of the casualties are women and children, and of the dead and injured men, only a few are actually "Hamas." There is no sign that the Israelis actually intend to wipe out or even seriously reduce the numbers of Hamas in Gaza. Many Israelis have appeared on Al Jazeera who have said that "Hamas can stay," as long as the rocket fire stops and they do not rearm. Of course the Israelis lie, but still.

    Almost all the Hamas spokespeople who have appeared on Al Jazeera have been in Syria; I cannot recall seeing even one interviewed in Gaza itself, though I could be wrong. Al Jazeera does have reporters on the ground in Gaza, and they are reporting live from their Gaza studios and on location (mostly at the hospitals) in the warzone throughout the day, but their reports seem oddly sterile. It seems they are being very careful in what they show and how they report on what is happening, as if they are under some sort of censorship rule, but by whom is the question. Their reports from Israel are obviously under some Israeli control -- although it seems to be relatively light -- but their reports from inside Gaza seem to be almost sanitized, only showing the bombing and shelling from a "safe" distance (although often live), rarely going out on the streets for face to face interviews with Gaza residents, never (so far as I can recall) interviewing Hamas officials in Gaza, but very prominently featuring the panicked delivery of the dead and wounded to the hospitals -- with a special emphasis on the children. There have also been a number of reports showing the appearance of "normal life" during the alleged daily "3 hour humanitarian cease fires" -- that are nothing of the sort. Gazans are shown shopping for food and sundries in the outdoor markets, some are interviewed, the usual denunciations of Israel and complicit Arab governments are expressed, and life goes on.

    How much of this somewhat tip-toe reporting is due to the nature of the conflict and the real dangers the reporters face -- and they certainly face plenty of dangers, even in London, where one reporter was stoned live on camera when he was reporting on a pro-Israeli demonstration -- and how much is due to management instructions from Doha I can't say, but it is... odd.

    They are reporting on Arab government complicity and failure to act to end the carnage, and there are many reports of the massive demonstrations around the world -- and in Israel and Arab capitals as well -- against the Israeli slaughter in Gaza. Al Jazeera had extensive reporting on and from the United Nations about their actions (and inactions) toward some sort of eventual "durable" ceasefire. The extent of the reporting was surprising given the general level of cynicism in the Middle East regarding anything the United Nations Security Council does or doesn't do or say.

    They have featured Barack Obama's non-statement statements about the Gaza situation, and they have had panels speculating on how the Incoming will approach the Middle East conundrum. Most panelists seem to be of the opinion that there will be little substantive change in the American government position favoring Israel, but that there may be more "engagement" in the region toward some sort of settlement of the hostilities and conflicts.

    [To Be Continued...]

    UPDATE: January 15, 2009

    I had a wan hope that this bloody Gaza reduction campaign would be over by the time I got back to this post, but no. The efforts at a ceasefire have come to naught thanks to the intransigence of the Israelis backed by the USA, both Outgoing and Incoming Administrations, the appalling corruption of the Egyptian, Jordanian and Saudi Arabian governments, along with the languid indifference of other Arab and world governments to the plight of the Palestinians.

    It's tough to compare what is going on in Gaza with the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising and liquidation. As I've said before, it's a comparison we really don't want to make. And yet what's been going on in Gaza, the methodical and deliberate campaign of death and destruction undertaken by the Israelis, the terror the Gazans are experiencing every minute the Israeli Aktion continues, and the near futility of resistance -- no matter how heroic it may be in individual circumstances -- all evoke echoes of what happened in Warsaw in 1943.

    What is significantly different is that there is no effort at all, by anyone, to get the Gazans out of there. They are being slaughtered in place and their cities are being destroyed around them. Except for a handful of injured and those with third country passports, no one is being let out -- or taken out -- of the Gaza enclave. The people are sealed in. In Warsaw, the deportations continued while the Uprising was going on. And in every other conflict I can recall, civilians have been able to (or have been required to) flee in advance of the Death Machine. In Gaza, they must stay. There is nowhere to run or to hide, no way out, and the Gazans can only await their doom.

    Even the indifference of so many world governments -- not so much the indifference of the Peoples of the world -- is an echo of the disinterest of the world in the plight of the Jews of Europe during the Nazi hey-day.

    The reports right now on Al Jazeera describe increasing horror in Gaza, as the Israelis are shelling and bombing UN headquarters and relief supplies warehouses, fuel depots, hospitals with hundreds of patients, apartment houses with hundreds of families still in them (reports are that some have collapsed and that perhaps hundreds of people have been killed in the latest bombings), the Red Crescent hospital is on fire, and a building housing journalists from Reuters and a number of Arab news services has been hit.

    Yet the word being passed around the Al Jazeera crew is that this is a last spasm of violence before a ceasefire which, for some reason, they expect to see implemented within the next 24-48 hours. From what they have been saying, the AJ crew seems to believe that Egypt has brokered ceasefire terms with Hamas that are acceptable to Israel, and that there will be an interim agreement today when the Israeli representative arrives in Cairo, and that the fighting will stop sometime in the next couple of days.

    If that's true, it will be an echo of how the Israeli campaign against Lebanon and Hezbullah sputtered to an end in 2006. In that conflict, the violence against infrastructure, civilians, and relief efforts increased the closer to the ceasefire things got. Then there was a last spasm of cluster bombing of southern Lebanon villages and then it was over, Israelis pulled out, and Hezbullah declared victory.

    Wednesday, January 7, 2009

    Neither So Big Nor So Bold -- and Not Very Fast, Either



    There's been a whole lot of hooey about nothing at all (eg: Caroline, Burris, Blago, Richardson, et al) this festive New Year Season, a lot of Israeli propaganda about deadly events in the Middle East, and a curious and disappointing level of hype and "well, maybes" about the vaunted economic "stimulus" Mr. Obama is going to start off his administration with, bold and big, right out of the gate. Signing bills the minute he takes office, putting people back to work, back in their homes, back on their feet.

    No wait. Well, maybe not. Miss McConnell over in the Senate House is throwing one of her patented hissy-fits yet again, demanding to know just why such and such is being done, and wanting account of every dime, every precious penny that is disbursed from the Treasury on Mr. Obama's Harebrained Schemes. Of course Miss McConnell was not at all concerned about the hundreds of billions and trillions that were extorted by the bankers of Wall Street without the least bit of accountability just a couple of months ago. But of course that was then, this is now.

    But wait. That's not all. Rather than a stimulus that helps individuals, families, and communities, we're talking about a dribble, a few dollars a week to those who are employed, nothing to those who lose their jobs, in the form of reduced withholding, but only slightly reduced, and likely only temporary. Nothing at all to keep people in their homes and forestall foreclosure, just as there has been nothing at all to put a stopper in that part of the economic meltdown since it first reared its ugly head years ago.

    There may be some infrastructure repair and construction funding, but that won't get under way in the middle of winter, and even when it does start up, it won't put more than a fraction of the unemployed back to work, and it was never intended to.

    My bet is that a shift to a "Green Economy" won't happen, at least not so you would notice, in part because of Miss McConnell and her flounces.

    Broad hints are being offered that the Bank Bailout will continue and even accelerate, hundreds more billions and trillions unaccountably down that rathole, with nothing at all to show for it, except that we ordinary folk are "allowed to live" one more day.

    There may -- or may not -- be some loans to some states and localities to help cover some of their operating deficits for a limited time. But one can almost be certain that California's catastrophic budgetary implosion (and we recalled Gray Davis over something much smaller by comparison) will not be one of the candidates for Federal assistance.

    I don't know how it is in your town, but the fallout from the economic earthquake that's going on is really showing up around me, and it ain't pretty. Businesses are closing right and left, some that have been around for a long time and are institutions around here. Car dealerships have almost completely vacated a long strip of suburban road where they once dominated. I was driving in a long-established neighborhood not long ago, and it seemed like every other house was in foreclosure, offered for auction or for sale by one of the foreclosure specialist companies. House prices in many neighborhoods -- not all -- have declined 40%-50%-even 60% from their peaks; but in some "exclusive" enclaves, prices have held steady or even increased slightly. What that says right there is that some folks still have plenty of money to live their ritzy lives, while as for the rest? Oh well!

    The number of people living on the streets has increased noticeably, and this in the middle of winter. Not good. Homeless camps are springing up all over. Wherever there is some flat empty space and at least a hint of shelter. Police are being a little more tolerant of the homeless than in the past. But property crimes are increasing fast, burglary and robbery statistics showing worrying trends upward. I hear the sirens of police cars a lot more than I used to.

    Helping agencies are running out of money and goods to help with and individuals are running out of resources to bulk up what's missing. It's a vicious cycle, and really there are few if any signs that this problem -- which continues to get worse -- will be addressed at all.

    Nearly 2 million people lost their jobs in 2008 alone; that many or perhaps even more are expected to lose their jobs in 2009; the job creation programs Mr. Obama has talked about may never happen on a major scale at all, but even if they do, they won't get under way for months if not years.

    In other words, things will continue to get worse while they get worse, and what the government intends to do about it -- at the level of individuals, families, and communities -- is the very least possible, with the bulk of what "help" there is continuing to go to the banks and Wall Street as extortion payments.

    What's been revealed so far of Mr. Obama's Stimulus Package looks an awful lot like what Herbert Hoover was content with in 1931 and 1932.

    Ain't we got fun.

    Wednesday, December 31, 2008

    Outlaws






    When the History of this era is written, I'm pretty confident that the Bushevik Regime and all its operatives will be deemed an Outlaw regime. The question will be whether history will romanticise this set of American Outlaws or will they be condemned?

    America loves its Outlaws. No matter how bad the Busheviks have been in real time, they have some supporters, not all of whom are drooling, braindead zombies.

    After all, a whole cohort of financiers and others became incredibly rich under the Bush Regime, and most of them still have oodles of money with which to buy any kind of future history they want, regardless of the wreakage all around them.

    But Outlaws they will be. They were put in office by an Outlaw Supreme Court majority, a majority whipped by the Court's most notorious Outlaw Justice, Antonin Scalia, a man who should have been impeached and then arrested long ago. But that didn't happen, and given all the hooey over letting bygones be bygones, water under the bridge, tut-tut, and not bringing any of the Busheviks and their running dogs and fellow travellers to account, it wouldn't be at all surprising if these Outlaws were held up as romantic idealists by writers of the future.

    The stunning lawlessness of the Bush Regime will have quite a legacy, too. The formerly balky and deeply flawed Constitutional Republic is now a balky and deeply flawed Autocracy run out of the White House and its ancillaries and bunkers. That's unlikely to change any time in the near future, barring the upheaval of revolt and revolution -- something which still seems impossible in America thanks to the fact that most Americans simply don't care what kind of government they have.

    And that's how these Outlaws are getting away with it.

    OT: The Cat

    This is Mao:



    He hated having his picture taken, always expressing his supreme annoyance by cutting his eyes and turning away.

    He was 16 1/2 years old, been at Casa Ché since he was born, and he died this afternoon and was buried in the back yard with his favorite red bird and yellow squeaker mouse toys, and with a stick, for nothing at all made him happier than playing "Stick!" any time of the day or night all the way up to nearly his last days.

    He was the smartest cat I think I've ever known, and one of the most loving. Whenever I picked him up, he would wrap his arms around my neck, rub my cheek with his, and proudly pose there like I was his trophy, and wait for others to admire his prowess.

    He knew many words in English and could say some of them. "No!" for example. And "Out!" He would query carefully if he wasn't sure of something or someone, and chat almost mindlessly when the spirit moved him.

    His mother was purebred Siamese; his father was a drunkard and a brawler from the alley, but who's to complain. He ran off and we didn't hear any more of him. His mother wound up going back to San Francisco when her "owner" decided he wouldn't be a reliable caregiver.

    Mao was truly the friend of nearly everyone -- except other cats, who he would drive off his property with a furious outrage that was a wonder to behold. He was the best friend the residents of Casa Ché.

    As I mentioned, home hospice care has been under way here since October for an elderly relative, a woman who adored Mao. When she was in the hospital this last time going through constant torments, she said one night when she was feeling particularly horrible, she heard a voice, not a human voice, a cat's voice, and she said, "Is that you?" The cat responded softly, "Mao..." She said, "Are you here? How did you get in here? They don't let cats in the hospital!" She heard him say, very softly, "Mao..." She said, "Let me touch you to be sure." She said she thought he was on the bed, but she felt all over and couldn't find him. She's blind so she couldn't see him. She heard him say, "Mao..." softly, and she said she reached over the side of the bed and she said she touched him. He was on the floor, and he rubbed her hand and she could feel him purring. She said she heard him say, just as plain as day, "You're going to be all right, and you're coming home. I'm going to make sure. I'll stay with you tonight, but don't tell anyone. It's a secret. Just you and me." And she said she broke down crying, because he'd come to visit her and promised she would come home again.

    And he was right there when she arrived home from the hospital, so weak she couldn't hold her head up. And he stayed with her for day after day, drawing the illness out of her, giving her strength. If she needed anything, he would call out or go get someone to help. He slept with her, stroked her with his own paw, and he "helped" when she was strong enough to stand, and "helped" some more when she took her first few steps after coming home. She's been devastated today, disconsolate -- like everyone else around here -- but she said she was so grateful he had been so determined to get her to come home and had done so much to help her get better.

    I said, "If Mao had been a person, he would have been a doctor. As a cat, he was a natural healer."

    During his last illness, he made clear what his wishes were. He didn't want to see the vet unless there was no other choice. He wanted to feel feline to the end and he wanted to be warm and he wanted to be with the people who loved him. The last couple of days, weak as could be, he wanted to go outside, and go next door to Joe's house. Joe was our neighbor until three years ago in January, when at the age of 100, he fell and broke his hip and had to be placed in a residential care facility. He and Mao were good buddies, and Mao used to sit on his porch and watch the clouds roll by while Joe trimmed the hedges or puttered with his flowers. Joe died a year after he went to the home, and Mao seemed to sense his passing. He didn't go over to Joe's house very often, and when new people moved in, with their own cats, he stayed well away. But he decided he wanted to go back and sit on Joe's porch and watch the clouds again, and he did for a little bit. And then he gave me a look that said, "I want to see Joe again."

    And I said, "You will, you will." And I held him so close, tears rolling down my cheeks and I took him back home, where he was warm and with the people who loved him, and this morning, he went outside one more time, and he came in and lay down and said his good byes, so softly, and he did not get up again.

    I hope he's with Joe now, and I hope they're sitting on a porch watching clouds roll by and listening to the mocking birds and thinking about playing "Stick!"

    You're both missed, buddies.

    Sunday, December 28, 2008

    The Center Table



    A common fixture of middle class and more pretentious homes of the Victorian and early 20th Century eras was the center table, most often found in the parlors and later living rooms, but also typical of practically any room in the house except the bathroom.

    The illustration above is from the 1912 Sears home heating catalogue, a supplement to the Sears Kit Home catalogue, and it shows a kind of ideal home life of the period, the family gathered around the living room center table, Father in his easy chair reading the papers, Mother reading to Young Daughter in her arm chair next to the table, Young Son on his stool listening raptly, Older Daughter practicing her postures nearby. The lamp on the center table illuminates the scene, somehow providing enough light for all their scattered reading activities while, of course, giving the best light to Father's newspapers. There are books scattered on the center table, as well as Father's cigars and a piece of good pottery that goes with the pots and statuary on the glassed in bookcase in the background. There is an open bookcase next to the glassed one which we note has empty shelves. I've always thought the reason was that the open bookshelf was awaiting future tomes acquired by the family.

    While there may be a sofa (called a Davenport) out of view, it's just as likely there wasn't one, nor any occasional tables, nor any other furniture at all except the center table and a collection of chairs scattered more or less randomly, plus some bookcases and possibly a drop front desk, at least not in this era. You'll note the grand piano is in a room of its own, suggesting more than a little bit of prosperity for this family, though the "music room" idea was not all that uncommon, even if the room was small and the piano an upright.

    Pictures adorn the walls, the historic portraits probably rotogravure prints which were very popular at the time. The triptych might be an allegorical painting or print, something about the conquest of barbarians by the forces of civilization, a popular theme at the time. The landscape, on the other hand, was quite likely an actual oil painting by an up and coming regional artist whose work now commands tens of thousands of dollars at auction, but at the time, the picture cost in the neighborhood of $50 with frame, and that was considered expensive.

    Family photographs and Kodaks of family outings are no doubt leaning against the wall on top of the bookcase. They were likely matted by a creative member of the family.

    The center table was used as the depository for all sorts of items and projects. Current books being read, the newspapers, the mail and telegrams, decorative items, linens and pottery, crafts projects under way (such as matting photos), the primary room light, all found a home on the center table, and sometimes meals would be taken there as well -- always if there was no dining room and no room in the kitchen for eating.

    This explains why there was a center table in nearly every room large enough for one. It was the work place and the gathering place for the room, and most rooms in most houses were used for more than one thing. A bedroom could also be a sewing room or a reading room. The dining room might serve as a general work room for anything that didn't involve food. The kitchen, if it was big enough, had a center table usually covered in oil cloth, where much of the food preparation went on, informal meals were taken, and messy projects were done.

    The institution of the center table was so strong, for so long, yet it is almost unheard of and unknown today, except in dining rooms and occasionally in large foyers, rare as they are in modern homes. In former times, even the dining room table was solitary in the center of the room, the dining chairs set around the walls of the room rather than around the table and only brought to the table at meal times.

    Vestigial center tables in today's homes include the ubiquitous coffee table in front of the sofa and the kitchen island. But it's not really the same.

    The illustration I chose for this post is from the Progressive Era, and it is in some sense a reflection of Perfect -- and Progressive -- Domesticity as it was conceived in those days. There were some holdovers from the Victorian Era, including the all-important institution of the Center Table, but in many other ways, it was a new and exciting time. Public health was being addressed and longevity improved dramatically. The condition of the poor was recognized and here and there was being ameliorated. The national Frontier was closed and overseas empires were being acquired, mostly at the expense of natives and decrepit old Empires (Spain and Hawaii come to mind.) The American presence was expanding world-wide, and the peoples of the world were looking to the United States to lead the way into the future.

    In 1912, the Soviet Union was barely a gleam in some exiled revolutionaries' eyes.

    We could be on the cusp of a similar era, it's hard to say.

    The United States went down a long and dark path some years back, and it has reached a natural stopping point. Whether a new door will open, new horizons be found is yet to be determined.

    The Center Table once provided American households with a focus for each households' endeavors. It was the family's center from which flowed their domestic harmony or its lack. From that center, the family drew its ultimate strength. Definitions of who we were were found around the Center Table became the touchstones for national progress.

    I've been trying to determine just when the institution of the Center Table was abandoned in America, so far without a lot of success. It was completely gone by the 1950's. But it had been vanishing through the '30's and '40's.

    My guess? The advent of Radio in the 1920's -- unlike the advent of the household piano, even a player piano -- made the institution of the Center Table redundant, and that, ultimately, changed everything.

    How 'bout another episode of Nick Danger?

    Saturday, December 27, 2008

    Resistance!


    Obama's nation has begun.
    Join the (Patriotic, Resilient, Conservative)Resistance!
    -- Grassfire motto

    If you listen to Right Wing Hate Radio at all, you've heard poorly produced ads declaring La Resistance to President Obama and his Socialist Agenda.

    Wealth redistribution and higher taxes? We Resist! Government takeover of more and more of our lives? We Resist! Open borders, amnesty and undermining of our uniquely American culture? We Resist! Taxpayer-funded abortions and a radical anti-life agenda? We Resist! The weakening of our military and retreat in the war on Terror? We Resist! Socialized health care? We Resist! The end of marriage and the exaltation of LGBT rights? We Resist! International taxation and submitting our nation to the ideals of “global citizenship”? We Resist! The Courts stacked with leftist judges who betray our Constitution? We Resist!


    Well. It's about time.

    When I first heard the ad I thought it was some sort of Lefty parody, but no. This is for real. They are going to Resist the Obaman "Brave New World" of [Leftist] collectivism in pursuit of Individual Liberty. Hundreds of thousands of them Resisting.

    And how will they do this?

    Why, by waxing warmly about the Obama Regime and its Leader, The President of the United States, Leftist Commander in Chief of America, The Honorable Barack Hussein Obama, Non-Citizen. They will be so warm and generous toward this uppity and unqualified African-American because the Left was so nasty and unforgiving, truly un-Christian toward George W. Bush, Annointed By God. These Resisters will never stoop to such depths of depravity by name-calling and demonizing Barack Hussein Obama. Oh no.

    As they say:

    Conservatives are not rebellious – we understand authority.


    That's for danged sure. Sure glad rebellion has never entered their pretty little heads. It's all about ideas, not so much about action, ya know? Whew.

    And just to make sure:

    Second, we will be resilient. From Day One, we will be there, watching every move, monitoring every action. We will not be chided into silence by the personal attacks on conservatives, our leaders or our motives. We will stand for principle. And we will not back down.

    Third, this will be a Conservative Resistance. Our resistance will not be partisan, it will be ideological. The real political struggle underway is one of a clash of worldviews—collective liberalism and freedom-based conservatism. We are not here to fight for the Republican Party to take over once again – certainly not the Republican Party that failed so miserably on so many fronts in recent years. We will resist on the basis of ideas alone, not political games. We have been stripped of our political authority which actually frees us to stand on principle first and foremost.


    By now it should be clear that this outfit is modeled on the Gingrich pattern of organizing -- whipping up enthusiasm for some harebrained scheme ("Drill here, drill now, pay less!") among the Republican Base and then juggernauting it onto Congress as The Popular Will.

    Gingrich has actually been pretty successful with these little ventures -- each of which prolly makes him several million dollars before he goes on to the next -- and it keeps turmoil on the front burner.

    The Left -- so called -- has never been able to do anything like it. The closest they ever came, of course, were with the huge protest marches against the Iraq War, protests and marches that were organized and implemented by the few remnant Communists there still are in this country, International A.N.S.W.E.R and its Brothers and Sisters around the world, which caused some, shall we say, discomfort among the masses who turned out to protest when they discovered that, say, this outfit is run by Commies! Well I never!

    Of course Progressives -- which is to say, the Internet's self-declared Progressives, led by a bunch of made-over Republicans (Markos, Arianna, and Aravosis are also Greek, I wonder what that tells us?) -- were never on board with the Marches, thinking them counterproductive and anachronistic and silly. "This isn't the '60's anymore!!! Stay home! Blog!"

    And Steve Elliot, the Regent University grad who's behind this Resistance3! Outfit, is busy using the Internet -- and radio and billboard and whatever publicity he can get his hands on -- to further the Call to Arms against the Leftist Tide overwhelming Our Great Nation.

    The Big Idea? It only takes a tiny spark to change your world.

    Well. He's got that right.

    And so, with that:

    The Resistance States:
    As an American citizen, while I will show respect to President-elect Obama, I oppose the far-Left and socialistic elements that comprise the centerpiece of his agenda. I recognize that it will take a patriotic and resilient Citizen Resistance to block implementation of this agenda and I join with others who oppose these threats to our liberties.

    Specifically, I Resist:
  • Socialistic wealth redistribution including any and all tax increases and big-government welfare programs.
  • Silencing conservatives through the Fairness Doctrine and other efforts that restrict free speech.
  • Open border anarchy including amnesty for illegal aliens and promotion of multi-nation “unions”.
  • Government-run health care that weakens our system and imposes more tax burdens on citizens.
  • Weakening of our military through rapid pullback from Iraq, defunding our troops and overall disarmament.
  • Social liberalism including radical pro-abortion agenda, the end of marriage and the homosexual agenda.
  • Liberal court activism that undermines faith, family and liberties while expanding government control.
  • Post-American globalism that diminishes our global role and threatens our national sovereignty.
  • Environmental extremism, the CO2 tax,
    undermining coal and nuclear, and bans on
    exploration.
  • Weakening the 2nd Amendment through unconstitutional gun laws that take away or penalize us for owning firearms and our right to defend our family, our property, and ourselves.


  • You see how it's done? Every Right Wing Base base is touched, all wrapped up in a pretty little package, coherent (in its own context) and fused with Action!

    INDIVIDUALS OF THE WORLD, UNITE! SUBMIT TO THE AUTHORITY OF YOUR RIGHTIST MASTERS!RESIST THE IMPOSITION OF LEFTIST COLLECTIVISM! UNITE! SUBMIT! RESIST!!!!