Hey Barry:
It's late, but Happy Birthday. The 50th was a big one for me - it was the one where I realized that I was fully grown and was all I was going to be. So, you should be real proud at your 50th: you are on the brink of some very big things and millions of people love you.
It’s time for some more real talk about economic policy in this informal forum. Be happy to expand any or all of the themes at your request.
So, Barry, we gotta be real clear here: traditional economics will NOT help us. Even Goolsbee said in an interview that the profession has to undertake some serious examination of its theories and policies. We need to acknowledge that the problem is inadequate domestic demand. It's not taxes or monetary policy.
So, we have to follow policies which increase demand. The policies we have used for the last 100 years WILL NOT WORK.
Here are some things we can do which will create jobs by increasing domestic demand:
- Pass laws which make it easier for unions to organize workers, this will increase demand by raising wages.
- At the same time, we need to hire more Justice Department regulators so we can prosecute companies which break laws which encourage workers to form unions.
- Enforce all anti-monopoly laws and pass more. The goal is to break up big companies so that smaller companies can be formed and hire more people. Some economists will holler about losing 'efficiency' from some duplication, but the goal is more jobs and not cheaper stuff.
- Hire more regulators to enforce existing anti-monopoly laws.
- If there are some industries which are essential and which benefit from economies of scale and for which breaking up monopolies is too costly, then make those industries public utilities with a Public Utility Commission to oversee them. Industries like oil, electricity, natural gas, telephone companies and internet service providers will qualify. To those people who complain about socialism, this is not socialism since the businesses are owned by private capital; this model has worked well in our past and today as well.
- Free Trade agreements destroy American jobs; do not approve any more such agreements. And, leave the WTO, NAFTA and other agreements.
- Create a national industrial policy which identifies those industries we want in the future and then encourages those industries with tariffs, subsidies and government contracts.
- Tax away the great fortunes. Nobody needs more than $100 million and the great fortunes are bad for the country. Our system is based on the public deciding which priorities our wealth should pursue - not some billionaire pursuing a better name in the history books.
- Tax away the great incomes - we need the money for our citizens and those with huge incomes do not have any incentives to promote the common welfare.
- Restore Glass-Stegal so that commercial banks can NOT buy assets.
- Keep Social Security and Medicare as high as possible so that we do not reduce demand among the elderly and handicapped. Besides, it's the right thing to do.
- Manage our debt so that we borrow when we need stimulus and pay down when we don't need it. I am pretty sure this will require a serious political revolution, but the alternative is simply not acceptable.
Well, Barry, that's a start.
Now I know that all of these will be political dynamite.
But, ideas like these are our only alternative.
If we don't do all of these and more, the future is bleak.
Your pal,
Saturday, August 6, 2011
Wednesday, August 3, 2011
Light, Shadow, Tea Party
Hey Barry:
It's time to think a bit about light and shadow, good and evil.
We are smack in the middle of a continuing struggle between two extremes of human society. It's been that way for a long time, but now it's becoming very pronounced.
Ever since before Rome, humans have organized into large groups to manage our lives. Roman civilization was based on violence and slavery - Roman legions scoured new territories for healthy slaves to sell and murdered many of the rest of the people they conquered. It's fair to say that Rome was a shadow society, regardless of how many incredible engineering feats they accomplished. Rome is a classic model of highly unequal, slave based society; it may have been preceded by Egyptian and earlier societies as well. However, there are some studies which show that some earlier societies used paid labor for large construction projects as opposed to slave labor.
Fast forward to today..............what do we see? We see a number of shadow societies where wealth and power accumulates toward the top and the rulers keep order with force and violence. Societies like Syria and Libya are models of shadow societies today.
Well, most of the people who live in shadow repressive societies are trying to change things so they can have a decent life free from fear and violence. We call it the Arab Spring, but it's a universal longing to be free from the shadows.
The good ol U S of A came from the same desire. We rebelled from England to throw off the repressive society and create a world where ordinary folks are free from state sponsored theft, fear and violence. We are an imperfect society, but we have made some progress from our beginnings.
It has taken - and will continue to take - extraordinarily gifted people to illuminate the shadows. The Founding Fathers, Abraham Lincoln, FDR are some of the people we thank for our American experiment. We hope that you, Barry Obama, will join that illustrious group. If you do, then we will be safer.
Shadow powers in the USA have been working diligently to reduce the average person's freedom from want and fear for hundreds of years. Those powers were upset by FDR's creation of Social Security and the other protections from want he installed in the 1930's. They scored a big victory with the repeal of Glass-Stegall in 1999. Now, they are looking for even more such victories.
See the report on ALEC - a group of state legislators and corporate executives which approves laws that are then presented to state legislatures: http://www.slate.com/blogs/weigel/2011/08/05/the_alec_wars_escalate.html
I am ashamed to say that my discipline of economics is used regularly by some economists to provide a justification for national policies that reduce the levels of protection from want and fear for the general population. The economists who practice that version of the discipline should be ashamed. Not only is it destructive of society, it is bad economics. That's a discussion for another day, but there are some implications for today.
People of wealth and power will always have sycophants near them who will further their accumulations of both. It has always been that way and it always will be. Even studying apes shows social interactions reminiscent of some Shakespeare plays.
Perhaps well-intentioned, the Tea Party has been usurped by shadow forces. Tea Partiers are not terrorists; they are worse, for they seek to impose state sponsored fear and want on all of us.
It is charitable to think that they are not aware of the implications of their policies, but rather blinded by economic gobboldy gook.
Tea Partiers may be abusers - at least they are behaving that way. Here's Julie Driscoll explaining how to combat the personality type: "It's interesting, but the one thing abusers respond to is the prospect of being harmed themselves. When faced with a threat, they back down."
See it here: http://www.examiner.com/liberal-in-chicago/republicans-fit-the-profile-of-a-classic-abuser
So, Barry, here's the deal: We gotta threaten and fight them and we gotta threaten big and fight hard. Today we are fighting with politics. It's better than fighting with violence.
Make no mistake, it is a fight and the shadow are well armed.
We are with you Barry, stand up for us.
Your pal,
It's time to think a bit about light and shadow, good and evil.
We are smack in the middle of a continuing struggle between two extremes of human society. It's been that way for a long time, but now it's becoming very pronounced.
Ever since before Rome, humans have organized into large groups to manage our lives. Roman civilization was based on violence and slavery - Roman legions scoured new territories for healthy slaves to sell and murdered many of the rest of the people they conquered. It's fair to say that Rome was a shadow society, regardless of how many incredible engineering feats they accomplished. Rome is a classic model of highly unequal, slave based society; it may have been preceded by Egyptian and earlier societies as well. However, there are some studies which show that some earlier societies used paid labor for large construction projects as opposed to slave labor.
Fast forward to today..............what do we see? We see a number of shadow societies where wealth and power accumulates toward the top and the rulers keep order with force and violence. Societies like Syria and Libya are models of shadow societies today.
Well, most of the people who live in shadow repressive societies are trying to change things so they can have a decent life free from fear and violence. We call it the Arab Spring, but it's a universal longing to be free from the shadows.
The good ol U S of A came from the same desire. We rebelled from England to throw off the repressive society and create a world where ordinary folks are free from state sponsored theft, fear and violence. We are an imperfect society, but we have made some progress from our beginnings.
It has taken - and will continue to take - extraordinarily gifted people to illuminate the shadows. The Founding Fathers, Abraham Lincoln, FDR are some of the people we thank for our American experiment. We hope that you, Barry Obama, will join that illustrious group. If you do, then we will be safer.
Shadow powers in the USA have been working diligently to reduce the average person's freedom from want and fear for hundreds of years. Those powers were upset by FDR's creation of Social Security and the other protections from want he installed in the 1930's. They scored a big victory with the repeal of Glass-Stegall in 1999. Now, they are looking for even more such victories.
See the report on ALEC - a group of state legislators and corporate executives which approves laws that are then presented to state legislatures: http://www.slate.com/blogs/weigel/2011/08/05/the_alec_wars_escalate.html
I am ashamed to say that my discipline of economics is used regularly by some economists to provide a justification for national policies that reduce the levels of protection from want and fear for the general population. The economists who practice that version of the discipline should be ashamed. Not only is it destructive of society, it is bad economics. That's a discussion for another day, but there are some implications for today.
People of wealth and power will always have sycophants near them who will further their accumulations of both. It has always been that way and it always will be. Even studying apes shows social interactions reminiscent of some Shakespeare plays.
Perhaps well-intentioned, the Tea Party has been usurped by shadow forces. Tea Partiers are not terrorists; they are worse, for they seek to impose state sponsored fear and want on all of us.
It is charitable to think that they are not aware of the implications of their policies, but rather blinded by economic gobboldy gook.
Tea Partiers may be abusers - at least they are behaving that way. Here's Julie Driscoll explaining how to combat the personality type: "It's interesting, but the one thing abusers respond to is the prospect of being harmed themselves. When faced with a threat, they back down."
See it here: http://www.examiner.com/liberal-in-chicago/republicans-fit-the-profile-of-a-classic-abuser
So, Barry, here's the deal: We gotta threaten and fight them and we gotta threaten big and fight hard. Today we are fighting with politics. It's better than fighting with violence.
Make no mistake, it is a fight and the shadow are well armed.
We are with you Barry, stand up for us.
Your pal,
Tuesday, August 2, 2011
Gut Check Time
Hey Barry:
Well, times are tough.
It was a hard time negotiating and we got what we could.
You saved the country from a real crisis.
But, now y'all gotta do some more.
It aint enough to just get through.
You sellin us to the Big Money when you do that. Then we is cooked big time.
Here's how to get out of the trap:
Find something Big Money really wants, then repeat this phrase:
"I will veto any spending bill that does not raise tax revenue by four times the amount spent."
"I will veto any spending bill that does not raise tax revenue by four times the amount spent."
"I will veto any spending bill that does not raise tax revenue by four times the amount spent."
"I will veto any spending bill that does not raise tax revenue by four times the amount spent."
"I will veto any spending bill that does not raise tax revenue by four times the amount spent."
And, by the way, you gotta veto about three laws because they won't believe you.
You can't negotiate with hostage takers, you gotta terminate their game. Sometimes you'll lose a hostage. Caint be helped.
It's like they say - 'You can't make an omlet without breaking a few eggs.'
So Barry, break some eggs. It's time.
It's like Harry Truman said: 'If you want a friend in Washington, buy a dog.'
Reps aint gonna cooperate, you gotta force them to do the right thing. The only way to do that is to make any other action they can take more painful to them than doing the right thing for the country. Think about it, y'all gotta make every other course of action more painful to them than what you want them to do.
They have demonstrated that they will not do the right thing for the country. They have not and they will not, unless you, Barry Obama, force them to do it.
We with you, be tough.
Your pal,
Well, times are tough.
It was a hard time negotiating and we got what we could.
You saved the country from a real crisis.
But, now y'all gotta do some more.
It aint enough to just get through.
You sellin us to the Big Money when you do that. Then we is cooked big time.
Here's how to get out of the trap:
Find something Big Money really wants, then repeat this phrase:
"I will veto any spending bill that does not raise tax revenue by four times the amount spent."
"I will veto any spending bill that does not raise tax revenue by four times the amount spent."
"I will veto any spending bill that does not raise tax revenue by four times the amount spent."
"I will veto any spending bill that does not raise tax revenue by four times the amount spent."
"I will veto any spending bill that does not raise tax revenue by four times the amount spent."
And, by the way, you gotta veto about three laws because they won't believe you.
You can't negotiate with hostage takers, you gotta terminate their game. Sometimes you'll lose a hostage. Caint be helped.
It's like they say - 'You can't make an omlet without breaking a few eggs.'
So Barry, break some eggs. It's time.
It's like Harry Truman said: 'If you want a friend in Washington, buy a dog.'
Reps aint gonna cooperate, you gotta force them to do the right thing. The only way to do that is to make any other action they can take more painful to them than doing the right thing for the country. Think about it, y'all gotta make every other course of action more painful to them than what you want them to do.
They have demonstrated that they will not do the right thing for the country. They have not and they will not, unless you, Barry Obama, force them to do it.
We with you, be tough.
Your pal,
Mugged by Big Money
Hey Barry:
Well, it's different, all right.
I mean when you're mugged, it's usually from some poor soul who's desparate and down and out. You can be afraid and sympatehtic at the same time.
But, Barry, we been mugged by Big Money and their dupes - the Tea Party.
It's just the latest mugging. It's a class war just like Syria, Libya and the rest. Different methods, same result: power in a few hands and theft and violence to keep it that way.
So, I'm really p----d.
Whatta we gonna do, Barry?
Whatta we gonna do?
Your pal,
Well, it's different, all right.
I mean when you're mugged, it's usually from some poor soul who's desparate and down and out. You can be afraid and sympatehtic at the same time.
But, Barry, we been mugged by Big Money and their dupes - the Tea Party.
It's just the latest mugging. It's a class war just like Syria, Libya and the rest. Different methods, same result: power in a few hands and theft and violence to keep it that way.
So, I'm really p----d.
Whatta we gonna do, Barry?
Whatta we gonna do?
Your pal,
Friday, July 29, 2011
Reich: Ignore Debt Ceiling
Hey Barry:
Robert Reich says 'Just ignore the debt ceiling and continue to issue and redeem T-bills. No big thang.'
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/07/29/EDD01KGFVC.DTL
I defer to him on the legalities, and it sounds very good.
So, Congress can't act. Ignore them and continue business as usual. Some folks sayin y'all can use the 14th Amendment, anyways.
So, go ahead. This is where we really need you to act, Barry.
We know y'all will lose some sleep, but that's why we pay you the big bucks. Hahahahaha. I needed a laugh.
Once the mess is resolved, then we can target some of the ignorant Tea Partiers and elect some folks who know what they're doing.
We with you Barry. Run our country the best way you can.
Your pal,
Robert Reich says 'Just ignore the debt ceiling and continue to issue and redeem T-bills. No big thang.'
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/07/29/EDD01KGFVC.DTL
I defer to him on the legalities, and it sounds very good.
So, Congress can't act. Ignore them and continue business as usual. Some folks sayin y'all can use the 14th Amendment, anyways.
So, go ahead. This is where we really need you to act, Barry.
We know y'all will lose some sleep, but that's why we pay you the big bucks. Hahahahaha. I needed a laugh.
Once the mess is resolved, then we can target some of the ignorant Tea Partiers and elect some folks who know what they're doing.
We with you Barry. Run our country the best way you can.
Your pal,
Thursday, July 28, 2011
Still A No-Brainer: Disclose Political Contributions
Hey Barry:
According to the WAPO: [http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/house-dems-to-obama-require-contractors-to-disclose-political-donations/2011/07/28/gIQAgOg1eI_story.html] the Dems want disclosure of political contributions.
This is a follow up to an earlier posting of the same idea.
What's to think, Barry?
If some corporations like Lockheed, Boeing and even the Acme Road-Runner Fireworks Company, Inc., LLC, LLP, LtD. all want to get some of my tax money from a government contract, they gotta tell us all how much will go to bribing folks to get more money. It should be a part of every contract application, big and small: disclose all payments to anyone conducting business with an elected or empoyed official of the United States Government. Period.
Thought it was already there.
Holy cow, Barry, it's a no-brainer.
Keep on it.
Your pal,
According to the WAPO: [http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/house-dems-to-obama-require-contractors-to-disclose-political-donations/2011/07/28/gIQAgOg1eI_story.html] the Dems want disclosure of political contributions.
This is a follow up to an earlier posting of the same idea.
What's to think, Barry?
If some corporations like Lockheed, Boeing and even the Acme Road-Runner Fireworks Company, Inc., LLC, LLP, LtD. all want to get some of my tax money from a government contract, they gotta tell us all how much will go to bribing folks to get more money. It should be a part of every contract application, big and small: disclose all payments to anyone conducting business with an elected or empoyed official of the United States Government. Period.
Thought it was already there.
Holy cow, Barry, it's a no-brainer.
Keep on it.
Your pal,
Wednesday, July 27, 2011
Tea Party Agreements
Hey Tea Party:
Let's have a short talk about the economy of the good ol U S of A.
After all, it's the place we all call home and the place we want to make better.
Now, I know that you folks sincerely want to make the country a better place and we sure agree there.
It'd be just wonderful if we could lower taxes and then get more jobs and also reduce federal spending.
After all, you folks have a good point, namely we just have to get a better handle on our fiscal policy pretty soon or we will be in big trouble.
We can all agree on that.
So, the bottom line here is that we can agree on the broad objectives for the country.
Our only, little disagreement is on how to get there.
There are a couple of things that you folks need to consider pretty seriously in trying to get to the goal we share.
First thing is this: lowering taxes does NOT create more jobs.
I'll grant that there is a small logic there: namely, if people have more money to spend then businesses will hire people to fill the new demand.
Well, even though that sound plausible, it does not work. The record shows that lowering taxes within limits actually reduces the number of jobs. We have proven that several times over the years, most recently with G W Bush policies. I know it does not make sense. It just is.
So, why do some politicians keep on saying that same old thing? The only reason I can figure out is that it gets them votes and campaign contributions. It would be good if politicians did not say things that are not true - well, we can sure agree on that.
So, we can expect politicians to keep on saying that lowering taxes creates jobs - it's our job to see through the BS.
Now, a reasonable person is going to ask this: How is it that keeping taxes high actually creates jobs?
And the answer is something they don't tell you in Econ 1, which I should know about because that's what I teach.
Here's the thing, there are about 70 million people who receive checks from the federal government every month. That's about one out of every 4.4 people [our population is about 311 million today]. If you know ten people, then you know at least two people who depend on the federal check to buy food and rent and medications and so on.
Now if all those folks don't get regular checks, well they won't be able to buy stuff. And, if they can't buy anything, that means that all the businesses they buy stuff from will have to lay off people.
So, by not sending out regular monthly checks, the Federal government will actually KILL about 25% of the jobs in the country.
That would create a very big Depression. It would be social and economic chaos with huge increases in crime and gang activity. Most folks, including you and I, would be afraid to go out of the house after dark.
Now, the second thing you folks need to be very careful about is the idea to stop the federal government from borrowing any more by refusing to raise the debt ceiling of the USA.
That idea seems to make sense - after all if you can’t borrow any more, then you can't spend any more, right?
Trouble is this: we have already spent the money.
Now we have to pay it back.
It's a simple idea.
Pay for what you buy - no brainer there.
But, here's the thing: the only place to get the money is to borrow it.
Of course in theory we could raise taxes to pay for what we spent, but that option is only a theory because of our catatonic political system.
Borrowing is our only option.
Now, I am not saying that is where we want to be.
However, that is where we are.
We agree that we have to fix that.
But, first we have to increase the debt ceiling.
Because, if we don't raise the debt ceiling now, then we will have a great Depression and we will never fix the problem.
If we buy some time, then maybe we can act as real patriots who place country ahead of personal advantage and really fix the problem the way our Founding Fathers expected us to: by political compromises in the best interests of the country.
Here's how the Rolling Stones said it:
'No, you can't always get what you want
You can't always get what you want
You can't always get what you want
And if you try sometime you find
You get what you need'
Well, anyway, if any of you want to explore our common areas, feel free to email me at: mckeever.mp@gmail.com
Your pal,
Let's have a short talk about the economy of the good ol U S of A.
After all, it's the place we all call home and the place we want to make better.
Now, I know that you folks sincerely want to make the country a better place and we sure agree there.
It'd be just wonderful if we could lower taxes and then get more jobs and also reduce federal spending.
After all, you folks have a good point, namely we just have to get a better handle on our fiscal policy pretty soon or we will be in big trouble.
We can all agree on that.
So, the bottom line here is that we can agree on the broad objectives for the country.
Our only, little disagreement is on how to get there.
There are a couple of things that you folks need to consider pretty seriously in trying to get to the goal we share.
First thing is this: lowering taxes does NOT create more jobs.
I'll grant that there is a small logic there: namely, if people have more money to spend then businesses will hire people to fill the new demand.
Well, even though that sound plausible, it does not work. The record shows that lowering taxes within limits actually reduces the number of jobs. We have proven that several times over the years, most recently with G W Bush policies. I know it does not make sense. It just is.
So, why do some politicians keep on saying that same old thing? The only reason I can figure out is that it gets them votes and campaign contributions. It would be good if politicians did not say things that are not true - well, we can sure agree on that.
So, we can expect politicians to keep on saying that lowering taxes creates jobs - it's our job to see through the BS.
Now, a reasonable person is going to ask this: How is it that keeping taxes high actually creates jobs?
And the answer is something they don't tell you in Econ 1, which I should know about because that's what I teach.
Here's the thing, there are about 70 million people who receive checks from the federal government every month. That's about one out of every 4.4 people [our population is about 311 million today]. If you know ten people, then you know at least two people who depend on the federal check to buy food and rent and medications and so on.
Now if all those folks don't get regular checks, well they won't be able to buy stuff. And, if they can't buy anything, that means that all the businesses they buy stuff from will have to lay off people.
So, by not sending out regular monthly checks, the Federal government will actually KILL about 25% of the jobs in the country.
That would create a very big Depression. It would be social and economic chaos with huge increases in crime and gang activity. Most folks, including you and I, would be afraid to go out of the house after dark.
Now, the second thing you folks need to be very careful about is the idea to stop the federal government from borrowing any more by refusing to raise the debt ceiling of the USA.
That idea seems to make sense - after all if you can’t borrow any more, then you can't spend any more, right?
Trouble is this: we have already spent the money.
Now we have to pay it back.
It's a simple idea.
Pay for what you buy - no brainer there.
But, here's the thing: the only place to get the money is to borrow it.
Of course in theory we could raise taxes to pay for what we spent, but that option is only a theory because of our catatonic political system.
Borrowing is our only option.
Now, I am not saying that is where we want to be.
However, that is where we are.
We agree that we have to fix that.
But, first we have to increase the debt ceiling.
Because, if we don't raise the debt ceiling now, then we will have a great Depression and we will never fix the problem.
If we buy some time, then maybe we can act as real patriots who place country ahead of personal advantage and really fix the problem the way our Founding Fathers expected us to: by political compromises in the best interests of the country.
Here's how the Rolling Stones said it:
'No, you can't always get what you want
You can't always get what you want
You can't always get what you want
And if you try sometime you find
You get what you need'
Well, anyway, if any of you want to explore our common areas, feel free to email me at: mckeever.mp@gmail.com
Your pal,
Tuesday, July 26, 2011
Budget: Big Money Class War
Hey Barry:
Well, you know it's kinda hard to figure out what's really going on with the debt and budget thing.
All I can do is to watch TV and try not to get angry.
Here's what it looks like from this end: Big Money is pullin the Reps strings so they're negotiating tough, real tough.
Thing is, the Reps and their puppeteers don't give a rosy red rat's a-- for what happens to the country so long as their taxes don't get raised. It's just a game for them. They lie, they steal.
I guess our only hope is that enough voters out here get the message. Then, we can vote out all the Reps and elect some patriotic people. Patriots, you remember them, the folks who put country before money. There are still some around.
But, in the meantime, Ya gotta feel sorry for the Tea Party folks who buy the Rep's hook, line and sinker.
We also gotta get those Tea Party folks out of power before they give even what we have left to the fat cats.
We know one thing: if the country defaults, Big Money will be OK and the rest of us will pay the price with even more $5 per hour jobs, unemployment and hunger.
So, Barry, since it's all politics at this point - get tough. Out tough the Big Money. We with you.
Give an inch so we can stick it to the the Reps down the road. Save the country, fight the Class War.
It's where we are.
Your pal,
Well, you know it's kinda hard to figure out what's really going on with the debt and budget thing.
All I can do is to watch TV and try not to get angry.
Here's what it looks like from this end: Big Money is pullin the Reps strings so they're negotiating tough, real tough.
Thing is, the Reps and their puppeteers don't give a rosy red rat's a-- for what happens to the country so long as their taxes don't get raised. It's just a game for them. They lie, they steal.
I guess our only hope is that enough voters out here get the message. Then, we can vote out all the Reps and elect some patriotic people. Patriots, you remember them, the folks who put country before money. There are still some around.
But, in the meantime, Ya gotta feel sorry for the Tea Party folks who buy the Rep's hook, line and sinker.
We also gotta get those Tea Party folks out of power before they give even what we have left to the fat cats.
We know one thing: if the country defaults, Big Money will be OK and the rest of us will pay the price with even more $5 per hour jobs, unemployment and hunger.
So, Barry, since it's all politics at this point - get tough. Out tough the Big Money. We with you.
Give an inch so we can stick it to the the Reps down the road. Save the country, fight the Class War.
It's where we are.
Your pal,
Monday, July 25, 2011
JP Morgan Chase: 'Dance forever with the devil'
Hey Barry:
Here's a song about bankers:
'Dance forever with the devil on a cold cell block
But that's what happens when you rape, murder and sell rock'
[Lyrics for Dance With The Devil as interpreted by MrMojoRisin5552]
Alabama's most populous county is deciding whether to file bankruptcy.
Why? They made a deal with JP Morgan Chase. They are paying the price.
Maybe it's time.
Let's put the bankers in a cell.
Your pal,
Here's a song about bankers:
'Dance forever with the devil on a cold cell block
But that's what happens when you rape, murder and sell rock'
[Lyrics for Dance With The Devil as interpreted by MrMojoRisin5552]
Alabama's most populous county is deciding whether to file bankruptcy.
Why? They made a deal with JP Morgan Chase. They are paying the price.
Maybe it's time.
Let's put the bankers in a cell.
Your pal,
Sunday, July 24, 2011
Tame the Gods, Tame the Politics
Hey Barry;
Holy Cow, Barry.
I'd really like to be optimistic, Barry, maybe there's a chance that we can really solve all the issues.
But, Barry, it don't look real good right now.
Y'all in DC caint get the simplest thing done. It's just a budget and a self imposed borrowing limit. It's just a simple thing. But, it don't seem like we can do it.
And, Barry, we are the ones who can unleash nuclear holocaust on ourselves.
We know we can do that.
But, can we prevent it?
For example, Entergy Corp is refueling its Vermont Yankee plant with more nuclear fuel even though the State of Vermont wants to revoke its operating permit. Read it here: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2011/07/25/national/a052752D25.DTL
So, Barry, here's the question: If we caint even do the simplest thing, how in the Hell are we going to control Mother Nature?
Is this my choice? Whether to die from radiation poisoning or to grow hungry and sick from political malpractice?
Barry, ya gotta tame the Gods and ya gotta tame the politics.
We're counting on you - for the grandchildren, yours to come and mine: Victor, Sydney, Brooke and Carson.
Your pal,
Holy Cow, Barry.
I'd really like to be optimistic, Barry, maybe there's a chance that we can really solve all the issues.
But, Barry, it don't look real good right now.
Y'all in DC caint get the simplest thing done. It's just a budget and a self imposed borrowing limit. It's just a simple thing. But, it don't seem like we can do it.
And, Barry, we are the ones who can unleash nuclear holocaust on ourselves.
We know we can do that.
But, can we prevent it?
For example, Entergy Corp is refueling its Vermont Yankee plant with more nuclear fuel even though the State of Vermont wants to revoke its operating permit. Read it here: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2011/07/25/national/a052752D25.DTL
So, Barry, here's the question: If we caint even do the simplest thing, how in the Hell are we going to control Mother Nature?
Is this my choice? Whether to die from radiation poisoning or to grow hungry and sick from political malpractice?
Barry, ya gotta tame the Gods and ya gotta tame the politics.
We're counting on you - for the grandchildren, yours to come and mine: Victor, Sydney, Brooke and Carson.
Your pal,
Thursday, July 21, 2011
Meet in Paris, September 8-13-11
Hey Barry:
My wife and I visited Paris between September 8 and 13, 2011 for some sightseeing and R & R. Had a great time and took lots of photos.
If any readers in Paris or California are interested in some future friendly, informal economic policy discussion or debate over a glass of wine or cup of coffee, please send me an email to: mckeever.mp@gmail.com
Ciao
Your pal,
My wife and I visited Paris between September 8 and 13, 2011 for some sightseeing and R & R. Had a great time and took lots of photos.
If any readers in Paris or California are interested in some future friendly, informal economic policy discussion or debate over a glass of wine or cup of coffee, please send me an email to: mckeever.mp@gmail.com
Ciao
Your pal,
Sunday, July 17, 2011
Tunisia, IMF and USA - Economic Theory and Practice, Revised
Hey Barry:
Sometimes I just have to talk about economics. I'll try to be clear, but it's important; so, pass it along to the econs if you want.
Pretty sure it is established in fact - not in theory yet, but absolutely in fact - that the NeoCon, Washington Consensus your predecessor used to run our government is dead, dead, dead.
Now just because something is actually dead does not mean that it has no influence. 'S like the old story of the dinosaur which was so big that he was dead for a week before his tail knew about it.
Well, the folks at the IMF are jes another example of the dinosaur's tail. I'll tell you why in a sec.
Back in the day when Keynes created the IMF, it was a pretty good idea. It was a simple idea back then: if a national government ran into a patch of difficulty with negative trade balances - importing more than exporting - then the IMF would provide a short term loan while the government did the necessary things to redress the trade imbalances. After all, if the government did not fix the trade balances, then the markets would correct the situation by devaluing the offending country's currency. And, since economic growth is helped when exchange rates are stable, it made sense to try and stabilize exchange rates.
Things the government could do included raising tariffs, installing quotas and so forth so that the trade imbalance went away.
Well, since then, the NeoCon dogma has held that governments can't fix trade imbalances with any interference in trading patterns. What happens to exchange rates is not considered important. The Holy Grail has become Free Trade. You and I know that Free Trade does not work, but there are lots of places where the facts of reality have not penetrated the cloister of theoretical purity.
Recently, government financial problems have morphed to include problems from too much borrowing. Governments need to borrow because they spend a lot on social problems like pensions, medical care and demand stimulus. Well, the IMF has stepped up and will sometimes lend to those countries as well, with the same requirements from their version of NeoCon Dogma: cut social programs and balance the budget regardless of consequences. It's a bad idea.
One of the places where NeoCon Dogma lives is the economics department of the IMF. They still cling to the Free Trade and Cut Social Programs Dogma like a starving dog to a bone.
Anytime a national government has a trade balance problem or borrowing problem and asks the IMF for help, the IMF requires that the country accept a STRUCTURAL ADJUSTMENT policy in order to get help. Since the IMF is the only place in the world countries can get help, then countries that need help are forced to install IMF policies.
Well, Barry, the problem is that the IMF Structural Adjustment policies are cookie cutter NeoCon dogma. And, since NeoCon dogma is dead, then the IMF continues to require that countries install wrong policies.
Imagine that. It's exactly the same as if George Bush and his crowd are running the economics department of many countries.
To see what that means in practice, consider Tunisia. Here is a country that underwent a people's revolution to overthrow a corrupt and brutal regime and is now trying to establish a democracy that shows respect to the Tunisian people.
But, Barry, wherever they look for help, all they get is more NeoCon dogma.
They get it from the IMF and they get it from the United States. Now, they know that it is wrong advice, but they don't seem to have a choice unless we, the United States of America offers some more realistic advice.
Below is a link to an in depth study of the impact of economic policies on the government and people of Tunisia. The study was written in June by a group of American lawyers who visited Tunisia and met with many of the important groups in Tunisia.
Please show the link to Hillary and to your econs - we need to understand how we can really help the people in all the countries rebelling against corrupt regimes.
Link: http://www.mkeever.com/tunisia2011.pdf
It is The Report of the March 2011 Delegation of Attorneys to Tunisia from National Lawyers Guild (US), Haldane Society of Socialist Lawyers (UK), and Mazlumder (Turkey) Published: June 2011
Your pal,
Sometimes I just have to talk about economics. I'll try to be clear, but it's important; so, pass it along to the econs if you want.
Pretty sure it is established in fact - not in theory yet, but absolutely in fact - that the NeoCon, Washington Consensus your predecessor used to run our government is dead, dead, dead.
Now just because something is actually dead does not mean that it has no influence. 'S like the old story of the dinosaur which was so big that he was dead for a week before his tail knew about it.
Well, the folks at the IMF are jes another example of the dinosaur's tail. I'll tell you why in a sec.
Back in the day when Keynes created the IMF, it was a pretty good idea. It was a simple idea back then: if a national government ran into a patch of difficulty with negative trade balances - importing more than exporting - then the IMF would provide a short term loan while the government did the necessary things to redress the trade imbalances. After all, if the government did not fix the trade balances, then the markets would correct the situation by devaluing the offending country's currency. And, since economic growth is helped when exchange rates are stable, it made sense to try and stabilize exchange rates.
Things the government could do included raising tariffs, installing quotas and so forth so that the trade imbalance went away.
Well, since then, the NeoCon dogma has held that governments can't fix trade imbalances with any interference in trading patterns. What happens to exchange rates is not considered important. The Holy Grail has become Free Trade. You and I know that Free Trade does not work, but there are lots of places where the facts of reality have not penetrated the cloister of theoretical purity.
Recently, government financial problems have morphed to include problems from too much borrowing. Governments need to borrow because they spend a lot on social problems like pensions, medical care and demand stimulus. Well, the IMF has stepped up and will sometimes lend to those countries as well, with the same requirements from their version of NeoCon Dogma: cut social programs and balance the budget regardless of consequences. It's a bad idea.
One of the places where NeoCon Dogma lives is the economics department of the IMF. They still cling to the Free Trade and Cut Social Programs Dogma like a starving dog to a bone.
Anytime a national government has a trade balance problem or borrowing problem and asks the IMF for help, the IMF requires that the country accept a STRUCTURAL ADJUSTMENT policy in order to get help. Since the IMF is the only place in the world countries can get help, then countries that need help are forced to install IMF policies.
Well, Barry, the problem is that the IMF Structural Adjustment policies are cookie cutter NeoCon dogma. And, since NeoCon dogma is dead, then the IMF continues to require that countries install wrong policies.
Imagine that. It's exactly the same as if George Bush and his crowd are running the economics department of many countries.
To see what that means in practice, consider Tunisia. Here is a country that underwent a people's revolution to overthrow a corrupt and brutal regime and is now trying to establish a democracy that shows respect to the Tunisian people.
But, Barry, wherever they look for help, all they get is more NeoCon dogma.
They get it from the IMF and they get it from the United States. Now, they know that it is wrong advice, but they don't seem to have a choice unless we, the United States of America offers some more realistic advice.
Below is a link to an in depth study of the impact of economic policies on the government and people of Tunisia. The study was written in June by a group of American lawyers who visited Tunisia and met with many of the important groups in Tunisia.
Please show the link to Hillary and to your econs - we need to understand how we can really help the people in all the countries rebelling against corrupt regimes.
Link: http://www.mkeever.com/tunisia2011.pdf
It is The Report of the March 2011 Delegation of Attorneys to Tunisia from National Lawyers Guild (US), Haldane Society of Socialist Lawyers (UK), and Mazlumder (Turkey) Published: June 2011
Your pal,
Saturday, July 9, 2011
Chinese Electronics Can Kill US
Hey Barry:
Y'all probably know about this already, but knowing ain't the issue - we gotta do something about it.
Read it here: http://www.examiner.com/technology-in-national/tomorrow-s-cyberwarfare-may-be-carried-out-by-pre-infected-electronics-dhs
Seems the rumors are true - computer chips and software from China and other places really DO carry embedded code and kill switches that can hurt our military and national security.
Solution is simple - make a list of products that must be made in the U S of A. The list will be a long list - mostly military stuff, but a lot of civilian things too.
Oh, by the way Barry, if we make stuff here, we'll get some more jobs. And, we'll be safer.
It's a no brainer.
Don't listen to the Free Trade monkeys - they're just running a con. The only trouble with their con is that it actually will kill some Americans.
Holy cow Barry, holy cow.
The nightmare is real.
Your pal,
Y'all probably know about this already, but knowing ain't the issue - we gotta do something about it.
Read it here: http://www.examiner.com/technology-in-national/tomorrow-s-cyberwarfare-may-be-carried-out-by-pre-infected-electronics-dhs
Seems the rumors are true - computer chips and software from China and other places really DO carry embedded code and kill switches that can hurt our military and national security.
Solution is simple - make a list of products that must be made in the U S of A. The list will be a long list - mostly military stuff, but a lot of civilian things too.
Oh, by the way Barry, if we make stuff here, we'll get some more jobs. And, we'll be safer.
It's a no brainer.
Don't listen to the Free Trade monkeys - they're just running a con. The only trouble with their con is that it actually will kill some Americans.
Holy cow Barry, holy cow.
The nightmare is real.
Your pal,
Friday, July 8, 2011
UPDATE 8.6.11: Wage Theft Today, Not Fun
Hey Barry:
Aside from numbers, you may be interested in what really goes on in a job today.
It's not fun Barry, not fun. Keep your day job for awhile.
August 6, 2011: Here's a new one about trucking: http://www.startribune.com/opinion/otherviews/126619568.html
When you're hired into a job, it's likely you get the job because the person who was doing the job is too slow by maybe 5%, or that person ticked off someone working there and the boss listened to the ticked off person.
Going in, you have a problem. Either you have to be 100% efficient from the get-go to keep the job - which is impossible - or you are dealing with a boss who has no common sense and listens to stories.
Now, what happens if the business suffers a little from a sales decline?
Well, all that gets even more pronounced. The gossipers make up stories ragging about co-workers from whole cloth because they are afraid of losing their job. The boss with no common sense fears for the future and wants to lay off somebody. Probably the person to go is the person whom the gossipers target.
Here's the dilemma: sell your soul and lie about fellow workers or lose your job to someone who lies.
Or maybe you work in a place where the boss commandeers all the tips and insists on four to six hour shifts with no breaks.
If you complain about either, you're gone. There are lots of hungry people out there waiting for a chance to work at less than minimum wage and in violation of labor standards.
See the article on wage theft - national disgrace: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/07/18/MNGB1KAIB2.DTL&tsp=1
One of the jokes about it goes like this:
Question: "Did you get that job at McD's as a cook?"
Answer: "Nah. All the openings were filled by the Stanford grads."
Question: "What about the BK toilet cleaning jobs?"
Answer: "Those were all filled by the Harvard grads."
That's the way it is.
Your pal,
Aside from numbers, you may be interested in what really goes on in a job today.
It's not fun Barry, not fun. Keep your day job for awhile.
August 6, 2011: Here's a new one about trucking: http://www.startribune.com/opinion/otherviews/126619568.html
When you're hired into a job, it's likely you get the job because the person who was doing the job is too slow by maybe 5%, or that person ticked off someone working there and the boss listened to the ticked off person.
Going in, you have a problem. Either you have to be 100% efficient from the get-go to keep the job - which is impossible - or you are dealing with a boss who has no common sense and listens to stories.
Now, what happens if the business suffers a little from a sales decline?
Well, all that gets even more pronounced. The gossipers make up stories ragging about co-workers from whole cloth because they are afraid of losing their job. The boss with no common sense fears for the future and wants to lay off somebody. Probably the person to go is the person whom the gossipers target.
Here's the dilemma: sell your soul and lie about fellow workers or lose your job to someone who lies.
Or maybe you work in a place where the boss commandeers all the tips and insists on four to six hour shifts with no breaks.
If you complain about either, you're gone. There are lots of hungry people out there waiting for a chance to work at less than minimum wage and in violation of labor standards.
See the article on wage theft - national disgrace: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/07/18/MNGB1KAIB2.DTL&tsp=1
One of the jokes about it goes like this:
Question: "Did you get that job at McD's as a cook?"
Answer: "Nah. All the openings were filled by the Stanford grads."
Question: "What about the BK toilet cleaning jobs?"
Answer: "Those were all filled by the Harvard grads."
That's the way it is.
Your pal,
Thursday, July 7, 2011
UPDATE 7.9.11 - Dog Days Are Over
Hey Barry:
Love this song by Florence and the Machine.
[You have to copy and paste the links to get the video - it's worth it.]
Florence + The Machine - Dog Days Are Over (2010 Version)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iWOyfLBYtuU
The new official video to the Dog Days Are Over. Click here to download http://zaphod.uk.vvhp.net/v-v/100312134937
I take it as a metaphor for the U S of A today - dog days are the lazy summer times when the world is right and calm.
But they're over and you've got to run fast for your mother because the horses are coming.
UPDATE 7.9.11
Gonna be soon...........
The next, worse financial crisis, Ben Arends:
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/the-next-worse-financial-crisis-2011-07-06
Your pal,
Love this song by Florence and the Machine.
[You have to copy and paste the links to get the video - it's worth it.]
Florence + The Machine - Dog Days Are Over (2010 Version)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iWOyfLBYtuU
The new official video to the Dog Days Are Over. Click here to download http://zaphod.uk.vvhp.net/v-v/100312134937
I take it as a metaphor for the U S of A today - dog days are the lazy summer times when the world is right and calm.
But they're over and you've got to run fast for your mother because the horses are coming.
UPDATE 7.9.11
Gonna be soon...........
The next, worse financial crisis, Ben Arends:
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/the-next-worse-financial-crisis-2011-07-06
Your pal,
Sunday, July 3, 2011
Who's Worse: Al Queda or NRC?
Hey Barry:
Let's get real about nuclear power.
It is a disaster waiting to happen. It will happen in the US - Americans will die and cities will be contaminated.
Just like Fukushima. 'It's another universe.' reports Greenpeace as seen on RT here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aY5cvod4Tiw&feature=player_embedded#at=284
And yet, and yet, the industry says things like this: 'Plants can run forever, the 40 year limit doesn't mean a thing.'
At the same time, upgrades, modifications and safety equipment don't get done, thanks to the NRC lap dogs.
We have 104 nuclear plants in the US - most are within killing distance of major population centers like New York, Philadelphia, Washington DC and Boston.
How many Americans must die before we eliminate these dirty time bombs?
We don't need Al Queda when we have the NRC.
Positively depressin.
Your pal,
Let's get real about nuclear power.
It is a disaster waiting to happen. It will happen in the US - Americans will die and cities will be contaminated.
Just like Fukushima. 'It's another universe.' reports Greenpeace as seen on RT here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aY5cvod4Tiw&feature=player_embedded#at=284
And yet, and yet, the industry says things like this: 'Plants can run forever, the 40 year limit doesn't mean a thing.'
At the same time, upgrades, modifications and safety equipment don't get done, thanks to the NRC lap dogs.
We have 104 nuclear plants in the US - most are within killing distance of major population centers like New York, Philadelphia, Washington DC and Boston.
How many Americans must die before we eliminate these dirty time bombs?
We don't need Al Queda when we have the NRC.
Positively depressin.
Your pal,
Thursday, June 30, 2011
Politicking the Budget
Hey Barry:
I don't think I like your debt ceiling and deficit reduction negotiating strategy. It has a fatal flaw - the dreaded blue screen of death.
Of course, I am just reading the tea leaves of press conferences and am probably missing something.
But, it seems to me that you're relying on the Reps to do the right thing for the country and hoping that some pressure from home will sway them to vote like adults.
You're making concessions and not getting anything in return, Barry.
But, giving away the store will NOT buy cooperation - ya gotta put the heat on 'em.
Barry, we live in a different world and you're gonna have to step up the game. Cuz if'n you don't we is cooked like a skinny goose.
The fatal flaw in your strategy is that the Reps have been bought and paid for - they don't listen to voters, they listen only to money.
So, since I don't think ya'll can bribe 'em outright, though mebbe you can, then ya'll gonna have to get to their money. You have to put pressure on their backers to pressure the elected bunch to vote the right way.
So, here's how to do that:
First, tell Biden that all the cuts are off the table and we want single payer health care and that ALL the deficits will be paid for by tax increases on rich folks - higher income tax rates for higher brackets, tax capital gains as ordinary income, close all the deductions for corporations and so on.
Make it clear to the public that you understand what the public wants and that the Reps are putting all the burdens on the middle class when Billionaires caused the problem in the first place.
We know that already; it's not a surprise.
Then..............have Biden walk out of the conference.
That will get their panties in a bunch and they will take their eye off the ball.
Next, get a list of the top 100 Rep donors and call each one on the phone. Here's what you'll tell them.
'Mr. Smith. this is the President of the United States Barack Obama. I am calling you on a matter of critical national importance and I need your help.
Your Rep. Mr. Jones is saying that he will not vote for a new debt ceiling or a reasonable budget unless we gut social security and medicare and leave tax deductions for corporate jets alone.
I am asking you to call him on the phone and ask him to cooperate in this time of national crisis.
If you don't make the call and if Mr. Jones does not do the adult thing by voting to raise the debt ceiling and allowing some reasonable tax increases, then the United States will default on its debts for the first time since Alexander Hamilton sold T Bills.
That will raise the interest rates the US has to pay to borrow money which will raise interest rates for everyone in the country. Higher rates will choke off business investment and we will have another Great Depression, Mr. Smith. I am sure you do not want that.
So I am asking you to make the phone call. If you do make that call and if Mr. Jones votes like an adult, then I'll pay your way to Washington and present you with a Certificate of Meritorius Service in the White House.
In order to be clear about how important this is to the country, if Mr. Jones fails to vote like an adult, then I will hold you personally responsible and will make it my business to discover whether you have broken any laws or regulations.
I am saddened by the need for this conversation, but the future of the country is on the line today like never before, Mr. Smith.
Can I count on your cooperation, Mr. Smith?'
There you go Barry - make 100 of those calls and the crisis is over.
Your pal,
I don't think I like your debt ceiling and deficit reduction negotiating strategy. It has a fatal flaw - the dreaded blue screen of death.
Of course, I am just reading the tea leaves of press conferences and am probably missing something.
But, it seems to me that you're relying on the Reps to do the right thing for the country and hoping that some pressure from home will sway them to vote like adults.
You're making concessions and not getting anything in return, Barry.
But, giving away the store will NOT buy cooperation - ya gotta put the heat on 'em.
Barry, we live in a different world and you're gonna have to step up the game. Cuz if'n you don't we is cooked like a skinny goose.
The fatal flaw in your strategy is that the Reps have been bought and paid for - they don't listen to voters, they listen only to money.
So, since I don't think ya'll can bribe 'em outright, though mebbe you can, then ya'll gonna have to get to their money. You have to put pressure on their backers to pressure the elected bunch to vote the right way.
So, here's how to do that:
First, tell Biden that all the cuts are off the table and we want single payer health care and that ALL the deficits will be paid for by tax increases on rich folks - higher income tax rates for higher brackets, tax capital gains as ordinary income, close all the deductions for corporations and so on.
Make it clear to the public that you understand what the public wants and that the Reps are putting all the burdens on the middle class when Billionaires caused the problem in the first place.
We know that already; it's not a surprise.
Then..............have Biden walk out of the conference.
That will get their panties in a bunch and they will take their eye off the ball.
Next, get a list of the top 100 Rep donors and call each one on the phone. Here's what you'll tell them.
'Mr. Smith. this is the President of the United States Barack Obama. I am calling you on a matter of critical national importance and I need your help.
Your Rep. Mr. Jones is saying that he will not vote for a new debt ceiling or a reasonable budget unless we gut social security and medicare and leave tax deductions for corporate jets alone.
I am asking you to call him on the phone and ask him to cooperate in this time of national crisis.
If you don't make the call and if Mr. Jones does not do the adult thing by voting to raise the debt ceiling and allowing some reasonable tax increases, then the United States will default on its debts for the first time since Alexander Hamilton sold T Bills.
That will raise the interest rates the US has to pay to borrow money which will raise interest rates for everyone in the country. Higher rates will choke off business investment and we will have another Great Depression, Mr. Smith. I am sure you do not want that.
So I am asking you to make the phone call. If you do make that call and if Mr. Jones votes like an adult, then I'll pay your way to Washington and present you with a Certificate of Meritorius Service in the White House.
In order to be clear about how important this is to the country, if Mr. Jones fails to vote like an adult, then I will hold you personally responsible and will make it my business to discover whether you have broken any laws or regulations.
I am saddened by the need for this conversation, but the future of the country is on the line today like never before, Mr. Smith.
Can I count on your cooperation, Mr. Smith?'
There you go Barry - make 100 of those calls and the crisis is over.
Your pal,
Saturday, June 25, 2011
Screwing Oil Speculators
Hey Barry:
Releasing oil into the markets has been criticized as a move to damage speculators like the Golden Sox Gang.
Good.
Your pal,
Releasing oil into the markets has been criticized as a move to damage speculators like the Golden Sox Gang.
Good.
Your pal,
Friday, June 24, 2011
New Reality Economics
Hey Barry:
Hope you like the picture above of our troops as my new header; it reminds me of what really matters.
Moving to an economic note, if we're looking at economic theory as it applies to today - at least that's what I'm doing - then there are one or two ideas to consider. This is part of considering what will take the place of the NeoCon dogma which has died recently. [Oddly enough, NeoCon dogma died from success - we gave it all it wanted and then it up and died. R.I.P.]
One of those ideas is called Post Keynesian Theory, or PKT. In other words, it attempts to suggest what happens to economics after the economy moves on beyond pure Keynesian doctrine. After all, the 1930's were a long time ago.
The basic Keynes idea from the 1930's is that the central government has to intervene on a macro level with stimulus and borrowing when the unemployment rate is too high. That's good as far as it goes, but in today's economy that action alone does not solve the problems we have. Markets are way too clogged with monopolies to react favorably to macro stimulus actions alone.
PKT takes Keynes' doctrine further into government intervention in the economy. Specifically, PKT suggests both an incomes policy and an industrial policy. And, I would add that a better PKT would also add a nationalist trade policy that protects our jobs.
An incomes policy is simply a tax policy that prevents personal incomes from rising so high that the possessors have the ability to damage the country from their actions.
An industrial policy is a national policy which chooses which industries will help the country in the future and then supports those industries with protective tariffs, subsidies and contracts until they become strong enough to stand on their own.
A protective trade policy is a policy which seeks to keep jobs at home. It has been forcefully explained by Ian Fletcher in his book Free Trade Doesn't Work: What Should Replace it and Why.
Now Mr. Fletcher has proposed a second alternative candidate for the moribund NeoCon dogma - Nationalist Economics. His discussion is available here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ian-fletcher/the-coming-upheaval-in-re_b_883608.html
Well, Barry, that's where economic thinking is heading: toward Post Keynesian Theory and Nationalist Economics. If you accept it, your job is to bring the legislature around to the new reality.
We're hoping you accept it Barry, because the penalty for ignoring reality will be very high for the country.
And, Lordy, them Reps is a stubborn bunch. My guess is that they'll cling to their bankrupt dogma until the country pays the price.
We're rooting for you here.
All of us in the day-to-day world know the real situation even if the Reps don't.
Your pal,
Hope you like the picture above of our troops as my new header; it reminds me of what really matters.
Moving to an economic note, if we're looking at economic theory as it applies to today - at least that's what I'm doing - then there are one or two ideas to consider. This is part of considering what will take the place of the NeoCon dogma which has died recently. [Oddly enough, NeoCon dogma died from success - we gave it all it wanted and then it up and died. R.I.P.]
One of those ideas is called Post Keynesian Theory, or PKT. In other words, it attempts to suggest what happens to economics after the economy moves on beyond pure Keynesian doctrine. After all, the 1930's were a long time ago.
The basic Keynes idea from the 1930's is that the central government has to intervene on a macro level with stimulus and borrowing when the unemployment rate is too high. That's good as far as it goes, but in today's economy that action alone does not solve the problems we have. Markets are way too clogged with monopolies to react favorably to macro stimulus actions alone.
PKT takes Keynes' doctrine further into government intervention in the economy. Specifically, PKT suggests both an incomes policy and an industrial policy. And, I would add that a better PKT would also add a nationalist trade policy that protects our jobs.
An incomes policy is simply a tax policy that prevents personal incomes from rising so high that the possessors have the ability to damage the country from their actions.
An industrial policy is a national policy which chooses which industries will help the country in the future and then supports those industries with protective tariffs, subsidies and contracts until they become strong enough to stand on their own.
A protective trade policy is a policy which seeks to keep jobs at home. It has been forcefully explained by Ian Fletcher in his book Free Trade Doesn't Work: What Should Replace it and Why.
Now Mr. Fletcher has proposed a second alternative candidate for the moribund NeoCon dogma - Nationalist Economics. His discussion is available here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ian-fletcher/the-coming-upheaval-in-re_b_883608.html
Well, Barry, that's where economic thinking is heading: toward Post Keynesian Theory and Nationalist Economics. If you accept it, your job is to bring the legislature around to the new reality.
We're hoping you accept it Barry, because the penalty for ignoring reality will be very high for the country.
And, Lordy, them Reps is a stubborn bunch. My guess is that they'll cling to their bankrupt dogma until the country pays the price.
We're rooting for you here.
All of us in the day-to-day world know the real situation even if the Reps don't.
Your pal,
Thursday, June 23, 2011
Replacing NeoCons
Hey Barry:
Well, the NeoCon economic philosophy seems to be withering to dormancy on the vine. But have no fear; it will come back again as soon as our memories fade.
Why is it withering? Well, it's fading because it won the war of ideas; it took over economics and politics. NeoCon philosophy was the dominant economic idea for several years. And, we - the good ol' U S of A - put its ideas into practice.
And, what did it give us? Among other things, it gave us high unemployment, the Great Recession, a housing crisis, a banking crisis, a debt crisis and a still developing European crisis that may well put us into another, deeper recession.
So, NeoCon ideas are correctly blamed for the mess we're in; and, those ideas are disappearing, for now.
John Maynard Keynes knew all this in the 1930's,
But, we forgot. And forgetting cost us, boy did it cost.
So, you may ask, what is the alternative anyway?
Well, the alternative is really pretty simple and it's mostly a lot of common sense.
See, markets are pretty good at creating jobs when there is some consumer demand. But, the problem is that when the entrepreneur's capital demands all the profits instead of giving fair shares to employees, customers, suppliers and society, then wealth becomes concentrated and society suffers.
Left alone this simple-minded NeoCon approach guarantees recessions because it chokes off demand from the consumers.
Consumer spending is two-thirds of the economy and consumers get their buying power from wages. If they don't have enough wages, then they can't buy things. That's called a recession.
That's where we are right now.
The better idea is to share the profits from business ventures with employees, suppliers, customers and society instead of giving all the profits to the capital. Allow capital a fair return but not everything.
After all, society is the thing that allows a venture to make a profit. Society provides a legal structure, educated workers, customers who buy things and so on. Without all of these things a business will simply fail from lack of revenue.
Of course, business owners will resist the idea of increasing wages and giving back to society. That reduces their profits and return on investment.
So, that means that you, Barry Obama, have to figure out a way to take some of the business' profits and billionaires' wealth - just a little - and give it to wages and to schools and roads and medical insurance - stuff like that.
But, wait a minute; we already have those mechanisms in place Barry. All you have to do is to tune them up a little. Let unions organize. Pass laws to protect them. Raise taxes on businesses to support education and infrastructure. You get the idea. It's not news, Barry.
Well Barry, we can hear it now, the screams and complaints will be really loud and panicky.
'That's socialism and it's anti-American. It's theft and stealing. It's Un-American.'
And so on and so on.
OK, Barry, here's the bottom line: this is the only way to survive as a country.
It's survival, not politics.
It's way more important than politics.
How about it, Barry? What will you do?
Your pal,
Well, the NeoCon economic philosophy seems to be withering to dormancy on the vine. But have no fear; it will come back again as soon as our memories fade.
Why is it withering? Well, it's fading because it won the war of ideas; it took over economics and politics. NeoCon philosophy was the dominant economic idea for several years. And, we - the good ol' U S of A - put its ideas into practice.
And, what did it give us? Among other things, it gave us high unemployment, the Great Recession, a housing crisis, a banking crisis, a debt crisis and a still developing European crisis that may well put us into another, deeper recession.
So, NeoCon ideas are correctly blamed for the mess we're in; and, those ideas are disappearing, for now.
John Maynard Keynes knew all this in the 1930's,
But, we forgot. And forgetting cost us, boy did it cost.
So, you may ask, what is the alternative anyway?
Well, the alternative is really pretty simple and it's mostly a lot of common sense.
See, markets are pretty good at creating jobs when there is some consumer demand. But, the problem is that when the entrepreneur's capital demands all the profits instead of giving fair shares to employees, customers, suppliers and society, then wealth becomes concentrated and society suffers.
Left alone this simple-minded NeoCon approach guarantees recessions because it chokes off demand from the consumers.
Consumer spending is two-thirds of the economy and consumers get their buying power from wages. If they don't have enough wages, then they can't buy things. That's called a recession.
That's where we are right now.
The better idea is to share the profits from business ventures with employees, suppliers, customers and society instead of giving all the profits to the capital. Allow capital a fair return but not everything.
After all, society is the thing that allows a venture to make a profit. Society provides a legal structure, educated workers, customers who buy things and so on. Without all of these things a business will simply fail from lack of revenue.
Of course, business owners will resist the idea of increasing wages and giving back to society. That reduces their profits and return on investment.
So, that means that you, Barry Obama, have to figure out a way to take some of the business' profits and billionaires' wealth - just a little - and give it to wages and to schools and roads and medical insurance - stuff like that.
But, wait a minute; we already have those mechanisms in place Barry. All you have to do is to tune them up a little. Let unions organize. Pass laws to protect them. Raise taxes on businesses to support education and infrastructure. You get the idea. It's not news, Barry.
Well Barry, we can hear it now, the screams and complaints will be really loud and panicky.
'That's socialism and it's anti-American. It's theft and stealing. It's Un-American.'
And so on and so on.
OK, Barry, here's the bottom line: this is the only way to survive as a country.
It's survival, not politics.
It's way more important than politics.
How about it, Barry? What will you do?
Your pal,
Tuesday, June 21, 2011
What Would Barry Do?
Hey Barry:
Let's imagine that we - the entire USA - is a small bunch on a tramp steamer on the high seas somewhere.
You are our Captain - no mistake. [Sorry, I have been reading Mark Twain, and he IS contagious - makes me want to write like a poor imitation]
Well anyway, there we are with pretty much two groups of folks: a smallish bunch with lots of food, great views and complete access to you at every table.
Then, there's the rest of us who have a little bit of bread, some brackish water and all the rats we can catch. Sometimes we can see you and the smallish bunch as you take your stroll on the top deck and we can wave to you. It makes us happy; we're still hungry, but happy.
It turns out that the smaller bunch want to reduce our bread ration by half because, well that's just what they do. But you as the Captain are sayin that 'We can't reduce their rations by half, but maybe we can just reduce it by a quarter instead. I'll think on it and get back to you.'
Of course, if you reduce the rations then the folks who actually keep the ship afloat will be weak and it'll be hard for them to fix all the leaks. When you mention that to the smallish gang, they just scoff and tell you that the workers can just work longer hours. After all, they don't have anything else to do.
But, Barry you have a dilemma: you know there's a storm coming and that the boat is in serious disrepair. If we don't fix the boat there's a real good chance it'll sink in the storm.
So you make an executive decision: "In order to save our ship, I have decided that I will take from the small bunch half of all that they have and distribute it to the folks who have little so that they will have the strength to keep our ship in good repair during the coming storm. I know that the bilge pump is broken, the engine needs a new fuel system, the piston rings are worn out and the radios are working only half time. In these difficult times, we must all work together because if we do not we will all perish together on the seas."
Immediately there is an uproar from the small gang.
"You cannot do that to us. We made our money fair and square by reducing bread rations every year, just like the rules allow. It is our right. We have been doing it for generations. You cannot stop us now. We will,.......... well, we will do SOMETHING real bad. Maybe we'll hold our breath for a really long time. Or, or, how about this, we'll promise to pay you 25% of the next food that floats by on a shipwreck. That's a good deal. You can't take away our rights like that - it's not fair.
OK, OK, how about this - we will pay you 5% of our food supplies right now, but you have to drop your outrageous demands on our property, our right to bread rations."
What'll be your answer, Barry?
What would Barry do?
Your pal,
Let's imagine that we - the entire USA - is a small bunch on a tramp steamer on the high seas somewhere.
You are our Captain - no mistake. [Sorry, I have been reading Mark Twain, and he IS contagious - makes me want to write like a poor imitation]
Well anyway, there we are with pretty much two groups of folks: a smallish bunch with lots of food, great views and complete access to you at every table.
Then, there's the rest of us who have a little bit of bread, some brackish water and all the rats we can catch. Sometimes we can see you and the smallish bunch as you take your stroll on the top deck and we can wave to you. It makes us happy; we're still hungry, but happy.
It turns out that the smaller bunch want to reduce our bread ration by half because, well that's just what they do. But you as the Captain are sayin that 'We can't reduce their rations by half, but maybe we can just reduce it by a quarter instead. I'll think on it and get back to you.'
Of course, if you reduce the rations then the folks who actually keep the ship afloat will be weak and it'll be hard for them to fix all the leaks. When you mention that to the smallish gang, they just scoff and tell you that the workers can just work longer hours. After all, they don't have anything else to do.
But, Barry you have a dilemma: you know there's a storm coming and that the boat is in serious disrepair. If we don't fix the boat there's a real good chance it'll sink in the storm.
So you make an executive decision: "In order to save our ship, I have decided that I will take from the small bunch half of all that they have and distribute it to the folks who have little so that they will have the strength to keep our ship in good repair during the coming storm. I know that the bilge pump is broken, the engine needs a new fuel system, the piston rings are worn out and the radios are working only half time. In these difficult times, we must all work together because if we do not we will all perish together on the seas."
Immediately there is an uproar from the small gang.
"You cannot do that to us. We made our money fair and square by reducing bread rations every year, just like the rules allow. It is our right. We have been doing it for generations. You cannot stop us now. We will,.......... well, we will do SOMETHING real bad. Maybe we'll hold our breath for a really long time. Or, or, how about this, we'll promise to pay you 25% of the next food that floats by on a shipwreck. That's a good deal. You can't take away our rights like that - it's not fair.
OK, OK, how about this - we will pay you 5% of our food supplies right now, but you have to drop your outrageous demands on our property, our right to bread rations."
What'll be your answer, Barry?
What would Barry do?
Your pal,
Monday, June 20, 2011
VTO Farewell?
Hey Barry:
Seems like the end of an era is here - VTO's are about to be gone, gone.
Read about the last flight of the Harrier here: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newsvideo/8204103/Bowing-out-last-flight-of-the-Harrier-jump-jet.html
We are still flying the tilt wing Osprey, but considering helicopters and unmanned craft, looks like its days are numbered to an outside observer like me.
Up, up and awaaay.
Your pal,
Seems like the end of an era is here - VTO's are about to be gone, gone.
Read about the last flight of the Harrier here: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newsvideo/8204103/Bowing-out-last-flight-of-the-Harrier-jump-jet.html
We are still flying the tilt wing Osprey, but considering helicopters and unmanned craft, looks like its days are numbered to an outside observer like me.
Up, up and awaaay.
Your pal,
Saturday, June 18, 2011
Revolution Against the Rich - 1765
Hey Barry:
Back in 1765 our backs were against the wall because we had a system of a few rich people who controlled everything and who used monopolies to soak up all the money around leaving ordinary folks to scrounge for a living as best they could.
We are in a similar state today Barry - a few rich people control everything and the rest of us scrounge for a living.
Perhaps a history lesson about how we handled the situation then could be instructive now:
I'll quote you from John Adams by way of
JOHN ADAMS AND THE AMERCAN REVOLUTION, Catherine Drinker Bowen, Little, Brown and Company, Boston, 1950, pp 270-273
HOW AMERICANS TREAT HOME GROWN ROYALTY:
Lieutenant Governor Thomas Hutchinson in 1765 was a Massachusetts man who knew what Massachusetts wanted.
'And if Britain would not respect American Property [by the Stamp Act of 1765], then by God, said Massachusetts men, they would not respect the property of Britons. Petition and protest had been spurned. Whose fault was this? Governor Bernard was English, born and bred in England. But his right-hand man was not born in Briitain. Lieutenant Governor Thomas Hutchinson was a Massachusetts man who knew what Massachusetts wanted. Once he had been the most popular man in the Province. His first volume of his HISTORY was out. His days were devoted to Provincial business, his nights to the second volume of this HISTORY. No one had served Massachusetts so long....
He said he was against [the Stamp Act]; declared he had pled with the Lords of Trade, with the colonial agent on London. Could Massachusetts trust him? In the past four years...whenever the Massachusetts House composed petitions to King, Lords or Commons, it had been Hutchinson, always Hutchinson who '"wiped out" [John Adams wrote in his diary] "every spirited if not sensible expression from those peitions." When the province was ready to choose a new agent to look after its affairs in London, hadn't Hutchinson done what he could to get Jackson appointed? Jackson, secretary to Lord Grenville himself! It was like handing one's country to the enemy. About Thomas Hutchinson there was surely the taint of ambition, of a grasping, greedy nature. He controlled nearly every high Crown appointment in the government. John enumerated them, with an indignant interrogation mark after each: "Has not the Lieutenant Governor grasped four of the most important offices of the Province into his own hands? Has not his brother-in law, Oliver, Secretary of the Province, another of the greatest places? Is not a brother of Oliver a Judge of the Superior Court? Has not that brother a son in the House, who is also a judge in one of the counties? Did not that son marry the daughter of another of the Judges of the Superior Court? Has not the Lieutenant Governor a brother, a Judge of the Pleas in Boston, and a namesake and near relation who is another judge? Has not the Lieutenant Governor a near relation who is Clerk of the House of Representative?
"is not this ascendancy of one family," John concluded, "foundation sufficient on which to erect a tyranny? Is it not enough to excite jealousies among the people?" It most certainly was enough. Everything told against Hutchinson.
One evening not long after the riot against Andrew Oliver, the crowd assembled again. They were very orderly this time, led by several merchants who had been friends of Hutchinson. Marching through town to his house on Garden Court, they surrounded it and called to him. "Come out,' they said, "on the balcony above the street. Tell us you never wrote to England in favor of the Stamp Act. Tell us this yourself and we will go away satsified."
Thomas Hutchinson ...had never written in favor of the Act. But no mob on earth had the right to demand explanations and declarations from Lieutenant Governor and Chief Justice Hutchinson...[Later] On August 26th, the crowd surged northward through town to Garden Court..to the gateway before Thomas Hutchinson's three-storied mansion. Swarming over the lawn and up the steps, brandishing their axes, whooping like Indians, the mob split doors and windows and poured into the house, filling every room, shouting, cursing, yelling for Hutchinson, flinging open closet doors, searching to the very attic. Finding no one, the crowd slashed and ripped, tore down panels, broke walls and floors with their axes...In Hutchinson's study, men climbed the shelves like monkrys to the ceiling, destroyed books and documents that had taken thirty years to collect. Even the manucript pages of THE HISTORY OF MASSACHUSETTS went out the window.'
Forwarding to today: seems like we are in a similar place now.
What should we do now, Barry? What is good for the country?
Is it good that the rich folks control all the wealth and systematically accumulate even more from the poor and middling among us?
What should we do, Barry?
We have to do something and time is running out.
'And ever at my back I hear time's winged chariot drawing near' [apologies to Andrew Marvell for the botched quote].
Maybe it's time to make an assault on Lloyd C. Blankfein
and Gary D. Cohn of Golden Sox and the Koch Brothers as well.
Of course we cannot, repeat CAN NOT, go to their houses and offices and sit there and clog up their businesses and overflow some toilets and such. After all, they are just following the laws. And it is SO unfortunate when the poor and middling suffer so much. It would be rude to inconvenience those folks just as we did in 1765. And, we don't want to be rude, Barry.
Whatever shall we do, Barry, whatever shall we do?
Your pal,
Back in 1765 our backs were against the wall because we had a system of a few rich people who controlled everything and who used monopolies to soak up all the money around leaving ordinary folks to scrounge for a living as best they could.
We are in a similar state today Barry - a few rich people control everything and the rest of us scrounge for a living.
Perhaps a history lesson about how we handled the situation then could be instructive now:
I'll quote you from John Adams by way of
JOHN ADAMS AND THE AMERCAN REVOLUTION, Catherine Drinker Bowen, Little, Brown and Company, Boston, 1950, pp 270-273
HOW AMERICANS TREAT HOME GROWN ROYALTY:
Lieutenant Governor Thomas Hutchinson in 1765 was a Massachusetts man who knew what Massachusetts wanted.
'And if Britain would not respect American Property [by the Stamp Act of 1765], then by God, said Massachusetts men, they would not respect the property of Britons. Petition and protest had been spurned. Whose fault was this? Governor Bernard was English, born and bred in England. But his right-hand man was not born in Briitain. Lieutenant Governor Thomas Hutchinson was a Massachusetts man who knew what Massachusetts wanted. Once he had been the most popular man in the Province. His first volume of his HISTORY was out. His days were devoted to Provincial business, his nights to the second volume of this HISTORY. No one had served Massachusetts so long....
He said he was against [the Stamp Act]; declared he had pled with the Lords of Trade, with the colonial agent on London. Could Massachusetts trust him? In the past four years...whenever the Massachusetts House composed petitions to King, Lords or Commons, it had been Hutchinson, always Hutchinson who '"wiped out" [John Adams wrote in his diary] "every spirited if not sensible expression from those peitions." When the province was ready to choose a new agent to look after its affairs in London, hadn't Hutchinson done what he could to get Jackson appointed? Jackson, secretary to Lord Grenville himself! It was like handing one's country to the enemy. About Thomas Hutchinson there was surely the taint of ambition, of a grasping, greedy nature. He controlled nearly every high Crown appointment in the government. John enumerated them, with an indignant interrogation mark after each: "Has not the Lieutenant Governor grasped four of the most important offices of the Province into his own hands? Has not his brother-in law, Oliver, Secretary of the Province, another of the greatest places? Is not a brother of Oliver a Judge of the Superior Court? Has not that brother a son in the House, who is also a judge in one of the counties? Did not that son marry the daughter of another of the Judges of the Superior Court? Has not the Lieutenant Governor a brother, a Judge of the Pleas in Boston, and a namesake and near relation who is another judge? Has not the Lieutenant Governor a near relation who is Clerk of the House of Representative?
"is not this ascendancy of one family," John concluded, "foundation sufficient on which to erect a tyranny? Is it not enough to excite jealousies among the people?" It most certainly was enough. Everything told against Hutchinson.
One evening not long after the riot against Andrew Oliver, the crowd assembled again. They were very orderly this time, led by several merchants who had been friends of Hutchinson. Marching through town to his house on Garden Court, they surrounded it and called to him. "Come out,' they said, "on the balcony above the street. Tell us you never wrote to England in favor of the Stamp Act. Tell us this yourself and we will go away satsified."
Thomas Hutchinson ...had never written in favor of the Act. But no mob on earth had the right to demand explanations and declarations from Lieutenant Governor and Chief Justice Hutchinson...[Later] On August 26th, the crowd surged northward through town to Garden Court..to the gateway before Thomas Hutchinson's three-storied mansion. Swarming over the lawn and up the steps, brandishing their axes, whooping like Indians, the mob split doors and windows and poured into the house, filling every room, shouting, cursing, yelling for Hutchinson, flinging open closet doors, searching to the very attic. Finding no one, the crowd slashed and ripped, tore down panels, broke walls and floors with their axes...In Hutchinson's study, men climbed the shelves like monkrys to the ceiling, destroyed books and documents that had taken thirty years to collect. Even the manucript pages of THE HISTORY OF MASSACHUSETTS went out the window.'
Forwarding to today: seems like we are in a similar place now.
What should we do now, Barry? What is good for the country?
Is it good that the rich folks control all the wealth and systematically accumulate even more from the poor and middling among us?
What should we do, Barry?
We have to do something and time is running out.
'And ever at my back I hear time's winged chariot drawing near' [apologies to Andrew Marvell for the botched quote].
Maybe it's time to make an assault on Lloyd C. Blankfein
and Gary D. Cohn of Golden Sox and the Koch Brothers as well.
Of course we cannot, repeat CAN NOT, go to their houses and offices and sit there and clog up their businesses and overflow some toilets and such. After all, they are just following the laws. And it is SO unfortunate when the poor and middling suffer so much. It would be rude to inconvenience those folks just as we did in 1765. And, we don't want to be rude, Barry.
Whatever shall we do, Barry, whatever shall we do?
Your pal,
Tuesday, June 14, 2011
INDIA: New Publication
Hey Barry:
I am happy to announce the publication of a new economic policy study of India on MIEPA's website: http://www.mkeever.com/india.html
The study was just completed by Atul Kumar, an economics graduate from Delhi University, doing M.A. Economics from Delhi School of Economics in New Delhi, capital of India.
Your pal,
I am happy to announce the publication of a new economic policy study of India on MIEPA's website: http://www.mkeever.com/india.html
The study was just completed by Atul Kumar, an economics graduate from Delhi University, doing M.A. Economics from Delhi School of Economics in New Delhi, capital of India.
Your pal,
Sunday, June 12, 2011
Schakowsky's Bill: Raise Taxes, Restore Progressive Income Tax
Hey Barry:
Representative Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill) is on it. She proposed a bill in March to raise taxes to help with the budget.
My only concern is that her bill is way too timid, but it's a start. It's something we used to have in the country - a Progressive income tax. It's time we brought it back.
Read the whole article here by Lucia Graves: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/16/jan-schakowsky-income-tax_n_836624.html
Excerpt:
"Schakowsky's bill would create new tax brackets for earners making between $1 million and $1 billion annually, with tax rates starting at 45 percent with the millionth dollar and increasing on a sliding scale. The legislation would also tax capital gains and dividend income as ordinary income for those earning over $1 million in a given year. A full list of the new brackets appears below:
$1-10 million: 45%
$10-20 million: 46%
$20-100 million: 47%
$100 million to $1 billion: 48%
$1 billion and over: 49%
If enacted in 2011, Schakowsky's Fairness in Taxation Act would raise an estimated $78.9 billion in its first year, according to Citizens for Tax Justice, a liberal lobbying group. CTJ was unable to provide further projections, however.
Reps. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) and Raul Grijalva (D-Ariz.), co-chairs of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, partnered with Democratic Reps. Jesse Jackson, Jr. (Ill.), Donna Edwards (Md.), Bob Filner (Calif.), Jerry Nadler (N.Y.), Steve Cohen (Tenn.), John Yarmuth (Ky.) and Peter DeFazio (Ore.) to cosponsor the bill."
We need your support Barry.
Your pal,
Representative Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill) is on it. She proposed a bill in March to raise taxes to help with the budget.
My only concern is that her bill is way too timid, but it's a start. It's something we used to have in the country - a Progressive income tax. It's time we brought it back.
Read the whole article here by Lucia Graves: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/16/jan-schakowsky-income-tax_n_836624.html
Excerpt:
"Schakowsky's bill would create new tax brackets for earners making between $1 million and $1 billion annually, with tax rates starting at 45 percent with the millionth dollar and increasing on a sliding scale. The legislation would also tax capital gains and dividend income as ordinary income for those earning over $1 million in a given year. A full list of the new brackets appears below:
$1-10 million: 45%
$10-20 million: 46%
$20-100 million: 47%
$100 million to $1 billion: 48%
$1 billion and over: 49%
If enacted in 2011, Schakowsky's Fairness in Taxation Act would raise an estimated $78.9 billion in its first year, according to Citizens for Tax Justice, a liberal lobbying group. CTJ was unable to provide further projections, however.
Reps. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) and Raul Grijalva (D-Ariz.), co-chairs of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, partnered with Democratic Reps. Jesse Jackson, Jr. (Ill.), Donna Edwards (Md.), Bob Filner (Calif.), Jerry Nadler (N.Y.), Steve Cohen (Tenn.), John Yarmuth (Ky.) and Peter DeFazio (Ore.) to cosponsor the bill."
We need your support Barry.
Your pal,
Wednesday, June 8, 2011
Economic Truth - Update 6.21.11 AND 6.11.11
Hey Barry:
I'm going to tell you exactly what we have to do to save the country. It's no B S; it's unvarnished and very difficult politically, but we're talking saving the USA from implosion. No time to pussy tweet around.
None of this stuff is a surprise. I’m giving you an intro y’all won’t hear from your econs, but it’s what they are thinking.
And, out in the real world, we get it; this is stuff we know.
But the thing about it is this: if most of this stuff does not happen, we are pretty much done and in for a very rough ride.
INCOME TAXES:
Y'all gotta raise income taxes on rich folks a lot, I mean a real lot. We need to go back to the Eisenhower years.
We need the money and we don't need the rich people. No brainer - tax them out of existence. If they don't like it they can move to some other place.
If we don't tax away the rich people, we will BE some other place soon.
The Rep idiocy that lowering income taxes creates jobs is just a billionaire con job, don't pay it no mind. It happened one time in history when Reagan was around, but it will never happen again. Talk to George Bush if you're in doubt.
Most of the Rep politicians know it's a lie, they just use it to get elected. Some of the intellectually challenged Tea Party folks actually believe it, though. Sad.
Jobs come from higher aggregate demand. And, higher aggregate demand has got to come from Government spending because most folks are just broke and can't buy anything. Or, we can raise incomes for the middle class through wealth transfers - social security, medicare, even lowering taxes on low income earners [of course NOT on high incomes], etc., etc.
We can't borrow any more, and we can't cut spending - we gotta raise taxes on rich people.
UPDATE 6.11.11: Read that you are calling for the private sector to create the jobs because government can't do it all. That's OK because when the aggregate demand goes up, the private sector will make the jobs - we get that. But, Barry, here's the big but: demand won't increase unless the government spends. Glad you agree Barry, glad you agree.
ESTATE TAXES:
Billionaire princes and their broods are killing the country. They get rich because they have a monopoly on something - usually from the government some way. They suck the life out of a market and they don't leave any room for folks to start new businesses.
Here's from the Financial Times: "Treating commodity cartels with benign neglect would be a mistake, however. Opec may not be able to realise its formal ability to collude. But other commodity markets also suffer from effective, if informal, cartelisation. Iron ore extraction, for example, is dominated by three large companies. The vast majority of rare earths – indispensable in many electronics components – comes from China. The recent public offering of Glencore exposed the extent of a single company’s control of commodity value chains from extraction to trading."
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/dc37dfa0-92c4-11e0-bd88-00144feab49a.html#axzz1OoVqgAQC
And, since new businesses are where jobs come from, y'all gotta tax away the monopolists' great fortunes. If you don't then we won't get job growth AND we'll become a feudal society where most folks are wage slaves and the Princes get all the favors by bribing the King.
The government will get some money from the tax, but that's not the point; the goal is to clear out the suffocating deadwood that are the Billionaire Prince Monopolists so folks can find some room to start some new businesses.
CORRUPTION:
We are corrupt, period. The only people who get laws passed are people who can make large campaign contributions.
Money buys laws. Usually, the money buys laws that gives money more money. I don't see a lot of laws helping out the middle class. I know you're trying and I know it takes awhile, but Barry, incrementalism won't get us there.
TRADE POLICY, INDUSTRIAL POLICY:
Free Trade is killing our jobs. We gotta be like China and South Korea: Protect American jobs with tariffs and quotas.
And, we need an industrial policy - a list of industries we want in the future and which we protect with trade laws and subsidies. Just like we want in solar energy, only better. China is eating our lunch in Solar, Barry.
NUCLEAR POWER
By the way, Barry: nuclear power has got to go. As human beings, we are just not smart enough to manage it. Remember the old TV commercial for some butter substitute: 'It's not nice to f--k with Mother Nature.' Ask Angela Merkel about nuclear power Barry - it's gotta go. Too bad, but that's the way it is.
UPDATE 6.21.11 Fukushima worse than imagined; read it here: http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/features/2011/06/201161664828302638.html
Double down Barry, we is just too dumb to manage this stuff.
Money Quote: "Radioactive air filters from cars in Fukushima prefecture and Tokyo are now common, and Gundersen says his sources are finding radioactive air filters in the greater Seattle area of the US as well."
-
TOO MUCH CAPITAL:
Now there is too much capital from too many very high income folks. But, there is no demand to buy the products or services that capital seeks to make.
It is time to redress the balance by taxing away some of the capital formation and giving more income to poor and middle class folks to stimulate demand.
BANKS:
The worst people on the planet and the ones leading us right off the cliff are the bankers. Letting bankers buy stocks and bonds was the dumbest thing we have ever done.
This we simply gotta fix. FDR did it - so can we.
********
It’s a tough job Barry, but we are with you. Every time you raise these points people love it and your polls go up. And, all the billionaire prince monopolists piss their pants.
But, ya gotta see it through. It'll help you get votes, Barry.
Your pal,
I'm going to tell you exactly what we have to do to save the country. It's no B S; it's unvarnished and very difficult politically, but we're talking saving the USA from implosion. No time to pussy tweet around.
None of this stuff is a surprise. I’m giving you an intro y’all won’t hear from your econs, but it’s what they are thinking.
And, out in the real world, we get it; this is stuff we know.
But the thing about it is this: if most of this stuff does not happen, we are pretty much done and in for a very rough ride.
INCOME TAXES:
Y'all gotta raise income taxes on rich folks a lot, I mean a real lot. We need to go back to the Eisenhower years.
We need the money and we don't need the rich people. No brainer - tax them out of existence. If they don't like it they can move to some other place.
If we don't tax away the rich people, we will BE some other place soon.
The Rep idiocy that lowering income taxes creates jobs is just a billionaire con job, don't pay it no mind. It happened one time in history when Reagan was around, but it will never happen again. Talk to George Bush if you're in doubt.
Most of the Rep politicians know it's a lie, they just use it to get elected. Some of the intellectually challenged Tea Party folks actually believe it, though. Sad.
Jobs come from higher aggregate demand. And, higher aggregate demand has got to come from Government spending because most folks are just broke and can't buy anything. Or, we can raise incomes for the middle class through wealth transfers - social security, medicare, even lowering taxes on low income earners [of course NOT on high incomes], etc., etc.
We can't borrow any more, and we can't cut spending - we gotta raise taxes on rich people.
UPDATE 6.11.11: Read that you are calling for the private sector to create the jobs because government can't do it all. That's OK because when the aggregate demand goes up, the private sector will make the jobs - we get that. But, Barry, here's the big but: demand won't increase unless the government spends. Glad you agree Barry, glad you agree.
ESTATE TAXES:
Billionaire princes and their broods are killing the country. They get rich because they have a monopoly on something - usually from the government some way. They suck the life out of a market and they don't leave any room for folks to start new businesses.
Here's from the Financial Times: "Treating commodity cartels with benign neglect would be a mistake, however. Opec may not be able to realise its formal ability to collude. But other commodity markets also suffer from effective, if informal, cartelisation. Iron ore extraction, for example, is dominated by three large companies. The vast majority of rare earths – indispensable in many electronics components – comes from China. The recent public offering of Glencore exposed the extent of a single company’s control of commodity value chains from extraction to trading."
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/dc37dfa0-92c4-11e0-bd88-00144feab49a.html#axzz1OoVqgAQC
And, since new businesses are where jobs come from, y'all gotta tax away the monopolists' great fortunes. If you don't then we won't get job growth AND we'll become a feudal society where most folks are wage slaves and the Princes get all the favors by bribing the King.
The government will get some money from the tax, but that's not the point; the goal is to clear out the suffocating deadwood that are the Billionaire Prince Monopolists so folks can find some room to start some new businesses.
CORRUPTION:
We are corrupt, period. The only people who get laws passed are people who can make large campaign contributions.
Money buys laws. Usually, the money buys laws that gives money more money. I don't see a lot of laws helping out the middle class. I know you're trying and I know it takes awhile, but Barry, incrementalism won't get us there.
TRADE POLICY, INDUSTRIAL POLICY:
Free Trade is killing our jobs. We gotta be like China and South Korea: Protect American jobs with tariffs and quotas.
And, we need an industrial policy - a list of industries we want in the future and which we protect with trade laws and subsidies. Just like we want in solar energy, only better. China is eating our lunch in Solar, Barry.
NUCLEAR POWER
By the way, Barry: nuclear power has got to go. As human beings, we are just not smart enough to manage it. Remember the old TV commercial for some butter substitute: 'It's not nice to f--k with Mother Nature.' Ask Angela Merkel about nuclear power Barry - it's gotta go. Too bad, but that's the way it is.
UPDATE 6.21.11 Fukushima worse than imagined; read it here: http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/features/2011/06/201161664828302638.html
Double down Barry, we is just too dumb to manage this stuff.
Money Quote: "Radioactive air filters from cars in Fukushima prefecture and Tokyo are now common, and Gundersen says his sources are finding radioactive air filters in the greater Seattle area of the US as well."
-
TOO MUCH CAPITAL:
Now there is too much capital from too many very high income folks. But, there is no demand to buy the products or services that capital seeks to make.
It is time to redress the balance by taxing away some of the capital formation and giving more income to poor and middle class folks to stimulate demand.
BANKS:
The worst people on the planet and the ones leading us right off the cliff are the bankers. Letting bankers buy stocks and bonds was the dumbest thing we have ever done.
This we simply gotta fix. FDR did it - so can we.
********
It’s a tough job Barry, but we are with you. Every time you raise these points people love it and your polls go up. And, all the billionaire prince monopolists piss their pants.
But, ya gotta see it through. It'll help you get votes, Barry.
Your pal,
Tuesday, June 7, 2011
Hissy Fit Banks Delay Rules
Hey Barry:
Looks like the bankers, especially the derivative hucksters, are kicking and screaming about the Dodd-Frank rules.
The rules don't go far enough to help protect the country against greedy banks, but even these light taps on the shoulder are making the Golden Sox crowd throw a hissy fit.
Y'all gotta get them on board to help the country - they live here and make their money from us, so they gotta help us out. It's the right thing.
If they won't do that, then kick 'em out or throw 'em in jail, Barry.
They're bad apples and un-American.
Your pal,
Looks like the bankers, especially the derivative hucksters, are kicking and screaming about the Dodd-Frank rules.
The rules don't go far enough to help protect the country against greedy banks, but even these light taps on the shoulder are making the Golden Sox crowd throw a hissy fit.
Y'all gotta get them on board to help the country - they live here and make their money from us, so they gotta help us out. It's the right thing.
If they won't do that, then kick 'em out or throw 'em in jail, Barry.
They're bad apples and un-American.
Your pal,
Monday, June 6, 2011
Danger Room: Fun Read about Defense
Hey Barry:
Here's a thing for your spare time: imagine some really bright reporters who take their time and write a story about weapons and politics - stories that won't get published in newspapers because they are too.....something.
It really exists and it's called Danger Room: What's Next in National Security. read it here: http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2011
Just read a great story on the new unmanned planes that will change aerial combat soon.
Your pal,
Here's a thing for your spare time: imagine some really bright reporters who take their time and write a story about weapons and politics - stories that won't get published in newspapers because they are too.....something.
It really exists and it's called Danger Room: What's Next in National Security. read it here: http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2011
Just read a great story on the new unmanned planes that will change aerial combat soon.
Your pal,
Sunday, June 5, 2011
All Contractors Must Tell All Political Contacts
Hey Barry:
According to Robert Reich [Sunday, June 5, 2011 - http://robertreich.org/], you are thinking about asking big government contractors to disclose their political [read bribery] spending.
What's to think, Barry?
If some corporations like Lockheed, Boeing and even the Acme Road-Runner Fireworks Company, Inc., LLC, LLP, LtD. all want to get some of my tax money from a government contract, they gotta tell us all how much will go to bribing folks to get more money. It should be a part of every contract application, big and small: disclose all payments to anyone conducting business with an elected or empoyed official of the United States Government. Period.
Thought it was already there.
Holy cow, Barry, it's a no-brainer.
Keep on it.
Your pal,
According to Robert Reich [Sunday, June 5, 2011 - http://robertreich.org/], you are thinking about asking big government contractors to disclose their political [read bribery] spending.
What's to think, Barry?
If some corporations like Lockheed, Boeing and even the Acme Road-Runner Fireworks Company, Inc., LLC, LLP, LtD. all want to get some of my tax money from a government contract, they gotta tell us all how much will go to bribing folks to get more money. It should be a part of every contract application, big and small: disclose all payments to anyone conducting business with an elected or empoyed official of the United States Government. Period.
Thought it was already there.
Holy cow, Barry, it's a no-brainer.
Keep on it.
Your pal,
Friday, June 3, 2011
MIEPA Revises Policies - Makes Trade Important
Hey Barry:
The jury is in - Free Trade is guilty.
Overwhelming evidence shows that Free Trade does not work. Countries which show job growth use protectionist policies while countries which practice Free Trade show job losses.
MIEPA has revised its policies to make job protection the second most critical external policy, just behind the policy which says that it is a bad idea when police from other countries arrest citizens.
Here is the exact quote from Policy Analyst instructions [http://www.mkeever.com/apply.html]:
"11. Protection of Domestic Enterprises
Countries which create the most jobs, growth and wealth protect their domestic companies from foreign competition with tariffs, quotas and other restrictions, while taking care to enjoy the gains from trade wherever possible. [See Ian Fletcher, Free Trade Doesn’t Work: What Should Replace it and Why; www.freetradedoesntwork.com for a complete discussion.] The more effective countries create an industrial policy - that is, they identify the industries they want to grow inside their country and then encourage those industries - and then use trade policy to support it.
The analyst will examine the current trade account for goods and services to determine whether the country shows a surplus - more exports than imports - or deficit - more imports than exports. High marks are given when the trade balance of goods and services in the current account are above balanced or balanced where exports equals imports. Low marks are given for a trade deficit. Financial transactions are not counted in this analysis.
Higher marks are given when the country has an explicit plan to establish some specified industries for future growth and fashions its trade policies to accomplish that goal."
Your pal,
The jury is in - Free Trade is guilty.
Overwhelming evidence shows that Free Trade does not work. Countries which show job growth use protectionist policies while countries which practice Free Trade show job losses.
MIEPA has revised its policies to make job protection the second most critical external policy, just behind the policy which says that it is a bad idea when police from other countries arrest citizens.
Here is the exact quote from Policy Analyst instructions [http://www.mkeever.com/apply.html]:
"11. Protection of Domestic Enterprises
Countries which create the most jobs, growth and wealth protect their domestic companies from foreign competition with tariffs, quotas and other restrictions, while taking care to enjoy the gains from trade wherever possible. [See Ian Fletcher, Free Trade Doesn’t Work: What Should Replace it and Why; www.freetradedoesntwork.com for a complete discussion.] The more effective countries create an industrial policy - that is, they identify the industries they want to grow inside their country and then encourage those industries - and then use trade policy to support it.
The analyst will examine the current trade account for goods and services to determine whether the country shows a surplus - more exports than imports - or deficit - more imports than exports. High marks are given when the trade balance of goods and services in the current account are above balanced or balanced where exports equals imports. Low marks are given for a trade deficit. Financial transactions are not counted in this analysis.
Higher marks are given when the country has an explicit plan to establish some specified industries for future growth and fashions its trade policies to accomplish that goal."
Your pal,
Tuesday, May 31, 2011
Vote YES, Raise Debt Ceiling
Hey Barry:
Seems the Reps are proposing a 'clean' debt limit increase.
We should take it: vote yes.
It is the right thing to protect our country.
And, the idiot Reps are at it again - somehow they think that we out here will blame you for voting yes with no spending reductions.
They are not the same things, Barry. One is about the future of our country and the other is about politics.
We get it.
Vote yes.
Your pal,
Seems the Reps are proposing a 'clean' debt limit increase.
We should take it: vote yes.
It is the right thing to protect our country.
And, the idiot Reps are at it again - somehow they think that we out here will blame you for voting yes with no spending reductions.
They are not the same things, Barry. One is about the future of our country and the other is about politics.
We get it.
Vote yes.
Your pal,
Targeted WMD: Goldman Sachs
Hey Barry:
Maybe bankers are actually good for something. We can make them our specialized weapon, as in "Sic 'em, boy."
This should be funny, as in "I'm from Golden Sox and I'm here to help you", except it's not.
Report: Goldman Angered Libya After $1.3 Billion Investment Vanished
By Matt Egan, Reuters
Published May 31, 2011
Goldman Sachs Headquarters, New York City
Just three years before U.S. planes began bombing forces loyal to Col. Muammar al-Qaddafi, Wall Street heavyweight Goldman Sachs (GS: 140.64, +1.98, +1.43%) reportedly enraged the Libyan leader by managing a $1.3 billion investment that lost a whopping 98% of its value.
According to The Wall Street Journal, Goldman attempted to soothe the strained ties by offering Libya a chance to sink $5 billion into the company in a deal that would have made the country’s sovereign wealth fund one of Goldman’s largest shareholders.
Read more: http://www.foxbusiness.com/industries/2011/05/31/report-goldman-angered-libya-13-billion-investment-vanished/#ixzz1Nwu6MZRE
Maybe bankers are actually good for something. We can make them our specialized weapon, as in "Sic 'em, boy."
This should be funny, as in "I'm from Golden Sox and I'm here to help you", except it's not.
Report: Goldman Angered Libya After $1.3 Billion Investment Vanished
By Matt Egan, Reuters
Published May 31, 2011
Goldman Sachs Headquarters, New York City
Just three years before U.S. planes began bombing forces loyal to Col. Muammar al-Qaddafi, Wall Street heavyweight Goldman Sachs (GS: 140.64, +1.98, +1.43%) reportedly enraged the Libyan leader by managing a $1.3 billion investment that lost a whopping 98% of its value.
According to The Wall Street Journal, Goldman attempted to soothe the strained ties by offering Libya a chance to sink $5 billion into the company in a deal that would have made the country’s sovereign wealth fund one of Goldman’s largest shareholders.
Read more: http://www.foxbusiness.com/industries/2011/05/31/report-goldman-angered-libya-13-billion-investment-vanished/#ixzz1Nwu6MZRE
Monday, May 30, 2011
Hire MIEPA, Grow the Economy
Hey Barry:
Because of the Arab Spring and the world's overall economic situation, there may be an opportunity for a non-doctrinaire approach to creating jobs in some developing countries.
It is a good time to make an offer to do just that and to take my fifteen years' work in policy analysis from the academic arena into the governmental arena.
And, Barry, I can't be shy about it - need to get folks to listen somehow.
Below is my announcement that the McKeever Institute of Economic Policy Analysis [MIEPA] is available to provide legislation and policy analysis focusing on job creation for any interested country.
ANNOUNCEMENT:
ECONOMIC SITUATION
After 15 years in the development stage, MIEPA announces that it is available on a contractual basis to advise national governments on creating sound economic policies.
In today's world, economic growth is the critical part of national security and stability. The revolutions of the Arab Spring demonstrate that many populations will no longer tolerate an economic system which exploits them.
Now, many governments are unsure how to create a system which will create growth without exploiting the population.
THE OFFER
MIEPA hereby offers a comprehensive assistance program which enables national governments to create an economic system which creates the maximum number of jobs in any society by combining the best parts of private, for profit firms with the best of governmental agencies. Employing primarily local citizens, the assistance program assures stability of the development program. We recognize explicitly that some of the policy recommendations we propose may be counter to existing interests which have strong influence; however, our recommendations will improve the country's economic performance even if some recommendations are ignored.
These policies are distilled from extensive studies of countless systems. While some countries have adopted MIEPA recommendations in an ad hoc procedure, for the first time, MIEPA professionals are available to work directly with economic development ministers and national legislatures to design specific economic systems.
QUALIFICATIONS OF MIEPA's FOUNDER
As founder and CEO of MIEPA, I have trained more than 200 specialists who have examined national economic systems and policies in 47 countries - ranging from revolutionary Tunisia and dictatorial Myanmar to the United States. The policy system studies can be read at: www.mkeever.com.
I am uniquely qualified for this work as my background combines extensive business experience with an academic background in economics of development. I have been a professional financial executive at a variety of profit and non-profit firms for many years. My book HOW TO WRITE A BUSINESS PLAN, Nolo Press, 10th ed., 2011, has helped thousands of entrepreneurs worldwide start new businesses. I have studied development issues in a variety of political systems since 1960 at the London School of Economics and Whittier College and applied those studies in developing MIEPA; as a Professor of Economics and Business Management at both the undergraduate and graduate levels since the 1970's I am well-qualified to work in both academia and business.
MIEPA's focus is on creating economic growth and job growth under any economic system. Its unique approach encompasses 34 specific economic policies and determines how each policy affects economic growth. Additionally, MIEPA specialists determine how the subject policies interact to create or hinder growth.
As a result of this experience I am qualified and able to train a national staff to propose legislation and regulation designed to maximize economic growth in both newly formed nations and well-established governments.
PROPOSALS TO CLIENT GOVERNMENTS
While each specific proposal will have unique characteristics, the overall methodology will be to review or propose legislation by examining the likely effects on job creation of any proposed law or regulation as well as the effects of existing legal framework. MIEPA analysts combine real world business experience with theoretical economic understanding. This provides a results driven process focused on real economic growth. The process produces an effective, job creating framework tailored for each specific environment - it is not a doctrinaire, one-size-fits-all approach.
After proposal acceptance, I plan to spend 90 to 180 days in country hiring people and establishing procedures for a legislative analysis unit. Once the unit is established and functioning, I will monitor and resolve questions via web. All specific proposals will be formally submitted by me until such time as the unit demonstrates its capability.
Specialists will include economics students fluent in English, who do not have to be graduates, and a small number of lawyers experienced in drafting legislation. Specialists in the unit will be primarily nationals of the client country; they will perform these analyses and recommendations in a timely and cost effective manner.
A six step process is envisioned:
Step 1: determine which existing policies need revamping by performing a policy analysis of MIEPA's policies plus the country's existing economic framework focusing on job creating effects and the cross effects of existing legislation;
Step 2: draft proposed legislation;
Step 3: vet bill by projecting likely outcomes of proposals;
Step 4: revise bill;
Step 5: present for adoption;
Step 6: monitor results and propose changes.
Please contact me at the locations below for an immwediate response.
CONTACT INFORMATION:
Website: www.mkeever.com
Email: mckeever.mp@gmail.com
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/home.php?sk=group_220339214659940&ap=1
Twitter: @mckeevermp
Cell: 415.816.2982
Your pal,
Because of the Arab Spring and the world's overall economic situation, there may be an opportunity for a non-doctrinaire approach to creating jobs in some developing countries.
It is a good time to make an offer to do just that and to take my fifteen years' work in policy analysis from the academic arena into the governmental arena.
And, Barry, I can't be shy about it - need to get folks to listen somehow.
Below is my announcement that the McKeever Institute of Economic Policy Analysis [MIEPA] is available to provide legislation and policy analysis focusing on job creation for any interested country.
ANNOUNCEMENT:
ECONOMIC SITUATION
After 15 years in the development stage, MIEPA announces that it is available on a contractual basis to advise national governments on creating sound economic policies.
In today's world, economic growth is the critical part of national security and stability. The revolutions of the Arab Spring demonstrate that many populations will no longer tolerate an economic system which exploits them.
Now, many governments are unsure how to create a system which will create growth without exploiting the population.
THE OFFER
MIEPA hereby offers a comprehensive assistance program which enables national governments to create an economic system which creates the maximum number of jobs in any society by combining the best parts of private, for profit firms with the best of governmental agencies. Employing primarily local citizens, the assistance program assures stability of the development program. We recognize explicitly that some of the policy recommendations we propose may be counter to existing interests which have strong influence; however, our recommendations will improve the country's economic performance even if some recommendations are ignored.
These policies are distilled from extensive studies of countless systems. While some countries have adopted MIEPA recommendations in an ad hoc procedure, for the first time, MIEPA professionals are available to work directly with economic development ministers and national legislatures to design specific economic systems.
QUALIFICATIONS OF MIEPA's FOUNDER
As founder and CEO of MIEPA, I have trained more than 200 specialists who have examined national economic systems and policies in 47 countries - ranging from revolutionary Tunisia and dictatorial Myanmar to the United States. The policy system studies can be read at: www.mkeever.com.
I am uniquely qualified for this work as my background combines extensive business experience with an academic background in economics of development. I have been a professional financial executive at a variety of profit and non-profit firms for many years. My book HOW TO WRITE A BUSINESS PLAN, Nolo Press, 10th ed., 2011, has helped thousands of entrepreneurs worldwide start new businesses. I have studied development issues in a variety of political systems since 1960 at the London School of Economics and Whittier College and applied those studies in developing MIEPA; as a Professor of Economics and Business Management at both the undergraduate and graduate levels since the 1970's I am well-qualified to work in both academia and business.
MIEPA's focus is on creating economic growth and job growth under any economic system. Its unique approach encompasses 34 specific economic policies and determines how each policy affects economic growth. Additionally, MIEPA specialists determine how the subject policies interact to create or hinder growth.
As a result of this experience I am qualified and able to train a national staff to propose legislation and regulation designed to maximize economic growth in both newly formed nations and well-established governments.
PROPOSALS TO CLIENT GOVERNMENTS
While each specific proposal will have unique characteristics, the overall methodology will be to review or propose legislation by examining the likely effects on job creation of any proposed law or regulation as well as the effects of existing legal framework. MIEPA analysts combine real world business experience with theoretical economic understanding. This provides a results driven process focused on real economic growth. The process produces an effective, job creating framework tailored for each specific environment - it is not a doctrinaire, one-size-fits-all approach.
After proposal acceptance, I plan to spend 90 to 180 days in country hiring people and establishing procedures for a legislative analysis unit. Once the unit is established and functioning, I will monitor and resolve questions via web. All specific proposals will be formally submitted by me until such time as the unit demonstrates its capability.
Specialists will include economics students fluent in English, who do not have to be graduates, and a small number of lawyers experienced in drafting legislation. Specialists in the unit will be primarily nationals of the client country; they will perform these analyses and recommendations in a timely and cost effective manner.
A six step process is envisioned:
Step 1: determine which existing policies need revamping by performing a policy analysis of MIEPA's policies plus the country's existing economic framework focusing on job creating effects and the cross effects of existing legislation;
Step 2: draft proposed legislation;
Step 3: vet bill by projecting likely outcomes of proposals;
Step 4: revise bill;
Step 5: present for adoption;
Step 6: monitor results and propose changes.
Please contact me at the locations below for an immwediate response.
CONTACT INFORMATION:
Website: www.mkeever.com
Email: mckeever.mp@gmail.com
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/home.php?sk=group_220339214659940&ap=1
Twitter: @mckeevermp
Cell: 415.816.2982
Your pal,
Saturday, May 28, 2011
Cutting taxes: a cruel joke, defers big tax burden onto kids
Hey Barry
Reagan's budget director David Stockman - the no B S guy - says that our failure to tax rich folks is killing us.
Read it here: http://www.marketwatch.com/story/reagan-insider-gop-destroyed-us-economy-part-2-2011-05-24
Holy cow.
Your pal,
Reagan's budget director David Stockman - the no B S guy - says that our failure to tax rich folks is killing us.
Read it here: http://www.marketwatch.com/story/reagan-insider-gop-destroyed-us-economy-part-2-2011-05-24
Holy cow.
Your pal,
Friday, May 27, 2011
Ten Country Economic Analyses Published
Hey Barry:
The McKeever Institute of Economic Policy Analysis [MIEPA] is pleased to announce the publication on its website [www.mkeever.com] of detailed studies of economic policies for The United States of America, Hong Kong, Indonesia, Vietnam and Spain in addition to the analysis of Tunisia's economy published earlier.
The United States is analyzed by four specialists: Andrew Majoulet, Thaibinh Tran, Jeremiah Taylor and Sean Cox.
Vietnam is analyzed by three specialists: Tram Lu, Tran Nguyen and Khoa Le.
Hong Kong is analyzed by specialist Karen Hoi Nga Leung.
Spain is analyzed by specialist Eduardo Fernandez Ferrero.
Tunisia was analyzed in April by specialist Khaled Bouker.
Best regards,
Mike P. McKeever
MIEPA
www.mkeever.com
The McKeever Institute of Economic Policy Analysis [MIEPA] is pleased to announce the publication on its website [www.mkeever.com] of detailed studies of economic policies for The United States of America, Hong Kong, Indonesia, Vietnam and Spain in addition to the analysis of Tunisia's economy published earlier.
The United States is analyzed by four specialists: Andrew Majoulet, Thaibinh Tran, Jeremiah Taylor and Sean Cox.
Vietnam is analyzed by three specialists: Tram Lu, Tran Nguyen and Khoa Le.
Hong Kong is analyzed by specialist Karen Hoi Nga Leung.
Spain is analyzed by specialist Eduardo Fernandez Ferrero.
Tunisia was analyzed in April by specialist Khaled Bouker.
Best regards,
Mike P. McKeever
MIEPA
www.mkeever.com
Saturday, May 21, 2011
Middle East Security and Stagflation
Hey Barry:
Loved your speech on the Middle East. Now we're ahead of the curve.
Just remember one definition of a pioneer: He's the one who walks in front of the wagon train and gets shot in the back with arrows.
It means you won't get a lot of sympathy: current governments feel the heat and ordinary people are too busy trying to get enough food and, maybe, a job.
But, our national security is better because we're on the right side. It's good that the religious fundamentalist approach to social problems is dying away. Fewer folks will try to blow up Americans now; there'll still be some, but not so many new ones.
Biggest problem is to deliver food and jobs to the people. We can help by reigning in the FED in its flooding the world with new dollars. All that is doing now is driving speculation in commodities, raising the cost of living and threatening the recovery. Just too much money in too few hands, Barry. It's a big problem.
I can remember the oil induced stagflation of the 70's - it was ugly.
Your pal
Loved your speech on the Middle East. Now we're ahead of the curve.
Just remember one definition of a pioneer: He's the one who walks in front of the wagon train and gets shot in the back with arrows.
It means you won't get a lot of sympathy: current governments feel the heat and ordinary people are too busy trying to get enough food and, maybe, a job.
But, our national security is better because we're on the right side. It's good that the religious fundamentalist approach to social problems is dying away. Fewer folks will try to blow up Americans now; there'll still be some, but not so many new ones.
Biggest problem is to deliver food and jobs to the people. We can help by reigning in the FED in its flooding the world with new dollars. All that is doing now is driving speculation in commodities, raising the cost of living and threatening the recovery. Just too much money in too few hands, Barry. It's a big problem.
I can remember the oil induced stagflation of the 70's - it was ugly.
Your pal
Friday, May 13, 2011
Scary Effects of Static Debt
[Lost from site and reposted.]
Hey Barry:
Let's try taking Boehner at his word and see what will happen. After all, he appears convinced that the Tea Party idea of not raising the debt ceiling is a good one.
Here's a likely scenario:
1. We cannot sell any more T-Bills;
2. We can spend only what we collect in tax revenue;
3. That's a 30% reduction in the revenue shown in your 2012 Budget;
4. Let's continue following Boehner, so we won't raise any taxes and we'll reduce expenditures by 30% or $1.1 trillion and we'll do it across the Board;
5. But, wait a minute - since we won't raise taxes and cannot borrow, we will be taking $1.1 trillion out of the economy;
6. That will reduce GDP by some $4 trillion more or less because of the Aggregate Demand multiplier effect;
7. GDP will drop from a forecast $15 trillion to $11 trillion - that's a 25% drop in GDP;
8. A 25% GDP drop is very similar to the GDP drop in the Great Depresssion;
9. We would expect great increases in human misery and social problems - 25% unemployment, increases in crime, violence, and drug abuse - from the GDP drop alone;
10. Also, the drop in GDP would reduce tax revenue, so that government spending would have to be reduced even further, creating an ever descending whirlpool of depression and social misery;
11. Additionally, in the beginning, Defense, Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid spending would drop by the 30% revenue reduction just to balance the budget - our national defense would be 30% weaker;
12. Since we could no longer pay interest on the outstanding debt, we would not be able to borrow in the future, even if we wanted to;
13. State and local governments would also see large budget shortfalls from the depression and lost tax revenues, leading them to cut security and education spending;
14. With a lack of police and security personnel, we would see a great increase in terrorism;
15. With a lack of schools, we would see great increases in gang activity - basically, no neighborhood will be safe from violence;
16. Due to reduced budgets and increased violence in the Homeland, we would call all troops back from foreign countries to provide order at home;
17. We would lose two wars to the Taliban and Al-Queda - and we would retreat from the war on terror;
18. With no effective American presence, countries like Iran and Syria would be free to take over Iraq and attack Israel.
This is the future the Tea Party wants for us.
I hope you don't agree, Barry.
Your pal,
Hey Barry:
Let's try taking Boehner at his word and see what will happen. After all, he appears convinced that the Tea Party idea of not raising the debt ceiling is a good one.
Here's a likely scenario:
1. We cannot sell any more T-Bills;
2. We can spend only what we collect in tax revenue;
3. That's a 30% reduction in the revenue shown in your 2012 Budget;
4. Let's continue following Boehner, so we won't raise any taxes and we'll reduce expenditures by 30% or $1.1 trillion and we'll do it across the Board;
5. But, wait a minute - since we won't raise taxes and cannot borrow, we will be taking $1.1 trillion out of the economy;
6. That will reduce GDP by some $4 trillion more or less because of the Aggregate Demand multiplier effect;
7. GDP will drop from a forecast $15 trillion to $11 trillion - that's a 25% drop in GDP;
8. A 25% GDP drop is very similar to the GDP drop in the Great Depresssion;
9. We would expect great increases in human misery and social problems - 25% unemployment, increases in crime, violence, and drug abuse - from the GDP drop alone;
10. Also, the drop in GDP would reduce tax revenue, so that government spending would have to be reduced even further, creating an ever descending whirlpool of depression and social misery;
11. Additionally, in the beginning, Defense, Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid spending would drop by the 30% revenue reduction just to balance the budget - our national defense would be 30% weaker;
12. Since we could no longer pay interest on the outstanding debt, we would not be able to borrow in the future, even if we wanted to;
13. State and local governments would also see large budget shortfalls from the depression and lost tax revenues, leading them to cut security and education spending;
14. With a lack of police and security personnel, we would see a great increase in terrorism;
15. With a lack of schools, we would see great increases in gang activity - basically, no neighborhood will be safe from violence;
16. Due to reduced budgets and increased violence in the Homeland, we would call all troops back from foreign countries to provide order at home;
17. We would lose two wars to the Taliban and Al-Queda - and we would retreat from the war on terror;
18. With no effective American presence, countries like Iran and Syria would be free to take over Iraq and attack Israel.
This is the future the Tea Party wants for us.
I hope you don't agree, Barry.
Your pal,
Monday, May 9, 2011
E U Debt Crisis Coming
Hey Barry:
We are having a debt problem in the USA - the EU may be joining us soon. It's not for sure, but needs watching.
Countries in the Euro zone mostly have sovereign debt problems from financing social programs with debt.
If some of them go - that is, if several countries have financial crises like ours - look for another worldwide recession.
We are all in the same boat now; when one sinks, we all drown.
Y'all can read it here:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/05/09/businesspro-us-eurozone-crisis-communica-idUSTRE74836T20110509
Here's the thing: banks.
No surprise here Barry.
If we don't corral the bankers, they will just make things worse by profiting from disaster. Not just US bankers, either; I mean all of them.
Greedy bankers pass the laws they want in every country so they can make billions while the rest of us can just 'eat cake' if we don't like it, just like Marie Antoinette said.
I'd really like to say that we are leading the world in reforming bankers and helping average folks; but I can't say that. Our bankers are right there with the leaders in passing laws that help themselves at our expense.
Brings a grown man a tear.
Your pal,
We are having a debt problem in the USA - the EU may be joining us soon. It's not for sure, but needs watching.
Countries in the Euro zone mostly have sovereign debt problems from financing social programs with debt.
If some of them go - that is, if several countries have financial crises like ours - look for another worldwide recession.
We are all in the same boat now; when one sinks, we all drown.
Y'all can read it here:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/05/09/businesspro-us-eurozone-crisis-communica-idUSTRE74836T20110509
Here's the thing: banks.
No surprise here Barry.
If we don't corral the bankers, they will just make things worse by profiting from disaster. Not just US bankers, either; I mean all of them.
Greedy bankers pass the laws they want in every country so they can make billions while the rest of us can just 'eat cake' if we don't like it, just like Marie Antoinette said.
I'd really like to say that we are leading the world in reforming bankers and helping average folks; but I can't say that. Our bankers are right there with the leaders in passing laws that help themselves at our expense.
Brings a grown man a tear.
Your pal,
Friday, May 6, 2011
UPDATE 7.22.11: Bogeyman America?
Hey Barry
It's good that OBL is gone - nobody will miss him and we'll feel safer.
But, Barry, one commentator on TV said something that's a little distrubing. I recall hearing a comment to the effect that Americans think the OBL killing was a one time event, but in reality we have teams in war zones that do this two or three times per night. Perhaps I heard it wrong, but I don't think so.
So, Barry, if I get this right, we sneak into people's houses and kill them - and anyone else who gets in the way - about 700 times or more every year.
This is not the American way, Barry, not at all.
Sneaking into houses in the dark makes us into the Bogeyman, Barry; it can go a long way to explaining why some people hate us.
Here's Petraeus on the tactic: http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2011/07/commando-killed-taliban-so/#more-52288
I don't want to live in Bogeyman Country Barry. I want to live in America.
Y'all can tell I've never been on either end of that gun - and I don't want to be, ever. Still, I can comment, Barry; it's Free Speech.
In America, we have processes and protections so we make sure that accused people have every chance to defend themselves. If they cannot defend themselves, then we go ahead and execute them.
Lotta folks will complain about that: "it's a war and we have to protect ourselves. If we give these killers processes and rights, then we will be less safe."
Totally got that we are in a war.
But, there must be a dfifferent choice somewhere. Can't imagine that the only choices are to bomb the house or sneak in and kill people.
First question is this: What kind of evidence do we have that justifies taking a life? And, if there is evidence, then that evidence can be presented to some jury or court somewhere. Maybe an international war crimes court.
Or, maybe we surround the house and tell the occupants that they have five minutes to surrender or we will bomb the house.
I'm sure there are better choices, Barry, we need to find some.
Of course, all that will cost a little more. Process and democracy are not cheap.
But, in the long run, it is a cost we should bear.
Because we are America.
Your pal,
It's good that OBL is gone - nobody will miss him and we'll feel safer.
But, Barry, one commentator on TV said something that's a little distrubing. I recall hearing a comment to the effect that Americans think the OBL killing was a one time event, but in reality we have teams in war zones that do this two or three times per night. Perhaps I heard it wrong, but I don't think so.
So, Barry, if I get this right, we sneak into people's houses and kill them - and anyone else who gets in the way - about 700 times or more every year.
This is not the American way, Barry, not at all.
Sneaking into houses in the dark makes us into the Bogeyman, Barry; it can go a long way to explaining why some people hate us.
Here's Petraeus on the tactic: http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2011/07/commando-killed-taliban-so/#more-52288
I don't want to live in Bogeyman Country Barry. I want to live in America.
Y'all can tell I've never been on either end of that gun - and I don't want to be, ever. Still, I can comment, Barry; it's Free Speech.
In America, we have processes and protections so we make sure that accused people have every chance to defend themselves. If they cannot defend themselves, then we go ahead and execute them.
Lotta folks will complain about that: "it's a war and we have to protect ourselves. If we give these killers processes and rights, then we will be less safe."
Totally got that we are in a war.
But, there must be a dfifferent choice somewhere. Can't imagine that the only choices are to bomb the house or sneak in and kill people.
First question is this: What kind of evidence do we have that justifies taking a life? And, if there is evidence, then that evidence can be presented to some jury or court somewhere. Maybe an international war crimes court.
Or, maybe we surround the house and tell the occupants that they have five minutes to surrender or we will bomb the house.
I'm sure there are better choices, Barry, we need to find some.
Of course, all that will cost a little more. Process and democracy are not cheap.
But, in the long run, it is a cost we should bear.
Because we are America.
Your pal,
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
