I shudder when I read articles like this, below, and I think to myself:
"If this is what our party's going to support--or, even contemplate supporting--after having spent the better part of my life as an active Democrat, then I think it's time to at least reconsider the whole matter in its entirety."
This is not a "centrist" Democratic meme. In fact, IMHO, it's not a Democratic Party meme, at all.
This is a wake-up call...to Democrats, everywhere!
More Than a Million in U.S. May Lose Jobless Benefits (Update1)
By Brian Faler
April 29 (Bloomberg) -- Since the U.S. recession began in December 2007, Congress has extended the length of unemployment benefits for the jobless three times. Now, the lawmakers may have reached their limit.
Continued...
They are quietly drawing the line at 99 weeks of aid, a mark that hundreds of thousands of Americans have already reached. In coming months, the number of those who will receive their final government check is projected to top 1 million.
It's a deadline that has rarely been mentioned in recent debates over jobless benefits, in which Republicans have delayed aid because of cost concerns. The deadline hasn't been lost on Teauna Stephney, a 39-year-old single mother from Bothell, Washington, who said she could become homeless once her $407 weekly checks stop in June...
...
Democrats who have pushed through the past extensions agree there's insufficient backing to go beyond 99 weeks, largely because of mounting concern over the federal deficit, projected to reach $1.5 trillion this year.
"You can't go on forever," said Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus, of Montana, whose panel oversees the benefits program. "I think 99 weeks is sufficient," he said.
"There's just been no discussion to go beyond that," said Senator Byron Dorgan, a North Dakota Democrat...
Quantifying the matter, and adding surreal insult to devastating financial injury, the article informs us that Goldman-freakin'-Sachs is now telling us: "...that more than 400,000 may soon begin losing benefits every month."
"The political climate is not as conducive to additional expansions as it had been last year," a Goldman analysis said. "The result is likely to be a greater share of unemployed workers not receiving unemployment compensation."
Do you support the expenditure of scores of billions of taxpayer dollars to support the International Monetary Fund's [IMF's] bailout of bankrupt European states while simultaneously justifying that it's okay to throw 400,000 Americans per month into the streets in 2010?
Do you support the expenditure of hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars per year to fund questionable military incursions abroad while simultaneously justifying that it's okay to throw 400,000 Americans per month into the streets in 2010?
Do you support the expenditure of trillions of taxpayer dollars per year to support the financial sector's involvement in our nation's housing/mortgage industry while simultaneously justifying that it's okay to throw 400,000 Americans per month into the streets in 2010?
IMHO, for Democrats everywhere, throwing 400,000 people per month into the streets shouldn't even be on the table!
But, today, we're told that it is?
Contrary to popular belief--and courtesy of Alternet's Zach Carter--we DO have choices.
There are Democratic options...
10 Ways to Force the Stinking Rich to Share Their Wealth
AlterNet / By Zach Carter
April 15, 2010
How rich people can stop whining about the deficit and start paying their taxes.
For all the moaning from deficit hawks, the U.S. budget is simply not in crisis. If investors were losing confidence in our nation's ability to pay off its debts, we'd see a major reduction in demand for U.S. Treasury bonds. And we do not, in fact, see any such reduction. Last week the Treasury sold $21 billion in 10-year bonds, and investors were clamoring for them in such droves that the government had to turn away nearly 80 percent of them. If investors were really worried about the U.S. paying back its debt, they'd demand a very high interest rate from the government to compensate them for the risk they were taking. But in fact, interest rates are remarkably low. That 10-year bond currently fetches a yield of around 3.9 percent. For entire years of President George H. W. Bush's reign, the yield was above 8 percent, often eclipsing 9 percent.
Deficit hawks aren't interested in the deficit, they just don't like the idea that the government spends money on social projects that help poor people. To close the deficit, we could either raise taxes or cut expenditures, and you never hear deficit haws begging to raise taxes. Here are 10 ways a deficit hawk who didn't hate poor people could ease his anxiety...
1. Ban Offshore Tax Havens For Big Corporations...
...
2. Close the Loophole for Hedge Fund Kingpins...
...
3. Increase the Capital Gains Tax...
...
4. Tax Financial Speculation...
...
5. Impose a Wall Street Bonus Tax...
...
6. Tax Too-Big-To-Fail...
...
7. Restore the Estate Tax to Pre-Bush Levels...
...
8. Tax Rich People for Social Security...
...
9. Raise Income Taxes on The Rich...
...
10. Simplify the Tax Code...
In closing, Carter reminds us that: "In 2008, Goldman Sachs paid a total tax rate of just 1 percent."
Obviously, Zach Carter's a Democrat.
Are you? If you are, then you KNOW what to do...