Skip to main content

I know many people are in election mode which narrows vision considerably, so let me just say upfront Mitt Romney may be the embodiment of all that is wrong with America: a self-absorbed Corporate Gangster that hides in esoteric dogma to rationalize his transgressive lifestyle. He won't be getting my vote, it would be like electing Gordon Gekko president. By the way Mittens, if your plan was to fire everyone and sell the country for parts... too late.

That being said, what the hell is Obama's plan to turn this economy around? Is there one?

Yes there is, and it's really stupid.

From President Obama's website:

When President Obama took office, the economy was losing more than 700,000 jobs per month. President Obama acted quickly to pass the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, which cut taxes for small businesses and 95 percent of working families. It also included emergency funding to support about 300,000 educator jobs, more than 4,600 law enforcement positions, and investments in the clean energy sector that supported 224,500 jobs through 2010. Through April 2012, the economy has added more than 4.2 million private sector jobs over 26 consecutive months of job growth.

President Obama knows we still have more work to do. That’s why, in his State of the Union address, the President laid out a blueprint for an economy that’s built to last—an economy built on American manufacturing, American energy, skills for American workers, and a renewal of American values.

OK... so let's see what that entails, from Whitehouse.Gov:
In his State of the Union address, President Obama laid out a Blueprint for an America Built to Last, encouraging companies to create manufacturing jobs in the United States while removing deductions for shipping jobs overseas and encouraging insourcing. During the past two years, we have begun to see positive signs in American manufacturing – with the manufacturing sector adding more than 300,000 jobs since December 2009, with companies engaging in the emerging trend of “insourcing” by bringing jobs back and making additional investments in the United States. Manufacturing jobs are growing for the first time since the late 1990s.

The proposals the President is describing today are designed to build on this progress.  They include six proposals that Congress should act on immediately to encourage job growth in the United States and that are fully paid for by closing tax loopholes that encourage the shifting of jobs and shielding of profits overseas.

OK... what are the six proposals?
1. Removing tax deductions for shipping jobs overseas and providing new incentives for bringing them back home

2. Targeting the domestic production incentive on manufacturers who create jobs here at home and doubling the deduction for advanced manufacturing

3. Introducing a new Manufacturing Communities Tax Credit to encourage investments in communities affected by job loss

4. Providing temporary tax credits to drive nearly $20 billion in domestic clean energy manufacturing

5. Reauthorizing 100% expensing of investment in plants and equipment

6. Closing a loophole that allows companies to shift profits overseas

The Blueprint includes other provisions like enforcing trade agreements, making Wall Street "play by the rules" and keeping tuition costs from going "too high."

In other words... Obama's economic strategy is lame bullshit. No change, no vision, nothing.

This isn't change you can believe in, it's not even change at all.

If doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results is insane then Obama needs a straightjacket. Neoliberalism doesn't work, has never worked, and will never work in creating broad prosperity. You would think after 30 years of watching the overwhelming majority of the gains going to the Top 1% and an epic crash to rival the Great Depression we would have learned something. Nope.

"Enforce Trade Agreements"
- The agreements were written by multi-national corporations for their benefit not America's.

"Make Wall Street Play By The Rules" - They literally write the rules: OCC, SEC, CFTC, Federal Reserve.. totally stacked with Wall Street cronies. Sometimes the firms get so greedy they break their own rules. But otherwise Wall Street has captured the regulators. They are the regulators.

"Keep tuition from spiraling 'too high'"
- If higher education is an investment in the future why are people walking out of it with any debt?

What may be the saddest fact of all is Obama can't even get the lame bullshit he is proposing through a Republican congress. That's how far stupid Right America has moved. Even defeatist, weak, mostly ineffectual reforms are unpalatable to the reactionaries in Congress.

How About A Real Jobs Program?

Allow me to offer six proposals that would actually improve the lives of the 99%.

1. Wipe Out The Debt. The Too Big To Fail Banks should be nationalized, wound down, and destroyed with a total wipe out of the debts they hold. Free enslaved Americans so they can reset and begin to grow again.

2. Nationalize the Fed. The Federal Reserve is the third iteration of a corrupting institution two other Democratic Presidents destroyed - Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Jackson. Allowing private money interests to have a strangle hold on the nation's money supply is a recipe for the kind of crony capitalism and subsequent inequality America now faces. The Fed is not "independent" at all. It is independent of democratic control but it is not independent of Wall Street. Nationalize America's Central Bank and have it absorbed by the Treasury Department under democratic control.

3. Withdraw from the World Trade Organization. Neoliberal globalization is an economic, political, social, and environmental disaster. It has lead to unstable markets, democratic deficits, racial/ethnic/religious hatreds, and environmental degradation. It is time to restore bi-lateral trade agreements that value fair labor standards and protect the environment.

4. Protect and Invest in New American Industries. Even Ronald Reagan knew that new industries needed protection - that's why he protected through anti-Free Trade measures the burgeoning Semiconductor Chip industry. One of the reasons Silicon Valley exists (besides the Pentagon creating it) is America protected its semiconductor industry when it counted.

China is now surpassing America in clean technology particularly solar energy - guess what? No. A 100% tariff on all foreign imports of clean energy technology including solar tech. We make it, we buy it, we put our people to work to make it happen. We are going to win the future by not playing a rigged game against slave drivers and reckless polluters.

5. Tax FIRE to build TECI. The Finance, Insurance, and Real Estate (FIRE) economy often euphemistically referred to as "Wall Street" creates no value - at best it is a utility that helps the REAL economy function, at worst it's a parasitic gang of plutocrats who wreck markets and corrupt politics.

The next evolution within the REAL economy should be Transportation, Energy, and Communication Infrastructure (TECI). Investing in roads and public transportation, alternative energy, a reliable and robust broadband and phone tower network creates jobs while rebuilding the country. Production instead of finance means a reindustrialization program. Real jobs for a Real economy.

How do we pay for it? Taxing the FIRE with a Financial Transaction Tax. Take from the useless to fund the productive.

6. A War On Corporate Politics. To secure the jobs program corporations simply must be removed from the political process. Right now the Supreme Court is firmly pushing corporate interests and Congress is bought by corporate powers. Before legislation can be put forward to politically disenfranchise corporations an all out assault from the White House should be launched. Any corporation giving money or lobbying against the jobs agenda should be hit from all sides from federal lawsuits and continuous investigations utilizing new federal powers granted by Anti-Terrorism legislation.

The Department of Homeland Security, FBI, and other security services should begin infiltrating Corporate America and provoking them into engaging in securities fraud or regulatory abuses then arresting executives. Agent provocateurs could help shut down a possible Corporate response to the jobs program. Strangling a political movement in the cradle is the best strategy.

-------

While #6 may or may not have some satire interlaced within it (see if you can find it) this Six Point Proposal would create jobs, now. It would also build a better society so America could no only win the future but in so doing have a victory worth having.

Originally posted to DSWright on Fri May 25, 2012 at 12:05 PM PDT.

Also republished by Occupy Wall Street, ClassWarfare Newsletter: WallStreet VS Working Class Global Occupy movement, and Progressive Hippie.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Yeah, if only... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    DSWright, SpecialKinFlag, Sunspots

    Economic proposals at this point shouldn't be about things that conceivably could pass Congress but putting forth a vision and creating a mandate for change. This is small-bore, neo-liberal stuff.

    •  Insert buzzword here. Neoliberal. Kabuki. etc. (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      emelyn, Unit Zero, Lawrence

      Oh, really? Neoliberal eh?

      1. Removing tax deductions for shipping jobs overseas and providing new incentives for bringing them back home
      What is neoliberal about that?
      2. Targeting the domestic production incentive on manufacturers who create jobs here at home and doubling the deduction for advanced manufacturing
      OK, fine, maybe you don't think it's the government's job to encourage the manufacturing industry. But how is that neoliberal?
      3. Introducing a new Manufacturing Communities Tax Credit to encourage investments in communities affected by job loss
      This sounds like political gobbleygook, but encouraging investments in communities to offset job losses is soooo neoliberal.
      4. Providing temporary tax credits to drive nearly $20 billion in domestic clean energy manufacturing
      Domestic clean energy manufacturing is high on the neoliberal agenda alright.
      5. Reauthorizing 100% expensing of investment in plants and equipment
      This one I might give you. But it's really just jiggering with the tax code to favor construction and production in America, and not in cheap overseas locales, as the neoliberals would have it. Oops, I guess I can't let you have this one either.
      6. Closing a loophole that allows companies to shift profits overseas
      Err. Yea. This one is, uh, kabuki.

      You never trust a millionaire/Quoting the sermon on the mount/I used to think I was not like them/But I'm beginning to have my doubts -- The Arcade Fire

      by tomjones on Fri May 25, 2012 at 12:20:26 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  "Removing a deduction" for job shipping is (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Sunspots

        putting a band aid on a severed limb. How about blocking the shipping of jobs overseas without difficult provisions.

        The incentive to ship jobs is NOT solely from the tax gains but more so from lower labor and environmental standards.

        At best it is a cosmetic change. Right?

        Example - Company no longer gets a deduction but it can use cheap child labor and dump it's pollution wherever it wants... still worth it to move the job? You betcha!

        •  How do we block said shipping (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Wee Mama

          without violating the Constitution?

          You never trust a millionaire/Quoting the sermon on the mount/I used to think I was not like them/But I'm beginning to have my doubts -- The Arcade Fire

          by tomjones on Fri May 25, 2012 at 12:30:08 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  is there a shipping jobs amendment? (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Sunspots

            I'm no expert but I know Congress can impose tariffs on goods brought into the country. If I'm a manufacturer saving $10 a widget by having the work done overseas and I'm charged $11 a widget to import the thing then maybe it wouldn't be worth it to bypass American workers.

            •  Yes, that would probably do the trick (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Shahryar

              and without violating the Constitution, as well.

              The only downside to tariffs is that they will make imported goods more expensive for us, thereby eroding our income gains from domestic manufacturing. It would be even worse if there were no domestic replacement for an import.

              But on balance tariffs are probably good for America. Bad for China and other poor countries, though.

              You never trust a millionaire/Quoting the sermon on the mount/I used to think I was not like them/But I'm beginning to have my doubts -- The Arcade Fire

              by tomjones on Fri May 25, 2012 at 12:54:18 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Another downside is having to redraft all of (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Shahryar, joe wobblie

                those so-called free trade agreements which specifically forbade tariffs. But it didn't forbid taxes. I think that if a company is not contributing to the community then its taxes should go up about a 1000 percentage points so that it DOES contribute. Exxon has this noxious ad complaining about American student's test scores in science and says "Lets fix this!" while not contributing one dime of taxes AND taking tax payer monies to boot.

                To live a creative life, we must lose our fear of being wrong. -Joseph Chilton Pearce

                by glitterscale on Fri May 25, 2012 at 02:10:03 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

          •  ... this country was built on Protectionism (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Sunspots, AoT, Shahryar

            Goes back to Hamilton/the beginning. It is absolutely constitutional to protect industries and restrict the flow of goods, services and jobs into and out of the country.

    •  Do you really support the 6 point plan? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Wee Mama

      All six of the agenda items laid out by the diarist? In a reality based way?

      from a bright young conservative: “I’m watching my first GOP debate…and WE SOUND LIKE CRAZY PEOPLE!!!!”

      by Catte Nappe on Fri May 25, 2012 at 12:55:12 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  In other words (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Catte Nappe, FG, sebastianguy99, elmo

    Obama should act like a flaming lefty, rather than the center-left Dem he ran as and has governed as.

    Quite apart from the merits of your suggestions, which are iffy as hell, Obama is just not the person who's going to upend the entire economy like you're prescribing.

    I'm not sure who that person is. Noam Chomsky? Or Roseanne Bar, if you prefer to support a candidate other than Obama in the 2012 election?

    You never trust a millionaire/Quoting the sermon on the mount/I used to think I was not like them/But I'm beginning to have my doubts -- The Arcade Fire

    by tomjones on Fri May 25, 2012 at 12:13:50 PM PDT

    •  All His Proposals Will Continue Transferring Wealt (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Sunspots, glitterscale

      from the 99% to the top, and continue accelerating climate change. Reality is a flaming lefty.

      That said, there is nothing to be done about Obama and the centrist Dems before November 7th. We need to have this debate but mostly after then.

      We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

      by Gooserock on Fri May 25, 2012 at 12:17:02 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  He's not going to do anything (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Sunspots

      True Story.

      And if you think what he is doing now is even popular check the polls.

    •  No, but he could at least (4+ / 0-)

      be running on big stimulus (jobs) package. Also should be running on increasing the minimum wage, which though not strictly a Jobs program, is desperately needed.

      •  He did propose the jobs act (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Catte Nappe, FG, Wee Mama, sebastianguy99

        Which was fairly well received by economists at the time, but went nowhere in Congress of course.

        You're right, he should pick it up and run on it.

        You never trust a millionaire/Quoting the sermon on the mount/I used to think I was not like them/But I'm beginning to have my doubts -- The Arcade Fire

        by tomjones on Fri May 25, 2012 at 12:25:09 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  The key is to present a short-, mid- and... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        DSWright

        ...long-term vision, with appropriate pieces of legislation for the short term and fuzzier proposals for further out. (e.g. We don't know how 50% renewable energy by 2035 would affect many parts of the economy, so nothing very specific can be proposed for the long term.) The advantage of introducing far-sighted legislation now even if it can't possibly pass is that it gives voters a reason to say, "that makes good sense," and cast ballots for the team with vision. Of course, it gives the opposition ammo to say, "this guy's a socialist." But they're calling Obama and plenty of Democrats socialists already (would that it were so), therefore, there is no downside.

        Don't tell me what you believe, show me what you do and I will tell you what you believe.

        by Meteor Blades on Fri May 25, 2012 at 04:14:33 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  *sigh* Nationalize the banks? Yeah, that in a... (8+ / 0-)

    country that hasn't even gotten around to implementing the metric system.

    If you are going to wish list, why stop with these piddly 6?  Go for broke.

    Obama should institute a dictatorship of the proletariate and nationalize all industry and agriculture.  Then he should oversee the gradual withering away of the state turning power and control over to worker's councils that will goven under the precept of "from each according to their ability and to each according to their need".

    Once that is done, Obama should then declare the US a "People's Republic" and welcome in the utopia.

    Tax and Spend I can understand. I can even understand Borrow and Spend. But Borrow and give Billionaires tax cuts? That I have a problem with.

    by LiberalCanuck on Fri May 25, 2012 at 12:30:22 PM PDT

  •  So wipe out everyone's debts? And for those of us (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Catte Nappe, Wee Mama, elmo

    who have paid off our debts then I guess we are out of luck.  I realize some people get into debt they cannot possibly pay back due to circumstances beyond  their control but there are also many people who get into that situation because they act irresponsibly.  

    Case in point - a relative of mine who bought an RV she couldn't possibly afford (and several of us told her she couldn't) and now is struggling with the note.   I feel bad for her but at the same time she made that choice and it would anger me to no end if she got that debt forgiven and my parents, who didn't go out and spend extravagantly, didn't get any sort of benefit.

    •  if you're paid up, how could you be out of luck? (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      DSWright, Sunspots, sebastianguy99, cstark

      or are you saying that you had to suffer so others have to, as well? Yes, I guess you are, now that I read your example.

      I don't think I agree with the concept of paying ALL debts but if the loans are crooked or predatory then they should be corrected.

      If a loan is fair then if someone can't make payments I have no problem with admitting now is not the time to have the loan and giving up the RV. If the going rate for a house is 6% interest and a bank suggests an ARM that starts out there but jumps to 10.25% in 3 years then that, in my opinion, is something that needs to be worked out.

    •  Bank bailouts "fair"? (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Sunspots, zett

      Not to mention many of the debts the banks claim to have are fraudulent anyway. Yet they STILL foreclose!

    •  So what is your interest in the debt of others? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      cstark

      This sounds similar to when Republicans ask, "why should MY tax dollars pay for ....?".

      I guess everyone should continue to suffer appropriately!

      "There is nothing more dreadful than the habit of doubt. Doubt separates people. It is a poison that disintegrates friendships and breaks up pleasant relations. It is a thorn that irritates and hurts; it is a sword that kills.".. Buddha

      by sebastianguy99 on Fri May 25, 2012 at 03:13:29 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Not going to shame me on this (0+ / 0-)

        Why should my tax dollars pay for someone who just made stupid choices?  As I said I know there are some people who are in debt through no fault of their own but there are many who aren't and no I don't think my tax dollars should bail out their dumb choices.

          •  Gee thanks. I am too stupid to know that (0+ / 0-)

            Oh wait. I am not seeing as how I said in an above post that you responded to:

            "But just because the bank bailouts were not implemented in a way that I think was fair does not mean we should compound the problem by forgiving the the debts of everyone, including those who made reckless fully informed choices."

            Two wrongs don't make a right.  I was against the way TARP was implemented without consequences for bad actors so naturally I am against any plan that gets people who knew the chances they were taking and decided to roll the dice anyway off the hook with no consequences.  

            In my opinion, NO institution or individual who made fully informed reckless choices should get bailed out without having to deal with some consequences.  Contrary to popular belief not everyone in the 99% is a hapless victim who has been taken advantage of.  Some are just people who decided that they just had to have the latest hot car even though they had a perfectly serviceable 2005 model and in order to get said hot car they indebted themselves up to their eyeballs.

            No thanks to bailing those people out without consequences just like I said no thanks to bailing the banks out without consequences.  

            •  Right, except the Banks were bailed out. So now (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              sebastianguy99

              it's a question of what to do next. And I'm saying don't bail out the banks but screw everyone else. Because

              1. It's morally wrong
              2. The debt hangover is strangling the recovery because people are producing income to pay off their debts rather than save or invest.

              However, in the abstract, if the banks failed - as the market demanded - problem would be solved. The debts would have died with them. Lenders and borrowers would be screwed as a market system dictated. In other words, you would have had your scenario.

  •  Like a President can do all these things without (5+ / 0-)

    the consent of Congress.... and he has the most obstructionist Congress ever.  Remember the GOP mission:  "to hell with the country - just make Obama a one-term President."

    "George Washington: "The power under the Constitution will always be in the people.... and whenever it is executed contrary to their interest, or not agreeable to their wishes, their servants can, and undoubtedly will, be recalled." 1787

    by moose67 on Fri May 25, 2012 at 12:58:04 PM PDT

  •  Let's just institute communism and be done with (3+ / 0-)

    it. Worked very well for all the countries that tried it.

  •  Tipped and Recced. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    BigAlinWashSt

    I don't agree with everything in this diary....

    But it is way past time for Americans to discuss how to fix our economy and get Americans back to work.

  •  Why not put some of this energy... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Lawrence

    ...behind good proposals that Obama (and some Democrats) have suggested? Like an infrastructure bank, for example. Or tripling the amount of money that has been directed toward creating a clean-energy infrastructure?

    I, too, don't think the administration has done nearly as much as it could have, nor do I think it should avoid introducing legislation that it knows won't pass but is part of an overall vision of what most Americans once called "can-do" spirit.

    We gain by saying to the president (whatever our objections to various things he has done or not done) we're-behind-you-on-this-proposal-of-yours. A constant diet of criticism makes anybody want to get up from the table and never come back.

    Don't tell me what you believe, show me what you do and I will tell you what you believe.

    by Meteor Blades on Fri May 25, 2012 at 04:22:40 PM PDT

    •  Fair critique. But there is a flip side. (0+ / 0-)

      Which is a lack of accountability.

      I am sorry but this President's jobs agenda is unacceptable even at its starting point. It won't work (pun intended) and more tragically, even this weak sauce won't get through Congress. So why not lay out a real agenda, at least then you give a vision of what's preferable and create a standard to rally around.

      There's also a question of the role of the executive. Given the emergency powers being usurped for Terrorism (killing U.S citizens without trial, launching military operations in foreign lands like Libya, NSA/FBI surveillance on protesters) - why not use emergency powers for economic justice?

      In for a penny in for a pound. Why couldn't Obama declare a state of emergency and nationalize the Fed or alter a trade deal? Or are emergency powers only to be taken for matters that don't upset the Plutocrats? The presumed justification for using extra-legal powers it to cite institutional inertia and incompetence - surely if it applies anywhere it applies to Congress' stewardship of the economy. Just sayin'

      In either case I see little to no point in pretending this jobs program is something to celebrate and I say this with all respect, how long are were we really supposed to let this bullshit go on for before we started saying "What the fuck, I'm poor and don't have any opportunities, I'm getting screwed while the Rich got bailed out and are now getting record profits, and Obama hasn't done anything to change that." Just a few years more...?

    •  I do not feel like I'm at the table (0+ / 0-)

      with Obama, unless I'm the waiter serving drinks.

      OK, so that statement is a bit flip, but I need to point out that there's an assumption in your comment:  that the Obama administration thinks it's in some kind of negotiations with us (however you want to define "us.")

      I've seen no signs of that.  What I see is a man who desperately wants to get enough people to the polls to be re-elected (understandable enough) without offending his very high-dollar donors, without whose good will he cannot win the election (understandable also).  In other words, I see a guy who's trying to throw rhetorical (and very occasionally, policy) crumbs to Democrats without stepping on the toes of the very wealthy men who oppose pretty much everything the Democratic party has ever stood for.

      I actually feel sorry for him.  I know he's in an impossible situation.  But I don't have any hopes of even being allowed a seat at his table, much less negotiating a good deal with him for the working class, including me.  And I'd feel a lot sorrier for him if his damned campaign staff could hold onto a good talking point when they find one (i.e. "War on Women.")    

      Being ignored is the difference between being a one percenter and an American.--sweeper

      by SouthernLiberalinMD on Wed May 30, 2012 at 01:31:49 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Wipe out all debts? What about the bond holders? (0+ / 0-)

    You do realize that a lot of pension funds are invested in Fannie/Freddie securities, right? So what's going to happen to those pension funds? Tough luck?

    •  But Fannie/Freddie already went bust... (0+ / 0-)

      True Story. So even in that instance were the bondholders would get nailed they merely would be losing what they in theory should not have had - if we are invoking "taxpayer money arguments" for why the borrowers can't get relief.

      However, with control of the Fed if money printing was going to happen it could occur to relieve borrowers by liquidating debts instead of inflating assets.

      Either eventuality - screwing the bondholders and/or printing money -  would be better than the status quo for the 99%.

      •  So you want Congress to control the Fed? (0+ / 0-)

        Thus setting monetary policy?  That is what control of the Fed would ultimately mean - congress would have control over monetary policy which I think would be disastrous.

        Now, of course, the Fed needs to be more transparent but not thanks to a group of 535 legislators who can't even agree to keep college tuition rates low controlling our monetary policy.  

        •  More disastrous than Greenspan controlling it? (0+ / 0-)

          Highly doubt it. Not even sure they could do worse.

          The "independent" Central Bank is an idea failing all over the world. ECB is doing a lot to wreck its credibility as well.

          Monetary policy is just as - if not more important than - fiscal policy, the notion that it should be outside democratic control is ridiculous unless you believe representative government and democracy are inferior to technocracy. Right now it's clearly captured by the industry it claims to "regulate."

          In truth, Wall Street regulates the government using institutions like the Fed not vice versa.

  •  You do have a lot of valid points, despite the (0+ / 0-)

    tone you've taken. It is entirely valid to question all those free trade agreements, and it is entirely valid to impose tariffs on certain trading partners. This is something democrats have seemingly given up on in recent years.

  •  And a unicorn! I want unicorns! (0+ / 0-)
  •  Love your #6 very much. LoL. n/t (0+ / 0-)

    "The word bipartisan means some larger-than-usual deception is being carried out”. - George Carlin

    by Funkygal on Sat May 26, 2012 at 05:20:56 AM PDT

  •  Not all of his 6 proposals are neoliberal. But (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    DSWright

    his overall record is neoliberal (stimulus is an exception).

    "The word bipartisan means some larger-than-usual deception is being carried out”. - George Carlin

    by Funkygal on Sat May 26, 2012 at 05:22:43 AM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site