Skip to main content

Economics Daily Digest by the Roosevelt Institute banner

By Rachel Goldfarb, originally published on Next New Deal

Click here to receive the Daily Digest via email.

There will not be a new Daily Digest on Monday, February 17, in observance of Presidents' Day. The Daily Digest will return on Tuesday, February 18.

Comcast's Time Warner Deal Is Bad for America (Bloomberg Businessweek)

A Comcast-Time Warner Cable monopoly won't just limit choice for consumers, says Roosevelt Institute Fellow Susan Crawford. The combined company will have no reason to upgrade infrastructure.

Just How Much Do Republicans Hate Unions? (TAP)

Volkswagen seems to be supportive of a union at its Chattanooga, Tennessee, plant. That means the GOP pushback is just about opposing organized labor in general, writes Paul Waldman.

It's Time to Kill the Debt Limit (The Daily Beast)

Jamelle Bouie says that the easiest way to stop the cycle of debt ceiling crises of the past few years would be to abolish it altogether, since it's a pointless and redundant concept anyway.

Should We Place A Tax On All College Graduates? (Forbes)

Josh Freedman considers this alternative model of funding for public higher education. He quotes Roosevelt Institute Fellow Mike Konczal to express concern about whether such taxes would lead to class-segregated schools.

How Credit-Card Debt Can Help the Poor (NYT)

Since good credit affects so many aspects of life in the U.S., Shaila Dewan writes that special loans that build credit alongside savings could make a big difference.

New on Next New Deal

Conservatives Concerned About the CBO and the Dignity of Work Should Consider a Higher Minimum Wage

Roosevelt Institute Fellow Mike Konczal suggests that a higher minimum wage could solve Republican concerns about people who choose to work less due to the Affordable Care Act and means-tested programs.

A New Medicare Penalty Puts the Focus on Community Health

Anisha Hegde, Roosevelt Institute | Campus Network Senior Fellow for Health Care, says that expanding community health resources and workers will help patients and reduce costs in the health care system.


Originally posted to Daily Kos Economics on Fri Feb 14, 2014 at 07:53 AM PST.

Also republished by Daily Kos.

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

  •  What, me worry about Anti-Trust (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Odysseus, Aunt Pat, Amber6541
    A Comcast-Time Warner Cable monopoly won't just limit choice for consumers, says Roosevelt Institute Fellow Susan Crawford. The combined company will have no reason to upgrade infrastructure.

    Warning - some snark may be above‽ (-9.50; -7.03)‽ eState4Column5©2013 "I’m not the strapping young Muslim socialist that I used to be" - Barack Obama 04/27/2013 (@eState4Column5).

    by annieli on Fri Feb 14, 2014 at 08:07:57 AM PST

  •  We use T-Mobile for cellular (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Amber6541

    Have used them for years.
    Loved their plans that separate the cost of the phone from the cost of the service.
    Loved that you could save money by providing your own phone and avoid a contract to boot.

    Then AT&T made a deal to buy them out.

    Nearly overnight, much of what we loved about T-Mobile disappeared.

    Then the Justice Department blocked the merger.

    And you know what?

    That old T-Mobile?
    The one that let you get your own phone and avoid contracts?
    The one that gave you lower prices if you did?

    It came back.

    LG: You know what? You got spunk. MR: Well, Yes... LG: I hate spunk!

    by dinotrac on Fri Feb 14, 2014 at 08:12:10 PM PST

  •  This just in (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Amber6541

    The Tennessean is reporting that the VW workers rejected the UAW in a vote of 712-626.

    If you think you're too small to be effective, you've never been in the dark with a mosquito.

    by marykk on Fri Feb 14, 2014 at 08:30:56 PM PST

  •  The Comcast article's comment section... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Amber6541

    ....makes the point the article doesn't, which is that there's no cable competition anyway for consumers so it's not clear why the total number of cable providers or their overall market share should matter.

    It's not the side effects of the cocaine/I'm thinking that it must be love

    by Rich in PA on Sat Feb 15, 2014 at 05:32:25 AM PST

  •  My time with any cable provider will end in two (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Amber6541

    weeks.  Yes, I have 200+ channels to choose from but hardly any worth my time to watch.  Channels like A&E, TLC, History and Discovery channels and more have programming that is mostly, for me, just silly.  How many "reality" shows do we need?  I'm switching to a streaming service for entertainment and will continue to use the internet for news.  I'm so done with paying $100/month for junk.

    ""How long does getting thin take?" Pooh asked anxiously." -- A. A. Milne

    by pittie70 on Sat Feb 15, 2014 at 05:42:15 AM PST

  •  CAPTALISM SHOULD BE ON SOCIETY’S TERMS (0+ / 0-)

    CAPTALISM SHOULD BE ON SOCIETY’S TERMS
    Babu G. Ranganathan

    Many in society have been taught to believe that the public has no right to tell corporations what to do with their money any more than a private citizen has the right to tell his neighbor what to do with the money he earns from a business or store. This is not a fair analogy.

    True enough that a private citizen doesn't have the right to tell his neighbor what to do with his money but the public does have the right to tell corporations what to do with their money. Why? Because corporations couldn't exist without very special and unique government help. Corporations are special legal entities that have unique rights, privileges, and protections given by government that ordinary citizens and business owners do not have. And, since the government in a democracy like ours comes from the people (the majority in society) the people have the right to determine how corporations act and how they spend their money. The majority in a democracy own the franchise of government!  

    Therefore, the public has a right to demand something from corporations in exchange for giving corporations the right to exist. Would I not have the right, even as a private citizen, to demand something from a business built on my property? The same logic applies to the relationship between the public (society) and corporations. Corporations cannot hide behind the specious argument of rugged individualism!

    Many in our society have been brainwashed to believe that an absolutely free market place with no government controls or regulations would automatically fix our nation's problems. Have we forgotten already that the Great Depression of the early 1930's was the direct result of a free market economy with no government control or regulation?

    Rugged individualism teaches that the individual has the right to benefit from social and economic interactions with society, but that society has no right to demand any benefit from the individual.

    However, if it is true that a person has a moral right to be a rugged individualist, looking out only for himself, then it also follows that individuals (plural), by mutual consent and agreement, have a moral right to look out for themselves. Such a moral right of individuals (plural) is the basis for majority rule and unions in our society.

    Certainly, if an individual is benefiting from commerce with the many individuals of society, then the many individuals of society have a right, by mutual agreement among themselves, to demand certain benefits from the individual, benefits such as decent wages, clean air, clean water, safe working conditions, safe products, etc.

    No one has absolute individual rights in society. Those who want absolute individual rights must live outside of society. Those who want to be part of society with the benefits of government and law must be willing to grant what the majority want, even if it's at their own expense.

    Yes, minorities have rights, but the majority has more rights.

    Absolute individualism is absolutely unfair. The majority has the right to tax an individual and collect money to build a park even if that individual doesn’t want the park and will never use the park. The majority has a right to tax an individual and use the money to provide welfare or help those who genuinely can’t help themselves in society.

    Self- proclaimed rugged individualists in society want all the benefits of what the majority has to provide - government, law, security, and protection - but they do not want to give up anything to the majority in exchange for these benefits. These so-called rugged individualists are the real leeches and parasites of society.

    The fact is there are no real rugged individualists in society!  

    If capitalism and social consciousness cannot coexist then how is it that modern industrialized nations such as Sweden, Norway, Denmark, and others can have a high degree of social consciousness and still be capitalistic with a thriving free enterprise.

    The rich are not paying their fair share of the taxes. Even billionaire Warren Buffet has said that his office secretary pays more in taxes in proportion to her income than he does.

    In fact, one of President Obama's ideas for reviving our economy is by the federal government spending money to repair the infrastructure in our country (roads, bridges, highways, etc.). Much of this money would come from taxing the wealthy and corporations and making them pay their fair share taxes.

    People can still become wealthy in a socialist society but not at the detrimental expense of others in society.

    Many of the basic rights, especially regarding safety in the work place, that we take for granted were not graciously given to society by the rich but won by the blood of bludgeoned workers and strikers in the early twentieth century.

    The Bible doesn't say that money is the root of all evil, but that "the love of money is a root of all sorts of evil." That love of money must be constrained in society or the worst aspects of capitalism will make a living hell for millions. Thank God, of course, that there are some capitalists who don't put money first or love money. God bless them!

    The Christian Scriptures have much to say against the rich and wealthy who obtain and maintain their wealth through the detriment of the rest of society (James 2: 6, 7; 5: 1-6).

    Read the author's Internet article:

    THE FAR LEFT AND RIGHTS OF THINGS

    The author, Babu G. Ranganathan, has his bachelor’s degree with concentrations in theology and biology and has been recognized for his writings on religion and science in the 24th edition of Marquis “Who’s Who in The East.”

  •  Good credit (0+ / 0-)

    and bad credit need to be abolished from all sorts of decisions, like hiring. Even if I am handling money, my credit score has no bearing on my ability to make change.

  •  A tax on college grads? (0+ / 0-)

    How about higher inflation adjusted wages than in 1970?

    I'm living in America, and in America you're on your own. America's not a country. It's just a business.

    by CFAmick on Sat Feb 15, 2014 at 08:23:32 AM PST

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site