Those Republican Party Tax Cuts?

Check out what none other than Goldman Sachs has to say today about the outlook for the nation given the new, much larger national debt due to the Republicans' tax cuts for the already-wealthy and corporations.

Goldman Sachs: 

The fiscal outlook for the US 'is not good' 

A little from the article:

"The fiscal outlook for the United States 'is not good,' according to Goldman Sachs, and could pose a threat to the country's economic security during the next recession.

According to forecasts from the bank's chief economist, the federal deficit will increase from $825 billion (or 4.1 percent of gross domestic product) to $1.25 trillion (5.5 percent of GDP) by 2021. And by 2028, the bank expects the number to balloon to $2.05 trillion (7 percent of GDP)."

This on top of what was already reported about the effects of these, again, Republican Party tax cuts:

Government set to borrow nearly $1 trillion 

this year, an 84 percent increase over last year

Not done there, there's also this:

Under Trump's watch, 

national debt tops $21 trillion 

for first time ever

All so they could pour more of the nation's wealth on the people who already have a great deal of it all.

Thanks, Republicans! Y'all are terrific!

Something legal -- that shouldn't be

A study was just released proving still more that letting the wealthy and corporations offshore profits, first, shouldn't even ever been made legal and that it should, now, be reversed and made against our tax laws:

Exhaustive Study Finds Global Elite Hiding Up to $32 Trillion

A new report reveals how wealthy individuals and their families have between $21 and $32 trillion of hidden financial assets around the world in what are known as offshore accounts or tax havens. The actual sums could be higher because the study only deals with financial wealth deposited in bank and investment accounts, and not other assets such as property and yachts. The inquiry was commissioned by the Tax Justice Network and is being touted as the most comprehensive report ever on the "offshore economy." It also finds that private banks are deeply involved in running offshore havens, with UBS, Credit Suisse and Goldman Sachs handling the most assets.

And the crazy thing is, of course, that it is legal, and that we allow this, but to go back to the beginning of it all, what's really insane is that, because of "campaign contributions" to their--our--legislators, the laws were written for the wealthy in the first place, so they could get away with this kind of rather treasonous obscenity in the first place. 

And sure, the wealthy will always have the laws written for themselves first but let's not let it be THIS easy for them. Let's at least see to it this is rescinded and made illegal.  Let's at least do that. Then, after that, let's take away tax cuts for offshoring jobs in America.

It's difficult to believe we even have to say this.

Link:s  

Matt Taibbi Explains Wall Street’s "License to Steal," Offshore Tax Havens and Private Equity Firms

"Griftopia: A Story of Bankers, Politicians, and the Most Audacious Power Grab in American History." (Spiegel & Grau, 2011)

Matt Taibbi & William Black on Bailout Secrets & How New Foreclosure Deal Spares Banks from Justice

Jan 11, 2013 | STORY

"Failure of Epic Proportions": Treasury Nominee Jack Lew’s Pro-Bank, Austerity, Deregulation Legacy

Jan 11, 2013 | STORY

Matt Taibbi: After Laundering $800 Million in Drug Money, How Did HSBC Executives Avoid Jail?

We need to stop the revolving door from government to business and back (guest post)

It was announced yesterday that Tim Geithner, President Obama's first Treasury secretary, will become president of Warburg Pincus, a private-equity firm. Before joining the Obama administration, Geithner had been president of the New York Fed, and before that worked for Bob Rubin in the Clinton Treasury Department. (Rubin, co-chairman of Goldman Sachs before becoming Treasury secretary, advised Clinton to repeal Glass-Steagall and nixed the regulation of derivatives. After leaving the administration Rubin became chairman of Citigroup's executive committee, and was there when Wall Street nearly melted down in 2008; he is now a counselor at investment bank Centerview Partners LLC.) Geithner's move to Wall Street follows Peter Orszag, Obama's first director of the Office of Management and the Budget, also a Rubin protégée, who is now vice chairman of Citigroup's corporate and investment banking group.

I don't begrudge those public servants who, after leaving office, take high-paying jobs in the private sector. But when someone who has been in charge of bailing out Wall Street and then shepherding through Congress regulations designed to prevent another near collapse, one can't help but worry. The public is already so cynical about both government and Wall Street that even the mere possibility that Geithner knew where he'd be heading afterward, and therefore pulled his punches, can only deepen the cynicism.

Wall Street's political power is a direct result of both the money it pours into political campaigns and the revolving door between it and Washington. So far, Wall Street's biggest banks have fought back tighter regulation (eviscerating much of the Dodd-Frank Act). Private equity has proven even more potent: It has preserved the "carried interest" loophole that allows the pay of private-equity executives to be taxed at low capital-gains rates even though these executives don't risk their own capital. (They buy and sell companies with funds from investors and with debt, typically charging an annual management fee of 2 percent of the funds and keeping 20 percent of the profits as a "carried interest.") During his time at Treasury, Geithner argued for “eliminating the carried interest loophole that allows some to pay capital gains tax rates on what is essentially compensation for services," as he told the Senate budget committee in 2012. One wonders whether he will stand ready to say the same thing again.

--Robert Reich, American political economist, professor, author, and political commentator

Links:  

Robert Reich - Wikipedia

Robert Reich | Facebook

Business-Managed Democracy -- a blog

LL

Government shutdown II

Welcome to October:

"What's happening in Washington these days may seem far removed from my boyhood memories, but Washington is really just another childhood playground. Its current bullies are rightwing Republicans, now threatening that if they don't get their way they'll close down the government and cause the nation to default on its debts.

"The American people don't want a government shutdown, and they don't want Obamacare," House Republican leaders said in a statement over the weekend. "We will do our job and send this bill over, and then it's up to the Senate to pass it and stop a government showdown."

Really? The American people don't want Obamacare as much as I didn't want my softball and bat.
Okay, maybe not quite as much. But the only settled way we know what the American people want is through the democratic process. And the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) is the law of the land. A majority of the House and Senate voted for it, the president signed it into law, its constitutionality has been upheld by the Supreme Court, and a majority of Americans reelected the President after an election battle in which the Affordable Care Act was a central issue.

Moreover, we don't repeal laws in this country by holding hostage the entire government of the United States.

The bullies are a faction inside the Republican Party -- extremists who are threatening more reasonable Republicans with primary challenges if they don't go along.

And where are the Tea Party extremists getting their dough? From even bigger bullies -- a handful of hugely wealthy Americans who are sinking hundreds of millions of dollars into this extortion racket.
They include David and Charles Koch (and their front group, "Americans for Prosperity'); Peter Thiel, leverage-buyout specialist John Childs, investor Howie Rich, Stephen Jackson of the Stevens Group, and executives of JPMorgan and Goldman Sachs, (all behind the "Club for Growth"); and Crow Holdings' Harlan Crow, shipping magnate Richard Uihlein, and investment banker Foster Friess; executives of MetLife and Philip Morris, and foundations controlled by the Scaife family (all bankrolling "FreedomWorks.")

Their game plan is to not just to take over the Republican Party. It's to take over America. The showdown over the budget and the debt ceiling is a prelude to 2016, when they plan to run Texas Senator Ted Cruz for President. (Cruz, if you haven't noticed, is busily establishing his creds as the biggest flamer in Washington -- orchestrating not only the current extortion but also the purge of reasonable Republicans from the GOP.) Obama and the Democrats must not give in. They shouldn't even negotiate with extortionists. As I learned the hard way, giving in to bullies just encourages them to escalate their demands. The president gave in at the end of 2011 when Republican bullies threatened to go over the fiscal cliff and take the rest of the nation with them. At that time they demanded spending cuts. Now they want to repeal a law they detest.

If we give in again, what's next?

A coup d'état?"

--Robert Reich, American political economist, professor, author, and political commentator

Let's get the money out of our politics and government

 

The fact is, as I've written here and elsewhere so many times, until we get the big, ugly, corrupting money of the wealthy and corporations out of our election system and so, our government, nothing will change. It will remain legislation and laws and so, that same government, of, by and for those same wealthy and corporations first and the rest of us, the rest of the country second, if at all.

To sign petition, go here:  http://www.wh.gov/P9j7

Disavowing the presumed Right Wing lean

"A majority of Americans still holds (George W.) Bush accountable for the Great Recession, and with good reason. We are still breathing the fumes of his toxic brew of deregulation, massive transfers of wealth to the rich and a doubling of the national debt. His policies, and those of the Republican Congress that had its way with the economy for six years, were in fact the culmination of a right-wing ideological revolution led by Ronald Reagan, which changed the way Americans view their government. Mr. Reagan's shadow continues to loom large, because Democrats have yet to make the case for a compelling alternative and have too often accepted the premises of the right."

--Drew Weston in The New York Times, yesterday, in his column "America's Leftward Tilt?"

Link: http://campaignstops.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/11/03/americas-leftward-tilt/?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20121104

"60 Minutes" on Goldman Sachs: Matt Taibbi is (somewhat) vindicated

Last evening, CBS' "60 Minutes" had a segment on a Goldman Sachs executive, one Greg Smith, and his leaving the company because of their low internal standards and lack of respect for clients in a rather famous op/ed in The New York Times last year.

There are a few things about this, too, that need to be pointed out, I think.

First is that it's amazing, to an extent, that it ever came out on CBS News at all, unfortunately. This kind of coverage from the "Big 4" networks just doesn't occur any more, it seems. As a kind of "gentlemen's agreement" between big corporations, one doesn't reveal much or anything of other companies if it's negative. It's the kind of thing Edward Murrow warned us of, so many decades ago, that the television networks would be about profit and profits and not on reporting what's important to the people, nation and world.

It's disgusting.

Second, it needs to be said that the reporter, Matt Taibbi, over at Rolling Stone has been reporting on various companies and their involvement in the huge 2008 financial collapse, for years now. His reporting seems to be lost to anyone and everyone who doesn't read this music/reporting, unconventional magazine.

It's a shame, too, since Mr. Taibbi's coverage has been both scathing and important, given the millions of people across the world that were hurt financially by this fleecing of America and the world.

The third thing about last evening's report from CBS is that it was the 2nd story.

The first story of the evening--what you'd t hink was the most important story of the show--was about medicinal marijuana. One of the biggest financial thefts in the nation's history, it nearly brought down the nation's economy and then the world's, yet it was relegated to the 2nd show of the evening. The last story before the "fluff piece" of the night. Nearly unbelievable.

Finally, the thing about this story being told last evening is that it involves one of the biggest banks in the nation and world, the theft was large scale in both dollars and people and nations that were effected by this debacle and stealing yet this is the bank that is still and has been for years in the White House.

Does this make sense to anyone who isn't in Goldman Sachs?

Links: www.cbsnews.com/8301.../goldman-sachs-vp-explains-why-he-quit/

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/20/business/why-i-left-book-about-goldman-falls-short.html?pagewanted=all

http://youtu.be/tOpUM3Uvz7U

Goldman Sachs: Getting away with grand larceny, lies and lying about it all

It's been widely reported now that Goldman Sachs is, indeed and in fact, getting away with theft--large scale theft, at that:

Goldman Sachs Won't Be Prosecuted In Fraud Probe

A Senate panel found last year that Goldman Sachs marketed four sets of complex mortgage securities to banks and other investors, but failed to tell clients the securities were very risky. The Justice Department said the "burden of proof to bring a criminal case" could not be met.

And while this should surprise no one, however much it dissappoints us, the following has to be acknowleded:

First, Goldman Sachs is in the White House and has been for some years. Timothy Geithner, the Treasury Secretary, comes from there as former CEO, no less, in one of the worst examples and there are plenty of others.

Second, it's an election year and this president--and all candidates for that office--want and need the big Wall Street firms on their side, if not also putting money in their campaign coffers. It seems clear nothing was going to happen here, no matter what the SEC found.

That said, perhaps the people examining this huge firm should go back and read even just some of writer Matt Taibbi's articles and columns over at Rolling Stone. It seems there's enough evidence in them alone to indict the company in general and specific employees of the firm. (See links below).

Forget that Goldman Sachs paid a $550 million fine (that's a little over one-half billion dollars, folks) to the SEC in 2010 for fraud in the subprime mortgage debacle. Forget that. That doesn't really mean they're guilty, right?

As if this all isn't enough to make you cynical, get this, from the New York Times: "News of the settlement sent Goldman’s shares 5 percent higher in after-hours trading, adding far more to the firm’s market value than the amount it will have to pay in the settlement."

So not only did Goldman steal millions of dollars from people and not only did they then also lie about it but when their fine of $550 million dollars was handed out, since it was such a small share of the $13.35 billion profits they made the previous year, their stock actually went up on that news.

They won.

They won big and they keep winning.

Why wouldn't you keep winning when, after all, you virtually--if not actually--own the government?

We have to also forget that the financial collapse that Goldman Sachs and Countrywide Mortgage and Citibank (or Sh*ttybank, as Bill Maher refers to them, rather appropriately) and others nearly brought the nation--and the world, actually--to very near total financial collapse back in 2008 with their lies and theft. Forget that.

The government says we don't have enough to prosecute.

Right.

Got it.

Links: http://www.npr.org/2012/08/10/158547458/business-news

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_Geithner

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-people-vs-goldman-sachs-20110511

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/16/business/16goldman.html

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-great-american-bubble-machine-20100405

A great way to spend 17 minutes

An education on the 2008 national and international near-total financial and economic collapse due to American bankers and banking and where we are now.

You owe it to yourself--and the nation, your country--to see this documentary: http://www.insidejobmovie.com.au/

Failing Institutions, Part II

Two more institutions that are failing us (besides the Catholic Church): Goldman Sachs and Citibank (also known as "Shittybank", pardon the crudeness). As for Goldman Sachs, you may have heard that a high-ranking executive just left the organization, then wrote and published a letter in The New York Times, describing the ugly, greedy culture within: Why I Am Leaving Goldman Sachs It's a good and important read, I think. Help yourself, if you haven't already. (link below). The second failed--really failed--institution is, as I said earlier, Citibank. It seems the Federal Reserve tested 19 of the biggest banks in the nation recently and 15 of the 19 passed this "stress test." One that didn't? The third largest bank in the US? You got it. Citibank: Four US banks fail Federal Reserve stress test So here we are, yet again. Two more big institutions, failing the people they should be serving, along with failing the nation. It seems true, that what we need is a mix of free market Capitalism that works but that government that keeps these organizations honest and from over-reaching. (See 3rd link, below). We seem to be victims of huge success that is otherwise now, bringing us down. I say it again, we must get the big, ugly, corrosive, corrupting money from the wealthy and corporations out of our political and election process and system. They mustn't be able to buy our legislators, their legislation, our laws and so, finally, our government. If we don't do that, if we don't kill "campaign contributions" with true reform, nothing will ever change. Links: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/14/opinion/why-i-am-leaving-goldman-sachs.html; http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-17361899

A brief reminder of where George W. Bush and the Republicans took us

And someone wants to vote Republican?

What "Occupy Wall Street"--and America--is all about

We need to get Alan Grayson back in Congress, to join Sen. Bernie Sanders and Dennis Kucinich.

Noted economist Joseph Stiglitz on the "Occupy Wall Street" protests

"You are right to be indignant. The fact is the system is not working right. It is not right that we have so many people without jobs when we have so many needs that we have to fulfill. It’s not right that we are throwing people out of their houses when we have so many homeless people. Our financial markets have an important role to play. They’re supposed to allocate capital, manage risks. But they misallocated capital, and they created risk. We are bearing the cost of their misdeeds. There’s a system where we’ve socialized losses and privatized gains. That’s not capitalism; that’s not a market economy. That’s a distorted economy, and if we continue with that, we won’t succeed in growing, and we won’t succeed in creating a just society." --Joseph Stiglitz, Economist to the "Occupy Wall Street" protesters. Links: http://dangerousintersection.org/2011/10/06/economist-joseph-stiglitz-speaks-to-the-wall-street-occupiers/; http://www.kansascity.com/2011/10/09/3196907/hundreds-march-in-kc-occupy-movement.html#storylink=omni_popular

The October Washington protest

Caution: occasional graphic language. To make more aware.

The latest SEC and government scandal America needs to know

A story breaking this week but that, I think, is getting far too little press tells of the SEC doing some preliminary investigations of Wall Street firms, then shutting them down and--worst of all--destroying any evidence. And why would this happen, you might ask? Well, because those very same SEC employees then get cushy, high paying jobs with the very companies they're supposed to be overseeing and regulating. And it's been going on since 1993, at least, apparently, and repeatedly. Goldman Sachs, anyone? It reminds me, once again, of the quote by Tim McIlrath: "If you're not angry, you're not paying attention." Read about it here: http://www.npr.org/2011/08/18/139758303/sec-documents-destroyed-employee-tells-congress; http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/is-the-sec-covering-up-wall-street-crimes-20110817

Bad business news out today

There's some fairly bad economic news on at least three fronts today. First, Cisco says it's laying off 10% of its workforce or 6,500 people so that stinks. Second is that Bank of America is reporting a "huge loss". Finally, "Weak trading bites into Goldman profits," to the tune of a 9.1 billion dollar loss. Not good indicators, boys and girls, not good indicators at all. Think happy, hopeful thoughts. And keep cool, by all means.Links: http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/07/19/idUS268176494420110719; http://news.yahoo.com/bank-america-reports-9-1-bn-second-quarter-000502952.html; http://news.yahoo.com/goldman-investors-seek-answers-beyond-dreary-second-quarter-095310101.html

Matt Taibbi gets it right yet again

From the latest Rolling Stone Magazine:

The People vs. Goldman Sachs

A Senate committee has laid out the evidence. Now the Justice Department should bring criminal charges

By Matt Taibbi,  May 11, 2011

They weren't murderers or anything; they had merely stolen more money than most people can rationally conceive of, from their own customers, in a few blinks of an eye. But then they went one step further. They came to Washington, took an oath before Congress, and lied about it.

Thanks to an extraordinary investigative effort by a Senate subcommittee that unilaterally decided to take up the burden the criminal justice system has repeatedly refused to shoulder, we now know exactly what Goldman Sachs executives like Lloyd Blankfein and Daniel Sparks lied about. We know exactly how they and other top Goldman executives, including David Viniar and Thomas Montag, defrauded their clients. America has been waiting for a case to bring against Wall Street. Here it is, and the evidence has been gift-wrapped and left at the doorstep of federal prosecutors, evidence that doesn't leave much doubt: Goldman Sachs should stand trial.

Then, additionally, there's this story about dirty Goldman Sachs, from a completely different source, showing still more at least questionable tactics, if not illegal, in an entirely different arena:

New Disclosures on Currency Swaps with Goldman to Hide Greek Debt; Tip of the Iceberg says Former Bond Trader "Dr. Evil"

Let's go get 'em, for pity's sake.


If even half of what Matt Taibbi documents is true--and it certainly looks as though it is--we should go after them, both because of what they did illegally, but also to ensure it isn't repeated.

Then, if we're lucky at all, it will get and keep G Sachs and all the people and companies like them out of the inner workings of the White House.

Let's hope.

And hope big.

Links: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-people-vs-goldman-sachs-20110511
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/photos/how-goldman-execs-screwed-their-clients-and-lied-to-congress-20110511
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-great-american-bubble-machine-20100405
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/wall-streets-bailout-hustle-20100217

Sure, we'll sue a German bank...

U.S. sues German bank over home loans

Deutsche Bank is accused of unfairly sticking American taxpayers with a monster tab.

To date, the U.S. government has brought few cases against big Wall Street banks in response to the mortgage crisis that nearly toppled the world's financial system almost three years ago. But the Justice Department today filed suit against Deutsche Bank for hundreds of millions of dollars, alleging that the banking giant unfairly stuck taxpayers with the tab for bad home loans it issued.

The complaint, filed in Federal District Court in New York, accused Deutsche Bank of failing to adequately scrutinize potential borrowers, then lying to government officials about its lapses of due diligence

Yeah, we'll jump all over a foreign, in this case, German, bank.  We'll sue them.  We'll go after them for lying to and cheating and stealing from Americans but an American bank?

Where are the lawsuits against Countrywide?

And since Bank of America bought Countrywide, where are the lawsuits against them?

And while we're at it, where are the lawsuits against Goldman Sachs for both pushing junk loans in one part of the company but then betting those same junk loans will fail in a different part of the same company, all to gain billions of dollars in profits?

Where are THOSE lawsuits?

We know the answer.

The people above pay their representatives "campaign finance" money--far better and more accurately known as bribes--to get whatever they want in the form of legislation and/or, in this case, just to be quiet and leave them alone.

Well, that and the fact that Goldman Sachs is IN the White House, has been for years and is having their way with us.

A simple change we need from Washington

I've said repeatedly here that one of the easiest, simplest and smartest things we need to do is have one enterprising representative in Congress in Washington introduce a bill that would take away incentives to take any manufacturing or business offshore.  Here's proof of what I'm saying from an article yesterday on Alternet:

According to the non-partisan Government Accountability Office (GAO), eighty-three of the 100 largest publicly traded U.S. corporations utilize such tax havens to reduce their U.S. tax liability. Ironically, these accounting tricks aren’t available for companies that only do business in the United States, so Congress in effect is providing tax incentives to ship jobs overseas and dismantle the middle class.


It would be so easy.


And smart.


Some bright--even demagoguic--representative or senator should sponsor a bill taking away tax benefits to offshore business and first, they'd be a huge media darling, overnight.  Second, they'd be hugely popular with the people, just as quick.  Third, they would gain a great name for themselves locally, in their own districts but also nationally, in case they wanted to run for some other, higher office later.


This would be perfect for ANYONE in any political party--Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent but especially a Tea Party member.


I don't understand why this isn't happening.


Well, other than the fact that some corporations might not want to give them more campaign money.  Other than that.


Link:   http://www.alternet.org/economy/150598/how_12_multinational_corporations_avoid_paying_taxes

Local UMKC Professor on everyone else (with money) vs. the little guy (you and me)

There's a terrific article out on the Crooks and Liars blog right now of one Professor Michael Hudson of our own University of Missouri--Kansas City on how the cards are stacked against us, from the White House through Congress through Wall Street and out.  Read for yourself:

Shock Doctrine: Break The Economy, Lower Wages By 20 Percent. Doesn't Sound So Farfetched Anymore, Does It?

By Susie Madrak

I've thought for a while that our leaders, both political and private, are actually trying to create another depression, but I wasn't quite clear on why. I mean, I figured they make money on it, of course, but I didn't connect all the dots.

This interview with liberal economist Michael Hudson is a few months old, but it has the ring of truth and explains so much:

PAUL JAY, SENIOR EDITOR, TRNN: Welcome to The Real News Network. I'm Paul Jay, coming to you today from New York City. Now joining us is Michael Hudson. He's a distinguished research professor at University of Missouri-Kansas City. He's also the author of many books, including Super Imperialism: The Economic Strategy of American Empire, and Trade, Development, and Foreign Debt: A History of Theories of Polarization Versus Convergence in the World Economy. That's a mouthful. Thanks for joining us. 

PROF. MICHAEL HUDSON, UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI-KANSAS CITY: Thank you. 

JAY: So President Obama's deficit commission has reported. The press, the media, and most of the political punditry all seem far more worried about government debt than depression. Why?
HUDSON: Because they're essentially appointed by the banking interests. When the government runs into debt, it has to borrow from the banks. They want to scale down government debt in order to scale down government taxes. So it's part of a one-two punch against the economy, basically. To the deficit commission, a depression is the solution to the problem, not a problem.That's what they're trying to bring about, because you need a depression if you're going to lower wages by 20 percent. 

JAY: And why do they want to do that? 

HUDSON: Because they have the illusion that if you pay labor less, somehow you re going to make the economy more competitive, and the economy can earn its way out of debts --meaning their employers, the banks and the companies and make more profits and pay more bonuses and stock options, andsomehow their constituency, Wall Street and the corporate economy, will become richer if they can only impoverish the economy. 

So essentially you can think of it as between a parasite and the host economy. A smart parasite in nature actually is in a symbiosis with the host and tries to steer to new food. It wants the host to find new food, doesn't want it to get bigger; the parasite wants itself to get bigger. But to do that, it has to take over the host's brain and make the brain think that the parasite, in this case the host, is the industrial economy, the real economy, production and consumption. 

The parasite is basically the financial sector. That's the deficit commission. That's the largest financier of the Obama administration. Obama appointed Wall Street lobbyists for the deficit commission, and basically their mind is a one-track mind: reduce labor's wages. So what we have here is a dumb parasite, not a parasite. That's the problem that's facing the American economy today. The problem is that the parasite's not only taken over the brain of the economy, which was supposed to be the government, but it's taken over its own brain in the process. And it actually imagines that corporations can make larger profits and the industrial, the financial system can survive if they just bring on a depression. In fact, it'll be the exact opposite.

And there you have it, ladies and gentlemen--the why of our government and corporations, all stacked against us.  It goes on to give more and detailed information but you get the idea.

If you thought we're all screwed, well, the good news is, you're right.

Unfortunately, that's also the bad news.

Links:   http://crooksandliars.com/susie-madrak/shock-doctrine-break-economy-lower-wa
http://michael-hudson.com/books/
http://cas.umkc.edu/econ/economics/faculty/Hudson/HudsonCV.htm