Powered By Blogger

Sunday, September 30, 2012

Miami Herald: Koch brothers trying to buy FL Supreme Court

Miami Herald: Koch brothers trying to buy FL Supreme Court

MSN.com

MSN.com

Wealth Redistribution and Class Warfare; Republican Speak

     Since the election of our first black president, republican politicians  have begun talking about redisitribution of wealth and class warfare, two phrases designed to divide the nation even further than it already is. As in the past, they come up with any gimmick they can to keep the 1% in power (I have since learned that this isn't what everyday republicans stand for). And make no mistake about it, they do it for the money. All those campaign contributions come in handy once political careers are over. Let me also clarify that many democrats are doing the same thing, but there are a big majority of repubs and the repubs are unapologetic and unashamed in their doings. The dems are fewer in numbers and try to hide their greed and apathy towards their constituents. But there are enough dems to go along with repubs to accomplish anything the 1% want.
     Just recently the repubs attempted to defeat a veteran's jobs bill in the US senate. Why would anyone vote against a jobs bill for those who believe they are fighting for the security of this country? The reason is because they were ordered to by those who contribute to their political campaigns, namely corporations and the wealthiest among us (the 1%). These are the people who have benefited the most from our society. It was our armed forces and our diplomats that have paved the way for them to open up markets and make inroads into foreign countries. But they cliam they built their corporations on their own, without any help. And to add insult to injury, after our sons, daughters, cousin, mothers and fathers come back from combat tours in those countries, on their behalf, they don't want to educate them, pay their medical bills, or even to provide jobs for them. This is what republican politicians stand for.
     Lately they have claimed class warfare against the upper class and welth redistribution as if anyone in the working class has the power to fight against the very wealthy or corporations. This is a tried and proven way of the conservatives putting off on their opponents what they themselves are doing. For sure, if anyone is redistibuting the wealth it has been people like Mr. Romney and others like him, with his million and one tax avoidance schemes, by claiming tax breaks for corporations to ship American manufacturing jobs overseas. They say these tax breaks are so that they can create more jobs. The problem is that none of th those jobs are in the United States. Taxes on corporations and the wealthiest among us have been steadily declining for the last thirty years. But they say it's  the democrats who are guilty of class warfare when it's the conservatives who fight for those tax breaks and to increase the defense budget exponentially, while at the same time decrying all domestic spending. They don't want to hire more policemen, firemen or teachers. They don't want to invest in alternative energy (green jobs), and neither do they want to invest in the infrastructure of the country. Thgey don't even want to provide college loans at reasonable rates for college students because banks can't charge those high interest rates they've been able to charge since GW Bush was in office. They made it illegal for the government to bargain with pharmaceutical corporations for drug prices so that the corporations could make windfall profits. They have seen to it (with help from the Obama administration) that insurance companies are in charge of our health care. And what about all the subsidies to all those corporations that are already super profitable even without these tax breaks? How's that for wealth redistribution?
    So yes, there has been a redistribution of wealth in this country. But it is in just the exact opposite as the conservatives claim. And it's about time to put things back into balance once the new democratic congress is in place. Since the democrats claim to be on the side of the working class, we need to hold their feet to the fire. Balance the federal budget, but not on the backs of the working class, the way they are doing in Europe. Force the corporations and banks clean up the messes they are responsible for and see to it that those who can afford to pay more in taxes do so!

Monday, September 24, 2012

Does the Pentagon Deserve Anything But A Cut In It's Budget?



Blogroll

Sep 21, 2012

The Sequestration Sideshow: Jobs and Pentagon Contracting in Context


Sideshow
Ben_ourtake_boxThis week another major defense contractor used its employees as political pawns in its campaign to halt planned reductions in Pentagon spending.
The Los Angeles Times reported on Monday “Northrop to shed nearly 600 jobs.” The article includes all of the industry’s talking points about “budget uncertainties,” “jobs lost,” and “more cuts,” and even uses the erroneously high $600 billion amount for defense sequestration (the correct amount is $492, as ProPublica’s critique of media using the $600 billion figure illustrated). Unfortunately, the article not only overstates the actual amount of Pentagon sequestration by more than $100 billion, it also fails to put Northrop’s job-shedding into context. For those interested in a little more balance in their sequestration news, here are a few facts to mull over before jumping on the contractor “doomsday” bandwagon.
First, Northrop has reduced its workforce every year since 2008, cutting thousands of workers every year during a time in which its Department of Defense contract dollars remained fairly constant. Employment figures from its SEC filings for 2008, 2009, 2010, and 2011 chronicle this downsizing. Northrop wasn’t the only defense contractor to cut jobs either. In the past five years the top five defense contractors—Lockheed Martin, Boeing, General Dynamics, Northrop Grumman, and Raytheon—collectively cut nearly 20,000 jobs while their contracts from the DoD increased by more than $10 billion. In short, if there is any connection between revenue and employment it has, at least recently, been in the opposite direction that Northrop would have us believe.
Second, while these firms have been cutting jobs they’ve been increasing the compensation packages of their top executives. For example, Northrop’s CEO, Wesley Bush, received a total compensation package worth more than $26 million last year. But even Bush trailed the top paid defense contractor CEO, David Cote of Honeywell, who received more than $35 million in total compensation last year.
Third, Northrop and the rest of the defense industry have an enormous backlog of contract work—guaranteed revenue from work yet to be complete—that will insulate their firms from reductions in planned Pentagon spending. At the end of last year Northrop had a $40 billion backlog—that’s nearly 3 times the value of its DoD contracts in 2011. The defense industry collectively has a $491 billion backlog, which incidentally is just a billion dollars less than the entire amount of defense sequestration ($492 billion).
Fourth, the immediate impact of defense sequestration on contractors will be marginal, at worst. The non-partisan Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments reports that defense procurement contracts would only be reduced by approximately 3.5 percent in 2013. And, numerous defense experts have argued that sequestration is manageable, as the Pentagon’s budget will ultimately climb back above current levels by the end of the decade.
In this economic climate we need a leaner, meaner military prepared to meet twenty-first century threats, not a large, bloated Pentagon bureaucracy that annually gives more than $350 billion to contractors who provide overpriced and underperforming weapons. And we need a media that will provide readers with all of the facts, not just the views of defense contractors.
Ben Freeman is an investigator with the Project On Government Oversight. Image by Flickr user heschong.

Trackbacks

Trackback URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c68bf53ef017c3208d053970b
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference The Sequestration Sideshow: Jobs and Pentagon Contracting in Context :

Comments

Jack
These pigs feeding at the trough need to be exposed for what they are. Many of these contracts they are given are being sent to foreign countries for manufacture. Cut the military budget until it will fit in a bath tub and then it will be the right size.

Sunday, September 23, 2012

Is the Fed Intentionally Wrecking Our Economy?

Why the New Fed Stimulus Won't Jumpstart the Economy - and What Would

The Truth No One Wants To Hear;The Siren Song of American Imperialism | NationofChange

The Siren Song of American Imperialism | NationofChange

Social Security and Medicare are Not the Problem, The Pentagon Is!

They Want to Destroy Social Security (circa 1935)‏

 
 

 All the crocodile tears that the Right Wing sheds for the supposed insolvency of Social Security are just a cover story for what they really want to do, i.e., destroy Social Security. My Tea Party opponent is a perfect example of this: he calls Social Security a "Ponzi scheme"; he calls Social Security and Medicare "robbery"; he calls them unconstitutional; and somehow we're supposed to believe that he's the one to save them.

So it has ever been. So it will ever be.

Germany introduced Social Security in 1889. It came to America "only" 46 years later, in 1935. When the Social Security program was introduced here, one of its most vociferous critics was former Republican President Herbert Hoover. Having led America into the Great Depression, Hoover wanted to make sure that no one led it out. (Does that ring a bell?)

According to an Associated Press report on May 6, 1935, and a New York Times report on May 22, 1938 (sorry, no NYT link), Hoover attacked Social Security in apocalyptic terms. Regarding the security for seniors that the program would provide, Hoover said that "we can find [the same economic stability] in our jails. The slaves had it [too]." Hoover said that programs like Social Security would put Americans in cages: "Our people are not ready to be turned into a national zoo."

It's odd that Sarah Palin hasn't deployed the same metaphors. Yet.

Hoover said that rather than indulging in programs like Social Security, Americans should "cling to their family life, to their homes, to their individual self-respect, to their rights, to their individual liberties." He urged that we must not shift "from the self-made man to the government-coddled man."

I know that this sounds just like Paul Ryan, but it was Herbert Hoover. Really.

Hoover added that the way to achieve genuine "social security" was not through government handouts, but by "saving pennies and producing more."

Yes, those pennies sure add up, don't they? Save five of them, and you've got a nickel. Or, in Mitt Romney's case, a quarter.

Hoover said that he believed in private charity, not government handouts. He predicted that government programs like Social Security would destroy private charity, "one of the most fundamental of inspirations in the spiritual growth of the family or individual."

Now you know whom Michele Bachmann and Rick Santorum got their ideas from.

With unemployment in America approaching 25%, Hoover said that social programs like Social Security simply weren't needed to feed, house and clothe people. "We could do that by the simple methods of bread lines, barracks and dungarees." The government could do nothing to ameliorate these problems; the only answer was "courage and vision in adversity."

This sounds like something that Mitt Romney would say, right? Either that, or something equally vacuous.

Herbert Hoover led the Republican effort to strangle Social Security in its crib. And now, 77 years later, Republicans are trying to suffocate Social Security as it lies in bed.

At least they're consistent.

When a right-wing Republican talks about how to "save" Social Security, I don't know whether to laugh or (like John Boehner) cry. Republicans have as much interest in saving Social Security as they do in saving the whales. Or the rainforest. Or the Queen. Or the last dance. Meaning none.

Courage,

Alan Grayson
EmailTwitterFacebook
Paid for and Authorized by the Committee to Elect Alan Grayson
8419 Oak Park Road, Orlando, FL 32819
If you do not wish to receive further email from Congressman Grayson, please click here to unsubscribe.
Too many newsletters? You can unsubscribe or better yet, schedule automatic cleanup.

Monday, September 17, 2012

Stop the Frack Attack Before It's Too Late!

 Help stop an onslaught of dangerous fracking‏

 

biogemsdefenders@savebiogems.org
NRDC - Frances Beinecke

From:NRDC - Frances Beinecke (biogemsdefenders@savebiogems.org)
NRDC
NRDC Save BioGems

Dear james,
Toxic spills ... poisoned drinking water ... air that’s unsafe to breathe.
Fracking Flame
This could be the new reality for thousands of communities across America -- unless we fight back and Stop the Frack Attack right now. Send a message to President Obama. Ask him to build on his environmental record by imposing tough safeguards on oil and gas drilling!
Take action

Oil and gas companies are running amok as they race to expand dangerous fracking operations in dozens of states -- leaving poisoned water, polluted landscapes and plummeting property values in their wake.

The result? Local communities, once quiet and peaceful, have been transformed into nightmarish industrial zones.

Ask President Obama to build on his environmental record and put the health of American families first by imposing strong safeguards on oil and gas drilling.

Incredibly, fracking is now exempt from some of our country’s most important environmental protections.

That’s because, in 2005, Vice-President Dick Cheney asked his cronies in the energy industry what they wanted, and they got their wish: the Halliburton Loophole, which exempts fracking from the Safe Drinking Water Act and laws that govern disposal of toxic waste!

And there’s plenty that’s toxic about fracking. It works by blasting massive amounts of water, sand and toxic chemicals into the ground in order to release oil or gas that is trapped in rock. Frackers can use up to 300 different chemicals, many of which are known to be cancer-causing.

But if you want to know which of these potentially deadly chemicals Big Oil is pumping into the ground near your home -- tough luck! Federal law doesn’t require oil and gas companies to disclose what chemicals they’re using.

In the past five years, ExxonMobil, Shell and other energy companies have drilled more than 200,000 new wells across the United States -- many virtually in the backyards of tens of thousands of Americans. And they’re chomping at the bit to drill more.

Call on the President to build on his environmental record by standing up to the oil giants and putting the brakes on their reckless drilling spree.

In the meantime, NRDC will be providing expert legal assistance to cities and towns on the frontlines of this battle -- empowering them to ban or restrict fracking if they so choose.

But make no mistake: we must mobilize now for tough national rules that will stop fracking companies from running roughshod over our communities and health.

Please send your message to President Obama right away. And thank you for standing with NRDC.

Sincerely,
Frances
Frances Beinecke
President
Natural Resources Defense Council
Top ratings from charity watchdog groups http://www.charitynavigator.org/ and http://www.bbb.org/