Showing posts with label great recession. Show all posts
Showing posts with label great recession. Show all posts

Thursday, June 24, 2010

There Are Two Americas

It seems John Edwards had a point about there being "two Americas", he just got the players wrong. How you have fared during the great recession largely depends on whether you work in the public or private sectors.

Here's a theory that explains the "two Americas" concept better than Edwards. In his new book "The Battle", Arthur Brooks posits that our country is split into 70-30 coalitions and that we are facing a new culture war with our country's future in the balance:

This is not the culture war of the 1990's. This is not a fight over guns, abortions, religion and gays. Nor is it about Republicans versus Democrats. Rather, it is a struggle between two competing visions of America's future. In one, America will continue to be a unique and exceptional nation organized around the principles of free enterprise. In the other, America will move toward European-style statism grounded in expanding bureaucracies, increasing income redistribution, and government controlled corporations. These competing visions are not reconcilable: We must choose.


The $862 billion stimulus amounted to little more than a government union member full employment plan. Now that most states have blown through their first bailout, they have their hands out for more. President Obama pressed Congress to borrow another $50 billion to send to profligate state and local governments to ensure they don't have to cut back on spending. Since Congress hasn't authorized the second round of bailouts, some politicians are starting to panic and mention the word "layoff"; which considering how much money government employee unions spend to elect(and keep) Democrats you can imagine the panic is genuine. After all, fewer government workers, means fewer union dues and ultimately less money to promote their common dream of ever expanding government.

The potential loss of more than $600 million in federal aid once deemed a sure thing has had Massachusetts Democrats scrambling to rebuild the state budget behind closed doors, warning publicly of layoffs and steep program cuts if the funds fall through.


From todays Boston Herald we have two stories of Mr. Brook's 30% coalition in action:

House and Senate dealmakers nixed a 24-hour hotline to report illegal aliens and refused to force the attorney general to agree in writing to enforce federal immigration law. And they would not put into law language barring state schools from offering in-state tuition rates to illegal aliens.


and

State probation department staffers banged in sick more than 11,000 days last year - the equivalent of 30 years - in a workplace epidemic that has private sector leaders shaking their heads in disbelief, a Herald review finds.

That’s obviously an absurd statistic,” said Robert Ahearn, chief executive of the Plymouth-based IGS Systems, a high-tech firm that was forced to lay off 27 people over the past three years.

“That would be an enormous impact on our business, and we couldn’t tolerate it,” he added.


On Capitol Hill Sen. Tom Harkin is threatening to use a "lame duck" session of Congress to aid his union allies.

One such law is the so-called “card-check” bill, which takes away employees’ right to vote secretly against unionizing and skews the balance in favor of labor unions during negotiations with newly unionized employers. Labor unions see the bill as essential in saving their many under-funded multi-employer pension plans. The bill’s binding arbitration provision could force many employers to enter the unions’ underfunded pension plans, taking away their employees’ opportunity to contribute to tax-deferred 401(k) retirement plans.


I encourage public employees who are unfamiliar with the term to google "layoff" because they are about to get a big, ugly dose of the real world.

Jeff Jacoby wrote this last September. Sadly it's just as true today as it was then. That's what happens when unions spend $400 million to make sure the politicians watch their backs at taxpayers' expense.

Americans increasingly fall into one of two camps. Those who work for the government - about 15 percent of the labor force - tend to enjoy sumptuous perks, virtually indestructible job security, and pensions that are guaranteed for life. The rest of us work in the private economy, where millions of jobs can be wiped out by a recession, defined-benefit pensions are disappearing, and competition and downsizing are facts of life.


What does this mean in dollars?

In 2008, total federal civilian compensation averaged $119,982 - more than twice the $59,908 in wages and benefits earned by the average private-sector employee. This gap has doubled since 2000.

It isn’t only at the federal level that the political class so handsomely takes care of its own. “State and local government workers get paid an average of $25.30 an hour, which is 33 percent higher that the private sector’s $19,’’ Forbes magazine reports. “Throw in pensions and other benefits and the gap widens to 42 percent.’’


Remember in November.

Tuesday, April 27, 2010

President Bailout

Pres. "Bailout Barry" Obama has reportedly insisted that Sen. Dodd stop negotiating with Senate Republicans on the "financial reform" bill. You see, he thinks it's good politics to have Harry Reid hold a cloture vote a day and label Republicans as tools of the Wall St. fatcats. This is a highly cynical strategy considering that the list of major donors to his election campaign looks like a rogues gallery of the architects of the great recession.

Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac: $126,349

Goldman Sachs: $994,795

Citigroup: $701,290

JP Morgan Chase: $695,132

Morgan Stanley: $514,881

Even though Goldman Sachs has been charged by the SEC with civil fraud, President Obama has yet to return a penny of their donations. These companies made out like bandits thanks to the American taxpayer through TARP. All we have received in return is a nearly worthless AIG and stakes, along with the UAW in GM and Chrysler.

There is a reason that Goldman and the other big banks support Dodd/Franks, it's because it decreases competition while promising nearly unlimited access to the federal treasury if their future bets go sour like those on the sub-prime mortgage market. The House bill caps taxpayer exposure at $4 trillion, the Senate bill doesn't have a cap, which means unlimited exposure. How is this supposed to prevent the big banks from engaging in risky behavior? This bill is TARP on steroids, HGH and what else you got? Instead it will mean that banks like USAA that serves our military and their family members' will need to curtail the services they provide.

Senate Republicans should hold the line until they get major concessions that will actually benefit average Americans and not the politically connected big banks on Wall St.

Mr. President, Return Goldman's Dirty Dough

The Senate is about to bring the execs of Goldman Sachs in for a dressing down for reportedly making $3.7 billion by shorting the mortgage market. Today's hearing will see the usual bloviating from Senators and incriminating e-mails like:

"According to Sparks, that business is totally dead, and the poor little subprime borrowers will not last so long!!!" Tourre wrote in a March 7, 2007, email to his girlfriend.


and

"Just made it to the country of your favorite clients!!! I'm managed (sic) to sell a few abacus bonds to widow and orphans that I ran into at the airport, apparently these Belgians adore synthetic abs cdo2," Tourre wrote in June 2007


The one missing ingredient from the typical Capitol Hill theatre is a call to return campaign donations from the pariah company/individual du jour. With Enron politicians couldn't get rid of the donations fast enough. Same with Abramoff. With the SEC indicted Goldman, not so much. Considering that Goldman was at the center of the collapse of the sub-prime mortgage market that led to the great recession you have to wonder about the double standard.

President Obama received $994,795 from employees of Goldman in 2007 and 2008 at the same time the company was betting that the mortgage market would collapse, taking the American economy with it. He hasn't returned a penny of this blood money. Since his campaign committee, Obama for America simply morphed into Organizing for America, the president has a vehicle to return the cash. If O for A can't cover that amount, the money should come from the coffers of the DNC, since Mr. Obama is the titular head of the Democratic party.

I think $994,795 would make a nice start for a scholarship fund for the children of the miners who died in West Virginia, whose funeral he not only attended, but addressed.