Black Like Me in Missouri

Black Like Me in Missouri

Ted Folkert

August 16, 2014

There was a book for assigned reading in a college human relations class 40 some years ago that really comes to mind with all of the turmoil over the Ferguson, Missouri incident of Michael Brown’s seemingly unnecessary killing by a police officer.

The calls for criminal justice, the calls for demonstration, the calls for violence, and the calls for calm and nonviolence are all valid by those whose voices are heard. None are all wrong and none are all right. The validity or necessity of the calls for action or inaction depends upon the place in society, the vantage point, of the participants.

The book, “Black Like Me”, written by John Howard Griffin, first published in 1961, was an enlightening educational experience which, for most readers, reflected a different light on the challenges of life as a black person in a white dominated and racially prejudiced country. He traveled throughout the South disguised as a black man and documented his experiences of disgusting discrimination.

We cannot fairly judge this incident without all of the facts and we don’t have all of the facts. A police officer’s job is obviously more challenging and dangerous than most of us would be willing to endure, so this police officer’s role certainly cannot be judged by someone who has never faced these challenges. Like a close relative told me once when we were discussing how he approached his job as a police officer on the streets of Kansas City, “I just want to return home to my family every day in the same condition as when I went to work.”

If you read Black Like Me, you can easily see the other side of the story about the everyday life of a black person, an everyday life full of challenges that most of us would choose not to endure, such as discrimination in education, employment, social experiences – life in general – denial of equal opportunity and enjoyment of life at every turn.

It is easy to see that, as a member of the minority community, the enraged demonstrators have endured these experiences throughout life and have witnessed discriminatory actions against innocent and guilty members of their community and immediately assume this incident as just one more of the same – one more of the same unrelenting discriminatory actions against blacks just because they are black.

This police officer may be guilty of murder. Michael Brown may be guilty of strong arm theft or robbery and resisting arrest. There may be what Paul Harvey used to call “the rest of the story.” Until we have the rest of the story we can’t judge this tragic incident fairly.

However, as Michael’s parents and friends would have it, we could use this incident to better understand the challenges of police officers and the challenges of being black. We could use it to change our individual attitudes about racial discrimination – simply because this incident could have been caused by racial discrimination either on the part of the police officer or on the part of Michael Brown, due to what we have caused him to endure in his lifetime. Think about this police officer and the job he is assigned to do. Think about Michael Brown’s life in the black community, where the majority are black and most all of the police officers are white.

Think about it!

Selective Memory of the Elite Media

Selective Memory of the Elite Media

Ted Folkert

July 31, 2014

How quickly our media moguls forget about the integrity, or lack thereof, of those who negotiate themselves (or stumble) into powerful foreign policy decision-making. Perhaps this helps to explain why our sad and abusive foreign policy has been soft pedaled by the press all these years. Of course, a powerful and benevolent country such as ours could do no wrong when dealing with foreign countries, even when we are forcing regime changes to meet our will or the will of some of our behemoth corporations or the whims of some of our misguided fearless leaders.

Eric Alterman, one of our leading home run hitters in the liberal media these days, has just hit another one out of the park in his Nation Magazine article: “Don’t Know Much About History.” He points out how lies, deception and corruption preceded the Vietnam and Iraq wars and now Henry Kissinger, in evading history entirely, calls them “idealistic”. Alterman states: “After all, it was “history” – which in contemporary American political culture, is another word for “irrelevant”. And it is this contempt for history, as the cliché correctly advises, that condemns our nation to continually repeat it.”’

As another example of the selective memory of the press, he points out that “Elliott Abrams is able to mouth off as a respected Senior Fellow for Middle East Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations, attacking Barack Obama … as The Man Who Broke the Middle East”, as the fact is ignored that “he was disbarred in the District of Columbia for his lies to Congress about … crimes in which he participated while serving in the Reagan administration.”

“ …. How about the fact that this criminal, while serving on the National Security Council during Bush II, himself helped break the Middle East by undermining the 2006 Palestinian elections, which helped lead to the creation of a Hamas-run rump state in Gaza in the first place. Yet he somehow gets away with the crazy claim that “the Middle East that Obama inherited in 2009 was largely at peace” in order to blame its alleged collapse on the president.”’

Alterman points out that …. “.… rehabilitations of Henry Kissinger and Elliott Abrams demonstrate, being a known liar and an arguable (Kissinger) or unarguable (Abrams) enabler of genocide is no barrier to career advancement in the American establishment, thanks to the collective amnesia of its most elite institutions, especially its elite media.”

Alterman cites other liars, such as Dick and Liz Cheney in The Weekly Standard, and William Kristol in numerous publications, stating that “as Kristol, Cheney, Abrams and Kissinger demonstrate over and over, success within our political punditocracy means never having to say you’re sorry.

Think about!

Read the article: http://www.thenation.com/article/180680/dont-know-much-about-history

 

Jim Hightower Defines Antonin Scalia

Jim Hightower Defines Antonin Scalia

Ted Folkert

July 30, 2014

Well, the stuff has apparently hit the fan in the race to wrest control of the largess of the public treasury and all of the political advantages and rewards that control of the government can bestow upon the winners of the winner-take-all contest. Or should we call it an all-out war? A war of the rich and powerful against the poor and powerless; a war of the plutocracy against the proletariat; a war of the privileged class against the working class.

This, of course, is a direct result of the supreme court (it is difficult to capitalize these two words) decision the allow the behemoth corporations and the rich and powerful plutocracy to buy the 500 seats in the Senate and the House along with the executive branch of our government. This is just the start. Once this is accomplished and they have total control of the three branches of government, three branches established to provide balance and prevent this from happening, then they can pack all of the courts with like-minded judges. Then the revolution will be complete. Then we will have the aristocracy and plutocracy that we deserve due to our willingness to stand aside and let it happen, our lack of understanding of what is happening, our preoccupation with enjoying every moment and ignoring the fact that we may be leaving a real mess for future generations and perhaps an uninhabitable planet.

Thanks to Jim Hightower we still have someone who is willing to call them like he sees them. Jim says, “So many absurdities abound in our lives that there’s a whole body of philosophical thought called “absurdism”, as well as an entire catalogue of plays called the “theater of the absurd.” And then there’s Antonin Scalia.”’

“This sour, scowling, and snarky Supreme Court Justice personifies the dictionary definition of absurd: “Utterly or obviously senseless, illogical, or untrue; contrary to all reason or common sense; laughably foolish or false.”’

“A right-wing dogmatist and extreme judicial activist who’s full of himself, Scalia has been the court’s chief monkey-wrencher for corporate interests, constantly messing with the Constitution to enthrone plutocratic money over our people’s democratic politics.”

Wow, I don’t think Jim Hightower will get invited to Scalia’s office party this year – just a hunch.

And to add more fuel the fire, Jim goes on to say: “… who’s either sublimely ignorant about the core democratic beliefs of a key author (Thomas Jefferson) of our founding documents; an ideological delusionalist; or a shameless liar.”

That should add enough frosting on the cake.

Jim Hightower’s recent article in the “Hightower Lowdown” (brilliant as usual) underscores the work being done to support the drive for a constitutional amendment to repair the damage done by the current wrecking crew, the supreme court. He mentions: Public Citizen, Common Cause, People for the American Way, Free Speech for People, Move to Amend, democracyforpeople.org, and others.

He reminds us that 84% on Independents, 82% of Democrats, and 72% of Republicans are against the Citizens United ruling. They give a movement for a constitutional amendment a good running start.

Please read the article. You will be glad you did and it may encourage you to get involved.

The Senate will soon vote on an amendment to overturn Citizens United. History is calling!

http://www.hightowerlowdown.org/node/3696#.U9kzrLFG1fg

Vargas Distracts From Cause

This article by Raul Reyes, son of Adolfo and Lupe Reyes, appeared in USA Today.

Vargas arrest at border distracts from cause: Column

Instead of bringing attention to child migrant crisis, activist made himself the story.

 

Maybe this was bound to happen sooner or later. Jose Antonio Vargas, arguably the most famous undocumented immigrant in the USA, was detained today by immigration officials in McAllen, Texas, when he attempted to board a plane en route to Los Angeles without proper documentation. A picture of him in handcuffs has gone viral on social media, resulting in a Twitter campaign — #IStandWithJose — to draw attention to his plight.

Vargas, who was later released, is a tremendous journalist who has been an outstanding voice for undocumented immigrants. However, inserting himself into the child migrant crisis might not be the ideal way to help the thousands of children languishing in Department of Homeland Security detention — or to pursue his broader goal of promoting immigration reform.

Vargas was sent to the USA illegally as a child by his Filipino relatives, and did not find out he was undocumented until he was 16. He later wrote about his experiences as an undocumented American for The New York Times Magazine and in a cover story for Time Magazine. He has testified before Congress on the need for immigration reform. Still, he may be testing the limits of his activism by getting himself detained in Texas.

In an interview with the Dallas Morning News, Vargas acknowledged the risk of getting stuck in Texas because of his immigration status. “The feeling of being stuck and trapped by our broken immigration system is very familiar to undocumented people like me,” he said. “But it’s even more pronounced for undocumented immigrants who live in the border. And now I’m trapped like they are.”

Yet Vargas was not trapped like other undocumented immigrants are. He was able to rally some of his 45,000 Twitter followers to press for his speedy release, and can continue to pen long-form articles about his immigration problems in Politico. Unlike other undocumented immigrants, Vargas is well known to virtually every major media outlet in the country. His unique standing gives him a platform — even while in detention — that no other undocumented immigrant can claim.

Vargas’ detention does not reflect too well on his personal judgment. His decision to go to the border was not necessary to draw attention to the child migrant crisis; that deplorable situation is already receiving saturation coverage. If he was indeed going to McAllen to report on the border crisis, he should have taken pains to ensure that he could travel without incident.

After all, one of the primary rules of journalism is that a reporter should not make himself part of the story. Unintentionally, Vargas is even playing into the narrative that the current border crisis is about illegal immigration, rather than it being a humanitarian crisis.

During the few hours that Vargas had been detained, Latino advocacy organizations and other immigrant groups demanded that he be released as soon as possible. Although they were right that Vargas should be freed, consider that his personal situation is temporarily dominating the headlines. Plus, Vargas has given the Obama administration one more unnecessary immigration headache. By releasing him quickly, it might smack of special treatment. This distraction was the last thing the administration needed as President Obama prepares to roll out his executive action on immigration in August.

Certainly, there is a case to be made that Vargas should not have been taken into custody. Under the terms of the Obama administration’s 2011 “prosecutorial discretion” memo, immigration enforcement actions are supposed to prioritize violent criminals — which Vargas certainly is not. Still, he was at an airport attempting to board a plane without a government-issued ID. This was knowingly risky behavior, and he paid the price — if only temporarily. And Transportation Security Administration officials who turned him over to the Border Patrol were simply doing their jobs.

The child migrant crisis at the border should not be a story about Jose Antonio Vargas. This is a story that still cries out for a compassionate government response, not a distracting media sideshow.

Raul Reyes is an attorney in New York and a member of USA TODAY’s Board of Contributors.

Republican Party Smoke & Mirrors

Republican Party Smoke & Mirrors

Ted Folkert

July 24, 2014

The Republicans have been in such a hissy over the Affordable Care Act that they may collapse out of frustration due to their failure to derail the first successful attempt to provide universal healthcare in the history of our country. This law has caused them a painful meltdown and left them embarrassed in the face of their wealthy corporate supporters. This is a law which was approved by the House of Representatives and the Senate and signed by the president. The last I heard those were the requirements to enact a law in this country.

Of course, the House passed this before the Tea Party took control of the House. Once they got control they have been viciously and tenaciously attempting to repeal the law. They have been unable to do so and simultaneously unable to explain their reasoning, other than that it reminds them of Hitler and that it will be the destruction of life as we know it and may even destroy mankind. Boy, what a stretch! The House has not only failed to repeal the Affordable Care Act, they have been unable to do anything positive – period

Their miserable approvable rating is well deserved since they have done absolutely nothing except attempt to prevent Obama from accomplishing anything to improve life for those suffering from the economic debacle created by the funding arm of the Republican Party, the rich and powerful corporations. Few would argue with the statement that this may be the worst and most dysfunctional legislature in our history. Surprisingly and sadly, this general feeling of the people doesn’t even seem to bother the head-in-the-sand Republicans. They seem oblivious to criticism as they steadfastly pursue a dismantling of all social programs that were created in our attempt at a democratic form of government. They seem to be oblivious to the fact that we need to improve our educational system as they continuously move to defund it and support private education which benefits their supporters, the behemoth corporations.

They find it easy to ignore the ridiculous condition of healthcare in this country, the most expensive health care system in the civilized world but far from the best system. They wouldn’t even bother to read the article in the Los Angeles Times by Steve Trumble that I read – “Medical debt’s high toll.”

Steve tells us that “the single biggest cause of personal bankruptcy in the United States isn’t job loss or irresponsible use of credit, It’s medical expenses” … and that Harvard researchers who examined a large sample of bankruptcy filings found that more than 60% of all bankruptcies were medical … and even that 10 million insured Americans have medical bills they are unable to pay.

And, guess what? Congress has declined to act on the Medical Debt Responsibility Act, which might help to alleviate some of these unnecessary bankruptcies. In other words, they don’t give a rat’s ass about the plight of the American people unless they happen to own or control a large corporation or happen to be wealthy donors to the Republican Party. Otherwise, we are red meat to be thrown to the lecherous and greedy corporate interests.

This is just one more of the examples, too many to count, of the Republican march toward an aristocracy, an aristocracy that will throw them to the pit bulls as well as soon as the aristocrats-to-be get what they are seeking. And what we will all end up with is a failed system and a slide backwards in education, healthcare and a strong infrastructure to build on for the future. We will end up with joblessness that we can’t even conceive of, a lack of employable skills, and a country without any safety nets for the people as they suffer with unemployment or poor health or lack of working parents.

Think about it!

Convince someone today to help us elect better leaders. Please!

Economic lessons from Kansas

Economic lessons from Kansas

Ted Folkert

July 14, 2014

Well, the State of Kansas made it onto the editorial page of the New York Times today. The tax cuts engineered by the brilliant economic minds of the fearless leaders of Kansas seem to have left to state coffers $338 million short when it came time to pay the bills.

Imagine the shock when they realized that less income and the same expenses makes it difficult to pay everyone. Higher mathematics, of course, is not a requirement for being a state official. All they wanted to do was to reduce the horrendous tax burden on the Kook brothers and all of the other wealthy Kansans – you know, the job creators, those benevolent souls who work hard for the benefit of society and have been robbed blind by this devastating tax burden.

It seems that Moody reduced the state’s debt rating due to lack of confidence in the fiscal management. Ouch! That hurts.

What happened to Governor Brownbrain’s promise? “Our new pro-growth tax policy will be like a shot of adrenaline into the heart of the Kansas economy. It will pave the way to the creation of tens of thousands of new jobs, bring tens of thousands of people to Kansas, and help make our state the best place in America to start and grow a small business.” (I have noticed lots of cars loaded with belongings headed toward the Midwest lately. Many of them were quoted as having said that they were headed for the best place to start and grow as small business in America.)

Well, perhaps it hasn’t been allowed enough time to kick in and fulfill those flighty goals. Maybe Kansas should give it a few more years to achieve the promises. At $338 million, if they let it run for 3 years, it is only a billion dollars. The schools probably don’t need the money anyway. Everyone can just send their kids to private schools. The streets and highways are already in place, no money needed there. The other government services can surely be reduced significantly instead of wasting all of that money wrung from the sweaty brows of the rich and powerful just so it can be wasted on the proletariat.

And now, as ridiculous as it may seem, Mr. Brownbrain is getting some resistance to getting reelected.

Like they say, acts of human kindness never go unpunished.

 

Donors Who Lavish Money on Elite Institutions Only Exacerbate the Wealth Gap

A recent conversation with Pat Hininger made this article by Pablo Eisenberg of particular note. Pat inferred that too many of the rich donors in the Kansas City area seem to only make sizable donations to the theater, the arts or other causes which are able to name something after them or create an enduring notice of their philanthropy.

This article makes it clear that such is the case throughout the country for donations of the rich and powerful and therefore can be more a hindrance than a benefit for the poor and powerless.

Read the article: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/pablo-eisenberg/donors-who-lavish-money-o_b_5577454.html

Donors Who Lavish Money on Elite Institutions Only Exacerbate the Wealth Gap

Pablo Eisenberg, Senior Fellow, Georgetown Public Policy Institute

7/11/14 – Huffington Post

“Most Americans probably think a major goal of philanthropy is to fight poverty. But a closer look reveals that giving by foundations and philanthropists exacerbates wealth inequality in the United States.”

“Look at some of the trends:

  • Thousands of local fundraising groups have been created to raise private money for public schools–and almost all of them channel resources primarily to schools attended by the children of people who live in affluent neighborhoods.
  • Elite colleges and universities are the major beneficiaries of multimillion-dollar gifts, and its those kinds of donations that are a key reason giving to higher education grew 9 percent last year. Yet these institutions are so high-priced, few low-income and working-class students can afford to attend.
  • Arts institutions saw donations soar in the past year, according to “Giving USA,” also because of donations by the wealthy. Most of the institutions that benefit from the bulk of private donations are established institutions that cater to the upper and middle classes. Meanwhile, “Giving USA” showed much smaller gains for social-service groups and other kinds of organizations that raise money primarily from people who aren’t multibillionaires.
  • America’s foundations and wealthiest donors give only a small proportion of their total donations to local and grassroots organizations.

“Philanthropy has always benefited such elite institutions, but as the richest Americans have gotten richer, they are creating an even greater gulf between rich and poor.

“After all, the biggest 10 gifts made so far this year have gone mostly to colleges and hospitals. Harvard, Dartmouth, and the University of Notre Dame are among the biggest beneficiaries. Benioff Children’s Hospital in San Francisco and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center also have received gifts of more than $75-million.

“America’s multimillionaires neglect the institutions that serve poor and working-class students, community colleges, public universities, and smaller non-elite institutions. They don’t seem to care that they are supporting a dysfunctional system that is devoting fewer and fewer resources to teaching, sustains a growing and bloated administrative structure, and ignores the poor and unjust conditions of adjunct faculty that now make up a substantial portion of the college teaching force.

“It is hard to imagine philanthropy will do much to transform the wealth gap anytime soon given the composition of foundation boards, which continue to be dominated by America’s elite and rarely include average citizens or leaders of nonprofits with expertise on the problems grant makers are trying to tackle.”

 

Citigrope – Human Kindness Punished

Here we go again.

Ted Folkert

July 9, 2014

A recent Reuter’s news story tells us that Citigrope is on the verge of paying out $7 billion to settle the probe of their defrauding of investors with falsely rated mortgage securities. Who could imagine a great company like Citigrope doing such a thing? Seems preposterous. I presume that if we read their mission statement we would be assured of their utmost integrity as one of the leading financial firms in the world.

Actually, here is the mission statement from their website:

Financial Ingenuity & Responsible Finance

Citi works tirelessly to provide consumers, corporations, governments and institutions with a broad range of financial services and products. We strive to create the best outcomes for our clients and customers with financial ingenuity that leads to solutions that are simple, creative and responsible.

So, they “strive to create the best outcomes for their clients and customers.” That being the case, this offer of attempting to ease the pain of those that were defrauded is obviously a very benevolent move on the part of this financial behemoth. I am certain that they are fully convinced that they did no wrong and are admitting no wrong doing, but just want to get this behind them so they can move on with their life of helping others – helping them enjoy “the best outcomes.”

Their acceptance of a settlement of these charges that they are not guilty of is just like some homeless guy who confesses to stealing a loaf of bread in order to avoid a longer sentence if found guilty of other thefts, even though he didn’t do any of it. And, of course, in the case of Citigrope, I would imagine those who purportedly conspired in this alleged fraudulent activity are quite willing to allow their stockholders to pay this sum in order for them to avoid any criminal charges for something they didn’t do.

Now Citigrope is a company once headed by the brilliant and heralded Bob Rabid, who assisted Sandy Wild and Bill Cliptum in removing that troublesome Glass-Steagall Act from the path of the financial behemoths such as Citigrope. This, of course opened the door for financial firms large and small to do most any freaking thing they wanted with our money. Our money – the money of working families, retirees, investors, struggling homeowners, pension funds, governments, hospitals, colleges, universities, religious organizations, you name it.

Someone said that they received $45 billion from the government’s Troubled Asset Relief Program, and won a federal bailout that will limit losses on $306 billion of toxic assets. Well, at least this might ease the pain of this $7 billion donation they are about to make. Let’s see: $45 billion + $306 billion – $7 billion – yes, if my math is correct that should cover it.

These benevolent Wall Street behemoths have already displayed their benevolence in these matters. They willingly accepted the bailout money forced upon them against their will in order to restore their financial well-being after they couldn’t pass the stress test so magnanimously bestowed upon them by Timothy Geithner, one of them. Then they willingly accepted the free loans from the Federal Reserve that were forced upon them so they could do more deals. Then they willingly bought up all of the foreclosed homes that the working class were thrown out of because they couldn’t pay the fraudulent loans they were swindled into. Then they willingly agreed to rent to these desperate former-homeowner, homeless families at exorbitant rents. So, my question is, how much more could they have done?

I know that some of us feel that we were hooked and reeled like a hungry fish, then fileted and served to the rich and powerful, then asked to be understanding about it because it is all for the good of the economy. It keeps the “job creators” in the dough so they can continue to create more jobs for us. And obviously we will need more jobs for several reasons: 1) many of those who thought they were retired have lost their retirement funds and now need a job; 2) many of those who thought they were retired are no longer getting any interest income on their retirement funds due to the actions of the Federal Reserve in their moves to improve the economy and keep the behemoths in business; 3) many of those who have been working one job now need 2 or 3 jobs in order to pay the higher housing costs; 4) many individuals and small businesses are suffering from tighter lending requirements brought on by the financial disaster which they had no role in creating.

So, even though Citigrope had nothing to do with this whole debacle, they are considering stepping up to the line and paying an undeserving penalty for trying to help all of us.

Like they say, “acts of human kindness never go unpunished.”

We know they “work tirelessly to provide consumers, corporations, governments and institutions with a broad range of financial services and products.”

Thank goodness they “strive to create the best outcomes for their clients and customers”, otherwise this could have really gotten ugly.

Think about it!

Convince someone today to help us elect better leaders, please!

Meaningful legacies of our fearless leaders

Meaningful legacies of our fearless leaders

Ted Folkert

July 6, 2014

Julie Makinen, NY Times, tells us that the 14th Century Emperor Hongwu, founder of the Ming Dynasty, fought government corruption by executing corrupt officials and using their skins to make chairs and scarecrows.

Are we on to something here? This could be a meaningful deterrent to malfeasance in office.

Just think of the possibilities: a Mumps McConnell scarecrow, a Boohoo Boner crying doll, a pair of Tex Crude, Rank Parry or GW Shrub cowboy boots, a Dark Chainy hunting vest, a Crush Chrusty car cover, an Error Counter crying towel – the possibilities are endless and useful – perhaps more useful than the former contributions of these fearless leaders who served us so gallantly as they distributed the largess of the public treasury to their chosen colleagues and contributors.

Someone I interviewed suggested a Sorry Payme talking rag doll that massacres the English language and spreads pathetic slurs against those who her fans abhor. Another suggested a Bull Clinchton doll that states, in eloquent English, “I didn’t fool around with any of those women.” And still another suggested a Mutt Romper doll with “my wife drives a couple of Cadillacs” tattooed on his forehead.

As you can see, this could go on forever and get continuously more meaningful.

Feel free to add your favorite moniker of one of our fearless leaders to the list. This could become a long list.

One could wonder if such colorful monikers and legacies would catch the attention of the corporate media so all of the people can see the ridiculousness of many of our elected (or should we say selected) officials and the complete ignorance they exhibit and the devastation they bestow upon our so-called democracy.

Think about it!

Convince someone today to help us elect better leaders, please!

Our “Horse & Carriage” Economy

Our “Horse & Carriage” Economy

Ted Folkert

June 21, 2014

Please sing along: “Love and marriage, love and marriage, go together like a horse and carriage, this I tell you brother, you can’t have one without the other.”

You remember that song that Sinatra and many others sang to us all those years. Maybe we can get David Basse to sing it for us.

Well, I am not one to lecture on the subject of “love and marriage”, but I always think about the “horse and carriage” as I incessantly read articles and hear commentary about income and wealth inequality. Love and marriage and horse and carriage seem to apply here too. The facts are what they are. If too much of the income is being captured by too few and too much of the wealth is owned by too few, the economy doesn’t work very well. It doesn’t produce enough jobs and doesn’t provide enough spending to create and maintain needed jobs. “You can’t have one without the other.”

If everyone has a job that pays enough to meet the family needs of food, shelter and clothing and then has a little left over for some discretionary spending, then the economy works quite well. If such is not the case, then it doesn’t work very well. History exemplifies this quite clearly, as do our leading economists. (unless you read Ayn Rand or listen to Tex Crude).

Most of the commentary on this subject evolves into finger pointing, name calling and stereotyping, all if which doesn’t help to resolve the problem of income and wealth inequality. Those on the right side of political idealism tend to call those who are reliant on assistance, such as unemployment insurance or other safety net programs, lazy and irresponsible, leaches on society, the 48%.

Those who are on the left side of political idealism tend to call the rich and powerful the rich and powerful, self-indulgent, self-serving, blood suckers and other disrespectful names, such as the Kook Brothers. Well, anyone who tries to approach the subject of the working class with an open mind knows that none of these stereotypes truly define those on that side of the spectrum. I have employed many people over the last 40 some years, most on the lower end of the wage scale, some somewhat better off. I can’t remember anyone who I employed, worked with, interviewed or interacted with socially who didn’t want to work, earn their way, enough to take good care of their family.

I can’t remember anyone who simply wanted to depend upon social programs for their survival. Where is the dignity in such an existence? Of course, there are those who experienced so much rejection that they gave up and succumbed to a welfare existence, but I doubt if it was ever their first choice. And that would probably be our fault, not theirs.

And anyone who tries to approach the subject of the rich and powerful with an open mind knows that these stereotypes are not true in most cases. Those who worked hard or had good luck, those who were in the right place at the right time, who took advantage of the system, shouldn’t be labeled either. They too are misunderstood. I have had the pleasure of knowing many of them and have represented them in business dealings and managed their assets. They are not villainous, they wanted to grow and prosper and many of them did. They deserve to enjoy the fruits of their labor and to pass on some wealth to their loved ones.

Some of the wealthy choose to pass on some of their wealth to make life better for those who haven’t been so fortunate, particularly some of those who have attained massive wealth, such as Bill and Melinda Gates, Warren Buffett, George Soros and many others. The problem is that they are not creating enough jobs to keep the economy growing. Perhaps growing the economy is no longer capable of improving the condition of the working class. As the economy grows now the increases in income and wealth seem to all rise to the top. This isn’t just because the rich and powerful are greedy, it has many reasons – automation, the global labor pool, global competition in technology, manufacturing, pricing. Some of the problem can be attributed to the rentier class and the investment funds who are taking a big bite out of that society since the vast home foreclosure debacle became a great investment opportunity for investors with unlimited funds available. Many families cannot afford or qualify for home buying and must rent. The rentiers increase the rent enormously all over the country. The renters have less money for discretionary spending, so few jobs are created and new jobs create low wages because most jobs created are low-skill jobs.

None of the economists or politicians seem to have a viable solution to the jobs and livable income problem without income and wealth distribution. Those with the power to legislate choose austerity over rebuilding our crumbling infrastructure, which would create good paying jobs that cannot be outsourced abroad. They choose austerity over unemployment benefits, education, job training and other working class benefits that would grow the economy.

We have choices. We can leave our negligent leaders in office or we can elect new ones. We can leave the taxation system of regression as it is or we can elect leaders who will correct it. Whatever we choose, things will not likely get much better and they will likely get worse unless we redistribute some of the massive wealth accumulated by the few and increase the taxation on income.

Then we can pay for the infrastructure rebuilding and education enhancements that are mandatory in improving the opportunities for the young.

Otherwise we will not have good jobs and we will not have a sustainable economy. It’s like love and marriage, they go together like a horse and carriage, you can’t have one without the other.

Think about it!

Convince someone today to help us elect better leaders, please!

 

 

 

We may have democracy, or we may have wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can't have both. Louis Brandeis