If you believe we need to experience the same debacle the Greeks are, then allow 'Obamascare' to become law along with all his other Progressive ideas and we will become Greece. If you think we are beyond riots I hate to disabuse you with the word Watts!
I know I often sound like an alarmist. However, much of what I have feared and written about has come to pass. Not as soon as I would have thought because there are so many who have a vested interest in keeping the wolf from the door but the problem is they have only delayed the 'knock' not slain the wolf. (See 1 below.)
---
If you think our economy is sick then you should be comforted by this humor: "A distraught senior citizen phoned her doctor's office.
'Is it true,' she wanted to know, 'that the medication you prescribed has to be taken for the rest of my life? '
'Yes, I'm afraid so,' the doctor (probably his P.A) told her .
There was a moment of silence before the senior lady replied,'I'm wondering, then, just how serious is my condition because this prescription is marked 'NO REFILLS'.'
Just imagine...
If you had purchased $1,000 of Delta Airlines one year ago, you would have $49.00 today!
If you had purchased $1,000 of AIG one year ago, you would have $33.00 today.
If you had placed $1,000 in shares of Lehman Brothers one year ago, you would have $0.00 today.
But, if you had purchased $1,000 worth of beer one year ago, drank all the beer,
then turned in the aluminum cans for a recycling refund, you would have received $214.00.
The moral of the story is you have two choices in life - drink it up or suck it up!
---
A good friend and memo reader recently sent me a site that reveals the foreclosure picture for the entire United States by respective town and city and specific dotted location.
A FRIGHTENING SATELLITE TOUR OF AMERICA 'S FORECLOSURE WASTELANDS !
RealtyTrac
On the whole things are getting worse. 72 percent of major metro areas saw an increase in foreclosure volume. Although some of the worst hit areas in Nevada , California and Florida improved from 2009, the foreclosure rate in these areas remains shockingly high. If not for some foreclosure suspensions due to the robosigning scandal, these numbers would have been higher.
For a frightening way to visualize the foreclosure crisis, we're borrowing a Google
I tried it and discovered The White House is on the foreclosure list!
The Saudis are thinking of buying and the real estate agent says they are in a bidding contest with the Chinese. She would not reveal the price but said it would probably go for a steal.
---
From my son - co-owner of Sweet Tammy's bakery in Pittsburgh sent me this article. Food prices are rising throughout the world and this is as big a threat to world stability as Islamism.
All I can say is Holy Cow!(See 2 below.)
Happier to say demand for Sweet Tammy's baked goods has reached the point where they are moving into a new rehabilitated location which should permit them to expand sales and customer store locations at least 7 and 10 times respectively. They now have this new delivery truck that should get some attention! A repainted former school bus outfitted with racks etc.
Hope Shakespeare was right about "All's Well That Ends Well."
---
What Obama wants Obama will not get because his ideas make for great sound bites but are not credible. (See 3 below.)
---
My friend Kyle-Anne believes the nation is in a sand trap and the nation's two most powerful golfers are duffers! (See 4 below.)
---
Our ships may be off Syria's shore but Assad is in control of Lebanon. I believe Assad has the upper hand because Obama's show of force has been trumped again by real action! (See 5 below.)
--
For what it is worth, I believe Unions, Obama and Democrat pandering is far more dangerous both to our nation and union employment than anything Sarah Palin has done or is likely to do. (See 6 below.)
---
A good friend of mine is a solid fund raiser for various politicians and he recently was engaged in raising money for a woman seeking re-election to the House - she is a Democrat. She spoke about Obama off the record and the general feeling among many of her fellow Democrats is not a pretty story but she said they have to work with him as long as he is there.
I have written Obama's support among his strongest constituencies will not be at 2008levels and because it is concentrated in urban area swing states and any shift could be significant. Yes, Blacks and Jews will still vote overwhelmingly for him because they are who they are but Merrill Matthews believes the Spanish vote has weakened and that is why Obama went to Puerto Rico recently.
The Spanish are far more conservative and independent in their thinking and loyalty than slavish Blacks and Jews.(See 7 below.)
Meanhwile Rekha Basu writes critics of Obama should give him a break because he cannot be a shill for corporations and a socialist all at the same time.
'
'Perhaps 'she is correct' but then, when you speak out of both sides of your mouth, 'perhaps she is also wrong.' You decide.(See 7a below.)
---
Dick
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1)Yale’s Shiller: Chances Are 'Substantial' For a New Recession
By Forrest Jones
Chances are 'substantial' that the United States is headed back into a recession, says economist, author and Yale University Professor Robert Shiller.
A weak U.S. housing market and a murky global economy indicate that the country is at a "tipping point" at the edge of a fresh economic contraction.
Even though economic models suggest the economy is on the path to recovery, the United States is in unchartered territory, which makes models less valid due to all the unknowns lurking on the horizon.
"Forecasting models would say no" on the question of whether the U.S. will face a double-dip, Shiller tells The Wall Street Journal.
"But I’m seeing signs that encourage me to worry about that."
Shiller, one of the architects of the S&P Case-Shiller home-price index, says the housing market may see a pickup in prices this summer, but adds he's concerned about the long-term path the sector is taking.
"There might be a turnaround if psychology changes," Shiller says, but "I fear that it may just continue down."
"It just doesn’t look good."
The Federal Reserve has pumped hundreds of billions into the economy in order to spur more robust economic growth, while interest rates stand near zero.
However, all the loose monetary policy in the world won't help if consumer demand just isn't there.
"When the demand isn’t there, you can lower interest rates all the way to zero and people are still not willing to spend — that’s where we are right now," Shiller says.
Another Lehman?
Red flags continue to wave overseas.
The world is watching how Greece navigates itself out of its debt crisis, with concerns growing that the European nation will default and take European — and U.S. — banking sectors on a wild ride with it.
"Stories like this, even if it’s from a small country, can have a vivid impact," Shiller says, adding the collapse of Greece could topple the global banking system similar to the way Lehman Brothers did in 2008.
"I don’t think it’s overblown," Shiller says of such fears.
Home prices dropped 33 percent in 20 cities through March from their 2006 peak, reaching their lowest level since 2003, according to the latest Case-Shiller report on May 31.
The decline means the sector has double-dipped back into negative territory, as the index fell below its previous post-housing-bubble low set in April 2009.
Shiller has said that U.S. housing prices could decline another 10 to 25 percent over the next five years.
"There’s no precedent for this statistically, so no way to predict," Shiller said recently, according to Bloomberg.
With so many houses in foreclosure, prices will stay depressed, especially with unemployment at 9.1 percent and tighter lending restrictions being the norm at many financial institutions.
Other experts agree that high unemployment rates and a tough economy mean housing prices are still well on their way on a downward slope.
"With the foreclosure pipeline still full to bursting, it’s hard to see this downward pressure on prices abating," says Paul Dales, a senior U.S. economist at Capital Economics Ltd. in Toronto, according to Bloomberg.
"I wouldn’t be surprised to see prices continue to fall this year and maybe into next year."
© Moneynews. All rights reserved.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------2)Lessin: Food prices will continue to rise
Food prices expected to increase due to rising price of raw materials and macroeconomic forecasts of future shortages.
By Adi Dovrat-Meseritz
Don't expect relief from the increase in prices any time soon - food prices will continue to rise, forecasts Gadi Lessin, chairman of the Food Industries Association at the Manufacturers Association and CEO of Strauss Group, which among its many other products, makes cottage cheese.
"One of the challenges the food industry will face in the coming years is coping with the rising price of raw materials and with macroeconomic forecasts of future shortages," Lessin told TheMarker. Consumption around the world is rising not only because of population growth, but also, because people are eating better. Looking at long-term trends, Lessin says, in five to 10 years, raw materials will be running short, and this will translate into higher prices.
TheMarker: Are you saying that the price increases we've been experiencing are nothing compared with what's to come?
"I quote leading economists and analysts around the world. This is not my personal theory. This is a huge challenge we all face because at the end of the day, nobody has an interest in product prices increasing. You have to understand, from the end of 2009 to date, the price of wheat has risen by 51%, sugar by 31%, coffee by 114%, diesel by 74% and water by 48%. This inflation is a huge challenge for food manufacturers."
Some raw material prices have dropped. The price of coffee for instance fell throughout 2009, but coffee prices in Israel did not drop.
"Raw material prices have been rising for the last 30 years. It isn't right to look at prices in one given month or a few months. You have to look at the long-term trend. Oil also dropped to $80 per barrel at some point and then flew to $112."
How is it that manufacturers all raise prices more or less together? Strauss announced a price hike on April 27, Tnuva came out with a similar announcement two days later and Tara raised prices a few days after Tnuva.
"I refuse to even comment on that claim."
Does Strauss feel that demand is falling?
"Not yet. I don't think it is because at the end of the day people have to buy food. It isn't a luxury. They might reduce consumption of some products that aren't consumer products."
The prices of some consumer products do make them a luxury. Yellow cheese costs more than NIS 40 per kilo.
"And when you pay double in Israel for a car compared with the price abroad, that isn't crazy? And when you pay double the VAT compared with the average in the rest of the world? And when you pay hundreds of shekels a month for your cell phone?"
Is that supposed to comfort consumers or justify the high food prices?
"It's no comfort and it's a serious matter. Gasoline in Israel costs twice as much as elsewhere because the state charges tax. That's also why cars cost double, and it's very sad. People look at absolute prices and don't understand that when prices and taxes are increased, somebody has to pay for it."
Do you worry about consumer ire?
"Manufacturers have to explain their position more often and much better. They have to make clear that they aren't the ones who set raw material prices. It's populist to say that companies are raising prices."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------3) Obama Wants Engineering Students and 'Diversity'
By David Paulin
President Obama wants America's universities to graduate 10,000 more engineers annually than they're now turning out. He wants more college students to major in math and science. But as universities embrace affirmative action and "diversity" programs supported by Obama and liberals, problems arise. These programs at bottom are aimed at creating a liberal vision of "social justice" -- yet they ultimately dumb down education as merit and excellence are sacrificed for liberal social engineering. In the end, they undermine the very "competitive edge" that Obama says America must maintain.
Consider what's happened at the top-ranked University of Texas, Austin, under an ad hoc affirmative action program called the "top 10 percent rule." It was adopted in 1997 by the state legislature after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled against the state's affirmative action policy at state universities. Yet the rule has dumbed down higher education in Texas, even as universities in other states look to it has a model that allows them to create "diversity" while avoiding reverse discrimination lawsuits.
The original premise of the "top percent rule" was straightforward: Graduating seniors in the top 10 percent of their high school classes were granted automatic admission to the state school of their choice.
Among some perverse outcomes: Students with top grades and high SAT scores (mostly whites) have had their applications rejected by the flagship University of Texas in Austin, yet less qualified students (mostly Hispanics and blacks) have gained admission to that popular and top-ranked school.
This has happened because Hispanics and blacks at poorly performing inner-city high schools are now put on equal footing with whites and Asians at high-performing suburban schools. Grades, SAT scores, and extracurricular activities -- all are less important than class rank under the rule.
Another perverse outcome: Students at top-performing high schools have sought to transfer into poorly performing ones to ensure they graduate in the top 10 percent of their classes.
In 2009, Texas lawmakers scaled back the "top 10 percent rule" for the University of Texas in Austin -- deciding too much "diversity" wasn't such a great idea after all. The previous fall, 81 percent of freshman had been admitted under the 10 percent rule. Now, the university limits freshman admitted under the rule to three-quarters of the class; Republican lawmakers had wanted the limit set at 50 percent.
Even so, the rule over the years achieved what university administrators and liberals had intended: creating a study body whose racial and ethnic makeup reflected the state's demographics, which have become heavily Hispanic in the last decade or so. Whites now make up slightly less than 50 percent of the state's population, thanks in part to illegal immigration from Mexico and Central America and soaring Hispanic birthrates.
Last year, the University of Texas in Austin announced that, for the first time in its history, less than half of freshman were white -- a total of 47.6 percent.
Not surprisingly, Texas universities now offer remedial courses to large numbers of underachieving students; obviously, they would have been better off if they'd started out at junior colleges or less competitive universities. Equally troublesome, students admitted under the "top ten percent rule" at the top-ranked University of Texas in Austin tend to take easy or "popular" subjects -- not science, technology, engineering, and math (the so-called "STEM" courses that, as Obama has observed, are needed for America to maintain its competitive edge).
In another perverse outcome, Texas is suffering a "brain-drain." Many high-achieving white students have gone to out-of-state schools after failing to gain admission into the University of Texas in Austin.
Supporters of the "top 10-percent" rule point out that many freshman admitted under the program earn grade points comparable to fellow students who were admitted under criteria otehr than the 10-percent rule. It's a fallacious argument. For one thing, it overlooks the types of classes the two groups are taking. More importantly, the correct comparison should look at students admitted under the rule and those from top-ranked high schools who were denied admission -- even though they'd earned better grades and SAT scores than minority students from dysfunctional inner-city high schools who'd graduated in the top 10 percent of their classes. Of course, it would be impossible to make that comparison.
Obama is a beneficiary of affirmative action. He's committed to the political ideology of "diversity." Accordingly, he's unlikely to be disturbed by the travails of diversity efforts in Texas, which even The New York Times has been unable to ignore, even as university administrators, liberals, and ethnic lobbies call the program a success and soft-peddle its perverse outcomes.
So what's Obama's solution for inspiring more students to become engineers and major in STEM courses? It's not to attract the best and brightest. Last Monday in Durham, North Carolina, he proposed a government-private educational initiative to "promote STEM education, to offer students incentives [emphasis added] to finish those degrees, and then to help universities fund those programs." Of course, if smart and well-prepared students were being admitted in the first place to the nation's top schools, it's doubtful this program would even be needed and that students would need "incentives" to graduate.
Obama's speech at least got one thing right. "Today," he said, "only 14 percent of all undergraduate students enroll in what we call the STEM subjects -- science, technology, engineering and math. We can do better than that. We must do better than that. If we're going to make sure the good jobs of tomorrow stay in America, stay here in North Carolina, we need to make sure all our companies have a steady stream of skilled workers to draw from."
"We're falling behind in the very fields we know are going to be our future."
Obama, incidentally, was speaking at the headquarters of Cree, Inc. The company has been a beneficiary of the administration's crony capitalism when it comes to its quixotic "green" programs that are supposed to wean America from its addiction to foreign oil and lift it out of its economic mess. Cree uses LED technology to produce fuel-efficient lighting, and in 2009 it got $39 million in tax credits from the Recovery Act (or taxpayers) to develop clean energy technology.
Regarding Cree's employment, Obama failed to mention one embarrassing little detail about its employees. Cree used its "stimulus" money to among other things open a manufacturing plant in Huizhou, China. Now, more than half of its employees work there.
If Obama's example of a "stimulus" success story is anything like his solution for creating future engineers and scientists, Americans have good reason to be very worried about whether America is on track to maintain its competitive edge.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4)The Golf Summit
By Kyle-Anne Shiver
Well, dear readers, this is certainly embarrassing.
While middle-class Americans suffer the ever-more-disastrous consequences of ruling-class profligacy, unfettered public debt, and the immoral greed of corporate and banking oligarchs, our President and the Speaker of the House schedule a golf summit tomorrow. On the links, these two will -- no doubt -- share a few beers and deign to throw out a couple of winks and nods to us little people of the productive class.
Golfing while our Republic burns.
How apropos for the modern era. Quite the evolutionary leap for civilization, is it not? From ancient Rome and their backward ole fiddling, our oh-so-enlightened leaders have discovered the hidden power of the 18 links.
I can almost hear the merry twosome's economic-fix proclamation now:
Hey! Why don't we all just go play golf?
Now, that's one heck of a bipartisan solution, folks. The Democrat social-justice king and the country-club Republican may next be touting the wholly bipartisan slogan, "A new set of clubs in every garage! And a country club membership for all!"
Seriously, are these two men common-sense challenged, or what?
Do they not realize how utterly foolish they look to the rest of the Country? While the citizenry suffers under the yoke of political-class policy failures, and these two leaders cannot -- among all those brilliant-beyond-brilliant policy makers -- find any real solutions, they choose to go play golf together.
How utterly humiliating.
Now, lest you be tempted, dear readers, to believe that I bear a long-simmering hatred for the game of golf and am merely using this column to vent my own "issues," let me assure you that I hold nothing against the game of golf.
Well, I would be a bit less than candid if I didn't own up to having indulged temporary grudges against the game, at times when I've felt my links-loving husband was giving it too much time or treasure in his eternal quest to shave one more point from his "handicap" -- whatever that is. However, as the wife of a golfing guy for more than 4 decades now, I long ago made my peace with the game and even learned to recognize its true benefits. A husband out golfing is a husband not reorganizing the kitchen because he has too much time on his hands. And I'm fully convinced that golfing provides many a high-drive male with a necessary release for excess aggression and orneriness.
But, really, leaders golfing when they ought to be rolling up their little sleeves, putting their little noses to the grindstone and donning their thinking caps in full resolved-to-fix-the-economy mode -- well, it's enough to drive any sane citizen to the very brink.
A mere month ago, our own president ceded leadership of the entire free world to that tiny sliver-nation by the Mediterranean, Israel. While President Obama hammed it up for his still-star-struck Obamaphiles in Europe, Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu was over here leading from the front of our own Congress.
While Barack showed the Brits his "lead-from-behind" prowess at a ping-pong table, Bibi was over here deftly taking the mantle of Churchill. And all Obama could offer in vainglorious glee was the "But I got Bin-laden" defense, which by now is just another tiresome refrain from Barack's me-myself-and-I choral repertoire. Not only did our Eddie Haskell president not get Bin Laden (Our incomparable Navy SEALS did the deed.), our Eddie Haskell Obama actually had the unmitigated gall to be playing golf while our SEALS were putting their real lives in danger in Pakistan.
What we Americans have before us now is the inescapable fact that the Israelis produced a genuine leader of historical proportion from a population less than many states, while from amongst our base of 300+ million, we ended up with a guy who bows, scrapes, winks, nods, bends over backwards, shoots hoops, sips Slurpees in flip-flops -- and to top it all off -- chases a little white ball around with a bunch of clubs, wearing sissy shorts and a baseball cap.
Actually, "humiliating" is becoming too mild a word here.
The man who catapulted -- with one teleprompter under each arm -- into the Oval Office, vowing hope in big-government could actually -- this time! -- be made to bear tasty fruit, has made every single thing he has touched with his adolescent finger worse, worse, worse. The president who vowed to "fundamentally transform America" never mentioned on the campaign trail that the "change" he was imagining would impoverish Americans, while making us the economic slaves of the rest of the world. Nor do I recall candidate Obama letting the public know that he was so addicted to golf that he wouldn't forsake another 18 for presidential Memorial Day observance -- even as he commands three foreign wars, one of them blatantly illegal.
So, as middle-class Americans worry themselves sick with economic stress and uncertainty in this simply grand Obama economy, our adolescent President hits the links with our Speaker of the House. Now, I've read that the Beltway Boys have invited the governor of Ohio, John Kasich, to join them for their jolly golf summit.
And really, truly, I cannot decide whether to grab the smelling salts, my hanky or another bottle from my dwindling supply of Pepto Bismol.
Are these supposedly grown-up men even aware of their symbolic infantilization of this country's genuine plight? From where I'm sitting -- in Obama-induced middle-class homemaker hell -- the "golf summit" reeks of good-ole-boys playing while their civilization faces destruction.
And I'm wondering why these "leaders" don't even have the sense to know this.
Golfing while America burns? Oh, what an impressive leap into progressive utopia.
At this moment I would pay really big money for a little red pill guaranteed to knock me out until election day 2012. This spectacle is becoming too torturous to endure while sober.
Kyle-Anne Shiver is an independent citizen journalist and a frequent contributor to American Thinker and Pajamas Media.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------5)Lebanon has a radical new government. It gives Assad his second front
After five months of political stagnation, Lebanon has a new government headed by Najib Mikati, ally of Syrian President Bashar Assad and Hizballah. Formed suddenly on June 13, the 30-minister lineup has awarded an unprecedented number of portfolios – 18, including defense interior – to Hizballah loyalists and pro-Syrian politicians. Gone is the careful sectarian balancing act which maintained a measure of equilibrium and kept civil war in Lebanon at bay.
The breakthrough was directly spawned by the Syrian uprising: The Shiite Hizballah capitalized on neighboring unrest to grab its largest slice of government ever. Assad set up a second front against his foes in Beirut, added muscle to his military repression at home and signaled the US, Turkey and Europe that attempts to topple his regime risked sparking civil strife and chaos in neighboring Lebanon. The peril of inflaming the entire Levant was meant to deter foreign military intervention in Syria.
Furthermore -
1. Lebanon's first pro-Syrian defense minister can bend the Lebanese army to the will of Damascus and the pro-Iranian HizballIah. The minister, Suleiman Franjiyeh, belongs to the influential northern Lebanese Christian clan whose private militia is traditionally funded by the Assad family in Damascus. So next time Hizballah coordinates with Syria a mass Palestinian demonstration to storm the two frontiers – as it did on May 15 - the Lebanese army will not be there to block its advance. A clash with Israeli troops would then become inevitable on both fronts.
2. Franjiyeh can count on firm support from the new interior minister, Brig. Gen. Marwan Charbel, one of his followers who will control all the national intelligence and security services. Close cooperation between the two promises Damascus and Hizballah total grip on every aspect of security - domestic and external. Pro-Western agencies in Lebanon are in for hard times.
General Charbel is close to another Christian powerhouse with a role in government, Gen. Michel Aoun, leader of the Free Patriotic Movement and Hizballah's chief Christian ally.
This interior minister was chosen to cement the disparate parts of government and push the Christian President Gen. Michel Suleiman into a corner from which he has no choice but to kowtow to an administration which is the tool of Damascus and Hizballah.
3. Aoun's Christian bloc was awarded eight ministerial portfolios, including the important justice, energy minister and telecommunications.
For years, Hizballah coveted telecommunications because of its control over Lebanon's satellite communications, landline and cellular phone systems as well as radio and television networks. When denied this post, Hizballah used Iranian funding to establish its own independent media networks.
Now telecommunications is in friendly hands.
4. Damascus and Hizballah have also attained command of Lebanon's judicial and security systems in time to anticipate the international court's publication of indictments for the 2005 assassination of the former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafiq Hariri. According tips they have received, the Special Tribunal for Lebanon-STL plans to issue indictments against Syrian military intelligence officials and members of Hizballah's security and intelligence organizations at the end of this month or in early July. Publication will come with warrants for the arrest and extradition of these suspects.
Damascus sees Washington's long arm behind this move for the purpose of punishing Assad for his harsh punishment of Syrian dissenters. The new Lebanese government is structured to outmaneuver the special tribunal by issuing a statement invalidating its authority and refusing to obey its decrees.
5. The pro-Iranian and pro-Syrian government installed now in Beirut is a major shot in the arm for the radical Iranian-Syrian-Hizballah alliance which sagged after the loss of one of its senior members, Turkey.
Up until the eruption of the Arab Revolt in December 2010, Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan was a prominent member of this bloc, viewing it as the vehicle for fulfilling his dream of a dominant regional role and serving as the bridge between the Muslim world and the West.
In the last three months, Erdogan established rapport with US President Barack Obama, as a result of which Iran, Syria and Hizballah decided to drop him. The new Lebanese government makes it possible to replace Turkey by Lebanon, the state, rather than Hizballah, the movement, as a full-fledged member of their alliance.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6)Union-owned and operated
By CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER
"Shovel-ready was not as shovel-ready as we expected," observed President Obama this week, enjoying a nice chuckle about the unhappy fate of his near-$1 trillion stimulus. To be sure, Obama has also been promoting a less amusing remedy for anemic growth and high unemployment: exports. In this year's State of the Union address, he proclaimed a national goal of doubling exports by 2014.
One obvious way to increase exports is through free-trade agreements. But unions don't like them. No surprise then that for two years Obama has been sitting on three free-trade agreements – with Colombia, Panama and South Korea – already negotiated by his predecessor.
Under the pressure of dire economic conditions and of the consequences of stiffing three valued allies, Obama appeared ready to relent – only to put up a last-minute roadblock. He's demanding an expansion of Trade Adjustment Assistance – taxpayer money (beyond unemployment compensation) given to workers displaced by foreign competition, something denied to Americans rendered unemployed by domestic competition. It's an idea of dubious fairness but nicely designed to hold up ratification, while placing blame on Republican heartlessness rather than on political sabotage by Democrats beholden to unions for the millions they pour into Democratic coffers. (A deal reportedly may be near. But the years of delay have been costly.)
Nothing new here. In 2009, Obama pushed through a federally run, questionably legal, bankruptcy for the auto companies that robbed first-in-line creditors in order to bail out the United Auto Workers. Elsewhere, Delta Air Lines workers have voted four times to reject unionization. A federal agency, naturally, is investigating and, notes economist Irwin Stelzer, can order still another election in the hope that it yields the answer Obama's campaign team wants.
But Democratic fealty to unions does not stop there. Boeing has just completed a production facility in South Carolina for its new 787 Dreamliner. The National Labor Relations Board, stacked with Democrats – including one former union lawyer considered so partisan that he required a recess appointment after the Senate refused to confirm him – is trying to get the plant declared illegal. Why? Because by choosing right-to-work South Carolina, Boeing is accused of retaliating against its unionized Washington state workers for previous strikes.
In fact, Boeing has increased unionized employment by more than 2,000 at its Puget Sound plant. Moreover, the idea that a company in a unionized state can thus be prohibited from expanding into right-to-work states by a partisan regulatory body is quite insane. It violates the fundamental principle in a free-market economy that companies can move and build in response to market conditions, rather than administrative fiat. It jeopardizes the economic recovery, not only targeting America's single largest exporter in its attempt to compete with Airbus for a huge global market, but also threatening any other company that might think of expanding in any way displeasing to unions and their NLRB patrons.
Obama has been utterly silent in the Boeing affair. Which is understood by all as tacit approval. He's facing re-election next year. And Democrats need unions.
Of course, unions need Democrats – who deliver quite faithfully. In last year's nationwide "shellacking" of Democrats, for example, Wisconsin gave Republicans control of both legislative chambers and elected a Republican governor who made clear his intention to rein in public-sector union power.
When the Republicans tried to do as promised, Democrats, lacking the votes, tried to block it by every extra-parliamentary maneuver short of arson. State Senate Democrats fled Wisconsin to prevent a quorum. Demonstrators filled the statehouse for days and nights on end. And when the bill finally passed nonetheless, Dane County's Democratic district attorney went to court to have it thrown out on procedural grounds.
They found a pliant judge to invalidate the law. A famous victory, but short-lived. On Tuesday, the Wisconsin Supreme Court overturned the ruling, upbraiding the judge for having "usurped the legislative power which the Wisconsin Constitution grants exclusively to the Legislature." The law is reinstated.
Instructive cases all, demonstrating how those who lose popular support – Democrats at the polls, unions in their declining membership – can subvert and circumvent the popular will by judicial usurpation (Wisconsin) or administrative fiat (Boeing).
The Wisconsin maneuver ultimately failed, as likely will the assault on Boeing. In the interim, however, there is collateral damage – to U.S. exports, to the larger economy, to bankruptcy law, to free trade, to a constitutional system wherein the legislatures make the laws, rather than willful judges and partisan regulators.
But what are those when there are unions to appease and elections to win?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
7)Hispanics Won’t Save Obama in 2012
By MERRILL MATTHEWS
President Barack Obama is hoping his visit to Puerto Rico will shore up the Hispanic vote for Democrats, but more importantly for his 2012 re-election bid.
The media choir has been singing a similar tune, especially since the U.S. Census Bureau recently released a new report, “The Hispanic Population: 2010,” which documents the disproportionately large growth in the Hispanic population.
According to the 2010 Census, there were 308.7 million people residing in the U.S. on April 1, 2010, of which 50.5 million (16 percent) were of Hispanic or Latino origin.
In addition, the Bureau asserted, “More than half of the growth in the total population of the United States between 2000 and 2010 was due to the increase in the Hispanic population.” Since Hispanics tend to vote Democratic—67 percent for Obama in 2008, according to a post-election poll cited in the New York Times—the Obama campaign thinks that growth could swing important states to the president.
That thinking is as wishful, and deluded, as the happy talk that surrounded the president’s economic policies and “shovel-ready” stimulus efforts that were going to get the country working again. Here’s why.
People ≠ Voters — That New York Times story pointed out that only 10 million Latinos voted in the 2008 election, 9 percent of all voters, and that was a record high. Why so low? For one thing, the Hispanic population is younger than the general population: 27.4 years was the median age for Hispanics in 2009, vs. 36.8 years for the U.S. Younger ages are less likely to vote, and a disproportionately large percentage of Hispanics aren’t even of voting age.
Another important point: No one knows how many of those 50 million Hispanics are citizens eligible to vote. The Census counts people in the U.S., not citizens. Someone from the Bureau told me that interviewers do not ask about citizenship nor do they record citizenship status. There has been a groundswell of Hispanics entering the U.S. over the last decade, some legally but many not, which has led to a huge national debate over immigration. How many of the 15.2 million more Hispanics (between 2000 and 2010) are eligible to vote? We simply don’t know from Census surveys, but it’s reasonable to think that many, and perhaps most, can’t—at least not legally.
The Electoral College Decides — The Electoral College, not the popular vote, decides who will be president. If none of those 50 million new Hispanics lived in California, President Obama would likely get all of the state’s 55 electoral votes; if all of them lived in California—and the largest number do—and they all vote for Obama he would still get … 55 electoral votes.
So the question for presidential election purposes is as much about where those votes are as how many there are. The Census Bureau says 75 percent of the Hispanic population is located in eight states: California, Texas, Florida, New York, Illinois, Arizona, New Jersey and Colorado. Of those states, California, New York, Illinois and New Jersey will very likely remain blue in the next presidential election, while Texas and Arizona will almost certainly remain red. Colorado, which has been trending blue, and Florida, which leans red but not by much, could be swayed.
Of the nine states where the Hispanic population more than doubled—Alabama, Arkansas, Kentucky, Maryland, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee and South Dakota—eight are in the south and all but one, Maryland, either lean or are strongly red.
The point is that a burgeoning Hispanic population may lead to a major shift in voting patterns at some point in the future, but not 2012. That said, there are some important swing states—e.g., Florida, Pennsylvania, North Carolina and Colorado—that could be affected by Hispanic votes next year.
Hispanics Are Diverse — The Census Bureau struggles with identifying a “Hispanic” since it is not a race, but more a place of origin, such as Central or South America or countries located in the Caribbean. Needless to say, there are lots of differences among these populations. Puerto Ricans living on the mainland, for example, tend to vote Democratic; those of Cuban descent tend to vote Republican. But the largest Puerto Rican population is in New York, which will vote for Obama anyway. In swing-state Florida, however, Cubans outnumber Puerto Ricans by 400,000.
Hispanics Are More Affected by a Bad Economy — A lot has been made of the notion that the Hispanic population, many of whom are Catholic, tend to embrace conservative social values but liberal economic policies. And those conservative social values give Republicans an opportunity to attract them to the GOP.
But the real opportunity for the GOP to get their presidential vote in 2012 comes from the devastating impact President Obama’s economic policies have had on lower-income families. Texas, where I live, has the second largest Hispanic population; they come mostly from Mexico and Central America, according to the Census. Most are hard workers who take service sector jobs in agriculture, construction, yard and landscape work, and restaurants. When the economy goes south, they are some of the first and hardest hit.
Those who are citizens and can vote may decide that Obama has had his chance. The recession officially ended in June of 2009, yet two years later the unemployment rate at 9.1 percent is still disastrously high—and much higher for Hispanics. Even more troubling, the president seems befuddled about what to do next.
Of course, Obama may still get more Hispanic votes than his Republican challenger, but that doesn’t mean he wins; Sen. John Kerry won the Hispanic vote over President Bush in 2004 by 9 percentage points, and Bush still won. But there is little reason to think, both for demographic reasons and the sour economy, that Hispanics will provide Obama with a victory in 2012.
However, the Census Bureau publication does point to a trend that neither party can ignore. Hispanics are becoming a larger and more politically potent force in U.S. politics. The party that moves to provide them with the greatest opportunities, not the most handouts, is the one that will capture their allegiance for the long term.
Merrill Matthews is a resident scholar with the Institute for Policy Innovation in Dallas, Texas.
7a)No breaks for Obama; a socialist and a shill for business?
By REKHA BASU
It is easy to criticize President Barack Obama for all the things he has not done, or not done quickly or firmly or well enough. The hopes he created during the election were so high, and the economy was so bleak, that he was bound to disappoint. But sometimes he can't win for losing.
He inherited a financial disaster: banks failing, homes in foreclosure, free trade agreements driving jobs to other countries and wars driving spending into the stratosphere. His predecessor had slashed taxes to corporations and the wealthiest Americans and had initiated a bank bailout.
Yet Obama is somehow tagged as the one giving up the store to corporate America. In Monday's Republican debate, Tim Pawlenty accused government and big business of being in an unsavory alliance. Mitt Romney accused Obama of being "out of touch" with ordinary Americans -- Romney, whose net worth was between $190 million and $250 million in 2007.
What's amazing is how opponents can portray Obama as both a shill for corporations and a socialist.
His health care reform plan to reduce the number of uninsured and prevent one of the biggest causes of personal debt and bankruptcies is ridiculed as socialist and is held hostage in Congress. Michele Bachmann even claimed, citing the Congressional Budget Office, that health reform could destroy 800,000 jobs. What the budget office actually said: 800,000 people might feel free to leave their jobs if they didn't need them to get health care.
It's one thing to be attacked over what are fundamental differences in party philosophies. Bachmann criticized "job killing" environmental regulations and Newt Gingrich called for de-funding the National Labor Relations Board. But none of his would-be opponents would name a thing Obama has done right for the economy, even in supporting business. Mitt Romney blamed the General Motors bailout for giving the company to auto workers.
Most Americans disapprove of Obama's handling of the economy, according to new polls. Even the Today Show's Ann Curry accuses him of being calm rather than angry that 14 million Americans are unemployed: "People have started to wonder ... whether you really empathize with the suffering."
Et tu, Ann?
So, what should he be doing? If you're a Republican, cutting taxes on businesses to stimulate hiring. If you're a Democrat, creating public sector jobs.
Liberal economic analysts focuses on increasing demand -- not cutting spending -- and growing revenues, which are down in part because of corporate tax loopholes and tax cuts to the rich. They object to Obama's agreement with Congress to extend tax cuts to the wealthy in exchange for extending unemployment benefits.
"This year's tax breaks to the wealthiest will cost the nation $41 billion," says Jo Comerford, executive director of the liberal Massachusetts-based National Priorities Project. She also faults his agreeing to a 5-year cap on discretionary spending.
The best way to help businesses is by helping put more money in consumers' pockets, says Ross Eisenbrey, vice president of the nonpartisan Economic Policy Institute in Washington. He observed, "The biggest problem for businesses is there is no demand in the U.S. economy."
One reason Obama can't seem to win with any side may be because he's trying to please all sides. Compromise is one thing, but if people are confused on where he stands, maybe it's because he doesn't push back enough.
"From Day One he should have told us, 'These policies brought us to near financial collapse,' " says Eisenbrey. "Cutting taxes on the rich and corporations is not a way to create jobs. It spreads the deficit and sends the tax burden down to working people."
The most important thing Obama can do for job growth is to ignore the anti-government ideologues and invest in improving America's infrastructure - making broadband accessible, rebuilding old highways, supporting renewable energy and education. He needs to grab the mike, and using the same passion he campaigned with, separate fact from fiction -- then forge ahead on innovative public works projects that employ people.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No comments:
Post a Comment