|
|||
|
Bush’s Hoover Impression Flirts With DepressionPosted on Nov 26, 2008By Marie Cocco There will be no freedom from want. The only thing we might now hope for is freedom from fear. Even that is a distant state of mind. It is not just the wild fluctuations in the stock market, the water-cooler jokes about retirement accounts that are now 201(k)s. It is the incomprehensible dithering of our current president through his lame-duck period, his bizarre refusal to give approval to any economic package that aided anyone or anything that is not a big bank or a Wall Street financial institution. This delay may well be the scariest development of these frightening times. What are the reasons for President George W. Bush to have blocked the post-election congressional effort to make a down payment on an anti-recession program aimed at job-creation and sending money to the squeezed states, which must balance their budgets while struggling with ever-rising demand for basic services such as Medicaid and what remains of the program we used to call welfare? Bush has argued, at various times in the past few weeks, either that such a package isn’t really necessary or that it might be possible if it were tied to a long-term trade deal with Colombia. The reasoning tortures the mind. Besides inheriting an economic crisis of historic proportions, President-elect Barack Obama must make up for the squandered time. But at the earliest, it is likely to be at least February or March before the first dollar of an Obama recovery plan is felt. Advertisement Consider, for example, that one of the leading indicators of poverty—a rise in the number of people eligible for food stamps—climbed 10 percent between August 2007 and August 2008. According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, which studies the impact of federal policy on the poor and working class, one in five children already receives food stamps, a rate that is comparable to the recessions of the early 1980s and the 1990s. Advocates for the poor are expecting that a record number of Americans will be receiving food stamps once new numbers are tallied over the coming weeks. And we aren’t deep into this recession yet. Economists believe that unemployment will climb to 8 percent or even 9 percent next year. As it happens, right around the time we became politically enamored of deregulating whole industries—and so prepared the ground for the current economic morass—we also became politically obsessed with shrinking the social safety net. It was too generous, the thinking went, and had to be made less so to encourage work and discourage dependency. We are entering a recession the likes of which we haven’t seen in about three decades or perhaps longer. Since the last time the economy fared so poorly, changes in the unemployment compensation system, coupled with a transformation of the labor force to include vastly more part-time and low-wage workers, have left a majority of workers unprotected by this basic benefit. “Unemployment benefits cover a smaller set of workers than they did in the late 1970s and early 1980s,” says Sharon Parrott, director of welfare reform and income support research at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. Fewer than 40 percent of unemployed workers now are eligible for benefits. And we haven’t yet tested—not on this scale anyway—what really happens to the welfare-to-work system when there is no work. Welfare revision was a signature cause of the 1990s, a centerpiece of President Bill Clinton’s drive to remake the Democratic Party’s image and a relentless demand of congressional Republicans determined to dry up what they considered wasteful social spending. Basic cash assistance to the poorest families has shrunk substantially since the 1970s and 1980s. In most states, adults who have no children and are not disabled are ineligible for any aid. Single mothers who may have lost their jobs now have time limits on the number of months they can receive public assistance. To cope, Parrott says, “they’ll double up, they’ll live with friends, they’ll move from house to house, which is very bad for kids.” We have lavished hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars on the financial masterminds whose collective genius has brought us these desperate times. Some of those taxes were paid by the now-unemployed workers who don’t qualify for benefits. Having socialized the financial system, there is no excuse now for failing to repair the social safety net. Marie Cocco’s e-mail address is mariecocco(at)washpost.com. © 2008, Washington Post Writers Group CommentsAre you a Truthdig member yet? Login now, or register with Truthdig. Add Your Comment |
By Ham-Archy, December 2, 2008 at 11:36 am Link to this comment
It doesn’t seem to me that “we” lavished money on financiers. What it looked like to me was that congress ingnored the voice of the people, handed Bernanke a blank check, and Burnin’ Key did the lavishing. From his position nothing else could possibly matter. But the congress was ‘kidnapped’ they wanted to get out of session and knew it wasn’t gonna happen until they gave in. The money from ‘we the tax payers’ goes to banks so they can keep us in debt (enslaved). Now, can we think of a way to pay for our freedom? What happens if suddenly every one stops using credit. The action you have just seen is a clue. It is the life blood of the Imperialist Oppressor. So, no credit, the financier bleeds to death. Credit, the people bleed to death. Let’s take a clue from SHIFT and reach for life.
Report thisBy purplewolf, November 28, 2008 at 9:25 pm Link to this comment
Bush impression of a Hoover
Report thisHoover = vacuum cleaner
vacuum cleaners suck
so does Bush and his legacy.
By Outraged, November 28, 2008 at 12:47 am Link to this comment
Thank you, Marie.
“It was too generous, the thinking went, and had to be made less so to encourage work and discourage dependency.”
This mantra is what was bouncing off the walls in the bizarre resounding fashion which is experienced only in the strangest of environments. And a strange environment it was.
I’ve often argued with those who “took up the chant” that if the safety net is so outrageously wonderful, (even back when) why don’t THEY join up. Obviously, it would be in their favor… would it not? Strangely there weren’t any “takers” to my proposition.
Had the safety net not been trashed, the middle class would be in a much better position today. The safety net is instrumental in the support of the middle class by keeping wages in check.
If the wage is too low to survive… then welfare is the better option. In turn, wages rise across the board when people have the OPTION to refuse subsistance wages and this “effect” trickles up.
Additionally, the safety net was there for the unforseen job loss or sudden medical expense, thereby allowing workers to maintain their standard of living in a crisis. By law we feed incarcerated individuals, yet the poor we disregard. American society makes poverty a fate more treacherous than prison.
Report thisBy 123456, November 27, 2008 at 3:34 pm Link to this comment
Great, anotanother insult to Hoover.
====================
JimM:
“Notice the gas guzzlers are hitting the road again now that the price of fuel has (temporarily) dropped.
A fuel tax would do much to discourage this piggish behavior and help to fund sustainable energy projects.
Also, it would be helpful to no longer subsidize mega-fools like exxon-mobil.”
How silly!
I’m sick of these Pavlovian/behavior-bullying taxes. If someone wants to smoke or drive a “gas-guzzler”, then that should be their choice, and no one should be punished for it.
Report thisBy Shift, November 27, 2008 at 11:17 am Link to this comment
My overarching concern is life. Not just the limited view of life as often debated in the death penalty and abortion, but a full spectrum view of life that is basic to our very existence. Environmental degradation is anti-life, human degradation is anti-life, spiritual degradation is anti-life. Today America is in the grip of a death culture and ONLY a life culture is big enough to fix it.
We all understand that we are approaching a critical mass, life or death. Global warming can lead to an extinction event, and nuclear war can lead to an extinction event. ONLY an appreciation of life in it’s fullest sense, and a collective determination to sustain it, will move us away from the brink of extinction. Life cannot be cherry picked. One is either fully for life or one is for death. Most American’s seem hell bent on death. Witness the open acceptance by American’s of the absolute effort to preserve Capitalism as an economic system at the great expense of the minions in need who are ignored by the ideological theorists. They cannot imagine life without Capitalism despite the evidence that Democratic Socialism better serves the People and national interests. The economic extremists who surround both Bush and Obama would kill the light of Democracy and Freedom in a failed effort to rescue a Capitalistic economic system that extinguished itself through greed. The trillions of dollars socialized at the top is grossly inadequate to mitigate the great sin of Capitalism, preying on the poor in the form securitized mortgages while equally denying them the income to sustain life in their homes. I would strongly encourage the immediate end to government assistance to the rich. If the rich want to preserve Capitalism they have the money to do it themselves. Instead concentrate on sustaining life, human life and all other forms of life. This is the path to redemption
Report thisBy JimM, November 27, 2008 at 5:57 am Link to this comment
Notice the gas guzzlers are hitting the road again now that the price of fuel has (temporarily) dropped.
Report thisA fuel tax would do much to discourage this piggish behavior and help to fund sustainable energy projects.
Also, it would be helpful to no longer subsidize mega-fools like exxon-mobil.
By coloradokarl, November 26, 2008 at 9:44 pm Link to this comment
Unemployment benefits and food stamps are no answer for this economic crises. They are but a bandage on a festering wound. The wound, that is our economy, needs an injection of fresh capital, of CASH. Money that goes directly to quality business plans for equipment and workers. Residential Solar would create 1 million jobs in 6 months, many businesses and training centers to certify new businesses ALREADY exist. Many companies in AMERICA manufacture panels and the associated electronics. This is the fastest and most direct path to energy independence and reduce our “Carbon Footprint” while creating High paying jobs.
Report thisThis must be accompanied with a “Fraud Clause” with a prison term attached to weed out the burn artists and con men. This is a true investment with a forever payback. This could bring the “American Dream” to millions and cheap, clean energy for the next generation.