A Golfing Con

"A golfing coup for Wisconsin," or so the Journal Sentinel declares.

Erin Hills, of Hartford, will host the PGA's 2017 U.S. Open.

The Journal believes this will encompass, "Gobs of television exposure and folks seeing the sights and spending lots of money in the state." For years the Journal has been backing any sporting event and/or stadium as a win-win situation. No questions asked.

Sadly, they don't mention the costs incurred by the public in hosting such an event. Which, alongside the economic principle of substitution, means sporting events are rarely economic-winners for their host.

I'm all for promoting the state and our many amenities and sites, and I'm an avid golfer, but blind boosterism does not equate to sound economic development analysis nor policy. This is great for Erin Hills, but the devil will be in the details as we get closer to the event and see what is required of the taxpayers in preparing (paying) Hartford and the golf course for this experience.

College Degrees

The states with the lowest proportion of college graduates are all red states. Coincidence?

One Man, So Much Evil

Looks like the numero uno evil curmudgeon - Dick Cheney - has his imprint all over the BP disaster. Not only did he formerly run Halliburton (with a record of shoddy work and fraud), which cemented the deep water drill hole improperly, he also decided precautionary oil well shut-offs were too expensive and allowed oil companies to ignore this safeguard.

Seems as though the, "It's Bush's fault" mantra still holds.

For Further Reading:
Beyond Petroleum or Beyond Preposterous?
Halliburton
Halliburton Corporate Crimes
Halliburton/Cheney Chronology
Halliburton Exec on Fraud Charges
Halliburton Get $70 Million Despite Fraud
Halliburton Scandal
Halliburton Sex Slave Scandal
KBR Linked to $13 Billion in Fraud
Making of Halliburton
War Profiteering

Inequitable Interchange

The Wisconsin Department of Transportation is going to use eminent domain to obtain non-blighted land and spend millions on an interchange for Whistling Straits golf course. "The interchange, which will be open for a week or so every few years, " Tom Daykin reports.

The blatantly private beneficiary and the use of eminent domain for such are highly problematic. Especially for something that will rarely be used and of utilization to such a select few.

For those who are going to trot out the line, "But sports grow the economy and add jobs." No, they don't.

For Further Reading:
A Closer Look At Stadium Subsidies
Stadium Swindle

The Lies of Austerity

Sheldon Lubar seems to feel The Age of Austerity Lies Ahead. He claims, "The county is spending, and agreeing to spend, very much in excess of its revenues and ability to meet its promises to current employees and retirees...What is causing this crisis is overgenerous entitlements such as health care, Social Security and other benefit spending."

He then uses the worn and mistaken comparison between household debt and government debt. "Can you continue to spend beyond your income and borrow money forever to pay for this deficit? Of course not." But, especially during economic downturns, government needs to spend to stabilize aggregate demand. And, lets not forget, two-thirds of homeowners have a mortgage. Meaning - they are in debt; their budget is not balanced. Some will say, "But that mortgage is an investment." I retort, just as government spending - sewers, roads, energy, etc. - is an investment is America's future.

And, his reforms are way off the base. As I and many others have written, Social Security is not a problem. Plus, the savings from extending the retirement age would be minimal, not to mention, the economic impact such a change would have on seniors would be negative.

He then says we need to reduce health care benefits. Um, no. We need to reduce health care costs. All other advanced nations have universal health care and they spend half as much (per capita) as we do.

Lubar's next idea is to cut public workers' benefits. But as recent research has shown, when compared with similarly aged and experienced workers, public workers make less than private ones. Instead, how about we put a cap on CEO compensation? Since Mr. Lubar is so concerned with our budgetary situation, I'm sure he's behind this idea, and is more than willing to do his part.

He, next, calls for an overhaul of the tax system. "To produce sufficient revenue to balance the various government budgets." But, he wants any new spending to be tied to budget cuts. Which, during a recession, as we're in now, would reek havoc and prolong suffering. These blanket prescriptions superficially sound good, but are unworkable in reality - unless, of course, we truly wish to see: more people unemployed, more out of their home, crime increasing, roads crumbling, etc.

His next point, reducing the military budget, is long overdue. On this point, we agree. Why we need a military budget as large as all other advanced nations combined is unjustifiable.

Sheldon's closing, "Let's throw the rascals out," may go over well with the Tea Party crowd, but is really just the rallying cry of the obtuse. Sure, we have bad politicians (just like we have greedy, self-serving businessmen), and by all means, elect officials more willing to work for citizens. But lets not throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Why don't we just reinstate higher tax rates, as we had during our post-WWII era of high growth? There are simpler and more equitable ways to balance budgets and restore growth. Higher taxes on the wealthy, historically, have helped, not hurt the economy. Does Mr. Lubar really want to solve budget problems and grow the economy, or is he more concerned with his own wealth and quarterly returns?

For Further Reading:
Breaking Down The U.S. Military Budget
CEO Pay
CEO-to-Worker Pay Imbalance Grows
Our View On Defense Spending
Post WWII Golden Age
Republican Resurrect Welfare Charge For Tax Day
Republicans Heart Irish Taxes
Tax Cuts
The Bounteous Wisdom of High Marginal Tax Rates
The Budget Deficit Crisis
The Great Tax Con Job

Combined Reporting

Local media, Republican legislators, and business blowhards are doing all they can to inflate the idea of onerous taxation possibly pushing Harley-Davidson from Wisconsin.

Some things never change.

They won't be happy until they [business] no longer pay taxes. (Even then, I'm not so sure.) This time, the culprit is combined reporting.

The Journal, alongside their co-conspirators, would have us believe combined reporting is an anomaly, a burdensome taxation specific to Wisconsin. Yet, combined reporting is a practice common among the majority of states.

Businesses typically create subsidiaries (in low-tax states) and allocate profits to such to avoid taxation. The New Rules Project has a great summary of this scheme and swindle.

In February 2009 the Institute for Wisconsin's Future released a report chronicling the tax avoidance and nefarious intentions which combined reporting would end for Wisconsin businesses.

Harley-Davidson paid no state income tax in 2007. So, we have a large corporation paying no state income tax, yet, some want to claim taxation is making them less competitive. Add this to the fact that the State of Wisconsin gave Harley-Davidson $4.5 million in 2006. The City of Milwaukee has given the company $868,000; while Tomahawk has given the company $3,042,000. From 2000 through 2006, Harley-Davidson had received $3,910,000 from the Wisconsin Department of Commerce.

Not only does the tax burden on Harley-Davidson seem to be minimal, the State (along with certain localities) is subsidizing the company. These hand-outs and favorable tax treatment are the case for Harley-Davidson operations in other states, too. The company also has no qualms about asking the Feds for "help," either.

One interesting tactic the Mayor or the Governor could use in exposing this bribery is televising the discussion with company executives. (All economic development discussions using public dollars should be televised to expose these toxic dealings to the light of day.) If an executive (or one of the anti-tax crusaders) could justify, on camera, why they should not pay their fair share of taxes...by all means, don't pay. I just want to, finally, hear a plausible explanation.

For Further Reading:
Class Warfare
Doyle Says Combined Reporting Not To Blame For Harley's Woes
Falsehood Fabrication
Legalized Bribery
Luring Lunacy
Miller Pork
Site Selection Shenanigans
Spuriously Invoking The Tax Boogeyman
Welcome to Walmart

Out-Of-Control Excuses

Lest the media be able to rewrite the causes and dictate the outcomes of Greece's problems, I need to squash some misinformation and falsehoods. This latest writing was motivated by the Journal Sentinel's "Lessons from Greece" editorial. In which, they fabricate or ignore the causes, and deduce the completely wrong conclusions.

They proclaim, "The central problem in Greece was out-of-control spending on government programs for aging populations." They talk of Greece's budget deficit and their debt, but no evidence backs up the claim of "out-of-control spending" and there is no mention of the numbers concerning these programs for the aging. If that is what actually caused their fiscal worries, some data corroborating such should be presented.

In reality, average annual government expenditures in Greece totaled 50.4 percent of GDP. Total spending for the European Union as a whole equaled 50. 7 percent of GDP. As Michael Linden and Sabina Dewan state, "Over the past 10 years, Greece has consistently spent less, as a share of GDP, than the European Union as a whole."

The Journal then, typically, brings the "over spending" meme back around to gutting American programs - like Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security. And, of course, they use the Peter G. Peterson Foundation to support such claims. Dean Baker has more on the true intentions of Mr. Peterson. [Whenever a Journal article cites the Peterson Foundation, the Wisconsin Policy Research Institute, or the Tax Foundation be very skeptical.]

The Journal creates false reasons for Greece's troubles, they then compare the U.S. to Greece. Investors will not have faith in Greece's ability to pay its debt, the U.S. has debt too, therefore, investors will soon have no faith in the U.S.. Paul Krugman explained why this connection is ridiculous and a red herring.

From here the Journal jumps ahead to an whole austerity program for the U.S. Yes, with aggregate demand stifled and the private sector neither spending nor hiring, the editors believe now would be a great time tighten our belts. WTF?! We need "prudent budgeting" to solve out debt. Whatever that nebulous statement means.

Governments must continue to spend now: repair and improve infrastructure - bridges, roads, electric grids, sewer systems, water ways, etc.. Without this necessary (and overdue) maintenance and government spending the economy would grind to a halt and unemployment would skyrocket. Spending more now to ensure growth (which enables us to pay off debt) is better than allowing unemployment to ravage a generation.

The lesson we should learn from Greece is that the neoliberal age of tax cuts and deregulation has left all nations vulnerable to the whims of bond traders.

For Further Reading:
A Principled Europe Would Not Leave Greece To Bleed
Being Rude to the Deficit Hawks
Clinton's Bequest
Deficit or Depression?
Economy Needs More Big Government
From Keynesianism to Neoliberalism
Greece's Spending Cuts Are Making The Crisis Worse
Paranoia Overdose
Social Security: The Phony Crisis
The Bubble Economy
The Debt Delusion
The Liability Con
This Time, Don't Buy What Rubin's Selling
Where Have All the Keynesians Gone?

Wingnuttery

Obama is a Nazi-Commie

Laura Bush is a Maoist

"Inexplicable"

A lawmaker blocking a vote on raising the liability cap pertaining to oil companies?

Young Companies: Biggest Job Destoyers

John Torinus (conservative, business-shill of the Journal Sentinel and CEO of tax-avoiding Serigraph Inc.) is pushing his 'entrepreneurialism, small business creates jobs' contention, yet again.

Doug Henwood elaborates, "The small business myth is probably the most durable and pervasive of all. It holds appeal across the political spectrum, from corporate lobbyists trying to sell tax breaks to postmodern New Agers trying to sell their vision of decentralization and local self-reliance...Small firms pay less than large ones, are less likely to offer health, pension, or child care benefits, and are often more dangerous to workers. With few exceptions, they're not all that innovative technologically."

I have tried to put this "idea" to bed many times. See below for more.

For Further Reading:
Job Creation
Legalized Bribery
Small Business

Gyro Meat

The Right, never missing an opportunity to take the low-road, is trying to give inertia to a "talking point" connecting a nanny state and the debt/insolvency problems of Greece (along with some other European countries: Italy, Ireland, Portugal, and Spain). As usual, reality doesn't support this privatized, market-humping meme.

The problem primarily stems from these countries following a laissez-faire, highly speculative, highly leveraged, American economic model. A consumption-based growth, fueled by easy credit. Buy now, pay later. And, of course, Wall Street was pulling strings behind the curtain.

With easy money allowing everyone to live beyond their means, purchasing an unsustainable lifestyle, on credit. Thus, giving the illusion of prosperity. The whole global system is in jeopardy. We have spent the last few decades spending on iPhones and SUVs, rather than on sewage systems, public transportation, and energy alternatives. This is a problem of priorities and tax avoidance, not of overly compensated public workers.

As Peter Boone and Simon Johnson assert, "The main problem that Portugal faces, like Greece, Ireland and Spain, is that it is stuck with a highly overvalued exchange rate when it is in need of massive fiscal adjustment." Doug Henwood saw the 'EU problem' in 1998 when the European Union, and a single currency among its member countries, was being created.

Unemployment in the EU's highly indebted countries is: Spain 20%; Ireland 14%; Greece 10%, Portugal 9%; and Italy 8.7%. As of this writing U.S. unemployment is 9.9%.

Public debt as a percent of GDP is: Greece 124.9; Italy 116.7; Portugal 84.6; Ireland 82.9; Spain 66.3. Presently, the U.S. public debt is 67.1 % of GDP. (In Japan it's 105%; Germany 70%; and France 67%.)

Luckily, as Paul Krugman explains, the U.S. is not Greece. He also, like Boone and Johnson, concludes that, "If Greece still had its own currency, it could restore competitiveness through devaluation."

Concerning other talking points regarding Greece, some data needs to be introduced into the discussion. The average Greek worker logs the second highest hours per year among 33 OECD countries. The average age of retirement in Greece is 61.4 years, slightly higher than the European average of 61.1 years. And, the average Greek pension is $990 per month. The average pension in other EU countries: Spain $1,176; Ireland $2,105; Belgium $3,466; and the Netherlands $3,962. Civil servants in Greece represent 22.3% of the total workforce, in France its 30%, in Sweden 34%, and in the Netherlands 27%. "As a result of cuts carried out since 1990...the total real income of civil servants has fallen by 30%."

Those numbers don't indicate Greece is a bunch of lazy, spoiled loafers.

Class warfare, as always, is alive and well.

Wage Reality

John Schmitt, of the Center for Economic and Policy Research, finds, "When state and local government employees are compared to private sector workers with similar characteristics - particularly when workers are matched by age and education - state and local workers actually earn 4 percent less, on average, than their private sector counterparts."

So much for the talking-point of overpaid and lavishly rewarded public sector workers.

Rate Reaction

The Journal Sentinel believes, "Some increase in the City of Milwaukee's water rate is warranted, but not this much." They claim, "Raise the cost of that water - even if it is still cheaper than in other places - and the region becomes less attractive."

Why is that? It's great to make proclamations. But it is also necessary to share the reasoning and maybe some data to back up the claim. The idea that a place must give away resources, cut taxes, provide cheap yet educated labor, provide subsidies, and on and on - with no guarantees or expected returns - is ridiculous. We should just have a blind faith in the 'built it and they will come' dogma. Locations have inherent advantages, encouraging business to locate in less than optimal places is inefficient and ultimately decreases overall growth.

Hence, allowing desert cities to charge minuscule water rates (due to heavy Federal subsidization of their water infrastructure) skews the true price of water, while allowing an inefficient (and unnatural and unsustainable) advantage to these locations.

Even after the proposed increase, "Milwaukee would have the 59th cheapest water out of the 78 water utilities in the seven counties that make up Southeastern Wisconsin. Among the country's 50 biggest cities, Milwaukee's water would still only rank 37th in cost."

The price of a product should reflect all costs involved in bringing that product to market, including the negative externalities. True capitalist and market proponents should understand that availability and location play a role in pricing. Supply and demand are always at the core of true value. Supply is a critical variable, especially with finite resources - like water and oil - in determining the correct price.

Milwaukee's water rate, even with the proposed increase, along with the quality of the water we produce, seems to be competitive and justified, despite dubious and business-pandering warnings from the Journal Sentinel.

For Further Reading:
Draining The Blue Planet
Drought Turns Off Subsidized Federal Tap
Large Subsidies to Corporate Farms in the West
The Price of Water
Water Subsidies Now Under Fire

Ranking Rubbish

The meme - oft repeated by corporate hucksters with their hands out - about an improving "business climate" in conjuction with (the always necessary) tax cuts, leading to an injection of new jobs and companies, was given more ink by the Journal Sentinel recently.

And, as usual in this flawed prescription, the Tax Foundation is cited as the "business climate" authority. But, as shown here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and here, their methodology is sloppy, to say the least.

For Futher Reading:
Doing Business to Eliminate Worker Protections
Grading Places
Torinus' Taxed Reality
What Do Business Climate Rankings Really Tell Us?
Wisconsin: Open For Business

Time Is On Our Side

Time is not on anybody's side.

Self-Serving Surplus

Milwaukee, City and County, was on the brink of insolvency, or so we were told. Budgets were cut. Programs were cut. Workers were cut and furloughed.

Milwaukee finishes year with $23 million surplus

Milwaukee County expects $8.9 surplus for 2009

Were the public employees and the programs/services they provide decimated simply to score political points for the mayor's and county executive's attempt to be governor?

Wisconsin CEO Performance Evaluation

Of 19 area CEOs, 6 saw their compensation increase/decrease at a higher/lower percentage than their company's stock value.

Gale Klappa, Wisconsin Energy, Compensation +22.74%, Stock Value +7.08%
Paul Jones, A.O. Smith, Compensation +25.10%, Stock Value +22.92
Michael Crowley Jr., Bank Mutual, Compensation -6.84%, Stock Value -20.50%
Thomas Florsheim Jr., Weyco Group, Compensation -14.48%, Stock Value -15.67%
Douglas Gordon, Waterstone Financial, Compensation -11.61%, Stock Value -38.67%
Kerry Wood, Ladish Co., Compensation 101.58%, Stock Value -11.16%

[Stock value was measured over the fiscal calendar; Oct 1, 2008 to Sept 31, 2009]

Various Readings

An Update on State Budget Cuts
Comparing Public & Private Sector Compensation
Privatization During An Economic Downturn
Public Debt and Other Issues

Politics Above The Law

Republican campaign committee orchestrated Wisconsin HCR repeal lawsuit

Deficit Origins

For Further Reading:

Where Today's Large Deficits Come From

Tea Bag This

Citizens for Tax Justice has found President Obama Cut Taxes for 99% of Working Families in Wisconsin in 2009.

Road Weary

Two excellent articles from the Journal Sentinel regarding public transportation subsidization:

Road debate developed into a zoo
You know those roads? They're heavily subsidized

Weekend Reading

Ten Republican Lies For Tax Day
The Gutting of State and Local Government
The Seven Warning Signs of Bogus Science
Urban Core Growing Faster Than Outer Burbs
Yes, I Love Paying Taxes

Tax Facts

Tax Facts (via Tom Schaller):

• The U.S. ranks fifth lowest in tax revenues as a share of GDP among OECD countries; at 28 percent - 20 percent lower than the OECD average
• Federal taxes as a share of GDP have been steady since 1950; at roughly 20 percent
• Income taxes as a share of GDP have also been steady over the same time period
• Only approximately 20 percent of GDP goes to the (federal) public sector
  

Fuzzy Math

Dean Baker makes an excellent correction to the mainstream media storyline which claims Citigroup has paid back the government. And, that the government will actually make a profit from the bailout of Citigroup.

Pity The Poor CEOs

The USA Today wants us to feel sorry for CEOs (Many CEOs take a pay cut in 2009). They were paid a median salary of $1.01 million in 2009. The median value of stocks and options they received was $3.7 million. The median value of their perks and compensation was $125,198.

Yes, pity the poor CEOs indeed.

Sunday Reading

Explaining The Impact Of Ultra-Low Rates To Greenspan
Government's Share Of Economy, 1950-2075
Has Social Security Begun Tapping Its Trust Funds?
Obama Attacks Wealth Inequality

Levy Legitimacy

Douglas Kane has an excellent article clarifying the discussion on business climate, taxes, best places to live, job growth and quality of life.

Lower taxes do not result in a better quality of life nor larger business or job growth.

The Suburban Apologist & Revisionist

Pat McIlerhan is - again - defending the poor suburbs against the big, bad city. When Milwaukee wants a fair price for its water, when continued sprawl is pointed to as an environmental issue, Pat is there to label such as anti-suburban. No such counter claim (anti-city) is ever mouthed when policies - highway expansion, sprawl, autocentrism, etc. - hurt the city.

Pat writes, "Waukesha's problem is that its well water is tainted with radium, put there by God and declared unacceptable by the EPA." Hey, if that radium-laced, god-given water is just fine, Waukesha doesn't need Milwaukee's water. The EPA is obviously another liberal, overzealous regulatory body working in concert with the Democrats' plans to turn the U.S. into a communist nation. Waukesha, continue drinking your radium-laced, god-given elixir.

The idea that Milwaukee simply receiving money from the sale of water will solve all problems is juvenile and short-sighted. Sure, the extra money would help the Milwaukee budget. More money tends to help any budget. But the continued sprawl of Waukesha will hurt the region as a whole, while continuing metropolitan competition for new jobs and expansion. Until we have regional revenue sharing policies, whereby the region benefits from growth, rather than one municipality, it is a (nearly) zero sum game.

And, why must Milwaukee always be the bigger person (especially in allowing policies that primarily benefit other communities)? Where are the suburbs in supporting regional rail transit? Or anti-poverty programs? What the City wants, what might benefit a large portion of our poor residents, Pat dismisses. But anything the suburbs want, that is part of a larger natural progression. A blessing to us all which we would be fools to not support. Give me a break!

Pat then claims, "Milwaukee's revival will come not by forcing the most urban area in Waukesha County to hand over money." Yet that's exactly how the suburbs grew. By forcing city-dwellers to hand over their tax dollars to allow for highway expansion and home mortgages, after WWII, which fueled suburban growth.

He closes with the absurdity, "The region can thrive if its parts cooperate." So, Pat, tell me one thing the suburbs have wanted to cooperate on with the city? Cooperation is not a one-way street.

Car Clowns

The Journal Sentinel reports, Rail Opponents Rally Suburbs.

Fine. We'll route rail around these communities. No charges, no more questions asked. When communities along the route are booming, and then these anti-rail suburbs want in, too bad, so sad.

But, city-dwellers and would-be rail-users would like to have our money back. The tax dollars which allowed the continued expansion of the highways (to the detriment of cities), and thus these anti-rail suburbs. But seriously...

Plenty of viable citizens didn't want highways dissecting their neighborhoods. But the U.S. marched forward building roads everywhere, transplanting homeowners and businesses. Supposedly this was in our best interest. Highways were a magical route to cheaper land (and environmental degradation). Never mind the problems with water availability, wetland destruction, sewer runoff, and pollution.

Well, we've learned something since then. Continued highway expansion is unsustainable and environmentally destructive. This isn't an all-or-none dilemma. The automobile and rail need to coexist. Most other communities realize this. Milwaukee is one of the last few metro areas to begin implementing a rail plan or system.

City folk have been forced to support (tax dollars) highways. Now the shoe is on the other foot. Suburbanites it's time to reciprocate; and rejoice in the positive consequences.

Must See TV

In Dodd We Trust

Weekend Reading

Jobs:
18 Million Jobs by 2012
How A New Jobless Era Will Transform America
What Happened To The American Working Class?
Who Broke America's Jobs Machine?

Economic Policy:
Republican and Democrat Presidents Have Switched Economic Policies

Stimulus:
Fiscal Stimulus, The Definitive Answer: It Works.
In Defense of Deficits
The Effectiveness of Fiscal and Monetary Stimulus in Depressions

Manufacturing Reading

Anti-Globalization and the U.S. Middle Class
Exports and American Prosperity
How Should We Gauge Manufacturing Importance?
Manufacturing Innovation
Thoughts on American Manufacturing Decline and Revitalization
Up From Globalism
U.S. Manufacturing is Not Dead

Sunday Reading

Employers Rapidly Shifting Health Care Costs To Workers
Ryan's Response to Center's "Roadmap" Analysis Is Off Base
The Ryan Budget's Radical Priorities
When You Go Into The Details, People Support The Health Care Bill

Myth Busting: Job Training

Globalization is inevitable. You can't stop it. It's good for all. Get on board or be left behind. To stay viable you need additional education and training.

There is only 1 job available for every 6 unemployed workers. So what exactly do these hucksters want people to retrain for? The economy continues to expand (even if that growth is slower). Workers have simply been cut off from the expansion. Capital has been expanding it's share of the profit, while labor has been left behind.

Most of the new jobs being created require an associate's degree or less. 85 percent of the population in the U.S. have at least a high school degree. Over 27 percent have a bachelor's. The percentage of high school and college graduates has increased since 2000. We have neither an unskilled nor an uneducated workforce. Education as a corrective to the employment problem seems minimally significant.

Technology has replaced jobs. This does not mean, as the 'job training' charlatans would imply, simple advances in automation automatically must equate to reductions in the workforce. Increases in productivity upon one variable in the production process can lead to increased needs for labor at another point in the process.

Historically, wages rose with productivity. It isn't an invisible hand or some magical market force pushing us along. It is conscious policy choice. The nanny state has become an inverse Robin Hood scheme. Rather than providing a safety net, ensuring that the least among us do not fall between the cracks, we now provide corporate welfare, ensuring asset price inflation.

We've transformed from a productive economy to an casino capitalism - filled with risk, speculation, and the endless pursuit of higher yields. Any downside is now covered by the public. This is alongside our funding of much of the research and development taking place, and other subsidization of many industries and sectors within the economy.

For Further Reading:
Debt Delusion
Economy Track
Job Crisis: Fact Sheet
Skills Crisis & Job Training
Unemployed Wait Longer For Jobs

Health Care Compared

Trickle Up Economics

From Citizens For Tax Justice:

"Rep. Paul Ryan's GOP Budget Plan would collect $2 trillion less over a decade and yet require the bottom 90 percent to pay higher taxes."

May The Force Be With You

"The force of globalization can't be stopped," declares John Torinus in his latest Journal Sentinel rant. This type of thinking is typical of the business class. They believe in the magic of the market - an unstoppable force which always gravitates toward optimal outcomes. The problem with this paradigm is that it leads to a global race to the bottom, which ends up decreasing labor standards, while rewarding mobile capital.

He points to Mexico, and our trade relationship with them, and concludes it's a "major plus, a job creator." But, as I wrote in an earlier post, with the U.S. continually subsidizing farmers, we artificially lower the price of American agricultural exports and hurt developing countries. Such as Mexico, in one area where they can actually produce at a lower cost. Instead, our subsidized agri-business drives Mexican farmers off their land because of our low priced agricultural products. And, because of this, Mexican wages have actually fallen since NAFTA.

Torinus also claims, "Companies must go where the business is, not where you want it to be." So why are subsidies and tax breaks given out to lure companies? Just as the two Spanish companies (which Torinus mentions) whom are moving some operations to Milwaukee based on subsidies, not simply business nor competitive advantage (which Torinus doesn't mention).

I guess when one believes so blindly in a theory, which one also benefits and profits handsomely from, it's hard to let historical and empirical evidence get into the picture.

Off Track

Pat is back attacking rail transportation.

He finds buses to be a stellar alternative. McIlheran claims, "And taxpayers do not subsidize the tickets." Whom does he think pays for the roads that the buses travel on? He also spouts, "Building the [rail] line commits taxpayers to unbounded expense." Just as building more and more roads commits taxpayers to their maintenance. Not to mention the cost of our addiction to oil and the automobile.

For Further Reading:
All Aboard
Blood on the Tracks
Money For Nothing
Note To Critics: Roads, Freeways Subsidized, Too
Road Warriors

Industrial Policy

In the past the Journal Sentinel has referred to the downsizing of America's manufacturing base as "the inevitable consequence of capitalism an democracy."

But now, lawmakers should "act to bolster nation's industrial base."

Better late than never, I guess.

For Further Reading:
NAFTA and the Myth of Free Trade
Wall Street Wants A Free Lunch, Not A Free Market

Yes To Reconciliation

Why must the effort to pass health care "be genuinely bipartisan"?

Barack Obama won the election. He has a mandate to do the many things he promised during his campaign. If the Republicans want to be on the wrong side of history, that is their problem. To keep wasting time in the hope Republicans will suddenly manifest a conscience is counterproductive. The Democrats are trying to get important legislation and programs in place for the American people. They are not elected to massage Republican egos.

Republicans feel there is no role for government, other than as a piggy bank for their cronies financial speculation. Bipartisanship is not possible. The Republicans will obstruct anything the Democrats want to accomplish. In the fractured, money-driven, two-party system we have, reconciliation may be the only way to pass meaningful legislation.

For Further Reading:
Battling Tomorrows Misinformation Today
Health Reforms Next Step: 23rd Use of Reconciliation?
Historical Uses of Reconciliation
Using Reconciliation Process

Sunday Reading

ACORN:
America Punk'd
O'Keefe and the Myth of the ACORN Pimp

Health Care:
Coburn-Ryan Health Bill Would Jeopardize Coverage For Many
Who Pays?

Scott Walker:
Why Won't Scott Walker Answer The Question?
Scott Walker Flip-flop Timeline

Blood on the Tracks

I've never been to Waterloo, and I'm sure its a quaint and beautiful town, but a high-speed rail line will not reduce property values and isolate neighborhoods, as a town alderwoman, Laura Cotting, states.

Mrs. Cotting, with typical NIMBYist attitude, is offering nothing but red herrings. Wisconsin's major metropolitan areas are one of only a few in the entire country that do not have some sort of regional rail transit. If Wisconsin's economic indicators - unemployment rate, job growth, etc. - were exceptionally better than the rest of the nation, such a belief may be justified. "They've all tried the rail thing, and they're doing worse than we are." But the opposite is actually the reality. Cities and regions which have instituted cohesive rail systems have seen the best and most stable growth.

John DeWitt, a developer offered his (misinformed) thought, "“Looking down the line there are so many different views on whether high-speed rail is good at all, and, to an extent, I think it’s hard to say.” The consensus is that rail is better for jobs, growth, and the environment.

Most of the country has actually decided rail is a good thing. And, most of the studies done on the subject have shown growth near transit stations and in the neighboring area, alongside increased property values.

For Further Reading:
Average Cost of Owning An Automobile
Economic Development & Smart Growth
Effect of Rail Transit on Property Values
Light Rail Can Turn Into Money Train
Milwaukee Needs to Lose Its Rail Phobia
Public Transportation Produces More Jobs
Trains and the City
Transit Oriented America
True Cost of Owning a Car
Why You're Better Off Not Owning A Car

Partisan Promotion

OK. So you're supposed to be a credible "think tank". Heck, even the Journal Sentinel, when citing your writing, always prefaces the Wisconsin Policy Research Institute as non-partisan.

Is it common, ethical, or non-partisan for a think tank to come out, years in advance, plugging their preferred candidate, and for president no less?

For Further Reading:
More Unbiased Reporting
Stink Tanks

Walking Off A Cliff

Scott Walker's idea of governance seems to be simply getting rid of government. And, whatever is left of it, he wants those jobs to be low-paying, pension-free employment.

As our crumbling infrastructure will attest - you get what you pay for.

Walker's attempt at running Milwaukee County has been merely passing the buck and cutting services, while (in typical Republican style) claiming superior vision, leadership, and accomplishment.

As Steve Schultze wrote in the Journal Sentinel, "Walker...favored parceling out county functions to the state, municipalities, private firms and independently elected parks and transit districts." His idea of County governance is having someone else do the work. If governor, what entities would he have do the work of the State? Obviously he doesn't want to actually govern.

His latest proposal calls for replacing County pension plans with a 401(K) system for new employees. Let's ask those whom were planning on retiring in the last few years how their 401K's held up during the 2007 downturn. Some plans lost over half of their value due to the mismanagement of the economy by these same hucksters that claim privatization will save us all.

Just imagine: we're still operating in this casino capitalism economy; defined benefit (pension) plans are now defined contribution (401K) plans; Social Security has been privatized; and booms and busts are as regular as the sun rising and falling. During the next downturn, millions of would-be retirees would have to find work to supplement the huge losses of their 401Ks. This would be compounded by the losses of the privatized (market driven) Social Security accounts. A massive double whammy for would-be retirees. Such a roadmap - such a change in how we fund and care for our our retirees - would subject a majority of them to impoverishment. I hope the aged remember this when they vote for our next governor.

The whole looming budget crisis meme being pushed by Walker (and many other self-serving politicians and business leaders) would be laughable if so many living wage jobs weren't at stake. We seem to always find the money for private projects, yet supporting our citizens with good paying jobs is too much.

Public employment should be the floor - of labor standards - for the entire labor force. A living wage, decent health care, and the assurance of retirement after a certain period of service, should be the goals of all employment. The Walmartization of our workforce is a competitive disadvantage and a sure path to ruin. And that's the path Scott Walker wants us to join him on.

Weekend Reading

After Voting to Kill Recovery, 100 GOP Lawmakers Tout Its Success
As Milwaukee's Economy Fails, How Can Public Schools Succeed?
Budget Deficit Scare Story and the Great Recession
Distinguishing Fraud From Failure: A Prosecutorial Primer
Free Market in Free Fall and You Pay
How to Spot a Deficit Peacock
How to Walk the Fiscal Tightrope
Instead of Jobs Tax Credit, Let's Fix Our Infrastructure
Questions About The Coming Wave of Second Mortgage Writedowns
Rank Hypocrisy on Subsidies
Richest 400 Taxpayers See Incomes Double, Taxes Halved
Slapped in The Face By The Invisible Hand
Toyota Recalls: Another Bush Disaster

Speaking of Tax Evasion

A truly horrible specimen of a person running for public office.

The 'lower taxes lead to job creation' claim is baloney.

And, don't forget it's the percentage of one's income paid in taxes (tax incidence) that matters (when trying to gauge the burden) not the total amount paid.

For Further Reading:
Corporate Scofflaws
Facts and Figures
Race To The Bottom
Tax Burden Illumination
Wisconsin Tax Truths

More Corporate Tax Evasion

Edward Lump [what a fitting name], president and CEO of the Wisconsin Restaurant Association, in a recent Journal Sentinel article, rants against a proposed Wisconsin bill which he feels will threaten small business.

He throws out some small business stats, regurgitating the discredited idea whereby small business will save the day. "Small business employs more than 53% of Wisconsin's workforce and creates 75% of new jobs nationally," Lump claims without reference.

And then there is this dubious and confused claim, "Now more than ever, Wisconsin needs government that recognizes small business is a vital part of the local economy, not a bank from which it can withdraw seemingly endless funds. Instead of creating new taxes, shouldn't we look for ways to cut taxes so businesses can add jobs?"

Wisconsin government doesn't recognize the importance of small business? Where's the proof for this claim? Because small businesses are required to pay taxes, that supports the notion that Wisconsin doesn't appreciate small businesses role in our economy? Even if we cut taxes and save a small business, let's say, $5,000-annually, does Mr. Lump think that would really ignite a hiring flurry?

If that were the case, we'd never have recessions, nor would we ever experience anything other than full employment...since we've been cutting taxes since the '80s. Shouldn't the miracle market, combined with the elimination of so much taxation, have produced a Utopian wonderland by now?

But we know this 'full employment, stable economy' scenario has not been the result of the tax cut frenzy we've seen over the past few decades. So how can these hucksters, with a straight face, always claim cutting taxes is the answer.

Now we get to the bill - Assembly Bill 215 - which has made Mr. Lump so limp. The bill regards the valuation of billboards for assessment purposes and property taxation. Lump sees this as a threat to all small businesses. That's quite the leap of paranoid irrationality. [I found it very odd there were no citations nor even the name of the bill Mr. Lump finds so vexing in his article. But then one would be able to go read the bill and see the tenuousness of Mr. Lump's claims...and there would be no reason to print his article.]

He completely leaves out an explanation as to why valuation of billboards is an issue. He doesn't mention that if billboard owners pay their fair share of taxes on their property, the rest of us pay a little less. And, somehow, "There is nothing that would prevent cities from applying the same rules to other small businesses, such as restaurants."

The bill applies to, "...permits issued, leasehold interests, or other intangibles with regard to the outdoor off−premises advertising sign. In this subsection, “off−premises advertising sign” means a sign that does not advertise the business or activity that occurs on the site where the sign is located."

The State already has the ability to tax. If they wanted to tax restaurants more, they would. To paint this legislation as some type of nefarious, backdoor bill aimed at (in a very roundabout way) a tax increase on all businesses is fantasy. Again, if the state wanted to increase taxes on business they could. They wouldn't want the arduous legal battles involved in such assembly bills just for the fun of it.

To support his paranoia, Lump equates billboard valuation with valuing liquor and hunting licenses. He sarcastically squawks, "How would the value of a liquor license be determined? Would the assessment take into account the myriad variables that affect the profitability of a licensed establishment, or would it be one-size-fits-all? ... Think about how ridiculous it would be for the state to tax you on the "value" of your hunting permit...Or on the "value" of the deer you could potentially take home, whether you actually get a deer or not. Who knows what other licenses cities will decide to tax, once the state gives them this power?"

A billboard's value is in the income stream it can generate by exposing whatever it's advertising to more and more people. The reason for the bill - more specific legal language to capture the true value of billboards - is because they are quite different from the much simpler licenses Mr. Lump incorrectly, and purposefully misleadingly, tries to compare them to.

A hunting license doesn't produce an income stream to it's holder. It allows them to shoot a deer (catch a fish, etc.). A liquor license allows its holder to ship, manufacture, and import liquor. The hunter will pay taxes when he has the butcher process his deer. The liquor will be taxed when it is sold. These are direct links along the chain of commerce for these two examples which can be traced and taxed accordingly. When Clear Channel, CBS Outdoor, or Lamar (a few of the largest billboard companies) obtain an outdoor advertising permit for $175, this cost nowhere near reflects the income stream these companies expect to profit from such advertising.

As Dennis Hathaway comments at the Scenic America Blog, "The billboard companies fight tooth and nail against tax assessments that account for the value of anything other than the structure itself, but if one of their billboards has to be removed for a highway widening or other public works project, they will seek millions in compensation based on the value of the sign as a 'revenue' generator. This is a classic case of wanting it both ways, and hopefully governments will point that out in defending against these inevitable lawsuits."

And, maybe both of the fees on hunting and liquor licenses are too cheap, also. Granted, there is a point where costs become too prohibitive and potential users will stop buying the licenses. With the current value of billboards abysmally low (compared to their true market value), we're nowhere near the tipping point. Even with an increase in the taxes billboard owners will pay, not one of them will stop advertising on billboards...because they are all making more than enough money to justify the cost.

Just shut up and pay your fair share in taxes. So residents, workers, home-owners, and those not as fortunate can pay less.

Road To Perdition

More Journal Sentinel boosterism for Paul Ryan's nonsense.

"We're not certain it leads to where Ryan says it does, but it at least represents an honest attempt at serious discussion."

Um...no, it doesn't.

Venturing Aimlessly

John Torinus, Journal Sentinel conservative business writer, loves to ramble on and on about entrepreneurship being a boon to the economy. Many of the same mindset also spout off about the magic of venture capital. In a recent editorial, the Journal Sentinel jumps onto the "venture capital is the answer to growing the economy" bandwagon.

"Money is the fertilizer that young companies need to grow." And, supposedly we don't have enough money. Yet, MoneyTree, a source they cite, reports venture capital grew from $2.9 million in Q1 2009 to $8.3 million in Q4.

The Midwest received $160 million in Q4 2009, garnered 3.18 percent of all venture capital for the quarter, and totaled 63 deals. The median representative percentage among all regions was 3.34. The median number of deals was 30.

Wisconsin had 4 deals in the 4th quarter of 2009; the median number of deals among all states was 5 (this number includes California, which had 323).

Yet, the editorial then claims, "Businesses usually are hatched with the help of money from friends and family." So, does that mean we just need better paying jobs, to allow family and friends the ability to fund more ventures?

The editorial continues, "This matters because venture capital is a proxy for the future economic health of a region; venture investors are adept at identifying companies with the best chance of growing and producing jobs and tax revenue. There is a correlation between income in a state and the amount of venture capital a state attracts."

Josh Lerner, of Harvard, has found the number of exceptional venture capitalists is very small. Harold Bradley, of the Kaufmann Foundation, believes venture capitalists have plenty of money, but allocate it very inefficiently, and therefore should not be receiving additional public dollars with the hope of boosting a local economy. Bradley and Carl Schramm, in an article for Business Week, write that the current focus on fees has promoted start-up flipping rather than nurturing.

In the end, venture capital amounts to one very small component of the overall capital market. An effort to attract more dollars to boost our local economy is desirable, but to what extent we should see venture capital as the goose that lays the golden egg is debatable.

The (Coming) Razings

"The White House says 'Both programs [Save America's Treasures and Preserve America] lack rigorous performance metrics and evaluation efforts so the benefits are unclear.' ... Except that isn't true, there are performance metrics, that prove that the programs created jobs at 1/18th the cost of last year's stimulus programs."

Obama Cancels Building Restoration Programs.

For some to still claim Barack Obama is a socialist, or even a liberal, they really haven't been paying attention. Barack has acquiesced to the Rubin Wall Street cabal in record-breaking, Olympic fashion. The pettiness and mean-spiritedness of these budget cut items (as well as many others) are slaps in the face of the "liberals" that mobilized in record numbers and got President Obama elected.

The conciliation and/or foot-dragging by the Obama Administration is thoroughly disappointing.

For Further Reading:
Congress Will Pay For What It Spends
Democracy Now: Robert Kuttner & Michael Hudson on the Obama Adminsitration
Obama Loves Business
Obama Shares Wall Street's Delusions
Wall Street's Killer Instinct Spells Death Knell For Jobs
What Does The Prez Stand For?

The Repackaging

Privatize Social Security, voucher-ize Medicare, cut taxes, ...

Sound familiar? The Republicans, and their latest rebranding posterboy - Paul Ryan, are trying to sell the same worn out, discredited ideas as the cure for what ails us.

"It’s not just the fact that Republicans are now posing as staunch defenders of a program they have hated ever since the days when Ronald Reagan warned that Medicare would destroy America’s freedom."

"Mr. Ryan offers a plan for Social Security privatization that is basically identical to the Bush proposals of five years ago."

"...the crusade against health reform has relied, crucially, on utter hypocrisy: Republicans who hate Medicare, tried to slash Medicare in the past, and still aim to dismantle the program over time, have been scoring political points by denouncing proposals for modest cost savings"

Paul Krugman has more here.

Growing Pains

James Rowen, at the Political Environment, has covered, in detail and with clarity, the expensive, sprawl-encouraging, Waukesha water diversion proposal. He also critiques the unthinking and misguided Journal Sentinel editorial page's support for such exurban development. Though the editorial does mention an environmental impact study, this seems more an obstacle than a true concern. There is no sense of caution for the underlying environmental issues. Growth is good, keep the sprawl train moving.

The editorial page's boosterism is surreal. They state the water diversion must be studied and done carefully. Yet, in their closing, "Growth in the region helps the entire region. And making sure Waukesha has a safe water source should be in everyone's interest." Basically, let's go through the steps, but, in the end, let's find a way to keep growing at the edges.

If only the Journal Sentinel were full of such vigor in pushing for improvements and pointing out the strengths of the City. How about editorializing for an more integrated public transportation system connecting inner-city poor with suburban job growth? What's good for the City is good for the region, too.

Encouraging enclaves of segregated growth only increases income inequality and solidifies the isolation between suburb and city.

For Further Reading:
More Suburban Shopping Lifestyle
The Suburbanization of Poverty

All Things Economic

Dean Baker on:
Defense Spending
Government Spending
Small Business
Social Security & Medicare
Underwater Mortgages

"Only" $9 Million

Why shouldn't we tax the sh@# out of such ill-gotten gains?

The Sky is Falling

Paul Ryan is wrong again. And, as usual, the Journal Sentinel is spreading his drivel.

Paul Krugman addressed and debunked these fiscal fallacies and scare-tactics (such as those Paul Ryan purveys) in his latest column.

The economy is, historically, worse under Republican administrations. When conservatives are in power: deficits increase, wage-growth slows, and general socio-economic indicators worsen.

It's time we stop listening to these free market, government-is-the-problem, snake-oil salesmen whose only track-record is failure.

Basket Case

The sales tax used to help pay for Miller Park may be extended past it's 2014 sunset date to pay for Bradley Center replacement or renovations.

These money losers - stadiums, convention centers, etc. - always have boosters and proponents pushing for the use of public dollars to fund such private playgrounds. In such instances, these normally government-averse, anti-tax crusaders, become big government supporters and partners. Suddenly government spending is a good thing that will create jobs and be an economic catalyst for the region. Or so the well-worn story goes. In the majority of cases, the reality is just the opposite.

These stadium subsidizers are against well-paid public employees, a well-funded public transportation system, or a targeted tax to pay for park system maintenance. But hundreds of millions for a sports stadium, that's a wise investment? Which of these investments returns more to a city or region long-term? Seasonal, retail/entertainment establishments? Or the infrastructure and amenities that citizens and businesses count on in everyday life?

For Further Reading:
Bucks Need New Arena
Miller Pork
Misplaced Priorities
New Kings Arena Would Add 229 Permanent Jobs
Sales Tax Ending Between 2015, '18
Stadium Rip-off(s)
Stadium Swindle
Will A New Soccer Stadium Help or Hurt the Bucks?
Yanking Away Taxpayer Dollars

Obama Getting His Groove Back?

Presidential remarks at the House Republican Conference.

Insanity*

The Journal Sentinel reports, Cabela's lures little retail growth.

Our economic development paradigm - of subsidizing retail, conventions, stadiums, etc. - is a stupendous waste of money. Yet even though the Journal reports on the failure of these schemes, just as they reported on the failure of privatization, nevertheless, I expect to see articles in the near future touting the need for public subsidization of private developments and supporting the privatization of public jobs.

* Insanity: doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.

False Corollary

Wise words from Jack Norman of the Institute for Wisconsin's Future.

Pushing On A String

John Torinus has penned another misguided and misinformed piece, Entrepreneurs, rather than government, will help create jobs, for the Journal Sentinel.

I've already taken Torinus to task for his fictitious claims regarding small businesses and job creation. His latest drivel is merely a variation of the same theme.

He also uses this most recent column, in a very roundabout way, to bring it all back to a classic right-wing panacea - the business climate. Which, to translate from Republican, means lower taxes. Another topic on which I've had the pleasure of throttling Torinus and his mistaken ideas.

The most glaring error in Torinus' latest mess is his obliviousness to our current recession. Spewing on about entrepreneurs opening new businesses and creating jobs is a cliched though plausible suggestion in a normally functioning economy. In the midst of a recession, with lending contracted, and extremely reduced demand, such a proposition is preposterous.

Suburbs Under Attack

In the latest issue of The American (The Journal of the American Enterprise Institute), Joel Kotkin - ever more so, a delusional apologist for suburbia - writes about a War Against Suburbia.

In what can only be described as ultra-paranoid, Kotkin talks of the Obama administration as an "urban-centric regime." "The suburbs are under a conscious and sustained attack from Washington," declares Kotkin. The President is trying to impose an urban agenda on America? Or, as Kotkin puts it, "A deep-seated desire to change the way Americans live."

He rewrites suburban history as simply people voting with their feet. He mentions nothing about this being an auto-centric and unsustainable lifestyle. He mentions nothing regarding government and business outright pushing/subsidizing people out of the city. He appears unaware of the water problems many of these developments face.

Never does Kotkin address the fundamental critiques of suburbia as relating to long-term, sustainability. His defense is that of anecdote. Everything wrapped in an - gosh-golly; Leave it to Beaver; the people like their SUVs, highways, and stripmalls, and so it must be - attitude. The growth of suburbia has been present for the past 50 years and therefore it must be a natural process. He doesn't seem to realize that, just as the suburbs were encouraged, they can be discouraged. There is nothing in our DNA that hard-wires us toward low-density living.

And, his magical solution to congestion - telecommuting. Yes, everyone can just work from home. This is part of Kotkin's reasoning whereby "technology will undermine much of the green case against suburbia." We can slowly move our working environment to the home office. This would not do wonders for a sense of community, relieving isolation, nor the retail businesses located in business districts, which depend on the agglomeration of workers each day for their livelihood.

Frozen Hope

President Obama's spending freeze idea is terrible. The economy is still in horrible shape. We should not be worried about inflation and we should be spending more.

For Further Reading:
A First Look At The Budget Freeze
Don't Let America's Red Ink Scare You
Spending Freeze Could Spell Disaster
Why Young People Should Want A Deficit Now

Poor Population Increases Over 15 Percent

During the Bush era, the number of persons living in poverty increased 15.4 percent.

It's Good To Be The King

Wisconsin taxes the rich less than it taxes the middle-class and the poor.

All Things Economic

Poor Warren Buffet, he's upset that Obama wants to tax his ill-gotten gains.

Consumer debt - pushed by are easy-money, predatory lending, and our commercialized society - is out of control.

Dean Baker shows that the abilities of Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner and National Economic Council head Larry Summers to avoid a complete financial collapse really was not that extraordinary. No major country had a complete financial collapse.

Joseph Stiglitz, Nobel laureate and economics professor, thinks banks have failed at their basic societal mission.

Bush Era Errors

Lest we forget, this is not Barack Obama's economy, he did not start two wars (although, sadly, he does continue them), he did not push huge tax cuts in times of incredible spending, and he did not take a budget from surplus to deficit. President Obama simply had the unfortunate timing of following the worst president in the history of the U.S.

Remember the Bush administration lost $12 billion, being delivered on pallets, in Iraq. Plus, the Iraq war, overall, will cost us over $3 trillion.

Bush also increased spending faster than any other president in the last 30 years.

The Republican tax cut strategy, again, failed to deliver.

Bush's policies are also responsible for the majority of our deficits.

And, let's not forget the warnings the Bush administration ignored before the 9/11 attack.

For Further Reading:
Please Call Out Conservatism For The Disaster It Is

Nowhere Else To Go

Crooks and Liars reports that Andy Stern, the head of SEIU, has warned Congress and the administration, if they falter with health care reform, they can forget about Labor's support during the midterms.

Really?

If not the Democrats, who else is Labor going to vote for?

Republicans? Sorry, but they really, really are against health care reform.

Yet another problem of our money-driven, two-party system.

Government For Sale

Bush Backed Supreme Court Thinks Corporations Are People Too
Campaign Finance Decision Worst Since Dred Scott
Campaign Finance Reform Reflect Supreme Courts Growing Audacity
Shed A Tear For Our Democracy
Supreme Court's Radical and Destructive Decision
Supreme Court Ruling Means Big Business Can Spend Billions
The Court's Blow To Democracy
The Man Who Took Down Campaign Finance Reform
Will Corporate Ads Buy 2010 Voters?

Weekend Reading

Entering the Repossession Lane
How American Awfulness Stacks Up
How the Federal Reserve Earned Its Profits
The Military-Industrial Complex is Ruining the Economy
Time to Reign in Out-Of-Control Corporate Influences on Our Democracy

Doing Nothing, Destroying Everything

Stephen Colbert explains the media coverage of President Obama. More precisely, the biased conservative coverage.

Jon Stewart gives perspective to the Massachusetts (not national!) election. (Colbert weighs in on the Massachusetts election.) Here Stewart explains Wall Street bonuses.

For Further Reading:
Brown's Victory is Hardly a Repudiation of Health Care Reform