Tuesday, January 31, 2012
Sunday, January 29, 2012
Sunday Reading
Bad Year For Wall St. Not Reflected In Chiefs' Pay
Destructive Austerity, USA
Distorting Facts On Keystone XL
Fortune 500 Companies That Lobby & Avoid Taxes
How Conservatives Lie About Government
How The Great Recession & The Slow Recovery Compare Historically
How The U.S. Lost Out On iPhone Work
Milwaukee Gets Arty In The Third Ward
No, Doctors Don't Hate Obamacare
Private Inequity
Reformers Playbook On Failing Schools Fails A Fact Check
The Right To Work Assault On The Middle Class
Top Marginal Tax Rates: 1916-2010
Walker: "We're Heading In The Right Direction."
Destructive Austerity, USA
Distorting Facts On Keystone XL
Fortune 500 Companies That Lobby & Avoid Taxes
How Conservatives Lie About Government
How The Great Recession & The Slow Recovery Compare Historically
How The U.S. Lost Out On iPhone Work
Milwaukee Gets Arty In The Third Ward
No, Doctors Don't Hate Obamacare
Private Inequity
Reformers Playbook On Failing Schools Fails A Fact Check
The Right To Work Assault On The Middle Class
Top Marginal Tax Rates: 1916-2010
Walker: "We're Heading In The Right Direction."
Saturday, January 28, 2012
Monday, January 23, 2012
Sunday, January 22, 2012
The Gazoo Government
I happened to stumble across Turner Hall's 4th Street Forum this morning while flipping through the channels. Eric Isbister, CEO Gen Met Manufacturing, was part of a panel discussing Wisconsin's "business climate." Mr. Isbister obviously read his Republican business climate talking-points before going on the show. Government needs to get out of the way, government needs to regulate less, taxes need to be lowered...but the government should be training people and providing an educated workforce for the private sector and helping to fill positions for these private sector companies when needed.
Despite decades of evidence to the contrary, Isbister believes Repulican policies are better for small business in the long-term. Jon Perr elaborates on the failure of Republicans policies over the years, based on numerous economic indicators.
It's as if private-sector CEOs see the government as Gazoo, from the Flintstones. A magical entity that can appear only when you want and whom will make whatever you need happen and then go away.
The Fiscal Policy Institute has found, States with minimum wages above the Federal level have had faster small business and retail job growth. Raise The Minimum Wage has more on wages across the country. One would hope the U.S. would be trying to increase the wages, and thus the quality of life, for it's citizens.
Public sector compensation was a convenient scapegoat of the right-wing to blame for our recession. But, as the Center for American Progress has shown, State budget deficits are not an employee compensation problem. The Great Recession has crushed budgets all around. The busting of the bubble and subsequent lack of demand are the real culprits.
Empirical evidence has been quite clear - cutting taxes does not lead to economic, income or wage growth, nor does it lead to job creation. Lane Kenworthy has done international comparisons and found higher taxes aren't necessarily bad for the economy. Kenworthy has also discovered that the tax burden on the top 1% is lower now than it was in the 1970s. Alejandro Reuss also explains that lower tax rates do not increase government revenue, as conservatives illogically claim. The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities reports that higher state taxes bring more revenue, not more migration.
The "business climate" talking-point is merely an extension of the mythology that is trickle-down, neoliberal, supply-side economics. Another fable the conservatives can spin to claim regulation is burdensome, taxes are too high, and government is always to blame. People need to, finally, realize the right-wing has basically made this stuff up. The real world just doesn't match up with the stories Republicans are selling.
Looking at the evidence, reality does appear to have a liberal bias. It's time for all of us to stop giving equal time, equal weight or the benefit of believing their views are based on rational or reasoned analysis, to these Republicans fairytales of how the world works and what helps it work best.
Despite decades of evidence to the contrary, Isbister believes Repulican policies are better for small business in the long-term. Jon Perr elaborates on the failure of Republicans policies over the years, based on numerous economic indicators.
It's as if private-sector CEOs see the government as Gazoo, from the Flintstones. A magical entity that can appear only when you want and whom will make whatever you need happen and then go away.
Public sector compensation was a convenient scapegoat of the right-wing to blame for our recession. But, as the Center for American Progress has shown, State budget deficits are not an employee compensation problem. The Great Recession has crushed budgets all around. The busting of the bubble and subsequent lack of demand are the real culprits.
Empirical evidence has been quite clear - cutting taxes does not lead to economic, income or wage growth, nor does it lead to job creation. Lane Kenworthy has done international comparisons and found higher taxes aren't necessarily bad for the economy. Kenworthy has also discovered that the tax burden on the top 1% is lower now than it was in the 1970s. Alejandro Reuss also explains that lower tax rates do not increase government revenue, as conservatives illogically claim. The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities reports that higher state taxes bring more revenue, not more migration.
The "business climate" talking-point is merely an extension of the mythology that is trickle-down, neoliberal, supply-side economics. Another fable the conservatives can spin to claim regulation is burdensome, taxes are too high, and government is always to blame. People need to, finally, realize the right-wing has basically made this stuff up. The real world just doesn't match up with the stories Republicans are selling.
Looking at the evidence, reality does appear to have a liberal bias. It's time for all of us to stop giving equal time, equal weight or the benefit of believing their views are based on rational or reasoned analysis, to these Republicans fairytales of how the world works and what helps it work best.
Saturday, January 21, 2012
I'm Rubber You're Glue
Bill Clinton's marriage was fair game for Republicans. His marriage infidelity was front page fodder and the Holy Grail in Republican attempts at total government control. Newt Gingrich rode the "Clinton was a bad boy" train all the way to shutting down the government. Republicans, to this day, still mention Clinton with a wink and a smirk.
Now that Newt has pushed himself onto the center stage, he is upset that his own infidelity is front page news. Is he upset because once conservatives actually hear the story of his not only infidelity, but selfish and, what some feel, despicable behavior, it will put and end to his campaign, and lay bear the mythology of the righteous, noble, church-going right-wing man who can save the day?
Newt's feigned outrage is yet another reason he is obviously too shallow, inept, and corrupt to be president. It's not the media's job to have a public hearings on celebrity marriages. So, he is right that real news should leave the tabloid stories to the National Enquirer. But the hypocrisy is that Newt was more than willing to judge Clinton in the court of public opinion, using the media to vilify and crucify him. And, if you're going to play that game, what's good for the goose is good for the big fat gander.
Update:
Now that Newt has pushed himself onto the center stage, he is upset that his own infidelity is front page news. Is he upset because once conservatives actually hear the story of his not only infidelity, but selfish and, what some feel, despicable behavior, it will put and end to his campaign, and lay bear the mythology of the righteous, noble, church-going right-wing man who can save the day?
Newt's feigned outrage is yet another reason he is obviously too shallow, inept, and corrupt to be president. It's not the media's job to have a public hearings on celebrity marriages. So, he is right that real news should leave the tabloid stories to the National Enquirer. But the hypocrisy is that Newt was more than willing to judge Clinton in the court of public opinion, using the media to vilify and crucify him. And, if you're going to play that game, what's good for the goose is good for the big fat gander.
Update:
Friday, January 20, 2012
Economic Indicators
Civilian Labor Force: Milwaukee County
Consumer Price Index: Fuel Oil and Other Fuels; Water, Sewer & Trash
Fuel prices started to spike around 2002-2003.
Consumer Price Index: Housing; Rent of Primary Residence
Consumer Price Index: Medical Care
Medical costs began their exponential rise during the mid-1980s.
Consumer Price Index: Transportation
Home Prices
Light Weight Vehicle Sales
Manufacturing Durable Goods Sector: Output Per Hour
Output per hour has steadily increased.
Manufacturing Durable Goods Sector: Real Hourly Compensation
Nonfarm Business Sector: Labor Share; Output Per Hour
Unemployment Rate: Milwaukee County
Consumer Price Index: Fuel Oil and Other Fuels; Water, Sewer & Trash
Fuel prices started to spike around 2002-2003.
Consumer Price Index: Housing; Rent of Primary Residence
Consumer Price Index: Medical Care
Medical costs began their exponential rise during the mid-1980s.
Consumer Price Index: Transportation
Transportation costs accelerated with the oil embargo of the 1970s. They've been on that elevated trajectory ever since.
Health Insurance: Not Covered
Health Insurance: Not Covered
Home Prices
Light Weight Vehicle Sales
Manufacturing Durable Goods Sector: Output Per Hour
Output per hour has steadily increased.
Manufacturing Durable Goods Sector: Real Hourly Compensation
Compensation increased during the Clinton, late 1990s, boom years, but has stagnated since.
Resident Population: Milwaukee County
Resident Population: Milwaukee County
Nonfarm Business Sector: Labor Share; Output Per Hour
Output per hour has increased steadily, while the share going to labor has stagnated.
Nonfinancial Corporations Sector: Output Per Hour; Labor Share
Nonfinancial Corporations Sector: Output Per Hour; Labor Share
Output per hour has increased steadily, while the share going to labor has stagnated.
Nonfinancial Corporations Sector: Profits; Real Hourly Compensation
Nonfinancial Corporations Sector: Profits; Real Hourly Compensation
Profits have been on an overall upward trajectory. Compensation hasn't kept up.
Total Construction Spending: Residential; Commercial
Total Construction Spending: Residential; Commercial
Unemployment Rate: Milwaukee County
Colbert Frightening Mainstream Media
Chuck Todd whines about Stephen Colbert making a mockery of our democracy, media, and legislative system. I guess he's upset that Colbert is exposing this corrupt, inequitable sham (which we propagandize as something fair and noble and in the best interests of the people) for what it truly is.
Stephen Colbert's mockery of elections, campaign finance, super PACs, politics, media coverage, and our legal system has been brilliant. He's merely shining a light on the scandal that is big business, political power, and the media that spoon-feeds their storyline.
Stephen Colbert's mockery of elections, campaign finance, super PACs, politics, media coverage, and our legal system has been brilliant. He's merely shining a light on the scandal that is big business, political power, and the media that spoon-feeds their storyline.
Monday, January 16, 2012
Infrastructure Readings
American Infrastructure
America's Infrastructure Engineering Dilema
A Plan To Save U.S. Infrastructure
Demand For Infrastructure At All-Time High
Falling Apart & Falling Behind
Infrastructure Report Card
The Race To Rebuild America's Infrastructure
Renovating American Infrastructure
10 Pieces of U.S. Infrastructure We Must Fix Now
This Is Why Your Flight Is Delayed
U.S Infrastructure Woes: A Roadblock To Growth
U.S. Port Infrastructure Ranked 22nd In The World
Wisconsin Infrastructure Report Card
America's Infrastructure Engineering Dilema
A Plan To Save U.S. Infrastructure
Demand For Infrastructure At All-Time High
Falling Apart & Falling Behind
Infrastructure Report Card
The Race To Rebuild America's Infrastructure
Renovating American Infrastructure
10 Pieces of U.S. Infrastructure We Must Fix Now
This Is Why Your Flight Is Delayed
U.S Infrastructure Woes: A Roadblock To Growth
U.S. Port Infrastructure Ranked 22nd In The World
Wisconsin Infrastructure Report Card
Sunday, January 15, 2012
The Stuff of (False) Legends
Now that the Tim Tebow saturation has, hopefully, ended, it's time to take a look back at how the "Tebow miracle" was pure public relations, selling a story, hero-making in the most nefariously deceptive form. The latest media blitz to sell advertising, tickets, jerseys, and magazines.
The Denver Broncos were 8 and 8 in the NFL 2011 regular season. A team that won the same amount of games that they lost. Hardly impressive.
The storyline goes - Tim Tebow was responsible for 7 of those victories, almost single-handedly as the legend would have it. But the effectiveness of the Broncos' offense, under the helm of Tebow, has some serious questions. Another example of correlation rather than causation masquerading as serious analysis and fact.
The Broncos had the 25th ranked offense (by points per game, out of 32 total teams) in the NFL, averaging 19 points per game. The Green Bay Packers were the highest scoring offense at 35 points per game. Tim Tebow was the 27th ranked quarterback based on passer rating at 73. Aaron Rodgers was the highest ranked quarterback with a 123 passer rating. Tim Tebow only completed 47 percent of his passes, ranking last in the league. Tom Brady, the leader in this category, completed 71 percent. Tebow also averaged the least amount of passing yards per game (124) in the league. Which also explains Tebow's low average of 6 yards per completion, ranking 26th in the NFL.
This is not to say Tebow has no future as a quarterback, that he can't improve, or that, someday, he might be one of the best quarterbacks in the NFL. But, based on the numbers, Tebow has neither deserved the accolades being poured upon him nor would it be logical to claim he is among the league's elite quarterbacks.
Let's hope Tebow was taking notes on the quarterback clinic Tom Brady put on in the New England Patriots 45-10 route of Tebow's Denver Broncos on Saturday. That was the type of performance expected of NFL elite quarterbacks, and deserving of praise and envy.
The Denver Broncos were 8 and 8 in the NFL 2011 regular season. A team that won the same amount of games that they lost. Hardly impressive.
The storyline goes - Tim Tebow was responsible for 7 of those victories, almost single-handedly as the legend would have it. But the effectiveness of the Broncos' offense, under the helm of Tebow, has some serious questions. Another example of correlation rather than causation masquerading as serious analysis and fact.
The Broncos had the 25th ranked offense (by points per game, out of 32 total teams) in the NFL, averaging 19 points per game. The Green Bay Packers were the highest scoring offense at 35 points per game. Tim Tebow was the 27th ranked quarterback based on passer rating at 73. Aaron Rodgers was the highest ranked quarterback with a 123 passer rating. Tim Tebow only completed 47 percent of his passes, ranking last in the league. Tom Brady, the leader in this category, completed 71 percent. Tebow also averaged the least amount of passing yards per game (124) in the league. Which also explains Tebow's low average of 6 yards per completion, ranking 26th in the NFL.
This is not to say Tebow has no future as a quarterback, that he can't improve, or that, someday, he might be one of the best quarterbacks in the NFL. But, based on the numbers, Tebow has neither deserved the accolades being poured upon him nor would it be logical to claim he is among the league's elite quarterbacks.
Let's hope Tebow was taking notes on the quarterback clinic Tom Brady put on in the New England Patriots 45-10 route of Tebow's Denver Broncos on Saturday. That was the type of performance expected of NFL elite quarterbacks, and deserving of praise and envy.
A Manufactured Paradox
The chief executive of the Wisconsin Economic Development Corporation and the secretary of the state Department of Workforce took to the Journal Sentinel to "inform" readers of a workforce paradox in Wisconsin. Or, to at least lay the groundwork for such a talking-point to help move forward more legislation which will supposedly address this manufactured paradox.
It's amazing when similar-minded people whom have advocated less regulation, lower taxes, and the general expansion of service industry jobs over the past three decades suddenly decide manufacturing is a crucial sector and that we must have a renewed focus on industrial policy.
Nevermind that the typical economic policies they've pushed over the past few decades have decimated manufacturing employment. Policies that have weakened unions, driven down wages, and outsourced many of the good-paying manufacturing jobs to low-wage countries. [The combination of low-road economic development and neoliberal policies.]
Now the government must rework the educational system's curriculum, provide more job training, and provide tax credits and relocation incentives to improve the same manufacturing employment that past policies decimated. Regardless of the fact that, "There is little evidence of absolute declines in cognitive or hard skills in the United States or generally poor performance relative to other advanced industrialized countries," as reported by associate professor Michael Handel.
The writers engage is some fairytales to make their point in the article. They claim part of the reason manufacturing employment and jobs have declined is because we haven't talked about them enough as being desirable employment. They also regurgitate the well-worn idea of structural employment - matching people who can do the jobs with where the jobs are needed. [As Rortybomb informs, "A report the IMF put out - The Great Recession and Structural Unemployment - which found find that structural unemployment is 1%-1.75% nationwide, with skills being 0.5%."]
People have chosen service jobs over manufacturing because of the diminished wages offered by the manufacturing jobs. The manufacturing jobs today have lower wages, reduced health care and slim to non-existent retirement packages. Why would a worker chose a challenging, skilled manufacturing job under such circumstances when they could just as easily take a similarly compensating service industry job, which is often, also, much less physically demanding?
If the writers were serious they would be addressing trade agreements, tax-policy toward outsourcing firms, and discussing the need for a comprehensive industrial policy focused on America's need for a strong manufacturing sector and it's link to our infrastructure and self-sustainability. Instead we get more apologetics and scapegoating. Like most businesses these days, the manufacturers want the inflated profits, but none of the social responsibility of good wages and a secure retirement for their workers.
It's not that we don't have workers who can do these jobs, it's just easier [cheaper] for the well-represented [lobbyists] manufacturing companies to appeal for government hand-outs than to pay wages necessary for the work. Thus, a whole cottage industry of cranks has arisen to create this fantasy of structural unemployment and skills mismatch.
Rather, this is simply a story of supply and demand. Until the manufacturers are willing to pay respectable wages to attract workers to these jobs, the manufacturers will continue claiming the educational system must be failing, the government isn't doing enough, and everyone but the manufacturers are responsible for these supposedly unfilled jobs.
For Further Reading:
Has The Great Recession Raised Structural Unemployment?
Latest in (Lack of) Structural Employment
It's amazing when similar-minded people whom have advocated less regulation, lower taxes, and the general expansion of service industry jobs over the past three decades suddenly decide manufacturing is a crucial sector and that we must have a renewed focus on industrial policy.
Nevermind that the typical economic policies they've pushed over the past few decades have decimated manufacturing employment. Policies that have weakened unions, driven down wages, and outsourced many of the good-paying manufacturing jobs to low-wage countries. [The combination of low-road economic development and neoliberal policies.]
Now the government must rework the educational system's curriculum, provide more job training, and provide tax credits and relocation incentives to improve the same manufacturing employment that past policies decimated. Regardless of the fact that, "There is little evidence of absolute declines in cognitive or hard skills in the United States or generally poor performance relative to other advanced industrialized countries," as reported by associate professor Michael Handel.
The writers engage is some fairytales to make their point in the article. They claim part of the reason manufacturing employment and jobs have declined is because we haven't talked about them enough as being desirable employment. They also regurgitate the well-worn idea of structural employment - matching people who can do the jobs with where the jobs are needed. [As Rortybomb informs, "A report the IMF put out - The Great Recession and Structural Unemployment - which found find that structural unemployment is 1%-1.75% nationwide, with skills being 0.5%."]
People have chosen service jobs over manufacturing because of the diminished wages offered by the manufacturing jobs. The manufacturing jobs today have lower wages, reduced health care and slim to non-existent retirement packages. Why would a worker chose a challenging, skilled manufacturing job under such circumstances when they could just as easily take a similarly compensating service industry job, which is often, also, much less physically demanding?
If the writers were serious they would be addressing trade agreements, tax-policy toward outsourcing firms, and discussing the need for a comprehensive industrial policy focused on America's need for a strong manufacturing sector and it's link to our infrastructure and self-sustainability. Instead we get more apologetics and scapegoating. Like most businesses these days, the manufacturers want the inflated profits, but none of the social responsibility of good wages and a secure retirement for their workers.
It's not that we don't have workers who can do these jobs, it's just easier [cheaper] for the well-represented [lobbyists] manufacturing companies to appeal for government hand-outs than to pay wages necessary for the work. Thus, a whole cottage industry of cranks has arisen to create this fantasy of structural unemployment and skills mismatch.
Rather, this is simply a story of supply and demand. Until the manufacturers are willing to pay respectable wages to attract workers to these jobs, the manufacturers will continue claiming the educational system must be failing, the government isn't doing enough, and everyone but the manufacturers are responsible for these supposedly unfilled jobs.
For Further Reading:
Has The Great Recession Raised Structural Unemployment?
Latest in (Lack of) Structural Employment
Saturday, January 14, 2012
Friday, January 13, 2012
Republican Election Obfuscation
Wisconsin Republicans want to make the already dirty process of campaigning even dirtier.
Wisconsin bill would roll back funding transparency
Wisconsin bill would roll back funding transparency
Republican Barons
The Colbert Report
Get More: Colbert Report Full Episodes,Political Humor & Satire Blog,Video Archive
Get More: Colbert Report Full Episodes,Political Humor & Satire Blog,Video Archive
Wednesday, January 11, 2012
Monday, January 9, 2012
Amnesia Appointments
President Obama's recess appointments - Richard Cordray to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and filling three vacancies on the National Labor Relations Board - have caused outrage among Republicans.
Although I don't recall Republicans being upset by the 171 recess appointments George W. Bush made during his administration.
And, I definitely don't remember Republicans complaining when Ronald Reagan made 240 recess appointments.
Although I don't recall Republicans being upset by the 171 recess appointments George W. Bush made during his administration.
And, I definitely don't remember Republicans complaining when Ronald Reagan made 240 recess appointments.
Wisconsin Economic Indicators
Health Insurance Coverage: Coverage Rate in Wisconsin (WIHICCOVPCT)
Home Ownership Rate for Wisconsin (WIHOWN)
Manufacturing Employment in Wisconsin (WIMFG)
Employees on Nonfarm Payrolls in Wisconsin (WINA)
Total Gross Domestic Product by State for Wisconsin (WINGSP)
Rental Vacancy Rate for Wisconsin (WIRVAC)
House Price Index for Wisconsin (WISTHPI)
Unemployment Rate in Wisconsin (WIUR)
Sunday, January 8, 2012
Trickle Down Tricks
With election season heating up, the usual right-wing talking-heads are spouting the usual right-wing misinformation. They claim uncertainty, taxes, and the possibility of a Scott Walker recall (specifically here in Wisconsin), are the culprits behind businesses not investing and their threats of moving to a location with a more friendly business climate.
Jared Bernstein and Lawrence Mishel have dispelled the "uncertainty" talking point, "First, 'uncertainty' in this context refers to the Republicans argument that it's government and central bank actions -- taxes, regulation, fiscal/monetary policy, health care/financial regulation reforms -- that are holding back the economy, not any of that ill-begotten Keynesian stuff, like lack of customers, orders, investors. So how might you test for something like that? Well, what about actual investment? Investment in the current recovery has increased more than in it had at the same time period in the prior two recoveries and roughly the same as it did during the 1980s recovery. In other words, this recovery is far more investment-led than the recovery under the pro-deregulation George W. Bush administration. Private sector jobs, you ask? ...private sector job growth in this recovery looks much like job growth in recent recoveries, suggesting that businesses are not reacting to a new threat of potential regulations and taxes (the difference with this recovery is actually the loss of public sector jobs. And then, of course, there's what the business folks, as opposed to their DC reps, actually say about what's bugging them: ...the regular National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB) surveys of small businesses found that the most common answer to the question, "what is the single most important problem your business faces?" was 'poor sales.' And while a number of businesses also cited regulation, the numbers were not substantially higher than under Presidents George W. Bush or Ronald Reagan and were lower than under Presidents Bill Clinton and George H.W. Bush. None of this is to say 'uncertainty' is not a problem. But while conservative politicians are busy jamming their perennial tax cut/deregulate agenda into the current context, the thing that businesses are truly uncertain about is when they're going to start seeing some customers again."
Numerous sources have debunked the 'burdensome tax climate' drum the Republicans continually pound.
As David Kocieniewski notes, "But by taking advantage of myriad breaks and loopholes that other countries generally do not offer, United States corporations pay only slightly more on average than their counterparts in other industrial countries. And some American corporations use aggressive strategies to pay less — often far less — than their competitors abroad and at home. A Government Accountability Office study released in 2008 found that 55 percent of United States companies paid no federal income taxes during at least one year in a seven-year period it studied."
The Institute for Wisconsin's Future has a series, Who Does Not Pay Taxes?, which details the numerous Wisconsin businesses that are paying little to nothing in taxes. Kimberly-Clark, Brunswick, Rockwell Automation, Snap-On and S.C. Johnson are but a few on the list.
Citizens for Tax Justice (CTJ), in their latest research spanning 2008-2010, has uncovered that the 280 most profitable corporation shelter half of their profits from taxes. "The average effective tax rate for all 280 companies in the study over the three year period was 18.5 percent; for the period 2009-2010 it was 17.3 percent, less than half the statutory rate of 35 percent." "30 Companies average less than zero tax bill in the last three years, 78 had at least one no-tax year."
CTJ has also discovered that the U.S. is one of the least taxed developed countries. U.S. taxes are the third lowest among OECD nations. "In 2009, total federal, state and local taxes in the United States were 22.6 percent of our gross domestic product, ranking 26th among the 28 OECD countries for which data are available. Only Chile (18.2 percent) and Mexico (17.5 percent) had lower taxes."
And, as the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities has found, "Government and independent researchers have long pointed out that the top statutory corporate tax rate is an incomplete measure at best of the burden of corporate taxes. It does not take into account the generous depreciation rules, exemptions, deductions, and credits (some of which are sometimes termed “loopholes”) that corporations may be eligible for. Those special provisions lower corporations’ effective tax rate, or the share of their profits they actually pay in taxes, and do so in a way that creates different tax rates for different industries. These differential tax rates across industries are generally regarded as more harmful to economic efficiency than any burden due to the current top statutory rate."
Business basics - inputs, suppliers, customers, labor, transportation - are much more important for a business in their site location decision. Republicans continually push for lower taxes because it benefits their favored constituents - the top 1 percent. But these policies actually have hurt the rest of us.
If we've learned anything from the Great Recession it should be that companies can get too big...and then we're stuck preventing their failure. Do we want such monopolistically large companies having such sway and getting such favors from state governments? Due to this war among the states (the competition for jobs) the ante keeps increasing with every business threatening their current host state for subsidies with the threat to move their jobs to another state.
Taxpayers are being asked to cover the bills for big business (by allowing them to pay less in taxes alongside receiving billions in subsidies) whilst being asked to take lower pay, less health care, and to fund their own retirement. And taxes and regulations are never little enough for these right-wing freeloaders. They want more and more breaks while they expect workers to sacrifice more and earn less. At the same time, corporations are making record profits.
Here's hoping voters don't buy the Republicans' snake-oil at the next election and we continue righting the wrongs initiated by the Reagan revolution.
For Further Reading:
America's Corporate Tax Obscenity
Blackmailed Into Oblivion
Doing Development Right
Insincere Revenue Barons
Misdirection & Ulterior Motives
Taken For A Ride
WalMart Propaganda & Media Lapdogs
We Have A Revenue Problem
Jared Bernstein and Lawrence Mishel have dispelled the "uncertainty" talking point, "First, 'uncertainty' in this context refers to the Republicans argument that it's government and central bank actions -- taxes, regulation, fiscal/monetary policy, health care/financial regulation reforms -- that are holding back the economy, not any of that ill-begotten Keynesian stuff, like lack of customers, orders, investors. So how might you test for something like that? Well, what about actual investment? Investment in the current recovery has increased more than in it had at the same time period in the prior two recoveries and roughly the same as it did during the 1980s recovery. In other words, this recovery is far more investment-led than the recovery under the pro-deregulation George W. Bush administration. Private sector jobs, you ask? ...private sector job growth in this recovery looks much like job growth in recent recoveries, suggesting that businesses are not reacting to a new threat of potential regulations and taxes (the difference with this recovery is actually the loss of public sector jobs. And then, of course, there's what the business folks, as opposed to their DC reps, actually say about what's bugging them: ...the regular National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB) surveys of small businesses found that the most common answer to the question, "what is the single most important problem your business faces?" was 'poor sales.' And while a number of businesses also cited regulation, the numbers were not substantially higher than under Presidents George W. Bush or Ronald Reagan and were lower than under Presidents Bill Clinton and George H.W. Bush. None of this is to say 'uncertainty' is not a problem. But while conservative politicians are busy jamming their perennial tax cut/deregulate agenda into the current context, the thing that businesses are truly uncertain about is when they're going to start seeing some customers again."
Numerous sources have debunked the 'burdensome tax climate' drum the Republicans continually pound.
As David Kocieniewski notes, "But by taking advantage of myriad breaks and loopholes that other countries generally do not offer, United States corporations pay only slightly more on average than their counterparts in other industrial countries. And some American corporations use aggressive strategies to pay less — often far less — than their competitors abroad and at home. A Government Accountability Office study released in 2008 found that 55 percent of United States companies paid no federal income taxes during at least one year in a seven-year period it studied."
The Institute for Wisconsin's Future has a series, Who Does Not Pay Taxes?, which details the numerous Wisconsin businesses that are paying little to nothing in taxes. Kimberly-Clark, Brunswick, Rockwell Automation, Snap-On and S.C. Johnson are but a few on the list.
Citizens for Tax Justice (CTJ), in their latest research spanning 2008-2010, has uncovered that the 280 most profitable corporation shelter half of their profits from taxes. "The average effective tax rate for all 280 companies in the study over the three year period was 18.5 percent; for the period 2009-2010 it was 17.3 percent, less than half the statutory rate of 35 percent." "30 Companies average less than zero tax bill in the last three years, 78 had at least one no-tax year."
CTJ has also discovered that the U.S. is one of the least taxed developed countries. U.S. taxes are the third lowest among OECD nations. "In 2009, total federal, state and local taxes in the United States were 22.6 percent of our gross domestic product, ranking 26th among the 28 OECD countries for which data are available. Only Chile (18.2 percent) and Mexico (17.5 percent) had lower taxes."
And, as the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities has found, "Government and independent researchers have long pointed out that the top statutory corporate tax rate is an incomplete measure at best of the burden of corporate taxes. It does not take into account the generous depreciation rules, exemptions, deductions, and credits (some of which are sometimes termed “loopholes”) that corporations may be eligible for. Those special provisions lower corporations’ effective tax rate, or the share of their profits they actually pay in taxes, and do so in a way that creates different tax rates for different industries. These differential tax rates across industries are generally regarded as more harmful to economic efficiency than any burden due to the current top statutory rate."
Business basics - inputs, suppliers, customers, labor, transportation - are much more important for a business in their site location decision. Republicans continually push for lower taxes because it benefits their favored constituents - the top 1 percent. But these policies actually have hurt the rest of us.
If we've learned anything from the Great Recession it should be that companies can get too big...and then we're stuck preventing their failure. Do we want such monopolistically large companies having such sway and getting such favors from state governments? Due to this war among the states (the competition for jobs) the ante keeps increasing with every business threatening their current host state for subsidies with the threat to move their jobs to another state.
Taxpayers are being asked to cover the bills for big business (by allowing them to pay less in taxes alongside receiving billions in subsidies) whilst being asked to take lower pay, less health care, and to fund their own retirement. And taxes and regulations are never little enough for these right-wing freeloaders. They want more and more breaks while they expect workers to sacrifice more and earn less. At the same time, corporations are making record profits.
Here's hoping voters don't buy the Republicans' snake-oil at the next election and we continue righting the wrongs initiated by the Reagan revolution.
For Further Reading:
America's Corporate Tax Obscenity
Blackmailed Into Oblivion
Doing Development Right
Insincere Revenue Barons
Misdirection & Ulterior Motives
Taken For A Ride
WalMart Propaganda & Media Lapdogs
We Have A Revenue Problem
Sunday Reading
The Book Of Jobs
Corporate Profits Up. Taxes Not.
Fannie And Freddie Fantasies
Top 5 Tax Myths of The GOP Spin Machine
How Many Colberts Are There?
Structural Adjustment For The Middle Class?
The City Solution
Urban Development Legends
What Is The Contribution Of The Financial Sector?
What Is The Real Unemployment Rate, And How Could We Tell?
Corporate Profits Up. Taxes Not.
Fannie And Freddie Fantasies
Top 5 Tax Myths of The GOP Spin Machine
How Many Colberts Are There?
Structural Adjustment For The Middle Class?
The City Solution
Urban Development Legends
What Is The Contribution Of The Financial Sector?
What Is The Real Unemployment Rate, And How Could We Tell?
Saturday, January 7, 2012
Wrong-To-Work
The latest research concerning the right-wing's continued attack on collective bargaining and living wages; the so-called "right-to-work" legislation:
Working Hard To Make Indiana Look Bad
"Right To Work" Lowers Wages - And That's A Fact!
Working Hard To Make Indiana Look Bad
"Right To Work" Lowers Wages - And That's A Fact!
Saturday, December 31, 2011
The Wisconsin Casino
The privatization/commercialization/casino-ization of Wisconsin public dollars continues.
WHEDA to invest $7 million.
We're broke?
WHEDA to invest $7 million.
We're broke?
Sunday, December 25, 2011
Friday, December 23, 2011
Thursday, December 22, 2011
Executive Disorder
Tom Barret, a Democrat, spoke like a Democrat, "I think it would be great if he [Scott Walker] could find another line of work," when asked about the impending recall of Scott Walker.
Chris Abele, Milwaukee County Executive and supposed Democrat, said, "I haven't been staying up nights thinking about it. It's not a driving thing." Asked whether he felt Walker should be recalled, Abele also demurred. "I don't know. It's not something I have a burning passion and opinion about."
The article notes, "Abele as county executive has sought to cast himself as an independent and a pragmatist for whom partisanship is secondary." This is not leadership.
You are a public servant...and you have no opinion on collective bargaining or the governor? As the county executive, you have no opinion about how the state is governed?
As Joseph McCartin states, "In 1959, Wisconsin became the first state to enact legislation recognizing the rights of government workers to bargain collectively." Overthrowing a 50-year labor standard for Wisconsin, a policy never mentioned by Scott Walker on the campaign trail, doesn't make Abele ruminate even in the slightest?
Chris Abele, Milwaukee County Executive and supposed Democrat, said, "I haven't been staying up nights thinking about it. It's not a driving thing." Asked whether he felt Walker should be recalled, Abele also demurred. "I don't know. It's not something I have a burning passion and opinion about."
The article notes, "Abele as county executive has sought to cast himself as an independent and a pragmatist for whom partisanship is secondary." This is not leadership.
You are a public servant...and you have no opinion on collective bargaining or the governor? As the county executive, you have no opinion about how the state is governed?
As Joseph McCartin states, "In 1959, Wisconsin became the first state to enact legislation recognizing the rights of government workers to bargain collectively." Overthrowing a 50-year labor standard for Wisconsin, a policy never mentioned by Scott Walker on the campaign trail, doesn't make Abele ruminate even in the slightest?
Not to mention, Walker killing trains, broadband, windmills, numerous federal aid packages and a host of other productive policies and projects that were in the works until Scott Walker took over. Abele has no passion nor thinks about any of this?
Abele wasn't elected to parrot the right-wing with talk of no new taxes and cuts, cuts, cuts. Milwaukee County citizens would like some guidance and direction: provide good, efficient services to the taxpayers and speak to the most pressing and important needs of our community. This whole Walker debacle fits into the latter category, and Abele should be thinking about it.
Americans For Pretense
American's For Prosperity (AFP) is pushing to put and end to Tax Incremental Financing (TIF). They feel this tool of economic redevelopment gives the businesses in the tax incremental districts an unfair advantage over other businesses not in the districts.
I'm not going to discuss TIFs and their viability. (I am also somewhat skeptical of their efficacy and efficiency.) The thing about this situation that jumped out at me is the utter hypocrisy and obliviousness of AFP.
Do Americans For Prosperity feel that their million dollar political campaigns for their causes give them an unfair advantage over others whom can't afford to spend that much? I'm sure now that they've decided TIFs are unfair, they've also realized how unfair our pay-to-play political system is and they will be urging public financing of elections from now on.
I'm sure they now understand that because they can get access to politicians and lobby in favor of their causes, that they have an unfair advantage over those who can't. Seeing they seem so concerned with fairness, I'm sure they will be altering their mission and doing all they can to give a voice to the voiceless and the needs of the underrepresented 99 percent.
I'm not going to discuss TIFs and their viability. (I am also somewhat skeptical of their efficacy and efficiency.) The thing about this situation that jumped out at me is the utter hypocrisy and obliviousness of AFP.
Do Americans For Prosperity feel that their million dollar political campaigns for their causes give them an unfair advantage over others whom can't afford to spend that much? I'm sure now that they've decided TIFs are unfair, they've also realized how unfair our pay-to-play political system is and they will be urging public financing of elections from now on.
I'm sure they now understand that because they can get access to politicians and lobby in favor of their causes, that they have an unfair advantage over those who can't. Seeing they seem so concerned with fairness, I'm sure they will be altering their mission and doing all they can to give a voice to the voiceless and the needs of the underrepresented 99 percent.
Buck You
The Journal Sentinel continues their advertising campaign periodic reporting for the Bradley Center. Don Walker writes, Operating Income Up, But Challenges Remain. (From fiscal year June 2010 to June 2011 operating income for the Bradley Center increased from $14.7 million to $16.3 million. A 10.9 percent increase.)
The thing that really irritates me about this whole stadium subsidization situation: these captains of industry, these entrepreneurs, these businessmen whom always complain about entitlements, aid to the poor, and workers wages (to name a few of their complaints), these same people have no problem putting their hand out and demanding taxpayer money for their private playgrounds and projects. They're so smart and innovative, except when it comes to paying the costs of their own business.
Exemplified by Marc Marotta, the chairman of the Bradley Center board, "The next five to seven years, there has to be a public-private effort." Strange how the private sector believes the public sector exists to service them specifically. Yet, when these private players are asked to pay their fair share of taxes, excuses for why they shouldn't have to pay more could fill all the seats at the Bradley Center.
Workers need to sacrifice. They should pay for their own retirement and health care; employers should no longer bear any responsibility. Social Security, Medicare, and unemployment insurance should all be diminished...we just can't afford it.
But...we need a private-public effort when tax dollars are being redistributed upward. When unemployment is at double-digits, people are losing their homes, and others are going without needed medical care, we can't use those same tax dollars to help out. No, in that case, we're broke. But when you can afford a boardroom full of attorneys, we will find the money to help build your stadium. We can raise taxes to pay for Miller Park, but we can't do the same for our park system or public transportation.
And, it's odd that even though the NBA season started late this year, the City of Milwaukee didn't collapse without the Bucks playing their basketball games. According to all the blather being whipped up, one would have thought that the, roughly, 20 cancelled games would have left Milwaukee resembling Thunderdome.
The thing that really irritates me about this whole stadium subsidization situation: these captains of industry, these entrepreneurs, these businessmen whom always complain about entitlements, aid to the poor, and workers wages (to name a few of their complaints), these same people have no problem putting their hand out and demanding taxpayer money for their private playgrounds and projects. They're so smart and innovative, except when it comes to paying the costs of their own business.
Exemplified by Marc Marotta, the chairman of the Bradley Center board, "The next five to seven years, there has to be a public-private effort." Strange how the private sector believes the public sector exists to service them specifically. Yet, when these private players are asked to pay their fair share of taxes, excuses for why they shouldn't have to pay more could fill all the seats at the Bradley Center.
Workers need to sacrifice. They should pay for their own retirement and health care; employers should no longer bear any responsibility. Social Security, Medicare, and unemployment insurance should all be diminished...we just can't afford it.
But...we need a private-public effort when tax dollars are being redistributed upward. When unemployment is at double-digits, people are losing their homes, and others are going without needed medical care, we can't use those same tax dollars to help out. No, in that case, we're broke. But when you can afford a boardroom full of attorneys, we will find the money to help build your stadium. We can raise taxes to pay for Miller Park, but we can't do the same for our park system or public transportation.
And, it's odd that even though the NBA season started late this year, the City of Milwaukee didn't collapse without the Bucks playing their basketball games. According to all the blather being whipped up, one would have thought that the, roughly, 20 cancelled games would have left Milwaukee resembling Thunderdome.
Midweek Reading
An Inconvenient Truth
The Case For Congestion
The Corporations That Occupy Congress
2011 Milwaukee: Year In Review
The Origins Of Financial Innovation
The Past, Present, & Future Of Venture Capital
The Price of Extremism: Wisconsin's Economy Under The Walker Administration
The University & the Start-Up: Lessons From The Past Two Decades
The Case For Congestion
The Corporations That Occupy Congress
2011 Milwaukee: Year In Review
The Origins Of Financial Innovation
The Past, Present, & Future Of Venture Capital
The Price of Extremism: Wisconsin's Economy Under The Walker Administration
The University & the Start-Up: Lessons From The Past Two Decades
Tuesday, December 20, 2011
U.S. Real Estate
Commercial Real Estate Prices for United States
Delinquency Rate On Loans Secured By Real Estate, All Commercial Banks
Loans Secured By Real Estate, All Commercial Banks
Owners' Equity in Household Real Estate - Net Worth - Balance Sheet of Households and Nonprofit Organizations
Real Estate - Assets - Balance Sheet of Households and Nonprofit Organizations
Sunday, December 18, 2011
Corporate Tax Dodgers
Citizen For Tax Justice has released an extensive report detailing corporate tax dodgers from 2008-2010.
Corporate Taxpayers & Corporate Tax Dodgers 2008-10
Press release with key findings:
A comprehensive new study that profiles 280 of America’s most profitable companies finds that 78 of them paid no federal income tax in at least one of the last three years. Thirty companies enjoyed a negative income tax rate over the three year period, despite combined pre-tax profits of $160 billion. These are among the findings in “Corporate Taxpayers and Corporate Tax Dodgers, 2008-2010,” released today by Citizens for Tax Justice and the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy.
“These 280 corporations received a total of nearly $223 billion in tax subsidies,” said Robert McIntyre, Director at Citizens for Tax Justice and the report’s lead author. “This is wasted money that could have gone to protect Medicare, create jobs and cut the deficit.”
The study examines 280 corporations, all from the Fortune 500 list. All of the companies were profitable in each of the last three years and provided sufficient and reliable information in their financial reports about their pretax U.S. profits and their U.S. federal income taxes. Corporations are lobbying for lower corporate rates and an exemption for profits they shift offshore. McIntyre, however, says “Our study provides proof that too many corporations are already being coddled by our tax system.” Findings in the report include:
The average effective tax rate for all 280 companies in the study over the three year period was 18.5 percent; for the period 2009-2010 it was 17.3 percent, less than half the statutory rate of 35 percent.
78 of the companies enjoyed at least one year in which their federal income tax was zero or less.
30 companies enjoyed a negative income tax rate over the entire three year period on their combined pre-tax profits of $160 billion.
Total tax subsidies given to all 280 profitable corporations amounted to $222.7 billion from 2008-2010.
Wells Fargo tops the list of 280 U.S. corporations receiving the most in tax subsidies, getting nearly $18 billion in tax breaks from the U.S. treasury in the last three years.
Pepco Holdings had the lowest effective tax rate of all the companies in the study, at negative 57.6 percent over the three year period. Some companies within sectors fare worse than others. For example, the report finds that FedEx paid a 0.9 percent tax rate over the three year period while its competitor, UPS, paid a 24.1 percent rate.
While retailers and wholesalers in the study generally pay average effective tax rates of about 30 percent, Amazon.com paid a rate of only 7.9 percent on its $1.8 billion in profits from 2008-2010.
Financial services received the largest share (16.8 percent) of all federal tax subsidies over the last three years. More than half of federal corporate tax subsidies for companies in the study went to four industries: financial services, utilities, telecommunications, and oil, gas & pipelines.
The top ten defense contractors saw their combined tax rate decline from 19.3 percent in 2008 to a mere 10.6 percent rate in 2010.
U.S. corporations with significant (ten percent or more of their total worldwide profits) foreign profits paid tax rates to foreign countries that were almost a third higher than they paid to the IRS on their domestic profits.
Corporate Taxpayers & Corporate Tax Dodgers 2008-10
Press release with key findings:
A comprehensive new study that profiles 280 of America’s most profitable companies finds that 78 of them paid no federal income tax in at least one of the last three years. Thirty companies enjoyed a negative income tax rate over the three year period, despite combined pre-tax profits of $160 billion. These are among the findings in “Corporate Taxpayers and Corporate Tax Dodgers, 2008-2010,” released today by Citizens for Tax Justice and the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy.
“These 280 corporations received a total of nearly $223 billion in tax subsidies,” said Robert McIntyre, Director at Citizens for Tax Justice and the report’s lead author. “This is wasted money that could have gone to protect Medicare, create jobs and cut the deficit.”
The study examines 280 corporations, all from the Fortune 500 list. All of the companies were profitable in each of the last three years and provided sufficient and reliable information in their financial reports about their pretax U.S. profits and their U.S. federal income taxes. Corporations are lobbying for lower corporate rates and an exemption for profits they shift offshore. McIntyre, however, says “Our study provides proof that too many corporations are already being coddled by our tax system.” Findings in the report include:
The average effective tax rate for all 280 companies in the study over the three year period was 18.5 percent; for the period 2009-2010 it was 17.3 percent, less than half the statutory rate of 35 percent.
78 of the companies enjoyed at least one year in which their federal income tax was zero or less.
30 companies enjoyed a negative income tax rate over the entire three year period on their combined pre-tax profits of $160 billion.
Total tax subsidies given to all 280 profitable corporations amounted to $222.7 billion from 2008-2010.
Wells Fargo tops the list of 280 U.S. corporations receiving the most in tax subsidies, getting nearly $18 billion in tax breaks from the U.S. treasury in the last three years.
Pepco Holdings had the lowest effective tax rate of all the companies in the study, at negative 57.6 percent over the three year period. Some companies within sectors fare worse than others. For example, the report finds that FedEx paid a 0.9 percent tax rate over the three year period while its competitor, UPS, paid a 24.1 percent rate.
While retailers and wholesalers in the study generally pay average effective tax rates of about 30 percent, Amazon.com paid a rate of only 7.9 percent on its $1.8 billion in profits from 2008-2010.
Financial services received the largest share (16.8 percent) of all federal tax subsidies over the last three years. More than half of federal corporate tax subsidies for companies in the study went to four industries: financial services, utilities, telecommunications, and oil, gas & pipelines.
The top ten defense contractors saw their combined tax rate decline from 19.3 percent in 2008 to a mere 10.6 percent rate in 2010.
U.S. corporations with significant (ten percent or more of their total worldwide profits) foreign profits paid tax rates to foreign countries that were almost a third higher than they paid to the IRS on their domestic profits.
The Time Is Now?
Are you kidding me?
On the list of priorities for public dollars - where public investment should be steered - building a new basketball stadium shouldn't even make the list.
But Michael Hunt, of the Journal Sentinel, feels the time is now to address a new arena for the Bucks.
The article notes:
On the list of priorities for public dollars - where public investment should be steered - building a new basketball stadium shouldn't even make the list.
But Michael Hunt, of the Journal Sentinel, feels the time is now to address a new arena for the Bucks.
The article notes:
"Marotta, a former Marquette basketball player, is getting it started by evoking the name of former Wisconsin state Sen. George Petak, whose vote saved Miller Park.
"Where would we be without a guy like Petak? Here was a guy who cared more about doing the right thing than being re-elected," Marotta said.
"He lost his seat, but if he hadn't taken that vote, we wouldn't have the Brewers here. And Milwaukee would be a significantly diminished town. We do have a lot of challenges. There's no denying that. We have significant economic challenges within the city. We've got public infrastructure needs. We've got libraries that need to be funded.
"The way to continue to do that and grow as a community is to invest in our entertainment, cultural and sports assets. That's what attracts business to come and expand here. It makes it a great place to live and work."
Entertainment, cultural and sports assets sure do make a city more tolerable. But Milwaukee isn't Las Vegas - lets not pretend these are the economic engines of Milwaukee's economy. We may have tourist attractions, but our economy isn't driven by the tourism industries. Manufacturing; trade, transportation, and utilities; information; financial activities; professional and business services; and education and health services all employee more people than our leisure and hospitality industry.
It's fine to look at our stadiums and conventions centers at some point. Preferably, when our economy is on better footing, and taxpayers may be more receptive to such public investment. But, as far as bang-for-the-buck investments are concerned, in helping to get our economy growing again, stadium subsidization has a poor return on investment.
The time is now for public investment in infrastructure. But it should be in public transportation, energy, water, and education, not sports stadiums.
Free-Falling
David Rohde has an interesting article up over at the Atlantic, Free-Falling In Milwaukee.
Excerpt:
Roads, Roads, Everywhere
With a dying planet and a dying economy, the Wisconsin Department of Transportation decides to double down on pollution and antiquated energy and transportation sources.
DOT kills Hoan Bridge bike lane proposal.
DOT kills Hoan Bridge bike lane proposal.
Risky Business
The Journal Sentinel is promoting, again, venture capital.
"The State of Wisconsin Investment Board (SWIB) said it will commit as much as $80 million to Danville, Calif.-based Northgate Capital. This is the first time the $85 billion public pension fund has had the opportunity to invest with the top venture capital pools, which are willing to take public funds' money because the weak economy has made it more difficult for the funds to lure private investors."
"We believe the current venture environment offers an unprecedented opportunity to access top-tier funds and invest into a climate with favorable valuations," Chris Prestigiacomo, SWIB portfolio manager, said. "Both should translate into higher future returns that meet SWIB's fiduciary duty to the Wisconsin Retirement System beneficiaries."
"So an old-fashioned financial romance began: Supply (Wall Street’s hottest financial products) met Demand (school districts seeking to build up their OPEB trust funds). It looked like a perfect match."
"Their trust fund for retirees’ benefits could accumulate almost $9 million in seven years by borrowing and investing $80 million. These CDOs would pay them over 1 percent more than what it would cost to borrow the money. The more the schools borrowed, the more they would make. It was practically free money. What was not to like?"
"Whitefish Bay and the other school districts got something substantial too: nearly all of the risk. The school districts are about to lose all of their initial $37.3 million. They will also lose another $165 million of the money they’d borrowed from Depfa. As soon as the default rate is reached, $200 million will go to pay insurance claims to the Royal Bank of Canada. And the schools still will owe the full $165-million Depfa loan, and they will still owe on the bonds they had issued to raise much of their $37.3 million in collateral. The risk of reaching total default currently is so high that Kenosha’s entire piece of the CDO investment ($35.6 million) was valued at only $925,000, as of January 29, 2009—a decline in value of $36,575,000. Now the school districts are paying hefty fees not just to bankers but also to lawyers, as they sue to unwind the deal and recover damages."
"The State of Wisconsin Investment Board (SWIB) said it will commit as much as $80 million to Danville, Calif.-based Northgate Capital. This is the first time the $85 billion public pension fund has had the opportunity to invest with the top venture capital pools, which are willing to take public funds' money because the weak economy has made it more difficult for the funds to lure private investors."
"We believe the current venture environment offers an unprecedented opportunity to access top-tier funds and invest into a climate with favorable valuations," Chris Prestigiacomo, SWIB portfolio manager, said. "Both should translate into higher future returns that meet SWIB's fiduciary duty to the Wisconsin Retirement System beneficiaries."
All of this reminded me of a great article, The Looting of America: How Wall Street Fleeced Millions From Wisconsin Schools.
The Whitefish Bay school district's trust fund (along with 4 other districts) wanted to 'get a piece of the action' and leverage funds with some Wall Street high-rollers, with the hopes of cashing in.
It didn't quite work out that way. The Wall Streeters made their money; Whitefish Bay, not so much.
We've been warned.
Saturday, December 17, 2011
Standards For State Economic Development Subsidy Programs
Good Jobs First has released a new report, Money For Something: Job Creation & Job Quality Standards For State Economic Development Subsidy Programs.
Excerpts:
"At a time when unemployment remains high and states and cities are spending an estimated $70 billion a year in the name of economic development, taxpayers are right to ask if such expenditures are creating a substantial number of good jobs. An analysis of major state economic development programs finds that many subsidy programs require little if any job creation. Fewer than half provide any kind of wage standard for the workers at subsidized companies, and fewer than a fourth require any sort of healthcare coverage."
"These findings come from a careful analysis by Good Jobs First of the most significant subsidy programs in all 50 states and the District of Columbia—238 programs in all, which together cost taxpayers more than $11 billion a year (amounts are not available for 20 of them). The programs include corporate income tax credits (for job creation, capital investment, and/or research & development), cash grants, low‐cost or forgivable loans, enterprise zones, reimbursement for worker training expenses and other types of company‐specific state assistance. (Subsidies that are enabled by state law but whose costs are borne by local governments, such as property tax abatements, are not among the programs examined.)"
"We rate each of the 238 programs on three primary criteria (and several derivative qualities): whether they require recipient companies to meet job‐creation or other quantifiable performance standards; whether the subsidized companies have to pay their workers above a certain wage level; and whether the companies have to provide their workers healthcare coverage or other employee benefits."
"Fewer than half (98) of the 238 programs impose a wage requirement on subsidized employers, and only 53 of those wage standards are tied to labor market rates, which are a more effective benchmark for economic development than fixed amounts that can stagnate in the manner of the federal minimum wage."
"Based on our criteria, the states with the best average program scores are: Nevada (82), North Carolina (79), Vermont (77), Iowa (70), Maryland (68), and Oklahoma (66). The worst averages are: District of Columbia (4), Alaska (5), Wyoming (10), Oregon (13), Washington (18), Hawaii (19) and North Dakota (19). Twenty‐three states score above 40, which is the average for all the states."
Excerpts:
"At a time when unemployment remains high and states and cities are spending an estimated $70 billion a year in the name of economic development, taxpayers are right to ask if such expenditures are creating a substantial number of good jobs. An analysis of major state economic development programs finds that many subsidy programs require little if any job creation. Fewer than half provide any kind of wage standard for the workers at subsidized companies, and fewer than a fourth require any sort of healthcare coverage."
"These findings come from a careful analysis by Good Jobs First of the most significant subsidy programs in all 50 states and the District of Columbia—238 programs in all, which together cost taxpayers more than $11 billion a year (amounts are not available for 20 of them). The programs include corporate income tax credits (for job creation, capital investment, and/or research & development), cash grants, low‐cost or forgivable loans, enterprise zones, reimbursement for worker training expenses and other types of company‐specific state assistance. (Subsidies that are enabled by state law but whose costs are borne by local governments, such as property tax abatements, are not among the programs examined.)"
"We rate each of the 238 programs on three primary criteria (and several derivative qualities): whether they require recipient companies to meet job‐creation or other quantifiable performance standards; whether the subsidized companies have to pay their workers above a certain wage level; and whether the companies have to provide their workers healthcare coverage or other employee benefits."
"Fewer than half (98) of the 238 programs impose a wage requirement on subsidized employers, and only 53 of those wage standards are tied to labor market rates, which are a more effective benchmark for economic development than fixed amounts that can stagnate in the manner of the federal minimum wage."
"Based on our criteria, the states with the best average program scores are: Nevada (82), North Carolina (79), Vermont (77), Iowa (70), Maryland (68), and Oklahoma (66). The worst averages are: District of Columbia (4), Alaska (5), Wyoming (10), Oregon (13), Washington (18), Hawaii (19) and North Dakota (19). Twenty‐three states score above 40, which is the average for all the states."
Weekend Reading
Competition Hasn't Worked In Health Care
How Did Fannie & Freddie Become Symbols Of The Housing Bubble?
How Finance Vultures Feed Off The Poor
It's Time To Tax The Church
Questioning The Benefits Of Curbing Short Sales
Rethinking Debt
The Top 1 Percent Since 1990: Getting Richer
Uncertainty & The Welfare Economic Of Medical Care
We Have More Doctors Per Capita Than Ever Before
Why Rich People Don't Create Jobs
How Did Fannie & Freddie Become Symbols Of The Housing Bubble?
How Finance Vultures Feed Off The Poor
It's Time To Tax The Church
Questioning The Benefits Of Curbing Short Sales
Rethinking Debt
The Top 1 Percent Since 1990: Getting Richer
Uncertainty & The Welfare Economic Of Medical Care
We Have More Doctors Per Capita Than Ever Before
Why Rich People Don't Create Jobs
Reality & Public Sector Compensation
With election season heating up, Republican myth-making and outright dishonesty can't be far behind. In anticipation of the next round of right-wing attacks on government and the public sector, here is some of the latest research completely debunking the Republicans' attempted deception on government size and public worker pay.
Are Wisconsin Public Employees Overcompensated?
Right-Wing Media Pushing Phony Public Sector Worker Stats
State Budget Deficits Are Not An Employee Compensation Problem
Wisconsin Has Lean Public Sector
Wisconsin Public Employees
Wisconsin Public Sector Workers Are Undercompensated
Are Wisconsin Public Employees Overcompensated?
Right-Wing Media Pushing Phony Public Sector Worker Stats
State Budget Deficits Are Not An Employee Compensation Problem
Wisconsin Has Lean Public Sector
Wisconsin Public Employees
Wisconsin Public Sector Workers Are Undercompensated
Race To The Bottom
The former head of Obama's auto task force, Steven Rattner, while speaking at a luncheon in Detroit, expressed that he wished he would have made the UAW sacrifice more.
Rattner also mentioned, "Friends on Wall Street were concerned by GM's earnings and communications with the market."
Rattner also mentioned, "Friends on Wall Street were concerned by GM's earnings and communications with the market."
The three-tiered pay structure has the highest 900 workers making $29 an hour, $16 for those 200 workers in the middle, and $9 for those subcontracted at the bottom. Which means that the top worker has gross earnings somewhere near $60,000 per year; the middle worker somewhere near $33,000; and the bottom somewhere near $19,000.
The article goes on to note that GM's North American division posted profits of $5.7 billion in the past nine months of this year. So, even though the workers are not making lavish amounts and the company is profiting handsomely, the Wall Street and Republican mindset is on full display - the rich deserve more, while the workers should sacrifice more.
This is class warfare people. Wake up!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)