MURDER, POLITICS, AND THE END OF THE JAZZ AGE
by Michael Wolraich
Order today at Barnes & Noble / Amazon / Books-A-Million / Bookshop
MURDER, POLITICS, AND THE END OF THE JAZZ AGE by Michael Wolraich Order today at Barnes & Noble / Amazon / Books-A-Million / Bookshop |
As we set here bandying about how the Republicans are decimating union and people's rights, how we should or should not support the current administration, hurl righteous brick-bats at the left and evangelical right and other amusing activities - we seem to forget one of the biggest reasons we are at each others throats these days. That the policies of the last 50 years or so have set this situation up to a tee. Paul Craig Roberts, whose column I just finished, reminds us of what has transpired to insure the decimation of this country and why our social safety nets are at risk.
The American Empire is failing. A number of its puppet rulers are being overthrown by popular protests, and the almighty dollar will not even buy one Swiss franc, one Canadian dollar, or one Australian dollar. Despite the sovereign debt problem that threatens EU members Greece, Ireland, Spain, and Portugal, it requires $1.38 dollars to buy one euro, a new currency that was issued at parity with the US dollar.The US dollar’s value is likely to fall further in terms of other currencies, because nothing is being done about the US budget and trade deficits. Obama’s budget, if passed, doesn’t reduce the deficit over the next ten years by enough to cover the projected deficit in the FY 2012 budget.
Indeed, the deficits are likely to be substantially larger than forecast. The military/security complex, about which President Eisenhower warned Americans a half century ago, is more powerful than ever and shows no inclination to halt the wars for US hegemony.
Yes I know, it has become a cliche as of late. But it is true and is the one thing that we lose sight of far too easily. We continue to piss away trillions of dollars on wars that serve no purpose what so ever except to line the pockets of the already rich industrialists. WWII showed the American industrial and financial sector that there is money to be had in Washington and you did not have to dig very hard or deep to get a good portion of it. Korea was the first test case for this and the Cold War and Vietnam the application.
Justification for obscene military expenditures was just a USSR and Communism speech away and the frame job fit them like a glove. Communists were going to take ALL YOUR MONEY, PROPERTY AND FIRST BORN MALE CHILD. At the same time US Industry was making out like bandits in an town with no law enforcement. Taking anything that was not nailed down in those countries who were friendly to US but not their citizens or the USSR. And the tyrannical, corrupt leaders of these states were supported without question as long as they were no communist. A Free Market Capitalist's wet dream to be sure.
But the game changed and is changing even now. The USSR collapsed in on itself, Vietnam came to an end and the rest of the world recovered from WWII. So we began hemorrhaging jobs and money and the military and its Corporate symbiont kept growing and wanting their government handouts to continue. So other "whipping boys" needed to be put front and center and a handful of Islamic extremists happily obliged. Giving these people another reason to con the public into funding two back to back wars. The last of which has no end in sight. And at 20% of the GDP, they are the main reason this country is going broke. But neither party or those on the right or left want to say NO. Enough is Enough.
The cost of these wars is enormous. The US media, being good servants for the government, only reports the out-of-pocket or current cost of the wars, which is only about one-third of the real cost. The current cost leaves out the cost of life-long care for the wounded and maimed, the cost of life-long military pensions of those who fought in the wars, the replacement costs of the destroyed equipment, the opportunity cost of the resources wasted in war, and other costs. The true cost of America’s illegal Iraq invasion, which was based entirely on lies, fabrications and deceptions, is at least $3,000 billion according to economist Joseph Stiglitz and budget expert Linda Bilmes.The same for the Afghan war, which is ongoing. If the Afghan war lasts as long as the Pentagon says it needs to, the cost will be a multiple of the cost of the Iraq war.
There is not enough non-military discretionary spending in the budget to cover the cost of the wars even if every dollar is cut. As long as the $1,200 billion ($1.2 trillion) annual budget for the military/security complex is off limits, nothing can be done about the U.S. budget deficit except to renege on obligations to the elderly, confiscate private assets, or print enough money to inflate away all debts.
Couple that with the shipping out of the manufacturing and support and even some of the design of supposedly American-made products, and you drop the government's income as well.
The other great contribution to the US deficit is the offshoring of production for US markets. This practice has enriched corporate management, large shareholders, and Wall Street, but it has eroded the tax base, and thereby tax collections, of local, state, and federal government, halted the growth of real income for everyone but the rich, and disrupted the lives of those Americans whose jobs were sent abroad. When short-term and long-term discouraged workers are added to the U.3 measure of unemployment, the U.S. has an unemployment rate of 22%. A country with more than one-fourth of its work force unemployed has a shrunken tax base and feeble consumer purchasing power.To put it bluntly, the $3 trillion cost of the Iraq war, as computed by Joseph Stiglitz and Linda Bilmes, is 20% of the size of the U.S. economy in 2010. In other words, the Iraq war alone cost Americans one-fifth of the year’s gross domestic product. Instead of investing the resources, which would have produced income and jobs growth and solvency for state and local governments, the US government wasted the equivalent of 20% of the production of the economy in 2010 in blowing up infrastructure and people in foreign lands. The US government spent a huge sum of money committing war crimes, while millions of Americans were thrown out of their jobs and foreclosed out of their homes.
So now we have and economy in shambles and two political parties that see no problem with gutting social programs to fund these military mis-adventures.
Republicans regard Social Security as an "unfunded liability," that is, a giveaway that is interfering with our war-making ability.Alas, Social Security is an unfunded liability, because all the money working people put into it was stolen by Republicans and Democrats in order to pay for wars and bailouts for mega-rich bankers like Goldman Sachs.
What I am about to tell you might come as a shock, but it is the absolute truth, which you can verify for yourself by going online to the government’s annual OASDI and HI reports. According to the official 2010 Social Security reports, between 1984 and 2009 the American people contributed $2 trillion, that is $2,000 billion, more to Social Security and Medicare in payroll taxes than was paid out in benefits.
What happened to the surplus $2,000 billion, or $2,000,000,000,000.
The government spent it.
That's right. No matter what the economists tell you, it was spent on the military industrial complex. Spent to support a symbiont creature that should have been gassed long ago.
A government that runs a deficit too large to finance by borrowing will print money as long as it can. When the printing press begins to push up inflation and push down the exchange value of the dollar, the government will be tempted to reduce its debt by reneging on entitlements or by confiscating private assets such as pension funds. When it has confiscated private assets and reneged on public obligations, nothing is left but the printing press.We owe the end-time situation that we face to open-ended wars and to an unregulated financial system concentrated in a few hands that produces financial crises by leveraging debt to irresponsible levels.
The government of the United States does not represent the American people. It represents the oligarchs. The way campaign finance and elections are structured, the American people cannot take back their government by voting. A once proud and free people have been reduced to serfdom.
That pretty much sums it up. And the left and right remain nearly mute about this sacred leech.
Comments
I keep reading and hearing about how we need form a new and just equitable society. But unless and until we get rid of these financial, military and industrial leaches - the patient will not recover.
by cmaukonen on Thu, 03/10/2011 - 6:25pm
As of late? It became a cliche two years ago. It's no longer a cliche. It's a friggin' mantra.
It's worth noting that this cliche came into fashion very soon after the old cliche about America's recession-free future went out of fashion. Coincidence? Or are we simply sheep who believe that the world is ending whenever unemployment hits 10 and that we'll never be poor again when unemployment hits 5.
I know, I know, it's different this time, but it's different every time. Seriously, every recession. If it's not the dollar, it's the trade deficit. If it's not China, it's Japan.
Alright, I'm done with my rant. None of this detracts from your fine point that the US needs to cut its military. I just wish that you would title the piece something like, "The US Needs to Cut Its Military" instead of, "WE'RE ALL GONNA DIE!" or whatever the title was, I forget.
PS Cmauk, in addition to avoiding Seatonesque headlines, would you please change your font before pasting? Whenever I promote your pieces, I have to strip out the wacky font you use, and it's a pain. I think that that you can set your font to the default, and that should work. Otherwise, set it to Arial. That's our font until such time as we have to switch to Chinese.
by Michael Wolraich on Thu, 03/10/2011 - 6:48pm
美國需要削减它的軍事預算.
by Elusive Trope on Thu, 03/10/2011 - 6:54pm
LOL
by cmaukonen on Thu, 03/10/2011 - 7:04pm
This unworthy one humbly asks forgiveness for breaks of the sacred rules. { bows humbly while backing away}
by cmaukonen on Thu, 03/10/2011 - 7:15pm
Ha. I'm obviously feeling a little cranky. But I would appeciate the font help.
by Michael Wolraich on Thu, 03/10/2011 - 7:19pm
gotcha
by cmaukonen on Thu, 03/10/2011 - 7:23pm
Just a word of support on your general rant. This boomer has had so much dejas vus allover again lately as regards circa 1979-1981 that I called my roomate up from that time period and asked her if she felt the same. She said yup absolutely. Ah the memories,we were never ever going to get a decent job there were just too many of us, unemployed PHD's begging on the streets, Iranian hostage crisis day XXX, gas rationing, the new Japanese overlords buying up the U.S. and nobody making or buying American goods. (The "come and bash a Japanese car with a sledgehammer" was a popular union event in those days.) All the economists back then told us then you have to pick one, which do you want: high unemployment or high inflation, that it was not possible to have low unemployment and low inflation at the same time. Oh and also too this was CW: it was possible to have a government budget surplus nor was it possible to lower the debt, ever, it was just going to grow and grow until the great great grandchildren were paying 99% of GDP to interest or some such. The world was coming to an end then, too, no way out.
by artappraiser on Thu, 03/10/2011 - 7:30pm
And if I remember correctly everybody was clamoring about the "Peace Dividend" when the Soviet Union collapsed. Didn't happen. Surprise Surprise. Why ? Because the military and it's contractor beneficiaries were left intact to find some other way the pillage the kingdom.
All we got was just one false prosperity after another. Each one a bubble that popped and left an even bigger mess than the previous one. And the next bubble may not be one that can be cleaned up so easily.
by cmaukonen on Thu, 03/10/2011 - 8:20pm
I also remember this headline from a decade later:
Bush: 'Our Long National Nightmare Of Peace And Prosperity Is Finally Over'
The Onion, January 17, 2001
How long do good economic times have to last before you don't call them a bubble anymore?
Seems sometimes people has expectations of something that never happened in the history of civilization. They had recessions in the 1950's and 1960's, ya know. You could have the most perfect miraculous economic system ever developed by mankind, with safety nets for all human folly, plus failed crops, floods, volcano eruptions and nuclear disasters, and then a big meteor would hit.
by artappraiser on Thu, 03/10/2011 - 10:19pm
All payed for now with funny money.
by cmaukonen on Thu, 03/10/2011 - 10:22pm
It's not a matter of how long they last so much as how brutally they pop ... and the underlying economic factors on which the good times were based.
by kgb999 on Fri, 03/11/2011 - 5:24am
by Elusive Trope on Thu, 03/10/2011 - 7:01pm
Unfortunately this is a case where the outgo exceeds the income significantly. The financial gains you speak of came to an end with the winding down of the cold war which consisted mainly of constructing bigger and badder missiles and ships and planes. None of which were intentionally destroyed but recycled or sold off two lesser countries. The cold war being more like to aging gorillas trying to show the world who had the bigger penis.
The actual fighting wars were and are a major drain and these communities are still going broke.
by cmaukonen on Thu, 03/10/2011 - 7:24pm
I'm not worried C. "Change has come to America." My spellcheck says that a synonym for change is "erosion." Ghengis is right. Things will go back to the way they were. It will just take a long, long, long, long, long, long, long time.
by LarryH on Thu, 03/10/2011 - 8:41pm
LOL Larry. I would like to live a long time but I have a nasty feeling that I wont be around THAT long. Besides, every one I know and their kids will be gone by then.
by cmaukonen on Thu, 03/10/2011 - 8:52pm
It's just a bunch of numbers C. What's important is the math you use. Like the song says:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v8BBipmqKxg&feature=related
by LarryH on Thu, 03/10/2011 - 9:42pm
"the American people cannot take back their government by voting. A once proud and free people have been reduced to serfdom."
The American people can take their government back by being informed when they vote. Until then, they will get the government that they deserve. The one they vote into office because they can't tell truth from lies, or honest candidates from liars and fools.
If they think the government can't do anything for them, which is exactly what the rich want them to believe, they might wonder why the rich take such an interest in buying candidates and funding campaigns. (Hint: it's not because folks like Koch want to protect either your freedom or your prosperity-it's that they want to protect theirs).
by NCD on Thu, 03/10/2011 - 8:50pm
But who are you voting for? The way things stand today, many politicans are in the back pocket of monied interests. They only pander to the public just to get into office.
by Beetlejuice on Thu, 03/10/2011 - 9:10pm
This is true because you have to be a millionaire or nearly so to run a successful campaign. Either from your own money or know enough millionaires that are willing to fund it for you. So who is the politician going to be the most responsive to ? The guy or gal who makes around 50k and can barely afford to make a donation or the moneybags that dropped 500k your way.
Add to that the public's increasing disinterest in politics because they do not feel the politicians represent them or their interests.
We needed public financing of campaigns and restrictions on political adds or an out right ban like a number of countries have.
by cmaukonen on Thu, 03/10/2011 - 9:38pm
Exactly. And throw in a new supreme court to prevent corporations from screwing their share holders by making political donations with what should have been the dividends.
by Flavius on Thu, 03/10/2011 - 9:44pm
One of the interesting facts about the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan is what friend of mine calls stupid money being paid out to anyone stepping foot in country. Stupid money is the money a soldier earns while in country. It's enough to buy a new BMW without getting a loan...cold hard cash. Why so much? It's the all volunteer force, stupid! Without a draft, you have to fight with what you have. So you need an incentive...and money talks. Rumor has it, Air Guard aircrews transporting war material in and out of country are raking in the big bucks for just a few hours on the ground. Not bad for a week-end warrior.So just think how much money would be saved if there was a draft. And just think how many people would wake up and realize how long the wars have been going with no end in sight and their sons and daughters are being called up for active duty.
Stupid money is just the tip of the iceberg.
Too many contractors doing work active duty personnel are quite capable of performing themselves. I was working on a contract with 6 people plus a supervisor when it only required 2. The extra 4 people were necessary because we were doing work that should have been done by the active duty personnel...there was a need for 2 contractors to keep the system running, but the tasks of installing and removing components was within the scope of military duties for assign service members.
It's the all volunteer force coupled with doing more for less with less that costs the taxpayer out the ass. The F-22 Raptor is a prime example. Pure eye candy in a rocket with wings. It's an all-in-one fighter/bomber/recon and whatever else you want it to be and the bells and whistles rivals any video/arcade game. But for some reason, having a couple of separate variants of the Raptor by different aircraft manufacturers, each with some unique operating environment as well as different flight characteristic but capable of overlapping support is not longer an option...we have to have all our eggs in one basket no matter what the cost.
In short, our military has gotten too exotic. They've forgotten that once upon a time they were only guaranteed three hots and a cot during peace time and 3 colds and a hole when out on the front line.
by Beetlejuice on Thu, 03/10/2011 - 9:05pm
Hey, freedom aint free but the F-22 really does represent Stupid Money. An aircraft prone to sunburn.
Unit Cost: $159.9 million (then year dollars)/ USA's General Air Force has said that it costs on average $50,000 to maintain for ever 1 hour it is flown. The system on the F-22 shuts down when ever it is exposed to the sun with the engine running.
Read more: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_much_does_the_f22_cost#ixzz1GFIZR88i
by A Guy Called LULU on Thu, 03/10/2011 - 9:14pm
Isn’t this one of the reasons why ROME had fallen?
The servants said to heck with you Senators and you of the aristocracy.
The new aristocracy saying "It’s not their fault you didn’t become part of that class; you had the freedom to achieve"
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Oh I suspect it won’t be too long before they’ll institute the draft again.
Forcing the servants to love their country of the privileged class.
“Now! You will bow to our demands; you will defend us “
Eugene Debs went to prison for speaking out against the arisocracy and the class of priviledge.
About how the servants will die to defend THEM..
When the ARU struck the Pullman Palace Car Company over pay cuts, President Grover Cleveland used the United States Army to break the strike. As a leader of the ARU, Debs was later imprisoned for failing to obey an injunction against the strike…. Noted for his oratory, it was a speech denouncing American participation in World War I that led to his second arrest in 1918. He was convicted under the Espionage Act of 1917 and sentenced to a term of 10 years. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugene_V._Debs
The aristocracy has gotten theirs, now try and get yours; but don’t you dare speak up either
If the class of prviledge wants a defense program, let them pay for it.... besides the cost of their social responsibilies...........or cut defense.
What would be the tax liability imposed upon the rich to fund the defense program; that serves them more, than it does a servant class with not much to lose.
A ....what if they (the corporate class) through a war and the servants refused to serve.
Let the rich pay for their computer controlled defense systems, that eliminates the need for the Rich to come to the servant class, asking for our help to defend their way of life.
They want a high tech miltary, just in case, we said to heck with you Senators, you of the aristocracy. But they also want the peasants to pay for it.
by Resistance on Thu, 03/10/2011 - 10:12pm
Sorry, the glass is half full.
If we had our apparently perpetual fiscal deficit despite a military budget half its current size ( and of course still the world's largest) and a 90% tax on incremental income over say a $1million that would be grounds for weeping and wailing and gnashing of whatever one gnashes. There'd be no self evident solution. Other than raiding social security and other such intellectually challenged proposals. As it is, to state the problem is to state the solution.
If we had an apparently perpetual trade deficit (multiplying the impact of the fiscal one ), despite a substantial manufacturing sector- protected by whatever level of tariffs required to protect it- that would be grounds for weeping etc.As it is (see final sentence above)
It wasn't easy Converting this almost irrepressibly wealthy country into a Gulliver entangled in tiny ropes tied by tiny people. It was a tough job but hey, we found the only people able to do it. Us.
All we have to do is to stop making fools of ourselves.
by Flavius on Thu, 03/10/2011 - 9:36pm
Damn F. It's after 6 PM here on the coast. I'm on my fourth latte. That font could give me a stroke.
Oh and sadly your last line is the depleted uranium truth.
by LarryH on Thu, 03/10/2011 - 9:46pm
Like sex with animals. Whatever happened to that? We don't ask much you know, just a few little things, here and there, to help make our humdrum lives worth living.
We don't ask much.
Or take sandwiches. How hard can it be to whip up a sandwich that juggles chainsaws and emits hydrogen sulphide should a stranger attempt to bite them? How hard?
Or moon rocks. That can do long division, generate energy from fusion, and hang out with Morlocks during the long nights.
I mean.... I MISS the Morlocks.
So many good times.
A fella comes home, after a hard day at the coal face, and just wants to be able to turn on the telly, take that 5 minutes while its warming up to make hisself a meal, and then... sit back, for a little entertainment, from the likes of Ed Sullivan.
Or his son, Andrew.
Nope. We don't ask much in this country.
That, and never to have to pay any fucking taxes for anything, at all, ever.
by quinn esq on Thu, 03/10/2011 - 10:29pm
I MISS Miss Brooks...oops wrong decade...never mind.
by cmaukonen on Thu, 03/10/2011 - 10:55pm
Just tell me what to do about the font and by god I'll do it. Can't afford to risk my holdings in Starbucks. Both shares.
by Flavius on Thu, 03/10/2011 - 10:52pm
No problem. It was probably the meth not the coffee.
by LarryH on Thu, 03/10/2011 - 11:25pm
Flave...that last one is a bitch for sure.
by cmaukonen on Thu, 03/10/2011 - 9:49pm