Certain Doubt

Nothing is certain in life except doubt

  • Home
  • About Me
  • Book Reviews
  • Personal Plea
  • Statement of Purpose

Archive for the ‘economics’ Category

Occupy The Rich

Thursday, November 17th, 2011

Today something happened I never would have expected. I found myself agreeing with Steve Forbes.

In an interview today the billionaire and one time presidential candidate intimated that the Occupy Wall street protestors were protesting in the wrong place.

I couldn’t agree more.

Of course Steve - “Mr. Flat Tax” – Forbes ruined it by going on to say the place protestors should be is the Halls of Congress… ostensibly to convince law makers to remove the few rules and regulations that allow him and his cronies to amass huge fortunes on the backs of hard working middle class workers.

Though I empathize and support the “Occupy Movement,” I’m also in agreement with those who think most of the protests are symbolic, undirected, and largely ineffectual, in part because they are “occupying” the wrong place. If the 99% really wants to affect change, they should take their protest to those truly responsible for their misery.

In other words, they should camp out on Steve Forbes’ lawn.

Plopping yourself down in the middle of Wall Street and chaining yourself to a lamp post might make you feel revolutionarily righteous. But it’s not going to do squat about changing the fundamental reasons you are homeless, jobless, and without healthcare. Why?

The 1% don’t care about you.

Why should they? They don’t even see you. At best you are an annoyance, like a wad of gum stuck to their shoe. You can keep marching in the streets all you want. You can join hands and wail about injustice till you’re blue in the face. It’s not going to do a thing to get assholes like Steve Forbes out of their plush country club comfort zones.

But if we start showing up on their lawns, if we can paint a color picture for the media of the disparity of wealth between young unemployed black men and white, entitled, Trust fund babies like Forbes, then and only then will we start to make them take notice and possibly change their behavior.

84 year old Dorli Rainey of Seattle got her 15 minutes of fame – in the form of an apology from the mayor and an interview with Keith Olbermann – when she was pepper-sprayed at a Seattle street protest. But imagine how much more effective that incident would have been if she had been sprayed on the grounds of the Koch brother’s Estate?

The sad picture of Ms. Rainey dripping with peppery goo that went viral was an effective symbol of police brutality and excess. But I can’t help but think the protest against Karl Rove – who was heckled recently at a speech he tried to give at the University of Virginia – was much more efficacious.

In my opinion, this is the direction the occupy movement should take. If you are suffering because of inequality and injustice, rather than meaningless confrontations with urban police in riot gear, why not take the protest to those who are responsible for your misery. Instead of protesting Bank of America at one of their branch offices, why not take the fight directly to the fat cats who own Bank of America?

The Koch Brothers made news with their secretive database of millionaires whom they can tap for campaign cash in 2012.

Why don’t we make our own database. A list of billionaires whom we can hound by showing up on their doorsteps till they stop acting like Oligarchic Emperors, till they quit hoarding all the money, and till they quit using their piles of cash to subvert the electoral will of the people?

The 1% need computers to compile their database. Ours can be more low tech. All we need to do is look for the mansions and country clubs.

By the Way, Make sure to check out Firedoglake’s effort to get warm clothes to occupiers: go to: https://donate.firedoglake.com/weatherize/contribute

Tags: 1%, 99%, 9gag, billionaires, economics, Forbes, inequality, occupy, protest, reddit, Thomas Vincent, Vincent, wall street
Posted in Daily Rant, Ethics, Politics, economics, government, humor, media | No Comments »

Declaration of Independence… From Corporations

Friday, October 14th, 2011

In honor of the Occupy Wall Street Movement, I have composed the following updated version of our Declaration of Independence.

IN CONGRESS, October 14, 2011

The Unanimous Declaration of the 99% of the Population
of The United States of America.

When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to re-examine economic systems which have connected them with one another, it is only natural that should those systems fail to serve them with fairness and justice, the People would have just cause to rise up and demand change.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all humans, by virtue of their birth are due certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness; that to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Citizens, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed; that whenever any Form of Government or Economic system becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, or economic system laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to produce fairness and justice for all. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Economies long established should not be changed for light and transient causes. But when a long train of abuses and injustices evinces a design to reduce them under absolute oligarchy, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such tyranny and to provide new Guards for their future security.

Such has been the patient sufferance of the People; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to rise up against their former economic system. In specific, the history of Corporations is replete with repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute oligarchy, the purpose being to subjugate the People by concentrating all wealth in the hands of a few. By placing the pursuit of profit and the accumulation of capital over the welfare of the people, Corporations have demonstrated their gross unsuitability as institutions that serve the public good. To prove this, let the following facts be submitted to a candid world.

Corporations have fought against the right of workers to form free and open unions and to bargain for better pay and safer working conditions.

They have perpetuated inequality and discrimination in the workplace based on age, the color of one’s skin, sex, gender identity and sexual orientation.

Corporations have repeatedly closed factories and shipped jobs overseas. They have caused untold hardship to thousands of unemployed workers in the form of lay-offs, reduced pensions, and lost health benefits.

Corporations have corrupted the electoral process, contributing large sums of money to legislators who will put the interests of corporations and the super wealthy over the needs of the people.
Corporations have repeatedly avoided paying their fair share of taxes by re-locating their headquarters in offshore tax havens, this despite gargantuan federal budget shortfalls.

Corporations have sought and continue to receive billions of dollars in tax payer money to bail them out for risky and speculative investments that failed, even while Corporate executives continue to receive millions of dollars in bonuses.
In a time of mass unemployment, lowered standards of living and reduced benefits, Corporations have raised the compensation for CEO’s till the average executive salary is 263 times that of the average worker.

Corporations have polluted the planet with impunity. They have repeatedly ignored laws and regulations meant to reign in the worst of their abuses. They have even written and pushed through legislation designed to water down and weaken existing environmental laws.

Corporations have routinely passed off the cost of cleanup for industrial pollution on the public taxpayer.

Corporations are leaders in denying the increasingly evident effects of climate change.

Corporate banks have illegally foreclosed on homes , despite not having the original mortgage.

Pharmaceutical Corporations have refused to research, develop and manufacture necessary drugs that could improve the health of the population because there wasn’t enough profit in it.

Corporations have sought to privatize, comodify, and limit access to the most basic services currently provided by government. They have worked to dismantle social programs, such as education, and health care, that should be the right of every citizen in a civilized society.

Corporations have fought to limit open competition and free markets through monopolistic practices such as consolidations and leveraged buy outs.

Corporations have sought to control public opinion and stifle dissent, through the monopolization and control of the media by a few large multinational companies.

Corporations have presided over the most lopsided and unfair distribution of wealth in our nation’s history. They have used this growing wealth imbalance to further influence government and tilt the board in their favor.

Corporations have sought to escape responsibility for malfeasance by influencing the courts to place limits on the amount of damages due to the public for corporate negligence.

Corporations have encouraged the government to engage in endless wars and military occupations. They continue to profit from the manufacture of billions of dollars of useless weapons of war despite a massive budget shortfall and a crushing national debt. Corporate war profiteers have stolen money that could have been used to improve the lives of the People by investment in domestic infrastructure, and fully funding public education and health care programs.

In every stage of these oppressions we, the People, have petitioned for redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated petitions to our government have been answered only by repeated injury, police harassment, and imprisonment. Any institution who places profit and the private accumulation of capital above all, who’s every action is marked by the stain of greed, corruption, and injustice, must not be allowed to continue to compromise the welfare of the People.

Therefore, as representatives of the 99%, we do solemnly publish and declare our right to be free from corporate tyranny and to be absolved of all allegiance to laws designed to maintain that tyranny; that until such time as our elected leaders reign in and enforce regulations to curb the worst avaricious acts of Corporations, we assert our right to join together and occupy public spaces until our grievances are heard.

United we stand in our opposition to the runaway greed and lust for power that causes large multinational corporations to try and subjugate the People, to deny them justice and equality, and to subvert and undermine our democratic system of government. The continued health and welfare of the People is more important than maintain corporate profits.

Tags: 99%, blog, certaindoubt, corporations, declaration, economics, Independence, occupy, occupy everywhere, occupy wall street, Politics, reddit, Thomas Vincent, Vincent
Posted in Daily Rant, Politics, economics, government, law, media | No Comments »

Capital Gains Scam

Wednesday, August 31st, 2011

In an August 14, 2011 New York Times
editorial entitled: “Stop Coddling the Super-Rich,” Warren Buffett called on Congress – pleaded actually – to raise taxes on the mega wealthy.

While the poor and middle class fight for us in Afghanistan, and while most Americans struggle to make ends meet, we mega-rich continue to get our extraordinary tax breaks. Some of us are investment managers who earn billions from our daily labors but are allowed to classify our income as “carried interest,” thereby getting a bargain 15 percent tax rate. Others own stock index futures for 10 minutes and have 60 percent of their gain taxed at 15 percent, as if they’d been long-term investors.

While on the surface this might seem like an admirable piece of altruism, Buffet’s call for higher taxes on the rich, as noble as it may be, does nothing to address the real problem in our society today: the inequities in our economic system that allow billionaires like Buffett to amass their phenomenal wealth in the first place. Raising taxes on the super rich, though it would help raise revenue and reduce the deficit, does nothing to change the rules of the game that give those same billionaires huge advantages over the average American.

In an August 30th 2011 piece in US News and World Report,
Tom Sightings presents as clear a summation as you will find of what I’m talking about. In examining Warren Buffet’s investment in Goldman Sachs for example Sightings notes:

You, too, could have invested in Goldman Sachs in 2008. But here’s the difference between you and Buffett. If you had an extra $12,000, you could have purchased 100 shares of Goldman common stock at $120 a share. Considering that Goldman had been worth over $200 a share the year before, you might have thought you were getting a pretty good discount. You also would be receiving the Goldman dividend of $1.40 a share, a rate of just over 1 percent.
But Buffett had more than $12,000 to invest. He had $5 billion. So he negotiated a much better deal. He bought preferred stock that came with a special dividend. Instead of 1 percent, he negotiated a 10 percent dividend. So now every year he receives a check for $500 million. Then, only after he gets paid, do common stockholders get their paltry 1 percent.

This is the real secret to the success of investors like Warren Buffett. With billions of dollars to throw around, they are able to negotiate sweetheart deals that not only guarantee them a high rate of return, it also guarantees that they will get paid before ordinary folks see a dime in dividends.

It’s almost as though you are playing Monopoly and as soon as one player begins to amass a fortune, the game board begins to actually tilt such that money, houses, and property deeds actually physically slide into their lap.

So now, three years later, how have we done? Goldman is selling at roughly $110 a share, slightly below its 2008 price. If you had invested with Buffett, you would have lost about $1,000. Buffett’s lost some capital too, but he’s collected $500 million a year in his special dividend.

Raising taxes on the super rich is itself a red herring. The real secret, the real scam behind modern Capitalism, is not whether the tax rate on capital gains is 15% or 20% (or even zero% as one republican presidential candidate has proposed). The real crime is that once you get to a certain level of capital accumulation, you are almost assured of amassing an even more staggering fortune by virtue of the fact that your vast wealth allows you to not only dictate to banks and corporations what your rate of return will be, but also to demand that you will be paid before ordinary shareholders thus reducing your risk to practically nothing.

The rigged nature of the game is even more insidious than it appears. As Sightings shows in his analysis of Buffett’s recent “investment” into Bank of America:

Now Buffett is investing in beleaguered Bank of America. He invested $5 billion in a special preferred stock and will be getting a 6 percent dividend, while the regular stock you can buy pays less than 1 percent. Now I don’t know whether Bank of America is a good deal at current prices. Maybe it is. But the point is, if you buy now, you’re not getting the same terms as Buffett. You’re just pumping money into his dividend payment and hoping for the best.

Think about that the next time you open the financial pages. If you’re fortunate enough to own stock in Bank of America, the fact that Warren Buffett pays a lower tax rate than his secretary should not be nearly as galling as the fact that he gets a 6 times higher rate of return as you do and is guaranteed to receive his money before you see a dime. Still having trouble with this? Consider the numbers in the BOA deal. The math here is not difficult. $5 billion at 6% means Warren is getting $300,000,000. If you invest even $10,000 at 1% you’ll only receive a whopping $100.00! Even after taxes (15%) Warren gets $255,000,000 to your rather pitiful $85 bucks!

This is not to say that Buffet’s plea for higher taxes on the rich is not valid. But where is Buffett’s call for fairness in the game of making money itself? It is certainly not fair that, as he has noted, his secretary pays a higher tax rate – and a higher percentage of her income – than he does. But I don’t hear Buffett – or any other billionaire – complaining about the fact that they are able to command six times the rate of return that ordinary investors receive and even less complaints that they get paid before everyone else.

Thus Warren Buffett, while he may seem altruistic, is really not saying a word about changing the rules of the game which give him an unfair advantage to amass a vast fortune in the first place.

Tags: Buffett, capital, capital gains, certaindoubt, economics, finance, government, investing, monopoly, taxes, Thomas Vincent, Vincent, Warren Buffett
Posted in Daily Rant, Politics, economics, government, law | No Comments »

Problems

Tuesday, July 26th, 2011

If there are two themes that have been central to my adult life, the first has to be that in order to come to any meaningful solution to a problem, one must first correctly identify the problem.

The second is that once correctly identified, most problems are really not all that difficult.

Regardless of how intractable and tough a quandary may seem, when you strip off all the non-essentials, when you lose the emotional baggage you bring to a problem, peel away the layers of “woulda, shoulda, coulda,” the essential nature of most of life’s dilemmas is usually pretty simple. Often, I have found, the difficulty of correctly identifying a problem far exceeds the difficulty of coming up with a fix. Moreover, when identified, it is uncanny how often the “problem” turns out to be not a problem after all.

Need an example?

Take the problem of getting to the moon. On the surface this problem might seem to be daunting in its complexity, requiring among other things, a prodigious amount of mathematics, physics, and engineering. (To say nothing of a mountain of cash.) In short, getting to the moon, really is rocket science.

But take a step back for a minute and ask yourself: is the question of how to get to the moon really a problem that needs solving? In retrospect, I am not at all certain. To be sure, our few trips to the moon took a herculean effort and were a monumental scientific achievement. However, if we really face the facts, our moon shots, indeed our entire space program, was motivated principally by a desire to win the cold war “space race,” by reaching the moon ahead of the Soviet Union. Thus we spent millions of dollars of tax payer money and years of research in what amounted to a politico/galactic pissing match that netted us little more than some cool photos and a handful of exotic rocks. When one considers the other uses that money could have been used for, other problems that could have been solved – oh, say, developing solar energy, or building up our infrastructure, or even educating our population in math and science such that we didn’t have large numbers of ignorant nut jobs wandering around who are so gullible to believe that a project as big as a moon shot could be faked – it’s enough to make one weep.

Thus, while the problem of how to get to the moon is undeniably complex, if one truly asks oneself why the problem needs to be solved, one might decide it simply wasn’t worth the effort. The issue would be moot.

Need a domestic example? Most of the few problems my wife and I had with our son when he was a teenager had more to do with our preconceptions of what was right and proper than they did with anything he did. His actions were rarely unsafe, or harmful to others. If he decided to dye his hair green like he did one Halloween was that really the end of the world? Nope. The obscenity laden graffiti drawn on his wall with a sharpie? Annoying, but not really life and death. Ultimately, the problems I had with most of my son’s acting out had more to do with me than to do with him. Thus, they were not really problems at all. Or they were not battles that needed to be fought.

And speaking of unnecessary battles, our current militaristic foreign policy is a classic example of a whole slew of problems that seem insurmountable, yet when you step back, they are not really problems that need solving. We didn’t have to invade Afghanistan or Iraq. We don’t need to be occupying those countries. Like most wars of aggression, the argument can be made that our entire foreign policy is nothing short of one big global pissing match. It’s tragic to think of what we could be accomplishing with the trillions of dollars and needless blood we are spilling in an effort to convince the world we are still a super power.

The debt ceiling? Another issue that seems to get more insurmountable every day. But is it really a problem? The congress rubber stamped increases in the debt ceiling as a matter of course for presidents from Regan on to Bush. Yet, somehow, the “debate” over the debt ceiling has taken on an ominous tone as the “tea party” branch of the republican party is stonewalling to get what they want on budget cuts and no taxes for the wealthy. As many have noted, they are holding the country hostage over an issue that is so obviously a political ploy that even rank and file republicans are starting to become disgusted. In short, they are making a problem where none exists.

“It’s embarrassing,” said a stock broker acquaintance of mine today. “The countries around the world are looking at the debt ceiling argument and shaking their heads in disbelief.” President Obama is fond of the phrase: “America’s vital interests.” If the threat of defaulting on our debts is not harmful to the nation’s vital interests I don’t know what is.

The Tea Party, anti-tax crowd is so bad at identifying what the problems in this country are it’s difficult not to come to the conclusion that they are actively trying to create problems instead of trying to solve them. I know that Eric Cantor and the other right wingers in the House of Representatives want to see Obama gone in 2012, but I think they really need to take a step back and ask themselves if they aren’t creating more problems for the country – and even for their rich constituents – than anything that could possibly occur if they just left well enough alone.

If anyone doubts that the debt ceiling is a bogus issue just consider the following: Suppose Obama holds a news conference tomorrow and says, “I’ve decided to replace Joe Biden with Eric Cantor. And I’m seriously considering packing it in in 2012 and turning the reins over to the Tea baggers.” If you think the debt ceiling would stay an issue for more than 2 seconds after that, then I have a conspiracy you’ll be sure to find interesting.

It involves the cover-up of a faked moon landing.

Tags: Cantor, certaindoubt, debt ceiling, election, government, moon landing, Obama, Politics, problems, republican, tea party, Thomas Vincent, Vincent
Posted in Daily Rant, Ethics, Politics, economics, government, media | No Comments »

Arguing With Cats

Friday, July 15th, 2011

Well it happened again. I was talking with a friend the other day and she said something like: “I have to watch them (Limbaugh, Hannity, O’Reilly) so I know what the other side is thinking.”

I have heard this sentiment before from otherwise well-meaning liberals and progressives who are convinced that it is important to know “where they are coming from” before they can have a meaningful dialog with conservatives.

I believe this to be an error.

The moment you listen to Rush Limbaugh you have already lost the argument. The moment you start thinking in terms of giving the “other side” any kind of credit for having a valid position, you have conceded game set and match. Watching Fox News in order to win an argument with those who watch Fox news is like trying to argue with a roomful of cats. You can’t win. It is pointless to try.

Why?

Because the other side is not interested in meaningful dialog. They are not interested in being fair and balanced. They could care less about compromise. They are not interested in winning an argument with you. They view any exchange with you as a cage match knife fight and they have no intention of ceding that “you may have a valid point.” On anything.

Need an example?

Take the so called “birther” controversy. The whole notion that President Barrack Obama was not born in the United States and is thus not a legitimate president is ludicrous on its face. And while it may not have been started by mainstream republicans, the list of prominent political leaders – from Newt Gingrich to Sarah Palin – who jumped on this issue proves they are not interested in meaningful debate on what’s wrong with America and how to fix it. If they will hammer at the birther story, a crude attempt to win over converts by questioning the very origins of their opponent, and playing – not too subtly – on the predjudices and bigotry of the population, then it is obvious that they don’t care about fairness or logic or reason. They are only interested in winning.

Need further proof?

Consider the economy. On October 25, 2010 Senate Minority leader Mitch McConnell, (R-KY) in interview with the National Journal said:
“The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president.”

There it is. The most important item on the republican agenda, is not jobs, or war, or even balancing the budget. No, the number one priority is getting rid of Obama. When faced with this type of bald faced absolutist statement, what is there left to discuss? When your opponent won’t even start debating the issues until you leave the stage, what’s the point in trying to learn where they are coming from?

McConnell repeated this sentiment the other day. When speaking about the so called “negotiations” on the debt ceiling he said: “I have little question that as long as this president is in the Oval Office, a real solution is unattainable.”

These are not the words of someone who is interested in compromise. And anyone who parrots back incendiary language such as this is obviously not interested in compromise either. You don’t have to listen to Fox News analysis to understand where Mitch McConnell and the other republican leaders are coming from. They want Obama gone. Period. No discussion needed. It is useless to listen to the latest outrageous statement by Rush or Bill or any of the other talking heads. In their view, as long as Obama remains in office, there can be no discussion.

The main reason it is pointless to try and learn what the other side is thinking by listening to bloviators like Rush and company is that they are nothing more than tools. They are shills, hucksters, pitch-men. They are selling snake-oil from the back of a wagon. Listening to them in order to gain ammunition with which to do battle with your racist brother-in-law is like trying to figure out how to convince said brother-in-law Chevy trucks are no good by watching Chevy truck commercials.

The republican party is bankrupt of anything remotely resembling a plan for what to do to make the country better. Modern republicans are corrupt, and venal. Their “ideas” consist of warmed over Ayn Randianism that greed is good and that the wealthy deserve to amass as much wealth as they possibly can. And they hate anything that smacks of Government helping its citizens.

You can’t argue with this viewpoint. Understanding where they are coming from does you no good. You can’t win in a discussion because theirs is not a viewpoint so much as a belief system. Presenting evidence to support the validity of your viewpoint will not work against an evangelical zealot for free market capitalism. You will not win an argument against them and you will not be able to win an argument with anyone who listens to their Apostles.

Listening to right wing radio will not aid you in convincing anyone who listens to right wing radio that what they are hearing is bad. The mere fact that they are listening to Rush Limbaugh is proof they are not interested in debating you. They are already lost. You cannot save them.

Your only hope is to resist turning to the dark side yourself.

Tags: arguing with cats, birther, cats, certaindoubt, conservatives, Fox News, Hannity, Limbaugh, media, OReilly, Politics, republican party, republicans, Thomas Vincent, Vincent
Posted in Daily Rant, Politics, economics, government, media | No Comments »

<< Previous

  • Categories

    • Daily Doubt (48)
    • Daily Rant (47)
    • economics (39)
    • Ethics (53)
    • government (24)
    • humor (13)
    • law (20)
    • media (33)
    • Politics (91)
    • satire (5)
    • technology (3)
    • Uncategorized (31)
    • warfare (35)
  • Other Writings

    • Book Reviews
  • Blogroll

    • Antiwar.com
    • Aphelion Webzine
    • Daily Kos
    • Freaking News
    • imgur
    • Impermanent Media
    • Olympia Newswire
    • Photobucket
    • Real Change Newspaper
    • The Ethical Spectacle
    • The Real News
  • Networking Sites

    • Digg.com
    • Reddit
  • News Sites

    • Antiwar.com
    • Common Dreams
    • Freaking News
    • Olympia Newswire
    • Raw Story
    • Wikileaks
  • Archives

    • December 2011
    • November 2011
    • October 2011
    • September 2011
    • August 2011
    • July 2011
    • June 2011
    • May 2011
    • April 2011
    • March 2011
    • February 2011
    • January 2011
    • December 2010
    • November 2010
    • October 2010
    • September 2010
    • August 2010
    • July 2010
    • June 2010
    • May 2010
    • April 2010
    • March 2010
    • February 2010
    • January 2010
    • December 2009
    • November 2009
    • October 2009
    • September 2009
    • August 2009
    • July 2009
    • June 2009
    • May 2009
    • March 2009
    • February 2009
    • January 2009
  • Admin

    • Log in
    • Entries RSS
    • Comments RSS
    • WordPress.org

Copyright © 2012 - Certain Doubt | Entries (RSS) | Comments (RSS)

WordPress theme designed by web design