Home » Posts tagged "consumers"

MSNBC – Advocates: Consumers ‘betrayed’ by high court ruling on class-action suits

Evans Liberal Politics
April 27, 2011

 

MSNBC – Advocates: Consumers ‘betrayed’
by high court ruling on class-action suits

Advocates: Consumers ‘betrayed’ by high court ruling on class-action suits, MSNBC, April 27, 2011, by Bob Sullivan, excerpt quoted verbatim:

Fine print in everyday consumer contracts can include provisions that require Americans to surrender their rights to file class-action lawsuits, the U.S Supreme Court ruled Wednesday, overturning a lower court ruling.

Microsoft Store

The ruling could have immediate impact on consumers’ ability to fight against companies when they feel their rights have been violated. It also raises questions about the future of class-action cases.

Consumer advocates roundly criticized the decision.

“(The ruling) is a devastating and far-reaching betrayal of the most fundamental principles of American justice,” said Nan Aron, president of the Alliance for Justice, a civil rights advocacy organization. “(The court) has effectively removed any incentive for corporations to behave within the law.”

When consumers sign up for everything from cell phone service to rental cars, terms of the contracts signed often compel them to forgo traditional legal mechanisms when a dispute arises, forcing them to mandatory binding arbitration instead. Such provisions have been struck down in many state cases as “unconscionable,” with various courts deciding consumers could not be compelled to surrender basic legal rights granted by the state. That is especially true in what are known as “contracts of adhesion” — standard form contracts offered on a “take it or leave it” basis, where consumers have little bargaining power, the courts have said.

Last year the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to review a case filed in a California federal court in which AT&T’s arbitration clause had been voided, a decision that was later upheld by a federal appeals court.

By a 5-4 margin, the Supreme Court overturned the appeals court ruling on Wednesday, with the majority essentially saying that federal law encouraging use of arbitration trumps state laws aimed at preserving consumer rights. ….

Read the full article, here.

OCInkjet.com 392x72 banner, image is updated by season.

Have a Listen to Our Playlists of Classic Rock Only Music, the Liberal Christian Rock, or Pure Electronic Music, or just have a look at the master playlist of 230 Rock, Pop & Electronic Hits. Get your music fix while you browse the news.

Open Letter to President Obama on the Nomination of Elizabeth Warren

Evans Liberal Politics
April 3, 2011

 

Open Letter to President Obama
on the Nomination of Elizabeth Warren

Open Letter to President Obama on the Nomination of Elizabeth Warren, Common Dreams.org, April 2, 2011, by Ralph Nader, used under Creative Commons 3.0 license, quoted verbatim:

Ralph Nader

April 1, 2011

Dear President Obama:

An interesting contrast is playing out at the White House these days—between your expressed praise of General Electric’s CEO, Jeffrey R. Immelt and the silence regarding the widely desired nomination of Elizabeth Warren to head the new Consumer Financial Regulatory Bureau within the Federal Reserve.

On one hand, you promptly appointed Mr. Immelt to be the chairman of the President’s Council on Jobs and Competitive, while letting him keep his full time lucrative position as CEO of General Electric (The Corporate State Expands). At the announcement, you said that Mr. Immelt “understands what it takes for America to compete in the global economy.”

Did you mean that he understands how to avoid all federal income taxes for his company’s $14.2 billion in profits last year, while corralling a $3.2 billion benefit? Or did you mean that he understands how to get a federal bailout for GE Capital and its reckless exposure to risky debt? Or could you have meant that GE knows how to block unionization of its far flung workers here and abroad? Perhaps Mr. Immelt can share with you GE’s historical experience with lucrative campaign contributions, price-fixing, pollution and those nuclear reactors that are giving people fits in Japan and worrying millions of Americans here living or working near similar reactors.

Compare, if you will, the record of Elizabeth Warren and her acutely informed knowledge about delivering justice to those innocents harmed by injustice in the financial services industry. A stand-up Law Professor at your alma mater, author of highly regarded articles and books connecting knowledge to action, the probing Chair of the Congressional Oversight Panel (COP) and now in the Treasury Department working intensively to get the CFRB underway by the statutory deadline this July with competent, people-oriented staff.

OCInkjet.com 250x250 banner,<br /> image is updated by season.

There were many good reasons why Senate leader Harry Reid (Dem. Nevada) called Professor Warren and asked her to be his choice for Chair of COP. Hailing from an Oklahoman blue collar family, Professor Warren is just the “working class hero” needed to make the new Bureau a sober, law and order enforcer, deterrer and empowerer of consumers vis-à-vis the companies whose enormous greed, recklessness and crimes tanked our economy into a deep recession. The consequences produced 8 million unemployed workers and shattered trillions of dollars in pensions and other savings along with the dreams which they embodied for American workers.

Much more than you perhaps realize, millions of people, who have heard and seen Elizabeth Warren, rejoice in her brainy, heartfelt knowledge and concern over their plight. They see her as just the kind of regulator (federal cop on the beat) for their legitimate interests in a more competitive marketplace who you should be overjoyed in nominating.

Yet there are corporate forces from Wall Street to Washington determined to derail her nomination—forces with their avaricious hooks into the Republicans on Capitol Hill and the corporatists in the Treasury and White House.

You have obliged these forces again and again over the last two years, most recently with the appointment of William M. Daley, recently of Wall Street, as your chief of staff.

How about one nomination for the People? The accolades on hearing the news of Elizabeth Warren’s nomination may actually exceed the enduring indignation were she not to be nominated. Just feed the Senate Republicans to the mass media that would cover the nomination hearings, all that calm, solid, wisdom and humanity that she communicates without peer. See who prevails.

Selecting Elizabeth Warren and backing her fully though the nomination process will always be remembered by Americans across the land. Not doing so will not be forgotten by those same persons. This is another way of saying she has the enthusiastic constituency of “hope and change”—that is “change you can believe in!”*

I look forward with many others to your response.

Sincerely yours,

Ralph Nader
PO Box 19312
Washington D.C., 20036

* If you doubt this observation and would like to see one million Americans on a petition favoring her selection, ask us and see how long that would take.

Ralph Nader is a consumer advocate, lawyer, and author. His most recent book – and first novel – is, Only The Super-Rich Can Save Us. His most recent work of non-fiction is The Seventeen Traditions.

See Johnson, Krugman, Nocera: Elizabeth Warren Is Getting Thrown Under The Bus, Evans Liberal Politics, March 21, 2011, by Bob Swern.

See Have Obama and the Dems Sold Out the People, Too? (Revised and Updated), Evans Liberal Politics, January 17, 2011, by Paul Evans.

The Two Categories of American Corporations — And Their Politics

Evans Liberal Politics
September 14, 2010

 

The Two Categories of American Corporations
And Their Politics

 

The Two Categories of American Corporation — And Their Politics, Robert Reich.org, September 12, 2010, by Robert Reich, used with permission, quoted verbatim:

Some giant American corporations depend on a buoyant American economy and a world-class industrial base in the United States. Others are far less dependent. What comes out of Washington in the next few years will reflect which group has most political clout — especially if Republicans take over the House and capture more of the Senate this November.

CompUSA Best Sellers

The first group includes national telecoms like Verizon and AT&T that need a prosperous America because most of their sales are here. Same with finance companies like Bank of America and Travelers Insurance whose business strategy has been built around U.S. consumers. Ditto certain giant chains like Home Depot. Naturally, all these companies were especially hard hit by the Great Depression and its devastating impact on American consumers.

The second group includes companies like Coca Cola, Exxon-Mobil, Hewlett-Packard, Intel, and McDonalds, that get substantial revenues from their overseas operations. Increasingly this means China, India, and Brazil. Ford and GM are still largely dependent on US sales but becoming less so. GM sold more cars in China last year than in the US. Not surprisingly, American companies that are less dependent on American consumers have been showing the biggest profits.

Wall Street gets this. Viewing the 30 giants that make up the Dow Jones Industrial Average, analysts are predicting that the 10 with the largest portion of sales inside the U.S. will show average revenue gains of just 1.6 percent over the next year, while the 10 with the largest portion of their sales abroad will grow by an average of 8.3 percent.

So what does this mean for politics? Big companies hedge their bets and support both Republicans and Democrats. But in my experience, companies in the first group are more responsive to tax, spending, and monetary policies that cause unemployment to drop and wages to grow, and less obsessed by inflation and deficits, than are companies in the second group. The former are also more supportive of new investments in infrastructure and education, which improve U.S. productivity over the longer term.

The problem is, more and more big companies are moving into the second category because that’s where the markets and the money are. Years ago groups like the Business Roundtable consisted mostly of large American corporations that were indubitably American, and took largely progressive positions on U.S. jobs and wages. I remember working with the National Association of Manufacturers on measures to improve U.S. education and job training. The American Electronics Association pushed the Reagan Administration for an industrial policy to preserve the nascent industrial base of U.S. computing.

No longer. Large American corporations are going global as fast as they can. That’s good for their shareholders. But in a Washington ever more susceptible to their money and influence, that’s not necessarily good for most Americans.

here. Reich’s newest book, Aftershock: The Next Economy and America’s Future is going to be released September 21, and is available for Pre-ordering at this link (Amazon.com). The above article is from Reich’s new blog, and can be viewed here.

InformIT (Pearson Education)

Check out Paul’s Playlist of 187 Rock and Pop Hits, and have fun with all the artists you love while you surf the web.


Follow Evans Liberal Politics and Paul Evans on
Twitter logo link for Evans Liberal Politics on Twitter

Follow Paul Evans on
Facebook logo link to follow Paul Evans on Facebook

We’re Counting on YOU! Please share Evans Liberal Politics with friends! While we enjoy a certain level of popularity on the web, in order for us to keep bringing you the latest in liberal news and politics, we really need you to SHARE Evans Liberal Politics with your friends and contacts. Can you help us today? If you value liberal and progressive ideas and politics, please simply share Evans Liberal Politics with friends and contacts to keep free, independent and liberal journalism alive. Thanks in advance.

To make a Word or .pdf document of an article, or share or email it, simply load the individual article by clicking the dark blue title at the very top, or use the icons beneath the article.

Vacancies Strain White House’s Goals for Economy

Evans Liberal Politics
September 11, 2010

 

Vacancies Strain White House’s Goals for Economy

 

Obama Hints May Make Elizabeth Warren Appointment

 

Vacancies Strain White House’s Goals for Economy, © The New York Times, September 10, 2010, by Sewell Chan, excerpt quoted verbatim:

WASHINGTON — President Obama signaled on Friday that he was close to choosing a director for a new consumer bureau, but an array of top jobs that will be crucial to shaping economic policy and financial regulation for the rest of his term remain unfilled.

Click the Class War
Sign to Visit Paul’s Playlist
for Great Rock & Pop Hits!

protest sign saying They Only Call It Class War When We Fight Back serves as a link to Paul’s Playlist of 185 rock, pop and electronic hits

At a White House news conference, Mr. Obama praised Elizabeth Warren, the Harvard law professor who was the chief proponent of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and is a front-runner to lead it. Calling her “a dear friend” and a “tremendous advocate” for the new agency, the president said he had talked with her but added, “I’m not going to make an official announcement until it’s ready.”Ms. Warren is considered a foe of Wall Street but a favorite of liberals. If she were nominated to the post it could set off a partisan brawl similar to the battles that nearly swamped the Dodd-Frank financial overhaul law Mr. Obama signed in July, which created the bureau.

That position, however, is only one of a half-dozen unfilled presidentially appointed posts that have vast powers over the mortgage market, financial stability and the banking and insurance industries. The seats have been vacant even though the new law directed regulatory agencies to make scores of major decisions that will shape Wall Street and the financial sector for years to come.

Delays in the appointment process — lengthened by Congressional brinksmanship and cumbersome vetting — are not new, and some choices have come quickly. On Friday, the president named Austan D. Goolsbee chairman of the White House Council of Economic Advisers, filling a position that had just opened. But the confluence of vacancies in the economic realm comes at a time of regulatory transformation, a slowing economy and a Republican resurgence. (Mr. Goolsbee, who was previously confirmed as a member of the council, did not need a second Senate confirmation to become chairman.)

The prospect of Republicans making strong gains in Congress in November has complicated the appointment calculation, as nearly all of the unfilled jobs require Senate confirmation.

“There’s a normal attrition around midterm,” said Stuart E. Eizenstat, who was President Jimmy Carter’s chief domestic policy adviser and later President Bill Clinton’s deputy Treasury secretary. “What’s different now is the likelihood of a dramatic change in the composition of Congress, and the fact that the Republicans may use each and every one of these to make an economic point.”

The tight Congressional calendar also means that some of the jobs might go unfilled for months longer.

“It is close to impossible to think that the Senate can take a nomination, hold hearings and confirm the person before the election,” Mr. Eizenstat said. “And getting this done in the postelection session is possible, but very difficult.”

In some cases, the president has put forward names that have not been acted on.

For example, the Federal Reserve’s board of governors, which is considering additional steps to prop up the flagging recovery, has just four of its full complement of seven members. The Senate has yet to confirm three candidates Mr. Obama nominated in April to fill the vacancies.

One factor that has delayed the decision over the consumer post is the fierce opposition of banking and business groups to Ms. Warren, who is chairwoman of the Congressional panel that oversees the 2008 Wall Street bailout. Senator Christopher J. Dodd of Connecticut, the chairman of the Banking Committee, has said she might have trouble being confirmed.

On Friday, Mr. Obama voiced frustration at Senate Republicans for routinely blocking his appointments, “even if I nominate somebody for dogcatcher.”

Pointing to vacant judgeships and unfilled positions at the Department of Homeland Security, he added: “It’s very hard when you’ve got a determined minority in the Senate that insists on a 60-vote filibuster on every single person that we’re trying to confirm.” The Republicans, he said, are “just playing games.”

Read the full article, here.

What keeps the Democrats from making their case?, OpEdNews, September 10, 2010, by Ralph Nader.

See The midterms: Who’s the ‘Party of No’?, MSNBC First Read, September 9, 2010, by MSNBC, excerpt quoted verbatim:

“The Republican National Committee turned the “party of no” label against Democrats in a new Web video, which clips together several Democrats’ campaign ads showing different members opposing healthcare reform, cap-and-trade legislation, the stimulus bill and other items,” The Hill writes.

Former New York Gov. George Pataki, who now runs the conservative nonprofit group Revere America, yesterday unveiled a seven-figure ad buy (YouTube video), part of the “Pledge to Win” campaign, which will target members of Congress who voted in favor of the health care reform law.

See Did Obama hint he’s going to appoint Elizabeth Warren?, The Washington Post, The Plum Line, September 10, 2010, by Greg Sargent.

See America Still Needs Elizabeth Warren, And The Bank Lobby Is Still Lying About Her, Campaign for America’s Future on Evans Liberal Politics, August 7, 2010, by Zach Carter.

Check out Paul’s Playlist of 185 Rock and Pop Hits, and have fun with all the artists you love while you surf the web.


Follow Evans Liberal Politics and Paul Evans on
Twitter logo link for Evans Liberal Politics on Twitter

Follow Paul Evans on
Facebook logo link to follow Paul Evans on Facebook

We’re Counting on YOU! Please share Evans Liberal Politics with friends! While we enjoy a certain level of popularity on the web, in order for us to keep bringing you the latest in liberal news and politics, we really need you to SHARE Evans Liberal Politics with your friends and contacts. Please help us out — we bring you the latest in liberal and progressive news and politics just to share the truth and promote liberalism. Can you help us today? If you love liberalism, and love reading articles from the independent, free press, please spread the news about Evans Liberal Politics with your friends and contacts. Thanks in advance.

To make a Word or .pdf document of an article, or share or email it, simply load the individual article by clicking the dark blue title at the very top, or use the icons beneath the article.

America Still Needs Elizabeth Warren, And The Bank Lobby Is Still Lying About Her

Evans Liberal Politics
August 9, 2010

 

America Still Needs Elizabeth Warren
And The Bank Lobby Is Still Lying About Her

 

America Still Needs Elizabeth Warren, And The Bank Lobby Is Still Lying About Her, Campaign for America’s Future, August 7, 2010, by Zach Carter, used with permission, quoted verbatim:

Of all the accomplishments Elizabeth Warren has amassed during her lifetime, one of the most impressive is also one of the least well-known to the general public. Warren was a co-founder of Credit Slips, a very technical, influential blog on banking and bankruptcy. She hasn’t blogged there since taking up her post as Chair of the Congressional Oversight Panel for the Troubled Asset Relief Program, but a review of her posts reveals a set of truths that Warren’s opponents in the bank lobby do not want to acknowledge. While Wall Street bankers like to smear Warren as an ideologically driven crusader, Warren’s blogging reveals her to be the exact opposite: a serious student of economic evidence, eager to embrace good ideas from any source.

Click the Magic Dollar Sign
to Visit Our Electronic
Rock Playlist! – 164 Songs
#1 Rated by Google

A magic dollar sign serves as a link to Paul's Playlist – Listen to hours of streaming rock, pop and electronic music

Take a look at this post from September 2008, in which she praised economists Greg Mankiw and Ken Rogoff. Both of these economists are, let’s say, unpopular among liberals. Mankiw was chair of President George W. Bush’s council of economic advisors, and Rogoff is an alum of the International Monetary Fund, where he pushed draconian cuts in social programs in developing nations in the name of balanced budgets.

But it turns out that both Mankiw and Rogoff had something interesting to say at a forum back in September 2008. And what did Elizabeth Warren have to say about it? She calls them “interesting,” “terrific,” “calm,” and “funny.” She doesn’t blast them for their backgrounds with institutions that are generally reviled by progressives, she just emphasizes that they’re serious thinkers who are making good points about the role the bank bailout played in the economy:

Greg’s work with the current administration and Ken’s background with the IMF and on the Board of the Federal Reserve add a certain credibility to their assessments of conditions on Wall Street. If they are right, the $700 bailout is saving some investment bankers’ jobs in the short term, but overall it is just making the financial system worse.

Aside from seeking out common ground with aggressive conservatives, Warren also displays a deep-rooted intellectual curiosity throughout her blog postings. One of the most obnoxious bank-lobby smears against Warren is that she doesn’t fully appreciate the benefits of financial innovation, and that she’ll cut off useful credit to poor people by pushing overzealous consumer protection. Even some otherwise respectable bloggers have taken up the chant, without really bothering to investigate whether there’s any shred of truth to it. Even a casual browsing of Warren’s blog work reveals this to be a silly charge.

In a post from May 2008, she details a Wells Fargo customer who was quite clearly ripped off by her bank. Warren provides a very cautious analysis of the situation. While Wells Fargo’s actions were an obvious disgrace to the bank itself and the regulatory regime, the appropriate response is not obvious. Maybe the kind of product Wells Fargo was selling should be banned outright. Maybe it should only be provided with more rigorous disclosures. Maybe consumers should have to ask for the product before bankers are allowed to discuss it. The point is, Warren isn’t eager to claim that an obviously abusive product should simply be banned—she wants to make sure that policymakers don’t unnecessarily cut off credit to well-informed adults who want it.

Again and again, Warren reveals herself to be a devout student of data in her blog work. It isn’t sexy, it sure as hell doesn’t traffic in the broader blogosphere, but it’s the mark of someone who truly cares about getting it right, rather than merely developing a set of popular talking points. Warren clearly loves reading economic papers on the effects of various credit policies, and determining their effects on both individuals and society at large. That’s exactly what we need from a bank regulator, especially at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

You can find all of Warren’s Credit Slips blogs here. I’ll be highlighting more of her blogging in future pieces, but it’s clear from these posts alone that she is not an ideological crusader. This fact, in truth, is why the bank lobby so fervently opposes putting her in a position of regulatory authority. For decades, all of our bank regulators have been driven by ideological agendas. They’ve aggressively pursued any policy that creates short-term profits for Wall Street, under the view that anything that generates money for Wall Street is expanding credit in society and furthering productive economic growth. President George W. Bush even appointed a bank lobbyist to the top regulatory post in the nation. The results of this plan were disastrous, as everyone living through the current recession can attest.

Of course, there is an alternative to appointing regulators who will always put bankers and brokers first. We need a rigorous scholar who cares about finding the right policies to elevate the middle class and further healthy economic growth. We need Elizabeth Warren.

Zach Carter lives in Washington, D.C. He is a Fellow a Campaign for America’s Future and Economics Editor for AlterNet. His work has appeared in The Nation, Mother Jones, The American Prospect and Salon.

Follow Evans Liberal Politics and Paul Evans on
Twitter logo link for Evans Liberal Politics on Twitter

Follow Paul Evans on
Facebook logo link to follow Paul Evans on Facebook

We’re Counting on YOU! Please share Evans Liberal Politics with friends! While we enjoy a certain level of popularity on the web, in order for us to keep bringing you the latest in liberal news and politics, we really need you to SHARE Evans Liberal Politics with your friends and contacts. Please help us out — we bring you the latest in liberal and progressive news and politics just to share the truth and promote liberalism. Can you help us today?

Please consider making a $5 or $10 donation to Evans Liberal Politics. We bring you the news and all things liberal for free out of love of people and liberalism, but a fellow has to eat! See Help a Christian Family in Need. The button to donate via PayPal is located at the top right of every page (or use this handy link), and your kind help is greatly appreciated.

*****

To make a Word or .pdf document of an article, or share or email it, simply load the individual article by clicking the dark blue title at the very top, or use the icons beneath the article.

We’re Counting on You!
Tell Your Friends About Evans Liberal Politics!

Listen to 164 Rock and Pop Hits!


Paul's Playlist of the best streaming rock, pop and electronic music

#1 Rated by Google

Robert Reich: The Great Decoupling of Corporate Profits from Jobs

Evans Liberal Politics
July 27, 2010

 

Robert Reich: The Great Decoupling
of Corporate Profits from Jobs

 

The Great Decoupling of Corporate Profits from Jobs, Robert Reich.org, July 26, 2010, by Robert Reich, used with permission, quoted verbatim:

Second-quarter earnings reports are coming in, and they’re making Wall Street smile. Corporate profits are up. And big American companies are sitting on a gigantic pile of money. The 500 largest non-financial firms held almost a trillion dollars in the second quarter, and that money pile is growing larger this quarter. Profits that plummeted in the recession have bounced back. Big businesses have recovered almost 90 percent of what they lost.

CompUSA Best Sellers

So with all this money and profit, they’ll start hiring again, right? Wrong – for three reasons.

First, lots of their profits are coming from their overseas operations. So that’s where they’re investing and expanding production.

GM now sells more cars in China than it does in the US, but makes most of them there. The company now employs 32,000 hourly workers in China. But only 52,000 GM hourly workers remain in the United States – down from 468,000 in 1970.

GM isn’t just hiring low-tech assembly workers in China. Last week the firm broke ground there on a $250 million advanced technology center to develop batteries and other alternative energy sources.

You and I and other American taxpayers still own over 60 percent of GM. We bought GM to save GM jobs, remember?

GM officials say no American taxpayer money is being used to expand in China. But money is fungible. Because of our generosity, GM can now use the dollars it doesn’t have to spend in the United States meeting its American payrolls and repaying its creditors, for new investments in China.

Second, big U.S. businesses are investing their cash in labor-saving technologies. This boosts their productivity, but not their payrolls.

Last Friday, for example, Ford reported a $2.6 billion second-quarter profit. The firm is already more than two-thirds the way to equaling its record 1999 profits. But due to labor-saving technologies, Ford now has half as many employees as it did a decade ago.

Wall Street analysts are happy with Ford’s “commitment to keeping capacity in check,” according to the Wall Street Journal. Ford shares rose 5.2 percent Friday. “Keeping capacity in check” is the Street’s way of saying “no new hiring.” In fact, the Street is advising investors to sell the stocks of companies that talk openly of expanding capacity.

Finally, corporations are using their pile of money to pay dividends to their shareholders and buy back their own stock – thereby pushing up share prices.

Last Friday, GE announced it would raise its dividend by 20 percent and reinstate its share-buyback plan. It’s GE’s first dividend increase since the company cut its dividend in early 2009. As a result, GE shares are up more than 5% in the past few days.

Bottom line: Higher corporate profits no longer lead to higher employment. We’re witnessing a great decoupling of company profits from jobs.

The next supply-side economist who tells you companies need more incentive (i.e. lower taxes) before they’ll hire is living on another planet.

The reality is this: Big American companies may never rehire large numbers of workers. And they won’t even begin to think about hiring until they know American consumers will buy their products. The problem is, American consumers won’t start buying against until they know they have reliable paychecks.

Watch Foreclosures on Pace for Record, AP Video on YouTube — 1:01

here. The above article is from Reich’s new blog, and can be viewed here.

Thanks to Professor Reich for permission to publish his articles on an ongoing basis.

*****

To make a Word or .pdf document of an article, or share or email it, simply load the individual article by clicking the dark blue title at the very top, or use the icons beneath the article.

We’re Counting on You!
Tell Your Friends About Evans Liberal Politics!

Listen to 150 Rock and Pop Hits!


Paul's Playlist of the best streaming rock, pop and electronic music

#1 Rated by Google


Certified Online Pharmacy - Lowest Price Guaranteed

Why We Can’t Rely on Foreign Consumers to Rescue American Jobs, and Why Today’s “Jobs for America Summit” is a Bad Joke.

Perfectmatch.com

Evans Liberal Politics
July 15, 2010

 

Why We Can’t Rely on Foreign Consumers to Rescue American Jobs,
and Why Today’s “Jobs for America Summit” is a Bad Joke.

 

Robert Reich: Why We Can’t Rely on Foreign Consumers to Rescue American Jobs, and Why Today’s “Jobs for America Summit” is a Bad Joke., Robert Reich.org, July 14, 2010, by Robert Reich, used with permission, quoted verbatim:

Fred Hochberg, president of the Export-Import Bank of the U.S., thinks I’m wrong to worry about a trade war, and that the President’s goal for doubling U.S. exports over the next five years is on track. Writing in the Huffington Post, Hochberg says:

Reich’s argument contradicts the message I’ve heard from leaders of the world’s emerging economies who know that American innovation will help sustain their rapid infrastructure growth.

According to data released yesterday by the Department of Commerce, U.S. exports of goods and services increased by 17.7 percent during the first five months of 2010, compared to the same period last year. If this trend continues, the President will meet his goal of doubling exports in five years. The key: targeting export markets strategically.

At the Export-Import Bank, we’re focused on countries that have weathered the global recession and want to grow in areas where U.S. companies have a comparative advantage…. Commerce’s May data illustrate the potential of an export strategy tailored to countries and sectors that suit our strengths.

Click the Peace Sign
to visit Paul’s Playlist of
148 Rock and Pop Hits
* Rated #1 by Google *


a beautiful and artful peace sign serves as a link to Paul's Playlist of 148 rock, pop and electronic hits

With due respect, Mr. Hochberg is being misleading. The same Commerce Department report shows that America’s trade deficit with the rest of the world has continued to widen. American businesses sold $152.3 billion of goods and services overseas in May (an increase of just over 2 percent from April) but the U.S. imported $194.5 billion (a jump of 2.9 percent).

In fact, according to the Commerce Department, America’s trade deficit expanded in May to its highest level in 18 months — rising 4.8 percent to $42.3 billion. Our monthly trade deficit with China alone jumped $3 billion, to $22 billion.

When the President promised to double exports over five years in order to create more jobs in the US, most people assumed he was talking about net exports – that is, exports minus imports. A doubling of net exports would help fill the demand gap caused by American consumers who can’t spend what they used to spend because they can no longer borrow to the gills.

But regardless of how much we export, if imports continue to exceed that amount, we’re heading in the opposite direction. Trade can’t possibly be a source of new American jobs. To the contrary, it reduces overall demand in the United States. The widening trade deficit remains a drag on the nation’s economic growth.

As a practical matter, the widening trade imbalance means no more trade agreements because Americans, worried about their jobs, don’t want to risk losing more of them to foreign workers.

Today (Wednesday), leaders of big business are meeting with the President and Vice President (along with former President Bill Clinton) to urge that the White House push stalled trade-opening agreements with South Korea, Panama, and Columbia. And the U.S. Chamber of Commerce is holding a so-called “Jobs for America Summit” to pressure the Administration.

The irony is that many of America’s surging imports are coming from these same American-based companies. They’re either employing foreign workers to make things for sale in the U.S., contracting with foreign companies to do so, or contracting for parts and supplies. Jobs for America Summit? These executives don’t care about American jobs. They care about their own bottom lines. That’s what they’re paid to care about.

But their bottom lines have little or nothing to do with good jobs for Americans. They have to do with good returns for American investors.

Check Out the Best Guide to Politics on the Web!
The Guide to Liberal News and Politics on the Web


Evans Liberal Politics Guide to Liberal News and Politics on the Web

Find Out Where to find the Truth!


Not all corporate executives are marching to the same drummer. Recently, Andy Grove, chairman of Intel, wrote that America should levy an extra tax on the product of offshored labor and give the money to American companies that will use it to grow their U.S. operations and create more jobs in the United States. The only small problem with this idea is it violates international trade law and would almost certainly lead to retaliatory tariffs against American exports. Grove doesn’t seem too bothered. “If the result is a trade war,” he writes, “treat it like other wars—fight to win.”

But trade wars damage everyone, as we should have learned in the 1930s from Smoot-Hawley. What Grove doesn’t say is that over 70 percent of Intel’s revenues now come from its sales abroad. A trade war is the last thing Intel (whose share prices are rocketing) needs.

Yes, America must keep the pressure on our trade partners to open their markets and not manipulate their currencies. By the same token, America also has to reduce its dependence on oil (which accounts for a large portion of our trade imbalance).

But the essential point is we can’t expect foreign consumers to fill the shortfall in demand left by American consumers who can no longer maintain their pre-recession standard of living. The only answer is to lift the standard of living of Americans. How?

That question has direct bearing on the other part of the business agenda at the faux “Jobs For America Summit” at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. Business executives (all of whom are now raking in just about the same seven- and eight-figure salaries and bonuses they did before the recession) are also telling the President to hold off increasing taxes on the rich (that is, ending the Bush tax cuts that had been scheduled to end this year) and to cut the budget deficit.

But the only way the President could meet both these objectives – other than by cutting Medicare, Social Security, and defense spending, which he won’t – would be to cut back even further on services going to the lower middle class and poor, including those that rely on federal support to state and local governments. Without these, including extended unemployment benefits, tens of millions of Americans are being forced trim their family budgets even more than they did last year. And that means fewer customers to purchase what these companies are selling in the United States.

Someone should remind business executives that their plan for America is eroding their customer base in America.

The way to get jobs back is to increase federal spending in the short term in order to make up for the gap left by consumers and businesses (the fastest way to get this money into circulation is by extending unemployment benefits and aiding stranded state and local governments).

Over the longer term, we can lift the wages of the vast majority of Americans by expanding and extending the Earned Income Tax Credit — an income supplement — up through the middle class, and pay for it by a higher marginal income tax rate on the top. And while we’re at it, exempt the first $20,000 of income from payroll taxes, and pay for that by lifting the cap on Social Security taxes on all incomes in excess of $250,000.

Beyond that, and over the still longer term, America’s vast middle class and the poor more need to be more productive and innovative, so they can add more value to an increasingly integrated global economy. That means better education. Instead of firing school teachers, closing libraries, and increasing tuitions at public universities, we have to do exactly the opposite.

Watch Foreclosures on Pace for Record, AP Video on YouTube — 1:01

here. The above article is from Reich’s new blog, and can be viewed here.

Thanks to Professor Reich for permission to publish his articles on an ongoing basis.

See Lost decade: The new threat to the U.S. economy, CNN Money, July 15, 2010, by Chris Isidore, excerpt quoted verbatim:

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) — The risk of a double-dip recession is getting a lot of attention recently, but even that grim prediction could prove a little too optimistic.

Disappointing job reports, weakness in housing and consumer spending and problems in world financial markets have raised concerns about the U.S. economy stalling out later this year. Now some economists are starting to talk about an even worse fate: a prolonged period of very weak growth, a so-called “lost decade.”

Listen to 12 Liberal Speeches

. We’re going to keep pounding three or four of these into a lot of our articles. Feeling discouraged and need some motivation? Sure you can read a self help book, but for me, listening to these four speeches makes all the difference to how my day goes:

logo button for Evans Liberal Politics which serves to launch a famous liberal political speech Martin Luther King: The amazing "I Have a Dream" speech. — 2:50

logo button for Evans Liberal Politics which serves to launch a famous liberal political speech Robert F. Kennedy: a speech by Bobby Kennedy made on the night Martin Luther King was assassinated. The pure goodness and wonder in this speech is amazing. — 6:10

logo button for Evans Liberal Politics which serves to launch a famous liberal political speech Abraham Lincoln: Sam Waterston reads Lincoln’s incredibly short but amazing Gettysburg Address. — 2:39

logo button for Evans Liberal Politics which serves to launch a famous liberal political speech John F. Kennedy: JFK calls for a revolution in energy use and warns about climate change, calling for use of renewable resources. — 1:46

To make a Word or .pdf document of an article, or share or email it, simply load the individual article by clicking the dark blue title at the very top, or use the icons beneath the article.

We’re Counting on You!
Tell Your Friends About Evans Liberal Politics!

Listen to 148 Rock and Pop Tracks


Paul's Playlist of the best streaming rock, pop and electronic music

#1 Rated by Google