Posts Tagged ‘corporations’

U.S. Video News Roundup for April 23, 2011

Evans Liberal Politics
April 23, 2011

 

U.S. Video News Roundup for April 23, 2011

Social News from Around the United States
That Adds Meaning to Your Life

The Corporate Mindset: Changing
Views on the Environment

Two Contrasting Voices
About Planned Parenthood

Obama’s FaceBook Town Hall
Meeting – Full Video

Runnin’ Wild: It’s Time
to Ride Your Bikes Again!

Microsoft Store


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

How Did You Like Paying Your Taxes and What Do You Think of Corporate Freeloaders?

Evans Liberal Politics
April 20, 2011

 

How Did You Like Paying Your Taxes
and What Do You Think of Corporate Freeloaders?

Evans Liberal Politics Note by Paul Evans: That was as good a title for this gem from MoveOn.org as any other. Do you see the huge corruption in the data below? It’s Congress that made the tax laws that allow this criminal behavior. Congress made the tax laws of by and for the rich people. America, how long are you going to stand this?

Share This on Facebook


Senator Bernie Sanders Guide To Corporate Freeloaders

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.

Two-Faced Corporate Personhood: Elected and Convicted

Evans Liberal Politics
August 27, 2010

 

Two-Faced Corporate Personhood:
Elected and Convicted

 

Two-Faced Corporate Personhood: Elected and Convicted, Common Dreams.org, August 27, 2010, by Donna Smith, quoted verbatim:

Forgive me for being a tad confused.  I am finding it difficult to understand why one person goes to jail for privately selling an appointment for elected office while others have a legal right to buy their elected positions.  The U.S. Supreme Court says corporations are persons in terms of exercising free speech through political contributions.  Other persons who behave more like corporations than persons are spending personal fortunes buying positions of power in the public sector.

NE Ohio Computer Repair


We’ll Fix or Optimize It For Less!

Phone 330-202-7661

Ohio's Fastest Growing Computer Repair and Optimization Service - Northeast Ohio Computer Repair and Optimization

Meg Whitman is working hard to buy the governorship of California.  Rick Scott is doing the same in Florida.  Millions and millions of dollars of their own personal fortunes have already been spent in their primary battles and both plan to spend “whatever it takes” to win.  In both states, the good that could be accomplished with what these two corporate born and bred candidates are spending to win their elections points to how insane our election process has become.

In contrast, former Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich faces another trial and millions in public funds will be spent trying to convict him of selling his favor in the appointment of a new U.S. Senator to Barack Obama’s seat after the 2008 Presidential election.

We call selling a political office a crime; we don’t seem to mind buying those same seats.

Don’t get me wrong, I don’t like what Blagojevich purportedly did. In fact, I am annoyed beyond what is probably reasonable that the former governor of my home state of Illinois makes the appointment process seem so ugly and tawdry.  Illinois just doesn’t need any more corruption scandals.  There are millions of wonderful, honest people in Illinois who deserve the best of governance.

Is it acceptable if a corporation contributes huge amounts of money with the intent of gaining political and policy favor?  It certainly is legal.  In fact, the Supreme Court said we violate the “corporate person’s” First Amendment rights to free speech if we limit their spending on campaigns and issues.

But wait.  Suggest that the same political or policy favor will be granted during a private phone conversation and you may go to prison?

Is it just that we object to being left out of the secret transactions?  Do we think the public purchase of our democracy by corporate persons like Whitman and Scott is somehow more ethical?

Meg Whitman didn’t care enough about the political process to vote much at all over the past three decades.  Many California women are offended by that after women fought and suffered to secure the right to vote in this nation just 90 years ago.  See one report about the action in Sacramento during which thousands of women expressed their views on the non-voting Whitman: http://www.vcstar.com/news/2010/aug/26/nurses-spotlight-womens-right-to-vote-and-voting/

Whitman has admitted her registration and voting history is terrible but says talking about it now is a distraction.  And furthermore, she’s showing up now, so what’s the problem?  Her disconnect with the people of California and the way they have to work and live is appalling and her disregard for the seriousness of being an active participant in one’s own governance through exercising the right to vote shows a level of arrogance and cynicism that is nauseating.

Rick Scott is a self-funded, rich candidate of quite another sort.  He wants to govern Florida.  He was at the helm of a huge healthcare corporation at a time when that corporation perpetrated the most serious Medicare fraud in this nation’s history.  Do I need to repeat?  He was in charge of a company that profited illegally by defrauding the federal Medicare program.  Some of the personal wealth he is using now to buy the Florida governorship was acquired while his corporation was bilking the taxpayers of Florida and of the nation.

Scott takes no personal responsibility for the Medicare fraud discovered under his corporate watch.  Does that give the people of Florida a clue as to what kind of responsibility he’ll take for ethical governance of their state or for any policy failings?  He expresses disdain for anything government — especially government healthcare.  That’s interesting in that he sure loved the Medicare dollars that helped him amass his own fortune.  Medicare dollars are taxpayer dollars — government dollars.  Scott’s arrogance, his belief that voters are too stupid to connect the dots between his “I-hate-big-government” propaganda and his “I-love-big-government money” financial success story, and his cynicism are nauseating.

What are we doing?  Could we explain how money works in this political process to any other sane society?  Buy an office?  Legal.  Sell an office?  Go to prison.  Tell us you will buy our votes?  Legal.  Actually pay us for our votes?  Illegal.  Corporate personhood?  The right to unlimited free speech protected by the Constitution.  Private personhood?  Taken for a fool.

Donna Smith is a community organizer for National Nurses United (the new national arm of the California Nurses Association) and National Co-Chair for the Progressive Democrats of America Healthcare Not Warfare campaign

NMLib comments to this article: I’ve had similar questions on this subject. And while we’re at it, can we question why Xe (formerly Blackwater) can get away with all they have? And why does Wells Fargo get a measly fine for laundering drug money- but no one serves any prison time like you or I would if we were caught merely possessing illegal drugs. Plus, I bet their CEOs didn’t have to take a drug test to get their jobs.

Phasor comments: “Could we explain how money works in this political process to any other sane society?”

No. It’s blatantly duplicitous. So how can Americans rationalize this state of affairs to themselves? Simple. It’s an American value (dream) that individualism, hard work and creativity leads to riches, entitlement and privileges.

Thus, the rich believe they are the elite and this entitles them to control and manage our social fabric to define acceptable conduct and that society bestows upon them privileges of speech, of moral righteousness (thereby rationalizing wars and “targeted killings” [murder]) and of their chosen charitable acts.

Of course, the rich, whose wealth tends to continue from one generation to another and tends to concentrate over time, are oblivious to the fact that their wealth has come from other people in one way or another and that they owe these people. (To be fair, some wealthy people understand this, like Andrew Carnegie. But today that seems to be out of fashion. Moral decay maybe.)

See Robert Reich – Tax Jujitsu: Why Democrats Should Propose a “People’s Tax Cut”, Robert Reich on Evans Liberal Politics, August 26, 2010, by Robert Reich. I think Robert Reich gets it. I think Robert Reich would give me a twenty so I could buy some gas for my car if I needed it.

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 183 Rock and Pop Hits!


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

Our Playlist is #1 Rated by Google

Robert Reich: The Enthusiasm Gap and You

Evans Liberal Politics
August 5, 2010

 

Robert Reich: The Enthusiasm Gap and You

 

The Enthusiasm Gap and You, Robert Reich.org, August 4, 2010, by Robert Reich, used with permission, quoted verbatim:

A friend whom I’ll call David raised a ton of money for Democrats in 2008 and now tells me they can go to hell. He’s furious about the no-strings bailout of Wall Street, the absence of a public option in health reform, financial reform that doesn’t cap the size of banks or reinstate the Glass-Steagall wall between investment and commercial banking, and a stimulus that was too small to do much good but big enough to give Republicans a campaign issue. He’s also upset about tens of thousands of additional troops being sent to Afghanistan, a watered-down cap-and-trade bill that’s going nowhere, and no Employee Free Choice Act. David won’t raise a penny this fall and doubts he’ll even vote. “I busted my chops getting them elected, and they caved,” he fumes. “They’re all lily-livered wimps, and Obama has the backbone of a worm.”

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

Tea Partiers are getting all the press. But the anger on the left, including much of the Democratic base, is almost as intense.

The pattern isn’t new. I remember a gloomy fall 16 years ago when as secretary of labor I traveled around the country trying to rev up the base for the 1994 midterms. I found anger and disillusionment then, too. Of course, Clinton hadn’t accomplished nearly as much as Obama. In fact, he’d pushed initiatives like NAFTA that infuriated the base.

When Republicans control Congress or the White House, their base can get restless but doesn’t seem to suffer the same disillusionment. Republicans stood by Ronald Reagan in the 1982 midterms and rallied enthusiastically for his re-election in 1984. They were out in force for George H.W. Bush’s 1990 midterm as well as George W. Bush’s in 2002 and his 2004 re-election.

Why the asymmetry?

First, the Republican base keeps the heat on after elections so Republican officeholders accomplish what they promise and are less likely to compromise in the first place. The Republican base fueled the Reagan and George W. Bush tax cuts and penalized George H.W. Bush only after he reversed his “read my lips” pledge not to raise taxes.

The Republican base is part of a conservative movement. The Democratic base, by contrast, is a loose coalition that elects a new president and then goes home, expecting the new president to deliver miracles.

When I ask David what he’s done over the last 18 months to push for a more progressive agenda, he says he e-mailed senators in support of a public option and signed a Sierra Club petition for cap-and-trade. “On Afghanistan I even called the White House to tell the president not to send more troops. What else am I supposed to do?”

David thinks of himself as an individual with strong progressive views about specific issues rather than as a member of an ongoing movement with a larger vision of what America should be.

Washington’s network of progressive advocacy groups is just like David. Each has a narrow bandwidth (health, environment, labor, women’s rights) with a national constituency that donates money and sends members of Congress e-mails as requested about particular initiatives.

These groups are staffed by overworked 20-somethings and headed by people who enjoy being minor celebrities at Washington fundraisers and occasional visitors to the White House.

But these groups don’t mobilize people back where they live, and they’re no substitute for a broad progressive movement.

A movement connects the dots across issues and reveals a larger wrong that must be righted.

When it comes to misuse of power, Americans carry two deep-seated fears — of big government taking over and of big business and Wall Street running amok. Both are sometimes justified, but the political response is lopsided. The conservative movement adeptly fits almost every morsel of news to the first fear, giving its members an animating cause: Reduce government.

A progressive movement would focus on the second fear, seeking to protect average working people from the depredations of big business and Wall Street. Given what has occurred in recent years — from Enron and WorldCom through the devastation brought on by Wall Street, to the price-gouging by health insurers like WellPoint and Big Pharma, right through BP — there is no absence of dots to be connected.

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!


Average Americans are hurting. But their pain isn’t coming from government. It’s coming from an economy whose benefits are concentrating ever more at the top, whose giant corporations are controlling ever more of our democratic process, and whose costs and risks are becoming ever more burdensome for the middle class and the poor. Public schools, parks, and libraries are closing or reducing hours and staff. Median hourly wages are dropping. Unemployment is at levels not seen in decades; long-term joblessness hasn’t been this bad since the 1940s. Social safety nets — unemployment insurance, Social Security, and Medicare — are endangered.

Yet corporate profits are reaching unprecedented levels, and the richest Americans — CEOs, other top corporate executives, investment bankers, and hedge-fund managers — are raking in as much or more than before the Great Recession.

With the election of Barack Obama, many on the left found comfort in the belief that a single man could make transformative change without powerful tailwinds behind him. But that was a pipe dream. No person can do it alone.

I can understand your disillusionment with a president and representatives that seem to bend to the prevailing winds from the right. But if you and David and other progressives wallow in your cynicism we’ll be in much bigger trouble as a nation than we are now.

Here’s what I learned during my years in Washington: Nothing good happens there unless Americans outside Washington are sufficiently mobilized, energized, and organized to make sure it gets done.

Be angry, but channel your anger toward constructive change. This fall, work for the reelection of politicians, or for candidates to replace them, who support a genuinely progressive agenda. And lend your hand to the creation and continued sustenance of a powerful progressive movement in America.

(Originally written for the American Prospect)

Comment by Evans Liberal Politics owner Paul Evans: I have attempted to liven up Professor Reich’s fine article by providing some hyperlinks to interesting, amusing and informative articles on the web about the topics which are linked. I hope those of you who enjoy surfing for surfing’s sake will enjoy my selections. It may even actually be true that you could learn a few things (and hopefully be entertained) by following the links.

See Deficit Scare Talk Is a Big Scam by Corporations and Right-Wingers; The Problem Is Not Enough Good-Paying Jobs, AlterNet, August 5, 2010, by Joshua Holland.

With Apologies to Professor Reich…:

AHEM: Lest We Be Thought Too Square…


Warning: Obscenity. For Mature Audiences Only.

George Carlin: The American Dream


OR: Why the American Education System Will Stay "Broken"



George Carlin performs a scathing and effective monologue on why the American education system will stay broken "The American Dream": George Carlin performs a brilliant and scathing monologue on our serfdom which may be his very best short effort. — 3:15. Scary stuff.

Question for Our Readers: Do you basically agree or disagree with Carlin’s assessment? Please leave a comment.

TRAVESTY: See US foreign aid to subsidize outsourced jobs in South Asia, The Raw Story, August 4, 2010, by Daniel Tencer.

See Gov’t Partnering with Foreign Firms to Outsource Jobs, Daily Kos, August 3, 2010, by Th0rn. An intelligent discussion by a liberal who is supportive of foreign aid yet objects to the insensitivity of this particular group of projects at a time when American workers are crying out for help.

Also see Dems break GOP filibuster on jobs bill, UPI.com, August 4, 2010, by UPI.

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.

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! 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 159 Rock and Pop Hits!


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

#1 Rated by Google

Robert Reich: The Final Lesson of BP

Evans Liberal Politics
July 29, 2010

 

Robert Reich: The Final Lesson of BP

 

The Final Lesson of BP, Robert Reich.org, July 28, 2010, by Robert Reich, used with permission, quoted verbatim:

BP is starting over. It just named a new American president and its finances are looking up. BP’s second-quarter report showed surprisingly strong revenues of $75.9 billion, beating Wall Street’s estimates. (This includes a $32.2 billion writedown along with the $20 billion liability fund that the Obama Administration wanted.) The company has started to sell $30 billion of its assets to ensure it has all the money it needs to pay any liability claims. No wonder several Wall Street analysts are suggesting BP stock as a terrific buy.

Click the Oil Noose Photo
to Visit Paul’s Playlist
for 150 Rock & Pop Hits
* #1 Rated by Google *

a gasoline hose twisted in the shape of an oil noose and serving as a link to our Playlist of 150 rock and pop hits also serves to highlight this article on BP and our dependence on oil

It doesn’t seem to matter BP was responsible for the worst environmental disaster in American history. Consumers worldwide – including Americans – continue to slurp up its oil.

But wait a minute. If BP emerges from this debacle fatter and happier than anyone imagined a few months ago, whatever happened to the idea of corporate accountability? Does this mean any giant corporation can wreak havoc and then get back to business as usual?

Corporations aren’t people. They have no brains, no consciences, no capacity for intent or guilt. Every one of their moveable parts can be replaced, just like BP’s former CEO Tony Hayward was replaced. Corporate accountability and responsibility are meaningless concepts. Corporations exist for only one purpose: to make money.

If we want corporations to act differently, we have to force them to do so through laws that are fully enforced and through penalties higher than the economic benefits of thwarting the laws.

Here’s the real outrage: In the wake of the BP spill, essentially no laws have been changed – not even a ridiculously low cap on damages private parties can collect from oil companies. Senate Republican leaders said Wednesday they wouldn’t support a bill retroactively removing the liability cap; and not even Democrats Mary Landrieu (D-La) and Mark Begich (D-Alaska) will support it.

Why isn’t Congress doing more – not only removing the cap on civil liability but also raising the level of penalties oil companies have to pay for violating safety and environmental regulations, permanently prohibiting deep-water drilling, and enacting a carbon tax?

Because of Big Oil’s political clout.

The same anthropomorphic fallacy that accords human attributes to giant corporations like BP distorts clear thinking about how to limit their political influence.

Consider the grotesque Supreme Court decision earlier this year in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, which gave corporations the status of people with First Amendment rights to spend unlimited amounts of money on political ads. Citizens United ranks right up there with Bush v. Gore and Dred Scott as the most brainless and irresponsible Supreme Court decisions in history.

Certified Online Pharmacy - Lowest Price Guaranteed

In March, the District of Columbia Court of Appeals decided that in light of Citizens United, there was no longer any basis for limiting contributions to so-called independent committees set up to support or oppose particular candidates. (Such committees are known as 527’s, after a loophole clause in the campaign finance laws.) The old contribution limit was $69,900 every two years. Now even that’s gone.

And the Federal Elections Commission has just interpreted these two court decisions to mean corporations, not just individuals, can now give unlimited amounts of money to 527’s.

To top it off, Tuesday the Senate failed (by only a few votes) to pass the “Disclose Act,” that would have forced corporate sponsors of campaign ads to reveal themselves and not hide behind innocuous sounding names like “Americans for America.” The bill also would have prohibited campaign ads run by U.S. subsidiaries of foreign companies. (Think BP.)

Now all the limits are gone and the gloves are completely off. Even BP, incorporated in the UK, is officially free influence American politics to its heart’s content.

The will of the American people is being subordinated to the demands of giant money-making machines called global corporations that can now spend or threaten to spend unlimited amounts of money in support of any politician willing to help them make more and against any who might cause them to make less.

This is the final lesson of BP.

What should you do? As with the loophole-ridden finance reform law, and the new health law that richly rewards Big Pharma — get angry, not cynical. Commit to getting big money out of politics, even if it takes us years.

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.

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?

*****

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

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

Robert Reich: The BP Shakeup That Isn’t, with Commentary

Evans Liberal Politics
June 20, 2010

 

Robert Reich: The BP Shakeup That Isn’t
with Commentary

 

The BP Shakeup That Isn’t, Robert Reich.org, June 18, 2010, by Robert Reich, used with permission, with commentary by Evans Liberal Politics owner Paul Evans, quoted verbatim:

One day after he was blasted on Capitol Hill, BP CEO Tony Hayward has been removed from day-to-day management of the oil spill. BP’s chairman has turned it over to a BP managing director, Bob Dudley.

That makes sense from a PR standpoint. Before the congressional hearings, Hayward seemed merely overwhelmed. After yesterday, the mere thought of Hapless Hayward in charge of plugging the hole strikes most people as ludicrous. Hayward told Congress he knew nothing, took no responsibility, and wasn’t able to comment on a thing.

Yet Dudley’s only apparent qualification is he’s an American. Dudley still reports to the same BP board of directors. They are responsible to the same BP shareholders. Those shareholders still, naturally, want BP to maximize share values and not spend a dollar (or pound) more than necessary.

Day-to-day responsibility for plugging the hole and containing the spill should be under a U.S. Admiral. He should use whatever expertise and resources BP has on hand, but also be able to get expertise and resources from other oil companies, the Navy, and the Army Corps of Engineers. He should report daily and directly to the President.

Click the Obama’s
Dog Bo to Visit Paul’s Playlist
for Great Rock & Pop Sounds!

photo of a very The Obama dog Bo serves as a link to Paul's Playlist of great streaming electronic rock and pop music

And he should send BP the bill for everything.

Otherwise Americans have no way of knowing everything necessary is being done.

Thursday BP said it recaptured 25,290 barrels of crude from the wrecked well – the most it has been able to collect in a day. But oil is still gushing at 35,000 to 60,000 barrels per day and shows no sign of slowing.

Until Tuesday morning only one vessel – the Discover Enterprise – was siphoning oil from the well. After the Coast Guard urged BP to speed up the operation, the company brought in another vessel, the Q4000, which by Thursday achieved its maximum capacity of roughly 10,000 barrels a day. Why not more vessels?

Comment by Evans Liberal Politics owner Paul Evans: In my article, BP: A Conspiracy of the Rich, I present material from an article which gives the real truth about this new “saviour” BP has given us, Robert Dudley: See Breaking: BP “Hives Off” Gulf Spill Operations!, Daily Kos, June 4, 2010, by dhfsfc. From the date of this article, you can see that the insertion of Bob Dudley into the picture has been ongoing for some time. Here’s what Daily Kos had to say about Dudley:

Dudley, a US citizen, has been looking for a suitable role in the company since he was thrown out of Moscow in a battle with the Russian shareholders of the TNK-BP joint venture in the middle of 2008.

In sum, Dudley is an American executive so odious that even the Russians don’t want him in the country, and someone who has not had a “suitable role” at BP for two years, ie., has not had a job anyone was willing to trust him with!

Interestingly, Hayward candidly advised The Guardian that the purpose of the split was to allow Dudley to concentrate on the Gulf “problem” and so that he and other Directors could keep from being distracted from BP’s “main businesss.”

Yeah, I guess this was so Hayward would feel safe to go off yachting with his rich friends.

In addition, on a conference call with analysts, Hayward noted that he had been verbally attacked by many American(s), however he noted that: he had a “thick jacket”, . . . adding: “They’ve thrown some words at me, but I’m a Brit. Sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me.”

I stated then:

Somehow, I smell a giant rat in BP’s hiving off it’s American operations. I just know that somehow they are doing this to limit their legal liability and keep overall corporate profits high and protected from legal encroachment, NOT as any operational ploy to run the company better.

The creation of the BP $20 billion escrow fund has made me feel somewhat better about this.

But you’re right Tony Hayward, BP executives, Goldman Sachs execs and rich people around the world, sticks and stones are not going to hurt you…. maybe. But just maybe America will see what is going on and say “enough”. Because this religion of greed has gone too far.

And just maybe the whole Gulf oil spill was somehow inevitable or even “necessary” to these rich people. Maybe it had to happen so that the energy companies could better their bottom line when the supply/demand imbalance for gasoline was corrected as the government reacted to the spill. Well, that’ what’s happening, isn’t it?

Either that or the BP oil spill simply represents man’s incredible arrogance and recklessness towards the natural world in the 21st century.

Some Thoughts on the Emerging New World Order


There is another possibility we can see when we look at the handling of the BP oil crisis other than the straight conspiracy idea. Perhaps the whole BP oil disaster situation should be viewed merely as a detail in the ongoing establishment of a greater “new world order”. In the new order of things, huge multinational corporations work hand in hand with national governments and the clear lines of separateness that used to divide the huge multinationals from government are blurred. Lobbyists in Congress and direct ties between government officials and the big multinationals make it so that it seems sometimes that we have a government of by and for the big corporations. This is, in fact, still not true: government is still government and big business is still big business. It’s just that these days, it’s such a close relationship between the two that we have to sometimes stand back and remind ourselves of this fact. These days, sometimes it’s hard to tell that the two are still basically separate.

(Listen to George H.W. Bush’s New Word order speech of March 6, 1991, or another very clear version of the speech of September 11, 1991. It is clear to me, at least, that this vision is coming to pass.)

How will the new world order play out? Will it be an order where government simply works hand in hand with the big multinationals while yet working of by and for it’s citizens, and for ordinary people around the globe? Or one where government seem inseparable from these business giants, and the rich are peculiarly empowered and powerful. Many progressives (and also many people who follow the banner of libertarianism) are working very hard to see that government remembers that it exists for the American people and not for monolithic corporate giants. To progressives, the Tea Party movement seems entirely co-opted by and infiltrated by the corporate world, and so very dangerous. Only time will tell what way this actually plays out. But if the BP oil spill is any indication, it doesn’t look like this battle is shaping up very well for the American people. That fills me with great sadness and apprehension for the future.

I apologize for jumping into the New World Order controversy, because I know that this puts me squarely in a small group that is officially relegated as a fringe. But the facts of the last 19 years seem strongly to indicate that this is coming to pass. It is up to the people of America and people all around the globe to see that the emerging order of things is one where ordinary people still count, and that America remains a nation of, by and for the American people. I did not feel that I could remain silent on the issue indefinitely.

From the way British Petroleum has been so handled with kid gloves by the Obama administration, you’d really have to wonder just who the President and Congress work for. President Obama and Congress need to stop being such corporatists and run America of, by and for Americans. Obama badly needs to take off the kid gloves when it comes to handling the big multinationals. Prediction: sadly, I don’t thing it’s going to happen. Draw your own conclusions. While the so-called “new world order” is just a label that in fact, George H.W. Bush invented in 1991, sometimes we need to sit back and remind ourselves of that fact — that’s it’s just a label.

It’s getting hard to tell. In recent years, the new world order seems increasingly real and potent. That doesn’t mean it’s necessarily a bad thing, in fact. I still remember my father quoting his father, a career marine officer, to the effect that “we’re in good hands.” But I believe strongly that government now needs a stiff reminder that they are working (still) for the American people, and not for corporate America. The Supreme Court, especially, seems to be corporate America’s lapdog, in such terrible decisions as Citizens United, which fully empowers corporate America unfairly beyond anything known before in earlier years. I pray that our government remembers this inalienable fact: that America is for all Americans. ~ Paul Evans

A Blatant Appeal: I’ve got three days until they turn off my internet and phone system. I am disabled on Social Security disability and have not been able to keep up with my bills. I am trying to run a household of three souls on the minimum that Social Security hands out monthly, and it’s just not possible. In recent days, we have not had enough to eat around the Evans household, lacking even decent nutrition and running out of such essentials even such as toilet paper.

Please help keep Evans Liberal Politics on the air. My PayPal account is temporarily disabled because I am one of the former National City account holders whose PNC accounts have been somehow fraudulently handled, and they have ripped me off for perhaps $3,000. In other words, my accounts have been hacked, I strongly believe. (See http://evans-politics.com/tell-your-story-bad-banks-pnc-a-pattern-of-systematic-fraud.html) There is no way Evans Liberal Politics is going to stay on air unless someone steps up to the plate and pays our Century Link phone/internet bill. If you love liberal-progressive news and want to avert a disaster for us, please do contact me, preferable by email. My phone number (for as long as it will work), is 330-202-7661. Please help avert a disaster for this truthful, liberal news and politics organization.

If you think you know of someone who might help me, please pass this on.

Thank you for reading this, and God Bless, ~ Paul

See Obama, BP and Theodore Roosevelt, Newsweek, June 19, 2010, by Jonathan Alter.

*****

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.

Tell Your Friends About Evans Liberal Politics!

Listen to 132 Rock and Pop Tracks


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

#1 Rated by Google