Why you should care about The Power of Economics and Public Policy

"Atlanta (CNN)-Under increasing pressure from major corporations that do business in Georgia, Gov. Nathan Deal announced Monday he will veto a bill that critics say would have curtailed the rights of Georgia's LGBT community.

House Bill 757 would have given faith-based organizations in Georgia the option to deny services and jobs to gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people. Supporters said the measure was meant to protect religious freedom, while opponents have described it as "anti-LGBT" and "appalling.

Salesforce CEO Marc Benioff said the company "can't have a program in Georgia" if the bill were to become law. Disney said it would stop filming in the state, and Unilever said it would "reconsider investment" if the legislation were signed. Coca-Cola spoke out against the bill, as did Home Depot and several other Fortune 500 companies based in Atlanta.

The NFL said the bill could cost Atlanta the opportunity to host the Super Bowl. Time-Warner, the parent company of CNN, also opposed the legislation." 

http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/28/us/georgia-north-carolina-lgbt-bills/

So what's the big deal? What's key here is that major corporations used the threat of what is paramount to state economic sanctions to affect public policy. While business interests and their paid lobbyists have a long history of controlling public policy, often for just their own special interests, this is one of those moments where such influence was used for a more positive, depending on your politics, purpose. Is this just because that such an action was perhaps the right thing to do? Doubt it. Or, was this done because of the potential consumer backlash if they didn't do it? Something to consider.

Money talks is an old cliche but it is true. Look at the change in copmanies now willing to label, and support the mandatory labeling, of GMO ingredients in foods. How about Campbell's Soup announcement that they were eliminating BPA in their cans and General Mills eliminating artificial ingredients from their cereal products. Is this happening because corporations have suddenly developed a conscious--a sense of social responsibility? No, it's because, you, the consumer, have flexed your spending muscles and demanded change with your purchases.

Important is the fact that people can greatly affect public policy, not just by voting, demonstrating, petitioning, or lobbying, but by how they spend their money. This is, perhaps, the most effective way to make your voice heard.

Is the West Responsible for ISIS?

 

Much blame has been placed on the West, the U.S. in particular, for creating ISIS. The failure to actually accomplish the mission in Iraq, blunders in Afghanistan, leniency toward Assad in Syria, and overall hatred of the U.S. are cited as a rationale for the rise of militants.

Of course, it begs the question: Is the U.S. government or western corporations responsible the problems? Is it the drive for oil and the thirst for profits that engender the hatred? Fast food, fast cars, mass consumption, cheaper clothes, loud music, lack of respect for cultures, religious differences fueled by greed, and a host of other issues that rise from economic colonialism and globalization are, perhaps, the real culprits in the rise militancy.

If we fight for liberty, the right to choose, the right to life, to practice beliefs freely, to live without fear, the rights of all (definitely for women), and rights regardless of religious beliefs, then we can rightly be blamed. If this issue arises because of economics, then we can rightly be blamed. So I guess in a big way, the West is responsible, but this is amended by the fact that there are those who seek power just to have power and who will kill because they can. This is also true of ISIS. 

 

We're Watching you!

Who's watching you ... well, quite a few people, not just the government.

Since the dawn of time, humanity has been watched by someone, or some thing. All ancient empires had their spies. The Church watched witches and heretics. The Romans watched the Jews and Christians. The rich watched the poor. The communists and Nazis watched everyone. McCarthy watched 'fellow travelers.' The government watched the Japanese. In the Cold War, all were being watched. We watch the Chinese and they watch us. With 911 we starting watching Muslims. Now we discover that our government is watching maybe all of us.

Perhaps even more insidious, corporations are watching all that you do. Have you ever looked up a product on Amazon or, for that matter, any internet company? Then, no matter what site you are on, you begin to see adds for the products that you searched elsewhere. I looked up kayaks and it seems that no matter what site I'm on, I see adds for kayaks.

There appears to be a great concern about Snowden and his release of information regarding how the government is spying on us. So what else is new? Is there an uproar over corporate spying on the average citizen? Haven't really seen any.

So the fundamental question is: Do we really care if 'someone' watches us? Do we care if they virtually know just about everything about us? If this is a loss of freedom, does it matter? What, as a society, are we willing to tolerate regarding others 'knowing' about us?

While we need to think about these things, I suspect that there is really nothing that can be done to stop the watching. How would one even go about it? Do we really think that we can stop secret spying into our lives?

THE ECONOMICS OF SCREW ME ONCE, SHAME ON YOU...

Screw me twice, shame on me. There can be little doubt those that control and dominate the American and world economy have had it pretty easy. Any time they get into trouble they simply cry 'too big to fail'and their puppet politicians simply take money from what was once a middle class and bail them out. The most recent being around $800 billion. And, while these 'too big to fail' companies make usurious profits and pay absurd bonuses for failure, they create no new jobs under the protection of the 'consumers aren't buying' mantra. Could it be because they have all of our money? But there has been so much said and written on this topic it is not worth repeating the list of corporate atrocities committed upon the consumers of the world. The bail out was the first, or rather the most recent and obvious, screwing. Shame on them.

These same corporate entities are now trying to screw us again, and if they are successful, shame on us. Hopefully, you all know that mid-term Congressional elections are coming up in November. The current mantra of these forces tends, on the surface, to sound appealing. Sound bites "cut the size of government, reduce government spending, keep tax cuts, fire the teachers, we can't afford to address climate change, reduce regulations, etc.," does have some appeal in a troubled economy. But what is really behind these corporate funded attacks? Of course they want the size of government reduced. If there a fewer food inspectors, environmental regulators, health and safety employees, they get more free rein to do as they please. Reducing government spending allows them to make more profit as they will be taxed less. Keep tax cuts helps the rich to stay rich. The poor don't pay many taxes anyway so it's not like tax breaks are very useful for the increasing numbers of people falling into poverty. They are not there because of taxes but because they have lost their jobs and banks are taking their homes.

Did you notice that just when people began to take climate change seriously that we had an economic crisis? How many times do we have to listen to the idea that increasing mpg will raise the price of cars and no one could afford them? Hell, we can't afford the cars they are making now. But we know that the technology exists for non-polluting/high mpg cars. But that means less money for the oil cartels. Spending money of safe and environmentally oil exploration would decrease the corporate bottom line. Corporations claim that such regulations cost jobs and raise the cost of energy so we can;t do that. How many people want to listen to 'save the environment' when they have a hard time putting food on the table?

Reducing the size of government, firing teachers to save money and massive public employee layoffs will not help the economy. If no jobs are being created, where will these people work? If we go on a benefit cutting spree, then how would all of these people live? Is there room for reform and efficiency improvement? Of course, but a wanton and reckless loss of government jobs will do nothing to help the economy. Although, it will allow the banks to take more homes away. Clearly, right-winged financed political campaigns against everything means that they are for themselves, not for us. Look at the resistance to the extension of unemployment benefits; efforts to take away Social Security benefits; the lack of interest in feeding hungry people; the unwillingness to help us get affordable health care and the basic disdain to human suffering and ask how these actions could benefit you.

There is no question that we need improved efficiencies and abuse of programs needs to end. But the demonetization of government workers, the poor, the middle class and efforts to create a sustainable and peaceful world serves only the interests of those that have a lot and not the interests of the majority of people. If you buy into the corporate financed propaganda, shame on you!

OBAMA AND FDR: A HOLISTIC APPROACH TO ECONOMIC RECOVERY

There are many who are comparing the actions of President Franklin Roosevelt with those of President Obama regarding the handling of our economic depression. I use the word depression because if we are not there, we will be soon. The following is a brief summary of FDR’s actions:

“FDR declared a "banking holiday" to end the runs on the banks and created new federal programs administered by so-called Alphabet Agencies. For example, the AAA (Agricultural Adjustment Administration) stabilized farm prices and thus saved farms. The CCC (Civilian Conservation Corps) provided jobs to unemployed youths while improving the environment. The TVA (Tennessee Valley Authority) provided jobs and brought electricity to rural areas for the first time. The FERA (Federal Emergency Relief Administration) and the WPA ( Works Progress Administration) provided jobs to thousands of unemployed Americans in construction and arts projects across the country. The NRA (National Recovery Administration) sought to stabilize consumer goods prices through a series of codes. Through employment and price stabilization and by making the government an active partner with the American people, the New Deal jump-started the economy towards recovery (fdrlibrary.maris.edu).”

Many Republicans argue that FDR’s actions actually prolonged the depression in the 30’s, created a new era of ‘big government’ and stifled the ‘free’ economic market. Many on the right of the political economic spectrum also say that Obama will and even should fail because he is not focusing on the economy. Instead, he is wasting time dealing with such silly issues as healthcare and education reform, stimulating alternative energy production and being concerned with environmental issues.

Our bodies, life, politics, economy and society are holistic. You cannot separate the parts from the whole. If a person is ill, it is necessary to examine not only the immediate symptom, but all factors that contribute to the illness. A heart attack may be the result of a combination of diet and stress in one’s life. While you can ‘treat’ the immediate issue of the heart attack, if the other issues are not resolved, the likelihood is that the heart attack will occur again. Issues in politics and society are holistic. Poverty cannot be solved simply by giving people money. Concerns regarding family values, cultural traditions, employment history, education and even health come into play. Obviously, very few politicians get elected or are effective if they only deal with single issues and not the complete array of problems confronting our society.

One cannot solve our economic crisis simply by focusing on banks. We have already seen that to be true. We cannot solve the crisis by focusing on credit; that has been obvious. Those who say focus on the economy only are the same ones that had no problem with giving money to the banks and who also have big problems with new rules or regulations. After all, we do not want to disrupt the ‘free’ economy. I am not really sure what economy they refer to. If by free they mean let business do as they please, one cannot help but see that this very attitude created our current issues. Do they mean that business should be free to have their products produced in Chinese sweat shops? Do they mean that business should be allowed to produce crap that must be replaced soon after the purchase? Do they mean that business should be free to destroy the basic eco-fabric of the planet in order to keep profits and bonuses high? Do they mean free to charge usurious interest rates? Do they mean free to convince you that you need products that have no lasting value? By focusing on the economy do they mean to simply deal with the issues of huge corporations, at the expense of the small businessman?

In order to deal with our economic crisis, I think president Obama is right. Our economy is not AIG or CitiBank. A truly functioning economy is based upon an educated consumer. People must be healthy to be productive. We cannot continue to destroy the environment else we may have profit, but no world in which to spend it. Some would argue for the quick fix. This will not work. Our issues are to complex and too braid to think we can go back and do things the way they were done in the past. Our economic body must be addressed holistically. FDR saw this in the 1930’s. Was he totally correct? Maybe not. However, he saw that the depression required more than just fixing banks. Yes, we have to deal with energy, the environment, agriculture, education, healthcare and a total review of our economic rules and regulations if we are to have any chance of reviving our economy. If we do not do these things now, there may never be another chance in the future.

BANKRUPTCY: NO HARM, NO FOUL

While numbers are not current, total personal bankruptcies rose 29% in 2008 and business bankruptcies rose 41%. Chapter 7 bankruptcies rose 36%. The headlines are replete with job layoffs reaching record highs, downsizing, bailouts, and general economic chaos.
For the consumer facing personal economic collapse, the motto should be, “no harm, no foul.” Look, if the leading corporations and banks in the world cannot make ends meet, why should there be any expectation that consumers can keep their financial ship afloat? We all know that we, the consumer, are wasting billions of dollars by trying to save huge corporations and financial institutions. They are killing us with interest rates, foreclosures, and zero credit. These problems have been generated by corporate greed, ignorance and basic stupidity.
Yes, we must take on the responsibility of our actions. We allowed ourselves to be duped by mass marketing and our own sense of greed. However, fair is fair, at least it should be. The large corporations are taking what little we have and what do we get in return? Layoffs and no credit. Actually, we do not need or even want more credit, we want out of debt. Why should the wealthy few still make their millions while the consumer has a hard time feeding their families? Why should the few take more of our money while we struggle to make ends meet? Why must the corporations get all of the bailout money and the consumer get nothing?
They tell you not to file bankruptcy because it will hurt your credit. What credit? Give money to corporations and there is no problem. Suggest giving money to people and they say, “Oh, that won’t work.” This is all madness. We have forgiven debts of foreign nations, paid corporate debt and given our dollars to banks that use it to buy smaller banks. What would happen if the government said, “We will require that all consumer debt will be reduced by 50%?” What would you do with all of that extra money? That’s how you get the economy moving.
So, for all of you that are worried about going into bankruptcy, don’t. If it is good enough for Wall Street, there is nothing to be ashamed of. The so called brightest economic minds have no clue how to end this crisis. Trust me, clear your debt and watch the credit card offers inundate your mail box. Is this what we want? No. But, feel no shame, there is no foul in taking care of your families.

ECONOMIC BANDAGE WILL NOT HELP ECONOMY!

When you get a cut you add a little antiseptic and seal it off with a bandage. All these treatments do is prevent infection; the actual healing is done by the body and not the treatment. It is a shame that this is not the case with the economy. The FED may cover it with a bandage, but the system is not self-healing.

The sub prime mortgage crisis began in 2006 and just hit its peak, according to some economic analysts. In my opinion, it has been long in coming. The basic issue was that lenders issued mortgages at low rates that were adjustable. At the low rate, home buyers were able to squeak out payments. But, when the interest rates rose and monthly payments rose, the consumer was unable to pay. Many loans were given to people at the economic margin and anyone with an elementary education should have seen that those consumers could not afford a doubling of their payments. Anyone looking for details can easily Google “mortgage crisis” and get more financial information than you could probably use.

One may also recall the savings and loan crisis of the late 70s and early 80s which, according to some, led to the recession in 1991-92. Again, the approach was a bandage in the form of a bailout. And today, we see another bailout, but not a cure. Economic news has seen the current financial woes spread across the world thanks to globalization. The economic markets have become so entangled that if one suffers, they all are affected. This is kind of reminiscent of the web of tangled alliances that led to WWI or the “domino theory” of the Vietnam War era. We all know that markets have been consolidating and control of the economies in the world is spiraling into the hands of the few. Perhaps we should take a lesson from nature.

Diversity is a key for ecological health. As species diversity decreases, an ecological system may collapse. While this is actually happening in the environment today, it should serve as a mirror of our economic systems. As conglomerates grow, diversity is lost and economic systems face collapse. They talk of a tipping point with respect to climate change, the same hold true for economic systems. We are fast approaching the time when the bandage will not work because the system cannot heal itself.

Perhaps the primary reason that the system is in deep financial is “greed.” The powers that be continue to insist that we purchase things that we do not really need and that we do so whether we have the money or not. In one of my articles, “You Are Pre-Approved to Go Deeper into Debt,” I tried to show that we are deluged with offers to take out low interest loans or get starter low interest credit cards in order to purchase that new car, fix the house or take a vacation. Daily offers received in the mail or by email to buy now and pay later are very attractive to those who might be faced with financial difficulties. The offers of thousands of dollars now are even attractive to those with steady incomes who feel that that will be able to keep up in the hopes of growing incomes. Even with the current financial crisis looming over everyone’s head, these cheap credit offers still pour in.

The world cannot sustain wanton consumerism. It is one thing to produce and to purchase products that will enhance the quality of our lives or to decrease our dependence on vanishing fuel systems. It is quite another thing to buy for the sake of buying and to keep up with the latest trends in fashion, the newest junk toys and other products that will soon hit already overburdened landfills. It has been clear that large corporations are not treating consumers and the environment in a responsible manner. We are now in that “pay later” of the buy now syndrome and the question is, “Can we afford the price?”