economy for all

Will Workers Survive State Budget Belt-Tightening?

Susan Ozawa — Tue, 13 Jan 2009 15:30:36 -0500

Other Economic Recovery Plans

Susan Ozawa — Tue, 16 Dec 2008 16:19:41 -0500

Center for American Progress, How to Spend $350 Billion in a First Year of Stimulus and Recovery

The United States Conference of Mayors, MainStreet Economic Recovery Report

National Governors Association, Economic Recovery: A Federal‐State Partnership

National Environmental Coalition, Economic Recovery through Investments in our Environment, Energy System and Heritage

USAction, TrueMajority.org and USAction Education Fund, The Next New Deal: Our Plan to Invest in America’s Future

Obama’s Jobs Summit: Jobs Now, Deficits Later

Eric Lotke — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 17:07:27 -0500

Last week’s job’s summit focused on the fierce urgency of now. And well it should, with 18 percent unemployment and underemployment. But Obama also seemed to understand how short term needs overlap with long term goals. There’s just one sticking point.

The short term need is obvious: jobs.

The long term needs are also clear: newly rebuilt infrastructure, from high speed rail to classrooms for our kids; designing a new energy economy, from windmills to solar cells; and high quality education so everyone can reach their personal potential and so our workforce has the skills to succeed.

These short term and long term needs solve each other. Billions of dollars of school improvements are “shovel ready.” People can be hired right away to retrofit buildings to improve energy efficiency with added insulation and double-pane glass (hopefully made in America). Even the projects that aren’t shovel ready can get started now. Hire the architects and engineers. Start the environmental impact statement and identify the right of way for the tracks. The future can start immediately. From design to construction, it will create jobs the entire time. The benefits will last for generations.

So what’s the sticking point? Money. It costs money to make money. The deficit hawks suddenly realized that wars and tax cuts cost money. People are turning hysterical about deficits, and willing to go no farther.

Robert Kuttner of The American Prospect attended the summit, and he had the opportunity to ask the President directly about deficits.

“I hope that your administration will recognize, as I know you will, that it's possible, first of all, to reduce the deficit over time and sometimes in the short run realize that you need to increase the deficit. And I hope the concern about the deficit in the long run doesn't crowd out the need for additional spending in the short run.

And I also think that some of these programs that increase jobs and increase GDP are probably the fastest way to get the economy back on a track that will reduce the deficit over time. It's certainly a better way to reduce the deficit than putting ourselves into a -- into a debtor's prison and assume we can deflate our way to recovery.”

The President agreed. He is concerned about deficits in the long run, especially the “structural deficit” from health care. But he recognizes that the way to reduce the deficit is not primarily by cutting costs (with the exception of health care) but by growing the economy.

“Now, if we can't grow our economy, then it is going to be that much harder for us to reduce the deficit. The single most important thing we could do right now for deficit reduction is to spark strong economic growth, which means that people who've got jobs are paying taxes and businesses that are making profits have taxes -- are paying taxes. That's the most important thing we can do.

We understand that in this administration. That's not always the dialogue that's going on out there in public and we're going to have to do a better job of educating the public on that."

Yes, control the deficit “in the out-years.” But Obama himself said we need to “press the accelerator in terms of job growth” right now. That’s the balance. And that’s the smart way to manage immediate needs and long term deficits.

Time to Take on the Banks

Eric Lotke — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 15:32:49 -0400

It's time to take on the banks. 74% of American voters agree that “greed and risky decisions of banks and financial companies led to the financial crisis and recession, and it's time that Congress cracked down on their reckless practices to protect consumers.”

The American people are angry. There is a strong, bi-partisan appetite for reform. By a 64 to 27 percent margin, people believe that “we need stricter safeguards on banks and financial companies to improve accountability by reining in excessive bonuses, protecting consumers from exorbitant fees, and making financial dealings safer and more transparent.”

All these findings come from a new survey of registered voters done by the Benenson Strategy Group for SEIU. People understand what damage was done and who’s to blame. And behind the damage is a strong sense of betrayal.

•• “While taxpayers are still suffering under the economic crisis, the big banks are back to business as usual after their bailouts, ignoring their commitments to help taxpayers and are helping themselves instead, making tens of billions in profits on the backs of the American taxpayers.” 75 percent agree.

•• “It's outrageous that after taking trillions of our tax dollars in bailout money, the big banks are now spending millions to lobby against reforms that would protect us from their abuses in the future.” 72 percent agree.

The solutions are clear as well. Supermajorities in the eighty percent range support technical reforms like capping rate hikes and regulating overdraft fees. Similar supermajorities support philosophical reforms like limiting executive compensation and requiring that bail-out money be used for business lending. That’s what the people want.

Now it does get partisan. Democrats have an opportunity to lead. People didn’t vote last November for laissez-faire capitalism and billion dollar bonuses. They didn’t bail out banks that were too big to fail so they could take over banks that were smaller and did.

But reform is stalling. The proposed Consumer Protection Finance Agency gets weaker every day. Efforts to regulate derivatives — what Warren Buffet called “weapons of financial mass destruction" — are barely off the ground. A grassroots push to Audit the Fed and find out what it did with our money ($2 trillion) hits deaf ears in the Senate.

Almost exactly six months ago, Senator Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) called banks the most powerful lobby on Capitol Hill. “And they frankly own the place.”

Now is the pivot point. After the melt-down and the election, now it’s time to find out if they still do. Democrats can show that they’re on the side of working people. They can show the courage to take on the banks. If it wasn’t obvious before, the SEIU poll makes it clear.

Next week the American Bankers Association will meet in Chicago, and protesters are organizing to be heard. Democrats can take a side.
——
Curious what happens if we don’t win this fight? Read my novel. 2044. The Problems Isn’t Big Brother. It’s Big Brother, Inc.

G-20 Promises: What They Mean

Eric Lotke — Fri, 25 Sep 2009 08:43:16 -0400

The G-20 Summit is wrapping up today. We can compare its performance to promises made in advance. Leaders discussed financial markets, of course, but they also made promises about jobs and work. Some highlights:

“3. We must promote employment through structural policies, active labour market policies, and training and education.”

In other words, leading economies from China to Germany — 80 percent of the world economy! — recognize that the invisible hand can’t work alone. Government doesn’t always need to get out of the way. Sometimes it needs to take the lead.

-- What “active labour market policies” do we need in America? A higher minimum wage? Health care that isn’t tied to your job? The Employee Free Choice Act to protect workers’ right to form a union?

-- What does America need for “training and education”? More public funding for higher education? Even if it takes money from the banks?

-- What can other countries do? China can stop devaluing its currency or improve labor or safety standards so U.S. products compete on a more level playing field … but I’m not holding my breath.

“5. We will work to achieve high, stable and sustainable growth, which will require orderly rebalancing in global demand, removal of domestic barriers and promotion of the efficient functioning of global markets.”

-- Does the G-20 realize that America can’t stay a debtor nation forever? It’s good for our lenders in the short run, but it’s good for nobody in the long run.

-- We put it this way in our report, Pittsburgh, G-20 and the New Economy:
“The G-20 must … chart the process by which the global economy that emerges out of the crisis is more balanced, and no longer dependent on U.S. citizens spending more than they earn. That means the U.S. must invest more and consume less, make more and import less. And the surplus nations must do the reverse: consume more and buy more from abroad. This will require wrenching changes in policy and in attitudes. But if we are to move to growth that is sustainable in Pittsburgh as well as Beijing, we have little choice.”

Did the G-20 Summiteers meet their goals? Is there a way to hold them to it?

Here’s a step we can take at home. The next time domestic Republicans yell about “protectionism” and “get the government off my back,” remind them how grown-up economies talk about government. “Active labour market policies” (#3) and “orderly rebalancing in global demand” (#5). Those are changes we need.

2044 on FireDogLake

Eric Lotke — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 11:02:38 -0400

I’ve blogged about my novel, 2044, here and here. 2044 is a future tale that starts where George Orwell’s 1984 left off. The problem in 2044 isn’t Big Brother and the leviathan government. The problem is Big Brother, Inc., and the all-powerful marketplace.

This post broadens the horizons. FireDogLake will feature 2044 on its book salon on Sunday.

If you weren’t familiar already, FireDogLake’s book salon is a terrific forum where authors discuss their work. It’s an on-line conversation and a chance for direct Q&A on important subjects. This Sunday’s forum will put me in the company of James Galbraith (about the economy), Tom Ricks (about Iraq) and Eric Boehlert (about blogging on the bus), who have all been on Firedog’s book salon. Of course, I’ll be talking about 2044, my new novel where the government doesn’t take over. It gets taken over.

The salon takes place every Sunday evening.
I’ll be on this Sunday, July 6 from 5:00 to 7:00 p.m. EDT. Right after we celebrate our independence.

Please join us. And ask me a question. A hard one.
It’s not necessary but of course it’s more than okay if you buy a book.

PS: Chapter one is available on my web page.

2044: Big Brother Inc.

Eric Lotke — Fri, 22 May 2009 11:13:26 -0400

I just finished a new novel, 2044.

2044 starts where George Orwell’s 1984 left off. The problem isn’t Big Brother and the leviathan government. The problem is Big Brother Inc., and the all-powerful marketplace.

Orwell was right for his time, of course. Europe lay in smoking ruins, and the statist Stalin peered over the wall with his Big Brother mustache. Orwell sounded the alarm.

But history didn’t unfold that way. The government didn’t take over. It got taken over. Nowadays the commercial sector is in control. Everything is produced en masse and for profit, from clothes to music to political campaigns. Amazon.com knows what I read. Microsoft makes me write with Windows™. ToysRUs tells my kids what they want.

Check out the fights over the new federal budget. Look what the insurance and pharmaceutical industries are doing to health care reform, and how the good old Military Industrial Complex grows the defense budget. Watch giant agribusiness conglomerates dress up like family farmers and milk the government for subsidies. 2044 follows the pattern to the endpoint.

The heroes of 2044 are two overworked professionals who spend long days at the office and short nights in tiny apartments. Malcolm Moore is an engineer who designs security devices for the titanic Tentek Corporation. Jessica Frey is a lawyer who defends such corporations in court. Both are single and both are lonely — though Jessica has a six-year-old son, her sperm-banked answer to isolation.

The story begins when Malcolm discovers a cheap, easy way to take the salt out of seawater. Fresh water is scarce enough right now. By the year 2044, people will die and countries will go to war for water. A microorganism that takes the salt out of seawater could benefit literally billions of people.

But it also threatens business interests who are happy the way things are. Malcolm’s effort to persuade Tentek to sell his discovery gets him fired. His effort to strike out on his own gets him branded a terrorist. People who assist him are harassed, jailed and even killed.

It’s an exciting ride. The action scenes are fun and the politics of terrorism are haunting. There are even touches of humor and occasional references to 1984 — like the corporate merger that creates the new Big Brother Inc., with its happy slogan, “Big Brother is looking out for you.”

I like it, anyway. But then I wrote the thing.

It started some years ago with the idea of a private sector sequel to 1984. The idea didn’t go away, and eventually I stopped waiting. I decided to do it myself. My precise inspiration: “You’ve read a lot of crappy books. You can probably write one that’s no worse.” So I did. And it turned out pretty good.

Publishing it was a different story, though. A story about consolidation in the publishing industry (someone could write a novel about that!), the devotion to proven authors, and the aversion to unhappy endings (true to the original, I’m sorry to say).

So I took the self-publishing route around industry bottlenecks. Now you can buy 2044 direct from the publisher or at Amazon.com, of course. You can read Chapter One for free on my web page or, if you ask me nicely, I’ll send you a PDF (though I kept the purchase price almost as low as the printing costs). If you have any other ideas for outreach or distribution, I’m all ears.

Now it’s onward, back to my nonfiction life (and the outline of a new novel, uplifting with a happy ending). Meanwhile, enjoy the book.

The Real AIG Conspiracy

Philip Palij — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 20:32:09 -0400

It may seem odd, but the public outrage against $135 million in AIG bonuses is a godsend to Wall Street, AID scoundrels included. How can the media be so preoccupied with the discovery that there is self-serving greed to be found in the financial sector?...

What is wrong with this picture?

Challenging Economic Dogma by Mark Weisbrot

Susan Ozawa — Tue, 10 Mar 2009 12:55:08 -0400

Robert Wade - A Change of Financial Regimes

Susan Ozawa — Tue, 17 Feb 2009 12:05:28 -0500

A Change of Financial Regimes Robert Wade, Development Studies Institute, LSE Speaking at the 2nd Workshop: "Developing Joint UK Policy Responses to the Financial and Economic Crisis" organized by the Bretton Woods Project and School of Oriental and African Studies, Research on Money and Finance, Dec 15th, 2008.

Wade makes the case for industrial planning on a global scale.