grahamhgreen's Journal - Archives
"If there's a prize for best infographic, ever, then Randall Munroe has won. Hands down. The winner? His Money infographic posted Monday. This monster infographic comes with full sources in CSV format and covers everything from Barenaked Ladies to 2012 presidential fundraising.
If you ever wanted to see money put into very detailed perspective, this will do it for you. Munroe starts with visualizations based on the dollar, like a Starbucks Coffee ($2.00) to a comparison of hourly worker and CEO pay between 1965 and 2007.
From there, Munroe goes on to compare box office revenue from Snow White to Avatar, and annual profits of AT&T, Verizon, and JP Morgan Chase. The U.S. Household Income visualization alone is worth the time downloading the 6.7MB image. See also the section on billionaires." (via http://www.readwriteweb.com/enterprise/201... )
Full Image at http://xkcd.com/980/huge/#x=-6400&y=-5104&... :
“It is a Ponzi scheme to tell our kids that are 25 or 30 years old today, you’re paying into a program that’s going to be there. Anybody that’s for the status quo with Social Security today is involved with a monstrous lie to our kids, and it’s not right.” - Rick Perry, 9/7/ll
In fact, it is childish to think that 25 and 30 year olds are not old enough to know that Social Security is solvent for the next 25 years, and the only thing we need to do to make it solvent forever is to make people who make over $106,000 a year continue to pay into it.
Condescending language, for sure.
(PS for disclosure - I'm not in that age range)
Need I Say More About Stopping Obama's Job Killing Trade Agreements? Not Really, Obama Already Has..
Obama is on a bus tour promoting more trade agreements. There is no evidence these trade agreements are creating jobs, in fact, the opposite is true.
Please call and ask him to end NAFTA and get out of the WTO. White House: (202) 456-1414
At least ask him to revisit these agreements as he promised to do in the campaign.
Need I say more?
"Islam is the religion of the state and the principal source of legislation is... Sharia" - Libyan Draft Constitution
What this means:
- Libya will be a Theocracy, not a Democracy.
- Homosexuals may be stoned to death.
- Adultery may be considered to be for a woman to be in the presence of another man without her husband, and may be stoned to death.
- Males may be able to marry a 9 year old.
- Wives can be beaten.
- Slavery may be legalized.
- Hands can be chopped off for stealing.
- The punishment for leaving Islam may be death.
Why would we be supporting this, much less celebrating?
DRAFT CONSTITUTION: http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=expl...
Thanks to joshcryer for the link. If this is the final document, all was for naught, IMHO.
Obama has been on a bus tour touting his plan to create jobs: BUT IT’S JUST ANOTHER JOB KILLING TRADE DEAL.
Progressives were almost able to kill Obama’s cuts-only deal on the debt ceiling, we can kill this. (The debt bill passed only with overwhelming Republican support, the fact is half the Dems in the house voted against it. He actually passed a Republican plan. Two thirds of Americans simply want to raise taxes on the wealthy, and do not want cuts to social programs.)
I'm calling my congress person to nip his new series of "trade deals" in the bud at 1-202-224-3121.
I’m telling them we don’t want more jobs off-shored, we want to end NAFTA and the WTO, and return to the trade policies and tariffs of the greatest generation - trade policies that actually create jobs.
The simple fact is that there is no evidence that the trade deals we’ve been engaged in since the mid 90’s have increased jobs - the opposite is true, they are costing us jobs.
When he signed NAFTA on September 14, 1993, Bill Clinton Said, "I believe that NAFTA will create a million jobs in the first five years of its impact. And I believe that that is many more than will be lost..."
Since that time, this is what has happened to US employment:
From the Economic Policy Institute:
"Since the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) was signed in 1993, the rise in the U.S. trade deficit with Canada and Mexico through 2002 has caused the displacement of production that supported 879,280 U.S. jobs. Most of those lost jobs were high-wage positions in manufacturing industries.
"The loss of these jobs is just the most visible tip of NAFTA's impact on the U.S. economy. In fact, NAFTA has also contributed to rising income inequality, suppressed real wages for production workers, weakened workers' collective bargaining powers and ability to organize unions, and reduced fringe benefits." (http://usliberals.about.com/od/theeconomyj... )
And since China joined the WTO, this is what’s happened:
U.S. International Trade Commission has admitted that KORUS-FTA will cost US jobs: the ITC sees the electronic equipment manufacturing industry, with average wages of $30.38 in 2008, as a major victim. The AFLCIO says it will cost more auto-workers their livelihoods.
Even our trading partners don’t want the deals, concerning the TPP (Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement):
A free trade deal with the US would be catastrophic for any remaining economic sovereignty that New Zealand has. CAFCA says this not because we are “anti-American”. All such FTAs – such as with the existing P4 partners, or the more recent ones with Malaysia, the Gulf States and Hong Kong - pose the same threat to a greater or lesser degree. And our opposition to them is not because of “xenophobia” but for well founded grounds that they simply enmesh NZ more and more tightly in a cobweb of transnational corporate control.
So it’s a recipe for disaster to enter into an FTA with the biggest economy in the world, headed by a Government that aggressively pushes the interests of American Big Business (there is a seamless flow between the US Government and US Big Business, as is evidenced by the trillion dollar bailout of the mega-greedy financial sector, a textbook example of socialism for the rich). (http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO1003/S002... )
Obama’s new trade deals will only benefit large multi-national corporations, they will not increase American jobs.
Please call - we can win this one: 1-202-224-3121.
And while we’re killing his new trade deal, let’s ask to kill the other part of his plan, the one that damages the long term outlook of Social Security, the extension of the FICA tax holiday, another bad idea.
dual core A5, 30% thinner, 8mp cam, alum. unibody, 4" display...
From Murdoch's Wall Street Journal -
"A study by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, titled “Tax Flight is a Myth,” states that “the effects of tax increases on migration are, at most, small—so small that states that raise income taxes on the most affluent households can be assured of a substantial net gain in revenue.”" - http://blogs.wsj.com/wealth/2011/08/08/hig... /
Another myth busted.
"Rather, S&P's downgrade is a pointed critique of our political system -- the reality that we have a group of political extremists, nihilist, who have invaded and seemingly conquered the Republican Party of Ronald Reagan conservatives.
This band of political hooligans are both unable and uninterested in governing. Reagan would have a hard time recognizing these Tea Partiers as real Republicans.
Let's face it, the Tea Party has sought to shut down the Government by any means necessary. As another expression of their nihilism, fresh from the Tea Party's foray into vandalizing America's economic stability, they most recently blocked funding of the Federal Aviation Administration, purely for ideological reasons."
And we must not cave in to their demands, either.
"...The essence of the Democratic response, certainly from the White House, was that they disagreed on the size of the cuts that were needed. Obama also put up a half-hearted case for raising revenue on the wealthy, though he has done little over the last year to try to get that passed.
Indeed, in December, the last time Democrats controlled both houses of Congress, Obama agreed to extend President George W. Bush's tax cuts for the wealthy.
The irony is that liberals often have public opinion on their side. Yet Democrats are frequently scared to say what a majority of Americans think.
Polls show consistently that the public has favored raising taxes on the wealthy to help lower the deficit. Polls also show that voters like and expect many of the government services that Republicans have moved to cut. Jobs, not deficits, are the No. 1 concern. Polls have shown that the public was unhappy with the performance of the GOP during the debt ceiling crisis and they have negative views of the Tea Party...."
Well, here are just a few of the Dem's ideas, solutions actually, I've seen us suggested on DU:
- Re-Tax the Rich at the rates of the Greatest Generation
- End the wars
- prosecute banksters and Bush crime
- Don't cut, instead increase entitlement spending to stimulate economy
- Increase Chinese tariffs, end 'free' trade
- build wind-farms not nukes
- jobs programs rebuilding infrastructure
- pump money into public schools
- Medicare for all
- Stop seeking to compromise with unworkable ideas that are really scams
In short, Obama should replace his cabinet with Progressives, because we have the solutions that will work!
Obama has gone after the lynch-pin of the New Deal - fair taxes for the wealthiest Americans.
By adding a "cuts only" default mechanism to the new 'Cat-Food Commission Extreme' he virtually guarantees there will be no new taxes for the very people who can afford to pay more.
I think it's fairly obvious that this is the reason our credit rating was downgraded; the President's 'cut's only' backup plan is not adequate to stabilize the budget as it fails to increase revenues at all. And there is not a snowball's chance in hell that the R's on the committee will increase taxes on the wealthy in a significant manner.
While Republicans, who control the U.S. House of Representatives, insisted that a deficit-reduction plan accompany the debt-limit increase, the accord reached in Washington was dismissed by S&P in its statement on the downgrade.
“The downgrade reflects our opinion that the fiscal consolidation plan that Congress and the administration recently agreed to falls short of what, in our view, would be necessary to stabilize the government’s medium-term debt dynamics,” the credit-rating service said.
Pessimism About Congress
The company also said it’s “pessimistic about the capacity of Congress and the administration to be able to leverage their agreement this week into a broader fiscal consolidation plan that stabilizes the government’s debt dynamics anytime soon.”
“One possible positive” of S&P’s move could be that it prods the committee “into coming up with a big deficit- reduction package -- bigger than the $1.2 trillion called for in the ‘trigger’,” said Ajay Rajadhyaksha, managing director of Barclays Capital in New York.
S&P has issued increasingly insistent demands over the past year that lawmakers address long-term deficits. Last October, it said Congress had as many as five years to address the issue. In April, the agency said there was a one-in-three chance of a downgrade within two years. Last month, it said there was a 50 percent chance it would downgrade the government debt within 90 days without a “credible” deficit plan.
If we simply increased taxes on the wealthy to those of the Greatest Generation, the debt would be gone in 10 years. Without debt, we would get our AAA rating back.
Key Tax Facts
15,753: The number of households in 1961 with $1 million in taxable income (adjusted for inflation).
361,000: The number of households in 2011 estimated to have $1 million in taxable income.
43.1: Percent of total reported income that Americans earning $1 million paid in taxes in 1961 (adjusted for 2011 dollars)
23.1: Percent of total reported income that Americans earning $1 million are likely to pay in taxes in 2011, estimated from latest IRS data.
47.4: Percent of profits corporations paid in taxes in 1961.
11.1: Percent of profits corporations paid in taxes in 2011.
Our credit rating was not downgraded during the Great Depression, why? Because of increased taxes on the wealthy.
Against a Congress where zealously rich people-friendly conservatives hold the upper hand, how much can a President of the United States committed to greater equality realistically hope to accomplish?
The answer from today’s White House: not much. Advocacy for equality has to take a backseat, Obama administration insiders insist, once fanatical friends of the fortunate in Congress recklessly put at risk our nation’s full faith and credit.
But history offers another alternative....
How high should the top rates go? All the way, FDR proposed, to 100 percent. At a time of “grave national danger,” the President told Congress in April 1942, “no American citizen ought to have a net income, after he has paid his taxes, of more than $25,000 a year,” an income just shy of $350,000 in today’s dollars....
Congress, Roosevelt pointed out, “had authorized the drafting of men into the armed forces at $600 a year regardless of what they had earned in civilian life,” but, with the salary cap repeal, had “refused to reduce the salary of a man not drafted no matter how high his income might be.”
To be fair, it's the TeaBaggers who started this. But they have been enabled by the White House's failure to engage with progressives or attempt to enact progressive solutions, or progressive framing on the debate. In the end, the President signed off on a deal that gave the baggers 98% of what they wanted, and crashed our credit rating.
It's the revenues, stupid. (IMHO)
We need to get EVERY DEM on the committee to sign a pledge - if possible, a contract - that they will ALL VOTE TOGETHER.
The 'Cat Food Commission Extreme' AKA 'Super Committee' needs but a simple majority to pass whatever draconian budget cutting plan they come up with.
Let's face it, the R's strategy will be to peel ONE Dem committee member and have them vote with them on whatever evil plan they come up with.
They will do it by offering the Dem all kinds of incentives in the form of money and power.
If we can get them to ALL STICK TOGETHER, by signing a pledge or contract, then we can avoid this impending catastrophe.
It is the goal of the members of this committee to enact a budget that re-tax the wealthiest people and corporations at pre-Reagan levels, and to slash defense spending by 50%. Raising taxes on the wealthiest and cutting "Defense" spending are supported by a wide majority of not just Democrats, but the American people.
I pledge not to cut social services.
I pledge to allow the Bush tax cuts to expire.
I pledge to increase taxes on the wealthiest beyond allowing the Bush tax cuts to expire since they are the ones who can afford it.
I pledge to close loopholes on the wealthiest and the wealthiest corporations, not the middle class, to increase revenues.
I pledge to vote as a block with my fellow Democrats on the committee to achieve this goal. Failure to do so will considered an immediate resignation, and forfeiture of all benefits associated with having worked in the US Govt..
Or, similar (I'm just dashing this off before work)..... Or, at least - THEY SHOULD SIGN A PLEDGE TO VOTE AS A BLOCK, IMHO.
Then when the President has the proclivity to feel sorry for Congressional members because of their pledges, it can be for the Dems and not the Tea Party.
If we don't do something like this, what will be our guarantee that each individual will act in our best interest?
Look at it this way: us progessive persuaded half our party to vote against the bill and Obama, this
makes us almost as effective as Obama.
PLEASE Filibuster the debt bill.
It will instantly turn our unheard pleas into a shot heard round the world.
We can get our message out, and with it weild some real progressive power.
Progressive solutions are the best solutions for a free Democracy.
Just imagine, this would make our voice as loud as the billionaires tea party!
4 times as many Chinese as Americans - you do the math!
"Annual average income for employees in Shanghai reached around 65,000 CNY (10,000 USD) in year 2011. Average salary for software engineer/developer in China is around 100,000 CNY (15,400 USD). More experienced software senior developers receive around 150,000 CNY (25,000 USD) and more. " http://www.averagesalarysurvey.com/article...
"Standard & Poor’s, Moody’s Investors Service, and Fitch Ratings all have warned that failure to raise the debt ceiling would trigger a downgrade of US government debt. S&P in particular has raised the stakes, and quite publicly. The kind of short-term fix so popular in Washington — like the ones that are being bandied about as I write this — that raises the debt ceiling for six months or so, with maybe $1 trillion or so in spending cuts, may forestall a technical default, but still may result in a downgrade, S&P officials have said.
I’ll save who I think is primarily responsible for this mess for my political blog, but I will say this: You can kiss the AAA rating of US Treasury debt goodbye.
If a miracle happens, we may be able to forestall it for a while. But without a huge turnaround in Washington’s broken political culture, I don’t think this Congress and president will enact the dramatic changes S&P has strongly suggested are necessary for us to stay in the elite club of AAA-rated sovereigns.
They include Australia, Austria, Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Norway, Singapore, Sweden, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom."
Note that the countries that are AAA rated are the ones that spend THE MOST on social programs (http://bit.ly/oky3mD ), this makes the attack on social spending even more pathetic.
The ten most recent threads posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums.
DU 2 Still Exists
Hillary Clinton's Glass-Steagall
Who should Sanders choose for VP?
By No Elephants
Donated to Sanders
President Bernie Fucking Sanders, Baby!!!
O’Reilly’s trouble deepens: A Kennedy tall tale that could unravel Fox News’ bully
By Divine Discontent
Leonard Nimoy Tribute (1931 - 2015)
By Divine Discontent
The ten most recommended threads posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums in the last 24 hours.
Use the tools below to keep track of updates to this Journal.