Which is precisely why common sense fixes will most likely never happen (or if they do only at a maximum of half measure) we need to stop it at the source (the corporations and the wealthy.)
Banning the taking of bribes would stop representatives from screwing their constituents in the first place. Citizens United is pure evil and anti Democratic!
Taking of bribes is banned, just not enforced. Having worked in Government agencies for 29 years and corporate America for 16, I can assure you I had to take classes on and swear to never take bribes, It is so bad that even buying a cup of coffee for an employee can cost them their job. BUT, when it comes to Congress (both houses) taking bribes is up to the 'Ethics' committees which frequently become blind, deaf, and dumb, especially if they get a cut.
Double hypocrisy that 'Ethics committees can take a cut to betray their own existence. Oxymoron moronic! they should lose their jobs! and do jail time and /or fines. the 'United states of corruption'!
I agree, but "that's politics today". It wasn't always like that, and some politicians still take their jobs seriously, my Congressman and one of my Senators (my other Senator needs to retire) are true to their oaths and their constituents. But trump really showed them how to lick the filth at the bottom of the barrel and still come out on top.
Fay, I can give you a list of House Democrats who were prosecuted for OGE violations and removed. Over time the regulations were relaxed as Citizens' United and like SCOTUS decisions legalized political contributions and lobbying rules were relaxed.
I lived in a fishbowl for 30 years where I had to report virtually every transaction and file reports, sometimes monthly.
I can also verify that the financial rules are strict for all federal judges, including the supreme court.
In the past several years many judges resigned in the face of investigations such as luminaries Alex Kosinski, who was chief judge of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals and Maryanne Barry, who happens to be Trump's sister.
I do not know why Kushner et ux, München, my former boss Elaine Chao and others who were being internally investigated were not prosecuted.
Laurie, their financial statements are public record.
There are several ongoing House ethics investigations, some for the equivalent of insider trading. I have been following the exploits of Mike Kelly, R. Pa. who represents my old home town. He, his wife, and his former chief of staff refused to testify before the House ethics committee about some financial transactions. Meanwhile I would hope that the FBI and the House 1/6 committee investigate all three of them re alleged participation on the insurrection planning. The Pittsburgh Post Gazette and other papers report that Kelly has implicated the former chief of staff as a participant in the insurrection conspiracy.
I also follow Mitch McConnell, accused of taking Russian money in the 2016 cycle, from Igor Derepaska, named in the Mueller Report. The Russian investigation is ongoing as yesterday, Justice charged Aleksandr Viktorovich Ionov, A Russian, with corrupting Americans going back as far as 2014. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/29/us/russian-indictment-florida.html
Thank you, Daniel. The treachery of these people who snooker our beloved western PA/eastern OH makes me physically ill. They then throw inflammatory religion on top. 98 days left as of today. Every vote counts.
Good overview and scope of situation with the official definition for inflation. So why do you not quit using the term? Clearly, as you point out, gouging is being used under the umbrella of term inflation. Close down your umbrella and put it away. Seems obvious then the methodology of using covid as cover to raise prices is illegibly - "deceptive practice" under a consumer protection act" is federal law.
As you might guess the States law usually covers commerce law. And as you might also guess the blue states do not have a law against price gouging but red states do. Here is the corporation loop hole - "Price gouging is illegal, and the Office of the Attorney General has authority to prosecute any business that engages in price gouging after a disaster has been declared by the governor or president." Did any president or governor declare covid as a disaster? No they declared a national emergency required for federal money to go to states.
So professor I suggest you change your language on this subject by removing all places using the 'inflation' word and replace with the 'legal price gouging'.
Do you suppose Biden, CNN, CSPAN etc will follow you led to encourage congress write a law specifically to remove the now "legal price gouging" laws currently on books. And you damn well know Robert if this little layman can figure this out then all of congress and the administration via their lawyers know there is no law against price gouging without a loop hole that in reality makes it quit legal in the US.
Just Disgusting this entire "diverse' administration has shown on each and every gimmick via show boating and spinning the words on the propaganda machine - CNN, CSPAN, NRP, FOX, etc.
I can't see why all that isn't the centerpiece of the campaigns of every Democrat up for election in November. I'm wondering if we shouldn't all forward this economic update essay to the DNC, using appropriately insistent language to make it the centerpiece of their November platform. Someone got a good email contact address where someone will actually see all those forwarded essays? Implementing it will require the Democratic horsepower in Congress to implement it. It's >not at all< difficult to understand why it's so hard to implement.
OK. Manchin and Sinema are old news. Who else? I see a lot vague references to Congressional Democrats "on the take." Who are they? Seems like someone could pin down a list of the a$$holes to be primaried and dumped. Who are they? We could do an irate email campaign with all of them if we know who they are and the best email addresses to castigate them!
DZK ; Good idea to identify them. But there is nothing wrong with putting Manchin's and Synema's feet to the fire in the meantime. Use them as an example. "We need them!" some will say. Like hemorrhoids!
There are no shortages of gas or other products. No gas station is posting, “Sorry, we’re out of gas”. America gets little from Russia. Enough with the supply chain baloney. The high prices are being caused by corporate greed and price controls are needed to lower the prices.
The US gets 3% of its gasoline from Russian petroleum. That would have led to a rise in price of maximum (!) 5% at the pump here. All that's happening here is uncontrolled, unbridled greed—stuffing the pockets of the super-rich at the expense of the rest of us. And, as far as the rich are concerned, the rest of us can be damned.
The KEY word YOU mention is "competition." There is no competition if four or five large corporations control the market and are satisfied to agree on price hikes to keep these corporations and their CEOs "fat and happy." And, NO, I am NOT playing any kind of "victim card," simply agreeing with Prof. Reich.
When you try to argue an overly-broad postulate, you get nothing but nonsense out. Saying that Profit is Good is like saying Fire is Good, and it is, except when it is bad. Light - good! You are anti-Light. BAD!
Hugging "the market" or scoffing at "the market" is just proclaiming a personal shibboleth. Go right ahead.
Perhaps you ought to consider - corporations which serve worthy purposes are good, and corporations which serve nefarious purposes are bad. That's STILL overly-broad, but it's closer to the real question.
Real conservatives don’t say such things. Cartels collapse from the edges, they say, undermined by independents in the market. Gouging is good, they say, as it preserves supply and allows price to freewheel, preventing supply distortion. Jeez, ain’t you got the book? MAGA-muffins ain’t got no economic knowledge. They just worship CarrotTop.
EXCEPT no. Wrong-o. Biden is not responsible for the increase in the price of oil. The accelerating economic recovery is. At least to real conservatives. Didn't you notice that when COVID hit and travel was down, the price of gasoline went DOWN? Remember? And now that travel is UP, the price of gasoline went UP! That's well, free enterprise, right Republicans? Your explanation makes as much no-sense as that it's because Joe Biden is a Scorpio, whereas Trump was a Gemini.
[Scorpios are extremely deep and emotional people, and are intense in all things they do, sometimes harsh and decisive. They are single-minded in achieving their goals, and they set those goals high. Scorpios don't see or set limits in their lives, and they don't let anyone tell them that something they want isn't possible.] I mean, how true of Trump...wait, that's Biden.
Blaming the market on the President, at least for people with a smidgen of knowledge about the free market, is about as reliable as astrology.
And "fracking like mad" has been there, done that. The reserves of profitable shale oil have been stripped out a few years ago. The only thing that's supporting "fracking like mad" is the increase in the PRICE OF OIL. If you think Biden did it, well, you can frack yourself. If you trust the guy who charged a 30% import fee on Chinese goods and "unfreezed" the fee for special friends, well, you're a sucker in the book of Atlas Shrugged.
Energy companies should be made to clean up their messes. They are still problems from the Exxon-Valdez “accident” years ago. The biggest problems of all in the Gulf of Mexico haven’t even been addressed. They should be made to clean up all the messes they have made and the new windfall profits tax should be implemented to ensure the citizens don’t have to clean up after them anymore.
Jul 30, 2022·edited Jul 30, 2022Liked by Robert Reich
What's wrong with the economy (definition not provided) shrinking? Does that mean that fewer people are buying plastic disposable stuff? It certainly doesn't mean that fossil fuel corporations, Big Ag, etc. are losing money, or that their shareholders are suffering. Our portfolio has lost a bunch of money because we specifically exclude weapons, Big Ag, Fossil Fuels, etc. So is the planet better off if the economy is shrinking? Does it mean fewer Amazon forests are being cut? What on earth does it mean in terms of greenhouse gas emissions? Does it mean corporations start laying people off with the excuse "reduced demand?" We all call BS on that one. Corporations lay people off when they effing feel like it. The thing is, right now we need a new economic model based on the elementary understanding that The Planet Is Finite. The Atmosphere Is Finite. We can't provide all the Californians who want more houses with more water. You can stay in California, suffer, and die, or you can leave California. It can't be fixed. Whether the economy shrinks or grows.
Yes it can be fixed. The way we transport our selves and the materials we use to consume products can consume far less with the same results. Cars today are better than they were 30yrs ago and use far fewer natural resources.
It takes innovation. And as long as companies are allowed to form monopolies and then plow profits into share buy backs then the innovation will not happen. Tax policy can fix this, even here in California...
Oh goodness. We should take away the government incentives given to the oil companies and put it back into the economy some how. There is an unbalance in the US of what is good for the country and its people and what is good for those at the top...This is sad news Robert, but much needed. Thank you.
We certainly should, starting with the oil depletion allowances. We just need to weed the greedy out of both Houses of Congress. With too many voters using their 'enemies' and 'authoritarian leanings', that is a stiff uphill battle. (I'm not letting Democrats off the hook, some of them in Congress are as greedy as the retrumplicans, and some of our voters vote on the best looking candidate too).
But party loyalty only goes so far. Even democrats are beneficiaries of corporate largesse and influence. We really need a groundswell of support for a third party that reflects the Peoples’ interest but we live in the United $tate$ of America.
Don, I don’t get how our nation has persisted with two parties. It would be like being limited to two auto manufacturers, two hamburger chains, two radio syndicates, two home styles….but when it comes to the most significant decisions that affect our lives and our futures we are viably limited to two choices.
We have the progressives who are almost their own party. If the establishment is afraid of them, there is a reason. They will be popular if they can get things done that people,(humans) want. Look out!, stick in the mud Dems! You can be primaried some election cycle.
Supporting wage increases are not the answer. It is without a doubt curbing the obscene profits that are made by our large corporations at the EXPENSE of the working men and women. On top of these unfair profits they are exempt from paying certain taxes, added to that they are offered INCENTIVES
from our very stupid Government (and I mean both dominant party's) like grants to expand, that they do not pay back. You may be fighting for $15 an hour, but next year you will find yourselves needing $25 per hour, just to keep food on the table. Under these conditions the spiral will continue upward as it has for decades. When a large corporation is forced to pay higher wages, they just raise the price of their commodity to the consumer who winds up paying for their own increase. It cost the corporation nothing in the end. Allan Weiss
Sadly your economics on increasing min wage has been proven wrong by Nobel Prize winning economist Andy Card and his former research partner at Princeton the late Alan Kreuger. Card won the Nobel prize this year because he was one of the first to use empirical research 30yrs ago and even after numerous studies since then the research stands directionally correct.
The data is very clear right now. Increasing min wage in the area of $15 to $25 is extremely healthy for the economy and it prevents the Federal Reserve from slashing wages when it boosts interest rates.
Oh, and the majority of RED and BLUe votrs support such policies..
On the contrary my friend. Look at where we are now with a rapidly decreasing "Middle Class."
Part of that happened because we listened to self made "economic soothsayers" of thirty years ago. I am a successful retired businessman who manufactured and imported for more than 30 years. I speak from hands on experience. What you call "directionally correct" is the direction that brought us to where we are presently, the place that is best for us according to past economists? I think not. We are heading in a direction that can only bring hardship for the masses, and greater wealth to those that control the markets. AW
I think that modification of the minimum wage is a good example of worsening the risk of damage by unanticipated consequences to many, when one tinkers with the economy. Companies which are most affected by changes in the minimum wage are small companies hiring lower-skilled workers. These companies are often local, and more likely to be part of the community. And they are much more likely to be profoundly affected by minimum wage change than the giant corporations.
I do not hold out much hope for fixes which involve the internal workings of how businesses do business, for the reason that the gigantic corporations can ride through big storms that put little businesses out of operation. We need to stop tilting the playing field to benefit big corporations, and instead make them all play by the same rules. Now, there are thousands upon thousands of "zombie corporations" that do nothing, but survive on the meager cost associated with borrowing. They are living above their means as corporations - they are massively unprofitable. We should let them sink. But the owners do not want that, and the government sets the cost of corporate lending so that the zombies can zombie on.
Just because a fix is constructed with righteous intent does not mean that it might be used by the unethical for wrongful purposes.
Similarly, I do believe that some degree of this period of inflation comes from re-engaging the supply chains. When you start a freight train up from a stop, there is plenty of slack in the couplings, which leads to a lot of back-and-forth banging around while you try to get all the cars going smoothly. That's reasonable economic inflation.
So, how did the end-user (consumer) get subjected to all the winds of change, but the giant corporations aren't being banged around by inflation? Simple. Socialism for corporations, free enterprise for the schmucks. Those who wear the admiral's whites command toy boats in a protected pond. We're the ones being hammered. Put the corporations out to sea, make them subject to the free market!
Rather than talking about manipulating the corporations, I propose that a margin, say $10,000 be placed upon all income, and the first $10,000 a year are protected from any state or local tax, FICA or social security - just subtracted off the end of the year's wages. The first ten grand goes to the worker as cash. Make it part of the IRS income tax as a rebate, so people can't cherry-pick from several jobs.
And elect a Congress with enough spine to decrease our military spending. Make the Iron Triangle subject to the same whims and vagaries that Mom and Pop's shop have to endure.
I agree with a lot of your post, your second paragraph, for instance makes a lot of sense. I absolutely agree that the only ones really benefiting from 'Socialism' are Big Oil, Big Agriculture, Big Pharma, etc. Letting the corporation face 'True Free Markets' would certainly help. I also like your tax suggestions BUT in most regions of the US $10,000 is so far below the poverty level they would be entitled to Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) Make it $30,000 and you'd be closer. But we also need a minimum tax payment based on gross income of at least 20% as it is too many billionaires pay ZERO in Federal and State income taxes. And some corporations pay little or no property or sales tax either
Once again many politicians and political pundits use consumers and workers as a scapegoat instead of addressing the real cause of high prices. This has become increasingly apparent since the Supreme Court ruling on "Citizens United" which opened the floodgates to corporate money. Politician's no longer work for the people, they work for the corporations who pad their pockets. Stop that flood of those donations and watch how quickly they'll be bending over backwards to pass bills that American support.
Yeah, those $600 checks two years ago and $0.50 raises for workers are causing inflation. Sho' `nuff. But not $3 trillion from the Fed to bail out the stock market, $1 trillion in corporate buybacks, and 1,322% increase in corporate CEO compensation since 1978 - lawsy, no, them thangs ain't causing inflation. Nosiree Bob!
"Bolder antitrust enforcement – even the threat to block mergers and break up giant companies – could also reduce their ardor to raise prices."
Agree, mergers should be broken up for the sake of the free market.
Tax the corporations, tax the wealthy. Allow the middle class to have more money to spend on consumables. This will reduce inflation over time, by reducing demand, and will be good overall for the GDP (as well as the factory owners).
FOX NEWS ALERT: Higher taxes will increase inflation.
And for God's sake, draft Elizabeth Warren in 2024 She knows how the game works. It will work to the benefit of all if they just take out the crony shims and fixes built into the system.
Congress and the Fed helping the worker? Never as business funds them. The SC has just about always favored corporations over workers. It is a stacked deck and besides, it is easier to raise interest rates than to curb business profits.
How do "we" do this in a political culture that characterizes Democrats as "Left" and current Republicans as "Conservatives"? I stopped listening to KALW's "Left, Right, and Center" last weekend when they announced that the spokesperson for the Left was a Hillary Clinton person—the program maybe should be renamed "Right, Right, and Righter."
More to the point, how do "we" promote policies that will redress the extreme wealth differential that is gouging or ignoring the majority of Americans?
What I have seen in the USA the past 40 years is the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. The middle class is no more. There is not going back now. Welcome to World Economic Forum started in 1971. The Forum suggests that a globalized world is best managed by a self-selected coalition of multinational corporations, governments and civil society organization. There is more going on around the world that affects everything happening in America, our politics and our communities. Citizens and politicians are ants on a hill running around in the dirt. When we truly understand what is happening to our planet we should then be looking at the bigger picture. This recession in the USA will last once again, for awhile, no matter what we say or do. Everyone stay happy and healthy. Thanks to Robert and all for caring to share your thoughts.
Interesting article. I wonder is there any movement to induce the president to do something about the price gouging going on especially in the oil corporations.
I do believe price controls and anti-monopoly enforcement will help control inflation. But we also need to attack the root cause of the problem, the extreme wealth of individuals (After all corporations are people - right?). Their income tax should increase when the well being of the mass of the people is not doing well.
This is simple common sense. I don't understand why it's so hard to implement (aside from the fact that corporations control our government).
Which is precisely why common sense fixes will most likely never happen (or if they do only at a maximum of half measure) we need to stop it at the source (the corporations and the wealthy.)
Banning the taking of bribes would stop representatives from screwing their constituents in the first place. Citizens United is pure evil and anti Democratic!
Taking of bribes is banned, just not enforced. Having worked in Government agencies for 29 years and corporate America for 16, I can assure you I had to take classes on and swear to never take bribes, It is so bad that even buying a cup of coffee for an employee can cost them their job. BUT, when it comes to Congress (both houses) taking bribes is up to the 'Ethics' committees which frequently become blind, deaf, and dumb, especially if they get a cut.
Double hypocrisy that 'Ethics committees can take a cut to betray their own existence. Oxymoron moronic! they should lose their jobs! and do jail time and /or fines. the 'United states of corruption'!
I agree, but "that's politics today". It wasn't always like that, and some politicians still take their jobs seriously, my Congressman and one of my Senators (my other Senator needs to retire) are true to their oaths and their constituents. But trump really showed them how to lick the filth at the bottom of the barrel and still come out on top.
Fay, I can give you a list of House Democrats who were prosecuted for OGE violations and removed. Over time the regulations were relaxed as Citizens' United and like SCOTUS decisions legalized political contributions and lobbying rules were relaxed.
I lived in a fishbowl for 30 years where I had to report virtually every transaction and file reports, sometimes monthly.
I can also verify that the financial rules are strict for all federal judges, including the supreme court.
In the past several years many judges resigned in the face of investigations such as luminaries Alex Kosinski, who was chief judge of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals and Maryanne Barry, who happens to be Trump's sister.
I do not know why Kushner et ux, München, my former boss Elaine Chao and others who were being internally investigated were not prosecuted.
On top of what? Old Smoky? ; A pile of $#it?
Yes. And if we can enlarge SCOTUS (probably the most efficient way to effect reforms) that should be the first order of business for a new court.
On the other hand, both Thomas and Alito (after his recent public admission) should be impeachable.
I agree that impeachment should be pushed for!
Agreed, but how?
Fay Reid ; Naming names may be effective. It seems to have made a difference recently with a certain senator.
Laurie, their financial statements are public record.
There are several ongoing House ethics investigations, some for the equivalent of insider trading. I have been following the exploits of Mike Kelly, R. Pa. who represents my old home town. He, his wife, and his former chief of staff refused to testify before the House ethics committee about some financial transactions. Meanwhile I would hope that the FBI and the House 1/6 committee investigate all three of them re alleged participation on the insurrection planning. The Pittsburgh Post Gazette and other papers report that Kelly has implicated the former chief of staff as a participant in the insurrection conspiracy.
I also follow Mitch McConnell, accused of taking Russian money in the 2016 cycle, from Igor Derepaska, named in the Mueller Report. The Russian investigation is ongoing as yesterday, Justice charged Aleksandr Viktorovich Ionov, A Russian, with corrupting Americans going back as far as 2014. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/29/us/russian-indictment-florida.html
Thank you, Daniel. The treachery of these people who snooker our beloved western PA/eastern OH makes me physically ill. They then throw inflammatory religion on top. 98 days left as of today. Every vote counts.
Daniel Solomon ; All good information! Thanks Daniel!
Good overview and scope of situation with the official definition for inflation. So why do you not quit using the term? Clearly, as you point out, gouging is being used under the umbrella of term inflation. Close down your umbrella and put it away. Seems obvious then the methodology of using covid as cover to raise prices is illegibly - "deceptive practice" under a consumer protection act" is federal law.
As you might guess the States law usually covers commerce law. And as you might also guess the blue states do not have a law against price gouging but red states do. Here is the corporation loop hole - "Price gouging is illegal, and the Office of the Attorney General has authority to prosecute any business that engages in price gouging after a disaster has been declared by the governor or president." Did any president or governor declare covid as a disaster? No they declared a national emergency required for federal money to go to states.
So professor I suggest you change your language on this subject by removing all places using the 'inflation' word and replace with the 'legal price gouging'.
Do you suppose Biden, CNN, CSPAN etc will follow you led to encourage congress write a law specifically to remove the now "legal price gouging" laws currently on books. And you damn well know Robert if this little layman can figure this out then all of congress and the administration via their lawyers know there is no law against price gouging without a loop hole that in reality makes it quit legal in the US.
Just Disgusting this entire "diverse' administration has shown on each and every gimmick via show boating and spinning the words on the propaganda machine - CNN, CSPAN, NRP, FOX, etc.
I can't see why all that isn't the centerpiece of the campaigns of every Democrat up for election in November. I'm wondering if we shouldn't all forward this economic update essay to the DNC, using appropriately insistent language to make it the centerpiece of their November platform. Someone got a good email contact address where someone will actually see all those forwarded essays? Implementing it will require the Democratic horsepower in Congress to implement it. It's >not at all< difficult to understand why it's so hard to implement.
DZK ; There are those members who are taking money/bribes from those who fleece us, thereby becoming complicit with the bad guys.
OK. Manchin and Sinema are old news. Who else? I see a lot vague references to Congressional Democrats "on the take." Who are they? Seems like someone could pin down a list of the a$$holes to be primaried and dumped. Who are they? We could do an irate email campaign with all of them if we know who they are and the best email addresses to castigate them!
DZK ; Good idea to identify them. But there is nothing wrong with putting Manchin's and Synema's feet to the fire in the meantime. Use them as an example. "We need them!" some will say. Like hemorrhoids!
This is why:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/us-policy/2022/07/28/manchin-schumer-climate-deal/?itid=hp-top-table-main-t-2
Paula, you’ve answered your own question.
There are no shortages of gas or other products. No gas station is posting, “Sorry, we’re out of gas”. America gets little from Russia. Enough with the supply chain baloney. The high prices are being caused by corporate greed and price controls are needed to lower the prices.
The US gets 3% of its gasoline from Russian petroleum. That would have led to a rise in price of maximum (!) 5% at the pump here. All that's happening here is uncontrolled, unbridled greed—stuffing the pockets of the super-rich at the expense of the rest of us. And, as far as the rich are concerned, the rest of us can be damned.
The KEY word YOU mention is "competition." There is no competition if four or five large corporations control the market and are satisfied to agree on price hikes to keep these corporations and their CEOs "fat and happy." And, NO, I am NOT playing any kind of "victim card," simply agreeing with Prof. Reich.
When you try to argue an overly-broad postulate, you get nothing but nonsense out. Saying that Profit is Good is like saying Fire is Good, and it is, except when it is bad. Light - good! You are anti-Light. BAD!
Hugging "the market" or scoffing at "the market" is just proclaiming a personal shibboleth. Go right ahead.
Perhaps you ought to consider - corporations which serve worthy purposes are good, and corporations which serve nefarious purposes are bad. That's STILL overly-broad, but it's closer to the real question.
Also time to cut oil subsidies. (And tax the NFL!)
Real conservatives don’t say such things. Cartels collapse from the edges, they say, undermined by independents in the market. Gouging is good, they say, as it preserves supply and allows price to freewheel, preventing supply distortion. Jeez, ain’t you got the book? MAGA-muffins ain’t got no economic knowledge. They just worship CarrotTop.
EXCEPT no. Wrong-o. Biden is not responsible for the increase in the price of oil. The accelerating economic recovery is. At least to real conservatives. Didn't you notice that when COVID hit and travel was down, the price of gasoline went DOWN? Remember? And now that travel is UP, the price of gasoline went UP! That's well, free enterprise, right Republicans? Your explanation makes as much no-sense as that it's because Joe Biden is a Scorpio, whereas Trump was a Gemini.
[Scorpios are extremely deep and emotional people, and are intense in all things they do, sometimes harsh and decisive. They are single-minded in achieving their goals, and they set those goals high. Scorpios don't see or set limits in their lives, and they don't let anyone tell them that something they want isn't possible.] I mean, how true of Trump...wait, that's Biden.
Blaming the market on the President, at least for people with a smidgen of knowledge about the free market, is about as reliable as astrology.
And "fracking like mad" has been there, done that. The reserves of profitable shale oil have been stripped out a few years ago. The only thing that's supporting "fracking like mad" is the increase in the PRICE OF OIL. If you think Biden did it, well, you can frack yourself. If you trust the guy who charged a 30% import fee on Chinese goods and "unfreezed" the fee for special friends, well, you're a sucker in the book of Atlas Shrugged.
Energy companies should be made to clean up their messes. They are still problems from the Exxon-Valdez “accident” years ago. The biggest problems of all in the Gulf of Mexico haven’t even been addressed. They should be made to clean up all the messes they have made and the new windfall profits tax should be implemented to ensure the citizens don’t have to clean up after them anymore.
What's wrong with the economy (definition not provided) shrinking? Does that mean that fewer people are buying plastic disposable stuff? It certainly doesn't mean that fossil fuel corporations, Big Ag, etc. are losing money, or that their shareholders are suffering. Our portfolio has lost a bunch of money because we specifically exclude weapons, Big Ag, Fossil Fuels, etc. So is the planet better off if the economy is shrinking? Does it mean fewer Amazon forests are being cut? What on earth does it mean in terms of greenhouse gas emissions? Does it mean corporations start laying people off with the excuse "reduced demand?" We all call BS on that one. Corporations lay people off when they effing feel like it. The thing is, right now we need a new economic model based on the elementary understanding that The Planet Is Finite. The Atmosphere Is Finite. We can't provide all the Californians who want more houses with more water. You can stay in California, suffer, and die, or you can leave California. It can't be fixed. Whether the economy shrinks or grows.
MT
Yes it can be fixed. The way we transport our selves and the materials we use to consume products can consume far less with the same results. Cars today are better than they were 30yrs ago and use far fewer natural resources.
It takes innovation. And as long as companies are allowed to form monopolies and then plow profits into share buy backs then the innovation will not happen. Tax policy can fix this, even here in California...
What's your time line? Because we don't have ten years, eh?
Oh goodness. We should take away the government incentives given to the oil companies and put it back into the economy some how. There is an unbalance in the US of what is good for the country and its people and what is good for those at the top...This is sad news Robert, but much needed. Thank you.
We certainly should, starting with the oil depletion allowances. We just need to weed the greedy out of both Houses of Congress. With too many voters using their 'enemies' and 'authoritarian leanings', that is a stiff uphill battle. (I'm not letting Democrats off the hook, some of them in Congress are as greedy as the retrumplicans, and some of our voters vote on the best looking candidate too).
VOTE!
D = What People Need
R = Corporate Greed
Yes, Vote!
But party loyalty only goes so far. Even democrats are beneficiaries of corporate largesse and influence. We really need a groundswell of support for a third party that reflects the Peoples’ interest but we live in the United $tate$ of America.
3rd party would work only if we have national ranked-choice voting, guaranteeing the winner has gotten over 50% of people's first or second choice.
Don, I don’t get how our nation has persisted with two parties. It would be like being limited to two auto manufacturers, two hamburger chains, two radio syndicates, two home styles….but when it comes to the most significant decisions that affect our lives and our futures we are viably limited to two choices.
Agreed, but why should anyone represent us with less than 50% of the vote?
I would concede your point if I thought that even now with more than 50%—we were represented.
Washington and Madison warned us!
We have the progressives who are almost their own party. If the establishment is afraid of them, there is a reason. They will be popular if they can get things done that people,(humans) want. Look out!, stick in the mud Dems! You can be primaried some election cycle.
Supporting wage increases are not the answer. It is without a doubt curbing the obscene profits that are made by our large corporations at the EXPENSE of the working men and women. On top of these unfair profits they are exempt from paying certain taxes, added to that they are offered INCENTIVES
from our very stupid Government (and I mean both dominant party's) like grants to expand, that they do not pay back. You may be fighting for $15 an hour, but next year you will find yourselves needing $25 per hour, just to keep food on the table. Under these conditions the spiral will continue upward as it has for decades. When a large corporation is forced to pay higher wages, they just raise the price of their commodity to the consumer who winds up paying for their own increase. It cost the corporation nothing in the end. Allan Weiss
AW
Sadly your economics on increasing min wage has been proven wrong by Nobel Prize winning economist Andy Card and his former research partner at Princeton the late Alan Kreuger. Card won the Nobel prize this year because he was one of the first to use empirical research 30yrs ago and even after numerous studies since then the research stands directionally correct.
The data is very clear right now. Increasing min wage in the area of $15 to $25 is extremely healthy for the economy and it prevents the Federal Reserve from slashing wages when it boosts interest rates.
Oh, and the majority of RED and BLUe votrs support such policies..
On the contrary my friend. Look at where we are now with a rapidly decreasing "Middle Class."
Part of that happened because we listened to self made "economic soothsayers" of thirty years ago. I am a successful retired businessman who manufactured and imported for more than 30 years. I speak from hands on experience. What you call "directionally correct" is the direction that brought us to where we are presently, the place that is best for us according to past economists? I think not. We are heading in a direction that can only bring hardship for the masses, and greater wealth to those that control the markets. AW
I think that modification of the minimum wage is a good example of worsening the risk of damage by unanticipated consequences to many, when one tinkers with the economy. Companies which are most affected by changes in the minimum wage are small companies hiring lower-skilled workers. These companies are often local, and more likely to be part of the community. And they are much more likely to be profoundly affected by minimum wage change than the giant corporations.
I do not hold out much hope for fixes which involve the internal workings of how businesses do business, for the reason that the gigantic corporations can ride through big storms that put little businesses out of operation. We need to stop tilting the playing field to benefit big corporations, and instead make them all play by the same rules. Now, there are thousands upon thousands of "zombie corporations" that do nothing, but survive on the meager cost associated with borrowing. They are living above their means as corporations - they are massively unprofitable. We should let them sink. But the owners do not want that, and the government sets the cost of corporate lending so that the zombies can zombie on.
Just because a fix is constructed with righteous intent does not mean that it might be used by the unethical for wrongful purposes.
Similarly, I do believe that some degree of this period of inflation comes from re-engaging the supply chains. When you start a freight train up from a stop, there is plenty of slack in the couplings, which leads to a lot of back-and-forth banging around while you try to get all the cars going smoothly. That's reasonable economic inflation.
So, how did the end-user (consumer) get subjected to all the winds of change, but the giant corporations aren't being banged around by inflation? Simple. Socialism for corporations, free enterprise for the schmucks. Those who wear the admiral's whites command toy boats in a protected pond. We're the ones being hammered. Put the corporations out to sea, make them subject to the free market!
Rather than talking about manipulating the corporations, I propose that a margin, say $10,000 be placed upon all income, and the first $10,000 a year are protected from any state or local tax, FICA or social security - just subtracted off the end of the year's wages. The first ten grand goes to the worker as cash. Make it part of the IRS income tax as a rebate, so people can't cherry-pick from several jobs.
And elect a Congress with enough spine to decrease our military spending. Make the Iron Triangle subject to the same whims and vagaries that Mom and Pop's shop have to endure.
I agree with a lot of your post, your second paragraph, for instance makes a lot of sense. I absolutely agree that the only ones really benefiting from 'Socialism' are Big Oil, Big Agriculture, Big Pharma, etc. Letting the corporation face 'True Free Markets' would certainly help. I also like your tax suggestions BUT in most regions of the US $10,000 is so far below the poverty level they would be entitled to Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) Make it $30,000 and you'd be closer. But we also need a minimum tax payment based on gross income of at least 20% as it is too many billionaires pay ZERO in Federal and State income taxes. And some corporations pay little or no property or sales tax either
I'm easy on the amount. Someone making the first 30 grand and KEEPING the whole thirty grand... s'cool. Save the people, harsh on the corporates.
Once again many politicians and political pundits use consumers and workers as a scapegoat instead of addressing the real cause of high prices. This has become increasingly apparent since the Supreme Court ruling on "Citizens United" which opened the floodgates to corporate money. Politician's no longer work for the people, they work for the corporations who pad their pockets. Stop that flood of those donations and watch how quickly they'll be bending over backwards to pass bills that American support.
It's all about greed. Until they are hit hard in the pocket they will continue to get away with it. Shame on Democrats for letting them.
Yeah, those $600 checks two years ago and $0.50 raises for workers are causing inflation. Sho' `nuff. But not $3 trillion from the Fed to bail out the stock market, $1 trillion in corporate buybacks, and 1,322% increase in corporate CEO compensation since 1978 - lawsy, no, them thangs ain't causing inflation. Nosiree Bob!
"Bolder antitrust enforcement – even the threat to block mergers and break up giant companies – could also reduce their ardor to raise prices."
Agree, mergers should be broken up for the sake of the free market.
Tax the corporations, tax the wealthy. Allow the middle class to have more money to spend on consumables. This will reduce inflation over time, by reducing demand, and will be good overall for the GDP (as well as the factory owners).
FOX NEWS ALERT: Higher taxes will increase inflation.
Bullshit.
And for God's sake, draft Elizabeth Warren in 2024 She knows how the game works. It will work to the benefit of all if they just take out the crony shims and fixes built into the system.
Congress and the Fed helping the worker? Never as business funds them. The SC has just about always favored corporations over workers. It is a stacked deck and besides, it is easier to raise interest rates than to curb business profits.
Yes, yes, and yes.
How do "we" do this in a political culture that characterizes Democrats as "Left" and current Republicans as "Conservatives"? I stopped listening to KALW's "Left, Right, and Center" last weekend when they announced that the spokesperson for the Left was a Hillary Clinton person—the program maybe should be renamed "Right, Right, and Righter."
More to the point, how do "we" promote policies that will redress the extreme wealth differential that is gouging or ignoring the majority of Americans?
What I have seen in the USA the past 40 years is the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. The middle class is no more. There is not going back now. Welcome to World Economic Forum started in 1971. The Forum suggests that a globalized world is best managed by a self-selected coalition of multinational corporations, governments and civil society organization. There is more going on around the world that affects everything happening in America, our politics and our communities. Citizens and politicians are ants on a hill running around in the dirt. When we truly understand what is happening to our planet we should then be looking at the bigger picture. This recession in the USA will last once again, for awhile, no matter what we say or do. Everyone stay happy and healthy. Thanks to Robert and all for caring to share your thoughts.
Interesting article. I wonder is there any movement to induce the president to do something about the price gouging going on especially in the oil corporations.
I do believe price controls and anti-monopoly enforcement will help control inflation. But we also need to attack the root cause of the problem, the extreme wealth of individuals (After all corporations are people - right?). Their income tax should increase when the well being of the mass of the people is not doing well.
Indeed.........something that this article discusses as well...........https://www.counterpunch.org/2022/08/01/to-reduce-inflation-control-corporate-profits/