Sunday, 4/14/13, Public Square



by | April 14, 2013 · 6:00 am

15 responses to “Sunday, 4/14/13, Public Square

  1. Wow, if only Ted Cruz were in the picture, it would be a trifecta of UnAmerican activities, no pun intended. Wish some of those ethics investigations against Bachman and now McConnell would stick. You know know they think rules are so for the little people. Ya know, little people like us.

    Laws for thee but not for me!

    • Huelskamp is as bad as anyone else.

      Does anyone remember a time when the collection of nutjobs actually holding elected office was higher? I think the republicans did a fine and dandy job of rounding them up in large numbers this time. Maybe they got a quantity discount?

      • True dat, Fnord, but my question is, how did they find all the bottom of the barrel dumb asses who voted these nutjobs into office? They did a great job of rounding up those low information voters!

      • I think that’s easily explained. Those low information voters have been voting for the little “R” without regard for anything else until it’s become an ingrained habit.

      • Girls – there is an abundance of assured-Republican voters in every single Corporate Mega Church – that is how these dumb asses got voted in..

  2. Wisdom from Robert Reich:

    “The biggest economic debate has been between Keynesians, who want more government spending and lower interest rates, and supply-side “austerics,” who want lower taxes on the wealthy and on corporations and who see government deficits crowding out private investment. We tried supply-side economics under George W. Bush and nothing trickled down, and austerity economics has been a disaster in Europe. Yet Keynesians don’t have a clear answer for how much spending is necessary in an economy, like ours, in which wages keep dropping and budget deficits keep growing. (In making the Bush tax cuts permanent for 98 percent of taxpayers, hiking Social Security taxes back up, and enacting the sequester, we’ve now adopted supply-side austerity.)

    Both sides neglect the scourge of widening inequality. When all of the economic gains go to the top, the rest don’t have enough purchasing power to keep the economy going. That’s exactly what’s been happening. Four years into a so-called recovery and we’re still below recession levels in every important respect except the stock market. A measly 88,000 jobs were created in March, and total employment remains some 3 million below its pre-recession level. Labor-force participation is it’s lowest since 1979. Retail sales are down, and production of consumer goods and factory output still below what they were in 2008.

    The underlying problem is real annual median household income keeps falling. It’s down to $45,018, from $51,144 in 2010. Meanwhile, all the gains from the recovery have gone to the top. Yet without a large and growing middle class, we can’t have a buoyant economy.”

    • You know, we’ve been saying this on our blog for a long time, like, oh, since it started. This recession is demand based, and the reason for the lack of demand is stagnation or even regression of wages due to income inequality and money flowing from bottom to top.

      I mean really, how many yachts does each billionaire need? However, give the money to middle and lower class consumers, and… bingo! It starts circulating and flowing again due to increased demand.

      It’s not rocket science. It’s not that we don’t know what the problem is. It’s just that the monied class owns our government and they refuse to acknowledge or fix the problem.

      • Oh so true, PP. I’ve been a bit pessimistic about the scope and length of time of any recovery from the “Great Recession” in the past, but now I’m greatly pessimistic about the same. For whatever reason, the austerity side has gained control of the debate in the industrialized world. Until the Keynesians can arrive at a number, things won’t change.

      • I remember when all this started and the PTB said they did not want a lost decade a la Japan. So… we’re five years into this and no end in sight. Hell, the way our ruling class governs and as stupid as the voters are, we could be looking at two lost decades.

        Keynesians will never arrive at a number. First of all, conditions change and economists love precision, something attainable only in academia and under contrived situations. Second, as much as most economists hate to admit it, economics should be called the dismal art, not the dismal science. It is as much art as science no matter how much math is employed.

      • Oh, I agree, PP, with all the points you raise. Thus, increased pessimism reigns.

        I’ve a long-held belief (35 years) that there was bound to be a “lost generation” regardless. I now hold the view that such will encompass two generations, at a minimum. Part of this flows from the actions of the PTB; the rest, from my view of a growing intellectual malaise which has overtaken the nation. Dunno; any way I cut it, examine it, etc., it sucks.