$46 Trillion Mostly Held by the Top One-Tenth of One Percent of Americans

“The American oligarchy spares no pains in promoting the belief that it does not exist, but the success of its disappearing act depends on equally strenuous efforts on the part of an American public anxious to believe in egalitarian fictions and unwilling to see what is hidden in plain sight.”– Michael Lind

In total, US millionaire households have at least $45.9 trillion in wealth, the majority of this wealth is held within the upper 0.1% of the 1% population according to the report by David DeGraw, Analysis of Financial Terror. Meanwhile an astounding 62 million Americans have a zero net worth, and 68.3 million Americans struggle to put food on their table. That's right, the very same people, the top one-tenth of one percenters, 300,000 out of 300 million people, essentially responsible for the devastating economic damage to the US,whilst benefiting greatly, have almost $46 trillion in wealth. Remember, $1 trillion is equal to $1000 billion! Imagine, what $46 trillion can do for you.

And unlike those in the lower half of the top 1%, the top 0.1%--not to mention, the 99.9%--can often borrow as much as they want at very nearly 0% interest, keep profits and production offshore, store personal assets in tax havens, ride out down markets and economies, and greatly influence legislation in the US. They have access to the best of the best in accounting firms, attorneys, consultants, private wealth managers, and access to a network of other wealthy and powerful friends, lucrative business opportunities, and on and on and on...

However, thanks to the absence of reporting and/or the reporting of outright lies on this issue by the mainstream media--despite growing financial hardship--most of us are left to believe the rest of the nation is coming out of this financial crisis and getting back on their feet. Add to that, statistics based on rather primitive and outdated poverty/unemployment measures. Although, all one has to do is drive around and see  the empty storefronts that line the streets of the wealthiest nation in the world.

The following excerpts come from  Michiganjf and Jon who commented on the show The End Of Middle Class Neighborhoods? on On Point with Tom Ashbrook. 

"Well, 30 years of Reaganomics and the Republican Revolution has allowed the super-wealthy to "trickle down" on the heads of the middle class and the poor in America... allow the wealthiest 1% to squeeze every penny they can out of the middle-class (those who actually spread money throughout the economy and kept it thriving for so long), and of course it eventually leads to the demise of once healthy middle-class neighborhoods!

Just check out On Points recent show on "Dirty Politics and Big Money" for an idea of the ways in which "The Club for the Rich" rigs the game for their own private and exclusive benefit, bestowing temporary Visas into the Land of the Wealthy unto politicians who "play ball" by the Club Rules.

The wealth, savings, and homes of the middle-class are fodder for the super-wealthy to milk at will:

• The market goes down, the wealthy make a bundle while the rest of America gets wiped out
• The market goes up, the wealthy make 99% of the profit
• The middle class saves money, the wealthy use institutionalized gambling to leverage those savings at absurd risk for their own gain, hedging their leverage for their own gain if the poor suckers' savings get wiped out
• Got a good job? Wait a while... the wealthy will see that your employer is liquidated for a nice tax write-off; or maybe they'll restructure and send your job off to China to improve the value of their executive preferred stock options
• Need cheap gas or food to make ends meet? Well, a nicely cornered commodity and some specualtive maneuvering will see to it that oil gets a $30 jump to makes someone billions almost overnight; or perhaps wheat, or corn, or pork
• You'd like to see that decaying bridge fixed so you don't end up having to add an hour to your commute? Well, Government's broke because the wealthy needed another tax cut... or perhaps a few million tossed by industry lobbyists saw to it that those infrastructure dollars were spent on corporate subsidies instead.
• Start a brilliant business and now want to take it public? Well, you'll get in on the IPO, of course... but the rest of the IPO stock needs to be reserved for the bank's "more deserving clients..." we don't want just anybody in on this money-maker, do we?

... But Hey, let's protect those tax cuts for the wealthiest 1% who milk the rest... even if not compromising means giving up the 4 trillion in deficit reduction the Dems and the Prez offered up in exchange,
[...]
Then you wouldn't be an industry lobbyist looking for corporate subsidies at the expense of infrastructure development! Good, successful programs start to suffer at the hands of the Mismanagement Kings who would rather see taxpayer dollars go to corporate welfare, tax breaks for those who don't need them, and the military-industrial complex... after all, why spend the money on Government programs that work well for 99% of Americans."

and from Jon:

"I'm an Electrical Engineer with a Masters Degree in Biomedical Engineering. I'm 57 and was layed off two years ago when the business I was associated with went under. At my age (ageism is accepted in our sociaty) I've given up after 100+ resumes. Luckly my wife is a tenured academinc, otherwise our situation would have been quite serious. Yes we are still middle class, however if the situation was a little different we would have been catapolted into the growing ranks of the distressed. I'm now doing furniture and cabinet work that grew out of what was a hobby. I've gone from being saleried to hourly and although I own my own buisness, my revenue is joined to the hip of the failing economy. Our income was cut by more than half and I feel like the very fabric of what made this country great is being torn apart.

Not only have our values been turned upside down, exalting greed and technology to the level of god, we no longer create value. Manufacturing and even services are increasingly chase cheap labor all over the world. At the same time institutionalized gambling--the stock/bond/derivative markets--has taken over, creating nothing, or counterfeit "value". The jobs have been shipped overseas, or "in-sourced", leaving us with a feudal system of lords and serfs. A perpetual underclass and permanent overclass.

This did not happen overnight. Rising home equity and easy credit masked the ever-increasing deficit in wages and purchasing power. But now that they've crashed the housing sector and tightened credit, the veil is beginning to rise, revealing the ugly reality. Moreover, the predator class is cashing in and increasing our burden tenfold, ensuring that the next generation faces a third world society, a reality they are not prepared for, given they've been dumbed down and distracted by glitzy celebrities and super shiny technology.

Links:

Full Report: The Economic Elite Vs. The People of the United States of America

Read more...

Save Grandma! Pull the Plug on the Tea Party!

What happens when a tea-bagger loses his or her job and can't find another one? Do they still spout the Tea Party "redistribute my work ethic, not my wealth" rhetoric?  What happens when a tea-bagger gets old? Sick? Disabled?  Are their 401ks immune to market crash?  Do they live in a giant tea-potted alternative universe? They're so quick to demonize anyone who falls on hard times; so quick to protest Social Security, Medicare, and entitlement programs; so quick to jump on the corporate bandwagon and support the extension of Bush tax cuts for the wealthy...

As Rachel Maddow pointed out, Wall Street charges five times as much as the federal government does to manage retirement funds, not to mention, the risk considering Wall Street's nothing but a giant casino. 

If only Obama really would say this:

"Believe me...these people getting elected scare the hell outta me! President Obama needs to get up there and say: 'Listen people. I know you're frustrated. Let me tell you how frustrated...when I had to deal with my Dixiecrats. Let me tell ya..if you elect these people...remember during the debate for healthcare? That I was going to pull the plug on Grandma? Guess what? These people will!! They want to get rid of social security!! There's no Grandma left! -- Chris, who called Tom Ashbrook, host of On Point regarding tea party candidates.

Links: 

GOP ready to make 'Pledge to America'

Read more...

Tea Party Demonstrations and the States’ Rights Challenge. Why Now?

I listened to The States’ Rights Challenge on the NPR radio show, On Point with Tom Ashbrook, my favorite radio broadcaster and he invited guests, Neil Siegel, professor of law and political science at Duke University and Thomas E. Woods, senior fellow at the Ludwig von Mises Institute in Auburn, Alabama, with very different viewpoints on the states' rights issue with respect to the health care reform package, in particular. As Ashbrook said, he wanted to discern whether the reemergence of this issue, at this time, points to the "proof of a vigorous democracy or fraying of national unity and authority.

Before health care reform even passed, two states, Virginia and Idaho had already voted to challenge its authority. Now, attorneys general from 13 states are challenging the constitutionality of the health care reform bill and in total, 36 states are considering legislation to limit certain portions or reject the bill, outright.

The first major tea party march, April 15, 2009, in response to President Obama's federal stimulus bill, was the first time this issue of "states' rights" materialized to the point of national recognition, especially with Texas Gov. Rick Perry threatening to secede from the union, which although he may deny it now, was clearly his message at the time.

Republicans claim big government is the monster in the closet when they don't like what's being legislated, and it appears - since President Obama has taken office - to include who is doing the legislating. This becomes apparent when you compare the lack of response to the huge expansion of federal power under former President Bush (prescription drug legislation, no child left behind, Iraq and cost of a war based on lies, ect.) So, one has to ask, why, now that we have our first black president, is there a push for state’s rights... talk of invoking the 10th amendment, nullification and secession, when article 6 clearly states federal authority outranks state’s authority?

Neil Siegel said it's important to distinguish the difference between challenging federalism and "couching" opposition to legislation in terms of 10th amendment, nullification and secession.

It’s important to make a distinction between Federalism – appropriate balance of power between the federal government and the states and “state’s rights”, nullification and secession which either intentionally or unwittingly invokes very powerful historical and cultural memories. Memories of southern opposition of federal regulation of slavery before the civil war; memories opposition of Brown v. Board of Education in school desegregation during what legal scholars call the second reconstruction.

Why is talk about the limits of federal power and the appropriate ways in which states should be pushing back against federal power when state officials think it’s being used in ways which are misguided…why is that being couched in terms of 10th amendment, nullification and secession and why is it being couched in those terms now?

It’s entirely legitimate for people to oppose health care reform, but what’s more questionable is whether it’s appropriate to couch those concerns in language of state’s rights. Is your substantive political opposition to health care reform or is it principled commitment to decentralization? It seems there are not very many principled people out there when it comes to state’s rights. Favorable to robust federal power when it suits them but then couch their concerns against a particular exercise of federal power in the deceptive procedural address of federalism. What specific constitutional principles of federalism render this legislation unconstitutional, in particular because it seems that individual states find it almost impossible to tackle health care?

One of the biggest complaints is about the portion of health care reform that would mandate individuals to purchase health insurance. However, isn't it true that citizens are mandated to purchase auto insurance? How is this "mandate" any different? Siegal explained it this way:

In the summer of 1787, when the Constitutional convention meets in Philadelphia, the convention instructs the Mid Summer committee of detail which is charged with drafting Congress’ powers in article 1 section 8, that congress should have the power to legislate when the states are separately incompetent. When the states face problems they can’t adequately handle on their own. Health insurance and an individual mandate to possess health insurance is a textbook example in economics which is a problem states can’t handle on their own.

Imagine some states have it and other don’t. Then you have people who are sick and unhealthy going to the states who have it and all the premiums of people in that state increase, and all health people in those states go to other states. Insurers only want to do business with those that don’t have the mandate. The states on their own can’t handle this.

Does the state has power to nullify federal law?

The 10th amendment says, "the powers not delegated to the United States by the constitution nor prohibited by it to the states are reserved to the states respectively or to the people..."

13 states: Alabama, Colorado, Florida, Michigan, Nebraska, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, South Carolina, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Washington. Alaska and Oklahoma reviewing legislation might file law suit.

Issues that involve states' rights:
Gay rights
Medical marijuana
Health care
Guns
Environmental
Continuous call up of the National Guard

Read more...

Hyatt Exploits Recession to Boost Profits

This past Wednesday. Tom Ashbrook, host of On Point interviewed Barbara Ehrenreich, author most famous for Nickel and Dimed On (Not) Getting By in America and two women, hotel housekeepers, recently fired by Hyatt Hotels Corp who hired replacements at half their wages.

The two women were part of a group of 98 employees Hyatt mercilessly fired from housekeeping - some of whom gave over 20 years of service, and who were tricked into training their replacements unknowingly - in a cost cutting measure in August, with absolutely no warning whatsoever. Many of the fired housekeepers made $16 an hour while the replacements make $8 an hour. Hyatt will now have the burden of maintaining the same quality of service, considering the replacements, paid only half the wages, will be responsible for double the work load (from 16 rooms to 32 rooms per day).

As Barbara Ehrenreich pointed out, Hyatt's problem was not the housekeeper's hourly wages, rather it's the executive salaries, bonuses and stock options that cost the corporation. In other words, corporate greed trumped common sense, and hopefully Hyatt's despicable cost-cutting measures will come back to bite them in the same place their brains obviously reside.

Today, after experiencing negative publicity, a threat to boycott from the Governor and taxi drivers, and public outcry against the hotel company, Hyatt said "it’s arranged full-time jobs through an outsourcing firm for the 98 housekeepers it recently fired from its three hotels in Boston and Cambridge and replaced with cheaper outsourced workers".

"Hyatt has faced withering criticism and even a boycott threat from Gov. Deval Patrick over the firings, which sparked protests yesterday in Chicago, where the company is headquartered".

However, these women, who were ruthlessly replaced, want to return to their jobs.

“Hyatt’s latest proposal is simply a smokescreen designed to trick people into thinking Hyatt is doing the right thing. It does not provide the women with the one thing they really deserve.

These women have made it clear that they want to be returned to the jobs they have held for years, and Hyatt’s PR scheme does not diminish their determination.” -- Janice Loux, president of United Here Local 26

Currently, Gov. Deval Patrick spoke with local Hyatt management and worker representatives, and is reviewing the proposal.

Unfortunately, Hyatt is only one of many hotel chains who treat their employees so unfairly.

Read more...

Caroline the Alaskan Broadcaster Says Palin is Major Disaster and Such an Embarrassment

Who is Caroline the Broadcaster? Well, she is just another "Joe, the Plumber" without the credibility issue. She called into the radio show, On Point: How to Fix the Economy, to comment on the responsibility of all of us, (I totally agree with what she has to say...another reason I'm posting this) but because she lived and worked broadcasting in Alaska for 40 years. host Tom Ashbrook asked her about what she thought of Sarah Palin.

Interpret the following portion of the transcript from that show for what it is, an opinion from someone who sounds as "trustworthy" as anyone can sound from a 2-minute excerpt of conversation.

Caroline: ...great discussion, gentlemen. I want to go back to the discussion about the responsibility of everyone of us. I've been watching all of this since the early 1950s. I remember the one President who asked for sacrifice was Jimmy Carter, and then he got kicked out quickly enough. When peoople are so self-absorbed, when it doesn't hurt them, than they don't care what goes on, they don't care if the blue collar jobs in the textile industry...they care whenever it's their white collar jobs that get exported to very well educated countries like India and so forth, that's when they care. So, until this hurts, and it hurts enough people, we will let it go...we'll have the cheerleaders out there treating us like infantile 2-year olds in the sandbox. We will only care for ourselves.

Tom Ashbrook: Well, it hurts right now, Caroline. Who are you thinking might lead us out this pain?

Caroline from Alaska: I think it will be people who are honest, who will be honest with us, who will go after the people who broke the law (the problem with that is there is no law to break) committed fraud. Now, again fraud is sometimes very hard to prove and if you don't want people punished than you don't put enough regulators and prosecutors in place to do it. It is like a giant pile of spaghetti...trying to find one end that's the cause. It's impossible.

Tom Ashbrook: You're from Alaska. What about your Governor there, Caroline? ...Sarah Palin? What about the cut of her jib on all of this?

Caroline from Alaska: I've lived there for 40-years and I've worked in broadcasting. This person is a major disaster and such an embarrassment to our state.

Tom Ashbrook: Why?

Caroline from Alaska: Take if from there. Do not...Don't even consider her as an expert in...

Tom Ashbrook: Why? She's very popular in Alaska, we read. 80% popularity...that's through the roof.

Caroline from Alaska: That's what's the matter with this nation. If you have enough of a cheering squad and you have enough lobbyists that are buying enough politicians... and they get to write all the rules... and nobody cares until it hits them in the face, then you are going to have people like that riding into prominence. It's marketing. And that's all that we've been driven on for the last 40 to 50 years. We haven't had a major hurt in this country since WWII, and I hate to think that we're going to get to that, but that may be what's necessary before people are going to realize we are all a community. And, the kids who are in schools that are lousy, you better not take an attitude, we need a permanent underclass to fight our wars. You are going to take the attitude, they're geniuses out there...we don't know where they are, we don't know what color or sex they are. We have to give everybody an opportunity and we've not been doing that for a very long time.

Prior to "Caroline the Alaskan Broadcaster", Ed, who identified himself as,"I'm Another Average Working Joe" phoned in to ask about executive accountability. If "Joe" is the average guy, who is the female counterpart?

Read more...