Posts tagged rich versus poor
Posts tagged rich versus poor
The Real Housewives of Wall Street
Why is the Federal Reserve forking over $220 million in bailout money to the wives of two Morgan Stanley bigwigs?
America has two national budgets, one official, one unofficial. The official budget is public record and hotly debated: Money comes in as taxes and goes out as jet fighters, DEA agents, wheat subsidies and Medicare, plus pensions and bennies for that great untamed socialist menace called a unionized public-sector workforce that Republicans are always complaining about. According to popular legend, we’re broke and in so much debt that 40 years from now our granddaughters will still be hooking on weekends to pay the medical bills of this year’s retirees from the IRS, the SEC and the Department of Energy.
Most Americans know about that budget. What they don’t know is that there is another budget of roughly equal heft, traditionally maintained in complete secrecy. After the financial crash of 2008, it grew to monstrous dimensions, as the government attempted to unfreeze the credit markets by handing out trillions to banks and hedge funds. And thanks to a whole galaxy of obscure, acronym-laden bailout programs, it eventually rivaled the “official” budget in size — a huge roaring river of cash flowing out of the Federal Reserve to destinations neither chosen by the president nor reviewed by Congress, but instead handed out by fiat by unelected Fed officials using a seemingly nonsensical and apparently unknowable methodology.
The governments of countries such as Greece, Ireland, Portugal and Spain are pushing for unpopular austerity measures, and richer countries such as the UK and France are trying to implement the same type of economic policies often by cutting social benefits and programs.
If austerity is the trend in Europe, it is certainly not the case in the United States. The US political and financial ruling class, which can be credited for starting the global financial meltdown of 2008, is still betting on the “virtues” of shock capitalism by cutting taxes and not cutting spending. What Congress did last night is quite simple: Our politicians made the decision to charge our common national credit card with a $700 billion gift to themselves and their real constituents, which are the wealthiest 2 percent Americans. And, once again, future generations will have to pick-up the astronomic tab. That is, of course, unless the United States goes completely bankrupt from 30 years of reckless financial and economic policies.
If you think bankruptcy is not a possibility, that’s just naive.
CHRIS ROCK, responding to host Bill Maher asking if he ever went to the emergency room as his primary healthcare provider, on Real Time (via inothernews) (via magulartheimpalor) (via allyourlovearebelongtome) (via gertymac)
Reblog for all those dumbfucks who parade about announcing the US has the best healthcare system in the world. It’s a great system, if you’ve got the money.
This is so true.
Chris Rock is right. Don’t believe me? Visit a hospital in the poorest part of a city, then a private “medical park.” Then grab your pitchfork and torch.
So this about sums up 2010, right here.
The greater the disparity in wealth between the very rich and everyone else, the more unstable an economy becomes. Our nation has now created a larger gap in the distribution of wealth than the massive chasm that helped fuel the Great Depression. In 1928, one year before the global economic collapse, the wealthiest .001% of the U.S. population owned 892 times more than 90% of the nation’s citizens. Today, the top .001% of the U.S. population owns 976 times more than the entire bottom 90%. This is not sustainable, and makes for a very volatile economy. It would appear that the American empire is about to crash.
I’ve been saying this for awhile now…
A liberal uprising over House procedures on Thursday was delaying a final vote on a far-reaching tax compromise brokered by the White House and Republican leaders.
Dozens of Democrats were demanding an opportunity to cast a vote to change an estate tax provision they view as too generous for the wealthy without also approving the rest of the package as passed by the Senate. That package contains a two-year extension of George W. Bush administration tax policies that benefit families at all income levels, including the very wealthiest Americans.
Democrats have complained for years about those provisions and want an opportunity to vote against them.
Senior Democrats said the delay was unlikely to derail the package, which is intended to prevent tax rates from rising in January for virtually every household.
House leaders initially proposed adding a third vote that would have permitted liberals to vote for the amended version but then vote against sending it back to the Senate for further action.
But after huddling with Democratic leaders on the House floor, Rep. Peter A. DeFazio (D-Ore.) said liberals were pushing for a new and broader amendment that would include changes to the estate tax, substitute the president’s signature Making Work Pay tax credit for a two-percentage point reduction in the Social Security payroll tax and add a $250 bonus payment for Social Security recipients who are being denied a cost of living increase for the second year in a row.
And now they get a backbone? Well, better late than never…