Friday, 6 July 2012

What Obama Really Represents

I've thought about this a lot lately and I think I've come to a conclusion about what Obama finally really represents to those who are not so dogmatically inclined. In saying this, I come not to these conclusions alone... influence from a wide array of economists, professors and bloggers have driven me to conclude this end. To the progressives Obama means hope, change and progress. Obama represents a monumental occasion in the world's history. The first African American President of the United States was elected and that means we are becoming more accepting of each other and that the world is becoming a more accepting and loving place.

What Obama really represents is the death of democracy and the perfection of commercial presidencies. Although it's argued that no president since Nixon has truly feared the electorate... I feel that Obama is the first president to really represent the death of the electorate. Obama was a businessman dealing in deception and he sold it all... hook, line and sinker. Obama represented a powerful commercial progressive image that was sold to the populace. The whole world stopped turning -for an instant- in awe of this image. Such hope, such change, such propaganda.

Obama represents a lot of things. He was sold as a people's person with issues himself, a hard worker who climbed the social ladder, a father with two daughters, a feminist, an environmentalist, a bleeding heart liberal, a man for the worker's unions, a man for the people, a man for Wall Street, the list goes on. He was sold on CNN during the reality TV show called the news. Sound clips of hope and change, a dash of pictures going onto a private air plane and pictures of tour buses. Obama was saving the world. That's what we were told, Obama was saving the world.

He was going to fly in on his private jet and put the evil bankers in their place. He was going to slay Global Warming and tame the beasts of Renewable Energy. Under his reign, the Gays, the Jews and the Muslims would all join hands and sing sweet prayers to the high heavens. He was going to solve the puzzle of World Peace, fix the United Nations and probably solve the Euro-zone's debt crisis. He was going to be such a bad-ass and that's all we cared about. He was going to fix EVERYTHING. Yeah, he was going to fix everything. I'm sure, if need be, he would have bombed China too for the conservatives too... just to make them happy. Then, of course, he would have dispatched a relief effort to help the Chinese out... he'd tell them it was a necessary evil for the greater good.

It's too bad Obama wasn't in it to save the world. It's too bad we thought he was. Of course, we've had countless people actually run who want to save the world. People who genuinely believe in democracy... who abandon the American Dream to pursue the American Dream for the 99%. We never elect those people, their stories seem so good... so fake. People who believe in hard work, sacrifice and actually trying to make a change. Those people are real heroes. Too bad we won't deserve them, we don't even deserve democracy.

Those people are the heroes we need. We'll get the heroes we deserve.

Monday, 2 July 2012

What happened to Worker's Rights?

In modern politics a lot of time is spent debating working rights for minorities and women. They demand equal opportunity as white men in all domains and this goal (even if it does not always work out) it is a noble pursuit that, if the disparities are drastic, should be pursued. However, in today's globalized economy and in today's neoliberal political sphere one issue important to all workers has fallen aside. The issue of worker's rights has been forgotten, buried and now lie dead with champions of worker's rights such as Martin Luther King Jr and Harvey Milk.

In a time of progressive movements, "radical" liberals and pro-choice debates we have forgotten about perhaps the most important rights of all. The right to fair pay and the right to work. These two rights have been forgotten by the 99% and torn asunder for the richest 0.1%. People talk constantly about education... and how a good education will get you a good job but even the value of an education has been declining over the last decade. Youth today face an alarming environment where they are forced to either work minimum wage with little chance of promotion, take on large student debts or receive the aid of their parents in financing their post-secondary crusade. The choices are slim and the prospects are slimmer.

You may graduate with a degree in one of the hot fields... but if you don't you will likely wind up flipping burgers, serving coffee or making sandwiches. You will be paid minimum wage for these tasks and you will be kept constantly on edge by the threat of losing your job or in the case of more advanced degrees, being outsourced. This pressure keeps wage prices low, keeps CEO profits high and in an environment with high unemployment the threat can be infinitely sustained. Someone will do the job you do since there are plenty of candidates to do it.

The effect of this pressure destroy all safety nets supporting workers, shift the power from the labourer to the rent-collector and result in the growth of corporatism. Since the rent-collector now has excess power and seeks to increase their ability to collect rent, the rent-collector uses its influence to increase rent-flow and this results in money being siphoned away from the healthier parts of the economy. As consumers become unable to consume due to the high rent costs imposed on them (Largely a result of the financial sector not government taxes) the healthier parts of the economy become even more stagnant.

As the economy stagnates the rent collectors become unable to collect more rent through conventional means and turn to government backed insurance obligations and the likes to continue increasing their rent collecting efforts. This involves taking on more risk with the taxes from income tax payers who are facing squeezes from high rent collection on their revenue. The income tax payers grow to depend on government services which depend on income taxes from the income tax payers. The banks proceed to cut into the income tax revenue and this results in shrinking of government services.

This income tax revenue must be further leveraged to allow the economics of rent-extraction to continue and in an economy with less consumer power greater risks must be taken by the rent-collectors to allow profit growth to continue. These risks must be backed by something and as a result government backs these risking loans to allow continued economic growth... or at least allow the illusion to go on. However, these government backed insurances are once again backed by the income tax payer who is facing more and more of a squeeze due to shrinking consumer power and now shrinking government power.

As the government shrinks government jobs are cut resulting in further loss of consumer power. This creates a powerful feedback loop where consumer power and government power both keep decreasing while financial institutes grow larger and larger. Unable to maintain growth margins, the financial institutes must take on more and more risk to compensate for poor consumer power. As the system collapses underneath the worker's feet, media shifts attention from the failing financial system to the remaining unions. The unions becomes a martyr for a massive financial sector that needs consumer support to survive.

However, due to the economic problem of rent capture, the financial sector can no longer feed off just the consumer and must also feed off the government. Worker's unions are broken up to provide additional stomping grounds for the financial sector to feed off of and subsequently the economy contracts further. Without strong unions it becomes easier and easier for corporations to exert predatory behaviour and they become capable of destroying the labour market and even stagnating healthier markets. This is why worker's rights have been forgotten. Their death began in the 1970s with the dawn of Neoliberal economics and they are but a long lost dream now.

Thursday, 28 June 2012

The Private Charity Myth

It is often argued by Libertarians and other free market advocates that private charities provide far better services then public charities do. When funded by the government, they argue, programs such as welfare and the likes result in a fair amount of the money being lost in the form of payments to members of government bureaucracies. Compared to government programs, private charities do the job so much better they claim. Without bureaucracies the costs of providing effective aid to the poor are diminished and the poor flourish from these charities. Meanwhile, government programs keep people on welfare while pocketing the taxpayer's dollar for government employees.

This is classic free market dogma and ignores information asymmetry and the role of regulation in business performance. In the case of a government bureaucracy, information is symmetrical since the data is made available to the public in yearly releases and these bureaucracies are required to adhere to certain rules and regulations. Private charities are not subject to the same regulations but also do not have the same degree of information symmetry that government programs do. Due to this lack of information symmetry private charities largely end up with far more corruption and accounts of charity theft.

Charity theft is actually one of the most common forms of theft and it is under-reported. Typically, charity owners and volunteers are assumed to be benevolent folk who just want to help out but in today's competitive society a lot of volunteers wind up in it for the resume... and could give less of a damn about those they are caring for. Although corruption exists in all areas, corruption is far more rampant in the private domain. Information asymmetry, a lack of regulations and a belief in the market to price goods at their actual worth is a pipe-dream at best and a debt-fueled bubble destroying more of the middle class at worse.

Leave the welfare programs alone... we wouldn't need them if we had actual worker unions, worker rights and a stronger work force as a whole. People need to wake up to the fact that private companies do not give a damn about worker's rights and that we need to fight for them as we did in the past. We need to get unemployment down to like 2 or 3%... and then we will barely need welfare!

Tuesday, 19 June 2012

Free Market Dogma

Free Markets are unicorns. They, like the invisible hand, can't be seen because they never have and never will exist. Adam Smith himself did not even believe in the invisible hand (It's only mentioned once in his seminal book The Wealth of Nations and not in the fashion that Randites and other Conservatives believe it is). Since there is no invisible hand and people are not rational beings seeking to maximize their own profit the entire notion that a free market is capable of curing all of societies ailments is pure fantasy.

Worshipping a fantasy is like praying to a god to solve all of your current problems. Sure, maybe it will work sometimes... but in the end taking some charge yourself and recognizing that free markets do indeed fail and that this deems that regulation is necessary. Of course, this does not mean corporate welfare should continue to exist. Since regulations exist and will always be necessary to prevent market failure we must make these regulations such that they benefit the many, not just the few.

This means doing away with corporate welfare, doing away with conservative deregulation dogma and restoring power to the worker's unions which once formed the backbone of a health society. This means letting banks fail when banks take on risks too big, this means socializing the losses and the profits and largely taking a stand against the free market dogma of the 1970s. This also means taking a stand against the notion of private versus public and embracing that, in the end, these two entities are largely one and the same.

Monday, 18 June 2012

This isn't Capitalism and it never will be

Capitalism is a buzz word... used to portray notions of freedom, liberty and competition. It is a convenient sound bite used by politicians world wide to promote the idea that we live in a capitalist society... which we largely do not. Capitalist elements exist in our society, as do socialist, as do democratic and as do republic. However, our society as a whole is largely not capitalistic but an economic system that is controlled in a bipartisanship between corporation and government.

Although tripartisanship was popular until the 1970s (Until new conservative policies took place and eradicated the worker's union) most of the economy that exists today is the result of interactions between corporations and governments to meet both entities needs. We, the people, are agents in this system that exist to serve the needs of both these entities. We are fed the line that we live in a capitalist society and that the american dream is still alive and well. It's not. As George Carlin said... it's called the American Dream because you need to be asleep to believe it.

In fact, I feel calling it a bipartisanship unfair. It's never even been bipartisan. It's simply the financial sector robbing the world of all it's money, We've legalized bank-robbers but now we call them bankers. Except in this case bank-robbers actually could perform noble tasks such as robbing from the rich to give to the poor. Bankers can do no such thing. Bankers rob from the poor, give to themselves and then blame the poor for being so damn poor. They marginalize all of humanity as incompetent fucks while creating massive unsustainable debt structures that will inevitably crash (And that will largely have their damage socialized).

When the banks fail they insist the problem wasn't the banks but the people. They made the loans but claim that we are the ones who shouldn't have taken them. They claim this while receiving cuts from income taxes, destroying social safety nets and turning basic commodities into assets. They claim that while they rob the 99%'s money such that the 99% turns to them for credit to maintain their standard of living that the 99% are the ones being irresponsible, not the banks themselves.

As Keynes said (And as late 19th Century economists realized) it is the rent seekers that are the most harmful to the economy in the long run. In today's society it is the rent seekers that rule and it is the rent seekers that will continue to loot the failing system and wait fervently for the coming collapse... so the next wave of looting can begin. This isn't capitalism... this is a modernized form of feudalism. We just have the notion of democracy and capitalism to help us ignore the harsh reality the 99% must face.

Monday, 11 June 2012

Shell Games

There isn't a single description of the current political landscape that describes the landscape as well as the notion of a shell game.Although portrayed as a game of chance, the shell game is actually a confidence trick used to perpetuate fraud. Bipartisanship, as a whole, is a classic example of a shell game. Supporters of either side watch as their respective party plays a shell game with social problems while, under the table, they create more and more economic and political issues. They distract the trusting majority with sound bite promises of  liberty, freedom, equality, justice, safety, protection, and hope. Of course they never tell the trusting majority how they'll achieve such goals... but none the less it will be through government intervention, of course.

The conservative shell game really isn't a shell game anymore. Conservatives have made it clear over the last few years that they only give a shit about the very wealthy and that they will do anything to serve their corporate masters. They extract the wealth of the vast majority, grant tax breaks to the richest minority and then use these taxes to fund the entrepreneurship of the rich. The average person takes a risk when they start a business... the wealthiest 0.1% take the collective risk of the 99.9% and then reap all the reward. Inventions driven by government funding such as computers, the internet and space exploration are funded by the 99.9% and in the end the greatest spoils of their profit goes to the wealthiest. We pay for their failures and their innovations on our own dime.

On the other hand, the liberal shell game is much more discrete. Liberals, as a whole, often live by a do as I say and not as I do ideology. They embrace conservation in public, why living vapid wasteful lifestyles in private. They talk about saving the environment while supporting programs that would generate massive amounts of waste. They argue for health care reforms while making sure the health care reforms largely benefit insurance companies and not the common person (At least in the United States). They talk about gay rights, multiculturalism and other buzz words while supporting legislation that, in the long run, hurts minorities... while putting more money into the pockets of courts. They talk about inconvenient truths... but never acknowledge one of the greatest inconvenient truths. They too are just as much of a problem as conservatives.

It's at this point in history that more are learning of the shell games we are all part of. The 99% is becoming aware of the cruel reality that the 1% has created and that their entire financial institution they've created is crumbling. When the truth behind the shell game is revealed... it is the 99% who must stop the 1% from letting this game continue. It is time for a return to partisanship, not bi-partisanship... at least in my opinion.

Friday, 30 March 2012

The DOOM Station 3

Imagine if every event that is happening in the world was reported to you ever second of every hour. Now imagine you can put a good and moderate filter on this incoming information. All of a sudden you have a flood of negative information with no end in sight and you would begin to feel that world was coming to an end. And of course, this is what the media wants you to believe. IF the world is coming to an end then you better keep on watching because only then will you be prepared for it.

Welcome to modern broadcasting 101. Get a constant stream of juicy negative information from all over the world, use a big ass strainer to get to the nittiest and the grittiest of the dirty information and then make a big mud pie of gloom and doom. Now, this mud pie isn't complete without you spitting all over it. This process, called "spinning the story", is rather important to making the mud pie digestible. The use of big numbers makes it soft, chewy and extra scary and graphs that look like this add some nice flavour.


Now plop time and amount of deaths on this baby and you've got yourself a succulent piece. Like the farmer's prized pig, the larger it is... the better it'll be.

All of a sudden everyone is gathered around watching news broadcast from the DOOM station 3. Those who miss the broadcast can catch it on all the other channels and those who miss the re-broadcasts can hear about it at work! I mean, why work when we can all talk about what we saw on the news last night. Did you see that video on the swan? So sad wasn't it? Yeah, it was very sad. Did you see the video on the man whose house burnt down? Some lot of houses burning down these days... must be global warming spitting an inert gas on the houses to set it afire. Did you hear about it? Did you?

At this point we should probably turn the doom station 3 off. But then we'd feel disconnected and out of the loop. How could you not hear the news? The news is important you know... you need to know all about that swan who died in Bermuda from the invading polar bears who surfed down on the ice sheets. I wish the news was more like that... at least then I'd have a reason to stop believing it as opposed to having to weed through all of it's bull.