NEON GODS

No one to blame but himself

Well, well, the new job figures are out for the month of June and I'll bet all of you hate-Obama nuts who doubted his plan to put Americans back to work are feeling really, really sheepish right now.  All you idiots on the right said his stimulus plan was a waste of money and made no difference, and all of you naysayers on the left whined about how his stimulus package wasn't big enough.  Hah!  Well suck on this: Obama created 18,000 new jobs last month!!  Yup, 18,000 new jobs.  What do you have to say about that?!

What do I have to say about it?  DUH!  The evidence is increasingly clear that Obama made bad choices and he's going to pay for it, as he should.  He's looking more and more like Herbert Hoover, but unlike Hoover he has no excuse for making bad choices because Hoover's failures are well documented. 

How bad was this news today?  Get this, economists were predicting 105,000 new jobs last month, which would have been bad enough, but a measly 18,000 new jobs?  Horrific! 

Employers added 18,000 jobs in June, a trivial number in a country with 150 million workers, and the unemployment rate rose to 9.2 percent from 9.1 percent, the Labor Department reported. It was a far worse report than expected: Economists had forecast 105,000 new jobs.

The jobs survey was exceptionally bleak even beyond those headline numbers. Job growth in April and May was revised downward by a combined 44,000 positions. Temporary employers, often a leading indicator of future activity in the labor market, cut 12,000 jobs. And roughly 272,000 Americans dropped out of the labor force, perhaps out of frustration with their job prospects. The unemployment rate would have risen even higher had they continued their job hunts.

Republicans were quick to bash Obama,

"The president always tells us he inherited a bad situation,” House Republican Conference Chairman Jeb Hensarling (Texas) said at the news conference with House Speaker John Boehner (Ohio) and other GOP leaders. “I concede the point, but he has made it worse, and after 2 1/₂ years, it is time for him to take responsibility and answer the question, ‘Where are the jobs?’”

Of course, much of Obama's failures can be laid directly at the feet of those assholes, for they have done NOTHING, not one damn thing, to help create jobs.  In fact at the state and local level Republican governors have gone on a job cutting orgy!

The steepest losses in June, as they have been throughout 2011, have been in government jobs. With state and local governments slashing workers by the tens of thousands to try to get their budgets balanced and the federal government posting heavy job cuts, as well, overall government employment fell by 39,000 positions in June alone. That followed 48,000 in jobs cut in May.

And we know this is just the beginning. 

Not only that, but when you insist on reducing the nation's deficit by slashing it's budget, you are going to end up losing a lot of jobs, not just government jobs but those in retail businesses where they used to shop. 

But, the Republicans are busy starving the beast which will end up starving innocent Americans.  And guess who is cheering them on?  President Barack Obama.   I feel sick.

--Trakker

We are caught in a death spiral

Monday the NY Times ran a superb in-depth story about the budget woes of an average American city, in this case Wilmington, NC.   It's a city of about 100,000 people that was using it's growing tax base to pay for improvements to make the city attractive for new businesses, conventions, and retirees. 

All was going well until the housing bubble burst and tax revenues plummeted.  Unfortunately, the services and and infrastructure maintenance these taxes paid for still remained.  So what do you do when your tax revenue drops drastically?  You cut services, cut employees, stop giving raises, and raise taxes to insure the most important services like education  and police and fire protection, aren't unduly compromised.  Except today the Republicans and tea partiers have insisted that taxes can never be raised, no matter what!

The Times article dramatically illustrates how badly Wilmington needs to replace one of it's fire trucks.  It is so unreliable that it's failure at a critical moment could put lives in danger.  A replacement would cost $730,000, but the payments could be spread out for a number of years.  In fact the fire truck could be acquired for a first year payment of $103,000.  Wilmington's  population is 106,000, so the fire truck could be acquired by raising taxes $1 for every resident in Wilmington!  A family of four would pay $4 to insure that if their house caught fire and their children were trapped inside, they could count on a reliable response from the fire department.

This is just an illustration of how stupid it is to refuse to ever raise taxes, no matter how small the increase is or who must pay it.  The right has managed to convince enough people in America that government is always wasteful, that governments spend too much money unnecessarily, that government employees are paid way too much, and that the only way to "reform" government is to starve it into submission.  No, what we are doing instead is starving America and insuring we will become a backward, run-down, crappy nation of impoverished people with potholed streets, bridges that fall, fire trucks that break down at critical moments ... but low taxes.

This how I see America in 2025:

American visiting Montreal: "You have a lovely city.  Your roads are smooth and your public gardens are so lush and beautiful.  And you have so many of them!"

Montreal resident: "I've visited your cities and noticed you have no parks. They are overgrown fields, and your streets are a nightmare, we couldn't go faster than 50 kph on any of them.  Your museums are all closed, and you have no libraries!"

American: "That's because we are richer than you Canadians."

Montrealer:  "Crappy streets and no public services is a sign of wealth??  Your unemployment rate is twice ours and many of you need your teenagers to work to help pay your bills!"

American: "Yes, we are rich because our taxes are much lower than in your socialist country."

Montrealer: "But almost all of our workers have jobs, and our jobs pay more than in America, and our median income is much higher than yours, how can you say you are richer?"

American: "Because our taxes are much lower than yours!  We get to keep more of our wages and we can spend it on whatever WE want, not what the government wants!"

Montrealer: "I'm confused. Most Americans are poor.  You make so little that even with low taxes you have little left over for things you want."

American:  "Don't you understand?  We are richer than you because we don't have to pay high taxes like you.  Our children learn to go out and find work, while your children waste too much time going to school, and your government forces them to learn propaganda like evolution, and even learn a second language.  Why?  The government should just make everyone speak English."

Montrealer:  "Okay, I'm beginning to understand America a lot better.  I will get in touch with my MP right away."

American:  "Great!  Your going to demand lower taxes!!"

Montrealer: "Um...no. I'm going demand we close the border between us and you."

Yes, I'm venting.  I'm seeing a nation that is caught in a death spiral and the Republicans won't let us save ourselves.  Look at Wilmington and multiply it by a thousand.   State and local governments can't run a deficit, so when their tax revenue drops, if they can't raise taxes a little, then the whole deficit must be closed by cutting services, cutting employees, and cutting the pay of those still employed. 

Laying off workers turns a taxpayer into someone who often needs government help, thus increasing the cost of government and increasing the deficit.  Cutting someone's pay means they have less to spend which means stores go out of business creating higher unemployment.  Ect. etc. etc.  This is a death spiral because every year more and more employees must be cut, which means higher unemployment, less tax revenue and more government services needed.  And when people have less to spend there is less demand for products and services from the private sector.

The answer is to raise taxes, and place a greater burden on those who can most afford it.  Also, the federal government, which CAN run a deficit, should increase aid to state and local governments to insure the basics, like a good education, police and fire protection, and needed infrastructure replacement, can go on, and fewer workers get laid off.

Grover Norquist wants to drown government in the bathtub.  Instead, because of him, the whole country is going to drown in that bathtub!

Read the NYTimes article about Wilmington, it's a fascinating story of how and why our cities are dying.

--Trakker

"...if we pretend we are living in Boston in 1773..."

E.J. Dionne wrote a thoughtful, concise, spot-on column today about how divided our country has become and how dangerously wrong the Republicans, especially the Tea Party, have become when they talk about the Declaration of Independence and our Constitution.

Our nation confronts a challenge this Fourth of July that we face but rarely: We are at odds over the meaning of our history and why, to quote our Declaration of Independence, “governments are instituted.”

Only divisions this deep can explain why we are taking risks with our country’s future that we’re usually wise enough to avoid. Arguments over how much government should tax and spend are the very stuff of democracy’s give-and-take. Now, the debate is shadowed by worries that if a willful faction does not get what it wants, it might bring the nation to default.

This is, well, crazy. It makes sense only if politicians believe — or have convinced themselves — that they are fighting over matters of principle so profound that any means to defeat their opponents is defensible. [emphasis mine]

Republicans have become a party so sure they are 100% right, and the Democrats are not only wrong about everything, but also want to intentionally ruin America because they basically hate this country, freedom, the Constitution, and the Founding Fathers.  Really.  Just ask them.

Dionne refutes their myths and errors.  Read the whole thing...and Happy Independence Day!

--Trakker

Republicans: better to become a backwater country than raise taxes on the very rich.

As you know, the FAA has been redesigning our air traffic control system, hoping to finally replace the radar-based, clunky, inefficient system designed in the 1950s.   Yes, this will cost us money.  $22 billion to be exact (it will cost the airline industry an additional $20 billion for upgrades to use the new system).  What would we get in return?

...ground radar stations will be replaced by satellite-based technology. Instead of flying indirect routes to stay within the range of ground stations, as planes do today, pilots will use GPS technology to fly directly to their destinations.

Planes will continually broadcast their exact positions, not only to air traffic controllers, but to other similarly equipped aircraft within hundreds of miles. For the first time, pilots will be able to see on cockpit displays where they are in relation to other planes and what the flight plans are for those other aircraft. That will enable planes to safely fly closer together.

When planes approach airports, precise GPS navigation will allow them to use more efficient landing and takeoff procedures. Instead of time-consuming, fuel-burning stair- step descents, planes will be able to glide in more steeply with their engines idling. Aircraft will be able to land and take off closer together and more frequently, even in poor weather, because pilots will know the precise location of other aircraft and obstacles on the ground. Fewer planes will be diverted.

Pilots and airline dispatchers will be able get real-time weather information. Computers will spot potential weather conflicts well in advance so that planes can be rerouted. And, controllers will do a lot less talking to pilots. Many instructions now transmitted by radio will instead be sent digitally to cockpits, reducing the chance of errors.

Even after taking the grain of salt that comes with every program like this, the benefits that would result from this new technology seems pretty impressive.

But don;t hold your breath.

It's getting harder to pry money out of Congress...some experts say the U.S. could lose its lead in the manufacture of high tech aviation equipment to European competitors because the FAA is moving too slowly. ... The program has widespread support in the Obama administration and Congress, but it isn't immune to budget cuts in the current climate of austerity. The [Republican] House wants to reduce FAA's budget authority by $1 billion a year over the next four years, while the [Democratic] Senate has favored higher funding.

As you know, this is a government responsibility.  Air Traffic Control is paid for by our tax dollars.  If we want to continue to remain competitive government systems must constantly be upgraded.  This costs money, money that we pay in taxes, but the Republicans have been cutting taxes for 30 years, and appears more than happy to turn the U.S. into a backwater, former superpower so the rich can keep more and more of their money.  And what happens if we hit bottom?  The rich will pack their bags and move to a more modern country.  No country is going to deny a visa to a billionaire.

--Trakker

A Democrat called their bluff.

Kudos to Minnesota's Democratic governor, Mark Dayton.  He told the Republicans, who control both houses of the Minnesota Legislature, that the solution to the state's $5 billion budget deficit must include a tax increase on those making $1,000,000 or more.  Republicans said, NO, the deficit must be closed only by further cuts to government spending.  Dayton refused to sign a budget that didn't include tax increases on the very wealthy so now the Minnesota government is shut down except for emergency services.

"Instead of taxing their friends, [Republicans] would prefer very damaging cuts to healthcare, K-12 and higher education, state and local public safety, mass transit, and other essential services," Dayton said of GOP lawmakers.

If Gov. Dayton is smart, he will spend the next week travelling around the state,  listening to the people who are being hurt by this and commiserate with them, pointing out that the wealthiest 1% of Minnesota taxpayers currently pay almost 2% less in state and local taxes (9.7% vs. 11.5%) than the average taxpayer, and he could not in good conscience agree to more cuts while letting the wealthy pay less in taxes than than the average taxpayer! 

He should also take this opportunity to find a way to publicize the fact that the services that are now shut down are services that the state provides with taxpayer dollars, and emphasize how important those services are to the people of Minnesota. Most taxpayers have no idea how much good their taxes do.

--Trakker

Take the Pledge!

After reading some comments on WaPost today, written by lunatic righties who insist we canot raise taxes on the rich but instead must cut government spending - even if it hurts the poor, I got pissed off.

All spring we've been reading about the tornados, floods, and wildfires that have really devestated a lot of lives, and it occured to me that much of the worst devesation has occured in states where a majority of residents appear to embrace the Ayn Rand/Grover Norquist model of small government by requiring people to take responsibility for their own lives, and yet when tragedy struck, there was the government stepping in and doing it's best to keep people and property safe, and helping those who lost their homes or loved ones.

I was especially disturbed to read that Arizona, a state that hates government, allowed government-paid firefighters in to fight those huge wildfires that threatened whole towns.  I kept thinking, isn't protecting one's home an individual's responsibilty according to their philsophy?  Aren't homeowners supposed to hire their own firefighters to stand and fight any fire that threatens their home?   That way people like me who live in Maryland where we have no wildfires wouldn't have to pay taxes to protect people's homes in Arizona.  I mean how does it affect me if someones's house in Arizona burns down?  Granted, I hate to see our national forests burn, but wildfires are nature's way of renewing forests and grasslands.  It's natural. 

So anyway, my solution for those who want small government, low taxes, and that people must take responsibility for their own life and property (in other words, you Ayn Rand/Grover Norquist desciples out there), I challenge you to make the followng pledge: "I am responsible for my own life and property, so I refuse to accept any help whatsoever from any local, state, or federal government. That way we can lower taxes and shrink our governments."

There.  Once we get those pledges we can begin reducing the deficit and lower our taxes.  Isn't that great?

--Trakker