Monday, September 22, 2014

Maximum Wage from Gov. Jesse Ventura


In a country where the economy is always a hot topic, the former governor of Minnesota said he's tired of talking about the minimum wage, and that it's time for a maximum wage instead.
With an economy that is still finding its way back from the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression, one issue that gets brought up around the political water cooler is the minimum wage. The current federal minimum wage is $7.25/hr, and hasn't been increased since July of 2009. The increase that summer was based on a law that was passed in 2007, when George W. Bush was in the White House and the Democrats controlled both houses of Congress. Since President Obama was elected and the Republicans have gained a full majority in the House and enough to prevent a majority in the Senate, the minimum wage, like many other issues, hasn't remained the same.
One voice that has been outspoken about the minimum wage is Jesse Ventura. Once the independent governor of Minnesota and current host of Ora.tv's "Off the Grid,"Ventura has been vocal about raising the minimum wage. "You should be able to live without government subsidies, without food stamps, without welfare, without anything like that," Ventura has stated. "The former governor notes that if you put in an honest week's pay, "your wages should be high enough to accomplish that."
On Friday's episode of "Off the Grid," producer Alex Logan brought up the story of former Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland, and current Representatives Tim Ryan out of Ohio and Jan Schakowsky, who all tried to live off the minimum wage for a week. While Ventura thought their effort should be praised, he sad he was tired of talking about the minimum wage because he had a better idea.
"I think we should end all talk about the minimum wage. I don't think we should talk about it anymore. Alex, you know what I think we should talk about. Maximum wage! I think we should pass a law in this country...$100,000,000 is the most any one individual can earn in a year. Because if you can't survive on $100,000,000, something is grossly wrong, isn't it?
Logan noted that when budgeting, only $77 was put aside for food and personal expenses and he asked Ventura if he thought that was reasonable for a weeks worth of meal planning.
"Are you kidding me? I go out to dinner myself and spend $77 in one night, depending on the restaurant. If you are surviving on $77 a week, you are eating garbage. You're not even eating nutritious food. And what expense will that give us then in the health care industry? Because people can't feed themselves and give themselves good nutrition."
If a full time worker received a minimum wage salary, took no time off and worked a full schedule for one calendar year, they would earn $15,080 - before taxes. While that makes life almost impossible for many, it also increases the tax payer burden to continue to fund and expand social welfare programs. Compared that to the possible earner of $100,000,000 a year, life seems like it would be a bit different.

Saturday, September 20, 2014

Super Rich Steal Workers Pensions

New crime.   Plutocrats Screw Working People’s Pensions

Thursday, 01 August      By Lynn Parramore, AlterNet | Op-Ed

Illinois fatcats discuss plan to sabotage state bond ratings in scheme to destroy pensions.

These days, many Americans walk around feeling like no matter how hard they work, how much they manage to save or how carefully they plan for the future, the game is rigged against them. They suspect that behind closed doors, CEOs and Wall Street honchos are eagerly scheming to rip them off.

Their worst fears of corruption and collusion just came true in Illinois, where corporate titans were caught red-handed in the act of Rigging the Game.

Let’s step inside a recent gathering of the corporate-backed Union League Club of Chicago, where former Illinois Attorney General Ty Fahner, who now leads a band of plutocrats known as the “Civic Committee of the Commercial Club of Chicago,” recently launched into an hour-long diatribe on the evils of state pensions.

Fahner, a top GOP fundraiser, can’t abide the notion that teachers, firefighters, nurses and other public workers in the state of Illinois can still expect a decent retirement. Not a luxurious retirement, mind you — the average pension is $32,000 a year, and most state employees will not receive Social Security. But even a modest retirement for hard-working people is too much for today’s fatcats.

Fahner is part of a virulent strain of public raiders and economic crackpots who have become dominant in the Republican Party (and increasingly among the Democrats, too) who are hell-bent on destroying unions and attacking public employees. Ultimately they wish to privatize everything and reduce their tax responsibilities down to nothing.

That’s why Fahner has declared war on pensions and is promoting a pension crisis in order to justify it. He has called for cost of living cuts, raising the retirement age, capping pension earnings and shifting the cost of the pension obligation of teachers to local school districts, many of which are too poor ever to pay. He styles himself as a savior who wants only to protect the public from debt, when in reality he is a brutal plutocrat who will stop at nothing to line his pockets at public expense and reduce his and his friends' taxes.

Illinois has real problems. However, Fahner desperately hopes the public will not catch on to the fact that states are having difficulty paying out pensions because of the lack of revenue caused by a Wall Street-driven financial crisis and the deep recession it set off, regressive taxes, and the myriad bond scams financiers have already inflicted on states, cities, towns, and municipalities which have triggered funding crises for pensions and other programs. (See "How Wall Street Fraudsters Plunder Public Finances, And 5 Ways to Fight Back.")
Fahner has tried a number of dirty tricks to attack pensions in his career. But his most recent admission is absolutely breathtaking in its brazenness: He boasted of working to scam the Illinois bond rating.

During Fahner’s talk to the Union League Club, an unidentified person in the audience suggested that pressuring credit agencies to rig the state bond ratings in order to attack pensions might be a jolly good idea. Fahner gleefully replied that he had already thought about that — and his group has tried it.

Audience member: “Maybe sometimes you gotta be irresponsible to be responsible. If a political solution really doesn’t produce a favorable outcome, maybe you really need a market solution. And a market solution, I don’t mean bankruptcy, I mean actually talking down the state rating even further so the state’s bonds essentially become below investment grade. And it drives up the borrowing cost to the state and all of us to a significant level enough that you really feel the public pressure…”

Fahner: “The Civic Committee, not me, but me and some of the people that make up the Civic Committee… did meet with and call – in one case in person – and a couple of calls to Moody’s and Fitch and Standard & Poors, and say, How in the hell can you guys do this?"

Fahner went on to take credit for downgrades to Illinois credit ratings, saying, "If you watch what happened in the last few years, it's been steadily down.”
Check out the video at minutes 46:30 to 49:43 for the full remarks on the ratings scam: “Fahner: Civic Committee helped jaw down state’s bond rating.”

As the audience member correctly adduced, pushing down the bond rating is a great way to screw workers, the state and taxpayers. Pension funds buy bonds, often from the state, to stay financially healthy. In order for the pension fund to buy the bond, it must have a passing grade. If the grade is lowered, say from A to B, the price of the bond goes down, and the pension fund will suffer a loss. If the bond rating is dropped below a minimum standard, then the pension fund must sell the bond, and take a much bigger loss.

Lowering the bond rating also has the effect of artificially inflating the interest rates that bond holders must pay on future bonds, making them more expensive to buy and reducing the state’s ability to borrow. The basic idea is to manufacture a crisis by financially starving pension funds. Fahner & Co. know this will put political pressure on Illinoisans to take away worker pension benefits.

In a nutshell, here’s what the video reveals:

  • Corporate honchos — some of whom may have a vested financial interest in Illinois bonds — feel perfectly comfortable calling and exerting pressure on ratings agencies.
  • Ratings agencies are political entities whose supposedly impartial research can be influenced and perhaps even bought.
  • CEOs think nothing of willingly and knowingly screwing the bond rating and economic standing of their home state in order to enact their anti-worker philosophy and fatten their own bank accounts.
  • Proclaiming you are “fixing” state fiscal problems is a great cover for potential insider self-dealing in the bond market.
  • Committing economic treason against fellow citizens and taxpayers is simply a matter of course for today’s American plutocrats.
The We Are One Illinois union coalition has released a statement condemning Fahner and calling for an investigation into the matter:

"Ty Fahner and unnamed members of his corporate-backed committee have shown their true colors. Fahner bragged openly about joining members of the business-backed group, behind closed doors, in lobbying credit rating agencies to lower Illinois' bond ratings in an irresponsible and unethical attempt to put the state in an even more difficult position. They show total contempt for the taxpaying public, total disregard for the difficult fiscal challenges the state faces, and total hypocrisy over their alleged care for the working families of Illinois.”

In addition, a serious conflict of interest may exist if either these unnamed CEOs or the big corporations they control profited in any way from lobbying to make Illinois pay more interest on its bonds—bonds which they or their corporations may hold.”

All right. What the hell can be done about this shameless hustle?

The state attorney general should immediately open an investigation into whether any members of Fahner’s group sold bonds before the downgrades, based on their conversations. That is plainly insider trading. Everyone who held bonds at the time of the downgrades also took a loss. Attorneys General and Treasurers in other States whose portfolios took a hit should also consider suing, given that political pressure seems to have played a role in causing their losses. Ditto for private holders and other unions—anyone who had the bonds at the time of the downgrade.   

It’s time for the Trustees of the Pension Funds to stand up for those whose interests they are charged with protecting, and not shrug off one more crime against the public interest that reduces pensions for working people.

Thursday, September 18, 2014

Colombia Taxes their Rich, Why Can't We

Colombia Is Taking On Its Billionaires - Why Can't We?

Thursday, 18 September 2014 13:52By The Daily Take Team, The Thom Hartmann Program | Op-Ed
2014 918 colombia stThe boundary line between the middle and lower classes in Bogota, Colombia. (Photo: Matt Lemmon)America's billionaires are driving this nation's poverty epidemic. But it doesn't have to be that way.
As we speak, working-class Americans are getting screwed over by policies that favor the wealthy elite, and leave everyone else in the dust.
As a result, more and more Americans are living in poverty.
In 2013, over 45 million Americans were living in poverty, including one in five children, and today, around 4 percent of our population lives on $2 per day or less.
Unfortunately, our lawmakers in Washington would rather continue pandering to the needs of the rich and famous, than confront the very real poverty epidemic that is crippling our country.

Like America, Colombia is struggling with its own poverty epidemic brought on by extremely high levels of wealth inequality and by wealthy Colombians who aren't doing their fair share to help the economy.

Colombia is the seventh most unequal country in the world, with a staggering 32 percent of Colombians living in poverty.

In rural areas of that country, the poverty rate jumps to just under 47 percent.
Meanwhile, just like here in America, there is a small number of very wealthy people who are doing very little to help the Colombian economy and working-class Colombians.
But that's changing.

More and more Colombians are being lifted out of poverty each year because the Colombian government isn't afraid to ask the wealthy elite to do their fair share to help the economy.

Last week, the Colombian government, under the direction of President Juan Manuel Santos, extended a wealth tax that was first introduced in 2002.  Speaking about the wealth tax, Colombia's Finance minister Mauricio Cardenas told the Financial Times that, "It is very important to collect revenues from the wealthiest Colombians to be able to invest in security and defence on the one hand, and in social sectors on the other hand."

What a novel idea: taxing the rich to help improve an economy.

Naturally, Colombia's rich and powerful are arguing that the wealth tax will hurt the Colombian middle-class and hamper investments in the country.

But the results of Colombia's wealth tax over its first 12 years speak for themselves.
Over the past decade, Colombia's economy has become one the fastest growing economies in Latin America.

Meanwhile, unemployment in that country has been steadily decreasing, and inflation has remained relatively low.

Now, imagine what could happen to our economy, and to working poor people in America, if our lawmakers weren't afraid to make the wealthy elite pay their fair share.

According to CNBC, if we were to bump up the top marginal Income Tax rate to 39.6 percent - where it was during the Clinton era - for all Americans making $250,000 or more per year, our economy would take in an extra $40 to $45 billion per year. 

Just imagine how much good that money could do, and how many Americans it could help lift out of poverty.    And if we rolled the top tax rate back to where it was from the 1950s through the 1980s, we could actually do away with our deficit and fully fund necessary social programs.    (Some call for a 92% Tax, c.f. FDR - editor)

Ever since Ronald Reagan stepped foot inside the White House, we've seen the devastating effects of putting too much wealth in the hands of too few people.
While the wealthy elite continue to get richer and richer, working-class Americans are finding themselves sinking deeper and deeper below the poverty line, struggling to survive day-to-day.

It's time for this insanity to stop and to make America's millionaires and billionaires pay their fair share to support our economy.

We are the wealthiest and most developed country in the world.

There is no reason why one in five children should be struggling with poverty, or why 12.5 million Americans should be living on $2 per day.

Let's take a page out of Colombia's playbook, stand up to the wealthy elite, and finally eliminate poverty in America.

Wednesday, September 17, 2014

Poverty is Too Expensive

The U.S. Census Bureau has announced that the poverty rate declined in 2013, falling from 15% of Americans to 14.5%. This is the first decline since 2006.
Pop the cork on the champagne, boys! This means that only 45.3 million Americans were living at or below the poverty line, which was an annual income of $23,834 last year ($24,375 in 2014 dollars).
So what does it take to live in poverty? A lot of hard work for that four-member family, especially if they're being paid the current minimum wage.
To make $23,834 at $7.25/hour takes about 3,287.5 hours per year. Now, since most minimum-wage jobs don't include things like sick leave, vacations and other things that would only be wasted on the poor, the calculations are easy.
3,287.5 hours per year equals about 63.25 hours per week. Since it's tough enough to get an employer to commit to 40 hours per week for hourly workers, overtime probably isn't a factor.
So either one adult in the family has to work two jobs or there must be two wage-earners. The single-breadwinner approach works out to 8 hours per day, seven days a week, every week and then pick up one more four-hour shift at the second job. Once again, there's no room for time lost due to illness.
The benefit is that one adult is free to take care of the home and children. This is the "Leave It To Beaver" world of the poor. No high heels and no pearls, but someone is there when the kids get out of school, which experts tell us is a good thing.
The more reasonable alternative is both parents work and try to adjust their schedules to maximize their family time.
Don't forget, this is all to make the maximum under the federal poverty guidelines. A lot of those 45 million-plus people don't make that much.
Of course, as we all know from listening to various pundits and politicians, these are the lazy sponges that soak up government assistance in the form of SNAP, WIC, Earned Income Tax Credits and other such examples of federal waste. And they don't even pay income tax.
Sorry, maybe it's just my flawed perceptions, but two people busting their butts just to make enough to be Poor don't sound very lazy.
But let's say this is the "Leave It To Beaver" world with one parent employed, one stay-at-home parent and a couple of kids, call them, oh, Theodore and Wallace. Ward or June has one job working 40 hours a week and let's toss in a two-week vacation, while we're at it.
How much does Ward or June need to make enough to live in gentile poverty in modern America? $11.92 an hour.
This is well beyond the proposed $10.10 minimum wage that some have solemnly predicted would cause the collapse of Western civilization and lead to mass joblessness.
But wait! That $11.92/hour would mean that many people could stop having to work two jobs. Those jobs would still need to be done, so other people would be needed to fill them. These new hires would now have money and could become consumers, the real job creators in our economy.
Of course, $15.00/hour sounds good, too. People who work as hard as many minimum wage earners should be able to see something beyond the bare necessities.
And to those who moan about how raising the Minimum wage to a livable level would make prices skyrocket, I would point out that the average price of a Big Mac has risen 30% since the last time the minimum wage was raised. The employees didn't get raises but somebody's making more money somewhere up the chain. And they're probably not buying enough Big Macs to cover it. Let's see what happens if we pay the folks that make them enough to buy them (McDonald's employee discounts apply only to food purchased by the employee for their own consumption during breaks).

Yellow Shirted Activists Disrupt CA Agency

Protesters say California

too Slow in Spending

$2 Billion to Aid Homeowners

hsangree@sacbee.comSeptember 16, 2014 Updated 1 hour ago




www.keepyourhomecalifornia.org 
Two dozen protesters wearing yellow T-shirts marched through a downtown Sacramento conference room and chanted slogans Tuesday during a meeting of the California Housing Finance Agency’s board of directors.
The members of the Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment demanded that the agency’s Keep Your Home California program move faster in distributing $2 billion in federal aid for struggling Homeowners.
Keep Your Home California still has about $1 billion of the money it received from the U.S. Treasury Department’s Hardest Hit Fund several years ago. It must spend that remaining amount by 2017.
Critics say the program has been dragging its feet as more homes are lost to foreclosure.
“What do we want? Principal reduction! When do we want it? Now!” the protesters chanted as they marched in circles around the room at the Holiday Inn on J Street, disrupting the meeting.
Group member Jose Vega and others addressed the Board during its Public comment period. Vega, who had his own loan Payments greatly reduced, said there were Thousands of other Homeowners who are unable to qualify for aid because they owe so much more than their homes are worth.
“The money is there. It needs to be used,” he said.
At the meeting, CalHFA executives assured the Protesters they’d been heard, but later took issue with the group’s message.
“We’re absolutely on track,” said Diane Richardson, head of Keep Your Home California and the housing agency’s director of legislation.
So far the program has helped more than 43,500 homeowners and distributed $790 million in aid, with an additional $75 million in payments scheduled to be distributed, Richardson said.
On Tuesday, Richardson gave The Sacramento Bee a copy of a letter that Tia Boatman Patterson, the agency’s new director, sent to ACCE organizers in response to their demands that Keep Your Home California do more to help struggling homeowners.
The letter contends the program has continually adjusted its criteria since it started in 2011, in order to include more homeowners.
Last year, for instance, Keep Your Home California loosened the rules of its Principal Reduction Program, which can slash the amount borrowers owe by up to $100,000. Previous rules required applicants to prove a hardship such as a death in the family or unemployment. After the changes, homeowners need to show only that they owe 40 percent more than their home is worth.
“In September 2013, California was able to implement a change to PRP that made severe negative equity (on its own) a hardship indicative of imminent default,” Boatman Patterson wrote.
Requirements that lenders modify loans – matching state principal reductions dollar for dollar – were removed.
The letter also noted that anyone who receives unemployment benefits in California is given information about the agency’s Unemployment Mortgage Assistance program, which covers loan payments up to $3,000 a month for 12 months.
Those changes and others have made the program more inclusive over time, officials said.
More information about the state’s homeowner assistance programs is available www.keepyourhomecalifornia.org 
or by calling (888) 954-5337.
Read more here: http://www.mercedsunstar.com/2014/09/16/3851925/protesters-say-california-too.html#storylink=cpy