Disastrous Budget Deal Coming In June? Cenk Uygur the Young Turks June 15, 2011 video and transcript

Posted on June 16, 2011 by William Brighenti

In an article this morning, Eric Cantor was very praiseworthy of Joe Biden. That is a red flag waving. If Democrats were to come out and say that they would give everything that Eric Cantor wants except minus one thing, except that they would not give him a stick of bubble gum that he wanted as well, Eric Canter would say these Democrats are the worse, they have done nothing to create jobs, they have done nothing to reduce spending cuts, etc. Eric Cantor is very pleased with how the talks with Joe Biden are going? Massive trouble.

Then Joe Biden came out and said that they will have a deal on the budget cuts by the end of June? The end of June is not that far off. That means that they are pretty close to a deal. Now a deal is a good thing if, overall, it’s a good deal. The Republicans are ready to accept this and the Democrats are going in their direction.

The Republicans were asking for $2 trillion in spending cuts without any tax increases. So if they are pretty close to a deal without discussing any tax increase, that’s bad news: that means it’s all spending.

But in a new article today, the Republicans would like $2.4 trillion in spending cuts. How many times have we seen this movie. Do you think that they are going to stop at $2.4 trillion? Remember the original idea was $2 trillion and the Democrats said we should do a clean raising of the debt ceiling not tied to spending cuts: that’s a different issue. So the Democrats were originally at zero spending cuts in relation to raising the debt ceiling, which is what we are talking about here. And the Republicans were at $2 trillion.

The Democrats moved to $1 trillion: Joe Biden announced that a couple of weeks ago. And I told you then that they would move to $2 trillion. Now $1 trillion should have been the middle and the end of the negotiations. But that’s not how Washington works. Do you think that they are just going to go to $1.5 trillion? Go halfway and then go halfway again? Then you don’t know the Democrats. They are definitely going to $2 trillion. And that isn’t the end either though. Once they go to $2 trillion, the Republicans will move the goal posts. In fact, the goal posts just got moved this morning to $2.4 trillion.

Do you think that’s the last time the Republicans are going to move it? They can go all the way to $4 trillion. Because the more they move the goal posts, the more Biden and the White House say, okay, let’s go further to the right.

So Biden saying today that they are beginning to tackle the really hard stuff and that they are making real progress, meaning giving in on more spending cuts. Now how do we know that? Because the Republicans come out of the meeting and say, not only have we not touched taxes but we will never touch taxes. Now the rich will get to keep all of their tax cuts.

If they do that deal and there are really no tax increases whatsoever, nothing on the revenue side, and they do $2 trillion or how many trillion in spending cuts—we already know that the Democrats are hopeless and the Obama White House in negotiations in the past has been hopeless—that is beyond hopeless. But I am worried that they are going in that direction.

But today, also a sign of so-called strength, Senate Democrats came out and said, hey, we’re drawing a line in the sand. They keep drawing lines in the sand; we’re drawing one. Mitch McConnell said earlier that Medicare cuts must be involved in this package. Well, Schumer, Reed, and Patty Murray came out and said, there will be no Medicare cuts in this package. That’s our line in the sand. And then you read into the details; the devil’s in the details. So let me tell you what they are.

Schumer said, “No matter what we do in these budget talks, we must preserve the program in its current form and we will not allow cuts to seniors’ benefits.” Now that’s a small red flag. Because he said we would not allow cuts to benefits; we must preserve the program as it is. Now that’s a code word for, we will not accept Ryan’s plan to change the total way that Medicare has performed but we might accept other changes to it.

A second article written by Brian Beutler explains that Democrat leaders drew a clear line, and here’s the distinction: Medicare cuts can be on the table but not medicare benefit cuts. The second red flag.

Then third, a separate article said, Democrats said that any changes to Medicare would be in the form of delivery reform to avoid cutting benefits for seniors.

Now look, that could be okay. We have to see what the proposal is. But I don’t know what they mean by delivery reform. Is that a code word for we are going to cut the benefits but we are not going to call it cutting the benefits? You know the Democrats: entirely possible.

So a word of caution about the Democrats drawing a line. They are Democrats; they don’t mean it. And afterwards they tell you they don’t mean it.

So watch out for what Biden has got cooking there. The Republicans are excited about it: that is a very bad sign.

One more thing. There is a lot of false drama in Washington. The same thing with health care. Will it pass? Will it not pass? Will financial reform pass or not pass. And I said all along that they were all going to pass. The question was never that they were not going to pass. The question was what’s in it. Is it tough, is it not tough. I told you that from day one.

And I’m telling you with this raising the debt ceiling. Are you kidding me? Wall Street and the Chamber of Commerce have already ruled on this. They said that they will definitely raise the debt ceiling, no matter what. The Republicans are a wholly owned subsidiary of Wall Street. They’re going to raise the debt ceiling. That’s why the debt ceiling actually isn’t a real problem until August. They said that they are going to settle this by the end of June. Why? Because the Republicans are bluffing. They are definitely going to raise the debt ceiling. Their bosses told them to do it.

Are the Democrats going to raise it? Absolutely. False drama. Why? Because the Democrats and Republicans have to play this game where at the end they take all of the money from the middle class and say that there was nothing that they could do about it. We just had to do the cuts to the middle class and the poor, but golly gee willikers, we still haven’t gotten to the tax situation for the rich. Another day.

You watch, you see. That is exactly what’s going to happen.

Transcribed by the Barefoot Accountant of Accountants CPA Hartford, Connecticut, LLC

Accountants CPA Hartford, Connecticut, LLC, located in Berlin, Connecticut, offers quality accounting, auditing, tax, bookkeeping, and QuickBooks consulting services at fees of one-third of those of our competitors to individuals and businesses across a wide spectrum of industries throughout the entire United States. William Brighenti is a Certified Public Accountant and Certified QuickBooks ProAdvisor. For all of your accounting, auditing, bookkeeping, tax return preparation, tax planning, and QuickBooks services, please consider us: (860) 249-1323.

Posted in Accountants CPA Hartford, Articles | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Progressives: hold the line! Fight the right! Cenk Uygur MSNBC TV June 15, 2011 Video and Transcript: How Democrats can fix the economy without the GOP

Posted on June 15, 2011 by William Brighenti

UYGUR: “It‘s the economy, stupid.” Remember, that was the phrase that helped Bill Clinton turn George H. W. Bush into a one-term president.

Now, two decades later, it‘s threatening to turn a Democrat into a one-termer. The latest polling shows that 47 percent of Americans think the economy is poor and 70 percent think it‘s getting worse. That is a very bad number.

Americans and the politicians who would like to keep their jobs desperately need a solution. So, Senator Chuck Schumer sat down with other Democrats last week to discuss doable job creation ideas, proposals they could pass with a GOP-controlled House.

The result, according to columnist E.J. Dionne, “The senators concluded that the only stimulative measures with any chance of getting Republican votes involve tax cuts.”

Are you kidding me? The only thing Democrats could come up with was tax cuts?

Tax cuts are not a Democratic solution. They‘re not even a solution at all.

Remember, President Clinton improved the economy and added 23 million jobs in the ‘90s when he raised taxes on the rich. But the Republican leadership knows they‘ve already won that conversation.

Mitch McConnell told “The National Journal,” “I can say pretty confidently, as the Speaker has, that we are not going to raise taxes in this agreement.”

Mitch even has a little advice for the president. “What the president
ought to say to his own political left is, ‘Those crazy Republicans won‘t let me raise taxes, but we need to do this for the country.‘”

That is so sad. You know why? Because it‘s true.

Watch. That is exactly what the Democrats and the president are going to say.

In my opinion, they are doing Mitch McConnell‘s bidding for him. Why are tax cuts the only option?

Hey here‘s an idea—create jobs for real Americans instead of giving more tax cuts to the rich.

But will Democrats really push for that?

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. DEBBIE WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (D-FL), DNC CHAIR: We own the economy. We own the beginning of the turnaround. And we want to make sure that we continue that pace of recovery.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

UYGUR: I wouldn‘t have said we own the economy. Look, I would fight for job creation. That‘s the real way to go.

To play on only Republican ground is a bad idea. It‘s going to lead to a bad economy and it‘s going to lead to bad electoral results, if you ask me. But you know what? Shockingly enough, they haven‘t asked me yet.

All right. Let‘s talk about it with someone else.

Adam Green is joining me. He‘s the co-founder of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee. He‘s live in Minneapolis, the site of the Netroots Nation convention this week, where, actually, I‘ll be speaking on Saturday night.

All right.

Adam, Democrats get together and they think their only option is tax cuts. I suspect you have a different idea.

ADAM GREEN, CO-FOUNDER, PCCC: Yes.

Well, first of all, welcome. Greetings from sunny Minneapolis, home of Paul Wellstone and, as you said, the Netroots Nation conference.

Look, Democrats have a consist pattern of essentially capitulating before the fight even begins. And it‘s a real problem. Here is kind of the mental process they go through.

It‘s like, well, do Republicans say they will vote for these progressive popular ideas? Oh, no, they won‘t. So let‘s just adopt Republican ideas. But that‘s an absurd way of legislating.

The best way for progressives to legislate is really a three-step process. One, say what is the right thing to do? In this case, as you said, it‘s massive government investment in jobs.

Step two, is this a popular idea? In this case, overwhelmingly. Republican, Independent and Democratic voters want investment in jobs.

And three I would call the Cenk Uygur step, which is, Democrats have to make the case, they have to rally the public. And if people like Mitch McConnell are against their own constituents, well, when they go back home, they need to face exactly what Paul Ryan and other Republicans faced a couple of months ago, which is angry people at town hall meetings.

That only happens if Democrats actually make the case first, and that‘s what we need them to do on jobs.

UYGUR: I feel like I stirred so many questions this week. What is wrong with them? How can they possibly have been in politics for decades and not understand that, hey, maybe you should make your own case, that maybe you should tell voters, here‘s what I‘m going to do—I‘m going to create jobs. I‘m going to create three or four million jobs.

But look at these Republicans. They‘re standing in our way.

And then you put pressure on the Republicans. And guess what? The Republicans might change instead of you caving in all the time.

Like, seriously, Adam, you work a lot in Washington. I‘m sure you tell the congressmen and the senators that. When you tell them that, what do they say? I mean, do they say, I don‘t know anything about politics? What the hell do they say?

GREEN: Look, honestly, there is kind of a culture clash between those who only play the inside game in Washington, D.C., and those who understand how to mobilize people outside of Washington.

So, look, here is the way I see negotiation. If 75 percent of the people are on my side, and 25 percent of the people are on the side of somebody across the table from me, and they‘re drawing a line in the sand in a way that puts them on the opposite side of their own constituents, I‘m not going to take that line in the sand. I‘m going to rally their constituents against them.

And politicians, most of whom are younger or a little bit more tech savvy, understand how to use the Internet to rally people quickly. But unfortunately, there‘s a culture in D.C. of making behind-the-scenes deals.

Now, the one fortunate thing—

(CROSSTALK)

UYGUR: I have a theory, Adam.

GREEN: OK. What‘s your theory?

UYGUR: My theory is, it‘s not that they‘re not tech savvy. It‘s not that they can‘t read a poll. They‘re politicians. They can read a poll. They know what 75 percent is.

No, it‘s that they take money from the same financial interests. So, they pretend like, oh, the Republicans made me do it! Mitch McConnell is rubbing their face in it saying, yes, you know that‘s the game you‘re playing. You‘re taking money from the same guys as we are.

Look, let me give you a sense of what the Republicans are up to.

They‘re going to take almost a billion dollars away from WIC, from CSFP, TEFAP. These are all programs that help the poor, the middle class, they help women and children. They are looking to kill Medicare and Medicaid if they can.

They want to spend $17 billion more on defense. They want to continue tax breaks for big oil. They want to demand $2.4 trillion in cuts in exchange for raising the debt ceiling.

All of these are enormously unpopular. Nobody wants these. These all polled terribly. And instead of fighting back, what do the Democrats do? They go, oh, OK, when you say jump, I say how high?

A party can‘t be that bad. They just can‘t be that bad.

GREEN: Look, I‘m not going to dispute your basic premise, which is that corporate money is absolutely corrupting politics. I really think it‘s a few things.

I think it‘s that. I think it‘s the failure to understand how to mobilize the public. And that comes along with the idea that some of these politicians would actually make more money for their campaigns if they rallied the public, as opposed to trying to get $500, $1,000, $2,000 contributions from Wall Street hacks.

But a third thing is honestly just the fear factor with Democrats. Many Democrats kind of imagine the worst-case scenario of, what will these big corporate ads that run against me look like?

And then they think to themselves, oh, there is no way I can possibly fight back, even when the polling clearly shows the public is on my side. And what we‘re trying to do is say to those people, the good people who feel trapped in a bad system, as opposed to the genuinely corrupt people, we‘re trying to say, we will get your back if you are willing to fight for massive government investment in jobs.

Let‘s wire America with the Internet. Let‘s rebuild crumbling schools. Let‘s put people to work.

UYGUR: And God bless. Let‘s do that.

GREEN: The one good piece of news today was in “The Huffington Post,” in response to our activism, Senator Chuck Schumer‘s office said that he is willing to fight for investment and infrastructure. We look forward to working with him if he is willing to do that.

(CROSSTALK)

UYGUR: I hope so. I really, really hope so. All right. Adam Green of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee.

Thanks for joining us. We appreciate it.

GREEN: Thanks, Cenk.

Transcribed by the Barefoot Accountant of Accountants CPA Hartford, Connecticut, LLC.

Accountants CPA Hartford, Connecticut, LLC, located in Berlin, Connecticut, offers quality accounting, auditing, tax, bookkeeping, and QuickBooks consulting services at fees of one-third of those of our competitors to individuals and businesses across a wide spectrum of industries throughout the entire United States. William Brighenti is a Certified Public Accountant and Certified QuickBooks ProAdvisor. For all of your accounting, auditing, bookkeeping, tax return preparation, tax planning, and QuickBooks services, please consider us: (860) 249-1323.

Posted in Accountants CPA Hartford, Articles | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Cenk Uygur, the Aggressive Progressive, June 13, 2011: IMF Economists Blame Lobbyists for Crash. Video and transcript.

Posted on June 15, 2011 by William Brighenti

Transcribed by the Barefoot Accountant of Accountants CPA Hartford, Connecticut, LLC

A scathing new report reveals just how effective American banks and their lobbyists were in watering down regulations that helped fuel our mortgage meltdown. Two IMF economists just wrote a new article saying, “In the period from 2000 and 2006, a bill that was unfavorable to the financial industry was three times less likely to become law than one promoting deregulation.” So, of course, there was a great drive for deregulation. Well, let’s find out who caused that drive and what it resulted in.

The economists of the IMF determined that, “There was a clear association between the money affected financial firms spent on lobbying and the way legislators voted on the key bills considered before the crisis.” Shocking! It turns out the more money spent on lobbying, the more laws you can buy.

The IMF researchers also concluded that if a lobbyist had worked for a legislator in the past, the legislator was very likely to vote in favor of less regulation. That’s why the lobbyists buy the top staffers on the hill after they leave their government jobs.

Now what was the result of all of this? The report found, “Lenders that lobbied heavily between 2000 and 2006 tended to engage in risky lending practices more often than other institutions over the same period and suffered worse outcomes during the crisis.”

So, how did this work? They lobbied for deregulation, they bought the staffers, they bought the politicians, they got the deregulation, and then they crashed. But don’t worry, they shovel that cost onto the taxpayers anyway.

Our system of government is broken. The way we finance elections is broken. They buy our politicians, they get the results that they want, and to everyone’s detriment. It even hurt their own firms, and it certainly hurt all the taxpayers. We’ve got to find a new way. This is not helping our Democracy.

Accountants CPA Hartford, Connecticut, LLC offers quality accounting, auditing, tax, bookkeeping, and QuickBooks consulting services at fees of one-third of those of our competitors to individuals and businesses across a wide spectrum of industries throughout the entire United States. Call us now at (860) 249-1323.

Posted in Accountants CPA Hartford, Articles | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Aggressive Progressive: Crooked Politicians, Businessmen, & Bankers Pilfer Town Causing Massive Layoffs and Tax Hikes. Cenk Uygur MSNBC TV June 14, 2011 video and transcript.

Posted on June 15, 2011 by William Brighenti

Transcribed by Accountants CPA Hartford, Connecticut, LLC

We’ve all heard the stories of Wall Street Greed but wait till you hear about how it affected one community in Alabama. We’re talking about Jefferson County, Alabama. Back in 1995 the local government planned to put a new sewer system in. The price tag was supposed to be $250 million.

But then the bankers came in. They paid off local politicians and businessmen to let them sell the County fancy synthetic swaps and other financial weapons of mass destruction. The eventual absurd price tage of the project became $3 billion.

JP Morgan Chase eventually charged $1.28 billion in just interest and fees. As the Rolling Stones Matt Taibbi reported, it was all a sham. Twenty local officials and so-called consultants were convicted of corruption in Federal court.

Now how many bankers got convicted? You guessed it: none. They paid a comically low fine of $25 million and restitution of $50 million, a fraction of what they made off the deal, and they were free to go.

And what happened to Jefferson County in the meanwhile? Well, they’re still saddled with the debt. So today 1,000 workers are being forced to take leave without pay. Sheriff Mike Hale said that his deputies will not be responding to traffic accidents because of budget problems.

And what about JP Morgan Chase? Well, they are living the high life, hauling in record profits. $17.4 billion last year, $5.6 billion in the first quarter alone of this year. That’s the biggest quarterly profit in its history. And just to put things into perspective, the $12 million saved by putting workers on leave is only 0.2% of JP Morgan’s first quarter profits.

Do you get it? This isn’t theoretical. They took this County for a ride. They got rich in the meanwhile and now all the residents have to pay the bills on their modest incomes.

And where the hell is our Justice Department? I thought they were supposed to be on top of things like this. The one thing Republicans and Democrats seem to agree on is that the banks must be protected at all costs no matter what they do. If Democrats were actually progressive, they would go down to Alabama and get those votes and actually help those people.

Can we get a party to finally represent us? Please.

Accountants CPA Hartford, Connecticut, LLC offers quality accounting, auditing, tax, bookkeeping, and QuickBooks consulting services at fees of one-third of those of our competitors to individuals and businesses across a wide spectrum of industries throughout the entire United States. Call us now at (860) 249-1323.

Posted in Accountants CPA Hartford, Articles | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Cenk Uygur’s GOP Con Job for June 14, 2011: Cut Women and Children First! Video and Transcript

Posted on June 15, 2011 by William Brighenti

Transcribed by Accountants CPA Hartford, Connecticut, LLC

Republicans can always find cash for millionaires and military contractors but they say we cannot afford to defend poor women and kids. The GOP’s whole twisted set of priorities is our con job of today.

The House began debating a spending bill today that cuts $833 million from the WIC nutrition program which provides healthy food to low-income women and their children. Appropriations Chair Hal Rogers (Republican Representative from Kentucky) says, “This legislation reflects hard decisions to cut lower priority programs, reduce spending in programs that can be scaled back, and target funds where they are needed most….”

So programs for the hungry are not a high priority. Well, at least they are honest about their Republican priorities. Now what was it that Jesus said? Give me your poor and needy and I will go tell them to pound sand. [Please note that the Christian Fundamentalists, in hypocritical fashion, all vote for these Republican fat cats, who only care about money and Wall Street and don’t give a damn about the poor and the downtrodden.] At least that’s the Republican’s vision of Jesus.

The other GOP rationale for cutting WIC is that there’s more than enough aid already. Republican Representative Virginia Foxx from North Carolina: “We do not lack for programs to help take care of the hungry people in this country, Mr. Speaker. What we lack is efficiency in our programs.”

This isn’t about efficiency. This is about need: helping the hungry in the middle of a tough economy. The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities estimates that the GOP cuts will mean up to 350,000 eligible women and children and babies won’t get those WIC benefits. What efficient about that unless your aim is to hurt the poor.

But the worst part is that the government is literally giving away money to offset these cuts. Bush era tax cuts provide millionaires with $860 million every week. That’s more than the total amount being cut from WIC for a year. Those priorities make me sick.

And if Republicans were serious about efficiency, they would take a look at military spending. Instead the House GOP is pushing for a $17 billion budget increase from the Pentagon. So we always have money for weapons and wars but not for the most needy in this country. They are low priorities.

Republicans say we have plenty of money for defense contractors and millionaires but not enough to help poor women and kids get the food they need and that heartless ridiculous reasoning is our con job of the day.

Accountants CPA Hartford, Connecticut, LLC offers quality accounting, auditing, tax, bookkeeping, and QuickBooks consulting services at fees of one-third of those of our competitors to individuals and businesses across a wide spectrum of industries throughout the entire United States. Call us now at (860) 249-1323.

Posted in Accountants CPA Hartford, Articles | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Power Panel discusses the Medicare problem: Democrats refuse to cave on Medicare, but will the Obama White House cave? Cenk Uygur MSNBC TV June 14, 2011 video and transcript

Posted on June 14, 2011 by William Brighenti

Transcribed by Accountants CPA Hartford, Connecticut, LLC

UYGUR: Welcome back to the show, everybody. Now to discuss some of the biggest political stories, we bring in our Power Panel. Alex Wagner, MSNBC‘s political analyst, reporter for the Huffington Post. Kiki McLean, a founding leader of the No Labels Group and former senior adviser to Hillary Clinton during her 2008 presidential run. And finally, former New York republican Congressman Rick Lazio. Great to have all of you here with us tonight.

FMR. REP. RICK LAZIO ®, NEW YORK: Thank you.

KIKI MCLEAN, “NO LABELS” FOUNDING LEADER: Glad to be here.

ALEX WAGNER, THE HUFFINGTON POST: Thanks, Cenk.

UYGUR: First question for the panel. Democrats refuse to cave on Medicare, let‘s hope but with the Obama White House, Senate Democrats stood firm on the issue again today.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. HARRY REID (D), NEVADA: We‘re calling on Republicans to take away any cuts to Medicare benefits. Take them off the table, now.

SEN. CHUCK SCHUMER (D), NEW YORK: The Ryan plan to end Medicare as we know it must be taken off the table.

SEN. PATTY MURRAY (D), WASHINGTON: Today, we are here to say to the Republicans, we will not allow them to balance the budget on the backs of our seniors.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

UYGUR: Alex, first question is, it for real, you know? It‘s nice rhetoric, ecstatically here it. But do we think they‘ll really going to hold the line?

WAGNER: Look, it is heartening I think to see the Democrats A united and B playing hardball. I mean, a lot of times. The Obama White House is probably most guilty of this. They negotiate with themselves ahead of this. And, you know, strategically speaking, the Paul Ryan Medicare plan is the best tactic the Democrats have had since Obama ran for office. I mean, this is manna from heaven for the 2012 presidential campaign. This is something they can all unite behind and fundamentally, it in genders of rhetoric conversation about the American social compact. And what the Republicans are offering and what the Democrats are offering. I think for now we have to hope for the best.

UYGUR: Kiki, help me understand this. Apparently they‘re saying that Medicare cuts can be on the table, but not Medicare benefit cuts. What‘s the distinction?

MCLEAN: Well, first of all, step back and understand that from my point of view, as a democrat but as a leader of No Labels, I believe to get to a solution, we‘ll going to have a bipartisan solution, and so everything‘s got to be on the table for that conversation. What I hear Senate Democrats saying, some in different ways than others, which is you‘re not going to go to the Paul Ryan extreme. There are people who believe that the Ryan plan is the most extreme and therefore not really moving toward a conversation about what can really happen. That‘s the difference I think when you look for it. Everything has got beyond the table, but the point is if you start off from a point of hyper partisanship, that‘s not going to move the debate forward.

UYGUR: All right. That scares me. Because.

MCLEAN: Why does that scare you?

UYGUR: I‘ll tell you it scares me. I‘ll tell you exactly why it scares me, Kiki. Because look, when you say, well, we‘re not going to do the Ryan plan which is massively radical, but we‘ll do other things. That tells me. Yes, we‘re on the cut Medicare. And I don‘t want to cut Medicare, especially when the Republicans tell me that they‘ll be no tax increases under no circumstances.

MCLEAN: Exactly.

(CROSSTALK)

UYGUR: I‘m going to take Medicare off the table in a second.

MCLEAN: Cenk, that‘s just the point. You see, you want to do it as a tit for tat. What I‘m suggesting is that a bipartisan solution means everybody is at the table and we figure out what we‘re for. The goal is to fix our economy, to create more jobs, get this debt ceiling raised, and make sure that we can preserve Medicare, that it can work. I personally happen to believe that the Ryan plan is extreme, and wasn‘t really meant as a legitimate offering. I believe that it was actually put out there as a political tactic, so the point is you‘ve got to start with everything on the table, including what you‘re concerned won‘t be on the table. It‘s two parts, everything has to be there.

UYGUR: All right. Look, over the last ten years, every time in Washington said, bipartisan. The middle class got screwed and the rich got richer. That‘s part of my concern, but Rick, are you willing to put taxes on the table as a republican and say, yes, sure, maybe we should raise taxes?

LAZIO: Well, first of all, somebody is going to have to address Medicare. Whether Republicans and Democrats can do it before the debt ceiling vote, I don‘t know. But when a program like Medicare which is a huge program is growing at twice the rate of the economy, it is unsustainable and those reductions are going to come from somewhere. And let‘s face it. You know, Democrats already accepted a reduction in the rate of growth of over $400 billion in order to help finance the health care bill. So, they‘re already on record for having reduced the base.

UYGUR: That‘s true. Is that good enough?

(TALKING OVER EACH OTHER)

UYGUR: Is that good enough, Rick?

LAZIO: Pardon me?

UYGUR: Is that good enough, $400 billion?

LAZIO: Not when the program is growing at twice the rate of the economy. We‘re borrowing $4 billion a day, Cenk.

(TALKING OVER EACH OTHER)

UYGUR: So, Rick, I want to stay with you then. Rick, I want to stay with you. You say, OK, Medicare is growing too fast, we can‘t afford it. On the other hand, you‘ve got Republicans saying they want to do massive gigantic tax cuts for the rich? What happened? I thought we couldn‘t anything.

LAZIO: So, let me say this. First of all, you‘ve got to understand that the only way long term to address this huge fiscal dilemma that we have right now is through growth. The worst time to raise taxes is when you have a soft fragile recovery like we have right now.

UYGUR: That‘s what they say every time, every time. Oh, it‘s a terrible time to raise taxes. Let‘s give more to the rich. Alex? Alex?

WAGNER: I just think what we have to look at this strategically. This is playing politics. I mean, I think Democrats are not in the dark that, you know, entitling programs, there needs to be some reform. Does that mean we need to turn Medicare into a voucher program, I‘m not sure. The Republicans have gone far to the right. Look at the budget to pass the House. I mean, I think it‘s high time that the Democrats—at least have some ground to stand on and circle the wagons a little bit.

(TALKING OVER EACH OTHER)

MCLEAN: I want to take a moment.

LAZIO: — Because people like to say all the time that this is some type of voucher program. The Ryan plan has the subsidies flowing through Medicare, and it only is going to be paid to license regulated insurers. It also means test the monies, so that people who are the most needy and who are the sickest are going to get a disproportionate amount of money. So, I know that‘s a great talking point, and sound bite, to call a voucher program, but it‘s not accurate base on the way the architecture of that plan.

UYGUR: No, no. Rick, Rick. The last part right—hold on. Let me just say, Rick, you‘re right about the last part. But about the first part, you described exactly a voucher program. That‘s what it is. So that‘s why we call it that. But Kiki, go ahead.

MCLEAN: Well, here‘s the issue. And I‘m going to praise two people. I‘m going to praise Eric Cantor by saying that he stepped out yesterday and praised Vice President Biden for the work the bipartisan team is doing trying to get us to agreement. Because this can‘t be about any one issue in isolation. This is about the whole, and we have to be able to look at it as a whole. Rick doesn‘t want to admit that we have to address taxes. We have to address taxes. I also think that when you look at Newt Gingrich and what he said, even in the republican debate last night, was that Medicare can‘t be an either/or on the far extremes. That we have to be willing to look at what the options are but the…

UYGUR: Let me tell you my problem with that is. Let me tell you what

the problem is

MCLEAN: Let me tell you what—let me say this.

UYGUR: Hold on. Let me address it. OK.

MCLEAN: The greatest moment, Cenk.

UYGUR: Look, the political spectrum has moved massively to the right over the last 30 years. And certainly over the last ten years. Now you‘re saying split the difference. I‘m not interested in splitting that difference.

MCLEAN: No, no, no. I didn‘t say split the difference.

UYGUR: Our tax rates are at historic lows.

MCLEAN: Cenk, I didn‘t say.

UYGUR: Hey, you can raise a tiny bit if we cut Medicare. I say no, let‘s bring the spectrum back to the center.

MCLEAN: I didn‘t say split it down the middle. What I suggested to you is this, that these things are connected. And so they‘ve got to be looked at in the whole. And by the way, when you talk about bipartisan solutions that it always work against middle class, I just don‘t believe that‘s true. Because the greatest moments in America‘s history have been where there have been bipartisan solutions. You‘re talking to a Texan who would be proud to have Lyndon Johnson carry all the water and all the gratitude for civil rights, but there was a republican from Illinois name Everett Dirksen who went to work with him on it.

UYGUR: Ancient history?

MCLEAN: I don‘t think a lot of people who live under civil rights reform.

UYGUR: Right. That was before the corporations took over it. The corporate America is taking over everything, including the military contractors, which is our next question for the panel.

MCLEAN: Cenk, then you don‘t believe that there‘s any possibility at all, and you might as well give up. I do.

UYGUR: No, no, I believe the real thing to do is to throw all the bums out and fix the system, because our money—the money has corrupted our system entirely. I mean, look at Evan Bayh, that‘s a democrat? That‘s progressive? That‘s a corporate robot. And what did he do? He came out of the Senate and he immediately grabbed the money. He grabbed the corporate money, now he works for the Chamber of Commerce and FOX News. That‘s what partisanship? That‘s ripping the middle class off, and that‘s what‘s been happening for the last 30 years. You go beyond 30 years, then, I agree with you. Then, we have lovely bipartisanship.

MCLEAN: But you know what? Your yelling and screaming doesn‘t solve the problems though, Cenk.

UYGUR: I think it begins to solve it.

MCLEAN: I don‘t think it solved anything right now. To be honest with you, I don‘t think it did anything to further the conversation in America. I don‘t think as a democrat, you did anything to help my point of view as a progressive get us to a solution. Because here‘s the reality, in order to address the issues I care about, we‘ve got to make sure our country is economically secure, that people have a chance to feed their kids, that they‘re able to take care of their parents when they‘re old and sick. And that they have opportunity. That‘s not going to come from one side alone.

UYGUR: All right. We‘ve got to move on, on the next question, and that‘s about defense budget. Look, we spent 43 percent of all the defense spending in the world. What is it every going to be enough? Rick, can we touch the defense budget? Or is it simply, again, the Republicans, no way, we have to give all our money to defense contract.

LAZIO: I think it needs to come down more. The program of a size of our defense budget right now. It means, it‘s partly a reflection of engaging in two wars the same time. I mean, we‘re going to have to make hard choices and defense and accept as Secretary Gates have said that there‘s going to be some traders here. That you cannot have a two-theater war effectively, and at the same time reduce spending. But in my mind, having a strong economy, creating jobs, and not relying on foreign governments to finance our debt is as much a national security issue as buying another ballistic missile system. I think we can do both. I think that number has got to come down. And frankly, if you look at President Obama‘s budget in February, not the second one, the first one, Republicans are pretty competitive with the amount of financing. So, it‘s not just a republican allocation here, it‘s one that the administration is also signed off on.

UYGUR: Agreed. We have agreement on the panel. I‘m feeling good.

MCLEAN: Yes, yes, it‘s partisan.

UYGUR: Alex, hold on one quick second. Look, another story that came out, somewhat related to this, $6.6 billion lost in Iraq. Lost.

WAGNER: Sure.

UYGUR: I mean, how much pork is in the defense budget that we can lose $6.6 billion and they don‘t even notice.

WAGNER: Look, even if we took all of our troops out of Afghanistan, arming and equipping the Afghan army will be $12.8 billion. We have serious expenditures as far as defense, five percent of our wealth that we spend on the defense budget. But, look, Leon Panetta was Clinton‘s chair of the Office of Management Budget, he‘s a notorious number cruncher. And looks like he‘s going to get some firm. I think there is some bipartisan support for trimming the defense budget. So, he may be the man to do it.

UYGUR: Kiki, real quick? Agreement again? We can cut defense?

MCLEAN: Yes, I think there‘s some agreement. Here‘s the amazing thing. I‘m not sure how those numbers went out because I think what you see on this panel is probably what you really find on Capitol Hill when it comes to that issue.

UYGUR: Well, I hope it‘s true on Capitol Hill. I know it‘s true across the country. People get there‘s pork in the defense budget and it goes to the military contractors. I wish our congressmen would get that.

Accountants CPA Hartford, Connecticut, LLC offers quality accounting, auditing, tax, bookkeeping, and QuickBooks consulting services at fees of one-third of those of our competitors to individuals and businesses across a wide spectrum of industries throughout the entire United States. Call us now at (860) 249-1323.

Posted in Accountants CPA Hartford, Articles | Tagged , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Wanted: jobs, not cuts. The progressive caucus proposes a jobs program. Cenk Uygur MSNBC TV June 14, 2011 video and transcript

Posted on June 14, 2011 by William Brighenti

Transcribed by Accountants CPA Hartford, Connecticut, LLC

UYGUR: Since the day that they took over the House, Republicans have laid a bear trap for President Obama. They kept insisting that the deficit was the only issue and challenged the president to do more and more spending cuts. Eventually, the president took the bait, listened, and started playing their game.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I am absolutely confident that we can move forward on a plan that gets our debt until control, gets our deficit under control.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

UYGUR: But now that the Republicans have the president on their ground and, more importantly, got him to stop focusing in public on creating jobs for the American people, which is in reality, of course, the number one issue in the country, they turn around and hammer him on jobs.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BOEHNER: The American people are still asking the question, well, where are the jobs? Republicans have been focused on jobs creation since the beginning of this Congress.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

UYGUR: That, of course, is a joke since they have not put forward one proposal or one bill to create jobs. But they are the masters of spin. They get the president to focus on spending cuts and ignore jobs creation, and then blame him for ignoring job creation.

Now, how many times is the president going to fall for this?

But out of the dark clouds of this misinformation campaign comes riding a posse of progressives, a veritable caucus—the Progressive Caucus. They‘re here to set the record straight.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. JAN SCHAKOWSKY (D-IL), PROGRESSIVE CAUCUS: And the new Republican majority has not offered one bill, one proposal, one concrete idea that would put Americans back to work.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

UYGUR: Now, will you look at that? Someone who actually cares about Americans who are out of work.

The Progressive Caucus announced today they‘re going on a listening tour this summer dubbed “Speak Out for Good Jobs Now.” The 12-city tour will give the unemployed and underemployed a chance to have their stories heard.

It started today in Washington with regular folks who desperately want jobs, folks who just happen to have some pretty astute observations.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The economy‘s just never going to recover if we get rid of the middle class. And that‘s essentially what‘s going on right now in the country.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

UYGUR: She sounds like Robert Reich. And she‘s right. How do you get a healthy economy for anybody without a middle class that can buy all those products? You can‘t.

Now, luckily, some Democrats are ready to listen. But can they stop the White House from falling into that GOP trap and focusing only on spending cuts?

Let‘s find out. Joining me now, Congressman Raul Grijalva, a member of the Progressive Caucus.

Congressman, great to have you here tonight with us.

REP. RAUL GRIJALVA (D), ARIZONA: Thank you very much. I appreciate the invitation.

UYGUR: No, no problem. Thank you.

So, when you talk about refocusing the conversation on to jobs, is the White House frankly an obstacle there? Because they seem like they‘re playing that Republican game of only focusing on spending cuts.

GRIJALVA: I think the whole discussion about jobs become so esoteric, so hypocritical, so full of spin, that nobody is listening to what the American people are saying, what working families are saying, what the middle class is saying. So, this 12-city, plus more in August, tour is about letting the American people talk about jobs, talk about their families, talk about their aspirations.

I think we‘re missing the boat as Democrats. If we don‘t embrace the idea that jobs are part of the cure for this recession, that good jobs are part of the cure for our economy, we‘re going to miss the boat.

The American people care about jobs. The Republicans have been hypocritical to talk about jobs and then cut anything that would stimulate job creation. And so, this tour is about listening to real people, on real time, with real ideas.

UYGUR: OK. You know, I want the audience to understand this.

Look, if you create more jobs, the government pays out less in unemployment, and they get more in revenue for the taxes of those people who have jobs. So it actually helps both things. It helps jobs and it helps the deficit.

And it seems like we have lost focus on that. Even David Brooks thinks the Republicans‘ strategy is a terrible idea.

Let me read you a quote from him. He wrote in “The New York Times” today, “The Republican growth agenda, tax cuts and nothing else, is stupefyingly boring, fiscally irresponsible, and politically impossible.”

So why are we having conversation on their ground? How do we fight on our ground? What would you propose? How do we create jobs as a member of the Progressive Caucus? What do you think is the right way to go?

GRIJALVA: I think the administration and Congress, and particularly the administration, has to get behind the public jobs bill that creates three to four million jobs for the American people, puts people to work on the things that need to be done for this country from our streets to our nursing homes, and puts these good people to work so they can take care of the family, circulate money in our economy, and begin to pull us out of the hole that we‘re in.

Franklin Roosevelt knew that. All his jobs bills were about circulating money and putting people to work, and giving the American people back the confidence that they need. That‘s what we need to do.

UYGUR: All right. You mentioned something really interesting there. I think most people watching go, hey, three to four million jobs, that would be great. Right?

How do you do that? What would you high them to do?

GRIJALVA: I would hire them to take care of America‘s needs—our roads, our buildings, our infrastructure, our nursing homes, to take care of the people that need to be taken care of, as my generation gets older and older. Also to take care of our schools, to make sure that we have all the infrastructure needs that the American economy is going to need to the future. Plan ahead.

We are not doing that. And as a consequence, we continue to fall behind in the global market because America is not prepared to compete in that global market, because we don‘t have the infrastructure to do that. Put American people, their ingenuity, their hard work, their dedication, put them to work to build us up again.

UYGUR: All right. Congressman Raul Grijalva, co-chairman of the Progressive Caucus, with a plan for actual jobs.

Thank you for your time tonight. We appreciate it.

GRIJALVA: Thank you.

UYGUR: All right.

Accountants CPA Hartford, Connecticut, LLC offers quality accounting, auditing, tax, bookkeeping, and QuickBooks consulting services at fees of one-third of those of our competitors to individuals and businesses across a wide spectrum of industries throughout the entire United States. Call us now at (860) 249-1323.

Posted in Accountants CPA Hartford, Articles | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Is Obama too focused on Wall Street? Wall Street: is it really worth it for Obama to woo Wall Street? Does Obama need Wall Street Fat Cats to win in 2012? Cenk Uygur MSNBC TV June 13, 2011 the Power Panel.

Posted on June 13, 2011 by William Brighenti

Transcribed by Accountants CPA Hartford, Connecticut, LLC

Joining us on tonight’s Power Panel are Michelle Cottle of Newsweek and the Daily Beast, Robert Borosage, Co-Director of Campaign for America’s Future and Contributing Editor of the Nation, and finally, Simon Rosenberg, President and founder of the New Democrat Network.

The question for you tonight: Wall Street, is it really worth it? These are the same bankers that contribute $71 million to the campaign in 2008 and that’s nearly 10 million more than to the Republicans in that election. Remember, Goldman, Citigroup and J.P. Morgan were among the top seven campaign contributors. Does it help or hurt the President’s re-election chances? On the one hand, he needs money. On the other hand, it is not good to go to the voters and say, look, I was trying to help the Wall Street guys.

I don’t think anyone would be surprised if he gets contributions from the Wall Street guys. he deserves them. he bailed out the banks. no one is prosecuted. bonuses are back up to record levels. the president earned their gratitude. he is not as shameless as republicans. they are trying to repeal even the small reforms we have had. but i think the president has a very good chance. you know, these are hedge fund operators. they will hedge their bets. they will put money on both parties. but i’m sure he will do quite well.

>> simon, is that too harsh? or is bob right?

>> that was a good one, bob. i think a year from now, if voters believe that the president is on their side and own the side of struggling communities, he will get a pass on things like this fund-raiser. but if he is seen as being too close to the banks and too close to economic interests, he can it can spell trouble in his reelection.

>> michelle, how do you thread this needle? unfortunately you need a ton of cash. who has it? the waup street bankers. on the other hand, the country hates the wall street bankers. rightfully so, in my opinion. how do you thread that needle?

>> on one hand you’ve got do it. the candidates intend to be a whiney bunch. pe want their hands held. obama calls them names and uses populous rhetoric. even if they like his policies, they don’t like that. so he has to do damage control from time to time. there was talk six months ago about kmarm offensity and probably six monthes before that. this is what he has to do to get things, you know, in line for election time.

>> it should be said in the president’s defense, this is a guy who has said to hedge fund operators, it is not a good thing that you pay a lower tax rate than your chauffeurs. you know, the other party, the republican candidate, thinks those tax rates are just dandy. so president has taken a bite out of these folks. but there’s no question, he saved their skins and i’m certain he can get some money out of them to run for president.

>> real quick, bob. i want to stay with you 07b that. look, you are doing the most criticism here. by the way, i don’t want anyone to be confused, i agree. but what do you do? you say you guys are fat cats and i don’t need your $71 million.

>> no. i assume he’s going to get get money for them. as said, i think he deserves it. what’s the country need in terms of getting finance shackled so the real economy can work again? and what we haven’t had are the investigations and the prosecutions and the accountability that we need to make certain that we don’t go explode a new bubble and drive the economy over the cliff again.

>> right.

>> that reform agenda has to get pursued no matter where you get your money from in the campaign.

>> look, our system is broken man. look at how terrible — the republicans and democrats both have to go begging wall street for money. gee, i wonder why we’re not tough on wall street. i wonder how that turned up. all right. but we got to move on to the next question. are republicans blind to their own hi pock ray racy?

>> it doesn’t pass the straight-face test from the chair of the party who, none of whose leaders called for senator vitter who actually broke the law, to resign.

>> senator vitter, that’s a five-year-old story. chris lee, how long did he last? about five seconds. senator ensign left within weeks. the fact of the matter is we have big issues here to tackle in this country.

>> michelle, is it a good strategy to counter weiner with vitter? did wren to a descent job to answer that? or there is no answer because i have thor is still in office?

>> there is no office. hypocrisy is a prerec kwi sit for being partisan but both sides need to tiptoe. this pops up on both sides. i think the difference here which is making it complicated for democrats, p is all about the visuals. vitter may have left him some hookers but they did not have those pictures popping up and embarrassing him all over the web. that is making it tough for people to come and let this go.

>> you’re right. there’s new pictures of weiner at the house. jim, i don’t know what this guy was thinking. look, i’ve defended him saying it is his private life bp but it was incredibly stupid. now the president spoke out on nbc news. let’s show you that and get your reaction.

>> obviously what he did was highly inappropriate. i think he’s embarrassed himself. he acknowledged that. he embarrassed his wife and his family. ultimately there will be a decision for him and his constituent. i can tell you, if it was me, i would resign.

>> simon, good answer or no?

>> i think we know how this is going to end. i think the problem for anthony weaner is he doesn’t come off as having a broken faith with his wife but he comes off looking a little crazy here. i think the way that these pictures were done, and pictures of himself sitting on the couch. i don’t really remember anything like this in all the years i’ve been in politics where it seeps to incredibly self-destructive over such a long period of time. i think he’s gone and however we get there at the end of the day we don’t know. but i think we know how the story’s going to end.

>> i think the house gym pictures are taking it another step.

>> i agree with that.

>> he brought it into the house gym. i mean his colleagues are going to be looking at him, going, dude, come on. this is going, i think —

>> i have a theory on this. i think that his problem was that he actually had a descent body. guys with guts, okay, nobody is taking pictures of my gut and sending it to anyone. so i think that was one of the problems. but last thing, bob, what do the democrats do? they are in a bind here, right? do you throw him under the bus? it is a personal matter. on ideology, on principle, i don’t think. but it is a distraction. what do you do?

>> he is already under the bus. he is gone as a national spokesman. whether he stay says up to his own constituents and his own conscious. i would figure out who will run and who will challenge him. i think he’s gone, the question is when. but democrats aren’t going to stand next to him. but whether you know, this is a private matter. or not so private. but whether he resigns or not, whether he resigns or not is up to him. this is really mud pit politics. the thing about the republican chairman, you pretend you’re on the high road. meanwhile you’re wallowing in this stuff. you can’t pretend you’re worried about the great issues facing the country when you are talking about anthony weiner.

>> all right. that’s the power panel for tonight. thank you all for the great discussion.

>> thanks.

Accountants CPA Hartford, Connecticut, LLC offers quality accounting, auditing, tax, bookkeeping, and QuickBooks consulting services at fees of one-third of those of our competitors to individuals and businesses across a wide spectrum of industries throughout the entire United States. Call us now at (860) 249-1323.

Posted in Accountants CPA Hartford, Articles | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Job creation versus spending cuts. Wanted: jobs not cuts. Economists: forget cuts, spend to solve job crisis. Cenk Uygur MSNBC TV June 13, 2011 video and transcript with Robert Reich.

Posted on June 13, 2011 by William Brighenti

Transcribed by Accountants CPA Hartford, Connecticut, LLC

UYGUR: Today, there‘s a growing debate in Washington over whether job creation is more important than spending cuts. Finally, the debate we‘ve been waiting for. Before all we ever heard was about spending cuts and how desperately we need them. The GOP played that broken record again over the weekend.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MAN: I believe that we need to get our fiscal house in order.

UNIDENTIFIED MAN: We have a big spending problem in Washington.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

UYGUR: But now, finally, the battle is joined. Folks on other side of the debate are chiming in over the last week. Economists have begun pushing a key piece of economic wisdom. Cuts won‘t solve the jobs crisis. Spending will. You have to actually higher people. Jarrod Bernstein, former Economic Adviser to Vice President Biden wrote about a recently and then talk about it with me on this show. Even Larry Summers, a former economic advisor to President Obama generally concerted a lot more conservative, agreed on a Washington Post editorial that concentrating on spending cuts is going in the wrong direction.

And Robert Kuttner of “The American Prospect” did an excellent job summarizing the perils of concentrating a spending cuts in an article out today. He said, quote, “but watch for the bipartisan gang of six and their conservative allies at Tim Geithner‘s Treasury Department, to snatch defeat out of the jaws of victory. In the most likely budgets compromise, that saves the country from defaulting on the national debt. The differences between the parties will collapsed in a largely conservative direction. It the current script is followed, the Republicans will be the big winners, they will win on gutting social spending, aborting a fragile recovery, humbling the president and undercutting his reelection chances.”

But the man who‘s going to settle all this of course is President Obama. He is on a two-day jobs tour. But will he listen to that progressive message that is now finally resounding throughout the country? That‘s what we really have to see.

Joining me now is one of those economists pushing the pro spending approach for job creation. That‘s Robert Reich, he‘s now professor at UC Berkeley and former labor secretary under President Clinton.

Secretary Reich, great to have you here. I want to start with a Kuttner quote, I know you bring about this topic as well, obviously, because I think he gets the hard of it. It looks like, you know, the Democrats have the Republicans on the run on Medicare, et cetera. If they come in and the gang of six that includes Democrats and it obviously come in. Tim Geithner‘s Treasury Department seems to be pushing for spending cuts. And they say, all right, great, let‘s do the spending cuts. Have they done great damage both of the economy and to the president chances of re-election?

ROBERT REICH, PROFESSOR, UC BERKELEY: Unfortunately, I think they will do damage, Cenk. I mean, the frame of reference right now in the capitol, and you‘re right, it is beginning to change. But the frame of references established by the Republicans is we‘ve got to cut spending. If you cut spending, we get the balance, the budget back towards balance, that‘s good for the economy, that‘s good for jobs, that‘s good for everybody. Well, that frame of reference is totally irrelevant right now given that consumers are holding back and businesses are holding back and we are flirting with a double-dip recession. We‘ve got to. I mean, the government has got to spend more. At least in the short term.

People are beginning to see that but that gang of six on the hill. There are a lot of conservatives still hanging around. Tim Geithner in the Treasury Department, there are many people who are whispering into Democrats ears including the president‘s ears. Saying, well, we really do have to worry most about cutting spending and getting an agreement on—getting the budget deficit capped. That is the total ceiling on the debts. Going upward. You see, we are right in a poise, the very, very difficult spot. The president has got to decide. And I hope he will decide that job creation is the number one issue, the number one goal and his number one responsibility.

UGYUR: I can‘t understand how he can‘t see it. He is supposed to be a good politician. I mean, I care about the economy. I care about creating jobs. I care about the American people. I hope the president cares about the same thing. But I know he also that has to care about getting re-elected. And at nine percent unemployment, how are you going to do that? I mean, have you heard of any economic theory that says, you do spending cuts and somehow magically when you already have inflation really low, it will create more jobs by time of November, 2012. Doesn‘t that seem crazy?

REICH: No, but it is a border line crazy, Cenk. We know, I mean, if there is one thing we‘ve learned over the past 75 years, is that when you have high unemployment, when you‘ve got a lot of people out of work. When you have such underutilized total capacity, the government has got to be the spender of last resort. Now, if you call it stimulus, it doesn‘t matter. Call it liver worst. I don‘t care what you call it. I mean, government has got to make up the difference somehow and has got to do something. I mean, a WPA, you know, like we had during the depression, to give jobs to so many of the long-term unemployed or civilian conservation corps. To give jobs to so many of young people who are sitting around doing nothing.

UYGUR: You know, I‘ve been saying this for so long. And finally, Bursy (ph) is start writing about it this week as well. Saying, hey, how is this for an idea? Why don‘t we hire people? Why doesn‘t the government actually say, I‘m going to hire extra number of people. And that could be a gigantic number. So, the Republicans will fight it. OK. Good. They are against job creation. I mean, I don‘t get it. So, but it looks like, common sense, economic wisdom, all of the progresses in the world, combined are not as strong as Tim Geithner. I mean.

(CROSSTALK)

REICH: Well, I don‘t—I‘m not going to play personality here. I mean, the issue is, and you put your finger on it just now, it‘s common sense. And the question is, will common sense and political pressure prevail? I mean, most Americans are in very, very tough shape right now. This is not just a matter of politics. It‘s a matter of pain. The degree of public pain, of suffering, of anxiety out there in the country should not be underestimated. Now, Washington is a little bit of an echo chamber as we know, so is New York. A lot of this pain does not get through. But if these people, including the president, want to be re-elected, they have got to come up with a very bold jobs plan. And they got to come up with it soon. Because if you were the vacuum there, if there is nothing there, if the Democrats and the president are not putting out anything specific, anything bold to stimulate and boost demand, what are you going to have? That vacuum is going to be filled by Republicans who say cut taxes, cut spending, the old republican play book, which has nothing whatever to do with creating job cuts.

UYGUR: Secretary Reich, I know, you say, (INAUDIBLE), so leave that to me. Tim Geithner is the worst. He is a former republican. All he has is republican ideas. He‘s never been a democrat, never claimed to be a democrat and he is pushing all these incredibly conservative ideas to the great detrimental of the president and of the country. I think that‘s a huge part of the problem. I think the president‘s biggest mistake as we‘re listening to Tim Geithner all along on every front. But my views on that are clear. You have the more professorial.

REICH: Look, I‘m not—I don‘t mean to duck from any individual criticism. I‘m just saying, look, the issues are very, very clear. And I think that the president would be very wise, just get out there, use the bullet pulpit and says to Republicans, here is my job plan, if you don‘t like it, I‘m going to fight for it. I‘m going to fight for it.

UYGUR: That would be good. We got to live it right there. Secretary Reich, thank you so much. We‘ll be right back.

Accountants CPA Hartford, Connecticut, LLC offers quality accounting, auditing, tax, bookkeeping, and QuickBooks consulting services at fees of one-third of those of our competitors to individuals and businesses across a wide spectrum of industries throughout the entire United States. Call us now at (860) 249-1323.

Posted in Accountants CPA Hartford, Articles | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

ABC This Week’s Economic Panel: Jobless Recovery. The Barefoot Accountant’s commentary, analysis, and response.

Posted on June 12, 2011 by William Brighenti

Provided by the Barefoot Accountant of Accountants CPA Hartford, Connecticut, LLC

On ABC’s “This Week” broadcasted this Sunday, June 12, 2011, Robert Reich and Senator Shelby debated about the way to create jobs in the United States.  Reich argued that a massive jobs bill, comparable to that of the Great Depression’s WPA, is needed to haul us out of this jobless economy; while Republican Senator Shelby dismissed any stimulus plan and advocated further tax reductions on the rich and corporations. Voodoo trickle-down economics appears to be the only solution for Republicans on everything that ails America: that is, if we give cake to the rich, crumbs will trickle down to everyone else in our country.

But American corporations already are sitting on $1.9 trillion of cash, not investing in our country and creating jobs.  What makes Shelby think that if Congress gives these mammoth corporations even more trillions of tax cuts that they will create jobs here in the US?  Are the campaign contributions that these corporations are giving to Republican and Democratic members of Congress overtaking the economic reasoning of these legislators? 

Even if Congress does lower the corporate tax rate, if the Multinational Corporations do, in fact, create more jobs, they are unlikely to create them here in the United States but rather in countries where labor is paid as little as 22.5 cents per hour. Why would they create jobs here, where the costs of labor are so much higher? That defies the laws of economics.  Multinational Corporations are efficient profit machines, the economic terminators of today, without any sense of patriotism, and acting in accordance with the laws of economics, will continue to offshore work overseas because lower labor costs result in more profits for their shareholders.

Of course, the problem with America’s democracy lies in the open door policy of campaign contributions to members of Congress, the Presidency, and every other political office held in America.  These very same corporations are also funding all of these 527 organizations that have been established to promulgate this voodoo trickle-down nonsense of how tax cuts for the rich and themselves would create jobs here in the USA, when, in fact, these exorbitant tax cuts would only result in even more deficits and more cuts in social security, medicare, medicaid, pell grants, and other social net programs.

Reich is right. The only way out of this jobless recovery is a dramatic and bold move: a massive government jobs program, comparable to the WPA during the 1930s.

Shelby erred in saying that the WPA and massive government spending did not take us out of the depression, claiming World War II did. But Shelby overlooked the fact that World War II entailed massive government spending of 120% of GDP. This led to huge tax increases on the rich and corporations, resulting in the greatest transfer of wealth from the rich to the middle class America.  With this wealth, middle class America bought homes, cars, appliances, etc., and stimulated growth in our economy.  Such is needed now for our country to recover economically.

Why would a similar transfer of wealth be justifiable morally today? Because over the last 30 years America has witnessed the greatest upward transfer of wealth from the middle class to the top 1% of our economic society. In essence, it would represent an undoing of a disastrous tax policy that led to the economic downfall of America:  a tax policy initiated under President Ronald Reagan and perpetuated by Presidents Bush, Sr., Clinton, Bush, Jr., and Obama.

Accountants CPA Hartford, Connecticut, LLC offers quality accounting, auditing, tax, bookkeeping, and QuickBooks consulting services at fees of one-third of those of our competitors to individuals and businesses across a wide spectrum of industries throughout the entire United States. Call us now at (860) 249-1323.

Posted in Accountants CPA Hartford, Articles | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment