The initial concessions by President Obama on the budget proposal is a mistake. Time and time again, the President has pre-emptively made concessions that abet his opponents and demoralize his supporters. Compromise is demanded in politics but leadership cannot be defined by compromise.
The President was dealt a good hand on the tax cuts in 2010, but his pre-emptive concessions dealt away his good hand. He had on his side public opinion, but you cannot just let it sit there: you have to mobilize public opinion with your leadership.
Our system in many ways is rigged to the power of establishment money, to the lobbyists that swamp D.C. everyday, but on the other hand you can provide leadership that lays out a different narrative. We are having this debate about the budget: completely wrong frame, skewed priorities. A budget is not just a set of numbers. It’s a moral document. It’s also a reflection of a nation’s values and aspirations. And if we are a nation that’s going to balance the budget on the backs of the working class and low income Americans to the benefit of the richest and multinational corporations that offshore jobs, then we are a nation—different from what we have seen in the Middle East—in dire need of our own pro-democracy movement to take back this country for the people who have built it and made it strong and take it away from those who have brought us the financial crisis which robbed trillions from people who have worked so hard over these last decades.
We need to understand what we are going to do outside of the White House. It is late for understanding what’s going on inside the White House. We need independent organizing to change the balance of forces, to change the nature of political power, and to find a way to have a different debate, because this President will not lead us to the promise land. These guys aren’t listening to us. They’re cutting from the middle class and giving to the rich, and they keep doing it over and over.
The question is, does the President understand all of this? He’s supposed to be on our side.
The GOP has a blueprint of cruelty in its economic plan. They did not have a mandate that put them in power in Congress. It was a lousy economy and joblessness, not a desire for big spending cuts, that put the GOP in power in 2010. The President is a very intelligent man and he understands all of this, but he is seeking re-election in 2012, and he is charting his own course, a course that has demobilized the base that elected him to the White House. And at the end of the day, we need to lay out alternatives. It’s insanity that military spending is 58% of discretionary spending budget. We have alternatives. Barney Frank and Ron Paul laid out a bipartisan plan that cuts $1 trillion by 2020. $78 billion is not going to do it over five years. And we have an inflation adjusted military budget that is larger than that in the Bush years and the Cold War: this is insanity. And two wars costing $120 billion per year. We can do better, but it’s going to require people outside of Washington working with allies inside Congress, and we can ally with them to stop this disconnect between what’s going in Washington and what this country needs.
We need to redefine the center, because what is defined as the center in Washington is not the true center of this country.
President Obama presented his nearly $4 trillion budget, proposing to cut more than $1 trillion from Federal programs over the next ten years. Over the next two years it will cut $200 billion. As you recall a little over a month ago, Congress approved $858 billion in tax cuts over the next two years. If one does a little math here by subtracting the $200 billion in proposed spending from the lost revenues of $858 billion in tax cuts, $658 billion of those tax cuts remain uncompensated for in Obama’s budget proposal. In essence, these cuts that Obama is proposing are not putting a dent in the budget because of the giant tax cuts.
In balancing our national budget, Obama and Congress keeps focussing on the wrong side of the equation. The projected deficit in 2011 is $1.65 trillion. The whole non-defense discretionary spending budget in 2010 was $477 billion. If all non-defense discretionary spending was eliminated, there would still remain a deficit over $1.1 trillion. Congress cannot cut its way out of deficits.
Some of the cuts that President Obama is proposing in his budget include $300 million for community block grants, $2.35 billion for low income home energy assistance program (let the poor people freeze to death), and $400 billion in five-year domestic spending freeze. Also pell grants, graduate school loans, community access, etc., were cut. Add all of these up still doesn’t come close to compensating for the recently given tax cuts to the rich. The numbers don’t lie. Congress and the President may lie, but not the numbers. However, Obama and Congress persist in cutting spending, affecting the poor and the middle class, and refusing to hit the rich. Congress refuses to include the rich in sharing the pain of balancing the budget along with the poor and middle class.
Obama agrees with the Republican argument to give tax cuts to the rich to help the economy. But that doesn’t help the economy. Then cut programs for the middle class and the poor to balance the budget. But you can’t balance the budget that way. All he is doing is helping the Republican agenda.
Obama is moving the political spectrum to the right. When Obama does a pre-emptive surrender, offering to cut programs right, extend tax cuts, or reduce estate taxes right from the beginning of any dialogue with the GOP, he moves to the right, since the Republicans don’t respond by moving towards the center to him. Rather than respond in kind and move to the center, they simply continue to move to the right.
America needs tax reform. The last thing Congress needs to do is to extend tax cuts to people who need them the least. Some Democrats want to cut the subsidies to the oil companies: $36 billion over the next ten years. Republicans refuse to cut these subsidies to the oil companies, the richest companies in the world, preferring to cut programs for the poor and middle class.
If the Democrats don’t draw the line and say they are not doing a single cut until the Republicans agree to eliminate the subsidies for the richest companies in the world, they will get rolled over by the Republicans. The White House and Congressional Democrats don’t understand that.
The President’s budget should have been more aggressive in terms of tax justice, in terms of being sensible in the reductions in military spending and the areas of agriculture reform.
>> always remained true to his ideals and principles and our country and the world are better for it.
>> he showed he could get together with political adversaries in an atmosphere of goodwill, mutual respect and the nation was better for that.
>> colleagues and friends and admirers of president reagor at least their fantasy of what he may have been celebrating what would have been his 100th birthday. the admiration hardly universal. the data set doesn’t even seem to be relevant at this point. if you have a fantasy you go with it. mark explains what’s going on in the daily rant.
>> thanks, dylan. we’ve all heard the phrase looking at things through rose tinted glasses. we remember the halcion days of yore, we have embellish this and that until all that’s left is a perfect ideal forever lost. so as time goes by we were pop warner champs, you should have seen the way i clocked him in fifth grade. now it’s 2011. our country is in a sorry state and along comes ronald reagan’s 100th birthday. watching the coverage and reading articles reminds me of that day when i took on le mack. that reagan they were showing us this past week, i have no idea who he was. you think from the coverage reagan should take teddy roosevelt’s spot on mt. rushmore, maybe all the spots. i’m here to jar memories a bit and set the record straight. going back to the ’60s when reagan emerged on the political scene as his hollywood career tanked there was an angry right wing group. the meanest in the golden state. in 1966 when reagan ran for governor of california, guess who was their favorite candidate. if you said reagan, ding ding ding, you win. okay. how about the big issue of that day. civil rights. well, again, reagan was against the civil rights bill. it wasn’t just a ’60s thing either. in 1979 reagan launched his presidential campaign in the same mississippi town where 16 years earlier three civil rights activists were murdered by the kkk. and again, in the ’80s as president, reagan embraced the apartheid regime defending it like it was a helpless princess under siege from evil liberals. for that desmond tutu, a nobel peace prize winner called reagan a racist, unquote. take universal health care, reagan ran around scaring americans into believing it was the first step towards stalinism and gulags. then his biggest pet peeve, affordable education. when he was elected governor in 1966, the university california system was the envy of the nation. imagine if you were accepted into uc berkeley, tuition was free and reagan hated that. he famously said education is not a right, it’s a privilege. as in it’s for the privileged. sow waged a war against california’s higher education system and against the uppity students and against their so-called enablers, the people who ran the best and cheapest university system in the country. four years later reagan won. education was no longer free and it was no longer a right but a privilege. if you weren’t privileged you became one of the millions of graduates who today are saddled with student loan deaths. oh, ronnie, we hardly knew you. there’s this tv show out called “fringe” where there are two parallel universes. maybe reagan should have played the mad scientist walter in that show. the record of reagan’s career and the coverage over the past week of it must have taken place in two separate parallel universes. it’s almost too perfect of a fit. reagan, born on the fringe of right wing politics could have played a starring role in the show of the same name.
>> do you think it’s as simple as euphoric recall?
>> i think it is not that simple. i think it’s actually a concerted pr effort. i think a lot of money and effort has been poured into white washing the reality about reagan so we forget how things got to the point where we’re at today.
>> to what end?
>> basically a war on the middle class. that’s what i tried to get into. he waged a war against unions, even though he started out as a union president, a union boss ahead of the screen actors guild. you know, through tax changes, tax cuts for the wealthy and cuts for all sorts of programs for the middle class.
>> they don’t want that to be his actual message.
>> they want to think everything was great when in fact he divided everybody.
Mega corporations control our Congress through campaign contributions and lobbyists, outsourcing American jobs while obtaining tax credits and subsidies. Bernie Sanders today on Dylan Ratigan says that “we got to break these babies up”.
We are in the midst of an economic crisis. Unemployment is not 9%. It’s 16% when we include all the individuals who have given up looking for work as well as all those who are underemployed at their present jobs. The fix is not going to be easy, since these mega multinational corporations have enormous power and funds.
00:00:00 T now.
00:00:24 >>> But your assessment, how many american jobs has that saved or created?
00:00:30 >> It’s obviously very difficult to know precisely.
00:00:33 We are seeing the intended results in terms of financial markets.
00:00:37 >> What is the started unemployment rate that you would be comfortable with?
00:00:44 >> Currently those projections are between 5% and 6% of the labor force.
00:00:49 >> 5% To 6%.
00:00:51 Is there a projected time period where that might occur?
00:00:54 >> If we were to average, just 5% growth, which is quite ambitious, it would still take us another four years or so.
00:01:09 >> Certainly that could have nothing to do with the fact that america’s corporations are currently hooding $2 trillion or ben bernanke’s banks system harvests your tax dollars or taking his printed money and lending it to traders in china.
00:01:25 Or high-frequency trading where they hold the stock or whatever it may be for 8 or 7 seconds at a time.
00:01:31 I wonder why there’s no jeb in our country when you can borough from the federal reserve and use it to buy treasuries to lend it to a çfree-spending government.
00:01:43 I have no idea how to solve that problem, I guess we’ll all just sit here.
00:01:47 I’m sure that it’s completely 5 million american jobs that have been shipped overseas in the past decade because of rig currency, rig tax policy, very profitable for a few people in this country.
00:02:06 I’m sure it has nothing to do with the fact that our biggest banks are recording record profits with the businesses i just described in the process handing out obscene bonuses paid with your tax subsidies, thank you america, while they continue to cut lending strayingle new business because it’s not profitable.
00:02:27 And surely you’ve heard that the good times are bag on wall street, people.
00:02:31 Come on.
00:02:31 If you’re going to provide 40% of the funding for every politician, the least you’ve got to do is get paid, brother.
00:02:39 The dow back over 12,000, and as stocks surge to pre-collapse levels on the implicit support of the federal reserve, and explicit support of the federal reserve, 30 million remain unemployed or underemployed, and a huge other percentage are in crappy jobs or afraid for their jobs.
00:02:58 Remember, it got so bad in egypt there was a direct correlation between the growth and the gdp and the deterioration of the quality of life of the people, because people at the top were making money at the expense of everybody else.
00:03:11 It’s connected.
00:03:21 Bernie, as you can tell, this is one that gets to me.
00:03:24 Investment is a great thing.
00:03:26 Lending is a great thing.
00:03:27 It drives prosperity.
00:03:29 Why does neither the democratic nor republican nor the white house, wow do I not see anybody in political leadership in this country talking about ending gambling and starting investment ç >> well, dylan, you didn’t leave much for me to say.
00:03:45 I think you want it all, but let me try to say a few things.
00:03:49 Number one.
00:03:50 At a time when we lost 42,000 fact foyers in america over a ten-year period, 42,000, millions of good paying jobs at the same time we saw wall street making almost 40% of all profits in america.
00:04:09 What you have is a wall street unto a world of itself.
00:04:13 You’re asking that the role of banking should be to help facilitate real production, real jobs in the real economy.
00:04:20 >> But let’s stop there.
00:04:21 I think that’s a lost point.
00:04:24 Will you say what you just said about what banking should be?
00:04:29 >> If I’m a being person and i have a good idea, I go to a bank.
00:04:33 I got a loan at a reasonable price, I invest, I make money, i produce real products.
00:04:40 That’s what the function of banking should be.
00:04:42 That’s what it used to be.
00:04:45 Increasingly now wall street is an I’d unto itself separated distinct from the real economy.
00:04:55 They produce worthless illegal products, sell it out there that nobody understands, make huge hams of money for themselves.
00:05:04 When their ponzi skype collapses they have the american taxpayer bailing them out.
00:05:10 Furthermore, to add insult to injury, and we don’t talk about this very much, you have today the four largest financial institutions in this country owning assets over half of the gdp of the united states of america.
00:05:25 Now, if teddy roosevelt were here, what do you think he would be saying?
00:05:30 We’ve got to break these babies up.
00:05:32 We need some real competition so we can get money out to the productive economy.
00:05:36 >> I spoke with ç alan grayson in the podcast we do each day, and asked him specifically about the failure to prosecute any of the fraud that was either reveal in the fcic report, or any of the other journalism that’s been done, when there is clear evidence that banks were knowingly selling fraudulent, worthless, nonconforming investments to pension funds and the government, and then betting on their collapse, as this company clayton holdings audited hundreds of thousands of these mortgages.
00:06:10 It was reported in the fcic report, that they xwreded they fraudulent mortgages in these investments and sold them to pensions and the government, and yet we have not seen a single prosecution, a single investigation, a sing the administration of justice, which only further undermines america’s relationship with the elite and the government.
00:06:31 Here’s what former congressman grayson had to say about all this.
00:06:36 >> We want at the beginning we’re going to look forward, not back, and thereof in the process of making that decision let all this is crooks off the hook.
00:06:47 It turns crime does pay.
00:06:48 It turns out if you steal a lot of money, there’s jobs for you somewhere else.
00:06:53 >> How can the democrats let these guys off the hook?
00:06:56 >> That’s a good question.
00:06:58 I’m not a democrat, I’m an independent.
00:07:01 When you that you can about why the american people are so frustrated and so angry, I think what we have just been talking about has a lot to do with it.
00:07:10 If a kid breaks a window in a shop, you know, steals some candy, steals some money, that kid can end up in jail, but if you have a bunch of crooks on wall street who destroy the american economy, throw millions of people — have millions of people lose their jobs, their savings and their homes, nothing happens to them.
00:07:30 So the real question is, and i think we have to take a deep breath and ask it, does the government regulate wall street, or does wall street with their bills onregulate the government through lobbyinga%d campaign financing?
00:07:44 I am afraid to a significant degree the latter is true, and i don’t want to, you know, give you some kind of utopian statement and make things seem better.
00:07:53 It’s going to be very, very hard to take these guys on.
00:07:56 In order to get deregulation, so they can end up doing what they did, which destroyed our economy, they spend $5 billion over a ten-year period.
00:08:07 They have all kinds of campaign contributions, president appoints guys — both parties are influenced.
00:08:14 >> Do we node need teddy roosevelt or his reincarnation?
00:08:20 >> Absolutely.
00:08:21 >> It seems like such a parallel.
00:08:23 >> Getting back to ben bernanke, what we should be doing is first off — and I have introduced — will reintroduce legislation, break these companies up.
00:08:30 You want to talk about a competitive society that’s not fourenings institutions controlling half the assets of america.
00:08:38 Control, producing, issues half of the mortgages in this country, two thirds of the credit cards.
00:08:43 Is that real competition?
00:08:44 Second of all, you know, ben bernanke and the fed have the emergency power to say to these banks top charging americans 25 or 30% interest rates on their credit cards.
00:09:02 The reality is the statistic is better than it used to be, don’t kit yourself.
00:09:08 In real sense, unemployment is probably at 16%, with underemployment, and with people who have given you looking for work.
00:09:17 We are in the midst of of an economic crisis.
00:09:22 >> And we need investment in america, straight up.
00:09:26 Who is against that?
00:09:27 It’s crazy.
00:09:29 Senator sanders, thank you for your support and the time.
00:09:32 If you want to check out the grayson podcast, his insdimt directly to the obama administration for their failure to administer justice against the obvious mortgage fraud at the highest levels of america’s financial institutions, that on ç dylanratigan.com.
00:09:51 Right here on “the dylan ratigan show,” a symbol of the revolution, our interview exclusively with a friend of wael ghonim, the 30-year-old google executive now at the heart of the egyptian uprising, a leader may be emerging.
00:23:50 The republicans finally reveal their proposed budget cuts.
00:23:54 Too bad they’re targeting the weakest most vulnerable americans while avoiding actually solving any of our budget problems.
00:24:02 Are these people serious?
00:24:04 Or are they just nasty?
00:26:48 >>> we’re serious about cutting spending.
00:27:18 We had agreement on that, i guess the particulars and i details will be where the disagreements may lie.
00:27:25 >> How can you be serious about cutting spending when your spending proposals are truly a flea on a dog’s ass?
00:27:33 The people come out with a few billion here and there, we’ll get rid of the food for poor people, obliterate subsidies for heating oil for the desperately poor, but we’ll continue to account for the half trillion spent on defense, we won’t address that.
00:27:51 We will not reform the tax code or investment policies of this country to drive investment in our country, which by the way, would help people get rich and create jobs, because we wouldn’t want to alienate those who are using us to extract money from this country.
00:28:07 There was a great tweet I said are the republicans serious or the republicans nasty?
00:28:13 And no, not again, on twitter said they’re both serious and nasty.
00:28:18 If only the democrats were any better.
00:28:20 That seems to be or problem, doesn’t it?
00:28:23 Well, today house republicans, friend of I don’t know who, released a partial list of what they plan to cut.
00:28:31 Not that we don’t spend a lot.
00:28:33 Medicare, social çsecurity, massive defense budget.
00:28:36 Not surprise glynn they’re tarting none of that and instead are targeting peanuts that are central to the obama political agenda.
00:28:44 Why deal with the military industrial complex or massive loopholes and bleed in the banks or tax code when you can cut the epa high-speed rail, renewable energy and the irs which has to help enforce the health care law, and in the process, they take aim as wic, which provides food for low-income mothers and children.
00:29:11 That would save your budget problems.
00:29:15 The full set of cuts will save about $32 billion this year.
00:29:21 I cannot emphasize how moronically small that number is and how sensationally devastating depriving poor people of food is while you continue to subsidize multimillion dollar tax trade and health care scams.
00:29:42 It’s stunning, almost as stunning as the democrats’ refusal to deal with the same problems.
00:29:49 I get a little worked up.
00:29:50 I apologize.
00:29:52 Let’s bring in our panel.
00:29:54 Jane hampshire, founder of the blog firedog lake, and doug haye, a former rnc communications director.
00:30:04 Doug, I won’t make you carry the entire water nor than I would jane the left’s water, but I am interested in your perspective on what the heck the republicans are thinking running on a pro-jobs, pro-growth campaign, they go after abortion and now food for women and children.
00:30:24 None of which do anything to create jobs or to drive investment or deal with our spending problem.
00:30:31 What are they thinking?
00:30:32 >> I disagree with your premise.
00:30:33 >> Where?
00:30:35 >> The house appropriations committee today reveal 70 different cuts that will be made in the budget.
00:30:40 I think that’s a proper thing to do.
00:30:43 >> I didn’t hear anything yk said.
00:30:45 I’m sorry.
00:30:45 I had somebody talking in my ear.
00:30:47 >> We saw from the house appropriations committee, detailing 70 different cuts.
00:30:52 >> How much money?
00:30:53 >> Well, we’re talking about $600 million from the irs.
00:30:59 >> Don’t go quickly.
00:31:00 That’s nice and fun for you.
00:31:03 What I’ll tell you about how much $600 million is as a percentage of $3 trillion, $14 trillion, $70 trillion?
00:31:11 $1.3 Trillion?
00:31:13 It is a moronically small.
00:31:17 The how many am I wrong in saying it is disengenous to just as moronic as our president and joe biden to talk about a high-spiel rail program like that’s going to create jobs.
00:31:31 Hundreds of millions of jobs this country is going to need.
00:31:34 It is equally moronic and insulting for republicans to come with a 20, 30 — we did 32 billion?
00:31:41 How much money have you cut out of the budget?
00:31:44 You can cut 1,000 things, what’s the dollar figure?
00:31:46 >> Dylan, we’re not talking about specific dollars figures, we’re talking about changing the culture.
00:31:52 >> So it’s not about spending, it’s about what we spend our money on and the republicans are against spending for food for poor people and the environment?
00:32:00 I thought the republicans were just against an overspending government.
00:32:02 Am I wrong?
00:32:04 >> Well, there’s so much in there, dylan — >> no, there’s not that much in there.
00:32:10 You’re either against spending money, which is understandable, or you’re against spending money that is irrelevant to the spending picture, you just don’t like feeding poor people and women.
00:32:20 >> Come on, dylan.
00:32:23 >> You haven’t answered my questions.
00:32:25 >> If you let me speak and stop interrupting, I this your questions are insulting.
00:32:29 I’ve heard you talk about an air of new civility and no you’re calling people morans.
00:32:36 >> Nobody — somebody comes into my office and says, jane, that they’re going to cut spending because they’re a spending hawk, okay?
00:32:44 On a multitrillion budget, and the best thing they can come up with is ç $30 billion that deprives women of food?
00:32:53 I would call them a moran.
00:32:54 >> Well, you know — I think this gets into insider/outsider politics that are dictating these things.
00:33:03 As we’ve discussions these are cuts made sure not to offend any of the big corporate benefactors, and the democrats do the same thing.
00:33:10 Earlier this year the national taxpayers union on the right and perg on the level got together, and they came up with a spending cut plan that both right and left agree on, and among other things, they cut the market access program that funds advertisements and promotions of private businesses overseas.
00:33:29 It cuts the private investment program, which encourages investors abroad by multinational corporations, that 154 xwil onover the next four years.
00:33:41 Why are we paying large corporations to investment overseas?
00:33:45 >> Those are tiny numbers, with all due respect.
00:33:47 >> Ethanol subsidies.
00:33:49 >> We have a multibillion dollar problem, people.
00:33:53 >> Ethanol subsidies $35 billion.
00:33:58 Agribusiness, $35 billion.
00:34:00 $22 Billion to ethanol subsidies going to the oil companies.
00:34:06 And even grover nor quist said we can’t pay for the war in afghanistan anymore.
00:34:10 These are the bold cuts we need to start making in the fat corporate contracts that don’t actually help people in any way.
00:34:17 That’s what we should be talking about, even if we’re talking about the culture of d.c.
00:34:22 >> I thought the republicans were against spending, but it sounds, doug they were against certain types of spending.
00:34:29 >> That’s not what I can said at all.
00:34:33 I’ll make my point, otherwise I’m not interested.
00:34:36 >> Listen, I don’t have enough time for it, doug, but again, i remain where I stand.
00:34:41 If you cut a small amount of money and take it away from people for food, you’re not solving the spending problem any more than somebody who wants to go after a high-speed rail program, until you break the banks, the trade, and drive money into this country, you are certainly not a patriot and ç chances are you are something worse than that.
00:35:01 Tomorrow on the show, we’re live , speaking of patriotism, with congressman ron paul, who surely is in favor of systems that will drive investment none country as opposed to favors for corporate donors who keep fat politicians in their jobs.
00:35:16 We’re with ron paul live in d.c.
00:35:18 We’re back here right after this.
00:43:53 >>> I’m dealing with chase, getting their phone calls, getting their harassment around the clock.
00:43:59 Jonathan missed two hours of our daughter’s birthday party, because chase simply would not hang up the phone until he made a payment in which we have already paid our mortgage.
00:44:09 >> We clearly made mistakes.
00:44:11 The customer service that we provided to him and to his wife was unacceptable.
00:44:26 >> So we subsidize them, and then prey upon the weakest in our society while funding 40% of both democrat and republican politicians all the way up to the presidency.
00:44:38 They seem to have a pretty good plan.
00:44:41 I wonder how long it would take us to come up with a plan.
00:44:45 morgan chase — not today — this is in the context morgan chase foreclosing on 18 military families, overcharging $4500 more for their mortgages.
00:44:55 Heck, they won’t know the difference, he’s at war.
00:44:58 Take the money, man.
00:45:01 The bank has apologized and is refunding the money, but congressman fillner was hearing none of it.
00:45:10 >> People under pressure we know commit suicide.
00:45:14 I would call it homicide, frankly, because you are putting them under pressure, and you are responsible for that.
00:45:21 >> With el now fresh from the capitol hill testimony is captain jonathan roust and his wife julia, along with their lawyer bill harvey.
00:45:30 Captain, how did it go today?
00:45:32 >> Well, dylan, it went very well.
00:45:37 >> You want to elaborate?
00:45:39 >> Yes, sir.
00:45:40 I believe that the ç members of the veterans affairs committees were — they understood our story, the other servicemens’ story.
00:45:54 That’s a starting point for them to move forward and make new legislation or what they need to do there.
00:46:00 >> Julia, do you feel like the banks were specifically trying to exploit military households?
00:46:08 >> I don’t know if they were trying to exploit medical tear households, but what they were doing is being ignorant to the fact that these claims and allegations of harassment were made over the years, and it almost seemed to myself that they knew what was going on and until it was a big enough problem, they were sweeping it under the rug.
00:46:28 >> Bill harvey, what is the legal breach, and what is the potential recourse for all of us desperate for any form of justice against a banking system that is peddling fraud and preying upon people at every turn?
00:46:41 >> Well, dylan, thank you for having us on today.
00:46:45 The scra is designed to protect service members like jonathan, when they were in the trenches and fighting for our freedoms.
00:46:59 Protect them from foreclosures, protect them from collection calls, protect them from repossessions of automobiles, protect them from the financial predatory practices that apparently chase has acknowledged that they did in this case.
00:47:16 >> And the penalty for violating or for violating these laws?
00:47:20 >> Well, it’s more — it’s definitely more than just give back $70 or $100 per violation, which is what chase has said 4 million, quote, refund.
00:47:34 We think they should be made to compensate these service members for the stress that they put them under, for the stress they put their families under.
00:47:45 There’s even an element of punitive damages in there if we can prove — and I think ç we probably can, knowledge and intention on their part.
00:47:55 >> Julia, describe what your household was like before being morgan and the stress and commitment involved with being the wife of an active american service member, and what the stress and environment in your household was like after the financial harassment began?
00:48:13 >> Before the harassment began, it was wonderful.
00:48:17 It was just jonathan and myself before we had two children, and not a care in the world.
00:48:23 You pay your mortgage, you see your statement, everything should come back correctly t jonathan is an active-duty marine, and the stress just alone with him being in flight school, deployed, being away from the home is bad enough when you have two small children.
00:48:44 Combined with the fact you would get collection calls of which on monies you did not owe.
00:48:50 It was — it was my nightmare.
00:48:52 It still is, because it still has not been resolved.
00:48:58 >> Captain rowles, you have made a significant commitment to serve america, to serve your country.
00:49:05 What would you consider to be the base expectation in return from your country?
00:49:13 >>.
00:49:13 >> Well, from my country, I just expect to be made whole.
00:49:18 My country is fighting for me, and I fight for my country.
00:49:23 The congressmen on the hill today were very sympathetic to our story, and I believe that many good things will come out of this, and we will continue to fight for every service member and their rights under scra while we can.
00:49:43 >> Bill harvey, according to the department of justice, the last service member’s civil release act violation, which is the law that we’re discussing, according to the american doj website, the last violation ç enforcement action was in 2008.
00:50:01 Is that in fact true, or is their website wrong?
00:50:05 And how much abuse do gentlemen and ladies like jonathan and julia have to suffer before eric holder and the justice department take action on their behalf?
00:50:17 >> Well, that was part of what we were on capitol hill here for today.
00:50:20 I think the members of congress that were on the committee extra understood the need for the doj and attorneys general offices to get involved.
00:50:37 It does have a criminal aspect to it.
00:50:39 We have urged the members and doj to get involved.
00:50:42 I think they’re taking that initiative.
00:50:46 They — doj, we believe that the doj sanctions, the criminal sanctions should be enhanced.
00:50:53 That was one of the suggestions we made to the committee today, and I think they heard it very favorably.
00:50:59 >> Listen, I continue to compliment you guys not only in taking up this fight, but in sharing this fight publicly with myself and other people, so we can all continue to educate ourselves into the nitty-gritty of the financial relationships with our service members and the recourse that we can pursue.
00:51:16 Captain rowles, julia, thank you so much.
00:51:20 Bill, thank you guys.
00:51:21 >>> Coming up on “hardball” the democrats, republicans or the tea party?
00:51:26 Chris is asking who really holds the political capital in washington?
00:51:29 I thought it was the guy with the checkbook.
00:51:32 >>> But first, social insecurity, cenk uygur back to say I told you so.
00:51:39 I just wonder about the democrats.
00:55:22 >>> I told you the whole government, senator richard shelby, republican, saying what are we going to do?
00:55:30 I think the correction solution is, quote, up the age every several years for your retirement.
00:55:36 So they’ll start at 65, go to 67, maybe they’ll go to 69, every couple years they’ll raise it again, maybe go to 71.
00:55:44 Do I have any takers?
00:55:46 Can I go to 73?
00:55:48 Can I go to 89?
00:55:50 How long can they do this?
00:55:51 He says, look, anybody that can do sixth grade math knows that social security is in massive trouble.
00:55:57 That is, 100% not true.
00:56:00 And I’m going to do the sixth grade math in a second, but he also said his sons like — he cares deeply, right?
00:56:07 He says, quote, they’re not going to receive anything, or if they do very little.
00:56:12 There’s no proof that they will get much, if anything.
00:56:16 Once again, totally completely utterly untrue.
00:56:20 ç social security has a surplus of $2.5 trillion.
00:56:30 $2.5 Trillion, surplus.
00:56:32 That will go all the way up to $4.2 trillion.
00:56:36 They say, no, but it’s just a BUNCH OF IOUs AND WE WON’T BE Able to pay it because we spent the money on the wars and tax cuts for the rich.
00:56:47 >> You’re going to pay china?
00:56:49 Saudi arabia?
00:56:50 But you’re not going to pay the people who put into social security all that time?
00:56:54 Hell no.
00:56:55 Hell no, we have to fight this tooth and nail.
00:56:58 Then he comes around and sell, look, what can we do?
00:57:01 We have a deficit problem.
00:57:03 No, social security has nothing to do with the deficit.
00:57:06 It gets paid by the payroll tax.
00:57:09 It gets put aside.
00:57:10 It has nothing to do with the deficit.
00:57:12 They’re lying to you.
00:57:13 They’re coming for your retirement money.
00:57:16 I’m not kidding.
00:57:17 You just saw the quote, right?
00:57:20 You can’t say stand for this.
00:57:23 Here’s the interesting part.
00:57:25 They say like no big deal, you have to work a couple more year, if you retired at 70 instead of an 65, you know how much it costs you?
00:57:35 $63,573.
00:57:39 They’re going to take that out of your pocket and they treat it like it’s no big deal?
00:57:43 Here’s my answer to them — hell no!
00:57:46 Hell no, they don’t get to touch social security.
00:57:50 We paid into that the whole time.
00:57:51 I’m going to leave it right there.
00:57:53 >> But how do we connect the dots?
00:57:56 We have these idiots on the right.
00:58:06 Our problem in this country is a lack of the courage to actually address the actual problems that we have with a corrupt banking system, corrupt tax code, corrupt health care system and corrupt trade relationship that’s created the deficits, and they come out as the republicans did today, going after food for poor people and social security.
00:58:30 The only barrier I see to prevent this is the american people’s ability to connect the dots ç between the borowed money, so obama and the republicans can keep their jobs, the subsidies for the banks so that obama and the politicians can keep their jobs.
00:58:49 The special deals with the health insurance companies and the drug companies so that obama and the republicans can keep their jobs, ownership the ongoing refusal as they just did last week to call china a currency manipulator and deal with the corrupt trade as obama’s treasury secretary did in the past few days so that obama and the republicans can keep their jobs.
00:59:11 They’re not worried about the people of america at all.
00:59:14 Obama, republicans and the democrats are simply worried about alienating those who write checks to keep them in the jobs and they have confidence that the spin doctors and advertising and marketing people they pay with those corporate dollars can convince the stupid americans that it was somebody else’s fault.
00:59:30 >> Well, let me connect the dots for you, right?
00:59:33 They cut $800 billion in taxes, half of those go to the top 2%.
00:59:38 >> We got that.
00:59:39 >> So then they say we’re out of money.
00:59:41 >> I get it.
00:59:41 How do we connect the dots?
00:59:43 >> They’ve got to get the money somewhere.
00:59:45 Where do they get the money?
00:59:46 From the middle class.
00:59:48 They already paid it in social security, so they go to rob the middle class to pay the rich.
Am I the only moron when it comes to downloading, licensing, and paying for Intuit’s tax programs, such as ProSeries? I first subscribed to using ProSeries in 2009. Before downloading that program onto my computer, I had to pay for the software by credit card. I selected the “pay per return” version of ProSeries since it offered me the greatest flexibility.
Back in January, I received a notice to install ProSeries 2010. I did install the program and actually awaited the screen to pop up requesting my credit card information. It never did, so I assumed that since my credit card information had been submitted to Intuit on many previous occasions, that it would simply charge my credit card. Besides, I was able to navigate around freely in ProSeries. I also, of course, did not wish to be charged twice for downloading a program, an event that has happened to me on more than one occasion in the past. Moreover, I was informed in January that many of the states tax software, including that of Connecticut, my resident state, were not yet available. For those of you who have had the pleasure of never dealing with Intuit, beware that Intuit has a practice of banging one an extra $50 if one does not pay by January 31st.
Recently when I started to prepare my first tax return of the year, I was notified that I had to license ProSeries, which surprised me since I had previously licensed the 2009 version. I was taken to a series of screens confirming my identity, email address, and account number, and then charged a total including the extra $50 for not processing payment before January 31st. Upon discovering this extra charge, I called Intuit’s customer service. This was a mistake.
I received a couple of customer service representatives that made me feel as if I were being interrogated by the Gestapo! Their posture did not exemplify the adage, “the customer is always right”. When I attempted to explain that I thought that I had previously authorized payment, I was treated as if I were an idiot, a liar, or both. Perhaps I am an idiot, since my wife customarily calls me such. But she is entitled to those endearing words of address since she is my better half. But a customer service rep?
Apparently, Intuit does not accept any responsibility on its part for failing to provide full and fair disclosure on the payment of its products, and profits from banging its “cherished” clients with penalty charges for “late payment”. Is this a scam? I ask this in all seriousness because of Intuit’s failure to make unambiguously clear to the subscriber that payment for the new version had not been processed at the time of its download, unlike the initial downloading of ProSeries.
I think it’s time to find another tax software vendor. If anyone has any recommendations, I would appreciate suggestions. I don’t like Intuit any more. It’s too big and powerful, and I don’t think Intuit appreciates all of the business that we CPAs bring to it.
>> lunch, but we already know that, right? today, speaker boehner, majority leader cantor and mccarthy trekked up to the white house to have lunch with president obama and vice president biden, in an effort to find common ground. oh, boy. they made a ? talk after lunch and common ground was a theme.
>> it was a very good lunch. and we were able to find enough common ground, i think, to show the american people we’re willing to work on their behalf.
>> we’re coming out of this lunch committed to trying to do that because the economy so desperately needs us to work together to send the signal that we should start growing again as america, because that’s what america does best. it innovates and leads.
>> i would say the main portion of the entire lunch was talking about the economy, ways that we could grow the economy, a lot to deal with regulation, reform to unleash those shackles that government holds, especially on small business.
>> shackles. small business is shackled. the only way to free them is to cut spending. by the way, big business is spending on over $1 trillion and they won’t spend it. so all this talk about small business is nonsense. all they want to do is cut their taxes and lower their regulation. and we should say that while republicans were pretending to look for common ground with the president, they were also at the same time releasing details of their proposed spending cuts to the president’s budget. their budget cuts will officially be unveiled tomorrow, but they put them out today just to no one would make the mistake of believing they would ever agree with anything with the president. this is what america looks like under republican rule and it looks scary. first, i want to start with nasa. nasa is a program republicans claim to like. they had their budgets slashed by only $100 million. that’s what they did to a program they liked. so you know it didn’t go well for the rest of us. republicans apparently think there’s too much being thrown at a program that provides healthy food and formula. american under public roule wants to cut $1 billion to the ? institutes of health. wants to cut the epa by $1.6 billion. pollution — it’s what’s for dinner. and american under republican rule wants to cut the cops program that helps local law enforcement coordinate against child predators. come on, don’t hard-working criminals need a break, too? and they also want to eliminate americorps. everyone knows that teachers are for the weak. and what about jobs? nay said that the gop majority was going to be laser focused on it. well, the republicans want to cut job training programs by $2 billion. look, for all these different programs, i don’t know what the right numbers should be, so can some of them be cut? yeah, maybe. maybe you should add to some of them. it’s hard to tell exactly what the right numbers are, but these numbers are draconian. i don’t trust the republicans because time after time after time, they get a paycheck from a lobbyist, they turn around and they do that lobbyist a favor. we show that and we prove that on this show all the time. so in this case, why are they cutting $1.6 billion from the epa? because they got paychecks from lobbyists who work for the polluters. if you get paid for the polluters, of course, you want to take away the regulations that stop the pollution. it’s obvious, and it’s simple. but the main thing was they promised jobs. that’s how they won the whole election. and they cut $2 billion from job training? did you know it’s been 35 days and 18 hours since they took over the house and they still have proposed exactly 0 bills to create jobs. what happened? i thought it was supposed to be ability the jobs. joining me now is ohio congresswoman mar cy kaptur. a lot of cuts here. which ones were you most upset by?
>> the ones that impact ordinary people, of course. they didn’t do anything to ? address the fact that hedge funds on wall street don’t pay taxes at the same rate as small businesses in my area. they didn’t do anything to propose prosecution of those who took equity from the american people and sucked it right up into the six biggest banks in in the country. there hasn’t been one prosecution to recover any of those assets. they’re focused on taking away heating assistance for people in ohio, for example, tonight for people who will be living in zero temperatures. these are senior citizens, people who can ill afford to pay high heating bills. as you said, they’re taking away job training from people who want to work in this country, who want to make a contribution. the reason we can’t balance the budget, too many people are out of work. and the way you get people back to work is make sure they have the skills for an economy of a new age. they want to cut energy programs to invest in energy production in america that will create jobs, rather than importing more and more and more from abroad and extending our military into these unending wars to protect the petroleum lanes around the world. wouldn’t it be better to put people to work in america?
>> congresswoman, you can’t expect them to cut the bankers. no, no, no, no. they don’t mean share pain that way. you can’t expect them to cut spending on wars and weapons we don’t need. no, no, of course not. i know that. what i want to know is, are there any cuts you would agree to or that you want to put on the table and say these are the things we need to cut?
>> everything has to be on the table. for example, military spending, homeland security. when i look at the amount of money wasted by the department of homeland security, it’s unbelievab unbelievable. if you look at the department of defense and those gold-plated contract, oh, my goodness. the military is asking for help to trim back. they know we can in-source a lot of these services. if you look at what they’re leading ?off, military construction, we can extend the years of construction. it doesn’t have to be all done in the first couple of years. there are ways to exact, i would say reasonable cuts in almost every program. but they’re cutting over $850 million from police. from police across this country and local law enforcement. with what we’re facing in community after community with the drug trade doing all this damage all over the united states, does that make any sense to you?
>> i thought the republicans were tough on crime, but apparently the way you cut the police is by cutting the police. i’m not sure how that works. if i were a listener or viewer, i would be wondering, how would i know what the budget of the epa would be, how much money the police say this, the republicans say this, the pratt democrats say that. how do you tell them? how do you make that decision?
>> look at your own community, if you feel that there are fewer cops on the beat and crime is going up and that crimes are not being addressed which is happening coast to coast in this country, you know there’s a problem. look at the streets in your community. if you look in cold weather, whether people are not able to pay heating bills. through your church or through your work, look how many people remain out of work. you can judge by your own experience, not just what you hear on virtual media. but from your own experience. there are parts of the country that are protected from the recession. look around your community. how many empty homes do you see? how many foreclosed homes? people can judge by what is happening in their own area. and certainly, when there’s an advertisement for a job, when 5,000 people line up for 50 jobs, you know america has a problem.
>> yeah, you know, when i look around my community, i see, you know, billionaire bankers who just desperately need more money. i don’t know why you’re not seeing that, congresswoman.
>> there hasn’t been one criminal prosecution by the government of the united states against the absolute meltdown that wall street caused our nation and nations around the world. think about that. and they want to cut the fbi. one of their proposals to cut the fbi, we ought to increase the fbi? so we can go after the wrong doers, confiscate their assets, make them pay their criminal penalties and help balance the budget.
>> are there any key party people you might be able to agree with on cuts? of course, they want to propose and bigger cuts, but are there — is there any room for agreement there?
>> i think that we’re looking for agreement. i think that across every account, we have to make reasonable cuts. i think the president’s proposal for a freeze over five years in some accounts makes sense. i think we’re going to get into the negotiation now, but i don’t think that you really take it out on the people who have been hurt the most in this economy. i don’t agree with that at all.
>> i brought up the tea party. i think a lot of them do want to cut defense. i think some of them might be amenable to your ideas on banks. one last thing here, i’ve got to be honest with you, how did you guys lose to these folks? you’re right, there are local communities all throughout this country who are incredibly hurt and they say let’s not address them, let’s cut them. and let’s give tax breaks to the very richest people in the country. i don’t understand how the democratic party loses to that platform.
>> trillions of dollars. the american people were so upset over just what you said — jobs. they want jobs, they want this country to thrive. they’re upset about the debt. they have a right to be upset about the debt. you get the debt problem solved by having a productive robust economy, and that’s why people have to be working. we can’t have people being idle across this country. that would heal so much. i think many people, including the tea party members that were elected, there are many of them very well intentioned, but they’re not familiar with the programs. so they might want to take a meat ax rather than a scalpel. and i think we’re now going to get into the discussions where we will, i hope make wise and intelligent choices that won’t jeopardize the recovery and will help put people back to work.
>>> florida’s new tea party governor has put out the new budget, unveiled in a megachur packed with hooping and hollering tea party activists, oh, well so much for being governor of everyone. the headline is he wants to cut corporate taxes. i mean, really cut them.
>> we’ll reduce the business taxes, completely — and we’ll completely phase it out by 2018.
>> now, it’s worth pointing out when corporations get tax breaks, someone has to pick up the slack, so it’s the regular taxpayers who pick up the tab. honestly, the republicans have put together a bit of a brilliant strategy. they push to cut corporate taxes, and then the citizens get mad about taxes, who then cut corporate taxes, and around and around we go. this is the republican 101 strategy. you say one thing, but mean the exact opposite. for example, rick scott is calling his budget, quote, a jobs budget, except that his budget actually cuts 13,000 jobs over two years. but it’s cool, because scott’s promising 700,000 jobs, and a pony for everyone. sometime in the future, at those wonderful no corporate taxes trickle down to all of you. rick scott says the florida legislature needs to pag a radical budget, quote, for the kids, except hi budget cuts 10% from per-student spending. it cuts $82 billion from the prison sim. but the real people who are paying are the very poor. scott wants to take $3 billion from medicate over the next two years. and reduce the, quote, medically needy program serving the catastrophic sick as the miami herald put it. but take it from the catastrophic sick isn’t the worst. they want to gut the state’s homelessness assistance office, and with the december 21st observance of the memorial day. that’s just gratuitous, man. there can’t be any clearer example of the hatred of the poor that the tea party people feel. they pretend to be pop you list? they hate the poor so much, not only do they want to cut help from the homeless, they don’t even want to recognize they exist. i have this very simple set of questions. what do you think happens when you shut down the homelessness assistance office? do they pick up and move to another country? what happens if you cut back jails? what happens when someone is butted from the rolls. do they get better? no, all these problems come back to haunt you in much worse ways. so do the criminals, so do the sick. is this the rpg version? ironically they’re the ones obsessed with redistricting of wealth. take a look at this. this is florida’s tax rate, one of the most regressive. the poorest people pay the most, almost 14%. the richest people pay the least, about 2%. this lord of the flies type of barbarism has to have a limit, and if it does, we’re apparently going to find that limit in florida. joining me now is former pennsylvania governor ed rendell, now an nbc news political analyst. so is there a limit? i mean, if he does this, do the voters in florida at some point say my god, what have we done?
>> sure. interesting thing about cutting the budget as the answer to all problems, the interesting thing is when you poll it, people are all in favor of reducing government spending, but then when you get specific, all of a sudden, it isn’t so hot anymore. you know, people are specifically against cuts to this, cuts to that. we had a demonstration for ed days when i was governor, trying to increase education spending in the midst of the recession, and a woman had a poster, and it said, i didn’t know cutting the budget meant firing my child’s teacher. when it gets personal, when it’s an older person you know, when it’s a criminal who’s committed a crime against your family that gets released from prison, those things stir people up. when the income gap– the people of this country have been very, very passive about the widening of the gap in income, but eventually we’re going to reach the breaking point. i think it’s not just florida and other states when we’re trying to balance budgets on the backs of people who really have legitimate needs — and by the way, it’s not just the poor anymore. cenk, i’ll just asking a rhetorical question. how many pennsylvanians out of the 12.5 million get food stamps?
>> that’s an excellent question. i think i might have once known the answer, but go ahead.
>> 1.2 million. 1 out of 12 pennsylvanians get food stamps. ten years ago people would have said food stamps are just for the very, very poor. these programs affect and help everybody. cut programs for autism, and you’re cutting into the heart of middle-class families trying desperately to pay for the services their kids need. this is not just an assault against the poor. it’s really going to be an assault against virtually everyone in society. there has to come a point about it breaks the tolerance of the public. look, understand that governors, both republican and democrats alike, you know, in ’08, ’09 and 2010, we all made different cuts. i cut $3.5 billion out of the pennsylvania budget. i closed down 16 on out of 780 budget lines, meaning those programs were closed down. so a lot of the cuts have already been made. if there are more cuts, and there having to more cuts, but if they’re wreckless, it will create an incredible social imbalance, and i think it will create unrest.
>> not just in florida. scott walker is another republican governor, this is what he said when we were talking about public employees. let’s watch.
>> we can no longer live in a society where the public employees are the haves and taxpayers who foot the bills are the have-23409s.
>> this is another line of attacks. they sea federal employees, unions, you see it in new jersey, all across, not that we cut the corporate taxes or the taxes for the rich. it’s the unions laborerers and workers that’s the problem.
>> demon icing government workers is silly. by and large they don’t get rich salary. they get average salaries. the benefits package is a bit better, and there have to be changes to make them more realistic. i came in and made our employees contribute to their health care costs for the first time, but that’s because every citizen does. changes have to be made and should be made, but this idea there are government employees living off the fat of the land making super salaries? that’s crazy. you can cut government employees left and right, and it’s not going to solve the depth of the budget problems we have. beshd stop scapegoating teachers. you can be mad at unions, i’m not sure that’s fair, but don’t be mad at the individuals. they’re hard- working people, just like people who work in the private sector. they have families and children to support, and they take care of their parents, just like people in the private sector.
>> governor ed rendell, thank you to your time tonight.
>>> zone tonight. on thursday, the republicans in the house are going to unveil their new round of spending cuts. they say they will cut on the floor 15% of discretionary spending from the domestic budget, including the money needed to regulate the banks. how convenient. they also want to cut money for food safety. yeah, who needs safe food? now, why do we need they so-called — they’re definitely drastic, but why the so-called cuts? because they blew up our budget over these massive tax cuts. republicans are addicted to these tax cuts. every time they run for office they promise move. they love to tell you that the democrats want to take more of your hard-earned money. well, this weekend the president unfortunately fed the freak-out machine with this comment.
>> do you deny you’re a man that wants to redistribute wealth?
>> absolutely. i didn’t raise taxes once. i lowered taxes over the last two years.
>> that revved up the right-wing blogosphere and immediately started call obama a liar. they pointed to the 0.9% medicare tax that people making over $200,000 will pay starting in 2013. they got him. and the tobacco tax obama signed shortly after taking office as well. and of course the infamous tanning tax. how will the republic survive all these new taxes? yes, snooki and john boehner will have to pay a bit more to maintain their orange glow, but i don’t think anyone really believes these are major tax hikes. let’s look at what is really going on with taxes. i love doing this show, because i get to give you the real fact. for the third year in a row, americans are paying less in federal taxes than they did under george w. bush. pause? did you get that? you’re paying less taxes under obama than bush. income tax payments this year will be almost 13% lower than in 2008. corporate taxes will be down by a third. in fact as a person of the economy taxes are at their lowers level since — wait for it — 1950. that was 61 years ago, and taxes over the past couple decades are nothing compared to what they were throughout most of the 20th century. today the to the marginal rake is 20%. in 1944, the top tax rate was 94%, and stayed at 91% or higher for a 13-year stretch from 1950 to 1963. now, remember those are the years that a lot of people, including conservatives believe were the golden age of america. ’em by the time ronald reagan was elected, the top tax rate was 70%. am i saying i want it to be at 70% or 94%? no, i’m not saying that. it hurts me to pay taxes. it hurts everybody. nobody likes to do it, but we need balance here. we can’t be at a 61-year low, and also can’t be at 94%, but they don’t listen to reason. they’re like, no, cut it, cut it. should we stop cutting now? no, cut it! okay. come on. balance the reason. that’s what we try to explain on this show. we’re going to keep trying joining me is bernie sanders of vermont. senator sanders, do you agree that our tax base is a bit out of whack right now?
>> what i believe is at a time when the wealthiest 1% earn more income that can the bottom 50%, when the middle classes in steep dlan, what we have seen in recent years are huge tax breaks that primarily benefited the wealthiest people. what you got today, cenk, is somebody like warren buffett pointing out that his effective tax rate– the real taxes that he actually pays are lower than his secretary’s, and at 16% is lower than many police officers or teachers or nurses. what we have seen are massive tax breaks to the wealthiest help drive up the deficit and national debt and our frens are saying, gee, we have to kit medicare, medicaid and social security. i think that’s hypothetical critical.
>> and we’ve broken another report back to the 1928 numbers for the top 1% owning about 24% of the nation’s wealth. that’s wildly disproportionate, but to the very important question. what can you do about it?
>> there’s a lot. for example, right now, according to a congressional study, we’re losing about $100 billion a year in revenue, because compses and 89 wealthiest people in this country are putting their money in tax havens in the cayman islands, in bermuda and other countries. there’s a picture on the budget committee of one building, a four-story building, i’ll get it the next time on the show. four-story building which, quote/unquote, houses 18,000 companies. got that? all that that means is these companies are using that address as a way to establish residency in the country and not pay taxes.
>> last year exxon mobil in 2009 paid zero federal income taxes. in fact they got 156 million rebate. general electric paid nothing in taxes. chevron paid nothing in taxes. bank of america paid nothing in taxes. if we are serious about dealing with our deficit crisis in a way that is fair, you’ve got to end those loopholes. we’ve got to do away with corporate loopholes.
>> but senator sanders, when you say hey, wait a minute, you can’t go to the cayman islands, who stops you?
>> you’re going to have virtually stuff republican and they’re about representing the relateiest people. they want to repeal — i want people to hear this. they want to repeal the estate tax, $1 trillion in tax breaks to the top 3/10 of 1%. the very, very wealthy, and then they have the snuff nerve to say we’re worried about the deficit. we’ve got to rally the american people to say, enough is enough.
>> they put you in a rhetorical hole. they lower taxes, whether it’s the corporate taxes, taxes on the top 1%, and then when you come in office. they say aha democrats are raising your taxes. i think you portrayed the scenario. we have to understand in a recent 25-year period, 80% went to the top 1%. to say the people who are doing fantastically well, that they have got to pay their fair share of taxes. we’ve got to understand that taxes millionaires and billionaires is different. with the middle class in decline, i support tax breaks for working families, but to say we continue to game whose incomes are soaring, i think that’s absolutely absurd. it drives up the definicit.
>> all right, senator bernie sanders from vermont, thank you so much for joining us tonight.
Over this past weekend, conservatives celebrated what would have been President Ronald Reagan’s 100th birthday. During the entire commemorative ceremony, Republicans tried to outdo each other with their praises of him. I love Ronald Reagan. Oh no, I love Reagan more. I love Reagan more.
The reality is that Reagan actually turns out really not nearly as conservative as they say he was. I n fact, I think there’s no way he could have gotten elected as a Republican today. Are you ready for this? I don’t think there’s any way he could have gotten elected as a Democrat today. FOX News would have ravaged him. Let me show you why.
When he was president, did you know that Ronald Reagan raised taxes 11 times? And when he was governor of California, Reagan signed into law the largest tax increase in the history of any state up until then? Now, what do you think FOX News would have said about that?
Also President Reagan almost tripled the federal budget deficit during his time in office. The debt increased to nearly $3 trillion. That’s almost three times as much debt as the U.S. had accumulated in the first 80 years of the 20th century. That’s a lot of debt. I thought Republicans were against debt.
In addition, President Reagan also illegally gave weapons to Iran. He negotiated with terrorists. Secretly sold arms to Iran in exchange for American hostages and money for contrast. That was the Iran contra fair. Does it get any worse than negotiating with terrorists?
And in 1984, Reagan pulled American troops out of Lebanon. President Reagan deployed an American peace keeping force in Beirut but after 241 U.S. services members were killed in a bombing ordered by Hezbollah, he ran for the hills.
President Reagan also — and this is crazy I know, but I’ll explained, he helped to start the Taliban and Osama Bin Laden. How? Reagan was trying to fight the Soviet Union which made sense but he trained, equipped and funded the Islamic Mujahideen fighters in Afghanistan. His plan backfired a little bit when they became the Taliban and Osama Bin Laden, which were the tough fighters for that group. I’m not giving all of the blame for him there. But it did turn out that way.
Now, if all that wasn’t bad enough, this one is going to sting. Reagan gave amnesty to three million undocumented immigrants. He signed a law that made any immigrant who entered the U.S. before 1982 eligible for amnesty. Complete amnesty.
Now, if you think Reagan sounds like a no good lib at this point, and you’re wondering why anyone calls him a conservative, it’s partly because of context but also partly because of what he did on race.
In Philadelphia, Mississippi, he gave a speech about state’s rights and that’s where some civil rights workers had died. I wonder why he gave that speech. And by the way, he was against the Anti-Apartheid legislation handed to him. He vetoed it! Luckily, they overcame his veto. So the one thing Reagan was conservative on was racial issues. And that didn’t really sit pretty as you can see with history.
UYGUR: Now, we come at the story of the Koch Brothers and how you can buy our government? David and Charles Koch each worth $21 billion. They own Koch industries, an oil and chemical giant that stands the second largest privately owned company in the U.S. In 1980, David Koch ran to the right of Ronald Reagan as a libertarian party`s vice presidential candidate. When that failed, they changed tactics and decided to buy Washington instead. This is a story of how they did that.
First of all, they decided then, you know what, why don`t we start think tanks? So, they funded 35 conservative or libertarian groups. They spent almost $48 million to fight global warming or that opposition to global warming groups, of course. That was from `97 to 2008. I wish they would fight global warming, they do the opposite. And we`ll tell you why in a second. They also funded the CATO Institute, the Federalist Society, and Americans for prosperity. These are some of the largest conservatives groups in the country. Now, let`s go to America for prosperity. They spent $40 million in the 2011 election cycle mainly against Democrats.
They use that in 100 races across the country in Congress. And with that money, they held rallies, they did phone banks, they canvas door to door, basically pretending to be grassroots when in fact, all they cared was not just about the congressman but specifically about the House Energy and Commerce Committee. And what did they do there? Well, they spent $279,500 and they gave it to 22 of 31 Republicans on the committee. They also gave 32,000 to five Democrats. Now, why did the Americans for prosperity care about the new Republicans on the House panel? Well, I`m going to get to that in a second.
But look at what they did with the freshman. Five of the six freshmen benefited from Americans for prosperity in 2010. So, hey, they are definitely on their side. Nine of the 12 signed on to the pledge on greenhouse gases that they wanted Americans for prosperity wanted them to take. So, what was that pledge? Well, here it is. They said that the pledge on greenhouse gases is quote, “ask politicians to denounce a democratic led effort to compel oil refineries to clean up emissions of greenhouse gases through a so-called Cap-and-Trade system.” Now, do you get what`s happening here, folks?
They are in the oil business and they are saying, hey, we don`t want oil refineries to get cleaned up. Because if you clean up oil refineries and have less pollution and less global warming, it costs the Koch brothers a tremendous amount of money. So, they invest a little bit of money to buy these politicians, they specifically target the commerce and Energy Committee and then voila, look at that, hey, those are all my boys! And what`s the first thing they want to do? The Republicans of course want to limit the EPA from controlling global warming. Say, hey, back off the oil refineries. Those guys paid our bills. That`s how our politicians get bought and in this case by the Koch brothers.
With me now is Kathleen Hennessey, reporter from the “Lost Angels Times,” she co-wrote a fascinating story about the link between the Koch and the GOP in today`s paper. All right. Kathleen, this program by the Kochs to buy influence seems has been an enormous success, is that right?
KATHLEEN HENNESSEY, LOS ANGELES TIMES: It`s certainly been successful. I don`t think I would say that they were buying influence so much as they were.
UYGUR: Renting it?
(LAUGHTER)
HENNESSEY: They set out several years ago to sort of beef up their political operations. They were among many Republicans, you know, during the Bush era who felt that small government, free market policies were not being followed and they decided several years ago to sort of amp up some of their operations. And I think we`re seeing, it was a gradual process and we`re seeing the results of that now.
UYGUR: And it was just a lovely coincidence that they`re free trade, free market policies wound up helping them pollute a little more. I mean, that`s just how it goes, right?
HENNESSEY: Well, they would say that, you know, they are certainly — that they believe that a certain amount of regulation is too much regulation. This is a long standing ideological position for David and Charles Koch. David Koch was a libertarian candidate in 1980 as you mentioned. So, you know, they would argue that this is their ideological position and they`ve been true to it. And may also benefit their company`s bottom line. Certainly both seem to be true at this point.
UYGUR: Let me ask you about Representative Mike Pompeo, he`s from their home district and he has some interesting ties to them. Can you tell us about that a little bit?
HENNESSEY: Sure. Congressman Pompeo has a long relationship with the Koch brothers there. He received a bit of investment in a company that he started many years ago which he since sold. And, you know, he`s from their home district. So, he`s known quantity to them and connected to their industries and for instance, he hired a former Koch lawyer as his chief of staff.
UYGUR: That`s funny. Again, a wonderful coincidence where they invest in his business, he makes some money and then when he`s in Congress, he hires their guy as chief of staff. Again, probably just a coincidence. So, let`s go to Fred Upton who is also on the committee. Now, he was a little skeptical in regards to the right wing talking point on global warming. He originally tells a little bit about that. Where was his original position and where is he now?
HENNESSEY: Well, his original position and his original statements indicate that he at the very least considered global warming a serious problem that needed to be taken seriously. He as part of an effort to win the chairmanship once Republicans had won in November, won control of the House, he had to, you know, make sort of a campaign for the chairmanship and there was some opposition from other conservative groups and he made a lot of steps basically sort of toughening up his rhetoric on the EPA in particular and its role in regulating greenhouse gases. And he was successful in that effort. And, you know, became the chairman and shortly after came out and wrote an Op-ed in “The Wall Street Journal” basically endorsing the same policy that Americans for prosperity has been advocating for a long time.
UYGUR: They`re among these top ten donors. He gets the money from them. Kind of changes his position, all of a sudden, he thinks global warming is no big deal. But probably a wonderful coincidence. All right. Now, one last question for you real quick. You know, we got the pollution that might come from refineries, et cetera, but there`s actually an excellent investment for them because it also affects their taxes, right? Tell us a little bit about that.
HENNESSEY: Well, I don`t want to say that this is part of a — I guess that their approach and their tactics is one that`s sort of been taken by democratic fundraisers and benefactors as well, that they sort of in many ways describe themselves as following the playbook of George Soros and other — and that they are trying to coordinate sort of various groups advocating for a point of view and that`s what they would argue that they are doing in this effort.
UYGUR: All right. I know. Their point of view saving them millions perhaps billions in taxes. Well, look at that. Again, a wonderful coincidence.
All right. Kathleen Hennessey of L.A. Times, thank you so much.
TRUMP TOLD THE AMERICAN PEOPLE THERE ARE THE SECURITY STATE AGENTS WHO THINK THAT THEY RUN THE GOVERNMENT AND HE STOOD UP TO THEM AND CHALLENGED THEIR ORTHODOXIES AND PIETIES AND SHOWED AMERICANS, ESPECIALLY PEOPLE IN THE REPUBLICAN PARTY ON THE RIGHT, THAT THESE INSTITUTIONS ARE NOT NOBLE OR BENEVOLENT BUT ARE HIGHLY PERNICIOUS. THEY […]
Joe Biden said, if you're fully vaccinated, the chances that you can get severely ill, not even die just get severely ill, are very low. And the statistic that he gave is, out of every 160,000 people who have been vaccinated, only one ends up going to the hospital with a serious illness. So the […]
Glenn Greenwald: "So you have huge number of journalists who believe that, they have the right to lie and even when they get caught, they don't care because they know their audience won't hold it against them." Continue reading →
THAT'S WHAT THEY ARE USING JANUARY 6TH. IT'S DEMENTED TO COMPARE 9/11 AND JANUARY 6TH BUT IT'S SO CENTRAL TO THE AGENDA OF THE SECURITY STATE, THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY, TO ESSENTIALLY INITIATE A SURVEILLANCE REGIME, A DETENTION REGIME, AGAINST PEOPLE ON THE RIGHT WHO ARE AGAINST THE ESTABLISHMENT. AND THEY’RE ALREADY DOING IT. AND THEY […]
Carlson: So now we’re arming the Taliban and marooning our own citizens in Afghanistan. Who could possibly have seen that coming. Glenn Greenwald is one of the few journalists who did see it coming. He writes for Substack where all … Continue reading →
And so that is what I call the birth of this woke industrial complex. It is a new leviathan, a new monster, that is far more powerful than what Thomas Hobbes might have envisioned 400 years ago, and it is the biggest threat to individual liberty today. It is not big government alone. Its conservatives […]
FBI CIA NSA are not only spying on American citizens but also are illegally unmasking their identities to journalists who support our fascist government Continue reading →
The government is instructing social media companies what should and shouldn't be allowed to be on the internet, these are the people least competent to judge what is misinformation. Continue reading →
Google, Facebook and Twitter should be treated as state actors under existing legal doctrines. Using a combination of statutory inducements and regulatory threats, Congress has co-opted Silicon Valley to do through the back door what government cannot directly accomplish under the Constitution. Congress is giving Big Tech immunity and more power in exchange for it censoring […]
THE SECURITY STATE HAS EXISTED SINCE THE END OF WORLD WAR II. THEY'VE BEEN OPERATING IN SECRET AND WITH NO DEMOCRATIC ACCOUNTABILITY FOR EIGHT OR NINE DECADES NOW. DWIGHT EISENHOWER WHEN HE LEFT OFFICE WARNED THE COUNTRY ABOUT THE DANGERS THAT THEY POSE. Continue reading →
Darryl Cooper, AKA @MartyrMade, is a podcaster who had a Twitter thread go viral with 13k retweets and 20k likes of the first Tweet alone. This one is 36-Tweets long. It makes very cogent arguments of not only why millions of Trump supporters believe the 2020 election was stolen, but also why we are justified […]
COVID-19 antibodies have been found in blood samples as early as September, 2019. China knew about the virus' transmission to humans months before it announced such to the world. Why has the media and our government not investigated this gross negligence, if not mass murder? Continue reading →
Democrats and elites are making straight white men the enemy of their new world order. Blacks, hispanics, gays are now the good guys; straight white men are the bad guys. Continue reading →
This ruling class of administrative state, big tech, corporations: all of these people think that they can get rid of Trump and we'll go back to normal. They're wedded to a broken system that has sold out the American people. And now they're going to try to sell out the American people and the middle […]
The real threat is collusion. When journalists strike secret alliances with the very people they're supposed to be holding accountable, we are in deep trouble. Lies go unchallenged. Democracy cannot function. And that's what we're watching right now. Continue reading →
The CIA from the very first days of the Trump administration, even before he was inaugurated, devoted themselves to sabotaging the administration because Donald Trump questioned just a few of their pieties. And that can't be done in Washington. Whoever does that must be destroyed. And so the CIA and the Deep State operatives became […]
The problem is the corruption that is absolutely pervasive in the U.S. news media. There are newsrooms all throughout New York and Washington DC, where top editors are explicitly saying they do not want this story investigated. And they're being clear that the reason that they don't want to investigate it is because they think […]
So Apple isn't fighting for diversity. They're doing exactly what they appear to be doing: they're trying to keep wages down and keep their workers compliant by importing labor from abroad.This isn't about diversity. It's about exploitation. It always is Continue reading →
Accountants CPA Hartford, LLC
Accountants CPA Hartford Connecticut is an accounting firm in Hartford, Connecticut offering a variety of accounting & tax services.
10
Accountants CPA Hartford, LLC