Several sources have taken a closer look at the "fiscal cliff" deal. It sure looks like it included a few "bridges to nowhere."
Here's a good rundown by Jim Hightower of Texas.
My own assessment of the "American Taxpayer Relief Act" is that it could easily have been worse. But what we really need to worry about is jobs, not the deficit.
Unemployment caused the deficit, not the other way round. The deficit increase is mostly a result of unemployment, and the resulting activation of safety net programs, otherwise known as "counter cyclical" measures.
In other words, at the present time, the deficits are a feature, not a bug.
Here are some links to other articles:
"From NASCAR to rum, the 10 weirdest parts of the 'fiscal cliff' bill," www.washingtonpost.com, January 2, 2013.
"Eight Corporate Subsidies in the Fiscal Cliff Bill, From Goldman Sachs to Disney to NASCAR," www.truth-out.org, January 2, 2013.
"Fiscal Cliff Deal Extends Measure Making It Easy For Wall Street To Avoid Taxes," www.thinkprogress.org, January 3, 2013.
Monday, January 7, 2013
150 Years Ago: Yes, The Civil War Was About Slavery
Nearly sixty years ago, my American History professor lectured on all the other things besides slavery that might have contributed to the Civil War.
I was never persuaded that Americans went to war over protective tariffs.
I was persuaded, though, that northern Republicans fought for the Union, not to free the slaves, until perhaps after the Battle of Gettysburg.
No longer.
The New York Times' series "Disunion" has documented the centrality of slavery to the Civil War from the outset.
In a recent post in that series, Professor James Oakes of CUNY thoroughly lays that issue to rest. Not only did influential Republican voices clamor for the end of slavery, most of the incidents used to demonstrate Lincoln's purported reluctance to free slaves turn out to reflect quite the opposite - his determination to end slavery.
I was never persuaded that Americans went to war over protective tariffs.
I was persuaded, though, that northern Republicans fought for the Union, not to free the slaves, until perhaps after the Battle of Gettysburg.
No longer.
The New York Times' series "Disunion" has documented the centrality of slavery to the Civil War from the outset.
In a recent post in that series, Professor James Oakes of CUNY thoroughly lays that issue to rest. Not only did influential Republican voices clamor for the end of slavery, most of the incidents used to demonstrate Lincoln's purported reluctance to free slaves turn out to reflect quite the opposite - his determination to end slavery.
Saturday, January 5, 2013
Seventy Years Ago: VT Projectiles Shoot Down Japanese Dive Bomber
January 5, 1943. Task Group 67.2 (Rear Admiral Walden L. Ainsworth) bombards a Japanese airfield and installations at Munda, New Georgia, Solomons Islands. After the rest of Task Force 67 joins TG 67.2, Japanese planes attack the force, just missing light cruiser Honolulu (CL 48) and damaging New Zealand light cruiser HMNZS Achilles, 18 miles south of Cape Hunter, Guadalcanal. In the action, light cruiser Helena (CL 50) becomes the first U.S. Navy ship to use 5 inch/38 caliber Mk. 32 proximity-fuzed projectiles in combat, downing a Japanese Aichi Type 99 carrier bomber (VAL) with her second salvo
This was a major technological triumph. These 5-inch projectiles contained a tiny radio proximity device, essentially a miniature radar, which caused the projectile to explode if it came close enough to the airplane to do damage. This system, under development since mid-1940, was a vast improvement over the mechanical time fuze previously used against aircraft. It also replaced contact fuzes that had to actually hit the aircraft to explode.
To conceal the purpose of the projectiles, they were designated as "VT-Fuzed projectiles" (Variable-Time fuze).
The story of development of the proximity fuze is detailed here in an article on the Naval Historical Center web site.
The greatest challenge was to ruggedize the miniature electronic tubes used in the circuitry back in the day before transistors.
Mark 53 Proximity Fuze
Friday, January 4, 2013
On Cabals
Some years ago, then-First Lady Hillary Clinton asserted that a "vast, right-wing conspiracy" had targeted her husband, President Bill Clinton.
In today's New York Times, columnist Timothy Egan stimulated a better word: "Cabal." I like "cabal" for the purpose. Cabals don't have to be vast in order to be effective.
Wikipedia explains: "A cabal is a group of people united in some close design together, usually to promote their private views or interests in a church, state, or other community, often by intrigue." Wikipedia elaborates: "The term can also be used to refer to the designs of such persons or to the practical consequences of their emergent behavior, and also holds a general meaning of intrigue and conspiracy. The use of this term usually carries strong connotations of shadowy corners, back rooms and insidious influence; a cabal is more evil and selective than, say, a faction, which is simply selfish; because of this negative connotation, few organizations use the term to refer to themselves or their internal subdivisions."
Egan didn't use the word "cabal" in his column. Instead, he referred to "a knot of Tea Party extremists who will never consider a fresh idea and a House Speaker whose notion of compromise is to tell his Democratic counterpart in the Senate to commit an unprintable act. For John Boehner, his profane shout-out to Harry Reid passed for a New Year’s toast." It was one of Egan's readers who suggested that "cabal" is a better word than "knot" for the phenomenon.
I agree with the reader. For many years now, a small group of extremely wealthy individuals, most of whom got their money the old-fashioned way (they inherited it) and who don't actually make anything but deals, have put their extreme wealth on the scales to change the rules that served the country well until the early seventies.
These are people who show nothing but disdain for Americans who actually work for a living. And they have proven adept at using intrigue to take resources from workers to line their own pockets.
That's the real story behind the "giant sucking sound" candidate Ross Perot talked about twenty years ago. Not the giant sucking sound of jobs fleeing to Mexico but of capital and jobs fleeing to China and India.
How can American workers (of all different-colored collars) counter this trend?
Get smart! Vote for jobs.
When everyone is back to work, get control over the banks and other financial institutions.
Uncloak the cabal.
In today's New York Times, columnist Timothy Egan stimulated a better word: "Cabal." I like "cabal" for the purpose. Cabals don't have to be vast in order to be effective.
Wikipedia explains: "A cabal is a group of people united in some close design together, usually to promote their private views or interests in a church, state, or other community, often by intrigue." Wikipedia elaborates: "The term can also be used to refer to the designs of such persons or to the practical consequences of their emergent behavior, and also holds a general meaning of intrigue and conspiracy. The use of this term usually carries strong connotations of shadowy corners, back rooms and insidious influence; a cabal is more evil and selective than, say, a faction, which is simply selfish; because of this negative connotation, few organizations use the term to refer to themselves or their internal subdivisions."
Egan didn't use the word "cabal" in his column. Instead, he referred to "a knot of Tea Party extremists who will never consider a fresh idea and a House Speaker whose notion of compromise is to tell his Democratic counterpart in the Senate to commit an unprintable act. For John Boehner, his profane shout-out to Harry Reid passed for a New Year’s toast." It was one of Egan's readers who suggested that "cabal" is a better word than "knot" for the phenomenon.
I agree with the reader. For many years now, a small group of extremely wealthy individuals, most of whom got their money the old-fashioned way (they inherited it) and who don't actually make anything but deals, have put their extreme wealth on the scales to change the rules that served the country well until the early seventies.
These are people who show nothing but disdain for Americans who actually work for a living. And they have proven adept at using intrigue to take resources from workers to line their own pockets.
That's the real story behind the "giant sucking sound" candidate Ross Perot talked about twenty years ago. Not the giant sucking sound of jobs fleeing to Mexico but of capital and jobs fleeing to China and India.
How can American workers (of all different-colored collars) counter this trend?
Get smart! Vote for jobs.
When everyone is back to work, get control over the banks and other financial institutions.
Uncloak the cabal.
Thursday, January 3, 2013
Who Pays?
Nice Chart From Ezra Klein's WonkBlog. I think there is an error in the legend: "20-60 percentile" should be "20-40 percentile."
Wednesday, January 2, 2013
Cui Bono?
I may yet comment on the good news/bad news about the "fiscal cliff."
Sometimes a Latin phrase delivered with a lifted eyebrow can suffice:
"Cui Bono"
Sometimes a Latin phrase delivered with a lifted eyebrow can suffice:
"Cui Bono"
Tuesday, January 1, 2013
Reflections On The New Year
“The past is never dead. It's not even past.”
William Faulkner, Requiem for a Nun
“For I have known them all already, known them all—
Have known the evenings, mornings, afternoons,
I have measured out my life with coffee spoons.”
― T.S. Eliot, The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock and Others
Reflections on the past and on the future. What are the chances of a clean break with the past?
Not high. Mark Twain put the matter in perspective:
"History doesn't repeat itself, but it does rhyme."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
