Comes The Repo Man.

Alright, here's the deal. There is a significant minority on the left and and an equally significant minority on the right.  Thankfully there's a more significant group in congress who are sane. These last stand in the middle. They're willing to negotiate in order to save our economy. Unfortunately this group isn't large enough to enact any legislation. Therefore they must depend on either the staunch conservative block or the equally staunch progressive block. The problem is that as soon as the center starts to lean one way or the other, they start to loose members from the other side. In other words the conservative and progressive members of the center who are welling to give in a bit in order to save the economy aren't willing to completely capitulate. I should mention again that none of the groups or coalitions are large enough to win the day. So what do you care? When the time comes, and there is no compromise, the  good ole U.S. of A. will be forced to default on it's loan payments. So what do you care? Have you ever defaulted on your car payments? You Haven't? Well what happens if you default on your car payments is that you start to get more exercise by walking to work and the store and everywhere else you want to go. That is unless you live on a bus route. Now you may think that nobody would dare try to take away this country's car, or whatever. Well you may be right, but the chance of our being able to borrow any money from anyone might become questionable. Except maybe a loan shark or two. We'd be placed on a "cash only" basis. No foreign oil on credit. No Chinese toys except cash in advance. It would not be fun. And we and the whole world would likely spiral into a Greater Depression. Maybe a semi-permanent depression. I don't think these children should be allowed to play with matches. They could burn the whole place down, ya know.            

Boy, What A deal For Crooks.

Here's a deal for ya. If you're a crook, you might be very interested in it. It's called "deferred prosecution agreement". How it works is the government goes to  people like big bankers or other large corporations and says if you agree to investigate yourself we will agree not to do it. So the big banker hires a lawyer to investigate the big bank. Of course the big banker can feel confident that the lawyer he chooses won't find any wrong doing on the part of the big banker. Perhaps a janitor has been the culprit in this case. The big banker and the lawyer report the janitor to the Justice Department . The Justice Department puts the janitor in front of the firing squad and everyone is happy. Well everyone but the janitor I suppose. So, if you're a crook, you may want to form a large corporation of crooks. Call it Crooks Are Us. Then if anyone is caught doing anything crooked you can arrange a "deferred prosecution agreement" with the Justice Department. The only thing though, you'll have to hire a bunch of janitors. And a lawyer of course. I can see all sorts of opportunities for this type of agreement. In fact, I think there's an opening here for nearly everybody to get in on the act. How about a "Taxpayers Misinformation On Tax Return Corporation". That way if you cheat on your tax return, you can tell them the janitor did it. Hey, even janitors could form a corporation. They could hire a few big bankers to be their fall guy. What goes around comes around.

Put Your Hands In The Air, This Is An Upstick.

Well there ya have it. Even the president is willing for me to take a cut in income in order for the economy to be saved. The only problem with his proposal is that some of the richest people in the country may have to take a cut in tax loop-holes. Now ordinarily you'd think that rich people would be willing to help the country get back on it's feet. After all if you're making ten or twenty million a year or even more, it's not going to be too painful to have to pay a little more in taxes. Ordinarily you'd think that. But you'd be wrong. So if the president agrees to cut back on Social Security increases, and inflation continues to rise, I'll have less to live on and corporate CEOs and hedge fund managers will continue to pay next to nothing in taxes and their incomes will continue to rise. It's sort of a "rise and fall" world, isn't it? Don't get me wrong, I believe that someone who is smart enough to become extremely successful, should reap just rewards for his or her efforts. And I even think that someone who is born with a silver spoon or special athletic abilities should have the right to capitalize on that good fortune. What I don't agree with is that they should be exempt from paying a fair share in taxes. I sort of feel like they should pay at least the same rate as the middle class has to pay, plus a little extra in return for the great good fortune they have of living in a country that makes it possible for them to rise to such dizzying heights. Honestly. I'm not greedy. I don't want all their money. I'd settle for what they haven't paid in taxes all these years. But then I'd be as rich as they are.

Capitalism In't Bad. Some Capitalists Are.

Wow! Columnist David Brooks, in today's N.Y. Times wrote a blistering attack against Republicans. Now this wouldn't be such a big deal except that he's normally a conservative Republican himself. The thing he is finding fault with in current Republican circles is their obstinate refusal to negotiate on taxation at all. He points out how much the Democrats have given in on cuts to entitlements nearly across the board and even agree to no tax increases at all. Only the closing of a few tax loop holes that would affect only the very wealthy. Still the Republicans say no. Now the Tea Party started off with some great ideas. It really is past time to begin to eliminate our indebtedness.  But the thing is, it isn't time to turn our backs on the needy. The poor and lower middle class still have to survive. Why? Because they are our fellow Americans. Because they are our fellow human beings. Does anyone but these fanatics believe that someone making  multi-millions of dollars every year should get special discounts just because they're rich? Does anyone really believe they would refuse to create jobs unless they get these special discounts? Here's a thought. Let them refuse to create jobs. If they don't, then someone else will and there's the start up of a new company. Because if the demand is there and existing corporations won't fill that need, then someone else will be ready to go into competition. That's been the foundation of capitalism from the beginning. It's how many corporations got started in the first place. It just doesn't make sense to let them hold us hostage.

Ahhh! The Good Life. Right?

It always happens this way. I plan to write about one thing and then something else crops up. Today I was going to talk about Afghanistan and the middle-east. Okay, well maybe an other day. Today in the N.Y.Times there's an article that is titled "We knew they got raises. But this?" It goes on to state that the CEOs of 200 large companies got a whopping 23% increase in wages in 2010 over 2009. That's nearly a quarter of what they made in 2009. Cash bonuses jumped by 38%. Now folks we're not talking about somebody who hit the daily number for a couple of hundred smackers, we're talking about the giant jackpot, multi-million dollar lottery. You can bet these guys don't bother buying lottery tickets though. Huh. or even Harrumph. These folks are winning these outrageous sums annually. Now you may thing that it's only a reflection of how well their companies are doing and you'd be right. You might think that all employees in those companies are doing equally well. Now there you'd be somewhat wrong. Actually only top executives are seeing any improvement in wages. In fact those companies, for the most part, haven't even begun to rehire folks that were layed off  because of the recession. And those who were kept on had to, in many cases, take a reduction in pay, which hasn't been returned. If only these few were the folks that were buying the products that those companies manufacture, in sufficient quantities, to rehire those folks that were layed off. if only. Unfortunately these CEOs likely don't buy their own companies products at all, preferring something far more expensive instead. But then that's not why they were hired. They were hired to make money for the investors. By not having to pay their employees as much, the company is making more money. Who said the economy wasn't doing well? Who said the recession isn't over? High end imports are selling like hotcakes.

If It Please The Court. Oops! I Mean If It Please The Corporation.

'The unfortunate thing about our problems with election financing is that our Congress is unwilling to do anything that might restrict the huge amounts of money they can collect from corporations and very wealthy people. Either directly or through PACs set up for that purpose. And even if they do find some backbone, the Supreme Court is determined to cut such limitations out of any laws passed. Folks we are destined to have a country that is For The Corporations, By The Corporations And With
The Corporations' Consent. The only thing left is for Corporations to be able to vote and hold office. Once that happens, they won't need us at all. At least that seems to be the thinking. around Washington. Maybe a few of us for military purposes and waiters and waitresses. I suppose I could volunteer to be a greeter someplace. Whatta you gonna do? Well if Congress won't do anything, then maybe it's time to take things into our own hands and start a grass roots campaign to amend the constitution. State by state. If we did that, then neither Congress nor the Supreme's would be able to do anything to stop it. Ya know, when your government won't do it's job, the people need to step in, in a legal, non-violent way and get the job done. At that point it probably would make sense to eliminate political parties as well. Probably impeach the Suprermes and Congress too. I'm not suggesting anything radical mind you. Just a complete overhaul of government. Congress would have term limits placed on members. Any dispute that cannot be resolved by them, such as out debt ceiling, would be decided in favor of the poor and middle-class. If that can't be determined, just give me a call. They'll have my number on speed dial. Of if you prefer, you could apply for the job, but I warn you, this job could be hazardous to your mind.  I only volunteered because I don't have one. What other qualifications do you need to go to Washington?

Justices Should Swear. But Only Once In Public.

Did you know that any and every federal judge in the country must agree to abide by an official code of conduct? Well they do. All, that is, except the nine members of the Supreme Court.  In other words, all federal justices must agree to be good and honest and especially not be a part of any political movements. That's right. In effect, they are supposed to be independents.  Above politics. But not Supreme Court justices. And some are proving they don't want to be neutral. Now there's a pretty good reason for this requirement. There was a lot of screaming a few years back about judicial activism on the bench. They wanted that changed. So the new Chief Justice was appointed by George W. Bush. Then he got to appoint another one. Now the court has five conservative justices to four liberals. The problem is not that they are conservative or liberal, the problem is that they are now more politically active then ever. It's far past time the Supreme Court Justices be required to swear to and abide by the same code of ethics all other federal judges must agree to. That's not being unfair. It's not being partisan. It's not being prejudicial. It's just being fair and reasonable. And even honest. Honesty, after all, is not such a terrible thing. I would expect that any judge hearing a case I might have, would be at the very least, honest. If I found out he was too friendly with the opposing side, I'd be a bit miffed. Maybe even madder then that.