Real Job Creation Policy vs. Bizarro World

I just can’t step back from the crap being pushed by politicians as “jobs” policy these days.   I can’t believe any one is actually falling for the line that basic corporate welfare programs and subsidies are actually going to create jobs because there’s never been any evidence of that being correlated in the past and there is certainly no evidence of that happening today.  Lest we forget, we have about 11 years of experience with corporate tax largess, deregulation of financial markets, and low taxes on capital gains. Yet this century has seen nothing but miserable job creation.  We’ve got nothing to show for it but the biggest recession since the Great Depression.

Here’s Robert Reich calling Romney’s job creation approach “bizarre”.  However, it doesn’t really sound any different from that offered up by any of the other candidates either and that includes the President.  This bothers me to no end and hence, I keep blogging on about it.

“Mitt Romney kind of has the odd idea, and it is a bizarre idea, that at a time when corporations are scoring record profits. At a time when you’ve got them sitting on $2 trillion of cash they don’t even know what to do with, that somehow if you give them more tax cuts and deregulate so you reduce their costs even further, they will then create jobs.

“They don’t create jobs now, he assumes, because their costs are too high or they’re not making enough money. Well, the reality of course is just the opposite,” former Secretary of Labor Robert Reich said on MSNBC’s “The Last Word.”

“They don’t need more money, companies are doing very well,” Reich said later on in the segment.

Corporations are flush with cash at the moment.  They just aren’t doing anything with it because they won’t expand unless there’s demand for their products and services.  As I demonstrated yesterday, the bottom has fallen out of consumer demand and that’s stymied economic expansion.  We do not need to appease some imaginary confidence fairy.  Businesses need paying customers. One of the primary drivers of economic activity in this country since World War 2 has been construction.  The housing market is still in big trouble and we have excess supply of both commercial and consumer real estate.  What business person is going to hire more people and produce stuff that no one buys?

We’re going to be live blogging both the Republican debate tonight as well as the President’s job speech.  Neither promise anything more than distinctly unproven economic policy.  Even the President is thought to not believe what he’s going to be saying if you believe this. What kind of leader pushes policy he knows to be wrong?

The centerpiece of the job creation package that President Obama plans to announce on Thursday — payroll tax relief for workers and perhaps their employers — is neither his first policy choice nor that of many economists. But it is the one that they figure has the best chance of getting Republicans’ support.

Mr. Obama has signaled that he will propose to extend for another year a reduction of two percentage points in the 6.2 percent Social Security payroll tax that employees pay, which means about $1,000 more for the average household. And he is considering a proposal to expand the tax relief to employers’ share.

In his prime-time address to a joint session of Congress, Mr. Obama is expected to call for a package totaling several hundred billion dollars that would also extend other business tax cuts, put federal dollars into building and repairing roads, rails, airports, schools and other infrastructure projects, and provide aid to states to avert more layoffs of teachers.

But the single biggest stimulus measure he will propose is likely to be temporary payroll tax relief. If the current tax cut, due to expire at the end of the year, is expanded next year to employers as well as employees, it would pump roughly $200 billion into the economy, with the aim of stimulating much-needed demand for goods and services from consumers and businesses and, additionally, of giving companies an incentive to hire.

For the White House, its appeal is that it may be the only large stimulus measure that can pass Congress this year given Republicans’ preference for tax cuts.

And if Republicans oppose him, the White House figures Mr. Obama has the better of the political argument because he will be trying to block a tax increase that otherwise would apply to virtually all households on Jan. 1.

Republican leaders have said they might support the payroll tax cut’s extension if its cost is offset by equal spending cuts, a condition they did not apply for extending the Bush-era tax cuts on high incomes. Mr. Obama has said he will propose long-term deficit savings to offset the short-term costs of his stimulus proposals, though that is not likely to satisfy Republicans.

Look, what in his 2 1/2 years in office should leave him with the impression that he’s going to get anything past the Republicans in Congress?  Half of them are indicating they probably won’t show up for the speech.  Ever since the man’s taken office he’s offered one Republican plan after another.  I still can’t believe after years of fighting Dolecare in the 1990s, the Democrats were forced to pass that stupid thing and it now wears the Obamacare label.  What kind of leader pushes policy that his own party fought for decades?

I have no idea what trade agreements or patent reform or reducing regulations have to do with job creation either.  None of that has ever been shown through research to be germane.  But again,  all you have to do is look at the amount of cheap money and the excess cash sitting on corporate balance sheets right now to know that businesses don’t need any more incentives to do something they aren’t doing any way.

The other thing that is most confusing is that the President’s plan will rob Peter to pay Paul because he’s going to make this ‘revenue neutral’ to appease Republicans.  Again, with this appeasing pipsqueak Cantor and the rest of the whackos in the Republican caucus.  Supposedly, some direct infrastructure spending and some direct aid to states to keep teachers in place is going to some how magically turn around a 9.1% unemployment rate.  I don’t see how that’s going to do anything on the level that he’s talking about –$300 billion–is a token amount of money in a $15 trillion economy and the offsets will likely take away jobs from wherever they’re pulled. The other simply confusing proposal has to do with tax breaks for equipment which is really strange given that it’s likely to increase current worker productivity making hiring additional workers questionable.

In his speech on Thursday night to a joint session of Congress, Obama will also consider a tax benefit to those businesses that hire the unemployed, with a price tag of around $30 billion. Public works projects will be included, but the AP reports that this will be less than $50 billion of the package.

The president also will continue for one year a tax break for business that allows them to deduct the full value of equipment.

The local aid that Obama intends to propose it aimed at preventing teacher layoffs, officials said.

The New York Times said the cost of the package would be “several hundred billion,” while the Washington Post estimated it to be “at least $200 billion.”

This is clearly a set of tax giveaways that the government can’t afford that won’t achieve much of anything other than further the Republican agenda of starving the beast.  What on earth does this president have in his head?  I can’t figure out any logical, reasonable strategy for doing these things.  Every time he furthers the Republican agenda it basically makes things worse for his reelection outlook.  His actions are completely unpopular when measured by polls. He’s numbers are approaching those of Bush by basically repeating the Bush-Cheney policy on steroids.  Unless he’s trying to become the President of the Chamber of Commerce, I’m not seeing any strategy here.  It’s like he so desires bi-partisan approval that he’s willing to throw anything up against the wall to see what possibly sticks.  Meanwhile, the Republicans are getting Republican policy without even putting any skin in the game. I just don’t get it.

Anyway, Minx and BB have promised to watch and liveblog the Republican debates tonight.  I don’t think I can do that because it will just be a contest to see who can be the meanest in a contest to beat up modernity, science, and people that aren’t rich.  I frankly see no purpose in continually watching people talk about issues that the civil war settled. I will watch the President’s speech because at this point, I’m looking for any sign of lucid economics and a strategy that doesn’t just infer faulty marketing.  Who knows, maybe the sky will open up, a choir of celestial beings will start singing, ray of sunshine will start streaming out of gold-rimmed clouds, and all my questions will be answered.  OR NOT.


Going …. Going …. Gone

The sellout continues …

So, this week is filled with speechification on job creation.  Romney and Huntsman have two of the most incoherent plans I’ve ever read. As usual, it’s a hodgepodge of stuff that’s not about creating jobs.  And the other republicans in the race–like President Obama–have more checklists on Trade Agreements, lower taxes, patent reform, and tickling the fancy of some imagined confidence fairy. Again, all I can say is the High Priest of Voodoo and the Confidence Fairy have more power in this country than you and I.  I’m getting tired of basing public policy on people’s imaginary friends.

I’m not trying to scare you off with Nifty Graphs, but I want to use one from FRED via Paul Krugman showing the Personal Savings rate.  That’s the blue line. The Red line shows residential construction as a percentage of GDP which I’m less concerned about for this discussion but you can read about why it concerns Paul Krugman on his blog post “On the Inadequacy of the Stimulus”.  I’m just going to use it as proxy for US investment since it’s a portion of that.

This is really simple macroeconomics math.  People get income.  They do four things with that income.  A portion of that is sent to the government via taxes.  A portion is spent on purchasing things and services in the US called domestic consumption. A portion is also spent on imported goods and services.  This subtracts from our GDP as well as our income.  The lowest percentage of what we do with our income has been that portion dedicated to savings until–as the graph shows–the Great Recession.  Our savings rate has really gone up which means we’re spending a lot less.  Savings and money spent on imports take money directly out of the expenditures portion of our economy as do taxes.  Taxes come back to our county’s expenditures via Government spending.  This happens relatively quickly and is powerful because when the government spends, it spends.  It doesn’t save, it doesn’t buy imports as a rule, and of course it doesn’t pay taxes. Savings works its way back to the economy through investment which is the smallest part of our domestic expenditures.  Right now–as proxied by the red line–you can see that investment isn’t really happening.  Because we are a net importer, that income just drains out of our economy and stimulates economies elsewhere.  Now, I’m not a protectionist and this is not meant to be a post arguing we shouldn’t do Trade Agreements.  What I’m saying is that because of our expenditures patterns, that’s not really a net gain for us in terms of jobs.  We get access to cheap goods,yes, but it doesn’t really bring about jobs.  Right now, people are spending less and you can see that by the increase in savings, but it’s not getting invested back into the economy because of this vicious circle.  People save and don’t spend.  Businesses don’t have customers so they don’t hire and expand.  We’ve been trying tax incentives for businesses for three years and it’s really not working because increased savings means no customers.  Tax rates are not the primary motivator for either consumer or business spending. So, why does every one keep suggesting more of the same?  Why even bring trade agreements into the discussion?  We need direct job creation.  We need a strong middle class with healthy incomes.  We know how to do it.  Our politicians, however, are in opposites world.

It’s certainly not paying off for the economy and it’s certainly not paying off in terms of support for Obama or Congress.  People know this approach is not working. As usual, the same poll shows that Congressional approval is worse than the increasingly horrible numbers for Obama.

Public pessimism about the direction of the country has jumped to its highest level in nearly three years, erasing the sense of hope that followed President Obama’s inauguration and pushing his approval ratings to a record low, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll.

More than 60 percent of those surveyed say they disapprove of the way the president is handling the economy and, what has become issue No. 1, the stagnant jobs situation. Just 43 percent now approve of the job he is doing overall, a new career low; 53 percent disapprove, a new high.

As part of a reinvigorated effort to regain momentum as he heads toward the 2012 election year, Obama traveled to Detroit on Monday for a Labor Day appearance that served as a prelude to his speech Thursday to a joint session of Congress in which he will unveil new proposals to create jobs.

The urgency for Obama to act is driven not just by the most recent unemployment report, which on Friday showed no job growth in August and the unemployment rate stuck at 9.1 percent, but also by the depth of the political hole in which the president finds himself. Even more than two-thirds of those who voted for Obama say things are badly off course.

By this time in their presidencies, approval ratings for both Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton — who also suffered serious midterm setbacks during their first term — had settled safely above the 50 percent mark. Both then stayed in positive territory throughout their reelection campaigns.

When ratings for George W. Bush slipped into the low 40s during his second term in office, they remained there or lower for the remainder of his presidency.

Obama does, however, rate better than do congressional Republicans, his adversaries in recent, fierce confrontations on federal spending. Just 28 percent approve of the way Republicans in Congress are doing their job, and 68 percent disapprove, the worst spread for the GOP since summer 2008.

When it comes to head-to-head match-ups on big economic issues, the public is deeply — and evenly — divided between Obama and congressional Republicans. Four in 10 side with both Obama and the GOP on jobs. There are similarly even splits on the economy generally and on the deficit. In all three areas, the percentages of Americans trusting “neither” are at new highs.

Nonetheless, current trends are highly unfavorable for the president. By 2 to 1, more Americans now say the administration’s economic policies are making the economy worse rather than better

So, in the midst of these terrible numbers comes a call by Boehner and Cantor to Obama to meet prior to the President’s latest speechification which is alway basically a lot of words that eventually mean nothing.  They are dangling that partisanship football–like Lucy to Charlie Brown–just one more time  Will Charlie Brown Obama go for it one more time?

House GOP leaders on Tuesday asked President Obama to meet with congressional leaders from both parties to discuss his jobs plan ahead of his Thursday night address to Congress.

In a letter to Obama, House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) and Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) cited the need for a bipartisan deal on jobs in requesting the meeting. Their letter also outlined potential areas of cooperation.

“We would suggest that prior to your address to Congress you convene a bipartisan, bicameral meeting of the congressional leadership so that we may have the opportunity to constructively discuss your proposals,” the letter said.

Keeping to my Peanuts metaphor:  ARGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!  The only jobs plan the Republicans have at the moment is to put Obama into the unemployment lines. Congressional Democrats appear just as unwilling to take principled stands based on sound economics.  Nancy Pelosi has now dropped the word “stimulus“. The unbelievable yielding Democratic Party folds every time.  It’s no wonder we’re in the mess that we’re in right now and people are frustrated.

Democrats are now being careful to frame their job-creation agenda in language excluding references to any stimulus, even though their favored policies for ending the deepest recession since the Great Depression are largely the same.

Indeed, with President Obama scheduled Thursday to lay out his job-creation plans before a joint session of Congress, liberal Democrats and left-leaning policy groups are pressuring him to ignore short-term deficit spending concerns in favor of sweeping spending initiatives designed to boost hiring.
The Democrats’ signature “Make it in America” platform aims to create jobs by increasing infrastructure spending, providing financial help to struggling states and expanding tax credits for businesses, all of which were key elements of their 2009 economic stimulus bill.

Recognizing the unpopularity of the 2009 package, however, Democratic leaders have revised their message with less loaded language – “job creation” instead of “stimulus” and “Make it in America” in lieu of “Recovery Act” – in hopes of tackling the jobs crisis.

Repackaging meaningless rhetoric on important issues that you refuse to fight for is a frigging’ losing strategy. The Republicans know it. One of the most interesting things I’ve read all week is this call in Bloomberg by a writer from the National Review for Republicans to get behind some one electable because Republican Party Central smells the blood in the water. Both parties have these terrible pathological behaviors.  The Republicans are overrun at the moment by the craziest of the crazies with ideas that would bring down the republic.  Democrats can’t seem to do anything but dither and try to find new buzz words to repackage already failed ideas that hand over everything to the donor class.  Lost in all of this are hard working American people who do not understand why normal governance stuff is not getting done.  It just seems like more and more of what used to make American strong is going, going and gone.  A pox on both their houses.  I want an alternative.


Tuesday Reads

Good Morning!! It’s back to work and back to school day. Let’s see what’s happening out there in the world.

It looks like Michele Bachmann’s presidential campaign is in disarray. From the NYT:

Ed Rollins, the veteran campaign operative who helped engineer an Iowa straw poll victory for Representative Michele Bachmann this summer, has stepped down from running the day-to-day operations of her presidential campaign, a spokeswoman for Mrs. Bachmann said Monday night.

A campaign spokesman said Rollins is stepping down because of health reasons, but that sounds like a cover story, because Rollins’ second in command, David Polyansky is also leaving, and

The change in roles for Mr. Rollins came on a day he was quoted in The Washington Post as expressing pessimism about Mrs. Bachmann’s campaign. “The Perry-Romney race is now the story, with us the third candidate,” Mr. Rollins said.

We may have dodged a bullet, but now Rick Perry may get stronger. Let’s hope he flops at the upcoming Republican debate. Maybe he’ll pray for rain on stage or something.

Fox News staffers were up to ther old tricks today. They doctored a video of Teamsters president James Hoffa to make it look like he was calling for violence against tea partiers.

Right-wing bloggers misled by dishonest Fox News video editing are attacking Teamsters President James Hoffa, Jr. for supposedly urging violence against Tea Party activists during a Labor Day speech. Conservatives are also attacking President Obama, who appeared at the event, for “sanctioning violence against fellow Americans” by failing to denounce Hoffa. But fuller context included in other Fox segments makes clear that Hoffa wasn’t calling for violence but was actually urging the crowd to vote out Republican members of Congress.

During the segment that the bloggers have latched onto, Fox edited out the bolded portion of Hoffa’s comments:

HOFFA: Everybody here’s got to vote. If we go back and keep the eye on the prize, let’s take these son of a bitches out and give America back to America where we belong! Thank you very much!

In an initial report on Hoffa’s speech at 1 p.m. on Fox News, Ed Henry reported that Hoffa said that “we’ll remember in November who’s with the working people” and “said of the Tea Party and of Republicans, ‘let’s take these sons of bitches out.'”

Here we are with around 15% real unemployment in this country, and the media is trying to kill unions with game playing. And it’s not just Fox News doing it either.

Hoffa says he has “no regrets.”

Hoffa riled up Fox News and the right wing Monday with a Labor Day speech in Detroit in which he called Republican members of Congress “sons of bitches” and said union workers are ready to “go to war” with the tea party next year and “take out” Republicans at the ballot box.

Hoffa said he’d say the exact same words all over again.

“I would because I believe it,” he said. “They’ve declared war on us. We didn’t declare war on them, they declared war on us. We’re fighting back. The question is, who started the war?”

The UK Guardian reports that the a number of activists are criticizing President Obama for continuing Bush policies that violate Americans’ civil rights. Among the critics is Michael Ratner, former president of the Center for Constitutional Rights.

On becoming president in January 2009, Obama promised to close Guantánamo Bay within a year. He did order an end to waterboarding but Guantánamo remains open and almost all the rest of the Bush era anti-terrorism apparatus, from the Patriot Act through to increased surveillance is still in place.

Measures once considered only for emergency use are being consolidated.

“I did not like it when the violations of rights were temporary but now, because of Obama going along with the changes, they are becoming a permanent fixture of our legal landscape,” said Michael Ratner, president emeritus of the Centre for Constitutional Rights (CCR), which has been battling since the civil rights campaigns of the 1960s.

Ratner, who was among the first, small group of lawyers to fight on behalf of the Guantánamo detainees, said Obama had the chance to close Guantánamo but became weak-kneed about it. “Indefinite detention, restrictions on habeas corpus, rendition, all these continue under Obama. We still have military commissions under Obama.”

He added: “All the restrictions on government surveillance and spying that we fought for and won in the 1970s, are gone. We are back to square one. There are no restrictions on the FBI. None. They are targeting Muslims in particular. One’s religion has become a key criteria for surveillance.”

Oddly, I have not seen this story reported in U.S. newspapers yet. I’m sure that’s just an oversight /snark

Meanwhile, Great Britain is ramping up their own “security” apparatus in response the the recent rioting there. Convicted rioters are getting longer sentences than normal and David Cameron is planning to show the sentencing of rioters on television!

Judges’ sentencing of offenders is to be televised under plans to be unveiled by the prime minister shortly, the Guardian has learned.

David Cameron is expected to make his announcement in a long-awaited crime speech, expediting the agenda even though a Ministry of Justice consultation with the judiciary into the matter has not yet begun. It is not yet known how many courts will be televised.

As part of his push for transparency in public services, Cameron will give the go-ahead to the televising of judicial verdicts but it is thought this will critically not include the process of the trial leading up to the verdict, protecting witnesses from exposure to publicity. The shift towards the televising of court proceedings has always been hampered by the spectre of OJ Simpson’s trial in the US which degenerated into prime-time entertainment.

I’m sure that will solve the unemployment problem. Of course it costs more in the long run to house people in prisons than to give them a hand up, but who cares? Got to punish dissent or the poor might get even more uppity.

In New York City they can’t seem to convict rapists, but the NYPD today managed to throw a Black city councilman and another man to the pavement and handcuff them for trying to join other officials at an event at the Brooklyn Museum that was part of West Indian Day.

The councilman, Jumaane D. Williams, was not charged with a crime, nor was the aide, Kirsten John Foy, Mr. De Blasio’s community affairs director….

Mr. Williams and Mr. Foy were trying to walk from Grand Army Plaza to a post-parade event at the Brooklyn Museum, using a sidewalk that the police had blocked. According to Mr. [Bill] de Blasio [a “public advocate”], who said he had spoken to Mr. Foy about the episode, they had been given permission to use the sidewalk by a police officer wearing the kind of white shirt usually worn by an officer of high rank.

But as the two men continued walking down the sidewalk, they found themselves surrounded by uniformed police officers stationed farther along.

“Jumaane was wearing a council member’s pin, they were trying to explain who they were, but the officers weren’t listening,” Mr. de Blasio said in an interview.

Mr. de Blasio said that Mr. Williams began to argue with the officers and that at some point, he and Mr. Foy were both thrown to the ground and handcuffed. They were taken to the Union Temple, a synagogue on Eastern Parkway, where Mr. de Blasio said he went after getting the call. There, Mr. de Blasio said, he spoke to a police commander, who released Mr. Williams and Mr. Foy after about 30 minutes without filing charges.

From reading the article, I get the feeling this is going to cause some problems for the NYPD and Mayor Bloomberg. Already the police commissioner has met with the two men and called for an investigation. Some are wondering if the race of the men was involved in the incident. Ya think?

According the LA Times, Wall Street is “bracing for losses” tomorrow following the horrible U.S. jobs report.

Any troubles in the world’s largest economy cast a long shadow over the markets, and a report Friday that the U.S. economy failed to add any new jobs in August caused European and Asian stock markets to sink sharply Monday.

That jobs figure was far below economists’ already tepid expectations for 93,000 new U.S. jobs and renewed concerns that the U.S. recovery is not only slowing but actually unwinding. U.S. hiring figures for June and July were also revised lower, adding to the gloom.

The full effect of the jobs report will hit U.S. markets Tuesday because trading was closed Monday for the Labor Day holiday.

Apparently everyone is pinning their hopes on Obama’s Greatest Jobs Speech Evah on Thursday. I wonder what will happen to the market after the speech turns out to be a great big nothingburger?

I wish I had some better news for you, but that’s all I could find. What are you reading and blogging about today?


Late Night Open Thread: Rice University Marching Band Makes Fun of Governor Goodhair

Via Raw Story, It seems that Rice University students, who tend to be heavily focused on their studies tend to look down on those who attend Texas A&M, like Governor Rick Perry.

Now Rice’s Marching Owl Band has taken a shot of their own at Perry’s intelligence, telling a stadium full of cheering spectators, “The next time you go to the polls, ask yourself, ‘Is your candidate smarter than an Aggie?’”

(See the video above.)

Just how dumb is Rick Perry? HuffPo has published his college transcript as a public service.

A source in Texas passed The Huffington Post Perry’s transcripts from his years at Texas A&M University. The future politician did not distinguish himself much in the classroom. While he later became a student leader, he had to get out of academic probation to do so. He rarely earned anything above a C in his courses — earning a C in U.S. History, a D in Shakespeare, and a D in the principles of economics. Perry got a C in gym.

Perry also did poorly on classes within his animal science major. In fall semester 1970, he received a D in veterinary anatomy, a F in a second course on organic chemistry and a C in animal breeding. He did get an A in world military systems and “Improv. of Learning” — his only two As while at A&M.

“A&M wasn’t exactly Harvard on the Brazos River,” recalled a Perry classmate in an interview with The Huffington Post. “This was not the brightest guy around. We always kind of laughed. He was always kind of a joke.”

Here’s the transcript:

Perry made up for his poor academic performance by being so popular that the was elected cheerleader two times. Apparently that’s a huge honor at Texas Aggie.


Labor Day Reads

Good Morning and Happy Labor Day!
New Orleans didn’t get quit the rain that was expected from TS Lee because of a high over Texas that sent some dry air at us.  However, Lee’s still around and it looks like it’s going to bring lots more rain as it makes its way to the NE so others may not be so lucky.

I read a great article by Robert Reich yesterday on the NYT about the plight of the middle class in the US which is one of my favorite topics to follow. I just can’t help but notice some of the astounding statistics that show how much wealth is being confiscated upwards.

THE 5 percent of Americans with the highest incomes now account for 37 percent of all consumer purchases, according to the latest research from Moody’s Analytics. That should come as no surprise. Our society has become more and more unequal.

When so much income goes to the top, the middle class doesn’t have enough purchasing power to keep the economy going without sinking ever more deeply into debt — which, as we’ve seen, ends badly. An economy so dependent on the spending of a few is also prone to great booms and busts. The rich splurge and speculate when their savings are doing well. But when the values of their assets tumble, they pull back. That can lead to wild gyrations. Sound familiar?

The economy won’t really bounce back until America’s surge toward inequality is reversed. Even if by some miracle President Obama gets support for a second big stimulus while Ben S. Bernanke’s Fed keeps interest rates near zero, neither will do the trick without a middle class capable of spending. Pump-priming works only when a well contains enough water.

Look back over the last hundred years and you’ll see the pattern. During periods when the very rich took home a much smaller proportion of total income — as in the Great Prosperity between 1947 and 1977 — the nation as a whole grew faster and median wages surged. We created a virtuous cycle in which an ever growing middle class had the ability to consume more goods and services, which created more and better jobs, thereby stoking demand. The rising tide did in fact lift all boats.

During periods when the very rich took home a larger proportion — as between 1918 and 1933, and in the Great Regression from 1981 to the present day — growth slowed, median wages stagnated and we suffered giant downturns. It’s no mere coincidence that over the last century the top earners’ share of the nation’s total income peaked in 1928 and 2007 — the two years just preceding the biggest downturns.

So, as BostonBoomer wrote last night, the President’s speech on jobs and labor is not expected to be a barn burner.  Salon’s Matt Stoller asks “What can Democrats do about Obama? The discussion around here has one answer, fall on your sword and let a real Democrat lead the way.

71 percent of Americans disapprove of how Obama is doing his job. Even among reliably Democratic groups — union households, women and young people — he’s now unpopular.

No one, not even the president’s defenders, expect his coming jobs speech to mean anything. When the president spoke during a recent market swoon, the market dropped another 100 points. Democrats may soon have to confront an uncomfortable truth, and ask whether Obama is a suitable choice at the top of the ticket in 2012. They may then have to ask themselves if there’s any way they can push him off the top of the ticket.

That these questions have not yet been asked in any serious way shows how weak the Democratic Party is as a political organization. Yet this political weakness is not inevitable, it can be changed through courage and collective action by a few party insiders smart and principled enough to understand the value of a public debate, and by activists who are courageous enough to face the real legacy of the Obama years.

Obama has ruined the Democratic Party. The 2010 wipeout was an electoral catastrophe so bad you’d have to go back to 1894 to find comparable losses. From 2008 to 2010, according to Gallup, the fastest growing demographic party label was former Democrat. Obama took over the party in 2008 with 36 percent of Americans considering themselves Democrats. Within just two years, that number had dropped to 31 percent, which tied a 22-year low.

Oh, the other hand, Republicans can say just about anything and the press will not call them out on their absolute insanity in search of some imaginary chalice of  fair-mindedness.  John Holbo has some interesting thoughts on that. He has a response to an earlier Kevin Drum question wondering if Democrats could get away with as much craziness and used Hillary Clinton as an example.

Kevin points out that if Hilary Clinton wrote a book about how much she wanted to repeal the Second Amendment and ban hate speech everyone would freak out that she was a radical. So what gives?

But the question answers itself: it’s really true that Perry doesn’t mean what he says. Mostly. As Kevin says, these are just the words he has to say to prove to the base he’s one of them.

By contrast, Hilary Clinton would only write that book about wanting to repeal the Second Amendment, etc., if – against all likelihood – she really wanted to repeal the Second Amendment. Because, since she isn’t a conservative, she’s not going to get a Get Out of Crazy Jail Free card. So there is no profit to her in writing such a book. Turning the point around: given that liberals don’t systematically employ a rhetoric of believing things they don’t, but conservatives do, it makes a great deal of sense to give conservatives an endless supply of Get Out of Crazy Jail Free cards. And round we go.

Really it’s more complicated. If people say crazy stuff long enough, they start to believe what they say, and other people do, too. The Overton Window gets dragged all over the place. (Michelle Bachmann really does seem to mean what she says. So she’s unviable, in the eyes of Republican establishmentarians. Even though she isn’t really saying anything absolutely crazier than Perry is saying at this point, and he’s looking pretty ok.) Having the license to say crazy stuff, without getting called on it, prevents serious debate and allows people to conceal any crazy stuff that really do believe, by hiding it in plain sight, as it were. It’s really true, I suspect, that when most conservatives say that they don’t buy this global warming junk science, what they really mean to do is, simply, signal ‘I’m in favor of capitalism’. If you are a conservative, talking to conservatives, and you say you think the scientists might be right, your audience is going to hear you refusing to send an ‘I’m in favor of capitalsim’ signal. Needless to say, this means conservatives can’t have reasonable discussions of global warming unless they are free from worries about what they are signalling, as opposed to saying. Which they never are, at least if they are politicians.

That only holds water when you consider polls that show a lot of the republican base actually believe insane things like the world is less than 10,000 years old.   Just look at this Pew poll taken on Darwin’s 200th Birthday.  Americans–and fundies in particular–look absolutely ignorant.  Here’s a great take on that from LGF scoffing at Erick Erickson’s assertion that not all of his fundie buddies are all that literal.  Sorry, Eric, they are.

Even pinning down the creationists’ beliefs more finely, the Gallup survey shows that approximately 44% or so of all Americans believe “God created human beings pretty much in the present form at one time within the past 10,000 years or so.”

Those are surveys that sample from all people living in the US. Since both Pew and Gallup show that only a small number accept the science (evolution over long periods of time), somewhere between 14% and 26%, it seems that those who believe in an old earth creationism process are roughly the same share (or slightly less) than the young earth creationists.

The bottom line is this, Erick: around half of all your fellow creationists are Young Earth Creationists. They even probably have a majority in your religion (American “conservative” Christianity.)

And yes, they are delusional, caught up in magical thinking.

You can read the original Ericson dribble here at the Washington Examiner where he tries to tell us that Michelle Bachmann’s brand of christianity is just misunderstood by the media.  There are many christians who believe the bible is metaphor, but your fundie friends–and Michelle Bachmann in particular–are not in their number.  I remember the first time I met an older woman that thought that there was a literal Garden of Eden some where on earth and that we actually were sons and daughters of Adam and Eve.  I was just speechless.  It’s a bit like watching a child talk excitedly about Santa Claus when you know the entire story. You don’t want to crush them, but sheesh, at some point you have to grow and realize that nothing is that simple and that magical thinking does no one any good.

Speaking of Michelle Bachmann, it seems she agrees with Quitterella on the elimination of corporate taxes.  Oh, great, not only does she want to eliminate the EPA so they can do whatever they want to our air, water, and environment, now the two Republican women don’t want them even contributing to the roads they over use or anything else.

Republican presidential candidate Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) said she was “open to” former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin’s call to eliminate corporate income taxes.

“I’m open to having that debate,” said Bachmann on CBS’s Face the Nation on Sunday.

But she cautioned that “if we went that route, then we’d have to have a fundamental restructuring of the tax code.” “What we would have to do then is rejigger other elements to define revenue and what revenues would be needed to the economy.”

In the short term, however the Tea Party favorite said President Obama could lower corporate taxes to aid American businesses. “I do believe that the president at minimum should lower the corporate tax rate to 20% so that businesses can see that they will have a more competitive rate,” she proposed.

Bachmann has made tax reform and rolling back regulations the centerpiece of her plan to boost job growth and jump start the economy.

Bachmann said if elected president, the first thing she would do would be to “bring about repatriation of income from American corporations that have earned money overseas … we have over $1.2 trillion in earnings that we could bring immediately to kick-start the economy which would be a true stimulus.”

Wow, for a tax attorney she sure doesn’t know what she’s talking about.  Businesses are overseas these days because that’s there’s a growing customer base there.  They’re taking advantage of the cheap labor and the fact they don’t have to transport the stuff over there.  US corporations just beg a tax loophole out of congress if they want their taxes cut.  The effective rate they pay is so low they don’t really care any way about the actual rate.

Speaking of manufacturing, here’s a report that might keep you up all night.  Gun manufacturers lose thousands of guns every year. 

More than 16,000 guns were “lost” from gun manufacturers’ inventories over the last two years, according to a report by a gun control advocacy group.

The report, released by the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, pulled data from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) and found that 16,485 guns left the inventories of nearly 4,500 licensed gun manufacturers throughout the country without a record of them ever being sold.

In 2004 Congress passed the Tiahrt amendment – named for its sponsor then-Rep. Todd Tiahrt (R-Kansas) – which prohibited the ATF from requiring gun manufacturers to track their inventory. The Brady Campaign has long advocated for a repeal of the Tiahrt amendment.

“It is shocking that gun makers are so oblivious to public safety that they lose track of thousands of guns every year,” said Dennis Henigan, the acting president of the Brady Center. “ Given the lethality of its product, the gun industry has a special duty to act responsibly.  Instead, it has a scandalous record of carelessness.”

The report states that the unaccounted for guns are often used in crimes because a trace of the weapon is not as likely to lead law enforcement officials back to the criminal.

Well, that’ll get things started on this Labor Day 0f 2011.  Have a good one and be safe if you’re under the threat of all that severe weather out there!!!