Money Changes Everything

The WaPo reported that the world’s 400 richest people added $92 billion to their collective wealth in 2014. Drilling down on the US political implications of that headline, Bloomberg reports: (emphasis by the Wrongologist)

Here’s a bit of perspective on the ever-rising cost of elections and the big-money donors who finance them: Three of the country’s wealthiest political contributors each saw their net worth grow in 2014 by more than $3.7 billion, the entire cost of the midterm elections.

(OpenSecrets.org reported that the tab for the 2014 House and Senate elections came to $3.7 billion.)

Bloomberg’s records show that Warren Buffett, Larry Ellison, and Laurene Powell Jobs (widow of Apple founder Steve Jobs) each earned enough in 2014 to have covered all of that campaign expense with the just the growth in their individual wealth.

So, the 2014 return on investment for political donations seems to be very, very good. And with investment returns like that, Citizens United will remain in place forever.

The Bloomberg Billionaires Index shows that 11 of the political donors that Bloomberg tracks added a combined $33 billion to their wealth in 2014. The implication is that, as the 2016 presidential election season approaches, almost all of those donors will have even more cash to burn contribute.

Their wealth, combined with loosening campaign-finance restrictions and the growing comfort of the wealthy flexing their financial muscles in politics will jump-start 2016 primary campaigns in the next few months. And Congress gave an additional gift to wealthy donors by voting in the CRomnibus to raise the limits on how much individuals can give to political parties: (emphasis by the Wrongologist)

Previously individual donors could give the national party committees up to $32,400 per year. The new law allows donors to add gifts of up to $97,200 to each of three causes: presidential nominating conventions, building funds, and legal proceedings, such as recounts.

That’s a grand total of $324,000 per year, ten times the prior level.

This points to a reality: A wealthy donor can now almost singlehandedly bankroll a candidate, as Sheldon Adelson did for former House Speaker Newt Gingrich in 2012. These buckets of ducats raise questions about whether their political contributions create policy. Bloomberg quotes Craig Holman of Public Citizen:

Our democracy just isn’t going to survive in this type of atmosphere…The US, throughout history, has worked on a very delicate balance between capitalism in the economic sphere and democracy in the political sphere. We no longer have that balance. The economic sphere is going to smother and overwhelm the political sphere.

The sheer amount of money some donors made on paper in 2014 rewrites the context of “big” money in politics. For a state-wide political race, a $1 million cash infusion could change the outcome. For America’s big-money clique, it’s a fraction of what some billionaires can make or lose in a single day.

The NYT’s Binyamin Appelbaum contends in “Who Wants to Buy a Politician?that there is an upper limit to the political expenditures by the wealthy. He makes the point that during the 2014 midterms, television stations in several contested markets reported that they had sold all of their available slots and that one station in New Hampshire actually issued refunds after selling more ads than it could air.

He says that the real return on political investment is in lobbying, which seems to be more valuable than campaign contributions. Appelbaum quotes Michael Munger, of Duke University:

Incumbents and large corporations can basically spend as much as it would take to defeat some change that would harm them…They spend around 10 times as much on lobbying, suggesting that it’s less effective to influence the selection of policy makers than to influence the policy-making process itself.

Also, the lobbyists threaten legislators that there will be fewer campaign donations next time unless the legislator votes correctly.

Either way, the wealthy have the money to buy the change they need, or you do not.

 

Facebooklinkedinrss

Sunday Cartoon Blogging – January 4, 2015

RIP Mario Cuomo:

Cuomo Koch

(Columbus Day Parade, October 11, 1982. Mayor Edward Koch, Gov. Mario Cuomo and Westchester County Executive Alfred DelBello march down New York’s Fifth Avenue) Credit: Associated Press

You have to wonder how different the country would be if Mario Cuomo had agreed to become a Supreme Court Justice in 1993 when Bill Clinton offered to nominate him to replace Byron R. White. George Stephanopoulos has written that Clinton came within 15 minutes of nominating Cuomo, until the latter rejected the job in a phone call with Stephanopoulos.

The Wrongologist never drops bold-face names in the blog, but today is an exception. In 1988, he (and Ms. Oh So Right) were backstage speaking with Frank Zappa, who was playing in Boston. Wrongo asked who Zappa would support for president the next time around, since the Dukakis debacle had just happened. He said: “only Mario”.  At the time, the Wrongologist agreed. But Mario would never run, and Zappa died in 1993.

On Christmas, Neil deGrasse Tyson sent this Tweet:

It caused the usual spewing by the “war on Christmas” crowd, who claimed that Tyson was deliberately provoking them. Tyson replied:

Imagine a world in which we are all enlightened by objective truths rather than offended by them.

Speaking of truth, here is the whole objective truth:

COW The Truth2015 will be totally different, except:

COW New Boss

 

We just ceased combat operations in Afghanistan. What did we learn?

COW Lessons Learned

Republican leader Scalise attends Klan meeting. What did the GOP learn?

COW Scalise

Facebooklinkedinrss

Transforming America, Part I

For the past few months, this blog has featured this quote:

He didn’t know what was defeating him, but he sensed it was something he could not cope with, something that was far beyond his power to control or even at this point in time, comprehend –Hubert Selby Jr.

Let’s start this year with a meditation about one transformative idea. Not something that is peddled by the DC think tanks, but an idea that lurks just below the surface.

All of us have wondered, like the characters in Selby’s “Requiem for a Dream” (and maybe, with increasing frequency) “hey, something is wrong here”. Maybe you accept mainstream logic, but now you’ve come to realize that things are getting out of control, despite the constant messaging from your ideological god of choice that tries to pull you back to conventional thinking.

Here is the transformative idea for today: The free market isn’t a beautiful self-correcting machine. Instead, it is consuming our society and our environment for the benefit of a very few.

And it isn’t an orderly process; the trajectory is more like a slow free-fall in which the market system moves downward devouring everything, unless it is met by real opposition. In fact, the globalized version of the free market makes life horrible for lots of people, creating a constant need for intervention.

For a couple of examples, you don’t get the Russian Revolution(s) without the Czar trying to play ‘catch up’ with the West. You don’t get the Cuban Revolution without the crimes of the Batista regime.

When there is a backlash against corporatism, especially on the periphery, capitalists come up with a solution. Anyone is better than a bunch of reformers who want society to pay attention to people’s well-being rather than to profits.

With globalization, local thugs became very useful. Folks like Shah Reza Pahlavi of Iran, the Saud family in Saudi Arabia, Mubarak in Egypt, Suharto in Indonesia, and Hussein in Iraq. Most of the time, these folks did the job big business wanted done (even if it was messy). And the American government protected US corporate assets in-country, and propped up the compliant local politicians. The profits got privatized, and the losses socialized, since our taxes paid for the military aid to the dictators, while the corporates skimmed the profits. And much of those profits remained offshore, out of reach of our taxing authorities.

Today, the useful thugs working on behalf of the American Empire are in Washington DC. They have made our political system a self-replicating support system for free market capitalism. We have retained only a veneer of our democracy, while moving rapidly in the direction of an authoritarian business-state combine, an improved version of Mussolini-style corporatism.

Oswald Spengler, who’s “Decline of the West” argued in the 1920’s that the urban culture of Northern Europe was a “Faustian” world, (his term for one of 8 global cultures) characterized by bigness and rationality, eventually to be dominated by the soldier, the engineer, and the businessman.

Doesn’t that seem particularly relevant to today’s America? Spengler thought that democracy is simply the political weapon of money, and that the media is the means through which money operates a democratic political system. Importantly, he said:

The ‘tragic comedy of the world-improvers and freedom-teachers’ is that they are simply assisting money to be more effective.

So here we are. One day, it was 2014, the next day, 2015. What has changed? Nothing. What will change? Nothing, unless you begin a process of thinking about one transformative idea:

The free market doesn’t self-correct. Therefore, it is an ideology that must be changed.

The struggle between market forces and societal needs has always existed. In the 20th Century, we evolved a series of social democracies that kept the rights of the people balanced against the rights of the corporations, with some of the pushback actually coming from businesses themselves.

But today, well-funded efforts to roll back New Deal and New Society social welfare programs are well advanced. And there are only so many times that this blog and others can point out that many Americans have been unemployed since 2008.

The political question is what happens to this great new underclass in America? An underclass that has grown large because of the past 7+ years of economic disparity. Since the free market system that is grinding up our society is a utopian fantasy, we should be able to turn to our democratic system to help solve the real failures of our economic system.

But, our democratic system has been co-opted by the free marketers. So, who can ordinary people turn to for help AGAINST the market?

The corporatists and their captured politicians have a term, “there is no alternative” or TINA. It has come to mean that “there is no alternative” to free markets, free trade, and globalization, if our society is to prosper. They stress TINA to keep ordinary people from seeing that we need to constrain the worst of free market excesses.

The unbridled free market has to die.

Facebooklinkedinrss

Monday Wake Up Call – December 15, 2014

Today’s Wake-Up Call is for Congress and the president. Mr. Obama’s support of the “CRomnibus” year-end spending package showed how the next two years in Washington will play out, and it doesn’t bode well for anyone (you) who doesn’t employ a registered lobbyist.

You already know that the budget bill included a rollback of derivatives reform, and a nearly ten-fold increase in the donation limits for party committees. What may have been less obvious is that the bill cuts $60 million from the EPA and $346 million, about 3%, from the IRS. The IRS cuts tell wealthy earners that tax avoidance is safe, with little expectation of an audit.

The White House basically turned on its own party, accepting roll-backs of liberal priorities. It’s clear that this kind of legislative sausage-making will be the rule in 2015.

Other benefits for specific lobbies:

• Private Pension Plan trustees could cut pension benefits to current retirees, reversing 40 years of promises to workers who earned their retirement packages.
• Voters in DC who approved legalized marijuana will see their initiative die, since Congress prevented the DC government from taxing or regulating the drug’s sale.
• Trucking companies can make their employees put in an 82-hour work week without mandatory time off.
• Pell grants for college students will be cut, with the money diverted to private student loan contractors.
• Blue Cross and Blue Shield will be allowed to count “quality improvement” measures toward their mandatory health spending under Obamacare’s “medical loss ratio” provision, a windfall that saves millions of dollars.
• The EPA is blocked from regulating certain water sources for farmers.
Reduced nutrition standards in school lunches and the Women, Infant and Children food aid program was a gift for potato growers.
• The bill halts the listing of new endangered species.
• It stops the regulation of lead in hunting ammunition.

The White House never threatened a veto of the CRomnibus over these riders, and actually supported the bill. House Democrats complained of being “lobbied by the White House” on the legislation. This is sure to be a recurring policymaking feature of the next two years.

So this is the new normal on Capitol Hill. The precedent for making changes on headline issues by tucking rollbacks into must-protect or must-pass legislation has been set with the White House’s active cooperation.

In other words, there’s your proof that elections have consequences.

Here are a couple of wake-up tunes for Monday. First, in keeping with the prime directive (well, maybe it’s the sub-prime directive), that the banks can never fail again, here is the late Pete Seeger doing “The Banks are made of Marble”:

The song was written by Les Rice in 1948 or 1949. Rice was a farmer in Ulster County, NY. Seeger lived across the Hudson from him, and apparently they met on several occasions.

Our second tune is in keeping with the other prime directive of a holly, jolly season. Captain Picard does “Let it Snow”:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i-zdMkOZTKs&app=desktop

Monday’s Hot Links:

The US attempted to co-opt Cuba’s hip-hop scene to foment revolution: USAID tried to recruit underground rappers in Cuba to sow unrest against Raul Castro’s government. They failed. Compared to the CIA torture story, this is small potatoes, but still another example of how we can’t stay out of any country’s internal affairs. Because, freedom!

The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New York ruled that insider trading is ok as long as the person accused of insider trading didn’t know that the original tipper disclosed the information in return for personal gain. Guessing that you’ll never know.

Thirty years after the Bhopal chemical accident, the worst in history, the spill’s effects are hitting a new generation. Professional clean-up hasn’t happened and there are no signs that the environmental catastrophe will end.

Congress and the President are going in the opposite direction from the Federal Reserve. The Fed is making the banks pony up more reserves to protect their balance sheets, while Congress and Obama are saying “go big on derivatives baby, we’ve got your back”.

Study supports the theory that all ‘men are idiots’. Well, it wasn’t a scientific study, but it looked at 318 Darwin Awards cases, of which 282 Darwin Awards went to males, and just 36 awards were given to females. Males made up 88.7% of Darwin Award winners.

Old news department: The latest Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll says that 56% of Americans say the country’s economic and political systems stacked against them. Different result from the NYT survey last week.

Your thought for the week:

I had two options, to remain silent and then be killed. Or I could speak up, and then be killed. I chose to speak up. – Malala Yousafzai, from her Nobel Peace Prize speech

Facebooklinkedinrss

Sunday Cartoon Blogging – December 14, 2014

Tough week trying to pick the worst from among the many, many wrongs this week:

• Congress passes a budget that defangs Dodd-Frank: Citibank got Congress to let the big banks place their risky derivatives business back under the protection of taxpayer-paid insurance. So we get to shoulder the losses when the next big bank failure comes. The Congress attached it to the CRomnibus spending bill that the president won’t veto. We can dig through the couch cushions for spare change to bail out the banks next time. Simon Johnson said it best:

Give enough clever people the wrong incentives and they will destroy anything.

• Congress also lowered funding for the EPA, and stuck in a provision that allows private funding of national conventions. They were previously publicly funded.
• Some detail on “we tortured some folks” became public with the publishing of the CIA Lite torture report. If that wasn’t wrong enough, many pols and pundits just gave up, and said torture was useful and necessary. One right thing was John McCain’s speech on the floor of the Senate debunking torture as a means of getting information.
• There was more wrong-headed messaging about the Ferguson/Garner cases. But there was also many “die-in” demonstrations around the country along with the usual finger-pointing about the demonstrators’ reactions, both peaceful and not-so-peaceful.

Dick Cheney continued his spirited defense of the indefensible:

COW Torture III

 

CIA Director Brennan insisted on calling torture “Enhanced Interrogation”:
COW Enhancements

 

Passing of the torch brings irony to the Senate:
Cow Filibuster1

Some see the “shoot first” mentality as a feature, not a bug in the system:

Tom Tomorrow

Some see Xmas as their favorite time of the year:

COW Indoor Plumbing
Some see Xmas as a giant pain:

Happy Xmas

Facebooklinkedinrss

Is Our System More Like Huxley, or Orwell?

Liberty lies in the hearts of men and women; when it dies there, no constitution, no law, no court can save it. – Judge Learned Hand

Yesterday was Human Rights Day. Maybe, with all that has happened to our human rights in post-9/11 America, it is a good time to look very carefully at the current spate of bad outcomes for people who draw attention from our police. One question is, who still believes in our system? Below is one answer that points to where we are:

Trust the police Here is the poll question that produced the above response:

How much confidence do you have in police officers in your community to not use excessive force on suspects: A great deal, a fair amount, just some, or very little confidence?

Note that “no confidence” was not an option for your answer. One way to look at the poll is that it shows that our system is working exactly as it is intended to work. From Ian Welsh: (emphasis by the Wrongologist)

If a police officer tells you to do anything, you do it immediately. If you do not, anything that happens to you, up to and including death, is your problem. The legal system exists today to ensure compliance.

And if you fail to do what is asked, the police will say, “He/she was non-compliant.” That is a way that this part of the American system performs as designed. It rewards compliance, it identifies those who will not obey laws, or who will fight or organize against the system, and then it works to push them down.

In our system, the wolves and the sheep self-identify, they know which group they belong to. If an injustice is committed, if people protest, the most aggressive protestors, even if not violent, are arrested. Our oligarchy is built on the idea that we must keep people from effectively resisting. More from Ian Welsh:

Any part of the population which is inclined to resist, must be taught that it cannot resist. Get out millions to demonstrate against the Iraq war: it will not work. Protest against police killings of African Americans, it will not work.

Occupy Wall Street? That didn’t work either. The system operates in two ways to repress and control people. America’s system has been 80% Huxley and 20% Orwell for decades, but now, the ratios are approaching 50/50. Let’s unpack the Orwell vs. Huxley worldviews: (h/t highexistence.com)
huxley_orwell1

 • Orwell feared the government would ban books.
• Huxley feared that there would be no reason to ban books, because no one would want to read them.
• Orwell feared the government would deprive us of information.
• Huxley feared they would give us so much information that we would be reduced to passivity.

Orwell feared that the truth would be concealed from us. Huxley feared the truth would be invisible in a sea of irrelevance. Orwell feared we would become a captive culture. Huxley feared we would become a trivial culture.
So, we became the trivial culture that Huxley feared. Now, the powers that be are tilting to Orwell to nudge us toward a captive culture.

Huxley’s vision of how human nature or human aspirations could be manipulated for the purposes of the controlling elite rings true in the US. But, Orwell’s depiction of the controlling/interlocking elites of allegedly opposed factions (R’s vs. D’s, government vs. private sector, Wall Street vs. Main Street) is truer than ever before.

So, both are right. Orwell’s fear is already a reality in the East (North Korea, China, Iran) and Huxley’s fear is reality in the West (US, Scandinavia, UK).

Look at how easily the citizenry acquiesced to militarized police in Boston a couple of years ago. Tanks rolled down the streets and officers dressed like they were in Afghanistan demanded that people go inside their houses, for their “safety”. This “army” then searched for the two suspects in the Boston Marathon bombing. This took place over a huge area—whole towns. Was this just the police testing their new toys? Or was it also something darker… like a test of how far the government can go with the Security State? It didn’t hurt that the people got to say they were “Boston Strong” and got the rest of the country to buy in to that.

Power and information are continua. The Orwellian vision tends towards power, while the Huxleyian view tends toward information. However, they are neither separate, nor divisible. Human history has always used deceit as a tool, backed by power, while the biggest bullies have tried to control things since prehistory.

Both manifest legalized lies, backed by legalized violence, wherein the government becomes the largest organized crime syndicate, controlled by the best organized criminals. Welcome to America.

These “crime syndicates” are destroying the foundations of our society, creating the twin near-religions of the State and the Corporation.

The system will not change until the people who want change have enough power to force change. But first, they have to open their eyes to what is happening: Ordinary citizens cannot change the system if the elites don’t agree with the changes the plebes want to make. If they try, they will be arrested or killed at the scene. This must change first.

After that, we can begin working to restore the fundamental systemic change that we brought about during the times of FDR through LBJ.

 

Facebooklinkedinrss

Today, Limousine Liberals are Neoliberals

Commenting on Monday’s post, blog commenter Terry McKenna closed with:

…we abandoned the worker for the limousine liberal.

You can read Terry’s blog here. Let’s pick up on his thought. “Limousine liberal” is a reference to the wealthy (including celebrities) who try to persuade others to their political and societal points of view. Critics assert that their wealth and status means they are out of touch with the American middle and lower middle classes they purport to support. Interestingly, its first use was in 1969, when a Democrat referred to Republican Mayor John V. Lindsay in his reelection campaign.

While Terry’s point is true, the “liberals” we need to be afraid of are the neoliberals.

Neoliberalism” is a set of economic ideas that have become widespread since Ronald Regan. The term used rarely used in the US, but you can clearly see the effects of neoliberalism here as the rich grow richer and the poor grow poorer. Neoliberalism is not “liberalism” or “liberals”.

“Liberalism” can refer to political, economic, or religious ideas. In the US, political liberalism has largely been a strategy to diminish the impact of potential social conflict that could arise from racial inequality, economic insecurity and lack of political power. It is described to the poor and to working people as a set of progressive values, compared to conservative values.

“Neo” means we are talking about a new form of economic liberalism. The liberal school of economics was based on Adam Smith’s The Wealth of Nations, written in 1776. Smith advocated the abolition of government intervention in economic matters. No restrictions on manufacturing, no barriers to commerce, no tariffs. He said free trade was the best way for a nation’s economy to develop. Such ideas were “liberal” in the sense of no controls. This liberalism encouraged “free” enterprise,” “free” competition — which meant, free for the capitalists to make profits however they wished, using whatever means necessary.

In the 1930’s John Maynard Keynes’s theory challenged economic liberalism as the best policy for growing nations. He said that full employment was necessary for growth, and it could be achieved if governments and central banks intervened when necessary to do what they could to increase employment.

Keynes’s theories had considerable influence on FDR’s New Deal −The belief that government should advance the common good became widely accepted. But, over the last 30 years, the global corporate elite has revived economic liberalism as neoliberalism. That’s why it is “neo” or new. With the rapid globalization of our economy, we see neoliberalism flourishing on a global scale.

The main ideas of neoliberalism include:

1. The Supremacy of the Market: Liberating private enterprise from any bonds imposed by the government. Greater openness to international trade and investment, as in NAFTA, or the coming Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP). Lower wages by de-unionizing workers. In all, total freedom of movement for capital, goods and services. It’s St. Ronnie’s “supply-side” and “trickle-down” economics − but somehow the wealth never trickles down.
2. Cutting Non-Military Public Expenditures: Reducing the safety net for the poor, reducing expenditures on public education, social services and welfare. Disinvesting in infrastructure (roads, airports, ports, the Internet) in the name of reducing government’s role.
3. Deregulation: Reducing government’s role in regulation of anything that could diminish profits, including protecting the environment and job safety.
4. Privatization: Selling state-owned enterprises, the commons, and provision of some services to private investors. This could include prisons, railroads, toll highways, electricity, schools, and even fresh water. Although usually promoted in the name of greater efficiency, privatization has mainly had the effect of making the public pay more for its services, while concentrating more wealth in fewer hands.
5. Eliminating the Concept of “The Public Good”: The “public good” is usually an application of a collective ethical notion of “the greater good” in political decision-making. Eliminating it pressures the poorest people in a society to find their own solutions to their lack of health care, education and social security by themselves — then blaming them, if they fail, as “lazy.”

In the US, neoliberalism is working to:

• Weaken social service programs by reducing benefits
• Attack the rights of labor (including immigrant workers)
• Cut back taxes to “starve the beast” of government
• Weaken the political power of the poor and lower middle class

The Republican “Contract” with America in 1994 was pure neoliberalism. Its supporters were attempting to move their agenda by saying it would “get government off our backs.” It worked. From Reagan in the 1980’s through Obama today, the neoliberal agenda has been strengthened. Banks, Big Oil, and the top .01% call the shots.

Neoliberalism and its buddy riding shotgun, neo-conservatism, are designed to assist large, mostly American corporations to harvest the wealth of our nation and that of others, and hide it in tax havens. For the vast majority, neoliberalism has brought lesser financial security, more debt, more underemployment and a smaller voice in government.

So, its neoliberals, not liberals, in those limousines.

Facebooklinkedinrss

Sunday Cartoon Blogging – November 2, 2014

When people decide not to vote because the parties are not different from each other, candidates with strong ideological commitments win. That elected person then tries to move the country in the direction of an ideology supported by a minority of voters.

For the past 20 years, that direction has been a death warrant for the American middle class. If you think that the middle class is really what made America “exceptional,” then those political leaders elected to implement and sustain a corporatist agenda have worked to destroy the American Dream, while they hypocritically endorsed and exploited it in order to get elected.

The US is in the middle of a course of corporate political imperialism that has savaged average Americans, while it enriched plutocrats. Wealth has been consolidated, the means-of-production have been concentrated in the hands of a few corporations, and big business has effectively purchased our governments, both state and federal. Mostly because not enough of us take the time to bone up on the issues, or to vote in the off-year elections.

Two things need to change: First, more people need to vote. Second, we must throw off our corporate political masters. As long as we have a situation where corporations have all of the rights, but none of the liabilities of the people, they always have a competitive advantage over the public.

For both your Halloween hangover and your pre-election headache:

COW Halloween Masks

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Jeb Bush floats idea of continuing the family dynasty:
COW Jebbie

Ebola Volunteers are heroes and potential disease vectors. Some politicians can’t hold both thoughts:

COW Ebola Recruting

Other epidemics caused by not voting:

COW Other Epidemics

Texas has apparently “solved” the voter fraud problem:

Facebooklinkedinrss

Retail Store Closings Reflect Middle Class Income

Today, we take a business trip!

The retail sector of the US economy is not doing so well. The Census Bureau tracks retail sales in the US, and sales decreased 0.30% in September, compared to the previous month. Retail Sales month over month in the US gained an average of 0.37% from 1992 until 2014, reaching an all-time high of 6.71% in October of 2001.

This week, NCR, the maker of point-of-sale devices for the retail industry who call themselves “the global leader in consumer transaction technologies”, announced disappointing third quarter results. NCR blamed particularly the “challenging retail market” for its debacle. CEO Bill Nuti explained it this way:

Market conditions within the retail industry worsened in the third quarter, as evidenced by weak same store sales comparisons and financial results. This resulted in our retail customers spending more cautiously than anticipated and further delaying solution roll-outs…Additionally, ongoing retail consolidation continues to be a factor impacting our performance.

NCR has noticed that brick-and-mortar retailers are cutting back. “Ongoing retail consolidation,” Nuti called it. And some, like Radio Shack, are likely to use bankruptcy courts to do it. The structural problems in the brick-and-mortar retail industry include Sears, which is closing 300 Sears stores and 80 Kmart stores.

Some of us wonder why anyone still buys there. Retail chains, large and small, have announced an epidemic of store closings in 2014. Here are the “Top 20? announcements of store closings. For these 20 chains, the total number of stores to be closed exceeds 4,200. The number of closed stores is the first column:

US-announced-retail-store-closings-2014Store closings add up: Jobs are lost, consumer spending weakens, and fewer tax revenues are paid to states and the federal government. This process has been going on for years. As a side note: when all this washes out, who is going to fill the vacant retail space in our malls? That’s one of the many secondary effects of the troubles in the American retail industry.

Hopefully, you haven’t invested in those Shopping Center Trusts.

 

Source: Wolf Richter

Yet, some box store retail continues to grow. Starbucks is opening another 1400 stores in the US by 2017, a 13% growth rate. They prove there is a market for things that can’t be ordered and delivered hot over the Internet. But, the openings of new retail locations for 2014 will not offset the closures. Much of domestic retail expansion in 2014 is about discount stores. Between Dollar General, Family Dollar and Dollar Tree, more than 1400 new discount stores will be opening, using the original Walmart expansion strategy. At the same time, Walmart is abandoning its own strategy. The New York Times reports that: (brackets by the Wrongologist)

Walmart’s woes [are causing] a change in corporate strategy. Walmart will slow store openings in the United States next year, opening 60 to 70 supercenters, compared with 120 this year…The Company is shifting its focus toward smaller Neighborhood Market grocery stores, and it said it would open 180 to 200 of them next year. It is also accelerating its online offerings…

Auto sales (mostly at retail box stores) have been booming, Reuters reports that: (brackets by the Wrongologist)

The annualized sales rate slowed to 16.4 million [units]…above last year’s 15.4 million, but well below the 17.5 million [annualized] pace in August.

This performance was partly due to cheap money, long financing terms, and a focus on subprime customers. Jim Lentz, US chief executive at Toyota Motor Corp:

We are seeing more ‘subprime,’ which is good.

In one report, a 71 year old Queens NY woman on food stamps got a $16,000 loan on a used car:

After two test drives and about two hours, the dealership found her a loan: $16,000 financing for a used 2014 Ford Fiesta. There would be a bank fee of about $4,000, and she would have an interest rate of 20.23%

Subprime, indeed. As for the role of consumer spending in our economy, American consumers are stressed. Many have had to curtail their spending, or make up the difference with borrowed money. Closing retail stores may be the canary in a coal mine for our consumer economy. For some business owners, considering some retail store analytics might provide insight into how to keep their stores open.

The best measure of economic security is ownership of wealth. Yet, using Median Wealth as a yardstick, the middle class in the US ranks only 27th in the world. Here is how we rank against two of our allies:

#27 USA: $44,911 ? hardly enough to pay for an operation in a US hospital
#1 Australia: $219205
#6 United Kingdom: $111,524

Global wealth has reached a new all-time high of $241 trillion, up 4.9% since last year and 68% since 2003, with the USA accounting for 72% of the latest increase.

Perhaps the solution in the US is to not to tax based only on income, but to tax based on income and assets. If you own or control 80 to 90% of the assets of this country, and the country’s resources are securing, maintaining, and protecting your assets, it stands to reason that you should also be bearing the majority of the tax burden of the country.

Facebooklinkedinrss

Friday Music Break – October 10, 2014

Today, we review the song “Sixteen Tons”. Here is the chorus:

You load sixteen tons, what do you get
Another day older and deeper in debt
Saint Peter don’t you call me ’cause I can’t go
I owe my soul to the company store

The song is about economic exploitation of coal miners. Depending on your view of history, the song was written by Merle Travis in 1946, or George Davis in the 1930’s as “9 to 10 Tons”. Of course, older readers know of the 1956 Tennessee Ernie Ford version of the song. It sold 20 million copies as a single!

Part of the exploitation was that miners were paid in scrip, not in cash. Scrip is non-transferable credit vouchers which could be exchanged only for goods sold at the company store. Workers also lived in company-owned dormitories or houses, the rent for which was automatically deducted from their pay. This had the feature of lowering the costs of labor for the mining companies, while making it impossible for workers to accumulate any cash savings. In the US, the associated debt bondage persisted until after the 1914 Ludlow Massacre.

The Massacre was the result of a strike against the Colorado Fuel & Iron Company, owned by John D. Rockefeller, Jr., the Rocky Mountain Fuel Company, and the Victor-American Fuel Company. The strike resulted in the violent deaths of at least 19 people.

Howard Zinn in The Politics of History described the Ludlow Massacre as:

The culminating act of perhaps the most violent struggle between corporate power and laboring men in American history

The Ludlow Massacre quickly evolved into a national rallying cry for labor unions and eventually helped lead to New Deal labor reforms. But over the years, the tragedy in Ludlow Colorado has been largely forgotten.

Here is the Wrongologist’s favorite version of the song by Jeff Beck and ZZ Top’s Billy Gibbons, who toured together this year. They are supported by Tai Wilkenfeld on bass:

Note that the performance ends at 3:49.

Now, please ask yourself how much you are worth. Then look around you and realize that you are also a part of the most underpaid workforce since the days of the company store.

If politics is about power, then the powerful will always have the advantage. There will be an endless loop of the more powerful crushing the less powerful, with any change in the balance of power simply a random fluke, like what happened after Ludlow catalyzed the United Mine Workers.

If politics can be about policy, then power will not have an insurmountable advantage, and progress can happen again.

 

Facebooklinkedinrss