The day was Sunday, August 1, 2010. Former Fed Chairman, Alan Greenspan appeared on Meet the Press. When asked to discuss the Congressional debate on tax cuts, the man known to move markets, a person who leans to the "Right," offered a decisive decree. In direct disagreement with Republican officials and the profitable corporations that fund countless political campaigns, Mister Greenspan declared, "Look, I'm very much in favor of tax cuts, but not with borrowed money. And the problem that we've gotten into in recent years is spending programs with borrowed money, tax cuts with borrowed money, and at the end of the day, that proves disastrous. And my view is I don't think we can play subtle policy here on it."
This statement was as a slap in the face to corporations, or more correctly to the tycoons who head these firms. Multi-millionaire media moguls might understand this best. These television and radio Executives experience firsthand that influence over an industry can translate into influence over an outcome. Cable News Network Chief Officers are among those who actively make use of this truth. Tax cuts expired? "Never;" say network Administrators and the newscasters such as Allan Chernoff, who do their bidding.
For but a moment, whilst the Group of 20 [G20] met in London's ancient financial capital, ,"The City," the roars of remorse, could be heard. Words of woe had been whispered in hushed tones for quite some time. Scholars spoke of various possibilities on occasion. Whether Senior Economic Fellows from various think-tanks thought a system to be dead, alive, or near doomed, there was perhaps a bit of agreement. "I see what you mean. It is broken," Economist Mark Thoma mused more than a year ago.
Tis true. For days, if not weeks, months, or years the country has been in a state of financial crisis. Americans experience what it means when the President of the United States says he will act boldly. Economically, he has been brazen. Our current Chief Executive unabashedly embraces businesses, just as he had in his private pursuits before he entered the Oval Office. Bush policies allow corporations to run free. If need be, he says, as he did early on in his Administration, Let the bailouts begin.
There are many wondrous women. Females are loved and lovely. The face of the "fairer sex" is photographed, fondled, treasured, and cherished. The being that brings life to us all is beloved and beautiful. I am a woman. As such, the idea of misogyny infuriates me.
In 2007, the State of the Union was not as we were told it was; nor is it as we were told it would be. Each year, and for eight long years, George W. Bush promised to unite us, and perhaps he has more so than most other Presidents. Collectively, Republicans and Democrats alike understand that as a nation we are not strong.
It is my honor to introduce Forgiven. I believe his thoughtful, reflective treatise speaks volumes. As I read it, so much of the information resonated within me. I hope you too will appreciate the missive and the message.
There is a common myth that runs through America, propagated by the wealthy for mass consumption. This myth has been one of the most dangerous and divisive instruments used against the American working class of all races. This myth has been a part of Americana from the beginning and continues today unabated for the most part and constantly being reinforced by the media, corporate America, and the talking heads. The myth is simply this: that if an individual will work hard, follow the rules, and be patient that they can be successful. The biggest determinate to a person's rise in this society is hard work and personal responsibility.
[Commentary followed by A Personal Reflection of Christmas Past]
"In Manhattan the income gap between the rich and poor is greater than in Guatemala, and within the U.S. is surpassed only by a group of 70 households near a former leper colony in Hawaii." ~ Gap Between Rich and Poor in New York City Grows Wider, By Sam Roberts. The New York Times. December 25, 1994
What is a home? It is easier to understand homelessness by taking a minute to define a home. A home is a space of our own that is considered to belong to us. We may not have a whole house, a whole apartment, or even a whole room, but we have our own space. It is secure: we know where we are going to sleep tonight; we know that 'home' is going to be there when we get there. It is safe. Although no safety is perfect, we have a way to lock our home, to control who comes in when we are there and when we aren't. We can leave our belongings at home and have a reasonable expectation of finding them safe when we get back. We are sheltered from rain and cold. We have a means to warm ourselves. We have a bed. We have a way to store and prepare food. We have cold and hot running water, a toilet, and a shower or bathtub to wash ourselves. We can come and go at our own choice. Home is where you put your stuff.
Today, I was reminded of how deeply divided this nation is. I read School Diversity Based on Income Segregates Some. I discovered in an attempt to offer equal opportunities, indeed, schools discovered discrimination remained a dominant force. School Boards, Administrators, and the community-at-large concluded educational institutions would be more diverse if learners were assigned to schools based on family incomes. A plan was introduced and implemented. The outcome was mixed; however, the pupil populations were less so. Some races, colors, and creeds were abundant within a given institution; others were not well represented.
Income inequity has been in the news of late; disparity is increasing. Jared Bernstein, of the Economic Policy Institute, wrote of this in, "The Catch-Up Economy." Paul Krugman, a writer-economist for the New York Times shared his views in "Left Behind Economics." Economics Professor J. Bradford DeLong comments on the subject. However, it seems to me that the views of these learned economists are limited. While assessing the statistics, I think experts miss the substance, what lies behind simple "economic" causes and effects.