Contrairimairi has forwarded a Discover the Networks post concerning the "Cloward-Piven strategy", which aims to overthrow capitalism by making impossible demands on the welfare state. Why leftists are intent to overthrow the current system is unclear to me because we are well on the way to achieving their totalitarian socialist goals.
According to the article, Cloward and Piven argued that potential welfare recipients should be encouraged to flood the system. That happened and capitalism did not fall, although my home city of New York became a corporate ghost town as all the industrial headquarters left and moved to Atlanta, presumably where government programs were not so generous. The article does not point out why, if Cloward and Piven were so effective as Mayor Giuliani claims, their success was limited to New York, Chicago and similar rust belt cities, but not the South. Perhaps Cloward and Piven were on the payroll of the Houston Chamber of Commerce?
The article points out that Cloward and Piven's idea led to an explosion of welfare benefits in the city. But this did not harm capitalism, as the article claims. It harmed New York City, which went bankrupt and had to curtail welfare benefits. The large corporations moved to Atlanta and Dallas. The statistic that the article gives of one in two New Yorkers having been on welfare is scary, but it begs the question as to why the city was unable to create jobs in the first place and why the welfare programs were not curtailed. This would seem to be a failure of New York's political choices. It is more convenient for Mayor Giuliani to blame Cloward and Piven than to blame himself for not reducing the city's budget by 35%, but what do you expect?
The welfare recipients could have been given brooms and told to sweep the city and welfare rolls would have fallen, but public sector unions objected and the city's politicians, including Mayor Giuliani, preferred to honor the Sanitation and other unions rather than re-build a great city. That is due to Progressivism, not Cloward and Piven.
Welfare was as much a result as a cause of the bankruptcy of New York City. Urban renewal, a bipartisan scheme, was doing harm to the City for two decades before the city's bankruptcy. You can eliminate welfare by demanding people get a job, but if you have a Progressive Republican like Robert Moses, the guy who ran urban renewal and a host of other city programs for 40 years, driving jobs out, you don't create jobs in the first place. Even in the past couple of years, with all of New York's economic decline, the leaders pass laws to harass Wal-Mart rather than repeal laws that discourage business formation.
Moses condemned many small businesses and destroyed about 20 neighborhoods along with low-rent tenements, replacing them with ugly city projects. The projects in turn engendered crime, further squashing small business.
The most important effect of Moses' road and apartment building was the neighborhood destruction and the eviction of about 3% of the city's population through eminent domain. Many neighborhoods were torn asunder by superhighways that cut through them, demolishing the customer demand base for small businesses.
Another important factor was the prevalence of public sector unions that had appeared in the 1960s. These made considerable demands on New York's budget to which both Republican and Democratic administrations acceded. As well, construction codes and a corrupt New York law known as the Wicks Law encouraged criminality and sub-quality public construction. Construction in New York is an open pit and an important source of economic decline.
As well, the Port of New York, which had been dominated by the mob for decades moved to New Jersey. Most of the port jobs were lost because of containerization. This also contributed to the bankruptcy. Instead of thinking in terms of laissez-faire policies to stimulate economic development, Robert Moses, Nelson Rockefeller and the Democratic administrations saw government-sponsored development and transfers to wealthy developers as the way to progress. But their Progressivism failed.
The dismal subway system, also due to policies of Robert Moses (and the "nationalization" of this once-private system in the 1930s) makes life in the city unbearable, further driving trade away.
The wonder is that people are willing to live in New York City at all. With high rents due to rent control and corrupt construction rules and probably the worst transportation system of any large city in the world, along with high taxes due to welfare, and an economy that is over-regulated and characterized by subsidies to big developers, it is a testimony to the city's cultural strengths that it continues to survive, albeit in a much more limited way than 40 years ago. It is no longer the center of new ideas as it once was.
I spend about half my time in New York City and the subway trips I take to Brooklyn and NYU twice a week are twice-weekly nightmares. I don't have to go to horror films. Just get on the subway, watch the rats and inhale the vomit. Truly a wonderful town.
Monday, September 29, 2008
Obama Campaign Fetes Ahmadinejad
Newsmax reports that:
"Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was feted on Thursday night by left-wing U.S. religious leaders and self-styled pacifists at a gala reception at New York’s Hyatt hotel — which is owned by the family of the Obama campaign’s national finance chairperson, Penny Pritzker.
"Several thousand protesters gathered on 42nd street, directly across from the hotel, late Thursday afternoon, including Beth Gilinsky, president of the Jewish Action Alliance; Frank Gaffney, president of the Center for Security Policy; and the Rev. Keith Roderick, the Episcopal canon to persecuted Christians.
"Ahmadinejad arrived at 8:45 p.m., nearly three hours late, and was protected by the Secret Service and Iranian security guards, Newsmax correspondent Kenneth R. Timmerman reported.
"Inside, the Iranian president was given a warm welcome by John Brademas, a former congressman from Indiana who rose to become Democratic whip in the House from 1977-1981.
"Also welcoming him was Nihad Awad, executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), which was named as an “unindicted co-conspirator” in an alleged criminal conspiracy to fund the Palestinian terrorist organization Hamas...
"Barack Obama has made negotiations with Ahmadinejad and other dictators a cornerstone of his foreign policy approach, in contrast to John McCain, who believes that the U.S. must spearhead an international coalition to prevent Iran from going nuclear...
"Obama has said that he is ready to sit down with Ahmadinejad “without preconditions” to negotiate a sweeping security agreement with his regime. McCain has dismissed this as 'reckless,'".
"Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was feted on Thursday night by left-wing U.S. religious leaders and self-styled pacifists at a gala reception at New York’s Hyatt hotel — which is owned by the family of the Obama campaign’s national finance chairperson, Penny Pritzker.
"Several thousand protesters gathered on 42nd street, directly across from the hotel, late Thursday afternoon, including Beth Gilinsky, president of the Jewish Action Alliance; Frank Gaffney, president of the Center for Security Policy; and the Rev. Keith Roderick, the Episcopal canon to persecuted Christians.
"Ahmadinejad arrived at 8:45 p.m., nearly three hours late, and was protected by the Secret Service and Iranian security guards, Newsmax correspondent Kenneth R. Timmerman reported.
"Inside, the Iranian president was given a warm welcome by John Brademas, a former congressman from Indiana who rose to become Democratic whip in the House from 1977-1981.
"Also welcoming him was Nihad Awad, executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), which was named as an “unindicted co-conspirator” in an alleged criminal conspiracy to fund the Palestinian terrorist organization Hamas...
"Barack Obama has made negotiations with Ahmadinejad and other dictators a cornerstone of his foreign policy approach, in contrast to John McCain, who believes that the U.S. must spearhead an international coalition to prevent Iran from going nuclear...
"Obama has said that he is ready to sit down with Ahmadinejad “without preconditions” to negotiate a sweeping security agreement with his regime. McCain has dismissed this as 'reckless,'".
Republican Liberty Caucus Opposes Bailout Plan
I'm on the New York State board of the Republican Liberty Caucus. The national RLC chairman, Bill Westmiller, has issued the following press release opposing the bailout. Despite the Bush administration's creation of this plan, there are many Republican Congressmen who oppose it. The trouble is that John McCain chose to identify himself with it. Bill's press release is excellent, but I would go further. There needs to be a de-nationalization of banking regulation and monetary policy. The current system is an abject failure. The problems go far deeper than the current socialization of banking. The banking system has not been creating value for decades. It depends on the money-creation powers of the Fed. Yet, this irresponsible institution has permitted bankers to extract large salaries. The public subsidization of Wall Street and banking occurs through the Federal Reserve. It is time to end this boondoggle and re-establish a gold standard.
Date: 09/28/2008
Release: Immediate
Contact: Westmiller (805) 493-4332
"NO Bailout for Failure, NO Rescue from Risk," says Republican Group"
Thousand Oaks, CA - A national caucus of Republican activists has urged GOP legislators to stand firm against the "Paulson Bailout" of a corrupt financial regulatory system. "This proposal is a government takeover of the entire U.S. economy," says Republican Liberty Caucus Chairman William Westmiller, "whose only purpose is to rescue those who made risky bets on bad mortgages." The Caucus [www.RLC.org] opposes any taxpayer payoff to rescue those who made bad investments in any sector of the economy. "The problem is not a lack of government control," says Westmiller, "but rather the decades of market distortions imposed by Congress through subsidies, mandates, guarantees, and constraints on free-enterprise mortgage offerings."
The Paulson proposal grants the Secretary of the Treasury total control over all mortgage-related financial instruments, nearly a trillion-dollars in discretionary funds, and the power to nationalize or deputize every financial institution in the nation. "This isn't a rescue plan," says Westmiller, "it is an economic police state."
Over the past five years, Congress has refused - on multiple occasions - to impose standard accounting practices on "Government Sponsored Enterprises", maintained an implicit taxpayer guarantee against all of their losses, and expanded the discretion of federal agencies to allocate new national debt to failed investments and insurance brokers. "This is not free enterprise, nor anything even remotely associated with the American Dream," says Westmiller, "it is pure and simply corporatism, designed by oligarchs, suitable for a Weimar Republic or Soviet Union, not the United States of America."
The RLC favors clear legislation protecting individuals against fraud, misrepresentation, and theft. It opposes any law that benefits one class of Americans at the expense of another, including any form of financial guarantee or subsidy that rewards failure or encourages foolish investments.
"The worst aspect of all the proposals now pending in Congress," says Westmiller, "is the destructive craving to save a system of patronage, political favors, and class benefits that has brought us the current crisis. More of the same is no solution.”
"The 'Pelosi Compromise' is a fruitless exercise of battling against the most extreme Democratic proposals," says Westmiller, "adding new layers of bureaucracy, prolonged studies of alernative interventions, and phased-in destruction of the dollar is not progress, it is more, much more, of the same failed policies." The RLC applauds the stamina and fortitude of multiple Republican Senators and Congressmen who have opposed any corporate bailout, expansions of government fiscal power, new burdens on taxpayers, or any further assaults on the value of the dollar through inflation. The RLC is a political membership organization working within the Republican Party in support of individual rights, limited government, and free enterprise. The Caucus has members in all 50 states and 20 chartered state chapters. The RLC has urged all of its members to communicate to their representatives in Congress their total opposition to any bailout.
Date: 09/28/2008
Release: Immediate
Contact: Westmiller (805) 493-4332
"NO Bailout for Failure, NO Rescue from Risk," says Republican Group"
Thousand Oaks, CA - A national caucus of Republican activists has urged GOP legislators to stand firm against the "Paulson Bailout" of a corrupt financial regulatory system. "This proposal is a government takeover of the entire U.S. economy," says Republican Liberty Caucus Chairman William Westmiller, "whose only purpose is to rescue those who made risky bets on bad mortgages." The Caucus [www.RLC.org] opposes any taxpayer payoff to rescue those who made bad investments in any sector of the economy. "The problem is not a lack of government control," says Westmiller, "but rather the decades of market distortions imposed by Congress through subsidies, mandates, guarantees, and constraints on free-enterprise mortgage offerings."
The Paulson proposal grants the Secretary of the Treasury total control over all mortgage-related financial instruments, nearly a trillion-dollars in discretionary funds, and the power to nationalize or deputize every financial institution in the nation. "This isn't a rescue plan," says Westmiller, "it is an economic police state."
Over the past five years, Congress has refused - on multiple occasions - to impose standard accounting practices on "Government Sponsored Enterprises", maintained an implicit taxpayer guarantee against all of their losses, and expanded the discretion of federal agencies to allocate new national debt to failed investments and insurance brokers. "This is not free enterprise, nor anything even remotely associated with the American Dream," says Westmiller, "it is pure and simply corporatism, designed by oligarchs, suitable for a Weimar Republic or Soviet Union, not the United States of America."
The RLC favors clear legislation protecting individuals against fraud, misrepresentation, and theft. It opposes any law that benefits one class of Americans at the expense of another, including any form of financial guarantee or subsidy that rewards failure or encourages foolish investments.
"The worst aspect of all the proposals now pending in Congress," says Westmiller, "is the destructive craving to save a system of patronage, political favors, and class benefits that has brought us the current crisis. More of the same is no solution.”
"The 'Pelosi Compromise' is a fruitless exercise of battling against the most extreme Democratic proposals," says Westmiller, "adding new layers of bureaucracy, prolonged studies of alernative interventions, and phased-in destruction of the dollar is not progress, it is more, much more, of the same failed policies." The RLC applauds the stamina and fortitude of multiple Republican Senators and Congressmen who have opposed any corporate bailout, expansions of government fiscal power, new burdens on taxpayers, or any further assaults on the value of the dollar through inflation. The RLC is a political membership organization working within the Republican Party in support of individual rights, limited government, and free enterprise. The Caucus has members in all 50 states and 20 chartered state chapters. The RLC has urged all of its members to communicate to their representatives in Congress their total opposition to any bailout.
Welfare Check Day for Wall Street
(H/t Larwyn.) Mark Hemingway of National Review Online blogs that a "deal" has been reach with respect to the bailout scheme and that Henry Paulson has been given a free hand to spend $350 billion, with another $350 billion available in the future. According to the Wall Street Journal:
"The bill leaves many mechanics of the operation up to the Treasury. Among these are the crucial issues of how the U.S. government would decide which assets it will buy and how it would decide what to pay for them. The legislation leaves the Treasury 45 days to issue guidelines on those procedures. The bill awaits votes in Congress starting on Monday.
"From big Wall Street houses to small community banks, executives have expressed an interest in signing up for the bailout. But some have said the extent of their involvement will depend on critical details."
"At the bill's core is Mr. Paulson's concept of buying impaired mortgage-related assets from financial firms -- giving them cash to replace the toxic debts that have put them in danger or dissuaded them from lending. The plan is to help the firms restore their capital bases as well as the trust that enables them to borrow and lend at reasonable terms. Without this, officials worry that the credit markets, the lifeblood of the economy, would grind to a halt.
"Sellers of assets could include a broad range of financial entities -- not just banks but also credit unions and pension funds. The assets offered to the government must have been originated or issued on or before March 14, 2008."
"Support from House Republicans, who staged an 11th-hour revolt on Thursday, is still uncertain. Asked about the outcome of the House vote, Rep. Christopher Shays, a Connecticut Republican, said, "I think it's up in the air. This is what we call a legacy vote."
JustOneMinute links to C-Span's website that carries the draft bill. JustOne Minute notes:
"Section 113 starting on page 33 is the place to look. At a quick glance it appears that the Treasury Secretary is exhorted but not obliged to buy warrants giving the taxpayer some upside participation - the Dodd formulas have disappeared, thank heaven. But at second glance, it appears that *any* purchase by Treasury must be accompanied by warrants of some type; earlier reports suggested that auction purchases would be exempt. The Secretary has broad flexibility in setting terms but I suppose he would be evading the spirit of the bill if he set an absurdly high exercise price with the idea of making the warrants meaningless. Paulson was worried that healthy firms would stay away from the auctions rather than deliver warrants. I guess we'll see if he's right."
I'm a little confused why Paulson would be rescuing healthy firms. I'm even more confused why incompetently managed firms deserve a $700 billion dollar subsidy to keep them afloat in order to continue being incompetent so that they can waste even more money, allowing conservatives to blame the Democrats and Democrats to blame capitalism. Only in the United Socialist States of America.
The majority of Americans did not favor a bail out. But Americans continue to support the two party system despite indifference to the public interest. This is probably because of the mental incapacity of the electorate to grasp problems that progressivism has demanded they resolve. The result is that progressives reach exploitive and incompetently thought through solutions that harm the public. The banking system is one of the biggest examples. It produces no value; it extracts enormous value; and it impoverishes the public. Yet, the public is not able to discern the issue. Progressivism has killed democracy by expanding the required information set because it vastly expanded government. America is no longer much of a democracy. This is accentuated by the bailout's permitting government to take direct ownership of banks. We are moving to a true socialist state accompanied with the economic decline concomitant to one.
"The bill leaves many mechanics of the operation up to the Treasury. Among these are the crucial issues of how the U.S. government would decide which assets it will buy and how it would decide what to pay for them. The legislation leaves the Treasury 45 days to issue guidelines on those procedures. The bill awaits votes in Congress starting on Monday.
"From big Wall Street houses to small community banks, executives have expressed an interest in signing up for the bailout. But some have said the extent of their involvement will depend on critical details."
"At the bill's core is Mr. Paulson's concept of buying impaired mortgage-related assets from financial firms -- giving them cash to replace the toxic debts that have put them in danger or dissuaded them from lending. The plan is to help the firms restore their capital bases as well as the trust that enables them to borrow and lend at reasonable terms. Without this, officials worry that the credit markets, the lifeblood of the economy, would grind to a halt.
"Sellers of assets could include a broad range of financial entities -- not just banks but also credit unions and pension funds. The assets offered to the government must have been originated or issued on or before March 14, 2008."
"Support from House Republicans, who staged an 11th-hour revolt on Thursday, is still uncertain. Asked about the outcome of the House vote, Rep. Christopher Shays, a Connecticut Republican, said, "I think it's up in the air. This is what we call a legacy vote."
JustOneMinute links to C-Span's website that carries the draft bill. JustOne Minute notes:
"Section 113 starting on page 33 is the place to look. At a quick glance it appears that the Treasury Secretary is exhorted but not obliged to buy warrants giving the taxpayer some upside participation - the Dodd formulas have disappeared, thank heaven. But at second glance, it appears that *any* purchase by Treasury must be accompanied by warrants of some type; earlier reports suggested that auction purchases would be exempt. The Secretary has broad flexibility in setting terms but I suppose he would be evading the spirit of the bill if he set an absurdly high exercise price with the idea of making the warrants meaningless. Paulson was worried that healthy firms would stay away from the auctions rather than deliver warrants. I guess we'll see if he's right."
I'm a little confused why Paulson would be rescuing healthy firms. I'm even more confused why incompetently managed firms deserve a $700 billion dollar subsidy to keep them afloat in order to continue being incompetent so that they can waste even more money, allowing conservatives to blame the Democrats and Democrats to blame capitalism. Only in the United Socialist States of America.
The majority of Americans did not favor a bail out. But Americans continue to support the two party system despite indifference to the public interest. This is probably because of the mental incapacity of the electorate to grasp problems that progressivism has demanded they resolve. The result is that progressives reach exploitive and incompetently thought through solutions that harm the public. The banking system is one of the biggest examples. It produces no value; it extracts enormous value; and it impoverishes the public. Yet, the public is not able to discern the issue. Progressivism has killed democracy by expanding the required information set because it vastly expanded government. America is no longer much of a democracy. This is accentuated by the bailout's permitting government to take direct ownership of banks. We are moving to a true socialist state accompanied with the economic decline concomitant to one.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
