Charlatans, Dirty Little
Sometimes a commentary needs
to begin with a disclaimer. My disclaimer is that I
consider most Economists to be Charlatans. They have
less intellectual integrity than the average used car
salesman. Economists - especially from the elite
universities - are just well educated con men. They
are the Pied Pipers who led us into the trap of a centrally
planned economy and the result is that we are headed for the
economic abyss of the Third World.
I first began this odyssey when I found out about the large corporations exporting high tech knowledge jobs to India. Just on the face of it, how does the United States benefit from allowing the export of high tech knowledge jobs? That led to an investigation of trade policies where I found that 'free trade' in Services - with Services being defined as people and jobs - was included in the Uruguay Round of WTO trade talks. Simply, a job in economic terms has a value. A $60,000 programmer job is worth about $80,000 as a "commodity for trade". A corresponding "worker body" from India as a "commodity for trade" has about a $30,000 net value when imported to the U.S. So there is a $30,000 trade surplus generated on the exchange of a programmer job and an imported "worker body". From an economists point of view, that's a good trade. For the United States and the American citizen who lost the job, it's a net loss no matter which way the trade works - exporting jobs or importing foreign "worker bodies".
The surplus goes to the
corporation in the form of higher profits due to less cost
(no... they do not pass along the savings to their
customers). The American programmer who lost the job,
his community and the rest of the economy through the ripple
effect (multiplier effect) suffer a net loss and the U.S.
Treasury and the state treasuries lose the tax base -
payroll, social security, Medicare, unemployment, etc.
And that doesn't even address the betrayal of American
citizens, the harm to our political and social system and
the fact that importing "worker bodies" is modern day slave
trade with the work visa (H-1B, etc.) being the slave import
license. And that's one of the dirty little secrets
that the mass media "just doesn't see" and so they don't
report. But hey! They can put together
grammatically correct sentences in newspapers and they can
produce the most entertaining News programs like nobody else
in the entire world.
On the right hand side of this page are excerpts from a Carnegie Endowment event in which Congressman Jim McDermott talks about globalization and the impact on the American worker. In elite circles, they tell the truth about the impact of globalization on the American people. Notice that the "solutions" offered by McDermitt don't address the source of the problem which is trade policies in conformance with supply-side economics. Rather, his solutions are to move to a socialist system - easing the slide of the American working class into slave status. The republicans don't even want to do that much. They are content to allow you to freeze and starve in the dark by yourself while all you've worked for in your life slips away from you - into the pockets of the multinational corporations.
One of the dirty little secrets that has been kept from the American people is that the base concepts for supply-side economics was the result of work done by a COMMUNIST named Wassily Leontief who did his dirty deeds - spreading the cancer at Harvard. (Note: the fact that he presented as an anti-communist is irrelevant since the nature of his work exposes his political philosophy as an economic central planner).
Leontief was born in Leningrad in 1906 and got his degree in ec0nomics from the University of Leningrad in 1925. Leontief's father was a Russian economist. Leontief immigrated to Germany to attend the University of Berlin and ultimately ended up in the U.S. in 1931.
Equilibrium - A State of Balance How do you achieve balance? Redistribution which requires central planning and control.
"The European Recovery Program (Marshall Plan) has been recognized as the most successful foreign-aid program ever undertaken by the United States. The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) role in the accomplishments of the Marshall Plan’s Technical Assistance Program has largely been ignored. This article highlights the BLS achievements in the Marshall Plan.
The Marshall Plan was named for then Secretary of State George C. Marshall, who, on June 5, 1947, proposed his solution to war-devastated Europe. The proposal was enacted into law in April 1948 as the European Recovery Program, which created an Economic Cooperation Administration Agency to organize and administer the program.
German reparations. President Franklin Roosevelt appointed Isador Lubin as Minister to the Allied Reparations Commission in 1945 after recognizing Lubin’s current service on the War Production Board, his experience with the War Industries Board during World War I, and his intimate knowledge of the mistakes that had led to hyperinflation.21 The immediate issue facing Lubin, therefore, was an approach to the handling of German reparations in a way that would not further devastate Germany’s industrial productive capacity. He knew that German industry was central to the recovery of Western Europe, but that its importance had to be measured in commodity terms in order to be effectively noninflationary. To tackle the problem, Lubin needed standardized measurements, that is, statistical data on the reparations Germany could afford, the state of German industrial capacity, and the living standards of the German population.
For answers, he turned to BLS, of which he was still technically the Commissioner. He addressed the following query to A. Ford Hinrichs, the BLS Acting Commissioner during Lubin’s assignment to the White House.
Lubin had authorizedBLS to create a small research unit at Harvard University in 1941; the unit, under the direction of Wassili Leontief, constructed the first official input-output table.23 Leontief’s new technique employed a system of double entry bookkeeping that tabulated the transactions of any one transactor group industry with all other groups. It included the flow of intermediate as well as final output.
The technique had proved useful to the Office of Strategic Services during the war, helping to pinpoint bombing targets of those German industries crucial to the war effort. Its earliest domestic application had been an estimate made in 1944 for the Planning Division of the War Production Board.24 "
"On June 5, 1947, speaking to the graduating class at Harvard University, Secretary of State George C. Marshall laid the foundation, in the aftermath of World War II, for a U.S. program of assistance to the countries of Europe. At a time when great cities lay in ruins and national economies were devastated, Marshall called on America to "do whatever it is able to do to assist in the return of normal economic health in the world, without which there can be no political stability and no assured peace."
Carnegie Endowment for
International Peace event, April 24, 2007
This path we are on - globalization – isn’t accidental. Our nation’s founders chose to pursue capitalism and democracy as a means by which American workers would be limited only by their ambition. By the mid-1930s economic bust, we recognized as a nation that some regulation and an economic safety net were vital for America to succeed. Enactment of the Social Security Act in 1935, which gave dignity for the elderly and income insurance for the unemployed, ensured that all Americans continued to have a stake in the economy and in the future. Now we need to make some adjustments to reflect the economic realities of our times.
Everyone here knows how globalization is changing our economy. Some of these changes result from decisions by Congress to allow capital and goods and services to move more freely. Other changes result from the technology we embrace. By and large, the bottom line is a boon to economic growth and the value of U.S. corporations, but we can’t say the same for the American worker. Wages for workers have stayed flat while anxiety over job security keeps rising.
First, it’s not enough to say that there are going to be winners and losers from trade, then tell the losers we’re going to give them an unemployment check and a little retraining. When a worker loses his or her job because of trade or outsourcing, government intervention is already too late. Case in point: the Trade Adjustment Assistance program provides benefits that are too little and too late.
Second, it’s not enough to simply say that if trade agreements included enforceable international labor standards that there would be a level playing field. It’s just not true. An American job can be among the most expensive in the world compared to its counterpart overseas.
I think we really need to
understand two things. First, the nature of job dislocation
has changed. In the past, people would lose their jobs when
the business cycle slowed, but those jobs would return when
the economy rebounded: cyclical unemployment. Today, people
lose jobs that will never return, even during good economic
times: structural unemployment.
Second, we need to understand what the employment picture means when we continue to tie health insurance and pensions to employment? How can employers meet the challenges and opportunities of international competition when they provide employees what foreign firms often do not? So what do we do - what does a New Deal look like?
[Note: This is the good part... the solutions offered by politicians]
[National Health Care]
First, we have to do away with employer-provided health insurance. Globalization means more unpredictable employment; it should not mean more unpredictable health care. Single payer health care, guaranteed by the government, would be tremendously helpful to every American family. And done the right way, it would make American firms better able to compete. It would cost less and cover everyone.
[Education for What? Both Blue and White Collar jobs are being EXPORTED!]
Second, we need to ensure that each and every American has access to affordable continuing education. We no longer live in a world where a worker can stop learning and training. We need to provide education and training to workers before they are uncompetitive, not just afterwards. We can’t approach the 21st century by financing education like we did in the 20th century. Federal grants, loans, and tax incentives are designed for the traditional student that leaves high school directly for college. These schemes don’t work for the non-traditional, working student, which is the fastest growing segment of college enrollees.
[Wage Insurance? To help you downsize your lifestyle - great idea :) ]
Third, we have to recognize
that structural unemployment is here to stay, just as a
global economy is here to stay. Therefore, I believe we
need to improve our policies that help workers when they
transition from job to job. We need to reform the
Unemployment Insurance program to meet the needs of a modern
workforce. And, I believe the nation would benefit with
from a program to insure wages, for those instances when a
worker is laid off and decides to take a job with lower
pay.... Many of you know that I’ve drafted legislation that
would implement a national wage insurance program. Under my
bill, if a worker is laid off and ultimately accepts a new
job with lower pay, the worker would receive a wage
insurance supplement equal to half of the lost wages.
Games with statistics
"FREE TRADE" (best read from the website because of the hyperlinks)
the WTO system for multinational domination of the global
economy (cartels), the U.S. mitigation to loss of production
due to "free trade" is to import cheap labor.
Cheap imported labor reduces costs for businesses remaining
in the U.S. - but it's a band-aid solution because the
economy isn't growing. It's shrinking despite the
bogus economic statistics coming from the government.
Pouring cheap labor in our economy is like pouring water
into a sand covered desert and expecting that you'll be able
to create a lake. It won't happen. The
decline of the American economy has been engineered by
communist central planners seeking to equalize the global
economy and all attempts to mitigate the demise will fail.
It's impossible to solve a problem when you don't define the
problem correctly. Politicians refuse to define the
because it is against the interests of the corporations that
So Bye, Bye Miss American Pie...