CBC/Radio-Canada must continue serving all Canadians: Turmel
The public broadcaster has a key role to play in this country, reminds NDP Leader
Tweet thisShare thisEmail thisJanuary 22, 2012MONTRÉAL—CBC/Radio-Canada is a key actor in Canadian society and the Conservative government shouldn’t blindly slash their budget without taking into consideration the needs of communities, New Democrat Leader Nycole Turmel said during her visit to Montreal today.
“A 10 percent budget reduction means that CBC/Radio-Canada’s funding would be slashed by more than 100 million dollars per year,” Turmel said. “Some Conservative members wanted to cut the budget by 20 percent”
The NDP recognizes the importance of CBC/Radio-Canada for Canadian communities, including those in remote areas and minority language communities.
“The Conservatives are about to butcher a national cultural jewel and that’s worrisome. Quebec culture won’t be the same without CBC/Radio-Canada. And many communities located outside major centres, who count on the crown corporation for news and entertainment, risk seeing their public service deteriorate,” Deputy Heritage Critic Pierre Nantel (Longueuil-Pierre-Boucher) added.
“In 2011, Quebecers set the wheel of change in motion and don’t want to now go back to the old debates and the old scandals. By working together, we’ll replace the Conservatives in 2015 and build a better future for Quebec families”, concluded Turmel.
Thursday, January 26, 2012
Wednesday, January 25, 2012
Maher Arar Endorses Paul Dewar For NDP Leader
Maher Arar Endorses Paul Dewar For NDP Leader
January 25th, 2012
OTTAWA – Today, Paul Dewar received another endorsement from a prominent human rights leader in his bid for the NDP leadership.
"I fully endorse Paul to be the next leader of the New Democratic Party," said Maher Arar. "Paul's knowledge of foreign policy, his involvement in supporting human rights causes in Canada and abroad have allowed him to grasp many of the complex issues that Canada and the rest of the world are facing today. I can easily picture Paul as the next Prime Minister of Canada."
In 2002, Arar, a Canadian of Syrian origin, was deported from the US to Syria where he faced devastating torture and imprisonment. Years later, the O'Connor Commission found that Arar had been the innocent victim of flawed intelligence and government smears.
"Like many Canadians, I was shocked and deeply disturbed by the treatment of Maher Arar during those terrifying months he spent in Syria,” said Dewar. “As Prime Minister, I promise to stand up and fight for the rights of all Canadians, regardless of religion, colour of skin, or country of birth”.
Arar adds his name to an impressive list of human rights leaders backing Dewar for NDP leader. Earlier in the campaign, Dewar obtained the support of human rights lawyers Amir Attaran and Paul Champ.
He has also obtained the backing of the eight former staff from Rights and Democracy who stated: "We are impressed by Paul’s deep commitment to social justice, his drive to be fair and yet forceful, and his charismatic personality. As Quebecers, we cherish his commitment to Quebecois values of justice, rule of law, respect for human rights and diversity, and of course his deep respect for Quebec’s unique place in Canada."
January 25th, 2012
OTTAWA – Today, Paul Dewar received another endorsement from a prominent human rights leader in his bid for the NDP leadership.
"I fully endorse Paul to be the next leader of the New Democratic Party," said Maher Arar. "Paul's knowledge of foreign policy, his involvement in supporting human rights causes in Canada and abroad have allowed him to grasp many of the complex issues that Canada and the rest of the world are facing today. I can easily picture Paul as the next Prime Minister of Canada."
In 2002, Arar, a Canadian of Syrian origin, was deported from the US to Syria where he faced devastating torture and imprisonment. Years later, the O'Connor Commission found that Arar had been the innocent victim of flawed intelligence and government smears.
"Like many Canadians, I was shocked and deeply disturbed by the treatment of Maher Arar during those terrifying months he spent in Syria,” said Dewar. “As Prime Minister, I promise to stand up and fight for the rights of all Canadians, regardless of religion, colour of skin, or country of birth”.
Arar adds his name to an impressive list of human rights leaders backing Dewar for NDP leader. Earlier in the campaign, Dewar obtained the support of human rights lawyers Amir Attaran and Paul Champ.
He has also obtained the backing of the eight former staff from Rights and Democracy who stated: "We are impressed by Paul’s deep commitment to social justice, his drive to be fair and yet forceful, and his charismatic personality. As Quebecers, we cherish his commitment to Quebecois values of justice, rule of law, respect for human rights and diversity, and of course his deep respect for Quebec’s unique place in Canada."
Harper must treat First Nations with respect to regain trust: NDP
Harper must treat First Nations with respect to regain trust: NDP
New Democrats say any path forward must be based on a nation-to-nation relationship
OTTAWA – As First Nations leaders gather in Ottawa for meetings with the federal government, New Democrat Leader Nycole Turmel urged the Prime Minister to work with First Nations, as full and equal partners moving forward.
“We all know the critical challenges facing Aboriginal communities,” said New Democrat Leader Nycole Turmel. “We saw it in Attawapiskat as we see it across the country. That is why First Nations are looking to this summit to reset their relationship with the federal government.”
“The government must acknowledge that treaties form the basis of their relationship with First Nations,” Turmel said. “It is an issue of trust and respect. Only when this government realizes that it must work in a nation-to-nation relationship with Aboriginal leaders will we start seeing real progress on the critical issues. Everything else flows from that.”
New Democrats are calling on the federal government to ensure that any new legislation or measures are developed in full consultation with First Nations.
“As National Chief Atleo has stated there needs to be a new fiscal relationship, mirroring the statutory guarantees granted to non-Aboriginal governments and Canadians for education, health, social services,” said New Democrat Aboriginal Affairs critic Linda Duncan (Edmonton-Strathcona). “We will be gauging the seriousness of the Conservative government’s commitments in the upcoming budget.”
New Democrats say any path forward must be based on a nation-to-nation relationship
OTTAWA – As First Nations leaders gather in Ottawa for meetings with the federal government, New Democrat Leader Nycole Turmel urged the Prime Minister to work with First Nations, as full and equal partners moving forward.
“We all know the critical challenges facing Aboriginal communities,” said New Democrat Leader Nycole Turmel. “We saw it in Attawapiskat as we see it across the country. That is why First Nations are looking to this summit to reset their relationship with the federal government.”
“The government must acknowledge that treaties form the basis of their relationship with First Nations,” Turmel said. “It is an issue of trust and respect. Only when this government realizes that it must work in a nation-to-nation relationship with Aboriginal leaders will we start seeing real progress on the critical issues. Everything else flows from that.”
New Democrats are calling on the federal government to ensure that any new legislation or measures are developed in full consultation with First Nations.
“As National Chief Atleo has stated there needs to be a new fiscal relationship, mirroring the statutory guarantees granted to non-Aboriginal governments and Canadians for education, health, social services,” said New Democrat Aboriginal Affairs critic Linda Duncan (Edmonton-Strathcona). “We will be gauging the seriousness of the Conservative government’s commitments in the upcoming budget.”
Tuesday, January 24, 2012
Jagrup Brars arrival in the DTES in Vancouver
Post navigation← Older posts My arrival in the DTES in Vancouver
Posted on January 23, 2012 by raisetherates
Reply
Today [January 17] I moved into the second phase of the Raise the Rates Welfare Challenge and will spend two weeks living in an SRO (single room occupancy) hotel in Vancouver’s Downtown Eastside (DTES).
I got up early to say goodbye to my housemates in Surrey. There was no way that I would be able to carry all of my belongings to Vancouver, so I left a few items like my sleeping bag and clothes with one of my housemates.
It was below zero while I carried my life’s belongings to the sky train: food rations, bedding and some clothes. Once I reached Main Street, I was met by members of Raise the Rates and we walked to my SRO hotel on Jackson Street.
I was assured by Raise the Rates that I would not be displacing anyone. They had done a survey on the availability of SRO’s in the area and found that units in the $425 range were readily available. I was told that if I needed to rent an SRO in the $375 range (the shelter portion of welfare), I would either be out on the street, in a shelter (weather dependent) or displacing someone.
I entered the room with great curiosity. I had not seen the room before today.
The room was 11 x 11 ft. with a sink, fridge, stove and single mattress, all in obvious disrepair. I later discovered the fridge didn’t work, which was cause for great panic, as I had a few perishables and only $25 left for food for the next two weeks. Luckily, a neighbour with a working unit offered to help store my items. When I asked about the bathroom, I was told I’d share one toilet and shower with the 11 other men living on the same floor.
Later that day, I had the opportunity to meet with single mothers at a local school. They shared with me the difficult struggles and challenges they face in order to qualify for welfare. The issues they raised were very similar to the issues raised by the single mothers I had met in Surrey.
One of the mothers explained that because there are no earning exemptions for a single employable person on welfare, if a person wants to work, even part time, to try and get off of welfare, whatever amount they earn is deducted from their welfare cheque. This leaves them running around in circles with little chance of ever getting off welfare.
I was told of the skyrocketing housing costs that eat up an increasing portion of the monthly income for those with low incomes and on welfare. This is especially true if you have more than one child and need more than one room.
Another mother, who was well educated, but had been on disability welfare for the last three years, had a teenage son who was a cancer survivor with heart conditions and autism. Her son was living with his father at first and then decided he wanted to live with his mom. As a result of the move the mom started receiving child support from the father, which was clawed back according to the current welfare rules.
These are just a few of the many challenges single-parent families face while living on low incomes and on welfare.
While the DTES has become the face of poverty in B.C., there are over 500,000 people across the province living in poverty, and 120,000 of those are children, more than 11 percent of our total population.
The people who live in the DTES have their own stories to tell. I look to this experience as an opportunity to hear about the challenges and circumstances that brought them to the DTES and to life in an SRO.
Posted on January 23, 2012 by raisetherates
Reply
Today [January 17] I moved into the second phase of the Raise the Rates Welfare Challenge and will spend two weeks living in an SRO (single room occupancy) hotel in Vancouver’s Downtown Eastside (DTES).
I got up early to say goodbye to my housemates in Surrey. There was no way that I would be able to carry all of my belongings to Vancouver, so I left a few items like my sleeping bag and clothes with one of my housemates.
It was below zero while I carried my life’s belongings to the sky train: food rations, bedding and some clothes. Once I reached Main Street, I was met by members of Raise the Rates and we walked to my SRO hotel on Jackson Street.
I was assured by Raise the Rates that I would not be displacing anyone. They had done a survey on the availability of SRO’s in the area and found that units in the $425 range were readily available. I was told that if I needed to rent an SRO in the $375 range (the shelter portion of welfare), I would either be out on the street, in a shelter (weather dependent) or displacing someone.
I entered the room with great curiosity. I had not seen the room before today.
The room was 11 x 11 ft. with a sink, fridge, stove and single mattress, all in obvious disrepair. I later discovered the fridge didn’t work, which was cause for great panic, as I had a few perishables and only $25 left for food for the next two weeks. Luckily, a neighbour with a working unit offered to help store my items. When I asked about the bathroom, I was told I’d share one toilet and shower with the 11 other men living on the same floor.
Later that day, I had the opportunity to meet with single mothers at a local school. They shared with me the difficult struggles and challenges they face in order to qualify for welfare. The issues they raised were very similar to the issues raised by the single mothers I had met in Surrey.
One of the mothers explained that because there are no earning exemptions for a single employable person on welfare, if a person wants to work, even part time, to try and get off of welfare, whatever amount they earn is deducted from their welfare cheque. This leaves them running around in circles with little chance of ever getting off welfare.
I was told of the skyrocketing housing costs that eat up an increasing portion of the monthly income for those with low incomes and on welfare. This is especially true if you have more than one child and need more than one room.
Another mother, who was well educated, but had been on disability welfare for the last three years, had a teenage son who was a cancer survivor with heart conditions and autism. Her son was living with his father at first and then decided he wanted to live with his mom. As a result of the move the mom started receiving child support from the father, which was clawed back according to the current welfare rules.
These are just a few of the many challenges single-parent families face while living on low incomes and on welfare.
While the DTES has become the face of poverty in B.C., there are over 500,000 people across the province living in poverty, and 120,000 of those are children, more than 11 percent of our total population.
The people who live in the DTES have their own stories to tell. I look to this experience as an opportunity to hear about the challenges and circumstances that brought them to the DTES and to life in an SRO.
Columns: Seven Reasons Why The US And Canadian Middle Class’ Are Disappearing
Columns: Seven Reasons Why The US And Canadian Middle Class’ Are Disappearing
Posted on 06 November 2011
Tags: Bad Government, christy clark, Depression, Middle Class Disappearing, Recession
By David Murray. This is an old post I did on my blog almost two years ago. The issue of the middle class seems to be even more in the news with the 99 percent and Take Back Wall Street-Bay Street movement going on in Canada and the United States.
1. Falling income: The pinch that many families feel comes from incomes that have fallen while other unavoidable costs have continued to go up. From 2000 to 2008, median household income after inflation was basically unchanged, the weakest performance since at least the end of World War II. And that was mostly before the recession. Economists estimate that once additional data are tallied, they will show that median real income fell by 5 to 7 percent during the recession. That’s a huge drop that seems unlikely to reverse itself anytime soon, since a weak job market means that even those who have jobs are far less likely to get raises. And many people have absorbed pay cuts or taken new jobs that pay a lot less than they used to earn. In Canada there has not been a real jump in the mean wage in the country since the early 1990′s. Many companies have had roll backs and three years of zero,zero, and zero increases.
Christy Clark and the BC Liberals have the lowest minimum wage in Canada , yet British Columbia has the highest cost of living.
2. Reduced savings net worth: When incomes fall faster than expenses, the first impulse is often to make up the difference by borrowing. But banks and credit-card issuers have clamped down on lending, leaving many Americans and Canadians no choice but to raid their savings to pay the bills. This has happened at the same time that home values have plunged. Many homeowners now have little or no home equity, and a topsy-turvy stock market has stabilized more than 25 percent below its peak values from 2007. The result is a net loss of about $12 trillion in Americans’ net worth over the past three years, according to the Federal Reserve–about $102,000 per U.S. household. In Canada , in many regions there is high house prices , coupled with a high cost of living , is putting more and more people on the streets in Canada than we have seen since the 1930′s. People are losing hope with our current Provincial and Federal governments ability to handle this crisis.
3. High healthcare costs. The sob stories trotted out by advocates of healthcare
reform ring true. Healthcare costs rose by 155 percent between 1990 and 2008, according to the White House’s middle-class task force, while median household income rose by just 20 percent. That means medical costs take an increasing share of take-home pay for virtually every family. A separate study from 2009 found that 62 percent of all personal bankruptcies stemmed from medical problems that overwhelmed family finances. Even if Washington passes healthcare reform, rising medical costs seem likely to pressure the family budget for years, forcing many to simply spend less on other things. This has also affected Canadians. More and more pressure is being put on ordinary Canadians as we see a stronger push for a two-tier pay as you go (or can afford) health care system. Hence making it less affordable for basic health care.
4. Child-care/elder-care expenses. Many families have maintained their standard of living because both parents work. Between 1990 and 2008, for example, hours worked by both parents in a typical middle-income family increased 5 percent; in a middle-income single-parent family, hours worked spiked by 13.4 percent. That leaves less time for taking care of kids, aging parents, and anything else that needs attention–and the added costs of paying somebody else to do it. Data from the recession may show that child- and elder-care costs have eased as more people find themselves involuntarily stuck at home. And as Americans and Canadians simplify their lives, some moms and dads may decide that it makes sense for one parent to spend more time at home instead of working to pay for a bunch of stuff the family doesn’t really need.
What is really sad is that we see the people that have built our country, paid for a lot of our infrastructure with their tax dollars are now having the squeeze put on them like never before. Just a few years ago if “Jack” or “Jill” had 1 or 1 1/2 years to go before they retired. A lot of companies would try and find a way for them to finish their work career with dignity. Now many companies are targeting these older-workers. Giving them increased work loads. Trying to either make them quit early or perhaps even terminate them so they can get out of paying a pension or reducing their pension contributions. This only increases the Elder-Care expenses.
As far as child-care expenses go. We need to have in Canada an National-Child Care Strategy.
5. College costs. A typical family with two kids should sock away about $4,200 per year to pay for college. That’s a tall order. College costs have risen about 43 percent since 1990, nearly twice the rise in median income. And with federal education funds being axed, public universities are hiking tuition and fees. A budget crisis in California, for instance, has led to a 32 percent increase in tuition at marquee state schools like UCLA and Berkeley, with more increases likely. Private schools, meanwhile, are struggling with steep drops in their endowments thanks to the financial crisis and the housing bust, which trashed mortgage-based investments. The bottom line for many families is that they’ll have to take out bigger college loans, with students working more to pay for their own education. In Canada it is actually worse. There are up to 2-3 year wait lists , just to get the courses you want. This makes your time for graduation and stepping into the workplace in your late 20′s and early 30′s. Parents get ready for your kids not to leave the nest for a long time.
6. Housing costs. The cost of financing and maintaining a home soared by 56 percent between 1990 and 2008, thanks to the housing bubble that’s now deflating. Many families that bought a home near the peak of the market–say, between 2005 and 2007–are stuck with property that’s declining in value and in some cases worth less than the mortgage. That will continue to fuel foreclosures and the stress of making huge housing payments that the family income can barely cover. But the housing bust is helping bring prices back down to manageable levels for many families, one break for those who escape the recession with their household finances more or less intact. In British Columbia , where we have the highest housing costs in Canada. The highest cost of living. Yet we have the lowest corporate taxes in all of Canada and the United States. Yet Christy Clark and the BC Liberals have the 2nd highest unemployment in the country.
It is obvious giving Big Business tax breaks do not equal job creation!
7. False expectations. For the past 40 or 50 years, Americans and Canadians have lived by a series of unofficial tenets: A good education guarantees a good job, hard work will bring prosperity, and 40 years of 40-hour-a-week work earns a comfortable retirement. Then, maybe; now, not so much. Workers who believe that somebody owes them a comfortable life just because they try hard are risking bitter disappointment in a Darwinian economy, where there are likely to be more losers and fewer winners than we’re used to. The winners will be those who learn how to adapt, expect nobody to give them anything, and are prepared to work harder in the future than they did in the past. That’s how it was in the United States and Canada before anybody ever heard of the middle class, and it may be that way for a while again. The real middle class–the true bedrock of the nation–will be able to handle it.
Stats came from the United States and Canadian economic history and development.
Posted on 06 November 2011
Tags: Bad Government, christy clark, Depression, Middle Class Disappearing, Recession
By David Murray. This is an old post I did on my blog almost two years ago. The issue of the middle class seems to be even more in the news with the 99 percent and Take Back Wall Street-Bay Street movement going on in Canada and the United States.
1. Falling income: The pinch that many families feel comes from incomes that have fallen while other unavoidable costs have continued to go up. From 2000 to 2008, median household income after inflation was basically unchanged, the weakest performance since at least the end of World War II. And that was mostly before the recession. Economists estimate that once additional data are tallied, they will show that median real income fell by 5 to 7 percent during the recession. That’s a huge drop that seems unlikely to reverse itself anytime soon, since a weak job market means that even those who have jobs are far less likely to get raises. And many people have absorbed pay cuts or taken new jobs that pay a lot less than they used to earn. In Canada there has not been a real jump in the mean wage in the country since the early 1990′s. Many companies have had roll backs and three years of zero,zero, and zero increases.
Christy Clark and the BC Liberals have the lowest minimum wage in Canada , yet British Columbia has the highest cost of living.
2. Reduced savings net worth: When incomes fall faster than expenses, the first impulse is often to make up the difference by borrowing. But banks and credit-card issuers have clamped down on lending, leaving many Americans and Canadians no choice but to raid their savings to pay the bills. This has happened at the same time that home values have plunged. Many homeowners now have little or no home equity, and a topsy-turvy stock market has stabilized more than 25 percent below its peak values from 2007. The result is a net loss of about $12 trillion in Americans’ net worth over the past three years, according to the Federal Reserve–about $102,000 per U.S. household. In Canada , in many regions there is high house prices , coupled with a high cost of living , is putting more and more people on the streets in Canada than we have seen since the 1930′s. People are losing hope with our current Provincial and Federal governments ability to handle this crisis.
3. High healthcare costs. The sob stories trotted out by advocates of healthcare
reform ring true. Healthcare costs rose by 155 percent between 1990 and 2008, according to the White House’s middle-class task force, while median household income rose by just 20 percent. That means medical costs take an increasing share of take-home pay for virtually every family. A separate study from 2009 found that 62 percent of all personal bankruptcies stemmed from medical problems that overwhelmed family finances. Even if Washington passes healthcare reform, rising medical costs seem likely to pressure the family budget for years, forcing many to simply spend less on other things. This has also affected Canadians. More and more pressure is being put on ordinary Canadians as we see a stronger push for a two-tier pay as you go (or can afford) health care system. Hence making it less affordable for basic health care.
4. Child-care/elder-care expenses. Many families have maintained their standard of living because both parents work. Between 1990 and 2008, for example, hours worked by both parents in a typical middle-income family increased 5 percent; in a middle-income single-parent family, hours worked spiked by 13.4 percent. That leaves less time for taking care of kids, aging parents, and anything else that needs attention–and the added costs of paying somebody else to do it. Data from the recession may show that child- and elder-care costs have eased as more people find themselves involuntarily stuck at home. And as Americans and Canadians simplify their lives, some moms and dads may decide that it makes sense for one parent to spend more time at home instead of working to pay for a bunch of stuff the family doesn’t really need.
What is really sad is that we see the people that have built our country, paid for a lot of our infrastructure with their tax dollars are now having the squeeze put on them like never before. Just a few years ago if “Jack” or “Jill” had 1 or 1 1/2 years to go before they retired. A lot of companies would try and find a way for them to finish their work career with dignity. Now many companies are targeting these older-workers. Giving them increased work loads. Trying to either make them quit early or perhaps even terminate them so they can get out of paying a pension or reducing their pension contributions. This only increases the Elder-Care expenses.
As far as child-care expenses go. We need to have in Canada an National-Child Care Strategy.
5. College costs. A typical family with two kids should sock away about $4,200 per year to pay for college. That’s a tall order. College costs have risen about 43 percent since 1990, nearly twice the rise in median income. And with federal education funds being axed, public universities are hiking tuition and fees. A budget crisis in California, for instance, has led to a 32 percent increase in tuition at marquee state schools like UCLA and Berkeley, with more increases likely. Private schools, meanwhile, are struggling with steep drops in their endowments thanks to the financial crisis and the housing bust, which trashed mortgage-based investments. The bottom line for many families is that they’ll have to take out bigger college loans, with students working more to pay for their own education. In Canada it is actually worse. There are up to 2-3 year wait lists , just to get the courses you want. This makes your time for graduation and stepping into the workplace in your late 20′s and early 30′s. Parents get ready for your kids not to leave the nest for a long time.
6. Housing costs. The cost of financing and maintaining a home soared by 56 percent between 1990 and 2008, thanks to the housing bubble that’s now deflating. Many families that bought a home near the peak of the market–say, between 2005 and 2007–are stuck with property that’s declining in value and in some cases worth less than the mortgage. That will continue to fuel foreclosures and the stress of making huge housing payments that the family income can barely cover. But the housing bust is helping bring prices back down to manageable levels for many families, one break for those who escape the recession with their household finances more or less intact. In British Columbia , where we have the highest housing costs in Canada. The highest cost of living. Yet we have the lowest corporate taxes in all of Canada and the United States. Yet Christy Clark and the BC Liberals have the 2nd highest unemployment in the country.
It is obvious giving Big Business tax breaks do not equal job creation!
7. False expectations. For the past 40 or 50 years, Americans and Canadians have lived by a series of unofficial tenets: A good education guarantees a good job, hard work will bring prosperity, and 40 years of 40-hour-a-week work earns a comfortable retirement. Then, maybe; now, not so much. Workers who believe that somebody owes them a comfortable life just because they try hard are risking bitter disappointment in a Darwinian economy, where there are likely to be more losers and fewer winners than we’re used to. The winners will be those who learn how to adapt, expect nobody to give them anything, and are prepared to work harder in the future than they did in the past. That’s how it was in the United States and Canada before anybody ever heard of the middle class, and it may be that way for a while again. The real middle class–the true bedrock of the nation–will be able to handle it.
Stats came from the United States and Canadian economic history and development.
Issues: Death Of The Middle Class
Issues: Death Of The Middle Class
Posted on 15 November 2011
By David Murray. I ran into Leo Gerard United States Steelworker President last summer at the NDP Federal Convention, I first met Leo in Halifax in 2009 and have been a fan ever since. This is an article he recently posted.
By Leo Gerard.
The deficit commission report issued last week is another Saturday Night Special pressed to the temple of the American middle class.
“Turn over your money and your benefits or your country will die,” the report screams at workers. “You want your country to go bankrupt? No? Then you gotta delay retirement, get less from Social Security, pay more for health insurance and lose your precious few income tax breaks like the one that helps pay your mortgage while the banker is breathing down your neck right now.”
For 30 years, rich conservatives have successfully threatened the American middle class this way, ever since that rich conservative Ronald Reagan converted the White House into a castle.
The result is a country with greater income inequality than during the age of corporate robber barons at the turn of the 20th century. It is a country whose 21st century robber barons, the richest 1 percent of Americans, take nearly a quarter of all income and demand that politicians relieve them of their obligations. The rich — hedge fund owners who rake in billions, Wall Street banksters handed bonuses in the millions, CEOs paid eight-figure golden parachutes after they mess up — insist that politicians place government debt burdens on the middle class, the unemployed, the elderly, the struggling young, people whose income has stagnated for three decades.
The co-chairmen of the deficit commission complied with that mandate from the flush when they recommended the middle class bear the brunt of the cost of reducing the deficit. Simultaneously, conservatives in Congress are acquiescing by insisting on extending tax breaks for the nation’s wealthiest. Those are the very tax breaks that contributed dramatically to creating the debt – the one that the deficit commission now wants heaped on workers’ backs.
This will be the death of the nation’s strength — its successful working class. Without the slightest regret or hesitation, the rich are killing the great American middle, rendering it a casualty of their shirked social responsibilities. Their campaign has been abetted by Republicans since Ronald Reagan. The Gipper contended slashing taxes for the wealthy would increase revenues for the government. Republican George H. W. Bush rightly ridiculed Reaganomics as voodoo.
In the GOP years between the beginning of Reagan in 1981 and the end of Bush II in 2009, the federal deficit exploded as Republican presidents failed to control spending and repeatedly cut taxes for the rich.
Reagan reduced the rate on the richest first down to 50 percent, then to 28 percent. The resulting budget deficit converted the U.S. from the world’s largest international creditor to its largest debtor. And now, the deficit commission sends the bulk of the bill for voodoo economics to the middle class, not the rich.
While Reagan gave the rich those breaks, income inequality increased. The share of total income taken by the richest 5 percent grew from 16.5 percent the year before he took office to 18.3 percent the year before he left. In that same time, the share of total income that went to the poorest 20 percent of households fell from 4.2 to 3.8 percent.
Democrat Bill Clinton fulfilled a campaign promise by increasing taxes on the rich — to a 39.6 percent marginal rate. He balanced the federal budget and left Bush II with a surplus.
Then Bush II squandered it. He gave the rich more tax breaks, accumulated debts larger than all those created by previous presidents combined and worsened income inequality. During his administration, from 2002 to 2007, the pretax income of the richest 1 percent increased 10 percent every year. Over that same period, the median income for working Americans declined and the poverty rate rose.
From Reagan through Bush II, more than four-fifths of the total increase in U.S. income went to the richest 1 percent. Hedge fund owners, whose income is literally in the billions, pay income taxes at 15 percent — lower than the rate paid by their secretaries, who earn far less in a year than any of the top 10 hedgers do in half an hour.
Wall Street recklessness crashed the U.S. economy, throwing millions of middle income earners out of their jobs and their homes. The banksters went to Washington and got politicians to hand them bailout billions, and now those Wall Streeters plan to increase their bonuses — while unemployment remains stuck at 9.6 percent in the Main Street economy.
It is those guys, bankers grabbing year end bonuses totaling two and three times what middle class earners get for a year’s labor; it is the five-home wealthy demanding that the foreclosed-on middle class suffer for the deficit. The rich, who have received the greatest benefits from this society, have no intention of paying their share of this national responsibility.
The deficit, the Social Security shortfall, difficulties with Medicare — they could all be solved if the nation returned to taxing policies that existed under Republican President Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower, when the rate on top earners was 91 percent. That was not even the high point. In the mid-1940s it was 94 percent. Generally it fluctuated between 81 percent in 1940 and 70 percent when Reagan began slashing it in 1981.
Those rates may sound confiscatory now, but it’s not like the rich actually paid them after they subtracted out all of their exemptions, deductions, loopholes, special deals, tricks and wiles.
No, the rich have succeeded in eliminating as a possibility their paying an increased tax share. Now, the only consideration is cutting their taxes. They didn’t hold an actual Saturday night special to anyone’s head. The rich are snake oil salesmen slick, Bernie Madoff-style schemers. They sold voodoo economics to America, and now they’re intent on making the middle class pay for what that policy has wrought in deficits.
Reagan’s re-election ad was wrong. He didn’t institute “Morning in America.” It was mourning for the once great American middle class.
Leo Gerard’s You Tube video:
Leo Gerard USW President
By Leo Gerard.
The deficit commission report issued last week is another Saturday Night Special pressed to the temple of the American middle class.
“Turn over your money and your benefits or your country will die,” the report screams at workers. “You want your country to go bankrupt? No? Then you gotta delay retirement, get less from Social Security, pay more for health insurance and lose your precious few income tax breaks like the one that helps pay your mortgage while the banker is breathing down your neck right now.”
For 30 years, rich conservatives have successfully threatened the American middle class this way, ever since that rich conservative Ronald Reagan converted the White House into a castle.
The result is a country with greater income inequality than during the age of corporate robber barons at the turn of the 20th century. It is a country whose 21st century robber barons, the richest 1 percent of Americans, take nearly a quarter of all income and demand that politicians relieve them of their obligations. The rich — hedge fund owners who rake in billions, Wall Street banksters handed bonuses in the millions, CEOs paid eight-figure golden parachutes after they mess up — insist that politicians place government debt burdens on the middle class, the unemployed, the elderly, the struggling young, people whose income has stagnated for three decades.
The co-chairmen of the deficit commission complied with that mandate from the flush when they recommended the middle class bear the brunt of the cost of reducing the deficit. Simultaneously, conservatives in Congress are acquiescing by insisting on extending tax breaks for the nation’s wealthiest. Those are the very tax breaks that contributed dramatically to creating the debt – the one that the deficit commission now wants heaped on workers’ backs.
This will be the death of the nation’s strength — its successful working class. Without the slightest regret or hesitation, the rich are killing the great American middle, rendering it a casualty of their shirked social responsibilities. Their campaign has been abetted by Republicans since Ronald Reagan. The Gipper contended slashing taxes for the wealthy would increase revenues for the government. Republican George H. W. Bush rightly ridiculed Reaganomics as voodoo.
In the GOP years between the beginning of Reagan in 1981 and the end of Bush II in 2009, the federal deficit exploded as Republican presidents failed to control spending and repeatedly cut taxes for the rich.
Reagan reduced the rate on the richest first down to 50 percent, then to 28 percent. The resulting budget deficit converted the U.S. from the world’s largest international creditor to its largest debtor. And now, the deficit commission sends the bulk of the bill for voodoo economics to the middle class, not the rich.
While Reagan gave the rich those breaks, income inequality increased. The share of total income taken by the richest 5 percent grew from 16.5 percent the year before he took office to 18.3 percent the year before he left. In that same time, the share of total income that went to the poorest 20 percent of households fell from 4.2 to 3.8 percent.
Democrat Bill Clinton fulfilled a campaign promise by increasing taxes on the rich — to a 39.6 percent marginal rate. He balanced the federal budget and left Bush II with a surplus.
Then Bush II squandered it. He gave the rich more tax breaks, accumulated debts larger than all those created by previous presidents combined and worsened income inequality. During his administration, from 2002 to 2007, the pretax income of the richest 1 percent increased 10 percent every year. Over that same period, the median income for working Americans declined and the poverty rate rose.
From Reagan through Bush II, more than four-fifths of the total increase in U.S. income went to the richest 1 percent. Hedge fund owners, whose income is literally in the billions, pay income taxes at 15 percent — lower than the rate paid by their secretaries, who earn far less in a year than any of the top 10 hedgers do in half an hour.
Wall Street recklessness crashed the U.S. economy, throwing millions of middle income earners out of their jobs and their homes. The banksters went to Washington and got politicians to hand them bailout billions, and now those Wall Streeters plan to increase their bonuses — while unemployment remains stuck at 9.6 percent in the Main Street economy.
It is those guys, bankers grabbing year end bonuses totaling two and three times what middle class earners get for a year’s labor; it is the five-home wealthy demanding that the foreclosed-on middle class suffer for the deficit. The rich, who have received the greatest benefits from this society, have no intention of paying their share of this national responsibility.
The deficit, the Social Security shortfall, difficulties with Medicare — they could all be solved if the nation returned to taxing policies that existed under Republican President Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower, when the rate on top earners was 91 percent. That was not even the high point. In the mid-1940s it was 94 percent. Generally it fluctuated between 81 percent in 1940 and 70 percent when Reagan began slashing it in 1981.
Those rates may sound confiscatory now, but it’s not like the rich actually paid them after they subtracted out all of their exemptions, deductions, loopholes, special deals, tricks and wiles.
The dozen years in the 1950s and 1960s when the rate on the richest officially was 91 percent is a time considered by many Americans to be among the nation’s greatest for the middle class, a period when American workers could afford to buy homes, send their kids to college and travel across American on vacation.There’s no talk of that now. Raising taxes on the rich now is considered ludicrous. Ridiculous. The whole Social Security shortfall could be solved if the rich paid taxes on their entire incomes, not just the first $110,000, a break that means the wealthy pay a smaller percentage if their income toward Social Security than the impoverished. But the deficit commission didn’t propose that.
No, the rich have succeeded in eliminating as a possibility their paying an increased tax share. Now, the only consideration is cutting their taxes. They didn’t hold an actual Saturday night special to anyone’s head. The rich are snake oil salesmen slick, Bernie Madoff-style schemers. They sold voodoo economics to America, and now they’re intent on making the middle class pay for what that policy has wrought in deficits.
Reagan’s re-election ad was wrong. He didn’t institute “Morning in America.” It was mourning for the once great American middle class.
Leo Gerard’s You Tube video:
LUNAR NEW YEAR GREETINGS FROM NEW DEMOCRAT LEADER ADRIAN DIX
LUNAR NEW YEAR GREETINGS FROM NEW DEMOCRAT LEADER ADRIAN DIX
January 23rd, 2012
VANCOUVER – New Democrat Leader Adrian Dix issued the following statement celebrating the start of the Year of the Dragon.
“On behalf of the New Democrat Caucus, I want to wish British Columbians Kung Hei Fat Choi as we enter the Year of the Dragon.
“Based on the attributes associated with the dragon - energy and positive change - the next twelve months promises to be a dynamic time.
“On behalf of the New Democrat Caucus, I want to wish British Columbians Kung Hei Fat Choi as we enter the Year of the Dragon.
“Based on the attributes associated with the dragon - energy and positive change - the next twelve months promises to be a dynamic time. “Lunar New Year is now one of B.C.’s most celebrated occasions, a testament to how we are a richer province thanks to the contributions of Chinese- Canadians, and other Asian-Canadian communities.
“The caucus looks forward to partaking in the many festivities associated with the transition from winter to spring this week. On a personal note, this Lunar New Year carries an additional significance for me, as I was born in the Year of the Dragon. “
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)