Swiss Equity

How I wish the United States had a similar measure:

• Switzerland Clamps Down Hard on Executive Pay

From Think Progress: Voters in Switzerland overwhelmingly approved new measures to clamp down on executive pay. Under the approved referendum — which means that the new provisions will be added to the Swiss constitution — shareholders will have the ability to veto executive pay packages, so-called "golden parachutes" will be outlawed, and executives who defy the rules could see jail time.

In a semi-related story, the New York Times reports that Corporate Profits Have Risen Almost 20 Times Faster Than Workers' Incomes Since 2008.

Faux Chicanery & Denial

According to Think Progress:

The Bureau of Labor Statistics released an unexpectedly strong monthly jobs report on Friday, finding a dramatic drop in unemployment to 7.8 percent and revised the number of jobs added in July and August up from initial estimates. While for most Americans, the growing economy is good news, conservatives immediately expressed their skepticism in the jobs report’s credibility.

Naturally, the right-wing believes the numbers are all part of a nefarious scheme perpetuated by President Obama:

Meet The Conservatives Who Think Today's Job Numbers Are a Conspiracy

First they felt polls showing President Obama in the lead were fixed, and now new job numbers are nothing more than liberal chicanery.

More reaction from the right:

• Romney lashes out against good economic news
• Conservatives: jobs data phony
• Mailer Misleads Ohioans on Job Losses

What must it be like to live on Planet Denial?

Dead Zone

I can't remember a time in my collective memory when Washington has been so utterly useless.

• Aseconomy falters, Washington fails to act

It drives one point home: elected officials have no interest in their constituents other than garnering their votes. Once safely in office, they cite the atmosphere in Washington as the reason progress is not being made on a variety of issues. Republicans blame Democrats, and Democrats blame Republicans.

However, one fact cannot be disproven: Washington has never been as ineffectual as they are now, ever since the right-wing took over the house.

God forbid we elect another one of them to take over the biggest job in the land.

Credit History & Employment

One of many sore points in today's economy is an employer's ability to check the credit history of job applicants. This is an outrageous invasion of privacy and should not be allowed. It stands to reason an applicant's credit history might be spotty if he/she has been out of work for a period of time or experiences a financially catastrophic medical procedure.

Individual credit histories should not be made available to employers who might use the information as a hiring qualifier. To state the obvious, job skills and credit histories have nothing to do with one another.

In addition, just as employees are often required to give a two-week notice before quitting a job, it should be mandatory for employers to give the same notice prior to layoffs or closings.

Cut Congress Benefits (CCB), Part One

Job security is a constant source of worry and stress for most Americans. Unlike members of Congress, we don't have assured benefits at the end of our working lives. Some of us have to make choices between paying rent, buying food or obtaining medicine, much less deciding what to do with a pension.

The perks enjoyed by members of Congress appear to rival those of a financially thriving corporation. While the base salary of a junior member of Congress is $174,000, they also have access to an "allowance" that helps fund their office staff. For instance, House members are allotted more than $900,000 to pay the salaries of up to eighteen employees. On top of that, they receive $250,000 for travel expenses and mass constituent mailings (also known as "franking"), the cost for which is borne by the taxpayer. Worse yet, Senators receive $3.3 million for office expenses. Some senators also receive $500,000 to hire up to three legislative assistants.

According to a report from the Taxpayers Protection Alliance (TPA) and Our Generation (OG) advocacy groups, "Federal legislators earn 3.4 times more than the average full-time American worker and are among the highest paid legislators in the industrialized world."

Furthermore, the report states: "Congressional salaries and benefits are compared with what private sector workers receive, and with those of foreign legislators. Members of Congress receive an annual salary of $174,000 - which alone puts them in the highest-paid 5 percent of U.S. workers. They also, however, receive a host of additional benefits that put their total annual compensation at around $285,000. By comparison, the average full-time American employee earns just $50,875 annually."

David Williams, president of TPA, says: "Congress has run up a $14.3 trillion debt and a $1.5 trillion deficit, yet they are still among the best compensated employees in America. It is time to hold our representatives in Washington responsible for their job performance. With the high salaries Congress is collecting, we don't think it's too much to ask that they do their jobs and get our economic house in order."

The TPA also points out that that if congressional salaries were cut to $100,000 taxpayers could save $39 million each year.

Current annual salaries for top positions in the House and Senate:

• Speaker of the House ($223,500)
• House Majority Leader ($193,400)
• House Minority Leader ($193,400)
• Senate Majority Party Leader ($193,400)
• Senate Minority Party Leader ($193,400)

Many of us would be more than grateful for just a fraction of such salaries, willing to work our fingers to the bone to earn the money. That's more than can be said of our legislators at the moment.

Members of Congress also enjoy an annual cost-of-living-adjustment (COLA), unless Congress votes against it. Why not leave constituents to vote on whether members of Congress receive annual COLA’s instead? Because congressmen and senators know they would never be granted raises if they let us decide the issue.

If members of Congress faced the same level of financial and healthcare insecurity the average American deals with every day, perhaps their voting consciences will take a direction for the better. Most important of all, perhaps the sense of urgency and panic many of us feel will be experienced by those in power and will propel them to set aside the poison and acrimony now polluting Washington D.C. and get down to business.

Pay cuts for members of Congress should be implemented, above and beyond any wage freezes currently in place. Since the rest of us have to live within our means, right in line with the virtually non-moving Cost of Living index, so should members of Congress. If they cannot live on their wages, so be it.

Onwards & Outwards

As mentioned in my blog post Media Skim, I was rather puzzled by the lack of coverage on the Occupy Wall Street movement. However, it's hard to ignore when people are assembling in every major city to make their displeasure known, including the bloody place where I live at the moment.

Local news channels in my current place of residence are not known for their impartiality. In other words, it's fairly obvious to which political side they lean on any given day. It's one of the reasons I tend to look to the web or cable news, in particular MSNBC, to get a reality check and to shed the feeling that I live in a veritable Twilight Zone.

I was surprised when people gathered at the capitol nearby to carry on their own Occupy Wall Street demonstration, and even more stunned when local news channels reported the event. It was peacefully organized and well-attended, but resident senator Orrin Hatch naturally cast his own brand of alarmism into the mix:

"We are going to have riots in this country because of what these people are doing."

"These people" are tired of carrying the burden for everyone in America, which is something right-wing extremists like Hatch will never understand. I'm sure he would be perfectly happy if we all just sat back and swallowed the financial inequities that have nearly crippled our country.

On an unrelated note, I'm doing my damndest to get out of the place where I currently reside. I realize the political and economic climates are the same everywhere in the United States at the moment, but to get away from a community that tries to control what we view on television or attempts to foist their religious views non-conformists is a good start.

Media Skim

I fully support the views of the Occupy Wall Street movement. I knew sooner or later people would grow tired of class and financial inequity; the constant burden placed on them even as they lose their jobs, benefits and homes with no signs of relief in sight.

However, I'm not sure what to make of the disparity in media coverage. I didn't realize the demonstrations had spread to other US cities until a headline at the UK’s Daily Mail caught my eye: Occupy Wall Street protests spread across U.S. to Boston, Los Angeles and Chicago as cities brace for more demonstrations.

One glance at my usual news source, MSNBC, displays not one mention of the incidents as of this morning. Why is that? It's certainly not typical for people to take to the streets in America. When they finally do take action, it's NEWS. I've heard brief mention of the demonstrations, but nothing as intense as the boringly ridiculous coverage of celebrity weddings and split-ups. If I'm gleaning reports from the wrong source, where do I go to find decent coverage – other than a British online newspaper?

Think Progress and Wonkette have been tracking the various protests (re: A Complete List of National Politicians Who Have Embraced the Occupy Wall Street Protests), but I'm flummoxed as to why major media outlets skim over the topic.

Is every money-making machine in the hip pocket of Wall Street these days?

In my opinion, the protests are long overdue. Hard-working people are weary of footing the bill as the wealthy virtually get away scot-free.

GOP Tripe

Who on earth do they think they're fooling?

> GOP Budget Plan

I listened to MSNBC while Republicans rattled off their plan, irritated by their misguided implications that President Obama is at fault for our current financial woes. Where were these people when Bush was spending like a drunken sailor? Why didn't they publicly gripe when Wall Street fell in 2008, yet again with Bush at the helm?

The right-wing has no real concern for the common people. Don’t be fooled by their patronizing rhetoric. If they truly wanted to help the American people they’d make a sincere effort to take away tax cuts for the rich, just for starters. As history has shown, doing so swings the deficit the other way and creates jobs.

God forbid!

Credit Foul

This is an issue that defies belief:

• Bad credit sidelines some jobless workers

How on earth can one protect their credit rating when they can't find work to pay the bills? Is having an avalanche of unpaid medical bills because of lack of insurance and employment an indicator of job skills or work ethics?

And whose bright idea was it to include credit rating as hiring criteria? It has nothing to do with job performance, and frankly is not the business in any way, shape or form of one's employer.

Money Pit

Here we go:

• Citigroup to repay $20 billion in bailout funds

I'm of the opinion that institutions suddenly paying back Uncle Sam think such actions will justify their multi-million-dollar executive bonuses.

In other words, now that they've repaid their federal debt they can begin the process anew that helped get us into an economic mess in the first place.

In the Money

As the economy slowly becomes more solvent, Republicans still can't resist lambasting the President on the merits of his Stimulus Package. They attacked it six months ago, and they are still bemoaning its existence despite their lack of action or direction in providing solutions of their own.

Considering that only about 25% of the stimulus package money has been spent, how can anyone determine the full affects of economic recovery at this point? The right-wing prefers to fan the flames of impatience by suggesting the plan is not working because its impact was not instantaneous.

Why not shed light on the Republican governors who refused stimulus money to extend unemployment benefits? And why weren't the right-wingers on top of the situation when Bush initially drove the economy down the drain with his governing practices, or when he injected the first stimulus package into the economy?

The following New York Times article written by Vice President Joe Biden perhaps explains it best:

• What You Might Not Know About the Recovery

Such as:

[And] those hardest hit by the recession are getting extended unemployment insurance, health coverage and other help to get through these tough times. The bottom line is that two-thirds of the Recovery Act doesn't finance "programs," but goes directly to tax cuts, state governments and families in need, without red tape or delays.

In another NYT article (President Urges Public Patience on Economy), White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel said: "I think the public knows three things: We inherited a total mess; we're working hard on it; and we're not going to get out of it overnight. Here's the deal: The key to what this year is about is rescuing the economy from falling off the cliff and trying to put in place the building blocks of recovery."

I feel most informed Americans understand the gradual process of economic recovery, especially the time it will take to chip away at the mountain of debt initiated by former president Bush.

More Ill Affects

Speaking of ill effects…

• Rove: Bush Administration Has No Responsibility For Current Budget Deficits

As most of us with a brain know, President Clinton left a budget surplus for Bush. So what happened in the ensuing eight years?

• Bush presided over the largest debt increase of any U.S. president in history

Where on earth do these right-wing yahoos get their facts? It's as if they are in denial that Bush was perhaps the worst president in American history.

In addition, their continued hate, fear mongering and non-action barely conceal a deep-seated bigotry that extends to their overall views about American citizens and President Obama.

The time for coddling the right-wing is over, political correctness be damned. Conservatives are in the minority, so let’s just shove them aside and get down to work.

Ill Affects

Here's what most Republicans don't want people to understand:

• Business cycle, Bush policies linked to most of federal government's deficits

The GOP wants people to believe that the majority of the massive deficit is President Obama's doing. Not even close.

President Obama's agenda, ambitious as it may be, is responsible for only a sliver of the deficits, despite what many of his Republican critics are saying.

Judd Gregg recently held up a chart on the Senate floor showing that Mr. Obama would increase the deficit — but failed to mention that much of the increase stemmed from extending Bush policies. In fact, unlike Mr. Obama,
Republicans favor extending all the Bush tax cuts, which will send the deficit higher.

The United States will probably feel the ill affects of the Bush presidency for many generations to come.