Nothing is more important than winning in November. And as we sit here (biting our nails), it feels like we will finally get the win we should have had back in 2000 and again in 2004. (I just got Fahrenheit 9/11 to see all over again. Highly recommended.)
And? Then what? We are Californians. We LEAD America in so many ways. Yet our (Republican) Governor is perfectly willing to close 50 Public Parks!!!
Huh? We grew up in California, before heading off to New York after college. We left a state blessed with Public Amenties. Now the Governator wants to shut all those parks???
What's different NOW from THEN? California has grown exponentially; Industry here, especially High Tech, has led the World. Billionaires pop up overnight. Where does all the money GO?
Now we're SHUTTING Public Parks??? (Plus slashing school budgets and library hours, etc., etc.)
Dennis Rockstroh (who prints lots of good information for Mercury New readers) has a letter saying that a cure for deficits is… more volunteer work. Sounds good, right? But wait: Foothill College has a class in Second Careers. Why? "70% of Americans over 50 intend to go right on working."
Intend? Nah...how about HAVE TO go on working...just to pay the bills.
So? Connect the dots, Puppies!
Where is the TIME left for Volunteer Work?
And: "We don't need new raises for city employees." Really? It's estimated that any family with income below $70,000 spends every penny they bring home just to meet expenses. But then we have a vicious circle - as we keep paying more, we impose higher taxes on ourselves! Where does it END?
It's all very complicated and confusing. But, we need to get focused on the major problems we face. David Cay Johnston splits America in two 2 parts: The Affluent and… "the Other 90%!"
What do YOU think is Important? I'd love to hear. And I'll report on the results.
I am serious. Which bank is SAFE... for your money? I ask because Citibank (America's largest bank, thank you)...is flirting with disaster. They are SO DEEP in the red...who knows where the bottom is?
What was that little blip on the screen about a week ago - that Citi was limiting cash a depositor could take from an ATM? (Some ATMS have been raided in New York.)
What if Citi knows lots more bad news is coming - today we are hearing DOUBLE the Billions
in write-offs - and layoffs of 20,000 people. What will we hear TOMORROW?
What if Citi can't pay out actual cash, if several million depositors get nervous? Forget FDIC...any department mismanaged by George W. Bush (FEMA, anyone?) is most likely to prove just as inept as they have with every OTHER catastrophe.
OK...so do you run to Bank of America? Wells Fargo? How do we know THEY will be in any better condition? I mean...how do we really KNOW?
Herbert Hoover sat there and twiddled his thumbs as America sank into the Depression. It took FDR to jolt the country out of its stupor.
Where is the mainstream media on this story? (Have you read this ANYWHERE, yet?) Hopefully, it's just another hiccup on the way to a Recession.
But if this turns sour, look out America.
Now: Read Paul Krugman in The New York Times today. He's telling you something important. And he summarizes the economic proposals of all the major contenders for President.
(From Congressman Honda)
The unemployment rate hit 5% last month, according to the U.S. Department of Labor. President Bush’s confidence in the economy does not reflect what local residents have been telling me, and the increasing level of unemployment, along with other economic measures, reflects the difficult economic conditions that Americans are experiencing.
When the President trumpeted 52 straight months of job growth, he ignored the constantly rising price of gasoline and home heating, falling home values and increased foreclosures, unchecked health care costs, and declining real income. And he also neglected to mention that the increase in the number of jobs is smaller than the growth in population.
The Democratic majority in Congress is committed to turning America in a new direction to reverse these failed policies by addressing these concerns directly.
Democrats:
-Passed landmark energy security legislation that will reduce our dependence on foreign oil, alleviate energy costs which have surpassed $100 per barrel of oil, and decrease the threat to global warming;
- Provided Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) relief for over 19 million unintended middle-income families;
- Passed legislation to address the mortgage crisis that will impact some 2 million Americans in the next 2 years;
- Increased the federal minimum wage for the first time since 1997. The previous minimum wage was not even adequate for a family of three to reach the federal poverty line;
- Enacted legislation to make college more affordable by expanding financial aid; and
- Promoted American jobs and competitiveness in the global economy with the Democrats Innovation Agenda.
The President continues to propose his same fiscally irresponsible economic policies, including calling for the permanent extension of his tax breaks for the wealthiest American taxpayers that have burdened America’s economy with record deficits.
Our nation cannot afford to rely on the President’s blind confidence in the economy. Democrats in Congress will continue to point America in a new direction and work to fix the state of our economy and to help alleviate the burden on the middle class.
(Cross posted at SCCDems.ning.com)
After almost 8 years of GOP policies it is clear that most Americans are worse off today then they were just a few years ago. Today the San Jose Mercury had a front page story on the cost of living in our area:
A new study on the cost of living in the Bay Area and the rest of California says that a family of four in Santa Clara County and the other nine greater Bay Area counties now needs an annual income of $77,069 - nearly quadruple the federal poverty threshold of $20,444 for a family that size - to afford housing and other basic needs.
A single-parent family needs to earn $65,864 to afford housing and utilities, food, child care, health care and transportation, according to the California Budget Project report, "Making Ends Meet: How Much Does it Cost to Raise a Family in California?" About 40 percent of the families in Santa Clara County earned $75,000 or less in 2006, while 31 percent earned $60,000 or less, according to the U.S. Census Bureau.
MSNBC has been running a series of stories on the hardships most middle class Americans are facing:
Even though household incomes have risen about 75 percent from 1970, most of that is the result of a second earner — generally a woman — joining the work force. And that added income has been swallowed by rising fixed expenses, such as child care and housing costs, Warren argues. The average family pays at least twice as much for housing compared to its counterpart in the 1970s, Warren says, and in some competitive areas with good schools, housing costs have risen by as much as 600 percent.Without savings, at risk of job loss
Now consider these factors: Four in 10 Americans don't have even one month's worth of savings for use in case of an emergency, according to a survey by HSBC Bank published in 2006. And with two incomes built into the family budget, the odds of a household getting hit by a layoff have doubled in the last generation. This combination — high housing debt, rising health care costs, lack of savings and greater exposure to unemployment — leaves many families in a precarious financial position.
More.....
How have you done these last eight years? Have your wages kept up with the overall cost of living? Have you decided that you have to cut back on expenses so that you can meet your household budget?
Republican policies have done nothing to help the middle class, in fact these policies have helped to create income inequity not seen since the great depression:
The richest Americans' share of national income has hit a postwar record, surpassing the highs reached in the 1990s bull market, and underlining the divergence of economic fortunes blamed for fueling anxiety among American workers.The wealthiest 1% of Americans earned 21.2% of all income in 2005, according to new data from the Internal Revenue Service. That is up sharply from 19% in 2004, and surpasses the previous high of 20.8% set in 2000, at the peak of the previous bull market in stocks.
The bottom 50% earned 12.8% of all income, down from 13.4% in 2004 and a bit less than their 13% share in 2000.
The IRS data, based on a large sample of tax returns, are for "adjusted gross income," which is income after some deductions, such as for alimony and contributions to individual retirement accounts. While dated, many scholars prefer it to timelier data from other agencies because it provides details of the very richest -- for example, the top 0.1% and the top 1%, not just the top 10% -- and includes capital gains, an important, though volatile, source of income for the affluent.
The IRS data go back only to 1986, but academic research suggests the rich last had this high a share of total income in the 1920s.
Did you notice something about the above information? Look carefully and you will see that the link takes you to the WSJ, not routinely known as a "liberal" newspaper. When the WSJ starts to take note of how the "middle" is quickly evaporating there can be little doubt about the economic reality for most Americans.
It is our job to help elect a Democrat to the White House in 2008, because it is clear that our nation can't survive much longer under GOP policies.