Showing posts with label socialism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label socialism. Show all posts

Monday, January 13, 2020

What Is American Socialism?

Financial FAQs


What is American Socialism that candidate Bernie Sanders has talked about ever since he has been running for President? In fact, our one and only example of something that represents any definition of Socialism and concerted government planning benefiting all Americans was President Roosevelt’s New Deal.

But there has never been any actual American government ownership of businesses and its profits that is Socialism spelled with a capital ‘S’. Rather, tax revenues of private businesses and individual incomes have always financed government programs and investments.

New Deal-type programs were needed because we were living through the Great Depression with 25 percent of Americans unemployed that required government planning and investments to bring the U.S. economy back to life; and which also enabled the U.S. to win World War II.

There has never been American Socialism or socialist programs as defined by Marx-Engels’ classical definition that communist countries have espoused; that have only worked for a time in dictatorships by a wealthy elite such as rule China, North Korea and Russia.

Why did the New Deal work so well? By directing public investment in both infrastructure and the American people while building up an industrial base that could quickly convert to a war footing by converting automobile and aircraft factories to tank and military aircraft factories in 1941.

The investment in people was firstly creating social security, labor union legislation, Workman’s Compensation and other labor protections to support American workers, while paying Americans to keep working in such as planting trees, building dams, power grids, post offices, and all the public infrastructure we needed to boost the productivity of our economy.

The Roosevelt administration even created the Home Owners Loan Corporation (HOLC) to purchase and refinance more than one million delinquent home mortgages to keep homeowners who had lost jobs in their homes until the Depression was over.

Have we seen any such programs created today that helped US out of the Great Recession and the busted housing bubble? There were one-time spending boosts to public spending and the TARP bank bailout in 2007-08, but no new HOLC program to purchase and refinance delinquent loans and keep homeowners in their homes, which would have mitigated effects of the Great Recession and the tremendous losses for homeowners.

Yet even today, die-hard Republicans (and President Trump) call Bernie’s socialism no different than China’s or North Korea’s, or even Russia’s; where Russia is ‘owned’ by a very wealthy elite controlled by Putin and his oligarchs.

The New Deal was working so well by 1937 that Republicans gained a majority in congress, and convinced Roosevelt to begin to pay back the public debt that had boosted growth. But he had to reverse course in 1938 when the U.S. plunged back into the depression that lasted a total of 10 years, hence came to be called the Great Depression for its repeat performance.

The only reason the Great Recession didn’t become another Great Depression was a proactive Federal Reserve that printed $billions to create more liquidity when it realized government aid and action was necessary to fill the gap vacated by private business.

Why is a new New Deal necessary today? We are ignoring very real crises that could precipitate another Great Depression—maybe not this year or next. One such is looming Climate Change, or Global Warming, that could even create another World War says the U.S. Pentagon in several congressionally-mandated reports, as increasing droughts and rising oceans begin to drown coastal cities and even countries.

Professor James Livingston, a Rutgers University historian, has highlighted the excesses in capitalism responsible for the many post- World War II recessions we have endured (five just since 1980) in a NYTimes Op-ed.

It’s the decline of private sector investment over the past century in anything that continues to grow the American economy for all Americans. Corporations instead began to pay themselves a larger share of their profits in stock buybacks and higher CEO and executive salaries.
“So corporate profits do not drive economic growth — they’re just restless sums of surplus capital, ready to flood speculative markets at home and abroad. In the 1920s, they inflated the stock market bubble, and then caused the Great Crash. Since the Reagan revolution, these superfluous profits have fed corporate mergers and takeovers, driven the dot-com craze, financed the “shadow banking” system of hedge funds and securitized investment vehicles, fueled monetary meltdowns in every hemisphere and inflated the housing bubble.”
In the words of columnists Nicholas Kristoff and wife Sheryl Wudunn via a NYTimes’ Op-ed describing their new book, Tightrope, a chilling portrait of the decline of Kristoff’s tiny rural Oregon home town since the Great Recession, “First, well-paying jobs disappeared, partly because of technology and globalization but also because of political pressure on unions and a general redistribution of power toward the wealthy and corporations.”

Bernie Sanders doesn’t have to call his election platform Socialism, since the New Deal was not really a lesson in socialism, but how governments should work for all Americans in a capitalist, private-ownership economy.

Harlan Green © 2019

Follow Harlan Green on Twitter: https://twitter.com/HarlanGreen

Monday, January 28, 2019

What is a Living Wage?

Answering the Kennedys Call

The Washington Post published a recent interview with new Democratic House Member Alexandria Octavia-Cortez in which she said, “I think it’s wrong that a vast majority of the country doesn’t make a living wage, I think it’s wrong that you can work 100 hours and not feed your kids. I think it’s wrong that corporations like Walmart and Amazon can get paid by the government, essentially experience a wealth transfer from the public, for paying people less than a minimum wage.”

Is it true that most Americans don’t make a living wage? Actually, that is not the right question we should be asking, which has been the subject of endless debate, anyway. What constitutes a living wage has to be different for each individual. Wouldn’t someone born and raised amid extreme wealth, say, have what they consider a far different living wage than a religious ascetic?

That’s an extreme example, but why not concentrate on what I believe Congresswoman Cortez is really talking about—fair play for the majority of Americans? There are maybe 25 percent who live at or below the poverty line that must work more than 40 hours per week to even make ends meet, depriving them of family, or enough leisure time to enjoy themselves. Europeans seem to have conquered the problem in countries like Denmark and the Netherlands, where the average workweek is 34-36 hours, with four weeks' paid vacation and universal health care for their citizens.

Meanwhile, American conservatives have worked to lower taxes on the wealthiest, while enhancing the monopoly powers of corporations since at least 1980. It has resulted in the greatest income inequality in the U.S. since 1928, the wealthiest country in the world, as illustrated by this well-known Piketty-Saez graph.


The result has not been good for a participatory democracy. The American electorate has become polarized, which has brought out the worst in human nature—including anti-immigrant racism, white nationalism, and the tearing down of government regulations that safeguard health and the environment. The consequence is a much reduced middle class that once maintained civility in political discourse.

Even conservative Barron’s Magazine editor Randall Forsythe mentions a 2017 Federal Reserve Consumer Finance study that showed the huge wealth disparities during the recent federal government shutdown—four in 10 Americans would have difficulty in meeting a $400 emergency expense—while the top 1 percent of income earners now own 50 percent of stock holdings.

PEW Research in a 2018 report, reports that year-over-year average hourly earnings have been rising at 2 to 3 percent. “After adjusting for inflation, however, today’s average hourly wage has just about the same purchasing power it did in 1978, following a long slide in the 1980s and early 1990s and bumpy, inconsistent growth since then. In fact, in real terms average hourly earnings peaked more than 45 years ago: The $4.03-an-hour rate recorded in January 1973 had the same purchasing power that $23.68 would today.”
We are seeing the results of the singular focus on private profits rather than public welfare spending that should include adequate healthcare, improved infrastructure, and educational facilities that would elevate America back into the pantheon of western countries, instead of becoming an outlier that is withdrawing from the developed world.

Maybe we are also seeing how the word socialism is beginning to scare the wealthy to return some of their newly-begotten wealth to bring back a democracy that benefits the majority of Americans.

Harlan Green © 2019

Follow Harlan Green on Twitter: https://twitter.com/HarlanGreen