Monday, September 5, 2011

The Fallacy of Post-Industrial Prosperity & RISE OF LA RAZA SUPREMACY

The fallacy of post-industrial prosperity AND THE RISE OF LA RAZA SUPREMACY “For the Race everything! For others nothing!” LA RAZA SLOGAN


WELL, MAYBE… BUT THE INVASION OF 40 MILLION OF MEXICO’S POOR, ILLITERATE, CRIMINAL, RACIST AND PREGNANT HAS DONE MORE TO KEEP WAGES DEPRESSED THAN ANYTHING MEYERSON ARTICULATES!
SINCE REAGAN’S AMNESTY TO END AMNESTIES OF 1986, THERE HAVE BEEN ABOUT 1.5 MILLION ILLEGALS HOP OUR BORDERS, JOBS AND WELFARE, AND 1.5 MILLION AMERICANS EACH YEAR FALL INTO POVERTY. HOW HARD IS THAT TO DO THE MATH?
NO SECTOR HAS BEEN HURT MORE BY MEXICO’S EXPORTATION OF “CHEAP” LABOR THAN BLACK AMERICA!
*
White working-class men in particular have become a disproportionately receptive audience for those who scapegoat immigrants and minorities for the damage that has actually been caused by economic and political elites blissfully blind to the devastation ushered in by their vaunted new economy.


*

BOOK - MEXIFORNIA: The Shattering of the American Dream

http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2011/05/book-mexifornia-shattering-of-american.html
*
CALIFORNIA – A STATE FILLED WITH ILLEGALS AND CORRUPT SELF-SERVING POLITICIANS SERVING THEIR CORPORATE RAPIST PAYMASTERS.

“So what about California? The economic well-being of many metropolitan areas in the Golden State has been sinking precipitously since 2006. This year, three California regions--Oakland, Sacramento and San Bernardino-Riverside--have sunk down into the bottom 10 on the large cities list. That's a phenomenon we've never seen before--and never expected to see.” FORBES

http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2011/05/forbes-california-10-of-worst-cities.html

*

The fallacy of post-industrial prosperity
By Harold Meyerson, Published: September 4
Of all the lies that the American people have been told the past four decades, the biggest one may be this: We’ll all come out ahead in the shift from an industrial to a post-industrial society. Yes, we were counseled, there will be major dislocations, as there were during the transition from an agrarian to an industrial economy, but the America that will emerge from this transformation, like the America that emerged 100 years ago, will be one whose citizens are ultimately more prosperous and secure than their industrial-era forebears.
What a crock.
On Labor Day 2011, the America that’s replaced the vibrant industrial giant of the mid-20th century is a basket case. We’ve lost the jobs that created the broadly shared prosperity that made us the envy of the world. In their place, when we’ve created jobs at all, they’ve generated neither prosperity nor security.
The most prescient writer on post-industrial America offered a sobering perspective. In his 1972 book “The Coming of Post-Industrial Society,” sociologist Daniel Bell predicted a future of service jobs, rising consumption, compensatory entitlements and wars over taxes.
Even as Bell’s prophecies began to be borne out, though, the champions of the new economic order — from General Electric’s Jack Welch to every New Democrat and any old Republican — assured us that America would flourish as a post-industrial innovator in the new global economy, crafting the cutting-edge technologies whose actual assembly we could relegate to less-skilled workforces on distant shores. Thirty years ago, when defenders of American manufacturing first suggested that the nation commit to a “domestic content” standard in the goods we bought, they were howled down by nearly every economist and editorial writer in the land. (A friend counted 98 newspapers that editorialized against it, and none that wrote in favor.)
Today, the economy that arose on manufacturing’s ashes has turned to ashes itself. The Wall Street-Wal-Mart economy of the past several decades off-shored millions of factory jobs, which it offset by creating low-paying jobs in the service and retail sectors; extending credit to consumers so they could keep consuming despite their stagnating incomes; and fueling, until it collapsed, a boom in construction.
We are only now beginning to understand the toll this economy has taken on America’s workers — and on our working men in particular. A stunning study from Michael Greenstone and Adam Looney of the Hamilton Project, published in the Milken Institute Review, reveals that the median earnings of men ages 25 to 64 declined 28 percent between 1969 and 2009. Within this age group, the median earnings of men who completed high school but didn’t go on to college fell 47 percent, while the median earnings of male college graduates also declined, if only 12 percent.
Part of this decline stems from the shrinking share of working-age men with full-time jobs, which fell from 83 to 66 percent between 1960 and 2009. The other part stems from the fall in inflation-adjusted median yearly earnings of working-age men who have full-time jobs, which have shrunk by about $5,000 since the mid-’70s. Combined, write Greenstone and Looney, these two declines explain why the earnings of American men “haven’t been this low since Ike was president and Marshal Dillon was keeping the peace in Dodge City.”
Anyone seeking to understand the pessimism, frustration and rage of working-class men needs to begin here, with Greenstone and Looney’s two-by-four-to-the-head tale of decline. White working-class men in particular have become a disproportionately receptive audience for those who scapegoat immigrants and minorities for the damage that has actually been caused by economic and political elites blissfully blind to the devastation ushered in by their vaunted new economy.
Since that new economy blew up three years ago, many of those elites have been disabused of the financial fantasies that ordinary Americans long ago ceased to entertain. The fact that Greenstone and Looney’s study emerged from the Hamilton Project — a pillar of new-economy thinking, founded by Clinton Treasury secretary Robert Rubin — is evidence of a paradigm shift in economic vision. From centrist Democratic groups such as the Progressive Policy Institute and Third Way, to economists such as Hoover Institution Nobel laureate Michael Spence, to chief executives and former chief executives such as Dow Chemical’s Andrew Liveris and Intel’s Andy Grove, the new watchword for America’s future — however challenging it may be to get there — is manufacturing.
Post-industrial America turned out to be a bust. The time for neo-industrial America has arrived.
YEAH, RIGHT AGAIN! IS THIS NEO-INDUSTRY TECH? TRY VISITING SILICON VALLEY WHERE THEY’RE STILL IMPORTING “CHEAP” LABOR CHINESE AND INDIAN ENGINEERS, OR FOR THAT MATTER ANYONE THAT WANTS TO COME AND TAKE AN AMERICAN JOB. CALL UP THESE TECH FIRMS, BANKS, ATT, E-BAY AND WHO ANSWERS THE PHONE? SOMEONE IN INDIA, THE PHILIPPINES, OR EVEN MEXICO!
*
OBAMAnomics: RICHER WALL ST, AND ILLEGALS IN OUR JOBS!

http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2011/08/barack-obama-one-of-greatest-tragedies.html
*
http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2011/08/barack-obama-one-of-greatest-tragedies.html
*
http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2011/08/obamas-america-ever-richer-wall-st.html

THERE IS NO UNEMPLOYMENT NUMBER HIGH ENOUGH THAT OBAMA AND HIS LA RAZA DEMS WILL NOT STOP PUTTING ILLEGALS IN OUR JOBS!
OBAMA’S ENTIRE ADMIN IS LA RAZA SUPREMACY PARTY INFESTED, STARTING WITH HIS SEC. OF (ILLEGAL LABOR) HILDA SOLIS, A LA RAZA SUPREMACIST.
THE DEMS ARE NOW THE PARTY FOR ILLEGALS, NO E-VERIFY, NO ENGLISH ONLY, OPEN BORDERS, AMNESTY, EXPANDED WELFARE FOR ILLEGALS, AND CONTINUED NON-ENFORCEMENT.
*
DICK DURBIN ON OBAMA’S LA RAZA INFESTED WHITE HOUSE
http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2011/07/sen-dick-durbin-la-raza-dem-ill-pushes.html

*
MEANWHILE UNEMPLOYMENT IN NARCOMEX IS UNDER 6%, WHILE IN PARTS OF MEXIFORNIA, WHICH PAYS OUT $20 BILLION PER YEAR IN SOCIAL SERVICES TO ILLEGALS, IT IS NEARLY 30%! LOS ANGELES COUNTY ALONE PUTS OUT $600 MILLION PER YEAR (OUT OF PROPERTY TAXES) IN WELFARE TO ILLEGALS!) VIVA LA RAZA SUPREMACY? OBAMA DOES!

“Recent economic data make clear that the social crisis is getting worse. The economy is stagnating. Millions of people face prolonged unemployment with no end in sight.”


The US budget cuts and the fight for socialism
3 August 2011
The agreement worked out by the Obama administration and the Republican Party to cut trillions of dollars in social spending heralds a new period of social upheaval and class struggle in the United States.
Nearly three years after the financial collapse triggered by rampant speculation plunged the United States and the entire world into an economic depression, the ruling class responsible for the crisis is engineering a reversal of every social reform won in the 20th century.
The deal signed into law by Obama on Tuesday will require immediate spending cuts of $900 billion over ten years, followed by an additional $1.5 trillion to be put in place by the end of 2011. On the chopping block are grants for education, funding for food and energy assistance, corporate regulations, and the major federal health care and retirement programs.
Recent economic data make clear that the social crisis is getting worse. The economy is stagnating. Millions of people face prolonged unemployment with no end in sight. States and local governments throughout the country are bankrupt and are responding by shutting down schools and slashing health care. The cuts in federal spending will only compound the crisis.
The Economic Policy Institute released a report on Monday estimating that a total of 1.8 million jobs will be lost next year as a result of the cuts and the failure of the debt limit measure to extend unemployment benefits and a payroll tax holiday for workers. This is only the beginning. Obama himself declared before signing the legislation that it was merely “an important first step in ensuring that as a nation we live within our means.”
The result of the debt ceiling debate has left Obama’s liberal supporters floundering. Even within the exceedingly narrow terms of the official “debate” in Washington, it is widely recognized that the final agreement gives the Republican Party everything it asked for. Obama dropped his demand for a “balanced approach,” i.e., the elimination of a few tax breaks for corporations, signing into law a measure that is comprised entirely of cuts.
Liberal economic commentator Paul Krugman published an essay in the New York Times Monday bemoaning Obama’s “abject surrender.” Krugman pointed out that the president had several other options than the course taken, including increasing the debt ceiling last year when the Democrats controlled both houses of Congress or threatening to use legal maneuvers to sidestep the debt ceiling.
Joe Nocera, another Times columnist, wrote on Tuesday that “Obama should have played the 14th Amendment card” to raise the debt ceiling unilaterally. “Inexplicably, he chose instead a course of action that maximized the leverage of the Republican extremists.”
There is nothing “inexplicable” or even surprising in the outcome. A basic deceit of the Times columnists, as well their counterparts in the Nation and other liberal and “left” publications, is the suggestion that Obama was somehow forced or duped into doing something he did not want to do. Nocera denounces the “Tea Party Republicans” who “have waged jihad on the American people.” Krugman worries that the outcome of the debate over the debt ceiling demonstrates that “raw extortion [by the Republican Party] works and carries no political cost.”
In fact, the demand of the Republicans that any increase in the federal debt ceiling be accompanied dollar-for-dollar by cuts in social spending was welcomed by the Obama administration as an opportunity to pursue an ever more right-wing policy. Obama went even further than the Republicans when he proposed that Social Security be included in the entitlement programs to be slashed in the name of deficit reduction.
This was a continuation of the administration’s lurch to the right following the 2010 mid-term elections, which resulted in significant Democratic Party losses. The election results were seized on by the Democrats as a justification to extend Bush’s tax cuts for the wealthy and launch a budget-cutting campaign that has reached a new stage in the legislation passed this week.
Krugman concludes his column with the worried comment: “What Republicans have just gotten away with calls our whole system of government into question.” While his analysis of the relationship between the Republicans and Obama is false, his concerns are justified. The entire political and social system in the United States is being discredited before the eyes of the American people.
Millions of people invested their hopes in the election of Obama, who was packaged as a progressive alternative to the social reaction and militarism of the Bush years. They now discover that his entire campaign was a fraud, and that he was put into power by the same financial oligarchy that had backed Bush for the purpose of pursuing even more right-wing, anti-working class policies.
The working class stands at a historic crossroads. Workers and youth are coming to understand that it is impossible to change anything within the existing political system. Well before these cuts are fully implemented, the working class will begin to fight back.
If these struggles are to be successful, however, workers must draw the necessary political conclusions. There can be no solution to the crisis that does not begin with the understanding that the root of the problem is the capitalist system, under which the economy is subordinated to the profit demands of the giant banks and corporations.
This system is defended ruthlessly by both the Democratic and Republican parties. The outcome of the debt ceiling discussions is a devastating exposure of all those who promoted illusions that Obama could be pressured to the left. It demonstrates that the most powerful sections of the financial and corporate elite exercise a stranglehold over the entire political system.
Moreover, the attack on workers in the United States is part of an international process. Obama’s budget cuts will encourage the ruling class in every country to expand its own assault. The essential ally of the American working class is the international working class.
The unfolding social counterrevolution directed by the ruling class poses the necessity for its opposite: social revolution. The basic question is that of political leadership. From the beginning of the Obama administration, the Socialist Equality Party has explained its class character and the logic of its policies. We anticipated that the measures taken by the ruling class would lead to the reemergence of working class struggle in the United States.
This analysis has been confirmed. The turn now must be to the building of a mass socialist movement. In the coming weeks and months, the SEP will intensify its work among all sections of the working class in every part of the country—manufacturing workers who have seen their wages and benefits decimated, teachers who are being laid off by the thousands and scape-goated for the crisis in public education, service workers who do not make enough to get by, working class youth burdened by debt, the unemployed who have no prospect of a job.
We have every confidence that on the basis of a revolutionary socialist program, we will win the leadership of the emerging struggles. Such a fight, however, requires the active participation of all those who agree on the need for socialism. Now is the time to make the decision to join the Socialist Equality Party.
Joseph Kishore
*
THE HISPANDERING PRESIDENT!

http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2011/07/tom-tancredo-on-barack-obamas-la-raza.html

http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2011/07/today-obama-addresses-his-party-base-of.html

No comments: