Friday, March 27, 2020



Goldman Sachs Bankster “King of the Foreclosures” Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin vows that the Goldman Sachs infested Trump Admin will hand no-strings massive socialist bailouts to Trump Hotels. Mnuchin says the welfare will exceed the Bankster-owned Democrat Party’s massive bailout of Obama crony Jamie Dimon of J P Morgan’s bailout in 2008

A massive tax cut for his plundering Goldman Sachs infested administration.

Obamanomics: How Barack Obama Is Bankrupting You and Enriching His Wall Street Friends, Corporate Lobbyists, and Union Bosses


 Editorial Reviews: Obama Is Making You Poorer—But Who’s Getting Rich?

Goldman Sachs, GE, Pfizer, the United Auto Workers—the same “special interests” Barack Obama was supposed to chase from the temple—are profiting handsomely from Obama’s Big Government policies that crush taxpayers, small businesses, and consumers. In Obamanomics, investigative reporter Timothy P. Carney digs up the dirt the mainstream media ignores and the White House wishes you wouldn’t see. Rather than Hope and Change, Obama is delivering corporate socialism to America, all while claiming he’s battling corporate America. It’s corporate welfare and regulatory robbery—it’s Obamanomics.

Gary Cohn: ‘I Am a Globalist 


— I Believe We Live in a 


Globalized World’

 18 Dec 2018211
Former President Donald Trump economic adviser and 

former Goldman Sachs COO Gary Cohn, when asked 

Tuesday on CBS’s “This Morning” about Trump calling him 

a “globalist” and if it was an anti-Semitic remark, 

proudly proclaimed himself as a globalist.

“I’m absolutely not offended by the term ‘globalist’ as I am a 
globalist,” Cohn stated. “I believe we live in a globalized 
world. I think the United States is an integral part of a 
globalized world. And we have to figure out how to live as a 
good citizen in a globalized earth — so do the Chinese, so do 
the Russians, so do the Middle Eastern countries.”

“We are globalized. We cannot change that fact,” he 
Follow Trent Baker on Twitter @MagnifiTrent


The Clinton White House famously abolished the Glass–Steagall legislation, which separated commercial and investment banking. The move was a boon for Wall Street firms and led to major bank mergers that some analysts say helped contribute to the 2008 financial crisis.

Bill and Hillary Clinton raked in massive speaking fees from Goldman Sachs, with CNN documenting a total of at least $7.7 million in paid speeches to big financial firms, including Goldman Sachs and UBS. Hillary Clinton made $675,000 from speeches to Goldman Sachs specifically, and her husband secured more than $1,550,000 from Goldman speeches. In 2005 alone, Bill Clinton collected over $500,000 from three Goldman Sachs events.


Can’t be done!

NEW YORK — In the midst of a public relations nightmare, former White House Deputy National Security Adviser Dina Habib Powell took charge of Goldman Sachs’s global charitable foundation, helping to resurrect the big bank’s shattered image after it was implicated in practices that contributed to the financial crisis of 2007-2008.


Obamanomics: How Barack Obama Is Bankrupting You and Enriching His Wall Street Friends, Corporate Lobbyists, and Union Bosses

NEW YORK — In the midst of a public relations nightmare, former White House Deputy National Security Adviser Dina Habib Powell took charge of Goldman Sachs’s global charitable foundation, helping to resurrect the big bank’s shattered image after it was implicated in practices that contributed to the financial crisis of 2007-2008.


Hillary Clinton is simply the epitome of the rabid self – a whirlpool of selfishness, greed, and malignance.

It may well be true that Donald Trump has made his greatest contribution to the nation before even taking office:  the political destruction of Hillary Clinton and her infinitely corrupt machine. J.R. Dunn

"Hillary will do anything to distract you from her reckless record and the damage to the Democratic Party and the America she and The Obama's have created."


Records show that four out of Obama's top five contributors are employees of financial industry giants - Goldman Sachs ($571,330), UBS AG ($364,806), JPMorgan Chase ($362,207) and Citigroup ($358,054).




Wall Street firms have chipped in more than $9 million to Barack Obama. Zurga/Bloomberg

Wall Street is investing heavily in Barack Obama.

 Although the Democratic presidential hopeful has vowed to raise capital gains and corporate taxes, financial industry bigs have contributed almost twice as much to Obama as to GOP rival John McCain, a Daily News analysis of campaign records shows.

“The administration has been pushing hard for a 

settlement among state attorneys general, the nation's five 

largest mortgage servicers — Bank of America 

Inc. and Ally Financial Inc. — and certain federal agencies.”

Coronavirus Is Not Even Close to America's Biggest Problem

The COVID-19 pandemic can be used to illustrate two problems that are both more destructive than the virus.  The problems relate to how Americans view the role of government in their lives and to the belief that government money can always fix problems. 
Let's look at the money issue first.  The immediate reaction of our government to the virus threat was to spend massive amounts of money.  The latest news is that politicians plan to "boost" the economy with nearly two trillion dollars in spending and loans.  "The package is coming in at about 10% of GDP.  It's very large," says Larry Kudlow.  For a plan of this size to sound like a good idea, you need to ignore some important economic facts.
Our country has unbelievable levels of debt, and our debt is rising rapidly.  The numbers are staggering.  The debt clock shows U.S. debt at $23 trillion (nearly 110% of the GDP) and unfunded liabilities of $77 trillion.  That's a conservative estimate.  Boston University economist Laurence Kotlikoff, an expert on the national debt, says, "The true size of our fiscal problem is $222 trillion...20 times bigger than the official debt."  He says, "The government has gone out of its way to run up a Ponzi scheme and keep evidence of that off the books by using language to make it appear that we have a small debt."
We are on the Titanic, headed for the debt iceberg.  In brief moments of clear vision, we see the iceberg and know we must change course to avoid disaster.  But a self-imposed fog allows us to pretend things are fine.  Do not look away.  Look directly at this problem.  It's real.  Things that are unsustainable cannot be sustained.  Reality always bats last. 
There is also an important moral dimension to new spending programs.  The government has spent all of its income and much more, so we should think of new spending programs as simply more debt being piled onto our children and grandchildren.  The required first sentence of any new spending bill should be, "Our current consumption is more important to us than any burden we will place on future generations, therefore let's place this much more debt on them."
It is immoral to ignore the burden of the deficit on future generations.  We are digging a hole for them that they will never get out of.  Government debt is a government claim on future incomes.  It is an unpaid tax bill.
You can make the case that big deficit spending is warranted to protect current and future citizens in a time of war.  Some level of spending is warranted in the fight against this virus.  But look at the big picture of government expansion over the last several decades as the administrative state grew and the deficit exploded.  Does it make you a caring person if you propose "free health care" for everyone, including illegal aliens?  No, it makes you a dangerous fool.
In the socialist dream world, there will never be a day of reckoning for government debt.   Stephanie Kelton, an economic adviser to Bernie Sanders, said, "If you control your own currency and you have bills that are coming due, it means you can always afford to pay the bills on time.  You can never go broke; you can never be forced into bankruptcy."
Governments that have tried this approach have ended up with money that looks like this 50-trillion-dollar bill from Zimbabwe.  It's real paper money.  But this $50 trillion wouldn't buy much.  In Venezuela, the inflation rate is around 53 million percent.  That means everything costs more every day.  And with socialist destruction of the economy, there are far fewer things to buy.  This kind of money does help with the toilet paper shortage, though.
Governments can create money, but creating money does not create wealth.  Wealth comes from productivity.  Putting ink on small pieces of paper does not make wealth.  You can visualize this fact quite easily.  Imagine that our government officials keep businesses closed "to protect us from the virus," but they send everyone large checks every month.  Our benevolent leaders made sure we had lots of money, so we are all taken care of, right?
Without productive people, the true engine of wealth, Atlas would shrug, and the world would fall into its natural state, which is poverty.  Anything that destroys productivity also destroys prosperity.  That is why socialism has never worked and never will.  The socialist utopian delusion is that people like Bernie and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez can manage taxing and spending in such a way that everything people really need will be free.  Alarming numbers of young people have this delusion. 
Unless you are new to this planet, or are blind to reality, you understand that government bureaucracies are an inefficient and expensive way to provide anything. 
Politicians themselves don't have the ability to "provide" material things.  They can only transfer money or borrow money.  Said another way, they can take the productive accomplishments of one group and give them to another group, or they can borrow from our children to pay for current consumption.  That's it.  They buy votes in one of these two ways. 
Let's now discuss how Americans view the role of government in their lives and see how it relates to the current crisis.  When our nation was young, citizens accepted both the pleasures and the perils of liberty.  They enjoyed the right to direct their own lives and accepted the resulting responsibilities.  The government was small and far away.  The explicit goal of the Founders was to keep it small because the sphere of liberty shrinks as the size of government grows.  Self-reliance was considered an important virtue.  Children may expect others to take care of them, but adults do not. 
People in need were helped by their neighbors.  Charity has always been a big part of the American spirit.  The goal of charity was to restore people to self-reliance.  The lesson in Aesop's fable "The Grasshopper and the Ants" was an integral part of American values.  The story shows the wisdom of preparing to take care of yourself in hard times.
In 200 years, Americans have moved a long, long way from self-reliance toward government dependence.  President Franklin Roosevelt did more to move the citizens in the direction of government dependency than any other president.  Yet look at what he said in 1935, when everyone could see that Roosevelt's big spending programs were not ending the Great Depression.  In his State of the Union speech, he said:
The burden on the Federal Government has grown with great rapidity[.] ... The lessons of history, confirmed by the evidence immediately before me, show conclusively that continued dependence upon [government] relief induces a spiritual disintegration fundamentally destructive to the national fiber.  To dole our relief in this way is to administer a narcotic, a subtle destroyer of the human spirit.  It is inimical to the dictates of a sound policy.  It is in violation of the traditions of America[.] ... The Federal Government must and shall quit this business of relief.
Has the "national fiber" been "fundamentally destroyed"?  Has self-reliance been replaced by acceptance of dependence?  Ask Americans these questions: whose responsibility is it to take care of people when they are old?  Whose responsibility is it to take care of children if the father doesn't care about doing it?  Who should be responsible for educating children?  Who should pay the bills when someone loses his job?  I think a very small number of people would say family members or charities should take responsibility.  These duties have been taken over by massive, inefficient government bureaucracies. 
Early Americans expected the government to leave them alone.  Many present-day Americans expect the government to take care of them. 
The assumption that the government will take care of your needs is "a narcotic, a subtle destroyer of the human spirit."  If you have the childlike attitude that someone (government) should take care of you, it changes how you prepare for future problems.  This attitude is why 25% of Americans do not even have a savings account, and 40% say they would have trouble paying an unexpected expense of $400.
Americans are not prepared for trouble, and trouble is here.  Americans are Aesop's grasshopper in winter.  This will greatly magnify the economic crisis caused by the current shutdown of productive activity.  If economic activity is smothered for too long, many businesses will not survive.  "Helicopter money" dropped by the government will not fix this problem.
President Trump understands that America's productive engine needs to be switched on as soon as possible.  That will help, but the debt explosion and the increasing dependence on government are much more dangerous to our Republic than the Wuhan virus.

Vulture Investors Using Coronavirus Carnage to Wipe Out Small Business

Getty Images

Private equity firms are reportedly using the Chinese coronavirus pandemic as an opportunity to cheaply buy up businesses, which will have a crippling impact on America’s small business owners.
While small and medium-sized businesses struggle to stay afloat in the midst of the coronavirus crisis — awaiting aid from the federal government — reports indicate that private equity firms on Wall Street “have been waiting” for economic devastation to capitalize on those hardships.
CNBC reports:
The coronavirus pandemic is shutting down entire sectors of the economy and putting millions of Americans out of work, but one corner of Wall Street may find opportunity amid the carnage: private equity. [Emphasis added]
The group, which includes investment giants Blackstone, Carlyle and KKR, has a record $1.5 trillion in cash ready to deploy and has been actively seeking deals across the struggling travel, entertainment and energy industries, according to a half-dozen investment bankers who declined to be identified to speak candidly about potential clients. [Emphasis added]
“They have been waiting for this type of market dislocation,” the head of mergers at a major Wall Street firm told CNBC. “I don’t think they wanted something quite this bad, but they did want a pullback in valuation.” [Emphasis added]
Federal Trade Commission (FTC) Commissioner Rohit Chopra has blasted the predatory practices currently being used to further devastate American small businesses and monopolize economic power.
“Small business in America is facing extinction,” Chopra wrote on Twitter. “COVID19 has put them in peril. But it’s the predatory fallout that could wipe them out for good.”
“Small businesses shouldn’t go extinct,” Chopra wrote. “We need to preserve them by throwing them a lifeline to stay afloat and by policing against shameless shakedowns during our national emergency.”
Chopra detailed three impending “existential threats” to small business amid the coronavirus crisis, noting how multinational corporations like Amazon are using the pandemic to further devastate smaller and medium-sized sellers:
Small business in America is facing extinction. COVID19 has put them in peril. But it’s the predatory fallout that could wipe them out for good.

Here are three existential threats they face:
Chopra said “lawyers running lawsuit mills are suing small businesses to extract cash” and that small businesses are “now under siege,” suggesting immediate federal action to stop the predatory deals.
Many small businesses are now under siege. Lawyers working for loan sharks are invoking "confessions of judgment" clauses to get a green light to collect whatever these businesses and their owners have left after being crippled by this crisis. 
Small businesses need help now to stop lenders and their lawyers from exploiting this emergency and kicking small businesses while they're down.

--> We need a moratorium on these sham collection actions.
--> We need to crack down on abusive, take-it-or-leave-it contract terms.

While restaurants, local retail shops, movie theaters, and other small to medium-sized American businesses have been forced to close their doors, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis President James Bullard has warned of a 30 percent unemployment rate during the year’s second quarter.
John Binder is a reporter for Breitbart News. Follow him on Twitter at @JxhnBinder.





Is Globalism the New End of History?

At the beginning of the twentieth century, the traditional ruling class was replaced with technocratic governments.  The old elite were interested only in perpetuating their power and managing the general affairs of the state.  In contrast, the new managerial class was much more ruthless and methodical.  Their ambition went farther than any tyranny of the past; they believed they had a quasi-divine mandate to reshape society in their image.  The main purpose of their political activities was to find the optimal governing model that maximized their power and the ideology that legitimized it.  Religious myths were replaced with an ideological narrative.  As a direct consequence, the twentieth century has shown that in the absence of an absolute, divine reference, words can justify any atrocity.
A totalitarian ideology aims to impose a vision on society and transform the individual mindset to fit a collectivist pattern.  All ideologies pretend they respond to a social necessity and that they are the end of history.  Ideologies are a means of transferring morality from the divine to a human level, thus shifting the emphasis from truth to power.  Fascism, National Socialism, and socialism left behind a trail of economic devastation, wars, and mass murder.  The fascist economies were based on a corporatist model; big companies in Germany and Italy worked alongside the state to set a national economic policy.  As economic depression set in, some of those companies were nationalized.  Trade unions were replaced with an organization controlled by the ruling class.  The spending on social welfare in fascist economies exceeded that of other European nations.  In the United States, the New Deal enacted reconstruction programs through cooperation between big businesses and the government bureaucracy, under the wise guidance of the Federal Reserve.  The centerpiece of the economic policy was the coerced government cartelization of industry based on corporatism.  The progressive and fascist economic models were virtually indistinguishable.
Any rational person would have learned from the lessons of the past century, but not our so-called leaders.  The growth of government has created a bureaucracy whose members, as in some feudal aristocracy, consider that their power is derived from their social status rather than the consensus of the governed.  The entire progressive rule, from Prohibition to open borders, has been a sequence of escalating social engineering experiments.  Permanent tinkering with the public education system has produced functional illiterates with the political worldview of Maoist guards.  Another progressive experiment, the welfare state, is insolvent and is kept alive only by the economic tricks of the glorious Federal Reserve.    
After the collapse of communism in 1989, the way was open for a progressive New World Order.  The oligarchic bureaucracy of the Deep State, together with shadowy characters from former communist and third-world countries, became part of a criminal global organization with supranational managerial power.  Ideologies competing with Progressivism had ended in enslavement, genocide, and war, so a new narrative was required.  The dangerous myth of the end of history was revived; this time, the future will belong to liberal democracy.
The new narrative is globalism, which is supposed to be the ultimate ideology that will save the world.  In reality, it is a mismatched combination of totalitarian ideologies; social movements; and the half-baked, pseudo-Marxist philosophical ideas of the Frankfurt school and Antonio Gramsci.  Socialism has been replaced with the socialization of perceived injustices.  Globalism considers nation-states as obsolete entities that are responsible for war and genocides.  In the name of ill defined concepts like diversity and multiculturalism, the demographics of Western nation-states have been irreversibly altered.
This process has no legal or moral basis and is justified only by emotional propaganda.  Instead of being set by negotiations, wages are now determined by an immigration policy dictated by politicians and CEOs rather than internal market demand.  Under the pretext of fighting a permanent crisis, the fascist corporatist economic model has been revived.  We have fallen down the rabbit hole to a place where the Mad Hatter is not just mad, but evil.  We are in a permanent war with Islamic terror, white supremacism, drugs, viruses, and the climate.  A mix of propaganda and psychological warfare has created the level of fear, chaos, and violence necessary for a radical transformation.  From orange and yellow terror alerts to pandemics, the ruling class needs to keep the peons in a permanent state of fear.  Never let a good crisis go to waste, and if no good crisis is available, manufacture one.  To our rulers, God is dead, so the connection between morality and the rule of law that is essential to the good workings of a republic has been broken.  The rule of law is gradually being replaced with the designed chaos and violence of social justice, while morality has become just a cover for "humanitarian" propaganda.      
To the politically engaged citizen, it is important to understand that, because of demographic changes and public school indoctrination, representative democracy is becoming less and less effective.  Even on the rare occasion when a president gets elected without first being selected, the best he can hope for is to slow down an irreversible process.  Our society is becoming neo-feudal, consisting of the ruling class and their serfs, with the indigenous middle class gradually losing any political and economic influence.  A narrative that grows into a state ideology is changing and altering everything, from entertainment to education, science, history, and politics.  The ideological tone is increasingly strident and hysterical, with any attempt at moderation gone out the window; it is as if a doomsday cult has monopolized any form of communication.  Capitalism is irredeemable, and climate change will end the world in ten years if we don't change our sinful consumerist ways or if a pandemic doesn't do it first.  Any minor potential danger is amplified in the media.  Propaganda is successful when millions of people believe in a narrative that is guaranteed to make their life miserable.  We do not have a self-defense mechanism against this permanent aggression. 
In a globalist world, the distinction between a foreign lobby and the politicians being lobbied becomes blurred.  China, Iran, and Saudi Arabia have a growing influence on our power structure, and they can sway important decisions that affect our national security.  The media are controlled by a few conglomerates, which in turn are controlled by a handful of shareholders, some of whom live in foreign countries. 
The worst is yet to come.  In the twentieth century, the demented dream of reshaping the world according to ideological principles led to the death of tens of millions of people.  That same dream has now been revived by the globalist Mafia on an even larger scale.  In a world that is increasingly violent, dysfunctional, and fragmented, chaos engulfs everything.  The fabric of society is being torn apart, and there is no natural cohesive factor to oppose it.  As the decision-making process becomes more centralized, rulers look increasingly like monkeys pulling levers at random.  In the end, they just give up any attempt at running society rationally and institute the total control of ignorant goons.  They are the apprentice sorcerers that lost control of their own experiments.
Peter Dempsey is a writer of political essays.  Follow him at

Why the rich favor the Democrats

There's little doubt that today's Democrat Party is the party of the rich.  Actually, that's an understatement.  Far more than billionaires are involved.  A better expression of reality would be to say a fundamental core of Democrat coalition is the managerial class, also known as the elite.  These are the people who run the media, Hollywood and the entertainment industry, the big corporations, the universities and schools, the investment banks, and Wall Street.  They populate the upper levels of government bureaucracies.  These are the East and West Coasters. 
The alliance of the affluent with the Democrat Party can be seen in the widely disproportionate share of hefty political donations from the well-to-do going to Democrats and a bevy of left-wing causes.  It's also why forty-one out of the fifty wealthiest congressional districts are represented by Democrats. 
 Bernie Sanders is an exception.  But he's an anomaly viewed as dangerous to the party, which is why he's being crushed by the Democrat establishment. 
Why do the wealthy align with the Democrats?  The answer may seem counter-intuitive, but it is really quite simple.  It's surely not ideals or high-minded principles.  Nor is it ignorance.  Rather, it boils down to raw self-interest.  
In his book, The Age of Entitlement: America Since the Sixties, Christopher Caldwell notes that rich Americans think themselves to be as vulnerable as blacks.  They are a relatively small minority of the population.  They fear being resented for their wealth and power and of having much of that taken from them.  Accordingly, the wealthy seek to protect what is theirs by preventing strong majorities from forming by using the divide and conquer principle. 
As R.R. Reno writes when reviewing Caldwell's book: "Therefore, the richest and most powerful people in America have strong incentives to support an anti-majoritarian political system."  He goes on: "Wealthy individuals shovel donations into elite institutions that incubate identity politics, which further fragments the nation and prevents the formation of majorities."
Some of the rotten fruit of the wealthy taking this approach include multiculturalism, massive immigration of diverse people, resistance to encouraging assimilation, racial strife, trying to turn white males into pariahs, and the promotion of gender confusion.  Through it all, society is bombarded with the Orwellian mantra that "diversity is strength," as if repeating it often enough can make it so.  It is also why patriotism and a common American culture are so disparaged today.  Those from the upper strata of society project the idea that if you're a flag-waving American, you must be some kind of retrograde mouth-breathing yokel.  
The wealthy as a groups are content to dissolve the glue that holds the U.S. together.  And it is all done to enhance and preserve their power, wealth, and influence.  This is why they so hate Donald Trump.  He strives to unite people and the country, although you'd never know that that is what the president is doing  if you live in the media bubble.  Trump's MAGA agenda is an anathema to the managerial class.
To quote Reno one final time:
The next decade will not be easy.  But it will not be about what preoccupied us in the sixties, and which Caldwell describes so well.  Rather than the perils of discrimination we are increasingly concerned with the problem of disintegration — or in Charles Murray's terms, the problem of "coming apart."
Trump and the GOP he is molding are the vehicles to restore and strengthen national solidarity.  Trump said at the Daytona 500, "No matter who wins, what matters most is God, family, and country."  That is not the Democrat agenda.  As seen in Democrat politicians, their policies, and the behavior of their major contributors, the aim is to further weaken the social and national bonds in America.  There is a lot at stake here.  If solidarity wins, the Republic can survive and prosper.  If the Democrats and their wealthy cohorts do, then the middle class withers, the Republic dies, and the rich and their managerial class get to rule the roost.  That is what it comes down to.


In addition, establishment Republicans are no better than Democrats at stemming the flow of illegal immigration because big businesses reap the benefits of this cheap labor without incurring any of the social costs.

This is why the SEIU supports blanket amnesty for illegal aliens.

Democrats: The Party of Big Labor, Big Government...and Big Business

There is a widespread perception that the Democrat Party is the party the working class and the Republican Party is the party of big business.  Even though Republicans on average received slightly more from corporate employees prior to 2002, the overall difference between both parties from 1990 to 2020 is statistically insignificant (Table 1).  In fact, Democrat reliance on big labor gradually shifted toward big business following the involvement of solidly Democrat corporate giants in 2002, and from 2014 to 2020, Democrats consistently surpassed Republicans in corporate donations (Tables 1 & 2).
Based on data compiled by Open Secrets, Soros Fund Management, Fahr LLC (Tom Steyer), and Bloomberg LP ranked among the top ten for political contributions that gave over 90% to Democrats.  In sharp contrast, the right-leaning Koch Industries made the top ten only in 2014.  In nearly all other years, Koch ranked well below the top twenty.
Whether or not this trend is long-term, there is no denying that large corporations on average no longer lean right.  But what does it mean to be "the party of big business"? Donations are not definitive evidence.  What ultimately matters is what politicians do once they get elected.
Many liberals believe that big government is needed to "rein in" big business and that in the absence of federal intervention, corporations will "run roughshod" over the average American.  Many liberals also believe that corporations are the main beneficiaries of laissez-faire economics and that free-market conservatives who want to scale back regulations are somehow "in the pocket" of big business.
In reality, the opposite is true: big business and big government 
go hand in hand because government meddling in the economy 
encourages rent-seeking by businesses that can afford to pay 
for the lobbyists.  This crony capitalism grew exponentially as 
result of New Deal regulations that squeezed out competitors 
during the 1930s.  Establishment politicians and well 
connected corporations are beneficiaries of the myth that big 
government and big business are adversaries because it hides 
their unholy alliance.
In all fairness, neither party has had a monopoly on the dispensation of corporate welfare: the TARP funds that propped up financial institutions deemed "too big to fail" during the Great Recession were released by the Bush administration.  In addition, establishment Republicans are no better than Democrats at stemming the flow of illegal immigration because big businesses reap the benefits of this cheap labor without incurring any of the social costs.
If both parties are playing this game, what is the basis for labeling the Democrat party "the party of big business"?  What policies from Republicans support small business?
Free-market conservatism benefits small businesses because the government does not pick the winners and losers by means of subsidies, tax breaks, and cumbersome regulations.  You will not see policies like these coming from Washington in a major way because proposals for shrinking the federal government rarely see the light of day in Congress.
Based on data collected by Gallup and Thumbtack, red states far outscore blue states in small business friendliness (Table 3).  This may be why less affluent Americans are fleeing states that score abysmally like CaliforniaIllinoisNew York, and Hawaii.  This might also be why small business–owners are more likely to vote Republican.
The Trump administration has been good for businesses of all sizes mainly due to the unprecedented rate at which it scaled back stifling regulations.  This may be why some of the president's highest approval ratings now come from small businesses.
Donald Trump set himself apart from the ruling class when he latched onto the third-rail issue of illegal immigration and called out the corporate darling Jeb Bush (AKA "Low Energy Jeb") for his lack of grassroots support.  This may explain in part why Bain Capital, the firm co-founded by Mitt Romney, switched teams and contributed solidly Democrat in 2018.  In 2012, Democrats accused Bain Capital of destroying jobs by systematically dismantling the companies it bought off.  Times have changed...
Small businesses generate well over half of all new jobs.  Most importantly, many are family-owned, have strong ties to their communities, and provide upward mobility for millions of Americans who never attended college.  The Democrats' undermining of this quintessentially American institution is shameful and disqualifies it as the "party of the working class."  Contributions from big labor do not count toward "labor-friendliness" because mega-unions care more about recruitment than about the welfare of working Americans.  This is why the SEIU supports blanket amnesty for illegal aliens.
Democrats fed up with the corporate status quo are now choosing their own anti-establishment candidate, not realizing that socialism is just a more impoverished version of the crony capitalism they are rejecting.  Many Sanders-supporters are also morally shallow because they want to harness the power of the state to muscle in on the wealth of Americans who borrowed responsibly and worked hard to pay their bills.
After the Constitutional Convention, Benjamin Franklin said, "This Constitution ... is likely to be well administered for a course of years, and can only end in despotism ... when the people shall become so corrupted as to need despotic government."  If Democrats implement the dystopian policies of California on a national level, their corporate allies will do fine.  It is small business–owners and working-class Americans with nowhere to flee who have the most to lose. Be careful what you wish for.

To view the tables below, click the links.
Table 1: Top contributors to Democrats and Republicans as compiled by Open Secrets.
*The red lettering highlights a funding advantage for Republicans.  The blue lettering highlights a funding disadvantage for Republicans.
**Based on a T-test, the difference is insignificant at P = 0.46
Table 2: Top ten contributors to Democrats and Republicans by category (union, corporate, and ideological) as compiled by Open Secrets:
*In 2008 Goldman Sachs donated 74% to Democrats.  All other groups in this column donated between 40 and 69% to both parties.  This column does not differentiate between giving equally to both parties and giving 70–79% to Democrats or Republicans.
**This number includes the "City of New York."  Although it is officially listed as "other" by Open Secrets (not corporate, union, or ideological), I was personally informed by someone from the organization that Michael Bloomberg was the main source of this funding.
Table 3: Small business scores states scored by Thumbtack ranked according to their Democratic advantage by Gallup:
*GPA scores are based on the following numerical equivalents: A = 4, B = 3, C = 2, D = 1, F = 0, A+ = 4.3, A- = 3.7, etc.
** Not scored.
***Mean GPA ± standard error. Based on a T-test, the difference is significant at P = 0.00001.

No comments: