Wednesday, March 17, 2021

NAFTA JOE BIDEN - WE MUST TOSS THE LEGALS A FEW COINS SO THEY DONT COME AND BURN DOWN MY CRONIES ON WALL STREET

 

The Biden plan assiduously avoids any infringement on the wealth of the financial oligarchy, whether through increased taxes or other means, including the hundreds of billions in new wealth it has amassed in the course of the pandemic.

Every facet of American life is dominated by the immense concentration of wealth at the very top of society. The grotesque levels of wealth amassed by the parasites and criminals who dominate American business, and the flaunting of their fortunes before tens of millions struggling to pay their bills and keep from falling into destitution, are fueling the growth of social anger. This anger will increasingly be directed against the entire economic and political system.

Biden begins tour to promote his stimulus package

President Joe Biden kicked off his “Help is Here” tour on Tuesday with a visit to a small business in Delaware County, Pennsylvania, outside of Philadelphia. Biden and other leading figures in his administration are touring the country to promote the recent passage of the $1.9 trillion “American Recovery Act.”

The Biden administration has paid a significant amount of attention to the impact of the pandemic on small businesses. It estimates that approximately 400,000 small businesses have closed, with millions more struggling to survive. Biden’s relief package includes a $28 billion grant program to support restaurants and drinking establishments, in addition to $15 billion in flexible grants that can be allocated.

Biden is advancing a racialist narrative as a key part of the promotion of his “American Rescue Plan.” He is particularly focusing on minority business owners. On Tuesday, he visited Smith Flooring Inc. in Chester, Pennsylvania, a black-owned business that supplies and installs flooring.

President Joe Biden speaks with owners Kristin Smith and James Smith as he visits Smith Flooring in Chester, Pa., Tuesday, March 16, 2021. (AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster)

In essentially restating Richard Nixon’s program of “black capitalism,” Biden is seeking to consolidate support within affluent sections of the African-American population and other minority groups.

The Philadelphia Inquirer reported that Biden spoke briefly, mostly promoting his administration’s vaccine program. As part of his pledge to administer 100 million vaccinations within this first 100 days, Biden said he was working to distribute vaccines to pharmacies, community centers and schools in order to better reach minority communities.

“People hardest hit are in minority communities,” Biden said. “The rate at which they get COVID is higher, death rate is higher.”

Biden told Smith Flooring owners Kristin and James Smith that “more help is on the way.” He added that small businesses would see more relief than was available in the first relief package enacted last spring.

Tuesday marked the beginning of a travel blitz across the country. First Lady Jill Biden visited an elementary school in Burlington County, New Jersey on Monday, while Vice President Kamala Harris and her husband were in Nevada. President Biden and Harris will travel to Atlanta, Georgia later this week.

The Democratic Party and allied media outlets have promoted the “American Recovery Act” as one of the most progressive pieces of legislation in US history, with comparisons to social reform programs such as the New Deal and the Great Society. Senator Bernie Sanders applauded the bill for allegedly “cutting child poverty in half.” Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer said it was “the biggest package of relief since the New Deal.”

Congressional Republicans, for their part, are absurdly denouncing the package as “socialist.”

All such claims are grotesquely inflated and false. Michael Gerson, former chief speechwriter and senior policy advisor to President George W. Bush, criticized the rhetorical hyperbole in an opinion piece (“Biden’s plan is far from a new New Deal”) published Tuesday by the Washington Post .

Gerson acknowledged the substantial size of the $1.9 trillion stimulus package, which equals about nine percent of the US gross domestic product, but rightfully called comparisons between the measure and the New Deal or Great Society “strained to the point of silliness.”

“Roosevelt and Lyndon B. Johnson established new federal roles in retirement security and health care, which were fulfilled by vast new federal bureaucracies,” Gerson wrote. “Biden is mainly adding more money to existing programs and mediating institutions. For the most part, he is dramatically increasing the funding pressure in existing pipes. This does nothing to change the fundamental relationship between the citizen and the state.”

Gerson hastened to add, “For me, this is not a criticism.” He goes on to state: “The American Rescue Plan reduces economic inequality—but not in such a way that it punishes the wealthy. According to the Tax Policy Center, the legislation will boost after-tax income in the lowest quintile by about 20 percent. Those in the top quintile will see their after-tax income rise by 0.7 percent. This is a pretty anemic socialist revolution.” He concludes by praising the package for “achieving liberal goals by market-oriented methods.”


In fact, Biden’s relief package does not establish a single social reform. All of its provisions are temporary, ending by 2022. While they provide welcome cash in the immediate term to some families reeling from the economic impact of the pandemic, they are designed to prevent a collapse in consumer spending until Biden’s back-to-school and back-to-work drive, combined with expanded vaccination of the population, can bring about a revival of economic growth. The cash supplements will go largely to pay back rent and accumulated consumer debt, and then disappear.

With his cash handouts to sections of the working class and middle class, Biden and the forces on Wall Street for which he speaks hope to avert a social explosion amid mounting working class anger over being forced to work under unsafe conditions and mounting social inequality, while carrying forward the brutal ruling class policy of reopening the economy and boosting corporate profits, regardless to cost in human lives.

Hence the accompanying endorsement of the unionization drive at Amazon, aimed at further integrating the unions into the state and using them to suppress working class opposition, combined with the promotion of racial politics to sow divisions within the working class.

The New Deal included a series of large scale public works projects, such as the Tennessee Valley Authority, which brought electric power to large parts of the country. It included the Social Security Act, which provided a permanent and universal retirement benefit as a social entitlement. Johnson’s Great Society program, through limited and cut short by the Vietnam War, established Medicare and Medicaid, providing basic health insurance to the elderly and the poor.

Roosevelt’s liberal reforms were not freely given, but wrung from the ruling elite through mass struggles of the working class. Roosevelt represented a faction of the ruling class that understood concessions were necessary to preserve the capitalist system, which was widely discredited as the Great Depression devastated workers. The threat of socialist revolution compelled the ruling class to adopt reformist policies.

Similarly, Johnson’s Great Society was implemented amidst social upheavals during the 1960s, including the Civil Rights and anti-war movements, the urban rebellions and a massive strike movement for higher wages, which threatened to develop out of the control of the ruling class. Johnson’s “War on Poverty” ended almost as quickly as it began. It turned out to be not the start of a new period of social reform, but the last gasp of the period of reform that began with the New Deal. By the end of the 1960s, the Democratic Party had largely abandoned its efforts to secure the support of the working class and moved sharply to the right.

The Biden plan assiduously avoids any infringement on the wealth of the financial oligarchy, whether through increased taxes or other means, including the hundreds of billions in new wealth it has amassed in the course of the pandemic.


Biden Puts Obama Economist w/Ethical Problems in Charge of $1.9 Trillion "COVID" Giveaway

 

 

What could go wrong?

Biden is appointing Gene Sperling to a role overseeing the implementation of the administration’s coronavirus relief plan, a White House official confirmed on Monday.

The announcement could come as early as Monday, sources familiar with the plans told POLITICO, which first reported the administration’s plans to tap Sperling.

Sperling, who currently lives in Los Angeles with his family, brings a wealth of experience on economic policy issues to the stimulus czar position. He served as head of the National Economic Council under both Clinton and Obama as well as a top adviser at the Treasury Department under Obama.

The Politico bio leaves out some major aspects of Sperling's career. Especially one really big one.

In 2011, Gene Sperling had a problem. He was working as President Obama’s chief economic advisor but his government salary did not cover his expenses. He and his wife lived in a Georgetown townhouse valued today at around $2 million, but did not have enough equity to qualify for a second mortgage or credit line. He didn’t want to sell the house and he wanted to keep working at a prestigious but relatively low-paid public service job.

And so Sperling turned to a close friend from law school: Howard Shapiro. A top partner at the Washington powerhouse law firm WilmerHale, Shapiro had loaned Sperling money before and was willing to do so again. Sperling asked the White House Counsel’s office and the Office of Government Ethics for permission to borrow from Shapiro, whose firm frequently negotiates with the government on behalf of some of the nation’s leading corporations. Officials approved the transactions.

So in 2011, Sperling borrowed between $100,000 and $250,000 from Shapiro at 5 percent, a rate that appears to be well below the interest banks charged at the time for comparable loans. Sperling listed his borrowing on his financial disclosure forms.

In each of the next two years, Sperling went to Shapiro again, taking out two more loans that brought his debt to a total of between $300,000 and $600,000. (The forms require disclosure of a range, not specific figures.) The loans are unsecured. Sperling consolidated earlier loans from Shapiro, one made in 2006 and the 2011 loan, into the later ones.

Today, Sperling is advising the Hillary Clinton campaign on economics. In a “Funny or Die” spoof shown last month to the Democratic National Convention, he warned that Donald Trump’s policies would lead to dangerous levels of debt for the country.

Wouldn't want that.

Shapiro is a partner and litigator at WilmerHale and the firm routinely represents clients with business before the federal government. Shapiro and WilmerHale’s clients have included major financial institutions, such as Goldman Sachs and JPMorgan Chase.

Sperling also got a bunch of money from Goldman Sachs

Goldman Sachs paid Sperling the $887,727 for advice on its charitable giving. That made the bank his highest-paying employer.

Sperling told Bloomberg, "My sole work for Goldman Sachs was as lead consultant on the creation, design, and initial implementation of ‘10,000 Women,’ their $100 million philanthropic effort to give business and leadership education to poor women around the world...."

Among other paid speeches, "Sperling spoke at a Washington event hosted by the Houston-based Stanford Group Co. in November 2008, three months before its chairman was sued by the Securities and Exchange Commission for allegedly bilking investors of $7 billion. He also spoke at a Washington event in October 2007 that was sponsored by Citigroup, which has received $45 billion in government assistance."


WALL STREET BIDEN IS ONLY BUILDING ON THE ECONOMICS OF THE OBOMB-BIDEN REGIME THAT SAW THE GREATEST TRANSFER OF WEALTH TO THE RICH IN AMERICAN HISTORY! THERE IS A REASON WHY WALL STREET JUMPED BEHIND THE BIDEN-HARRIS PLATFORM EN MASS!

“In response to the ruthless assault of the financial oligarchy, spearheaded by Obama, the working class must advance, no less ruthlessly, its own policy.” 

“The general tone was set by the New York Times in its lead editorial on Wednesday, which described the speech as a “simple, dramatic message about economic fairness, about the fact that the well-off—the top earners, the big banks, Silicon Valley—have done just great, while middle and working classes remain dead in the water.”


“The goal of the Obama administration, working with the Republicans and local governments, is to roll back the living conditions of the vast majority of the population to levels not seen since the 19th century, prior to the advent of the eight-hour day, child labor laws, comprehensive public education, pensions, health benefits, workplace health and safety regulations, etc.”

 

Industrial Production Unexpectedly Slumped in February

KILLEEN, TEXAS - FEBRUARY 18: Icicles hang off the State Highway 195 sign on February 18, 2021 in Killeen, Texas. Winter storm Uri has brought historic cold weather and power outages to Texas as storms have swept across 26 states with a mix of freezing temperatures and precipitation. (Photo by …
Joe Raedle/Getty Images
2:02

Industrial production in the U.S. fell 2.2 percent in February, the Federal Reserve reported Tuesday.

The Fed said severe winter weather in the south central region of the country in mid-February accounted for the bulk of the decline.

“Most notably, some petroleum refineries, petrochemical facilities, and plastic resin plants suffered damage from the deep freeze and were offline for the rest of the month,” the Fed said. “Excluding the effects of the winter weather would have resulted in an index for manufacturing that fell about 1/2 percent and in an index for mining that rose about 1/2 percent. Both indexes would have remained below their pre-pandemic.”

The results were far worse than expected. Economists surveyed by Econoday had forecast a 0.5 percent gain, with estimates ranging from a o.4 percent loss to a 1.6 percent gain.

Manufacturing output fell 3.1 percent, below the consensus estimate for a 0.6 percent gain. Capacity utilization tumbled to 73.8 percent, highlighting how the Texas freeze hit the industrial sector.

The output of motor vehicles and parts fell 8.3 percent, the fourth decline in the past six months. This sector has been impacted by a shortage of computer chips.

Mining output fell 5.4 percent. Utility output jumped 7.4 percent on elevated demand for heating.

Most economists see the February slump as temporary and due to severe weather rather than a sign that the broader economy faltered in the month. Manufacturing has recovered more quickly than expected, becoming a bright spot in an economy beset by covid and lockdowns.

January’s industrial production number was revised up to 1.1 percent from an initial read of 0.9 percent. Manufacturing output was revised up to 1.2 percent from 1.0 percent.

 

Retail Sales Plunge Amid February Freeze

Residents help a pickup driver get out of ice on the road in Round Rock, Texas, on February 17, 2021, after a winter storm. - Millions of people were still without power on Wednesday in Texas, the oil and gas capital of the United States, and facing water shortages as …
SUZANNE CORDEIRO/AFP via Getty Images
1:51

U.S. retail sales plunged by more than expected in February amid bitterly cold weather.

Retail sales declined by 3 percent in February compared with the prior month, the Commerce Department said Tuesday. Economists had expected a much smaller decline of 0.5 percent.

January’s sales, however, were revised up to show a stronger gain. Initially reported as a 5.3 percnt gain compared with December, January’s retail sales now show a 7.6 percent gain.

Retail sales were up 6 percent over the last three months compared with the same period a year ago, according to the Commerce Department.

Excluding vehicles and gas stations, retail sales dropped 3.3 percent in February. They gained an upwardly revised 8.9 percent in January.

The figures appear to reflect stimulus-induced volatility. Many U.S. households received $600 relief payments from the federal government in January.

February is typically a slow month for retail sales. The harsh weather in much of the country, including the freeze that practically shut down Texas midmonth, likely contributed to the slump.

The declines in sales were widespread. Nonetheless, sales at grocery stores advanced one-tenth of a percentage point.

On a year over year basis, sales in most categories were up. Car dealership sales are up 9.5 percent compared with a year ago. Sales at restaurants and bars, clothing stores, department stores, and electronic and appliance stores are down from 2020.

Online sales are up 25.9 percent compared with last year but fell 5.4 percent in February compared with January.

Yang: ‘Return to the Obama Years’ Not Enough for Biden — They Were Left Behind in Those Years,’ ‘They’re Pissed Off’

 

JEFF POOR

 

Late Tuesday on CNN, former Democratic presidential hopeful Andrew Yang, now a CNN contributor, warned that his old opponent, former Vice President Joe Biden could not defeat Trump with just a pledge to return to the years of former President Barack Obama alone.

According to Yang, it needed to start with an understanding of what problems facing the country led to Trump’s presidency.

“Donald Trump needs to be defeated,” he explained. “Forty-two percent of my supporters said they would not support the Democratic nominee in the general, in large part because when I ran, I ran for the problems that predated Trump. Like, Donald Trump would never be our president today if things were going well for a lot of people around the country. Bernie Sanders would not have almost been the nominee last time if things were going well for people around the country. So even as Joe Biden saying, ‘Hey, we need to defeat Donald Trump,’ he also has to say, ‘Look, things have not been working for millions of Americans, and after we defeat Donald Trump,’ we need to get deep into these problems, get our hands dirty and solve them. This can’t be a, ‘Hey, I’m better than Trump’ race. It has to be, ‘Hey. I understand how Trump became our president.'”

Yang told a CNN panel people were left behind in the Obama-Biden years, and they were not happy about it. He called on Biden to recognize that situation and address it, which he said would better his chances in the 2020 general election.

“I think he’s been talking about restoring a culture, tone and a soul of the country,” Yang added. “I was talking about putting more money in Americans’ hands because I saw we decimated entire ways of life in Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin. And because I was talking in those terms about the real problems these people have experienced, again, 42% of my supporters were not going to support the Democratic nominee. I’m hoping that we can get some of those people to support Joe. But it would be helpful if Joe acknowledged it because one of the weaknesses of saying, ‘Hey, return to Obama years’ is that there are many Americans who were getting behind in those years, too, and they’re pissed off. And so, if you say, I’m going to revert, that loses to that group of people. There are so many Americans who just don’t think their institutions are working for him at all, and Joe Biden’s’s weakness is he represents those institutions. I’m endorsing Joe. We need Joe to beat Trump. But we’ll have a much better chance of that if Joe recognizes that our institutions have been failing many Americans for a long time.”

 

 

Obama’s State of Delusion ... OR JUST ANOTHER "Hope & Change" HOAX?

 

22 January 2015 

 

”The delusional character of Obama’s State of the Union

 

address on Tuesday—presenting an America of rising living

 

standards and a booming economy, capped by his declaration

 

that the “shadow of crisis has passed”—is perhaps matched

 

only in its presentation by the media and supporters of the

 

Democratic Party.”


http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2015/01/oxfam-richest-one-percent-set-to.html

 

“The general tone was set by the New York Times in its lead editorial on Wednesday, which described the speech as a “simple, dramatic message about economic fairness, about the fact that the well-off—the top earners, the big banks, Silicon Valley—have done just great, while middle and working classes remain dead in the water.”

 

OBAMANOMICS:

 

The report observes that while the wealth of the world’s 80 richest people doubled between 2009 and 2014, the wealth of the poorest half of the world’s population (3.5 billion people) was lower in 2014 than it was in 2009.

 

http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2015/01/oxfam-richest-one-percent-set-to.html

 

In 2010, it took 388 billionaires to match the wealth of the bottom half of the earth’s population; by 2013, the figure had fallen to just 92 billionaires. It fell to 80 in 2014.

 

THE OBAMA ASSAULT ON THE AMERICAN MIDDLE-CLASS

 

“The goal of the Obama administration, working with the Republicans and local governments, is to roll back the living conditions of the vast majority of the population to levels not seen since the 19th century, prior to the advent of the eight-hour day, child labor laws, comprehensive public education, pensions, health benefits, workplace health and safety regulations, etc.”

 

http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2015/01/oxfam-richest-one-percent-set-to.html

 

“In response to the ruthless assault of the financial oligarchy, spearheaded by Obama, the working class must advance, no less ruthlessly, its own policy.”

New Federal Reserve report

US median income has plunged, inequality has grown in Obama “recovery”

The yearly income of a typical US household dropped by a massive 12 percent, or $6,400, in the six years between 2007 and 2013. This is just one of the findings of the 2013 Federal Reserve Survey of Consumer Finances released Thursday, which documents a sharp decline in working class living standards and a further concentration of wealth in the hands of the rich and the super-rich.

 

New Federal Reserve report

US median income has plunged, inequality has grown in Obama “recovery”

The yearly income of a typical US household dropped by a massive 12 percent, or $6,400, in the six years between 2007 and 2013. This is just one of the findings of the 2013 Federal Reserve Survey of Consumer Finances released Thursday, which documents a sharp decline in working class living standards and a further concentration of wealth in the hands of the rich and the super-rich.

The report makes clear that the drop in a typical household’s income was not merely the result of what is referred to as the 2008 recession, which officially lasted only 18 months, through June 2009. Much of the decline in workers’ incomes occurred during the so-called “economic recovery” presided over by the Obama administration.

In the three years between 2010 and 2013, the annual income of a typical household actually fell by 5 percent.

The Fed report exposes as a fraud the efforts of the Obama administration to present itself as a defender of the “middle class”. It has systematically pursued policies to redistribute wealth from the bottom to the very top of the income ladder. These include the multi-trillion-dollar bailout of the banks, near-zero interest rates to drive up the stock market, and austerity measures and wage cutting to lift corporate profits and CEO pay to record highs.

The Federal Reserve data, based on in-person interviews, show a far larger decline in the median income of American households than indicated by earlier figures from the Census Bureau’s Current Population Survey.

In line with the figures on household income, the report shows an ever-growing concentration of wealth among the richest households. The Fed’s summary of its data notes that “the wealth share of the top 3 percent climbed from 44.8 percent in 1989 to 51.8 percent in 2007 and 54.4 percent in 2013,” while the wealth of the “next 7 highest percent of families changed very little.”

The report states that “the rising wealth share of the top 3 percent of families is mirrored by the declining share of wealth held by the bottom 90 percent,” which fell from 33.2 percent in 1989 to 24.7 percent in 2013.

The ongoing impoverishment of the population is an indictment of capitalism. There has been no genuine recovery from the Wall Street crash of 2008, only a further plundering of the economy by the financial aristocracy. The crisis precipitated by the rapacious, criminal practices of the bankers and hedge fund speculators has been used to restructure the economy to the benefit of the rich at the expense of everyone else.

Decent-paying jobs have been wiped out and replaced by low-wage, part-time and temporary jobs, with little or no benefits. Pensions and health benefits have come under savage attack, as seen in the bankruptcy of Detroit.

Not surprisingly, the Fed report has been buried by the American media, confined to the inside pages of the major newspapers.

Measured in 2013 dollars, a typical household received an income of $53,100 in 2007. By 2010, this had fallen to $49,000. It hit $46,700 by 2013. At the same time, the average income for the wealthiest tenth of families grew by ten percent.

While median income fell between 2010 and 2013, mean (average) income grew, from $84,100 to $87,200. The report noted that, “the decline in median income coupled with the rise in mean income is consistent with a widening income distribution during this period.”

For the poorest households, the drop in income has been even more dramatic. Among the bottom quarter of households, mean income fell a full 10 percent between 2010 and 2013.

The report reveals other aspects of the social crisis. The share of young families burdened by education debt nearly doubled, from 22.4 percent to 38.8 percent, between 2001 and 2013. The share of young families with more than $100,000 in debt has grown nearly tenfold, from 0.6 percent to 5.6 percent.

These statistics reflect both a historic and insoluble crisis of the profit system and the brutal policies of the American ruling class, which is carrying out a relentless assault on working people and preparing to go even further by dismantling bedrock social programs such as Medicare and Social Security. The data undercuts the endless talk of “partisan gridlock” in Washington and the media presentation of a political system paralyzed by irreconcilable differences between the Democratic and Republican parties.

There has, in fact, been a seamless continuity between the Bush and Obama administrations in the pursuit of reactionary policies of war abroad and class war at home. The two parties have worked hand in glove to make the working class pay for the crisis of the capitalist system.

The Federal Reserve has itself played a critical role in the growth of social inequality in the US. The bailout of the banks, estimated at $7 trillion, has been followed by six years of virtually free money for the banks.

Every facet of American life is dominated by the immense concentration of wealth at the very top of society. The grotesque levels of wealth amassed by the parasites and criminals who dominate American business, and the flaunting of their fortunes before tens of millions struggling to pay their bills and keep from falling into destitution, are fueling the growth of social anger. This anger will increasingly be directed against the entire economic and political system.

The figures released by the Fed reflect a society riven by class divisions that must inevitably trigger social upheavals. The explosive state of social relations is itself a major factor in the endless recourse by the Obama administration to military aggression and war, which serve to deflect internal tensions outward.

The growth of inequality likewise underlies the relentless attack on democratic rights in the US, including the massive domestic spying exposed by Edward Snowden and the use of militarized police to crack down on social opposition, as seen most recently in Ferguson, Missouri.

 

Message from big business on coronavirus pandemic: Save profits, not lives

As the coronavirus pandemic continues to spread throughout the world, and as reported cases in the United States increase at a faster rate than in any other country, a definite line is emerging from the American ruling class: “The cure is worse than the disease.” In other words, the lives of millions of workers must be sacrificed in the interests of corporate profit.

“We cannot let the cure be worse than the problem itself,” Trump declared on Twitter Sunday evening. “At the end of the 15-day period [that began one week ago], we will make a decision as to which way we want to go.”

At his news conference Monday, Trump said that he wants American businesses to reopen in a matter of “weeks, not months… At a certain point, we have to get open and we have to get moving. We don’t want to lose these companies…”

Downplaying the significance of the pandemic, which is already overwhelming health care systems in the US, Trump added, “We have a very active flu season, more active than most… And you look at automobile accidents, which are far greater than any numbers we’re talking about. That doesn’t mean we’re going to tell everybody no more driving of cars. So we have to do things to get our country open.”

If millions of people die, so be it. It is a cost of doing business. So declares the corporate and financial oligarchy. Lloyd Blankfein, the former CEO of Goldman Sachs, wrote on Twitter that it was necessary “within a very few weeks to let those with a lower risk of the disease return to work.”

An autoworker prepares a chassis to receive an engine on a new aluminum-alloy body Ford F-150 truck at the company's Kansas City Assembly Plant in Claycomo, Mo. (AP Photo/Charlie Riedel)

These statements came as Wall Street suffered a further fall on Monday, dropping to the lowest levels since Trump was elected in 2016, despite the infusion of unlimited sums of cash to the financial markets by the US Federal Reserve.

The move by the ruling class to quickly end restrictions on business operations to boost Wall Street defies the recommendations of epidemiologists and doctors. The New York Times, in an article posted Monday night, wrote that “Trump, Wall Street executives and many conservative economists began questioning whether the government had gone too far,” even though “relaxing those restrictions could significantly increase the death toll from the virus, public health officials warn.”

The Times failed to note, however, that among those leading the “back to work” campaign is the editorial page of the New York Times itself, the media outlet for the Democratic Party. The most explicit argument for letting people die in the name of “economic growth” came from leading Times columnist Thomas Friedman.

In a column published Monday, Friedman asks, “But as so many of our businesses shut down and millions begin to be laid off, some experts are beginning to ask: ‘Wait a minute! What the hell are we doing to ourselves? To our economy? To our next generation? Is this cure—even for a short while—worse than the disease?’”

Friedman’s column stacks one lie on top of another.

Lie #1: It is impossible to contain the disease

Friedman argues that governments should abandon efforts to contain the pandemic. He writes that “at this stage there is no way of avoiding the fact that many, many Americans are going to get the coronavirus or already have it. That ship has sailed.” He goes on to cite fellow Times contributor David L. Katz, who declares “we missed the opportunity for population-wide containment.”

The World Health Organization (WHO), the globally recognized authority on infectious disease, has been clear that the abandonment of efforts at “containment” of COVID-19 is inappropriate and unacceptable. “The idea that countries should shift from containment to mitigation is wrong and dangerous,” said the organization’s director-general, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus.

The fatality rate of COVID-19 varies by country. In Korea, where a vast portion of the population has been tested and extensive resources have been brought to bear in treating the pandemic, the fatality rate is 1.2 percent. In Italy, where the health care system is overwhelmed by the disease, the fatality rate is 9.4 percent and growing by the day.

Based on this range of possible outcomes, Friedman’s proposal to allow the majority of the population to be infected with COVID-19 would be purchased with between one million and 18 million lives.

Lie #2: Social distancing does not save lives

Friedman takes an even more reprehensible step, not just arguing against efforts to contain the pandemic through contact tracing, isolation and quarantine, but demanding the end of social distancing measures in the name of preserving the “economy.”

Friedman argues that “governors and mayors, by… basically sending everyone home for an unspecified period, might have actually increased the dangers of infection for those most vulnerable.”

This is yet another false and unsubstantiated statement, totally at odds with the guidance of the WHO, which has endorsed social distancing as necessary to save lives by keeping hospitals from being overburdened.

Lie #3: Saving lives will “destroy the economy”

Friedman continues, “But we also need to be asking ourselves—just as urgently—can we… maximize the chances for as many Americans as possible to safely go back to work as soon as possible. One expert I talk to below believes that could happen in as early as a few weeks.”

That “expert” is Dr. David L. Katz, whose published works include Dr. David Katz’s Flavor-Full Diet: Use Your Tastebuds to Lose Pounds and Inches with this Scientifically Proven Plan. Katz has promoted the quack science of homeopathy and “energy medicine,” declaring that the medical profession must embrace “a more fluid concept of evidence.” Surgical oncologist David Gorski has argued that Katz specializes in seeking “to ‘integrate’ pseudoscience with science, nonsense with sense, and quackery with real medicine.”

In an earlier column in the Times, Katz argued for “most of society to return to life as usual and perhaps prevent vast segments of the economy from collapsing. Healthy children could return to school and healthy adults go back to their jobs. Theaters and restaurants could reopen.”

Friedman, citing Katz, argues “as with the flu, the vast majority will get over it in days, a small number will require hospitalization and a very small percentage of the most vulnerable will, tragically, die.”

In fact, economic activity necessary to the functioning of society can be sustained under safe conditions with a massive investment in infrastructure. All non-essential production can be shut down for a period of time necessary to contain the pandemic. However, this requires that the principle determining all the actions of governments—the profit interests of the rich—be eliminated from all consideration.

The statements of Katz and Friedman have been condemned by leading epidemiologists. In a letter to the Times, a group of four Yale epidemiologists, Sten H. Vermund, Gregg Gonsalves, Becca Levy and Saad Omer, slammed Katz’s “suggestion that the global community is overreacting to Covid-19,” declaring that “he favors letting the pandemic run its course.”

Gonsalves, an assistant professor of epidemiology at Yale, who has spent decades researching infectious diseases, was even more direct on Twitter, declaring that neither New York Times op-ed editor Jim Dao nor editorial page editor James Bennet thought of “talking to an infectious disease epidemiologist about any of this before publishing this irresponsible garbage.”

He wrote that the articles by Katz and Friedman “are going to undermine public health efforts with a bunch of hot air, based on no evidence, no analysis full-stop.”

He continued: “In the @WhiteHouse we have @realDonaldTrump who botched the response to the epidemic, @nytimes we have entitled upper-middle class men who know little more than the President does and like him, love to say what’s on their minds. You should be ashamed of yourselves: @DrDavidKatz @tomfriedman @jimdao & @JBennet.”

The New York Times is deliberately promoting quack science during a pandemic and putting lives at risk. These actions have a definite social content. Like Trump, the primary concern of the Times is to reopen businesses and pump up the value of the stock market, at any cost. If it means that the workers forced to toil in unsafe conditions “will, tragically, die”—so be it.

There is an underlying logic to this process. The massive infusion of credit into the financial system must be supported by the extraction of surplus value from the working class.

The lifting of mandatory quarantines will do little to get people to shop and go to restaurants. But not working will be treated as an individual decision, making workers who refuse to work under unsafe conditions ineligible for unemployment insurance.

From the beginning, the ruling class has viewed the pandemic not as an issue of public health, but as a potential impediment to generating profit. Its sole concern has been how the crisis will impact its bottom line. Now that it has secured a massive government bailout, the ruling class wants to ensure that business returns to normal.

This form of socially sanctioned euthanasia has a distinctly fascistic character, not dissimilar to the argument by the Nazis that the disabled were “undesirable” elements who should be eliminated. In the face of the greatest crisis facing American capitalism, the ruling class is revealing itself to be not just parasitic, but homicidal.

This policy arises out of the unchallenged assumption that no measures can be taken that impinge upon the profit system. Even in the midst of a global pandemic, which threatens the lives of millions, the priority of world governments and their media flunkies is to defend, at all costs, the wealth of the ruling class and the interests of the corporate-financial elite.

All the economic resources of society must be mobilized now to fight the pandemic, not salvage Wall Street! The demand of the ruling class that workers sacrifice their lives and the lives of their families by returning to work, to be realized by force if necessary, will generate enormous opposition.

The development of mass opposition to the demands of Wall Street, the media and the Trump administration must be based on an understanding that the fight against the pandemic, and the implementation of policies to secure the health and safety of workers, is at the same time a fight against capitalism.

No comments: