The Daily Ticker on Yahoo! has the story The ‘American Dream’ Is a Myth: Joseph Stiglitz on ‘The Price of Inequality’.

Even more than income inequality, “America has the least equality of opportunity of any of the advanced industrial economies,” Stiglitz says. In short, the status you’re born into — whether rich or poor — is more likely to be the status of your adult life in America vs. any other advanced economy, including ‘Old Europe’.

I know a family who has done very well for itself over the last 30 or so years.  With hard work and two income earners, they have a nice home and have raised three children who are all out of high school now.

One just graduated from college and is now working in a clothing store chain instead of working in the field studied at college.  The significant other of this person has a recent technical degree, but cannot get a job in that field of study.

Ironically, the one that did not get a college degree has started a business and is doing very well.  That business may well support the business owner and the spouse who struggles to find work commensurate with the field studied in college.

I wonder how the next generation of this family is going to fare.  Will they still hold onto their Republican leanings?

This YouTube video has to be one of the best Paul Krugman performances I have ever seen. This is the video I mentioned in my previous blog post, Paul Krugman: ‘I’m sick of being Cassandra. I’d like to win for once’.

His explanation of why lack of demand is what is the real roadblock to business expansion is the one I keep harping on.

When I hear these conservatives give their remedies for what ails business, I want to shout out (and frequently do) “What part of no frigging demand do you not get?” Before I gave up watching Nightly Business Report, I used to see Susie Gharib interviewing the titans of business about what it would take to get them investing again. They would give all the same excuses you see in the above video. I kept posting on their Facebook page that she should ask them if having more customers would help. She never asked that question.

In the video I also liked the analogy with physicians trying to cure a patient’s declining vitality by increasing the amount of blood letting that they were doing. I often use that analogy myself.

I also just loved the moderator’s parting shot at one of his conservative guests, “Yes, you’ll have to come back some time and tell us all about the Estonian economy.”

The UK Guardian has this wonderful article Paul Krugman: ‘I’m sick of being Cassandra. I’d like to win for once’ .

The Krugman quote from this article that I have chosen to highlight is,

In an economy that produces $15tn worth of goods and services each year, $500m “is just not a big number”. Back in 2009, Krugman had warned: “By going with a half-baked stimulus, you’re going to discredit the idea of stimulus without saving the economy.” And that, he sighs, “is exactly what happened. Unfortunately it was one of those predictions that I wish I’d been wrong about. But it was dead on.”

“Discrediting the idea of stimulus without saving the economy” is exactly what I think Obama’s biggest sin has been.  This is why I get so steamed with Obama sometimes.

As great as this article is, the most valuable thing that may have come out of it is the comment that links to a YouTube video that I will blog about next.

The article Malcolm Gladwell Unmasked: A Look Into the Life & Work of America’s Most Successful Propagandist « naked capitalism: might come as a severe shock to liberal fans of Malcolm Gladwell.

In the vast ecosystem of corporate shills, which one is the most effective? Propaganda works best when it is not perceived as propaganda: nuance, obfuscation, distraction, suggestion, the subtle introduction of doubt—these are more effective in the long run than shotgun blasts of lies. The master of this approach is Malcolm Gladwell.

I only read about ⅔ of this article before I said to myself, “OK, I get the point.”  For those with more stamina than I have, could you please let me know if I missed something?

McClatchy has the story Biden: ‘A make or break moment for America’s middle class’.

Vice President Joe Biden stumped for the Democratic administration’s programs Wednesday, blaming the Republican Congress for blocking a raft of initiatives designed to help the middle class.

Biden ticked off a list of programs stymied by the Republican House, such as providing money to keep teachers and police from being laid off, tax credits for companies that bring businesses from overseas back home, new efforts for veterans, and efforts to help homeowners refinance their mortgages.

As one comment on the article had it, it’s about time the Obama administration started making this point.  The Republicans decry the loss of jobs for women without owning up to blocking funds to keep teachers on the job.

Did you ever notice that one way or another, the Republicans can always come up with a reason to block an initiative that helps the middle-class, but can never think of a reason to block an initiative that gives more money to the rich?

I got this email from AFSCME explaining all the results in Wisconsin.

Though Wisconsin did not recall its governor, it did recall a state senator. The state senate is now in the hands of the Democrats who can make it harder for the governor to do any more damage than he has already done.

The White House is using an abbreviated headline that essentially asks, Why Promote Mortgage Refinancing?

In this installment of the White House White Board, Brian Deese, Deputy Director of the National Economic Council, explains how President Obama’s plan would make it much easier for millions of American homeowners to refinance their mortgage and save hundreds of dollars every month.

President Obama is urging Congress to take up his proposal to cut through the red tape that prevents so many homeowners from refinancing their mortgages and saving hundreds of dollars each month.

It has the potential to be a huge deal, so we want to make sure you have the facts — and get a chance to tell us what you think.

The site asked me if I had any questions after viewing the video. Here is my response:

Why aren’t banks competing to refinance homes already?

Why would banks want to compete to refinance underwater situations where such a loan would not meet the fiduciary standards of the bank?

Wouldn’t it make more sense for the federal government to deal directly with the home owner about the underwater part of the loan, and then let normal competition work on the safe part of the loan?

Why are we giving subsidies to the banks again? Why can’t we give the subsidies to the innocent instead of to the guilty?

Then they asked why I thought that this program was important. Here is my response to that:

It is important to fix the housing bubble collapse created by the banks. This is a necessary condition for getting the economy going again. Any fix that rewards the people who created the problem is absurd.

I have extracted a summary of positions from the Elizabeth Warren, Senator For Massachusetts, web site. From that document we have:

It has been more than three years since the greatest financial crisis in three generations. It is past time that we stop talking about accountability and start demanding it from those who broke the system.

A deregulated credit industry squeezed families harder, hawking dangerous mortgages, credit cards loaded with tricks and traps, and student loans that carried unexpected risks.

We have to take serious and hard steps to get this housing market to level out so that we can start rebuilding our economy. That’s true here in Massachusetts and around the country.

I think Elizabeth Warren would have a much better plan than this one from President Obama. This is why I think we need Elizabeth Warren in the Senate in Washington to help shape these policies to make better justice for the middle-class.

A local newspaper has this story elevated right to the front of page A8.  On the web, they have the story behind a paywall, so I won’t bother to provide a link or name the newspaper.    They did provide these paragraphs of explanation:

Other Republican moderates, including Senators Olympia J. Snowe and Susan Collins of Maine, who Democrats had hoped would support the bill, agreed with the Bay State Republican, saying that the legislation would impose too much of a burden on employers and spawn frivolous lawsuits.

Supporters of the bill had hoped to build on the Equal Pay Act of 1963, and more recently the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009, by requiring employers to provide a reason for pay gaps when asked, and barring companies from retaliating against employees who discuss pay.
.
.
.
Republicans said the bill would restrict an employer’s ability to reward employees based on performance, provide bonus pay for hazardous work, or differentiate pay rates based on regional standards. And it would subject employers to unlimited damages, even for what they said could be unintentional pay differences.

If these paragraphs are close to being a fair description (and why should I assume that), then there are a few serious flaws in the Republicans’ excuse for not voting for this.

The law  “requiring employers to provide a reason for pay gaps when asked” doesn’t seem to be that onerous.  If any of the supposed legitimate reasons mentioned by Republicans for a pay gap were the real reason, then all the employer would have to do is to say so.  However, don’t you have to wonder why the Republicans think that there might be systematic differences in pay “based on performance”?  Do they really think men do the job so much better than women that they merit a 30% wage differential?

The Elizabeth Warren campaign is onto this issue.

See the link, Tell Scott Brown that women deserve to earn fair wages | Elizabeth Warren, Senator for Massachusetts.

Apparently Scott Brown, Senator for the rich in Massachusetts, thinks it would be too big a burden for companies to explain wage disparities.

He also seems to think that a systematic difference between men’s pay and women’s pay might be based on merit. Does that mean that on average he doesn’t think female workers are as good as male workers?

Scott Brown claims to be working for all of Massachusetts, but he always finds a reason why a particular law to help the middle-class would be bad, and he never finds a reason why a particular law to help the wealthy would be bad. Is this sort of like Faux Noise’s “fair and balanced”?

Governor Deval Patrick addresses the 2012 Massachusetts Democratic Convention on June 2, 2012 in Springfield, Massachusetts.

I was thrilled to hear this speech at the convention. I am so glad it has been posted on YouTube so that more people can see and hear it.

Sturbridge Community Television (Channel 12) will be playing the video of Elizabeth Warren’s visit to Southbridge on Wednesday, June 6th at approximately 10:20 a.m.; 2:20 p.m. and 8:20 p.m.

The Warren visit to Southbridge occurred on May 12, 2012.  There was a turnout of about 125 people at the Fins & Tales restaurant to listen to her and to talk to her.