Partisans and Plutocracy

(Figure 1: included in this citation)

The proportion of independents now equals its highest level in 70 years. Owing to defections from the Republican Party, independents are more conservative on several key issues than in the past. While they like and approve of Barack Obama, as a group independents are more skittish than they were two years ago about expanding the social safety net and are reluctant backers of greater government involvement in the private sector. Yet at the same time, they continue to more closely parallel the views of Democrats rather than Republicans on the most divisive core beliefs on social values, religion and national security.” (Pew Charitable Trust 2009)

Democrats and Republicans both have their individual platforms and philosophies with supporters that are partisan in their beliefs, often following their beliefs blindly; however, the underserved group of moderates who believe in bi-partisanship and compromise as the best means to solve our collective problems are not properly represented. As we have read, new “Independents” are generally conservative, yet they are more liberal in social issues, meanwhile established “Moderates” are comprised largely of liberal Republicans and Blue Dog Democrats. Others in this group are simply disillusioned with the manner in which politics are conducted.
Extremists on the “left” or the “right” have become so polarized that they no longer seem to work together in good faith to solve problems. While both parties are guilty of this shortcoming, the Republican Party and far right have developed a policy of attempting to sabotage the Democratic Party at all costs. Since 2008 Republicans have set the record for filibustering in the Senate, and recently often filibuster their own bills. The question becomes why any patriotic American with the best interest of their constituents and nation would simply say “no” to everything that comes before them and essentially stop the functions of governance.
To understand why the Republican Party worked against the Democrats we must understand Plutocracy. We are also bound to look at facts and figures in recent history that will show what political party guides America towards growth and prosperity and which one leads us into debt and decline. Let us first examine the definition of plutocracy.

World English Dictionary
plutocracy (pluːˈtɒkrəsɪ)
— n , pl -cies
1.
the rule or control of society by the wealthy
2.
a state or government characterized by the rule of the wealthy
3.
a class that exercises power by virtue of its wealth
[C17: from Greek ploutokratia government by the rich, from ploutos wealth + -kratia rule, power]
(Collins English Dictionary, web)

There are people in American society who feel that when the wealthy do well the rest of society will prosper with them. The people who believe in this are usually the most are the wealthy in society. The affluent use their wealth as power to control media and produce messages supporting this belief and in attacking any who oppose this view as “socialists”. The wealthy, which include corporate interests, will support candidates who will favor them in policy and taxation regulations. When in power, Republicans lower taxes on the wealthy and cut social spending. They also work to deregulate regulations upon businesses. This raises the income and short term profits of the affluent but is dangerous to the economy as the following graph demonstrates.
This graph shows the correlation between the wealth and earnings of the top 1/10 of 1% and the effective tax rate for the affluent and how it relates to recessions and depressions in the economy.

(Figure 2)

Republicans and the conservatives will argue that if taxes and regulation were limited or removed that the free market will solve all of our social and economic woes. They argue that with tax cuts the wealthy will create jobs.The facts do not support this contention. It is a fact that most real growth comes from small companies started by middle class college graduates underscores this fact. When the most wealthy get even more money which they could never possibly spend they buy stock on the stock market or invest it, usually overseas in places like Korea and China. “40 percent of millionaire investors surveyed had no allocation whatsoever in alternative investments, including private equity, hedge funds and commodities.” (Benner)
There is a clear correlation between the lowering of the tax rate and profits of the most wealthy and economic collapse. There is also the matter of deregulation of business and commerce. In the 1980’s deregulation lead to the collapse of the Savings and Loan Industry, and this was followed by a bailout by the Reagan Administration. The assets of the savings and loans became the profits of the affluent, and the same process occurred with the stock market prior to the Great Depression except there was no bailout, and most recently with mortgage based derivatives, which there was. The Bush Administration started bailouts for failed investment banks, and President Obama became trapped into this bailout process because not to continue this would have meant a complete collapse of much of the world economy. Where George Bush gave bailout money without any requirement for repayment or accountability in how it would be spent, Obama attempted to make recipients accountable. Obama inherited further complicating problems of an economy in freefall, a large Federal debt, and looking at the following graph derived from the Bush Whitehouse clearly shows that under Reagan, Bush I and Bush II that debt related to GDP goes up and goes down under Democrats. We must pay attention to the spike which occurred just before Obama took office.

(Figure 3)
(Figure 4)

The exceptions we must be mindful of the spikes which are a result of World War I and World War II. When we correlate this data with the data from what was demonstrated in the section on Plutocracy we can notice how economic trends seem to fit together. Data specific to this discussion is easy to attain but not in one comprehensive source. We must add other data to create a clear picture to see what political party is in power when America prospers and what political party is in power when we are in decline. We must look at these facts with a wide lens. We must consider, process, and recall many aspects of economics and politics at once. We turn next to look at our poverty rate. To determine what party serves us best it is prudent to consider what political party was in power when the economy did well and when it did not.

(Figure 5)

If we correlate dates of increases in the poverty rate we find that this occurs when Republicans are in the White House. We can see when Democrats are in power the poverty rate declines. It is clear to see that the poverty rate and unemployment rate coincide with what political party controls the White House, and that under Republicans we experience less growth and more economic problems, and that when times become bad economically for the bulk of American society that our most affluent seem to do better. Their tax rate is lowered, the tax burdens are shifted to the working classes, needed social services and government spending are cut. However, if we take a look at Spending and Revenue as Percentage of GDP (in Figure 7) we can see that under Clinton we had cut spending and were generating a surplus. We will also notice that the Clinton Administration actually showed strong traits of austerity in how spending cuts were targeted and applied. We will also notice that defense spending leveled off and entitlement spending started to be reduced. In Investment Share of GDP and Unemployment we can see again that real investment goes down despite the tax advantages given to the wealthiest Americans and our largest corporations, and that unemployment rises, following Republican policies being put into place. The logical deduction is that cuts in social spending and tax cuts for the moist affluent and our largest corporations does not significantly create jobs or growth, and that is actually has more of the reverse effect; it becomes damaging to our economy.
If we take a close look at Unemployment Rate US we can see that just prior to Obama taking office that our nation was losing jobs at an ever increasing rate. The last graph in this series shows that it was under the Bush Administration that job loss grew and grew, and the when Obama took office that that process was halted and reversed. The loss of so many jobs cannot be blamed upon Obama, but on Bush.
Obama was also highly criticized for “bailing out” the automotive industry and for the “Stimulus Package”, but where Bush gave billions with no strings attached Obama demanded collateral and a plan of action, and he saved millions of jobs in the process. 40% of the stimulus “spending” came in the form of tax cuts (OMB), something Republicans normally promote and praise, and Obama accepted and adopted many Republican ideas and suggestions only to have the Republican Party attack him when he did. The result of GM and Chrysler going belly-up would have cost America 1 to 2 million jobs directly and several million more jobs in supply and logistical support industries that are interdependent of the automotive industry (Dionne). It seems as if Obama would have promoted and signed any bill or policies the Republicans presented that they would still have attacked him anyway.

(Figure 6)



(Figure 7)

(Figure 8)

To understand the complex reality of what Democrats and Republicans stand for one has only to review easily attainable data. It is common knowledge that Republicans consider themselves “conservatives” and are critical of Democrats describing them to be “tax and spend liberals” and “socialists”. They blame the woes and problems of the nation upon Democrats, and sadly Democrats often shy away from confronting Republicans. Democrats are often more apt to seek bipartisan agreements to find solutions, but the Republican Party has become obstructive and the rise of Libertarians and Tea Party members has set a mood where anyone working with Democrats to seek solutions is ostracized.

There are also other factors for which there is a common understanding and awareness but not much research. First, that right wing and Libertarian talk radio and Fox News spin news with an agenda, knowingly lie or misrepresent the truth, make innuendo and suggestions that are untrue, and do not fairly or accurately report the news. Add to this the rise of right wing militant Christianity where the lines between church and state are under constant attack and the fact that our population is falling behind in education and as such in the ability to understand the complex nature of our politics and society and what appears is a society in decline. “As the years go by, the United States slips down the list. Americans educated in the sixties captured a Bronze Medal in literacy, those schooled in the seventies got 5th place in the race. But those schooled in the nineties ranked 14th.” (Peterson)
America is not the first highly advanced society to suffer decline or fall victim to conservative fanaticism or plutocracy. In the late 70’s Jimmy Carter spoke of malaise, but even though he had a clear and well defined message we are left to wonder if his message about malaise was met in irony with malaise itself. Returning to the subject of the introduction, there are many “middle of the road” people who understand much of what has been discussed, but who seemingly feel powerless to effect change. The problem seems too big to confront. It is a fact that big money interests control much of our media, and that the pace and nature of modern society have made attaining real change difficult at best. We simply do not have a well educated or engaged population, and the result is the persistence of social, political, and economic problems which threaten our collective security.

Again, we should look into the philosophy and message of Republicans. From recent reports found in Politico and shown by example in an article entitled “RNC passes watered-down resolution” by Joel Seidman and Mark Murray “Backing away from an earlier attempt to rename the Democratic Party the "Democrat-Socialist Party," the Republican National Committee just passed a resolution saying the Democrats are pushing the United States to socialism.” (Seidman & Murray)
Democrats are called “socialists”, but looking at the following graph we can see who spends like socialists. If Republicans were serious about their contempt for socialized spending they would spend only what they contribute. We can assume spending cuts in Republican states would be met with resistance.

(Figure 11)

Next, we should take a clear look at what party produces real GDP growth and job growth. The following two graphs show that with minor exceptions Democrats produce more job growth and GDP growth than Republicans. The last graph in this series shows GPD average growth and the two highest configurations have a Democrat holding the White House.

(Figure 12)


(Figure 13)

Facts can be disputed, but the realities they represent remain unchanged. It is clear that under Democrats that America has done better economically. Our collective national security relies upon our economic welfare; therefore Democrats provide better overall national security. Republicans have been demanding that unfunded and unsustainable tax cuts for persons making over $250,000.00 a year be continued, for which America must borrow adding to the national debt another $700,000,000,000.00 to $1,000,000,000,000.00.
It is known and proven that the most affluent do not create jobs as they argue, but instead invest excess money, often overseas. China would be where we would likely borrow most of the money needed to pay for any such tax cut, and Republicans would likely invest in Communist China. This is support of a Communist nation at the expense of national security for the purpose of greed. Another part of the problem America faces is other nations manipulating their currency. China is one of the worst culprits. Their manipulation of their currency by lowering it makes our exports more expensive to purchase and theirs cheaper to import. This drives American manufacturing companies out of business because they cannot compete due to unfair trade. The affluent who own such businesses will close their American operations, even when they are still profitable, and move operations overseas just to maximize their profits. When America exports our products we face tariffs, but we allow other nations to send imports here duty-free. This destroys America’s ability to generate wealth. Nations create wealth when they create goods or provide goods and services in a free and fair market, and our most wealthy and our corporations are systematically allowing and/or destroying this ability. The result is a nation that imports cheap goods but does not have the wealth to pay for them.
It is clear from factual data and recorded history that good infrastructure and a well educated and healthy population generates capital investment and growth and that reductions in poverty result in an increase in the education level of the population, reductions in crime, and as such a reduction on the expenditures to compensate for social ills that taxes are collected and spent on. Social spending on infrastructure produces jobs and is shown to spur recovery and growth. In the preamble to our Constitution we find the following:

“We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.” (US Constitution)

We find that there is a directive to “promote the general Welfare”. It is widely accepted that the Preamble is a clear guide as to the intent of the Founders. We can see they understood the necessity of caring for all citizens in the Republic as a means of collective strength which insures collective security. While Republicans may have a valid complaint about runaway spending without accountability, this seldom happens as it once did and is seldom the case. This shows that this directive in the preamble may be overlooked by many people who consider themselves conservative, including Republicans and Libertarians. Conservative Democrats (Blue Dogs) and liberal Republicans seem to have a better grasp on this and understand the benefits of cooperation and compromise

Summary

The proof is clear that Republicans are destructive to the economy, and as such to our collective security as described. This suggests that any American who would knowingly vote to empower a party with an agenda to redistribute wealth in a plutocratic fashion and undermine America’s collective strength is acting in either ignorance or in greed, and if the case is self-interest and greed are morally guilty of treason and should be treated as traitors.

Works Cited

Benner, Katie, ” How the very rich invest their wealth.” CNN Money Fortune Reporter January 25 2007: 1:41 PM EST
http://money.cnn.com/2007/01/24/news/economy/benner_affluent.fortune/index.htm. Accessed 11/21/2010
“Plutocracy” Collins English Dictionary - Complete & Unabridged 10th Edition 2009 © William Collins Sons & Co. Ltd. 1979,
1986 © HarperCollins Publishers 2009
Dionne, E.J. Jr., “Obama's Auto Bailout Victory” The New Republic:partner reported on NPR
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=128925681 Accessed 11/28/2010
Office of Management & Budget. The White House http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/ Accessed 11/24/2010
Pew Trust. “Independents Take Center Stage in Obama Era Trends in Political Values and Core Attitudes: 1987-2009.” The Pew Trust
May 21, 2009 http://people-press.org/report/517/political-values-and-core-attitudes Accessed 11/21/2010
Peterson, Paul E. “The Decline and fall of American Education.” Hoover Digest 2003 #1 education Hoover Institution Stanford University
http://www.hoover.org/publications/hoover-digest/article/6325 Accessed 11/23/2010
Seidman, Joel & Murray, Mark “RNC Passes watered-down resolution:” NBC First Read 20 May 2009 9:20 pm EDT http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2009/05/20/4438414-rnc-passes-watered-down-resolution Accessed 11/26/2010
United State Constitution

Works Cited Charts & Graphs

(all citations accessed between 11/20/2010 and 11/29/2010 via’ Web)
Figure 1 Pew trust (included in citation)
Figure 2 Higgs Institute for policy studies
Figure 3 zFacts.com/p/318.html
Figure 4 Short/dshort.com
Figure 5 Census Bureau
Figure 6 & 7 Heritage.org from OBM data
Figure 8 Seeking Alpha
Figure 9 data360.com
Figure 10 Office of the Speaker Bureau of Labor Statistics
Figure 11 Eirbaum & Pinto of the Democratic Action team w/data from CNN & the tax Foundation
Figure 12 & 13 Philippa Dunne & Doug Henwood The Liscio Report

posted by Saint Nicholas X  # 3:37 AM 0 Comments