“So long as I confine my activities to social service and the blind, they compliment me extravagantly, calling me ‘archpriestess of the sightless’, ‘wonder woman’, and ‘a modern miracle.’
But when it comes to a discussion of poverty, and I maintain that it is the result of wrong economics – that the industrial system under which we live is at the root of much of the physical deafness and blindness in the world – that is a different matter!” - Helen Keller, (6/27/1880 - 6/1/1968)

“So long as I confine my activities to social service and the blind, they compliment me extravagantly, calling me ‘archpriestess of the sightless’, ‘wonder woman’, and ‘a modern miracle.’

But when it comes to a discussion of poverty, and I maintain that it is the result of wrong economics – that the industrial system under which we live is at the root of much of the physical deafness and blindness in the world – that is a different matter!” - Helen Keller, (6/27/1880 - 6/1/1968)

‘Global Capitalism: A Monthly Update’ published on May 15, 2013

Economics Professor Richard Wolff publishes these monthly updates on developments relevant to capitalism around the world. His analysis is really on point. It’s long but it’s worth watching, listening to & learning from. 

the-lone-pamphleteer.tumblr.com: Sundown in AmericaApril 4, 2013
Rarely do journalists reporting on the state of the American or world economy write with the accessibility and honesty of David A. Stockman in his recent New York Times opinion piece, called “State-Wrecked: The Corruption of Capitalism in America.” The former Republican Congressman and Office of Management & Budget director during the Reagan administration has the experience with financial markets and central economic planning that most critics of the system lack, and it makes his column seem both more reliable and more frightening than the alarmist pleas of many other doomsday prophets.
With carefully explained figures and simplified (yet, to my knowledge, accurate) descriptions of the history of twentieth century American capitalism, Stockman takes us through the eras of mistaken governmental policies, avoiding the typical biases that pervade in financial opinion writing:
“The culprits are bipartisan, though you’d never guess that from the blather that passes for political discourse these days.”
Stockman’s willingness to criticize Republicans and Democrats alike is refreshing, as when he points to 1933 as the origin of our current “state-wreck,” when “when Franklin D. Roosevelt opted for fiat money (currency not fundamentally backed by gold), economic nationalism and capitalist cartels in agriculture and industry,” but then only a few paragraphs later emphasizes Richard Nixon’s “sin [arguably] graver than Watergate”: ending the convertibility of gold to the dollar, essentially defaulting on the nation’s debt obligations and launching a “four-decade spree during which we have lived high on the hog, running a cumulative $8 trillion current-account deficit.”
Many of his claims, though controversial, strike me as correct: World War II did more to end the depression than the New Deal; the only reason Alan Greenspan’s monetary policies—keeping interest rates too low for too long and flooding Wall Street with freshly minted cash—didn’t set off inflation was that domestic prices for goods and labor were crushed by the huge flow of imports from the factories of Asia; we’ve been living on borrowed time, spending Asia’s borrowed dimes; beginning under Reagan, and especially under Bush, the GOP basically “embraced Keynesianism—for the wealthy”; that the overblown fear of another Great Depression in 2008 was concocted by Wall Street to force a panicked bail-out from Washington; and—perhaps most frighteningly—that the 10-year deficit is actually $15 to $20 trillion—much larger than the $7 trillion that even “deficit hawks” like Paul Ryan would have us believe (Stockman explains that this disparity is partially made possible by the Congressional Budget Office’s projection of 16.4 million jobs over the next decade, compared with only 2.5 million in the last ten years).
I find myself convinced by Stockman’s column not only because of his seemingly accurate portrayal of the many mistakes made by government and industry alike, but also because he seems genuinely concerned with the stark and widening inequality created by the broken system. He sounds like Bernie Sanders when he says that Paul Ryan’s “proposal for draconian 30 percent cuts over a decade on the $7 trillion safety net—Medicaid, food stamps and the earned-income tax credit—is another front in the GOP’s war against the 99 percent.”
Like many critics of the harshly unequal outcomes of the supposed “recovery,” he invokes mind-boggling figures: real median family income growth has dropped 8 percent; the real net worth of the bottom 90 percent has dropped by 25 percent; the number of food stamp and disability aid recipients has more than doubled, to 59 million (which is one in five Americans).
In the 1980s Stockman was a true believer in Chicago School neoclassical economics and the trickle-down theory. Unlike most of his peers, however, he’s willing to look, 30 years later, at the disastrous outcomes and know how misguided that ideology was.
Stockman is no Kissinger, warning of the future of an empirical China in America’s image. Instead, he recognizes that just as America will soon follow Greece and Cypriot’s lead, the rest of the world won’t be far behind:
“The greatest construction boom in recorded history—China’s money dump on infrastructure over the last 15 years—is slowing. Brazil, India, Russia, Turkey, South Africa and all the other growing middle-income nations cannot make up for the shortfall in demand. The American machinery of monetary and fiscal stimulus has reached its limits. Japan is sinking into old-age bankruptcy and Europe into welfare-state senescence. The new rulers enthroned in Beijing last year know that after two decades of wild lending, speculation and building, even they will face a day of reckoning, too.”
He joins other pragmatic truth-tellers, like former Comptroller General David Walker, in calling for drastic reforms, but is more than pessimistic about the potential to realize them, writing that “the way out would be so radical it can’t happen.” I disagree with Stockman on what appears to be a faith in truly free and functioning markets that could save the global economy while decreasing inequality—especially because he doesn’t address how constant growth could be compatible with an ecologically sustainable future—but I am willing to concede that many of his measures would be improvements over the status quo. I also agree that they’re completely unfeasible as a matter of politics.
So what are we left with? How do we proceed? Is there any way to stop this latest bubble, “inflated by an egregious flood of phony money from the Federal Reserve rather than real economic gains,” from bursting and leaving us in ruins? I don’t know, but Stockman’s closing line leaves me with chills: “If this sounds like advice to get out of the markets and hide out in cash, it is.”
— Written & submitted by the-lone-pamphleteer.tumblr.com whom you should follow. 
Please send your own original content for review & publishing on The People’s Record at thepeoplesrec@gmail.com & feel free to write us with any ideas for regular columns, podcasts, cartoons/comics or similar such content. 
Or if you’re interested in helping us curate & post regular international protest news content from other sources (we’ll have to trust you first cos of passwords, etc) for The People’s Record on our Facebook page, our Twitter account, our Tumblr, Instagram or other sites that you think we should be on, let us know so we can get that process started.

the-lone-pamphleteer.tumblr.com: Sundown in America
April 4, 2013

Rarely do journalists reporting on the state of the American or world economy write with the accessibility and honesty of David A. Stockman in his recent New York Times opinion piece, called “State-Wrecked: The Corruption of Capitalism in America.” The former Republican Congressman and Office of Management & Budget director during the Reagan administration has the experience with financial markets and central economic planning that most critics of the system lack, and it makes his column seem both more reliable and more frightening than the alarmist pleas of many other doomsday prophets.

With carefully explained figures and simplified (yet, to my knowledge, accurate) descriptions of the history of twentieth century American capitalism, Stockman takes us through the eras of mistaken governmental policies, avoiding the typical biases that pervade in financial opinion writing:

“The culprits are bipartisan, though you’d never guess that from the blather that passes for political discourse these days.”

Stockman’s willingness to criticize Republicans and Democrats alike is refreshing, as when he points to 1933 as the origin of our current “state-wreck,” when “when Franklin D. Roosevelt opted for fiat money (currency not fundamentally backed by gold), economic nationalism and capitalist cartels in agriculture and industry,” but then only a few paragraphs later emphasizes Richard Nixon’s “sin [arguably] graver than Watergate”: ending the convertibility of gold to the dollar, essentially defaulting on the nation’s debt obligations and launching a “four-decade spree during which we have lived high on the hog, running a cumulative $8 trillion current-account deficit.”

Many of his claims, though controversial, strike me as correct: World War II did more to end the depression than the New Deal; the only reason Alan Greenspan’s monetary policies—keeping interest rates too low for too long and flooding Wall Street with freshly minted cash—didn’t set off inflation was that domestic prices for goods and labor were crushed by the huge flow of imports from the factories of Asia; we’ve been living on borrowed time, spending Asia’s borrowed dimes; beginning under Reagan, and especially under Bush, the GOP basically “embraced Keynesianism—for the wealthy”; that the overblown fear of another Great Depression in 2008 was concocted by Wall Street to force a panicked bail-out from Washington; and—perhaps most frighteningly—that the 10-year deficit is actually $15 to $20 trillion—much larger than the $7 trillion that even “deficit hawks” like Paul Ryan would have us believe (Stockman explains that this disparity is partially made possible by the Congressional Budget Office’s projection of 16.4 million jobs over the next decade, compared with only 2.5 million in the last ten years).

I find myself convinced by Stockman’s column not only because of his seemingly accurate portrayal of the many mistakes made by government and industry alike, but also because he seems genuinely concerned with the stark and widening inequality created by the broken system. He sounds like Bernie Sanders when he says that Paul Ryan’s “proposal for draconian 30 percent cuts over a decade on the $7 trillion safety net—Medicaid, food stamps and the earned-income tax credit—is another front in the GOP’s war against the 99 percent.”

Like many critics of the harshly unequal outcomes of the supposed “recovery,” he invokes mind-boggling figures: real median family income growth has dropped 8 percent; the real net worth of the bottom 90 percent has dropped by 25 percent; the number of food stamp and disability aid recipients has more than doubled, to 59 million (which is one in five Americans).

In the 1980s Stockman was a true believer in Chicago School neoclassical economics and the trickle-down theory. Unlike most of his peers, however, he’s willing to look, 30 years later, at the disastrous outcomes and know how misguided that ideology was.

Stockman is no Kissinger, warning of the future of an empirical China in America’s image. Instead, he recognizes that just as America will soon follow Greece and Cypriot’s lead, the rest of the world won’t be far behind:

“The greatest construction boom in recorded history—China’s money dump on infrastructure over the last 15 years—is slowing. Brazil, India, Russia, Turkey, South Africa and all the other growing middle-income nations cannot make up for the shortfall in demand. The American machinery of monetary and fiscal stimulus has reached its limits. Japan is sinking into old-age bankruptcy and Europe into welfare-state senescence. The new rulers enthroned in Beijing last year know that after two decades of wild lending, speculation and building, even they will face a day of reckoning, too.”

He joins other pragmatic truth-tellers, like former Comptroller General David Walker, in calling for drastic reforms, but is more than pessimistic about the potential to realize them, writing that “the way out would be so radical it can’t happen.” I disagree with Stockman on what appears to be a faith in truly free and functioning markets that could save the global economy while decreasing inequality—especially because he doesn’t address how constant growth could be compatible with an ecologically sustainable future—but I am willing to concede that many of his measures would be improvements over the status quo. I also agree that they’re completely unfeasible as a matter of politics.

So what are we left with? How do we proceed? Is there any way to stop this latest bubble, “inflated by an egregious flood of phony money from the Federal Reserve rather than real economic gains,” from bursting and leaving us in ruins? I don’t know, but Stockman’s closing line leaves me with chills: “If this sounds like advice to get out of the markets and hide out in cash, it is.”

— Written & submitted by the-lone-pamphleteer.tumblr.com whom you should follow.

Please send your own original content for review & publishing on The People’s Record at thepeoplesrec@gmail.com & feel free to write us with any ideas for regular columns, podcasts, cartoons/comics or similar such content.

Or if you’re interested in helping us curate & post regular international protest news content from other sources (we’ll have to trust you first cos of passwords, etc) for The People’s Record on our Facebook page, our Twitter account, our Tumblr, Instagram or other sites that you think we should be on, let us know so we can get that process started.

There’s a tectonic mindshift going on in the science of economics right now, but you wouldn’t know it by tuning in to the likes of Martin Wolf, Paul Krugman, Andrew Sorkin, Lawrence Summers, Tim Geithner, Ben Bernanke, Dominique Strauss-Kahn or most of the professors teaching Economics 101 around the world. These old-school practitioners of neoclassicism are stuck in the past, versed in only one language: the language of pure, unadulterated money.

As oil reserves dwindle and climate tipping points loom, they babble on endlessly about liquidity, stimulus, derivatives, bond markets, sovereign debt, AAA ratings and investment banker bonuses. They never say a word about melting glaciers, eroding coral reefs, rising sea levels, fizzing oceans or the methane that’s bubbling out of the arctic tundra. Like medieval theologians who argued endlessly about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, today’s economists argue incessantly about how economic growth can be sustained forever on a finite planet. Ten years from now, as the blowback from the externalities of their way of doing business repeatedly hammers us and global warming kicks in with a vengeance, we’ll look back in shock and awe – and wonder what it was about these logic freaks and their money narratives that so mesmerized us.

Five hundred years ago astronomers following Ptolemy’s geocentric model of the universe were tearing their hair out trying to make sense of all their calculations of the sun, moon and stars moving around above us in the night sky. It was only when Copernicus pointed out that we are not the center of the universe – the sun does not revolve around the Earth but rather the other way around – that all their convoluted calculations fell magically into place.

Today something eerily similar is happening in the science of economics: Economists and lay people alike are realizing that our human money economy is a subset of the Earth’s larger bioeconomy rather than the other way around. Over the next few years, as this monumental shift of perspective kicks in, all the economic, ecological and financial craziness of the industrial era will evaporate, and a new sustainable way of running our planetary household will fall magically into place.

Economics students, especially PhD students, in departments around the world have a crucial role to play in ushering in this new paradigm. Go to kickitover.org and join the movement.

—Kalle Lasn on Adbuster.com here.

Global Capitalism – A Monthly Update & Discussion: February 2013 
by Professor Richard D. Wolff

These Tuesday evenings will each begin with an update and analysis of major economic events of the last month and their contexts of longer-term economic trends shaping politics and society here and abroad. We will focus on the evolving global capitalist economic crisis and its consequences. We will examine topics such as

  • the social costs effects of the historic long-term US unemployment,
  • national debt crises and “austerity programs” in Greece, Ireland, Spain, and beyond
  • changes in today’s Chinese economy and their global effects,
  • tax reform and the entire tax issue in the US today,
  • continuing crisis in the US housing and credit markets
  • the economics of immigration

Actual economic developments will shape the agenda for each monthly Tuesday meeting. Rick Wolff, with occasional guests, will present an economic update and an analysis of some particular economic topics and then open the floor to questions, comments and a general discussion of where the US and world economies are going and the political implications. We aim to develop participants’ understanding of and ability to explain to others the key economic developments of our time.

If you’re ever in New York and can attend one of these - he speaks live once a month at the Brecht Forum, giving updates about the state of capitalism and important developments regarding the capitalist system in the last month.

His book & his organization, both called Democracy@Work (link to buy the book - it’s only $15), advocates for democratic work-places in an effort to combat the destructive nature of capitalism. He speaks in a really accessible, entertaining way. So if you have the time to watch any or all of this, I recommend it. Browse the Democracy@Work website for more talks by Richard Wolff. 

Is there an alternative to capitalist economics and politics? Richard Wolff says yes
Februrary 11, 2013

"Imagine a country where the majority of the population reaps the majority of the benefits for their hard work, creative ingenuity and collaborative efforts. Imagine a country where corporate losses aren’t socialized, while gains are captured by an exclusive minority. Imagine a country run as a democracy, from the bottom up, not a plutocracy from the top down. Richard Wolff not only imagines it, but in his compelling, captivating and stunningly reasoned new book, Democracy at Work, he details how we get there from here - and why we absolutely must."

— Nomi Prins, Author of It Takes a Pillage and Black Tuesday

Few are better equipped than economist Richard Wolff, professor emeritus at the University of Massachusetts, to address the massive failings and inequalities of capitalism as he does in his latest book, Democracy at Work: A Cure for Capitalism.

He also describes Workers’ Self-Directed Enterprises (WSDEs) as an alternative to the capitalism that broke the US economy and has resulted in massive economic redistribution to the ruling elites. 

Mark Karlin: In your book, what is the distinction between capitalism and welfare state capitalism?

Richard Wolff: Capitalism, like all other economic systems, displays a variety of forms. There are, for example, largely private, laissez-faire kinds of capitalism that differ in many ways from forms of capitalism in which the state plays more significant roles, such as market regulator or social welfare guarantor (as in “state welfare capitalism”), or as a close partner of capitalists as in fascism. What remains the same across all such forms - why they all deserve the label “capitalist” - is the exclusion of the mass of workers that produces the output and generates the profits from receiving and distributing that profit, and from generally participating democratically in enterprise decisions. Capitalism excludes workers from deciding what is produced, how it is produced, where it is produced and how profits are to be used and distributed. Democracy at Work is a critique and alternative aimed at changing that exclusion shared by all these forms of capitalism.

Mark Karlin: In that regard, what do you think about the contention that FDR was not at all an opponent of capitalism, but simply saw that some government intervention was necessary in the US economy in order to save capitalism during the depression of the ’30s?

Richard Wolff: What FDR saw was the political might of the coalition of unionists (galvanized by the CIO in the middle 1930’s), socialist and communist parties demanding that government not only bail out the banks and corporations, but also directly help the mass of people suffering the Great Depression. Elements within that coalition threatened that Washington’s failure to respond to do so would turn many millions of US citizens against capitalism. FDR got the message and crafted a deal in response. The government would both tax and borrow from corporations and the rich to fund the new Social Security system, national unemployment insurance, and a vast program of federal hiring. In return, the coalition would downplay its anti-capitalism and celebrate instead the achievement of a welfare state type of capitalism. The coalition mostly accepted this New Deal. FDR went on to win four consecutive presidential elections making him the most popular president in US history. The New Deal saved the capitalist system by changing its form from a relatively more laissez-faire [form] to a welfare-type state.

Mark Karlin: Before the recent crash, what was the capitalist crisis from above and below that you describe in the book?

Richard Wolff: The crisis from above refers to the speculative mania indulged by the small minority of people (major holders of corporate securities, boards of directors, their professional staffs, etc.) who gathered increasing profits into their hands as wages stagnated after the mid-1970s. Financial enterprises competed for the funds accumulating in this minority’s hands by taking ever-greater risks with old and new (e.g. asset-backed securities, credit default swaps, etc.) financial instruments. Another in the long history of capitalist speculative manias built a bubble on the back of the rising debt of the US working class. When the latter’s debt burden could no longer be serviced, the bubble burst, adding the crisis from above to that built from below by the lethal mixture of stagnant wages and rising debts.

Mark Karlin: How does the distribution of surpluses in revenue (profits) in business enterprises affect the economic structure of a society?

Richard Wolff: The surplus generated by enterprises - the excess of revenue from commodity sales over the direct costs of producing those commodities - is what capitalists receive and control in capitalist economies. They then distribute those surpluses as they see fit to reproduce the system in which they occupy such exalted positions. Thus, for example, they distribute some of the surplus to top corporate officials (shaping the distribution of income and wealth in capitalist societies), some to moving production abroad if, when and where that might generate larger surpluses (producing unemployment at home and growth abroad), some to donations to politicians and parties to shape and control political decisions to serve their needs, and so on. The distribution of the surplus is thus a major shaper of how our society works, how we all live.

Mark Karlin: During the last few years, particularly during and after the Occupy movement, many of the masters of the universe on Wall Street trumpeted their alleged intellectual capital, as if capitalism was equal to being the smartest guys on the block. In this bragging rights boasting, it can be inferred that workers are interchangeable parts of a machine and should be grateful to those with “intellectual capital.” How do you respond to that claim?

Richard Wolff: Intellectual capital is just the latest name for an old idea that has long been recognized as a crucial part of production. In the past, other names included “know how” and “technology” and “expertise.” The basic idea was that in addition to the tools, equipment, machines and raw materials that go into production, and in addition to the muscles and energy people contribute to production, there is the mental capacity to think, to adjust behavior, to invent new things and new ways of working - that is also crucial to production. To build that “intellectual capital” is one purpose of schooling. Of course, everyone in the production process can bring his or her intellectual capital into the production process if that process is organized to welcome, recognize, reward and stimulate that. When people suggest that only executives or financiers have or apply “intellectual capital,” that is one sure way to discourage and reduce the application of workers’ intellectual capital to production.

Mark Karlin: Refreshingly, you offer a key alternative to capitalism in decline. You promote Workers’ Self-Directed Enterprises (WSDE) in Part III of your book. What would be a succinct description of a WSDE?

Richard Wolff: Quite simply, a WSDE entails the workers who make whatever a corporation sells also functioning - collectively and democratically - as their own board of directors. WSDEs thereby abolish the capitalist differentiation and opposition of surplus producers versus surplus appropriators. Instead, the workers themselves cooperatively run their own enterprise, thereby bringing democracy inside the enterprise where capitalism had long excluded it.

Mark Karlin: In your sixth chapter, you contrast WSDEs with worker-owned enterprises, worker-managed enterprises and cooperatives. What are the primary differences?

Richard Wolff: Workers have a long history of multiple kinds of cooperatives. That is, workers can cooperatively own (e.g. their pension fund holds shares in the company that employs them), buy (e.g. the many food coops around the country), sell (e.g. grape growers who combine to market their outputs), and manage (e.g. workers take turns supervising themselves). All such cooperatives can and often do co-exist with a capitalist organization of production in the precise sense of workers being excluded from the decisions of what, how and where to produce and what to do with the profits. What makes WSDEs unique is precisely that they are about cooperative production, about ending the capitalist division of producers from appropriators of the surplus, and replacing it with democratic cooperative decisions governing production and the social use of its fruits.

Mark Karlin: Where does the much-celebrated (and world’s largest) Mondragon cooperative model fit in with your vision of WSDEs?

Richard Wolff: Mondragon is the world’s largest and perhaps most successful example of WSDEs’ successful growth in competition with conventional capitalist enterprises. Begun in 1956 with six workers organized into a cooperative enterprise by a Spanish priest, the Mondragon Cooperative Corporation (MCC) now employs over 100,000 workers, is the largest corporation in the Basque part of Spain and the tenth largest corporation in all of Spain. It has extensive research and development labs generating new ways to produce new products and maintains its own university to train its workers and interested others in all the ways of running and building democratically cooperative enterprises. MCC is thus a remarkable testimony to the contemporary viability and strength of non-capitalist production systems.

Mark Karlin: I recently asked this question in another interview on labor and economics and received an answer that amounted to a sigh. Although there is definitely a growing cooperative movement in the United States, it is still struggling. What will be the tipping point that will persuade US workers that WSDEs are preferable to the current managerial capitalist system? So many workers in the US have been brainwashed that any alternative to capitalism is satanic and communist. How does an idea like WSDEs change from an intellectual concept to a grassroots labor movement?

Richard Wolff: As has happened often in human history, what provokes change is less any clear vision of where we go next and more the intolerability of where we are. Capitalism is no longer “delivering the goods” for most people.The circle of its beneficiaries grows smaller and richer and more out of touch with the mass of people than ever. In the US, this is particularly problematic because the rationale of US capitalism has long been its creating and sustenance of a vast “middle class.” As capitalism’s evolution destroys that middle class, it opens the space in minds and hearts to inquire after alternatives to an increasingly unacceptable system. WSDEs offer precisely that. Nothing better illustrates that growing interest than the fact thatDemocracy at Work is going into a second printing three months after it was first published.

Mark Karlin: Republicans and Democrats both tout the alleged benefits of free trade agreements, despite their lack of adequate support for labor rights and worker remuneration. One thing that free trade advocates claim is that by moving to lower-cost labor, products will be cheaper in the US. While this may be true in some cases, this hardly appears to be the case in name brand products (particularly clothes) and trendy hi-tech products such as Apple. For instance, I went to a retail store and looked at items made by Calvin Klein, Nautica, and IZOD. Not one of the items, not one, was made in the United States. Most were made in China and Southeast Asia. Supposing we assume a worker who gets a few dollars a day produces a Nautica polo shirt for $1. Add the costs of material and equipment and maybe we get to $3. Add management and shipping and maybe we get to $5 per shirt, maybe. But the retail price on upper end brand name polo shirts could be as much as $70. So the shirt is not less expensive; the company is just making a greater profit off of exploited labor overseas. Is that correct?

Richard Wolff: When US corporations producing for the US market move existing (or open new) production facilities overseas, their usual goal is more profits. They relocate to exploit cheaper labor, lax environmental rules, lower taxes, etc. If they lowered their prices, then the cheaper labor, lax rules, and lower taxes would raise their profits less or not at all. So they rarely drop prices much when they move and then only temporarily to gain market share (thereby pressuring competitors to similarly relocate). Of course, relocating corporations could choose to lower their prices, but profit considerations usually render that a last resort. Finally, corporations in lower-cost overseas locations can usually more easily manage competition among themselves than they do in the US (because local rules against monopoly are less effective and relatively low-cost bribes are more effective).

Source

Dangling working-class dummies shock Las Vegas commuters
August 8, 2012
A mannequin hanging from a Las Vegas billboard emblazoned with “Dying For Work” had motorists lighting up 911 switchboards at the crack of dawn this morning — drivers were convinced they were seeing a real person swinging from the rope. Another billboard in the Las Vegas area read ”Hope You’re Happy Wall St.,” with a second mannequin hanging from the edge. No one has claimed responsibility for the creepy hangmen, though the website for Occupy Las Vegas applauds the displays, and accuses Nevada lawmakers of slashing social aid programs in the down economy.
“People saying it’s in bad taste are living sheltered lives,” says Sebring Frehner, an Occupy supporter. They ”don’t pay attention to what affects the working class.”

Source

Dangling working-class dummies shock Las Vegas commuters

August 8, 2012

A mannequin hanging from a Las Vegas billboard emblazoned with “Dying For Work” had motorists lighting up 911 switchboards at the crack of dawn this morning — drivers were convinced they were seeing a real person swinging from the rope.

Another billboard in the Las Vegas area read ”Hope You’re Happy Wall St.,” with a second mannequin hanging from the edge.

No one has claimed responsibility for
the creepy hangmen, though the website for Occupy Las Vegas applauds the displays, and accuses Nevada lawmakers of slashing social aid programs in the down economy.

“People saying it’s in bad taste are living sheltered lives,” says Sebring Frehner, an Occupy supporter. They ”don’t pay attention to what affects the working class.”
Premature austerity measures have cost Britain 16.5% in economic growth’ warns leading forecaster 
August 04, 2012
George Osborne’s austerity measures may have cost Britain 16.5 per cent in GDP growth over a decade, a leading economic think-tank forecast today.
Had the Chancellor withheld from a deficit-reduction package of cuts and tax rises until 2014, he could have avoided this year’s double-dip recession and saved the equivalent of £239billion in 2010 prices, the National Institute of Economic and Social Research predicted.
The forecasts are likely to pile further pressure on the coalition government to change its austerity tactics, which detractors increasingly blame for the slump in the economy.
Source

Premature austerity measures have cost Britain 16.5% in economic growth’ warns leading forecaster 

August 04, 2012

George Osborne’s austerity measures may have cost Britain 16.5 per cent in GDP growth over a decade, a leading economic think-tank forecast today.

Had the Chancellor withheld from a deficit-reduction package of cuts and tax rises until 2014, he could have avoided this year’s double-dip recession and saved the equivalent of £239billion in 2010 prices, the National Institute of Economic and Social Research predicted.

The forecasts are likely to pile further pressure on the coalition government to change its austerity tactics, which detractors increasingly blame for the slump in the economy.

Source

Movement in Italy following the lead of protesters in Greece
June 16, 2012
Italy’s prime minister has “warned” that he is fending off economic disaster and insists that he must assault the working poor and unemployed as a result but tens of thousands of unionists, activists and regular citizen protesters have followed the situation in Greece closely and refuse to accept austerity attacks. They have taken to the streets in thousands to oppose the brutal austerity measures. 


"We stepped away from the precipice before, but the hole is growing bigger and it may swallow us up. We are again in a crisis," Monti said in Milan on Saturday, trying to threaten his own citizens if they don’t allow him to steal all of their social benefits. 

Monti took over from former prime minister Silvio Berlusconi in November 2011. He inherited a recession and has done everything in his power since to protect Italy’s rich and to create a living hell for the working poor of Italy. Monti has passed tough austerity packages that protect his rich friends and create suffering for the masses. 
-R.Cunningham

Movement in Italy following the lead of protesters in Greece

June 16, 2012

Italy’s prime minister has “warned” that he is fending off economic disaster and insists that he must assault the working poor and unemployed as a result but tens of thousands of unionists, activists and regular citizen protesters have followed the situation in Greece closely and refuse to accept austerity attacks. They have taken to the streets in thousands to oppose the brutal austerity measures.

"We stepped away from the precipice before, but the hole is growing bigger and it may swallow us up. We are again in a crisis," Monti said in Milan on Saturday, trying to threaten his own citizens if they don’t allow him to steal all of their social benefits.

Monti took over from former prime minister Silvio Berlusconi in November 2011. He inherited a recession and has done everything in his power since to protect Italy’s rich and to create a living hell for the working poor of Italy. Monti has passed tough austerity packages that protect his rich friends and create suffering for the masses.

-R.Cunningham