Skip to content

Month: September 2013

Even when you do everything right, life happens

Even when you do everything right, life happens

by digby

There’s a lot of resentment toward baby boomers among young people out there and often for a very good reason. We are an insufferably self-centered lot. (And the generation that famously used “never trust anyone over 30” as its credo is in no position to complain.) In their view we are leaving a pretty awful world behind, one worse than the one were born into. And in their minds we had it easy. One young liberal in his 20s said to me the other day that baby boomers deserve to live in penury in their old age because they failed to take advantage of their opportunities which he doesn’t have and I suppose he had a point. A lot of us failed to get rich, something that was undoubtedly easier to do during our lives than what’s facing young people today.

It was with that conversation in mind that I read this piece about a 77 year old man who has gone back to work:

It seems like another life. At the height of his corporate career, Tom Palome was pulling in a salary in the low six-figures and flying first class on business trips to Europe.

Today, the 77-year-old former vice president of marketing for Oral-B juggles two part-time jobs: one as a $10-an-hour food demonstrator at Sam’s Club, the other flipping burgers and serving drinks at a golf club grill for slightly more than minimum wage.

At the height of his corporate career, Tom Palome was pulling in a salary in the low six-figures and flying first class on business trips to Europe.

Today, the 77-year-old former vice president of marketing for Oral-B juggles two part-time jobs: one as a $10-an-hour food demonstrator at Sam’s Club, the other flipping burgers and serving drinks at a golf club grill for slightly more than minimum wage.

While Palome worked hard his entire career, paid off his mortgage and put his kids through college, like most Americans he didn’t save enough for retirement. Even many affluent baby boomers who are approaching the end of their careers haven’t come close to saving the 10 to 20 times their annual working income that investment experts say they’ll need to maintain their standard of living in old age.

For middle class households, with incomes ranging from the mid five to low six figures, it’s especially grim. When the 2008 financial crisis hit, what little Palome had saved — $90,000 — took a beating and he suddenly found himself in need of cash to maintain his lifestyle. With years if not decades of life ahead of him, Palome took the jobs he could find.

The youthful and perennially optimistic grandfather considers himself lucky. He’s blessed with good health, he said. He’s able to work, live independently and maintain his dignity, even if he has to mop the floors at the club grill before going home at 8 p.m. and finally getting off his feet.

“That’s part of the job,” he said. “You have to respect the job you’re doing and not be negative — or don’t do it.”

Low-income Americans have long had to scrape by in old age, relying primarily on Social Security. The middle class, with its more educated and resourceful retirees, is supposed to be better prepared, with some even having the luxury to forge fulfilling second acts as they redefine retirement on their own terms. Or so popular culture tells us.

The reality is often quite another story. More seniors who spent much of their careers as corporate managers and professionals are competing for low-wage jobs. For these growing ranks of seniors with scant savings, it’s the end of retirement.

About 7.2 million Americans who were 65 and older were employed last year, a 67 percent increase from a decade ago, according to government data. Yet 59 percent of households headed by people 65 and older currently have no retirement account assets, according to Federal Reserve data analyzed by the National Institute on Retirement Security.

“People who built successful careers, put their kids through college and saved what they could, are still facing downward mobility,” said Teresa Ghilarducci, an economist at The New School, who has studied the finances of seniors.

It’s about to get worse. Right behind the current legions of elderly workers is the looming baby boomer generation, who began turning 65 in 2011 and are reaching that age at a rate of about 8,000 a day. They’re the first generation expected to fund their own retirements, even as they live longer lives.

They, too, are coming up short. Company-paid pensions are mostly a thing of the past, replaced in the last three decades by 401(k) accounts primarily funded and managed by employees. The median 401(k) balance for households headed by people aged 55 to 64 who had retirement accounts at work was $120,000 in 2011, according to the Center for Retirement Research at Boston College.

Those savings will provide $4,800 a year, assuming seniors withdraw 4 percent annually, the amount recommended by retirement experts to ensure retirees don’t run out of money in their lifetimes.

Little wonder that half of baby boomers aged 50 to 64 don’t think they’ll ever have enough to retire, according to a 2011 survey by AARP.

“The current retirement savings systems isn’t working, and that’s becoming a crisis as Americans who make it to 65 in good health are now living at least two more decades,” said Larry Fink, chief executive officer of BlackRock Inc. (BLK), the world’s largest asset manager.

“Longevity should be a blessing, but if you haven’t planned for it, you’re going to work much longer than you ever dreamed of doing,” he said. “Or you better be good to your children because you’re probably going to be living with them.”

I think this guy’s history is fairly typical of many middle class Americans of a certain age:

Palome grew up in Poughkeepsie, New York. His parents were both immigrants, and his father worked as a laborer. After a stint in the Navy, Palome had a chance to work at a local International Business Machine Corp. (IBM) plant. The work was steady, with solid pay and benefits. Instead, he enrolled at Fordham University to study business, relying on veteran benefits to pay tuition. His father was so angry Palome turned down the plant job that he didn’t speak to him for months.

“I knew that anyone who got into that plant never got out,” he said. “You just got stuck because of the steady pay.”

Palome landed a job at Shulton Co., the maker of Old Spice after-shave lotion and cologne, then moved to Yardley of London as a brand manager. His big break came in 1975 when he was recruited to The Cooper Cos. as vice president of marketing for the Oral-B dental-care business.

The job gave him a high five-figure income and an executive’s life at age 39. He flew first class to Cooper offices in the U.S. and in England, Sweden and Germany. He helped win an endorsement for the Oral-B toothbrush from the U.S. Olympic Committee. He had a closet filled with business suits, and on weekends he played golf with other executives.

That life turned upside down when his wife, Edna, was killed in a car accident in 1983. Palome’s daughter, then a college student, offered to come home to take care of her brothers, who were 14 and 16 years old. Palome insisted she stay in school. He took charge of the parenting and the housework.

“I was numb, in shock and trying to hold everything together,” he said. “And my sons didn’t want anyone in the house besides me, not even a housekeeper.”

When Cooper relocated from New Jersey to California, Palome didn’t want to uproot his family. So in 1980, when he was 44, he started a consulting company, with Cooper as his main client. He also did consulting for Sandoz Pharmaceuticals, Johnson & Johnson and others.

In flush years, Palome had several clients and earned about $120,000. Though he saved for his kids’ college and helped his elderly parents, retirement wasn’t on his radar.
“I never thought I’d live this long,” he said.

Because he was self-employed, Palome didn’t have a 401(k) account, and he has never had a tax-deferred IRA, or Individual Retirement Account. It’s the same for most Americans. Only about half of private-sector workers were covered by an employer-sponsored retirement plan of any kind in 2011. And fewer than 40 percent of those participated, according to the Employee Benefits Research Institute.

Many now approaching retirement began saving too late, stopped saving when they lost jobs, or borrowed against their 401(k) accounts to finance their children’s college tuition. They also often chose investments that failed to yield the best results, or they bailed out of the stock market after the financial crisis battered their savings, then missing the rebound.

“How is the average middle-class person going to amass $1,000,000 by the time they’re 65, which is what they’ll need to get $40,000 a year in income from their retirement savings?” Ghilarducci said.

Palome had lean years when he couldn’t easily save. He decided to take a job running a Friendly’s restaurant in Parsippany, N.J., from 1990 to 1993. He figured he’d acquire new skills, which have since proved useful.

“Tom always did what he had to do to keep going,” said his younger brother Peter, who’s 66 and lives in the same senior community.

Palome later ran a restaurant at a New Jersey golf club while he continued his consulting. At 64, when an 800 square foot manufactured home he’d seen in Plant City, a Tampa suburb, became available for $21,500, he purchased it with a credit card to amass frequent flier miles. He then sold his New Jersey home for $180,000, kept what he needed to quickly pay off his credit card debt and divided the rest among his children so they’d have down payments for their own homes.

“The house was theirs as much as mine, and that’s their inheritance from me,” he said.

At first everything went according to his plan. Palome enjoyed the year-round warm weather and he avoided dipping into savings by doing part-time bar-tending and catering. Then the financial crisis hit. Palome’s part-time work evaporated. His savings, which he’d invested mostly in stocks, shrank from about $90,000 to less than $40,000.

That’s the story of a long life, which basically just observes that shit happens. It’s nice to think that you can plan everything properly, make the right decisions, be smart, be successful. But you just don’t know when life is going to toss you a curve ball that sets you off on a totally different course — like the death of a spouse, an illness or an epic financial and housing meltdown that wipes out your housing equity and 401K…

I’m not trying to make excuses. But it’s important to remember that the concept of “generations” is an abstraction. Within that abstraction are real human beings who live their lives the best way they know how within the context of their time. Most of them, regardless of their time on this planet, are just average folks doing their best to live decently, raise families and find a little happiness along the way. And when you get closer to the end of the adventure you realize a lot of things you could have done differently but you were busy just living.

This could happen to anyone, even those who are “responsible” and do all the right things. In a country as rich as this one it should be at least a little bit easier at the end of your life.

Social Security benefits need to be raised. For the good of every generation.

.

ICYMI: Duck Dynasty wisdom from Ted Cruz

ICYMI: Duck Dynasty wisdom from Ted Cruz

by digby

For those who were sleeping during the bulk of Texas Sen. Ted Cruz’s marathon floor speech on ObamaCare, which began at 2:41 p.m. EDT Wednesday, here are the highlights:

At hour 6, Cruz took an odd turn by reading his young daughters a bedtime story via the Senate floor cameras. The freshman Republican said his book of choice, Dr. Seuss’ “Green Eggs and Ham,” was a favorite of his as a child.

At hour 8, Cruz said he has no doubt President Obama sleeps well at night because he is committed to his principles, which Cruz argued are deeply harmful.

At hour 11, Cruz noted that most senators were sleeping through his all-night filibuster-like speech on the Senate floor. “It’s a late night. I’m going to venture to say most members of the United States Senate are home in bed, asleep, while America lives the nightmare.”

He also referenced the “wacko bird” comment – stemming from Arizona Sen. John McCain’s dismissal of Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul’s filibuster about drones – from earlier this year, saying he’s a “proud wacko bird” if that means fealty to the Constitution.

Cruz also rattled off quotes from the show “Duck Dynasty.” “… Redneck rule number one – most things can be fixed with duct tape and extension cords …”

At hour 12, there was a “Jeopardy”-like exchange between Cruz and Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, with both senators asking questions such as how long the Hundred Years’ War lasted (116 years); what color a purple finch is (crimson); what a camel-hair brush is made out of (squirrel fur); and where a Panama Hat comes from (Ecuador). They stretched the analogy to ObamaCare, arguing it was presented as something different than it really was – i.e., a “penalty” versus a “tax.”

At hour 14, Cruz acknowledged he’s had fatigue and pain but said it doesn’t compare with the pain of not fighting ObamaCare.

At hour 15, Cruz took a swipe at Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and other senators who rejected his defunding strategy. “This is the first time since I’ve been in the Senate that I’ve seen Senate Republican leadership whipping a vote … so that Harry Reid can turn around … and fund ObamaCare and gut the House resolution.”

So there you are.

The Village CW seems to be that Cruz has destroyed his career and this spells the end of the Tea Party Republicans. That would be nice.

.

Can we stop pretending these scammers have any productive value to society? by @DavidOAtkins

Can we stop pretending these scammers have any value to society?

by David Atkins

Behold, ladies and gentlemen, your masters of the universe so productive that the American economic engine would cease to operate without them:

Reporting from CNBC and Quartz points to strong circumstantial evidence that one or more traders received an early leak of the Federal Reserve’s surprise decision last week not to slow down its bond purchases.

Markets swung rapidly on the 2 p.m. announcement last Wednesday, with stocks, bonds, and the price of gold all skyrocketing. Somebody placed massive orders for gold futures contracts betting on exactly that outcome within a millisecond or two of 2 p.m. that day — before the seven milliseconds had passed that would allow the transmission of the information from the Fed’s “lock-up” of media organizations who get an early look at the data and the arrival of that information at Chicago’s futures markets (that’s the time it takes the data to travel at the speed of light. A millisecond is a thousandth of a second). CNBC’s Eamon Javers, citing market analysis firm Nanex, estimates that $600 million in assets could have changed hands in that fleeting moment.

There would seem to be three possibilities: 1) Some trader was extraordinarily lucky, placing a massive bet just before a major announcement that would make that bet highly profitable. 2) There was a leak, either by a media organization with early access to the data or even someone at the Fed. Or 3) The laws of physics have been violated as the information traveled from Washington to Chicago faster than the speed of light.

You can see why Option 2 looks the most plausible.

What you are looking at here is very similar to this scene from the fantastic film Trading Places:

Except that the modern scam involves writing computer programs to trade insider information a few milliseconds faster than the other guy. Keep in mind also that there is unproven speculation that a few key trading firms, including and especially Goldman Sachs, have direct access to the stock exchange servers themselves thereby allowing them to get a few milliseconds jump on their competition.

None of which, of course, has any productive value for society whatsoever. None, nada, zip. If all of this activity were made illegal and every one of these “traders” jailed, the only people who would miss them are their chauffeurs, nannies and housekeepers.

These people aren’t the “productive class.” They’re the scammer class. America just hasn’t figured out yet that what they do should be either illegal or very highly taxed.

.

A clever return

A clever return

by digby

Somebody responded to the Koch Brothers shameful ad trying to convince young people to go without insurance:

Honestly, the minute I saw creepy Uncle Sam betwixt the girl’s legs I thought of the mandatory transvaginal probes, not Obamacare.

*Another way to do this would be to have Uncle Sam hand the girl a packet of birth control pills and say, “no charge.”

.

Mama Cheney’s not happy. And when Mama Cheney’s not happy …

Mama Cheney’s not happy. And when Mama Cheney’s not happy …

by digby

She’s such a nice lady:

While Former Vice President Dick Cheney has stayed mostly mum on his daughter’s bid for the U.S. Senate seat currently held by Sen. Mike Enzi (R-WY), his wife allegedly had some harsh words Saturday for a former senator who voiced his support for Enzi.

Lynne Cheney told former Sen. Alan Simpson (R-WY) to “shut your mouth” about Liz Cheney’s primary opponent at a fundraiser in Cody, Wyo., according to Simpson’s daughter-in-law.

“So I’m at the Patrons Ball tonight and Lynne Cheney, the mother of Liz, comes up to my father-in-law and tells him to… I believe the direct quote was ‘Shut your mouth’ regarding his support of Mike Enzi,” Deb Oakley Simpson wrote on her Facebook page, as quoted by the Casper Star-Tribune.

Lynne’s got a nasty temper. I couldn’t help but recall this CNN interview with Wolf Blitzer from 2006:

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Would you agree a dunk in water is a no- brainer if it can save lives?

VICE PRESIDENT CHENEY: Well, it’s a no-brainer to me, but I — for a while there, I was criticized as being the vice president for torture. We don’t torture. That’s not what we’re involved in.

(END VIDEO CLIP) BLITZER: It made it sound — and there’s been interpretation to this effect — that he was, in effect, confirming that the United States used this waterboarding, this technique that has been rejected by the international community that simulates a prisoner being drowned, if you will, and he was, in effect, supposedly, confirming that the United States has been using that.

L. CHENEY: No, Wolf — that is a mighty house you’re building on top of that mole hill there, a mighty mountain. This is complete distortion; he didn’t say anything of the kind.

BLITZER: Because of the dunking of — you know, using the water and the dunking.

L. CHENEY: Well, you know, I understand your point. It’s kind of the point of a lot of people right now, to try to distort the administration’s position, and if you really want to talk about that, I watched the program on CNN last night, which I thought — it’s your 2006 voter program, which I thought was a terrible distortion of both the president and the vice president’s position on many issues.

It seemed almost straight out of Democratic talking points using phrasing like “domestic surveillance” when it’s not domestic surveillance that anyone has talked about or ever done. It’s surveillance of terrorists. It’s people who have al Qaeda connections calling into the United States. So I think we’re in the season of distortion, and this is just one more.

Nobody does it better. She’s as good as anybody in the GOP.

Here she goes right in Blitzer’s face:

L. CHENEY: Well, all right, Wolf. I’m here to talk about my book, but if you want to talk about distortion …

BLITZER: We’ll talk about your book.

L. CHENEY: Well, right, but what is CNN doing running terrorist tape of terrorists shooting Americans? I mean, I thought Duncan Hunter ask you a very good question and you didn’t answer it. Do you want us to win?

The answer, of course, is we want the United States to win. We are Americans. There’s no doubt about that. Do you think we want terrorists to win?

L. CHENEY: Then why are you running terrorist propaganda?

It doesn’t get any more aggressive than that. And then she went into an even angrier spin:

BLITZER:Let’s talk about another issue in the news, then we’ll get to the book. This — the Democrats are now complaining bitterly in this Virginia race, George Allen using novels — novels — that Jim Webb, his Democratic challenger, has written in which there are sexual references, and they’re making a big deal out of this. I want you to listen to what Jim Webb said today in responding to this very sharp attack from George Allen.

L. CHENEY: Now, do you promise, Wolf, that we’re going to talk about my book?

BLITZER: I do promise.

L. CHENEY: Because this seems to me a mighty long trip around the merry-go-round.

BLITZER: I want you to — this was in the news today and your name has come up, so that’s why we’re talking about it, but listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JAMES WEBB (D), VIRGINIA SENATE CANDIDATE: There’s nothing that’s been in any of my novels that, in my view, hasn’t been either illuminated the surroundings or defining a character or moving a plot. I’m a serious writer. I mean, we can go and read Lynne Cheney’s lesbian love scenes, you know, if you want to get graphic on stuff.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

L. CHENEY: Jim Webb is full of baloney. I have never written anything sexually explicit. His novels are full of sexual, explicit references to incest, sexually explicit references — well, you know, I just don’t want my grandchildren to turn on the television set. This morning, Imus was reading from the novels, and it’s triple-X rated.

BLITZER: Here’s what the Democratic Party put out today, the Democratic Congressional — Senatorial Campaign Committee: “Lynne Cheney’s book featured brothels and attempted rape. In 1981, Vice President Dick Cheney’s wife, Lynne, wrote a book called “Sisters,” which featured a lesbian love affair, brothels and attempted rapes.”

L. CHENEY: No.

BLITZER: “In 1988, Lynn Cheney wrote about a Republican vice president who dies of a heart attack while having sex with his mistress.” Is that true?

L. CHENEY: Nothing explicit. And actually, that was full of lies. It’s not — it’s just — it’s absolutely not a…

BLITZER: But you did write a book entitled “Sisters”?

L. CHENEY: I did write a book entitled “Sisters.”

BLITZER: And it did have lesbian characters.

L. CHENEY: This description — no, not necessarily. This description is a lie. I’ll stand on that.

BLITZER: There’s nothing in there about rapes and brothels?

L. CHENEY: Well, Wolf, could we talk about a children’s book for a minute?

BLITZER: We can talk about the children’s book. I just wanted to…

L. CHENEY: I think my segment is, like, 15 minutes long and we’ve had about 10 minutes of…

BLITZER: I just wanted to — I just wanted to clarify what’s in the news today, given — this is…

L. CHENEY: Sex, lies and distortion. That’s what it is.

BLITZER: This is an opportunity for you to explain on these sensitive issues.

L. CHENEY: Wolf, I have nothing to explain. Jim Webb has a lot to explain.

BLITZER: Well, he says he’s only — as a serious writer, novelist, a fiction writer, he was doing basically what you were doing.

L. CHENEY: Jim Webb is full of baloney

As I said, she’s a lovely gal. Simpson is lucky he didn’t wind up on the floor clutching his crotch. Blitzer had the look on his face of someone who had suffered a low blow in that exchange, that’s for sure.

Update:

In a statement, Lynne Cheney denied the brush-up, saying, “We love Al and Ann. We have been friends for over 40 years. As to the story posted on Facebook, I have to admit I am at a bit of a loss. That simply did not happen.”

Ryan Grim spoke to Simpson, who is hardly known as a wilting flower himself, and it looks like the lovely Lynne lied:

Lynne Cheney “just unloaded” on Alan Simpson at a Wyoming event Saturday evening, the former Republican senator told The Huffington Post. Cheney was angry at Simpson for backing incumbent Sen. Mike Enzi in the Republican Party primary race against her daughter Liz Cheney.

“I was surprised at her intensity,” Simpson said. “It was eyes-flashing and pretty intense.”

Simpson said he explained to Cheney that he has a history with Enzi that goes back decades — and that, in fact, Simpson is the reason Enzi is in public life at all.

“I am unqualified in my support of Mike Enzi, but it’s not about Liz Cheney for God’s sake,” he told The Huffington Post on Tuesday. “It’s about the fact that I’m the guy who talked Mike Enzi into running for public office. I met him when he was the president of the Wyoming Jaycees. I explained that to Lynne but she didn’t seem to listen.”

It’s not pretty when a party starts to cannibalize itself. But it’s fun to watch.

Evidence-based governance versus faith-based economics, by @DavidOAtkins

Evidence-based governance versus faith-based economics

by David Atkins

Krugman:

Proponents of austerity, however, were lying about their motives. Strong words, but if you look at their recent reactions it becomes clear that all the claims about expansionary austerity, 90 percent cliffs and all that were just excuses for an agenda of dismantling the welfare state. That in turn helps explain why the intellectual collapse of their supposed arguments has made no difference to their policy position.

One interesting point, which Wren-Lewis gets at and I’ve mentioned on other occasions, is that the austerity side of this debate isn’t just disingenuous; it doesn’t seem to comprehend the notion that other people might actually argue in good faith. No time to do the link right now, but back when we were discussing stimulus many people on the right, economists like Lucas included, simply assumed that people like Christy Romer were making stuff up to serve a political agenda. And now I think we can see why they made this assumption — after all, that’s how they work.

This is the problem when only one side is interested in actual governance. “Serious” people cringe when this sort of rhetoric gets thrown around, but it’s less useful to consider conservative economics as a political principle than a religious one. The biggest problem with faith-based arguments is that there’s no way to disprove them: believers will continue to believe no matter what logic is marshaled because their beliefs aren’t based in evidence.

To both its credit and detriment, the Left saw the failures of Communism and determined to be above all pragmatic and pratical: where capitalism and free markets can achieve the best outcomes for the greatest number, let them flourish unfettered. Where unbound capitalism creates grossly unjust inequalities, crashes into resource shortages or fails to provide the best outcomes, government of the people must step in. The entire argument between progressives and neoliberals is about where those areas are, and their extent–financial markets, energy and healthcare being prime examples of each, respectively. But the internal battles of the left are reality-based regardless of which side one is on.

The Right never had such a reckoning. Between the 1930s and 1960s the Right bided its time in fear of competition with other economic systems, but never came to grips with the failures of its own ideology. It remains mired in the theological doctrine of the gods of the market. Free market principles cannot fail; they can only be failed.

If the free market is clearly ill-equipped to deal with providing healthcare at a national level, it still must be the fault of something else. A scapegoat must be found, even if it’s as silly as tort lawyers, because the economic principle cannot fail. At a pragmatic level, a rightist insisting that the free market provide healthcare is as silly as a leftist insisting that the government nationalize the hairbrush market. A pragmatist knows that different methods work better in different circumstances. As it turns out, progressives tend to be a fairly pragmatic bunch.

But for the Right, arguments are never based on the empirical evidence, but amassed to justify what they already “know” to be true in their hearts. It’s hard to run a country divided between pragmatics and zealots but there we are.

.

Cruzin’ for a bruisin’

Cruzin’ for a bruisin’


by digby

So, this happened:

“If you go to the 1940s, Nazi Germany. Look, we saw in Britain, Neville Chamberlain, who told the British people, ‘Accept the Nazis. Yes, they’ll dominate the continent of Europe but that’s not our problem. Let’s appease them. Why? Because it can’t be done. We can’t possibly stand against them.'”

“And in America there were voices that listened to that. I suspect those same pundits who say it can’t be done, if it had been in the 1940s we would have been listening to them. Then they would have made television. They would have gotten beyond carrier pigeons and beyond letters and they would have been on tv and they would have been saying, ‘You cannot defeat the Germans.'”

That’s Ted Cruz in his pretend filibuster. And he’s not comparing the Democrats to the Nazi appeasers. He’s talking about his fellow Republican Senators. Oh s-nap.

Here’s an example of right wing reaction:

How dare Ted Cruz threaten to filibuster to save Americans from Obamacare! At least when Democrats filibuster, it’s for important reasons, like to try to prevent the Republicans from passing the Civil Rights Act in 1964!!! – liberal logic

And this, from RNC chair Reince Priebus, is hardly any more coherent:

The House has passed a bipartisan bill to accomplish two goals that are in line with the will of the American people: (a) end the ObamaCare train wreck by defunding it and (b) keep the government open and running. Now it’s up to the Senate to do the same.

Republicans want to keep the government running. Democrats claim they want the same, but they aren’t acting like it. By denouncing the House bill, Harry Reid has already said that he’s willing to shut down the government to save face for the president and to defend a failed law.

Republicans run the House and they’ve done their part: funding the government, defunding ObamaCare. If the Senate fails to do the same, it will be Democrats’ fault. If the government has to shut down, it will be their doing.

President Obama could’ve tried to work with the Senate toward a solution. But as has been the case for over four years, he refused to.

House Republicans produced and passed legislation to keep the government running. They’ve done the job Americans wanted. Now it’s up to the Democrat-run Senate. Now the #SenateMustAct.

Judging from the twitter machine the tea partiers are fired up and ready to … vote against Republicans. They seem to be convinced that this can actually happen.

.

The plaintive wail of the persecuted Master of the Universe

The plaintive wail of the persecuted Master of the Universe

by digby

Because denying bonuses is to rich white guys what lynching is to blacks:

Robert Benmosche told the Wall Street Journal that “less than 10” employees were behind bad trades that led to a massive collapse of the market, and that lawmakers suffering of “ignorance” were wrong to demand accountability of AIG across-the-board:

“That was ignorance … of the public at large, the government and other constituencies. I’ll tell you why. [Critics referred] to bonuses as above and beyond [basic compensation]. In financial markets that’s not the case. … It is core compensation.

“Now you have these bright young people [in the financial-products unit] who had nothing to do with [the bad bets that hurt the company.] … They understand the derivatives very well; they understand the complexity. … They’re all scared. They [had made] good livings. They probably lived beyond their means. …They aren’t going to stay there for nothing.

The uproar over bonuses “was intended to stir public anger, to get everybody out there with their pitch forks and their hangman nooses, and all that–sort of like what we did in the Deep South [decades ago]. And I think it was just as bad and just as wrong.

In the wake of the crisis, the Obama administration pledged $85 billion to rescue AIG, in addition to the $250 billion TARP program.

The humanity.

This isn’t the first time we’ve heard this lament, of course. One of the most famous cri de couers of this financial meltdown came from an AIG executive clutching his pearls over possibly having to give back his bonus:

After 12 months of hard work dismantling the company — during which A.I.G. reassured us many times we would be rewarded in March 2009 — we in the financial products unit have been betrayed by A.I.G. and are being unfairly persecuted by elected officials. In response to this, I will now leave the company and donate my entire post-tax retention payment to those suffering from the global economic downturn. My intent is to keep none of the money myself.

I take this action after 11 years of dedicated, honorable service to A.I.G. I can no longer effectively perform my duties in this dysfunctional environment, nor am I being paid to do so. Like you, I was asked to work for an annual salary of $1, and I agreed out of a sense of duty to the company and to the public officials who have come to its aid. Having now been let down by both, I can no longer justify spending 10, 12, 14 hours a day away from my family for the benefit of those who have let me down.
[…]
As most of us have done nothing wrong, guilt is not a motivation to surrender our earnings. We have worked 12 long months under these contracts and now deserve to be paid as promised. None of us should be cheated of our payments any more than a plumber should be cheated after he has fixed the pipes but a careless electrician causes a fire that burns down the house.
[…]
So what am I to do? There’s no easy answer. I know that because of hard work I have benefited more than most during the economic boom and have saved enough that my family is unlikely to suffer devastating losses during the current bust. Some might argue that members of my profession have been overpaid, and I wouldn’t disagree.

That is why I have decided to donate 100 percent of the effective after-tax proceeds of my retention payment directly to organizations that are helping people who are suffering from the global downturn. This is not a tax-deduction gimmick; I simply believe that I at least deserve to dictate how my earnings are spent, and do not want to see them disappear back into the obscurity of A.I.G.’s or the federal government’s budget. Our earnings have caused such a distraction for so many from the more pressing issues our country faces, and I would like to see my share of it benefit those truly in need.

On March 16 I received a payment from A.I.G. amounting to $742,006.40, after taxes. In light of the uncertainty over the ultimate taxation and legal status of this payment, the actual amount I donate may be less — in fact, it may end up being far less if the recent House bill raising the tax on the retention payments to 90 percent stands. Once all the money is donated, you will immediately receive a list of all recipients.

This choice is right for me. I wish others at A.I.G.-F.P. luck finding peace with their difficult decision, and only hope their judgment is not clouded by fear.

What could be more frightening that what happened to that poor, poor man. Why it’s even worse than being lynched, when you think about it. Because these men were job creators. (Well, not really, but they are members of the 1% and that’s just as good.)

I honestly don’t know when I’ve ever seen a more repulsive spectacle than these vastly wealthy Wall Street barons whining and blubbering over and over again about how unfair it is that they aren’t popular. Even now! What a big bunch of Marsha, Marsha, Marsha losers. Just crawl off somewhere, count your money and STFU.

.