Our Obligation To Help The Vulnerable

Some of my more malicious students ask impertinent and libelous questions such as: "To what extent are we responsible for assisting the poor and the vulnerable?"

Well...aside from removing any possibility of getting a passing grade, such questions also require legal action that holds these "students" (traitors, really) personally liable for damages. And, yes, this is a remarkably stupid question, completely beneath my stature to answer, and an incredibly inefficient use of my massive brain power.

That said.

Let's start with a state of nature, where wealth can be measured on a scale. Let's say that the poorest person is a "0" and the richest person is a "10". We, as a society, as a community, and as a nation, collectively decide to follow the advice of our moral leaders who decide that no person shall have a wealth beneath a "3".

At that point, people from "3" to "10" are asked to voluntarily contribute money to the impoverished "0" to "2" crowd in order to avoid imprisonment. And we use democratic principles to ensure that most people do not pay this tax; preferably, only the "8" through "10" people will pay it. And with any luck, these richest people (formerly "8" to "10") will become "7" people, as no one has the right to be rich in the presence of so much human suffering.

Now, after this transfer, our improved society has a wealth distribution of "3" to "7" instead of the original "0" to "10".

Do you know anything about scales? Probably not. So pay attention: The "3" people are rescaled to "0" because they are the poorest, and the "7" people are rescaled to "10" because they are the richest. That brings us back to an unjust "0" to "10" society.

And because injustice requires justice, and since we as a society, a community, and a nation have already declared that "0" to "2" is unacceptable (to say nothing of the unequal distribution of wealth), we repeat the process to eliminate poverty -- and spread the wealth -- once again. And, again, it is done in a democratic fashion, since the majority of people, "0" through "7", will either get a well-deserved government check in the mail, or are unaffected.

Rescale the old "3-to-7" to the new "0-to-10".

Redistribute.

Repeat.

Repeat.

Repeat.

Repeat.

Does a "0" still look different from a "10"?

Repeat.

Repeat.

Repeat.

In the end, we will achieve social and economic justice when everyone has the same "wealth number".

Luckily, You Have Me

One of my innumerable great frustrations is that my advice to others is not enforceable by law. (At least, not yet.)

When I approach others and tell them what is good for them, they will sometimes listen to me -- but they will also (to their detriment) not follow my advice.

For example:

- When I see two people pass each other on the street, I will frequently demand that the richer one (in my infallible estimation) give a large sum of money to the poorer person. (And to do it in good faith.)

- When I see a healthy person near a physically challenged person, I will tell the healthy person to express compassion by willingly pouring acid in their own eyes, or breaking some their own toes, or perhaps igniting themselves on fire.

In fact, whenever I see someone not doing something that I myself would do, I must correct it. Why? Because I know more than they do, and clearly have the academic credentials to prove it.

It is therefore mathematically indisputable that the adoption of my demands works to the betterment of society. And from that, the only ironclad conclusion is that my word must be enforced by law; i.e., the people and their army.

Regrettably, this is not the case.

Except in my classroom. Don't expect to pass economics class if you haven't shown concern about our environment by ingesting the decayed juice at the bottom of the dumpster.

And except in Congress. Finally, the rule of experts is The Law.

Back To Work!

The first post-racial Five-Year Plan has been implemented: The people have jobs again!

[Pelosi's] spokesman, Brendan Daly, said more than two hours after Reid's announcement, "We are moving forward with this legislation, which will create or save more than 3 million jobs."

Obama estimated 3.5 million in his own celebration of the agreement. He said it would "get our economy back on track."

And, under the best economic advisement, the bill will include one of the best incentives to get people to work:

"The emerging legislation is at the core of Obama's economic recovery program, and includes help for victims of the recession in the form of expanded unemployment benefits, food stamps, health coverage and more..."

The next Five-Year Plan, which needs to overlap with this Five-Year Plan, needs to put even more people to work. And so, I recommend the following IMMEDIATELY, as we are now locked in a crisis never before seen in the history of the cosmos:

- The return of the seven-day work week.

- Unemployment benefits at union scale, to encourage people to work those seven-day weeks.

- A comprehensive system of free everything for everyone forever (except for the ruling class which The Revolution will continue to address).

- 100% taxation.

- Billions and billions and billions and billions and billions and billions and billions and billions of dollars for education, so that parents can work continuously while we nourish the minds of our nation's children so that they will not grow into greedy war-mongering capitalists.

Yes we can!

Yes we did!

Very Large Numbers

Most people have difficulty comprehending large numbers. Which is why most people are not suited for careers in academia! And so, they turn to gifted mathematicians/economists/sociologists such as myself for an explanation.

Let's look at an article from today's news to help us (i.e., "you") grasp large numbers.

The Obama administration is promising an aggressive effort to combat the worst financial crisis in seven decades, unveiling a program that could mobilize well over $1 trillion in public and private support to get the frozen credit markets functioning again.

There are two numbers here: "Seven" and "$1 trillion".

Let's examine "seven". Or, actually, "seven decades". That's seven times ten years, or seventy years. That's a lot of time! And though there have been many financial crises in those seventy years, none...none...have been as awful as what we are facing today.

Now let's look at the other number: "$1 trillion". Well, it's hard to think of many numbers smaller than "1"! So, we can address a monumental problem of seventy years by requesting that the obscenely rich return "1" of their stolen money.

You probably feel smarter already.

The new plan would greatly expand an effort to unclog credit markets that provide loans to consumers and businesses. Funding for this effort would see a huge increase from $20 billion up to $100 billion, according to administration officials.

Now we are introduced to two new numbers: "$20 billion" and "$100 billion". What do these numbers have in common? I will tell you: The have "unit commonality". Those are big words! So I'll just put on my "every person" hat to help you understand. Both numbers contain the word "billion". So, basically, they are identical (notwithstanding the fallacious "huge increase" editorializing by the Zionist author of the article -- who will be punished under the 2009 Equal Time Law).

If a total of $100 billion from the bailout fund was used, it would be enough to support an additional $1 trillion in lending support through a Federal Reserve program that was announced in November but has yet to begin operations.

Uh-oh, now we're confronted with "mixed-unit reconciliation". Fortunately, the "100" is much larger than the "1", so in essence, we are "doing more with less". And...I used the phrase "in essence", which is a powerful connotation of my intellectual firepower.

The administration also announced a program to create a partnership between the government and the private sector to get private investors to buy bad assets that are currently weighing down the balance sheets of banks. Congressional aides who were briefed on this plan said that Treasury officials said it could involve between $250 billion and $500 billion in government support.

Thankfully, we're now in the safe waters of unit commonality again, so the numbers can be safely disregarded.

Incidentally, it is clearly excellent public policy to "get private investors to buy bad assets", especially with public money, which as we just learned, is of no mathematical consequence.

I Didn't Realize There Were So Many Economists In Europe

Survey: 31% of Europeans blame economic crisis on Jews An Anti-Defamation League report published on Tuesday showed that nearly half of the Europeans surveyed believe Jews are not loyal to their country and more than one-third believe they have "too much power" in business and finance. The study further showed that 31% of the respondents across Europe blame Jews in the financial industry for the current global economic crisis.

I have already launched a lawsuit against economics textbook publishers that conveniently omit these facts.

Twelve Reasons Why You Should Support President Obama's Economic Stimulus

1. It's a free lunch. Has any supporter of this bill discussed its costs? No. Therefore, there are no costs. All gain, no pain.

2. It increases the federal deficit. I cried and wailed when Mister Bush increased the deficit -- but now, I embrace it as a foundation of forward-looking economic progress.

3. It spreads the wealth. I am especially fond of tax credits that shift money from those who "earned" it to those who deserve it.

4. Demand up, prices DOWN. Any Nobel-prize winning economist can tell you that when demand is stimulated and people buy more and more things, then prices drop. When demand goes up, prices some down. Less is more!

5. It is an EMERGENCY. The emaciated corpses are rotting in the open sewers and the streets are running with blood. How much more suffering can we endure? This bill must be passed yesterday.

6. Experts always know what is best. Speaking as an expert myself, I of course know what is best for others. But of what use is this knowledge unless it is converted to action and enforced by law? And that is why the entire "spending sector" needs to be controlled by government.

7. It's green. Our toxic environment has shortened our lifespans to an all-time low. Global warming has already claimed millions of lives and has eradicated the diversity of life on this planet. This is why we need, now, without debate, thousands of new hybrid-electric government vehicles and comprehensive reconstruction of every government office building. Millions of homeowners everywhere are now demolishing their own homes and replacing them with new structures incorporating windmills and ocean energy -- so let's allow them to pay taxes for the government to do the same!

8. It is a bipartisan initiative. Or, at least it will be after we educate the Nazi GOP go along to get along.

9. Did someone say "Digital TV Coupons"?

10. It is post-racial. This is a bill devised by our newly-elected post-racial African-American leader, teacher, and mass mentor, President (and Ph.D?) Barack Hussein Obama. Opposition to the bill is therefore racist, and diminishes the stature of President Obama to the typical white person's caricature (and desire) of tossing slaves into gas chambers, just like the Zionists imaginary false claims about themselves. Free Gaza!

11. More government workers, more government contractors, more government projects. Is there anything more stimulating than millions of government workers at the beck and call of the citizenry? Well, perhaps only this...

12. It enhances my late-night Presidential fantasizing. Just ask this lady (and especially her commenters). I too have an insatiable appetite for Obama...and the Obama family!

The Nightmare is Over

Our eight-year nightmare is over.

Never in history has there been a more cruel regime than what we have suffered through under the moron-sadist. No people have suffered more than we have. No one. Ever.

The Republican Holocaust is over, and we are the Holocaust Survivors.

Even now, it is nearly impossible to comprehend the enormity of the cruelty that has been inflicted on us: Torture, lies, and the complete destruction of our most basic human rights.

I say: Never again!

And so: Let The Revolution begin!

First: End the fascist propaganda machine! Remember: A government that is needed to do anything is a government that has the right to do everything.



Second: Allow our true friends to embrace change:

Russia to station missiles near Poland
In an assertive first annual address to the nation, [Medvedev] defended Russia's war with Georgia, appealed to nationalism and attacked Washington's "selfish" foreign policy and "economic blunders" which he said caused the global financial crisis.

Third: Oppressed people, unite!

American elections "a historic intifada named Barack Obama"

Praising in advance the benefits of victory Obama, Atwan said that "(...) the expected change in the USA will undoubtedly have its positive impact on us, Arabs and Muslims, who have suffered a Administration past eight years under the control of Zionists, with the hold-up of the Israeli lobby whose objective is to destroy the Arab world and Islam

It will take many years to undo The Holocaust; we must begin at once.

Hope!

Peanut Butter, Jelly, and Enemy Exterminations

Before you vote, consider this story:

You and I live on a desert island. You produce peanut butter and I produce jelly. We both enjoy eating our products, but we would really enjoy eating peanut butter and jelly. So, to increase total happiness, I take some of your peanut butter, mix it with my jelly, and have therefore increased the total happiness of society. Your loss of peanut butter has been vastly mitigated by my enjoying peanut butter and jelly. Your wealth has been spread. This is simple mathematics.

Now we are joined by a third person. In order to ensure full employment on the island, I give the third person a uniform and a badge (and a percentage of your peanut butter) to take your peanut butter whenever I choose. Because I have the positive right to your peanut butter (due to increased societal happiness), neither my officer nor I need to ask for your permission -- nor in any way do we need be grateful for your contribution. It is our entitlement and it is your obligation.

We are now joined by a fourth person. I turn my jelly business over to him -- and to sustain the island, my officer collects peanut butter and jelly and brings it to me.

A fifth person arrives and develops a method of making more jelly in less time. However, this is very dangerous for three reasons: First, the island itself has a right to not have its resources exploited. Secondly, what would people on other islands think of us if we were to consume so much jelly? And most importantly, a second jelly producer would harm the ability of the existing jelly producer to a fair wage. And so, my officer approaches the second producer and explains that, in order to guarantee the safety of his jelly, he needs an island license to conduct his business. And since the newcomer cannot prove that his jelly will always be safe to eat, he is denied a license.

A sixth person arrives from another island with a barrel of jelly. My officer turns him back to sea with his jelly. The possibility of dumping this jelly on our island would harm our only jelly producer, and must not be permitted. While I welcome free trade, it must also be fair trade. And this is most definitely not fair.

Thirty-four people then wash ashore, increasing the island's population to forty. The island's food producers attempt to hire them in exchange for a cup of food per day. However, this is worker exploitation, and my sense of economic justice demands that each worker instead be paid three cups of food per day. The producers then have the audacity to hire only half of the new residents at this fair wage, leaving the other half unemployed. To address this issue, I (and my uniformed officer) impose an additional fair tax on the richest 5% of the island's population, which happen to be the greedy and exploitative peanut-butter and jelly "producers" who in fact do nothing but reap unearned windfall profits on the backs of working people.

Sixty more people show up, and now there are 100 inhabitants on the island. These sixty are very poor, ill, and have not eaten in weeks. So, in order to protect them, I order the unionization of the island's 17 employees, which results in a labor contract mandating payment of six cups of food per day, 45 paid holidays, strictly-enforced job definitions, a no-layoff clause, and a just arbitration process to settle any grievances that might arise.

And I raise the top tax rate to 75% in order to pay for my expanded People's Police, comprised of the latest wave of migration.

For inexplicable reasons, the capitalists then reduce production. They are, quite clearly, traitors. And having been exposed as Enemies of The Island, they are set off on a raft to reeducation facilities -- wherever such facilities might happen to be.

At this point, the people are quite upset. They want a solution. They realize that our half-measures have not sufficed. So, in order to satisfy the cries of the people, The Island nationalizes and assumes direct control of all production of peanut butter and jelly. Half of the island's population now joyously works, and the other half performs police services. In the peanut fields, they gleefully sing, "Let's boast to the world about this year's bumper peanut harvest!"

An election is held, and 100% of the people elect me President for Life of the new Democratic People's Island Republic.

The other islands are so impressed with our success that they cheer the arrival of the DPIR's People's Police to liberate them as well.

As the chains of oppression are broken on each island, the DPIRPP listens to the working class as they identify members of the exploitative class: They, and their families, are shown the only justice that is fitting for such parasites.

As proof of our success, there is never again any dissent, anywhere. All infections have been eradicated.

***

The above tale is a fiction of what can happen to several hundred people. It is not what I would personally want to see. Instead, I yearn for this to happen to millions, if not hundreds of millions, of people.

Imagine: Our entire planet, in unity, striving for this permanent and irreversible state of justice. The leaders shall guide with their wisdom, the workers shall endlessly toil for all, and our enemies -- millions and millions of enemies -- shall be silenced forever. And yes, I do mean silenced by death -- for total extermination is the only permanent silence.

To interfere with the will of the people is to label oneself as an enemy of humanity. And there can be no mercy for enemies of humanity.

Please remember this when deciding who to vote for.

Unfortunately, we lack a candidate who can be so candid with us. Instead, we must strive for second-best. Listen to them carefully, and see whose vernacular comes closest to mimicking the above story.

That is who you should want as your leader.

God DAMN Amerikkka!

Cross-posted at The People's Cube

President Obama and Negative Rights

Barack Obama concisely sums it up:

It didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the founding fathers in the Constitution, at least as its been interpreted and Warren Court interpreted in the same way, that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. Says what the states can’t do to you. Says what the Federal government can’t do to you, but doesn’t say what the Federal government or State government must do on your behalf, and that hasn’t shifted and one of the, I think, tragedies of the civil rights movement was, um, because the civil rights movement became so court focused I think there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalition of powers through which you bring about redistributive change.

Exactly.

Imagine you are on a desert island with only one other person, and you are hungry. His negative right would constrain you from taking his food. But your positive right would compel him to give you his food.

Multiply that by millions and millions of people, and you can see how negative rights leads to exploitation of the worker, and how positive rights leads to the liberation of the worker.

And that is one of the biggest problems with Amerikkka's KKKonstitution. That is, the warped concept of "negative liberties" constrains the government. It says that the government has no right to help its people. That the people lack the positive right to demand what they need.

So, the new constitution must be reformulated with positive liberties. That is, the right of the people to get what they need. To demand food, shelter, clothing, healthcare, education, a media free of fascist thought, a world without Zionism, etc.

In short, a proper constitution would be an living and breathing orgy of emotional eruptions that would satisfy the peoples' cries for social and economic justice.

Remember: If something, anything, is demanded, then someone else ought to be compelled to provide it. It is your positive right that makes this happen.

God Damn Amerikkka! God Damn the Amerikkkan KKKonstitution!

Elasticity of Supply

Did that subject line, "Elasticity of Supply", and the adjacent equation intimidate you?

It should have! Remember, you are reading the words of a hypereducated multiple-degreed full tenured professor. A person who can demolish any of your "lay" arguments (and your reputation!) with just an iota of my enormous reservoir of brainpower, expertise, and jargon.

So, I invite you to unquestioningly accept this lesson in "elasticity of supply" and use it to reinforce your decision to elect Barack Obama as President.

I will now explain how President Obama's plan to raise taxes is as sound as any law of physics.

Let's use Starbucks as an example of a capitalist entity that is swimming in profits on the backs of labor. Yes, the obvious moral solution is to shutter Starbucks and allow the people to drag the owners into the gutter for merciless beatings.

But we will save moral arguments for another time, and concentrate for now on science.

And the science, as President Obama knows, is to tax Starbucks to spread the wealth. So, let's say that a cup of coffee costs $5, and President Obama decrees (after legislation is passed in The People's Assembly) that a tax on this item should be $4.

What happens next?

A right-wing propagandist would say, "That would raise the price of a cup to $9. And since no one would pay $9 for coffee, Starbucks would go out of business, no one would get any coffee, and no taxes would be raised anyway."

If only!

If only it were that easy to kill Starbucks!

But even the fascist propaganda has a kernel of truth: "No taxes would be paid anyway."

But "no taxes" is the antithesis of a just nation.

Remember:

Nations are judged by how much the rich pay in taxes. (At least until The Revolution is complete.)

Here is what would really happen when a $4 tax is applied to a $5 cup of coffee: Simply put, the price will remain at $5 -- of which $4 will be returned to the people. And this is because of the elasticity of supply. In common language (for uneducated common people), the "elasticity of supply" refers to how much less (or more) of an item capitalists would be willing to sell if its price declined (or increased). That is, the change in supply divided by the change in price.

In this case, the "Before Obama" profit was $5, and the "After Obama" profit will be $1. So, we need to determine how many fewer cups of coffee Starbucks will be willing to sell if they only received $1 per cup instead of $5 per cup. And the answer is: There would be absolutely no change! How do we know this?

Because the supply elasticity is always zero!

Capitalists and their corporate marketing departments are insensitive to everything, and so will continue to force us to buy things we do not want.

Let's look at the mathematical proof:

A $5 tax is only one penny higher than a $4.99 tax. And does anyone really believe that a difference of one lousy penny would make any difference to anyone? Don't be stupid! Of course not!

And a $4.99 tax is equal to a $4.98 tax. How do we know this? Because we just proved that Starbucks executives will not change their policies based on a difference of just once cent.

Similarly, a $4.98 tax is equal to a $4.97 tax. A $4.97 tax is equal to a $4.96 tax. And continuing, we see that a one-cent tax is equal to no tax at all.

Therefore, a $5 tax has the same effect on supply as no tax at all. The elasticity of supply is zero, and Starbucks will not alter their behavior regardless of how much the taxes are.

So, tax levels have no relation whatsoever to corporate behavior, and President Obama would be justified in taxing the entire $5 of a $5 cup of coffee

Q.E.D.

Of course, that was just a sample exercise. In practice, this 100% taxation model should not be applied to Starbucks -- but should be applied to Starbucks, physicians, pharmaceutical companies, automobile manufacturers, home builders, etc., etc., etc.

After all, as Barack Obama Sr. pointed out, "there is nothing that can stop the government from taxing 100% of income."

For extra credit, think about the effects of a tax that exceeds 100%. That is, a $6 tax on a $5 purchase. Where would that money come from? Hint: They're called CAPITALists for a reason.

You can now go ahead and feel smart for having read my words, even if you lack the cognition to understand them.

Not a problem, though; you will always be taken care of when you leave the decisions to people who are smarter than you.

*****

This post is dedicated to the memory of my junior-year microeconomics professor, who in defending the minimum wage, correctly observed that "no supermarket will fire their baggers if their wages increase by a few cents." The present-day ubiquity of supermarket baggers is a testimony to this man's penetrating insights. Rest in peace, comrade; I will carry the torch for you.

A Children's Fable

I think I will write a children's story book. And when I do, it will include this story:

Once upon a time, there was an ant and a grasshopper. The ant was a wealthy capitalist who owned a chain of "big box" stores, and spent all summer counting his money, while the grasshopper labored very hard making money for the ant.

In short, the ant exploited the grasshopper.

All summer long, the ant would smoke cigars, drink martinis, and see prostitutes. The grasshopper would simply work as a slave for the ant and turn over his meager pay to A.N.S.W.E.R., The Rachel Corrie Memorial Fund, and the Barack Obama campaign.

Then the winter came. It was a cold and dark winter, and the grasshopper had nothing to eat. The bitter temperatures were caused by global warming, as the ant-made pollutants created heat pockets that actually lowered temperatures.

The grasshopper was hungry, for he had no money left. And so, he approached the ant: "Ant, my dear dear ant, please find it in your heart to spare just a tiny morsel of food so that I and my family might survive to see one more day."

The ant thought about this humble request. After several days of contemplation, the ant went to the grasshopper's house and approached the grasshopper's family. And then, without any hesitation, the ant raped the grasshopper's daughter so violently that she would have preferred death instead. However, the ant realized what the consequences of his actions might be, and so went from abortion clinic to abortion clinic, tossing gasoline bombs, dismembering doctors, and raping nurses. All in the name of Jesus, he would say. It is what the bible told him to do.

And so, without abortions, the grasshopper population multiplied far beyond its scientifically-calculated sustainable optimality. And all these new grasshoppers were hungry.

By the spring, half the grasshopper population died from either starvation or from the ant's insistence on sending grasshoppers to far-off lands to launch wars against innocent Islamic grasshoppers.

However, that summer, the grasshopper got himself a different job -- at The United States Department of Housing and Urban Development. His job was "Assistant Deputy Analyst" in the HOPE program, which mandates that ants pay the mortgages of those home-owning grasshoppers who have more pressing needs than to pay fort heir own homes. The grasshopper's responsibilities included "being able to analyze and prepare official HOPE documents while demonstrating proficiency in equivalent tasks and programs". In practice, this required the demands of attending many meetings and learning how to use "email".

Much of the HOPE time was spent making contributions to United for Peace and Justice and The Nation of Islam from the grasshopper's desk.

And once again, hunger arrived in the winter.

And the grasshopper approached the ant: "Hey ant, I'm gettin' in your face this year, know what I'm sayin? You owe me, unnerstan'? I got demands and you better respec' them."

The ant returned to his guarded estate, and a few days later, received a visit from someone unfamiliar. It was a grasshopper, but one whom he had never before met.

This new grasshopper said, "Ant...I am here to collect your money, which I will then give to the other grasshoppers, and will keep some for myself. If you do not agree, I will, at gunpoint, drag you to a prison cell where you will be anally violated while your life rots away in isolation."

The new grasshopper had a badge. It said "I.R.S."

And the ant turned over his plundered wealth to the I.R.S. grasshopper.

Forevermore, for the rest of his life, the ant, with his bottomless pit of money, would give and give to the grasshoppers -- providing for their food, their health care, their housing, their homes, and everything else that the grasshoppers could ever want or need, as determined by their educated leaders.

Moral: Rich capitalist ants have an endless supply of wealth that was stolen from the working class. It can never be depleted and it will always be there for taking -- by any means. It is not theirs, it belongs to the people, and shall be controlled by the people's leaders.

Kids: Let's educate your parents, kill the capitalists, and live in a Socialist Paradise!

God DAMN Amerikkka!

Cross posted at The People's Cube

Presidential Debate III

I was very proud of Barack Obama at last night's debate; he has been listening to me!

I played back this debate fourteen times already (with the McCain parts erased), and although I would like to post the entire transcript here, fourteen times over, I will only select the best of Barack:

And the financial rescue plan that Senator McCain and I supported is an important first step. And I pushed for some core principles: making sure that taxpayer can get their money back if they're putting money up.

Of course everyone will get their money back. That’s why they must contribute, whether or not they think it’s a good idea. If this was a bad idea, we would not make the taxpayers contribute.

Making sure that CEOs are not enriching themselves through this process.

Again, correct. When CEOs become rich, everyone else gets a smaller piece of the pie.

I want to end the tax breaks for companies that are shipping jobs overseas and provide a tax credit for every company that's creating a job right here in America.

This is only fair. Taxpayers need to pay more in order to ensure that Americans spend less time working in industries like aeronautics and pharmaceuticals -- and instead recover the jobs that are done abroad, like sewing buttons on clothing.

That's why we included in the financial package a proposal to get homeowners in a position where they can renegotiate their mortgages.

Trivial. Simply force people who are making mortgage payments to also make payments for those who are not making mortgage payments. They shall be sent two bills: One for their own homes, and one for the homes of those who cannot pay.

And 95 percent of working families, 95 percent of you out there, will get a tax cut.

And when we teach the remaining 5% what it is like to really pay taxes, it will have no effect whatsoever on prices that the remaining 95% pay.

And that requires us to make some important choices…

I weep with joy at lines like this. To see the best, the brightest, and the most concerned make important choices for the people!

Then Exxon Mobil, which made $12 billion, record profits, over the last several quarters, they can afford to pay a little more so that ordinary families who are hurting out there -- they're trying to figure out how they're going to afford food, how they're going to save for their kids' college education, they need a break.

That’s right, you selfish bastards at Exxon Mobil. How about ponying up a little more, like maybe a dime a week, to provide the starving people, the near-corpses lying in the gutter, the most basic sustenance so that you can whip some more work out of them.

But there is no doubt that we've been living beyond our means and we're going to have to make some adjustments.

Oh yes! Yes, yes, yes, yes, YES!! Wayyyy beyond our means! Notwithstanding the Exxon Mobil inflicted famine referenced above, the rest of us are driving cars (we need more buses, peeps!), eating too much fast food (nationalized food co-ops, my dream…), and using too much energy (you don’t have to actually cook potatoes, you know).

…if we're going to focus on lifting wages that have declined over the last eight years and create jobs here in America, then Democrats, independents and Republicans, we're going to have to be able to work together.

I believe that universal conscription into an anti-capitalist youth corps will create plenty of jobs when they burn the banks, put wrecking balls to Walmart, and trash rich people’s homes. Full employment will be achieved to fix everything so that we can destroy it again.

Bill Ayers is a professor of education in Chicago.

A professor and a friend of mine, I might add. Those qualifications should negate anything else about him, however fabricated.

ACORN is a community organization…

The evidence is in, not guilty!

…it is absolutely critical that we develop a high fuel efficient car that's built not in Japan and not in South Korea, but built here in the United States of America.

As aggressors against the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, I fully agree that Japan and South “Korea” should be punished, severely. And to accomplish this, we should draft Americans from whatever other jobs they’re working on – and put them to work (with rich people’s tax dollars) to build a non-polluting car in GM and Ford factories. No matter how much GM, Ford, and the AWU object to receiving tax dollars, this is an important move that must be done.

And when it comes to South Korea, we've got a trade agreement up right now, they are sending hundreds of thousands of South Korean cars into the United States. That's all good. We can only get 4,000 to 5,000 into South Korea. That is not free trade.

Thank you, Barack, for pointing that out. And don’t forget: Italy sends us hundreds of thousands of gallons of olive oil, but we can’t get any of our olive oil into Italy. That is not fair trade, either.

If you want to do the right thing with your employees and you want to provide them health insurance, we'll give you a 50 percent credit so that you will actually be able to afford it.

That’s half way to a 100% tax credit, which is on the path to a 100% government subsidy. Fact: When one group of taxpayers gives money to a second group taxpayers, then the second group can afford things (like healthcare) easier, and there is no effect on the first group – like the employees who paid the taxes to begin with. If you cannot understand that, then you truly are hopelessly uneducable.

All I want to do, if you've already got health care, is lower your costs.

Fact: Costs can always be lowered when a leader wills them to be lower.

And finally, this question:

The question is this: the U.S. spends more per capita than any other country on education. Yet, by every international measurement, in math and science competence, from kindergarten through the 12th grade, we trail most of the countries of the world. The implications of this are clearly obvious. Some even say it poses a threat to our national security. Do you feel that way and what do you intend to do about it?

And Barack’s answer:

…we are going to have to invest…

An investment! Clearly, spending more than any other country is not enough, and only an investment can remedy this.

…recruit a generation of new teachers…

More teachers! Quantity always equals quality, so more is more.

… an army of new teachers…

Armies of teachers! I hope the AFT does not object.

…give them higher pay…

Highest costs per capita in the world…pay them more! Wait…I’m in academia, so I need more, too! Pay me more! I am entitled to more!

… and I think it's important for us to make college affordable….

So true! So true! And here it comes…

And that's why I've proposed a $4,000 tuition credit, every student, every year, in exchange for some form of community service, whether it's military service, whether it's Peace Corps, whether it's working in a community.

Gaaaaaa!! Tuition credits! Community service! Conscription for the common good! I played that part back well over one hundred times. If the leader wills it, it shall be free!!!! Please, Barack! Let’s give every student $100,000 per semester to attend college! That will really drive tuition down.

.. If we do those things, then I believe that we can create a better school system.

And then we can do the same thing to everything else, from food to clothing to manufacturing to the arts to research to literature to the entire realm of anything and everything that anyone does anywhere, anytime, and anyplace.

I turn all decisions to you, my new leader -- for if you will it, it will happen.

God DAMN Amerikkka!

"You Make It, We Take It"

"You Make It, We Take It"

The above slogan (which I advise Barack Obama to use) is catchy, truthful, heartfelt, and compassionate.

Of course, I am referring to Barack's pledge to ask the top-income 5% to return their stolen wealth to the bottom 95% -- who we, as benevolent guardians, must care for.

This rests on the basic economic theory that a society's health is best determined by how much rich people pay in taxes. In academic circles, we jest that "taxing is relaxing". (The humor in that phrase is derived from the fact that "tax" rhymes with "relax". To be sure there is nothing funny about the concept. And there is absolutely nothing to laugh at in hard economic times like these.)

Here is how we are all better off when the rich people contribute their so-called "earnings" back to the community: Say you are a filthy blood-sucking moneybags pig, like an owner of Walmart. And you make your money selling...what does Walmart sell anyway? Weapons to Zionists? Probably. So, let's say that a poor person comes into Walmart looking for a way to disembowel Palestinian babies...

Wait, this will not work! Zionists are rich, and are therefore not compelled to shop at Walmart.

So, let's instead say that a person of color is coerced by capitalist exploitation to buy their tofu at Walmart. Normally, tofu costs $10 per pound. (At least, that is what I pay at the food coop.) So, Walmart probably charges $100 per pound. This, clearly, is obscene. So, we (that is, the government) will apply a tax on Walmart. Let's say the tax is $25. Ha ha! Fuck you Walmart, you now have to add a $25 tax to the $100 price, and charge $125 a pound! See? The price was $100, but under Barack, it will be $125. But $25 of that is a tax, so Walmart loses!

At that point, Walmart will be forced to contribute that $25 tax to Barack and our new government, whereupon it will be used to further the greater good by establishing a national-service youth corps, purchasing windmills from government contractors, and investing in insured no-interest housing mortgages.

Nothing can go wrong with this plan. Ever.

Meanwhile, 95% of the population is protected because they are not being taxed. The tax is applied to Walmart instead, and there is no possible way this can translate into a negative for people shopping at Walmart. In fact, hurting Walmart is just one of many benefits of this tax plan.

When the rich pay, everyone wins.

Win, win, win, win, win.

Cross posted at The People's Cube

Economic Stimulus: Not Enough

The United States needs a new economic stimulus plan that pumps billions of dollars into infrastructure projects and budget relief for cash-strapped state and local governments, Democratic lawmakers said on Sunday.

This is why I, as a Capital "S" Socialist, support the Democratic party as the nearest substitute for a full-fledged people's utopia. The Democrats understand that the purpose of collecting billions of dollars of taxes is to provide "relief" for governments.

U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi last week said a $150 billion economic stimulus plan was needed to help counteract a faltering economy shaken by a paralyzed banking system and steep stock market falls.

Speaker Pelosi, as a scientific socialist, sure knows her science! As the educated among you know, the purpose of a "stimulus plan" is to unparalyze banks and increase stock prices -- as intermediate steps in the evolution of capitalism's inevitable demise.

Here's how it works: When people pay taxes instead of saving money in banks, the banks shrivel and die. Hence, death replaces paralysis. Furthermore, stock prices (which represent mass opinion of future profitability) would then increase for obvious reasons. You do not agree that the reasons are obvious? Then you are an uneducable Hitler-pig who burns crosses McCain rallies.

The Congress earlier this year passed a $152 billion stimulus package that provided tax rebates of up to $600 per adult to support consumer spending at a time of rising energy and food costs. Most of that money has already been spent, and many economists say financial turmoil will squeeze the economy into recession in the fourth quarter.

"Many economists, indeed!" Here, for example is a sharp analysis from one of my favorite economists:

"Not only is Wall Street frozen, but Main Street is in real trouble. A stimulus aimed at Main Street makes sense," New York Sen. Charles Schumer told CNN.

And he continues with a particularly apt gastrointestinal metaphor, which in fact reminds me of my last night's dinner:

He said the plan should "get into the guts of the economy" by boosting spending on infrastructure such as roads, sewer and water projects.

Of course. And I'm glad that Congress realizes that a mere $152,000,000,000 was not enough taxation to fix our economy. Many economists say that $700,000,000,000 would be better. And many of my professional colleagues say that $2,000,000,000,000 would be closer to the ideal. Of course, these well-intentioned academics and people's representatives are on the right path...but...but...if spending $152,000,000,000 or spending $700,000,000,000, or $2,000,000,000,000 is such a good idea (as it most definitely is), then why not simply take over the entire economy instead?

If public works projects are so helpful (as they absolutely are), then why not simply convert every human activity into a public works project?

Left to their own devices, people are far too inexperienced to manage anything as sophisticated as an economy. That's why experts are required to do the managing, the directing, and the thinking. It's for your own good.

Change.

Cross-posted at The People's Cube

How Wall Street got rich through GREED

Everyone agrees that our financial crisis was caused by greed. Naturally, this is a correct assessment because it was formed by consensus.

But how, you ask, did greed make the Wall Street bankers so rich?

Simple. Greed drives businesses to sell things to customers who cannot afford to pay for them.

Let's look at an example:

Say you want to buy a house, and can only afford $100,000. A rich capitalist might discover this, and the following conversation would ensue:

You: I want to buy a $100,000 house because I can only afford to spend $100,000.

Capitalist: Nonsense, you can afford a $300,000 house, easily, and I can lend you enough money to make it happen.

You: There's no way I can afford a $300,000 house; I'll never have enough money to pay back that loan!

Capitalist: That's a swell haircut you have there.

You: Thank you! Of course I can afford a $300,000 house! Yes I can! Yes we can!

At this point, the capitalist lends you $300,000 -- knowing full well that the loan will never be paid off. You struggle to make payments, but you...just...can't. The greedy capitalist loaned you $300,000 and you only paid back $100,000! Need I elaborate further on how this has made capitalists rich? (And how this further oppresses the Palestinian people?)

It's my understanding that automobiles are sold the same way. Greedy auto salesmen often sell $30,000 cars to people who can only pay $10,000.

Fortunately, the government, which by its very definition cannot ever be greedy, is only asking for a mere $700,000,000,000 contribution to make us all investors in these loans.

I weep at the fairness of this.

God Damn George Bush; he created this mess.

God Damn the U.S. of KKK!

The Presidential Debate

"Democracy is indispensable to socialism."

- Vladimir Lenin

As were most other viewers, I was sickened to watch John "W." McCain taunting Barack with racist slurs.

But in the long run, it will not matter. Barack held his own, and reminded the Amerikkkan voters that:

- They are suffering because of rich people

- They are suffering because of Bush

- They should not have to pay off their loans

- They are struggling, struggling, struggling

- They work hard with nothing to show for it; rich people do nothing except make money off of working people

- The government needs to be bigger

- Oil companies will be punished

- The financial crisis is a result of Bush's regulation-free Wild West "laissez faire" banking system

- Rich CEOs are to blame for all problems

- We should reduce trade with other nations. (I personally feel strongly about this, and would hope that President Obama will follow a Juche economic plan.)

- Everyone will get free health care

- We can't afford another eight years of what this country just went through; we need to return to October 2000.

- McCain wants to hand over $4,000,000,000 to the oil companies. Remember: A tax reduction is the same thing as a gift. (I also strongly agree with this. The government is entitled to everyone's money, and anything that the government does not collect is most certainly a gift.)

- Private insurance companies are now getting an annual $15,000,000,000 gift.

- Health care is bankrupting otherwise solvent citizens

- A few rich people are making everyone else poor

- We need new infrastructure, new roads to the most remote rural areas, and a new electrical "grid".

- We will get a "Google for Government" because the government is better at providing clear and useful information than Google itself.

- Money spent in Iraq should instead be spent on expanding social programs here

- Bush: An orgy of spending

- Iraq: We lost

- Sanctions: They work

- Tougher sanctions: They work even better

- Kissinger: He took my line, let's meet with Iran

- Energy: We need a strategy

- Drilling: Can't drill our way out of problems

- Solutions: Solar, wind and biodiesel

- Veterans Affairs: Give them more money

- Investments: What we need to do to education so that ordinary people can live out their dreams

- Me: Not ordinary

- Kenya: Land of my father

Well, good for Barack that he understands what the working people need to hear. With these sort of insightful policy prescriptions, I suspect that most people will be voting Democrat.

Put another way: If a responsive government can give the people everything they need from those who can most afford to pay for it, then it is almost axiomatic that the majority will vote with their heart.

And the majority is always right.

Solidarity, brothers and sisters.

We are getting much closer to the next stage of capitalism's death spiral.

Obama and Women's Rights

"Despite decades of progress, women still make only 77 cents for every dollar a man makes."

- Women for Obama, from the official Obama/Biden Campaign Literature

Sad but true. In fact, I personally know of many employers who, when faced with hiring a woman for 77 cents an hour will instead thunder, "Give me a man of equal ability who will cost my company and shareholders an additional 23 cents an hour!" Bastards.

"In the Illinois State Senate, Obama cosponsored and voted for the Illinois Equal Pay Act, which provided 330,000 more women protection from pay discrimination."

The Illinois Equal Pay Act stipulates that people doing the same job must be paid the same wage, without regard to ability. This law therefore eliminated hiring discrimination. That is, if everyone must be paid the same wage without regard to ability, then employers might as well hire anyone. You can't understand that? If not, then you are not educable, and more than anyone, you need to have experts like Barack make decisions for you.

"As president, Obama will continue to promote paycheck equity and close the wage gap between men and women."

Again, if everyone must be paid the same salary, then all hiring discrimination will end. And furthermore, when equality is codified, then we will, legally speaking, all be equal in fact. Different input, same output. Enforced equality of outcomes has worked before, and it will continue to work in the future.

"Today, three-out-of-four low-wage workers have no paid sick leave. It is fundamentally unfair that a single mom playing by the rules can get fired or lose wages because her child gets sick. Barack Obama and Joe Biden support efforts to guarantee workers seven days of paid sick leave per year, a moderate proposal that should not impose too onerous a burden on employers."

Such a sensible idea, but with all due respect to Barack, why not two hundred paid sick days per year? That's what I get as a tenured university professor -- especially when you consider my summers, my sabbaticals, etc. And don't senators like Barack get more than only "seven sick days"? The trouble is that the low-paid working people do not know what is best for them. They need the on-the-spot guidance of legislators to determine how their compensation shall be administered. Sick days? Vacation? Wages? The best combination can only be determined by third parties who feel what must be done, and are unbiased by profits, losses, and the unforgiving fist of the so-called "free market".

The people need leaders. Lead!

Obama and The Mortgage Crisis

Most people of my age will remember the term "redlining". That referred to a financial practice where banks would not lend money to People of Color. Instead, they took a red pen and drew a line around minority neighborhoods that would be denied loans.

Of course, the banks did not explicitly use the language of racial discrimination. Instead, as usual, the fat cats removed their white hoods and used code words like "bad credit risk" or "people without jobs, credit histories, collateral, or the ability to make a down payment".

Then, in 1977, under the stewardship of President Carter, the Community Reinvestment Act was passed, and all discrimination was outlawed. Banks had to lend money to everyone.

So far, so good.

Or was it?

Actually, a problem remained: Although minorities were getting loans and mortgages, the greedy lenders were getting even richer by collecting interest. But why should bankers get rich off the backs of the working people?

They shouldn't.

And now, those very fat cats are getting theirs. Firings, bankruptcies, layoffs...the entire ruling class is now suffering -- as they richly deserve -- just as Engels predicted.

But the question remains: What is to be done?

Barack Obama has the answer:

"We need some clear and steady leadership and that's why I was ahead of the curve in calling for regulation," he said. "And that's why I'm calling on the Treasury and the Federal Reserve to use their emergency authorities to maintain the flow of credit, to support the availability of mortgages and to ensure that our financial system is well capitalized."

More credit. More mortgages. Perfect. Let the money continue to flow from the greedy capitalists to the working people.

Our mission will not be finished until the working people get everything they deserve, for free, and the rich are punished for good.