Background; 1. The Last GOP Bill Condemned 28,600 Americans To Death (Approx), Media Ignores Story 2. How Media Helps With the GOP's "Murder, Death, Kill" Policies OR How The Media Is Failing The American People On The Healthcare Debate 3. An Introduction To, And A Basic Overview Of, The Fake Economics Republicans Push 4. The Fall Of The American Economy: Trump Makes War On The Economy By Taking Treasonous Economic Policies Designed To Destroy The Economy From Koch Brother Think-Tanks This post basically proves that the Koch Brothers & the GOP have been implementing economic policies that go against the letter and spirit of the Constitution. So lets begin with the outline of the Kochs policy of treason.
Extract of the Constitution: We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
The following book was written a longtime ago but its lessons on the basic functioning of a countries economy for prosperity seems to have been ignored in favor of, what appears to be, just plain madness (I'll explain that in a bit). In short, investment in a countries economy is important. like one might invest in a business.
On Amazon: The Misunderstood Economy: What Counts and How to Count It - Paperback – August 1, 1995 Everybody talks about the economy. Everybody has complaints or recommendations but often nobody knows what they're talking about. So asserts Eisner in this authoritative analysis of the real and imagined ills of the US economy. The text explains how economic and social progress is, and should be, measured, confronting widespread misconceptions about debt and deficit, government spending and taxes, unemployment and inflation, foreign investment and foreign trade. The author argues that government accounting is fundamentally flawed since it fails to distinguish between current and capital expenditures, as every business firm does. Not only is the deficit, when properly measured, not as large as assumed, but government spending is in fact not high enough. Eisner claims that we are starving this essential public investment, which will advance our productivity now and in the next century. Politicians and private citizens alike fail to understand that what makes sense to the individual, such as not spending and trying to save in case of hard times, may create more costly idle resources in the economy as a whole.
Introduction from Cover: In this age of balanced budget amendments and concern over the national debt, here is a lucid, powerful, and controversial argument for increased government investment spending from one of our foremost economists and a dynamic and legendary teacher. In The Misunderstood Economy, Eisner explains how economic and social progress are and should be measured, challenging widespread misconceptions about debt and deficit, government spending and taxes, unemployment and inflation, foreign investment, and international trade. He argues that government accounting is fundamentally flawed because it fails to distinguish between current and capital expenditures, the way every business does. Not only is the deficit - when properly measured - not as large as we think, but Eisner contends that we are starving public investment spendning, which is essential for improving our national productivity and competitiveness, just as we are cutting off opportunities to achieve full employment, which is key to achieving maximum social well-being. Understanding "what counts and how to count it" is of vital importance to our nations future. For economics students, policy makers, and business leaders alike, The Misunderstood economy is a crash course in economic common sense.
KIRKUS REVIEW - Best known for maverick views on federal deficits and the national debt, Eisner (Economics/Northwestern University; How Real is the Federal Deficit?, not reviewed) makes his signature subjects a centerpiece of this contrarian and somewhat unfashionable audit of the domestic economy. While Eisner stops well short of claiming that budget shortfalls don't matter, he does argue that government figures overstate the case, inter alia, by failing to take economic growth and investment (in education, infrastructure, etc.) into account. Nor, the author complains, do they distinguish between operating outlays and capital expenditures. He goes on to point out that deficit abatement is not an end in itself; the government's principal objective is -- or should be -- to improve the well-being of the American people. To further his point, Eisner weighs widely used measures of the US economy and finds them wanting. Starting with GNP, he cautions that it's necessary to look beyond official data to get an accurate picture of activities not included in market transactions, e.g., housework, research, and the volunteer services provided nonprofit institutions like museums, schools, and churches. He also discusses investment's links to savings, the realities of America's putatively reprehensible status as a debtor nation, foreign-trade balances, the considerable gains that can accrue from reducing unemployment below its so-called natural rate (above which, many other economists believe, inflation is inevitable), monetary policy, the effect of tax increases, the issue of whether government spending is high enough, and why prosperity (or the lack thereof) could have more to do with the country's capacity to care for the elderly than the condition of Social Security trust funds. An informed and informative guide to the US economy's strengths and weaknesses for those perplexed or offended by the major media's invariably shallow, frequently mistaken interpretations.
The following article describes the society they want with the descriptions of Kansas showing what America will look like with Koch policies. This Libertarian Strategy to Make America as Screwed-Up as Texas Before there were the Koch Brothers, there was James McGill Buchanan, the inspiration for their modern right-wing oligarchy.
What would a society based on Buchanan's principles and goals look like?
Tyler Cowen, the economist who co-presides with Charles Koch over the cause's academic base camp (yes, that Tyler Cowen, host of the most visited academic economics blog), has spelled that out. You might want to sit down to hear what he envisions for the rest of us. He has written that with the "rewriting of the social contract" underway, people will be "expected to fend for themselves much more than they do now." While some will flourish, he admits, "others will fall by the wayside." Since "worthy individuals" will manage to climb their way out of poverty, "that will make it easier to ignore those who are left behind." And Cowen didn't stop there. "We will cut Medicaid for the poor," he predicted. Further, "the fiscal shortfall will come out of real wages as various cost burdens are shifted to workers" from employers and a government that does less. To "compensate," this chaired professor in the nation's second-wealthiest county advises, "people who have had their government benefits cut or pared back" should pack up and move to lower-cost, poor public service states like Texas.
Indeed, Cowen forecasts, "the United States as a whole will end up looking more like Texas." His tone is matter-of-fact, as though he is reporting the inevitable. Yet when one reads his remarks with the knowledge that he has been the academic leader of a team working in earnest with Koch for two decades now to bring about the society he is describing, the words sound more like premeditation. For example, Cowen prophesies lower-income parts of America "recreating a Mexico-like or Brazil-like environment" complete with "favelas" like those in Rio de Janeiro. The "quality of water" might not be what US citizens are used to, he admits, but "partial shantytowns" would satisfy the need for cheaper housing as "wage polarization" grows and government shrinks. Cowen says that "some version of Texas -- and then some -- is the future for a lot of us" and advises, "Get ready."
You conclude your book ironically with a Koch maxim: "playing it safe is slow suicide." How does that apply to those who support a robust, non-plutocratic society?
I ended the book that way because I understand the many pressures that lead people not to act on their anxiety over what they are seeing unfold in Washington and so many states. Union leaders have fiduciary responsibilities that make bold action risky. Nonprofits have boards of directors to answer to. Young faculty must earn tenure. People in public institutions worry about their next appropriations. Parents have to budget their time. And so on. We tell ourselves, "Well, if it were that serious, surely others would be doing something about it." So, I wanted to alert people that what is happening now is radically new -- and designed to be permanent. We may not get another chance to stop it.
Having said that, though, I also believe that panic is the last thing we need. There is great strength to be found in the simple truth that Buchanan and Koch came up with the kind of strategy now in play precisely because they knew that the majority, if fully informed, would never support what they seek. So, the best thing that those who support a robust, non-plutocratic society can do is focus on patiently informing and activating that majority. And reminding all Americans that democracy is not something you can just assume will survive: It has to be fought for time and again. This is one of those moments.
Some more important information on how the Kochs are manipulating people from the same article;
Why, until your book, has his importance to the right wing been largely overlooked?
There are a few reasons Buchanan has been overlooked. One is that the Koch cause does not advertise his work, preferring to tout the sunnier primers of Hayek, Friedman and even Ayn Rand when recruiting. Buchanan is the advanced course, as it were, for the already committed. Another is that Buchanan did not seek the limelight like Friedman, so few on the left have even heard of him. I myself learned of him only by serendipity, in a footnote about the Virginia schools fight.
In fact, Buchanan's records provided a kind of birds-eye view into collaboration between the corporate university and right-wing donors that at least I have never seen before, and I've done a lot of research in this area over the last two decades.
How would you draw a line connecting Buchanan to the Koch brothers?
Charles Koch supplied the money, but it was James Buchanan who supplied the ideas that made the money effective. An MIT-trained engineer, Koch in the 1960s began to read political-economic theory based on the notion that free-reign capitalism (what others might call Dickensian capitalism) would justly reward the smart and hardworking and rightly punish those who failed to take responsibility for themselves or had lesser ability. He believed then and believes now that the market is the wisest and fairest form of governance, and one that, after a bitter era of adjustment, will produce untold prosperity, even peace. But after several failures, Koch came to realize that if the majority of Americans ever truly understood the full implications of his vision of the good society and were let in on what was in store for them, they would never support it. Indeed, they would actively oppose it.
So, Koch went in search of an operational strategy -- what he has called a "technology" -- of revolution that could get around this hurdle. He hunted for 30 years until he found that technology in Buchanan's thought. From Buchanan, Koch learned that for the agenda to succeed, it had to be put in place in incremental steps, what Koch calls "interrelated plays": many distinct yet mutually reinforcing changes of the rules that govern our nation. Koch's team used Buchanan's ideas to devise a roadmap for a radical transformation that could be carried out largely below the radar of the people, yet legally. The plan was (and is) to act on so many ostensibly separate fronts at once that those outside the cause would not realize the revolution underway until it was too late to undo it. Examples include laws to destroy unions without saying that is the true purpose, suppressing the votes of those most likely to support active government, using privatization to alter power relations -- and, to lock it all in, Buchanan's ultimate recommendation: a "constitutional revolution."
Today, operatives funded by the Koch donor network operate through dozens upon dozens of organizations (hundreds, if you count the state and international groups), creating the impression that they are unconnected when they are really working together -- the state ones are forced to share materials as a condition of their grants. For example, here are the names of 15 of the most important Koch-funded, Buchanan-savvy organizations each with its own assignment in the division of labor: There's Americans for Prosperity, the Cato Institute, the Heritage Foundation, the American Legislative Exchange Council, the Mercatus Center, Americans for Tax Reform, Concerned Veterans of America, the Leadership Institute, Generation Opportunity, the Institute for Justice, the Independent Institute, the Club for Growth, the Donors Trust, Freedom Partners, Judicial Watch -- whoops, that's more than 15, and it's not counting the over 60 other organizations in the State Policy Network. This cause operates through so many ostensibly separate organizations that its architects expect the rest of us will ignore all the small but extremely significant changes that cumulatively add up to revolutionary transformation. Gesturing to this, Tyler Cowen, Buchanan's successor at George Mason University, even titled his blog "Marginal Revolution."
In what way was Buchanan connected to white oligarchical racism?
Buchanan came up with his approach in the crucible of the civil rights era, as the most oligarchic state elite in the South faced the loss of its accustomed power. Interestingly, he almost never wrote explicitly about racial matters, but he did identify as a proud southern "country boy" and his center gave aid to Virginia's reactionaries on both class and race matters. His heirs at George Mason University, his last home, have noted that Buchanan's political economy is quite like that of John C. Calhoun, the antebellum South Carolina US Senator who, until Buchanan, was America's most original theorist of how to constrict democracy so as to safeguard the wealth and power of an elite economic minority (in Calhoun's case, large slaveholders). Buchanan arrived in Virginia just as Calhoun's ideas were being excavated to stop the implementation of Brown, so the kinship was more than a coincidence. His vision of the right economic constitution owes much to Calhoun, whose ideas horrified James Madison, among others.
And from that kind of thought, Buchanan offered strategic advice to corporations on how to fight the kind of reforms and taxation that came with more inclusive democracy. In the 1990s, for example, as Koch was getting more involved at George Mason, Buchanan convened corporate and rightwing leaders to teach them how to use what he called the "spectrum of secession" to undercut hard-won reforms through measures that have now become core to Republican practice: decentralization, devolution, federalism, privatization, and deregulation. We tend to see the race to the bottom as fallout from globalization, but Buchanan's guidance and the Koch team's application of it through the American Legislative Exchange Council and the State Policy Network reveals how it is in fact a highly conscious strategy to free capital of restraint by the people through their governments.
Another way all this connects, indirectly, to oligarchic racism: wanting to keep secessionist thought alive for this practical utility, the billionaire-backed right necessarily gives comfort to white supremacists. A case in point: the Virginia governors who supported the Buchanan-Koch enterprise at George Mason University also promoted a new "Confederate History and Heritage Month." Likewise, the Ludwig von Mises Institute, which honors one of Koch's favorite Austrian philosophers, is located in Alabama and led by Llewellyn Rockwell, Jr., a man who has long promoted racist neo-Confederate thought, yet was still thought fit to run the Koch-funded Center for Libertarian Studies. It's thus a mistake to imagine that the Koch and so-called alt-right causes are wholly separate; there's a kind of mutual reinforcement if you understand what Koch learned from Buchanan and how they operated.
As I conclude in the book, as bright as some of the libertarian economists were, their ideas gained the following they did in the South because, in their essence, their stands were so familiar. White southerners who opposed racial equality and economic justice knew from their own region's long history that the only way they could protect their desired way of life was to keep federal power at bay, so that majoritarian democracy could not reach into the region. The causes of Calhoun, Buchanan and Koch-style economic liberty and white supremacy were historically twined at the roots, which makes them very hard to separate, regardless of the subjective intentions of today's libertarians.
Koch Economics In Action: Kansas
A warning to Washington from Kansas
(CNN)Last week, Republican state legislators in Kansas finally acknowledged what we have known since 2012: Gov. Sam Brownback's "Kansas Experiment" burdened our businesses, wrecked our state's finances, and mortgaged our children's future, all in the name of giving tax breaks to the wealthy.
When pushing their controversial plan, Brownback and his allies claimed his agenda would create 22,000 jobsin the state. Unfortunately for hard-working Kansans, Brownback's trickle-down economics didn't make those jobs appear.
Kansas' job growth actually declined since Brownback's tax giveaway to the most well-off Kansans. We've fallen 47,000 jobs short of the promise made by the governor's revenue secretary; an especially notable trend given that our neighbors in Colorado, Nebraska, Missouri, and Oklahoma have all experienced increasing job growth rates during the same period. And that is just the tip of the iceberg. Kansans' disposable income declined in the years under Brownback, falling nearly $20 billion short of his promise. Unsurprisingly our neighbors to the North, South, East, and West did not suffer the same drop. They also kept their state's credit rating intact, which was not the case in Kansas.
Ultimately, Brownback delivered on none of his promises. The only accomplishment was stacking the deck even further in favor of the wealthy. For example, Bill Self, the head coach of KU's basketball team, dominated the tax code with the same ease that his Jayhawks dominate Iowa State. Self set himself up as a pass-through business, using Brownback's tax policy to pay $0 in state income taxes on that part of his pay, which was the bulk of his compensation.
While I love KU basketball and our head coach, the fact that he paid no income tax on $2.75 million in compensation shows he is as shrewd with his taxes as he is on the sidelines, but that isn't fair to Kansas families scraping to get by. Putting more money into the pockets of those who need it the least doesn't create jobs. It just weakens the fundamentals that keep our economy and communities strong.
Kansas contains a lesson for Congress. Politicians in Washington, D.C., are set to embark on a similar fiscal path Brownback charted. President Donald Trump's insistence on huge federal tax giveaways to wealthy Americans will not create jobs. Fewer investments will hurt our economic growth rate. There will be a decline in tax revenue. His plan to enable the setup of pass-throughs for business owners will only lead to evasion and dwindling federal dollars. Infrastructure will crumble and critical services will be cut. It is impossible to hide the effect of slashing revenue, and Americans will feel the impact of these cuts. His plan will give tax breaks to the largest corporations and mirrors the agenda that put Kansas in dire fiscal straits. And from a political perspective, it is historic that a Republican controlled legislature is rebuking their Republican governor over tax cuts. Why? Because the rhetoric on tax cuts does not match reality. Daily Show: SAM BROWNBACK'S CONSERVATIVE KANSAS EXPERIMENT 10/16/2014 Jessica Williams travels to Kansas to investigate the outcome of Governor Sam Brownback's extreme tax-cut experiment.
Sam Brownback declares war on Kansas: This is how extremists gut a state — and democracy The ultraconservatives take control, with an assist to ALEC and no concern for the people
Gov. Sam Brownback’s march to zero income taxes, combined with legislation designed to weaken public services and wrest control away from local government, are hollowing out the very aspects of government these committees focus on. Public education certainly seems targeted to be greatly supplemented by, if not outright replaced by, private education.
We see this in other states as well. For some time now, model legislation from the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), Americans For Prosperity (AFP) and other libertarian / ultraconservative organizations has been used as the template for bills in states with varying levels of ultraconservative control. Such templates have been developed on everything from taxation and fiscal policy, to energy and the environment, to health and human services.
Looking just at education, in 2015 there were 172 measures introduced in 42 states based on ALEC model legislation, according to the Center for Media and Democracy. The general goal being to “… transform public education from a public and accountable institution that serves the public into one that serves private, for-profit interests.” With public education commonly comprising a significant portion of state budgets, this dovetails nicely with ultraconservative legislation focused on drastically shrinking government and reducing taxes.
Comparing Kansas and California; What happened after California raised taxes and Kansas cut them
The state of California made some headlines last week when the latest economic data found that the Golden State’s economy is now the sixth largest on the planet, passing France and Brazil. It was a striking milestone just in terms of California’s sheer economic might.
But there was something else about the news with some political salience: when California raised taxes on the wealthy in 2012, creating one of the highest marginal tax rates in the country, conservatives were certain the state’s economy would take a severe hit. How’d that work out? The Washington Post reported the other day:
California grew just fine in the year the tax hikes took effect… California’s economy grew by 4.1 percent in 2015, according to new numbers from the Bureau of Economic Analysis, tying it with Oregon for the fastest state growth of the year. That was up from 3.1 percent growth for the Golden State in 2014, which was near the top of the national pack.
At the same time, Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback (R) slashed taxes, leading conservatives to predict great things for the state’s economy. And yet, here we are.
The Kansas economy, on the other hand, grew 0.2 percent in 2015. That’s down from 1.2 percent in 2014, and below neighboring states such as Nebraska (2.1 percent) and Missouri (1.2 percent). Kansas ended the year with two consecutive quarters of negative growth – a shrinking economy. By a common definition of the term, the state entered 2016 in recession. […]
Kansas’s gross domestic product is still less than it was at the end of 2011, said Menzie Chinn, an economist at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, who has been following Kansas’s economy. Meanwhile, the economy in the rest of the country continues to expand.
In case it’s not obvious, California and Kansas don’t have much in common, and they have very different populations and industries. It wouldn’t be fair to evaluate the two solely on the basis of size.
But it is fair to note that conservatives’ predictions weren’t even close to being correct about these two states – though it hasn’t caused much in the way of introspection.
Here John McCain demonstrates one of the tactics the GOP are using to attack the democrats, i.e. by not helping them kill Americans the GOP/Fox is trying to claim that the Democrats are not doing thier duty (its psychotic that this works, by the way)...
THE GOP FAILS TO REPEAL OBAMACARE (AGAIN) & TRUMP TARGETS TRANS SOLDIERS 7/26/2017Senate Republicans once again push to repeal the Affordable Care Act, and President Trump takes to Twitter to ban transgender people from serving in the military.
Here you see John McCain flip flopping after grandstanding as a political tactic of attack...
Note: He actually kept his word but if he does push Koch Economics he can't be trusted so I thought I would leave this here just in case McCain is a Koch stooge.
Makes me wonder if John McCain is working for his constituents or for the Koch Brothers and thier echo chamber of misinformation...
Republican health/tax bill tests loyalty to constituents Chris Hayes talks with Rachel Maddow about the key to the success or failure of the Republican health/tax bill: whether Republicans from Medicaid expansion states care about their constituents. Duration: 7:37
How do the Kochs con the people to pushing ideas that attack America (its Constitution and society)? By buying the politicians and the media... Bernie Sanders describes the Koch's echo chamber of misinformation that all media seems to take from;
Huffington Post: Here’s How Much Fox News Hosts Are Intertwined With The Koch Brothers
New Book Exposes Koch Brothers' Guide To Infiltrating The Media
A new book by New Yorker writer Jane Mayer lays out how the oil billionaire Koch brothers rose to the powerful position they are in today, where they wield unquestionable political influence and have shaped public opinion in drastic ways. Titled Dark Money: The Hidden History of the Billionaires Behind the Rise of the Radical Right, the book brings to light many tactics that the Koch brothers and others in their network of like-minded millionaires and billionaires have used over the years to push their agenda while hiding the true motivations behind it.
The book examines the influence of several of the country's wealthiest conservative donors, but it pays particular attention to the activities of Charles and David Koch, who have organized their network and spearheaded the group's political efforts. "Few had waged a more relentless or more effective assault on Americans' belief in government," Mayer wrote of the Kochs.
A key element of the Koch brothers' strategy is influencing the media. Through media, they have advanced their political and ideological goals and attacked those who stand in their way. The Koch brothers and their network have paid conservative media figures to promote their message, bankrolled front groups that run aggressive anti-environmental media campaigns, and even created their own right-wing "news" outlets. Meanwhile, they've garnered some favorable mainstream media coverage by tightly controlling reporter access to their summits and other events, while attacking and otherwise intimidating journalists who dare to shine a light on their activities.
Here is how the Koch brothers and their network have infiltrated the media:
Buying A Conservative Media Echo Chamber
Creating Their Own Media Outlets
Funding Front Groups That Run Deceptive Media Campaigns
Tightly Controlling Reporter Access To Their Events And Activities
Intimidating Journalists Who Seek To Uncover Their True Agenda
Media Matters: The Koch Brothers Are Using Fox News Employees As Campaigners
Inside the NRA’s Koch-Funded Dark-Money Campaign How the N
BREAKING... The Misunderstood Economy: What Counts and How to Count It OR Real Economics VS Fake Economics: How The Kochs Are Destroying America By Attacking Its Societal Structures In Favor Of Social Darwinism Or "Survival Of The Fittest"