The Strangulation Continues

If you've been watching the price of oil and gasoline lately, it's been on the rise. The masters of greed come up with any and all reasons to keep raising the prices. Up until a few days ago, it was the very cold weather that gripped much of the country that was the excuse for the rise in oil and gas prices. After just a few days of milder temperatures, CNBC says that now its because the "summer driving season is just around the corner." We're in February folks!!!

I'm slowly but surely becoming radicalized about many of these issues. I'm actually amazed how docile so many Americans are anymore. They've given up hope to ever regain some control over their lives, or to combat those financial bigwigs who are just strangling us in so many ways. We voted for change last November, don't let those who won forget that!!! Don't weep for the monied folks. When taxes on wealth were much higher, they kicked and whined, but they were still the wealthy. Now, with much lower rates of taxation, they are the "wealthier," and they still whine.

Negative Savings Rate

The Commerce Department has reported that the savings rate for Americans in 2006 was a negative one percent. The rate was a negative 0.4 percent in 2005. This is the worst performance for American savings since the Great Depression, when there was a negative savings rate in 1932 and 1933. To simplify, this means that overall, collectively we spent more than we made. We actually drew down our savings. To add insult to injury, if I understand it right, in 1998, we had a "zero," savings rate. The Clinton Administration's response was to redefine "savings," adding in some items that had previously been excluded, thus giving us a small gain in savings that year. (Hey, I consult Clinton on definitions all the time. I now know the definition of "is" and "alone.") Anyway, that means that using the pre-1998 definition puts us even further behind in both 2005 and 2006.

The big question is, "Why?" With a population as large as the United States, I'm sure there isn't any one answer to that question. One reason put forward by some conservative economists is that many people don't feel the need to maintain large savings accounts, because they have home equity and stocks/bonds, either individually, or through some retirement plan, or both. Now, is that possible? I suppose so, but I'd put it in the same category of possibility as our likelihood to have a severe thunderstorm in Cleveland tonight (the temperature is around 12 degrees). I seriously doubt that it is THE major reason, or even A major reason. The idea is just a bunch of nonsense and an attempt to put spin on a growing problem for many Americans; that is, wages and benefits have not been rising enough to sustain many Americans' standard of living.

High oil, gas, and natural gas prices, plus increased health care costs (if you're lucky enough to have a decent health care plan), the cost of sending kids to college, and severe job losses, particularly in the manufacturing sector, have forced many Americans to look for ways to bridge the gap between their incomes and their living standards. Folks, this is NOT a tough one! You just have to keep your eye on the ball, and not on the spin. We have a bunch of Wall Street fat cats and business execs telling Americans that they don't save enough for retirement, but these very same people don't pay their employees enough for many of them TO save for retirement! In fact, as these latest government statistics show, we can't even keep the assets we have (our money in savings).

It is no wonder that polls tell us that we're anxious. We just seem to be involved in endless "catch 22" situations, with many folks just looking out over the edge of a cliff. If we stay in Iraq, the chances for success are dim, if we leave Iraq, the country, and perhaps the entire region could implode. If you need something other than a small car for your family or business, the cost of fuel is enough to send you to the poorhouse, and if the situation with Iran deteriorates, today's fuel prices will look cheap. Our kids need college educations more than ever, but if we send them to college, we end up virtually bankrupt, and mom and dad could face a very tough retirement. If you have medical problems, but minimal or no insurance, you stand to lose everything to get treatment. Business people want us to spend money, but if we keep spending everything we make, we'll have no money for retirement, and if we spend more than we make, we'll end up with huge credit problems, also ending in possible bankruptcy. If we keep the trade agreements we have, we'll suffer more job losses, if we try to alter or abandon the agreements, we could face retaliatory measures from abroad, causing job losses in businesses involved in international trade. The list just keeps going.

Even The Conservatives Agree!

Another voice has been added to the chorus about income inequality. That voice comes from none other than Ben Bernanke, Bush's choice just a year ago to head the Federal Reserve, replacing the retiring Alan Greenspan. Like Greenspan, Bernanke has now commented on the growing income disparity in this country, and it should be noted that neither of these guys is a "raving liberal." So, with these two men making such statements, and President Bush giving his two cents on the subject to Wall Street the other day, I hope we have some momentum to take the ball and run with it. The question in my mind is, just to keep the football analogy, "Will someone take the ball down field for a touchdown?" I'm under no illusions that this problem can be fixed quickly, but we need to put some points on the board.

Since the time of the Great Depression, the public has generally seen Democrats as being more on the side of working people and the poor. With that in mind, I'd have to say that the ball is in their court (Okay, that's not sticking with football, but hey, it's basketball season!). The Dems control both houses of Congress, and with such power, they need to keep moving a pro-middle class/working class agenda. The minimum wage is a start. No, it won't solve everything, but it IS a start, and it sends a signal, and it puts a floor under wages. Many moderate Republicans favor the increase, too, and unless I've misunderstood something, the President has indicated that he WILL sign a bill along the lines passed recently by the Senate. The Senate version showed strong bi-partisan support and compromise, something missing so often in Washington. Now, let's hope the pols can work together on many other such beneficial legislation in the very near future.

Bush Is Starting To Get It

At long last, President George W. Bush is starting to get it. I'm amazed how long it has taken, but I welcome the President into the fold. What is "it?" "It" is, or rather "they" are the CEO pay and the income disparity issues. This President went to Wall Street, the holy shrine of the money lending, price gouging, sit on their ass class, and actually mentioned these two issues! I've never believed much in so called "political geniuses," Republican or Democratic, and Karl Rove is no exception. It has taken a long time for him to grasp these issues. Of course, the almost immediate response from the proponents of "I'll sell my mother to you, if the price is right," was that this is just blatant class warfare and government interference in "the market." It always has amazed me, that when businesses are squeezing the hell out of consumers, it's always "the market," but when the public strikes back, it's never "the market." Anyway, the "blame it on class warfare" slogan won't work this time. The money managers and the ass-sitters are afraid of that battle, because it's a battle they could lose, at least to some extent, and then, instead of making say, $50 million a year, they might actually have to settle for $35 million. I'll tell ya, life is tough.

One Office Too Many?

Just a few comments about Senator Joe Biden's recent problem. Biden has been in trouble before, in 1988, if I recall, when he was accused of plagiarism. If my memory serves me right, the situation brought about his withdrawal from the presidential race. Biden is a smart man, in my opinion, but some folks just weren't made to go to higher office, and I think Biden is one of them. He's a thoughtful guy on many issues, but put him in front of a microphone and you'd swear that he studied under President John Kerry, ah, I mean Senator John Kerry.

Another such person is Newt Gingrich. I'm sure I'll take some heat for this, but I like him. He's another thoughtful guy. He and Clinton played well off of one another after Gingrich became Speaker of the House. He's a lightning rod though, and ideally, he should have not taken the speaker's job, although to many Republicans, he was the natural choice, and conquering his own ego would make the Battle of the Bulge look like it was an easy fight. He seems much more at ease with himself when he's teaching and thinking through problems. It's a shame that he didn't have George W. Bush as a student.

Here in Ohio, Bob Taft, now the former governor, went one step too far. He was our Secretary of State during much of the 1990s. It really isn't a very high profile job, and it doesn't necessarily require a whole lot of political skills. The position was far better suited to him than when he became governor. He's a nice, easy-going guy, and he just was overwhelmed by Ohio politics. He got caught up in, what I consider, a mini-scandal, which involved some golf outings paid for by lobbyists, but not reported as such. Interestingly, many in the media came to his aid, saying that the reporting omission was a staff error, but the damage to his reputation was done. He was so hobbled, that it was like we really didn't have a governor for the last year or two of his term. Further, one of his ideas, to provide state money to high tech companies to locate or develop in Ohio was given pretty high marks by many in the media, but when it was put on the ballot, Taft never seemed to even get behind the measure, and it went down to defeat at the hands of the voters, who were never told by the governor why the measure should get their support.

Ideally, some folks just need to stand back and see where they are, and what their capabilities are, and stay in that realm. As Joe Biden would sing, "You Can't Always Get What You Want." (Oh wait! Did Joe Biden sing that?)