Skip to content

HILLARY AND OLIGARCHIES PAST AND PRESENT

October 24, 2016

HILLARY AND OLIGARCHIES PAST AND PRESENT

What, adjusted for the times, is the difference between our oligarchic-ownership of today by banking and corporate interests and a royal ownership of former days when royal charters were issued to the likes of the East India Tea Company to exclusive trade with the British colony of India (a front, of course, for a piece of the action payable to the Crown)? Monopoly by royal decree – no Sherman Anti-Trust Act in sight – a price British and other citizens were required to pay, and all because rulers appointed by God said so. Blue blood trumps red blood. Democracy? Self-rule? Such quaint notions! Send them back to Athens; they have no place in our world of privilege supported by serfdom. . . .

It took a Gandhi to unmask such perfidy, among others, in the British colony of India, just as it took an FDR to unmask and repair the structural and grievous damage done to this country and its people by status quo and “let the market decide” Republicans who gave us the Great Depression of the 1930s.

If you substitute Wall Street for a king or queen, ignore anti-trust laws and refuse to meaningfully regulate the activities of the corporate and financial sectors of our economy, then I think the result defines a form of domestic colonialism a la East India Tea under which we are currently suffering, a system where “the market” with the help of craven politicians “decides” from time to time to starve and otherwise mistreat ordinary Americans, and in which the “market” morphs into a kind of King George.

Voting power and pretended embrace of democracy mean little to nothing if those elected do not truly represent the people who voted for them rather than selling their souls to the oligarchs for “campaign contributions” (aka bribes), so any reform plainly requires a change in personnel, and that’s a start, but there is much more to be done if all and not just a few of us are to realize the immense benefits of a currently underperforming economy, underperforming due largely to wage inequality.

Thus it is clear that Hillary is going to be elected and that the only question at this stage is the margin of her victory. Her opponent, a tinhorn real estate promoter, is, politically speaking, a member of the walking dead as his past and bullying nature has caught up with his political aspirations. Quite aside from his tabloid past, he was never in the race due to temperament, inexperience and a life lived in his own world, so it is now time to think about what Hillary has promised from the stump.

She has, thankfully, talked down austerity economics and talked up Keynesian economics. She has talked about massive infrastructure maintenance and repair of our publically owned roads, bridges, sea ports, airports and buildings; she has talked about ending some of the most egregious tax breaks (read especially “carried interest” and redefinition of ordinary income into lesser taxed categories) the rich and corporate class has been enjoying at the expense of the rest of us and having them pay at a higher rate of taxation than the chump change they have been sending to the IRS year after year  (with none some years); she has talked about reducing the pain of those who must take loans out to go to college etc. etc. etc. I note as an amateur economist that all such plans would operate to increase aggregate demand, the final arbiter of the economic health of any market-based economy, which would in turn provide the necessary shot in the economic arm which would lead to a lasting boom.

She has talked a good game and indeed an excellent game that will if implemented bring America back from the economic abyss created by austerity economics into a broadly prosperous America where all our people are winners (even Wall Street). The naysayers will say that we can’t afford it, that our debt will not permit further expansion etc. What they are not telling you is that strong economic growth and the revenues it creates reduces debt, not increases it, all in keeping with and indeed a cornerstone of Keynesian economics as has been proven time after time while, as the eminent economist Joseph E. Stiglitz writes, austerity economics has never worked in large economies. Ours is large.

This election is about more than who wins; it’s also about us and those who follow us. Vote!    GERALD     E

Advertisements

From → Uncategorized

Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: