Next week, progressives in Congress will release their annual budget proposal. They do this every year, and every year the national news media largely ignores it. Will the elite media report on it this year? Make some noise, and maybe they will.
I would suspect that every politician in Washington has been instructed to ignore this budget proposal. Ditto for the MSM.
"We can have a budget that serves “We, the People.” It’s about priorities. Frankly, in the richest country in history, it is possible to make sure that everyone has a job, good medical care, a good retirement, a good free education, and keep our infrastructure modernized and up-to-date — and all while making sure that the budget is balanced. It really is just a matter of priorities — choices about how we distribute the country’s resources. Unfortunately for 99 percent of us, “we” choose intense inequality and a vast military machine."
How did Mr. Johnson arrive at his concluding statement?
People do not naturally vote against (or hold positions that act against) their own interests.
It was hardly WE the people that voted all these privileges TO corporations.
How many lawmakers did corporations purchase?
How many courts did corporations bribe?
How much media have corporations commandeered to speak only in an idiom supportive of their narrow (hint: 1%) interests?
WE, The People did not vote for tax cuts to the big corporations.
We did not vote for NAFTA... and certainly not the humane--"lifting all boats"--FALSE way that it was sold to the American people.
We did not vote for banks to be bailed out while home prices sunk and millions of homes were left to foreclosure.
We did not vote for colleges to expand their tuition costs MANY times over.
We did not vote for a Homeland Security state and the militarization of domestic police departments.
MOST of what's been going on has been based on backroom deals funded by the likes of ALEC, Pete Peterson, the Koch Brothers, Bill Gates, Monsanto, Big Oil, Big Coal, Big Pharma, and the banksters and other Wall St. hustlers.
The Page & Gilens Study PROVES that citizen input has been rendered null and void. The Piketty data shows why.
Now and then, protests have begun to shake The Powers. In ways that simulate the post-Depression angst of the 1930s, Power may feel forced to make concessions.
However, given the sums of money that the 1% has coveted unto itself in recent decades, whatever it "gives back" will represent a drop in the bucket.
That is until the Trifecta of climate chaos, the cessation of the dollar's hegemony, and wars spreading in unintended ways split apart the current political piñata.
Watch for falling debris. This baby's gonna blow!
BTW: I applaud the Progressive Budget. And I would say that it represents the majority of citizens' preferred interests. The FACT that it will not be given air time is precisely why the WE, that constitutes the actual citizenry is not the same WE as the entities arrogating to themselves the right to impose 3rd World lifestyles onto most Americans.
Obama and the rest of the current power center of the New UnDeal Democratic Party will ignore this budget proposal, and if it becomes necessary for them, actively block it.
all while making sure that the budget is balanced.
So not a progressive budget at all then. There is zero need to balance the budget and trying to 'ensure' that is giving in to the deficit terrorists from the get go. And destined to fail.
What is needed is massive fiscal stimulus. That's the only way to solve the unemployment disaster.
You can't be a neoliberal AND a progressive. Neoclassical economics needs to be rejected out of hand as the perverted political ideology that it is.
A progressive budget can spend trillions more on jobs and projects that require jobs over 10 years without increasing the debt. There are plenty of sources of revenue to be tapped...........look at the links in the articles to see past progressive caucus budgets.
Worrying about so called government debt is a fool's errand. Lifting aggregate demand requires greater deficit spending.
John, that's actually a false statement. Aggregate demand could be lifted in many ways without increasing the deficit......in fact, decreasing the deficit when you factor in the new taxes paid on the higher wages and the reduced safety net spending required.
1) Increased spending on jobs and projects that require jobs funded by increased tax revenue from sources that would not reduce their spending in the economy as a result of paying the higher taxes.
2) Eliminating or reducing our trade deficits
3) A higher minimum wage