In Obama’s America, each day is Halloween. The “lesser people” (Alan Simpson) should be afraid, very afraid! Why? Uncle Sam is bankrupt. He lives merely on the kindness of strangers. Only painful actions can remedy this situation.
Uncle Sam, you see, has long suffered from Affluenza. While the condition is often mistaken for a state of healthy well-being, the illness can be terminal. There are limits. They need to be respected. Austerity looms. The open question before Americans today: What kind of austerity will we have? The common answer amounts to this: Uncle Sam’s Affluenza would be fatal but for the remedies which a public commitment to fiscal austerity can provide.

The medicine is harsh and drastic, but necessary.

Or, so it is often claimed by a large fraction of America’s political and economic elite. Bob Urie, on the other hand, points out that:
The scare tactics being used to cut social insurance depend on the public’s misunderstanding of several related issues. In the first, the U.S. isn’t ‘broke’ because it can create money as needed — ask yourself: how were the bank bailouts funded? Next: what is an ‘entitlement’ when existing government policy overwhelmingly benefits the rich through favorable tax treatment, cost-plus government contracts, Federal Reserve bailouts and government guarantees of the banks. ‘Free markets’ have nothing to do with how the wealthy became so. The fight over ‘entitlements’ is over how government expenditures are allocated, not over their ‘scarcity.’
Urie suggests that the rich have prevailed in the democratic class struggle and now wish to deepen and intensify their exploitation of the “lesser people,” using the federal state and its fiscal situation as their hammer:
Social Security has an income ‘cap’ of $110,000 above which no deduction is made. A billionaire who became rich by sending jobs overseas — by firing and lowering the wages of labor, pays a smaller proportion of his or her income into Social Security than does the worker whose wages have been reduced. And by reducing the wages of labor, workers are left with less to pay in to these social insurance programs through payroll taxes. The problem with Social Security and Medicare is that a small group of connected plutocrats have ‘entitled’ themselves to far more of what labor produces. How often has the deficit ‘crisis’ been raised when there is a war to be fought for multi-national oil companies or a corporate welfare scheme like the bank bailouts to be paid for?
And this all ties back to Mr. Obama’s Affordable Care Act — if he and his corporate supporters were truly interested in fiscal discipline they would have pushed for far less costly ‘Medicare for all.’ Instead Mr. Obama pursued a deal with private health insurers that includes (sic) a ‘profit’ above the cost of a government program. Those wanting to argue the political infeasibility of Medicare for all are now confronted with a ‘liberal’ Democratic President who believes he can cut the programs that most of us have paid into under known terms for decades. If doing this is politically feasible while building a rational public health care system isn’t, we are truly doomed.
Doomed? Yes….
Ultimately Mr. Obama, like his ‘opponent’ Mitt Romney, is but an apparatchik in a class war launched by the rich against the rest of us. Left out of the contrived nonsense about an ‘entitlement’ society is who exactly is entitled. Were the government spending the rich live off of under the knife there would be no argument of scarcity — we have the wars, the bailouts and corporate welfare to prove it. But social insurance programs stand between over one hundred million of our citizens and destitution. And these are programs we have collectively paid for — they aren’t a ‘gift’ as the rich and their servants in government would have us believe
Even the ‘gifts’ of income transfers, support for education and public transportation, Medicaid, subsidized housing, occupational training, works programs, etc. are not lacking in social benefits which directly and indirectly improve the quality of life enjoyed by every American. Every American would benefit from a fair and humane society, from a better standard of living. Such a society serves a common and public good. Who, after all, wants to watch the homeless die on the street for want of food and medical care? How might the United States compete with the emerging Asian economic powers when its education system, long the envy of the world at large, falters because of a lack of fiscal and political support? Who wants to bring children into the world when they will intimately know insecurity and want?
But the Nobel Laureate Americans just reelected wishes to create neither a fair nor humane society. He is a system politician who serves his various masters. The latter are cruel and greedy. Americans of the lesser kind along with the world at large deserve much better than Barack Obama. They truly need a man much better than him..
Related articles
- James Galbraith on Social Security ‘reform’ (atung.net)
- By Their Fruits Ye Shall Know Them (counterpunch.org)
- Bill Black: Wall Street Urges Obama to Commit the Great Betrayal (nakedcapitalism.com)
- The People Who Elected Obama Don’t Want Cuts to Social Security and Medicare (alternet.org)
- Peter Orszag of Bank Welfare Queen Citigroup is Selling Catfood Futures Hard (nakedcapitalism.com)
- The coming debt battle (salon.com)
- Washington Post Abandons More Journalistic Norms In Push to Cut Social Security and Medicare (my.firedoglake.com)
- Quote of the day (atung.net)



5 Comments

…Thank you szielinski…goes and gets to the middle…commended
You’re welcome!
Thank you, Szielinski. It takes a peculiarly unfeeling politician to take on Obama’s task:
1. Make G.W.Bush’s tax cuts EVEN BIGGER. Given the damage GWBush’s tax cuts have already done in the past 10 years, Obama is not merely going to preserve GWBush’s tax cuts, but Obama is going to make them EVEN BIGGER (Bowles Simpson). (Sure, they will get rid of deductions while reducing the progressive income tax RATE ie. restructuring taxes further in favor of the 1%. The deductions that are eliminated can be slipped back in later. The rich have always been very concerned about progressive taxation, whereby the higher your income, the higher the percentage of your tax. Reducing the income tax RATE flattens the progressiveness of income tax rates.) Any doubts that is Obama’s intention: to concede even greater income tax RATE cuts to the Boehner?
2. Make the trade deals EVEN MORE aggressive. Given the results of NAFTA and WTO, Obama is not merely going to preserve those trade deals, and do nothing about them, but he is going to sign EVEN BIGGER trade deals ON STEROIDS–Transpacific Trade Pact, a trade deal on steroids which could allow foreign companies to come to U.S. and not be subject to US labor and environmental laws and therefore compete with what is left of companies that are still left operating in US.
3. Undermine Social Security as a first step to taking it down. Given social security is what keeps a lot of people one step from poverty, Obama gratuitously cut contributions to social security by 30% thus weakening it? He tied 30% of social security to the federal funding, so that we can no longer say all of social security is separate from the federal debt. (With Democrats like this..)
No, Obama is not a moderate Republican such as Nixon and Eisenhower. Nixon and Eisenhower were responsible adults who did not touch social security, and they were not reckless. Obama is a reckless adolescent who is unfeeling about the consequences, a radical–as radical as GWBush, if not more. And unfeeling in the damage he does. That is why he is so useful. Is he a good man? You could probably find a person on the street right now who is a good man.
The masses have to be crushed and reduced to utter poverty so when it comes time to withdrawal into their high mt. redoubts and domed cities the elite can easily abandon them to die in the dystopian hell hole they intend to create by burning every last fucking drop of oil every last piece of coal and every last whiff of Nat. gas. The more wretched the better. In less then 50 yrs. the world we all took for granted will be long gone and the Hunger games world will be here, or something far worse.
You’re also welcome!
It is ironic that America’s long affluence may be the lubricant which makes such economic predation feasible. Americans have known wealth for the better part of a century, and often cannot draw upon personal experience or even collective memory to appreciate the degree of poverty and insecurity that awaits them. Most of us make do most of the time. But that could change in short order, and, if it does change, those changes will reflect the general wishes of big capital, especially finance capital.
The political and economic elite can take comfort knowing that they command the greatest military mechanism the world has ever seen. This capacity for violence will serve them well when the ‘lesser people’ demand a larger share of the wealth they produce.