This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Courtesy of Michael Hudson
Michael Hudson on the Super Committee and the deficit strategy.
- advertisements -
Contact Information:
Tips: tips [ at ] zerohedge.com
General: info [ at ] zerohedge.com
Legal: legal [ at ] zerohedge.com
Advertising: ads [ at ] zerohedge.com
Abuse/Complaints: abuse [ at ] zerohedge.com
Suggested Reading:
Make sure to read our "How To [Read/Tip Off] Zero Hedge Without Attracting The Interest Of [Human Resources/The Treasury/Black Helicopters]" Guide
It would be very wise of you to study our disclaimer, our privacy policy and our (non)policy on conflicts / full disclosure. Here's our Cookie Policy.
a republican government would be far worse for the US of A, far worse than obama.
corizine is donating 2 -1 oz gold bars
Obama is incompetent. Doesn't even compare to anyone besides Jimmy Carter. In fact he sets a new standard of which Jimmy Carter is eternally greatful.
obama is not incompetent.
obama is bought.
Which is why my copy-written name is O'BUMMER! I think he is not only corrupt (bought) but also an incompetent leader. Who else but someone who is incompetent would surround himself with people dead set in the greatest transfer of wealth from the 99% to the 1%? O'BUMMER is indeed both incompetent and corrupt!
YE!, and Banker wars are coming as the wolves feed on each other. Question is, will humanity bow to the oversight they try to install...or not!
I don't know how anyone didn't expected him to be a incompetent leader imo. I actually feel sorry for the man, if his work history skills that are published are acurate, what could anyone expect? The wrath of shit from all angles that flow into the white house have got to be just mind boggling. With limited business and foreign relation's understanding it would be all but impossible to lead.
I didn't vote for Mr. Obama but after Mr. Mccain authored or co authored the round up bill that was passed yesterday, would he have been any better? Jury is out on that subject now imo.
It is almost like on the job training for a unwanted laborer now ehh?
Corruptors won't pay for incompetence.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=qoAxmpiM1So ..........
Christie slams do nothing Obama "what the hell are we paying you for?"
Problem is, there are others paying him more to do their agenda.
OTOH, when it comes to labour, wages and regulation Michael Hudson is an out-and-out socialist Krugmanite Keynesian. Certainly no free enterpriser...
you americans should be pleased with mr. Obama. the alternative is far worse.
Yes, being led around by the United Nations is worse than Obama.
THAT is the problem!!!
in the last election, we were really given no choice.
how could anyone vote for palin for that office?
I'll bite. . .what's "the alternative" to which you refer that would be worse than Zero?
I suppose Newt Gingrich could be "worse", but it's kind of like comparing cholera with typhoid.
The only reason that justifies this video being posted on this website is that you didn't take the time to watch it...not a commendable excuse.
The case made in Mr. Hudson's argument is entirely dependent on Obama manipulating the Budget Control Act to include the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction and then controlling the selection of Committee members and determing the Committee's final decision...all of that and more to drive wages down. That is ridiculous.
Secondly, if this guy thinks Obama wants to lower wages, then why did Obama give GM to the Unions? Why does Obama favor the end to secret ballot voting? Why does Obama's NLRB challenge Boeing on their non-union South carolina plant, etc., etc., etc?
It's very productive for ZH to present all sides to the political discourse, but this misinformed, counter-productive blather is typical of the reason college kids end up unemployed and not having a clue.
He gave GM to the Unions to buy time, pure and simple. He knows along with alot of people that they can't continue with the way they do business (they are finace company that happens to make cars). That is why they threw out decades of bankruptcy law to essentially make ad hoc law to make sure no one scuttle the deal. They didn't want to deal with the 1.2 million retirees that would be out of a pension and medical care.
The unions do not own GM! Re-writing history are we? We the people still own a small part of GM. What should have happened was compel the union (UAW) to buy GM as a worker owned enterprise. I would have backed that. What O'Bummer did was paper over yet another future failure. I was surprised the Chinese did not buy GM? At one point before the bankruptcy GM was capitalized at less 100 million dollars! Strange the Chinese or the UAW didn't buy?
1.2 million retirees/votes
Excellent comeback, Buck Johnson, but let's also add that Obama just signed three, that's THREE, "free trade" agreements: one w/South Korea, where the largest chunk of jobs go NOT to the South Koreans, but to slave labor work camps in North Korea (65% at least, probably more through various loopholes), the second one with Panama, which has zero corporate tax, thereby doing the old routing products via paperwork through there to further destroy the American tax base, etc., and the final one with Columbia, another jobs killer for the US and negative finance angles to Columbia.
Plus, Obama signed that Budget Control Act of 2011, a true jobs killer for years to come.
No, this is simply the Bush-Obama administration, with the present president changing even more regulations than Bush, making them highly favorable for the oil industry, coal industry, pharmaceuticals, etc., etc.
http://mgx.com/blogs/2011/11/30/obama-worse-than-bush-trumps-protection-of-safety-health-rights-environment/
"Secondly, if this guy thinks Obama wants to lower wages, then why did Obama give GM to the Unions? Why does Obama favor the end to secret ballot voting? Why does Obama's NLRB challenge Boeing on their non-union South carolina plant, etc., etc., etc?"
Not a very good argument. Union wages and non-union wages are two very different matters. Frankly, I don't think Obama cares about non-union wages one way or the other. The only reason he cares much about union wages is that they are the source of mandatory union dues, which fund Obama's machine.
But saying Obama wants to give union leaders more money and power is very different than saying Obama wants to increase worker's wages or denying he wants to lower them.
Most people don't belong to unions. Giving money to unions now is picking aa select few over everyone else, it's tyranny. The market might be cruel, but it's honest and promotes level headed thinking and decisions. Take the market away and you let people like Obama and the unions for that matter get away with murder. There will be justice, that is the real market that man has constantly tried to destroy through out all of history, Obama and the rest of the elites will fail and the will pay a heavy price for their foolish disrespect of 'the market'.
The whole US right-wing thing about "ooh look how bad unions are" is just so much BS. Look at all the countries with very strong unions that are doing (relatively) well: Germany, Holland, Sweden, Norway, Australia etc etc etc. It's the same old debate: Capital versus Labor. Workers bad, Bosses good. Yes there are some very bad abuses on the Labor side...but they pale in comparison to the gargantuan abuses on the Capital side, as is constantly detailed here on ZH.
So put on your thinking cap before you spout that "ooh, bad unions" crap.
I see that falun is another LibTard directing our eyes away from the trainwreck that is OBAMA. Get your head out of the sand. Unions are leeches that are draining America of productivity.
You must be a COCK Brother tool? Unions are now less then 15% of all employees! Cops, teachers, nurses, firefighters they are all that is left of unions. Do some homework before you show your ignorance.
Spot on. Obama is all about competition outside the U.S., not within our own borders. He is another sock-puppet for the kleptocrats on the left.
"kleptocrats on the left" ?????
How absurd can a moron get? You worship Sarah Palin for her intelligence, right??
Since when do the ultra-rich represent any political milieu, clownster?
You, are a complete and total idiot!
The globalists play the left and right sides. Obama is one of their left-hand-men.
Such a low level debate.
Then again, I didn't sit through the 15 minutes of babble, but it sounds like Hudson should be on the back side of the burning stake we tie the rest of them to,... before we light the match.
MH is an elite propagandist; more gov't more control is his mantra; sort of fascist, dontcha know.
That interview would have been half the time if MH had cut down on the use of 'Uh..uh..".
I've agreed with some of what MH has said in the past - I disagreed with most of what he said there.
DavidC
SUGAR KEYNES
I wasted fifteen minutes listening to this, and observed the following:
(1) This Michael Hudson person is in favor of public-sector unions, big government and big governmental spending, Keynesian stimulus policy, a Constitutional amendment limiting free speech for corporations, and deficit spending (at least in certain conditions).
(2) He also dislikes Obama, who he sees as a tool of big corporations (despite the onslaught of additional regulations via EPA, Dodd-Frank, and every other agency and department of the FedGov).
(3) He suggests that an all-powerful cabal of big businesses wanted a recession in the US as a strategy; somehow, depressing wages and throwing people out of work was expected (by the cabal of big businesses) to increase their profit margins.
This guy is clueless, I wasted fifteen minutes listening to nonsense and I plan to ignore anything he says in the future, as the ravings of a deluded and inconsistent mind.
"Darkness" is highly accurate, Ms. Douchebagger:
(2) He also dislikes Obama, who he sees as a tool of big corporations (despite the onslaught of additional regulations via EPA, Dodd-Frank, and every other agency and department of the FedGov).
Read below to answer your crapola on all those fantasy "regulations" , dood.
http://mgx.com/blogs/2011/11/30/obama-worse-than-bush-trumps-protection-of-safety-health-rights-environment/
You've obviously never read any legislation, and certainly haven't read Dodd-Frank, major parts of which were directly written by Goldman Sachs, etc. (too many major loopholes to go into, but the structure favors covert bailouts directly by the Fed -- which you WOULD KNOW, had you ever frigging read it, simpleton!)
Reading is fundamental, fool......
(2) Dodd-Frank is toothless
(3) Profit margins are at record highs
(2) Aside from discouraging foreign banks from doing business with US citizens? Requiring reporting on more financial transactions than ever? Raising documentation burdens on US firms? Causing more companies to IPO overseas? It's not toothless for US citizens and companies; it has FANGS, loaded with venom. And don't forget the Keystone pipeline interference, ethanol subsidies, carbon dioxide regulations, and all the other blundering by all the other agencies.
(3) AMR; AIG; GM; or Solyndra; Lightsquared; FirstSolar; nothing the administration has done economically has worked, even their crony capitalism deals seem to go sour as often as not. Plus, the taxpayers wind up paying for their incompetence, again and again. The US central planners are every bit as pathetic as the Soviet ones.
edit: caRbon dioxide (damn typos)
Worse than the Sovs, 'cos they've got a military with stuff that actually works.
I see your points. I was referring to the impact on large corporations, i.e. the ones that pay off congress. For those corporations, profit margins are at record highs. AMR, AIG, etc are not intended to work, they're just examples of corruption. The taxpayers pay for that corruption. Incompetence is a convenient veil for thievery.
I'm glad to see that you've recognized the obvious and are sharing with all. Obama going for broke for his dictatorship friends and their "Burn the Constitution Party". Fuck'em. Their actions are treason.