The IMF Destroys Iceland and Latvia

The International Monetary Fund operates primarily as a banker bailout machine. They cajole and tempt and confuse and threaten the leaders of governments worldwide to pay off the failed bets of the big bankers using the taxpayer funds of their countries. This has been going on a long time, at least since the early 1980s.

Thus, I am not in the teeniest bit surprised that the same thing is happening today in Iceland and Latvia.

This article by Michael Hudson has some of the details:

For the past decade Iceland has been a kind of controlled experiment, an extreme test case of neoliberal free-market ideology. ... Is there a limit, a point at which government will draw a line against taking on public responsibility for private debts beyond any reasonable capacity to pay without drastically slashing public spending on education, health care and other basic services? ...

The European Union and International Monetary Fund have told them to replace private debts with public obligations, and to pay by raising taxes, slashing public spending and obliging citizens to deplete their savings. Resentment is growing not only toward those who ran up these debts -- Iceland's bankrupt Kaupthing and Landsbanki with its Icesave accounts, and heavily debt-leveraged property owners and privatizers in the Baltics and Central Europe -- but also toward the neoliberal foreign advisors and creditors who pressured these governments to sell off the banks and public infrastructure to insiders.

This is the trick: replacing private debts with public obligations. Lots of people loaned money to banks and corporations in Iceland. They are now facing huge losses.

What is supposed to happen here is: they take their losses. There was no government guarantee. Why should someone with no relation to this business deal have to pay off their losses just because they happen to live in Iceland?

The government of Iceland may not actually have the money to pay this off. They would have to borrow it. When the IMF makes a "rescue loan" to a government, the money spends no time in Iceland or Latvia. It goes directly to the foreign creditors, in places like New York and London.

However, the debts remain, to be paid off by the taxpayers of Iceland. Taxes rise, which just makes a bad economic situation worse. Valuable and important services are cut -- precisely when they are most needed. Then, the IMF "advisors" come in and start to make a lot of demands.

For example, they may demand that the government sell off "public infrastructure" and the assets of failed banks (which still have considerable value) to pay off the loans which were used to bail out the bankers in New York and London. Who buys this "public infrastructure"?

Typically, it's the bankers in New York and London! Normally, at very good prices -- very, very good prices. Extraordinarily good prices.

Prices for assets in a crisis are normally very low. But, a government that can be coerced into bailing out the bankers can also usually be coerced into selling off state assets at values that no private owner would accept.

Hudson calls this "neoliberal free-market ideology." Of course, it has nothing to do with the principles of capitalism. You could call it a form of fascist imperialism. I think John Perkins, author of Confessions of an Economic Hit Man and The History of the American Empire, would agree with this terminology.

It is hard to tempt and cajole and confuse world leaders when you use unpleasant terms like "fascist imperialism." That's why these proposals are camouflaged with labels like "neoliberal free-market principles," when they have nothing to do with free-market principles.

It's not about "conservative" and "liberal." It's about us against the banker imperialists.

The IMF should be abolished.

“No One Should Die Because They Can’t Afford Health Care”

For many people (and yes I’m jumping to conclusions and making sweeping generalizations here) “No one should die because they can’t afford health care” is the weasel way of saying “I want someone else to pay for it” without sounding like a panhandler. So, take what follows with a grain of salt, OK?

On that note, someone’s Facebook status said:

No one should die because they cannot afford health care, and no one should go broke because they get sick. If you agree, please post this as your status for the rest of the day.

No one should die just because they were born in sub-Saharan Africa, either. But they do. Doesn’t make it fair, but it happens. For every “poor” or underprivileged Westerner complaining about their lack of “health care” (NB: even the poorest Americans have access to better health care than, I would venture to guess, 85% of the earth’s population has ever had), there are a million people living on $1 and a cup of rice each day — so cry me a fucking river.

Every one of us will die at the crossroads of some particular circumstances, time, and place.

Some of us die in our sleep. Some of us are merely in “the wrong place at the wrong time.” Some of us will die because the technology to cure what ails us has not yet been invented. Some of us will die because we made poor choices that presently impact our ability to care for ourselves. And some of us will die unfortunately through no direct fault of our own, because we can’t afford to pay for the technology that does exist.

To lament the fact that some people die under seemingly inopportune circumstances is folly; it ignores the lion’s share of the equation. Financial circumstances are a scapegoat, because at nearly any time and place where the individual isn’t DOA, a change in financial circumstances might forestall death for a few hours, days, weeks, or months.

You’ll get no arguments from me, if you say that “health care is too expensive”: blame the AMA cartel, the FDA, blame “Big Insurance”, etc. But National Healthcare is healthcare fascism, the insurers want guaranteed profits, guaranteed customers for life, and Uncle Sam to pay the bills. They want to sell you your own welfare.

You’ll get no arguments from me, if you say that “the system” needs to be reformed: specifically it needs to not be a system at all. People aren’t permitted under the law to care for themselves or to arrange for the care of others. Or because the consumer is not the customer, and the customer enjoys certain tax privileges that the consumer does not, etc. Or because people have been conditioned to believe that “insurance” should pay for an annual check-up and dental exams and all sorts of other routine maintenance instead of just providing for accidents and serious illnesses.

The problem is that health care, medicine, long term care, etc., is damned expensive. Government is the problem in health care, which keeps it unaffordable.

Asking or forcing others to pay the costs which you can’t afford will do nothing to actually solve that problem, it just shifts the burden, fucking up someone else’s life circumstances, exacerbating the problem for the future.

My Passive Aggressive Response to YouTube Yanking My Cybersecurity Video

YouTube disabled this video yesterday due to "Inappropriate Content." It obviously does NOT violate the Terms of Service, but there's no way to contact YouTube to appeal their decision.

It's too bad, since it had about 20k views and some really great discussion in the comments.

Worse, because of this "violation," we are now on probation and could have our account deleted without warning.

Lingle says government needs to be reworked

HONOLULU - Gov. Linda Lingle on Thursday warned Hawaii residents of a ''fundamental restructuring'' of state government, including layoffs and cuts to public assistance benefits, because of the state's continuing budget woes.

The governor said in a webcast that she plans to decrease payments to social service program beneficiaries and eliminate programs that can effectively be provided by federal or local agencies, or by volunteers.

Lingle said some state offices must be closed and some administrative duties consolidated in areas of government she oversees, which include health and welfare, business and economic development, transportation, and land and natural resources.

More layoff notices for state workers also are likely in coming months, Lingle said, adding to the nearly 1,200 employees who already have received such letters.

Her proposed changes are aimed at shoring up the state's budget, which is now $884 million in the red for the biennium that runs through June 2011.

''Even with all of the prudent cuts in spending we have already made, we are still facing a budget shortfall because we are spending at a rate that exceeds our actual and projected income,'' she said.

However, Lingle offered no specifics, including when the proposed restructuring would occur. ''As we make specific decisions, I will share them with you and the reasons for them,'' she said.

Hawaii's constitution gives the governor wide discretion over state spending that falls under her purview. The Legislature, which isn't scheduled to meet again until January, could call a special session and attempt to block or revise her actions, but that would take time and create a messy political fight.

The governor's Internet speech, which was marred by technical problems, came less than 24 hours before the start of binding arbitration hearings that will decide the next labor contract between the state and the Hawaii Government Employees Association. The union has nearly 30,000 members.

Lingle's timing annoyed Rep. Marcus Oshiro, D-Wahiawa-Poamoho, who charged that she was making an ''insincere and disingenuous attempt'' to sway the neutral member of the three-person arbitration panel toward siding with labor proposals from the state.

''It was more like an opening statement that one makes before the trial begins,'' said Oshiro, chairman of the House Finance Committee. ''When you hold these kinds of media events on the courthouse steps, it tells you that you may be uncertain about your case.''

Still, Oshiro said he welcomes a discussion about ending or shrinking state programs while defining what core services the state should provide.

Randy Perreira, executive director of HGEA, refuted Lingle's assertion that union leaders favor layoffs instead of furloughs.

''HGEA and its negotiating teams recognize that the members prefer furloughs to across-the-board pay cuts, and to that end have proposed furloughs effective in October,'' Perreira said in a statement.

Lingle had wanted to unilaterally furlough 15,600 state workers under her direct control for three days a month to help close the budget gap. But a state judge ruled that unconstitutional, and private talks on furloughs between state officials and the union have been fruitless.

The governor also reduced appropriations to the university system, the Department of Education and the Hawaii Health Systems Corp. by 14 percent in recent months.

In Thursday's address, Lingle said she will ''attempt to avoid'' more cuts to public schools and the University of Hawaii system. But she said she would urge educators to find other money to finance nonessential programs.

Lingle added that tax increases would hurt an already ailing economy, and draining the hurricane and other special funds would not fill the budget gap.

''These actions we must take are not unlike a business that loses one-third of its income and therefore must reprioritize its budget by scaling back on certain expenses and activities, and focusing on its core business,'' she said.

By HERBERT A. SAMPLE, The Associated Press

Tom Jefferson Tells Swedish TV: WHO Pandemic Criteria Lowered to Benefit BF

Check this link ...... http://bit.ly/CGapb

Who Is The Boss?

The bailouts were done to save the big corporations. The citizens paid taxes, or money was borrowed in our name, and the money went to the big corporations. The big corporations then gave out huge bonuses. Some of the corporations actually gave out the exact amount they received from bailouts as bonuses.

Health care reform is something that is for the citizens. So do we ask big corporations to pay taxes, so citizens can have health insurance? No, instead our government is about to pass a low requiring citizens to cough up tons of money, to give to big insurance corporations. That is "reform."

Here is how it is now: We exist to serve the big corporations. That is the purpose of our lives - to be a "productive" member of society. We go to school to learn the things that best serve the big companies. Then we beg to have a "job" which means giving up our brains and labor so someone else can get rich. Once we get a "job" we are "allowed" to have some time off once in a while, if we are lucky. Some of us are allowed to take time off if we get sick.

All of the benefits of our economy now flow to a top few. Vast proportions of the income and wealth now sit at the top 1%. And vast proportions of that sit at the top .01%

by Dave Johnson

Job market unlikely to recover until 2014

About 14.9 million people are out of work and looking for employment

New unemployment data show why it will take years for the labor market to recover from one of its fastest and deepest declines since World War II, even if an economic recovery is around the corner.

The Department of Labor report released Friday showed job cuts in August were lower than they've been in recent months. But a deeper look at the data shows why it will take millions of new jobs to dig American workers out of this recession's deep pit.

Unemployment for teenagers stands at nearly 26 percent. More than 758,000 workers are so discouraged they quit looking for jobs altogether, by far the biggest such number since the Department of Labor started tracking it in 1994. Damage continues to mount in the manufacturing, financial and construction sectors.

In all, some 14.9 million people are out of work and looking for a job.

This means it will take several quarters of economic growth to put the unemployed back to work. About 125,000 jobs need to be created each month just to keep up with the natural increase in the number of job seekers from immigration and population growth. Even if that number is surpassed in coming months, it will take a very long time to make up all the lost ground.

The data show that unemployment is deep, widespread and lasting longer than usual. Here are some details, by the numbers.

Worst downturn in decades
9.7 percent: The current unemployment rate, up from 4.7 percent when the recession began in December 2007.

10 percent: The rate expected to be hit by the end of this year.

2014: The year Moody's Economy.com predicts the unemployment rate will finally dip toward 5 percent, considered to be the "normal" level.

7.4 million: The number of jobs lost since the recession started.

A broader problem
24.9 weeks: The average duration that unemployed workers are out of a job, the highest level since the Department of Labor started tracking the figure in 1948.

4.98 million: The number of people unemployed longer than 27 weeks, also the highest level since World War II, although the growth in the size of the labor market over time contributes to that.

9 million: The number of workers forced to take part-time jobs who would rather work more hours.

33.1: Average hours in the workweek, near this summer's record low of 33 hours.

Different groups, different fortunes
25.5 percent: The unemployment rate among teenagers, the highest level on record since 1948, breaking the previous high of 24.1 set in 1982.

10.1 percent: The unemployment rate for men over age 20.

7.6 percent: The unemployment rate for women over age 20.

8.9 percent: The unemployment rate for white workers over 16 years old, short of the record 9.7 percent from 1982.

15.1 percent: The unemployment rate for black workers over 16 years old, far short of the record 21.2 percent from 1983.

13 percent: The unemployment rate for Latino workers over 16 years old, short of the record 15.7 hit in 1982.

After the bubble
1.4 million: The number of construction jobs lost since December 2007 as the housing crisis intensified.

65,000: The number of construction jobs lost in August, mostly in nonresidential and heavy construction.

537,000: The number of financial sector jobs lost since the recession began, including 28,000 shed in August.

829,000: The number of retail jobs lost since the recession started and consumers pulled back spending, including 10,000 lost in August.

Click for related content

Unemployment rate jumps to 9.7 percent

Silver lining
544,000: The net increase in health care jobs since the recession began, with 28,000 being added in August.

2.6 percent: The rise in average hourly earnings over the last year, with a boost of 6 cents in August bringing the average to $18.65.

0.8 percent: The smaller increase in overall weekly earnings over the last year, which was held back by workers getting fewer hours.

Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, unless otherwise noted.

Copyright 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.