The final step in Ronald Reagan’s "starve the beast" economics....

The final step in Ronald Reagan’s "starve the beast" economics....

If you thought the Paul Ryan plan to privatize Medicare was bad – wait until you see what Republicans have up their sleeve today. Republicans in the House today will vote on THEIR plan to raise the debt-limit – which includes a balanced budget amendment that makes sure the government can’t close loopholes on rich people in the future – and can’t spend any money beyond a certain threshold – even if emergency spending is needed to fight off a recession or some other crisis.

The balanced budget amendment will require a 25% spending cut in every single government program – from Social Security – to Medicare – to Veteran’s benefits – and will return government spending to it’s lowest levels since 1966 – when the United States population stood at 100 million people fewer than it is today. No President has ever supported a spending cut and structural changes this massive – yet Republicans feel that with our nation in a Great Depression and real unemployment above 16% - that now is the perfect time to blockade government spending – just like Herbert Hoover did.

What we’re seeing unfold in the House today is the final step in Ronald Reagan’s "starve the beast" economics – and if Republicans are successful – we’re all screwed.

Comments

DRichards's picture
DRichards 3 years 14 weeks ago
#1

Re: Were America's Assets Looted Years Ago?

Forbes' Merrill Matthews argues that the multi-trillion dollar social security trust fund was looted years ago:

Either Obama and Geithner are lying to us now [in saying that social security checks won't go out if the debt ceiling isn't raised], or they and all defenders of the Social Security status quo have been lying to us for decades. It must be one or the other.

Is the real purpose in cutting Social Security, or even privatizing Social Security, an effort to not have to pay back the money that was "borrowed" from the trust fund?

ramaci's picture
ramaci 3 years 14 weeks ago
#2

Murdoch is using the Ronald Reagan defense, "I don't recall"

DRichards's picture
DRichards 3 years 14 weeks ago
#3

Does Washington have a spending problem or an income problem? We offer some key facts.

Summary

Washington's spending has recently been higher as a percentage of the nation's economic output than at any time since World War II. But by the same measure, Washington's revenues are the lowest in more than 60 years.

So does the U.S. have "a spending problem," as Republicans keep repeating in the current debate over how to reduce the nation's record deficits? Or is the problem that taxes are not high enough? Those questions frame a long-running partisan debate, and as usual we won't offer an opinion one way or the other. But for those seeking their own answers, we can offer some fiscal history and factual context.

Some key facts we think are worth considering:

* Federal spending ("outlays" in budget jargon) is expected to equal 24.1 percent of the nation's gross domestic product in the current fiscal year, which ends Sept. 30. The figure was 25 percent in fiscal year 2009, highest since 1945.
* On the other hand, federal revenues are expected to drop to 14.8 percent of GDP this year, lower even than the 14.9 percent attained in both 2009 and 2010. There has been only one year since World War II when revenues have been as low as in any of these years: 1950, when the figure was 14.4 percent.
* These historically high rates of spending and low rates of taxation have combined to produce a chain of deficits that are also the highest since WWII. The deficit was 10.0 percent of GDP in fiscal 2009. It declined to 8.9 percent last year as the economy started to recover, but is projected to go up to over 9 percent this year. Each of these deficits is larger than in any year since 1945, measured as a percentage of GDP.
* The U.S. is borrowing about 36 cents of every dollar spent so far this year. It borrowed 37 cents on the dollar last year, and 40 cents in fiscal 2009.
* The largest components of federal spending are Social Security and Medicare programs for the elderly (33.5 percent of total outlays in 2010) and national defense (20.1 percent). Interest payments on the federal debt alone accounted for 5.7 percent of all federal spending, and that percentage is rising.
* The federal income tax accounted for 41.5 percent of federal receipts in 2010 (down from 49.6 percent prior to the Bush tax cuts of 2001 – 2003). Corporate taxes brought in only 8.9 percent, also down sharply since the recent recession. Payroll taxes and other "social insurance" payments accounted for 40 percent of total receipts in 2010.

It's easy to argue one side or the other by just citing facts that support a particular view, and omitting others. In the Analysis that follows, we offer some graphics, details and documentation in an attempt to give our readers a quick look at the entire picture — both where the money goes, and where it comes from.

Note: This is a summary only. The full article with analysis, images and citations may be viewed on our Web site:

Desktop Users

Mobile Users

Palindromedary's picture
Palindromedary 3 years 14 weeks ago
#4

Or even the Ken Lay (Enron) defense..."I didn't know what my executive employees were doing"...quite a popular Chairman and/or CEO defense of late.

I'm glad that that idiot, Murdoch, got a pie in the face...well..almost. Well done Mr. Marbles!!!

http://montreal.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20110719/murdoch-pie-mar...

Mr. Marbles, a popular British comedian, doesn't like the current election system and has threatened to burn his ballot. Hmmm!!! Shoe throwing, pie throwing, burning ballots. I wonder how many people in the US in 2012 will be doing any of those things....especially burning their ballots. What if people started having symbolic "burn your ballots" bon-fires in major cities across the US (as long as you get a permit, of course;-} They wouldn't be actual ballots (government property?)...just fake ballots....or maybe people at government functions...appearance of their favorite hated politicians...would throw fake shoes (real ones would probably land you in jail)...just go through the motion of throwing shoes. Is this illegal? If whole crowds did this it might help to signal our disapproval. Is it illegal to signal your dissent in a democratic country? Is it legal to flip the bird at a politican...or anyone? Or is our "freedom of speech" limited to the printed or oral expression? And they are trying to take that away as well.

Palindromedary's picture
Palindromedary 3 years 14 weeks ago
#5

Since money is created out of thin air, on keyboards anyway, and all bank reserves are mostly thin-air keyboard transactions, one can hardly believe that there ever was a "coffer" or "stash of cash" anywhere, ever. It is all based on a belief in the legality and integrity of the system that claims they can make your monetary demands whole at any instance. When the legality and integrity of that system falls apart, as it has done and continues to do, the imaginary coffers, even our bank accounts, no longer have any meaning.

When you can no longer trust the system to live up to it's obligations then there is no obligations on the part of the citizens to the institutions. Those we trusted with our money have corrupted this trust and have imposed a kind of lawless anarchy against the majority of the citizens...not an anarchy by the people but anarchy against the people. These wealthy anarchists have raped and pillaged democracy and our economy.

If you are not outraged by our government not living up to it's long-held obligations by now using the excuse that "oh, the social security coffers were raided a long time ago"...if it is even a true statement...then how can you even trust that the money you have in the bank or in other "coffers" (aside from you mattress, of course) have not been raided a long time ago...and that the government won't soon come up with more lies and pretenses while you begin your new life as paupers and peons....in your United States of NeoSerfdom.

Martin Sandberg's picture
Martin Sandberg 3 years 14 weeks ago
#6

This is what I've been trying to get across for a while. The trust funds were spent long ago. Its quite easy to see, even though Dean Baker, among others, absolutely refuses to. Write yourself an IOU for $1,000,000 and put it into your 401K. How much is your 401K now worth? The same thing is going on here - government is both the issuer and holder of the bonds in the so-called trust funds. This means that there is no way for it to redeem those bonds without paying for them itself. You do not, of course, have to pay to pull money out of your 401K because you are not the issuer of the bonds/stocks, etc. in it, you are only on one side of the transaction - you are the holder.

The OMB noted back in 2000 ( http://blog.heritage.org/2010/08/05/once-again-the-social-security-trust...) :

“These [Trust Fund] balances are available to finance future benefit payments and other trust fund expenditures-but only in a bookkeeping sense. These funds are not set up to be pension funds, like the funds of private pension plans. They do not consist of real economic assets that can be drawn down in the future to fund benefits. Instead, they are claims on the Treasury, that, when redeemed, will have to be financed by raising taxes, borrowing from the public, or reducing benefits or other expenditures. The existence of large trust fund balances, therefore, does not, by itself, make it easier for the government to pay benefits.”

jelohman's picture
jelohman 3 years 14 weeks ago
#7

A balanced budget amendment? Are you kidding???

This “sounds” like absolutely the right thing to do; getting our politicians locked into a balanced budget. But NOT with our current moneyed political system that is controlled by the highest bidder!!!

Remember “payback time.” A balanced budget amendment would immediately turn this nation into a Banana Republic. Can you imagine what would happen if they had to cut spending or raise taxes to balance the budget, and YOUR side didn’t come up with enough bribes?

If you think things are bad now, just wait until these jokers make it better.

Ask these questions:

  • If your politician’s choice is to “balance the budget” by either (a) cutting entitlement or social spending, or (b) cutting spending on pork barrel projects or no-bid contracts for the corporate interests that fund his elections, which way do you think the vote will go?
  • If your politician’s choice is to raise taxes on the top 3% of wage earners, or not, would you expect him to do that if those top 3% are the funders of his campaign? Even if raising those taxes are necessary to the vital interests of the state or nation? Or would he instead cut entitlements to protect his funders?

There *IS* just one solution… public funding of campaigns.

Corrupt politicians got us into this mess, and only removing the corruption will correct it.



--
Jack Lohman
jelohman@gmail.com
http://MoneyedPoliticians.net

Palindromedary's picture
Palindromedary 3 years 14 weeks ago
#8

And the Outlays vs Revenues Since 1930 chart at that web site shows that the biggest differences between outlays and revenues occurred at times when the US was at war...the biggest difference was during WWII and the second biggest difference is now....while we have spent the last decade wasting lots of taxpayer dollars (Revenues) on an illegal war that has made the rich richer. The third biggest difference was spread out over the infamous period where employers were trying to maximize their profits, and their bonuses, by depleting their employees wages and salaries and benefits especially during the Reagan era. That web site, FactCheck.org..a project of the Annenberg Public Policy Center...although it pretends to be a "fair and balanced" purveyor of truth...does seem to me to be very slanted and biased toward the ruling elite....especially the part about..."Who pays all these taxes?" and it goes on to say their "facts" comes from the CBO {itself, a fair and balanced news source ;-} ...that "55 percent of all federal taxes in 2007" were paid by the "top 10 percent of income earners". I find this very hard to believe since the top income earners spend so much of their time seeking out offshore accounts to hide their money...and then when the government makes a deal with them, giving them a paltry 5 percent tax on any capital they return to the US in return for creating more jobs in the US, these tax-evading criminals create more jobs overseas and not in the US. They renege on their agreements with the government...the IRS should throw these bums into jail and take away all their ill-gotten gains.

Some right wingers claim that this web site is a "left-leaning" web site because it is by Annenberg Foundation which had Obama and Bill Ayers sitting on the board at one time. But how left-leaning is Obama? Not at all..In fact he's really a Republican....a faux Democrat.

But then this site also said "The top 10 percent paid 50 percent of all federal taxes in 2001. However, that comes in spite of lower tax rates at the top, not because of it. The reason the most affluent 10 percent pay a greater share of taxes is that they are getting a greater share of all income. Their share of all pre-tax income went from 37.5 percent in 2001 to 42 percent in 2007.

But then this article says this: "There is plenty of blame to go around, some of which rests with an American public that won't accept cuts in the largest categories of public spending, and also resists tax increases on anybody but "the rich."

I didn't see anything in this article that calls out the Military and their wasteful spending as being "part of the problem".

Military spending is over 20 percent and is totally unnecessary and a waste of tax dollars...remember the charts? Part of the big problem is military spending not social programs. If Bush had not started that illegal war in Afghanistan, then Iraq, and now other places in the Middle East and Africa we would not have such a separation of outlays and revenues. If the Republicans hadn't finagled a repeal of Glass-Steigal and their rich banksters and Wall Streeters hadn't created the heist of the American economy..the Ponzi schemes, CDOs, created the mortgage fraud that is bankrupting America...and the world...then we wouldn't have to be talking about who is to blame here...and we certainly wouldn't be reading some idiocy like: "There is plenty of blame to go around, some of which rests with an American public that won't accept cuts in the largest categories of public spending, and also resists tax increases on anybody but "the rich."

The problem is not an American public that won't accept cuts in social INSURANCE programs that they have put their hard-earned money into....the problem is that our system has been corrupted by wealthy scamsters who gamed the system (stole from the rest of us) and won't pay their fair share of taxes. This whole thing was engineered by the rich Republicans/Democrats who wanted to "drown social Insurance programs in a bathtub" from the very beginning of the Reagan years. They are doing it and it is absolutely all their doing...not those of us who have believed in the system, participated in the system, and payed our dues.

Palindromedary's picture
Palindromedary 3 years 14 weeks ago
#9

"The trust fund contains promises to pay—not real money. Those promises are in the form of special issue U.S. Treasury bonds, so they have legal standing, but there is no Scrooge McDuck-like vault filled with cash."--from that heritage website...a truly liberal institutions for sure...not!! ;-}

But then so are our bank accounts...ie: not real money...but only promises to pay. And there certainly isn't a Scrooge McDuck-like vault filled with cash...except for very, very, very small amounts compared to the "promises-to-pay" accounts you have with the bank. (Savings and checking accounts guaranteed by the FDIC..no less ;-} Yet another government guarantee whose coffers are empty? So if the bank tells you that they have been having a hard time with their bills lately and they will have to keep you from getting the full amounts you demand from your accounts, then I suppose that is alright with everyone? You have been slaving away and saving your money and putting it into your bank accounts and then the banks decide to give you only 50 cents on the dollar because they don't have coffers full of money to give you...they spent it already...this is acceptable???

This Republicanesque propaganda to blame the "little people" for being unreasonable after the rich have defrauded us is too much to take. We are the masses and there is strength in numbers. The rich only have so much gold to buy their protections and the price of protection is getting pretty steep. And the rich use a lot of it to buy idiotic propaganda that actually works on some people but not on everyone. And I believe that "the little people" are beginning to wake up and see how the system has been gamed and corrupted.

Palindromedary's picture
Palindromedary 3 years 14 weeks ago
#10

Yet another sign that Obama is not our friend:

"On Sunday, when President Obama let it be known that he would not appoint Elizabeth Warren as the head of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, it was pretty clear that the Harvard law professor who has become a hero to progressives was going to need a new approach to Washington."

http://www.thenation.com/blog/162131/elizabeth-warren-says-shell-conside...

How can such a guy be a hero to the progressives when he is such a Faux Democrat...a Republican?

Palindromedary's picture
Palindromedary 3 years 14 weeks ago
#11

Right on...Bernie Sanders...our only warrior for sanity.

http://www.thenation.com/blog/162166/gang-six-plan-not-so-fast-says-bern...

He is objecting. And he says the American people should join him in challenging a plan that he says would result in devastating cuts to needed programs.

“While all of the details from the so-called Gang of Six proposals are not yet clear, what is apparent is that the plan would result in devastating cuts to Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and many other programs that are of vital importance to working families in this country. Meanwhile, tax rates would be lowered for the wealthiest people and the largest, most profitable corporations," says Sanders.

“This is an approach that should be rejected by the American people. At a time when the rich are becoming richer and corporate profits are soaring, at least half of any deficit-reduction package must come from upper income people and profitable corporations. We must also take a hard look at military spending, which has tripled since 1997.”

jaykaygee43's picture
jaykaygee43 3 years 14 weeks ago
#12

And for the same reasons: 1) deniabiity

2) early dementia

jaykaygee43's picture
jaykaygee43 3 years 14 weeks ago
#13

Remember: ," If you're so smart, why aren't you rich?"

We now need: " you're so rich; why aren't you smart?"

The ultra rich are scared to death to take a risk. Which is why they like treasury bills so much. Now their donations to everything Republican has backfired. Smart people don't let their financial manager flunkies exploit and frighten them. Please see Jamie Johnson's film: "One" also known as, "One Percent." You can find it on YouTube. 80 minutes of insight and charm.

Punch line: most of the multi-generational ultra rich are ignorant of how money and capitalism work, and they are being stampeded by their "hedge fund" new - rich whiz kids (remember ENRON?)

Gates and Buffet understand money and they aren't spoiled, trust fund dependents. They're carrying out philanthropy and preaching oblesse oblige to their fellow millionaires/billionaires.

The Bumper Sticker should read: "You're so rich, Why aren't you smart?"

jaykaygee43's picture
jaykaygee43 3 years 14 weeks ago
#14

Re: Call me selfish, but I'm looking forward to working to elect Elizabeth Warren to the senate from Massachusetts to replace the smiling Sen. Brown. He marches to the Republican piper, and tries to look like a folksy good old pickup truck driving regular guy.

All P.R. and no substance. Sen. Warren could be a real gift to us all, and a pro=consumer protection advocate in the Senate.

Meanwhile prayerful thoughts directed to the newly elected nominee for the post. Perhaps equipped with the necessary balls for the job.

jaykaygee43's picture
jaykaygee43 3 years 14 weeks ago
#15

Hey, all !

I've been getting e-mail from CLG: "Citizens for Legitimate Government". Sometimes I read their daily missives, largely headline things. Sometimes not. More fine print than this tired progressive can always follow.

Now, I get a posting from them reading, "Seize D.C." and inviting me to select a link for ongoing information about an event to take place Sept. 10.

I'd love to answer a call to join with a million others to declare our progressive position. But, . . . so much horse manure these days . . .

Anybody else getting this? Anybody checked these folks out?

Palindromedary's picture
Palindromedary 3 years 14 weeks ago
#16

Harper's Index, May 2011

Confirmed number of terrorist plots against the United States perpetrated by Muslims in 2010 : 10

By non-Muslims : 25

Minimum number of people killed by CIA drone attacks in Pakistan last year : 607

Number of those who appeared on a U.S. list of most-wanted terrorists : 2

Estimated number of “behavior-detection officers” employed by the Transportation Security Administration : 2,800

Estimated number of people these officers have flagged for examination under the program : 288,600

Percentage of those examinations that led to an arrest : 0.7

Lonnie819 3 years 14 weeks ago
#17

Why is no one willing to address the elephant in the room? It all started with de-regulation. There would have been no financial crisis in 2008 if there had been no relaxation of banking regulations that used to prohibit interstate banking.

Does anyone really believe that we need almost 17000 pages of tax law? The U'S. tax code is over 13000 pages in 20 volumes, while Title 26(Internal Revenue code) is an additional 3300 plus pages. If your 12 year old can't do your taxes, it is too complicated.

Palindromedary's picture
Palindromedary 3 years 14 weeks ago
#18

jaykaygee43: Hey, thanks for the info on CLG!
Here's the invitation:
Citizens for Legitimate Government, http://www.legitgov.org/ (CLG) calls for protest – SEIZE DC!

SEIZE DC will begin on September 10, 2011, at noon, until finished.

Why SEIZE DC?

Endless, illegal, murderous and bankrupting war abroad; endless, brutal and bankrupting attacks on the vast majority at home—this is what we protest.

Ten years ago, with the illegitimate installation of Bush as "president," Citizens for Legitimate Government made it its mission to expose the coup and to oppose the Bush occupation of the White House. We predicted that the installation of Bush was merely the precursor to an era of illegal and undemocratic undertakings on the part of the U.S. government--policies that had begun at home and that would extend across the globe. Unfortunately, we were right. And we were right to say that this era would not and has not ended with Obama. In fact, it continued unabated and gained in intensity.

In 2008, we witnessed a supposed change of guard with the election of Barack Obama. But even before the election took place, we suggested that Obama, rather than being an agent for change, was in fact a cleverly constructed mirage to enable the financial, corporate and military oligarchy to continue on the same course, in fact, to do so with without the degree of opposition that was building to the Bush regime. What we have witnessed is not ‘change you can believe in,’ but, where Obama and most Democrats in Congress are concerned, belief you can change.

From Bush to Obama, we have seen not a change in policies, not a reversal, not even a 'failing' to change course, but the exact opposite: a determined continuation, extension and increase of the very same policies.

Rather than an end to imperialist wars, we have witnessed the increase in scope and the extension of war into other countries. Rather than two wars, we now have four.

Rather than policies favouring 'Main Street' as promised, we have witnessed the unprecedented transfer of wealth into the coffers of the banks, corporations and military contractors. We have seen record corporate profits while social misery for the working classes continues to rise, with unemployment not seen since the Great Depression and record home foreclosures. We now have austerity imposed on the vast majority while those who caused the financial crisis with wars, bailouts and corruption, pay little or no taxes and enjoy record profits.

Instead of restoring civil liberties, we have seen their further erosion with the extension of the Patriot Act, the increase of surveillance on the web, and a declaration by the president of the right to assassinate American citizens without any legal sanction whatsoever.

Indefinite detentions have not only continued under Obama, but he has also made sure that proven innocence is no cause for release.

This is but a short summary of the reasons for SEIZE DC!

How to SEIZE DC?

We protest "peacefully," although not passively. We do not accept marching orders. This is how we protest.

For 10 years, we have witnessed the absolute formalization of protests—the seeking of permits, the placing in quarantined zones, the appropriation of 'free speech' and the pro forma 'right to dissent,' treated as a purely formal and meaningless expression. We say, enough! We need no permission to free speech or the right of assembly. We seek no one’s permission and will not have our protest cordoned off from and made irrelevant to the functioning of a murderous and tyrannical oligarchy. We will not be corralled or controlled. Our protest is a seizure of DC, by which we mean an attempt to seize the attention of the city and the nation so that its policies of seize and destroy may end.

More details on the protest schedule to follow soon.
Lori Price, Editor-in-Chief

Sign up to receive Seize DC alerts!

Palindromedary's picture
Palindromedary 3 years 14 weeks ago
#19

Be sure to read Glenn Greenwald's excellent article:
The War on Terror, now starring Yemen and Somalia

"Just behold how little has changed in political and media circles when it comes to the War on Terror. The propaganda and policy tactics are virtually identical; only the names and places change. So we have anonymous officials continuously hyping the New Terrorist threat and the New Terrorist Masterminds, reporters who do nothing but uncritically pass it all along, civilian slaughter and secret prisons and interrogations simply transferred to the new Battlegrounds, and all new pretexts for not only continuing, but escalating, the War on Terror under a new brand name. The War on Terror is the ultimate self-perpetuating industry: it endlessly spawns its own justification."

Now who is the biggest, needless waste of our tax dollars? ...the social Insurance programs or our wasteful military murdering machine? I say cut military down to zero...shut down the damn pentagon!!!!

http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2011/07/18/terrorism/i...

2950-10K's picture
2950-10K 3 years 14 weeks ago
#20

I know it's hot in Washington but Obama needs to lay off some of the Kool-Aid Cantors been serving. He and the Democrats need to pay attention to what the vast majority wants, like jobs, taxing the rich, little or no cuts to social programs, and base compromise on true representational ideals.

It's preposterous that with control of the Senate and White House, a handful of delusional tea-baggers have been allowed to frighten the crap out of everyone and set the agenda as if they were a super majority. All along the agenda has needed to be about job creation, not spending cuts. For God sakes why don't they listen to Krugman and read a little history, you don't cut your way out of a working class depression.

Being nice and playing by the rules will never prevail over sociopaths without rules and moral standards. Maybe like Fox we progressives need to consider using the weapon of mass deceit. Is it below us to warn the bible belt voters that Cantor is the Anti-Christ and that republicans want to take away their food stamps and social security....well they might believe the Anti-Christ lie, but I doubt they will buy into the factual stuff!

2950-10K's picture
2950-10K 3 years 14 weeks ago
#21

I don't find it suprising that corp. media is down playing potential damage from the Murdoch scandal, but find it curious that progressives are not inflating the negative aspects as much as possible, use his own venomous techniques.....sensationalize, distort, spin, get loud and mean, don't let this opportunity pass. Even if you think all will be OK with Fox , don't give investors hope, attack like our Democracy is at stake, because it is! We have no problem with destroying good people like Weiner, whats the deal with holding back on Murdoch?

Palindromedary's picture
Palindromedary 3 years 14 weeks ago
#22

There is also going to be another massive protest in DC by a group called October2011. The date is October 6, 2011. Check it out on www.october2011.org/welcome

Palindromedary's picture
Palindromedary 3 years 14 weeks ago
#23

Latest on TYT (the young turks)...Question..do you buy products from companies whose political views or actions are against your best interests? If you buy their products..you are feeding their profits and supporting them. Should we find out more about the products we buy and boycott those products whose companies have policies, business practices, political views and actions that we might find objectionable? If we are not all going to attend mass demonstrations...maybe we should at least massively boycott these companies!!! When they begin to feel the pinch financially they will take us more seriously.
I know it is not so simple because nearly everything should be boycotted....

"Virtually everything you'll find on supermarket shelves (unless you shop the perimeter of the space where fresh fruits and veggies, meats, fish, and store breads and deli items are found) is made by the companies represented in our Boycott Lists. These are huge multinationals, and all of them are affiliated with uber-conservative political groups."
http://thepeoplesboycott.typepad.com/blog/2011/06/shortened-grocery-list...

Here's a longer list that Unions are boycotting...you'd be surprised to see some of those listed.
http://www.patriotactionnetwork.com/profiles/blogs/partial-list-of-compa...

And here's boycott Koch Bros...
http://www.chailife.com/2011/02/boycott-koch-industries-avoid-these-brands/

Maybe it would be a lot simpler to find a list of brands and companies to do business with...it would be a lot shorter anyway...maybe even non-existent.
Maybe one?...
http://www.greenamerica.org/pubs/greenpages/
But who really knows if it is really what it pretends to be.

One way to boycott is to grow your own garden (a big one) ...providing you are not buying your seeds or plants from Monsanto or any number of other sellers. Try not to be tempted to buy anything at all except what you absolutely need...no..not a new wall-sized hi-def TV...or the latest new hi-tech gadget that makes you have carpal tunnel syndrome in your thumbs or cross-eyed from staring at it all day. If you really care about your plight you need to start boycotting and doing without...that's the only way we will put a hurt on the companies who we help dig our own graves.

dianhow's picture
dianhow 3 years 13 weeks ago
#24

I am disgusted / sick to my stomach over this debt ceiling / SS-Medicare cuts clown show. USA is being black mailed- held hostage I never thought US could sink so low. Its like a freaking nightmare. What good is voting anymore ? Huge US and foreign Corps - 5 con judges and the Goldman FED OWNS USA.-our economy & courts. It took 30 yrs of Reaganomics deregulation, Bush 1-2 Cheney -GOP fat cat policies, lies, corruption -GREED, fear tactics- long failed wars- to bring up to our knees. I can not take this anymore. This is a true tragedy for our once beloved country. I mostly blame ignorant ill informed illogical voters .

gerald's picture
gerald 3 years 13 weeks ago
#25

@dianhow, your eloquent words need to be said over and over again!!! Please store your words and repeat them every two to three weeks until about two weeks before the election and repeat them every day and for least two or three times a day until after the election.

gerald's picture
gerald 3 years 13 weeks ago
#26

If there were Eisenhower Republicans to take over the party, I would return to Republican roots. Our country is being destroyed by the Regan-Bush Republicans, the Libertarians, the Teabag Party, and the Blue-Dog Democrats. I have eliminated the preposition “of” and I have replaced it with the preposition “in.” We are the United States in Mortal Sin. The “in” is most appropriate because our nation is always “in” a constant state of Mortal Sin. We are also the Anti-Christ.

I saw a recent poll from Michigan. Mitt Romney defeats Obama 46% to 42%. Romney was the hatchet man for corporations that eliminated American workers from their jobs and shipped these jobs to other countries. This is how Romney was able to accumulate his $500,000,000 million in wealth. American stupidity will never surprise me.

Remember these words!!! ONCE MEDICARE AND SOCIAL SECURITY ARE HISTORY IN OUR COUNTRY AND THEY WILL BE HISTORY. THESE SOCIAL SAFETY NET PROGRAMS WILL NEVER EVER RETURN TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE!!!!! Yes, Americans will get what they deserve.

I plan on repeating these words today.

HempForPresident's picture
HempForPresident 3 years 13 weeks ago
#27

Thom,

I love your show, and I love that you're out there getting common sense ideas out to the American people, and that you cut through the BS.

One quick note though: I always hear you use this word, but you equivocate from saying it correctly to saying it "spooned". The term is "sacrosanct". I've heard you say this as "sancrosact" a few times over the past week, and I just want to get you on the right path here, because conservatives will take any opening and attack you for it:

Sacro = sacrament - something likened to a religious sacrament

sanct = sanctity- The state or quality of being holy, sacred, or saintly.

So when you're speaking think: "Sacrament, sanctity" "sacrosanct".

Love you, Thom! Keep up the great work! Sorry about being a word nazi...

LeMoyne's picture
LeMoyne 3 years 13 weeks ago
#28

Just a thought about the source of Thom's spoonerism of sacrosanct. Maybe Thom has it right as "sancrosacked" in reference to Social Security. What was once "sancro" i.e. a sacred sacrament with great sanctity (taking care of elderly people) is being "sacked" by both parties in their incessant good cop-bad cop routine.

My thoughts on the Balanced Budget Amendment's role in the current debt ceiling austeria (austerity hysteria) are in the post Heed Lincoln's Warning: Restore American Democracy. We need to get money out of politics and support ONLY the politicians who will stand with the We The People against corporate control of our country.

Time to Rethink the War on Terror

Thom plus logo

When Eric Holder eventually steps down as Attorney General, he will leave behind a complicated legacy, some of it tragic, like his decision not to prosecute Wall Street after the financial crisis, and his all-out war on whistleblowers like Edward Snowden.

From Unequal Protection, 2nd Edition:
"Hartmann combines a remarkable piece of historical research with a brilliant literary style to tell the grand story of corporate corruption and its consequences for society with the force and readability of a great novel."
David C. Korten, author of When Corporations Rule the World and Agenda for A New Economy
From The Thom Hartmann Reader:
"Thom Hartmann is a creative thinker and committed small-d democrat. He has dealt with a wide range of topics throughout his life, and this book provides an excellent cross section. The Thom Hartmann Reader will make people both angry and motivated to act."
Dean Baker, economist and author of Plunder and Blunder, False Profits, and Taking Economics Seriously
From The Thom Hartmann Reader:
"Thom Hartmann seeks out interesting subjects from such disparate outposts of curiosity that you have to wonder whether or not he uncovered them or they selected him."
Leonardo DiCaprio, actor, producer, and environmental activist