Opinion

The Almost-Done Deal, and the Era of Angry Populism

»

by: Robert Reich, Talking Points Memo

photo
Economist Robert Reich. (Artwork: The Economist)

    Editor's Note: The Senate passed the $700 billion economic bailout plan on Wednesday, while the House is expected to vote by Friday. -TO/ms

    The Senate will vote tonight; the House is scheduled to vote tomorrow morning. Will the deal fly? Probably. Wall Street's gyrations since Monday have scared the hell out of a number of holdouts, notwithstanding all the negative emails and phone calls they continue to receive from constituents.

    An important distinction here. While more Americans are coming around to "supporting" the bailout bill, the vast majority still hate the idea of bailing out Wall Street. They're for the bailout bill now only because they fear that a failure to pass it will have worse consequences -- drying up credit at a time when Main Street is struggling. But make no mistake: America is mad as hell. They resent what they perceive as extortion by the Masters of the Universe.

    Angry populism has always been a potent force in American politics. And now, with wages dropping, jobs insecure, fuel and food and health-insurance costs soaring, and millions of homes in jeopardy -- and what's perceived to be a massive tax-payer bailout of some of the richest people in the land -- angry populism is about to explode. McCain has already tried to cast himself as an angry populist, even though he still wants to give the very rich a bigger tax cut than George W. gave them, and cut taxes on big corporations (oil companies alone would reap $1.2 billion a year under McCain's plan). Barack Obama, whose plans for middle-class tax relief and affordable health care will genuinely help America's middle and working classes, has been expressing more indignation lately on behalf of them. But anger doesn't come as easily to Obama as it does to McCain -- even though McCain seems quite ready to aim his anger anywhere and everywhere.

    Democrats should be angry populists, given their traditional role of protecting and championing the underdogs in American politics, and especially considering the absurdly wide gap that's opened up between the rich and everyone else. But in recent years Democrats have ceded the mantle to Republicans, who now mimic the faux populism of Sean Hannity and other right-wing talk show demagogues. (The recent maneuvering in the House over the bailout bill is really over this. House Democrats are getting the same angry mail that House Republicans are receiving, and don't want to be seen as lending their support to this ugly bill without Republicans signing on.)

    In fact, the bailout bill isn't really taxpayer supported. It will be funded by additional federal debt, issued mostly to foreign governments -- especially the Chinese and in the Middle East. And, strictly speaking, it's not even a bailout. The Treasury will buy and hold mortgage-backed securities whose value is now unknown because there's no market for them, until housing prices start rising again, by which time the securities should be worth something -- perhaps even more than the Treasury pays for them. (Note that there continues to be great confusion about the extent to which the Treasury will hold a reverse auction, paying banks the minimum price at which they're willing to sell the securities -- perhaps 20 cents on the dollar -- or whether the Treasury will buy the securities outright for their face values and take warrants or shares of stock in return.)

    But whatever it's called and however it's financed, it's still an outrage. America's foreign policy is made no more flexible by going into deeper hock to the Chinese and the Middle East. And the deal still subjects American taxpayers to some risk, especially if the housing market doesn't bounce back for many years. Worse, the bill can't help but prop up the earnings many Wall Street executives whose malfeasance, greed, and stupidity got us into this mess in the first place. And it does nothing for average Americans except avoid economic calamity. (The provision ostensibly helping distressed homeowners is to be used at the discretion of the Treasury Department, so it's mostly a sham.)

    The larger economic outlook is not encouraging. All signs point to the economy worsening, bailout or no bailout. Unemployment will continue to rise. Median earnings will continue to drop, adjusted for inflation. More Americans will lose their health insurance.

    The Era of Angry Populism has only just begun. Let's hope Obama wins, and is able to mobilize the anger into fierce pressure on Congress to get his agenda enacted, as well as reform Wall Street and Washington.

»


IN ACCORDANCE WITH TITLE 17 U.S.C. SECTION 107, THIS MATERIAL IS DISTRIBUTED WITHOUT PROFIT TO THOSE WHO HAVE EXPRESSED A PRIOR INTEREST IN RECEIVING THE INCLUDED INFORMATION FOR RESEARCH AND EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES. TRUTHOUT HAS NO AFFILIATION WHATSOEVER WITH THE ORIGINATOR OF THIS ARTICLE NOR IS TRUTHOUT ENDORSED OR SPONSORED BY THE ORIGINATOR.

"VIEW SOURCE ARTICLE" LINKS ARE PROVIDED AS A CONVENIENCE TO OUR READERS AND ALLOW FOR VERIFICATION OF AUTHENTICITY. HOWEVER, AS ORIGINATING PAGES ARE OFTEN UPDATED BY THEIR ORIGINATING HOST SITES, THE VERSIONS POSTED ON TO MAY NOT MATCH THE VERSIONS OUR READERS VIEW WHEN CLICKING THE "VIEW SOURCE ARTICLE" LINKS.

Comments

This is a moderated forum.  It may take a little while for comments to go live.

Commentator Bang's

Commentator Bang's suggestion is right on the mark! Terms just like those offered on their credit cards should be the model. This is exactly the form such legislation should take. Reich is quite correct when he says that "America is mad as hell. They resent what they perceive as extortion by the Masters of the Universe." But it's not simply a perception, Mr Reich. It is the truth of the matter. It IS extortion by the masters. Yes, we are angry as hell, but we won't do anything about it more than maybe cast a ballot. We are a nation of sheep, and are just like W: all hat and no cattle, all talk and no walk. A real nation would dissolve the government, prosecute the officials for treason, and make liberal use of the guillotine for the many we will find guilty. This country, but for its population of sheep, would bring the nation to a standstill until this treasonous legislation was wholly and immediately repealed, the Fed dismissed, democratic rule and the Constitution (complete with the Bill of Rights) and its insistence on sound money, issued by the US Treasury fully restored. Anything less merely exacerbates the crime of theft and treason that is already taking place. PS. What happens if and when the Chinese and/or the Middle East decide they no longer wish to be buyers of the US's junk debt?

Why I'm not McCain supporter

Why I'm not McCain supporter or Republican apologist, I'm stymied by the ending of this piece: "Let's hope Obama wins, and is able to mobilize the anger into fierce pressure on Congress to get his agenda enacted, as well as reform Wall Street and Washington." --What agenda, exactly, has Obama put forth for all this, and what reform has he concretely outlined? He talks vaguely of change, but that's it. Not that he can be expected to work miracles. I won't envy him for the mess he's handed if he wins in November. But this piece, which starts as an accurate depiction of our woes, ends with phony hope-is-over-the-hill populism that's almost as bad as Reagan's "It's Morning in America."

What's that supposed to

What's that supposed to mean? "America's foreign policy is made no more flexible by going into deeper hock to the Chinese and the Middle East." So... we can't start more wars because they won't finance them? What are you trying to say, and why is something as vastly important as "America's foreign policy" given such short shrift? The immoral empire is on the cusp of collapse. That's the starting point. http://crimesofthestate.blogspot.com/

The bailout is not nor was

The bailout is not nor was it ever Paulson's idea to bail out the banks. It was a plan designed by Ben Bernanke former head of the Harvard Economics department where he received his doctorate in the study of the Great Depression, its causes, prevention, and a working response to such an event to prevent another financial meltdown like the one in the 1930s. Of course it would probably cause some inflation, but like in the roaring 1920s the Fed Reserve Bank could just print more money with which to extend as much credit as necessary. The Fed Reserve Bank is responsible for the US monetary policy, so you can blame them for most of the financial disasters we've experienced since its inception. Google; History of the Federal Reserve Bank and you will be surprised at the chicanery involved in setting up our central bank which was a main reason for our Revolutionary war. The British Central Banking system had a strangle hold on U.S. finances. War was the only option for us to get out of the clutches of greedy bankers, but they found a way to achieve their goals despite our Founding Father's resolve never to allow a Central Banking system to be created in the US of A.

For those who have been

For those who have been swayed or have supported this rotten bill: think 6 mos to a year from now when Americans are forced to give up the damn dollar for something like Ameuros at 10¢ on the dollar. To give you an idea of what that means: in my life, it costs me half a months' wages to pay my livestock feed bill. At 10¢ on the dollar, it would take me 5 months to pay this bill. Powerful thought, boys. M

For those who have been

For those who have been swayed or have supported this rotten bill: think 6 mos to a year from now when Americans are forced to give up the damn dollar for something like Ameuros at 10¢ on the dollar. To give you an idea of what that means: in my life, it costs me half a months' wages to pay my livestock feed bill. At 10¢ on the dollar, it would take me 5 months to pay this bill. Powerful thought, boys. M

Mr. Reich: At what point

Mr. Reich: At what point along the spectrum of negotiated changes to Mr. Paulson's original ransom note would you think it fair to cease calling it a "bailout". We have a framing problem here.

For too long, the notion of

For too long, the notion of liberalism has been tied up in the specifics of SOCIAL liberalism, and severed from the the common economic needs of the populace. After all, the populace as a body is pretty iffy when it comes to issues of tolerance and social harmony. So that up to now, the only liberals our Congressmen and Congresswomen have taken very seriously were the social liberals, especially ones packing large bank accounts. Populism was dismissed as a synonym for racism and no-nothingism, and so racists and no-nothings had the field all to themselves. Wall Street interests might write checks to AIDS charities and ban discrimination based on color and gender, yet they have relentlessly promoted a "fairer" type of discrimination, that targets a wide array of people in a way not categorizable by race or ethnicity, religion or sexuality. This is a discrimination based on the presence or absence of the arcane skills solely required in a financial meritocracy. Adherence to this narrow set of principals is relentlessly promoted as the key to all economic life, and economic life has grown to encompass every waking hour. Those left behind have only themselves to blame, in this view, and so its promoters on the liberal side continue to look themselves in the mirror and praise themselves as good idealistic citizens. These are not the same as the right-wing nuts who profit by a cruder application of the very same principals. Our champions hired and rewarded ANYONE that worked relentlessly to enrich them, and in return they promoted tolerance in and out of the workplace, universal health-care (when the numbers worked out in their favor), and much that was good. Who could fault them? I wonder if financial ruin might be a cure for such vanity? Unfortunately, the ruin will have to be shared by all. Yet, in my mind, I toy with the notion, and I am afraid others do as well.

McCain seems to think that

McCain seems to think that the ultra-rich, the top one-tenth of one percent aren't rich enough. He proposes tax breaks for them that are so huge, you have to see it to believe it. Check out these bar charts that compares McCain's Tax Breaks, to Obama's Tax Breaks. What an eye-opener! http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2008/06/09/ST2008060900950.html

Senator Sanders, I am not

Senator Sanders, I am not a constituent but would like to express some thoughts. First, I want to thank you for being a consistent voice for fairness and social good. Let me preface the second point by saying I do not have much money saved at the age of forty-eight, even though I have been a professional software engineer since college. Half of my savings is in what I supposed to be solid stocks and this portion is rapidly becoming a quarter, and less than that. I have no property beyond an automobile and furniture. In recent years my jobs have been contract positions, and sporadic, and my savings have been eaten away in the lean times. I feel that I will have far too little to retire on, and if Social Security is cannibalized, I will have even less. So I have material reasons to hope that Wall Street perks up soon. Because the same ideological forces that created the current situation have done their very best to shake the faith of the people in our government, and destroy its commitment to our well-being, health, and retirements; so that we the people have invested in the monetary schemes that were proffered to replace social commitment. The result, as you can see, is the situation we face now. I truly feel that your dissent in the Senate is a worthwhile expression of distrust and disgust and I will not begrudge it despite my precarious position. Our economic "system" is mainly imaginary, a card house cooked up by by neurotics and egotists -- to describe them at their best. At worst, they are out-and-out scoundrels. So whatever happens to me in the short term, I doubt I or the majority of Americans can win in the long-term -- not if economic stewardship remains solely in the hands of monetarist gurus and market fundamentalists, and the sharpers who fund their think-tanks and their University chairmanships. My main point, then, is this: Congress should take up the revamping of the economy as its primary chore in the coming years. Measures that once would have been commonsense under President Eisenhower are now considered radical, so I urge you to be as radical as you can. I am hoping and working for a Democratic President and Congress next year, but am well aware that Democrats are nearly as vulnerable to market-based snake-oil as are establishment Republicans. So please continue in your role as conscience of, gadfly to, and I dearly hope, full participant in a Congress that will take rebuilding the social contract as seriously as you do. You represent a so-called fringe that by rights should be a majority. Thanks for your work

I love this guy and trust

I love this guy and trust him. Whenever he speaks, common sense and compassion spill out. I just hope to God he is not naive. I realize he's speaking out on behalf of Obama, who he advises, but I wholeheartedly agree. The problem is, there's lots of wishful thinking going on right now. Maybe codifying the idea of "Angry Populism" will bring together citizens of every stripe who are sick of being used by the Man no matter how they feel about privacy, choice, homosexuality and Jesus. Maybe that's the way we get Obama's back, emboldening him to enact the change he promises, even for those who won't vote for him.

Read Howard Zinn's "From

Read Howard Zinn's "From empire to democracy" http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/oct/02/usa.creditcrunch

Let's make the bailout a

Let's make the bailout a 'loan' in terms that the banks can understand. The borrowers MUST pay back the entire loan in five years. Since the borrowers have a Credit Rating lower than GWBs IQ, they are entitled to a commensurate interest rate of, let's say, 29%. This rate is subject to change at anytime, and without notice to the borrowers. If the borrowers miss or are late with a payment, a Charge of no less than 1 % of the remaining principle or three times the payment (whichever is greater) will be assessed. There is no penalty if the borrowers pay off the loan early. It is suggested that the borrowers go to the Halliburtons, KBRs, Blackwaters, and not just the greedy CEOs (and the next five layers of management under each CEO as well as all of the Boards of Directors for each failed company) to see if they will make donations to help. We all know that they received ludicrous donations while they were struggling over the last eight years. OR, let's ask the administration how the US functions day to day with a National debt approaching $10 trillion without any impact on credit.

Excuse me! Rupecissa, Sarah

Excuse me! Rupecissa, Sarah Palin said she's a Joe Sixpack candidate. How about we stop dumping on "elitist" Leftists just a little bit, huh? And start recognizing who is an elitist -- it's a filthy rich person with incredible power who thinks of those who are struggling financially as "parasites." Look at some of the Chicago economic boys and you'll see that attitude around. It's obscene. But, we're not really talking about elitism in the way of money or power, are we? Because we can all aspire to at least make money -- we can kid ourselves that we will, even if we never do. But we can't all aspire to be smarter than we naturally are, so we REALLY resent someone who has more brains than we do. Can't help it. We just resent 'em. And THAT'S the elitist we hate -- the very smart guy who might think us out of a mess, whether he's arrogant about it or not. How self-destructive is envy, anyway.

It shows how equally corrupt

It shows how equally corrupt the two party duopoly is in this country. We even have the charade of the presidential debates that is hosted no longer by the League of Woman Voters but by a private corporation run by two men, one a lobbyist for the drug industry and the other is the head of the American Gaming Association. So we will see a debate and an election that will determine only the degree of corruption but do nothing for the common man.

Mr. Reich is correct. Who

Mr. Reich is correct. Who do these idiots in Congress and the White House think is going to pay for this bailout--the answer, ultimately, is the Chinese, if they are stupid enough to loan us more money. Maybe we should sell them the White House. They will end up running the country anyway.A prosecution of the U.S. leadership (sic!) for treason would be in order. But most of those who did in the Roman Empire got off scott free too!

Robert Reich is correct.

Robert Reich is correct. Obama needs to speak up, LOUDER. Also this bail outdefinitely needs to have a clear cut distinction that we the people are going into hock over this mess and we want equity and shares in every company that we buy back the mortgages and all other "instruments" that get exchanged for the $700Billion. PLUS we will sell back these mortgages at a time that suits us (the government) and perhaps hold onto our equity stake. Why should we bail them out and then let them have it all back IF things get rosy again.

Let the rich pay for the

Let the rich pay for the bailout Bernie Sanders Amendment is the way to go.

The most important thing

The most important thing that Congress could do is make the ownership of precious metals a tax free event. Then junk this bill. Study the over fifty EARMARKS now attached. Then ask yourselve if this is good government. American should through out ALL current Senators for this bill.

Neither the Democrats nor

Neither the Democrats nor the Republicans have any credibility on this. Both Work for the war machine and Wall St. Only th eGreen Party is ready to shut down the Wall st criminals and the war machine that keeps them in power. And no one else is ready to discuss this Wall St crime as an ecological disaster. Vote Green Vote Cynthia McKinney for President.

Let's see where we stand: 1)

Let's see where we stand: 1) We Americans are angry because their twice elected (?) leader got them into an off-budget trillion dollar war? 2) Oh, and gave tax breaks to the rich and infamous? 3) And they are angy because the didn't save and maxed out too many credit cards? 4) Oh, and drew down too much equity in their homes? 5) And bought pricey homes on no money down, expecting home values to increase forever? 6) Oh, and their elected government deregulated virtually every federal watchdog agency or appointed dimwit heads? Do we feel we are exempt from the truth that our actions have consequences, that are now, sob, a little hard to bear? What we are experiencing now is reality therapy--we will get well but it will hurt.

While D.C. and New York

While D.C. and New York swirl in their usual adrenaline-junkie pre-formed panics, some of the rest of us are going to Peak Oil-, permaculture-, sustainable-this-and-that meetings. We will trade greens of value (fancy chard, arugula, etc., GOV's) for some of our greens of doubt (GODs, formerly known as Federal Reserve notes). I already traded some of my GOV's for a restaurant meal at my local employee-owned, plugged-in, linux-connected cafe. The pierced and tatooed owners are colorful and entertaining, if a bit slow and overly chilled from time to time. It's going to be interesting watching the IRS, etc., try to chase so many of the others of us down assorted rabbit holes. I wish Paul Newman were still here to make movies about it, but then, since Reincarnation Is, he will. Thanks to Robert Reich for this posting that seems more from the street (off-Main) than anything else I've read yet. It was just what I needed to let go of a needed riff.

"Joe Sixpack"-- is an

"Joe Sixpack"-- is an condescending way of talking about the people you don't agree with. It isn't just some Other unenlightened demographic that votes for lower taxes and hates this bailout. Liberals, Leftists and Democrats could more easily shed their elitist image if they stopped talking like elitists. The Republicans have voters in all social classes, just like Democrats.One doesn't contribute to serious discussion indulging in derogatory stereotypes.

I fled the country

I fled the country nearly eight and a half years ago... I've been afraid to visit my son.. The tenacity people have displayed in maintaining.. some sort of.. Support for these Ghouls is beyond ANY understanding I could possibly muster. "Liberty and Justice for...

Reaganism was always false.

Reaganism was always false. It was designed to tap into everybody's hope for more wealth. The same urge that drives people to go to Las Vegas and play the lottery also drive people to day-trade and watch the stock market. The truth is that most of us will never make more than our two or three peak earning years, rising to middle management and being sent out to pasture before we have had enough career to save. Tax cuts never create jobs. Only new ideas create jobs. Ideas have been suppressed by a lust for tax cuts that have only favored old-idea industries like oil and defense.

Debate Premonition: Ifill:

Debate Premonition: Ifill: Governor Palin, what steps would you take to end the economic crisis. Palin (glancing at the crib notes written on her wrist) I would immediately shore up the financial system via back loaded Credit Undefault Reverse Swap Agreements with the Deparment of the Interior. Ifill: That's quite a specific proposal Governor. What do you think about that Senator Biden? Biden: I think that is an oversimplification and a diversion , The Governor may not know that... Ifill: Oh I'm sorry Senator did I spill coffee on you? I'm terribly sorry. Now back to the Governor. Governor Palin, What is the role of high minded moral courage in your campaign? Palin: ( smiling and whispering) It doesn't say anything about being high in the script. Ifill: Let me rephrase that Governor. What are your seven steps to courage, moral fibre, and good stewardship? Palin: I'm so glad you asked that Gwen!

Hock-and-spend,

Hock-and-spend, hock-and-spend....it's just a Republican thing, don't ya see? If they would offer a principled need to finance a war or a bailout, they could sell us "victory bonds", and we would buy them because it would be the right, patriotic thing to do. But the war and the bailout are NOT principled, so we will owe the Chinese primarily rather than ourselves.

Make the bailout bill right!

Make the bailout bill right! Add the Bernie Sanders Amendment so only the rich will pay for the bailout. This makes sense to me.

'false populism' was

'false populism' was presbush attempt to devalue or invalidate populism.

I think Obama needs to tap

I think Obama needs to tap into that anger now. Bush's tax cuts went over in large part because Joe Sixpack thought, "When I get rich, I don't want to have to pay taxes either." Joe's dream is on the ropes and his fear and disappointment will turn into seething rage. Tolerance of tax cuts for the rich will soon be turning into demands for punitive tax increases.