I wish that were the start of a joke. What I mean is the very unfortunate prospects of longterm unemployed when a so-called free market economist suggests a government solution in a Congressional hearing under a “national emergency” lens.
Unless you are ill acquainted with how national emergency language translates to the American public, let me brief you. The most recent example would be the military lock down and monitoring of Boston and America’s financial centers on the Tax Day bombings. Martial law prevailed and armed soldiers penetrated American homes in search of the Tsarnaev brothers, accused of crimes of terrorism. Martial law is sononomous with national emergency.
They are all but indicted already by way of media tampering. There is no way there can be an unbiased fair trial due to the FBI statements released as incriminating evidence. There are notably two narratives. The first is the non-stop microanalysis of every detail on the Boston bombings to the exclusion of other news, a full fledged media distraction plying the Tsarnaev brothers as undoubtedly guilty. This now includes bombings that haven’t even happened. The other narrative is that the Tsarnaev brothers were convenient terror suspects zeroed on prememtively by intelligence agencies based on their religion and foreign travel affiliations. They are the PR sacrifices taking the fall for US State sponsored domestic terrorism and “drill exercises” in Boston the day of the bombings.
Here is what I was watching for the day of the bombings: the fiscal crisis in America. On the day that most Americans were rushing to file their tax returns, everyone would forget that our government is only getting enough tax cash to keep themselves afloat another 6 months. Not enough Americans are working to collect taxes. Fermented unemployment amid able bodied, energetic and educated people terrifies a national security state hiding behind an cheapening facade. There is a securitized elite who sees all civilian life as both threat and vermin. Their economic counterparts, global banking cartels and their D.C. lapdogs will corroborate any story that will keep up any internal illusion of complete universal control based on elite military force.
That is why I wasn’t surprised to read this in my morning newspaper c/o McClatchy
“An economic adviser to the last three Republican presidential candidates, Kevin Hassett, labeled the stubbornly high rates of long-term unemployment a national emergency.
Hassett, who’s now a researcher at the free-market research center the American Enterprise Institute, cited research showing a drop of at least 40 percent in per capita income for people who’ve gone six months or longer without employment. The longer a worker is jobless, the greater the chance of divorce, family strife, suicide and a host of other ills that do permanent damage to children, who’ll become workers someday.”
One would think, great, finally someone from AEI has a fine grasp on a dehumanizing and virtually unlivable problem in America. Here’s his solution.
“One idea he strongly supported involves subsidies for “work sharing.” That’s a process in which, say, five workers each take a 20 percent pay cut, or a cut in hours, and none are let go. Rather than having to provide unemployment benefits, the government would provide money to offset that 20 percent pay cut for workers. The incentive for companies is that as the economy improves, they’d already have these skilled workers on their payrolls.”
So what Hassett proposed is not to employ people who need jobs, but cut the pay of existing work forces to reinforce reason of retention. One of the pressing problems in workplaces across America right now is job absorption. Due to economic stressors, businesses are taxed more and less able to afford needed staff. So core staff are being forced into taking on additional job responsibilities to keep businesses afloat.
So the geniuses at AEI are not proposing PT employment increases for skilled workers who need to make a living. They are proposing government reinforcement of less pay for more work in exchange for hanging to your job. This keeps job growth smaller and current employees overworked under constant threat of unemployment. Their solution is to not liberate a labor force to greet the needs of the markeplace but propose that our government pay, with TAX SUBSIDIES, any business who will standardize a lockout for longterm unemployed. They want an exclusive employers market indoctrination underneath national emergency language and they want US businesses to be taxed for it.
This is the most dangerous thing I have read in my daily paper, past all of the gun death and bombings, fires, nuclear and oil leaks, natural disasters and wars. AEI suggested to our Congress that longterm unemployment should be a military matter, handled by DHS enabled police militia monitors to keep employed people employed and overworked for 20% less pay. Unemployed civilian vermin can be out of jobs and in the gutters permanently. AEI hopes you starve to death. Good luck to you.
This is unlivable public policy, America. If you allow this, you will not recover.
In my happy place, the true free market, economic justice and fiscal conservative interests show up to work on a full deconstruction of AEI’s elite state sponsored coup attempt on US soil. If it were even possible to bring them up on charges for global economic sabotage and market rigging, I might even think it should be attempted.
Hasset’s standard is not simply an economists faulty ideas – he is pulling in military meat, bone and muscle to reinforce employment. He is asking limping businesses to surrender economic power in exchance for more government money and control. In exchange they will get military protection.
NOT A LAWYER, NOT A LAWMAKER
Like most Americans who aren’t judges, lawyers or lawmakers, I am relatively directly unconcerned with proving the guilt or innocence of any terrorism suspect. What I am responsible for is maintaining an assertion of justice when I am innocent. I find whether or not the Tsarnaev brothers were the convicts, is irrelevant if I am repeatedly stripped of my freedoms for things I had nothing to do with. This is how natives grow apathetic to terrorism events because the direct translation is that government will now grow aggressive against their privacy, their business and their freedom to travel. That’s how people begin to connect terrorism with the native government plots whether there is any proof of a real conspiracy or not.
Slate published how it’s Constitutionally viable for military soldiers to go into any Boston home with guns and without a warrant and represent the positive argument for more surveillance nationally as a knee jerk reaction to Boston’s bombings. They’ve lost the forest for the trees. If you were scared into the same place you need to work on that traumatic attachment to government. You are in denial about what you’re losing, what is happening to you and your freedoms and who your government really is.
No matter how much lip service is paid to civil liberties by the Presidency and corresponding agencies, they are never protecting my freedoms by suppressing or railroading them with increasing military force.