Perceiving the power of projection widens our world


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

“My guiding principles in life
are to be honest, genuine,
thoughtful and caring.”
Prince William

When you look in a mirror, what do you see?

th-58

No, you don’t see yourself. You inhabit a body—not a mirror. No, you see a projection of yourself. Similarly, we often project ourselves upon others.

Are you diligent and honest? Then you tend to trust others easily: You project on them the traits of diligence and honesty which come naturally to you. If you are a private person, you likely believe others also keep secrets. Or if you often tell small lies, you may readily conclude others are deceiving you.

Name the trait or motivation. We tend to project these on others. This is familiar and natural. The opposite attributes are foreign to us, so we find these more difficult to believe.

The consequences of these beliefs can be disastrous, for ourselves and others. As a landlord, for example, I lost several thousand dollars when I rented to a few tenants despite signs they were untrustworthy. We all need to widen our vision—to see reality—or our mistakes will multiply.

How can we apply this wisdom? How can we challenge our mistaken projections?

Shortly after graduating college in 1977, I discussed farm subsidies with Mark, a church friend. I had just completed a study of economist Milton Freedman, agreeing with his tenet that the free market alone should determine a person’s income. So I opposed farm subsidies.

th-59

Mark was shocked. Why would an otherwise caring Christian approve of farmers going bankrupt when farm prices crash? My friend thought I was heartless, having lost both compassion and common sense.

Mark was right.

Why did I fail to care? Despite my business degree, I was ignorant. I knew nothing about farming. Even more pertinent: I had adopted an ideology which shut out the experiences of others.

I also projected on to bankrupted farmers my history of obtaining work easily. I did not consider the hardship of bankruptcy, the trauma of families losing their homes, nor farmers’ ordeals when seeking another profession.

I needed to widen my world. I needed to listen to others’ experiences. I needed to be thoughtful.

Similarly, many leaders project their limited experiences upon others. One politician, “Edward,” laments that so many receive food stamps. Why not? His family never needed food stamps. Why should anyone else?

Instead of projecting his economic abilities upon others, however, Edward could consider their experiences. What about the millions who earn a living yet, due to low wages, experience the continuing agony of poverty? What about the many millions of seniors dependent upon social security and food stamps for survival? What about the many children who, due to food stamp cuts, have some days each month with little or no food?

th-60

Edward projects his economic strengths on others. He concludes the US needs to spend more on the military, so our nation should spend less on food stamps. This is a false choice. One does not exclude the other.

Those in need should not be denigrated or starved. Moreover, the US military currently spends as much as China and Russia—as well as the next ten countries combined.

“Supporting our troops” instead of supporting those needing food stamps is ironic: The pay of low-ranking service people requires $100 million in food stamps and $1 billion in subsidies at military grocery stores in 2014. Severe reduction of commissary subsidies brings hardship to many military families. For many, food stamps remain a necessity.

Edward is not alone in projecting his food prosperity on others: A plethora of political leaders hold a variety of heartless viewpoints.

Sometimes, due to our own projections, we too have uncaring positions. What is true for these heartless politicians is also true for you and me: We need to widen our world; we need to listen to others’ experiences; we need to be thoughtful.

What to make of Trevor Noah?


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

daily-show-trevor-noahTrevor Noah’s premiere on THE DAILY SHOW, taking the place of Jon Stewart, was a nice opening. His discussion of the papal visit to America was funny, his take on Speaker of the House John Boehner’s resignation went over well, and his coverage of the discovery of water on Mars, which included the introduction of a new correspondent, Roy Wood, Jr., made me laugh out loud.

However, there remains a certain gap in the show that keeps me from rolling on the floor. Part of it may have to do with the absence of Tim Carvell, the Mad magazine writer who worked on the show from 2004 to 2014 before following John Oliver over to HBO. The Daily Show has had some brilliant moments in the past few years, including its takes on race, gender, and sexuality issues, but it does not have the same zing it did in 2004, when the Bush administration was providing plenty of material. It is also not out of line to notice that the show has been muted in comparison when dealing directly with the Obama administration, a criticism that also can be leveled at the late, great Colbert Report.

But I feel that only scrapes the surface. Noah says he will bring to the show a more internationalized focus, perhaps taking more material from the Global Edition of the show that has been in production since 2002 and broadcast on CNN International. Can we expect future episodes where correspondents cover political conventions of not just the Republicans and Democrats but also the British Tories or the Irish Sinn Fein? Will there be dispatches from the headquarters of Christian fundamentalists in Switzerland?

The fact is that those potentialities fail to address just how bizarre America is. On September 27, The New Yorker magazine carried a story worth remembering, WHY ARE REPUBLICANS THE ONLY CLIMATE-SCIENCE-DENYING PARTY IN THE WORLD? With the help of a survey of the worldwide right-wing parties by the University of Bergen’s Sondre Båtstrand, the periodical points out that every other conservative (read: Tories) to right wing party (read: European neo-Nazis like Greece’s Golden Dawn) on earth has climate change action as part of their campaign platform. The idea that Adolf Hitler fanboys have better policies than Gina Raimondo and Sheldon Whitehouse is simply disturbing. Now, there is a lot to say for these parties in terms of the implications of their policy statements, some of them demonize refugee immigrants from the Middle East and blame them directly for climate change because they were involved in the production of fossil fuels. But the point is clear, Båtstrand says that the GOP is “not representative of conservative parties as a party family” and our culture has become simply insane.

Does Trevor Noah have the intention or hope to take on this paradigm and try to shift it? Can he?

I do not believe so. Jon Stewart said in interviews leading up to his departure that he was exhausted by the specter of going through another election season. He was on the air for just over sixteen years, having replaced the terminally unfunny (and reportedly piggishly sexist) Craig Kilborn. After four presidential elections, several published books, and the Rally to Restore Sanity and/or Fear, co-hosted with Stephen Colbert, American politics are essentially the same as when Stewart’s first episode lampooning the Lewinski scandal aired. Indeed, we are in the midst of yet another Clinton scandal and about to crown Hillary in a farcical primary that would be called bad government, if not outright treasonous, by any other population on earth!

When we look at the last year of Stewart’s work, we see material terminally lacking in real value. For instance, he barely had the nerve to take on the murderous behavior of the IDF in Gaza during 2014’s Operation Protective Edge. The farthest he could bother going was spoofing Israel’s policy of dropping a mortar on the roofs of houses they intendeded to bomb in the next few minutes. Meanwhile, the equally-Jewish Max Blumenthal is able to write this in his recent book THE 51 DAY WAR: RUIN AND RESISTANCE IN GAZA:

The Gaza Strip is a ghetto of children. Of its 1.8 million residents, a majority are under the age of 18. Most have never left the 360 square kilometers where they were born, raised and confined. There is no discernible future for them beyond the Israeli military occupation that has endured nearly 50 years and a siege that was officially proclaimed in 2007. The formative years of these young people have been marked by three major military assaults. These are their rites of passage. The Palestinians of Gaza have no reason or experience to believe that a fourth war will not arrive soon.

There are certain places where Mr. Blumenthal and I have differences about advocacy of Palestinian rights, but if the son of Sidney Blumenthal, who wrote for the Boston Phoenix and became an aid in the Clinton White House, can be this honest, why can we not see that same treatment from Jon Stewart?

Perhaps the answer is to be gleaned from the ownership. Comedy Central is owned by Doug Herzog’s Viacom, who has a history of donating to both the Obama Victory Fund 2012 and McConnell Senate Committee ’14, helping to keep Kentucky’s favorite Foghorn Leghorn impersonator in the Congress.

Crowing_pains-PD_Looney_Tunes-_sylvester_+_foghornThis kind of ownership, despite being palpable to liberals with support of abortion and gay rights, has no interest in the essential element of any critique of society, discussion of class. Of course, Marxism itself is not fully capable of such a critique of our neoliberal capitalist system, post-structural and post-colonial studies have shown us the gaps regarding the intersectionality of identity, as in the case of racism, gender bias, or homophobia. One cannot look to the Labor Theory of Value and hold DAS KAPITAL with the same level of surety that defines the religious fanatic. But in our cultural deficit in this area is so pronounced that just the cover of one of Gramsci’s Prison Notebooks would seem like an oasis in our desert of the real, where our celebration of Labor Day is one of mourning a return to the grind of work and our holiday praising the democratic socialist Martin Luther King, Jr., a holiday signed into law by Ronald Reagan, dares not even mention the words ‘Vietnam War’, let alone King’s evolution towards a united front with labor union against capital in his final year.

We need comedy that skewers our pathetic news media. We need comedians who are willing to speak truth to power about the abuses of the mighty. But it remains to be seen if Trevor Noah or any other televised personality dependent on ad revenues or cable subscription profits will have the bravery to tell the truth, that America is not the greatest country in the sum total of human existence, that our so-called progressive President is in fact a deeply conservative politician, and that our hyper-bloviating notions of patriotism are seen as buffoonish, reactionary, and ecologically dangerous by people in Europe who enjoy reading MEIN KAMPF.

Until then, the joke is really on us.

kaGh5_patreon_name_and_message

PVD City Council fails to deliver on minimum wage promise in new TSAs


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387
DSC_4038
City Council Finance Chair John Igliozzi

Last year, after the General Assembly stole away the power of cities and towns in Rhode Island to set their own minimum wages, Providence City Councillor John Igliozzi told a packed room of disappointed hotel workers that the city was not prohibited from imposing higher minimum wage standards via tax stabilization agreements (TSAs), which are contracts between cities and private industry, and cannot be interfered with by the General Assembly.

Igliozzi said then that all future TSAs should include strong minimum wage requirements and many other worker protections and rights.

Igliozzi is the chair of the Providence City Council Finance Committee, so one would expect that he would follow up on this proposal, but so far, nothing like this has been incorporated into the new TSAs being cooked up in City Hall and expected to be voted on this week.

When Jesse Strecker, executive director of RI Jobs with Justice, testified before the Finance Committee of the Providence City Council, he presented a short list of proposals to ensure that whatever TSAs were adopted would truly benefit not just the investors and owners of billion dollar corporations but also the working people and families of Providence.

Strecker’s list included the following:

1. Provide good, career track jobs for Providence residents most in need by utilizing apprenticeship programs and community workforce agreements, hiring at least 50% of their workforce from the most economically distressed communities of Providence, with a substantial portion of that workforce made up of people facing barriers to employment such as being a single parent or homeless, or having a criminal record, offering job training programs so local residents are equipped with the skills necessary to perform the available jobs and hiring responsible contractors who do not break employment and civil rights law;

2. Pay workers a living wage of at least $15 per hour, provide health benefits and 12 paid sick days per year, and practice fair scheduling: offering full time work to existing employees before hiring new part time employees, letting workers know their schedule two weeks in advance, and providing one hour’s pay for every day that workers are forced to be ‘on call’;

3. For commercial projects, create a certain number of permanent, full-time jobs, or for housing developments, ensure that 20% of all units are sold or rented at the HUD defined affordable level. Or, contribute at an equivalent level to a “Community Benefits Fund,” overseen and directed by community members providing funding to create affordable housing, rehabilitate abandoned properties, or finance other community projects such as brown field remediation; and

4. Present projected job creation numbers before approval of the project, and provide monthly reporting on hiring, wages and benefits paid, and other critical pieces of information, to an enforcement officer, overseen by a Tax Incentive Review Board comprised of members of the public and appointees of the city council and mayor, to make sure companies are complying with their agreements, and be subject to subsidy recapture if they do not follow through.

Mayor Jorge Elorza submitted an amendment mandating that under the new TSAs, “projects over $10 million will be eligible for a 15-year tax stabilization agreement that will see no taxes in the first year, base land tax only in years 2-4, a 5% property tax in year 5 and then a gradual annual increase for the remainder of the term.”

In return, the “agreements include women and minority business enterprise incentives as well as apprenticeship requirements for construction and use of the City’s First Source requirements to encourage employment for Providence residents.”

But that short paragraph above contains few of the proposals suggested by Strecker.

Supporting the Jobs with Justice proposals are just about every community group and workers’ rights organization in Providence, including RI Building and Construction Trades Council, Direct Action for Rights and Equality (DARE), UNITE HERE Local 217, IUPAT Local 195 DC 11, District 1199 SEIU New England, RI Progressive Democrats of America, Teamsters Local 251, Fuerza Laboral / Power of Workers, Environmental Justice League of RI, RI Carpenters Local 94, Restaurant Opportunities Center RI (ROC United), Mount Hope Neighborhood Association, American Friends Service Committee, Occupy Providence, Olneyville Neighborhood Association (ONA), Fossil Free RI, Providence Youth Student Movement (PrYSM), Prosperity for RI, and the Brown University Warren Alpert Medical School Prison Health Interest Group.

Patreon

Gina Raimondo and wealth inequality


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

The future of democracy is being threatened and will be determined by our response to the problem of ever increasing wealth inequality. As a very few generate exceptional profits from capital investments, the rest of us recede ever further into relative poverty. Democracy and the open society are under serious threat from snowballing capitalism, which buys elections and access to the political system at prices the average citizen cannot compete with. It is not science fiction to suggest that our children may be slaves in all but name to uncaring oligarchs in some dystopian future.

One of the problems reformers run into is the opaqueness of the financial world. Not only are the systems that govern financial transactions intentionally byzantine and unnecessarily complex, financial actors working within the system do everything they can to obscure who owns what assets, who is paying how much to whom, and by what pathways money tends to flow. Everyone who has seen a movie is familiar with the idea of “shell corporations” and “offshore accounts” as a way of hiding financial assets for nefarious purposes, but few of us are aware of how pervasive these and similar practices are in reality.

If we seek to put an end to ever increasing economic and political inequality and prevent future economic crises similar to or worse than our recent recession, then economic transparency is of the utmost importance. As Thomas Piketty says in his landmark (but far from perfect) Capital in the Twenty-First Century, “there should be clarity about who owns what assets around the world.” (page 518)

Piketty argues that the debate around growing inequality and the management of global capitalism is operating in the dark. We have no reliable data about who owns what and how much money they are making. A significant portion of the world’s wealth seems to be squirreled away into secret black market accounts. Without accurate data, we are flying blind and suggesting solutions to problems we don’t fully understand.

It is in this light that I see the actions of Treasurer Gina Raimondo as contrary to the public good. Raimondo, far from fighting for the rights and economic prosperity of all Rhode Islanders, seems more interested in veiling herself and her allies from financial scrutiny. For instance, Raimondo’s use of a blind trust, to hide her investments and income from scrutiny during her gubernatorial campaign, flaunts economic clarity and openness.

More problematic is the outrageous letter Raimondo sent to the RI Attorney General’s office, in which the treasurer maintains that revealing the amount of money Rhode Island pays to its hedge fund managers might put hedge fund managers at risk of kidnapping! From David Sirota at the International Business Times:

Citing the case of Eddie Lampert, an investor who was abducted in 2003 by ransom-seeking kidnappers, the letter to Assistant Rhode Island Attorney General Michael Field from Raimondo’s office further argued that disclosing too much information about financial fees and compensation could endanger the lives of hedge fund managers.

The amount of money people like Treasurer Raimondo make from their jobs as elected officials pales to insignificance when compared to the amount of money they generate from their capital investments. If people were given a true picture of how wealth is distributed, there would be outrage. This is why financial transactions and the ownership of assets is hidden, and why a new era of financial transparency is mandatory if we wish to preserve our democracy.

Otherwise, the only viable financial plan for those wishing to avoid economic serfdom may be the realization of Treasurer Raimondo’s worst fears: the kidnapping and ransoming of the 1%.

RIPTA Riders Alliance: Save Kennedy Plaza


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

DSC_4681In the minds of some Rhode Island politicians and business leaders, the empty and unsellable “Superman” building hangs like a millstone around the neck of the City of Providence. Rather than come to grips with the fact that the building is rundown and overpriced and that new economic thinking is needed to reinvigorate the Capital City, Providence Mayor Angel Taveras and Warwick Mayor Scott Avidesian (who currently heads RIPTA, the Rhode Island Public Transportation Administration), have pushed through a plan that scapegoats the poor, disabled, elderly, homeless and people of color.

DSC_4707The new vision for a modern and vibrant downtown does not include a busing hub. So Kennedy Plaza has been fenced off and is being destroyed as quickly as possible, before an outraged public can mount any kind of coordinated defense. Already the shelters have been taken down and trucked away, and the expensive heating system that automatically melts the snow is being dug up and scrapped. This work is leaving a giant pit in the center of downtown, even though there is no money allocated to completing the project. The plan seems akin to digging a hole in the hopes that someone will come along and build a house there.

DSC_4566Simply stated, this is class warfare being waged against the most vulnerable populations in our state, and it is being done with taxpayer money. Instead of walking across a plaza replete with convenient shelters to transfer from one bus to another, bus riders are now required to walk several blocks from one bus to another. In the winter, when Burnside Park is effectively one giant sheet of ice, the walk will become more treacherous or even impossible, especially for the handicapped and the elderly.

DSC_4740
Tonya Withers

Yesterday the RIPTA Riders Alliance held a press conference calling on officials to allow the public to have real input into the redesign of Kennedy Plaza. They demanded that construction be halted pending the swearing in of a new Mayor of Providence and a review of the plan. Forty-five people attended the event, including members of the Sierra Club, the Rhode Island Progressive Democrats, Occupy Providence, The George Wiley Center and others.

Tonya Withers, a homeless woman who sleeps in Kennedy Plaza on the hard stones of the Civil War Monument, also spoke out against the construction and in favor of greater public services for the poor and homeless.

Of course, Tonya is exactly the kind of person this new plan seeks to eliminate from downtown, so what are the chances that city or RIPTA officials will give her words any weight?

RIPTA Riders Rochelle

RIPTA Riders Elaine

RIPTA Riders Patricia Raub

Sierra Club Barry Schiller

Tonya Withers

Joe Buchanan

RIPDA Jed

Occupy Providence Randall Rose

RIPTA Riders Ele

Deborah Wray

RIPTA Riders Ingrid

RIPTA Riders Ralph

DSC_4627

DSC_4587

DSC_4598

DSC_4606

DSC_4612

DSC_4616

DSC_4622

DSC_4627

DSC_4639

DSC_4647
Ed Benson, RIPTA Riders Alliance

DSC_4683

DSC_4697

DSC_4704

DSC_4709

DSC_4715

DSC_4731

DSC_4740

DSC_4748

DSC_4763

DSC_4769

DSC_4786

DSC_4795

DSC_4825

DSC_4860

RI economy improved for 1%, but it got worse for 99%


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387
one percent epi graphic
Click on the image for a larger version.

Rhode Island’s economy is recovering. But not for the 99 percent it isn’t.

A new report by the Economic Analysis and Research Network shows that between 2009 and 2011, the 99 percent – those Rhode Island’s who make on average $41,958 a year – saw an average decline of 4.1 percent in their earnings.

On the other hand, the one percent in Rhode Island – those who make at least $287,311 a year – did quite well in the same two years. Their earnings increased by 17.3 percent from 2009 to 2011.

“Rhode Island has not escaped the disturbing trend of growing inequality over the past decades,” said Kate Brewster, executive director of The Economic Progress Institute. “Today, the average income of the top one percent is 20.3 times the average income of the bottom 99 percent.  We call on leaders in Washington and here at home to put in place policies that increase income for the majority and help close the income gap.”

Only in four other states – North Dakota, Massachusetts, Texas and Colorado – did the one percent fare better from 2009 to 2011. And only the 99 percent in Nevada fared worse than the 99 percent in Rhode Island did from 2009 to 2011.

Conversely, there was less income disparity between the one percent and the 99 percent in Rhode Island from 1979 and 2007, and Rhode Island had less income disparity than the national average. The richest one percent of Rhode Islanders income grew by 170.3 percent from 1979 to 2007 compared to 40.4 percent for the poorest 99 percent of Rhode Islanders. Nationally during that same time frame, the richest one percent increased their earnings by 200.5 percent and the poorest 99 percent increased by only 18.9 percent.

The change in income distribution coincided with not only the economic collapse but also broad income tax cuts for the top tax bracket in Rhode Island proposed by former Governor Don Carcieri, a tea party Republican, and approved by the General Assembly, which took a hard turn to the right on economic policy during and after the Carcieri era.

From 2005 to 2011, the highest income tax rate in Rhode Island dropped from 9.9 percent to 5.99 percent. And during that same time frame that taxes were lowered on Rhode Island’s richest residents and they simultaneously started to earn a higher percentage of the state’s overall income, the unemployment rate creeped up to among the highest in the nation, further eroding the talking point from the far right and conservative Democrats that tax cuts help create new jobs.

The new report released today does not breaks down the data only into the one percent versus the 99 percent. You can read the full report here. Or check out the online version here. Here’s the Rhode Island-specific data.

In 2007, the one percent in Rhode Island accounted for 18.1 percent of all income. That was up from 1979, when the one percent only accounted for 10.3 percent. In 1928, the one percent in Rhode Island were responsible for 23.6 percent of all income.

‘Inequality For All’ at State House today, Fox and Paiva Weed to attend


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Legislative leaders Gordon Fox and Teresa Paiva Weed will be attending a screening of “Inequality for All” at the State House this afternoon, according to spokesman Larry Berman. But whether or not the Robert Reich film’s thesis – that the historically high gap between the haves and the have-nots is tearing apart America’s economy and social fabric – will make their way from the screen to the General Assembly’s agenda is a question only the future knows.

But at least we know they will be listening!

inequality

The op/ed documentary is being screened at Statehouses across the country to commemorate the 50th anniversary of Lyndon Johnson announcing the war against poverty (which many say America lost but others say has been a “mixed bag”). Here in Rhode Island, it’s being sponsored by the Economic Progress Institute and General Assembly leadership. It will be shown in the House lounge (popcorn permitted) after the session commences for the day (approximately 4:30 or 5)

Before the session there will be an “Interfaith Vigil” to call attention to the plight of the homeless in America – talk about income inequality – some people slept outside last night in Rhode Island! (please think about that for at least one minute today) The vigil begins at the Gloria Dei Lutheran Church, located at 15 Hayes Street (across from the Providence Place Mall) at 2:30 and participants will make their way to the State House by 3pm, where they will be joined by Fox, Paiva Weed and Governor Chafee.

 

Pope Francis is a progressive


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Francis-Cartoon-11“Inequality is the root of social ills.” – Pope Francis

On March 13, the day he was first elected CEO of the Catholic Church by its Board of Directors, I posed this question to twitter: “Is Pope Francis a progressive?”

Yesterday the Pope provided pretty conclusive evidence that I was right.

Just as the commandment “Thou shalt not kill” sets a clear limit in order to safeguard the value of human life, today we also have to say “thou shalt not” to an economy of exclusion and inequality. Such an economy kills. How can it be that it is not a news item when an elderly homeless person dies of exposure, but it is news when the stock market loses two points? This is a case of exclusion. Can we continue to stand by when food is thrown away while people are starving? This is a case of inequality. Today everything comes under the laws of competition and the survival of the fittest, where the powerful feed upon the powerless. As a consequence, masses of people find themselves excluded and marginalized: without work, without possibilities, without any means of escape.

Human beings are themselves considered consumer goods to be used and then discarded. We have created a “disposable” culture which is now spreading. It is no longer simply about exploitation and oppression, but something new. Exclusion ultimately has to do with what it means to be a part of the society in which we live; those excluded are no longer society’s underside or its fringes or its disenfranchised – they are no longer even a part of it. The excluded are not the “exploited” but the outcast, the “leftovers”.

54. In this context, some people continue to defend trickle-down theories which assume that economic growth, encouraged by a free market, will inevitably succeed in bringing about greater justice and inclusiveness in the world. This opinion, which has never been confirmed by the facts, expresses a crude and naïve trust in the goodness of those wielding economic power and in the sacralized workings of the prevailing economic system. Meanwhile, the excluded are still waiting. To sustain a lifestyle which excludes others, or to sustain enthusiasm for that selfish ideal, a globalization of indifference has developed. Almost without being aware of it, we end up being incapable of feeling compassion at the outcry of the poor, weeping for other people’s pain, and feeling a need to help them, as though all this were someone else’s responsibility and not our own. The culture of prosperity deadens us; we are thrilled if the market offers us something new to purchase; and in the meantime all those lives stunted for lack of opportunity seem a mere spectacle; they fail to move us.

In his exhortation, Pope Francis makes direct references to income inequality and how it erodes the social fabric.

When a society – whether local, national or global – is willing to leave a part of itself on the fringes, no political programmes or resources spent on law enforcement or surveillance systems can indefinitely guarantee tranquility. This is not the case simply because inequality provokes a violent reaction from those excluded from the system, but because the socioeconomic system is unjust at its root.

In chapter 4 of his address, he adds:

As long as the problems of the poor are not radically resolved by rejecting the absolute autonomy of markets and financial speculation and by attacking the structural causes of inequality, no solution will be found for the world’s problems or, for that matter, to any problems. Inequality is the root of social ills.

He writes about the concept of “dignified sustenance for all people.”

We are not simply talking about ensuring nourishment or a “dignified sustenance” for all people, but also their “general temporal welfare and prosperity”. This means education, access to health care, and above all employment, for it is through free, creative, participatory and mutually supportive labour that human beings express and enhance the dignity of their lives.

At times, he seems to speak about issues that matter m0st to Rhode Island progressives, like income tax structure and minimum wage:

It must be reiterated that “the more fortunate should renounce some of their rights so as to place their goods more generously at the service of others”

And:

A just wage enables them to have adequate access to all the other goods which are destined for our common use.

These are the principles the Catholic Church in Rhode Island should spend its time and resources advocating for too. This blog again calls on RI Bishop Thomas Tobin to follow the Pope’s lead in abandoning the politics of discrimination in favor of the politics of lifting people up.

George Vecchione needs to meet Jo-Ann Gesterling


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Jo-Ann Gesterling, a fast food worker, and George Vecchione, a former CEO, have both recently garnered some attention for their respective salaries.

vecchione gesterling

In 2011, Vecchione made $7.88 million as the chief executive of Lifespan, a WPRI investigation revealed recently. Meanwhile, Gesterling helped organize a protest at the Wendy’s in Warwick where she works in hopes of calling the media’s attention to her hourly wage of $8.20 an hour. In other words, Vecchione made almost twice as much in one day (~$30,300)  as Gesterling will make all year (~$17,000).

hourly weekly monthly annually
George Vecchione $3,788.45 $151,538 $656,667 $7,880,000
Jo-Ann Gesterling $8.20 $328 $1,421 $17,056

But perhaps it is unfair to compare a free enterprise fast food economy with that of a non-profit, regulated for consumer health. So instead let’s use Wendy’s internal pay grades. At $16.5 million in 2011, CEO Roland Smith made more than twice running Wendy’s as Vecchione made leading Lifespan. Here’s how his salary compares to Gesterling’s:

hourly weekly monthly annually
Roland Smith $7,932.68 $317,307 $1,375,000 $16,500,000
Jo-Ann Gesterling $8.20 $328 $1,421 $17,056

Fighting truancy with poverty


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387
State House Dome from North Main Street

State House Dome from North Main StreetRep. Stephen Casey of Woonsocket has figured out a new way to punish the poor in Rhode Island.

He’s backing a bill that would kick parents off of government assistance programs if their children don’t have good attendance records at school. The bill only applies to welfare recipients, and not parents who receive tax breaks from the state. In other words, it targets poverty and exempts affluence.

Such legislation is becoming more commonplace in the General Assembly as class politics increases here in the Ocean State. Last year Rep. Doreen Costa introduced a bill that required social service recipients to be drug tested before receiving benefits but did not put similar conditions on those who get tax breaks from the state.

Advocates say the idea is to incentive better behavior. I think this line of reasoning ranges from being flawed logic to disingenuous debate. If poverty increases the likelihood of truancy or drug use, which it does, increasing poverty won’t decrease truancy or drug use.  If this worked, fire fighters would carry flame throwers instead of water hoses! Casey, a Woonsocket fire fighter, should know you don’t fight fire with fire.

Whatever the stated purpose of such legislation is, they function best at stigmatizing government assistance to the poor.

Truancy is an issue in Rhode Island. But divesting from the families of those who aren’t showing up for class won’t increase attendance. It will, on the other hand, make being poor a little bit more onerous on both the poor and by extension the rest of the economy as well.

Sen. Bates: Cash Assistance Programs Are ‘Wonderful’


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Good for state Senator David Bates, a Republican from Barrington, who seems to have a pretty reasonably position when it comes to public sector cash assistance programs for the needy.

“Cash assistance programs are wonderful for the people that are really in need of it, but for people who want a gallon of ice cream and a filet mignon every night, that‘s not right,” he told WPRI.

Bates is right on both points. Cash assistance programs are great for the people who need them. And nobody should use a government subsidy to engage in extravagance – not EBT cards and not tax credits either.

He’s backing a bill that would make it harder for recipients to use their EBT cards for booze, lottery tickets and tobacco. Steak and ice cream, for the record, would still be allowed.

In theory it’s a great idea; I don’t know anyone who thinks government subsidies should be used for these items. As a practical matter, WPRI points out that it might cost more to enforce than it will save.

Public policy experts say they’re not convinced that regulating the use of EBT cards is necessary. Elizabeth Lower-Basch, a policy coordinator at the Washington D.C.-based Center for Law and Social Policy, said that depending on how states implement the federal restrictions, they may end up spending more on enforcement than the cash assistance recipients spend at questionable retailers.

“Sure, do low-income people buy some things that aren’t ideal? Yes, so do the rest of us,” Lower-Basch told WPRI.com. “It’s how much money do you want to spend on these intrusions? You want to make sure you’re not spending dollars to catch dimes.”

Lower-Basch noted that California is one of the states that already has a monitoring system in place, but said she isn’t sure hiring a company to review every transaction and flag those considered ineligible is the best use of taxpayer money either.

In other words, Rhode Island will have to determine if punishing the poor is more important than small government.

My guess is many legislators, regardless of what legislation they might propose, actually want Rhode Islanders to buy alcohol, cigarettes and lottery tickets. Rhode Island would go broke if they don’t.

Do RI GOP Candidates Stand By 47% Comments?


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Republican candidates from both Massachusetts and Connecticut came out against Mitt Romney’s “controversial comments” about not concerning himself with the 47 percent of Americans that he feels are dependent on government, according to Politicalwire, a beltway blog about politics. (Here’s my post on the matter from earlier today, with the video if you still haven’t seen it.)

So far I haven’t heard anything from the Republican candidates running in Rhode Island. I left Dave Layman, from Brendan Doherty’s campaign, a voicemail. I just now left a message for Mike Riley, who is running against Jim Langevin. Patrick Sweeney, spokesman for Barry Hinckley, said he would email a statement by 3 pm, though I haven’t gotten anything from my inbox yet.

According to The Hill, Scott Brown, a Massachusetts incumbent who needs to defend his seat against middle class champion Elizabeth Warren, said, “That’s not the way I view the world. As someone who grew up in tough circumstances, I know that being on public assistance is not a spot that anyone wants to be in. Too many people today who want to work are being forced into public assistance for lack of jobs.”

And according to the Hartford Courant, Linda McMahon said, “I disagree with Governor Romney’s insinuation that 47% of Americans believe they are victims who must depend on the government for their care. I know that the vast majority of those who rely on government are not in that situation because they want to be. People today are struggling because the government has failed to keep America competitive, failed to support job creators, and failed to get our economy back on track.”

She actually posted her statement to her website, but she also has a history with the idea that 47 percent of the population doesn’t pay income taxes. Red the Courant story for details.

Would someone please let me know if the GOP congressional candidates from Rhode Island decide to speak up about this issue? Since both are accused of being too conservative for Rhode Island, and because Romney’s comments shined a light on what many liberals and moderates fear most about conservative Republicans, I think we should know what Brendan Doherty and Barry Hinckley think of Romney’s comment.

I’ll update this post if and when they speak on the matter.

Mitt Romney and the 47 Percent Movement


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

If  you were considering voting against Mitt Romney because of his disdain for the 99 percent; it turns out there’s only 47 percent of America that he isn’t interested in representing as POTUS.

In a statement that pits him squarely against the middle class and will certainly serve as another nail in his presidential ambition coffin, Mother Jones released a video yesterday that has Mitt Romney saying: “There are 47 percent … who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you-name-it.”

He added, “My job is is not to worry about those people. I’ll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives.”

I don’t know what additional evidence one would need to conclude that Romney’s campaign is little more than a thinly-veiled war against the working class.

But don’t take my word for it, here’s what conservative columnist David Brooks said about Romney’s telling statement in a piece aptly headlined Thurston Howell Romney. He writes:

Romney, who criticizes President Obama for dividing the nation, divided the nation into two groups: the makers and the moochers. Who are these freeloaders? Is it the Iraq war veteran who goes to the V.A.? Is it the student getting a loan to go to college? Is it the retiree on Social Security or Medicare? The people who receive the disproportionate share of government spending are not big-government lovers. They are Republicans. They are senior citizens. They are white men with high school degrees. As Bill Galston of the Brookings Institution has noted, the people who have benefited from the entitlements explosion are middle-class workers, more so than the dependent poor.

But forget for a moment the political reality that Romney was effectively campaigning against a huge number of people who were potential supporters, a larger point is he was actually low-balling the percentage of America that relies on the public sector.

We all are. Elizabeth Warren describes how we are all dependent on public sector programs far better than I can in this famous Youtube video:

So why does Mitt exempt 53 percent of America from his ire? Because despite what they say it isn’t government Romney and the Republicans don’t like, it’s the middle and working class.

RI Progress Report: Taveras, Homelessness, Class Warfare


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Happy May Day. Find out what’s happening locally here and across the country here. Learn about the history of the holiday here.

Providence Mayor Angel Taveras will announce a deal with Brown today for more in lieu of tax money and last night his office announced that Lifespan would be giving the city $800,000 a year. That, and the City Council passed his pension overhaul last night. Not a bad run for the Mayor, says Ian Donnis.

“We get tired of announcing this is the worst year for homelessness ever.”

House Republicans would kick nearly 300,000 poor children out of the school lunch program and 1.5 million people off of food stamps to protect tax cuts to the rich. Of course there is class warfare going on … an op/ed in today’s Providence Journal rightly puts the blame for it on the GOP.

So far, the General Assembly has passed no new environmental bills this legislative session.

Congressman Jim Langevin joins the calls for keeping student loan interest rates low.

We could have told you this long ago but we’re glad a panel from Parliament now agrees that Rupert Murdoch is unfit to lead a multinational media company.

This page may be updated throughout the day. Click HERE for an archive of the RI Progress Report.

Lucky Duckies


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

One of the more reprehensible things that conservatives have come out with of late is the idea of the ‘lucky duckies.’

This is what the Wall St Journal’s op-ed page called those of our society who are ‘fortunate’  enough to make such a low salary that they don’t have to pay fed income taxes.

This is truly verging (has crossed into?) Newspeak. You know, 1984–war is peace, freedom is slavery etc…)

In most people’s minds, getting stuck in a job that makes you $20k a year is the opposite of  ‘fortunate’.  And if those WSJ writers think these folks are so lucky, all they have to do is quit their cushy office job and stand on their feet 8 hours a day flipping burgers.

Lucky duckies, indeed.

[ Pre-emptive strike: the idea is that these people have no ‘skin in the game’, so they don’t care about tax rates because it’s so hard to make ends meet on $250k per year,  yadda yadda.  Utter nonsense.  Give me the $250k, I’ll pay the 39% tax rate from the Clinton years, and still be waaaaaaayyyyy ahead of where I am now.  And so would most of you reading this. ]

So far, this has been standard class warfare stuff as waged by the 1%. True, people in the bottom half don’t make enough to pay fed taxes.  Think about that: almost half the country, by conservatives own reckoning, don’t make enough to pay fed taxes. Is the problem that their a) tax rate is too low;  or, b) that their salary is too low?

If you’re a conservative, the answer cannot be (a), because tax rates are NEVER low enough.

And yet, that’s what they’re saying. That tax rates on the bottom half of the country have to go UP. While tax rates on the top 1% have to go DOWN.  Talk about internally inconsistent.

Or, it would be if they actually cared about being logical. Or consistent. They don’t. They only care about waging class warfare against everyone who’s not part of the 1%.

What truly takes this distortion to another level, and makes it reprehensible is the way it looks at a tiny sliver of the situation, cherry-picks what suits their cause, then ignores the rest.

The fact is, this lower 47% that pays no fed income tax, pays plenty of other taxes. Payroll tax, which is hugely regressive since it’s capped at around $100k (may be higher; it moves with inflation), sales taxes (also hugely regressive) excise taxes, state taxes, local taxes, and so on.

What happens when we factor all of these in?

Here’s the result:

This is a chart done by the Corporation for Enterprise Development. It shows what the total, overall tax rate is for all income quintiles by state.  It shows how much of their income the poorest 20% pays, vs how much of their income the top 1% pays in each state, then shows the ratio between the two.

The median state is Mississippi. The poorest 20% pay about 10.8% of their total income in taxes. The top 1%, OTOH, only pay 5.5% of their income.

In other words, the effective tax rate of the bottom 20% is about twice as high as the tax rate for the top%–despite paying no fed taxes.

And how does RI stack up? We’re worse.

Here, the bottom 20% pays about 11.9%, while the top 1% pays 5.5%.

In other words, the bottom 20% pays a rate that is more than twice the rate paid by the top 1%.

And Mass is two spots worse, CT is one spot better, so spare me the “Oh, I could just move to Mass and save all this money” lie.  And founder of a certain ‘alternative’ party, I’m looking at you.

What does this mean? The top end earners are not overtaxed. They have a great gig going. And if we elect someone named either Willard or Newt, it will only get better for them, and much, much worse for the rest of us.

Lucky duckies, indeed.

Sound Fair to You?


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Cities and towns across Rhode Island have faced financial hardship over the last several years. Cities have been devastated by the economic crisis, which itself was caused by a complete lack of oversight on Wall Street, oversight that even today Republicans are fighting tooth and nail. They even oppose the idea of having an agency whose job it is to protect consumers and prevent such a collapse from ever happening again.

Now comes a Congressional candidate who has called for the capital gains tax to be dropped to zero, a policy that would mean his endorsed presidential candidate, Mitt Romney, would pay not a dime in income taxes. So, it was surprising to see Carcieri protégé and Romney supporter Brendan Doherty weigh in on the current Providence budget crisis by calling for “tax fairness.” Sound fair to you? He has even argued for slashing corporate tax rates from 35% to 22%. That’s right, Doherty has called for corporate taxes to be even lower than proposed in the Paul Ryan budget plan that the Tax Policy Center estimates would cost taxpayers almost a trillion dollars over the next decade.

While Doherty is running on a platform of trickle-down economic policies that helped create the economic crisis which so weakened municipalities, he makes no mention of the need to scale back the outrageous COLAs given away in the 1990s. Nor did he acknowledge the role his mentor and major fundraiser, former Governor Carcieri, played in slashing aid to cities and towns, shifting the burden to local communities while still leaving the state with a huge budget shortfall.

Doherty has shown a lack of understanding of what has really been happening to cities and towns across Rhode Island and his plans of more big giveaways to corporations and millionaires and billionaires is exactly the wrong approach to get our state and country back on track.

Doherty has been quick to dismiss any critique of his far-right policies as partisan rhetoric but the fact is that policy differences matter. Doherty supports the same economic proposals as Carcieri and Romney that have done so much damage to our local and national economies. This upcoming election will offer voters a choice as to whether they want to send someone to Washington who will side with the wealthiest Americans and corporations or whether they want a representative who will stand up for the interests of seniors, students, small businesses and the middle class.

 

Republican Presidential Candidates’ Tax Policy Would Destroy the Economy (Even More)

There’s nothing quite like a political campaign to demonstrate just how extreme the national Republican Party and its primary voters are. The Center for Tax Justice has an analysis of the GOP Presidential Candidates’ Tax Plans which shows just how much they favor the wealthiest 1% of Americans. Some high(low)lights:

  • Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich’s $18.1 trillion tax plan would give the richest one percent of Americans an average tax cut of $391,330.
  • Texas Governor Rick Perry’s $10.5 trillion tax plan would give the richest one percent of Americans an average tax cut of $272,730.
  • Former Senator Rick Santorum’s $9.4 trillion tax plan would give the richest one percent of Americans an average tax cut of $217,500.
  • Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney’s $6.6 trillion tax plan would give the richest one percent of Americans an average tax cut of $126,450.

To put these numbers into better perspective, let’s compare them to the 2010 median wgae of $26,363, as reported by the Social Security Administration (note: median wage means that 50% of workers earned less and 50% or workers earned more. This is a much better calculation to use since “average” income skews higher because of the outrageous sums of wealth that some people generate).

  • Under Newt Gingrich’s plan, the median worker would need to work almost 15 years to earn as much as the average tax cut received by the richest 1%.
  • Under Rick Perry’s plan, the median worker would need to work about 10 years and 4 months to earn as much as the average tax cut received by the richest 1%.
  • Under Rick Santorum’s plan, the median worker would need to work about 8 years and 3 months to earn as much as the average tax cut received by the richest 1%.
  • Under Rick Perry’s plan, the median worker would need to work about 4 years and 8 months to earn as much as the average tax cut received by the richest 1%.

And these calculations don’t include the millions of people who are either “officially” unemployed, or have stopped looking for work, just those that are fortunate enough to find jobs. Why these proposals are even being seriously considered is beyond me.

It’s important to remember that not all taxes (or tax cuts) are equal. For instance, a payroll tax is more regressive than an income tax, a sales tax is more regressive than a payroll tax, and a capital gains tax is the most progressive of all since the wealthy benefit the most from capital gains (hence why capital gains taxes were sharply cut under George W. Bush). It’s also important to remember that the US tax burden is at its lowest level since 1958 and also federal income taxes are at historically low levels. The LAST thing this country needs right now are additional transfers of wealth to the already rich.

Each of the GOP candidates’ tax plans would further starve the federal government of much needed revenue, increase borrowing to provide for all the important things the federal government does for us, further increase the national debt and the interest we pay on that debt, and exacerbate the growth of income inequality, albeit in varying degrees. What they wouldn’t do is deal with the real economic problem facing the country: not enough money is going into the hands of people who will spend it.

Since the 1970s, U.S. wages have largely remained stagnant. At the same time, the vast majority of all the wealth created in the country over the last 30 years has been flowing upward.

Because the super wealthy don’t actually work to generate their income, wages as a share of national income has been declining for just as long. What that means is less and less money is being earned by workers, and that’s bad for the economy because workers spending money is what fuels economic growth. Consumers earning more money means that they can buy more goods and services, increasing the effective demand in an economy. Seems pretty simple, right? Well, yes, it is.