ALL OF THIS WAS ONE LONG PLAN TO KILL SMALL AND REGIONAL BUSINESS ECONOMIES TO HAND CONTROL TO GLOBAL CORPORATIONS AND WALL STREET WHILE SENDING A MIDDLE-CLASS TO POVERTY.
Republicans loved Reagan/Clinton while they were deregulating and downsizing government busting unions and the middle-class and making labor desperate for jobs to take lower wages-----but then US small and regional businesses lost out to global corporations taking all this profit AND NOW REPUBLICANS ARE MAD. This is what we mean when we say----INJUSTICE FOR ONE BECOMES INJUSTICE FOR ALL.
Supposedly it was alright to deny everyone else's US Constitutional rights----it was alright to allow government coffers empty with no Rule of Law----it was alright to ignore anti-trust and monopoly laws as long as US businesses were growing----
NOW THE NEW WORLD ORDER IS TRYING TO ELIMINATE THE US CONSTITUTION AND US SOVEREIGNTY COMPLETELY HANDING CONTROL OF GOVERNMENT TO A GLOBAL CORPORATE TRIBUNAL -----REPUBLICANS NOW DON'T LIKE SELECTIVE ENFORCEMENT OF US CONSTITUTION AND LAWS.
Downsizing government and deregulation have ALWAYS BEEN a Republican economic policy---social Democrats installed regulations and oversight to keep from happening what has happened. Everyone sees it led to soaring corporate fraud and fleecing of Federal agencies ballooning the Federal budget not from services and programs to the poor-----but to fraud against our public Trusts and agency programs at Federal, state, and local level. The rising spending CATO and Republican think tanks refer to is this massive corporate fraud and they know it. Instead of paying US citizens as employees to protect and serve citizens in government agencies -----we pay 3 times as much to corporate fraud while citizens are left unemployed.
Downsizing the Federal Government
Downsizing the Federal GovernmentBy Chris Edwards, Director of Tax Policy Studies, Cato Institute
The federal government is running massive budget deficits, spending too much, and heading toward a financial crisis. Without a change of direction in Washington, average working families will be faced with huge tax increases and a lower standard of living. In Downsizing the Federal Government, Cato Institute budget expert Chris Edwards provides policymakers with solutions to the growing federal budget mess. Edwards identifies more than 100 federal programs that should be terminated, transferred to the states, or privatized in order to balance the budget and save hundreds of billions of dollars. Edwards proposes a balanced reform package of cuts to entitlements, domestic programs, and excess defense spending. He argues that these cuts would not only eliminate the deficit, but also strengthen the economy, enlarge personal freedom, and leave a positive fiscal legacy for the next generation.
Make no mistake-------raiding a perfectly healthy corporation with the intentions of spinning off all its assets to send this corporation into bankruptcy so all legal vendor and labor contracts can be voided in bankruptcy court------IS NOT LEGAL. ALL OF THIS VULTURE CAPITALISM WAS ALWAYS ILLEGAL. A corporate board has fiscal duties to manage a corporation such that it can meet it's liabilities. Romney and Wall Street simply kept saying they were raiding these corporations to make them 'more efficient'. US corporations at this time were earning millions of dollars in profit---the only 'inefficiency' was the deregulated energy industry deliberately jacking up the cost of electricity and oil/gas.
Below you see where Clinton neo-liberal Democrats were running from all this neo-liberal policy------you see as well Corey Booker and Obama as the coming generation of Clinton neo-liberals posing progressive in saying they were going to fight these Wall Street policies and get people back to work
AND OF COURSE BOTH BOOKER AND OBAMA NOT ONLY CONTINUED THESE CLINTON NEO-LIBERAL POLICIES----THEY MADE THEM SOAR WITH MASSIVE JOB LOSES-----
Booker's Newark NJ looks like Baltimore as does Obama's Chicago-----all jobless all because global corporations wanted to consolidate all industry to a few global corporations and push unemployment in the US and poverty to third world levels.
Here is where Bill Clinton started to cultivate the SHOW ME THE MONEY PEOPLE AS POLS-----breaking down the Democratic base of labor and justice. A small percentage of all Democratic groups were allowed power and wealth to install Reagan/Clinton Wall Street global empire policies at state and local levels. Lautenberg of course was the old-school 1980s neo-liberal pretending he was against all that far-right neo-liberal policy while NJ was hit hardest with the corporate fraud, corruption, and unemployment.
NONE OF THIS HAD TO HAPPEN-----THE US WOULD HAVE MAINTAINED A HEALTHY DOMESTIC ECONOMY WITH STRONG EMPLOYMENT HAD THESE GLOBAL POLS NOT CAPTURED THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY.
Obama ran against Romney for President against Romney's business practices and then installed all of Romney's business practices. By this time long-term unemployment for urban cities had set in and now middle-class union labor was moved into long-term unemployment and poverty-----this is a black/white/brown issue-----all races in. This was what was happening as Clinton left office and they tout Clinton as 'growing the economy'.
NJ Sen. Lautenberg: "Mitt Romney’s corporate raiding on Wall Street killed jobs"
Monday May 21, 2012 · 3:32 PM EDT
Current New Jersey Democratic Senator Frank Lutenberg, whose senate seat Cory Booker apparently lusts after (it's up in 2014 and Lautenberg is 88 years old), shows Booker what a Democrat sounds like.
Let’s be clear about something: Mitt Romney’s corporate raiding on Wall Street killed jobs. Good jobs for Americans. And why? So Mitt Romney and his pals could rake in more money.
Romney says that, as President, he wants to make his business philosophy the economic policy for the entire country. That is a frightening prospect for working families.
So let’s be clear about something else: President Obama must point out Romney’s reign of destruction on Wall Street.
How the GOP presidential candidate and his private equity firm staged an epic wealth grab, destroyed jobs – and stuck others with the bill
By Matt Taibbi | August 29, 2012
The great criticism of Mitt Romney, from both sides of the aisle, has always been that he doesn't stand for anything. He's a flip-flopper, they say, a lightweight, a cardboard opportunist who'll say anything to get elected.
The critics couldn't be more wrong. Mitt Romney is no tissue-paper man. He's closer to being a revolutionary, a backward-world version of Che or Trotsky, with tweezed nostrils instead of a beard, a half-Windsor instead of a leather jerkin. His legendary flip-flops aren't the lies of a bumbling opportunist – they're the confident prevarications of a man untroubled by misleading the nonbeliever in pursuit of a single, all-consuming goal. Romney has a vision, and he's trying for something big: We've just been too slow to sort out what it is, just as we've been slow to grasp the roots of the radical economic changes that have swept the country in the last generation.
The incredible untold story of the 2012 election so far is that Romney's run has been a shimmering pearl of perfect political hypocrisy, which he's somehow managed to keep hidden, even with thousands of cameras following his every move. And the drama of this rhetorical high-wire act was ratcheted up even further when Romney chose his running mate, Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin – like himself, a self-righteously anal, thin-lipped, Whitest Kids U Know penny pincher who'd be honored to tell Oliver Twist there's no more soup left. By selecting Ryan, Romney, the hard-charging, chameleonic champion of a disgraced-yet-defiant Wall Street, officially succeeded in moving the battle lines in the 2012 presidential race.
Like John McCain four years before, Romney desperately needed a vice-presidential pick that would change the game. But where McCain bet on a combustive mix of clueless novelty and suburban sexual tension named Sarah Palin, Romney bet on an idea. He said as much when he unveiled his choice of Ryan, the author of a hair-raising budget-cutting plan best known for its willingness to slash the sacred cows of Medicare and Medicaid. "Paul Ryan has become an intellectual leader of the Republican Party," Romney told frenzied Republican supporters in Norfolk, Virginia, standing before the reliably jingoistic backdrop of a floating warship. "He understands the fiscal challenges facing America: our exploding deficits and crushing debt."
Debt, debt, debt. If the Republican Party had a James Carville, this is what he would have said to win Mitt over, in whatever late-night war room session led to the Ryan pick: "It's the debt, stupid." This is the way to defeat Barack Obama: to recast the race as a jeremiad against debt, something just about everybody who's ever gotten a bill in the mail hates on a primal level.
Last May, in a much-touted speech in Iowa, Romney used language that was literally inflammatory to describe America's federal borrowing. "A prairie fire of debt is sweeping across Iowa and our nation," he declared. "Every day we fail to act, that fire gets closer to the homes and children we love." Our collective debt is no ordinary problem: According to Mitt, it's going to burn our children alive.
And this is where we get to the hypocrisy at the heart of Mitt Romney. Everyone knows that he is fantastically rich, having scored great success, the legend goes, as a "turnaround specialist," a shrewd financial operator who revived moribund companies as a high-priced consultant for a storied Wall Street private equity firm. But what most voters don't know is the way Mitt Romney actually made his fortune: by borrowing vast sums of money that other people were forced to pay back. This is the plain, stark reality that has somehow eluded America's top political journalists for two consecutive presidential campaigns: Mitt Romney is one of the greatest and most irresponsible debt creators of all time. In the past few decades, in fact, Romney has piled more debt onto more unsuspecting companies, written more gigantic checks that other people have to cover, than perhaps all but a handful of people on planet Earth.
By making debt the centerpiece of his campaign, Romney was making a calculated bluff of historic dimensions – placing a massive all-in bet on the rank incompetence of the American press corps. The result has been a brilliant comedy: A man makes a $250 million fortune loading up companies with debt and then extracting million-dollar fees from those same companies, in exchange for the generous service of telling them who needs to be fired in order to finance the debt payments he saddled them with in the first place. That same man then runs for president riding an image of children roasting on flames of debt, choosing as his running mate perhaps the only politician in America more pompous and self-righteous on the subject of the evils of borrowed money than the candidate himself. If Romney pulls off this whopper, you'll have to tip your hat to him: No one in history has ever successfully run for president riding this big of a lie. It's almost enough to make you think he really is qualified for the White House.
The unlikeliness of Romney's gambit isn't simply a reflection of his own artlessly unapologetic mindset – it stands as an emblem for the resiliency of the entire sociopathic Wall Street set he represents. Four years ago, the Mitt Romneys of the world nearly destroyed the global economy with their greed, shortsightedness and – most notably – wildly irresponsible use of debt in pursuit of personal profit. The sight was so disgusting that people everywhere were ready to drop an H-bomb on Lower Manhattan and bayonet the survivors. But today that same insane greed ethos, that same belief in the lunatic pursuit of instant borrowed millions – it's dusted itself off, it's had a shave and a shoeshine, and it's back out there running for president.
Below you see how in Reagan's 1980s they sold the idea of deregulating our public utilities----THEY CALLED THESE PUBLIC UTILITIES----MONOPOLIES.
Flash forward to today and of course----every energy utility is a monopoly and it is now being handed to global corporations ----a national security threat and attack on our US sovereignty.
Remember how many public jobs were behind electrical and gas utilities? When we had electrical linesmen pruning trees and maintaining infrastructure instead of simply allowing strong storms with long outages and massive worker overtime handle it? Remember that good old meter reader who was able to accurately read a meter for monthly costs that were more than reasonable?
HUGE LAYOFFS AS DEREGULATION KILLED QUALITY SERVICE AND PRODUCT ALL WHILE SAYING PRIVATE SECTOR JOBS WOULD TAKE THE PLACE----WELL, GLOBAL CORPORATIONS NOW SEE EMPLOYEES AS IMMIGRANT LABOR FROM AROUND THE WORLD.
Remember----this is all far-right Reagan/Clinton neo-liberal economic policy-----social Democrats installed all the New Deal FDR policies to control against all this.
Before deregulation in the 1980s, the only option consumers had for their supply was their local utility; there was no choice. The government-regulated pricing and single-distribution source fostered a monopolistic marketplace. Once deregulation was approved, customers started benefiting from an open, free marketplace offering a choice in supplier and ultimately, more competitive rates.
What is Energy Deregulation?Energy deregulation is the reason that you can shop for an energy provider in the first place. It gives you the power to switch your electricity or natural gas supplier and ultimately affects how much you will pay for your energy.
Deregulation gives consumers a choice when it comes to their energy supplier. It also motivates suppliers to differentiate their products and offer comparable rates and pricing to be competitive in the marketplace.
What does Energy Deregulation Mean for Me?Having the power to choose your energy supplier allows you to compare natural gas and electricity rates, giving you more control over your energy costs. Deregulated energy also gives you the chance to choose from different products, like IGS Energy’s go green™ products.
You don’t have to worry about service interruptions when you switch energy suppliers because your local utility will handle the details. Your utility is still responsible for distributing energy commodities to your home, regardless of the supplier that you choose. The only difference is that the supply price is not set by your utility. Depending where you live, you may receive billing information from your supplier, or from your utility with a mention of your supplier.
Deregulated Energy by StateEnergy deregulation is taking place on a state-by-state basis. Certain states are fully deregulated for electricity and natural gas, while others are only deregulated for one service or the other. Some states have not yet implemented any type of energy deregulation.
The Benefits of a Free Energy MarketThe free and open market gives you the power to choose from several options for your natural gas and electricity supply. With competition brings new innovations and efficiencies, and allows you to choose a supplier with the right price, products, service, and support that fits your needs.
When you purchase your natural gas and electricity from IGS Energy, we deliver it directly to your local utility, who continues to provide you with expert distribution, metering and billing services.
As with all that is Baltimore under politicians tied to a very, very, very neo-conservative Johns Hopkins and Wall Street Baltimore Development-----citizens are soaked in taxes, fees, and fines as corporate subsidy and profits soar. So, all the while energy deregulation through Reagan/Clinton occurred-------absolutely no work on energy or water infrastructure occurred causing more and more layoffs and unemployment in US cities ----none of this 'efficiency' went into upgrading infrastructure or providing better service----it went right into corporate profits and today-----our once public BGE is now national Exelon who outsources to global corporations ------no Baltimore employees needed they say.
ALL OF MARYLAND POLS ARE CLINTON/OBAMA GLOBAL CORPORATE NEO-LIBERALS OR BUSH/JOHNS HOPKINS NEO-CONS.
When we hear each election that Baltimore City Hall is going to create JOBS, JOBS, JOBS------as they run as Democrats and serve as far-right Republicans----we have the long-term unemployment in Baltimore and other cities that created the huge black market economies with the crime, violence, and incarceration. From being gainfully employed and productive citizens to being school to pipeline jail and prison labor.
YOU DO NOT FIND LONG-TERM UNEMPLOYED ON FEDERAL UNEMPLOYMENT STATS----ONLY THOSE RECEIVING UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS. THAT IS WHY TODAY'S UNEMPLOYMENT IS ACTUALLY AROUND 35% AND GROWING.
WHAT????? Energy rates are soaring with deregulation? Who could have seen that coming-----not Republican policy think tanks obviously. Let's stop electing Republicans as Democrats in Maryland and Baltimore to rebuild our public utilities and public works. That will make local employment soar!
Utility workers of America
“Draw one line on a graph charting the decline in union membership, then superimpose a second line charting the decline in middle-class income share, and you will find that the two lines are nearly identical.”
-- Journalist Timothy Noah in his book, The Great Divergence
Baltimore tops cities with highest utility bills
Jun 21st 2010 12:30PM
Updated Sep 15th 2010 11:37AM
Maybe it's the extreme changes in weather, the big homes or affluent consumers who don't mind paying top rates for cable TV, but whatever the reason, Baltimore, Maryland is the most expensive U.S. city for utility bills -- with the average customer paying $359 a month in May.
Those living in Los Angeles can breathe a sigh of relief. Utility bills there are among the least expensive at $193 a month, according to a monthly survey for May by WhiteFence.com, a web site that helps people shop for better cable TV, telephone, Internet, electricity and natural gas prices in the United States.
The WhiteFence Index is derived from the orders the company takes from customers each month, along with rate information from utility providers. The company surveys 21 major metropolitan areas, says Bob Harris, CEO of WhiteFence.
Here are the cities ranked by total utility costs for May, from cheapest to most expensive:
- Los Angeles, CA $193.36
- San Diego, CA $194.50
- San Francisco, CA $207.69
- Minneapolis, MN $210.60
- Indianapolis, IN $219.99
- Denver, CO $235.42
- Atlanta, GA $244.55
- Seattle, WA $254.90
- Washington DC $259.61
- Boston, MA $262.85
- Philadelphia, PA $265.25
- Charlotte, NC $274.11
- Phoenix, AZ $274.33
- New York, NY $279.06
- Las Vegas, NV $285.88
- Chicago, IL $287.27
- Portland, OR $305.24
- Dallas, TX $309.10
- Orlando, FL $312.04
- Houston, TX $315.99
- Baltimore, MD $359.29
Electricity tends to comprise the largest percentage of overall utility bills, Harris says. Baltimore, for example, was not only the most expensive city for overall utility costs, but it was also among the top five most expensive cities for electricity bills. Of the $359.29 average utility bill in Baltimore, $178 went toward electricity. The city's electricity and natural gas provider, Baltimore Gas & Electricity (or BGE), disagreed with similar findings by WhiteFence last year. It argued that WhiteFence's study is misleading and faulty. Harris says BGE isn't looking at the whole picture, it was looking at the rate and not at usage.
Weather is probably the biggest factor in determining the size of a utility bill. With less extreme weather in L.A., heating and cooling a home there is cheaper than in Baltimore where there are cold winters and hot summers.
Here are the highest and lowest city rankings broken down by individual utility rates for May, according to the WhiteFence Index:
- Phone: New York, $39; Portland, $26
- TV: San Diego, $77; Minneapolis, $48
- High-speed Internet: Charlotte, N.C.; $45. Phoenix, $32.
- Electricity: Baltimore: $178; San Diego, $26
- Natural gas: New York, $50; Boston: $9.
For people looking to cut their monthly utility bills, WhiteFence and other comparison web sites, such as Saveology and BillShrink, can help. On a national average, WhiteFence customers save $76 per month, or $917 a year, off their total utility bill -- TV, phone, Internet, electricity and gas -- by using the service, the company says. In Baltimore, WhiteFence says it could save residents $87 per month.
Creating deliberate high unemployment in the US all while intending to bring International Economic Zone global FOXCONN corporate campus/factories to do to American citizens and our environment what they did in Asia
'With the United States and most of the world economy (notwithstanding the economic rise of Asia) stuck in an era of secular stagnation and crisis unlike anything seen since the 1930s—while U.S. corporations are sitting on around $2 trillion in cash—the issue of monopoly power naturally returns to the surface'.
Monopoly and Competition in Twenty-First Century Capitalism
by John Bellamy Foster, Robert W. McChesney and R. Jamil Jonna
John Bellamy Foster (jfoster [at] monthlyreview.org) is editor of Monthly Review and professor of sociology at the University of Oregon. Robert W. McChesney (rwmcches [at] uiuc.edu) is Gutgsell Endowed Professor of Communication at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. R. Jamil Jonna is a doctoral candidate in sociology at the University of Oregon. This is a chapter from Foster and McChesney’s Monopoly-Finance Capital: Politics in an Era of Economic Stagnation and Social Decline, forthcoming next year from Monthly Review Press.
A striking paradox animates political economy in our times. On the one hand, mainstream economics and much of left economics discuss our era as one of intense and increased competition among businesses, now on a global scale. It is a matter so self-evident as no longer to require empirical verification or scholarly examination. On the other hand, wherever one looks, it seems that nearly every industry is concentrated into fewer and fewer hands. Formerly competitive sectors like retail are now the province of enormous monopolistic chains, massive economic fortunes are being assembled into the hands of a few mega-billionaires sitting atop vast empires, and the new firms and industries spawned by the digital revolution have quickly gravitated to monopoly status. In short, monopoly power is ascendant as never before.
This is anything but an academic concern. The economic defense of capitalism is premised on the ubiquity of competitive markets, providing for the rational allocation of scarce resources and justifying the existing distribution of incomes. The political defense of capitalism is that economic power is diffuse and cannot be aggregated in such a manner as to have undue influence over the democratic state. Both of these core claims for capitalism are demolished if monopoly, rather than competition, is the rule.
For all economists, mainstream and left, the assumption of competitive markets being the order of the day also has a striking impact on how growth is assessed in capitalist economies. Under competitive conditions, investment will, as a rule, be greater than under conditions of monopoly, where the dominant firms generally seek to slow down and carefully regulate the expansion of output and investment so as to maintain high prices and profit margins—and have considerable power to do so. Hence, monopoly can be a strong force contributing to economic stagnation, everything else being equal. With the United States and most of the world economy (notwithstanding the economic rise of Asia) stuck in an era of secular stagnation and crisis unlike anything seen since the 1930s—while U.S. corporations are sitting on around $2 trillion in cash—the issue of monopoly power naturally returns to the surface.1
In this review, we assess the state of competition and monopoly in the contemporary capitalist economy—empirically, theoretically, and historically. We explain why understanding competition and monopoly has been such a bedeviling process, by examining the “ambiguity of competition.” In particular, we review how the now dominant neoliberal strand of economics reconciled itself to monopoly and became its mightiest champion, despite its worldview—in theory—being based on a religious devotion to the genius of economically competitive markets.
When we use the term “monopoly,” we do not use it in the very restrictive sense to refer to a market with a single seller. Monopoly in this sense is practically nonexistent. Instead, we employ it as it has often been used in economics to refer to firms with sufficient market power to influence the price, output, and investment of an industry—thus exercising “monopoly power”—and to limit new competitors entering the industry, even if there are high profits.2 These firms generally operate in “oligopolistic” markets, where a handful of firms dominate production and can determine the price for the product. Moreover, even that is insufficient to describe the power of the modern firm. As Paul Sweezy put it, “the typical production unit in modern developed capitalism is a giant corporation,” which, in addition to dominating particular industries, is “a conglomerate (operating in many industries) and multi-national (operating in many countries).”3
In the early 1980s, an unquestioning belief in the ubiquitous influence of competitive markets took hold in economics and in capitalist culture writ large, to an extent that would have been inconceivable only ten years earlier. Concern with monopoly was never dominant in mainstream economics, but it had a distinguished and respected place at the table well into the century. For some authors, including Monthly Review editors Sweezy and Harry Magdoff, as well as Paul Baran, the prevalence and importance of monopoly justified calling the system monopoly capitalism. But by the Reagan era, the giant corporation at the apex of the economic system wielding considerable monopoly power over price, output, investment, and employment had simply fallen out of the economic picture, almost as if by fiat. As John Kenneth Galbraith noted in 2004 in The Economics of Innocent Fraud: “The phrase ‘monopoly capitalism,’ once in common use, has been dropped from the academic and political lexicon.”4 For the neoliberal ideologues of today, there is only one issue: state versus market. Economic power (along with inequality) is no longer deemed relevant. Monopoly power, not to mention monopoly capital, is nonexistent or unimportant.
Here you see all of the incumbent politicians who worked from Clinton/Bush/Obama to install all of the deregulation, government downsizing, huge unemployment, corporate fraud and government corruption, city decay, privatization of all public utilities and infrastructure----all being called the 'TOP CANDIDATES' by the same Baltimore media that has worked to keep Baltimore citizens uninformed and crony political machines in place. Keep in mind the the Federal elections laws for 501c3's like this Arena Player WOLM Mayor's Forum does not allow candidates in a primary to be excluded-----they are breaking IRS 501c3 election laws openly in Baltimore and Maryland and this is how Clinton neo-liberals and Bush/Hopkins neo-cons have stayed in office these few decades while destroying the American economy and people's lives. No one did that better than these candidates in Baltimore's mayor's race and NO----they are not the top candidates---even with skewed election poll data they barely polled at all. These are the candidates that will move NEW WORLD ORDER International Economic Zone policies forward and Baltimore Development has media in its pocket.
'WSJ: 50% Black Youth Unemployed Under Obama
Submitted by IWB, on September 15th, 2011 '
'Downtown loses jobs, while demand for offices, housing grows, report shows
March 22, 2012|By Lorraine Mirabella, The Baltimore Sun'
'Md. manufacturing job losses outstrip most of U.S'.
'Second round of layoffs hits 59 city school workers
Erica L. GreenContact ReporterThe Baltimore Sun
Friday layoffs bring city school cuts to more than 200 positions.'.
'Enterprise Zone Program Fails To Create Jobs
SAN FRANCISCO, California, June 10, 2009'
THIS IS WHY DEMOCRATIC VOTERS WANTING SOCIAL DEMOCRATIC PLATFORMS HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO GET REAL CANDIDATES IN PRIMARIES.
Everyone of these candidates are repeating what citizens are shouting with no intention of doing what they say. AUDITS, LOWER TAXES, JOBS, HOUSING, REFORMING CRIMINAL JUSTICE-----all the same things said a few decades ago and they don't mean any of it. Unemployment in Baltimore and across the US will soar if these global corporate pols are left in office. THIS IS WHAT OUR MAIN STREAM MEDIA TV AND RADIO CHANNELS ARE DOING -----never does media or these election events mention any of these public policy histories---candidates are simply allowed to say anything.
Here is Doni Glover mentioning every candidate just about but CINDY WALSH FOR MAYOR OF BALTIMORE. It speaks to how dangerous to the crony political status quo Cindy Walsh is that these major election events exclude my name.
Shame on you Mr Glover! SHAKE OFF THE CRONY!
Home / The Glover Report /
TGR: Arena Players Mayoral Forum Exposes Candidates’ Reasoning
Feb 05, 2016 Posted by bmorenews
By Doni Glover, Publisher
(BALTIMORE – February 5, 2016) – With several mayoral forums having already taken place and with a long list of forums still to go, all of the candidates have come to paint us a picture of Baltimore, where it’s been, and where they respectively want to see it go.
These forums have given attendees – as well as the respective mayoral camps – the opportunity to feel out the opposition and get a sense of where each is headed.
Pay close enough attention and the keen observer may even start to see patterns and the unveiling of each candidate’s line of reasoning.
Actually, it is a beautiful thing to see the candidates evolve and become more relaxed telling their own truths and how they see the world. I am enjoying these forums, typically with a moderator or small cadre of panelists posing questions in a fair process where everybody gets a turn to speak.
It is really key, however, for the citizenry to show up. On that note, a huge thanks to Rodney Orange and his mother (and my 7th and 8th grade English teacher at William Hugo Lemmel, Jr. High School), Catherine B. Orange. They run Arena Players, the oldest black continually-run theatre house in the country. Theirs is a fascinating history on McCulloh Street involving the likes of the late Sam Wilson (Read more about the Arena Player’s history here).
Kudos, too, to promoter Lou Fields and WOLB 1010 AM’s Larry Young of WOLB. This may have been the liveliest, most pointed one thus far.
Baltimore mayoral candidates debate issues at forumPrimary election set for April 26
UPDATED 4:14 PM EST Feb 05, 2016
BALTIMORE --Five of the top candidates in Baltimore's mayoral race gathered Thursday for a community forum that covered a wide range of issues.
The forum, held in front of a packed crowd of more than 300 people at the Arena Players theater, was one in a series of forums planned to give residents a chance to hear from all of the Democratic candidates in the field.
"I come to these different types of events to and forums just to get information and be informed," voter Nathaniel Johnson Jr. said.
Voters in the audience were ready to hear candidates talk about the issues that matter most to them, including crime, opportunity, housing and education.
On turning blighted neighborhoods around, candidates state Sen. Catherine Pugh and former Mayor Sheila Dixon offered opposing solutions.
"Going back to a dollar-house program, and I wrote about it in the Huffington Post, utilizing the individuals who are coming out of our prison system to help us rebuild our neighborhoods," Pugh said.
Dixon countered by saying that the dollar houses helped get Baltimore into a situation of blighted neighborhoods.
"If we create a land bank and a land trust, if you come as an individual and would like to buy that piece of property, that piece of land, we will give that to you," Dixon said.
A question about policing and crime brought out contrast between candidates and City Councilmen Nick Mosby and Carl Stokes.
"We're going to immediately have police-worn body cameras and dashboard cameras we're going to provide more teeth to the civilian review board," Mosby said.
Stokes countered: "Policing is not the answer to what's going on in our communities, it is the lack of opportunity."
Transportation issues were also discussed. The candidates shared their opinions to ensure all citizens have access to it.
"We need a transportation system on the west side that gets people to the east side to those jobs at Amazon," candidate and businessman David Warnock said.
Antonio Asa, a candidate for City Council, who was in the audience, said the candidates provided some much-needed insight into their respective visions for Baltimore.
"After listening to all the issues and candidates tonight, it has given me a lot to think about," Asa said.
The candidates spent more than three hours on the stage before the forum ended at about 10 p.m. More than two dozen candidates are running for mayor with the primary election set for April 26.
Maryland and Baltimore are the most raging International Economic Zone state and city outside of NYC, Houston, and San Francisco. It has made sure all small manufacturing businesses have been put out of business-----all local small business contractors are out of business or are tied to pay-to-play. All of this mirrors the crumbling decay of Baltimore's communities because---the Master Plan was to bring global FOXCONN corporate campuses and factories back in their place. We all know what wages will be in these factories under IEZ and Trans Pacific Trade Pact policies -----enslavement and not middle-class. Maryland has every intention of filling the state with those overseas global manufacturing campuses that devastated China's environment and people's health and enslaved Asian labor creating the 1% rich 99% extreme poverty----wherever an International Economic Zone came.
The solution in reversing all these global corporate rule policies is to rebuild the small local manufacturing that Maryland used to have. If we keep all business development local and domestic-------International Economic Zone and TPP policies will not apply-----and we create a stable, healthy economy separate from these Wall Street/global market boom and busts----with massive frauds.
Global pols in Maryland are still calling for more and more and more deregulation and corporate tax cuts having nothing to do with job creation or small business creation----it is all tied to International Economic Zones being tax and regulation-free.
'Manufacturing accounted for one-third of the jobs in Maryland just before World War II engulfed the country — and nearly half the state's jobs at the height of war production'.
If Bernie Sanders is elected President and does the $1 trillion infrastructure bill-------Cindy Walsh for Mayor of Baltimore is the only candidate that will reverse all of this global corporate mess. It matters who is mayor in 2016 as to whether Baltimore gets global FOXCONN corporate campuses and factories----or a local economy with local manufacturing.
Brookings Institute is the neo-liberal think tank behind global International Economic Zones so that is the manufacturing they are pushing.
Md. manufacturing job losses outstrip most of U.S.State could reverse long-running shrinkage, advocates say
The site of the former Solo cup manufacturing plant will become… (Barbara Haddock Taylor,…)
November 17, 2013|By Jamie Smith Hopkins, The Baltimore Sun
The General Motors factory in Baltimore, the Solo Cup plant in Owings Mills and the steel mill at Sparrows Point all made things for decades. And all closed in the past 10 years.
It's a familiar tale for much of the country. But Maryland's manufacturing job losses — the result of cutbacks, shutdowns and technological innovations requiring fewer people — are among the nation's steepest.
The state saw a faster pace of job reductions in the sector than all but seven other states and the District of Columbia in the past six years, according to a Baltimore Sun analysis comparing the most recent Labor Department figures with the period just before the recession.
Maryland has lost 25,000 manufacturing jobs — nearly 20 percent of its base — since August 2007. It hasn't enjoyed even the partial rebound the United States as a whole saw after deep declines.
The problem isn't new. Maryland has shed manufacturing jobs since the 1970s. Since 1990, it has lost more of them than all but four states and the District of Columbia, part of a deindustrialization that hit the entire Mid-Atlantic region harder than much of the country.
Advocates say it's not too late for Maryland to rewrite this story line and rebuild its manufacturing base, perhaps by focusing on high-tech niches. They warn that people without a college education — and some with one — have been harmed by the long shrinkage.
"Manufacturing was steppingstones to middle-class America," said Mike Galiazzo, president of the Regional Manufacturing Institute of Maryland, a nonprofit advocacy group. "When we lose manufacturing, that just means nobody's knocking on the door to Bethlehem Steel, they're knocking on the door to Walmart."
As the state reliably added jobs over the decades in such fields as information technology, health care and government contracting, it was easy for state leaders to shrug off losses in manufacturing as inevitable, even acceptable. That appears to be changing: Last year the state convened a commission on manufacturing competitiveness, which is due to make recommendations next month.
Industry was once a linchpin of Maryland's economy. In 1912, The Baltimore Sun reported that Maryland had more manufacturing plants than all but 14 states. Manufacturing accounted for one-third of the jobs in Maryland just before World War II engulfed the country — and nearly half the state's jobs at the height of war production.
The losses in more recent decades are part technology-driven — machines enable one worker today to accomplish what it took several or many manufacturing workers to do years ago — and part geographic shift. Every state in the Mid-Atlantic, from New York to Virginia, saw cuts in the past quarter-century that outpaced the country as a whole.
American auto companies consolidated, favoring Midwestern and Southern locations, said Howard Wial, director of the Center for Urban Economic Development at the University of Illinois at Chicago. The region's steel mills — such as Sparrows Point — were buffeted by newer "mini mill" competitors in the South and Midwest and by foreign producers.
Other manufacturers moved south for lower wages and taxes, cheaper land and less regulation. And some sent production out of the country.
This happened to Mid-Atlantic states both blue and red, ones (like Virginia) that do well on business-climate rankings and even those (like Delaware) considered relatively low-tax.
Still, Michael Hicks, director of the Center for Business and Economic Research at Ball State University in Indiana, says Maryland does itself no favors with its tax rates. In a 2013 state-by-state score card, he gave Maryland a "D" for both its manufacturing health and its tax climate.
"Firms vote with their feet," he said. "Manufacturing is one where people can easily vote."
While he acknowledged that the state's well-educated workforce is a plus, companies are more likely to employ labor-saving technology in higher cost, higher-educated areas. He thinks that explains part of the region's losses in recent years.
"All the productivity gains in manufacturing are designed to kill jobs," Hicks said.
But Wial doesn't see job loss as the final result of innovation. He thinks it would be well worth Marylanders' time to help manufacturing flourish.
"Don't assume that just because factories are more automated that that limits manufacturing job growth in the future," he said. "What has usually happened in the past is that automation reduces the cost of the product and enables the market to expand."
Wial is also a nonresident senior fellow at the Washington-based Brookings Institution, which has called on the Baltimore region to increase manufacturing as part of a strategy to expand middle-class jobs. Brookings warned that low-wage fields account for a growing share of area employment.