The idea right now is that wages are staying low, so there isn't inflationary pressure coming from people demanding higher pay to handle the inflation that is there. On account of this, the Federal Reserve is not raising interest rates yet. They are trying to stick with Milton Friedman's theory that tightening money when the Great Depression hit was the actual reason that depression was so deep and long. What are people going to do as they are laid off and can't find work? What are people who still have jobs going to do when they can't make their bills? This is coming at a time when the lower and middle classes are being asked to foot the bill for bailing out the rich.
The larger the pool of unemployed, the more workers are competing for the same jobs, and the less employers have to hand out more in salaries and wages relative to other costs. That's the whole idea behind systemic unemployment. It was the whole idea behind off shoring jobs. It was part of the plan to bust the unions. So, again, what are people going to do?
Their going to learn from each other what happened and who was responsible and why unlike ever before. Oh, there were people who knew way back when, but they didn't have the means of being heard quite so clearly and certainly not as non-fiction. The movies showed some anti-capitalists leanings, but the only written non-fiction was on paper and considered subversive. Today, the Internet allows people to learn and learn quickly if they care to, if they have been driven to ask the question of why?
The big wave of people asking why hasn't come yet. Too many young adults have come up out from the 1980s when Ronald Reagan's so-called revolution was brainwashing so many about the evils of big government when in fact, it was big business and big banks and big Wall Street firms that put the U.S. into economic depression. Why the adults who backed Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal didn't educate or re-educate the masses is a mystery.
There was some strange regulation in the 1960s and 70s, but it was still based upon worker and consumer protection. There had been snake oil salesmen after all. People did die from poison. Workers were being crippled and killed left and right. The old were often living in abject poverty after a life of hard labor. They didn't live long on account of the capitalist system.
The capitalists are quick to claim all the credit for American economic "success." Frankly, the good things about the American economy are still the results of the more regulated eras. The times of less and no regulation always have ended up being worse than the worst of the regulated times in the U.S.
The only problem with regulations is that they are coerced into existence rather than being the result of consensus from the grassroots up, or better, across.
Well, this is a global recession heading into a rolling depression — pass the loss around like a hot potato to keep the people guessing. The U.S. will come out of it first if the plutocrats are true to form.
The following should appear at the end of every post:
According to the IRS, "Know the law: Avoid political campaign intervention":
Tax-exempt section 501(c)(3) organizations like churches, universities, and hospitals must follow the law regarding political campaigns. Unfortunately, some don't know the law.
Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from participating in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. The prohibition applies to campaigns at the federal, state and local level.
Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes. Section 501(c)(3) private foundations are subject to additional restrictions.
Political Campaign Intervention
Political campaign intervention includes any activities that favor or oppose one or more candidates for public office. The prohibition extends beyond candidate endorsements.
Contributions to political campaign funds, public statements of support or opposition (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of an organization, and the distribution of materials prepared by others that support or oppose any candidate for public office all violate the prohibition on political campaign intervention.
Factors in determining whether a communication results in political campaign intervention include the following:
- Whether the statement identifies one or more candidates for a given public office
- Whether the statement expresses approval or disapproval of one or more candidates' positions and/or actions
- Whether the statement is delivered close in time to the election
- Whether the statement makes reference to voting or an election
- Whether the issue addressed distinguishes candidates for a given office
Many religious organizations believe, as we do, that the above constitutes a violation of the First Amendment of the US Constitution.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
That said, we make the following absolutely clear here:
- The Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project not only do not endorse any candidate for any secular office, we say that Christianity forbids voting in such elections.
- Furthermore, when we discuss any public-office holder's position, policy, action or inaction, we definitely are not encouraging anyone to vote for that office holder's position.
- We are not trying to influence secular elections but rather want people to come out from that entire fallen system.
- When we analyze or discuss what is termed "public policy," we do it entirely from a theological standpoint with an eye to educating professing Christians and those to whom we are openly always proselytizing to convert to authentic Christianity.
- It is impossible for us to fully evangelize and proselytize without directly discussing the pros and cons of public policy and the positions of secular-office holders, hence the unconstitutionality of the IRS code on the matter.
- We are not rich and wouldn't be looking for a fight regardless. What we cannot do is compromise our faith (which seeks to harm nobody, quite the contrary).
- We render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. We render unto God what is God's.
- When Caesar says to us that unless we shut up about the unrighteousness of Caesar's policies and practices, we will lose the ability of people who donate to us to declare their donations as deductions on their federal and state income-tax returns, we say to Caesar that we cannot shut up while exercising our religion in a very reasonable way.
- We consider the IRS code on this matter as deliberate economic duress (a form of coercion) and a direct attempt by the federal government to censor dissenting, free political and religious speech.
- It's not freedom of religion if they tax it.
And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. (Matthew 17:24-26)