You are hereBlogs / Stephen Lendman's blog / Class Warfare Jeopardizing American Workers' Security

Class Warfare Jeopardizing American Workers' Security

By Stephen Lendman - Posted on 16 November 2010

Class Warfare Jeopardizing American Workers' Security - by Stephen Lendman

Warren Buffett once said:

"There's class warfare, all right, but it's my class, the rich class, that's making war, and we're winning," Obama's deficit-cutting agenda the latest battle.

On May 4, Hugo Radice, Life Fellow of the University of Leeds School of Politics and International Studies, headlined an article, "Cutting Public Debt: Economic Science or Class War?" asking:

"Is cutting the public debt really an objective economic necessity, or is it actually a deeply political stance, reflecting the interests of the business and financial elites?"

Analyzing historical public policies, he explained the shift from earlier Keynesianism to "the unchallenged hegemony of free-market neoliberalism since the early 1990s." In fact, over the past three decades, it was notable, beginning under Britain's Margaret Thatcher and America's Ronald Reagan, establishing practices that succeeding administrations hardened. As a result, Britain's New Labour governs like Conservatives while American Democrats mimic Republicans, especially on imperial and pocket book issues.

Radice calls it class warfare, pitting private wealth against public good, "a new common-sense" based on property rights, individualism, and notion that free markets work best so let them, including the right to demand massive public spending cuts, ones Radice says "are not, repeat not, economically necessary."

Nonetheless, for over 30 years, they've been ongoing. Since the mid-1970s, real wages haven't kept pace with inflation. Benefits have steadily eroded. High-paying jobs disappeared. Improved technology forced wage earners to work harder for less. More than ever, "free" markets work only for those who control them.

As a result, the class struggle between haves and have-nots escalated. A handful of powerful winners emerged. Wealth disparity extremes became unprecedented. Exploitation increased and successive crises, busts following speculative booms. Easy credit fueled them by excess lending and spending as well as high public and private debt levels. To heal, officials now call for "shared sacrifice," their sharing, our sacrifice.

Richard Wolff calls mainstream economics "faith-based." For Michael Hudson it's "junk economics," a Wall Street power grab, holding industrial America and wage earners hostage, debt peonage the final solution, benefitting only a powerful, elite few.

Today's buzzword across Europe and America is austerity, Obama's deficit commission declaring war on ordinary workers. Targeted are their jobs, benefits, standard of living, and retirement futures from draconian cuts. A scam to transfer greater wealth to the rich, trillions more than already looted, the grandest of grand theft, class warfare of the worse kind, a bipartisan scheme to wreck the economy and working Americans for profit.

After endorsing deficit commission proposals, a second New York Times editorial headlined "Waiting for the President," saying:

There's "no way to wrestle the deficit under control without both cutting spending and raising taxes." Everything "must be on the table," Obama out in front promoting it. Watching from the sidelines increases odds "it will never go anywhere." Strong White House leadership is needed to support "the commission's plain truths."

The Times editorial, other mainstream opinions, and Obama's deficit cutters avoided constructive alternatives, the right way to address high debt, foster economic growth, and lift all boats equitably. Obvious ones include:

-- waging war on concentrated wealth and power;

-- an across-the-board populist agenda, elevating social justice as issue one;

-- slashing the defense budget, minimally in half, ideally much more, including closing overseas bases, reducing force levels, ending foreign occupations, and renouncing imperial wars;

-- a progressive income tax replacing today's dysfunctional one;

-- removing the payroll tax ceiling, taxing all earned income at the same rate;

-- empowering workers to bargain collectively with management on equal terms;

-- a guaranteed living wage, adjusted by urban, rural, state and local considerations;

-- a guaranteed income for the indigent;

-- real regulatory reform, reinstituting vital ones eroded or lost;

-- abolishing monopoly and oligopoly power;

-- strengthening public education;

-- enacting universal, single-payer healthcare, excluding predatory insurers, except as a voluntary option;

-- returning money creation power to Congress as the Constitution mandates;

-- a Tobin Tax to make Wall Street and rich investors pay their fair share; and

-- establishing government of, by, and for the people for real.

Benefits of a Tobin Tax

Besides discouraging speculation, economist Robert Pollin estimates that at one-half of one percent, about $350 billion annually can be raised. A one-tenth of one percent tax on the estimated $500 trillion in annual derivatives trades could bring up to $500 billion a year. Depending on volumes and taxable trading threshold levels, those figures might be greater or smaller but nonetheless considerable. Most important, they'd help grow the economy productively, cut the deficit, and raise everyone's standard of living equitably, especially working Americans left out of bipartisan equation thinking - corrupted for America's aristocracy, Wall Street giants most of all.

Instead ordinary Americans are sacrificed on the alter of capitalist excess, their pain the price for its gain, a shocking indictment of a broken system - venal, depraved, degenerate, and criminal, deserving a dagger in its heart to kill it before making workers serfs, including destroying their retirement security.

America's Growing Retirement Crisis

In the May 2006 issue of Monthly Review, Teresa Ghilarducci titled her article "The End of Retirement," saying:

"Scarcely a day passes without a new pension nightmare: Social Security privatization," corporations ending private pensions, declining household savings, cancelled retirement healthcare benefits, and "401(k) accounts becoming '201(k)s,' " having replaced traditional pensions, defined benefit obligations fast disappearing.

These developments reflect a nightmarish reality. Today's "ownership society" forces everyone to manage their financial futures, leaving them vulnerable to marketplace uncertainties, a task few have enough expertise to handle, especially during hard times, eroding years of built up resources savagely, what older workers may be unable to recoup.

Conditions are far worse today than in May 2006. Yet Ghilarducci said "For the first time in US history, every source of retirement income is under siege: Social Security, personal savings, and occupational pensions." Also Medicare for retirees, their dependents, and the disabled, as well as Medicaid for the nation's poor - vital income-equivalent plans without which millions would be uninsured or underinsured, leaving them vulnerable to the catastrophic illness costs.

In July 2010, Professor James W. Russell, writing in Socialism and Democracy, titled his article, "Retirement Crisis in the United States," saying:

"The great 30-year experiment in 401(k) and similar retirement financing schemes that depend on stock market investments has failed. Even before the" 2008 crash, it was clear, the signs "everywhere that very few workers would be able to accumulate enough wealth through these accounts to insure" their retirement futures.

Like Russell, economist Richard Wolff explains that until 1980, each generation since the 19th century was better off financially than previous ones, including more retirement security. No longer, workers since victimized by institutionalized inequality. Examples include eroded union representation, mostly in commerce and industry, stagnant wages, weakened or lost benefits, and high-risk defined contribution plans replacing secure defined benefit ones.

By 1935, during the Great Depression, 34 European nations and America established social insurance programs. It was a watershed time, "consistent with the socialist value of solidarity through socialization of support for children, the elderly, the disabled, and others unable to" to work productively for a living.

Social Security in America As Amended

The Social Security Act became law when Franklin Roosevelt signed it on August 14, 1935, perhaps his finest hour, a measure during hard times against the 50% poverty rate. It still is when US poverty rates are soaring, perhaps heading for Great Depression levels or higher.

The program works well as mandated, taxing active workers and their employers to support eligible retirees, their dependents and the disabled. As Russell explains: "It is a formula that has worked remarkably well since its inception, producing the federal government's most successful and popular domestic program."

Employers also began offering pensions in a package of other benefits. It worked the same way, they and workers contributing for retirees, "a pay-as-you-go formula" - simple, effective, and assured, based on employment tenure under individual company plans.

The Revenue Act of 1978, however, changed things, its sections 401(k), 403(b), and 457 letting retirement plan contributions be made with pretax dollars. Though intended to encourage workers to participate in defined benefit plans, employers used it advantageously, increasingly switching them to defined contribution ones, providing no assurance of enough income at retirement.

In contrast, "defined benefit plans are progressive reforms within capitalist societies that are consistent with guaranteeing old age support as worker or social rights." Today, they're fast disappearing, victimized by neoliberal "reforms" for business, especially financial industry predators, not employees.

Russell cites two reasons why 401(k)s failed:

-- by falsely assuming worker investments (mostly stock market ones) will provide a secure retirement; given other lifetime obligations, including medical expenses, home purchases and mortgage payments, and college tuitions, it's not possible for most people; and

-- the financial services industry profits hugely from private investment plans, siphoning off large commission amounts that add up through the years; as a result, American workers have subsidized the industry's expansion while jeopardizing their own futures.

In contrast, government or business provided plans are "dedicated purely to supporting retirement instead of creating private wealth," often more for investment firms than their customers, and therein lies the problem. Instead of secure retirement income, having enough depends on marketplace uncertainty that in crisis times can be ruthless, destroying years of savings quickly, savagely, and unfairly.

As a result, for millions, 401(k)s and similar plans have been poison, failing to deliver on promises. Three arguments were made to sell them:

-- they'd way outperform traditional pensions - untrue;

-- retirement income would "owned" - true, but it hardly matters; and

-- they'd be portable - importantly true in a highly mobile society, jobs and careers today changed more often than earlier.

A major problem is how commonly these plans are used - for home purchases, medical expenses, college tuitions, other needs, or discretionary ones, depleting funds intended for retirement.

In contrast, Social Security works as intended by financing it, not private wealth or profits for industry predators. Bogusly, critics claim it's going bankrupt when, in fact, it's sound and secure if properly administered, needing only modest adjustments at times to keep it that way.

Moreover, as explained above, simple revenue enhancement methods exist, including a progressive income tax; removing the payroll tax ceiling, taxing all earned income at the same rate; and instituting a Tobin Tax - combined they might keep Social Security flourishing for a millennium, for sure a century or two, and more.

"They could and should be (ways to expand) Social Security benefits and (begin) phas(ing) out employment-based retirement plans" that don't deliver on promises. Retirement plans should have fundamental goals - to provide predictable, adequate income amounts, adjusted for inflation, delivering as much annual working lifetime earnings as possible. Achieving it depends on replacing today's "three-legged stool" - "Social Security, employment-based benefit(s), and personal savings - with a national system in which Social Security accounts for the" lion's share of income, "topped off by personal savings" that for most people are meager.

A Final Comment

For American workers, achieving retirement security is simple and achievable, but not with opposition from powerful, destructive forces - financial giants complicit with government, willing bipartisan majorities plotting to jeopardize the future of millions. A previous article explained how, accessed through the following link:

Only mass outrage can stop them from slashing Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and other social benefits on the way to ending them - a venal plot to make America another banana republic, its working millions oppressed serfs, their present and future security destroyed. Obama and congressional majorities support this in league with big money backers, largely Wall Street racketeers profiting hugely from sucking public and personal wealth to themselves. The die is cast. It's their future or ours. There's no in between. Grassroots activism only, or lack of it, will decide.

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at Also visit his blog site at and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.

Re. poverty rate in the US:

If the poverty rate reached 50% during the Great Depression era, then David DeGraw says that the rate is higher, today; not much higher, but still exceeded 50%, according to him.

The Social Security Act became law when Franklin Roosevelt signed it on August 14, 1935, perhaps his finest hour, a measure during hard times against the 50% poverty rate. It still is when US poverty rates are soaring, perhaps heading for Great Depression levels or higher.

David DeGraw very recently said in the first of a series of video clips he and his team will be producing and releasing until their documentary is ready to be released several or more months from now that the poverty rate in the US is now 52%. The video clip was posted here over the past week or so, but I don't have the bookmark for it here, so will provide the direct link for the Youtube copy.

"Video: David DeGraw: Dear America, Your Taxes Are Going Up 20%, Food and Gas Prices Will Skyrocket, Fed Drops Bomb On Us" (14:29)

AmpedStatus, Nov. 10, 2010

This is about effectively robbing Americans through a "hidden tax" equivalen to 20% of income and through what's being called Quantative Easing, the second phase of it, QE-2 or QE 2. He says that QE 1 has already caused the number of Americans unemployed and needing work to rise to roughly 30 million, that "millions of families have" lost their homes to foreclosures, and that the poverty rate has reached the highest it's ever been in the US, 52%. Meanwhile, and as everyone or nearly everyone knows by now, "banker bonuses have been at all-time highs over the past two years". He says that 77% of Americans now live "pay check to pay check", up from 44% three years ago, and that 43 million are living off of or from food stamps, "the highest total" in US history, so far. One-tenth of 1%, so 0.1%, "of the population have" $39TN in investable wealth, and that's not even counting the money they have hidden in offshore accounts. And QE 2, what he says is basically about a hidden tax, will rob Americans of another 20% of their money, but he also says that while an expert at Pinco (spelling?) says this will "devalue" the US dollar by 20%, others say the devaluation may be more than 20%. And he also says that the US has never been through economic periods as bad as today and that it's due to a "financial terrorism network" or "financial terrorist network" of the big banks/bank(st)ers.

Financial terrorism, it is.

Re. unpredictability of stock market:

In contrast, government or business provided plans are "dedicated purely to supporting retirement instead of creating private wealth," often more for investment firms than their customers, and therein lies the problem. Instead of secure retirement income, having enough depends on marketplace uncertainty that in crisis times can be ruthless, destroying years of savings quickly, savagely, and unfairly.

It can also be due to outright criminality. Very many shareholders in one or more American corporations and Nortel of Canada, f.e., lost all of their investments in these cies because of criminal activity by corporate chiefs; investors got financially wiped out and with evidently no compensation coming to them because of these crimes that they were absolutely not responsible for at all.

A question:

As a result, for millions, 401(k)s and similar plans have been poison, failing to deliver on promises. Three arguments were made to sell them:

-- they'd way outperform traditional pensions - untrue;

-- retirement income would "owned" - true, but it hardly matters; and

"retirement income would "owned""? What the hell does that mean, or is it a typographical error? It's grammatically and semantically incorrect. In terms of semantics, retirement income can't own anything. A person can own something, and people, through their government and through businesses they own, can own things, but things can't own anything. A business and a government can own things, but only because it's really the people these entities are owned by and represent who are the owners. Retirement income is money and its value is backed, but money can't own anything.

I can't presently discern what is meant by "retirement income would "owned"", at all. Maybe it's some goofy economist wording.

The description for the following video says that RFK Jr is in the discussion, but only the host and Jeff Sharlet are. Maybe the host is RFK Jr, but I just looked at the picture of him in the Wikipedia page for him and the host in the following interview doesn't look like RFK Jr's picture at Wikipedia, which is from Sept. 2007. Otoh, looking at the Web site for GoLeft TV, which is the Youtube channel posting the following video and for which the Web site is, the host is supposed to be RFK Jr.

"C Street: The Fundamentalist Threat to American Democracy" (8:29)

Nov. 1st, 2010 (originally at Youtube Oct. 28th)

For decades in Washington, D.C., a secretive group known as The Family has been working behind the scenes to empower a few select politicians, and to influence the decisions that shape our country. Not only has this group operated in almost complete secrecy, but they've also skewed Christianity to the point where they believe that God wants us to take care of the rich and powerful more than the poor and hungry. Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. talks about this secret Family in Washington with Jeff Sharlet, author of the new book "C Street: The Fundamentalist Threat to American Democracy."

This "Family" is apparently based on so-called mystical "revelations" from God, who supposedly said to do the opposite of what Jesus of Nazareth taught and which most people know was and is, remains to work to help the poor, sick, and prisoners. The "revelations" claimed by C Street "Family" are to work for the rich and that this will somehow help the poor, if they're to be helped at all. Jeff Sharlet refers to it as a sort "of religion of ruling class economics" and it clearly is that kind of "religion".

The host, who's supposed to be RFK Jr, says it's been appraised or praised (?) by Ronald Reagan, Gerald Ford, and "through the American prayer practice" as a secret organization, and this kind of organization evidently would be secret, until discovered and exposed anyway. Jeff Sharlet was invited to attend one of their gatherings at C Street and this permitted him to gain important inside information about the organization.

He says that "In 1953, they founded something called the National Prayer Breakfast, which continues to this day, and the goal ... was to consecrate the nation's leadership to Jesus. And they had gone to" FDR and Truman, who both said no. They also asked President Eisenhower, who initially also said no, having refered to the First Amendment regarding separation of church and state, but Jeff Sharlet adds that he owed political favors to Evangelicals, so he said he'd go to one event while adding that he hoped that it wouldn't "become a tradition". Jeff Sharlet continues by saying that this is mixing up Jesus with the defense and oil industries, f.e.

RFK Jr says they have "tremendous impact" with respect to the US foreign policy, while specifically referring to the evil US foreign policy of using despotic dictators. And they clearly have impact in terms of national economics in the US. US foreign policy is inherently going to have impact on or benefit for national economics in the US, just that there hasn't been any beneficial foreign policy, yet, imo.

It sounds like this "Family" is into "dark" occult stuff, satanic-like, and I'd be curious about what their versions of biblical scripture say about Jesus, because their religious views are completely contrary to his. Can't they read, or have they a perverted rewriting of scripture?

With people like this having "tremendous impact" on the politics of the government, we can only expect hellish consequences for the general public and, therefore, by far most Americans; as well as for populations of countries where the US backs and also ensures the installation of dictatorships.


Support This Site


Get free books and gear when you become a supporter.



Speaking Truth to Empire


Families United


Ray McGovern


Julie Varughese


Financial supporters of this site can choose to be listed here.



Ca-Dress Long Prom Dresses Canada
Ca Dress Long Prom Dresses on

Buy Books

Get Gear

The log-in box below is only for bloggers. Nobody else will be able to log in because we have not figured out how to stop voluminous spam ruining the site. If you would like us to have the resources to figure that out please donate. If you would like to receive occasional emails please sign up. If you would like to be a blogger here please send your resume.
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Enter the characters shown in the image.