According to the nonprofit American Committment, Gruber reportedly made his videotaped comments at a special event on the MIT campus and conceded that it was necessary to avoid transparency to pass Obama's healthcare grab. Dr, Gruber even admitted to lying in order to help the Obama White House and the Democrats in both houses of the U.S. Congress in order to get the support of a number of groups and individuals.
"During the intense debate over ACU, the Republicans were denigrated and vilified for being opposed to the legislation that very few, if any, lawmaker read. In fact, one congressman, Alan Grayson of Florida, told the American people that Republicans 'want you to die' because they opposed Obama's monstrosity," said former hospital security director and police chief, Tony Arcadian. "I believe these people should face criminal charges for perpetrating a fraud. Eric Holder prosecuted businessmen for less," Arcadian added.
“Lack of transparency is a huge political advantage,” says the MIT economist who helped write Obamacare. “And basically, call it the stupidity of the American voter or whatever, but basically that was really, really critical for the thing to pass.
The inept rollout of the ACA exchanges; the meaningless "red lines" in Syria; the gathering chaos in the Mideast; the many fumbles attendant to the ebola scare; the continuing lukewarm recovery from the recession (the slowest in several ngenerations); and the growing appearance of detachment on the part of the president have all added to the public unease.
But the bigger problem, he argues, is that the Democrats' policy agenda, aside from proposing minimum wage increases, isn't particularly built to help the 99 percent.
But what are the policies that would change this corrosive trend? And how do you run on them as a party if you don't know what they are? Minimum wage increases help those at the very bottom of the income scale and they have a lifting effect up the wage scale as the floor gets pushed up. But it is at best a small part of the puzzle. Clamping down on tax dodges by the extremely wealthy claws back some resources for the treasury and sends an important message, as might some restrictions on ridiculously high CEO pay. But again, these are important changes at the margins that do not fundamentally change the equation. Economic populism or another comparable politics with a different tonality won't get you very far if you can get beyond beating up on the winners to providing concrete improvements to those losing out in today's economy.
Marshall's argument—that the Democrats haven't proposed a structural solution to inequality—dovetails with Thompson's Atlantic piece, which explains how an economy can grow without the participants in that economy getting paid more. Basically: The industries on the rise in America are the ones that create crap service jobs, while the country's more sustainable manufacturing-type companies are focused on growth and hiring abroad rather than here.
Minimum Wage Mythbusters
Myth: Raising the minimum wage will only benefit teens.
Not true: The typical minimum wage worker is not a high-school student earning weekend pocket money. In fact, 88 percent of those who would benefit from a federal minimum wage increase are age 20 or older, and 55 percent are women.
Myth: Increasing the minimum wage will cause people to lose their jobs.
Not true: A review of 64 studies on minimum wage increases found no discernable effect on employment. Additionally, more than 600 economists, seven of them Nobel Prize winners in economics, have signed onto a letter in support of raising the minimum wage to $10.10 by 2016.
Myth: Small business owners can't afford to pay their workers more, and therefore don't support an increase in the minimum wage.
Not true: A June 2014 survey found that more than 3 out of 5 small business owners support increasing the minimum wage to $10.10. Small business owners believe that a higher minimum wage would benefit business in important ways: 58% say raising the minimum wage would increase consumer purchasing power. 56% say raising the minimum wage would help the economy. In addition, 53% agree that with a higher minimum wage, businesses would benefit from lower employee turnover, increased productivity and customer satisfaction.
How exactly does an increase in minimum wage actually help the middle class, as touted by Obama and Lizzy Warren
Remember, it was the Congress controlled by Democrats who gave the richest of the rich the biggest tax break in history when they increased the Estate Tax exemption to 5M per person (10M perfamily) and reduced the tax by 30% to 40%.
In 1997, the 105th Congress passed the Taxpayer
Relief Act of 1997 (111 Stat. 788). Among the most
significant changes to estate and gift tax laws includ
ed in this act was the incremental increase of the uni
fied credit to $345,800 by 2006, effectively raising
the estate tax filing threshold to $1 million.
The Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconcili
ation Act (EGTRRA) of 2001 (115 Stat. 38) provided
for sweeping changes to the transfer tax system, the
most significant of which was the eventual repeal of the tax. Specifically, the law provided for periodic increases in the exemption amount for decedents who
die after December 31, 2001, so that the effective
filing threshold will be $3.5 million by 2009. The
tax is then repealed for decedents who die in 2010.
THE AMERICAN TAXPAYER RELIEF ACT OF 2012
The compromise in the federal estate tax was
to make 2011 and 2012 law generally permanent, but with a compromise rate of 40 percent (the midpoint between the 2012 rate of 35 percent and the 2009 rate of 45 percent)
By your own cited census data the % of the population over 65 increased from 18% to 19% between 2000 and 2010.
You have a point here, however it explains, at best, about a quarter of the measured drop in labor force participation rates.
It doesn't 'protect' anyone. An increase in the minimum wage puts more money into their pockets that they can spend. That in turn helps other businesses increase their income that they can turn around and spend. It's somewhat of a pyramid scheme where money gets turned over many times after it comes into the economy. Money is not static; it's dynamic.
Do you have any sense of logic? More money in circulation helps the whole economy when inflation is low. Since 20% of the wealthy owns 80% of the assets, there's no fear of inflation - yet.
There are over 6 million more people over 65 since Obama took office. Employment participation is dropping because the baby boomers are retiring and will continue to drop until 2050 at which point over 30% of the US population will be 65 and older.