Biden: Occupy Wall Street, Tea Party Have Frustration in Common

Vice President Joe Biden today likened the Occupy Wall Street protests to expressions of grassroots frustration by members of the Tea Party.

“Let’s be honest with one another,” Biden told an audience on camera at the Washington Ideas Forum. “What is the core of that protest? The core is: The bargain has been breached. The core is the American people do not think the system is fair, or on the level. That is the core is what you’re seeing with Wall Street.

“There’s a lot in common with the Tea Party,” he said. “The Tea Party started, why? TARP. They thought it was unfair.”

Biden cited Bank of America’s recent decision to impose a $5 monthly fee on some debit card users as an example of new perceived unfairness related to the banking sector that has fueled more popular frustration.

“The middle class folks, these guys with the debit cards, are on their back. And [banks] are going to charge them $5 to use the cards? At minimum, they are totally tone-deaf,” Biden said.  http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/10/biden-occupy-wall-streettea-party-have-frustration-in-common/

Biden: GOP Strong Enough to Beat Obama in 2012

WASHINGTON — Vice President Joe Biden says the Republican Party is more than strong enough to beat President Barack Obama in the 2012 election.

"A significant majority of the American people believe that the country is not moving in the right direction," Biden said. "That is never a good place to be going into reelection whether it’s your fault or not your fault. It’s almost sometimes irrelevant."
During an appearance Thursday at the Washington Ideas Forum, Biden was asked by NBC News host David Gregory if a significant majority of the American people don't believe the country is moving in the right direction. And he says that is never a good place to be going into re-election, regardless of whether it is the current administration's fault or not.

“Is it strong enough of a Republican Party for its nominee to beat this president?” Gregory asked.

“Oh absolutely, absolutely," Biden replied. "It’s strong enough to beat both of us. Look, look – no matter what the circumstance, at the end of the day, the American people right now are - many of them are in real trouble – an even larger percentage have stagnant wages and a significant majority of the American people believe that the country is not moving in the right direction.


Read more on Newsmax.com: Biden: GOP Strong Enough to Beat Obama in 2012
Important: Do You Support Pres. Obama's Re-Election? Vote Here Now!

Public employee salaries, pensions far outpace private sector's

John R. Smith

October 5, 2011

For decades, I was told by friends who work in local government that they were entitled to higher job benefits than private sector workers because they received less in terms of salary.

Why is it I don't hear that anymore? It's because these days the numbers decisively show that most government workers earn more pay than their counterparts in private sector jobs, and earn far more in benefits, too. In fact, the benefits are four times greater for federal workers than private industry workers.

Even union-friendly media are turning a critical eye to public sector unions, who throw up picket lines and pack the halls of government to bleed dry the American taxpayer.  http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/opinion/fl-jscol-pensions-salaries-public-smith-1005-20111005,0,4134099.column

The High Price of Hidden Costs

Many policy experts and economists think it’d be far better if people knew the cost of health care, if they were aware what their full, employer-sponsored premiums cost, etc. I agree. Transparency is the right way to go.

But make no mistake, people will be annoyed. No, that’s not right. A $5/month debit card use fee is annoying. Suddenly learning that your income is lower than it would otherwise be by $10,000 because of your “employer-paid” premium is not annoying. It is enraging.

What will Americans do when they finally recognize the full cost of health care?....I think many people will be furious at how much of their paychecks are, effectively, being piped into the pockets of health insurers, health care providers, drug manufacturers, health IT gizmo creators, massive radiology machine developers, other device makers, and government programs. Some will think the return is worth the price. Many will not, particularly those who think insurers are wringing them dry.

Once you start thinking about it, you'll be surprised at just how addicted we all are to hidden costs. There are all the hidden bank fees, of course, which become enraging when they turn into transparent fees and we realize just how high they actually are. There's the hidden cost of healthcare that Austin points to — hidden because, in the American system, employers pay for most of it and most of us never really realize just how much we're really paying.

 Read more at : http://motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2011/10/high-price-hidden-costs

There are hidden taxes, too. If we want to reduce greenhouse gases, the single best way to do it is via a carbon tax. But that's transparent and produces a gigantic political battle. So instead we end up with direct EPA regulation, something that every economist in the world agrees is less efficient, less effective, 

Falling Wages Threatening U.S. as Consumers May Cut Spending

Ninety-one percent of people in the U.S. labor force have a job.(bullshit) That may be the extent of the good news for these Americans, whose incomes tell a darker story.

Take-home pay, adjusted for prices, fell 0.3 percent in August, the third decrease in five months, and personal income dropped for the first time in two years, the Commerce Department reported last week. The declines followed news from the Census Bureau that median household income in 2010 fell to $49,445, the lowest in more than a decade, and the poverty rate jumped to 15.1 percent, a 17-year high.

Salary and benefit growth “has been going nowhere,” said Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Analytics Inc. in West Chester, Pennsylvania. “One of the key reasons the recovery has stalled is that real incomes have fallen.”

While policy makers from Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke to President Barack Obama focus on cutting unemployment stuck near or above 9 percent since April 2009, the widespread stagnation in wages may offer a better explanation for the failure of economic growth to accelerate two years after the end of the recession. Workers’ ability to negotiate higher earnings won’t return until the job market strengthens, and flagging confidence has raised the risk that consumers may retrench.

Inflation-adjusted weekly earnings have fallen for six consecutive months, dropping 1.8 percent in August from a year earlier, a pace not seen since the 18-month economic slump ended in June 2009.

Getting ‘Squeezed’     http://www.businessweek.com/news/2011-10-03/falling-wages-threatening-u-s-as-consumers-may-cut-spending.html

Has Dallas, Texas Got a Good Idea or What?

Recently, the City of Dallas, Texas passed an ordinance stating that if a driver is pulled over by law enforcement and is not able to provide proof of insurance, the car is towed.

To retrieve the car after being impounded, they must show proof of insurance to have the car released. This has made it easy for the City of Dallas to remove uninsured cars.

Shortly after the “No Insurance” ordinance was passed, the Dallas impound lots began to fill up and were full after only nine days. 80+ % of the impounded cars were driven by illegals.

Not only must they provide proof of insurance to have their car released, they have to pay for the cost of the tow, a $350 fine, and $20 for every day their car is kept in the lot.

Accident rates are going down and… Dallas’ solution gets uninsured drivers off the road WITHOUT making them show proof of nationality.

Wonder how the ACLU or the Justice Department will get around this one.

Just brings tears to my eyes.

GO Dallas!   

Cuomo now open to 'tweaks' in labor contract

ALBANY, N.Y. -- After a public workers union boldly rejected wage freezes and benefit cuts and New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo responded by ordering 3,500 layoffs, both sides are returning to negotiations.

"Nobody feels this responsibility more than I do," Cuomo said in the radio interview. "Are you open to tweaks?" he asked himself. "Of course, I'm open to tweaks. It's 3,500 people. It depends on how you define tweaks."

Cuomo told "The Capitol Pressroom" radio show Friday that he would consider reallocating elements of the Public Employees Federation contract as long as the overall cost to taxpayers remains the same. Cuomo, through a spokesman, had previously said the only way to avoid layoffs would be for union workers to ratify the tentative budget they rejected Tuesday. Layoffs are scheduled to begin in about 20 days.

He emphasized he wouldn't add to the cost of the labor deal or provide the job security union members seek.

"We are anxious to discuss with the governor's negotiators how we can reach an agreement my members are willing to ratify while preserving state services and meeting the savings the state requires," PEF President Ken Brynien said.

The Public Employees Union has said it hopes to make changes in benefits such as health care that could lower the increased cost for the lowest paid members. 

http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2011/09/30/business-us-ny-state-workers-layoffs-new-york_8710584.html

How Generous Are Federal Employee Pensions?

USA Today reports that “retirement programs for former federal workers—civilian and military—are growing so fast they now face a multitrillion-dollar shortfall nearly as big as Social Security’s.” USA Today’s figures include both pension and retiree health costs and are inclusive of military programs, so it is a broad figure. Nevertheless, it raises an interesting question: how did retirement costs for a small segment of the population grow to rival Social Security, a program designed to cover nearly all Americans? One big reason is that federal pension benefits are simply very generous relative to typical private sector plans.

How generous? To check, I took a stylized worker and ran his annual salary through both the federal pension programs and a typical plan offered to private sector employees to see the difference in how much they would end up with at retirement. Since federal workers receive higher salaries than the average private sector worker (more on thathere) I assumed the employee earned 150 percent of the average wage each year; that would put his earnings this year at a bit over $60,000. I assumed he entered the workforce at age 21 and worked until age 65; in reality, most people take some time out of the workforce and most federal employees have held other jobs, but for these purposes that doesn’t matter too much.

Most current federal employees are covered by two pension plans: a defined benefit (DB) program known as the Federal Employees Retirement System (FERS) and a defined contribution (DC) program called the Thrift Savings Plan (TSP). For a federal employee who retires at age 62 or older and has 20 or more years of service, his basic FERS benefit will equal 1.1 percent of his highest 3 years of average earnings, multiplied by his years of service. For FERS, most federal employees contribute 0.85 percent of pay, with the remaining costs covered by the government. The Thrift Savings Plan functions similarly to a private sector 401(k) plan. Federal employers contribute 1 percent of worker wages to the TSP regardless of whether individuals participate. In addition, the federal government matches employee contributions $1.00 per $1.00 for the first 3 percent of earnings contributed and $.50 per $1.00 for the next 2 percent of earnings. A federal employee contributing 5 percent of earnings to the TSP would receive a total employer contribution of 5 percent of earnings. Most current federal employees also participate in the Social Security program. 

 Andrew Biggs

http://blog.american.com/2011/09/how-generous-are-federal-employee-pensions/