host

Many of the arguments stated on this thread, in the press, and in the recent
televised, pre-election debates, primarily from Republican party candidates, have
been in defense of proprietors of small business with income in excess of
$200,000 per year, who fall into Kerry's proposed income threshold targeted for
tax increases, if he wins the election. The primary objection to tax increases for
these small business owners is that they will be impeded in their creation of new
job opportunities unless they can keep more of their profits to reinvest in their
businesses.

Assume that many of these businesses do much of their activity in their local
community. They either sell a product, or offer a service. With half the households in the country now controlling a little less than 3 percent of the
wealth, much of it a suburban population, affected adversely by the rise in the
cost of transportation fuels and energy to power and heat their homes, how
much disposal income do you think that this large segment of the population
have to left to spend after the pay for necessities? The personal bankruptcy
rate reached another new record number of filers again in 2003. Those not
in bankruptcy tend to pay higher interest rates on their consumer credit than
the wealthy do, very high rates when compared to inflation. For the past 8
years, Republicans in the house and the senate have pushed a "bankruptcy
reform" bill, that, if passed, would make it much more difficult for the bankrupt
to discharge their debts, effectively removing them from any ability to get
back on their feet in a reasonable amount of time, because post bankruptcy, they would still be obligated to pay of much of the debt that they now are
able to discharge. The bulk of debt that they discharge is owed to consumer
credit lenders and banks, who charge much higher interest rates than
are justified, making the excuse that they must protect themselves from
consumers defaulting on their debts. The bankruptcy reform bill offers no
provision to regulate the interest rates the banks/credit card lenders will
charge if the reform becomes law. The credit card accounts that you are
offered by mail are extremely profitable to the banks, even with the rising
bankruptcy rate.

My point is that wealth distribution trends make it less likely that small businesses will have the lower half of their communities households as
customers, unless they sell food, toilet paper, fuel, or other necessities.
It is a two way street. The top wealth holders are so successful in transferring the country's wealth to themselves, that there is a squeeze on
the ability of the bottom 80 percent to retain a "fair share". In 1913, when
Henry Ford's business of building model T cars began to boom, he was
wise enough to offer his workers the unheard of sum in that day, of $5.00
per day in wages, at a time when most workers made less than half that
rate. Ford realized that it was a smart business strategy to make it possible
for his workers to be able to buy one of the cars that they were building in
his factory. It also raised the bar for a fairer wage in the entire country,
making it more likely that a new, more prosperous class of workers would
emerge; wealthy enough to also purchase his model T's. The efficiencies of
Ford's innovative assembly lines and the rising demand for his product allowed
him to produce vehicles in increasing numbers at lower prices. Ford's larger
profits from an economy of scale allowed him to cut the price he needed to
sell his vehicles profitably for a number of years.

There is a 1950's story that UAW union leader Walter Reuther was touring a highly automated Ford Assembly Plant when someone said, Walter, you're going to have a hard time collecting union dues from all these machines. Reuther simply shot back, not as hard a time as you're going to have selling them cars.

The hard fought battle of the first half of the 20th century to organize labor
into unions, along with the creation of a progressive federal income tax and
inherittance taxes on the rich, were major catalysts for the rapid creation
of a U.S. middle class; consumers who drove ever increasing demand for
new and more innovative products. Eisenhower's administration launched the
building of the interstate highway system, spurring new growth in the oil and
auto industries, the creation of numerous suburban communities, hotels,
tourism, restaurants, shopping centers. The casualties were the old infrastructure of city centers, and the railroads. This created demand in the
airline industry.

Union organizers fought the battles and made the sacrifices that brought us
paid holidays, the 5 day work week, pensions, medical benefits, a safer
work place, overtime and minimum wage laws, higher wages, and legislation
that created the National Labor Relations Board, and unemployment insurance. Government forced concessions out of the wealth holders, like
John D, Rockefeller, who had become obscenely rich via railroad and oil
monopolies, because the wealthiest and most powerful did not possess the
wisdom and foresight that Henry Ford did.

Many of the gains have been given back to the rich. Union membership dwindled as old nothern manufacturers moved first to the sunbelt where
"right to work" laws stripped unions of the power that they held in nothern
states where laws allowed compulsory union membership. Then they moved
their labor intensive businesses overseas, chasing cheap labor as they would
any other commodity. Lower skilled U.S. workers lost out first, now even
computer programmers and engineers are feeling the loss. Union members
became prosperous enough to vote for Republican politicians who they
perceived to better represent them vs. Democrats who taxed their rising income at higher rates. Then, even the Democrats sold out the middle class
by courting the wealthier, liberal Republican class. The sunbelt working
class can now be counted on to vote against their familys' own economic
interests, helping to elect anti union and anti middle class candidates like
Reagan and the Bushes. The trend now is for an American majority with
declining househeld wealth and earning opportunities, shouldering the burden
of a higher percentage of total taxes paid to government, an expanding and
crushing federal and state debt burden, a busted paper currency that will drop to a state of near worthlessness, scarcer and much more expensive
energy and building materials, and an ever wealthier top class who will favor
overseas investments and seek to create jobs in the lowest cost locations.
U.S. workers will continue to observe the rise in wealth of the Chinese and
Indians, as the wages and benefits of U.S. workers continue to decline
until there is uniform, lower compensation for all workers in the industrialized
portions of the world. I havr lost faith that innovation will reverse these trends. The proliferation of the internet has only accelerated the move of
back office financial industry and computer and customer service jobs
out of the country. Realize that politics is class warfare. Abandon the notion
that the wealthy got where they are without the help of the government
infrastructure and corporate welfare that you owe the bill for.