Annual Fundraising Appeal

The US Geological Survey recorded a minor earthquake this morning with its epicenter near Wasilla, Alaska, the probable result of Sarah Palin opening her mail box to find the latest issue of CounterPunch magazine we sent her. A few moments later she Instagrammed this startling comment…

Ayers

The lunatic Right certainly has plenty of problems. We’ve made it our business to not only expose these absurdities, but to challenge them directly. With another election cycle gaining steam, more rhetoric and vitriol will be directed at progressive issues. More hatred will be spewed at minorities, women, gays and the poor. There will be calls for more fracking and war. We won’t back down like the Democrats. We’ll continue to publish fact-based critiques and investigative reports on the shenanigans and evil of the Radical Right. Our future is in your hands. Please donate.

Day10

Yes, these are dire political times. Many who optimistically hoped for real change have spent nearly five years under the cold downpour of political reality. Here at CounterPunch we’ve always aimed to tell it like it is, without illusions or despair. That’s why so many of you have found a refuge at CounterPunch and made us your homepage. You tell us that you love CounterPunch because the quality of the writing you find here in the original articles we offer every day and because we never flinch under fire. We appreciate the support and are prepared for the fierce battles to come.

Unlike other outfits, we don’t hit you up for money every month … or even every quarter. We ask only once a year. But when we ask, we mean it.

CounterPunch’s website is supported almost entirely by subscribers to the print edition of our magazine. We aren’t on the receiving end of six-figure grants from big foundations. George Soros doesn’t have us on retainer. We don’t sell tickets on cruise liners. We don’t clog our site with deceptive corporate ads.

The continued existence of CounterPunch depends solely on the support and dedication of our readers. We know there are a lot of you. We get thousands of emails from you every day. Our website receives millions of hits and nearly 100,000 readers each day. And we don’t charge you a dime.

Please, use our brand new secure shopping cart to make a tax-deductible donation to CounterPunch today or purchase a subscription our monthly magazine and a gift sub for someone or one of our explosive  books, including the ground-breaking Killing Trayvons. Show a little affection for subversion: consider an automated monthly donation. (We accept checks, credit cards, PayPal and cold-hard cash….)
button-store2_19

or use
pp1

To contribute by phone you can call Becky or Deva toll free at: 1-800-840-3683

Thank you for your support,

Jeffrey, Joshua, Becky, Deva, and Nathaniel

CounterPunch
 PO Box 228, Petrolia, CA 95558

The Government Needs to Do More to Stimulate the Economy

What Will Lew Do?

by DEAN BAKER

It has been more than five years since the onset of the financial crisis.

It will be at least several more years before the economy recovers fully. And the too-big-to-fail banks are bigger than ever. President Obama’s nominee for Treasury Secretary, Jack Lew, needs to address these two problems.

On the first, would he be open to increasing the deficit to stimulate the economy? If not, why not? What sort of person would he recommend to chair the Federal Reserve? Would he want a continuation or even expansion of Ben Bernanke’s policy of quantitative easing – having the Fed buy government securities to increase the monetary supply? Or would he prefer a retrenchment in monetary policy?

Does he favor trying to break up the huge banks, whose protection by the government gives them an implicit subsidy? If so, what measures would he propose? If not, how does he justify this taxpayer subsidy for many of the country’s richest people.

Also, the European Union is moving ahead with a financial transactions tax. Such a tax would make the financial sector more efficient by eliminating a huge amount of wasteful transactions. It could also raise a large amount of revenue. Congress’ Joint Tax Committee estimated that the Harkin-DeFazio bill’s modest transaction tax, with a 0.03 percent rate, could raise $40 billion a year. Other proposals could raise more. If Lew doesn’t support this efficiency enhancing tax, why not?

Finally, we just saw Standard & Poor’s sued by the government on accusations that it mis-rated securities in the run-up of the housing bubble. A provision of the Dodd-Frank bill would end the conflict of interest inherent when, as is now the case, bond issuers pay raters, by having the Securities and Exchange Commission select the rating agency. This provision sits in some bizarre regulatory limbo even after an SEC study determined that it is feasible. Will Lew push to have this provision put into law? If not, why not?

Dean Baker is the co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR). He is the author of Plunder and Blunder: The Rise and Fall of the Bubble Economy and False Profits: Recoverying From the Bubble Economy.

This article originally appeared in Room for Debate.