2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumIf you like Social Security, you need to know about the CIA, Henry Kissinger and Chile.
After the coup on behalf of American corporate interests in 1973*, the Chicago Boys would roll out Austerity for Chile, a model for "government hands-off capitalism," the fiscal blueprint for our present age.
One very interesting part for those following the Democratic primaries is then-President Bill Clinton's interest in the Chilean model for "privatization" of social security.
President Clinton and the Chilean Model.
By José Piñera
Midnight at the House of Good and Evil
"It is 12:30 at night, and Bill Clinton asks me and Dottie: 'What do you know about the Chilean social-security system?' recounted Richard Lamm, the three-term former governor of Colorado. It was March 1995, and Lamm and his wife were staying that weekend in the Lincoln Bedroom of the White House.
I read about this surprising midnight conversation in an article by Jonathan Alter (Newsweek, May 13, 1996), as I was waiting at Dulles International Airport for a flight to Europe. The article also said that early the next morning, before he left to go jogging, President Bill Clinton arranged for a special report about the Chilean reform produced by his staff to be slipped under Lamm's door.
That news piqued my interest, so as soon as I came back to the United States, I went to visit Richard Lamm. I wanted to know the exact circumstances in which the president of the worlds superpower engages a fellow former governor in a Saturday night exchange about the system I had implemented 15 years earlier.
Lamn and I shared a coffee on the terrace of his house in Denver. He not only was the most genial host to this curious Chilean, but he also proved to be deeply motivated by the issues surrounding aging and the future of America. So we had an engaging conversation. At the conclusion, I ventured to ask him for a copy of the report that Clinton had given him. He agreed to give it to me on the condition that I do not make it public while Clinton was president. He also gave me a copy of the handwritten note on White House stationery, dated 3-21-95, which accompanied the report slipped under his door. It read:
Dick,
Sorry I missed you this morning.
It was great to have you and Dottie here.
Here's the stuff on Chile I mentioned.
Best,
Bill.
Three months before that Clinton-Lamm conversation about the Chilean system, I had a long lunch in Santiago with journalist Joe Klein of Newsweek magazine. A few weeks afterwards, he wrote a compelling article entitled,[font color="green"] "If Chile can do it...couldn´t North America privatize its social-security system?" [/font color]He concluded by stating that "the Chilean system is perhaps the first significant social-policy idea to emanate from the Southern Hemisphere." (Newsweek, December 12, 1994).
I have reasons to think that probably this piece got Clintons attention and, given his passion for policy issues, he became a quasi expert on Chiles Social Security reform. Clinton was familiar with Klein, as the journalist covered the 1992 presidential race and went on anonymously to write the bestseller Primary Colors, a thinly-veiled account of Clintons campaign.
The mother of all reforms
While studying for a Masters and a Ph.D. in economics at Harvard University, I became enamored with Americas unique experiment in liberty and limited government. In 1835 Alexis de Tocqueville wrote the first volume of Democracy in America hoping that many of the salutary aspects of American society might be exported to his native France. I dreamed with exporting them to my native Chile.
So, upon finishing my Ph.D. in 1974 and while fully enjoying my position as a Teaching Fellow at Harvard University and a professor at Boston University, I took on the most difficult decision in my life: to go back to help my country rebuild its destroyed economy and democracy along the lines of the principles and institutions created in America by the Founding Fathers. Soon after I became Secretary of Labor and Social Security, and in 1980 I was able to create a fully funded system of personal retirement accounts. Historian Niall Ferguson has stated that this reform was the most profound challenge to the welfare state in a generation. Thatcher and Reagan came later. The backlash against welfare started in Chile.
But while de Tocquevilles 1835 treatment contained largely effusive praise of American government, the second volume of Democracy in America, published five years later, strikes a more cautionary tone. He warned that the American Republic will endure, until politicians realize they can bribe the people with their own money. In fact at some point during the 20th century, the culture of self reliance and individual responsibility that had made America a great and free nation was diluted by the creation of [font color="green"] an Entitlement State,[/font color] reminiscent of the increasingly failed European welfare state. What America needed was a return to basics, to the founding tenets of limited government and personal responsibility.
[font color="green"]In a way, the principles America helped export so successfully to Chile through a group of free market economists needed to be reaffirmed through an emblematic reform. I felt that the Chilean solution to the impending Social Security crisis could be applied in the USA.[/font color]
CONTINUED...
http://www.josepinera.org/articles/articles_clinton_chilean_model.htm
Not that this is what Ms. Clinton would do, but it bears repeating and putting in writing on the Party Platform: Democratic solutions work because they are Democratic and put We the People first.
7wo7rees
(5,128 posts)Just quite simply beyond me.
Sorry.
Forgot to say thank you, Octafish!!
Octafish
(55,745 posts)Those in charge at the top of the heap have zero interest in making it possible for the masses to climb up there.
PS: You are most welcome, 7wo7rees!
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)one and is living now will forget how insecure those 401(K)s were when the stock market fell in 2008.
A system of private investment of our Social Security money would be a huge mistake. Wall Street is just not secure enough as an investment to be trusted with the lives and well being of retired people.
My mother died of sound mind in her late 90s. She was such a brilliant woman all her life, well read and sharp as a pin, but could hardly bear to deal with the on-line pharmacy orders and her simple bank account, much less some sort of investment account for her Social Security. It made her so nervous. She could not understand why her medications were mailed from one city in America while she called another city for her orders and yet another city sent her bills. That was very troubling for her. Mind you, she read and kept up on the news, won at Scrabble, etc. into her late 90s, but dealing with money and accounting was very stressful for her. She became absolutely anxious about it.
The only reason that Wall Street wants the privatization of Social Security is that it will give them a lot of new, very vulnerable customers from whom to take lots of money in exchange for their advice and for moving money around.
Our current Social Security system is what we need. As a 72-year-old, I will say it works well. We need to raise the minimum wage so that more of our GDP goes into the pockets of working people as well as into our Social Security and Medicare systems.
Who in the world wants to have to watch the stock market when they are suffering from disease or in the last years of their life?
Privatizing Social Security is a nightmare for us as a nation. We do not want it.
Octafish
(55,745 posts)Sort of doubt it, though, going by her friends. Take Lawrence Summers. He was wont to ask: "What would Goldman think?"
nashville_brook
(20,958 posts)Octafish
(55,745 posts)Thank you, nashville_brook! Economic freedom isn't free, so the rich get the middle class to pick up the tab.
"The Chicago Boys in Chile: Economic Freedom's Awful Toll"
Orlando Letelier
August 28, 1976
EXCERPT...
The Economic Prescription and Chile's Reality
SNIP...
These are the basic principles of the economic model offered by Friedman and his followers and adopted by the Chilean junta: that the only possible framework for economic development is one within which the private sector can freely operate; that private enterprise is the most efficient form of economic organization and that, therefore, the private sector should be the predominant factor in the economy. Prices should fluctuate freely in accordance with the laws of competition. Inflation, the worst enemy of economic progress, is the direct result of monetary expansion and can be eliminated only by a drastic reduction of government spending.
Except in present-day Chile, no government in the world gives private enterprise an absolutely free hand. That is so because every economist (except Friedman and his followers) has known for decades that, in the real life of capitalism, there is no such thing as the perfect competition described by classical liberal economists. In March 1975, in Santiago, a newsman dared suggest to Friedman that even in more advanced capitalist countries, as for example the United States, the government applies various types of controls on the economy. Mr. Friedman answered: I have always been against it, I don't approve of them. I believe we should not apply them. I am against economic intervention by the government, in my own country, as well as in Chile or anywhere else (Que Pasa, Chilean weekly, April 3, 1975).
SNIP...
A Rationale tor Power
SNIP...
Until September 11, 1973, the date of the coup, Chilean society had been characterized by the increasing participation of the working class and its political parties in economic and social decision making. Since about 1900, employing the mechanisms of representative democracy, workers had steadily gained new economic, social and political power. The election of Salvador Allende as President of Chile was the culmination of this process. For the first time in history a society attempted to build socialism by peaceful means. During Allende's time in office, there was a marked improvement in the conditions of employment, health, housing, land tenure and education of the masses. And as this occurred, the privileged domestic groups and the dominant foreign interests perceived themselves to be seriously threatened.
Despite strong financial and political pressure from abroad and efforts to manipulate the attitudes of the middle class by propaganda, popular support for the Allende government increased significantly between 1970 and 1973. In March 1973, only five months before the military coup, there were Congressional elections in Chile. The political parties of the Popular Unity increased their share of the votes by more than 7 percentage points over their totals in the Presidential election of 1970. This was the first time in Chilean history that the political parties supporting the administration in power gained votes during a midterm election. The trend convinced the national bourgeoisie and its foreign supporters that they would be unable to recoup their privileges through the democratic process. That is why they resolved to destroy the democratic system and the institutions of the state, and, through an alliance with the military, to seize power by force.
In such a context, concentration of wealth is no accident, but a rule; it is not the marginal outcome of a difficult situation -- as they would like the world to believe -- but the base for a social project; it is not an economic liability but a temporary political success. Their real failure is not their apparent inability to redistribute wealth or to generate a more even path of development (these are not their priorities) but their inability to convince the majority of Chileans that their policies are reasonable and necessary. In short, they have failed to destroy the consciousness of the Chilean people. The economic plan has had to be enforced, and in the Chilean context that could be done only by the killing of thousands, the establishment of concentration camps all over the country, the jailing of more than 100,000 persons in three years, the closing of trade unions and neighbourhood organizations, and the prohibition of all political activities and all forms of free expression.
While the Chicago boys have provided an appearance of technical respectability to the laissez-faire dreams and political greed of the old landowning oligarchy and upper bourgeoisie of monopolists and financial speculators, the military has applied the brutal force required to achieve those goals. Repression for the majorities and economic freedom for small privileged groups are in Chile two sides of the same coin.
CONTINUED...
http://www.ditext.com/letelier/chicago.html
Three weeks after this was published in The Nation (Aug. 28, 1976), Orlando Letelier was assassinated by a car bomb in Washington, D.C. Ronnie Moffit, a young American woman, also was murdered.
"Managed Democracy."
amborin
(16,631 posts)Octafish
(55,745 posts)C-SPAN aired Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's remarks at the Peter G. Peterson Institute. Pete Peterson made billions as a private equity underwriter (PEU). He used $1 billion to establish his institute, focused on getting America's financial house of cards in order (without asking corporations or the rich to step up in any major way.)
America believes government cannot do anything competently, thus the private sector is the answer. That goes for international development.
Hillary started with a shout out to Rajiv Shah, Obama's Chief of USAID and former executive with the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. It's time for a "new mindset for a new century." She envisions rebuilding USAID into "the world's premier development agency."
That requires partners. Giants of philanthropy gathered in New York in 2009. This list included Bill Gates, Warren Buffet, Pete Peterson, George Soros, David Rockefeller, and Oprah Winfrey.
Big dollar philanthropists salivate over the possibility of federal government matching money for their pet projects. Change includes U.S. taxpayers establishing a $50 million endowment for Egyptian President Hosni Mubarek. Can taxpayers write that off?
Clinton stated in her talk:
Aid chases need, investment chases opportunity.
She mentioned the Clinton Foundation as a partner. President Bill Clinton privatized government functions during his two terms, benefiting multiple private equity underwriters.
CONTINUED...
http://stateofthedivision.blogspot.com/2010/01/hillary-clinton-speaks-from-peter-g.html
Whatever happened to old Hosni? Did he ever collect on his social security (em-PHASS-siss on whatever syl-LOLL-ible)!?
nashville_brook
(20,958 posts)and then billions more!
amborin
(16,631 posts)felix_numinous
(5,198 posts)Amazing how Democrats who used to be against Bush&Co are supporting the same practices in a different shiny package, it defies logic.
Octafish
(55,745 posts)An alphabet soups worth of government agencies are exercising their ability to look down on ordinary citizens.
CONOR FRIEDERSDORF
The Atlantic, MAR 10, 2016
A little more than a decade ago the border patrol started using surveillance drones. The technology and the mission were a perfect match, and few did any worryingalmost no one objects to closely monitoring Americas southern border.
The belief that the federal government was using drones to conduct domestic surveillance inside the United States, though, could get a person labeled a paranoid lunatic as recently as 2012. Yet by then, the border patrol had lent its drones to other agencies 700 times. And the Department of Homeland Security was actively developing a domestic drone fleet, egged on by at least 60 members of Congress. This bipartisan caucus, together with its allies in the drone industry, has been promoting UAV use at home and abroad through drone fairs on Capitol Hill, new legislation and drone-favored budgets, the Center for International Policy reported.
In 2013, Senator Dianne Feinstein, a staunch defender of NSA surveillance, declared that drones are the biggest threat to privacy in society today. Under her questioning, the FBI admitted to using surveillance drones in a very minimal way.
SNIP...
The ACLU and Electronic Frontier Foundation are trying to draw attention to these issues; the Department of Justice has issued its own guidelines on domestic drone use. But theres still not much public discussion, debate, or oversight of domestic drone surveillance.
My sense of public opinion is that Americans dont particularly want to be spied on from above. By keeping various aerial-surveillance programs hidden or very quiet, the government will continue to achieve a rapid fait accompli unless it is stopped.
SOURCE: http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/03/the-rapid-rise-of-federal-surveillance-drones-over-america/473136/
felix_numinous
(5,198 posts)for being there, Octafish. Yes oh I wish I could go into this but can't here. Wish the universe would make us all cross paths one fine day.
Downwinder
(12,869 posts)I guess it has to be Sanders or Trump, or suicide.
Octafish
(55,745 posts)I'm talking the BEST from Selfridge's for ALL.
They don't, because it would mean they have to sacrifice -- their wealth, of course, but to them even more valuable: Their Privilege.
PS: I am right there with you, Downwinder. God keep us ALL.
Downwinder
(12,869 posts)I was just hoping to get cancer first, to collect my 50K.
We've all got to go some time.
Octafish
(55,745 posts)Like you and me, Downwinder, the guy was a Democrat before it was cool.
SOURCE: http://www.gramophone.co.uk/features/focus/a-meeting-of-genius-beethoven-and-goethe-july-1812?pmtx=most-popular&utm_expid=32540977-5.-DEFmKXoQdmXwfDwHzJRUQ.1&utm_referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2F
The composer Luigi Cherubini compared Beethoven to an "unlicked bear cub.'
That carries no impression like the dam."
Shakespeare:3 Henry VI, act iii. sc. 2 (1595)
Reading about Beethoven's measure of the aristocrats makes me glad for my politics today. Lots of voices, all free to speak their mind and each equal under the law, working toward the goal of making this life better for ALL. That is the essence of Democratic politics.
And the music. The music.
Beethoven was at the point of quitting after realizing he was going deaf. Then he realized what it was all about and moved the art of music to a new dimension.
"Whoever gets to know and understand my music, will be freed from all the misery that drags down others." -- Ludwig van Beethoven
Thus, why I fight the BFEE.
"The heart grows stronger by facing the evils of the world." -- Ludwig van Beethoven (Fidelio)
The BFEE, or Bush Family Evil Empire, is shorthand for the Powers-That-Be. They are the warmongers, the mass murderers, the corrupt secret government, the banksters, the gangsters, the traitors -- the buy-partisan War Party -- that have long used their positions of political and economic power to enrich themselves and their cronies.
Giving them a name, makes it easier to hold them in the utter contempt they so richly deserve.
How do I fight the BFEE? By telling the truth. It is what they most fear -- as it means the loss of their power and privilege.
Downwinder
(12,869 posts)Wise guy pulled a knife on me, Bonanno jumped all over him, bad for business.
Fellow I ran with ended up in the trunk of a car. He was a player, I wasn't.
7wo7rees
(5,128 posts)polly7
(20,582 posts)7wo7rees
(5,128 posts)What is that saying about history?
Something about doomed to repeat.....
Uncle Joe
(58,366 posts)Thanks for the thread, Octafish.