Robert Reich: The Most Important Economic Speech of His Presidency

[ProSense]

The Most Important Economic Speech of His Presidency

The President’s speech today in Osawatomie, Kansas — where Teddy Roosevelt gave his “New Nationalism” speech in 1910 — is the most important economic speech of his presidency in terms of connecting the dots, laying out the reasons behind our economic and political crises, and asserting a willingness to take on the powerful and the privileged that have gamed the system to their advantage.

Here are the highlights (and, if you’ll pardon me, my annotations):

<...>

We all know the story by now: Mortgages sold to people who couldn’t afford them, or sometimes even understand them. Banks and investors allowed to keep packaging the risk and selling it off. Huge bets - and huge bonuses - made with other people’s money on the line. Regulators who were supposed to warn us about the dangers of all this, but looked the other way or didn’t have the authority to look at all.

It was wrong. It combined the breathtaking greed of a few with irresponsibility across the system. And it plunged our economy and the world into a crisis from which we are still fighting to recover. It claimed the jobs, homes, and the basic security of millions - innocent, hard-working Americans who had met their responsibilities, but were still left holding the bag.

Precisely – and it’s about time he used the term “wrong” to describe Wall Street’s antics, and the abject failure of regulators (led by Alan Greenspan and the Fed) to stop what was going on. But these “wrongs” were only the proximate cause of the economic crisis. The underlying cause was, as the President said before, the breaking of the basic bargain linking pay to productivity.

Ever since, there has been a raging debate over the best way to restore growth and prosperity; balance and fairness. Throughout the country, it has sparked protests and political movements - from the Tea Party to the people who have been occupying the streets of New York and other cities. It’s left Washington in a near-constant state of gridlock. And it’s been the topic of heated and sometimes colorful discussion among the men and women who are running for president.

But this isn’t just another political debate. This is the defining issue of our time. This is a make or break moment for the middle class, and all those who are fighting to get into the middle class. At stake is whether this will be a country where working people can earn enough to raise a family, build a modest savings, own a home, and secure their retirement.

Right again. It is the defining issue of our time. But I wish he wouldn’t lump the Tea Party in with the Occupiers. The former hates government; the latter focuses blame on Wall Street and corporate greed – just where the President did a moment ago.

Now, in the midst of this debate, there are some who seem to be suffering from a kind of collective amnesia. After all that’s happened, after the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression, they want to return to the same practices that got us into this mess. In fact, they want to go back to the same policies that have stacked the deck against middle-class Americans for too many years. Their philosophy is simple: we are better off when everyone is left to fend for themselves and play by their own rules.

He might have been a bit stronger here. The “they” who are suffering collective amnesia include many of the privileged and powerful who have gained enormous wealth by using their political muscle to entrench their privilege and power. In other words, it’s not simply or even mainly amnesia. It’s a clear and concerted strategy.

Well, I’m here to say they are wrong. I’m here to reaffirm my deep conviction that we are greater together than we are on our own. I believe that this country succeeds when everyone gets a fair shot, when everyone does their fair share, and when everyone plays by the same rules. Those aren’t Democratic or Republican values; 1% values or 99% values. They’re American values, and we have to reclaim them.

Amen.

more

[boston bean]

1. I'm not going to get all excited about words.

When there is some action behind those words is when I will actually give a shit.

It's an election year and all those words should be taken with a grain of salt. We cannot let our guard down. We've been raised up and hopes driven by words. No more. Action Action Action. No more hope that politicians will do as they say, or that there will be some major change.

And if you are going to tell me all the wonderful things he has done, well then, ask yourself why this speech means so much to you.

[ProSense]

2. Do

"I'm not going to get all excited about words."

...you really want to be excited? There was stuff to be excited about last week and before that.

Still, none of that matters when everything the President does or says is met with: "I'm not going to get all excited about words."

"And if you are going to tell me all the wonderful things he has done, well then, ask yourself why this speech means so much to you."

No, I'm not: "wonderful things" don't excite you, and speeches are just "words."

[Name removed]

3. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ProSense]

6. Is

...not a single Wall Street banker has been charged in connection with the mortgage frauds. Instead of talking about "words" or "wonderful things", let's hear some "names".

...this opinion supposed to detract from the speech and everything else the President has done?

Want names: Do your own search. Still, I'm sure there will be a dismissive response.

[Cigar11]

4. The ACTION you are looking for is called VOTING !

If a US President could do it by himself, this mess would have been resolved 3 years ago.

[boston bean]

5. No the action we need is for him to listen to the people.

You can make a republican and a democrat do things they otherwise wouldn't using social pressure.

Really, voting is secondary. Because if you aren't demanding change from them, they will do what they want, often in the interest of corporations, after you give them your vote.

[ProSense]

7. Which

"No the action we need is for him to listen to the people."

...ones? Those who dismiss everything or those who recognize some progress?

[boston bean]

8. yep, listen to them.

[ProSense]

9. Don't

"yep, listen to them."

...you mean, "yep, listen to them us"?



Or are you not one of "them"?





edited for clarity

[Name removed]

12. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ProSense]

13. Seriously,

Didn't think you were one of the 99% by your posting method, style and links.
Maybe you are, but most of your posts are re-gurgitated talking points from DNC, which don't hold much water for me anymore, and most of OWS.

...that comment is absurd!

[phleshdef]

10. Why are you dodging specifics?

You say you want "actions", you ignore any actions that are point out to you then you offer up a bunch of vague bullshit nothing like "listen to the people".

I

[boston bean]

11. Don't really think you need a full history written by me. It's been stated over and over again on

DU. I'm not all that into lists.

I'm into reality. People are suffering. We know what's wrong and for three years he never said any of this.

Good he's saying it now, ok. But won't mean much if there is no action.

That is all. What is so hard to get about that?

[phleshdef]

15. "and for three years he never said any of this" = completely and utterly false

Obama has been consistent on this message since 2007. This is not the first or the second or even the third time he has spoken of income equality, has slammed trickle down economics and has spoken of the corporate and political forces that are at fault. He has made these same statements in various speeches, interviews and debates numerous times over the past 4 years. I know. I was there. I paid attention. I heard him say it. Obama said very little during this speech that he hasn't said before. He just has to keep repeating himself because people like youare so wrapped up in finding more things he has done wrong, you aren't actually listening to a damn thing he says.

[boston bean]

21. He extended the bush tax cuts. made a deal with republicans behind the dems back.

I remember it all to well.

[phleshdef]

23. He extended unemployment and kept middle class tax level stable during a jobs recession.

And when he extended the Bush tax cuts with the wealty portions included, he never once acted like it was, in and of itself, the right thing to do. He clearly said it would not create one job. But paired with what he got in return, it was the right thing to do.

I agreed with that compromise. It was the end of the year and the tea baggers were about to seize control of Congress. The President made the correct assessment, that unemployment benefits and middle class tax stability was far more important right now than sticking it to the rich on the taxes. He had to get the best deal he could before the Dems totally handed over control. And as far as the needs of the many go, it would have been immoral to gamble extending unemployment benefits and middle class tax stability on winning a 3-4% tax increase on the wealthy.

[boston bean]

24. you agreed with it. I did not. end of story.

[phleshdef]

26. Which means you care more about a 4% tax increase on the wealthy than you do helping people.

End of story.

I want to raise their taxes too, but I have my priorities straight.

[boston bean]

28. means nothing of the sort. Extending those cuts harmed millions of Americans.

And it was a bad deal. He and the Dems should have never bargained that way.

So they have given me and many others reason to want more than just words, cause their actions prior, pretty much sucked, all the way around.

[phleshdef]

29. Thats ludicrous and you know better.

The tax cut extension didn't hurt anyone, it just raised the deficit a bit... whatever the annual loss is times 2, that much. Provide proof of your statement or just admit that you care more about satiating a need to do something punitive to the wealthy and you actually don't give a damn about the unemployed.

Extended unemployment and keeping middle class tax levels stable were actions that likely saved many people from foreclosure or eviction and kept some food on the table. Those were actions.

And whether you want to admit it or not, the healthcare bill saves a lot of lives as we are seeing storing surfacing about this every single day.

And financial reform was the boldest of its kind in several decades, with or without some of the bolder reforms progressives called for.

Those were all actions and actions that undoubtedly and undeniably helped a lot of people. Taxing the rich helps our accounting but it won't put a drop of food on one god damn table.

[boston bean]

30. It did not just raise the deficit "a bit".

it was a large cause to the complete collapse of the economy and caused the recovery to be virtually non existent.

never mind, how the redistribution stole from most americans.

[phleshdef]

31. Obama's extension of the Bush tax cuts hasn't been in effect for even 2 full years yet.

The economy collapsed way before that and the Bush tax cuts didn't cause the economic collapse anyway. The economics collapse was caused by risky, shady loan practices.

The Bush tax cuts contributed to the deficit (they don't make up the entire thing) and yes, it contributed to more wealth distribution problems. But the 2 years tacked on them because of Obama only raised the deficit a bit and thats the only part Obama is responsible for.

This stuff shouldn't even need explained.

[boston bean]

32. I don't need anything explained to me. Obama pushed to continue a policy that harmed

millions of Americans.

Really, do I have to explain myself over and over again.

[phleshdef]

33. You just don't want the truth raining on your bitching parade.

Obama's compromise on those taxes HELPED millions with the unemployment extension and the middle class tax relief.

YOUR way would have cut more people off of unemployment and made everyones taxes go up at all income levels, during 8-9% unemployment. YOUR way would have harmed millions of Americans.

This is why I'm glad someone like Obama is President and not someone like you. You would fuck a bunch of people over just to have your way with people you don't like. That doesn't make you a progressive, that makes you selfish.

[boston bean]

34. you are getting rather personal here. take a step back.

I DISAGREE with you. It aint the end of the world!

[Tarheel_Dem]

20. "for three years he never said any of this". How the hell would you know?

I remember a post of yours, sometime back that you could neither bear to listen nor look at him. I'm sure some good DU'er can find that post. So your opinion is worthless, and you Madame, are a fabricator. :hi:

[Cigar11]

16. My point is this …

Speeches are a great motivational tool, and listening to speeches can be inspirational; and the President of the United States has been trying to act on what he is hearing from nearly 300 + Million. But are few Congressional Powers are preventing him from serving the many. Therefore … voting out the few to serve the many is a more effective solution to ensuring progress over speeches and hearing speeches. It’s been 3 years … time to crap or get off the pot!

We may be saying the same thing, only if a different way.

[emilyg]

19. I'm with you. Words are easy.

[Major Hogwash]

14. I totally agree. And President Obama can win re-election on this issue, hands down.

They don't have anything else to whine about!!
The soldiers are coming home, and the national security issue is not even going to be a factor next year because President Obama already dealt with Osama bin Laden!!

[Cigar11]

17. Agreed … how can he loose on this obvious point.

[bertman]

18. Actions speak louder than words. Even eloquent, lofty words. nt

[JoePhilly]

22. "Bully Pulpit!! Pretty Speech!! Bully Pulpit!! Pretty Speech!! Bully Pulpit!! Pretty Speech!!

[boston bean]

25. Both, bully pulpit and action. That is all anyone is saying. nt

[JoePhilly]

27. Actually, no.

On DU, we regularly here how Obama needs to use the Bully Pulpit (BP), and then stand strong, even if that means NOTHING happens.

This was the meme on the stimulus, HCR, financial reg reform. No Compromise!!!

He was supposed to use the BP, and then if nothing happened, that was OK. No Compromise.

Except it is not OK.