Simple, raise taxes to 90% top personal income tax rates (60% top corporate income tax rates) and cut defense spending to below $200 billion dollars a year. Both have been done before (though not at all in the supposedly "fiscal conservative" 90's, under Clinton's, Rubin's, and Summer's watch), it can be done again.
Also, have inheritance and estate of near 100% on big estates and inheritances, a token on everybody elses. And a near 100% excess profits tax (take that, Halliburton!).
Finally, do not cut the stimulus. Rather, raise the spending to $2 trillion dollars per year, so as to really stimulate investment and consumption. Spending now, by reviving the economy, will turn into surpluses later-that is, if taxes are drastically raised at the same time.
Sorry to rain upon one's parade, but Jewish people are also leading sources of neoliberalism and neoconservatism, of "liberalism scurrying rightward." As well, vast income disparities and ruthless exploitation of people, including their own, can exist amongst Jewish people as much as it can exist amongst any body of people.
There could be a World War II style effort. That would get us out of this "Great Recession," just as the other one got us out of the Great Depression. As well, it is misleading to speak of jobs as "lost for good." That is the typical speech of a journalist who has no idea of how the mass of the population lives.
One wishes that Obama would get rid of these neoliberal twits. They were no good back in the 90's, and they are no good now. Unfortunately, however, and also ominously, he may still think, like so many other African-Americans, that the 90's were a great time and that Clinton was the "first black president."
People have always been willing to fight a class war in this country. The real problem is that the Democrats and the New Left are unable and/or unwilling to take the lead on the issue-they are much more interested in "issue" and "group" politics.
The tax increases of Bush Sr. and Clinton were nowhere near enough to balance the budget. The Reagan-era tax cuts and military spending increases were, and still are, there, and without getting rid of them one cannot have real fiscal sanity in this country. The balanced budgets only came years later, lasted for only 4 years (1998-2002), and were due to a brief period of prosperity (1997-2001). Once the prosperity came to an end, so too did the balanced budgets.
LBJ losing the South for the Democrats due to his Civil Rights Laws? The Democrats gained over half the South in the 1964 election, and continued to gain large chunks of the region for years therafter. It was only in the 80's that the South really turned Republican.
Volcker a great guy? His interest rates hikes plunged this country into a recession (the most severe until now) and did not really solve inflation (which only went really down in the early 90's, when interestingly enough rates were much lower). Give one a break.
Amen to the two immediately above. It is the ultra-rich ("Overclass") and global capitalism that are at the root of our problems, not the admittedly often poor choices of the ordinary consuming public (who were often pushed into those choices anyway by the powers that be). Until we restore social democracy, Keynesianism, and the New Deal we will be still stuck in the mire. I am not quite sure that Lemos understands this, coming from Goldman-Sachs and all that.
Well maybe the middle class-and the farmers, and the working class-would have voted against Reagan and the Bushes had the Democratic party come up with a decent alternative, not the centrist, neoliberal, DLC junk of the past decades. Were things really that much better under Clinton?
I am sorry but some of the comments above smack too much of defense of free-enterprise capitalism. Why should we prop up the world economic system? It is cruel and unjust to everybody, including ourselves. And so what if Goldman-Sachs is diverse, if there is no class justice? What about all the other members of those various groups who do not have jobs at Goldman-Sachs.
Again, maybe Goldman-Sachs is the "Democratic" firm, as opposed to the other ones who are "Republican." Does that mean that they will support high taxes upon wealth, income, property, and business, in order to do something about the terrible maldistribution of wealth, property, and income that we have, which makes us hateful in the eyes of other and of ourselves? Does that mean that Goldman-Sachs will support making over the financial industry into a public utility? One does'nt think so.
Apart from Glass-Steagal and how it should not have been repealed, and that Goldman-Sachs isn't the only one and should not be singled out, and that the business appears to be run in a rather cooperative fashion (even that has it's problems-is it really an employee-run company? Are the CEO's elected by the workers?) there does not appear to be much here. It is interesting, though, that favorable comment about a huge capitalistic organization is made by people who are, oh, so censorious about America and what it does in the outside world. Without defending such actions, it appears to some that America is evil but capitalism is okay.
One final note: If Goldman-Sachs is the "Democratic" Wall Street firm, then why did it do so well late last year at the hands of an arch-conservative, arch-Republican administration.
This is in no way a belated endorsement of Hillary Clinton for president. Judging from who (Mark Penn, Robert Rubin) and what (the cover of Fortune magazine as the "pro-business" candidate)she associated with, she would have been just as bad.
Sorry but Truman was soon looked at as a folk hero for dismissing MacAarthur. Intially the public supported MacArthur, but that fell away very quickly (vide the complete failure of MacArthur as a presidential candidate in the 1952 Republican primaries).
As well, if the public is always going to come down in favor of the military, why then has their been nothing but relatively small-scale wars to date? Why has'nt World War III broken out yet?
What "substantial accomplishments" did triangulation and Dick Morris actually do? At the end of the 90's, America still did not have universal social services, big business was allowed to get away with everything, and there was a huge jail population. Not really something to be proud of.