Jack Rasmus

Listen to my July 26 Alternative Visions radio show commentary on Biden’s 11min. capitulation speech’s 3 big lies about the US economy, immigration and wars + first look at US GDP 2nd Qtr and why it’s 1.6% annual growth and not reported 2.8% + Ukraine negotiations in Beijing & Israel’s imminent next war in Lebanon.

TO LISTEN GO TO:

https://alternativevisions.podbean.com/e/alternative-visions-biden-s-withdrawal-speech-us-2nd-quarter-gdp-first-look-us-wars-update/

by Jack Rasmus
copyright 2024

“The 2024 election may be like no other. In less than a month—from June 27 to July 21—three bombshells have gone off. Anyone thinking that’s the end of it is politically naïve.

The first political explosion was Biden’s June 27 presidential debate performance. His subsequent public addresses to the NAACP convention and other venues fared no better. Overnight the key issue in the 2024 election became Biden’s mental competency.

The second bombshell was the assassination attempt on Donald Trump and the fallout from the event raising the question why the US secret service performed so pathetically providing protection.

The third event occurred this weekend when President Biden threw in the towel and exited the campaign.

But as the saying goes: “The past is prologue”. Similar bombshell events are therefore likely ahead.

The next event may be the Democrat party convention in Chicago a month from now, notwithstanding the current appearance that the Democrat party has closed ranks and is now behind Kamala Harris.

Then there’s the 2nd presidential debate coming in September, followed by the conduct of the November election itself. Either event may provide yet another ‘bombshell’. Any semblance of vote manipulation—or even the perception thereof—in November could erupt into widespread civil disobedience with unknown consequences for the electoral college processes that take place from November to January 2025.

In between Biden’s exit this past weekend and the November election, any number of crises on the foreign policy front are also possible now that Biden is lame a duck and the issue of his competency has simply moved from his ability to campaign to can he still govern the country. It’s quite possible that the neocons running US foreign policy and US wars the past two years may now run amuck. They will want to ‘ lock in’ support for continuing US war policies for any next administration—specifically Ukraine, Israel, Yemen, and possibly escalate confrontation with China in the south China sea as well.

The official story behind Biden’s exit is that his poll numbers were bad and moving in the wrong direction. The well respected Emerson College poll showed Biden behind in key swing states like Arizona, North Caroline, Georgia, and Pennsylvania by margins of 5%-10% but behind by margins of only 3% in Michigan, Nevada, and Wisconsin. Hardly a un-closeable gap.

National polls of voters margins are totally irrelevant here; the archaic US electoral college system determines presidential elections and that means the swing states will determine who wins. Nevertheless, national polls showed Biden and Trump within 1-2 points of each other. Other presidents going into elections have had similar poor numbers and weren’t dumped by their party.
So what’s changed? What’s changed is the extreme role and influence of money and wealthy donors within the two political parties and in high stakes US national elections.

Has Money Corrupted Democracy Beyond Repair?

It’s an easily documented fact that the movement to get Biden to leave originated with the big money donors of the Democrat party. They quickly suspended at least $90 million in donations to the Biden campaign after the June 27 presidential debate. That’s what the media reported. It was probably more.

Second Tier Democrat party leaders thereafter, one by one, came out publicly suggesting Biden should leave the campaign. Meanwhile, Tier 1 leaders of the party (Obama, Pelosi, and soon after Shumer, Jeffries and others) worked behind the scenes. Notoriously absent from their ranks, however, were the Clintons, both Bill and Hillary, who remained in support of Biden. So did the Democrats’ black caucus kingmaker, James Clyburn, Representative from South Carolina who played a key role in manipulating Biden’s nomination in 2020 and who has wielded inordinate power within the party the last decade
.
But it was the donors who set the Biden exit train in motion and kept it going.

This all raises the question how deeply American electoral democracy has been corrupted by money. And suggests strongly the system has shifted significantly along the Democracy-Oligarchy spectrum toward the latter. History will no doubt show that this shift has been occurring for at least the last quarter century.

The Supreme Court has played a central role in promoting the shift, starting with its selection in 2000 of George Bush as president by suspending ballot counting in Florida. The next milestone was the Court’s Citizens United decision in 2010 that ruled not only corporations are people but as people enjoy the same rights as actual people under the US Constitution and that campaign contributions are the equivalent of free speech. The Court further chipped away at electoral democracy thereafter by gutting the Voting Rights Act of the 1960s and approving State legislatures’ gerrymandering districts for their members of the House of Representatives. As a result to this day, despite 450 seats in the US House of Representatives up for re-election every two years, no more than 50 or so seats are ever competitive.

We see the same decline in democracy within the political parties. Democrat party donors on July 21 de-selected their candidate, Biden, after having selected him in phony primaries held by the party earlier this year. Both selecting and de-selecting were conducted by party leaders in consultation with wealthy donors who are now allowed to manipulate American elections as never before. Republican party primaries were no less perfunctory.

Mainstream parties have become obstacles to Democracy not its enablers. As the Supreme Court recently ruled, the parties don’t have to be ‘democratic’ in their functioning. They are just ‘clubs’ according to the Court.

We hear a lot about the US Constitution nowadays. When I do I can’t help but think of James Madison, its greatest architect, and 3rd president of the United States, who warned in his contribution to the Federalist papers—which were public arguments published by Madison and others while the US Constitution was being voted on in 1787 by the 13 states—that the young country should beware of political parties and their potential to corrupt democracy. His warning is right up there with George Washington’s beware of entanglements in European wars. And Thomas Jefferson’s that every couple generations or so a revolution is necessary to give rebirth to Democracy.

The efforts by Republicans and Trump to short circuit democracy are also well known. Republican red state legislatures are champions of voter suppression. Less known are the Democrat party’s own efforts in recent years: Since 2016 that party has launched a nation wide campaign to deny independent 3rd parties from ballot status. It has blocked campaign funds for them. It has manipulated primaries to ‘select’ rather than elect nominees through open competition. It has engaged in ‘lawfare’ against opposing candidates, not just Trump. Prevented free and open debates in its own ranks. Like their Republican counterparts, it has engaged in gerrymandering at the state level. And has blocked secret service protection for challengers like RFKjr and green party presidential candidate, Jill Stein.

The leadership of both political parties have become more un-democratic, arrogantly believing it is best to ‘manage’ their constituencies rather than listen to and represent them. And that arrogance and manipulation has deepened in parallel to the deepening influence of money and donors.

Wealthy donors are—like their corporations—undemocratic by nature. Their corporations are not bastions of democracy. They are run top down. No one votes in corporations. Decisions are made in secret, closed door committees. That cultural practice has been transferred to political party leaders as party leaders have become increasingly dependent on money from their wealthy donors. The two cultures—corporate and political party—have been converging fused ever so tightly by their mutual addiction to money.

Politicos like to say ‘Money is the mother’s milk of politics’. That’s the wrong metaphor. What they should say is money is the street drug destroying democracy: Wealthy donors, corporate and individual, are the pushers and political party leaders have become the addicts.

A Return to Key Issues?

Now that Biden has left the campaign, the matter of his mental competency is off the table as the key issue in the election. Now it’s back to the real issues.

According to Pew Research, in its earlier 2024 poll the top issue is the economy for 73% of the respondents polled. That means inflation, jobs, high interest rates, housing affordability, healthcare costs, and a host of related economic issues. All other issues were secondary to varying degree, including immigration (58%), crime (57%), illegal drugs (55%), protecting the environment (45%).

However, since the start of summer 2024, Gallup polls show that immigration and related issues have risen sharply in voters concern. It is now the second most important issue.

Immigration has serves as an umbrella issue: Republicans have been cleverly manipulating it as such. It’s not immigration per se but its negative consequences that voters are concerned with—like crime, jobs, housing, social security, etc.

Trump has been emphasizing anecdotal stories of former criminals allowed in the country, released by Biden administration at the border and subsequently performing crimes, especially against women. He’s also tied immigration to the homeless vets issue by saying immigrants get to stay in hotels at government-taxpayer expense while homeless vets languish on street corners and under highway underpasses. There’s also a tie in to social security, which is allegedly in trouble since immigrants get disability checks and credit cards with $1000 balances causing pressure on social security Trust funds.

Noteworthy is that reproductive rights does not poll high among voters concerns in legitimate polls like Pew and Gallup. Thus Republicans appear to be focusing more closely on the sentiment of voters than Democrats, who seem to think that reproductive rights will prove the issue that will put them over the top in the election in swing states which is highly doubtful.

The state of the economy is the second primary issue among voters. Democrats focus on the recent reduction in inflation, citing the Consumer Price Index over the past year rising at only 3.2%. However, the public does not seem to agree, which has resulted in editorials in the mainstream media by perplexed authors who can’t understand why the public and voters just don’t get it that the economy is doing great. Democrats like also to emphasize the US economy is performing so much better than foreign economies.

The problem with this Democrat messaging is that voters, as consumers, don’t care as much that prices for goods may have leveled off in recent months. What they remember is the past four years and that prices today remain at high levels, even if not rising as fast as before.

When compared to the start of the Biden administration, gasoline prices per gallon are still 38% higher, the most often purchased groceries are up 35%, bread 52%, chicken 37%, eggs 114%, milk 24%, and even big Mac meal 27%. Food and gasoline are considered Goods in the government inflation indexes and have been bringing down the rate of increase in the inflation indexes over the past year. But Services in the indexes have continued rising even over the past year and remain stuck at around 5% and probably much higher. Goods are given greater weighting in the government inflation indexes which explains why the indexes have abated over the short term. But important categories of Services like rents, auto insurance and repairs, medical insurance, utility services, etc. have continued rising 5%-20% over the past year and over the past four years even more.

Moreover, the CPI and PCE inflation indexes are misleading and under-estimate inflation for various reasons. As just one example: neither of the inflation indexes include the category of credit costs’ impact on family budgets, i.e. interest rates that consumers pay. Mortgage interest payments have risen 114% as rates have risen since early 2022. Democrats forget that people don’t make house payments to the builder; they make mortgage payments to the banker. The problem of higher interest rates extends beyond mortgages. Households are paying more for credit cards, student loans, auto loans and installment loans in general. These higher payments significantly impact household budgets and convince voters that the cost of living is out of control.

Perhaps a more telling statistic that almost never gets mentioned by media, mainstream economists or politicians is that household debt as a percent of family income is now 54%. Much of family disposable income now consequently goes to bankers and millions of households have to do with less of the necessities in order to make those interest payments monthly. Or else they just don’t make them, like the 19 million student loan debtors who have simply refused to resume payments on their loans after the Covid era student loan moratorium expired.

The Democrat and pundits claim that the ‘economy is doing great’ just doesn’t ring true for millions of households who vote. And their ancillary claim the US economy is doing better than other countries is viewed with disdain. Voters could care less.

In short, immigration and the economy are the dominant issues for voters as election 2024 kicks into high gear. And Republicans appear to have their finger on that pulse more accurately than do the Democrats.

Some Important Unanswered Questions

The first obvious question is ‘why did the Democrat party leadership schedule a first election presidential debate in June’, many months before the election? This writer does not recall any debate held so early. What was the purpose? Did party leaders know Biden could not perform in a campaign and put him out there early to verify? And once he failed, donors and party leaders moved swiftly to remove him.

The story in mainstream media is that Biden advisers were keeping it secret how far his mental acuity had deteriorated. But that’s hard to believe. There were many public events at which he spoke before June that made it obvious. And to argue that no one leaked any of Biden’s performance at cabinet meetings to other party leaders like Obama and Pelosi is not convincing. More likely the planning to remove Biden was set in motion at high levels of the party well before the first presidential debate. Perhaps even before it was decided not to have primary debates last February.

A second question has to do with the Trump assassination attempt. It is becoming clear that secret service protection of Trump was more than lax. Given the official Democrat vitriol about Trump as destroyer of democracy, and the country itself, that was intensifying over the summer, one would have thought more, not less, secret service protection for Trump would have been justified and provided. The counter argument that the service was short of funds doesn’t calculate either, in that the service is still sitting on a fund of $3.1 billion for the election. In the past year the lack of protection was in fact obvious to the Trump campaign, as it repeatedly requested more agents be assigned to Trump speaking events—only to be turned down by the secret service according to both the New York Times and Washington Post in recent months.

Then there’s the related question, why hasn’t the Biden administration approved any service protection at all for RFKjr? He continues to poll 18-12% voters and could easily upend any Democrat candidate in the election. But Democrat leaders have consistently scuttled all efforts by the RFKjr campaign to get secret service protection. Finally, why is it that the Biden administration provides to this day protection for former Ukraine president Zelensky—but not for RFKjr and inadequately for Trump? Zelensky isn’t even president of Ukraine any longer since his term ran out back in May 2024 and no new elections have been held or scheduled.

A third question is what happens next in the weeks up to the late August Democrat Party convention in Chicago? While it appears that the party leaders are rallying behind vice president Kamala Harris, it is not assured she will prevail at the convention. The delegates are free to vote for whomever they want, although the party’s at large 1500 super-delegates are always positioned to determine the outcome at conventions according to the wishes of party leadership should a decision they don’t like by delegates appears imminent.

Whether Harris prevails and is the party nominee in the end will be determined by how many donors return to the party fold under her in the next few weeks. Reportedly about half the $90 million have done so but it remains to be seen if the rest follow. Democrat party leaders have shown the money is priority #1. If she falters, another will surely be chosen come convention time.

The Democrat party fundraising remains in deep trouble. It appears its once firm hold on big tech money is fragmenting. Trump’s choice of JD Vance may prove to have been a master stroke in this regard. Vance is the darling protégé of big tech billionaire, Peter Thiel. Thiel put up $15 million of his own money to ensure Vance got elected to the Ohio Senate. Far from the ‘working class’ spin Vance is made out to be, he’s actually bankrolled by big tech and finance money.

Vance’s rise is reminiscent of Obama’s, who was similarly pulled out of nowhere by the billionaire Chicago Pritzger family and spent just a few years in the Illinois state Senate minor league before Pritzger money called him to the majors and funded his US Senate seat and then push for the presidency. This is how big capital selects its representatives to highest levels of US government.

Thiel is also now a major player in the venture capitalist and private equity big money community. Many are throwing their wealth behind Trump now for the first time. The highly visible announcement by Tech billionaire Elon Musk to contribute $45 million a month to Trump’s campaign is only the tip of the Tech money machine iceberg. Scores more of big Tech and private equity (finance) have been announcing the same. The big Tech spigot may be shutting down for the Democrats, leaving them even more dependent on Hollywood, sports celebrities, and AIPAC the Israeli lobby.

It is likely the Democrats will now become even more dependent on AIPAC money in the campaign. Already pledging $100 million, AIPAC in return will insist on even more pro-Israel support from Harris and the Democrats between now and November. That will become apparent after Israel PM Netanyahu speaks to Congress soon. The timing of his appearance is not coincidental, any more than is his increasingly aggressive policies in the middle east.

Another development that may become more apparent in coming weeks is whether there is a split within the Democrat party. It is clear thus far that Obama and Nancy Pelosi have played a key role in the background in engineering Biden’s exit. It’s similarly clear that the Clintons and kingmaker James Clyburn did not join them, but were content to keep riding the Biden horse into the sunset. Obama and Pelosi statements this past week also suggest indirectly—or at least imply—they’d prefer to see an open convention; whereas Clyburn in particular wants to retain the ‘black’ candidate Kamala Harris. If fundraising lags between now and Chicago, more evidence of a split within the party may emerge.

Perhaps in the weeks ahead until the Democrats’ party convention in late August in Chicago, some of these questions may be answered. Meanwhile, Harris appears as the nominee heir apparent for the party. But much can, and likely will, happen in the interim. As the saying goes ‘it ain’t over until the fat lady sings’ and she’s waiting off stage, still in the wings, waiting for her cue.

Dr. Jack Rasmus
July 22, 2024

Listen to my friday, July 12, Alternative Visions radio show and my updates on status of US wars & escalations (Ukraine, Gaza, Taiwan); latest fallout of Biden’s recent press conference; growing official awareness of problems with US data stats; real state of US economy (actual inflation vs. CPI, PCE low-ball reports); and consequences for US dollar dominance and US economic empire from latest BRICS moves to replace $ with gold + digital currency.

TO LISTEN GO TO:

https://alternativevisions.podbean.com/e/alternative-visions-us-wars-update-5-us-economy/

Listen to my recent short radio interviews (15-20 min)of the past week on topics of the Presidential debate, election 2024, efforts to dump Biden, Ukraine & Israel-Gaza wars, BRICS vs US empire in crisis, and latest on the state of US economy:

1, Critical Hour Radio (July 8, 2024)

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1r75V4dsrAgDNqLxvvsqA0SfiNJVBHFlj/view

2. Political Misfits Radio (July 4, 2024)

https://sputnikglobe.com/20240706/labour-reclaims-uk-parliament-orban-in-moscow-ecuadors-anti-imf-protests-1119255884.html

3. Critical Hour Radio (July 1, 2024)

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1xqmlBzNFCpP5ItHYiak12CkMdn0mZ6I_/view

4. Critical Hour Radio (June 25, 2024)

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1UR2kgklWFONJETCoNqy1WLSSwP_dgCA9/view

by Dr. Jack Rasmus
Copyright 2024

In the days immediately following the first US presidential debate between Joe Biden and Donald Trump, countless analyses have appeared. Nearly all have focused on the candidates’ delivery, less on what they said, and almost nothing about what should have been but was not said.

Trump was obviously coached by his team to tone down the personal insults, which he mostly did, and scored some policy points while making dozens of false or unverified statements in the process. Meanwhile, as the general media analysis has also gone, Biden’s delivery was a disaster. As one well known TV commentator called it: “a slow motion car accident”.

The CNN host network’s post-debate analysis panel was particularly critical. At least initially. In the post-debate commentary they offered initial assessments like: he (Biden) “seemed disoriented” and delivered “an atypically bad performance” (David Axelrod). “His candidacy has fallen” (Scott Jennings). He was “not coherent” and “real damage was done” (Abby Phillips). “He failed…No two ways about it” (Kate Bidingfield). Seasoned election commentator for CNN, John King, called Biden’s performance “dismal” and said there was now deep panic in the Democrat party. While perhaps the most liberal on the panel, Van Jones, described Biden’s delivery as “painful”, noting the debate was the ‘Con Man vs. the Old Man’ and the affair appeared as a debate between “somebody who shouldn’t be president and another who can’t do the job”.

Many of Biden’s harshest critics on the panel were long time Democrat party operatives, like Axelrod, Jones, and Bidingfield. The harshest criticism was leveled afterward by former Presidential debate moderator, Chris Wallace, author of the aforementioned quote “A car accident in slow motion”. He concluded “he sunk his campaign tonight”.

It’s clear that several of the panelists were by means of their ear phones connected during the debate with high ranking Democrat party donors and supporters. Van Jones and Axelrod, long time Democrat party operatives and advisers, both referred to calls they were getting during the debate. As Axelrod admitted “Democrat Party leaders area reacting” and in a state of panic over Biden’s performance. Jones said he even received calls well in the middle of the panel discussion, during a commercial break by CNN, in which he was ‘chewed out’ by a Biden insider for his previous panel comments.
Not surprising, as the panel discussion went on some of the panelists tried to walk back their earlier public criticism which was contributing to the ‘panic’, according to some party sources. It’s likely that some of the CNN panelists won’t be around for subsequent debates if they occur. Or at least they won’t be allowed to wear ear phones.

Anyone watching the debate and the post debate commentary might easily conclude that Trump was not all that impressive, reducing his statements and rebuttals every chance he had to the border immigration issue; or making statements like ‘he’s killing the country” and “what he has done is criminal”; or throwing out wild unsubstantiated charges declaring Biden’s policies on abortion led to doctors to killing eight or nine month old.

Biden debated in the dirt no less, often focusing on Trump’s infidelity affairs and, in one of his few entertaining ‘one liners’ declaring “you (Trump) have the morality of an alleycat” or “you’re a whinner”. How many times each rebutted the other by simply calling him a ‘liar’ probably set a record for presidential debates.

As presidential debates go, this time around the CNN moderators asked no trick questions—as occurred in prior presidential debates— and their questions challenged the candidates to address some serious points. But when it came to explaining their policies and proposals neither candidate performed very well. They either ignored the moderators’ questions altogether, or drifted off point, slide into another of their favorite topics, or descended into the silliest and most childish attacks on their opponent.

Poll after poll today shows American voters are most concerned about two issues: Economy and War. But anyone watching the debate got no idea what either candidate intended to do for the economy stuck in chronic inflation, interest rates, weakening job market, declining real wages, and a growing fiscal crisis marked by the past eight years of $13.3 trillion additional budget deficits and $14.9 trillion in added national debt. Since 2000 deficits and debt have been doubling every eight years and the worst eight have been the most recent, 2016-2024, under Trump and Biden.

When it came to answering the moderators’ questions on the economy, Trump ducked their questions altogether several times, used the question to slip into elaborating further on one of his favorite themes like the border, or just answered with an off the wall personal accusation of Biden.

Biden did no better: he mumbled, changed his topic and sentence mid-stream, confused words, and hesitated with long pauses as if he lost his train of thought. At one point after saying the US had a thousand trillionaires, then correcting it to billionaires, he mumbled incoherently for almost a half minute, lost his thought, and ended with a topically unrelated phrase “we finally beat Medicare”. Trump predictably jumped on it and rebutted, ‘Yes, you beat Medicare to death’.

These kind of petty, juvenile exchanges went on all during the debate. Perhaps the most pathetic, however, was late in the debate when both candidates got into a pissing match over who had the lowest golf handicap. Somehow they then both segwayed into accusing the other being the unhealthiest. Biden charged Trump of being too fat, to which Trump replied he had taken two health tests and passed both with excellent results while Biden hadn’t taken even one.

At that point, following the golf thing, most watchers must have said to themselves: ‘what the hell are they talking about’? Then probably followed that by saying to themselves, ‘holy shit are we really in trouble’!. Yes, the USA is in trouble. Big trouble. And both the candidates aren’t really talking about it. Nor have the slightest idea what to do about it.

Which brings it all back to what the American voters wanted most to hear in the debate but didn’t—i.e. what are the two lightweights called Trump and Biden going to do about escalating War and declining Economy?

Polls consistently show voters want to know what are the candidates’ proposals for dealing with inflation, jobs, runaway annual trillion dollar US budget deficits, the $35 trillion US national debt—not to mention unaffordable housing, healthcare, child care, and student debt? And on the geopolitical front: what would either do as president about the three wars the US is involved in (Ukraine, Gaza, Red Sea)—and the fourth that is obviously being planned (Taiwan)?

Very little was revealed by either candidate during the debate as to how they planned to deal with the voters’ top issues of War and the Economy. Here’s what was not said by the candidates on the real issues of import:

THE ECONOMY

The very first question the moderators asked the candidates was the state of the US economy. Moderators noted many voters felt the economy was ‘worse off’, with groceries up 20% and home prices 30% since 2020.

(Jobs)

Biden ducked the inflation question and launched into a statement how great the economy was now. His main point in that regard was his claim he had created 15 million jobs since taking office. That claim, however, is a misrepresentation and a selective interpretation of government statistics that he and the Democrats have been peddling throughout the campaign.

The fact is the Covid recession of 2020 resulted in 35 million being unemployed at one time or another due to government mandated economic shutdown. When Biden took office in 2021 there were 12-13 million still jobless. The US economy began to reopen in late spring 2021. It was too early. It aborted and only began again to steadily and slowly reopen later that summer 2021. It was in late summer 2021 when inflation began to accelerate.

Over the next two years the twelve million mandated jobless returned to the jobs they had left. But these were not new jobs Biden ‘created’. These were jobs workers ‘returned to’. Biden did not create those 12 million jobs. There were additionally some net new jobs created in addition to those ‘returned to’ over the course of Biden’s term. About 2.7 million. However, they have been mostly part time jobs not full time. Only by manipulating the numbers is Biden able to claim he created 15 million jobs.

As for the unemployment rate of 4% and Biden’s claim it’s the lowest in decades, that too is questionable. The 4% is what the US Labor Dept. calls the U-3 unemployment rate which refers only to full time workers. The government has another statistic that rarely gets reported in the mainstream media. It’s called the U-6 unemployment rate and it covers not only full time workers but part time, those who’ve given up looking for work, dropped out of the labor force altogether, and simply haven’t filed for unemployment benefits even though they’re jobless. That also official US government U-6 unemployment rate is 7.4%, not 4%; or almost twice the always reported lower U-3 number by the mainstream media.

Trump of course had no idea about these clarifications of Biden’s misleading jobs claims. Nor apparently did his advisers. So Trump simply failed to challenge Biden on these job numbers.

(Inflation)

The moderator’s question about why many voters don’t feel economically ‘better of’ included a reference to a basket of groceries up 20% and home prices 30% since Biden. Biden’s answer was he brought prescription drug prices down, referring to insulin prices for seniors on Medicare. Trump said he did it. Biden said he did. What ensued was a ‘he said, she said’ silly exchange. But the fact is prescription drug prices in general are going through the roof. And drug price inflation is not accurately picked up by the official US government inflation statistics. For example, he newest drugs aren’t included. Nor factored into inflation are pharmaceutical companies moving their existing drugs into higher ‘tiers’ in their formulary (list of drug prices).The most purchased drugs’ prices are raised more than average, while thousands of drugs not purchased hardly any more are not. The result is a lower average price for all drugs that the government uses in its inflation statistics.

It was at this point following the drug price inflation, only three minutes into the debate, that Biden went off the rails mumbling incoherently about several unrelated topics, going silent for loss of words, and concluding with the “we finally beat Medicare” comment.

If Trump had been prepared he could have elaborated on what’s really happening with the costs of medical services—a topic on which Biden remained silent for good reason since hospital and medical services are recently among the fastest rising services inflation.

Biden instead repeated his campaign line that more people now have medical insurance than ever before. But at what cost? And how much coverage given the higher cost? According to research by the Kaiser Family Foundation, monthly health insurance premiums for a $65k/yr median income family of four are now about $2,000/mo. ($23,968/yr); for an individual $8,435 a year. Moreover, for 51% of households the same monthly premiums have deductibles of $2k-$3k per year. The other 49% households have deductibles of $600-$900/yr. What good is medical insurance coverage if the cost of insurance is unaffordable?

The debate moderators indicated housing prices had risen 30% and asked what either candidate would do about it. Once again, Trump ducked the question altogether and went on to rail about the border, immigration, and rapes and deaths caused by terrorists and criminals at the border. Biden too ducked the question, trying to turn it into the topic of tax cuts—Trump’s and his.

Here’s why both candidates didn’t want to talk about housing costs or inflation in general:

According to the Wall St. Journal in a recent June 2024 survey, home prices have surged 50% not 30% as the moderators noted. But even that 30% is a gross underestimate. What people pay is a mortgage which includes interest charges and other fees not just a monthly principal on the price of the house. And according to the Wall St. Journal, ‘Home Monthly Mortgage Payments’ have risen 114% under Biden.

Nor are any other interest costs—in credit cards, auto loans or any other source—also factored into US inflation indexes. If they were, the government’s formal price indexes (CPI, PCE, etc.) would be much higher than publicly reported.

Rent prices follow home mortgages. But US government’s price indexes like CPI and PCE only record ‘new leases’, not renters whose landlords raised their existing rents. Then there’s the further trend of landlords adding all kinds of new monthly fees to their rents. That too is not picked up in the official inflation stats. Even so, government limited statistics still show rent increases exceeding 20% since 2021. In reality, it’s at least 30-40% and far more in some cases.

Prices for processed foods have also surged since 2019. These prices are subject to big monopolistic corporations’ price gouging. Processed foods inflation is responsible for most of the 35% rise in the most often purchased grocery goods since 2019, according to the Journal.

Government statistics show many basic household food staples have risen significantly since 2019: Bread up 52%, Eggs 114%. Pound of chicken breast 37%. Milk 24%. And food ‘away from home’ category (restaurants, bars, etc.) is also rising faster than reported. For example, the US statistics for ‘food away from home’ don’t include the recent ratcheting up of tips charges, in some restaurants mandatory. Tip rates used to be 10%, 15% and 18% at most. Now it’s an automatic 18%, 22% or 25% to the restaurant bill. Fast food away from home, that many low income households rely upon, has fared no better. Statistics show that a ‘Big Mac’ meal is up 27% since 2019.

Transportation is the third largest weighted category in the inflation statistics. It includes the prices of autos, auto insurance, repairs, cost of a gallon of gas and other items. Car prices surged in 2021-23 and then leveled off, making the latest year stats appear ‘tamed’. But auto insurance has accelerated by more than 20% the past year alone, following auto repair services up by at least that amount. Gasoline initially accelerated in 2021-2022 due to global and domestic supply issues, then leveled off. When prices ‘level off’ it appears the inflation has abated. But consumers remain paying the previous higher prices and that’s what they remember. Consumers remember they are now paying 38% more for a gallon of gas since Biden took office.

Politicians, mainstream media, and many mainstream professional economists have been spinning the message that the US economy is doing great. Inflation is under control. Unemployment low. As Biden said during the debate “The US is the greatest economy in the world”. But consumers know what they’re actually paying, workers know what they’re actually getting paid and the extra jobs they have to take on to make ends meet. Consumers and workers have longer memories than the politicians, media and economists want them to have. They know what the inflation and job score is since 2019. And don’t care that much what the others say about the last six months or even year.

In short, the tens of millions of the roughly 130 million households in the USA know when the politicians or their mainstream economists echo chamber keep telling them ‘Oh, the economy is doing great!’ is not the reality they face.

(Tax Cuts)

At another point in the debate the moderators raised the question of Trump’s 2018 tax cuts and if the candidates, especially Trump, would once again support the extension of the cuts coming up in 2025. Trump totally ducked the question, except to say his tax cuts—which by the way amounted to $4.5 trillion over a decade—produced a massive number of jobs. That job creation of course did not occur. The tax cuts of 2018 went mostly to wealthy investors and US businesses and corporations, who then either hoarded the savings or plowed it back into financial markets or invested abroad. Very little went into investments that resulted in business expansion that created jobs.

Under Trump’s first three years before Covid hit in 2020, the Fortune 500 corporations returned more than $3.5 trillion in stock buybacks and dividend payouts to their shareholders. Under Biden it’s been closer to $4 trillion. During the debate Biden indicated he wanted to raise taxes on individuals earning more than $400k a year in income. That was blocked by Senators Manchin and Sinema of his own party, as were efforts in general to roll back Trump’s $4.5 trillion. Biden refused to pressure either of these rogue Senators the past three years. Both are now leaving the Senate. Moderators should have asked Biden, now that Manchin and Sinema will be gone, if he now will reverse the Trump tax cuts if elected.

(Deficits & Debt)

On the matter of the budget deficit which has been chronically running at more than $1T a year since 2019 and is expected to hit $1.9T this year, neither candidate had much to say. Trump mentioned it in general and Biden not at all. Nor did either say anything about how the accumulation of those annual deficits have created the current national debt of $35 trillion—with annual interest payments of more than $800 billion and rising.

Both candidates’ virtual silence to discuss the topics of deficit and debt likely had something to do with the fact that both of them have been responsible for record levels of deficits and debt on their watch: annual budget deficits rose $5.5T under Trump and $7.8T under Biden. The national debt accelerated an addition $7.7T under Trump and $7.2T under Biden. It’s important to note that the record acceleration in both deficits and national debt occurred within just four years for Trump and Biden—exceeding the levels attained over eight years in the case of both George W. Bush and Barack Obama. In short, Trump’s contribution to escalating deficits and debt were just as bad as Biden’s. No wonder neither candidate wanted to ‘go there’ and discuss the issue. Pointing fingers at the other would amount only to pointing fingers at themselves.

Meanwhile, the continuing escalation of both deficits and debt constitute a major economic issue, as the driving forces for both—tax cuts for corporations and the rich, slow growth of the economy despite massive fiscal stimulus, and chronic wars and their costs—are policies both candidates fully endorse in their actions if not their campaign rhetoric. What would they do if elected about the trillion dollar plus annual US deficits and debt—a question directly asked by the moderators—was essentially ignored by both candidates.

Meanwhile, a fiscal train wreck of the US economy is emerging that will result in massive social spending cuts in 2025 and after. But no one addressed that either. The moderators didn’t even raise it.

(Tariffs)

Biden challenged Trump’s recently announced proposal to raise tariffs on all imports and use the revenue to eliminate the corporate income tax. He charged it would be inflationary as corporations passed on the higher costs to consumers. Trump hit back with the charge he (Biden) has been agreeing with his tariff policy by continuing his (Trump) tariffs and expanding them against China as well. But that exchange about tariffs was as far as both candidates went in discussing the increasingly unstable global economy. The subject of the state of the global economy and its consequences for the US was simply ‘several pay grades’ beyond their intellect.

Missing in the debate as well was any discussion whatsoever as to how the Biden sanctions on Russia and China have encouraged the rapid expansion of the BRICS countries. Formerly five countries, since Biden’s sanctions policies the BRICS have doubled in number to 11 with 25 more applying for membership this year. Nor was it asked how the BRICS’s forthcoming new global financial structure later this year will impact the US economy in 2025 and beyond.

That growth of the BRICS and its consequences is perhaps the single most important global economic development unfolding today. However, what the BRICS expansion means for the US economy was never even raised in the debates, let alone debated.

To sum up regarding the quality of the debate on the topic of the economy, neither candidate had the capacity, or even apparently any interest, in addressing the critical economic issues the country faces. Both candidates either ducked questions by the moderators that were related to economic matters or diverted the discussion to their pet topics when the moderators raised important economic issues. In other words, neither proposed solutions to the pressing economic issues voters want to hear.

THE WARS

The same inability and/or refusal to explain how they’d deal with the deepening US involvement in the wars abroad further characterized the presidential debate.

The USA is currently mired in three wars—all of which appear to be intensifying: Ukraine, Israel in Gaza and soon perhaps Lebanon, and in the Red Sea with Yemen. Biden’s regime has been paying the bills for all, totaling at least $300 billion so far—i.e. a major cause of the US deteriorating budget deficits and national debt. The USA is also deeply involved in providing weapons in all three; and increasingly as well in manpower in the form of advisers and officers on the ground in Ukraine and Israel, and a full US navy carrier task force in the Red Sea. Direct weapons and other financial aid costs has amounted at least to $200-$250 billion; add another minimum $50 billion in Pentagon OCO (overseas contingent operations) costs.

Unfortunately the candidates were not even asked if the US can continue to afford that level of spending; or if the returns so far have justified it.

When asked on the subject before the debate Biden’s response has been consistently that the US can afford multiple wars. As he put it: ‘What do you mean. This is the United States of America. The most powerful country the world has even seen!” His view the US can afford and fight multiple wars has been echoed by other members of his administration, like Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen. However, neither Biden or Yellen have said who will have to do with less in order to continue to pay for USA’s multiplying war involvement—which by many estimates exceeds $8 trillion in the past two decades? Where’s the money in the next four years to come from: What social programs will be cut in 2025-28 if either is elected? Whose taxes raised? Or how much more debt will have to be issued by the US Treasury on top of the US current $35 trillion national debt—the latter now projected to rise to $54 trillion by 2033 with annual interest costs well over $1 trillion/yr payable to bondholders?

The only detailed exchange on Wars between the candidates was Afghanistan. Biden bragged “we got 100,000 out”. To which Trump retorted that US soldiers died in the retreat which was hastily and sloppily conducted, made the US look weak and somehow, per Trump, encouraged Putin to invade Ukraine. Those remarks opened the door for Biden to jump into his favorite war subject: the Ukraine conflict. He accused Trump of giving the green light to Putin to invade—i.e. contradicting the history of events from June 2021 to February 2022 during which Biden policy was to refuse to even talk to Putin, rejected all requests to do so, and instead encouraged Zelensky in Ukraine to make increasingly provocative statements about joining NATO and intentions to militarily invade the eastern Ukraine provinces. Trump criticized Biden’s Afghanistan pull out but never understood it as a link in the Biden decision in early 2021 to provoke war in Ukraine. The USA retreat from Afghanistan was a ‘clearing of the decks’ to prepare for war with Ukraine.

Biden’s remarks on the war in Ukraine avoided the moderator’s direct question what did he plan to do about it. Instead, Biden repeated one-liners straight out the 1970s cold war era saying “Putin is a war criminal. He wants to restore the Soviet Empire and won’t stop there”. Or “Just see what happens to Poland if Putin wins in Ukraine”. In other words, the old ‘dominoes theory’. Just as that view was the center piece of US ideology during the Vietnam war, Biden’s view of the war in Ukraine is taken from the US war justification playbook during the 1970s. The moderators’ question how would he address the US wars abroad was a non starter. Biden answered indirectly ‘he wouldn’t’. Biden policy is US can afford multiple wars which he intends to continue.

Later in the debate Biden spouted even more worn out 1970s ideology about US power. So the debate audience was treated to such statements during the debate like: “we’re needed to protect the world. We’re a powerful nation.” And then the kicker: “everybody trusts us”. Listening to Biden one gets the impression we’re half a century back in the old cold war with the USSR. Even more scary, he apparently actually believes he is?

Trump’s line of argument on Ukraine as well as Israel was as simplistic: if he were president the wars wouldn’t have happened. Somehow, he suggested, he would have been so threatening to all sides of the conflicts in Israel-Gaza and Ukraine that they would have cowered in fear of his threats and not gone to war in the first place.

So there was no need to explain what to do about them now; they wouldn’t have happened.

In the case of Israel, when asked by moderators if he, Trump, supported a Palestinian state he dodged the question and instead criticized Biden for restraining Israel: “Biden’s holding Israel back. Israel wants to go. Let them go”. Trump’s animus toward Iran is well known. It is likely he wouldn’t need much encouragement to provoke a war with Iran should that latter country support its Hezbollah allies in the event of an Israel attack into Lebanon. Trump may be ‘softer’ on the Ukraine war but even more aggressive than Biden on a middle east one focusing on Iran. It wouldn’t be the first time a US president ended one war and, to placate the pro-war forces in the US, start up another.

On the Ukraine war Trump was, and has been, more amenable to forcing a compromise with the Russians. In the debate, and on many occasions before, his main charge against Biden is the cost of Ukraine so far, which to date is in excess of $200 billion according to Trump. So the main problem is the US is spending too much money on it. Get the Europeans to cough up more is the suggestion. In a sense, Trump’s position on Ukraine is an extension of his more general view that Europe/NATO should pay more.

To sum up Trump on the Israel and Ukraine wars: neither would have happened. He would have been tough and intervened and gotten all sides to settle beforehand. Israel is different than Ukraine, however. Iran has always been on Trump’s shit list; Russia has not. So based on his comments in the debate, if elected he would likely approve a broader war in middle east if it meant going after Iran. Which seems somewhat ironic since, in the debate, he accused Biden of war policies as “driving us to World War 3”.

Biden’s view on Ukraine is apparently just to continue as is. In place of answering the moderators’ question how he might resolve the conflict, it’s clear Biden’s generalities in the debate mean let the war continue. Resolution occurs only when Russia is defeated. After all, if he’s not, the Russians will eventually march on Paris! He didn’t say Paris, but did say Poland. Dominoes again! Spending money on the wars may have been the core concern of Trump, but for Biden money is not the question. The US and NATO should spend as much of it as needed.

On Israel Biden refused to get specific. He said little if anything since the US position is to let Israel proceed in Gaza, fund whatever it asks of the US, and do what it must to prevent a further attack on Israel from other quarters or at least to contain it and prevent a wider war breaking out. However, none of this was discussed in the debate by Biden.

The other two wars—Red Sea with the Houthis and with China over Taiwan—were never raised as questions and therefore easily avoided altogether by both candidates. A simple query from the moderators might have been: ‘why is a full task force of the US Navy unable to stop the Yemenis from sinking ships and preventing two thirds of the normal flow of container shipping traffic through the Red Sea’? Or how much is it costing the US to maintain a carrier task force off the Arabian peninsula?

And then there’s biggest war in planning by the USA: against China in Taiwan. Not a word asked, and not a word said about Biden administration plans now being implemented to prepare for a war with China over Taiwan. Moderators could at least have asked about recent US admirals and generals stationed in the far east who have publicly been saying war with China was inevitable and coming by 2030?

Or the moderators might have asked: ‘why are US Marines now landing and occupying Philippine islands within view of Taiwan and elsewhere in the South China sea and training again to carry out amphibious landings? One can understand why Biden, the author of the pending conflict, wouldn’t want to debate such matters. Perhaps the moderators got that message before developing their lists of questions. Or maybe the questions list was vetted by the parties (which was the case in fact). But Trump limited his criticisms of Biden China policy during the debate to the topic of tariffs.

Apart from questions of War and Economy there were other glaring omissions in the debate. At one point the moderators specifically did ask each candidate what they would do about the fact 2023 was the hottest year on record? Biden said he passed legislation—presumably the Inflation Reduction Act in 2022—that subsidized businesses investing in alternative energy. Biden also hyped his ‘climate corps’ idea. Trump ducked the question of climate change, referring instead to the need for ‘clean water and clean air’. Both candidates briefly indulged in an unintelligible discussion of the Paris Climate Accords.

In other words, there was not much substantive discussion over what is in fact a 5th war underway: the war on Nature. Or rather one should say Nature’s war on us which Nature so far is winning. Neither candidate thus answered the moderators’ question on 2023 the hottest year on record which is another way of saying: what are you going to do to prevent the climate from warming to the 2 degrees or more tipping point to which it is on track by 2035? Just as the candidates failed to provide answers how they would resolve the four US wars underway or in planning, so too the 5th was brushed off and left unanswered.

Dr. Jack Rasmus
July 1, 2024

(Critical Hour Radio)
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1VdF-k5z8hBUE4uF_5v2JctjaOSqOTlUB/view

(Political Misfits Radio)

https://drive.google.com/file/d/19khUL9-BBQGIKdM6Ugnvt7rjX26W7DuA/view

(Political Misfits Radio)

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1sGBMkK-UC4A3-k3-to70sw2gXEBQ9tFo/view

Listen to my in depth interview with Global Research and my detailed breakdown of the current state and future plans of US/EU to continue funding the war after the US Nov. elections. What’s the scenario for the future US global economic empire as the BRICS expand and create an alternative global financial system?

GO TO:

https://www.globalresearch.ca/funds-for-ukraine-more-slaughter-without-victory-conversations-with-jack-rasmus-and-peter-koenig/5856377

Listen to my May 17 Alternative Visions Radio show and discussion how in various ways US is trying to confront forces undermining its global economic empire.

GO TO:

https://alternativevisions.podbean.com/e/alternative-visions-us-economic-empire-reacts/

SHOW ANNOUNCEMENT

With BRICS conferences coming this year and fundamental challenges to US economic empire coming in 2025 and after, the US empire continues to react and fight back. Today’s show reviews the hot spots: In Ukraine, Russia military advances resulting in more NATO escalation including US signaling Ukraine it’s ok to use missiles to attack inside Russia; re China, US policy expands sanctions plus reintroduces a Trump tariff strategy as US tech corps in China begin to exit; in So. America, Argentina’s IMF-Banks model of super-neolib policies devastate the economy, crash the currency 90% and raise poverty to 58% in order to pay IMF & western banks bondholders; in Europe, US multiple US policies now driving Europe to deeper economic dependency on US and US political vassalage. Meanwhile, US economy slows steadily as both housing and manufacturing continue to contract, price gouging remains chronic, real wages slowing fast, real retail sales stagnate, and banks expand debt leverage while corporate profit margins, stock prices, and buybacks accelerate.

Critical Hour Radio (April 29)

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1EkBHPHa7aKVirYJclpIKMw1xbYLIV7DD/view

Critical Hour Radio (April 10)

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1m3ELGEUkAgO8rR7H7AW5NC1JAmXeruTi/view