You are here


Economics Logo

Bernie Sanders Voted For The Act That Helped Crash The Economy.

  • There it is in black and white, or rather red and blue: Sanders’ vote in the House on the very legislation that greased the skids for banks and other financial institutions to run roughshod without any messy government oversight.
  • Special Project | I'm Not Ready for Bernie Sanders: Week Ending October 24, 2015

Shaun Mullen, Crooks and Liars

Thanks to Evergreene Digest reader/contributor Dorothy Reilly  for this contribution. Credit: DonkeyHotey  

12/16/15 | Now we know why Bernie Sanders is so anxious to change the subject to Glass-Steagall when the Wall Street Crash of 2008 comes up. It turn out Mr. Independent Progressive (or is it Progressive Independent?) voted for the 2000 legislation that deregulated derivatives, credit default swaps and other exotic financial instruments that tanked the economy eight years later.

Let’s assume that Sanders never read the background report on the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000. (Yeah, like Hillary Clinton never read the background report on the resolution in support of Dubya’s invasion of Iraq, something that Sanders has repeatedly pounded her on.)

Shaun Mullen writes for Crooks and Liars, a politically left blog focusing on political events and the news coverage of them.

Full story … 

Related: To stay on top of important articles like these, sign up here to receive the latest updates from all reader supported Evergreene Digest.



Special Project | I'm Not Ready for Bernie Sanders: Week Ending October 24, 2015, Compiled by David Culver , Ed., Evergreene Digest.


  • Bernie Sanders exposed! A shocking look at his views on issues other than class struggle!
  • 9 New items including:
    • Bernie Blew It: He Sold Out Instead of Confronting Clinton
    • Bernie Sanders' Elephant in the Room
    • A socialist FAQ on Bernie Sanders and the left
    • The problem with Bernie Sanders
    • Bernie Sanders, Gun Nut
    • Bernie Sanders must show he takes race as seriously as class struggle
    • Chris Hedges | Bernie Sanders 'Cut A Faustian Bargain' with Democrats
    • The Sanders Trap
    • Bernie Sanders exposed! A shocking look at his views on rape and violence against women




Obama’s Original Sin

The president’s failure to demand a reckoning from the moneyed interests who brought the economy down has cursed his first term, and could prevent a second.

Frank Rich, New York Magazine Now you can follow Evergreene Digest on Twitter <>. Illustration by Eddie Guy 

Jul 3, 2011 | fter 9/11, Rudy Giuliani went on Saturday Night Live to give New Yorkers permission to laugh again. But Mayor Bloomberg never did tell us when we could resume conspicuous consumption after the crash of 2008. And so, as we stumble through the second year of the official “recovery,” it’s been an improvisational return to high-end carousing in Manhattan.

A case in point was the late-May celebration of the centennial rededication of the New York Public Library. Surely no civic institution could be a more unimpeachable beard for a blowout. The dress code—no black tie—was egalitarian. The Abyssinian Baptist Church Gospel Choir, the New York City Gay Men’s Chorus, and that cute chorus from P.S. 22 in Staten Island—Glee diversity on steroids—were in the house along with some 900 invited guests, marquee names included (Toni Morrison, Jonathan Franzen). Bloomberg delivered a pre-dinner benediction from an altarlike perch on the main reading room’s balcony. “Free and open access to information may be the single most important component of any democratic society,” he said.

Frank Rich <> joined New York magazine in June 2011 as Writer-at-Large, covering politics and culture. He is also a commentator on, engaging in regular dialogues on the news of the week.

Full story … 

Why Organized Labor is More Important Than Ever In An Era of Vast Economic Inequality

  • Where unions remain, wages and benefits are better.
  • Workers, Unions Face Big Loss in Top Labor Case at Supreme Court

Harold Meyerson, The American Prospect / AlterNet Now you can follow Evergreene Digest on Twitter. Photo Credit: Image by Shutterstock, Copyright (c) A. Katz 

January 18, 2016 | Imagine America without unions. This shouldn’t be hard. In much of America unions have already disappeared. In the rest of America they’re battling for their lives.

Unions have been declining for decades. In the early 1950s, one out of three American workers belonged to them, four out of ten in the private sector. Today, only 11.8 percent of American workers are union members; in the private sector, just 6.9 percent. The vanishing act varies by region—in the South, it’s almost total—but proceeds relentlessly everywhere. Since 1983, the number of states in which at least 10 percent of private-sector workers have union contracts has shrunk from 42 to 8.

Harold Meyerson is editor-at-large for the American Prospect and a columnist for the Washington Post.

Full story … 


Workers, Unions Face Big Loss in Top Labor Case at Supreme Court, Compiled by David Culver , Ed., Evergreene Digest 

  • The real issue … is whether public worker unions can survive a big loss of revenue as not just present “free riders” refuse to pay, but everyone else does, too – and can get away with it. Justice Elena Kagan estimated that thousands of union contracts and 10 million workers could be affected.
  • Part 1: Workers, Unions May Face Big Loss At Supreme CourtPart 2: Title
  • Part 2: Attorney: high court ruling could hurt all workers, union and non-union



from Bread & Roses FB group


The game is completely rigged; The 1 percent has more than ever.

Simon Reid-Henry, Salon If you like reading this article, consider joining the crew of all reader-supported Evergreene Digest by contributing the equivalent of a cafe latte a month--using the donation button above—so we can bring you more just like it.  Sunday, Dec 27, 2015 | We have reached a crossroads in our history. For all the achievements and riches of our time, the world has never been so unequal or more unjust. A century ago, at the time of the First World War, the richest 20% of the world’s population earned eleven times more than the poorest 20%. By the end of the twentieth century they earned seventy-four times as much. Today, despite seven decades of international development, three decades of the Washington Consensus, and a decade and a half of Millennium Development Goals, our world is even more divided among the haves, the have-nots, and—as President George W. Bush once quipped in an after-dinner speech—the have-mores.

When it comes to wealth, rather than income, the picture is more extreme. Globally, the richest 1% now own nearly half of all the world’s wealth. The poorest 50% of the world, by contrast—fully 3 billion people—own less than 1% of its wealth. Anyone with assets of more than $10,000 a year is an exception to the global norm and is better off than 70% of everyone else alive. Yet most of us are so preoccupied by the relative few with more that we rarely stop to notice this. There is growing awareness today of the consequences in rich countries of rising income inequality: we know what it means to talk of the 1% there. But when it comes to the much greater gaps between rich and poor the world over, we confine ourselves still to talk of “global poverty.”

Simon Reid-Henry is a lecturer in the School of Geography at Queen Mary, University of London and a senior fellow at the Peace Research Institute, Oslo.

Full story …