The Real IRS Scandal August 22, 2013August 21, 2013 So it turns out that, swamped by applications and looking for short-cuts to spot the most likely politically over-active applicants, the IRS denied tax exempt status for . . . drum-roll, please . . . three left-leaning groups — and none on the right. Not to say there wasn’t mismanagement (under the the Bush-appointed managers); not to say there weren’t outrageous bungles and errors in judgment. But quite a denouement to what my pal Peggy Noonan saw as Obama’s Watergate, just so deeply troubling . . . . . . as she is now so deeply troubled over Obamacare, the top line of which is simply that tens of millions will have better or more secure health care coverage, partly at the expense of those of us at the top. (We still won’t be taxed as heavily as we were in the Forties and Fifties and Sixties and Seventies and much of the Eighties but, yes, those of us fortunate enough to have income above $250,000 will be paying more.) And there are no death panels, and climate change is real, and Al Gore never said he invented the Internet, although he championed its funding at a time when it was mind-numbing to try to understand, not the indispensable magic it is today. I digress, but (a) you don’t pay me enough to exact self-discipline; (b) it’s truly all related. Now: It turns out — and this one is not of recent partisan origin, if it ever was at all — the real scandal is that the IRS has allowed any political activity at non-profits. The 1959 statute establishing c4 status said the activity of such groups must be “exclusively” for the social welfare, which someone at the IRS at some point changed to “primarily.” There’s an effort now under way to change it back. All explained here, by Lawrence O’Donnell, on “The Last Word.”
Do Not Be Alarmed August 21, 2013August 20, 2013 But today has been canceled. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Oh, okay. Here are New York — and other cities — as they have grown through the decades. Behold. (Now all we have to do is plan to move them inland 20 miles or so by mid-century, because the Republican chair of the House climate-change committee doesn’t “believe in” climate change.) Tomorrow may be cancelled, too — it’s August, for crying out loud! What are summers for if not a little sloth?
Thanking Peggy Noonan August 20, 2013August 19, 2013 Peggy Noonan is — reluctantly — concerned. She doesn’t want things to be terrible for the Obama Administration (or the country), but it just feels . . . well, for example, the IRS thing evoked for her Watergate, which we should all agree would be deeply concerning (except that Watergate was ordered from the Oval office to subvert a presidential election, while the IRS snafu was Bush-appointed bureaucrats trying to cope with thousands of applications for tax-exempt status by searching on politically-charged words like Tea Party, Occupy, and Progressive). And now, for example, Obamacare. It’s not that she wants 30 million of her fellow citizens to be uninsured — obviously — or tens of millions more subject to the insecurity of “lifetime caps” and “preexisting conditions.” It’s just that, you know, she has deep-seated concerns. As expressed recently in the Wall Street Journal. Actually, Obamacare is beginning to look as though it may, for most people, be a non-event or else a pleasant surprise. (You wouldn’t think an entire political party could be vehemently united against something good, but remember the first Clinton budget? That not a single Republican voted for? That they were certain would tank the economy? And then it turned out we had the eight best years ever?) But Peggy is concerned, as amply quoted in this rebuttal from Aaron Carroll at The Incidental Economist: I know I should just stay away from the WSJ, but I can’t help myself. This time it’s a post by Peggy Noonan, “The High Cost of Obamacare“. I’m going to ignore her discussion of the rodeo clown incident and focus on her issue du jour with the Affordable Care Act: But back to health care. The piece I linked to, by Yuxing Zheng of the Oregonian, makes quick work of a complicated subject. A woman in Cornelius, Ore., takes care of her disabled 22-year-old daughter. The daughter has cerebral palsy, spina bifida and a condition called automonic dysreflexia. She requires 24-hour care. The mother provides it, receiving for this $1,400 a month. The mother fears—and is apparently right to fear—a provision of the Affordable Care Act that will, as Zheng reports, “largely prohibit guardians from serving as the paid caregiver of an adult child with developmental disabilities.” The mother is afraid this will mean foster care for her daughter, or a lengthy and costly process in which she herself will be forced to transfer legal guardianship to someone else. The provision, the paper says, will likely cause hardship for hundreds of Oregon families in which the guardian and the caregiver are the same person. Most of the time, I try to avoid anecdotes when making arguments for or against policy. Opinion writers don’t. But in this case I have to admire the chutzpah Noonan shows. She’s pulled up a mother who is getting paid – by the government – to care for her child. She gets paid $1400 a month to provide services to her daughter. Let me say that again. The government is paying this mother to care for her daughter. Do I have a problem with this? Absolutely not. I doubt many supporters of the ACA do. But CMS does. Why? They’re afraid of fraud: The new federal provision aims to resolve a conflict of interest that arises when the guardian who helps develop an individual service plan hires herself or himself as the paid caregiver, which could lead to financial fraud. Oregon has allowed guardians to be paid caregivers for more than 10 years under various federal waivers, and a state official says she can’t recall a case where that arrangement was problematic. CMS is more cautious than Oregon. They are enforcing federal guidelines about conflicts of interest. Now this will create legitimate problems for some families in Oregon, especially single parent families, who have been paid to serve as caregivers for their adult children with profound disabilities. I sympathize with every single one of them. So do lawmakers in Oregon, who are actively trying to fix the regulations. But let’s take a breather. Let me propose a thought experiment for you. Can you imagine if, as part of the Affordable Care Act, President Obama had proposed a new program to pay parents to stay at home and care for their children? Can you imagine the outrage that type of welfare would have sparked? I bet Peggy Noonan would have had a coronary. But in this universe, suddenly she’s championing this program. Let me propose another. Can you imagine if President Obama had proposed to eliminate this fraud prevention provision, and then the media had uncovered someone who was abusing it to collect a paycheck and stay at home with their child? Can you imagine the outrage? I bet Peggy Noonan would have screamed that all of Obamacare should be scrapped over this abuse. But in this universe, fraud prevention is harming families. So be it. But it’s telling where Noonan got her anecdote. It wasn’t from among the 560,000 people in Oregon who were uninsured in 2011 and will likely benefit from the ACA. It wasn’t from the 237,000 people in Oregon who are expected to buy a guarantee- issue and community-rated policy (many with subsidies!) on the exchange. It wasn’t from the 222,700 people in Oregon who will be newly eligible for Medicaid under the expansion. It wasn’t even from the 14,300 people in Oregon who are currently eligible for Medicaid but not getting it for some reason. No, Noonan tells a story that she picked from the 455 families in Oregon who are going to need a legislative fix in order to keep getting paid to be caregivers for their adult disabled children. I bet they get that fix. Do you think she’ll talk about that legislative triumph if it occurs? She ends with four specific points, which I feel compelled to answer: First, no mother or child should be put in this position by a government ostensibly trying to improve their lives. I agree. So will she support legislation to make it easier for parents to choose to dedicate more time to their children instead of working? Let’s wait and see. Second, everyone in America knows health care is a complicated and complex subject, that a national bill will have 10 million moving parts, and that when a government far away—that would be Washington, D.C.—decides to take greater control of the nation’s health care it will likely get many, maybe a majority, of the moving parts wrong. Again, the anecdote is telling. She didn’t choose from the majority, or even the many. She went after a specific minority where things might go wrong instead of talking about the many, many things that might go right. Third, because health-care legislation is so complex, it is almost impossible for people to understand it, to get their arms around what may be a given bill’s inadequacies and structural flaws. Stories of those inadequacies and flaws dribble out day by day, in stories like this one. They produce a large negative blur, and a feeling of public anxiety: What will we find out tomorrow? Is she serious? She’s bemoaning the dribble of bad news stories – like the one she is writing right now – and how they make people afraid! Again – you have to respect the chutzpah. Fourth, when a thousand things have to be changed about a law to make it workable, some politician is going to stand up and say: “This was a noble effort in the right direction but let’s do the right thing and simplify everything, with a transparent and understandable plan: single payer.” If a politician does, I think we’ll have pieces like Peggy Noonan’s to thank.
Ashton Kutcher and North Carolina August 18, 2013August 18, 2013 SEX At the 1:44 mark, Ashton Kutcher tells teens how to be sexy. You will want to share this with your teen. (No: really.) VOTES The Republican Party could hardly be less subtle: they want to make it as difficult as possible for black people and poor people and young people to vote. Watch. One little piece of it: In North Carolina, you now need a state-issued ID to vote — but if it was issued by the state university (because you’re a student) that’s not good enough. Students vote for Democrats. [Sarcasm ON] we certainly don’t want students assuming the mantle of citizenship, do we? And actually, when you think about it[sarcasm OFF], students have the most at stake: the decisions made today will affect them for the next 70 years, whereas those same decisions will affect a 70-year-old voter for maybe another 10 or 20. So [oh for heaven’s sake, sarcasm back ON], shouldn’t we make it as hard as possible for them to have a say in their own future? This is America? This is patriotism? This is what Abe Lincoln or Teddy Roosevelt or Dwight Eisenhower would have been comfortable doing??? Will you ask your Republican uncle to please take his party back from the current Republican leadership? And to vote Democrat, or at the very, very least, stay home, until he has?
Vicco, Kentucky August 16, 2013August 16, 2013 The real America. Enjoy. And on a more serious — but entirely compelling — note (if you are a human living on Earth), watch Chris Hayes’ climate change documentary, The Politics of Power, airing on MSNBC at 8pm tonight.
Can Women Save the World? August 15, 2013August 14, 2013 Well, this from the opinion pages of The Washington Post will make some of you a little crazy, but . . . Hillary Clinton Power In 2016 By Kathleen Parker Three years out and you’d think the deed was done: Madame President Hillary Diane Rodham Clinton. She’s everywhere these days because: (a) It’s August; (b) reporters are bored with President Obama; (c) reporters are bored with Joe Biden; (d) Clintons are never boring. Correct. Op-ed columns are filled with advice about what Hillary needs to do. She needs a narrative. A message. It can’t be that she’s a Clinton or a woman. It has to be . . . What? Here’s a thought: She can save the world. Yes, all right, perhaps that’s a trifle hyperbolic, but hear me out. And keep in mind that this works only as a long game. We may not live to see salvation but one has to start somewhere. Thus far invasions, bunker-busting mega-bombs and killer drones seem not to be having the desired effect. Let’s begin with a working (and provable) premise: Women, if allowed to be fully equal to men, will bring peace to the planet. This is not so far-fetched a notion. One, men have been at it for thousands of years, resulting in millions and millions of corpses. Two, countries where women are most oppressed and abused are also the least stable. Three, as women become more empowered, especially financially, countries become more stable. When women have money, they can feed their families, get health care, educate their children, start businesses and so on. The ripple effect is stronger families, stronger communities and ultimately saner nations. This fact, reinforced by numerous economic studies, has not escaped the attention of corporate America, which is investing heavily to reach women in developing countries. As Muhtar Kent, the CEO of Coca-Cola, put it: “Women are already the most dynamic and fastest-growing economic force in the world today.” What does this have to do with Hillary? Quite a bit. Rewinding the tape to 1995 at the U.N.’sFourth World Conference on Women in Beijing, then-first lady Hillary Clinton empowered women as never before with just a few words: “Human rights are women’s rights and women’s rights are human rights, once and for all.” Imagine that. Well, of course, we can imagine that. Our Founding Fathers created the instruments to codify this concept, even if it took a while to imprint on our psyches and to be reflected in our laws. But elsewhere, in places where women are tortured, abused, sold into slavery and disfigured, all to the “glory” of men, it was a trumpet blast from heaven’s gate that caused the earth to tremble: Women are human beings, too. How do you say “wow” in Lingala? At the time, it was a revolutionary statement and helps explain why Hillary is one of the most recognized and revered individuals in the world. While Americans obsess about Hillary’s hair and married life, others have been studying her for inspiration. To millions, she is a role model and a warrior for women’s right to self-determination. As secretary of state, she continued the work of predecessors Condoleezza Rice and Madeleine Albright, who first insisted that women’s rights be part of our foreign policy, and then pushed further. Under Hillary’s watch, Obama made permanent the Office of Global Women’s Issues and appointed longtime Hillary colleague Melanne Verveer as ambassador-at-large. These strides in soft diplomacy may get less ink than, say, John Kerry’s progress toward Middle East peace talks, but they are no less important in the longer term. Far newsier than yet another round of “peace talks,” necessary though they be, are the implications of the global explosion in women’s economic and, therefore, political power. Whether one likes or dislikes Hillary, few dispute that she has matured in her public role. Her résumé can be topped by few and the symbolic power of electing a woman president — especially this woman — can’t be overestimated. Many doubtless shudder at the prospect of Hillary Clinton as the most powerful person in the world, but we’ve done worse. For what it’s worth, many in the Bush White House said privately they hoped Hillary would win because they felt she was better prepared to handle international challenges. Whatever transpires during the next three years, we can be sure the world’s women are watching closely. In 2007 when I traveled through the Middle East with then-first lady Laura Bush, every woman I met was riveted by the U.S. presidential election and wanted to talk about only this question: Will Hillary win? In 2008, it seemed possible. In 2016, barring a Benghazi surprise, it seems probable. Read more from Kathleen Parker’s archive, follow her on Twitter or find her on Facebook.
Get Hip – Fly Sabena August 14, 2013August 13, 2013 TURNING WATER INTO COFFEE Speaking, as we did yesterday, about living light on the land — do you know how much water is required to make your morning latte? Two hundred liters! This clip surprised “even me.” BLOWING MOSQUITOES AWAY They don’t like a headwind. SAVING ON SURGERY In case you missed it in the New York Times a couple of Sundays ago, this is the story of how much less it costs to have high quality surgery done in places like Mexico and Belgium. Raising the questions: Why don’t foreign hospitals advertise for patients here? And why don’t US insurers offer patients cash to have surgeries abroad? “Yes, we’ll cover your hip replacement at your neighborhood hospital. But if you’ll let us fly you first-class to Brussels, we’ll also give you $10,000.” (Saving the insurer $40,000, in case you accept.) Airlines should start marketing this! Surgical tour packages. GET HIP – FLY SABENA!
Jambox August 13, 2013August 13, 2013 JAMBOX KILLER You could buy a Jambox — and even after reading this, you might still. And if you already have one, you probably won’t throw it out — as you know, you just plug in your iPhone or Android and suddenly have symphonic-quality sound. Or if not symphonic quality, certainly not bad for the size and convenience. But guess what I just learned? All you have to do is stick your phone in an empty glass (or small vase), and you get the same symphonic speaker effect. Try it! Experiment with different size and shape glasses and you’ll soon find one that fits the bill. You just saved $250! And having to recharge anything or having to remember where you put it or, eventually, having to discard it. Because every time we live a little lighter on the land, well . . . WHAT A WONDERFUL WORLD Click here. Two minutes. David Attenborough. After 5 billion years to get to this point, can we please not screw it all up? LA TO NY IN AN HOUR Click here. I mean, if they can print you up a new bionic ear in four hours, why not this?
Money! August 12, 2013August 12, 2013 ASK LESS To those of you who wish I’d spend more time writing about personal finance and less about personal peeves (Home Depot on-line is so screwed up! and why does my iPhone keep changing the — not an uncommon word!!! — to T&E, whenever I mistype it?) . . . I say: Ask Less. He knows everything about personal finance and prudent investing. My speculations — to be made only with money you can truly afford to lose — make him blanch. A question here — will ordinarily elicit a quick answer on his blog. (Hence the little asterisk that’s been blinking on the right-hand side of this page for years. See it? Nearly 500 million blinks by now, if my math is right.) But while I have you . . . NPSP First suggested here at $6.65 and then again at $5.50 or so, it closed Friday at $22.59, for about a quadruple. I celebrated by taking some profits; yet Guru writes of the company’s wildly expensive drug ($295,000 a year): “There are probably 1,000 to 3,000 people in the US who could really benefit from Gattex. Could be more. That’s $300 million to $900 million in the US. They will launch in Europe where the market is similarly sized. For sure this is a $500 million in peak sales. Every year. For a long time. No competition. No one even trying to compete. This product could extend survival. Meanwhile, they have another product, for hypoparathyroidism — to supply the missing parathyroid hormone. Will file this year. Launch end of next year. Another $300 million potential market in the US. Then they get a royalty from Amgen of $100 million. The stock should hit 36 over the next year.” So I’ve kept some. NKTR Guru told us about this one in May at $10.30, suggesting it could be $15 or more fairly soon. Up 20% since then, he now writes: “NKTR reaffirmed that the arthritis trial — the focus of my interest — will be out ‘this summer.’ So: soon. I just don’t see how it doesn’t succeed. I think this drug, NKTR-181, and a second one — a short-acting pain drug , NKTR-192 — fully justify the current market cap. These should be easy approvals because they’re based on known effective drugs that have been chemically and permanently altered so that they reduce abusability and adverse events dramatically. They address a current market of $12-$15 billion. At the same time, NKTR has partnerships with AZN on the constipation side, with Baxter on an extended release hemophilia factor, and with Bayer on extended release antibiotics to treat hospitalized lung infections, so lots of ways to win here. It’s one of my favorite intermediate cap stocks.” So on I hang. ETRM Suggested here in February at 85 cents, it closed Friday at $1.11, which I suppose is good, up 30% in six months, but is really not the point. The point of this one, as stated then, is either to go to zero if its device fails to get approved or else to $10 or $20 if it does get approved (very possibly by the end of this year). Two smart people I know think there’s a better than even chance it gets approved. I am skeptical, as “the market” sure doesn’t seem to be assigning those same odds. But if there’s even a 20% chance the stock could hit $10 or $20 in the next year or two (say), that chance is worth approximately 20% of $10 or $20 — and so still this gamble appears cheap. Wish us luck. BOREF By contrast, I just don’t see Borealis going to zero. Why would a patented technology for a little motor powerful enough to drive a fully loaded commercial jet at 20 miles an hour — and all its other patents and even its iron ore — be worth zero? It could be, with sufficiently bad management and sufficiently bad luck. So this is, as always, a speculation to be made only with money YCTATL. But even if there is only a 10% chance that it will pan out — and by now I think the chances are higher, given their 11 signed airlines and their impressive production partners and the fact that their system has been shown to work — then it seems to me that a reasonable valuation for the company might be $200 million to $500 million, which is to say 10% of the $2 billion to $5 billion that success might be worth. I know these numbers are insanely large (the company would doubtless argue they are not nearly large enough, and that the chance of success is well north of 10%), but with 5 million shares outstanding, a $200 million market cap is $40 a share. So who is selling it at $12? I know who’s not buying it — anyone with a fiduciary responsibility to buy only S.E.C. regulated companies. (Did I mention that the company is headquartered in Gibraltar?) But in a way, if this thing ever does pan out, that’s an advantage for us: it’s kept demand low while we were buying. And I know one guy who sold 2,000 shares recently at $10 a share. “What were you thinking?” I asked him. It turned out, he was thinking he had to pay the landscapers. Hurricane Sandy had left him a big uninsured mess. But he was also thinking these were not his only shares — by a long shot — so he’d just take the profit on these, for the sake of the rhododendrons, and hope to do well with the rest. Who else is selling I don’t know. RUNNING OUT OF GAS I once got to test drive what was then the revolutionary new Mazda, with its Wankel rotary engine. I ran out of gas on the Saw Mill River Parkway. At night. With cars whizzing past and no paved “shoulder” — the charm of a parkway as opposed to a highway (or at least this is how I remember it 40 years later). It seemed like a big problem at the time; but imagine running out of gas on the approach to, say, Gatwick. Or Laguardia. This story about discount carrier Ryan Air reminds us what a bad idea it is to leave the gate with insufficient fuel. And because you can’t know before you push back how long you may be delayed on the tarmac, what a good idea it is to have enough extra fuel to allow for longer-than-usual delays, even if 90% of the time you won’t have them. Even though it’s generally unused, that extra fuel weighs hundreds of pounds; WheelTug makes it unnecessary, reducing the weight of the plane accordingly — which in turn lessens the amount of fuel required to thrust it 37,000 feet into the air. (How much extra fuel would you require to climb 3,000 flights of stairs with an extra, generally-unused barrel of jet fuel on your back?)
The President’s Speech August 9, 2013 COOLEST BILLBOARD IN THE WORLD Just one more reason to be inspired and hopeful for the future. Skip the ad and take 96 seconds to watch. But then don’t forget to come back! We have the President’s speech AND the King’s speech. Double-bonus Friday. $15 MINIMUM WAGE I argued Wednesday that the minimum wage is in a way the ultimate “collective bargain.” We the people, through our elected representatives, decide that — for a variety of reasons, both moral and self-interested — it would be a good thing to set a floor on wages. If you buy that (as only some do), then the question becomes: how much? As we’ve been discussing (here and here), $15 — though way higher than I first thought practical — might actually make a great deal of sense. WELL, OR AT LEAST $10.10 Friday, I asked . . . Have you watched or read the President’s Chattanooga speech? I plan to post the transcript Monday. But Monday I got distracted and Tuesday I got confused and Wednesday I forget what happened because I was so excited by CNBC, as described Thursday — but have you watched or read the President’s speech? The one he delivered at that gigantic Amazon fulfillment center? There’s so much good in it — not least that the President wants to raise the minimum wage from $7.25 to $10.10 an hour — that I wanted to post most of it here (with some bolding and “subheads” added for your convenience). These are crucial times we’re living through. Even on an August weekend, it’s worth paying attention: [PROGRESS WE’VE MADE] . . . [O]ver the past four and a half years, we’ve been fighting our way back from the worst recession since the Great Depression, and it cost millions of Americans their jobs and their homes and their savings. And part of what it did is it laid bare the long-term erosion that’s been happening when it comes to middle-class security. But because the American people are resilient, we bounced back. Together, we’ve righted the ship. We took on a broken health care system. We invested in new American technologies to reverse our addiction to foreign oil. Changed a tax code that had become tilted too much in favor of the wealthy at the expense of working families. Saved the auto industry, and thanks to GM and the UAW working together, we’re bringing jobs back here to America, including 1,800 autoworkers in Spring Hill. (Applause.) 1,800 workers in Spring Hill are on the job today where a plant was once closed. Today, our businesses have created 7.2 million new jobs over the last 40 months. This year, we’re off to our best private-sector jobs growth since 1999. We now sell more products made in America to the rest of the world than ever before. (Applause.) We produce more renewable energy than ever. We produce more natural gas than anybody else in the world. (Applause.) Health care costs are growing at the slowest rate in 50 years. Our deficits are falling at the fastest rate in 60 years. (Applause.) So thanks to hardworking folks like you, thanks to the grit and resilience of the American people, we’ve been able to clear away some of the rubble from the financial crisis. We’ve started to lay a new foundation for a stronger, more durable America — the kind of economic growth that’s broad-based, the foundation required to make this century another American century. [THE NEED FOR GOOD JOBS] But as I said last week, and as any middle-class family will tell you, we’re not there yet. Even before the financial crisis hit, we were going through a decade where a few at the top were doing better and better, but most families were working harder and harder just to get by. And reversing that trend should be Washington’s highest priority. (Applause.) It’s my highest priority. But so far, for most of this year, we’ve seen an endless parade of distractions and political posturing and phony scandals. And we keep on shifting our way — shifting our attention away from what we should be focused on, which is how do we strengthen the middle class and grow the economy for everybody. (Applause.) And as Washington heads towards yet another budget debate, the stakes couldn’t be higher. And that’s why I’m visiting cities and towns like this -– to lay out my ideas for how we can build on the cornerstone of what it means to be middle class in America: A good job with good wages. A good education. (Applause.) A home to call your own. (Applause.) Affordable health care that’s there for you when you get sick. (Applause.) A secure retirement even if you’re not rich. (Applause.) More chances for folks to earn their way into the middle class as long as they’re willing to work for it. And, most importantly, the chance to pass on a better future for our kids. (Applause.) So I’m doing a series of speeches over the next several weeks, but I came to Chattanooga today to talk about the first and most important cornerstone of middle-class security, and that’s a good job in a durable, growing industry. (Applause.) It’s hard to get the other stuff going if you don’t have a good job. And the truth is everything I’m going to be talking about over the next several weeks really is about jobs. Because preparing our children and our workers for the global competition they’ll face, that’s about jobs. A housing finance system that makes it easier and safer to buy and build new homes, that’s about jobs in the construction industry. Health care that frees you from the fear of losing everything after you’ve worked so hard, and then having the freedom to maybe start your own business because you know you’ll be able to get health care, that’s about jobs. And, obviously, retirement benefits speak to the quality of our jobs. And let me say this, it’s something everybody here understands: Jobs are about more than just paying the bills. Jobs are about more than just statistics. We’ve never just defined having a job as having a paycheck here in America. A job is a source of pride, is a source of dignity. It’s the way you look after your family. (Applause.) It’s proof that you’re doing the right things and meeting your responsibilities and contributing to the fabric of your community and helping to build the country. That’s what a job is all about. It’s not just about a paycheck. It’s not just about paying the bills. It’s also about knowing that what you’re doing is important, that it counts. So we should be doing everything we can as a country to create more good jobs that pay good wages. Period. (Applause.) [HOW TO GET THEM] Now, here’s the thing, Chattanooga, the problem is not that we don’t have ideas about how we could create even more jobs. We’ve got a lot of ideas out there. There are plenty of independent economists, plenty of business owners, people from both parties agree on some of the ingredients that we need for creating good jobs. And you’ve heard them debated again and again over these past few years. I proposed a lot of these ideas myself. Just two years ago, I announced the American Jobs Act — full of ideas that every independent economist said would create more jobs. Some were passed by Congress. But I got to admit, most of them weren’t. Sometimes there were ideas that historically had Republican support and for some reason suddenly Republicans didn’t want to support them anymore. Putting people back to work rebuilding America’s infrastructure. Equipping our kids and our workers with the best skills. Leading the world in scientific research that helps to pave the way for new jobs in new industries. Accelerating our clean energy and natural gas revolutions. Fixing a broken immigration system so that American workers aren’t undercut, undermined because some businesses are unscrupulous and hiring folks and not paying them decent wages. (Applause.) Independent economists say immigration reform would boost our economy by more than a trillion dollars. So we’ve got ideas out there we know can work. And if we don’t make these investments, if we don’t make these reforms, then we might as well be waving the white flag to the rest of the world, because they’re moving forward. They’re not slowing down. China, Germany, India — they’re going. And we can’t just sit by and do nothing. Doing nothing doesn’t help the middle class. (Applause.) So today, I came here to offer a framework that might help break through some of the political logjam in Washington and try to get Congress to start moving on some of these proven ideas. But let me briefly outline some of the areas I think we need to focus on if we want to create good jobs, with good wages, in durable industries -– areas that will fuel our future growth. [JOBS] Number one — jobs in American manufacturing. (Applause.) Over the past four years, for the first time since the 1990s, the number of manufacturing jobs in America hasn’t gone down, it’s actually gone up. (Applause.) So the trend lines are good; now we’ve got to build on that progress. I want to offer new incentives for manufacturers not to ship jobs overseas, but to bring them back here to America. (Applause.) I want new tax credits so communities hit hardest by plant closures can attract new investment. (Applause.) In my State of the Union address, I asked Congress to build on a successful pilot program we’ve set up. We want to create not just 15 manufacturing innovation institutes that connect businesses and universities and federal agencies to help communities left behind by global competition to become centers of high-tech jobs. Today, I’m asking Congress to build on this bipartisan support and triple that number from 15 to 45 — these hubs — where we’re getting businesses, universities, communities all to work together to develop centers of high-tech industries all throughout the United States that allow us to be at the forefront of the next revolution of manufacturing. I want it made here in the United States of America. I don’t want that happening overseas. (Applause.) Number two — jobs rebuilding our infrastructure. I look at this amazing facility and you guys, you don’t miss a beat. I mean, you’ve got these packages coming out. You’ve got dog food and Kindles and beard trimmers. (Laughter.) I mean, there’s all kinds of stuff around here. But once it’s packed up, it’s got to get to the customer. And how quickly and how dependably it gets to the customer depends on do we have good roads, do we have good bridges, do we have state-of-the-art airports. We’ve got about $2 trillion of deferred maintenance here in this country. So let’s put more construction workers back on the job doing the work America needs done. (Applause.) These are vital projects that Amazon needs, businesses all across the country need, like widening Route 27 here in Chattanooga — (applause) — deepening the Jacksonville Port that I visited last week. These are projects vital to our national pride. We’re going to be breaking ground this week at the St. Louis Arch. Congress should pass what I’ve called my “Fix-It-First” plan to put people to work immediately on our most urgent repairs, like the 100,000 bridges that are old enough to qualify for Medicare. That will create good middle-class jobs right now. (Applause.) And we should partner with the private sector to upgrade what businesses like Amazon need most. We should have a modern air traffic control system to keep planes running on time. We should have modern power grids and pipelines to survive a storm. We should have modern schools to prepare our kids for the jobs of tomorrow. (Applause.) Number three, we need to keep creating good jobs in energy — in wind and solar and natural gas. Those new energy sources are reducing energy costs. They’re reducing dangerous carbon pollution. They’re reducing our dependence on foreign oil. So now is not the time to gut investments in American technology. Now is the time to double down on renewable energy and biofuels and electric vehicles, and to put money into the research that will shift our cars and trucks off oil for good. (Applause.) And let me tell you, cheaper costs of natural gas is a huge boost to our businesses here in America, so we should develop it even more. We’ve got to do it in a way that protects our air and our water for our children and future generations. But we can do that. We’ve got the technology to do it. Number four, we’ve got to export more. We want to send American goods all around the world. (Applause.) A year ago, I signed a new trade agreement with Korea, because they were selling a lot of Hyundais here, but we weren’t selling a lot of GM cars over there. Since we signed that deal, our Big Three automakers are selling 18 percent more cars in Korea than they were. (Applause.) So now we’ve got to help more of our businesses do the same thing. I’m asking Congress for the authority to negotiate the best trade deals possible for our workers, and combine it with robust training and assistance measures to make sure our workers have the support and the skills they need for this new global competition. And we’re going to have to sharpen our competitive edge in the global job marketplace. Two years ago, we created something called SelectUSA. This is a coordinated effort to attract foreign companies looking to invest and create jobs here in the United States. And today I’m directing my Cabinet to expand these efforts. And this October, I’m going to bring business leaders from around the world, and I’m going to connect them to state leaders and local leaders like your mayor who are ready to prove there’s no better place to do business than right here in the United States of America. (Applause.) Number five — let’s do more to help the more than 4 million long-term unemployed Americans that are out there. (Applause.) One of the problems is a lot of folks, they lose their jobs during this really bad recession through no fault of their own. They’ve got what it takes to fill that job opening, but because they’ve been out of work so long employers won’t even give their application a fair look. (Applause.) So I’m challenging CEOs to do more to get these Americans back on their feet. And I’m going to bring together the CEOs and companies that are putting in place some of the best practices for recruiting and training and hiring workers who have been out of work for a long time, but want the chance to show that they’re ready to go back to work. (Applause.) And at the same time, I’m calling on our businesses to do more for their workers. (Applause.) Amazon is a great example of what’s possible. What you’re doing here at Amazon with your Career Choice Program pays 95 percent of the tuition for employees who want to earn skills in fields with high demand — not just, by the way, jobs here at Amazon, but jobs anywhere — computer-aided design or nursing. I talked to Jeff Bezos yesterday, and he was so proud of the fact that he wants to see every employee at Amazon continually upgrade their skills and improve. And if they’ve got a dream they want to pursue, Amazon wants to help them pursue it. (Applause.) That’s the kind of approach that we need from America’s businesses. Offering training programs, health care, retirement plans, paying better wages — that’s not just the right thing to do, it’s actually good for your bottom line. A recent study shows that when a company makes the list of the “100 Best Companies to Work for in America,” its share price outperforms its competitors, because the stock market and investors, they know if a company has employees that are motivated and happy, that business is more likely to succeed. (Applause.) That business is more likely to succeed. And because nobody who works full-time in America should have to live in poverty, I’m going to keep on making the case and fighting for the fact that we need to raise our minimum wage, because right now it’s in lower terms than it was when Ronald Reagan took office. (Applause.) When folks have more money in their pockets, that’s good for Amazon; it means your customers have a little more money. They can order a little more of that protein powder. (Laughter.) I noticed a lot of folks were ordering protein power. Everybody is trying to get bulked up. (Laughter.) So here’s — those are some of the ideas that we’re out there, we’re promoting. We’re not lacking for ideas, we’re just lacking action, especially out of Washington. (Applause.) For most of the past two years, Washington has just taken its eye off the ball when it comes to the middle class. And I’ll tell you — look, there are a growing number of — the good news is there are a growing number of Republican senators who are trying to work with Democrats to get some stuff done. (Applause.) That’s good news. [THE PROBLEM] The bad news is that rather than keep our focus on what should be our priority — which is growing our economy and creating good middle-class jobs — we’ve seen a certain faction of Republicans in Congress hurt a fragile recovery by saying that they wouldn’t pay the very bills that Congress racked up in the first place, threatening to shut down the people’s government if they can’t get rid of Obamacare. Instead of reducing our deficits with a scalpel to get rid of programs we don’t need, but keep vital investments that we do, this same group has kept in place this meat cleaver called the sequester that is just slashing all kinds of important investments in education and research and our military. All the things that are needed to make this country a magnet for good middle-class jobs, those things are being cut. And these moves don’t just hurt our economy in the long term; they hurt our middle class right now. The independent Congressional Budget Office estimates that the cuts that are being made right now in Washington will cost our economy 750,000 jobs this year; 900,000 fewer jobs next year. And a lot of the jobs at risk are at small businesses that contract with our military or our federal agencies. Over the past four years, another 700,000 workers at the federal, state, and local levels of government have lost their jobs. These are cops and firefighters, and about half of them are people who work in our schools. Those are real jobs. It doesn’t help a company like Amazon when a teacher or a cop or a firefighter loses their job. They don’t have money to place an order. That’s hundreds of thousands of customers who have less money to spend. If those layoffs had not happened, if public sector employees grew like they did in the past two recessions, the unemployment rate would be 6.5 percent instead of 7.5 percent. Our economy would be much better off, and the deficit would still be going down because we’d be getting more tax revenue. So the point is, if Washington spent as much time and energy these past two years figuring out how to grow our economy and grow our middle class as it’s spent manufacturing crises in pursuit of a cut-at-all-costs approach to deficits, we’d be much better off. We’d be much better off. (Applause.) And it’s not like we don’t have to cut our deficits. As a share of the economy, we’ve cut our deficits by nearly half since I took office. Half. And they’re projected to go down even further, but there’s a right way to do it and a wrong way to do it. And we should do it in a way that actually helps middle-class families instead of hurts them. (Applause.) I’ve told Republicans that if they’re serious about a balanced, long-term fiscal plan that replaces harmful budget cuts that would get serious about a long-term plan that prevents those 900,000 jobs from being lost, that helps grow the economy, that helps the middle class, I am ready to go. But we can’t lose sight of our North Star. We can’t allow an impasse over long-term fiscal challenges to distract us from what the middle class needs right now. So here’s the bottom line: If folks in Washington really want a grand bargain, how about a grand bargain for middle-class jobs? (Applause.) How about a grand bargain for middle-class jobs? [THE SOLUTION] I don’t want to go through the same old arguments where I propose an idea and the Republicans just say, no, because it’s my idea. (Applause.) So I’m going to try offering something that serious people in both parties should be able to support: a deal that simplifies the tax code for our businesses and creates good jobs with good wages for middle-class folks who work at those businesses. Right now, everybody knows this — our tax code is so riddled with loopholes and special interest tax breaks that a lot of companies who are doing the right thing and investing in America pay 35 percent in their taxes; corporations who have got fancy accountants and stash their money overseas, they pay little or nothing in taxes. That’s not fair, and it’s not good for the economy here. So I’m willing to simplify our tax code — closes those loopholes, ends incentives to ship jobs overseas, lowers the rate for businesses that are creating jobs right here in America, provides tax incentives for manufacturers that bring jobs home to the United States. Let’s simplify taxes for small business owners, give them incentives to invest so they can spend less time filling out complicated forms, more time expanding and hiring. I’m willing to do all that that should help businesses and help them grow. But if we’re going to give businesses a better deal, then we’re also going to have to give workers a better deal, too. (Applause.) I want to use some of the money that we save by closing these loopholes to create more good construction jobs with infrastructure initiatives that I already talked about. We can build a broader network of high-tech manufacturing hubs that leaders from both parties can support. We can help our community colleges arm our workers with the skills that a global economy demands. All these things would benefit the middle class right now and benefit our economy in the years to come. So, again, here’s the bottom line: I’m willing to work with Republicans on reforming our corporate tax code, as long as we use the money from transitioning to a simpler tax system for a significant investment in creating middle-class jobs. That’s the deal. (Applause.) And I’m just going to keep on throwing ideas out there to see if something takes. (Laughter.) I’m going to lay out my ideas to give the middle class a better shot. But now it’s time for Republicans to lay out their ideas. If they’ve got a better plan to bring back more manufacturing jobs here to Tennessee and around the country, then let them know — let me know. I want to hear them. If they’ve got a better plan to create jobs rebuilding our infrastructure or to help workers earn the high-tech skills that they need, then they should offer up these ideas. But I’ve got to tell you, just gutting our environmental protection, that’s not a jobs plan. Gutting investments in education, that’s not a jobs plan. They keep on talking about this — an oil pipeline coming down from Canada that’s estimated to create about 50 permanent jobs — that’s not a jobs plan. Wasting the country’s time by taking something like 40 meaningless votes to repeal Obamacare is not a jobs plan. That’s not a jobs plan. (Applause.) So let’s get serious. Look, I want to tell everybody here the truth. And you know, look, I know that the politics for Obama aren’t always great in Tennessee. I understand that. But I want everybody to just hear the honest truth. I’ve run my last campaign, so I don’t need to spin. (Applause.) And here’s the truth — there are no gimmicks that create jobs. There are no simple tricks to grow the economy. Growing the economy, making sure that the middle class is strong is like getting in shape. You can’t just go on the muffin and doughnut diet and the latest fad and lose weight. You’ve got to work out and you’ve got to eat better. Well, the same is true for our economy. The same is true for helping the middle class. We’ve got to have a serious, steady, long-term American strategy to reverse the long-term erosion of middle-class security and give everybody a fair shot. (Applause.) And we know what we have to do. It involves education. It involves infrastructure. It involves research. It involves good energy policy. And we just have to stay at it — more good jobs that pay decent wages, a better bargain for the middle class, an economy that grows from the middle out. That’s got to be our focus. We can’t be getting into a whole bunch of fads and pretend like you roll back Obamacare and suddenly all these jobs are going to be created, because the middle class was struggling before I came into office. (Applause.) The middle class was losing ground before I came into office. (Applause.) Jobs were getting shipped overseas before Obamacare was in place. So we’ve got to be honest. We’ve got to be honest about the challenges we face, but also the opportunities that are out there. And that’s what I’m going to be focused on not just for the next few months. I’m going to be focused for every one of the 1,270 days I’ve got left in my presidency on how to make sure that we’ve got more opportunity and more security for everybody who is willing to work hard in this country. That’s where I believe America needs to go. (Applause.) And we can do it if we work together, Chattanooga. Let’s get to work. Thank you very much, everybody. God bless you. God bless the United States of America. THE KING’S SPEECH Writing the headline for today’s post, I remembered “The King’s Speech‘” — not least the exquisite double meaning of its title — and, because without an editor to restrain me I get to share whatever flies into my head, I just thought for anyone who missed it the first time, I’d suggest you Netflix it. Just so great. The triumph of the human spirit. Have a great weekend.