The lead article in today’s New York Times, “Fed Vows to Keep Rates Near Zero Until Late 2014,” describes an engaged Federal Reserve, trying to make up for the gridlock in Washington by pursuing its own actions to nurse along our economic recovery.

After its latest meeting, the Fed promised to keep interest rates low through the end of 2014, an expansion of 18 months compared to its previous commitment. Ben Bernanke, so vilified by Republicans, may be doing more to help the economy than they are.

The ability of monetary policy to help the economy has been much debated of late, but when you’re without a job, every action helps. The Fed predicted that our rate of growth would recover slowly, from 2.7 percent this year, to 3.2 percent the next, and up to 4 percent in 2014.

Significantly, the Fed is making promises that extend beyond the tenure of its current head, Ben Bernanke. And the Fed can always change policy before then should the economic “facts on the ground” change as well.

The Fed’s outlook on unemployment remains grim. They are predicting a rate of at least 6.7 percent by the end of 2014, due to a gradually improving condition. But that may not be enough to save President Obama from what promises to be a brutal reelection campaign.

And, if a Republican gets in, the situation may deteriorate further. Because, in addition to rejecting scientific advice on global warming, Republicans do not believe in Keynesian economics either and are likely to reduce spending at the very worst time.

The lead article in today’s New York Times, “Many Workers in Public Sector Retiring Sooner,” show the impact of the recession on what were once the perks of public jobs: superior health benefits and a secure pension for retirement.

Now, with public workers under attack and even previous victories for collective bargaining being rolled back by Republican governors, public jobs seem less of a privilege and more of a burden. Many are therefore choosing incentives for early retirement promulgated by many state governments to reduce staffs and help to balance the budget.

These trends in public employment contradict what’s going on in the private sector where many people can’t afford retirement and are therefore working later in their lives.

And conversely, many public employees have little-to-no choice regarding their jobs — because they are being laid off. Even Congress is considering paying for the payroll tax cuts by freezing federal salaries and reducing the workforce through attrition.

All these trends make public-sector employment less attractive than it has been in the past, and that’s a shame. Public service was once considered one of the most noble of professions, choosing to help other people. Instead, it has become fraught with scapegoating and insecurity.

The lead article in today’s New York Times, “Democrats Look to Payroll Issue for Upper Hand,” shows clearly the difference between the two Parties and exposes the Republicans anti-tax message as a ruse to support their wealthy campaign contributors.

This message may seem a little strong, but there is no other way to explain why the Republicans would oppose a tax cut for 160 million people when they so vigorously defend the Bush tax cut that largely benefit upper-income citizens.

So, it’s not that the Democrats are waging class warfare; it’s the Republicans who are doing so, in a perverse anti-Robin Hood sort of way, stealing from the poor and middle to give to the rich.

When times are so hard, and both Parties profess support for boosting jobs, how can the Republicans explain their opposition to a policy that would create 750,000 jobs, according to neutral observers.

The Democrats are right to make an issue about this and take it to the electorate. Because only the voters can budge Republicans from their unfair policies — by firing them. At a time when the upper strata of our society are receiving obscene bonuses, and more people than ever are falling into poverty, we need a Congress who will stand up for the vulnerable among us.

The lead article in today’s New York Times, “Line Grows Long for Free Meals at U.S. Schools,” shows the depth to which poverty has grown in this country by the ever increasing number of subsidized lunches for schoolchildren.

The National School Lunch Act, originally passed in 1946, has been used as a barometer of poverty in the nation, and there have never been so many new kids receiving the subsidized lunches it provides in a single year since 1972. The program has now grown to $10.8 billion with 32 million kids participating. Families earning up to 130 percent of the poverty line are eligible.

There are many reasons cited for this less than satisfactory number. Las Vegas, for example, is suffering under an unemployment rate of more than 13 percent, and the construction industry has collapsed. Lumber and paper mills have closed in North Carolina. In Rochester, New York, there are many unemployed engineers and technicians.

It is sad to note that all 50 states have experienced expansions of the school lunch program. And one wonders how many kids are relying on the program for their only hot meal of the day.

Juxtapose these statistics with the Republicans intransigent attitude about renewing the payroll tax holiday, and you get some idea of what is at stake in the coming election.

The lead article in today’s New York Times, “Lawmakers Trade Blame as Deficit Talks Crumble,” once again demonstrates the inability of Washington to avoid partisan bickering for the sake of the nation.

If no final agreement is reached by tonight, automatic spending cuts will go into effect, indiscriminately applying across-the-board spending cuts to total $1.2 trillion in 10 years. However, because of the deal previously struck with the Republicans, major programs such as Social Security, Medicare and anti-poverty initiatives will remain untouched.

Some Republicans are already making noise about reconfiguring these cuts to protect the Pentagon even though the military cuts were the only real concession the Republicans offered in previous negotiations. It’s important to note, despite all the dire warnings from the Pentagon, the overall military budget will still increase next year.

And new confrontations loom on the horizon. In addition to continuing efforts by President Obama to pass portions of his jobs bill, the recent payroll cuts and extension of unemployment benefits are due to expire at the end of the year. Despite their stimulative effect, the Republicans are bound to oppose their renewal. Despite their promotion of nearly every tax cut for corporations and the rich, it seems that tax cuts for the middle class are somehow exempt from the Republican agenda.

The lead article in today’s New York Times, “Jolted, Wall St. Protesters Face Challenge for Future,” describes a blitzkrieg action carried about by Mayor Bloomberg to evict the Occupy Wall Street movement from Zuccotti Park. Bloomberg’s action came as a total surprise and was carried out at 1 AM in the morning.

The police turned on spotlights, lighting up the park like it was daytime, rousing the protesters from sleep, and totally cleared the area, including confiscation of tents, books and other property. The decision was roundly denounced by advocates of free speech, but the ultimate effect was an efficient removal and end to Occupy Wall Street.

While it lasted, it was a testament to the diversity of our society, and a gathering place for free exchange of ideas, something that can never do any harm. It held a bohemian atmosphere and drew tourists from around the world.

Perhaps, this result was inevitable. There were sanitary issues involved, and the park was generating a lot of noise unacceptable to its neighbors. Perhaps, a better location could have been found, more planning engaged in, and a spokesperson with some clear demands that could be negotiated. But that was half the fun of the whole thing. In its eschewing of these standard devices, Occupy Wall Street drew its unique character.

The lead story in The New York Times, “On Deficit Panel a Push to Defer Details on Taxes,” describes an attempt by the members of the Congressional deficit reduction panel to avoid automatic cuts if they are unable to agree on reducing the deficit by $1.2 trillion by the deadline of November 23. If they should fail to come up with an accord, according to law, the automatic cuts previously agreed upon will target the military and entitlement programs.

These two areas were included specifically to spur the committee to agree; the draconian automatic penalties will hurt the two areas most sacrosanct to both Parties.

Now, in the face of almost inevitable discord, the committee is looking for the minimum ways necessary to reach agreement. President Obama has said he will veto any attempts to use any shortcuts and exempt military spending as the Republicans now want to do.

In fact, the actual deadline for action by the panel is not November 23rd but November 21st, as the Congressional Budget Office must score the impact of the final proposal. This puts the 12 members, six Democrats and six Republicans, under even more pressure.

What will happen? Probably, the panel will do the minimum amount necessary to avoid the automatic cuts and leave much of the writing of the legislation to the House Ways and Means Committee and the Senate Finance Committee. That’s the Congressional way.

The lead article in today’s New York Times, “Federal Reserve Slashes Outlook for U.S. Growth,” means more bad news for President Obama as he struggles to improve the economy ahead of the 2012 elections.

The Fed revised downward its forecast of U.S. growth from more than 3 percent to 2.5 to 2.9 percent and also predicted that the unemployment rate would not drop below 8.5 percent by the end of 2012.

However, despite these dire predictions, the Fed took no further action to spur the economy, being concerned with non-existent inflation instead (or being intimidated by Republican lawmakers). The Fed did criticize Congress for lack of action, but that’s a pretty easy shot at an institution hovering around 10 percent approval ratings in the polls.

The unemployment rate figures are due out on Friday, and they are likely to spark another round of criticism of President Obama’s handling of the economy. With more than 25 million people unemployed, the President needs to keep pushing his jobs bill, one piece at a time if necessary.

Meanwhile, with Occupy Wall Street protests spreading around the country, the President faces criticism from his left flank as well. How he will thread this gauntlet to win reelection remains to be seen — though with the Republicans currently imploding in their primary race to replace him, he may yet received a second term as a gift.

The lead article in today’s New York Times, “Corzine-Led Firm is Said to be Eyed on Missing Funds,” gives more fodder to the Occupy Wall Street protest as it details more wrongdoing by a financial firm.

The brokerage firm, MF Global, is run by former New Jersey Senator Jon Corzine, and it declared bankruptcy yesterday after revelations about hundreds of millions of dollars in missing funds scuttled a last-minute deal for a partial takeover by Interactive Brokers.

One of the most fundamental regulations for brokerage firms involves keeping customers’ money separate from corporate money, and MF Global seems to be guilty of sloppy bookkeeping at the very least.

The firm was originally in trouble because of risky investments at the heart of the European sovereign debt crisis, as it purchased holdings of debt from Italy, Portugal, Belgium, Ireland and Spain. After investors evaluated these holdings, it lowered MF Global’s bond rating to the status of junk bonds, making it hard for the organization to borrow money for operational purposes.

Still, the company was hoping to sell part of its organization to Interactive Brokers, but the acquirer got cold feet after the revelation about missing funds.

Whether there is something more nefarious about these missing funds remains to be seen. This story will definitely be continued.

The lead article in today’s New York Times, “U.S. Set to Charge Major Executive in Trade Inquiry,” represents, in effect, the first victory for the Occupy Wall Street movement, whether it is recognized as such or not.

The pursuit of criminal charges against a top financial insider, Rajat Gupta, represents an accounting, a holding of someone to responsibility, for the atittude and actions that wrecked our economy. Mr. Gupta, a former director of Goldman Sachs, an adviser to the Bill Gates foundation, and a close consultant of Jeffrey Imelt of General Electric, divulged the fact that Warren Buffet was considering a significant purchase of Goldman Sachs stock to a hedge fund manager, who then purchased a large amount of stock and made more than $900,000.

The divulging of inside knowledge represents the way that Wall Street often works and the filing of criminal charges for doing so addresses one of the major planks of the Occupy Wall Street movement, that the game is rigged and that Wall Street was not punished for its phenomenal greed.

In fact, it was said that Mr. Gupta, despite a salary in the millions, still wanted more. Hedge fund managers gossiped that he wanted to be in “the billionaires circle.” Well, after this case is prosecuted, he may end up in a much smaller one, and it will be rectangular.