The old Aristocracy had an entrenched way of keeping their field-hands, maids, and servants in their position for life. In 2012, how can the wealthy 1% of Americans keep a class of people from whom they rely on for operation & profit without letting them become anything more than what they are now? The United States never wants to admit we have such a class of people with little hope of advancing their station in life, but we do. Individuals in this class may be there due to poor decision making such as a drug or gambling addiction which prevents them from getting ahead. There are individuals that never get above impoverishment due to a variety of uncontrollable external environmental events, such as a child losing their family in a terrible accident.
What's society to do with these individuals? Profit from them of course! Enter the Prison system. Prisons have quietly become Big Business for the States, Federal Government, and Contractors. Prisons provide big returns on investment for local, state, and federal governments.
For example, the Wall Street Journal published a special section called The Journal Report: Investing in Energy on December 5, 2011. One article, "Energy Boomtown Tries Not to Blow It" highlights a small town called Fallon in Nevada's Churchill County investing wisely in its future. One of the first capital improvements the City of Fallon made to this town of 25,000 people was to spend $3.5 million to build a new juvenile detention center. The article reads "Besides meeting a demand for a local place to house at-risk youth rather than send them to other counties, Churchill County's 16-bed facility has enough extra beds to accommodate juveniles from other parts of Nevada......the juvenile center not only is bringing in new revenue but also has created 12 jobs, with the potential for more, says County Comptroller Alan Kalt."
I've read several articles where incarcerated men are trained to specialized work that used to be valid tradesman, such as restore classic cars. These classic cars are then sold to prison contractor executives for pennies on the dollar. If that isn't the beginning of a new Serf class, I don't know what is.
Monday, February 6, 2012
Saturday, July 30, 2011
Where's the incentive to do the right thing?
In just a few hours, the U.S. Government will have to decide whether or not to default on our debt obligations or simply raise the debt ceiling. In the light of Greece officially defaulting within the European Bank and Italy & Spain close behind, our Representatives, Senators, President, lobbyists, and every organization is using this moment to further agendas that have been trying to get passed for a while.
But where's the incentive to do the right thing? What is the right thing?
I feel we should raise the debt ceiling and not be put in the situation that Greece, Italy, and Spain aree facing. I believe insanely profitable corporations and wealth individuals need to pay taxes at the last Great Depression tax rates. I no longer want my tax money being spent on troops & the expensive wars of Iran & Afghanistan.
So, now what are my options to see this change through as a person without any political connections, who works a normal job for normal pay, and lives a small life? Call my Representative & Senators and tell them "raise the debt ceiling." If huge numbers of their constituents do the same thing, then the Representatives & Senators should vote as their people demand. Elected officials assume by appeasing their constituents that their constituents in return will vote them back into office. What if my Representative is a Tea Party member who has no intention of running for re-election. What is their incentive to listen to their constituents at all? If they case the "wrong" vote and the economy become worse, why would they care? They won't be on The Hill for the aftermath.
Where's the incentive for the rich to pay more in taxes? Using the old Plantation model of land owner & slaves, where's the incentive for the land owner to be good to slaves or even pay them? I'm sure we'd all agree we'd rather be in the position of the land owner & rich than being the poor slave who works ungodly hours and receives little or no compensation when the land owner makes record profits. What would motivate him to distribute his wealth evenly among the people he governs?
What's the incentive to be the public figure who finally pulls the plug on the Wars in Iran & Afghanistan? Every day the media claims Iran has forged an agreement with al Qaeda to move money, arms, and fighters through Iranian territory to terrorist groups in Pakistan & Afghanistan. Either this is a Rupert Murdock spin to keep us scared or it's real. If it's real and we get attacked again, do you want to be the public figure who said, "we don't need troops in these countries anymore"?
But where's the incentive to do the right thing? What is the right thing?
I feel we should raise the debt ceiling and not be put in the situation that Greece, Italy, and Spain aree facing. I believe insanely profitable corporations and wealth individuals need to pay taxes at the last Great Depression tax rates. I no longer want my tax money being spent on troops & the expensive wars of Iran & Afghanistan.
So, now what are my options to see this change through as a person without any political connections, who works a normal job for normal pay, and lives a small life? Call my Representative & Senators and tell them "raise the debt ceiling." If huge numbers of their constituents do the same thing, then the Representatives & Senators should vote as their people demand. Elected officials assume by appeasing their constituents that their constituents in return will vote them back into office. What if my Representative is a Tea Party member who has no intention of running for re-election. What is their incentive to listen to their constituents at all? If they case the "wrong" vote and the economy become worse, why would they care? They won't be on The Hill for the aftermath.
Where's the incentive for the rich to pay more in taxes? Using the old Plantation model of land owner & slaves, where's the incentive for the land owner to be good to slaves or even pay them? I'm sure we'd all agree we'd rather be in the position of the land owner & rich than being the poor slave who works ungodly hours and receives little or no compensation when the land owner makes record profits. What would motivate him to distribute his wealth evenly among the people he governs?
What's the incentive to be the public figure who finally pulls the plug on the Wars in Iran & Afghanistan? Every day the media claims Iran has forged an agreement with al Qaeda to move money, arms, and fighters through Iranian territory to terrorist groups in Pakistan & Afghanistan. Either this is a Rupert Murdock spin to keep us scared or it's real. If it's real and we get attacked again, do you want to be the public figure who said, "we don't need troops in these countries anymore"?
Monday, May 16, 2011
Have lots of Money, but lost 77% in a bad investment
If you have plenty of money, you can spend millions in legal fees to get your millions back. If you're a firefighter or a teacher at the mercy of your State run pension, you're shit out of luck. Your money is gone.
Individuals receive surprisingly large arbitration award.
According to The Wall Street Journal, Citigroup has been ordered to pay $54.1 million to two wealthy investors (a venture capital investor and a retired patent attorney) for losses they sustained on risky municipal bond funds that lost 77% of their value in the financial crisis. “The award by an industry arbitration panel is the largest ever levied against a major Wall Street brokerage in favor of individual investors . . . .” (Larger awards have been made to corporate investors.) The award included $17 million in punitive damages and $3 million in legal fees. Citigroup’s municipal bond funds are the subject of an SEC probe into whether the bank misled investors by failing to disclose the funds’ risks. The investors were neighbors, and the former Smith Barney broker testified on behalf of his former clients. Arbitration is mandatory in most Wall Street customer agreements, and this result appears to substantially exceed any previous award to individuals is such an investment advice dispute. It is good to see a case in which a FIRA arbitration worked out so well for the investors!
Individuals receive surprisingly large arbitration award.
According to The Wall Street Journal, Citigroup has been ordered to pay $54.1 million to two wealthy investors (a venture capital investor and a retired patent attorney) for losses they sustained on risky municipal bond funds that lost 77% of their value in the financial crisis. “The award by an industry arbitration panel is the largest ever levied against a major Wall Street brokerage in favor of individual investors . . . .” (Larger awards have been made to corporate investors.) The award included $17 million in punitive damages and $3 million in legal fees. Citigroup’s municipal bond funds are the subject of an SEC probe into whether the bank misled investors by failing to disclose the funds’ risks. The investors were neighbors, and the former Smith Barney broker testified on behalf of his former clients. Arbitration is mandatory in most Wall Street customer agreements, and this result appears to substantially exceed any previous award to individuals is such an investment advice dispute. It is good to see a case in which a FIRA arbitration worked out so well for the investors!
Sunday, May 15, 2011
Sicilian Mafia Born Out of Serfdom
"There was, after all, something irresistible in solving money problems simply by printing money..." page 114 of The First Family: Terror, Extortion, Revenge, Murder, and The Birth of the American Mafia by Mike Dash.
Out of Money & Options
The Sicilian Mafia was born out of serfdom because the Barons who ran the estates paid the Serfs almost nothing, sharing little of the prosperity the Serfs had produced from their land. Page 41 of Mike Dash's book reprints a police officer's letter from Sicily from 1860 illustrating the injustice:
"it hurts to see some of the scenes you come across when you live here like I do. One hot day in July...I was on a long march with my men. We stopped for a rest by a farmyard where they were dividing the grain harvest. I went in to ask for some water. The measuring had just finished, and the peasant had been left with no more than a small mound. Everything else had gone to his boss. The peasant stood with his hands and chin planted on the long handle of a shovel. At first, as if stunned, he stared at his share. Then he looked at his wife and four or five small children, thinking that after a year of sweat and hardship all he had left to feed his family with was that heap of grain. He seemed like a man set in stone. Except that tear was gliding silently down from each eye."
I read in the paper a quote saying something to the effect of Americans don't want shared sacrifice (to solve our debt problems), they want shared prosperity. In the example above, I think the field hand would have been satisfied with enough grain to get his family through the winter. Is that shared prosperity? Sort of, but it's not like the field hand was asking for a $400,000 yacht or a $2 billion tax break. He was asking for the means to support his family. I think that's what we're all striving for today - enough to take care of the ones you love if you've worked & earned the right to have it.
Out of Money & Options
The Sicilian Mafia was born out of serfdom because the Barons who ran the estates paid the Serfs almost nothing, sharing little of the prosperity the Serfs had produced from their land. Page 41 of Mike Dash's book reprints a police officer's letter from Sicily from 1860 illustrating the injustice:
"it hurts to see some of the scenes you come across when you live here like I do. One hot day in July...I was on a long march with my men. We stopped for a rest by a farmyard where they were dividing the grain harvest. I went in to ask for some water. The measuring had just finished, and the peasant had been left with no more than a small mound. Everything else had gone to his boss. The peasant stood with his hands and chin planted on the long handle of a shovel. At first, as if stunned, he stared at his share. Then he looked at his wife and four or five small children, thinking that after a year of sweat and hardship all he had left to feed his family with was that heap of grain. He seemed like a man set in stone. Except that tear was gliding silently down from each eye."
I read in the paper a quote saying something to the effect of Americans don't want shared sacrifice (to solve our debt problems), they want shared prosperity. In the example above, I think the field hand would have been satisfied with enough grain to get his family through the winter. Is that shared prosperity? Sort of, but it's not like the field hand was asking for a $400,000 yacht or a $2 billion tax break. He was asking for the means to support his family. I think that's what we're all striving for today - enough to take care of the ones you love if you've worked & earned the right to have it.
How Europe sees America
A reporter by the name of Holger Zschapitz wrote in Germany's Welt am Sonntag, "Europeans are aghast at America's reckless spending and refusal to raise taxes. Yet what we see as a moral failing is really the consequence of a very different historical experience. Europeans have bitter memories of the hyperinflation that followed both world wars, so we have made monetary stability the primary goal of our central bank. Americans, by contrast, were traumatized by the Great Depression, so to avoid unemployment they pursue 'growth at any cost,' which means running up ever greater debts. Fortunately, the U.S. also has a strong tradition of 'inventiveness and entrepreneurship.' So far, it has always been able to grow its way out of debt. Let's hope it hasn't lost that 'spirit of innovation.' "
Wednesday, May 4, 2011
Deaf Republicans
Wednesday, April 13, 2011
50th Anniversary of President Eisenhower's Warning
As I follow the fierce negotiations on this week on cutting the national debt I am struck (awestruck really) that both parties and the President have not even considered cutting the Defense Departments budget as part of the equation. In fact the Pentagon's budget will be increased this year by 5 billion. Republicans rail on and on about "Entitlement programs" of Medicare and Medicaid while we continue to fund 2 foreign wars and 700 military bases. Just a decade ago before 9-11 the Defense budget was considered bloated and out of control. The BRAC committee was looking for ways to cut redundant military bases and programs. Since then the defense budget has been increased every year, bankrupting our country along with the housing crisis and bail outs of Wall Street and AIG. Why is this? According to many military experts, spending billions on massive military programs and invading Iraq and Afghanistan has done nothing to make us more secure from terrorism. What it has done is make a lot of beltway bandit military contractors very rich. I think its time America remembered the warning of its most famous 5 Star General, hero of WWII and President - Dwight D. Eisenhower. Fifty years ago in his farewell speech to the country, President Eisenhower addressed the dangers of the corrupting influence such a powerful triumvirate could have on government:
"A vital element in keeping the peace is our military establishment. Our arms must be mighty, ready for instant action, so that no potential aggressor may be tempted to risk his own destruction.
Our military organization today bears little relation to that known by any of my predecessors in peacetime, or indeed by the fighting men of World War II or Korea.
Until the latest of our world conflicts, the United States had no armaments industry. American makers of plowshares could, with time and as required, make swords as well. But now we can no longer risk emergency improvisation of national defense; we have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions. Added to this, three and a half million men and women are directly engaged in the defense establishment. We annually spend on military security more than the net income of all United States corporations.
This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence -- economic, political, even spiritual -- is felt in every city, every State house, every office of the Federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society.
In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the militaryindustrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.
We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.
Akin to, and largely responsible for the sweeping changes in our industrial-military posture, has been the technological revolution during recent decades.
In this revolution, research has become central; it also becomes more formalized, complex, and costly. A steadily increasing share is conducted for, by, or at the direction of, the Federal government.
Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has been overshadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories and testing fields. In the same fashion, the free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research. Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity. For every old blackboard there are now hundreds of new electronic computers.
The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present
and is gravely to be regarded. Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientifictechnological elite.
It is the task of statesmanship to mold, to balance, and to integrate these and other forces, new and old, within the principles of our democratic system -- ever aiming toward the supreme goals of our free society."
"A vital element in keeping the peace is our military establishment. Our arms must be mighty, ready for instant action, so that no potential aggressor may be tempted to risk his own destruction.
Our military organization today bears little relation to that known by any of my predecessors in peacetime, or indeed by the fighting men of World War II or Korea.
Until the latest of our world conflicts, the United States had no armaments industry. American makers of plowshares could, with time and as required, make swords as well. But now we can no longer risk emergency improvisation of national defense; we have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions. Added to this, three and a half million men and women are directly engaged in the defense establishment. We annually spend on military security more than the net income of all United States corporations.
This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence -- economic, political, even spiritual -- is felt in every city, every State house, every office of the Federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society.
In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the militaryindustrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.
We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.
Akin to, and largely responsible for the sweeping changes in our industrial-military posture, has been the technological revolution during recent decades.
In this revolution, research has become central; it also becomes more formalized, complex, and costly. A steadily increasing share is conducted for, by, or at the direction of, the Federal government.
Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has been overshadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories and testing fields. In the same fashion, the free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research. Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity. For every old blackboard there are now hundreds of new electronic computers.
The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present
and is gravely to be regarded. Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientifictechnological elite.
It is the task of statesmanship to mold, to balance, and to integrate these and other forces, new and old, within the principles of our democratic system -- ever aiming toward the supreme goals of our free society."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)