Woodgate's View
"You're not making an impact if you're not pissing someone off"

Monthly Archives: May 2011

Fantasy Games Hard for Boys to Put Down

May 31, 2011

Here’s one of those news items that flash past you with all the bigger more important things as you peruse the headlines that makes you do a double take and then stop you in your tracks to say,  “WTF?!?”

A study … conducted by Divorce Online … [found that of the] women who cited unreasonable behavior for their divorce, fifteen percent said their partners put gaming before them.

Just a year ago only about five percent believed that. Many specifically blamed the games ‘World of Warcraft’ and ‘Call Of Duty’.  SOURCE

Boys playing games into their 20’s and 30’s is simply a factor of who matures earliest – men or women.  According to Dr. LouAnn Brizendine, a neuropsychiatrist and author of the new book, “The Female Brain”, women are.  They also think of sex way less than boys do and this may contribute to why boys fill time with games.

It would be interesting to see if there is a correlation between those 15% who sue for divorce because their male spouses play games too much and how often they deny sex to men when the urge hits the male.  This isn’t something that women should be expected to subject themselves to but it might explain why a divorce was pursued as a result of adolescent male warrior fantasies instead of being caught cheating on his wife.

Ladies, here’s a clue that special guy may not be mister right or even ready for a serious relationship.  If he asks you to be his Guinevere to his Sir Lancelot and plans the wedding and reception at Medieval Times Dinner & Tournament and then suggest a honeymoon in costume at Scarborough Faire, run away.  Unless of course you share similar fantasies.  Just expect to play the tavern wench on occasion

Speaking about male immaturity.

  

Rep. Anthony Weiner and his wife, Huma Abedin. (Charles Dharapak, File / AP Photo)

Anthony Weiner ‘s Twitter account was hacked and someone sent a lewd photo over it of, you guessed it, an image referencing his last name.  To be more specific it was “a man’s bulging underpants”, according to an AP report.    NY Congressman Anthony Weiner has been the butt of jokes since he was kid about his last name but says he has been able to deal with it and is seldom bothered when people today chuckle or giggle upon hearing his name.

“Weiner spokesman Dave Arnold said the Democrat believes it was a prank but he’s retained a lawyer to advise him on what civil or criminal actions should be taken.”  Before the image could be removed it was tweeted to a female college student in Seattle.  However, it wasn’t removed quick enough before the story was all over the web and other social media.

You might be asking yourself about this time who would conceivably pull such a sophomoric prank.  Surely none of his close friends would risk the results that such an impropriety would effect?  But the answer is really not that far away when you discover that the “tweet of the lewd photo first was reported Saturday by BigGovernment.com, a website run by conservative commentator Andrew Breitbart.”

If the name Andrew Breitbart doesn’t ring a bell at first then perhaps the name of the phony right-wing journalist James O’Keefe and his edited “expose” about ACORN will ring abell.  O’Keefe was a protege of Andrew Breitbart when the ACORN incident occurred.

Breitbart was also the man behind the edited tape of Shirley Sherrod, a USDA state director in Georgia giving a speech at the NAACP’s 20th Annual Freedom Fund Banquet last March, which cherry picked comments of hers portraying her as a racist.  When the entire tape of Ms. Sherrod’s comments at the banquet were revealed  it was clear that Breitbart had intended to defame yet another segment of the black community as he did with ACORN.

Apparently Breitbart has advanced beyond the fantasy warrior games that get men divorced from their ignored wives and moved into an even bigger fantasy world that has him attempting to destroy real lives with trumped-up charges.  But what else can you do when you have a small penis yourself?  Answer: poke fun at someone whose name reminds you of your own inadequacies?

Breitbart and Friend

Posted by in People, Society and Politics Tags: ,

7 comments

The State of Bubba

May 30, 2011

I have a member of my North Texas community who frequently writes to the Letters to the Editor column often accusing the President, the Democrats and liberals of every social and economic ill we come face to face with and many that are not so apparent.  Such people are to be expected and suffered in Red State Texas and in a Country where Republicans tend to win victories by no less than 60% of the vote.  It is some relief however to watch and read their positions on issues as they serve as comic relief and show what a bad education will produce.

This woman I refer to, Alice Gore, always uses an imaginary character she calls “Bubba” to describe her views as if it served to show that basic, down-to-earth folk can see simple truths to complex issues.  She fails to understand that to many of us, Bubba comes across as a  more simple-minded rube who limits his knowledge to the very small world of his/her making.  In her letter to the editor today, Gore’s Bubba character  tells us, as he has on more than one occasion, that high gas prices are the result of “super-strict environmental controls”.  At the heart of all this is an agenda by people who align themselves with “rabid environmental groups” like the Sierra Club and of course, liberal Democrats.

I have learned that Ms. Gore, aka “Bubba”, lives on several acres in a relatively tranquil country environment just south of town and apparently doesn’t suffer as greatly from the failures of industries that pollute our air and water as some of her neighbors do, specifically those who chose to allow natural gas drilling on their large estates or are victim to wells near their property.  I’m sure if she had, she would be the type who would be amongst those demanding that the government agencies responsible for oversight of these industries do something to correct this problem.

In a community less than 10 miles as the crow flies from Ms. Gore is Dish, Texas.  Dish gained national notoriety in Josh Fox’s Oscar-nominated film “Gasland”.  Dish has about 11 gas compression stations in close proximity to each other and equally close to the small number of people who live there.  When the state’s Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) failed to act aggressively on concerns with Dish citizens about potential health hazards related to these gas compression stations, the Mayor of Dish got authorization to spend 15 percent of its $70,000 annual budget on a private environmental consultant.

Their findings were dangerously startling as it showed extremely high levels of both carcinogens and neurotoxins.  When this made the news state-wide the TCEQ finally did respond and they also found “the presence of benzene, a potentially cancer-causing toxin detected near the compressors”.

The effects of these toxins to their community, who had no history of serious health issues up until the time that these wells were drilled, impacted the residents of Dish in remarkable ways.  One such family are the Collins.

“Megan Collins, a 32-year-old pediatric nurse, lived with her husband, a firefighter, and their two small children downwind from the compressors. She started having unexplainable symptoms: headaches, dizziness, blackouts, muscle contractions. She got test after test while her condition worsened, but she never really worried about the compression stations.  ‘We just always constantly heard the noise and constantly smelled the fumes, Ms. Collins stated in a report by public radio NPR. But every time we would ask, they would always just say that it was normal’.” (Health Issues Follow natural Gas Drilling in Texas by Josh Burnett, NPR, 11/3/09) 

But for Ms. Gore’s, this is not a concern because she and her family have not felt the ill effects of some of the gas wells and compression stations just a few miles south of them along U.S. Hwy. 377.  This tends to be the case to where some areas, depending on their location and how often wind circulation shifts, are not as easily affected by leaks at compression stations and the well heads themselves.  Ms. Gore would be more willing to buy into the claims of natural gas spokespeople like Terri Lawson with Enbridge Energy who says their company is “in compliance with state regulations. We are concerned about this issue, Ms. Enbridge declares. We are investigating it fully. We have been responsive. We’ll continue to be responsive to requests from Mayor Tillman and our neighbors.”

The key factor from Ms. Lawson’s claim is that they are “in compliance with state regulations”.  This fact seems to presume that Texas and it’s oversight agency of oil and natural gas well, the TCEQ, have amply mandated and enforce rules that prevent problems of the nature found in Dish as well as other areas throughout the state.

In the NPR report it points out that “most of the concern in Texas is focused on air emissions more than noise, which is scarcely regulated in rural areas. The worry is that compression stations may individually meet state and federal regulations for air emissions, but what’s the cumulative effect of a complex like the one at Dish?”

Al Armendariz an environmental engineer at Southern Methodist University in Dallas says that “If you were to aggregate the emissions from all of these 11 compressor engines and all of the associated piping and meters and valves and everything else at these facilities, you can get a significant source of emissions, hundreds of tons per year.”

Mr. Armendariz wrote a widely circulated report earlier this year. “He estimated gas production, processing, and transmission in the Barnett Shale produces nearly as much air pollution as all the region’s vehicle traffic. State regulators validated his numbers.”  And yet the state has taken no quantitative action to ameliorate the problem in a state where gas and oil industry lobbyists have tight connections with Republican majorities in both the state House and Senate along with a very industry-friendly Governor Rick Perry

To highlight this is the state’s attempt to prevent the Environmental Protection Agency to enforce rules that govern CO2 emissions in the state.  Every other state has accepted the EPA’s authority on this but Rick Perry and Republicans legislators are trying to gain points with the extreme Tea Party elements in the state rather demonstrating a legitimate concern for its citizens.

Sharon Wilson who keeps Texans in the Barnett Shale updated about issues central to natural gas wells and their fracking practices on her Bluedaze website illustrates the inefficiencies of TCEQ.  Last year Sharon studied records that showed complaints to the TCEQ from people within only 6 counties in the Barnett Shale; Tarrant, Denton, Wise, Johnson, Parker, Hood and Erath.  Denton is my county as it is with Ms. Gore’s Bubba.  Of some nearly 900 complaints between January through July 23rd Sharon could only find 3 violations cited by the TCEQ, or as she has stated, “the TCEQ found nothing wrong 99% of the time.

Ms. Gore and her demonstrable “Bubba” mentality reflects a mental block that wants to promote ideology over research and science.  To express as she does that policies enacted by the Obama administration are responsible for high prices ignores the fact that higher gas prices were in place while George Bush was still in office in 2008 and the weight the financial crisis was creating havoc in all of the markets.

The higher gas prices, then as they are now, are in large part due to market forces the President and liberal Democrats have no power over and are unwilling to regulate.  In a letter to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), Better Markets, Inc.,  a nonprofit organization that promotes the public interest in the capital and commodity markets, including in particular the rule making process associated with the Dodd‐Frank Act, validated through extensive analysis and empirical data, the following facts:

  • speculation in commodity markets has dramatically increased and is excessive;
  • excessive speculation has caused increased volatility and increased prices in the  future markets;
  •  price increases in the futures markets directly affect physical market prices and, thereby, have increased prices in the underlying commodities;
  • while increased volatility and prices have increased the need for hedging by physical producers and purchases, the increased costs to such hedgers as a result of the above have caused physical producers and purchasers to hedge less.   SOURCE

The goofy notion that we as a state or even as a nation can control global oil markets is as naive as it is absurd.  To attempt to do so would also run against the “free market” values of people like Ms. Gore that takes a rigid hands-off approach of governments over private enterprises.

Ms. Gore wants to compel those who support serious enforcement of existing regulations and improve what is lacking to sufficiently do this to identify themselves with environmental groups in order to “give the readers an idea of what [their] real agenda is.”  Surely she’s not suggesting that environmentalist and liberals seek to intentionally raise gas prices that they too must deal with?  How would she connect such illogical conclusions with any reality based hypothesis?  That of course would be the comic relief aspect of reading such people in the Letters column.

But I for one would gladly show my alliances with people like the Sierra Club and the Natural Resources Defense Council.  I would also ask that people like Ms. Gore who oppose such groups show their allegiance to the fossil fuels industry by revealing how much stock they hold in the Petrol Industry.

Posted by in Energy, Texas/Local stories Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

6 comments

Is the Change We Voted for in 2008 Finally Gaining Some Footing?

May 28, 2011

In his Presidential campaign Obama promised voters “Change We Can Believe In” but did the economic down spiral generated long before his inauguration negatively impact his effectiveness and the voters’ patience?

The rhetoric of campaigns and campaign speeches are all too familiar to most of us who listen intently to politicians and their spin-meisters.  Inherent in all campaigns is the theme of change, either progressive change – “fulfilling our destiny” – or a regressive motif – “reclaiming our country”, “restoring our values”.  

It’s a premise that for some presumes everything that came before was not good enough and better days lie ahead, while for others it is the reverse – returning to “a better and simpler America”.  Both have appeal and both have an element of truth to them.

Change in any direction has to be gradual to allow all of us time to readjust our thinking and our way of life.  Change has to overcome the obstacles that remain once we have chosen change.  These obstacles don’t magically disappear just because we have cast our vote for change.  Those who have created those obstacles don’t fade away at a whim.  One person’s obstacle is another’s sanctuary and fortress to fight from.

Now as apparent as this simple logic is to most people it is still difficult for a lot of them to be patient and allow change to become fully manifested.  The initial energy of those who voted for change in 2008 needs to be sustained in order to effectively and more quickly push those ideas of change over the barriers that stand in the way.  We mustn’t lose sight either that holding on to some traditions and cultural values has it place in a dynamic life cycle that alters civilization over time.  The value and tradition of assisting others who are unable to or who have fallen on hard times is a well-established part of our heritage.

Our efforts to bring about the change we want must also be prepared to deal with distractions from our opponents that would weaken our overall efforts.  The notion that budget deficits at this time are more important than job creation and fixing Social Security as baby boomers hit retirement age is a distraction being used by the GOP.

Change is inevitable and the best we can hope for is that we are able to control it at a reasonable level and not become so overwhelmed that we disengage from it.  Humans have foibles though. We tend to lose our focus when shiny objects are put in front of us.

This is where we stand today as a nation.  In 2008 we made a vote for change to correct the flaws and failures of Republican led government that converted a large budget surplus to a record deficit , started a very needless, expensive and life consuming war in Iraq, created the widest income gap yet in our history, invaded our privacy and damaged our international credentials with almost everyone, including many long-time allies.

The hands-off approach that allowed banks to fraudulently transfer great amounts of wealth from our savings to their tax-deferred offshore accounts caused the Great Recession of 2008 and saw job loss rates that hadn’t been seen in over a quarter of a century.  As businesses suffered and people lost their source of revenue many middle-income families saw their retirement futures, their college funds for their kids and their homes disappear.  Some will never regain what they once had.

But the short memories of many Americans of what and who brought us to this level seems to kick in at the least appropriate times.   Accompanying this mental fog was the outrage many were feeling from the economic losses they were personally experiencing.  Some who voted for change got swept up in the astroturf Tea Party euphoria that clamored to “throw the bums out” while others simply stayed home feeling rejected by President Obama and the Democrats they helped elect.  It didn’t dawn on these overactive and non-active players who helped the GOP regain the House last fall, until it was too late, to realize they had not allowed their choice in 2008 the time it needed to work its way through a gridlocked political system.

The slow effects of corrupt financial institutions and politicians under the Bush White House and GOP majorities during the first eight years of this century did not get a full head of steam until just before they were booted out in 2008.  The greatest  impact of their misguided  economic policies was only felt after power transferred to the Democrats on January 29th, 2009.  But this reality was lost behind a well-funded and highly effective bogus message conveyed by the GOP to a beleaguered voting public about who was responsible.

This overall bogus message was given most of its clarity when the government bailed out those poorly managed financial institutions under both the Bush and Obama administrations as low and middle-income working families were pretty much left to fend for themselves.  The perception however that was presented by Republican losers of the 2006 and 2008 elections was that the new administration was more at fault than anything they had done.  To win re-election Republicans had to conceal any hand they had in the misery many Americans found themselves faced with while portraying themselves as agents of change that would “restore America to its greatness”.

The rhetoric of campaigns and campaign speeches that are all too familiar to most of us  is in play again and may well again have its impact on voters who can’t seem to really think beyond their immediate circumstances and concerns.  Some are like the easily distracted Golden Retriever, Dug, in the Disney animated movie, “UP”! whose attention span changed instantly at the thought of a “squirrel?!?”    Holding to the belief that all things worth changing takes time is difficult in a culture where rapid responses are prevalent in all genres of human activity.

 

The reality that consumer needs are met in mere hours, minutes and seconds gets misplaced with political issues that have more lasting impact than those seeking to satisfy our empty stomachs or images of what will appeal to the opposite sex at tonight’s party.  Things like world peace, national budgets, effective, low-cost heath care and environmental hazards brought on by an eagerness of some to become independently wealthy require more than a day, week, month or a year to correct.  This is a lifetime to many people who have come to expect all things to change yesterday.

This short-sightedness by some voters has threatened the security of many elderly and low-income families as newly elected Tea Party-type politicians swept into office and began attempts to dismantle those social networks that serve the needs of seniors, children and the disabled.  It has put our kids at risk as school budgets are slashed, putting teachers and staff in unemployment lines while expanding classroom sizes to meet state budgets that were undermined by tax cuts too deep in earlier years at the hands of the GOP.  To pour salt into these wounds, tax subsidies for profitable corporations are sustained as well as avoiding needed spending cuts with a bloated Defense Department.  The revenue these actions would create for Education and Medicare budgets are ignored by complicit conservative legislators.

The budget is now more serious in the minds of Republican and Tea Party fanatics than it was when Dick Cheney declared it wasn’t back in 2001.  This phony dread generated by the GOP and their corporate backers has molded the misplaced idea that only cuts to the “welfare state” can save us, despite the fact that these programs have worked relatively well in times past WHEN they were appropriately funded.  The corrections needed to make Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid more solvent are part of the health care reform bill passed last year by then Democratic majorities but are now being repealed by the new GOP majority in the House.

Our debt crisis isn’t solely the result of providing needed services for those who cannot physically meet their own needs but is more the result of drastic tax cuts for the wealthiest among us and a needless war in Iraq that had to be paid for by borrowed money from abroad.  Instead of generating revenue here at home to pay as you go, the Republicans voted for hefty tax cuts for the wealthiest 2% that required borrowing money from the likes of China and Germany.

So as another campaign year rolls around the rhetoric that “deficits are bad” is dusted off to distract voters from what is most on their minds.  Where are those who promised that “priority one is jobs!”  Budgets are a smokescreen by corporate-friendly legislators to dance around high unemployment rates that are deeper than they were during the high rate periods under Reagan.

The GOP has released its comic book plan to restore jobs nearly six months after taking office and it is nothing more than a revisit to the failed policies of the past.  To declare in their opening statement that “Democrats in Washington have enacted policies that undermine [the] basic concepts of … free markets, free enterprise, innovation and entrepreneurship” is laughable in light of the fact that the “free market system” failed under their watch while they deregulated everything.

 

Opportunities that Republicans have side stepped to create more jobs include a failure to vote for tax breaks for small businesses, assisting them offset their expenses with health care coverage for employees and ignoring the high potential for 21st century jobs in the fields that address our energy needs – developing the technology to produce clean, renewable energy sources of wind, solar and hydro power.

These failures, along with the Ryan plan to kill Medicare as we know it may prove to be too much to fool voters yet again.  The recent outcries about such things at GOP town hall meetings and the election of a Democrat in a historically Republican district in New York state last Thursday could well be signaling that the change many expected in 2008 is still in play and making its way to the front of the line.

Let’s hope this is true and that people are willing to give the Democrats and the White House enough time to justify their 2008 decision.  Lets also hope that the Democrats and the White House will not miss this opportunity to better fulfill their obligations and promises the electorate expect from them.

Related articles

Posted by in 2012 Presidential Elections, Budget Crisis, Economy, Health Care Reform, Society and Politics Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

4 comments

To Not Die in Vain

May 27, 2011

Yet another Memorial Day rolls around
With each flag placed neatly on rounded mound
Of those lying silent beneath the ground.

There lies each woman and man
Who perished in a distant land
For things we seldom understand.

We hear the reasons given to make us proud
With pomp and circumstance they’re said aloud
But heard no more under covered shroud.

If die they must it should be clear,
Our cause is just and sincere
To promote a world free from fear.

We cannot throw away good souls
For extraneous reasons given by those
Who only gain and never lose.

Young men and women cannot be fodder
Thrown into battle and led to slaughter
By those who sacrifice neither son nor daughter.

Let wars be executed if we must
But for reasons that are just;
Anything less violates a sacred trust.

This great nation has always stood
As a standard for each who would
Treat all equally and promote what’s good.

For all have a stake in what’s celebrated this day,
That loss of life that has given way
To prevent future wars so we can say,

The peace we know came at high cost
Through human sacrifice and loss
So tomorrow’s children will benefit most.

Let it be clear we are here today
To seek a path, a certain way;
That war no longer serves as a need to pray.

Posted by in National Holiday Tags: , , , , , , ,

3 comments

Our Meat Might Not Moo in the Furture

May 25, 2011

My friend Donna Cavanagh is having difficulty in deciding if her meat should come from a petri dish or the animal warehouses.  


Getting ready to chomp down on your first juicy burger of the barbecue season?  Well, right now you know where that meat came from, but in a few years, that might not be the case. Yes, the scientific community, and it is a community — not just one rogue scientist hiding away in Norway or Sweden somewhere, is developing test tube meat.  Technically, it’s more of a Petri dish meat, but the concept is the same.

This is how it works: Cells are grown into muscle tissue which eventually becomes edible meat.  For lab meat to be feasible, the muscle tissue has to be stimulated to grow much like human muscles need to be stimulated or exercised in order to grow. While scientists have so far grown a piece of meat the size of a contact lens, they realize that this is not going to feed the world.  They are investigating a variety of cost-effective methods that will grow muscle tissue that will lead to steak and burgers that most of us will be proud to eat.

I know that your first reaction is “Yuck!”  When we bite into that cheeseburger or hot dog we want to know that at one time it went “Moo” or whatever sound a hot dog makes before it becomes a hot dog. We want to know for some warped reason that our food was alive and kicking.  Scientists do say that the Petri dish meat offers many advantages to real-animal meat. First, it will eliminate or at least greatly reduce the need for slaughterhouses, and that’s a nice thing. I admit that I am an omnivore hypocrite. I like a good burger once in awhile but I don’t want to know what happened to that meat before it wound up on my plate. I like the fact that by the time I get the burger, it is all nicely cooked and sitting on a bun with no sign of a head or a hoof.  This is why I can’t go to pig roasts. I don’t want to see an entire pig sitting in front of me waiting to be carved.

I went to a roast once, not knowing that the whole pig would be displayed on the table, and I literally got queasy when people started to slice into it.  I have friends who have pigs for pets, and when I saw that roasted pig’s face, it was like my pig friends were looking at me and crying, “Why, Donna Why?”

Scientists also argue that lab meat will help to reduce gas emissions. At first I thought they were talking about gas emitted from animals but it turns out they are talking about the gas-house emissions that result from the resources needed to sustain the agricultural industry. And reducing emissions would be a good thing too, but I still have questions about this process.

What happens to all the animals? Are they all unemployed then?  Are they put on strict birth control regimens so they only produce one calf or pig or chick because there is no reason for them to really reproduce?  If they are not going to be fast food meals for us, are they not going to exist?  Will the expense to keep them on farms outweigh their usefulness?

My next concern is this: As the generations go on and view lab meat as their primary food source, will our descendents not realize that meat came from animals?  And what about the deer that are out there? Don’t you think they are going to feel slighted?  Sure, the cows and pigs get out of being slaughtered, but the deer run free. Hunters are not going to want to go into a lab and shoot a Petri dish?  Somehow, I think that might take the thrill of the hunt away.

Lastly, what about the farmers and ranchers? What happens to them?  Does Mr. Perdue go out of business?  What about the cattle ranchers out west?  Do they convert their ranches and chicken farms to labs? Will they make the lab meat?  I will admit that the Petri Dish lab meat has promise, but there are a lot of issues that need to worked out before I toss one of these puppies – and I don’t mean that literally – on the grill.

 Donna is a published humorists who has written two books - “Reality: Fantasy’s Evil Twin” now available on Amazon and “Life on the Off Ramp” She is also the author of “Poems for a Positive Day II” which like her “Life on the Off Ramp” was named as award-winning finalists of the Best Books 2010 Awards, sponsored by USA Book News. She is also a featured guest humor writer for More.com and Divine Caroline as well.  She can now add to her list of accomplishments as creator and a contributor to HumorOutcasts.com

Posted by in Humor, Our crazy and wonderful world Tags: , , , ,

3 comments

Liberty and Freedom in America Still Have Barriers to Overcome

May 24, 2011

A piece by Leonard Pitts on the editorial page of my hometown newspaper highlighted an event that on the surface appears anti-climatic but represents an event that was history making and changed the social structure for blacks in the South and around the country.  It was a tribute to those Freedom Riders 50 years ago who were intent, as Pitts says, to “take up the mission of testing segregation ordinances in the South”.  Five who survive today rode into New Orleans a week ago on a bus that preceded this generation’s Freedom Riders, “a group of college kids who have joined this commemorative voyage”.

I wasn’t quite 13 years old in that deadly summer of 1961 but I recall it vividly and the conflicting feelings I had about racial inequality at the time.  As a product of the South I was all too familiar with the prejudices of whites toward blacks yet as a devout Catholic at the time I couldn’t mesh the attitudes of bigots with the biblical New testament teachings I was raised with.  Kennedy was then President and as a fellow Catholic, along with his brother Robert, they gave me some encouragement to follow my feelings that race discrimination was wrong.  Why, I would ask myself did blacks have to sit at the back of the bus, drink from separate public water fountains and use separate public bathroom facilities if Jesus himself associated with beggars, prostitutes and tax collectors?  These people had character flaws for society to object to.  Blacks simply were scorned because of their color.

I was also familiar enough with American history that spoke to the equality of all men and women.  Yet I would see community leaders viciously condemn those blacks who expected their fair share of civil rights along with whites who either lived amongst us (they were few and far between) or who traveled from outside our cultural boundaries and stood up to the racial hatred represented in the acts and comments of people like George Wallace, Bull Connor and Lester Maddox.

I eventually reconciled myself to the movement and identified with those few whites who supported the efforts of Martin Luther King and other blacks, if in spirit only.  When called a “nigger lover” by an acquaintance on one occasion I retorted “No, I’m not.  I’m just not a ‘nigger’ hater”.    The “N” word was used too loosely then.  It seemed at the time to validate what we were all taught in our church services about Paul’s gospel of love and our American heritage initiated by disenfranchised groups who fled Europe for a better life.

It’s hard to think at one time in my life that an event as simple as people coming into Southern cities to encourage those principles that we were all raised with would wound up facing violent objections by people familiar to me.  The remnants of such racial prejudice are still with us in the South and other parts of the country but they are now the exception rather than the norm.

Blacks have made great strides in personal freedom since those days.  Other than the occasional action or comment by a few bigots who get way too much media attention, there is little left to resemble the division that once existed in its place just two generations ago.  Today however, we run up against new barriers within society that discriminate against people for their religious views, economic condition or their partner lifestyle choices.

The same moral standards that were in place back in 1961 that eventually convinced the majority of people to do the right thing are still present today.  But their presence alone is insufficient to sway the minority who insists that only one religion should dominate, that profit motives should have precedence over need and that anything other than heterosexual relationships are strictly verboten.  It will once again take the physical efforts of those willing to sacrifice the verbal and sometimes physical assaults by those who fear change; a change that simply asks that they do to others what they expect for themselves and fully grasp Jefferson’s words that ALL men and women are created equal.

 

There are those who would argue that full liberty and freedom for all doesn’t mean we  should trash traditional values.  I would agree.  But I would also add that traditional values that are only  designed for a select few are not morally based.  Only values that are inclusive of all people in all walks of life at their heart are morally sound.

People who cheat, steal and hurt others physically and emotionally exists within all cultures.  ALL of them.  We shouldn’t exclude those cultures because some of their members are defective nor should we presume that such social defects are beyond human and divine grace.  The energy we waste building walls demonstrates to those who have yet attained our level of freedom that perhaps democracy is not all it’s cracked up to be so why bother.  It’s a work in progress that must be dealt with everyday in every corner of our society.

We are coming up on Memorial Day that salutes the lives of men who, we are told, died that we may keep and extend our freedoms.  Let’s hope we eventually live up to their sacrifice and not sully their death with shallow exceptions to the concept of liberty and justice for all.

Posted by in History, Society and Politics Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

1 comment

Abnormal Extreme Weather Threatens a Rise in Property Insurance Rates

May 23, 2011

I’ve made numerous references in my posts on this blog about the association between fossil fuel use, how it affects our health and how that impacts our health care costs.  I have been adamant on the use of coal-fired power plants and their harmful emissions that create greater risks for lung disease and those who have allergies.

Studies show that coal dust causes pneumoconiosis, bronchitis and emphysema in exposed workers.  The waste products coal production produces include uranium, thorium, and other radioactive and heavy metal by-products along with  toxic metalloids like arsenic.  These toxic elements make their way into the local drinking water supplies and the air we all breathe, creating long-term health issues and drive up health care costs for all Americans.    SOURCE

The point I was trying to make and continue to make is that for those who feel that it’s cheaper to persist in using cheaper sources of energy like coal, oil and natural gas that emit toxic pollutants in our air, drinking water and the earth’s atmosphere are missing the bigger issue and the effects it has on each individual’s pocketbook.  The costs we may be saving now by using fossil fuel energy sources will not last as this limited source of energy is diminishing rapidly as demand from China and India develop rapidly.

There is now another cost reason we need to distance ourselves from fossil fuels as fast as we can.  It’s related to the increased rate of extreme weather we are experiencing – property insurance rates.  The severe weather we saw last year and are seeing this year are creating property damages at extensive rates that neither the businesses, homeowners or the insurance industry themselves anticipated.

The extreme weather of 2010 exacted a huge human and economic toll.  More than 380 people died and 1,700 were injured due to weather events in the United States throughout the year. And the magnitude of these events forced the Federal Emergency Management Agency, or FEMA, to declare 81 disasters last year. For nearly 60 years, the annual average has been 33. In 2010, total damages exceeded a whopping $6.7 billion. As of April 2011, FEMA had dedicated more than $2 billion in financial assistance to those harmed by extreme weather in 2010.  SOURCE

This year alone we are on pace to register about 100 declared disasters with 36 on record as of May 20th.   The recent southeastern storms and tornadoes took at least 297 lives across eight states and the tornado that ripped through Joplin Missouri yesterday has thus far claimed 116 lives; a combined figure that already exceeds last year’s 297 count.  In Joplin, 25-30 percent of businesses and homes were destroyed and untold damage to vehicular property.

The Property Insurance Industry has been hit hard and are at a loss on how best to deal with potential future cost from extreme weather.

It’s a tough time to be in the $500 billion U.S. property insurance business. Storms are happening in places they never happened before, at intensities they have never reached before and at times of year when they didn’t used to happen.

Those bizarre weather patterns damage not just homes but also insurance companies’ financials. If seas rise and houses flood, insurers pay. If winds shift and buildings blow down, they also pay. If temperatures rise and crops fail, same thing.  SOURCE

According to George Backus with the Discrete Mathematics & Complex Systems Department at Sandia National Laboratories, “the climate uncertainty as it pertains to rainfall alone [puts] the U.S. economy at risk of losing between $600 billion and $2 trillion, and between 4 million and 13 million U.S. jobs over the next 40 years.”

Thus far property insurers around the world have laid out payments to victims of extreme weather damage to the tune of $36 billion in just 2010 alone, according to Swiss Re a global reinsurer with focus on risk transfer, risk retention financing, and asset management.  Another reinsurer, Munich Re stated last year that “the only plausible explanation for the rise in weather-related catastrophes is climate change”.  Tom Wilson, the chairman and chief executive of Allstate, the largest publicly traded property insurer in the country agrees.  “Some people believe that [these cataclysmic storms are] because weather patterns have changed. I happen to be in that camp.  I just don’t think it should happen three years in a row.”

There of course is no absolute link between specific extreme weather conditions and  global warming but as Kevin Trenberth, Sc.D., head of the Climate Analysis Section at the National Center for Atmospheric Research, explained “Given that global warming is unequivocal, the null hypothesis should be that all weather events are affected by global warming rather than the inane statements along the lines of ‘of course we cannot attribute any particular weather event to global warming. [I]t’s not the right question to ask if this storm or that storm is due to global warming, or is it natural variability. Nowadays, there’s always an element of both.”

If the likelihood is that increased use of CO2 sources like coal, oil and natural gas are intensifying global warming, then by insisting that we should “drill baby, drill” instead of converting as quickly as possible to clean, renewable sources of energy, the argument that it’s cheaper to sustain the status quo will no longer have any merit as health and property insurance rates wipe out any temporary savings that people realize now from using dirty fossil fuels.  Not only that, our children and grandchildren will be faced with the destructive forces of nature from our short-sightedness as they will ultimately be forced to make this switch themselves simply because coal, oil and natural gas supplies will be pretty much used up by the end of this century.

 

RELATED ARTICLE:

A Link Between Climate Change and Joplin Tornadoes?  Never!

Posted by in Business/Jobs, Climate Science/Global Warming Tags: , , , , , , , ,

7 comments

Ben Stein: Master Jurist?

May 21, 2011

Dominique Strauss-Kahn, or DSK as he is known in France, may have acted too hastily in selecting his attorney to defend him against criminal charges of “oral sexual conduct and anal sexual conduct with another person by forcible compulsion” as it was stated in the official complaint.

Ben Stein, the pretentious lawyer turned actor turned amateur economist has interjected in this highly publicized ordeal and provided commentary for DSK’s defense that one would surely think originated from late night comics.  Stein allows that “it’s possible indeed, maybe even likely, that[DSK] is guilty as the prosecutors charged”, BUT lets look at some likely scenarios by Stein as someone who thinks Darwin’s theories led to the Nazi holocaust.

Stein: If he is such a womanizer and violent guy with women, why didn’t he ever get charged until now? If he has a long history of sexual abuse, how can it have remained no more than gossip this long? France is a nation of vicious political rivalries. Why didn’t his opponents get him years ago?  

Logical Response: DSK’s a billionaire.  Money often persuades people not to take legal action against powerful people and further jeopardizing their own future careers:  CASE IN POINT – “In Paris this week, a young journalist named Tristane Banon spoke up to say she had been sexually assaulted by Strauss-Kahn in 2002 when she interviewed him. He attacked her like “a rutting chimp,” she says, describing how he wrestled her to the floor, undoing her bra and trying to pull her blue jeans off before she managed to flee. Her mother dissuaded her from filing suit at the time, because there had not been an actual rape and public opinion would have sided with the great man.”  SOURCE 

Stein: In life, events tend to follow patterns. People who commit crimes tend to be criminals, for example. Can anyone tell me any economists who have been convicted of violent sex crimes? Can anyone tell me of any heads of nonprofit international economic entities who have ever been charged and convicted of violent sexual crimes? Is it likely that just by chance this hotel maid found the only one in this category? Maybe Mr. Strauss-Kahn is guilty but if so, he is one of a kind, and criminals are not usually one of a kind.

Logical Response: Right.  Upper income, highly educated types are rarely criminals.  I guess people like Ken Lay and Andy Fastow of ENRON fame, Bernie Madoff,Jack Abramoff, Richard Scrushy, Jeffery Skilling and Bernard Ebbers were just two-bit thugs robbing little old ladies’ purses on the street.

But if you want to get specific and declare that there are no ECONOMISTS who have committed violent crimes you might want to see the list below that Jon Stewart presented on his Daily Show Thursday evening (run timer to 3:00)

Richard Nyamwange – Former ESU Business Professor sentenced to state prison for sexual assault

*Robert Von Der Ohe – Former Rockford College Economics Professor who plead guilty to sexual abuse

*Robert Maubouche – Retired French Economist who worked at the World Bank convicted of sexually assaulting – wait for it – a housekeeper.

Then there are those guilty of crimes that regrettably have connections in high places where they can evade the long arm of the law.  Executives at AIG, Goldman Sachs, Lehman Brothers, JP Morgan Chase, Bank of America and Morgan Stanley through this country into an economic tailspin that lost millions there homes and their jobs for elaborate fraud and theft schemes yet not one of them will see a jail cell.  SOURCE

Stein: The prosecutors say that Mr. Strauss-Kahn “forced” the complainant to have oral and other sex with him. How? Did he have a gun? Did he have a knife? He’s a short fat old man. They were in a hotel with people passing by the room constantly, if it’s anything like the many hotels I am in. How did he intimidate her in that situation? And if he was so intimidating, why did she immediately feel un-intimidated enough to alert the authorities as to her story?

Logical Response: Perhaps the element of surprise is enough to distract a young foreign immigrant who has unintentionally in her duties as house a hotel maid walked in on others not bent upon raping her.  And hey, DSK ain’t that much older than me and when the adrenaline gets flowing in my veins I can wrestle a smaller frightened chicken to the floor, especially if I haven’t eaten in three days.  And do people really pass by luxury suites constantly – at lunch time, when the assault occurred?  And lastly, unlike other women who have been assaulted by DSK, this housekeeper had only her dignity to defend, not a lucrative career in the IMF or politics.  Nothing that a billionaire can use here to intimidate this woman.  And does Stein think all women who may be intimidated are incapable of reporting such crimes against them so quickly?  What law course was that absolute theory under?

Stein: Did the prosecutors really convince a judge that he was a flight risk when he was getting on a flight he had booked long beforehand? What kind of high-pressure escape plan is that? How is it a sudden flight move to get on a flight booked maybe months ago?

Logical Response: Just a sneaking hunch that prosecutors made based on the hotel staff’s testimony that he appeared rushed as he checked out, was caught on a plane bound for France instead of Berlin where he had a scheduled appointment with German Chancellor Angela Merkel the next day and was still unshaven as he appeared in his bail request to the judge here.  

Stein: Mr. Strauss-Kahn had surrendered his passport. He had offered to stay in New York City. He is one of the most recognizable people on the planet. Did he really have to be put in Riker’s Island? Couldn’t he have been given home detention with a guard? This is a man with a lifetime of public service, on a distinguished level, to put it mildly. Was Riker’s Island really the place to put him on the allegations of one human being? Hadn’t he earned slightly better treatment than that? Any why compare him with a certain pedophile from France long ago? That man had confessed to his crime. Mr. Strauss-Kahn has not confessed to anything.

Logical Response: Yes, why should we treat “recognizable people with a lifetime of public service, on a distinguished level” in such an uncivilized manner?  It was an honest mistake that he has made numerous other times it appears and besides, the victims are always of questionable nature.  Especially young African females who are used to being raped and molested from their earliest days as a child. How could he have possibly known that his “amorous actions” would be misinterpreted by such a woman?  How gauche of us to treat a man this way who thinks his capacity in the IMF helping the impoverished of third world nations entails having his way them in his high dollar hotel suites.

Stein: People accuse other people of crimes all of the time. What do we know about the complainant besides that she is a hotel maid? I love and admire hotel maids. They have incredibly hard jobs and they do them uncomplainingly. I am sure she is a fine woman. On the other hand, I have had hotel maids that were complete lunatics, stealing airline tickets from me, stealing money from me, throwing away important papers, stealing medications from me. How do we know that this woman’s word was good enough to put Mr. Strauss-Kahn straight into a horrific jail? Putting a man in Riker’s is serious business. Maybe more than a few minutes of investigation is merited before it’s done.

Logical Response: Those “lunatic” hotel maids that you claim steal your airline tickets, money and medications while throwing away “important papers” were merely cleaning up after your overnight orgy with those high dollar prostitutes male and female.  You should really control yourself when your outof town promoting your hackneyed skills as an intelligent human being.  But still, let’s say this woman is guilty of doing these things to DSK, does that automatically follow that charges of rape are part of this deviant behavior too?

Stein: In this country, we have the presumption of innocence for the accused. Yet there’s my old pal from the Ron Ziegler/ Richard Nixon days, Diane Sawyer, anchor of the ABC Nightly News, assuming that Mr. Strauss-Kahn is guilty. Right off the bat she leads the Monday news by saying that Mr. Strauss-Kahn is in Riker’s… “because one woman stood her ground…” That assumes she’s telling the truth and he’s guilty. No such thing has been proved and it’s unfortunate for ABC to simply assume that an accusation is the same as a conviction. Maybe he’s in jail because one person didn’t tell the truth. I don’t know one way or the other, but I sure know that there has been no conviction yet.

Logical Response: Perhaps unlike you, Sawyer did her background check on this guy and found that he has a history of such deviant behavior and was simply implying that this woman was willing to take her charges to the public arena knowing that people like you would attack her personal character.

Stein: In what possible way is the price of the hotel room relevant except in every way: this is a case about the hatred of the have-nots for the haves, and that’s what it’s all about. A man pays $3,000 a night for a hotel room? He’s got to be guilty of something. Bring out the guillotine.

Logical Response:  Of course it is Ben.  The have-nots always exaggerate their claims about the haves, or as one of your fellow “have” types refers to the rest of as – “small people”.  You might want to allow for the possibility that journalist were just pointing out to what many Tea Party, small-minded people like you presume – that wealthy people are above reproach and should be extolled for their virtues and gifts of job-creation they bestow upon us. How wrong it is for any peon to believe that people of wealth use their money and influence to screw as many people as they can.  Oh, by the way, have you seen the latest report detailing how the income disparity between the haves and have-nots is wider than it has ever been?  Coincidence?

To be fair to Stein, he has often made rational statements that many of us can agree on but you have to wonder when he did if they were those times when hotel maids were not stealing his medications.

RELATED ARTICLE :

Creepy Ben Stein Defends Accused Rapist (http://jobsanger.blogspot.com/)

Posted by in Our crazy and wonderful world, People, Social Discourse, Television Tags: , , , , , , , ,

4 comments

Texas Tea Party and the Feds

May 20, 2011

Texas Governor Perry to Feds 6 months ago – “Get off our Back”

Texas Governor Perry to Feds Today – “Why haven’t you got our back?”


Remember the lines from Joni Mitchell’s 1970’s hit “The Big Yellow Cab”

Don’t it always seem to go,

That you don’t know what you’ve got till it’s gone.

It’s a song about how we gave up the natural beauty of our environment to build more malls, housing developments and parking lots.  But it’s not that far removed from how ultra conservatives in this state today have dismissed the need for shared responsibility between states and the federal government in times of crisis.

In a state where Republican Tea Partiers have gained dominance in the Texas legislature there is a glee of sorts that was recently expressed by Lt. Governor David Dewhurst that saw the funding gutted for schools and social services in the state as an opportunity.  “We pronounce the word C-R-I-S-I-S as ‘opportunity.’” Dewhurst said after winning his third term last fall.

Then voters  who supported Governor Rick Perry and Tea Party candidates were caught off guard when they discovered earlier this year that Texas has a $23 billion budget shortfall.  It had an unsettling affect on some who were given a rosy picture of the state’s economic condition by Perry and others prior to the elections last fall.  “We’re opened for business” Perry claimed in one campaign ad as the mounting economic crisis he helped create was looming in the wings.


This opportunity the Republicans are over-joyed about is the fact that their revenue sources are so deeply cut that they no longer can fund many education and social services programs like Medicare and Education at last year’s rates.  It has also left them short to care for their own citizens in natural disaster circumstances and matters of security.  But instead of realizing they have cut off their nose to spite their face they continue to insist that further tax cuts are needed, as they proceeded to give millionaires a tax break on yacht purchases.

The shoe is on the other foot now and the anti-government attitude of Tea Partiers in the state and their appeasing Governor are facing critical situations that require massive amounts of federal aid.  At a Tea Party meeting two years ago Perry told the enthusiastic crowd there that, “We think it’s time to draw the line in the sand and tell Washington that no longer are we going to accept their oppressive hand in the state of Texas.”

It appears now that it is this hand from the federal government that Perry so earnestly needs.  Last month Texas wildfires due to droughts devastated a good part of the state and the governor, who as rejected federal aid to help cover the increased need for Medicaid coverage and the unemployed in this state has asked FEMA for financial help in covering the losses of these natural disasters.  FEMA responded by “supporting the State of Texas with 22 Fire Management Assistance Grant (FMAG) declarations, including 16 FMAGs since the beginning of April”.  Yet Perry continued his indignation towards the feds and claimed they were not coming to the state’s rescue fast enough.  A strange stance from someone who portrays government more as a foe than a friend.

 

Then just recently the federal government made Perry and the state aware that they were cutting Homeland Security funding for Austin, El Paso and San Antonio.  These cities were among the cities around the nation being dropped from the grant list after these three received a combined $14.5 million in funding last year.  This news didn’t sit well with the state’s top law enforcement agency.  “Any significant cuts to homeland security funding degrades our ability and capability to protect, respond and recover from terror attacks or natural disasters,” said Steve McCraw, director of the Texas Department of Public Safety.  

If McGraw finds no sympathy from Washington he can thank the crowd in his state that snubs such federal sources.  Forced to make cuts, when all things are equal, those who dole out money from our national treasure for things like disaster relief and homeland security are apt to give priority to those who don’t say mean and nasty things about them.  It’s simple human nature.  Don’t bite the hand that feeds you.

The “crisis-as-opportunity” attitude that Tea Partiers and the state’s GOP cheered earlier has now been put into perspective for them who seemed blind to it when parents and educators were beseeching them to not cut education funding.  Evidently what’s good for the goose is not such a good idea for the gander.

Perry and conservative anti-tax, anti-government proponents have no room to call the kettle black.  To validate their claims that spending needs to be cut they have been slowly cutting tax revenue over the years to eliminate necessary funds and thus legitimately claim that there is now not enough in the state’s treasury to cover the social services and educational needs of the state.   But they have done so perhaps without realizing that this practice and its gospel they spread can be their own undoing.

Texas has a “rainy day” fund that with increased sales tax revenue from this year currently sits with $9.7 billion in it.  The legislators have reluctantly agreed to provide some of that to cash strapped school districts in Texas as advocates have pressured their representatives but there is still much reluctance to utilize these assets by Perry, Dewhurst and newly elected Tea Party legislators as they complain they’re not getting their fair share of federal assistance.  It’s the same argument many of them have lamely made about low-income families bleeding the state of financial resources instead of “getting a job” and covering their personal needs themselves.

For a governor and a contingent in this state that favor “secession” as a possible solution to avert “the oppressive hand” of the federal government, their bragadocious assertions may force them to reconsider the “opportunities” of tax cuts as the need arises to convince Texans that less is not necessarily better.

Instead of approaching a state’s rights argument with a more rational view that the constitution allows for the shared responsibility between each of them to assist its citizens, Perry and the Tea Party have thumbed their noses at those they now depend on for emergency aid and find themselves now back tracking on an attitude that has given federal sources pause in considering anything other than basic essentials within narrow limits of the law.

It a game of hardball and the secessionist have just figured that the other side can play this game as equally well as they.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Rick Perry Has to Eat Crow but Will Voters Notice Come Election Time?

The Ax Man Cometh (Again) to Texas  

Texas’ Wild Tea Party 

Posted by in Education, Health Care Reform, Texas/Local stories Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

5 comments

What’s In a Name?

May 19, 2011

What should we call those who have our back as opposed to those who would put a knife in it?  What should we call those who fail to acknowledge that economic policies that rely on an “invisible hand” of the markets may be flawed in dealing with human realities?

A new regulatory agency that evolved out of the financial reform spearheaded by Democrats last year has a ring to it that most consumers ought to find appealing.  It’s the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB).  This consumer-friendly agency arose out of an apparent lack of concern by other existing regulatory agencies that were supposed to have our back and make sure that large powerful private institutions were not taking advantage of ill-informed consumers.

But another name that is creating problems for many conservative legislators is Elizabeth Warren, President Obama’s selection to head up this new agency.  If ever the lowly consumer had a champion in this day and age it is Ms. Warren.  She’s “a Harvard law professor who has been a tireless critic of the financial services industry — one of the most powerful lobbies in Washington” according to an msnbc.com piece by Jon Schoen

Why do we need someone like Elizabeth Warren on our side?  Because there exist an organization out there that ultimately hurts consumers as it enables itself through its connections with conservative lawmakers in state and federal legislatures.  The name of that organization is the American Legislative Exchange Council or more simply just ALEC.

Alec sounds like the friend down the street you grew up with.  This council though is far from being neighborly.  It’s been around since 1973 and one of it’s primary functions is to create legislative “models” that are friendly to corporate interests.   How many consumers can identify themselves with wealthy corporate interests?  Maybe 2%?

People for the American Way (PFAW), another consumer friendly name recently revealed that in 2009, 826 model ALEC bills were introduced in state legislatures and had 115 of them eventually enacted into law.  Some of these bills were entered into the law of the land almost word for word as written by the special interests of these various corporate entities.

 

The CFPB, the agency designed to assist consumers from becoming prey to predatory lenders faces challenges from members of the corporate-friendly Party in Congress – the GOP.  I hesitate to use the name GOP anymore since it no longer resembles the “grand old Party” it came to be called in 1855 by anti-slavery advocates and served as the Party that put Abraham Lincoln in office.  But that’s a topic for another day.

The GOP, representing the wealthy corporate interest of ALEC, are opposed to the restraints they feel the CFPB would impose on those financial institutions; institutions that mismanaged mortgages and savings accounts for average Americans in the early years of this century, creating in 2008 the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression 80 years ago.  Yes, that’s right.  The GOP wants to make sure that Goldman-Sachs, Bank of America and Citibank are not impeded from doing much of what they did just two years ago that created home foreclosures and job losses for millions and millions of hard-working Americans while the banks themselves walked away unscathed and are seeing some of their highest profits ever.

Warren’s populist appeal to consumer groups finds its opposite in the GOP, Wall Street and some Treasury Department officials.  Obama is to be commended for sticking with Warren in the face of this opposition as his choice and convince consumers that somewhere in Washington they have a friend.  But this consumer’s friend has her enemies and it appears to be people who have been sticking it to consumers for quite sometime now.

Government interference, as wealthy corporate interests like to put it, is hurtful to so-called “free-markets”.  Advocates claim that creating regulations where corporations can police themselves unduly adds to the cost of running a business and thus makes them more uncompetitive in global markets.  This generalized view makes sense if you disregard every other variable that requires the need for government oversight with many of these free-market allies.

If we could be assured that all free-marketers were honest and would never do anything to monopolize an industry, then their call for de-regulation would have a lot of validity.  But only a fool would believe that when people are capable of manipulating conditions that enhances their own positions they would choose to do only the honorable and right thing.  It goes without saying that tons and tons of paper have been used to write on the human weakness of greed and “self-interests”.

People of wealth and power should seldom be trusted to do what’s in the best interest of everyone.  Is it even possible to create conditions where “everyone’s” self-interest can be satisfactorily met?  I think not and so do those people who are capable of exploiting economic and political systems to ensure that they at least get theirs while throwing the rest of us a bone; a bone that we should accept without complaining.

The reality that seems to be overlooked by those who support “free-markets” is that it can be and has been gamed to benefit only a select few.  When people like Elizabeth Warren and groups like PFAW try to point this out and work to correct this flaw, they are linked to names that call into question their value to all consumers and impugns they are somehow less worthy of respect.  Names like Socialist, Communists, Fascists and Stalinist are used to lessen the worth of people who simply ask those who have the greatest power and wealth to play by the moral standards we claim as a society.

To some it may seem that we have no chance to ever create a fair and balanced system so we might as well let the forces of self-interest have their way?  There may be no simple and absolute answer for that.  We may have evolved into an over-populated, all-consuming species that does mainly what it needs to survive without sufficient regard for the consequences of our actions.

To some, this justifies the view that only the fittest should survive.  But when it comes to choosing who should survive and who should be considered as refuge, what name will you use justify that action?  Should we allow the “free hand of the market” to decide who should and shouldn’t perish while drowning out that voice inside us that asserts our true worth is in how we reach out to others?

“Free-market” is a name that has been placed on a pedestal and portrayed by a zealous lot as a determinant factor in what best guides us.  Like any religious dogma it has flaws and warts that fails to fully live up to what those who praise it expect of it.   But to raise this specter amongst true believers is a heresy that any true fundamentalist must deny.  To acknowledge that for so long a view could be wrong is to label oneself with a name no one wants pinned to them.   Hypocrite.

If you believe that we as consumers need someone to cover our back and prevent the abuses of financial markets whose support of a free markets ignores a code of ethics then call your U.S. Senator or House representative and let them know.  We went without effective government oversight in years past by people who were too closely aligned with the Wall Street interests and many of us have paid dearly with our jobs and the loss of our homes.

Believe as Edward Everett Hale did that we can make an impact:  “I am only one, but I am one. I cannot do everything, but I can do something. And because I cannot do everything, I will not refuse to do the something that I can do. What I can do, I should do. And what I should do, by the grace of God, I will do.”


Posted by in Budget Crisis, Business/Jobs, Economy, Jobs, Society and Politics Tags: , , , , , , ,

6 comments

← Older Posts

Search Blog Content

Global Warming Is Real

America Honors Leaders, Not Politicians

Bet on solar power

What I have written recently

SAY NO TO CITIZENS UNITED

Blogroll

Archives


Blog at WordPress.com. | Theme: San Kloud by Theme.fm.
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 81 other followers