Featured Post

Me and My Mission

Tuesday, February 26, 2013

Catholic means "universal", stupid.

I'd rather priests be gay women, than pedophiles. 

I believe when scriptures say "men" they mean "of mankind" not "male". Unfortunately the Catholic power structure believes all three to be the same as far as the priesthood is concerned. 
 
The bible states specifically that its bishops should be married. Jewish rabbi's, including Jesus, were expected to be married. It says that a bishop unable to run his family successfully cannot possibly run his flock.  Celibacy was brought into the church to protect its land ownership and wealth, not do god's work, severely limiting free will and going directly against the Bible. No wonder it has produced so much perverse fruit and misery.

Creating a legion of sexually repressed men invites those seeking to repress their sexuality, especially if they consider it to be deviant. Only god's power can keep them from giving in, they think. They forget that evil exists as a consequence of the exercise of free will. Heavenly Father allowed his sinless son to suffer in order that the test of free will be preserved. He does not interfere unless there is no other option or it fits his greater plan for our evolution.

Our priesthood is unpaid, having jobs to support themselves and their families, as well as the church. We do not depend on the existence of the church for our existence. We are told that we serve god, then our families, and then ourselves.

Cutting priests off from the supports of family, marriage, and self-sufficiency can't help but cut them off from reality. There are no children in the city-state called the Vatican; not even a married couple. Yet they presume to guide the world. It has become a hollow relic filled with an evil wind. Catholic means universal, but that is the last thing I would describe the present version to be.

The following is a re-posting of an article from FOREIGN POLICY .

Vatican Insider

  • Though rumors of gay scandal are swirling around Pope Benedict’s retirement, it’s larger concerns that will test the Vatican as the Conclave begins.

    BY PAOLO MASTROLILLI | FEBRUARY 26, 2013


    The last time a pope resigned -- Gregory XII in 1415 -- it was to end a 40-year schism that threatened to tear the church in two. Today, the church faces a crisis that may be no less profound, and it has to do it with the entire world watching. (Gregory didn't have to contend with the Twittersphere.) And while many things remain opaque in the secret and closeted Vatican, one thing we know for sure is that the church faces a fundamental divide that threatens its future far more than the scandals that are dominating front pages.

    "This time is different, the crisis is much deeper and more difficult to solve than it appears," an Italian bishop with long experience in the Curia laments. "Catholics are deeply divided between a group of conservatives, constantly looking toward the past that will never come back, and progressives, who pushed themselves too far from any possible compromise with the other group. I don't envy the next pope."

    According to sources close to the pope, Benedict XVI resigned because he felt he no longer had the physical and intellectual energy to address the Vatican's problems. These problems started to emerge in the late 1990s,with the revelations of sexual abuse of children by priests in the United States. Church officials hoped the scandal could be contained in America, but soon there were similar reports of abuses and church cover-ups in Ireland, Belgium, Britain, and even Benedict's old parish in Germany. The fallout from the abuse investigations was compounded by other scandals including remarks by Benedict that upset the Muslim community in 2006, the rehabilitation of Holocaust-denying bishop Richard Williamson in 2009, and revelations of money laundering at the Vatican's bank, IOR, last year. If Benedict were an elected politician, it's unlikely his government could have survived.

    The most recent blow to the pope's authority was the "Vatileaks" scandal, which erupted in January 2012 when the Italian journalist, Gianluigi Nuzzi, received a trove of secret documents directly from the pope's apartment -- documents that proved beyond any doubt the disarray inside the Curia. The revelations pointed to widespread corruption within the Curia, including bribes demanded to secure a papal audience. Benedict asked three trusted and experienced cardinals -- Julian Herranz, Jozef Tomko, and Salvatore De Giorgi -- to investigate the matter, and they produced a report that was given to the pope a few weeks before his resignation. The report is classified, but that hasn't stopped rumors about it from swirling around the world.

    The rumors suggest that church leaders have been routinely participating in at least two or three of the deadly sins. The most outrageous accusation is that inside the Vatican there is a "gay lobby" strong enough to influence the church leadership. It is not clear whether this accusation is actually written in the report by the three cardinals; however sources inside the Curia confirm to me that something like a "gay lobby" exists, just as they confirm the struggle for economic power around IOR, the Vatican bank.


    The pope apparently knew all about this corruption before the report came out but didn't think he had the strength to fight the battle. Therefore he decided to resign as a "great act of governance of the Church," as his spokesman Father Federico Lombardi put it. Benedict couldn't solve the problems himself, so he opted to shock the Vatican and push for the election of a successor that will have a better chance to redeem the Holy See.
     

Saturday, February 23, 2013

The Cause and Solution for the Collapse

Why are healthcare, education, and infrastructure crumbling like national economies and society?

Why is personal debt (besides the fact that personal income for most hasn't even kept in distant view of inflation, earnings changing little in the last thirty years of Neoliberalism), along with national deficits and debt, rising beyond crippling levels?

Why are wages, benefits, and rights being suppressed? Why has distraction replaced debate and omnibus decree replaced open negotiation?

Tax Evasion. Theft from us all.

Some of it, like the few hundred unclaimed by a hairdresser, is illegal and ruthlessly prosecuted. The majority of it, done by the largest individual offenders, is completely legal. They paid to have it that way. It may be legal, but it is completely immoral and is the rot eating away at society's foundations, and, fed by compounding interest, is the cause of the widespread collapses.

A Country's economy is like a pool. It can only grow if more is added to it than is drained away. Otherwise, parts will go dry.

Corporations and the wealthy who own them, are given tax breaks (essentially doubled) to encourage their investment in the economy of the nation giving those breaks. Instead, historic and present fact shows that they hoard and sit on their growing wealth - at least what they declare. The vast majority is funnelled offshore to shell companies that exist on;ly to send the money back tax free as a business transaction between companies. These companies exist as addresses only, nothing but paper. When you consider that both a company and a person who owns that company can participate in this to the benefit of that person, this double-dodge scheme gets expensive quickly.

Billions are stolen from the country, from our schools, hospitals, roads (etc.), each year through the use of the tax havens set up by banks and western governments, present and past. Add to that their shirking overt their share of the national burden through tax breaks and there is enough to avoid "austerity" of finances and rights, and properly fund essential services, programs, insurance, and institutions.

At least it would be enough if the banks in these tax havens, and the individuals who own them, weren't also paying compound interest on  the growing pile of stolen money and charging just enough top keep us in debt while "investing" in meaningless, complex, immoral, but "legal" financial gambles and then getting bailed out by us. Interest has to come from somewhere.In the case of tax havens, both the principal and the interest come from us.

There is a reason that until relatively recent times Christians, Jews,Muslims, and their scriptures agreed that interest on loans was immoral. They aslo agreed that it is a duty to pay lawful taxes so that your nation may function.

Tax evaders brag about it openly these days. They aren't screwing the Man. They are screwing you.

It is time to smash some piggies' banks and let our wealth, health, and future, out.

Tuesday, February 19, 2013

Leading the Way for the World

If you need more evidence that the Nordic countries, socialism and all, know what they are doing, here it is. Three interviews from CBC's The Sunday Edition



Why Finland's public schools are so successful






A school in Finland, where an egalitarian, low-stress model helps students to excel. Photo: Teemu Vehkaoja
A school in Finland, where an egalitarian, low-stress model helps students to excel. Photo: Teemu Vehkaoja


The hand wringing over the state of public education in North America has produced a lot of reports, proposals and tensions between teachers, school boards, students, parents and governments.


We hear that teachers have too much power, that governments don't adequately fund schools, that teachers need to be made accountable, that under-performing schools should have their funding cut back, that students need to be tested, that we need to focus on core subjects and spend less time on art and music. 

FinnishChildren300b.jpgFinland is consistently put at the very top of global educational rankings despite, or perhaps because of, taking a very different approach: teachers are highly trained and very well-paid, students aren't tested until their teens, there's very little homework, and there are no private schools.

Michael Enright speaks to Finland's education reform guru, Dr. Pasi Sahlberg, about how the country's egalitarian, low-stress model has helped Finnish students reach for the top.

Redefining Dementia in Denmark




In Denmark, people with dementia aren't confined to nursing homes, they go on biking trips. (CBC / Karin Wells)
In Denmark, people with dementia aren't confined to nursing homes, they go on biking trips. (CBC / Karin Wells)


Denmark looks after its old people.
Lotte, the most famous nursing home in the country, has become an international shrine for anyone seeking another way ... a happier way ... to make a life for people with dementia.
Lotte is a big old brick house on the west side of Copenhagen, where 23 men and women live like a family. Seventy per cent of the family has dementia.
They take Caribbean vacations together. The 98-year-old man on the second floor has fallen in love with the 101-year-old woman. The cat sits curled up next to the dining room table.
Lotte's first leader, Thyra Frank, is the rock star of elder care in Denmark.
Denmark - like every other country in Europe - is in an economic squeeze. Yet Lotte is fully funded and fostered by the Danish government.
The underlying philosophy of elder care is well rooted.  Every man or woman, no matter how ill, or how old, has the right to choose how they want to live.
We all know the numbers - dementia of some sort is catching up with more and more of us. It is a frightening prospect.
No one wants to see mum or dad  - or to imagine themselves - strapped down to a bed in a locked dementia ward - chemically warehoused. But in North America, the choices are limited.
Which is why the world looks to Denmark -- where it is illegal to imprison people with dementia in locked wards; where nursing homes regularly take their people on holiday, and where people with dementia are asked what they want to do today.
Karin Wells's documentary is called It's Their Life.


Icelandic President


The President of Iceland, Olafur Grimmson reflects on the challenging decisions that helped rescue his country from the brink of total economic collapse.

Thursday, February 14, 2013

The Fear that Feeds the NRA

Conservatives, particularly southern American conservatives (who largely still think a confederacy of freedom-loving slave-owners was an idea worth fighting for), cling to guns or as powerful weapons as they can get their hands on, because they are paranoid with fear. Fear of the jungle of social, economic, mobility, racial (etc.), inequalities their ideas and policies helped thrive. Many, whether Muslim, Hindu, Taoist, Buddhist, or part of the spectrum of those who claim to follow the acts and teachings of Christ. I'd like to point out that in his eyes hypocrites ranked below only those who harm children and that the wealthy stood little or no chance of entering his father's kingdom.  He had little patience or forgiveness for either. 

The conservatives with real power take it from the masses through oppression of the spirit through force or finance, chains of steel or interest points. These few realize that as it has always been, it the the oppressed who have the real power and could wield it if they believed in themselves. So they spread their fear to those conservatives who have no real power. Those with real power fear losing it; those without real power believe their pathetic guns give them power. Their faith in the gun becomes unified and unshakable.

Because the fear the seeds of what their policies and ignorance have sown, they fear the vast majority of humanity, thus they need a lot of big guns to fight them off. What I wonder are they protecting their family for, if everything has broken down and everyone is out for themselves? Better try and stop that than try to be the only family standing in an environmental wasteland.

Hunting rifles have a purpose beyond the efficient killing of humans, other guns, and certainly anything with assault in the the name, don't.  Most guns, when used properly as intended, kill people. Assault weapons exist for no other reason. Semi- and full automatics are designed to do this quickly and in large numbers. Weapons that allow one family to take on the zombie hoard also allow one nut to kill as many innocent people as he has bullets for. Turning primary schools into war zones constantly on the bring of eruption doesn't make children safer. Ask the ones in Gaza or Afghanistan.

Conservatives are most likely to claim knowledge of the mind of god, yet they want to arm themselves, in church, against their spiritual brothers and sisters. How did Jesus, someone who controlled life and death, react to persecution, torture, and execution? Did he strike them all dead, particularly the homosexuals? No, he gave no resistance, forgave them all, and endured it all until his mission was complete. Then he chose to die. I'm not saying we're meant to all do this because it was his mission, not ours, but we're supposed to model ourselves after his example and sacrifice ourselves for the good of others, not strike the sinners dead and hope they fry in their Greek-inspired idea of eternal torment, which, like the Zeus-inspired image of a lighting throwing old man in the clouds, has nothing to do with Christ's message of love even for the enemy. He wants us to give him our pain because he can take it, and so that we don't create more pain by inflicting it on one another and ourselves. It is the pain we inflict upon ourselves and cling to that can stretch into an eternity.

Conservatives claim to be faithful, literal followers of god's words and then they completely ignore, "Love Thy Neighbour as Thyself," which Christ says encompasses all the other commandments and rules into one simple sure rule. We are obliged to forgive others as many times as it takes, so that we might be forgiven and forgive ourselves in turn.There is no room for vengeance.

Lastly, I find it absolutely hilarious that individuals in the most technologically powerful nation on Earth think they can hold of their hostile government army with the militia weapons that they can get their hands on. Even if they have a few major missiles, or even a nuke, they are up against satellites,stealth aircraft, drones, trained assassins, tanks, and completely overwhelming numbers. Keep your 30-round mag. It will help you last maybe three seconds. Weekend warriors think they are professional, elite soldiers who never miss or have equipment failure.

What a laugh.

Thursday, February 7, 2013

"Coalition" - Harper's Worst Fear

The call in Canada for all parties opposed to the government of  President and Chief Hypocrite Stephen Harper to unite  to defeat him doesn't mean a US-style 2 -Party system. However, it does mean we need a coalition government.

Based on the way he vilified the concept when it threatened to take away his minority,  through the confidence votes he was forcing, Harper is terrified of a left-centre coalition. Harper is an "us vs them" kind of person so he riles on dividing his perceived foes. A democratic, mature, constitution-based coalition could stand a chance of reducing him to a minority without confidence that could be replaced by the coalition.The candidate most likely to defeat Harper in each riding runs for their party "as supported by" the other parties. The leader of the party of the coalition with the most members who won seats could be PM. The others would be cabinet members.

2-party systems try to squeeze at least twelve viewpoints into a dichotomy: fiscal, social, political and environmental liberals, conservatives, and centrists.

Coalitions, like proportional representation, is far more democratic than what we have now. because it requires negotiation, compromise, and cooperation. Proportional representation would strongly encourage coalition governments, but we work with what we have as we work for something better.


Monday, February 4, 2013

Chris Hedges on the Minimum Wage

What is the minimum wage? 

It isn't the minimum needed to survive and thrive. 

It isn't the minimum needed to live above the recognized poverty level. 

It is the minimum employers can get away paying people to do hard and distasteful work that the employer would never do personally. It is barely enough to afford a life spent servicing debt that you wouldn't have if you made a living wage. It is enough to keep you borrowing with the slim hope that you will one day pay it off, but fees, penalties, balloon payments, and most of all, compound interest, ensure that will never happen. 

Interest creates inflation by creating value from nothing, like most shady financial schemes, including the derivatives and futures markets. It causes the need for higher wages in the first place and ensures that no matter how high the minimum wage rises, it will never be a living wage, just a chain to the creditors. 

The following is a re-posting of an article for Truthdig by Chris Hedges.

Breaking the Chains of Debt Peonage

The corporate state uses debt to keep workers—especially the working poor—frightened and disempowered. Only through a campaign for a minimum wage of at least $11 an hour can Americans begin to regain economic, social and political control. 

Posted on Feb 3, 2013
flickr/watchingfrogsboil



Chris Hedges gave this talk Saturday night in Brooklyn at the People’s Recovery Summit.
 
The corporate state has made it clear there will be no more Occupy encampments. The corporate state is seeking through the persistent harassment of activists and the passage of draconian laws such as Section 1021(b)(2) of the National Defense Authorization Act—and we will be in court next Wednesday to fight the Obama administration’s appeal of the Southern District Court of New York’s ruling declaring Section 1021 unconstitutional—to shut down all legitimate dissent. The corporate state is counting, most importantly, on its system of debt peonage to keep citizens—especially the 30 million people who make up the working poor—from joining our revolt.
Workers who are unable to meet their debts, who are victimized by constantly rising interest rates that can climb to as high as 30 percent on credit cards, are far more likely to remain submissive and compliant. Debt peonage is and always has been a form of political control. Native Americans, forced by the U.S. government onto tribal agencies, were required to buy their goods, usually on credit, at agency stores. Coal miners in southern West Virginia and Kentucky were paid in scrip by the coal companies and kept in perpetual debt servitude by the company store. African-Americans in the cotton fields in the South were forced to borrow during the agricultural season from their white landlords for their seed and farm equipment, creating a life of perpetual debt. It soon becomes impossible to escape the mounting interest rates that necessitate new borrowing.

Debt peonage is a familiar form of political control. And today it is used by banks and corporate financiers to enslave not only individuals but also cities, municipalities, states and the federal government. As the economist Michael Hudson points out, the steady rise in interest rates, coupled with declining public revenues, has become a way to extract the last bits of capital from citizens as well as government. Once individuals, or states or federal agencies, cannot pay their bills—and for many Americans this often means medical bills—assets are sold to corporations or seized. Public land, property and infrastructure, along with pension plans, are privatized. Individuals are pushed out of their homes and into financial and personal distress.

Debt peonage is a fundamental tool for control. This debt peonage must be broken if we are going to build a mass movement to paralyze systems of corporate power. And the most effective weapon we have to liberate ourselves as well as the 30 million Americans who make up the working poor is a sustained movement to raise the minimum wage nationally to at least $11 an hour. Most of these 30 million low-wage workers are women and people of color. They and their families struggle at a subsistence level and play one lender off another to survive. By raising their wages we raise not only the quality of their lives but we increase their capacity for personal and political power. We break one of the most important shackles used by the corporate state to prevent organized resistance.

Ralph Nader, whom I spoke with on Thursday, has been pushing activists to mobilize around raising the minimum wage. Nader, who knows more about corporate power and has been fighting it longer than any other American, has singled out, I believe, the key to building a broad-based national movement. There is among these underpaid 30 million workers—and some of them are with us tonight—a mounting despair at being unable to meet even the basic requirements to maintain a family. Nader points out that Walmart’s 1 million workers, like most of the 30 million low-wage workers, are making less per hour, adjusted for inflation, than workers made in 1968, although these Walmart workers do the work required of two Walmart workers 40 years ago.

If the federal minimum wage from 1968 were adjusted for inflation it would be $10.50. Instead, although costs and prices have risen sharply, the federal minimum wage remains stuck at $7.25 an hour. It is the lowest of the major industrial countries. Meanwhile, Mike Duke, the CEO of Walmart, makes $11,000 an hour. And he is not alone. These corporate chiefs make this much money because they have been able to keep in place a system by which workers are effectively disempowered, forced to work for substandard wages and denied the possibility through unions or the formal electoral systems of power to defend workers’ rights. This is why corporations lavish these CEOs with obscene salaries. These CEOs are the masters of plantations. And the moment workers rise up and demand justice is the moment the staggering inequality of wealth begins to be reversed.

Being a member of the working poor, as Barbara Ehrenreich chronicles in her important book “Nickel and Dimed,” is “a state of emergency.” It is “acute distress.” It is a daily and weekly lurching from crisis to crisis. The stress, the suffering, the humiliation and the job insecurity means that workers are reduced to doing little more than eating, sleeping—never enough—and working. And, most importantly, they are kept in a constant state of fear. Ehrenreich writes:
When someone works for less pay than she can live on—when, for example, she goes hungry so that you can eat more cheaply and conveniently—then she has made a great sacrifice for you, she has made you a gift of some part of her abilities, her health, and her life. The “working poor,” as they are approvingly termed, are in fact the major philanthropists of our society. They neglect their own children so that the children of others will be cared for; they live in substandard housing so that other homes will be shiny and perfect; they endure privation so that inflation will be low and stock prices high. To be a member of the working poor is to be an anonymous donor, a nameless benefactor, to everyone else.
It is time to halt the sacrifice of the working poor. It is time to empower the 30 million low-wage workers—two-thirds of which are employed by large corporations such as Walmart and McDonald’s—to fight back.

Joe Sacco and I spent the last two years in the poorest pockets of the United States, our nation’s sacrifice zones, for our book “Days of Destruction, Days of Revolt.” We saw in Pine Ridge, S.D., Camden, N.J.—the poorest and the most dangerous city in the nation—the coalfields of southern West Virginia and the produce fields of Immokalee, Fla., how this brutal system of corporate exploitation works. In these sacrifice zones no one has legal protection. All institutions, from the press to the political class to the judiciary, are wholly owned subsidiaries of the corporate state. And what has been done to those in these sacrifice zones, those places corporations devastated first, is now being done to all of us.
There are no impediments within the electoral process or the formal structures of power to prevent predatory capitalism. We are all being forced to kneel before the dictates of the marketplace. The human cost, the attendant problems of drug and alcohol abuse, the neglect of children, the early deaths—in Pine Ridge the average life expectancy of a male is 48, the lowest in the Western Hemisphere outside of Haiti—is justified by the need to make greater and greater profit. And these costs are now being felt across the nation. The phrase “the consent of the governed” has become a cruel joke. We use a language to describe our systems of governance that no longer correspond to reality. The disconnect between illusion and reality makes us one of the most self-deluded populations on the planet. 

The Weimarization of the American working class, and increasingly the middle class, is by design. It is part of a corporate reconfiguration of the national and global economy into a form of neofeudalism. It is about creating a world of masters and serfs, of empowered oligarchic elites and broken disempowered masses. And it is not only our wealth that is taken from us. It is our liberty. The so-called self-regulating market, as the economist Karl Polanyi wrote in “The Great Transformation,” always ends with mafia capitalism and a mafia political system. This system of self-regulation, Polanyi wrote, always leads to “the demolition of society.”

And this is what is happening—the demolition of our society and the demolition of the ecosystem that sustains the human species. In theological terms these corporate forces, driven by the lust for ceaseless expansion and exploitation, are systems of death. They know no limits. They will not stop on their own. And unless we stop them we are as a nation and finally as a species doomed. Polanyi understood the destructive power of unregulated corporate capitalism unleashed upon human society and the ecosystem. He wrote: “In disposing of a man’s labor power the system would, incidentally, dispose of the physical, psychological, and moral entity ‘man’ attached to the tag.”

Polanyi wrote of a society that surrendered to the dictates of the market. “Robbed of the protective covering of cultural institutions, human beings would perish from the effects of social exposure; they would die as victims of acute social dislocation through vice, perversion, crime, and starvation. Nature would be reduced to its elements, neighborhoods and landscapes defiled, rivers polluted, military safety jeopardized, the power to produce food and raw materials destroyed. Finally, the market administration of purchasing power would periodically liquidate business enterprise, for shortages and surfeits of money would prove as disastrous to business as floods and droughts in primitive society. Undoubtedly, labor, land, and money markets are essential to a market economy. But no society could stand the effects of such a system of crude fictions even for the shortest stretch of time unless its human and natural substance as well as its business organizations was protected against the ravages of this satanic mill.” 

The global and national economy because of this “satanic mill” continues to deteriorate, and yet, curiously, stock market levels are close to their highs in 2007 before the global financial meltdown. This is because these corporations have been able to suppress wages, slash social programs and bilk the government for staggering sums of money. The Federal Reserve purchases about $85 billion worth of mortgage-backed securities and Treasury bills every month. This means that the Fed is printing endless streams of money to buy up government debt and toxic assets from the banks. The Federal Reserve now owns assets, much of them worthless, of $3.01 trillion. This is triple what it was in 2008.

And while corporations such as Citibank and General Electric loot the Treasury they exact more pounds of flesh in the name of austerity. General Electric, as Nader points out, is a net job exporter. Over the past decade, as Citizens for Tax Justice has documented, GE’s effective federal income tax rate on its $81.2 billion in pretax U.S. profits has been at most 1.8 percent. Because of the way General Electric’s accountants play with tax liabilities the company actually receives money from the Treasury. They have several billion dollars paid to them from the federal government into company bank accounts—and these are not tax refunds. The company, as Nader argues, is a net drain on the Treasury and a net drain on jobs. It violates a host of environmental and criminal laws. And yet Jeffery Immelt, the CEO of General Electric, was appointed to be the chairman of Obama’s Jobs Council. Immelt’s only major contribution to the jobs initiative was to get rid of 37,000 of his employees since 2001. Jim McNerney, president and CEO of Boeing, who also sat on the Jobs Council, has cut over 14,000 jobs since 2008, according to Public Campaign. The only jobs the CEOs on the Jobs Council were concerned with were the ones these CEOs eradicated. The Jobs Council, which Obama disbanded this week, is a microcosm of what is happening within the corridors of power. Corporations increasingly terminate jobs here to hire grossly underpaid workers in India or China while at the same time stealing as much as fast as they can on the way out the door. 

As Michael Hudson has pointed out, financialization has created a new kind of class war. The old class warfare took place between workers and bosses. Workers organized to fight for fair wages, better work hours and safety conditions in the workplace as well as adequate pensions and medical benefits. But with a country of debtors and a government that must also borrow to continue operating, Hudson says, we have changed the way class warfare works. Finance, he points out, controls state and federal policy as well as the lives of ordinary workers. It is able to dictate working conditions. The financiers, who insist that cuts be made so governments can repay loans, impose draconian austerity and long-term unemployment to, as Hudson told a Greek newspaper, “drive down wages to a degree that could not occur in the company-by-company clash between industrial employers and their workers.”

The former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan, testifying before Congress, was quite open about the role of debt peonage in keeping workers passive. Greenspan pointed out that since 1980 labor productivity has increased by about 83 percent. Yet real wages have stagnated. Greenspan said this was because workers were too burdened with mortgage debts, college loans, auto payments and credit-card debt to risk losing a job. Household debt in the United States is around $13 trillion. This is only $2 trillion less than the country’s total yearly economic output. Greenspan was right. Miss a payment on your credit card and your interest rates jumps to 30 percent. Fail to pay your mortgage and you lose your home. Miss your health insurance payments, which have been spiraling upwards, and if you are seriously ill you go into bankruptcy, as 1 million Americans who get sick do every year. Trash your credit rating and your fragile financial edifice, built on managing debt, collapses. Since most Americans feel, on some level, as Hudson points out, that they are a step or two away from being homeless, they are deeply averse to challenging corporate power. It is not worth the risk. And the corporate state knows it. Absolute power, the philosopher Thomas Hobbes wrote, depends on fear and passivity.

The only way to break this fear and passivity is to organize workers to break the cycle of mounting debt. And the first step to achieving independence from debt—the primary form of political control by the corporate state—is to raise the minimum wage. There are other solutions—forgiving mortgage and student debt, instituting universal health care, establishing a nationwide jobs program to rebuild the country’s Third World infrastructure, and green energy—but none of this will happen until we are able to mount a sustained mass movement that discredits the corporate state. This mass movement will arise, as Nader says, when we mobilize around the minimum wage. 

The lowest-grade worker at the General Electric plant that makes high-tech health care devices outside Paterson in Totowa [New Jersey]—a pay grade known as the D 04—was just raised to $14,555 a year. That is under $8 an hour. The plant’s highest-paid hourly employee, known as D 16, earns $22,000. Immelt makes over $11 million a year. This vast disparity in income, and this wage abuse, is played out in every corporation in the country. No one in Washington intends to challenge it. 


Only 11.3 percent of workers in this country belong to unions. This is the lowest percentage in 80 years. And nearly all these unions, and especially the AFL-CIO, have been emasculated by corporate power.
Nader is right when he warns that we are not going to be assisted in this effort by established unions. Union leaders are bought off. They are comfortable. They are pulling down at least five times what rank-and-file workers make. Nader says we have to mount protests not only outside the doors of Walmarts and General Electric plants, not only outside congressional offices, but outside the doors of the AFL-CIO. There is no established institution inside or outside government that will help us. They are all broken or complicit. But there are the 30 million working poor who, if we organize to break the system of debt peonage that holds them hostage, may be willing to rise up. We are bound with many chains and shackles. We will have to break them one at a time. But once we rise up, once we are able to threaten the corporate systems that keep us supine through fear, we will unleash a torrent of energy and passion that will confirm the worst nightmares of our corporate overlords.

 




Why Do Countries Keep Listening to These Guys?


Credit Rating agencies are the slave-masters of present governments around the world, forcing them to serve the greed of investors rather than their people. Austerity is all about credit rating and borrowing to amke up for the tax shortfall created by low taxes on corporations and the wealthy, but mostly through the massive, sanctioned, and encouraged, tax evasion via offshore tax havens that our governments helped create, proving who they truly work for - their future employers when they become advisers, consultants, or lobbyists. The world's wealth is being locked up in these accounts and fake companies. Corporations are sitting on massive profits, just like their owners, refusing to invest in the society that makes it possible. They are traitors, investors are gamblers, and credit rating agencies are nothing but odds-makers. The world economy is being run as a casino.   

The following is a re-post of an essay by  Michael Enright broadcast on CBC's The Sunday Edition.





The damage done by credit rating agencies - Michael's essay


They make the ebola virus seem like a chocolate sundae. When you see them coming, hide the children and family valuables in the root cellar. Any downgrade from super terrific triple A, and Bay Street gets a violent attack of the vapours.
This past week, Moody's Investors Service downgraded, ever so slightly, the ratings of Canada's largest banks. The stated reason was concern over volatility in the housing market and a lot of blather that the banks are, "more vulnerable to unpredictable downside risks facing the economy than in the past."

The Big Three -- Moody's, Standard and Poor's and Fitch -- control something like 90 per cent of the ratings market. Their ratings are the single most important element in determining the value of a bond or a company or a portfolio. Investors cling to their findings like lint on Velcro. But leave us not forget that the credit raters got just about everything wrong leading up to the 2008 economic collapse.

For example, the thousands of residential mortgages rated triple and double A by Standard and Poor's, more than 70 per cent were near or in default by the end of that  year. And Moody's kept pumping out good news about Enron and didn't downgrade its value until the day before the company collapsed.

Incidentally, Matt Taibbi, the much feared and much respected financial writer for Rolling Stone, calls Moody's, " the most whorishly corrupt ratings company in modern history."

Since the 2008 meltdown, politicians and others have voiced concern about the immense power of the companies. In fact, the June 2010 G-20 meetings in Toronto ended with a communiqué committing governments to reducing reliance on, "external ratings in rules and regulations." That resolve lasted about eight seconds.

Who are these companies that can make governments tremble? They are unelected, anonymous oligarchs with more power than many financial and political institutions.

It all started in 1909 when a man named John Moody began selling subscriptions to his reports on the financial worthiness of bonds being sold to finance the building of railways. He later expanded it to include electrical companies, and ultimately, heavy industry.

Companies employ a ratings agency to look at the books and give them a rating. For this, they pay a hefty fee. The rating is an opinion, not a fact, and the companies themselves seem to realize it's all a bunch of flapdoodle. For example, S and P warns at the end of every rating that the recipient, "should not rely on any credit rating or other opinion contained herein in making any investment decision."

Governments are starting to fight back, ever so tentatively. In the middle of January, the European Parliament adopted a resolution which will in fact restrict the operations of credit rating agencies. For countries like Portugal, this is a god-send, because thanks to a lousy credit rating, the government can't borrow and if it can't borrow it can't pay its bills.

The U.S. Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission, a ten-member panel set up to determine the cause of the 2008 implosion, found the credit rating agencies were complicit. Said the Commission's report, "This crisis could not have happened without the rating agencies. Their ratings helped the market soar and their downgrades through 2007 and 2008 wreaked havoc across markets and firms." 

That's the indictment. What's the penalty?