Clitoral Economics

With all the talk about how to stimulate it, you’d think that the economy is a giant clitoris. Ben Bernanke may not employ this imagery, but the immediate challenge–and the issue bound to replace Iraq and immigration in the presidential race–is how best to get the economy engorged and throbbing again.

It would be irresponsible to say much about Bush’s stimulus plan, the mere mention of which could be enough to send the Nikkei, the DAX, and the curiously named  FTSE and Sensex tumbling into the crash zone again. In a typically regressive gesture, Bush proposed to hand out cash tax rebates–except to families earning less than $40,000 a year. This may qualify as an example of what Naomi Klein calls “disaster capitalism,” in which any misfortune can be re-jiggered to the advantage of the affluent.

But even the liberal stimulus proposals have me worried—not so much for their content as their rationale. Most liberals want a stimulus package that includes an increase in food stamp allotments and an extension of unemployment benefits, which are both screamingly obvious measures. Currently, the food stamp allotment amounts to about $1 per meal, and when four Democratic congresspersons tried living on that for a week last May they ended up even crankier than if they’d had to sit through a week-long filibuster by Tom DeLay.

As for unemployment benefits: They last just 25 weeks in most states and end up covering only a third of people who are laid off. If ever there was a time to create a real working system of unemployment compensation, it is now. Citigroup has announced plans to eliminate 21,000; investment banks in general will shed 40,000. The mortgage industry is in a state of melt-down; and Sprint – how did they get into this?—will lay off 4000 full-time employees as well as 1600 part-time and contract workers.

The economic rationale for more a progressive stimulus package, which we hear now several times a day, is that the poor and the freshly unemployed will spend whatever money they get. Give them more money in the form of food stamps or unemployment benefits and they’ll drop more at the mall. Money, it has been observed, sticks to the rich but just slides off the poor, which makes them the lynchpin of stimulus. After decades of hearing the poor stereotyped as lazy, stupid, addicted, and crime-prone, they have been discovered to have this singular virtue: They are veritable spending machines.

All this is true, but it is also a form of economy fetishism, or should I say worship? If we have learned anything in the last few years, it is that the economy is no longer an effective measure of human well-being. We’ve seen the economy grow without wage gains; we’ve seen productivity grow without wage gains. We’ve even seen unemployment fall without wage gains. In fact, when economists want to talk about life “on the ground,” where jobs and wages and the price of Special K are paramount, they’ve taken to talking about “the real economy.” If there’s a “real economy,” then what in the hell is “the economy”?

Once it was real-er, this economy that we have. But that was before we got polarized into the rich, the poor, and the sinking middle class. Gross social inequality is what has “de-coupled” growth and productivity from wage gains for the average household. As far as I can tell, “the economy,” as opposed to the “real economy,” is the realm of investment, and is occupied by people who live on interest and dividends instead of salaries and wages, aka the rich.

So I’m proposing a radical shift in rhetoric: Any stimulus package should focus on the poor and the unemployed, not because they spend more, but because they are in most in need of help. Yes, when a parent can afford to buy Enfamil, it helps the Enfamil company and no doubt “the economy” too. But let’s not throw out the baby with the sensual bubble bath of “stimulus.” In any ordinary moral calculus, the baby comes first.

Far be it from me to make the revolutionary suggestion that babies are more important than profits. My point is just that our economy–with its dizzying bubbles, wild lending sprees, reckless downsizings, and planet-wide hyper-sensitivity – has gotten too far disconnected from ordinary human needs. We could take the current crisis as an opportunity to fix that, at least in part, by shoring up government support for the needy and the dislocated. Or we can wait around and watch while the appropriate imagery gets nasty, as this ghostly creature, “the economy,” starts acting like a nymphomaniac junkie in withdrawal.

Comments

[chris]

Barb wrote:

"Far be it from me to make the revolutionary suggestion that babies are more important than profits."

Yeah. Babies are more important. That's why over 1.1 million women kill one each year.

[Brian]

What if the people of a nation were on a bell curve with the meek and mild on the extreme left end or tail, and the aggressive and psychopathic were on the far right end or tail. Then in theory the middle or majority in the bell curve would be the average in all ways. Now imagine that the aggressive and psychopathic(like many of our corporate and governmental titans) wrote laws and regulations, an in-bred and old boy/girl network that created a cluster of wealthy families over several generations that managed to pull the whole bell curves wealth over to themselves over time. So superimpose a wealth bell curve that shifts way to the right over the first meek to aggressive people curve and what have you? America, free enterprise gone amuck, laws, earning and tax regiemes, favoring the rich, wealth constantly shifting over to them. Their tools, the media, the police state, the fantasy that anyone can be president if they just try hard enough. Hillary yale Law School, Bill yale law school, rhodes scholar, george bush harvard mba, paulson ex-ceo goldman sachs, bernache Princeton economics chair, etc etc I could generate a long long list if I looked it up all night. Even jim cramer, small investors advocate harvard law, goldman sach's(lots of goldman sach's alumni in all facets of gov and well if its big, you name it). And all the bits of wealth of all the working people that is kicked up to these people, who spin what they do into them somehow doing "public service". Please. Did High School varsity teams really do a public service for the student body? No they cost the student body other options that the money could have been spent on. So what to conclude? Is our democracy a myth, carefully spun and manipulated, the velvet glove of an iron fisted growing police state to keep hold of an increasingly restive worker population? Are workers simply innocents in this or is there some dysfunctional co-enabling relationship of entangled abuse going on? Are we simply a modern credit card Rome that lets the Senate run amuck with the public treasury and Cesar wage any ole war he pleases with the nations blood and treasure? Judges even belive they have the right to judge because the law says they do, but who's law is that? One of the first things the colonists did right after the revolution was to gut the judicial system as it was formerly used by the British to win their cases for them. Why would that be any different today when we have an untouchable aristocracy using the courts once again to their advantage. Its amazing that nobody really follows and analyses the Supreme Court, our third branch of government, in the cases they hear and why, and in their decisions and thinking. More will be said of a members sex or ethnicity than anything about the case law they try that fundamentally changing our democracy in deep, deep ways. Our justice system has totally ignored the fraudulant activities involved in fueling our current financial breakdown. This happened because people lied, and signed their names to the lies, then reneged and walked away. Except the corporate insiders walked away with huge money and their shills got huge bonuses. Wall street paid itself 37-9 billion dollars in bonuses this year for all the "fine" work they did. Yet, no mention of the outright fraud, yet the war on drugs puts nonviolent small possession "arrestees" in jail and prisons not fit to sell themselves as even animal shelters. Its beyond shame. Its a police state run by the aggressive on the rest of us. The expensive traffic stops and parking tickets is just a reminder of who controls things. You may think I am being overly dramatic, but this is how its done in modern times.

[cookie]

I agree with Barbara's comments in theory - better unemployment benefits, more effective and generous food stamp allocation and, as discussed in previous columns, a universal basic health care system.

However, that ship has sailed. We do not live in a theoretical world, we are starting to run up against reality. By 2013, we will be steamrollered by it. The US government is not in a position to expand entitlement programs, no matter how justified.

For those who haven't seen it, I recommend that you watch the recent 60 Minutes interview with U.S. Comptroller General David Walker for a blunt assessment of the current and future budget situation and consequences.

A link to the archived episode may be found here:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7461407498377956300

[Ken]

If the Clitoral Economy could just experience and earth-shattering, trembling in its knickers orgasm then perhaps class tension would be released and the economy could exist again primarily for the good of the people rather than the people existing primarily for the good of the economy.

[JCS]

Brian,
Well said and spot on.

[Dawn]

My husband and I were discussing the need to try funding the poor and see how it trickles to the rich.

We saw a need for a change in the trickle down theory, citing how rather than help grow the economy, feeding money and tax breaks to the rich helps to grow the profits. More people have lost jobs, their ability to be consumers, in the name of profits than for any other reason.

No one seems to know how much profit is enough. And those with the power and money seem to find this a game of finding the tipping point -- when they have too much profit. So far, none of the wealthy have decided that one can be too wealthy.

I've been reading about the homeless, the poor, the drugged out, the death of our young stars due to drugs and desperation. What a sad statement that some compassion, some reason, some investment, some caring could turn that around. I think as a country, we have reached that tipping point where 'profit' has turned into a detriment for us all -- the wealthy are still floating in that beaker of gradually heating water and haven't realized that they're cooking their own goose by contributing to the downfall of the middle class.

Dawn

[Anarcissie]

Barbara: '... Far be it from me to make the revolutionary suggestion that babies are more important than profits. My point is just that our economy–with its dizzying bubbles, wild lending sprees, reckless downsizings, and planet-wide hyper-sensitivity – has gotten too far disconnected from ordinary human needs. We could take the current crisis as an opportunity to fix that....'

I think we are more or less stuck with revolution -- not in the sense of civil war but in the sense of profound and maybe very difficult change. As things stand now, the authorities cannot simply create a few bushels of alms and throw them to the poor, as so many liberal and leftists voices are suggesting, and necessarily get any kind of constructive result. After twenty years or more of false statistics, false interest and exchange rates, and false money, the economy is probably hitting the wall, and giving the poor currency or the promise thereof may result in no more than sharp inflation in prices without any real increment of goods and services in their lives. It would be nice if the revision and correction of present economic structure could be made rationally, but if people were rational we wouldn't be faced with the current crisis in the first place. Instead, I think events will be at the mercy of the usual blind forces.

[Buena]

Thanks, Barbara. I almost busted a gut laughing at your first paragraph.

Everything you say is true down here in the real world. I've got a little bit of money in an IRA and I fear it will disappear before I can touch it.

[chris]

dawn writes:

"My husband and I were discussing the need to try funding the poor and see how it trickles to the rich."

It's been done. Lyndon Johnson started it in large-type, UPPER-CASE letters -- The Great Society.

Massive housing, food, education and social-program giveaways.

What did all that lead to? Larger government expenditures.

Has the practice of giving everything to the poor reduced poverty? A little.

But the thing that made the difference was unleashing the productive power of the American economy. That's why there's money to give away.

Where's the mystery? North Korea and Cuba are bankrupt because their economies are based on fantasy economic theories. If the US were to embrace the marxist/socialist policies of those countries, the US would become as bereft of everything as those two dying nations.

We saw a need for a change in the trickle down theory, citing how rather than help grow the economy, feeding money and tax breaks to the rich helps to grow the profits. More people have lost jobs, their ability to be consumers, in the name of profits than for any other reason.

No one seems to know how much profit is enough. And those with the power and money seem to find this a game of finding the tipping point -- when they have too much profit. So far, none of the wealthy have decided that one can be too wealthy.

I've been reading about the homeless, the poor, the drugged out, the death of our young stars due to drugs and desperation. What a sad statement that some compassion, some reason, some investment, some caring could turn that around. I think as a country, we have reached that tipping point where 'profit' has turned into a detriment for us all -- the wealthy are still floating in that beaker of gradually heating water and haven't realized that they're cooking their own goose by contributing to the downfall of the middle class.

[Chickensh*tEagle]

chris wrote: "Yeah. Babies are more important. That's why over 1.1 million women kill one each year."

And probably why an approximately equal number of men beget them in the first place.

[chris]

dawn writes:

"My husband and I were discussing the need to try funding the poor and see how it trickles to the rich."

It's been done. Lyndon Johnson started it in large-type, UPPER-CASE letters -- The Great Society.

Massive housing, food, education and social-program giveaways.

What did all that lead to? Larger government expenditures.

Has the practice of giving everything to the poor reduced poverty? A little.

But the thing that made the difference was unleashing the productive power of the American economy. That's why there's money to give away.

Where's the mystery? North Korea and Cuba are bankrupt because their economies are based on fantasy economic theories. If the US were to embrace the marxist/socialist policies of those countries, the US would become as bereft of everything as those two dying nations.

Dawn writes:

"We saw a need for a change in the trickle down theory, citing how rather than help grow the economy, feeding money and tax breaks to the rich helps to grow the profits. More people have lost jobs, their ability to be consumers, in the name of profits than for any other reason."

Take a course in economics. Your conclusions are wrong.

You wrote:

"No one seems to know how much profit is enough. And those with the power and money seem to find this a game of finding the tipping point -- when they have too much profit. So far, none of the wealthy have decided that one can be too wealthy."

Wealth is not determined by the wealthee. Wealth results from giving consumers something they want. No one is stopped from entering this game. Lemonade stand to Microsoft, the chance to profit is wide open.

Unlike, say, Cuba, where earning a profit is generally a crime against the state. Hence, most people honor the law and stay poor, as they fester while sitting around on their island prison.

Dawn writes:

"I've been reading about the homeless, the poor, the drugged out, the death of our young stars due to drugs and desperation. What a sad statement that some compassion, some reason, some investment, some caring could turn that around."

Yeah. I feel terrible about Heath Ledger. At 28 he had enormous career success, a beautiful child, endless amounts of money -- he was living in an apartment that rented for $23,000 a month. Twenty-three THOUSAND a month -- but his poor world-weary soul could not take another day of his miserable existence.

What an idiot. What a selfish jerk. Kiling himself and leaving his child without her father.

Dawn writes:

"I think as a country, we have reached that tipping point where 'profit' has turned into a detriment for us all -- the wealthy are still floating in that beaker of gradually heating water and haven't realized that they're cooking their own goose by contributing to the downfall of the middle class."

Your well of economic nonsense is overflowing. Put a cork in it.

If it weren't for the wealth-builders of this country, the complainers would find themselves living in mud huts and drinking dirty water, like about 500 million Africans.

[Lulu]

Isn't it interesting that the Chrises of the world are so protective of fetuses and so careless regarding the well being of actual babies?

The Great Society was really underorganized. Social programs need to work with local agencies and community groups to ensure that funds are spent wisely, that accountability is built in from the beginning.

Worship of free markets is holding church in the World of Mammon. It's too bad that the proponents of free market workship are dominating academia... they have pretty much stifled debate. Now that's not a free market of ideas.

[Lulu]

Isn't it interesting that the Chrises of the world are so protective of fetuses and so careless regarding the well being of actual babies?

The Great Society was really underorganized. Social programs need to work with local agencies and community groups to ensure that funds are spent wisely, that accountability is built in from the beginning.

Worship of free markets is holding church in the World of Mammon. It's too bad that the proponents of free market workship are dominating academia... they have pretty much stifled debate. Now that's not a free market of ideas.

[Buena]

Yes, Lulu! Apparently many people believe fetuses are innocent and wonderful. But if they're born into poverty they are immediately lazy, bad babies who just want everything handed to them.

How dare they? Why should they get my hard-earned tax dollars when that money needs to be spent to kill Iraqi children?

[hazel]

Barbara wrote:
"As far as I can tell, “the economy,” as opposed to the “real economy,” is the realm of investment, and is occupied by people who live on interest and dividends instead of salaries and wages, aka the rich."

also the retired

[Dawn]

Chris wrote: Wealth is not determined by the wealthee. Wealth results from giving consumers something they want. No one is stopped from entering this game. Lemonade stand to Microsoft, the chance to profit is wide open.

Dawn: Wealth also grows from cutting jobs, salaries, benefits, and demanding that people do more work for less income. Wealth grows from sending jobs to third world countries. Wealth grows from cutting corners on quality in the product. Wealth grows from cutting out the product entirely and dealing in junk bonds. Wealth seems to grow best in an environment where morals and humanity are absent.

Dawn

[Anarcissie]

chris: '... But the thing that made the difference was unleashing the productive power of the American economy. That's why there's money to give away. ...'

The problem being that the money no longer represents wealth (that is, goods and services of real value). That is the result of many years of going in hock to the Chinese and so forth, under Reagan and Bushes I and II in order to pump up absurd stock and real estate prices, corporate executive salaries, and idiotic wars.

If you call that "unleashing" people are going to be calling for a leash, if not a noose.

[roger]

dawn: " I've been reading about the homeless, the poor, the drugged out, the death of our young stars due to drugs and desperation. What a sad statement that some compassion, some reason, some investment, some caring could turn that around. "

my taxes pay for all of the following: food stamps, medicaid, medicare, social security (retirement, ssi, survivors), section 8 housing assistance, baby your baby program, CHIP, child care assistance, financial assistance, sub for santa, utility assistance.

for a person who works until age 65 and dies at age 80 taxes would be extracted from gross pay in a confiscatory manner for 50 years of the period of employment and for 15 years of retirement. that would be 65 years of payment into the rathole of government to be redistributed by those thieves and fools in washington. i gather that you see this as insufficient compassion and investment.

as for heath ledger he was a multimillionaire who left a child for idiot selfish reasons and is not deserving of sympathy.

[roger]

barbara: " Far be it from me to make the revolutionary suggestion that babies are more important than profits. "

i live in a small town in the west. we have a meat processing plant in town which employs a large number of hispanics. the plant is over 85% hispanic many of which lack all of the following: 1) citizenship status, 2) english proficiency, 3) specialized employment skills, 4) grade school education.

the work is difficult, monotonous, and unpleasant. the hourly wage is above the average for this part of the country and the sign on bonus is now $1500 and assistance with the down payment on a house. the down payment assistance is coordinated through a local real estate agency. let us be quite clear. these persons earn a living wage in exchange for unskilled manual labor without the benefit of english nor any level of american education and this circumstance is made possible because the plant makes a profit. my suggestion is that many babies benefited from this arrangement.

[roger]

brian: "So what to conclude? Is our democracy a myth, carefully spun and manipulated, the velvet glove of an iron fisted growing police state to keep hold of an increasingly restive worker population? Are workers simply innocents in this or is there some dysfunctional co-enabling relationship of entangled abuse going on?"

i recently finished a book entitled crossing the river by victor grossman. he was in the military in the 50s and a communist. he swam across the danube river and eventually defected to the german democratic republic. he described living in the gdr and the eventual failure of the state by pressure from capitalism in west germany and glasnost in the soviet union. the description you give above better describes the gdr than it does america. the gdr exchanged employment security and guarantee of social services for lack of true freedom and the need for an enforced frontier. grossman defected in an effort to "build socialism" and yet the socialist state failed utterly. there is a lesson there.

[Chickensh*tEagle]

roger: "these persons earn a living wage in exchange for unskilled manual labor"

How quickly do you think you could get reasonably proficient at disassembling cows as fast as those jobs require without chopping your own fingers off?

In our economy, that word "unskilled" often means having skills most other people have no wish to acquire and don't really want to pay you for having.

[roger]

no this is unskilled labor. income, benefits and stability are accessed in exchange for manual labor. this is opportunity that millions throughout the world would sacrifice dearly to have. and the element that opens these doors is the dreaded profit.

[Chickensh*tEagle]

So, manual labor = unskilled labor?

You didn't answer my question: how fast do you think you could learn to to it?

[roger]

cutting meat is a simple process. the carcass moves from one station to the next and the worker makes the same cuts to each carcass at each station. it is something you learn in a day.

yes manual labor is the same as unskilled labor. that is why business wants a large pool of exploitable manual workers. this is why there is no substantial immigration reform.

on the other hand this is exceptional financial opportunity for workers coming from the south.

[Anarcissie]

roger: '... the gdr exchanged employment security and guarantee of social services for lack of true freedom and the need for an enforced frontier. grossman defected in an effort to "build socialism" and yet the socialist state failed utterly. there is a lesson there. ...'

One would think. And yet in spite of it, here in America people are giving their freedom away without even getting the social services.

So maybe it's _freedom_ that's the problem. If only they could get rid of it and still have tons and tons of big people's toys, not for everyone of course, but for the good folks.

[roger]

" Death toll

Berlin Wall, with graffiti and death strip. The side with the graffiti on is the West. This was at a street called BethaniendammIn the 28 years of its existence, over 192 people were killed when trying to cross the Berlin Wall. At least 800 more people were killed outside Berlin, trying to cross from East Germany to the west.

The East Germany did not record all of the deaths, so the real number may never be known.

Those people who were caught alive in an attempt to flee, had to go to prison for at least 5 years. The first victim of the wall was Günter Litfin. He was 24 years old and was shot by police, near the railway station of Berlin Friedrichstrasse, when he tried to get into the West. This was on 24 August, 1961, only 11 days after the border had been closed.

Peter Fechter bled to death in the death strip, on 17 August, 1962. This lead to a public outcry. American troops watched him, but could not help him. The East-German border policemen, who had wounded him, did not help him either.

In 1966, two children, aged 10 and 13 years, were killed in the border strip. This is unusual because the East German border police had orders not to shoot on pregnant women, children or mentally ill people.

The last death took place on 6 February, 1989, when Chris Gueffroy died trying to escape into West Berlin. "

from wickipedia.

no anarcissie there simply is no comparison between the freedom taken from american citizens in response to the terrorist attacks (appropriate response or otherwise) and the atrocities inflicted at the east german frontier.

how can you see this as an applicable comparison.

[Anarcissie]

Surely, roger, you can figure out that it's not the location but the direction that matters in the long run.

Americans don't seem to like freedom much, except talk about, unless freedom just means to have a lot of stuff and act like your neighbors. Fortunately they also like to be left alone by the cops, and that contradicts their desire to have the cops check up on everyone else. But eventually they'll figure out some workaround.

The spirit of repression is there, the "flight from freedom" is alive and well. Every social problem or difficulty is to be solved by the cops and a big book of rules. This goes back to long, long before 9/11, but of course 9/11 provided a golden opportunity to the worshipers of Security Mind to expand their operations.

Several months ago I went to a movie theater to see _Other People's Lives_. The theater permits people to post their reactions to the offerings. For _OPL_, someone very aptly wrote: THEIR PAST, OUR FUTURE.

[roger]

about the time federal marshals have shot their 800th american who attempted to cross the canadian border is about the time i believe that there is any comparable circumstance between the united states government and the east germany secret police.

or did i once again fail to surely figure out what matters.

[Anarcissie]

When the comparison you desire can be accurately made, it will no longer be permissible to make it, at least not in public.

[Barbara E]

Anyone who thinks manual labor is unskilled hasn't tried it.

[Anarcissie]

Economically speaking, the crucial thing is not whether a particular kind of labor requires skill but how much it costs to obtain the particular skill involved. One low-wage job I had involved clearing brush with an axe. To do this for many hours without killing yourself requires knowing how to handle an axe skillfully. But many people do have that skill, so it can't be traded for much money. I've gotten much more money for lesser but less widely-distributed skills.

[Andrea]

Roger, manual labor is not unskilled labor.

Can you pack irregularly shaped furniture into a regularly shaped container in the most efficient way in under eight hours? Can you move a 400 pound armoire by yourself? Can you hitch a tanker truck? Do you know how to clean a whole house in an hour and a half? How about maintaining a garden full of perennials, can you do that? Do you know how to detach the bottom of a car engine and weld a hole in it? All these things require manual labor and they all require experience and skill. Indeed it is not rocket science nor yet brain surgery, but some people are better than others at all of those things, and that is skill and that skill deserves respect.

Disrespect for any people, skilled or unskilled, erodes compassion. Lack of compassion is ugly.

[Chickensh*tEagle]

How about plumbing? Manual labor doesn't get any more hands-on (and sometimes hands-in) than that. Try telling the plumber who comes to fix your burst pipe in the middle of the night that you consider his work "unskilled."

In fact, whether a bill lists "labor" or professional services" is largely a matter of social convention.

[Brian]

To Roger, speaking of the oldtime East German police have you watched any of the youtube tapes of Southland police(aka LA and the OC police) shooting into cars of hemmed in parking lot runaway drivers who won't just submit and give up to a bunch of beefy buffed up armed jocks(many ex-military) of the government? They always claim the driver was trying to run them over but the tapes "prove" otherwise. God forbid if some unstable, disturbed, or intoxicated individual should fail to heed their command to stop and fall to their knees as they naturally don't want to be humiliated like hogs to be roped and caged on the way to the cell. Try crossing the border to come into America and not stopping when commanded to and see what gets shot. A student got tased in his own college library(UCLA) three times because he simply refused to show his i.d. and was obnoxious while ignoring the order to stop computing on a desktop. When other students questioned the police what the hell was going on they were told to stand back or they would get tased too. And these are tuition paying students in good standing suddenly talked down too like trash. Did the East German police prowl their libraries and ask for "papers"? Sure we have wayward homeless and "bad people" everywhere we go now, but even the good people get shot or tased if they don't obey authority. The troubled noisy women in the Arizona airport that was left alone unattended handcuffed who choked to death trying to get home to her family. The airport and town will spend tons for police but will they staff the airport with one good nurse? Is this the next thing the middle class has to look foward to in the middle classes downward descent? Have they even arrested even one manipulator of the subprime fraud scheme, a banker, a broker, a ratings agency actuary, a federal regulator? You're culling from history facts that while interesting in the 1980's bear little application to today. I don't think most people even have a clue just how big and all encompassing our police state has become as they only deal with the soft edges of it pushing more and more into their every day lives. It may sound like some radical boiler plate here, but its factual. I personally have had southland police growl, grimace, yell, and scream at me over simple questions. In Jury duty selection they treated us all as some cross between potential criminals and idiotic junior high school students they could intimidate and push around. Its then I noticed the courtroom doors were four inches thick solid wood. Why should the whole potential jury pool of two hundred adults be made to feel afraid through the whole process? A warning? Is there some war going on and we are catching a glimpse of it? The illusion of freedom is just that as financially and physically we are extremely vulnerable. Yes there are violent and some not so violent criminals running around, but what is in place is really for controlling us. I would say, re-read the bill of rights then read some of the Supreme Court decisions of the past 8 years and you will wonder if we are even still in the same country. The only argument that outmaneuvers all this is as a nation of 300 million have we simply gotten so overcrowded that all of this is unavoidable and just accept the new order as the best we can hope for. Yet i just read how in San Francisco a driver of a car was shot and killed in a drive by at a gas station across from the police station and since they have restrictions on business surveillance cameras up there for privacy reasons they have no description of the assailants. So now there will be a push to cameratize san francisco as its assumed the drivers were from gang ridden Oakland just across the bridge. From this start, cameras presence will grow and grow up there till like Los Angeles and the Southland you will be on virtual camera 24 7 outside your home. But then they have infra red cameras that can see through walls if they want and specific agencies like the DEA and treasury use them. So while ostensibly the intention to cameratize is to increase public safety, it will ultimately simple create better surveillance of the public in general. It won't prevent a crime necessarily, but it will enable capture of the perpetrators in a more convienent method. So to improve our security they have to first take our privacy, but then are we more secure? I can remember coming back from Canada in college and the angry distasteful look the American border gaurd had upon seeing us, and immediately searing our car as if we were some criminals and not even becoming friendly when obviously we were not. If we complained or resisted we would have been further detained, or ultimately shot. The way American law enforcement works is they have to right to escalate to lethal force if you resist even over the littlest matter. And it doesn't seem to matter what the offense is, as the basic policy is, if you refuse to obey, you are deemed such a threat to the system they have the right to simply kill you, even if its just a highschool grad in some "federalized" city or county or state or park or university uniform. Its key to remember all the federal money's and programs that effectively turn all our local police into a federal police. The US marshalls office and the DEA and other branches do joint policing efforts all the time. The concept that city and states are soverign or have separate police forces is a myth as they are all de facto federalized and can be superfederalized with one phone call. The East Germans order was to shoot those who tried to flee the country, and the American police orders are to shoot anybody who attempts to resist federal authority. Its that simple and I think a lot scarier.

[roger]

good morning all. we were talking about a meat processing plant and the hispanics who work there and who lacked several basic attributes and skills and these were referred to by me as manual laborers and unskilled workers. the point of identifying these as unskilled is to stress that profit allows those without skills to gain wages and benefits in exchange for manual labor thus profit is a valuable and desirable feature of competitive capitalism.

of course there are all strata of skills associated with manual labor.

[roger]

barbara: " Anyone who thinks manual labor is unskilled hasn't tried it. "

my back ground involves working in sawmill, working graveyard shift at a fruit and vegetable cannery, cleaning work and extensive restaurant work. i believe i have a firm handle on what is unskilled labor. i supported my family for many years from unskilled labor.

[roger]

andrea: " Disrespect for any people, skilled or unskilled, erodes compassion. Lack of compassion is ugly. "

im certain you sat up all night composing that equation.

as indicated above the question surrounds whether profit serves a useful component within capitalism. additionally i would add that big business to include food manufacturing needs a large pool of exploitable manual and specifically unskilled labor to keep labor costs to a minimum. if the worker is unskilled then they would be interchangeable with other unskilled and vulnerable workers and thus allows for a malleable workforce to the detriment of the workers. that you imply that i have disrespect for workers who earn their wages by means of manual labor is benighted.

[roger]

chickenshit: " How about plumbing? Manual labor doesn't get any more hands-on (and sometimes hands-in) than that. Try telling the plumber who comes to fix your burst pipe in the middle of the night that you consider his work "unskilled." "

indeed plumbing requires training and acquisition of skills unlike the job description associated with meat processing which is precisely and intentionally designed to allow for substitution or adjustment in number of unskilled workers. this is about containment of labor expenses. whether containment of wages to ensure the health of the company is beneficial to the workers is another question.

[roger]

brian: " The East Germans order was to shoot those who tried to flee the country, and the American police orders are to shoot anybody who attempts to resist federal authority. Its that simple and I think a lot scarier. "

again show me documentation that 800 americans have been shot at the canadian border and i will take your fabrications into consideration.

" Did the East German police prowl their libraries and ask for "papers"? "

read your history. they did much worse than that.

" You're culling from history facts that while interesting in the 1980's bear little application to today. "

if they have little application today why are you straining at the comparison. i did not include the soviet rendition of socialism: ukraine famine, show trials, kolyma, prisoner transport trains. nor did i include the asian equivalents: red guard and the cultural revolution. to say nothing of the atrocities in north korea.

barabara's infatuation with socialism is misplaced.

[wellclosed]

Barbara, if I vote for you, will you serve? I have voted for Ralph and yourself more than any other in my whole voting career. Shall I throw another away?

[Andrea]

Roger, I've clearly offended your delicate sensibilities by assuming you had contempt for a group of people. I see now that you were not thinking of them as "people" but rather as "economic units". My mistake.

Perhaps to avoid confusion and offense in the future you might define your terms first, and tell us that you are presenting an economic argument from a theoretical point of view, using an example from your own experience.

Most of us here tend to think of things from the point of view of individuals, who tend to see things in terms of personal human experience. For example, when I hear people refer to "hispanics" as expendable, malleable and replaceable, I become upset because I picture my cousins, my mother-in-law and my husband going through all the difficulties of poverty, joblessness and workplace abuse. It isn't that hard to picture, either, because they have gone through poverty, joblessness and abuse.

But we were speaking theoretically.

Yes, theoretically, profit does create opportunity. Offering product that consumers wish to purchase does create jobs. Some of those jobs require more generalized skills than others, which creates opportunity for a generalized work force. In theory, this is all true.

I think my reaction comes more from a highly unscientific emotional distaste for treating people like "economic units".

But I apologize for saying you had no compassion and were therefore ugly. I have no provable basis for saying this about you.

[roger]

these are indeed individuals. business sees these individuals as a labor force which at once creates wealth and inflicts expense. the question is whether business has more responsibility to these individuals than simply exchanging wages for manual labor. while it is true that profit creates opportunity for the worker may we expect business to invest more in its workers and if so what further is required.

[Me]

At least they can FIND the economy.

[roger]

" Americans "expect us to find ways to work together, not reasons to fight with each other," said Rep. John A. Boehner, R-Ohio, who forged the agreement with Pelosi in consultation with Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson.

"The sooner we get this relief in the hands of the American people, the sooner they can begin to do their job of being good consumers," Boehner said. "

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/01/29/business/main3766604.shtml

apparently our sole function in the republic is to be good consumers. this is nearly as daft as barbara insisting that profit and babies are mutually exclusive priorities.

[Brian]

I just don't see a need to compare what is happening in the US with the old Soviet block of the post world war 11 era till the 1980's. I do see a need to compare what is happening in America in the new millenium from post world war 11. This avoids the America, love it or leave it argument as if a bunch of people would suddenly joyously pick up from New York State and move on up to the Soviet Union of 30 some odd years ago. I am talking about what is happening in our states of today in our own contry which has been progressively federalized out of our hands. Now here is a really radical idea, and that its wrong to think that companies simply exchange wages for x number of hours of labor. They also are exchanging the person's ability to get and hold onto that job with the person submitting most of their life's waking energies to it, that some of could be better spent with their families, wives and children, their pets, their friends and hobbies and their ability to enjoy the so called freedom they are constantly told they have. When you have to work forced overtime(often paid as straight time, if even) to where you are fatiqued, irritable, numbed, tired, and dreading the next day, that may mean more about an unreasonable work place stealing your life than about your weakness in not handling, putting up with it, even competing with others to keep that job. You hear the stories of coworkers who went on vacation to return to a new person working their job. You hear stories of someone insisting they have saturday off to be with their family only to being frozen or even let go. A job that demands 40,50,60 hours of your week plus 1-5 hours commuting time a day simple takes over and rules your life while it puts substantially more profits in the pockets of the owners of that job. Yes they own that job, and sublet it to you and make certain things conditional for you to remain its tenant, or else. Its wrong to ever assume a job is simple an exchange of free time for wonderful wages. Its numbing not to realize jobs affect people's very emotions, energy, state of self, their families, etc in many deleterious ways usually, but these deleterious ways line the owners of these jobs with profits at this induced misery. In the US of the mid 1970's the 35 hour workweek was in vogue, and yes some worked more, but the basic concept was 35 hours. If you had a sensible commute, if you bundled those ours into 4 days or whatever, you had substantial time to have a life in addition to a job. Back then people got and took hour long lunch breaks. There was no pressure to skip lunch, eat a sandwhich at your work station or desk, or cut it short to be a good employee. People vacated their work stations in droves and ate, talked, some took health walks. It was ok, it was expected, it was encouraged, it was never guilted. Commuting was easier as it wasn't as overcrowded in most parts like today. Everyone got a few three, even four day weekends a year in addition thier full vactions. Everyone took their full vactions. Nobody cut them short or didn't take them. The idea of you getting paid off for not taking your vacation didn't exist back then. Now days companys think nothing of calling back their workers on saturdays, or nights, or early mornings for meeting after meeting, training seminar after training seminar. Back in the 1970's it was also a common practice for companies to pay full tuition for employees to go to night school in whatever subject they wanted. The concept of testing the general work force constantly with drugs screens did not exist. Some businesses allowed alcohol on friday lunches believe it or not and it wasn't considered a negagitve issue back then. It was a more forgiving time and people didn't have to lie as much to keep their jobs. It was so different back then it wasn't even funny. So you do a great disservice to all us patriots who remember what our country was like just such a short while ago, these were the freedoms we cherished that have now been abolished completely.

[The Eternal Squire]

A funny story about being a gold bug: when times were good back in 2000 I noticed how Dubya was such a horrible president, and that the financial fundamentals were shaping up to be the worst I ever saw in my lifetime. So I starting buying gold coins at $245. I had to sell much of my stash when I got I married, but after my child was born I managed to hook my wife on collecting them. It is now 2008 and I have been unemployed for the last couple years, and I have still held onto a few coins even though gold reached $1000.

VIVA LA GOLD!

[Karl]

I think Roger is correct. what Barbara is advocating is for Capitalist countries to become Socialistic. This, we all know, has already failed. Perhaps Barbara and her ilk should study the GDR, and then they could stop propagating this nonesense. Capitalism has "won." It best mimics human nature and the nature of the jungle, "survival of the fittest." In ancient human societies a few became powerful while most suffered. This is the way of the world. It is cute that everyone wants to dream in a sophmoric way about what could be, what should be..etc. Get real! Life isn't about "sharing", it is about "taking" and using your noggin. The problem is that most people have a low I.Q., and they have to settle for what society dishes out to them. Good luck! Read a book! Educate yourselves and invent ways to make money. No one is going to give you any.
Karl

[Brian]

yes Karl, go read a book! And I think what Barbara is talking about is fairness, and in unbridled capitalism that does mean some regulation, some sense of doing right by others rather than simply going to church and feeling absolved of all responsibilities, or we will surely have another subprime fraud scheme cooked up by the more aggressive on the rest of us.

[Anarcissie]

Karl: '... It is cute that everyone wants to dream in a sophmoric way about what could be, what should be..etc. Get real! Life isn't about "sharing", it is about "taking" and using your noggin. ...'

You're not a very good capitalist, Karl. First of all, capitalism is a mode of cooperation, of collective behavior, not of isolated individualism. Secondly, the mainspring of capitalism has been the conviction of its practitioners, from top to bottom, that life can be different and better, that things imagined can be made real. That conviction may be as delusional as you suggest, but if people come to think that way, you can kiss capitalism good-bye.

[chris]

Barbara writes:

"Anyone who thinks manual labor is unskilled hasn't tried it."

False. Anyone who thinks manual labor requires more than basic motor skills has bad judgment and no understanding of the term "manual labor."

The trio of andrea, anarcissie and chickenshit eagle all engage in misdirection and dissembling when claiming manual labor is equal to work that requires some input from the higher parts of humans.

Manual labor is work that depends almost entirely upon a human performing a simple task that is accomplished through simple muscle movements applied to simple tools or no tools.

However, andrea, anarcissie and chickenshit would conclude that writing a book or artistic painting is "manual labor" because it involves merely pushing a pencil across paper or daubing some paint on a canvas.

As for plumbing, clearly chickenshit doesn't know the reason plumbers earn a lot of money has nothing to do with the low-skill requirements of the job. He did note that it's a bad idea to criticize someone who comes to your aid in the middle of the night to stop the flooding in your basement.

Anyway, animals once performed a lot of "manual labor". Pulling the plow, carrying us on their backs, etc. When possible, we let Nature do the work. Such as when flowing water turns a wheel.

But based on comments from anarcissie, andrea and chickenshit, it would seem that people who are preparing for careers as neuro-surgeons are just as likely to consider the option of becoming packers of boxes.

[Chickensh*tEagle]

chris: "As for plumbing, clearly chickenshit doesn't know the reason plumbers earn a lot of money has nothing to do with the low-skill requirements of the job."

Well then, it would seem that plumbers are heroes of the capitalist ideal -- getting more for less.

As for neurosurgery, the ESSENTIAL work is done with the hands and it's a simply a much more delicate form of plumbing repair -- knowing how a to find a physical problem and fixing it. That's very different from realizing a mental image as an image in paint on canvas or setting a thought, or many connected thoughts, down in writing. I don't need to misdirect you; you're already misdirected.

[chris]

chickenshit, you wrote:

"As for neurosurgery, the ESSENTIAL work is done with the hands and it's a simply a much more delicate form of plumbing repair -- knowing how a to find a physical problem and fixing it."

Yeah, there's a lot of overlap between plumbing and neurosurgery. That probably explains the large percentage of neurosurgeons who began their careers as plumbers then realized soldering copper pipes and cutting lengths of PVC tubes was no different than opening a skull and performing a lobotomy like the one your ex-plumber performed on you.

[Anarcissie]

chris, you don't appear to understand basic market economics. In a normal "free" market, goods and services do not have intrinsic exchange value -- they are worth what someone will pay for them. What people will pay is affected by external conditions like supply and demand, fashion, credentialism, the general state of the local economy, and so on. What makes a kind of labor cheap is a large supply of that kind of labor as opposed to the money available to pay for it, not its complexity or difficulty.

[chris]

anarcissie, gee, I never knew something was worth what others are willing to pay for it.

You wrote:

"What people will pay is affected by external conditions like supply and demand, fashion, credentialism, the general state of the local economy, and so on."

Many people hire others to do work they could do themselves, if they wanted to. Lots of people paint their houses, renovate their property and repair their cars. But no one performs neurosurgery on himself or removes his own appendix.

In other words, lots of people are able to perform those low-skill or no-skill jobs. They do this work because they can and because it is is worth it for some to save the money. But amateurs can't perform work that requires true professionals.

You wrote:

"What makes a kind of labor cheap is a large supply of that kind of labor as opposed to the money available to pay for it, not its complexity or difficulty."

There are very few gas jockeys in the US today. Millions of people once pumped gas to make a few bucks. But that no-skill job has been replaced by credit-card machines built into the gas pumps that are operated by customers.

Meanwhile, a large supply of labor does not ensure low wages. In fact, the wealth of an economy does affect wages for low-skill jobs. Yard maintenance -- grass cutting, etc -- is a job held by many in the US. In a lot of other countries the job is unheard of.

Fast-food jobs at places like McDonalds are rare to nonexistent in many countries. But millions of those jobs exist here and their numbers are increasing.

There are no complex jobs for which wages are near the bottom of the wage scale in this economy.

But people do labor for love. Millions of writers earn zero dollars for decent work. But people employed to write by viable organizations can expect to earn a living. Something more elusive that technical skill plays a role.

[Anarcissie]

chris: '... There are no complex jobs for which wages are near the bottom of the wage scale in this economy. ...'

Sure there are. Teaching, in many areas, for one.

[chris]

anarcissie, you wrote:

"Sure there are. Teaching, in many areas, for one."

Teachers start at $40,000 in NY City. That's nowhere near the bottom of the wage scale in this city.

In addition, teachers receive gold-plated healthcare. The same coverage would cost at least $10,000 a year if a participant were self-employed and paying for his own coverage.

[Personal experience essay]

http://www.masterpapers.com/personal_experience_essay.htm
Frequently the reason behind the desire to write this type of paper remains unclear. However, once the events are recounted and recorded, it becomes clear that the writer is striving to find the universal truth.Personal experience essay

[Anarcissie]

chris -- I knew you would start in about NYC teachers. NYC teachers are in an unusual situation: they have a strong union and the city has a large tax base. In general, teachers don't make much money, and a good many of them make very little money.

Not only do you appear to not understand basic economics, you also seem to be missing basic logic. Anecdotes of exceptions do not count for much in a logical argument, although they may go over well in TV advertising.

[roger]

chickenshit: " As for neurosurgery, the ESSENTIAL work is done with the hands and it's a simply a much more delicate form of plumbing repair -- knowing how a to find a physical problem and fixing it. "

about the time the local technical college begins offering classes in neurosurgery along side their plumbing classes is about the time this makes and sense at all.

[roger]

brian: " Its wrong to ever assume a job is simple an exchange of free time for wonderful wages. Its numbing not to realize jobs affect people's very emotions, energy, state of self, their families, etc

why is it wrong to assume that employment is a negotiated arrangement between workers and owners. if owners feel that labor is a resource for adding value to other resources and unions bid on work as they would any other resource and if disadvantaged and unskilled workers manipulate labor in a way which yields nothing more than wages, how does emotion come into this. employment is the means by which those who lack wealth and advantage gain wages. henry ford offered $5 per day in order to gather a resource for the manufacture of automobiles. workers accepted this eagerly as a means to access wages. this is the negotiated arrangement.

the need is to prevent the abuse of the worker. i do not see how the employer is responsible for the emotions of the worker.

[roger]

.....and of course we cannot keep politics out of the equation.....

http://www.borderfirereport.net/latest/tancredo-assails-stimulus-package-giveaway-to-illegal-aliens.html

[Chickensh*tEagle]

chris (earlier): "Anyway, animals once performed a lot of 'manual labor'. Pulling the plow, carrying us on their backs, etc. When possible, we let Nature do the work. Such as when flowing water turns a wheel."

That shows you don't know the difference between "physical" and "manual." Work animals don't have hands. A work animal has to be directed by the hand of a human that knows what s/he is doing.

The human hand and the brain that directs it co-evolved as complements to each other. Humans were "Homo habilis" -- i.e., handy with tools -- even before they were "Homo erectus," let alone "Homo sapiens." Even in the days of Homo habilis, manual work was skilled work. I don't doubt, though that some H. habilis were more skilled than others.

"Yeah, there's a lot of overlap between plumbing and neurosurgery."

That shows only that you don't know the difference between overlap and similarity of concept.

roger (earlier): "my back ground involves working in sawmill, working graveyard shift at a fruit and vegetable cannery, cleaning work and extensive restaurant work. i believe i have a firm handle on what is unskilled labor. i supported my family for many years from unskilled labor."

If you were good at those jobs, you were skilled by any fair definition. As an individual you lacked the bargaining power to win acknowledgment of that fact from your employers, but it's sad that you should sell yourself short to yourself by accepting that "unskilled" label from society.

"about the time the local technical college begins offering classes in neurosurgery along side their plumbing classes is about the time this makes and sense at all."

There's no particular reason why the path to neurosurgery couldn't at least start out in a technical college. In fact, in days of yore one became a surgeon or physician through apprenticeship.

And guess what -- the skills of surgeons were valued less than those of physicians, even though most of what physicians did back then was quackery. As late as the '60s (and up until now, as far as I know) surgeons in the UK were called "Mister," not "Doctor."

[roger]

" If you were good at those jobs, you were skilled by any fair definition. "

that would be the point. one does not need to be skilled to be good at these jobs. competetive, extractive capitalism does not reward one for being able to do that which everyone else can do equally well. negotiation is only incidental to the question.

[chris]

anarcissie,

NY teachers are paid on a par with most teachers in the US. However, if you were to listen to the complaints from them, you'd learn that teachers in the suburbs around NY City earn more on an absolute basis. And teachers in every suburb earn more than NYC teachers on a relative basis.

Meanwhile, teachers in towns in Idaho are well compensated relative to other local workers. A young female relative of mine is a teacher in Anchorage, Alaska. She recently bought a house and drives a late-model vehicle. No help came from her parents. She's single and covers her bills with her teaching income. She's 28.

[Anarcissie]

chris, you don't seem to understand the law of supply and demand, which is about the most basic principle of market economics there is. Let us forego prolonging the tedium of my provoking and your supplying further irrelevant anecdotes.

[chris]

anarcissie, you made a claim you are unable to support.

First, I stated:

"There are no complex jobs for which wages are near the bottom of the wage scale in this economy."

You claimed:

"Sure there are. Teaching, in many areas, for one."

Frist, despite the large numbers of teachers -- the education departments in every state are major employers -- wages are good.

Moreover, most teaching is not complex, which was the basis of my original statement. Basic learning is, well, pretty easy -- for the students and the teachers.

Teachers need very little training to teach grade school. Thus, the jobs are not "complex". Subjects may become tougher in middle school and high school. But there's no shortage of people capable of teaching them.

Then you made a bizarre comment:

"chris, you don't seem to understand the law of supply and demand, which is about the most basic principle of market economics there is."

Perhaps I don't know your personal version of supply & demand. But it is a simple fact that people pay for knowledge. They pay teachers, and sometimes they pay teachers a lot.

Martha Stewart comes to mind. Interestingly, people willingly pay a lot of money to learn and acquire skills which, in turn, offer no money-making value to the student. Aside from Martha, there are the teachers who teach writing.

Then there are teachers who teach students how to achieve higher scores on tests, like Stanley Kaplan and the Kaplan organization. Or tutors, regularly earning $80 or more an hour and often working 40 hours a week.

If anything teaching and the wages of teaching follow Say's Law -- supply creates its own demand.

Home Depot holds classes. Everywhere are classes, classes for any and every imaginable subject or pursuit. Thus, the demand for teachers grows daily.

On the other hand, the impact of a rising minimum wage and the declining cost of collecting payment from gas station customers has led to the near disappearance of gas jockeys. This has happened despite the growth in the number of cars and drivers.

Anyway, with respect to supply and demand, you'll have to spell out your views. Your assertions make no sense.

[Anarcissie]

If more people want to be teachers than there are job positions for teachers, the wages and benefits of teaching will decline until equilibrium is reached (supply and demand balance). Unless, as in NYC, the teachers can constrain the supply by forming a strong union -- but that is just another version of supply and demand.

One might think that the skill level of a job might significantly restrict the supply of people who can do it, thus raising its price, but this often isn't the case, as in teaching, various of the arts, farming, and other kinds of work, because the work evidently attracts people for reasons other than the monetary reward.

Is that so arcane?

[chris]

anarcissie, you seem to think the only people who earn a living as teachers work in union-controlled public schools.

Public school teachers are obviously a large segment of the teaching corps in this country, but the number of people who are teachers is much larger than the public-school total.

As I said in an earlier post, many teachers possess limited skills. Kids in grade school are there to develop basic skills. Not advanced and sophisticated knowledge.

Meanwhile, at the grade-school level, there are no economies of scale possible. One teacher can handle about 25-30 kids. Hence, as the population grows, so too grows demand for teachers.

Anyway, it appears there is no end to what people want to learn and no limit to what they will pay to learn it.

Moreover, teaching wages reflect more than just the complexity of what's taught. Timing matters.

Kids need to be ready for SATs on test day. Not a week later. Hence, in addition to possessing some specific knowledge, a teacher must also know how to present it effectively within a fixed period.

Aside from the fact that you didn't support your claim I was uninformed about supply and demand, you also added the same point that I made -- that some work is a labor of love.

[Tom McCarthy]

Chris:

Yeah, like adults are so important. That's why conservative think it's fine for 18,000 of them die each year for lack of health insurance. Never mind the suffering of somewhat-less-ill millions who go untreated.

I'm so goddamn sick of living in a culture where every last thing is determined by money. Culture of life, my ass.

[Tom McCarthy]

Which reminds me: one reason behind the difference in religiosity between the U.S. and Europe, I think, is that Europeans simply don't feel the *need *to pray as often--or as desperately ("Oh, God, please don't let me be homeless").

That's because Europeans live in civilized societies in which they know they will never be reduced to the scraping for scraps like wolverines. They know their governments have their backs. Here in the U.S., thanks to the predominance of conservative ideology, no one has our backs.

Indeed, in the even more de-civilized nation that conservatives want to create, scraping for scraps would become a spectator sport. Wagers would be laid, and the lucky winner would be allowed to grovel briefly before a rich person (no touching allowed).

[roger]

tom: " That's because Europeans live in civilized societies in which they know they will never be reduced to the scraping for scraps like wolverines. "

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4401670.stm

it was too easy

[roger]

how do you see this tom. how do we understand this violence. you say that in europe the govt has the backs of the people (your unfortunate colloquialism, not mine) and yet when the social network is extended to such an extent that no one can fail and immigration policy is relaxed to the extent that anyone can enter the country it is then that there is muslim violence.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/10/05/wmuslims05.xml

perhaps the europeans are not praying enough.

[Anarcissie]

Tom -- I believe the religiosity difference between Americans and Europeans comes from their cultural history, not government services. In Europe, the government provides services because the people demand them. In America, at least in the US, they resent them (except when they are the direct beneficiaries).

To understand this, we need to remember that for the first four hundred years of contact between Europe and the Americas, the people who came to the latter from the former were conquistadors (thieves and murderers), gentleman adventurers, slaves, failures, criminals, desperate refugees, prostitutes, remittance men, and people with extremely strong delusions. Decent, hard-working, respectable people stayed home and made decent respectable lives for themselves.

Well, it is clear that the kind of people who were immigrating could not be running on reason and common sense; they had to have _faith_, had to believe that "You're the one / That can do what's never been done / That can win what's nver been won," as one of our bards puts it. Once you have this faith, you're faith-based and don't need a job or welfare, you just run after the shining thing in the air, and if you fall, the others running with you just trample you down and never notice. It's a wonderful system, at least for those who enjoy it.

You can see this working out in recent American history. Bush, confronted by a nation with serious financial, social and environmental problems, uses a terrorist attack to launch an idiotic war again _someone_else_ in the Middle East. That's the faith-based way! Just do anything that comes into your head, it's God whispering in your ear!

Welfare, single-payer medical, and unemployment insurance wouldn't have done anything to assuage the fevers of his soul -- after all, Bush _got_ welfare, because born rich. Didn't do a bit of good, did it?

[roger]

" conquistadors (thieves and murderers), gentleman adventurers, slaves, failures, criminals, desperate refugees, prostitutes, remittance men, and people with extremely strong delusions. "

perhaps you can help the rest of us catagorize the signers of the mayflower compact. persons with strong delusions perhaps.......

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mayflower_Compact

it is an astonishingly broad brush.

[roger]

......or do you prefer criminals.

[Anarcissie]

roger -- I think the Puritans definitely fall into the delusional class, in that they were religious fanatics -- people who talk to, in fact have long conversations with, beings no one else can see. This in itself would not be a problem, but like most religious fanatics but only some delusionals they were absolutely convinced that only _their_ conversations were valid and correct.

Were they criminals? Well, by the laws of their time they were; the religious fanatics in charge of the government of their time and place (17th-century England) were convinced they were talking to the wrong invisible being, or at least talking to the right invisible being in the wrong way. One could also say that they were moral criminals: within a few years of establishing their colony in the New World, taking what was not theirs, they were hunting and hanging witches, persecuting heretics of their own, and engaging in wars of extermination with the Indians (King Philip's War). There was a strong racial shading to the war and the witch business: the Indians were Indians, and the first witch was Tituba, a slave whose ethnic origin was Indian or Black, or both. If you look at the religious fanatics of today, you can see that some things don't change much.

But, anyway, it's nice that you carry on the grade-school tradition of admiring these folks so faithfully.

But I agree -- I paint with a broad brush. There are a few people in the United States who can learn, remember, reason, read and write. But they don't appear to be in the majority at the moment, and that's who I'm talking about.

[chris]

tom mccarthy, you wrote:

"Yeah, like adults are so important. That's why conservative think it's fine for 18,000 of them die each year for lack of health insurance."

This claim is one of the many unsubstantiable claims that arise from the chorus of those who seem to believe no one would die if the US offered Universal Government Healthcare.

Lots of people die each year as a result of the Flu. But flu shots are free almost everywhere in the country. Some people die because they are unable to obtain liver transplants in time to save their lives.

Of course people receiving liver transplants don't live long even if the operation is successful.

What cause of death is listed on the death certificates of these 18,000? Why would insurance coverage have made a difference? Were any of them smokers? Heavy drinkers? Drug abusers? Overeaters?

A lot of health problems are preventable. Hence, my sympathies do not extend to those who can choose to live healthier lives but risk disease and ill health instead.

You wrote:

"I'm so goddamn sick of living in a culture where every last thing is determined by money."

There are other "cultures" in the world. Try Cuba or North Korea. Meanwhile, since everyone wants to receive a paycheck for his labors, why not ask doctors, nurses, and the various therapists to accept a big pay cut. Ask the pharmaceutical companies to cut back on research so they can lower costs of existing drugs.

Perhaps capping awards in medical malpractice lawsuits is another way to lower medical costs.

Keep this in mind. The US spends about $8,000 per person eligible for Medicaid. If you extrapolate that figure of the entire US population, you arrive at an estimate for total healthcare that is about 50% higher than our current expenditures.

Are all Americans ready for an increase like that? Of course the actual increase would be much larger because Medicare does not cover pregnancy.

[Brian]

do you mean some of the criminals holding top positons in our financial services industry, or those governmental malfeasers negligently postulating fantasy government bugets and spend and tax regiemes dependent on funny math? Is there anything about the subprime banking crises that doesn't fit within the definition of criminal? Isn't fraud criminal? Isn't blatantly faulty ratings of cdos, sivs malfeasance if not fraud?
What about governmental regulating agencies looking the other way while this global mess was cooked up. Huge Bonuses were still paid to the chef's, even those "symbolically" retired, but now their institutions are tipping towards insolvency and ordinary people are losing their primary life-long assets and in a recession their jobs. Isn't all of that criminal? Why is capital held so high and immune from prosecution, while workers are kicked to the curb with impunity. Its a class system run amuck and in another time pre-revolutionary.

[lc2]

Crap. Every time I take a break from reading this blog and come back, chris and roger have taken over. They suck, and this forum sucks b'c of them.

We need some meeting of like minds and momentum to defeat the Huckabees of the world in Nov. ... just you wait, he will be McCain's running mate. What, did you think the Dobsons and Robertsons and other evangelicals were going to give up their honored place in politics that easily?

Why won't chris and roger go away ... they already have the mainstream media to promote their views, why must they pester marginalized leftists? They already have Horatio Alger, the Prostestant ethic, etc. firmly in place ... most people already believe that if they're not rich and/or incredibly sexy, it's their own faults ... the radical view promoted here, that most rich people are undeserving and greedy, and working people are anesthetized to their power, is in no danger of infiltrating the masses. So why do roger and chris feel the need to frequent this forum? They act as if we have any real power ... what a joke. Why does it bother them that somewhere, someone might actually love themselves and their neighbors enough to hold a diff. view?

Ugh, I can't stand roger and chris. Go away!

[Brian]

What Chris is saying is that those with lifestyle induced poor health outcomes are inferior to those with better lifestyles. Just think how much control you can have over your lifestyle if you are rich and niched around a bunch of health food restaurants, tree lined parks with bicycle and jogging trails free of gangs, sheik gyms, other healthy rich and educated folks, compared with if you're born to a single parent family in South Central Los Angeles where liquor stores and fast food outlets dot each corner? How is that the kid's fault? Why shouldn't he have access to health care, and his parent also, and their neighbors. Why was the only county hospital shut down in their area for such a lack of competent talent? Why couldn't the state of California, with County and federal help provide a real management team, good nurses and doctors, and make it work? Instead under Clinton they recieved a 400 million dollar grant to provide services which apparently was petered away by imcompetent leadership? Now the hospital and urgent care center is gone. The problem is bigger than just the lifestyle here, it boggles the mind. Los Angeles got some homeless shelter grant monies and immediately turned the bulk of it over to the police department to more aggressively police them for drugs. They did not build more shelters, provide urgent care, or social workers as the orignal intention was. These are vulnerable populations that are for the most part un or marginably employable so a job based solution isn't going to work for them. So why should they be denied health care? These people simply don't have the pull- yourself-up-by-you- bootstrap skills Chris and Roger rigidly and apparently blame on their genetics. But even if it is a mix of locally based eco-genetics why should we let them suffer? Is that liberal to think you don't want another to suffer and just watch them circle the drain as problem creatures? Finally I would say to Chris is why don't you ask some of these business people(bankers, brokers, partners, sales and marketing and media titans, corporate ceo's and their top associates, board members, etc) paid many multiples of what most hard working doctors and lawyers make to top stacking the deck so they can walk away with such a disproportionate amount of our national wealth as if they eco-genetically owned it. Its said the average American CEO gets paid 200x the average employee. How can that be? And those that surround him also get paid exhorbinately to do what? And when they get tired of that stint they rotate into the US treasury department and other powerful venues of federal and state and county government a while till they cross pollinate and rotate back into the private sector. All this time the single working parent in South Central barely scratching a living saves a little time picking up a McDonalds dinner for her kids. Why demonize her? You have to decide who you argue for. For the rich who control everything or the people who just work or survive day in and day out and control nothing. The system little needs your support to maintain control and further concentrate wealth into fewer highly powerful hands who feel fully entitled to all they can grasp. I don't understand why that is your default position because most likely they will never let you in that door. You may have a job that seems reasonable to you, but to them you are just noisy middle class bugs on the wall to be "managed" "hyped" and "spun". I am sure many in the current administration believe they are just doing a real bang up job and nobody understands their sacrifices. The system is constructed to empower them this way and reinforce in them their own myopic self-serving views on the taxpayer dole. I seriously doubt if the Federal Government were 1/10th the size it is now we would notice any difference in anything if they keep the military as it is. So much of what they provide is an illusion of provision driven by governmental marketeers for private vested interests. It would really be even sadder if it wasn't so pathetic. I am not talking about reallocating wealth, but simply readjusting the reward scale so that things are fairer in the future. And you would demonize that is liberal? I see it as stop the cheating, check the greed, and become an adult that recognizes we need a better balance in our society or we are going to surely go off the cliff.

[Anarcissie]

lc2: 'Crap. Every time I take a break from reading this blog and come back, chris and roger have taken over. They suck, and this forum sucks b'c of them. ...'

Well, _I_ find roger charmingly screwy. No one else around here would so shamelessly hagiographize the Pilgrim Fathers and thus pitch me one right over the plate.

I do find chris a bit tedious in his rather ineffectual attempts to totally destroy his opponents. I'd like to see a tighter, more succinct style. Some thinking, some relating of a to b might also be in order. And concentration on one point, rather than random flailing away at many.

So. And where's "Monica"?

[Anarcissie]

Brian: '.... I am not talking about reallocating wealth, but simply readjusting the reward scale so that things are fairer in the future. ...'

Well, who's going to do that? It seems to me that things are the way they are because people generally support things being the way they are, as for instance with their worship of rich people, celebrities and thugs. Sure, I'd like to change that, but how?

[lc2]

Hmmmm. I wonder if roger and chris also go to right-wing blogs, and skewer the posters there, using our arguments? Probably. Lol.

My point is, they have nothing valuable to contribute. Ask any political consultant who does work w/foreign leaders (most do, these days) ... and they will tell you, the farthest-left pol in the U.S. is like fifteen degrees to the right of the mainstream political establishment just about anywhere else (no, chris, I'm not including the Arab world in that analysis). "The left" does not exist in this country, outside of fledgling and ineffective cyber communities like this one. So why expend the effort in pissing on our parade? It's not like we're doing anything other than exercising our freedom of expression and thought ... now why would that bother a conservative?

And please chris ... in your response, do not mention the following: Coeur d'Alene, Idaho; Brooklyn, NY; pumping gas as a high-school student; the NYC public school system and its overpaid and entitled employees; your highly-virtuous health habits; your mother; or Muslims. . Or better yet ... don't respond at all, b'c it's utterly predictable, and no one cares what about what you say anyway ... we can turn on Fox or O'Reilly or Rush and hear the exact same shit, any day of the year. We're here precisely *b'c* that "you are x or y b'c you deserve to be" crap is so simpleminded, it doesn't ring true to us, and we're in search of something more honest and and fair and real and worthy of debate. Now go try and get along w/your neighbors in Flatbush ... you should be happy you get to see such a varied slice of humanity up close and personal each day. Leave the computer ... go and live!!

[Brian]

Anarcissie...well, my most radical theory to date is people are utterly programmable. Our advertising machine, our government, our legal system, etc constantly promotes key certain values, one being the winner take all. Not the winner shares wisely with the rest of the tribe. Yet in real life most of us are expected to submit all of our efforts to the tribe while we toil under the illusion we are going to win it all by hard work and lottery luck. Reminds me of Flash Dance where you weld by day and dance at night and become a star as you capture people's imaginations. Someone else said our sports stars, rock stars, celebrity icons is a modern version of sainthood, those who we worship. Even the pharmaceutical industry spends around 40% of each prescription dollar on marketing, when if the drugs were that good, they should just fly off the shelves. Much of our television, movies, music, media and print industries constantly program us a strong message. For quite a number of years you could simply turn on a news radio or tv broadcast and in the first ten seconds hear about terrorism, fear, the world trade towers by simply sampling a few sentences of what was being said. I was amazed at how reliable this was. They were literally programming a mindset into the entire population by the seconds. Don't forget there are entire college majors in communications and media in addition to journalism and mass communications, etc etc. All large organizations and the government and the white house have people on the payroll, experts with experience in the field very close to those who hold power for whatever message they want to get out. And no, I don't believe in black helicoptors flying overhead or the UN is trying to take over. So what can people do, either take over the media and do new programming somehow, or simply TURN IT OFF(and don't associate with others who are contaminated).

[lc2]

Brilliant post, Brian.

I am considering doing that very thing ... taking an extended media vaca. I alredy gave up TV 12 years ago to save $$ ... I was one of those people who had no self-control and just watched Jerry Springer anyhow. Nowadays when I catch a glimpse of tv, it's like watching a parody (that the viewers seem to take seriously, even though the production staff clearly doesn't) or, after 8pm, soft-core porn. Read Chris Hedges's book "War is a Force That Gives Us Meaning" for some frightening parallels to how tv devolved in Bosnia before fighting broke out.

Anyhow ... I think the internet is next for me ... even though I know it'll break chris's heart. I will continue to read print media, b'c having something in your hand that you can put down, revisit if something seems off, reflect on, and share, is a powerful thing. One of my internships back in the day was w/a tv news roundtable. My job was to read 5 major dailies and clip all pertinent articles. Of course I also read the headlines. You'd be shocked at how varied the reporting was ... sometimes you'd hardly believe you were reading about the same event. All facts, mind you! It's just about which ones you choose to include.

Also, thanks for articulating the religion-sports connection (I am a big sports fan btw ... but mainly watch them live, in the form of local rec or high school contests). That is something I've been tossing around in my head for awhile. I live in New England, and it's seemed to me for some time now that, aside from the fact that our regional teams are indeed enjoying great success these days and there's no denying that that would get people excited regardless, there is some unprecedented fervor in the air. I believe that it's b'c for so many Catholics who are disaffected in the wake of all the clergy sex abuse scandals, these sports dynasties provide them w/the near-religious experience and sense of unity they can no longer get at Mass. I know a bunch of fams in our working-class circle who 15 years ago would've had more than the current token religious icon or two prominently displayed in the house ... but now have RedSox or Patriots paraphenalia in their place. I'm glad to know I'm not the only person who has wondered about this phenomenon.

It seems unnecessarily cruel to keep childhood fantasies like the Flashdance thing, such a part of our landscape into adulthood. But we do choose to buy into them or not ... we are free people after all.

Thanks again for the post. Maybe this blog doesn't suck entirely after all, lol.

[chris]

It's always good to get feedback from readers. Thank you.

[roger]

" I think the Puritans definitely fall into the delusional class, in that they were religious fanatics -- people who talk to, in fact have long conversations with, beings no one else can see. "

" Well, by the laws of their time they were; the religious fanatics in charge of the government of their time and place (17th-century England) were convinced they were talking to the wrong invisible being, or at least talking to the right invisible being in the wrong way. "

i gather then that it is criminal to be engaged in each of the following: praying to God and being persecuted for ones religious beliefs. if we approach this from the perspective that religion and belief on God are each specious and puerile then i could anticipate some persons coming to the conclusion that the mayflower travelers would be delusional. if one however believes in God the perspective shifts and it is understood why the pilgrims would seek sanctuary from religious persecution in the first place. that the mayflower compact could be viewed as felonious is not clear to me.

[roger]

" If you look at the religious fanatics of today, you can see that some things don't change much. "

do you see all who have a belief in God as fanatics or do you use some manner measurement.

[roger]

" the radical view promoted here, that most rich people are undeserving and greedy, and working people are anesthetized to their power, is in no danger of infiltrating the masses. So why do roger and chris feel the need to frequent this forum? "

im interested in why you believe that those who have made some money, in some cases a lot of money, do not deserve the money the have. is the issue that you believe as marx did that all wealth is theft from the masses or do you believe that the game is rigged in favor of the wealthy. i gather that it would now be the responsibility of the government to regulate greed.

i will certainly not dispute that the wealthy class is the ruling class however i would also say that given the capacity of extractive capitalism to create wealth that there is ample opportunity for the majority of the population to gain access to that which they need in order to live much better than most of the world population.

additionally how exactly would you extract from the wealthy that wealth which you believe they do not deserve.

[roger]

speaking of the homeless population: " These are vulnerable populations that are for the most part un or marginably employable so a job based solution isn't going to work for them. So why should they be denied health care? These people simply don't have the pull- yourself-up-by-you- bootstrap skills Chris and Roger rigidly and apparently blame on their genetics. "

why is employment not the solution in these instances. how is a financial grant preferable to employment. as for genetics you would need to explain where i ever implied that this is either genetic weakness or racial inferiority. this is a fairly serious accusation.

[roger]

" Our advertising machine, our government, our legal system, etc constantly promotes key certain values, one being the winner take all. Not the winner shares wisely with the rest of the tribe. Yet in real life most of us are expected to submit all of our efforts to the tribe while we toil under the illusion we are going to win it all by hard work and lottery luck. "

is there something wrong with gaining an education, gaining employment and securing ones future. as i said before the alternative was played out to failure in the east germany where employment was in theory secure for a lifetime and the cost of health care was spread out among the masses however there was no initiative to improve the welfare of the population nor was there any scientific/health care innovation. german democratic republic was dependent upon western government and business for its medicine, technology and raw material.

[lc2]

chris,

Glad I could give you a little of the attention you clearly crave .. indeed, require. Since you live in NYC, I'm sure you could find someone who would, for a price, let you sit on their lap and stroke your hair, too. Maybe even for free.

roger,

My observations are purely anecdotal .... and I'm not even talking about "earned" income a la ceo's. I've just noticed that most outrageously wealthy people are serious douchebags ... and literally have more money than they know what to do w/ ... so for the most part, they just hoarde it. In the case of the younger generation of heirs particularly ... it does them a real disservice, to never have to work a day in their lives. I live close to several elite boarding schools, so I know of what I speak. Also, I point to countless analyses of charitable/philanthropic giving, which show that if you are needy, you are far more likely to be given someone's last dollar than to get the coffee grounds out of a rich person's cup.

As for extraction ... the old-fashioned way. Tax the rich, too!! Don't allow a system in which wages are the most harshly-taxed form of compensation. It's not complicated, and I never said I wasn't a liberal.

[roger]

" I've just noticed that most outrageously wealthy people are serious douchebags ... and literally have more money than they know what to do w/ ... so for the most part, they just hoarde it. In the case of the younger generation of heirs particularly ... it does them a real disservice, to never have to work a day in their lives.

ok so you dont like them.

i guess i would say that the government is as incapable of teaching work ethic to the children of the wealthy as it is incapable of teaching frugality to the poor.

as for taxes the wealthy pay a lot of taxes as they find themselves in a much higher tax bracket. this income is taken by fools and thieves in washington and wasted. plz tell us where you are going with this line of argument.

[Anarcissie]

roger: 'i gather then that it is criminal to be engaged in each of the following: praying to God and being persecuted for ones religious beliefs. if we approach this from the perspective that religion and belief on God are each specious and puerile then i could anticipate some persons coming to the conclusion that the mayflower travelers would be delusional. if one however believes in God the perspective shifts and it is understood why the pilgrims would seek sanctuary from religious persecution in the first place. that the mayflower compact could be viewed as felonious is not clear to me.'

The Puritans were criminals according to the laws of their time and place. I regard those laws as stupid and repulsive because I don't believe in the religion of the lawmakers, which held among other things that correct beliefs must be imposed by force. The Puritans, however, agreed with that principle and carried it out as soon as they had the power to do so. Indeed, they went further than that, and hunted down, tortured and executed people who were not heretics or infidels, but _imagined_ to be witches -- a competing religious belief. If you think the Puritans were correct, then by the laws of their own society they were criminals.

We're not talking about god-beliefs here but violent and savage political acts. What in them do you find admirable?

[lc2]

Touche, roger. We both make mainly unfair generalizations. However, I would say that food stamp benefits that amt. to less than $2/meal in most cases (and aren't adjusted to increasing groc. costs) go much farther to "teaching" frugality, than tax breaks for trillionaires go toward promoting a work ethic. I don't know if people learn a lesson when they fill out tax returns ... other than the fact that if they're wage-slaves like we are in my family, we're royally fucked.

I've interacted w/plenty of amiable rich people ... just am aware that when it comes to their $$, they're far less willing to part w/it than are their poorer counterparts who actually know the value of a dollar. How's that for a generalization? Lol. But it is borne out thru statistics, laws, the tax code, and all of human history ... of which you appear to be an astute observer.

As far as why the wealthy should be less bothered by the waste of their tax dollars? Simple: b'c they have so much more than they need or could ever us anyway, it's water under the bridge. When I throw a few cans of Beefaroni into the Food Pantry basket, I don't micro-manage its distribution ... I just assume that someone else needs that food more than I do. As long as it's not being sold for cash value, at cost, what do I care? And per Marx and Engels's equation, that food cuts into my standard of living far more than million$ of tax dollars would for your average trillionnaire.

[roger]

i admire the desire by the puritans to escape religious persecution. i see the witch trials as a separate and despicable episode which occurred in 1692, 70 years following the landing of the mayflower and the writing of the mayflower compact in 1620.

[lc2]

Btw, Barbara, in case you read this:

My local paper printed a modified version of this essay on the op/ed page ... nice to see that you're a journeywoman wordsmith and not a temperamental artiste who would balk at omitting "clitoral" from the title and contents ... lol.

Just to lick rim a bit further ... the "occult" bit is brilliant! That pretty fairly sums up neoclassical economics, b'c it won't fess up to or include the profit motive in its "equations". Lol.

[chris]

Barb mistakenly claims:

"Any stimulus package should focus on the poor and the unemployed, not because they spend more, but because they are in most in need of help."

Some cash to tide one over may be appreciated, but it does not create a new job for the poor or unemployed. Hence, it is wrong to conclude that this is the best strategy for those seen as most in need of help.

She opines:

"Yes, when a parent can afford to buy Enfamil, it helps the Enfamil company and no doubt “the economy” too."

Thus, it appears Barb is claiming that reproduction stimulates the economy. True. It does.

But, she says:

"But let’s not throw out the baby with the sensual bubble bath of “stimulus.” In any ordinary moral calculus, the baby comes first."

Given that there are over one million abortions a year in the US, there are a lot of women who disagree with the notion that babies come first.

Anyway, virtually every sentence in Clitoral Economics contains a demonstrably false statement.

Here's just one:

"As for unemployment benefits: They last just 25 weeks in most states and end up covering only a third of people who are laid off."

Benefits are granted to everyone who qualifies. Of course if you have been an auto-worker for GM, you might have spent the last year or two at home on the couch while drawing your full wage. Why? The "Job-Bank" program that forces GM to pay union workers for whom there is no work.

Toyota is inching ahead of GM because it operates in response to actual economic conditions rather than the dreams of union leaders. Reality is chipping away at the mistaken ideas that are driving some major employers, like GM, into the ground.

[Chickensh*tEagle]

chris: "Given that there are over one million abortions a year in the US, there are a lot of women who disagree with the notion that babies come first."

How about the millions more women who chose to keep their babies? Do their babies come first once they've had them, or even count for anything, in your grand scheme of things?

[Anarcissie]

roger 'i admire the desire by the puritans to escape religious persecution. ...'

But they didn't want to escape religious persecution. They wanted to perpetrate it, and that is exactly what they did.