Truly Despicable

The most important leader in the attack on the American working class today has a name: Ron Gettelfinger. Whereas the heads of the corporations are clear and present enemies with opposing interests, it's the collaborator who can do the most damage. Every word out of Gettelfinger's mouth seems to be an attempt to further demoralize and set back workers everywhere.

Gettelfinger is agreeing to the attacks coordinated by the auto companies and Washington. The UAW wants to allow Auto to renege on health care payments and remove lay-off protections, UAW gives ground to aid Big 3’s chance for bailout.

The "slickness" of the betrayal is in presenting a complaint yet conceding. From Gettelfinger before Congress: "I'm having a little problem myself here understanding why there's a double-standard here, but we accept it and we'll play by those rules." Playing by Auto's rules is a losing game, one which the UAW has been actively losing for thirty years. By the union's own admission UAW members now earn $14 to $33 an hour, and the unionized workforce has been cut in half in Auto over the past five years.

But be assured that Gettelfinger is not alone in betraying workers who have traditionally looked to the union as a source of strength. The other labor powerhouse, the Teamsters, is also doing it's part to serve the ruling class, having just proposed a 10% pay cut for 40,000 workers: Trucking Firm YRC, Union Set Tentative 10% Wage Cut.

The Health Care That Money Can Buy

Some new studies delve into the effects health care costs are having on people in this country, Americans Skip Care. More people are skipping medications and appointments because of the cost, despite having chronic conditions. 42% have to spend more than $1000 a year. And to top it all off, Americans are more likely to face medical errors.

Now that's quality.

Rape is OK if You're a Cop?

The county has decided not to prosecute yet another Inglewood police officer: No rape charges filed against cop (scroll down). The D.A.'s office admitted that there had been sexual contact between the officer and the woman in question, but they dismissed the case because she had a prior arrest for prostitution. The message to police officers: it's OK to rape poor women as long as she "looks" like a prostititute.

This is on top of the recent murders by Inglewood police of Eddie Felix Franco, Richard Tyson, Michael Byoune, Ruben Walton Ortega, and Kevin Wicks (all separate instances). There is no room for illusion in Inglewood as to the role of the police.

Kudos for Setting a Good Example

In Los Angeles, the DWP union has been doing something right. Workers there are set to get a 5.9% raise for this year, matching the official inflation over the past year: Windfall for DWP workers. Not keeping up with inflation (and waiting a year even when you do) is the primary means which bosses use to cut workers wages over time. It's so ingrained into the contemporary mentality that you sometimes encounter defensiveness when pointing this out as a "wage cut".

The article explores the fear this kind of example instills in the bosses, pointing out left and right how upset their lackeys are at the raise. Fortunately, there is some perspective here: the $16.4 million needed to cover this is small compared to the $4.3 billion budget. On top of that, when forced to deal with this situation, the DWP had to admit that it's not an additional burden on the infrastructural needs. Instead, money can be cut from "outside consulting contracts" – a code word for money handed out to friends.

The biggest fear from those opposed to this is that other workers might demand the same treatment. Well, those workers should!

Inevitably Sowing the Seeds of its Own Destruction

Every new detail and fact that comes out of the Metrolink crash is a further condemnation of this system. Today it was brought out that the engineer was working a split shift, with his work week spread out over 53 hours: Probe looks at whether Metrolink engineer's split shift played part in deadly crash. It doesn't take scientific studies (thought there are plenty out there) to see that irregular and longer shifts lead to more exhaustion and in turn more mistakes.

And then you take this over-worked individual and make him the single point of failure? One hallmark of a secure system is redundancy. Simply put, if one system fails, a second one kicks in, and then a third if that system falls through. It doesn't eliminate the risk entirely, but it's an effective means of limiting risk in a situation where human lives are at stake.

But safety takes money, and – like with split-shifts – maximizing profits trumps all other concerns. Safety systems have been available for over thirty years, yet everyone from the heads of Metrolink and Union Pacific all the way up to President Bush have argued against the added expense of safety features. To insult us all, the President called these long-existent systems "unproven".

It would cost more money to actually expand the amount of track. Why shouldn't there be more track going in and out of the second largest metropolitan area in the United States? Because it would cost too much to lay the track and maintain it once in place.

What no paper has mentioned yet is that there used to be more human eyes on and around these trains as well. The engineer wasn't alone in the cabin. There were switchmen on the ground to monitor the coming and going of the different trains. But again, that kind of staffing takes money.

So a few fatalities is a small price to pay to maximize profits. There's no fixing that, it's the fundamental basis of the American way of life. Unless people decide to fight back, that is.

Step in the Right Direction

In Greece, some people are taking a more proactive approach to soaring food prices: "Robin Hoods" steal at the store, give to the poor?. The article throws out the word "anarchists" without really backing it up, i.e., are these people consciously organized under that label? In any case, seemingly spontaneous acts like this during the early years of the Great Depression were building blocks to greater resistance in the working class. It's how the people organize that will determine whether something like this gets crushed as an exception or builds into something positive instead of just desperate.

Do Only Harm

The Hippocratic Oath is no longer taken by all physicians and has fallen by the wayside because of the needs of the capitalist system. The most extreme examples are those doctors who assist in the torture and murder of state enemies in places like the Guantanamo Bay Detention Camp. But an equally dangerous threat to the American way is the notion some women have that they should be equal and have control of their bodies. The government, therefore, is stepping in to protect it's shock troops in the medical professions: Protecting health workers beliefs. (notice the title change between the delivery edition and that online).

The rule empowers federal health officials to pull funding from more than 584,000 hospitals, clinics, health plans, doctors' offices and other entities that do not accommodate employees who refuse to participate in care they find objectionable on personal, moral or religious grounds.

....

the regulation would explicitly allow workers to withhold information about such services and refuse to refer patients elsewhere.

Hiding behind a wall of false morals is not a new approach. And, of course, the people with morals aren't going to deny care based upon whether a patient "believes" in evolution: "I'm sorry sir, but I can only prescribe aspirin to you, all our anti-biotic and heart medicines have been developed by scientists using the principles of evolution." So this regulation is yet another bald-faced attack on women and their rights. The economy has developed too far to pull women from the workplace, but there's still a burning need to make sure they are kept second-class citizens — higher wages and civilization are at risk.

Waiting for a Gulf of Persia Incident

Always worth reading, Seymour Hersh has a new article out: Preparing the Battlefield. It's an overview of recent developments in the U.S.-Iran relationship vis-à-vis secret operations. The reason insiders are speaking up about this is because the U.S. government – in order to destabilize Iran – is backing small separatist movements who use terrorist tactics, and the insiders do not consider this an effective approach in dealing with Iran. Their goals are not any nobler, but they are concerned about the tactics.

While pointing out that the U.S. is repeating the same behavior that helped create the Taliban, it's asserted by one of the interviewees that "the violence [from U.S. support of terrorist fringe groups], rather than weakening Iran’s religious government, may generate support for it." This is just a continuation of policy shifted since the late 90s when the U.S. "diplomatic" approach to Iran helped strengthen support for the regime at a time when democratic elements had seemed to be gaining strength.

The other important factor here is the search for an accelerator into the conflict. (Hersh seems to chalk it up to the will of Cheney, but the desire to regain Iran is more widespread in the ruling echelons.) Polls have taught the administration something important: that an incident like the patrol boat scare in January 2008 could sway American public opinion enough to justify their war. A meeting following this incident was described thus: "The subject was how to create a casus belli between Tehran and Washington". In other words, another contrived incident like the Gulf of Tonkin Incident could be used to push the U.S. into a war with Iran.

Just remember, when they used this ruse in 1964, it was with a Democrat in office who'd paid lip service to the idea of keeping us out of war. The Tonkin situation, likewise, was the culmination of years of secret operations (including Operation 34A) against the Vietnamese government.

Founded Upon Moral Hazard

The New York Times, among many, has been putting out the idea of "moral hazard" this past week (When a Safety Net Can Lead to Risky Behavior). The notion is that the presence of a reliable, implied safety net can lead to risky behaviors.

Normally, the concern among the media is about the risk of poor people benefiting from some sort of safety net, so moral hazard is yet another club in the bag of political demagoguery used to beat on workers. Now, however, it's become a question of whether actions like the Bear Stearns bailout can lead to moral hazard. What makes this laughable is that the entire financial system is grounded upon moral hazard for the capitalist class.

Let's examine some cases from recent history. Japan's housing bubble burst around 1990, leading to at least 15 years of economic decline for that nation. Over the 90s (and particularly in 1995) several financial institutions were bailed out using taxpayer money, including Yamaichi Securities and Sanyo Securities – some of the biggest in the nation. After the Russian debacle of 1998, the U.S. stepped in to bail out one of the largest hedge funds, Long Term Management Capital. And, of course, a major role of the IMF is to help bail out failed investments throughout the third world, seen in particular following the Asian financial crisis of 1997.

All of these bailouts send a distinctly clear message: for those at the top of finance (i.e., the major players of the capitalist class), take as many risks as you like, the government is your insurance agent with low premiums. Let's not confuse this with some deviation from policy, though, for this is the very role of the government. The state's role has always been to protect the investments and property of the ruling class, even if the particulars of those investments change over time from one primarily based on land to one based upon capital.

King-Drew Redux

The destruction of the county health system continues, as documented in Harbor-UCLA emergency room patients are in jeopardy, state inspectors say. What is going on now at Harbor-UCLA and the Sylmar hospitals is just an early step toward what was done to King-Drew over the past few years. The same threat used to close King-Drew, the loss of federal funding, now sits on the plate of two of the remaining county hospitals.

As more emergency rooms are shut down and more funding cut to these hospitals, the downward spiral of public health accelerates. The article lays out statistics for the Downey Regional Medical Center, where many patients who would have gone to King-Drew are now turning up. They are over-capacity for their rooms and understaffed to be able to handle the increased load. The VP there admitted, "It's not unusual to hold 10 or more patients in the emergency room waiting for rooms upstairs, and we never used to do that."

The real solution for these hospitals is not to cut funding, but to put more in (or to stop wasting it on management). You don't improve medical care by cutting staff, but by hiring more doctors, nurses, and support staff. A large chunk of the mistakes that cost people their health – and in the worst cases their lives – are because the staff is overworked. Don't expect any administrator or politician to sincerely propose this.