Regarding Atheism

An editorial the other day, 10 myths -- and 10 truths -- about atheism, lays out ten common "misconceptions" about atheists and the reality behind these falsehoods. The article does a pretty good job of laying out the arguments and countering them. It is written in a rational, thought-out manner and exposes these arguments against atheism as complete contradictions.

The real problem here, though, is that these are not genuine arguments. These ten points are not issues that are brought up against atheists. These are the talking points of the evangelical preachers and politicians and are all about distraction and avoidance of real issues. By addressing the arguments as if they are real, the author is legitimizing their war against anyone who is not of their sect. Instead, these people need to be exposed for who they are, lest we waste our effort trying to give bulk to their straw men.

Still Sick

Nothing to add to my last post except this article, which just came out from the Nobel winner Joseph Stiglitz: Scrooge and intellectual property rights.

Making Us Sick

The Government Accountability Office (GAO) has released a study, New Drug Development: Science, Business, Regulatory, and Intellectual Property Issues Cited as Hampering Drug Development Efforts, an analysis of the problems with the drug industry in the past decade. For example, only 12% of new drug patents are for truly innovative drugs that might help people; the rest are primarily for "me-too" drugs or insignificant modifications to existing drugs with the primary purpose of extending the patent and profits. Although half of their conclusions shouldn't be taken even with a grain of salt, the data is interesting. The best part, of course, is that this is the government, so the data has the veneer of neutrality.

Despite the numerous claims by the drug industry to what is hindering their progress, the statistics show that drug approval times are actually diminishing and the chances of getting approved have not varied. The report effectively lays out the flaws in a for-profit drug research model, where the vast majority of truly significant advances are still coming from government and charity-funded research. The path of least resistance for capitalism is the me-too drugs and sexy drugs, not necessarily something that will help people who are suffering from serious problems. Industry complains about FDA guidelines getting in the way, but the report does not offer any clear demonstration that this is something that has change significantly in the past ten years.

The reality is that we need more restrictive drug approval, instead of the system that has gotten things like Vioxx into the marketplace. Drug news over the past several years has shown how linked the FDA and the pharmaceutical industry are.

The proposals out of this report will do little to aid the rest of us. Shorter patents for non-innovative drugs isn't an answer: no patents is. And putting longer patents on innovative drugs isn't the problem, since the drug that might help (or even cure, a notion contrary to profit motives?) isn't likely to be profitable. Furthermore, such drugs should be quickly and cheaply available on a widespread basis, not restricted to only the wealthiest patients for years to come.

Disparate Reporting

No big deal. With potentially 800,000 people subject to identity theft because UCLA hadn't spotted a leak for a year, it was front page news for a couple days. When Boeing announced that the personal information of nearly 400,000 workers was on a stolen laptop, it was buried in a small article in the Business section (Information on Boeing workers, retirees stolen). Given that Boeing is one of largest employers in the L.A. area, you'd have thought it was bigger news.

I haven't gotten my letter yet from UCLA, but I've been told that they offer to lock the files of those of us at risk ... for a fee. Boeing at least has the decency to offer credit monitoring for three years for those affected. Maybe they are charging a fee, too, but the article doesn't indicate that. Given that it is their responsibility, it is the least they should do.

Cancer from IBM

As a result of a lawsuit, IBM released a large data set of its former employees and the causes of their deaths. This, in turn, resulted in a study, Mortality among US employees of a large computer manufacturing company: 1969–2001.

Summing it up quickly, there is an increased amount of cancer among workers who had been employed at their factories. IBM, of course, denied the findings of the study, which was the largest (10,219 people after removing incomplete records) study of its kind for a computer hardware manufacturer. IBM was also not cooperative with helping flesh out the data, though that should be expected since it could lead to more liability on their part.

Don't Choke Your Chicken

Consumer Reports has just published Dirty birds, an article where they researched bacteria levels in store-bought chicken. This recent study found that 83% harbored campylobacter or salmonella, up from only 49% when they did the same tests in 2003.

The high level of infection is a concern, of course, as is the fact that most of these bacteria proved resistant to at least one antibiotic. Properly cooked chicken should eliminate the risk here, but these kinds of levels should still be considered unacceptable.

What is most interesting, though, is what kind of enforcement powers the USDA has. If a plant fails a certain "acceptable" level of infection, the USDA is not able to levy fines. It cannot close the plant simply because these tests have failed, but instead must have another reason. The best they have is the threat of releasing the salmonella test information to the public, and even there private groups were able to beat them to the punch.

None of this comes as a surprise, as the USDA is essentially an arm of the agriculture industry and not a standards organization designed to keep consumers safe. Budget and staffing cuts, along with years of lobbying efforts and the underlying system, have seen to that.

401(k)s Are Just Like Pensions

Nice article in the paper on Sunday, So you think your 401(k) money is safe. With a solid decade of pension raiding and destruction under our belts here in the U.S., some more details are coming out about 401(k)s. If the company responsible for your 401(k) doesn't fall under regulations for larger companies, then your retirement can be taken away from you without you even knowing it. I guess the smaller companies were jealous with what all the big dogs were getting away with and wanted to get in on the act.

Like most corporate malfeasance, there is little monitoring of it by the federal government, and what monitoring there is doesn't have the staff or funding to really pursue the problems. The article lays out several cases where the government just doesn't follow up, leaving people out to dry. Even when they do press charges, the victim is often left with maybe 10% of what they should be getting. Yet another opportunity to work until you die.

Of course, the article presents traditional pensions in a rosier light that isn't quite right. The Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation has been screwing over people left and right in recent years, and there is talk that they are getting stretched so thin from all the bankruptcy scams that they might collapse completely.

Less Insurance is No Insurance

As is typical of articles that deal with reports or groups critical of business, the vast majority of the article Report criticizes high deductibles is providing a mouthpiece to the insurance industry. But it also does talk about the report, which addresses the increase of insurance plans with high deductibles.

The corporate-driven health plans cater in part to the young who do not get sick as often, but also to those who simply cannot afford any kind of health care at current prices. The end result is that people on these plans are more likely to postpone care or skip it out of concern of being able to pay. If you are afraid to use your insurance, then it isn't any insurance at all.

At its core, these plans further the destruction of health care. The point of insurance is to spread the burden around, so that those who need it are covered. Hence, the inherent contradiction, since the basic motivation of an insurance company is to make money off of only the people who won't ever use it. What it all boils down to is that health care in the hands of private companies never made human sense, only business sense.

How Capitalism Achieves Equality

American society is achieving a small amount of "progress" in diminishing the wage gap between men and women. As the article Gender pay gap narrows -- for unexpected reasons points out, men's wages have been shrinking faster than women's as of late, so there is now only a 23% gaps between what the average man gets versus the average woman.

There's no mention about whether the statistics include the "wages" of CEOs. Given that the vast majority are male, if you exclude them the gap would be even smaller, as their wages certainly distort the numbers.

How to Tank an Economy

There is scant data on the U.S.-Korea Free Trade Agreement. The only thing clear is that "free trade" needs to be put in quotation marks, since the first announcements make it clear that the U.S. is interested in imposing trade restrictions upon South Korea in terms of intellectual property rights. The population of South Korea is clearly upset: Workers hold protests against U.S.-South Korea free-trade talks.

Despite the fact that 80,000 people took to the streets, there is very little information out there about these protests, particularly in the L.A. Times which serves the largest Korean-American community in the country. The Korean TV news showed pictures of windows being broken and police riots, but provided little explanation as to why. The protests have been heavier in the poorest areas of the country.

This FTA is definitely going to devastate South Korean agriculture – there is already a plan to provide $119 billion to farmers over 10 years. There should be little doubt that this money will only cover a small part of the damage done. It may also hurt the film industry, which is protected by screen quotas that Hollywood hates. Medical costs are set to soar as well with the price controls on drugs being removed.

Reading through the data provided by the United States Trade Representative, I don't see anything that will actually help South Korea. So, reading between the lines, this is being shoved down the throat of South Korea at the threat of economic violence. The claims that this will increase GDP are easily counterbalanced by the fact that nearly all countries that have entered into "free trade" agreements with the U.S. have seen GDP growth shrink, not grow.

Oh Yeah, You Might Want to be Able to Get There

Another minor oversight in the full-frontal assault on health care for working people here in L.A.: City Considers Transit Changes In Wake Of King-Drew Downsizing. Now that people in South Central no longer have access to a hospital, they have to go to another one that is 11 miles away. But, oops, it is 18 miles and 90 minutes by bus. Minor oversight.

And, continuing to rub salt into the wounds, we have this quote from Councilwoman Janice Hahn: "Many people in South Los Angeles were dying 40 years ago because of the distance they had to travel to access health care. Forty years later, we're back in the same situation." I think Hahn (who is complicit in all this) is trying to point out how good people have it now, because the current plan in the works is to move things back 100 years.

About Inflation Statistics

Wonderful piece from Consumer Reports, Inflation’s sharp pinch on your bottom line. They break down what the CPI means, how it is arrived at, and why it is that it doesn't seem to match up with the reality we face day to day.

The article also mentions the website Shadow Government Statistics, where if you delve into it you can see that these skewed inflation statistics aid in skewing GDP as a useful statistic as well, since it is adjusted for inflation. That is, it makes overall growth of the economy look rosier than it really is.

In the end, these changes to the calculations make useful tools for pushing more sacrifices onto working people. For the economists, though, they turn to more accurate statistics if their real interest is figuring out where the economy is going. But then, most economists don't dare buck the consensus for fear that things might start to appear as bad as they really are.

An Injury to One is an Injury to All

Nice article today about immigration law and the workplace: Latinos walk out amid firings. After 50 workers were fired at the Tar Heel, NC Smithfield pork processing plant on the pretext of immigration violations, a large number of workers (mostly Latino) walked out in protest. But they'd been fighting for some time, so this was just another straw on the camel's back.

There couldn't be a more textbook example of how employers use immigration to divide workers, lower their wages, and intimidate them into being docile. The ability to marginalize any part of the working class allows wages and working conditions to be driven down for every member of the working class. And of course, in the face of blatant firings of union supporters, a company can simply claim that they are complying with federal law. Of course, when it doesn't suit them, they aren't worried about federal law at all – and the lack of enforcement allows that to be the case most of the time.

Horray for Subtlety

I remember in the weeks approaching the election, there were a number of articles and economists talking about the lower gas prices. One thing they strove to point out was that the falling prices were mistakenly seen by laymen as a political maneuver by the oil companies. They offered one explanation or another as to why this was wrong.

Here we are, a week after the election, and sure enough, gas prices have rise by about $0.15 here in Los Angeles. Pure coincidence, I'm sure. Let's see what happens to gas prices in the coming weeks and months.

But for everyone who was afraid to vote for Proposition 87 because it "would raise gas prices," what the analysts and commercials failed to mention, was that gas prices would rise no matter how we voted.

Talking about Jobs ...

Saturday's article, Strong U.S. job growth boosts GOP hopes, brings up the idea that improved job numbers might help the Republicans out in Tuesday's elections. Of course, the reality is that although job growth is getting a little better, it still isn't enough to meet the needs of the population. The article does point out this roughly 35% deficiency.

Another point that the article doesn't mention, though, is that over 50% of the job growth in the recent job numbers have come from government jobs. This is probably typical, though I don't have older numbers to back me up. With elections coming up, incumbent parties hoping to woo a segment of the population, create a few more jobs in September and October. Simple enough election trick, but how long will the jobs last?

Freedom Isn't Free

The group Reporters Without Borders just release their 2006 Press Freedom Index. By their standards, the U.S. has dropped yet again this year, though the usual suspects appear at the bottom of the list.

They ask a series of questions from a number of people, but I don't know if there is any weighting to the responses. It isn't clear what their "index" really means – the scale doesn't seem to have a maximum value. I'd rather see boundary conditions, and I'd like to know that there is some relative weighting, instead of what appears to be a measure of absolute numbers. Can you really compare Cuba, where a large contingent of anti-government forces are entrenched in the United States and receiving heavy financial and political support, to a country where those critical of their government are truly isolated?

So, in the spirit of bad statistics, here's some additional numbers. We are told that "freedom isn't free." This would imply that the higher a country's GDP, the more they can afford freedoms such as the press. The index doesn't scale well to do a straight ratio, so subtract the ratio from 100 (North Korea adjusted to 99.9 to fit the scale). Then divide this modified RWB index by the GDP (from CIA data) of each nation.

The results ... The United States is one of the worst in the world. They rank only after China and North Korea. At the other end of the scale, countries like Tonga and the Comoros are doing quite well, given that they just don't have any money to begin with. If we only look at countries with fairly good GDP, Finland, Ireland, and New Zealand still end up at the top of the list.

What's hinted at here is that countries like Finland and Ireland are getting pretty good bang for the buck. Those of us here in the U.S., however, are getting ripped off. Americans are used to it though, they get the worst return on their dollar for health care, too.

California Election, November 2006

Finally had a chance to read through all the voter information this weekend. Here's a rundown.

My Vote — Proposition — Reasoning

• No — 1A — The State government has already borrowed money from the 2003-05 budgets. At the current schedule, they have to pay that loan off within a 2007-09 time frame. This proposition, if it passes, allows them to not pay the money back until June 30, 2016. Sorry, but pay the money back now like you are supposed to.


• No — 1B — Only a small portion of this money is going to public transit. In L.A., that's where the money really needs to be spent, so I cannot back any transportation bill that doesn't focus on this.


• Yes — 1C — This looks like development for people who actually need it, and in the areas that need it.


• No — 1D — I'm all for education, but this one would lift earthquake-safety regulations for community colleges. No thanks, I'd like everyone to survive an earthquake, even the people who cannot afford high-end educations.


• No — 1E — The costs here just seem too high and misallocated. I have this sinking feeling that agribusiness should be footing most of this bill, not us.


• No — 83 — I'm confused as to why this is a constitutional amendment. Shouldn't these things be covered by law already? These are the kinds of laws that politicians jump at so they can put it on their record. If they haven't passed it themselves, there is a reason. Most importantly for me, though, is the fact that this proposition openly throws the idea of reform out the window. Once you have committed a crime, you must always pay for it?


• Yes — 84 — This is a hesitant Yes. It seems broader in scope than 1E, and most of it sounds good. My one concern: the exemption for emergency water. Why?


• No — 85 — This is anti-woman, plain and simple. Only the most backwards of societies allow men to force women on this decision.


• Yes — 86 — How can a tax on tobacco be bad thing? It may not be the best place to put the money, but experience has shown us that if we don't pre-allocate the money, it will be misappropriated.


• Yes — 87 — How can a tax on oil companies be a bad thing? Sure, they've been lowering gas prices for a couple of months to make use think they are swell guys, but no one is fooled by that.


• No — 88 — I hate regressive taxes, and this is one. It disproportionately affects small property owners more.


• No — 89 — The problem isn't with how campaigns are funded, and fiddling with this a little more isn't going to make any serious kind of difference. At best, this proposition shifts a little more money to one group of warmongers over another. None of these parties have proposals that aren't fundamentally anti-worker.


• No — 90 — We don't need restrictions on eminent domain, especially if it makes it harder to get more parks and public transit. Reality is that the government usually only seizes property from poorer folks, and this wouldn't change that at all.

Yet Another Giveaway

Wonderful bit of information enclosed in the two paragraph article, Panel Endorses Plan to Simplify Business Taxes. The City of Los Angeles is planning to cut business taxes by 4% next year. They also plan to adjust the business tax system, which will likely lead to more tax cuts for businesses in the affected categories.

And what is the reason for this change? Because revenue projections have been met.

There are a couple issues here. First of all, this is the primary basis of the supposed budget issues of the last half decade. In the face of higher income, cities and counties cut business taxes in the 90s and then took a hit when business income dropped because of the dot-bomb. I don't remember hearing that those taxes were increased as a result of the changing economic situation. Instead, the cumulative effect over time is to shift more and more of the tax burden onto tax sources that derive more disproportionately from working people. It also becomes an excuse to cut more and more public services from the very people who are bearing more of the taxes.

The other thing is that there is no shortage of needs. Instead of cutting taxes (which no legitimate economist has shown actually increases jobs – usually the opposite) it would make sense to either save it somehow or spend it on important projects. The Mayor has played up public transit a lot, that needs money. Public health has taken a hit, that needs money. Public schools, that always needs money. The City Councils actions speak louder than words.

First to be Sacrificed

Two years on, the Workers' Comp dismantling has had some profound effects, as outlined in Workers' Comp Gains Haven't Eased the Pain of Tough Cases.

For businesses and insurance companies, the "reform" has been a great success. Insurance companies have cut medical care and disability payments by 37% over the past two years. They are raking in $0.69 on the dollar from premiums, a significant change from their former claims of paying out more than they were taking in (a number you cannot trust without actually opening their books to public examination). Businesses are raving about their savings and the governor who consistently stands by their side.

Of course, while there is plenty of analysis of the business gains, there is no data yet on how much damage it has done to workers nor any enthusiasm to collect such data. The anecdotal evidence is pointing toward incredible increases in delays and denials of claims. Workers face delays in the order of years on their claims. The article points out a wonderful example of a woman who received shoulder surgery but then only received two weeks of physical therapy – for those unaware, thorough therapy is essential for recovery from these kinds of surgery, and it can easily take months to see real progress and recovery.

Schwarzenegger made it clear up front: "The most important thing for us was putting workers first." In case you misunderstood this statement, he meant that it is important to put workers first in line for sacrifice to profits. More grist for the capitalist mill.

How to Dismantle a Public Health System

As the King/Drew fiasco continues, I decided to crunch some numbers.

I think I've figured out what's wrong with the hospital: yesterday's article, Hospital Turmoil to Affect Staffing, mentioned that there is a 5000 job shortage of healthcare workers in the county.

I looked into the County budget. Since 1999, there has been a roughly 15% cut in real dollars spent on health and social services. This, during a period when the percentage of uninsured has increased by about 4%. For the community that King/Drew serves, we're looking at over 50% of the population being uninsured. On top of this is the dramatic increase in medical costs over the same period, something like 75%, I think. This really puts Yaroslavsky's comment that "Money is not the issue" into perspective. Since he's been on the County Board of Supervisors since 1994, he's played an active role in gutting local health care.

And what is their "plan"? Set it up so other county hospitals collapse, too. They want to push King/Drew onto Harbor, where staff is already stretched thin. Rumors are floating that the director there will resign if their load is doubled like that. And what about services? They want to cut the number of beds down to less than 20% of what it is now. They are even threatening to shut the hospital down temporarily while they "reorganize".

King/Drew was built because of the Watts Riots. It is going to take at least that much to keep it, and a lot more than that to fix health care in L.A. County.

Worker vs. Worker — Guess Who Loses

There are a couple of articles on pensions in today's paper: Private-Sector Anger Builds as Public Pension Costs Rise and Workers Get a Double Jolt on Pension Benefits.

The second article simply lays out a couple ways in which laws have been changed in order to short-change public-sector workers out of their Social Security. There is, of course, little movement by politicians to fix this, since it means several billion dollars per year that they can spend elsewhere.

The first article talks about supposedly growing resentment by those in the private sector against public-sector workers who are set to receive pensions. They present it as if these are grass-roots organizations of people opposed to paying more taxes to fund "underfunded" public pension funds. The article doesn't bother to track down who "Americans for Prosperity" is, but a quick search shows that they are an established lobbying group. Pure astroturf. The article hints at this later when it talks about how this organization as well as the Heritage Foundation are pushing for the destruction of pensions. Oh yeah, and there's that windfall Wall Street would get from switching all that money into 401(k) pits.

What is truly disgusting is that there are union people supporting this idea. What it boils down to, of course, if that these officials already betrayed their base by letting the companies steal their pensions. This, without challenging the fact that pensions cannot be underfunded because of any fault on the workers' part. In many cases, they aren't even underfunded, but when combined with CEO pensions, suddenly they look to be in dire straits since those pensions are underfunded (mostly because they are so bloated in the first place).

Fact is, as long as this attitude predominates, kiss pensions good-bye, along with health care, safe working conditions, and wages. Even the public-sector unions who say correctly that their pensions should be kept and should be the standard ... well, as long as they don't take up the fight and spread it to the rest of the working class, they are gone.

Same Tactics, Different Location

Wary Eye Cast on Abe's 'New Japan' is a shallow overview of Japan's new prime minister, Abe Shinzo.

It isn't comforting but also not surprising to see that the attacks taking place in this country are also taking place elsewhere. In the U.S. it is some sort of mythical, christian America. In Japan, the politicians leading the attacks against working people are vocally calling upon bushido, the old samurai code that allowed the elite to cut down peasants as part of their social rights. For a wonderful commentary on bushido, I recommend the film Harakiri.

These politicians aren't subtle, either. They focus their energies on "left-wing" education and "brainwashing" — this despite the fact that their party has dominated Japanese politics for the whole period they say is the problem. At the same time, they claim that their cronies who are right-wing terrorists aren't a threat. It's obvious pandering to these groups which openly harass and commit violence against the population (and have done so for some time).

The LDP has had the remilitarization of Japan as a goal for some time now. What isn't reported on here is that there's obviously been a shift in the Japanese population. For decades, leading politicians wanted the constitution changed, but knew that the population wouldn't support it. Economic desperation and social breakdown over the last fifteen years, however, have shifted people's opinions. In the absence of another voice, the demagogues have gained ground. This subtext is throughout the article, but not mentioned clearly.

The Gas-Roots Lie in Tobacco

Great article at the Guardian entitled The Denial Industry. It uses corporate documents to show how it was actually Phillip Morris who spearheaded the astroturf organizations that are so prevalent today, though it is ExxonMobil who perhaps benefits the most now. (All of the above are providing funding, of course.)

There's too many details to talk about here, but what's really impressive is the level of calculated, patient, insidious planning that has gone into creating the media environment today. What many people call "right-wing" should really just be called "corporate." Not that those two ideas are in any way contradictory, but it is important to draw a distinction between people who are desperate and attach to backward ideas and those that are shilling for company profits.

Celebration of an Embargo

Today's article From the Ground Up, Cuba Is Crumbling gives a nice long list of how bad the situation is in Cuba. It makes a weak attempt to try to place the blame elsewhere, but the reality is that 45 years of embargo have devastated the economy, and continues to do so.

In addition to the weakness of the economy, more and more of the infrastructure is falling into disrepair. This, of course, has had an effect on the population, forcing them to deal with it by scavenging from any and everything. Of course, it is hard to decipher how much this reflects the real attitude of the population — U.S. newspapers like to pretend that Cubans are on the verge of returning to a U.S.-sponsored dictatorship. I'm sure, as much as people are dissatisfied with the current situation, they have no interest in seeing their health care system and other public goods completely disassembled by U.S. interests.

The other thing to point out here is that much of the infrastructure that is crumbling wasn't even there before 1959. It isn't like Cubans lived in some slick, polished dream up until that date. It's a testament to the Cuban people that they have what they do, in spite of the embargo.

So-Called

The littlest things can actually say a lot. In today's short quip, Council Fails to Override Veto of Living Wage, it starts off with the statement, "The so-called living-wage ordinance..."

This article is about the City Council's inability to override a veto from Chicago mayor Richard M. Daley. The ordinance would have forced larger employers (read as Wal-Mart to many) to pay higher wages, something like $10/hour plus some amount of benefits, if my memory is correct.

But why the editorial phrase "so-called"? Is it because this wage would not in fact be enough to provide a living wage? Because to put the recipient above the national poverty level would take a few more dollars? I really doubt it. And it isn't a coincidence that the use of the phrase "so-called" is applied to something that would help working people. I don't see the paper reporting about the so-called Patriot Act, or any of the other long line of insidiously misnamed laws and propositions that come before us on a regular basis.

Pollution in Perspective

There were a few interesting articles that touched on pollution on Friday and Saturday:

• New Power Plants May Get Leeway on Smog

• Air Quality Board Approves Revised Pollution Credit Policy -- Much to Critics' Displeasure

• Pollution Concerns May Lower the Boom on Offshore Fireworks

Basically, when it comes to major polluters, like power plants, the South Coast Air Quality Management District wants to give them a break. Instead of really enforcing the (poor) pollution standards that have been set, they are lowering them. Instead of the $90,000 per pound fee every year a plant is over the limit, the South Coast AQMD decided a $54,000 per pound fee just once (not yearly) would be enough. And, oh yeah, these plants are likely to be in poor neighborhoods where the air quality is already low and asthma rates high.

The contrast with this issue was the concern over the pollution from fireworks shot over the ocean. The pollution from this is probably less than from one airliner making a flight over the Pacific. Furthermore, there has been only one study done on this pollution, whereas there are plenty of studies to show the horrible effects of pollution from power plants.

The difference is small fry (fireworks companies and the towns who hire them) versus big fry (energy industry). It is yet another good example of how incapable this system is of tackling environmental issues. They can attack the individual and expect us to monitor our purchasing and recycling habits, or even attack smaller industries, but the only thing they have to offer in way of controlling the big industries is to offer them greater and greater subsidies at our expense.

Environmentalism without Economic Change

I finished Cradle to Cradle: Remaking the Way We Make Things recently. The book presents a lot of great ideas about how to rethink the way we approach things like manufacturing and housing. These are areas that definitely need to be approached differently.

One thing the authors have a track record on is analyzing the various chemicals available for different industrial processes and eliminating known problems. More of this cannot be bad. Most importantly, they lay a groundwork upon which more research needs to be done for there to be real human-centric progress.

There’s a limitation to their approach, however, and it was clarified for me by a simple comparison between what’s presented in the book and how things played out. A chapter late in the book talks about the Ford Rouge plants and lists a long number of design changes there when they rebuilt some of the facility. If you drive past the Rouge now, there is certainly a lot of greenery filling much of the open space. They also implemented the pressurized air approach to atmospheric control within the plant. Problem is, since they were put into place a few years ago, half the blowers stopped working and there has been no maintenance done on them. Then there’s the “living roof.” This caused a number of “problems” – the most prominent being that it attracted “unwanted” gulls and pigeons. To counterbalance this, you now have at the Rouge what is called the “roof of death.” This is where poisons have been laid to kill all those birds (bit of contradiction to the principles here, I think). And when the wind blows, the decayed carcasses and other detritus come to earth and create a health hazard for the workers there.

The failing, like with books such as Fast Food Nation, is that their final proposals lie within the capitalist system and its reliance upon profit. The core proposals and ideas are good, and I recommend the books, but they always hit the wall of this economic system. Certainly, a niche can be carved out wherein the dwindling “middle class” can feast on safer food, enjoy safer products, and live healthier lifestyles, but without changing the economic system, these kinds of changes will be more about PR than human lives.

No Man is an Island

"Your Honor, years ago I recognized my kinship with all living beings, and I made up my mind that I was not one bit better than the meanest on earth. I said then, and I say now, that while there is a lower class, I am in it, and while there is a criminal element I am of it, and while there is a soul in prison, I am not free."

— Eugene V. Debs

There's more to this than simple solidarity with the oppressed. There is the very real consequence that while one people oppresses another, they cannot be free. There is no choice in this, for no man is an island but a part of the whole.

There are consequences to the oppression of other people, and it has only been the high level of wealth extracted from these people that had allowed the U.S. to have a period of seeming calm. But we've been seeing our freedoms erode for a while now, accelerating more after 9/11. These are not freedoms we can simply gain back by marching for a right here or there. The natural tendency of our system is toward one that is more and more overtly oppressive.

Why Lieberman Matters

There's been all this talk recently about Lieberman. My first impression was something along the lines of "who cares?" There is one issue to bring up here, though.

Lieberman is like Dean and Kucinich in the last presidential election. They never really had the full support of the Democratic Party, but they were very useful in bringing in votes. Lieberman is actually the reverse of this, in that his defeat by another rich man whose only difference is that he's opposed to the war in Iraq. Will this make a difference in how the Democrats support the war? Not really. But it will have the effect of pulling people into the Democrat fold when they should rightfully toss the Democrats on the trash heap where they belong. It helps create the illusion that the Democrats might actually oppose the war.

Better Late Than Never?

The California Labor Federation has voted to oppose Proposition 85, set to appear on this fall's ballot (article). It's about time. Actually, it was time decades ago.

This is really a no-brainer, but also a sign of where labor unions are and have been. The fact that this comes up as a "controversial" decision makes it clear that labor has not taken the leadership role that it should. The group most harmed by abortion restrictions are working women. It is working women who must lead a fight for abortion rights, since they are the ones that face it not simply as a moral issue but as an economic issue.

The article brings up a notion that should be laughed at: the idea that such a decision isn't necessarily representing all of the members. The role of leadership is to lead, and more so in a labor organization. Leaders should represent the interests of workers, but as leaders they should realize the need to fight greater problems in society which are in the interest of all workers. This would be a much more fruitful investment of their resources than dumping money down the Democrat hole.

The reasoning behind this vote which the article points to, and doubtlessly is a major factor, is that unions are relying more and more on "liberal" elements to man their campaigns and work as allies in various fights. One downside to this is that it appeals more to the morals of these outsiders. A robust movement would pull these people in without effort, instead gaining its strength from individual workers who see real possibility in fighting as workers. And that should be the morality of a labor organization.

PATCO and the Decline of U.S. Workers

It's the 25th anniversary of the crushing of the PATCO strike. The strike was so significant and successful in the destruction of working-class organization and standard of living that they decided to name an airport after the leader of that attack (Reagan).

Although the media plays up the cockiness of the union, they really don't get at the story of what really happened. The union was set up for the fall, so that the ruling class could make a demonstration to the rest of the working class. Well before the strike, Carter had already helped push worse working conditions on the air traffic controllers. This lead the union to back Reagan for president, with Reagan making all sorts of promises to the union.

When the FAA presented a concession-heavy contract, the union went on strike. Reagan then proceeded to fire all the controller, bringing in scabs. The plan of attack was already laid, the FAA setting up a "Strike Force" from the year before.

Now working conditions are even worse, and NATCO (PATCO's replacement) is looking at a situation where new hires will be trained at the busiest airports – obviously the worst idea if your concern is safety. But that's just it, they're concern isn't our safety.

The PATCO strike, since they were privileged compared to other workers and expected to win, had an incredibly demoralizing effect on the working class. Combined with unions who were already in bed with management, it sped up the degenerative process that leaves us with the working conditions we see today.

Ghouls' Night Out

The media this week had plenty of photos of Cuban-Americans celebrating the ill health of Fidel Castro. I was in a restaurant Monday night when the news was depicting the same scenes. How ghoulish. If Bush died and people throughout the world began to celebrate, the media would be condemning them as savages.

It was refreshing talking to my aunt last night, though. Her news is limited to what's on TV, and she couldn't understand at all the animosity against Castro. Unlike this country and its leaders, Castro has shown a real concern for the welfare of his people. My aunt had learned enough about Cuban education to see this demonstrated.

Of course, Castro's health has also spawned talk of post-Castro Cuba and the embargos. They always claim that these embargoes are because of Cuba's treatment of dissidents, as if the U.S. has some sort of humanely-based morality to its foreign policy. What I'd like to see is a break down of how few countries we would maintain economic relationships with if we applied these standards to everyone.

A Little More Insight

I was pointed at a useful Hezbollah Primer. It contains a lot of good historical information, regardless of any opinions that might come through.

For me, one interesting note is that the fighting between Hezbollah and Israel has (up until recently) taken place in the Golan Heights, which Israel is illegally occupying. Not that there's any reason to give any merit to Israel's claims in this war, anyway, but this means that Israel launched its latest war because of an attack that took place in territory they shouldn't be in. It's like WMDs, though ... simply an excuse that allows it to rally popular support for its massacre of Lebanese civilians.

The code words that Israel (and in turn the U.S. government and press) use also becomes clearer from reading this Primer. To make a goal of eliminating Hezbollah is to state a desire to commit genocide. And for what? I can only guess, Lebensraum?

The downside of the article is that while it does present clearly why people in Lebanon support Hezbollah, it doesn't address the organization's policies. As much as they provide support to the local population, they are still a backwards-looking organization that is looking to control that population. They are a dead end for the population, Shi'i or not.

The Democrats Want a Better Bully

Classic bit of honesty from the Democrats. That party obviously does an excellent job of deceiving the American public into thinking that they offer some kind of alternative to their closely related brethren in the Republican party. This comes from the hearings on confirming John Bolton as ambassador to the U.N.

U.S. Senator Christopher J. Dodd (D-CT) — "My objection isn't that he's a bully, but that he's been an ineffective bully ..."

This just sums up well what interests the U.S. political party serves and what their intent is. To have delusions that one of the two factions of this party might offer anything but crass support for U.S. imperialist policy reflects either naivete or dishonesty.

Definition of Self Defense

Just so everyone is clear on the concept, genocide is not self defense. If someone attacks your person and you defend yourself, that is self defense. If someone invades your home and you use force to remove them from your home, that is self defense.

Although that seems pretty simple and straightforward, many people like to repeat arguments that fail to grasp this simple concept. If you and your friends go into a house, kick out the residents, and then start firing at the legal owners when they try to reenter, that is NOT self defense. If you start throwing bombs over the fence at your neighbor, that is NOT self defense. If you just up and build a new fence halfway through your neighbor's yard while they are away at work, you can expect them to tear it down when they come home at the end of the day. Attacking them for doing so is NOT self defense.

Although I expect the U.S. and Israeli governments to spout this malarkey, please don't repeat it ... it's an insult to the intelligence of us all. When Israel attacks infrastructure and ambulances, that is not to cut off supply lines but to terrorize a population. Israel has infamous special ops that have openly carried out assassinations, so why are we to believe that mass barbarism is acceptable? When an entire region of people, to the tune of millions, is displaced from their homes out of fear for their lives, the invading army responsible is the terrorist organization. Hezbollah, as backward as they are, are a result of Israeli policy against the Lebanese population ... to condemn them, you must first condemn the nation and system that brought them into existence.

If a man takes a woman prisoner and keeps her locked in a room, raping her every day and starving her half to death, what would you think? If that woman, using the last bit of her strength, kicks the man in the balls, is that fighting dirty? When he then beats her unconscious, is he acting in self defense?

The Inevitable Shrinking Middle Class

There was a nice article in today's L.A. Times entitled That Raise Might Take 4 Years to Earn as Well. Now, not only are blue-collar workers facing wage stagnation, but so is the "middle class." Of course, stagnation is an improper term, since things are getting worse, not staying the same. I put "middle class" in quotes because this is a manipulative term used in the U.S. press and by economists to avoid a real definition of class.

The guy getting spotlighted says it well, "Nothing else was going down except wages." Our economic boom is rumbling over not just the people at the bottom, but even those in the middle. This just seems like common sense, since you can only depress wages against the workers as the bottom for so long before they spread to other sectors of the population. Anyone at all familiar with Marxism is also aware of the shrinking middle class as a feature of capitalism.

Another gem is from a fellow at the Economic Policy Institute, "The administration is saying the only reason people are not sharing in the recovery is they don't have the right skills." People on the ground know this is a lie, but it is nice to see the statistics bear it out.

Of course, the article then blames outsourcing overseas. These are great emotional statements that work to stir people up against the wrong problem (most analysis of this issue are anecdotal and miss many aspects of the problem). The article does hint at part of the real problem, that corporations work to push more and more work on people and more of it down onto lower wage and skill categories. This is precisely one reason why a shrinking middle class is inevitable under this economic system.

The other issue they touch on is the notion of an "over-educated" population. This is such a wonderful condemnation of our society ... the notion that we might be over-educated. Our society is so bankrupt that it cannot use people's intellectual capacity, and in fact sees it as a burden. We have the greatest productive capacity in history and face innumerable problems that might be solved if people actually had the time and resources to work on them, yet "we" are over-educated. It certainly gives some additional insight into our deteriorating school system.

And in North Korea ...

There's never a shortage of FUD in any given issue of the daily paper. Quick rule of thumb to find FUD is to read an article about any nation the current U.S. administration has differences with. Today's example: U.S. Pursuing Talks With 4 Nations on N. Korea.

The most obvious FUD, or FUD semi-retraction actually, is that Christopher Hill, a State Department spokesman, said he could not confirm that Iranian officials had witnessed the recent missile testing. The great thing about these tactics, and why they are used so often, is that all you have to do it put it out there (true or not) and then retract it later. The L.A. Times adds to this by placing the article right next to an article about Iran (another subject of heavy FUD in the U.S. press).

The article has a number of other lies and half-truths. For example, "the North Koreans don't seem to want to go to six-party meetings right now." It also labels this as a "boycott." This is a half-truth. The North Koreans are willing to engage in talks, but the U.S. has been foot-dragging. Oh yeah, and there are those sanctions the U.S. has on North Korean. One reasonable explanation for the missile tests is actually that they were a means of forcing talks to reconvene, since the U.S. was clearly trying to line up all of the other six parties against North Korea. In particular, China was invited in May to watch U.S. joint military exercises. As North Korea's largest ally, this was a strong indication of further isolation.

What is funny is that North Korea has been asking for two-party talks from the get-go. So, statements by Hill that the "U.S. would have no problem with one-on-one contact with Pyongyang on the sidelines of six-nation negotiations" are evading. The U.S. really wants to get its allies and others in the region to do the work, and particularly to pay the cost. The U.S. is the one who doesn't want to "torpedo" the six-party talks.

In the end, the U.S. state line is that North Koreans "pride themselves on being opaque" and that's what the media regurgitates. Why can the U.S. push this line? Because the media never talks about the details of North Korea unless it is backed by a U.S. policy. I've studied Korean history, and I have to say that nothing here seems opaque to me. North Korea is acting in a rational manner given its situation.

It is an interesting situation now. Of the six parties, there are three factions. North and South Korea obviously don't want war and don't want the North to suffer, but instead move toward something like reunification on a basis that won't devastate either economy too much. China and Russia as semi-neutral; they don't want war or complete deprivation, but have totally different interests. And then you have the U.S. and Japan who are clearly hostile to North Korea.

Japan is interesting here, since that nation is clearly trying to expand its military and get rid of its constitutional prohibition on warfare. But, under Bush's definition of self-defense, Japan could claim justification in participating in a war against North Korea even with that restriction. I don't think a war is likely at this point (initial estimates are that something like 100,000 people would die in the first week of a war between the U.S. and North Korea). Really, South Koreans are the only ones in a position to head things in a positive direction, but if they had the resources to do it alone things would be better off already.

One thing I'd love to see is a good, neutral timeline of events for North Korean-U.S. relations over the last decade or so. Every one I've come across online is biases toward U.S. foreign policy aims.

What's Israel's Reach?

As the L.A. Times continues to cover the Israeli invasion of Lebanon in the same lop-sided manner as everyone else in the U.S. media, they ran a graphic today of Hezbollah's reach. In this graphic, they depict the different kinds of missiles that MAY be at Hezbollah's disposal and their ranges should Hezbollah be able to fire from the heavily guarded Israeli border. They also focus on the fact that these are missiles produced in Iran.

About the Iran issue. Apparently, the U.S. and Israel are the only countries allowed to sell arms to other countries and groups. The press has been full of unsubstantiated statements and inferences about Syria and Iran's connection to Hezbollah, and this is yet another one of them. The press certainly doesn't condemn allied dictators for using weapons against innocent people when they use arms produced by the U.S. or Israel (Israel apparently arms much of Africa).

This graphic is pure FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt). There are missiles listed that have not been fired by Hezbollah. Furthermore, there is no reliable intelligence to say that they even own some of these missiles.

It is also interesting that, at least in the version of the graphic in front of me, Lebanon is not depicted as a country! It has a label, but it seems to be floating over the Mediterranean without any cities or borders. Is this just a subliminal message about Israel's intent?

But the main thing I want to ask is: What is Israel's reach? This is not the first time the L.A. Times has run a graphic of Hezbollah's military capacity, but I've yet to see them show Israel's. Let's have a full listing of their missile capacity. Let's also see their helicopter and airplane reach, since – unlike Hezbollah –– they have a very well-equipped air force that they are using to terrorize thLebanesese population and destroy their infrastructure. Also, Israel has nuclear weapons. What is their reach? What countries are within the reach of Israel's nukes?

In any case, this is yet another good example of the "Freedom of the Press" and how unbiased U.S. newspapers are. Hey, maybe they aren't printing the Israeli information because it would just be too big to fit on the page?

Bush is Not Stupid

Ever since the election in 2000, many people on the left has liked to call Bush stupid. It comes in many forms, but many a comedian has made a name for themselves by poking fun at the seeming idiocies of George W. Bush. This, of course, gets turned around by Bush and his supporters, as a demonstration of "liberal elitism" ... and they aren't wrong.

This has been a rather powerful tool. It allows people to claim that something was done because Bush is stupid, rather than seeing (or admitting) that Bush and his advisors are consciously pushing a particular policy. But this is a tool. Bush is consciously mis-speaking, consciously presenting himself as a bit of a buffoon ... or rather, presenting himself as being just like the "common man."

On that note, and this is something I've been telling people but didn't have a link to provide, a friend passed along this clip:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1342132664644484246&sourceid=igoogle

I disagree with the editor's conclusion. Bush is not senile. He is a politician and, like marketing gurus, an expert in presentinghimself to the public. This video, rather than showing senility, shows that Bush made a conscious decision between 1994 and 2000 to shift his image. It is an act and a policy.

Back to the issue of "liberal elitism." This tactic of Bush's is actually quite ingenious. What it does is drive a wedge between "liberal" intellectuals and workers. The intellectuals, by making fun of Bush in this manner, are making fun of working people. There are many workers who do in fact make the verbal stumbles that Bush so deftly imitates; and who can doubt why, given the state of education in the United States. While these workers may not align themselves with Bush, the intellectuals by their actions push them away. This at a time when what is needed are intellectuals who can play a role in real left politics and discussion.