Out of a job ? again ? or suddenly scared of losing that job you complained so much about just recently ? You are not alone. Some thoughts of an unemployed. Share your comments and suggestions here too.
Some thinking people actually have become more than full up with all the Obama fawning and the constant admiring of his continual PR and his continual campaigning is getting old too. This Prez said, same as prior one, go buy more to help the economy recover. Huh ? How ?
Some people on unemployment are now saying it is good to 'go on the dole' as the Brits say, and assume that if a job is not easily found quickly, then just take the government's money [ that is= all the taxpayers' money, including your prior employed payments ] and pretend it is all 'for free now'...not to worry...just take a year's vacation on the back of the rest of the hard-laboring-citizens? "Stay on unemployment as long as you can", many like to advise.
But is that called helpful - moral - fair - and honest advice? Some of us differ. That benefit is only a temporary tide-over so we can continue searching, persisting, learning and trying some more. Not a good answer, even if the govt is now giving it up for longer or with more benefits. It's still 'the dole', not to be ashamed of, but not an uplifting way to live.
The easy way out is not the best way, nor is the selfish taking "time off with pay" a socially conscionable act. If you need time off because of some serious emotional or health reason, that is different, but just because work is more difficult to find or with less pay than you had before... that walk-away is not a healthy choice for you, or the rest of us either. In fact, the too-long-time-off creates other attitude problems for returning to employment.
Better yet is learning how to trade and barter and help each other,any other, collectively, cooperatively, and willingly.
Spend less and realize that the good-economic-with-debt- times were a faked up advertised illusion, that you too believed as if no consequences would ever occur when over-consumption was indulged.
Realize the ways USAns have been sold on luxury, regularly eating 'out', buying fancy new items [phones, electronics, clothes, toys] , and always "more" with it's attendant Entitlement Attitude was fun but that was also a fake lure. All that is excessive has it's cyclic turn and then ...plop ! right back into the good earth dirt mud.
And what is wrong with being frugal, sharing sparingly but lovingly with others ?
It's not hard to do unless you have become indulgent, expectant, and spoiled-childlike.
So how can each person share whatever skills they have accumulated in-Trade with someone else's talents and resources ? Barter more. What's so hard about coming back around to where the global citizens had less, saved more, did without all those up-scale extras ?
And....without complaints and self-pity. Without taking advantage of anyone else or even the system?
Can't we do as others do : Share apt. spaces, and learn how to "get along" with others that seemed so difficult before . Not everyone needs a whole apt. for themselves alone, or even just 'for 2'. Like so many other peoples of this world, spaces can be used in shifts, or shared in different ways as work spaces, not just stored as 'sitting rooms'.
And what tragedies occur if time is used more practically with a lot less TV, movie, DVD, and passive other-story-watching ?
Being INVOLVED in real life with real people is a real learning experience...yes, again.
Learning to tolerate, accept and cooperate is a whole level we have easily avoided by the being able to live separately while previously affording 'my very own' for a while now.
Can we now take the challenges we have avoided, like having to live alongside each other, again, instead of separating [like spoiled milk], or instead of looking down at having-to-share, yes, again.
Who ever said this USAmerican life is suppose to always be more filled with more stuff, including electronics, toys, adult toys, and full wallets ? Who ever promised us that we would always get MORE ...while also working longer hours for less and like it too ?
We've heard that actual wages have not risen in real inflated dollars since 1997, but we have demanded to stay in that dream in which we could buy more and more because we "deserve" to keep always buying. Besides buying being a 'national duty' by this and prior Prez's decrees too.
Is it Depression, recession, hard times or just 'harder than we ever thought it Should Be'? The word description is not what is important. It is how we go into the challenges and find creative ways of learning to live...again...differently than we have grown accustomed to...but still not so bad as is feared and complained.
We still have what friends we realize, yes, we can trust and like. We may even have family to which we must re-connect back.. yes, again. We may find that regular home-cooking, doing our own cleaning and laundry, driving less and taking public transportation at times, reading for personal growth and learning, and talking to strangers [who love to share their secrets and advice too] is not as bad as we thought. The simple life. The fuller life.
Hey, why the sour look ? The free paycheck from the govt is not free for all. But while finding clever ways of making just-enough to keep us housed and fed until another job or opportunity emerges, we can still stay free, independent, inter-dependent and be adults.
The welfare roles are not the best opportunity for growth or gain, tho many do lazily prefer them.
Try another way, for a change. Grow. Be willing to do something 'different' than just get. For a change.
(C) maryjanie 2009
Tuesday, April 14, 2009
Wednesday, March 4, 2009
Banks are eating us up =what do you expect when you appoint the head of New York Fed to "fix" the banking problem?
this is a reposting from:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/william-k-black/why-is-geithner-continuin_b_169234.html
Why Is Geithner Continuing Paulson's Policy of Violating the Law?
February 23, 2009 by William K. BlackAssociate
Professor, University of Missouri; Senior regulator during S&L debacle
Whatever happened to the law (Title 12, Sec. 1831o) mandating that banking regulators take "prompt corrective action" to resolve any troubled bank? The law mandates that the administration place troubled banks, well before they become insolvent, in receivership, appoint competent managers, and restrain senior executive compensation (i.e., no bonuses and no raises may be paid to them). The law does not provide that the taxpayers are to bail out troubled banks. Treasury Secretary Paulson and other senior Bush financial regulators flouted the law. (The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) and the Office of Thrift Supervision (OTS) are both bureaus within Treasury.) The Bush administration wanted to cover up the depth of the financial crisis that its policies had caused.
Mr. Geithner, as President of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York since October 2003, was one of those senior regulators who failed to take any effective regulatory action to prevent the crisis, but instead covered up its depth. He was supposed to regulate many of the largest bank holding companies in the United States. Far too many of these institutions are now deeply insolvent because the banks they own are deeply insolvent. The law mandated that Geithner and his colleagues place troubled banks in receivership long before they became insolvent. Why are the banking regulators, particularly Treasury Secretary Geithner, continuing to disobey the law?
We need a Pecora investigation
We can understand now why the administration and so many committee chairs are virulently opposed to the single most essential step we need to take to diminish future crises -- a modern Pecora investigation. Pecora was the prosecutor hired by the Senate banking committee to investigate the misconduct that helped cause the Great Depression. You must vigilantly study past failures to learn causation and to enact remedies. If we were dealing with a crisis of airplane crashes and someone opposed studying the causes of the failures we would (correctly) label him a lunatic. Congress largely stopped conducting meaningful oversight hearings of financial regulation during the Bush administration. The results were horrific. It appears that only intense public pressure will suffice to overcome congressional and administration resistance to a Pecora investigation. I hope readers will add their voices to this call.
The financial cost of Paulson's and Geithner's flouting of the law
Paulson and Geithner's refusal to comply with the law has already cost the taxpayers scores of billions of dollars in unnecessary costs. Geithner indicated Friday, February 20 that he would continue to flout the law. If he is allowed to do so it will add hundreds of billions of dollars to the eventual cost to taxpayers. The amount of taxpayer money wasted due to Paulson and Geithner's violations of the prompt corrective action law will exceed the total present value cost of resolving the S&L debacle, $150 billion ($1993). The waste will take the form of the U.S. taxpayers subsidizing the officers, shareholders and subordinated debt holders of failed banks -- who are disproportionately wealthy, frequently profited from the accounting fraud that caused the banks to fail, and are often foreign. The prompt corrective action law was passed in large part to prevent such a subsidy.
The S&L debacle led to a new financial regulatory system premised on "prompt corrective action" (PCA). Future posts will explain more fully why this system failed, but it is remarkable that the system, the phrase, and the law have disappeared from the coverage of the banking crises. PCA's premise was that regulatory discretion led to cover-ups of failed banks and excessive losses to the taxpayers. The PCA solution was to require higher capital requirements and to mandate that the regulators take over troubled banks before they deteriorated to the point that the failure would impose a cost on the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC). PCA also recognized that failing bankers had perverse incentives to "live large" and cause larger losses to the FDIC and taxpayers. PCA's answer was to mandate that the regulators stop these abuses by, for example, strictly limiting executive compensation and forbidding payments on subordinated debt.
PCA's purpose is "to resolve... problems... at the least possible long-term cost to the [FDIC]." That means the least possible cost to taxpayers. Secretary Geithner's priority is protecting private shareholders:
We have a financial system that is run by private shareholders, managed by private institutions, and we'd like to do our best to preserve that system....
We have a law that says when banks are at or near insolvency private shareholders should be eliminated unless we can arrange a transaction that has no cost to the FDIC. Receiverships produce "private institutions." The FDIC manages the failed institution only long enough to get it in shape to be sold at the least cost to the taxpayers. Receiverships end unnecessary bailouts of private shareholders, reducing the cost to the FDIC, as the law requires. Receiverships place banks back in the hands of new shareholders. Geithner has so twisted the framing of this issue that he is warning that a cheaper, more effective means of resolving failed banks used under President Reagan is some alien form of socialism that President Obama must slay before it destroys capitalism. Geithner is channeling Rove when he conflates receiverships with "nationalization."
Secretaries Paulson and Geithner subverted the PCA law by allowing failed banks to engage in massive accounting fraud (which also means they are engaged in securities fraud). Treasury is telling the world that resolving the failed banks will require roughly $2 trillion dollars. That has to mean that the failed banks are insolvent by roughly $2 trillion. The failed banks, however, are reporting that they are not simply solvent, but "well capitalized." The regulators flout PCA by permitting this massive accounting and securities fraud. (Note that by countenancing this fraud they make it extremely difficult to ever prosecute these elite white-collar frauds.)
==================
Why are the USA public and it's opinions and concerns being ignored by this "new" fangled administration ? huh ?
Why is our money, so carefully saved and squirreled away being depleted, sold out, given away and diminished in value [with daily printing devaluing our dollars] ????
Why are we so passive, docile, quiet and submissive, just listening to what "they tell us" and not taking more ACTIVE MOVES to insure that what was 'ours' as personal, individual cash, properties, government-saved-monies-paid-by-our-taxes remains OURS ?
huh?
(C) maryjanie 2009
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/william-k-black/why-is-geithner-continuin_b_169234.html
Why Is Geithner Continuing Paulson's Policy of Violating the Law?
February 23, 2009 by William K. BlackAssociate
Professor, University of Missouri; Senior regulator during S&L debacle
Whatever happened to the law (Title 12, Sec. 1831o) mandating that banking regulators take "prompt corrective action" to resolve any troubled bank? The law mandates that the administration place troubled banks, well before they become insolvent, in receivership, appoint competent managers, and restrain senior executive compensation (i.e., no bonuses and no raises may be paid to them). The law does not provide that the taxpayers are to bail out troubled banks. Treasury Secretary Paulson and other senior Bush financial regulators flouted the law. (The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) and the Office of Thrift Supervision (OTS) are both bureaus within Treasury.) The Bush administration wanted to cover up the depth of the financial crisis that its policies had caused.
Mr. Geithner, as President of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York since October 2003, was one of those senior regulators who failed to take any effective regulatory action to prevent the crisis, but instead covered up its depth. He was supposed to regulate many of the largest bank holding companies in the United States. Far too many of these institutions are now deeply insolvent because the banks they own are deeply insolvent. The law mandated that Geithner and his colleagues place troubled banks in receivership long before they became insolvent. Why are the banking regulators, particularly Treasury Secretary Geithner, continuing to disobey the law?
We need a Pecora investigation
We can understand now why the administration and so many committee chairs are virulently opposed to the single most essential step we need to take to diminish future crises -- a modern Pecora investigation. Pecora was the prosecutor hired by the Senate banking committee to investigate the misconduct that helped cause the Great Depression. You must vigilantly study past failures to learn causation and to enact remedies. If we were dealing with a crisis of airplane crashes and someone opposed studying the causes of the failures we would (correctly) label him a lunatic. Congress largely stopped conducting meaningful oversight hearings of financial regulation during the Bush administration. The results were horrific. It appears that only intense public pressure will suffice to overcome congressional and administration resistance to a Pecora investigation. I hope readers will add their voices to this call.
The financial cost of Paulson's and Geithner's flouting of the law
Paulson and Geithner's refusal to comply with the law has already cost the taxpayers scores of billions of dollars in unnecessary costs. Geithner indicated Friday, February 20 that he would continue to flout the law. If he is allowed to do so it will add hundreds of billions of dollars to the eventual cost to taxpayers. The amount of taxpayer money wasted due to Paulson and Geithner's violations of the prompt corrective action law will exceed the total present value cost of resolving the S&L debacle, $150 billion ($1993). The waste will take the form of the U.S. taxpayers subsidizing the officers, shareholders and subordinated debt holders of failed banks -- who are disproportionately wealthy, frequently profited from the accounting fraud that caused the banks to fail, and are often foreign. The prompt corrective action law was passed in large part to prevent such a subsidy.
The S&L debacle led to a new financial regulatory system premised on "prompt corrective action" (PCA). Future posts will explain more fully why this system failed, but it is remarkable that the system, the phrase, and the law have disappeared from the coverage of the banking crises. PCA's premise was that regulatory discretion led to cover-ups of failed banks and excessive losses to the taxpayers. The PCA solution was to require higher capital requirements and to mandate that the regulators take over troubled banks before they deteriorated to the point that the failure would impose a cost on the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC). PCA also recognized that failing bankers had perverse incentives to "live large" and cause larger losses to the FDIC and taxpayers. PCA's answer was to mandate that the regulators stop these abuses by, for example, strictly limiting executive compensation and forbidding payments on subordinated debt.
PCA's purpose is "to resolve... problems... at the least possible long-term cost to the [FDIC]." That means the least possible cost to taxpayers. Secretary Geithner's priority is protecting private shareholders:
We have a financial system that is run by private shareholders, managed by private institutions, and we'd like to do our best to preserve that system....
We have a law that says when banks are at or near insolvency private shareholders should be eliminated unless we can arrange a transaction that has no cost to the FDIC. Receiverships produce "private institutions." The FDIC manages the failed institution only long enough to get it in shape to be sold at the least cost to the taxpayers. Receiverships end unnecessary bailouts of private shareholders, reducing the cost to the FDIC, as the law requires. Receiverships place banks back in the hands of new shareholders. Geithner has so twisted the framing of this issue that he is warning that a cheaper, more effective means of resolving failed banks used under President Reagan is some alien form of socialism that President Obama must slay before it destroys capitalism. Geithner is channeling Rove when he conflates receiverships with "nationalization."
Secretaries Paulson and Geithner subverted the PCA law by allowing failed banks to engage in massive accounting fraud (which also means they are engaged in securities fraud). Treasury is telling the world that resolving the failed banks will require roughly $2 trillion dollars. That has to mean that the failed banks are insolvent by roughly $2 trillion. The failed banks, however, are reporting that they are not simply solvent, but "well capitalized." The regulators flout PCA by permitting this massive accounting and securities fraud. (Note that by countenancing this fraud they make it extremely difficult to ever prosecute these elite white-collar frauds.)
==================
Why are the USA public and it's opinions and concerns being ignored by this "new" fangled administration ? huh ?
Why is our money, so carefully saved and squirreled away being depleted, sold out, given away and diminished in value [with daily printing devaluing our dollars] ????
Why are we so passive, docile, quiet and submissive, just listening to what "they tell us" and not taking more ACTIVE MOVES to insure that what was 'ours' as personal, individual cash, properties, government-saved-monies-paid-by-our-taxes remains OURS ?
huh?
(C) maryjanie 2009
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
NO bailouts needed, just good accounting, they say....
We have clearly not been heard nor heeded. We have written, called, demanded accountability from our govt and rec'd what ? ignore-ance...been ignored and bankers, financiers are paid off instead on OUR saved scarce money. NO BAILOUTS !!! Get It back ! Here are some pertinent and clever quotes to copy & paste out to use to send to your own government officials. Speak and Write your own version. Dont let 'them' all rob us...and let us not be blind. Never ! Watch it ! our $$$$ go down the hollow dark hole - black hole of universal corruption.....
Just goes to show there's nothing new under the sun:
NO MORE BAILOUTS, TAKE IT BACK NOW !
IT'S OUR MONEY THIS GOVT IS 'SPENDING' !!!
No give-aways, only investments and nationalize what is broken to fix it, but get your best honest auditors and accountants first, or just "drop it "
...too rotten ... too hot.... too corrupt already !
1. In my many years I have come to a conclusion that one useless man is a shame, two is a law firm and three or more is a Congress. -- John Adams
2. If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed, if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed. -- Mark Twain
3. Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But then I repeat myself. -- Mark Twain
4. I contend that for a nation to try to tax itself into prosperity is like a man standing in a bucket and trying to lift himself up by the handle.
-- Winston Churchill
5. A government that robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul.
-- George Bernard Shaw
6. A liberal is someone who feels a great debt to his fellow man, which debt he proposes to pay off with your money. -- G. Gordon Liddy
7. Democracy must be something more than two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner. -- James Bovard, Civil Libertarian (1994)
8. Foreign aid might be defined as a transfer of money from poor people in rich countries to rich people in poor countries.
-- Douglas Casey, Classmate of Bill Clinton at Georgetown University
9. Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys. -- P.J. O'Rourke, Civil Libertarian
10. Government is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else. -- Frederic Bastiat, French Economist (1801-1850)
11. Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.
-- Ronald Reagan (1986)
12. I don't make jokes. I just watch the government and report the facts.
-- Will Rogers
13. If you think health care is expensive now, wait until you see what it costs when it's free! -- P.J. O'Rourke
14. In general, the art of government consists of taking as much money as possible from one party of the citizens to give to the other. -- Voltaire (1764)
15. Just because you do not take an interest in politics doesn't mean politics won't take an interest in you! -- Pericles (430 B.C.)
16. No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session.
-- Mark Twain (1866)
17. Talk is cheap...except when Congress does it. -- Anonymous
18. The government is like a baby's alimentary canal, with a happy appetite at one end and no responsibility at the other. -- Ronald Reagan
19. The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of the blessings. The inherent blessing of socialism is the equal sharing of misery. -- Winston Churchill
20. The only difference between a tax man and a taxidermist is that the taxidermist leaves the skin. -- Mark Twain
(C) maryjanie 2009
Just goes to show there's nothing new under the sun:
NO MORE BAILOUTS, TAKE IT BACK NOW !
IT'S OUR MONEY THIS GOVT IS 'SPENDING' !!!
No give-aways, only investments and nationalize what is broken to fix it, but get your best honest auditors and accountants first, or just "drop it "
...too rotten ... too hot.... too corrupt already !
1. In my many years I have come to a conclusion that one useless man is a shame, two is a law firm and three or more is a Congress. -- John Adams
2. If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed, if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed. -- Mark Twain
3. Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But then I repeat myself. -- Mark Twain
4. I contend that for a nation to try to tax itself into prosperity is like a man standing in a bucket and trying to lift himself up by the handle.
-- Winston Churchill
5. A government that robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul.
-- George Bernard Shaw
6. A liberal is someone who feels a great debt to his fellow man, which debt he proposes to pay off with your money. -- G. Gordon Liddy
7. Democracy must be something more than two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner. -- James Bovard, Civil Libertarian (1994)
8. Foreign aid might be defined as a transfer of money from poor people in rich countries to rich people in poor countries.
-- Douglas Casey, Classmate of Bill Clinton at Georgetown University
9. Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys. -- P.J. O'Rourke, Civil Libertarian
10. Government is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else. -- Frederic Bastiat, French Economist (1801-1850)
11. Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.
-- Ronald Reagan (1986)
12. I don't make jokes. I just watch the government and report the facts.
-- Will Rogers
13. If you think health care is expensive now, wait until you see what it costs when it's free! -- P.J. O'Rourke
14. In general, the art of government consists of taking as much money as possible from one party of the citizens to give to the other. -- Voltaire (1764)
15. Just because you do not take an interest in politics doesn't mean politics won't take an interest in you! -- Pericles (430 B.C.)
16. No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session.
-- Mark Twain (1866)
17. Talk is cheap...except when Congress does it. -- Anonymous
18. The government is like a baby's alimentary canal, with a happy appetite at one end and no responsibility at the other. -- Ronald Reagan
19. The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of the blessings. The inherent blessing of socialism is the equal sharing of misery. -- Winston Churchill
20. The only difference between a tax man and a taxidermist is that the taxidermist leaves the skin. -- Mark Twain
(C) maryjanie 2009
Saturday, February 21, 2009
worried about your money or your freedom ? here are some thoughts from others....
this are a partial reposts of various sites below:
- - - --
Maverick News: Small Expectations
Maverick Media - 24 January, 2009 -on Pacificana.org
In describing the current economic crisis, for example, he said, "Our economy is badly weakened, a consequence of greed and irresponsibility on the part of some, but also our collective failure to make hard choices and prepare the nation for a new age." But the people suffering the most didn't "fail" to make "hard choices" about the greed and speculation on Wall Street. They didn’t get to choose at all. And they didn’t share in the gains that preceded the crash. Yet now they're being asked to take responsibility and sacrifice he also claimed that "our nation is at war against a far-reaching network of violence and hatred." This and other lines could have come from Bush's speechwriters.
Other troubling signs from Team Obama: calling for more US troops in Afghanistan without a clear explanation of what they’ll do there… giving a misleading impression about how soon and how many soldiers will be removed from Iraq by using the term "combat troops" – 100,000 mercenaries and up to 60,000 troops may remain… approving unspecified bailout amounts for unspecified purposes with unspecified oversight… picking a budget director who favors cutting Social Security for those under 60… picking an attorney general who supports continued immunity for illegal wiretapping and secret searches of library and bookstore data files… Plus, support for the war on drugs, the Patriot Act, and the death penalty.
- - - -
from http://pacificana.org/
THE STATE OF FREEDOM. Freedom House, an advocacy group founded in 1941 by Eleanor Roosevelt that fights tyranny around the world, says that freedom was in retreat in 2008. According to the group’s just released annual survey of political rights and civil liberties, this is the third year of decline in a row. Sub-Saharan Africa and the former Soviet Union led the way down, while South Asia showed some improvement.
The report, "Freedom in the World 2009" examines the state of freedom in all 193 countries and 16 territories. It analyzes developments that occurred in 2008 and assigns each country a freedom status – "free", "partly free" or "not free." Overall, 34 countries registered declines in freedom and 14 registered improvements.
The number of countries judged as "free" in 2008 was 89 – 46 percent of the world’s population. Sixty-two countries were listed as "partly free,” 20 percent of humanity. And 42 countries were classified as "not free; that’s the remaining 34 percent. Eight countries received the survey's lowest possible ranking for both political rights and civil liberties: North Korea, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Burma, Libya, Sudan, Equatorial Guinea and Somalia. Two territories are in the same category: Tibet and Chechnya.
Eleven other countries and territories received scores that were only slightly better: Belarus, China, South Ossetia, Laos – all in Asia, Saudi Arabia and Syria in the Middle East, Cuba, and, in Africa – Zimbabwe, Chad, Eritrea, and Western Sahara.
[snip]
The most significant progress occurred in South Asia, where several countries saw improvements linked to elections. In addition to improvements in Pakistan, Maldives and Bhutan, progress was also seen in Nepal, Kashmir, Malaysia and Thailand. Declines were registered in Afghanistan, Burma, Fiji, Papua New Guinea, Singapore and Tibet. China increased repression instead of delivering the human rights reforms promised in connection with hosting the Summer Olympics.
In the Former Soviet Union/Central and Eastern Europe, non-Baltic countries continued their decade-long decline in freedom, now ranking below Sub-Saharan Africa and the Middle East on several survey indicators. Russia and Georgia, which went to war over South Ossetia, were among the notable declines, as well as Armenia, Azerbaijan, Kyrgyzstan and Moldova. Democracy in Central and Eastern Europe remains strong, despite setbacks in Bulgaria and Macedonia.
After several years of modest gains, the Middle East and North Africa are experiencing trouble. Iraq was the only country to show improvement, mainly because of reductions in violence, political terror and government-sponsored Shia militias – although it’s still considered “Not Free.” Jordan, Bahrain, Iran, the Palestinian Authority and the Israeli-Occupied Territories also declined, freedom-wise.
Latin America managed to maintain its democratic character despite economic problems, an increase in violent crime in some countries and the rise of populist demagogues. Paraguay and Cuba saw improvements, although the Castro government continues to be pretty repressive. Colombia, Nicaragua, Mexico and Venezuela were among the countries where freedom took a hit.
Western Europe and North America continued to get the highest scores. The election of Obama could lead to reforms of counterterrorism policies. But freedom did decline in two European countries: Italy and Greece. The survey also expressed concern about potential threats to freedom of expression in Canada and England.
++++++++++
And now, the 10 Worst Corporations of 2008, courtesy of Multinational Monitor. Actually, it would have been easy to restrict the awards this year to Wall Street firms. But the rest of the corporate world wasn’t on good behavior, so this Top Ten list includes only one financial company. And since it’s pretty hard to say who’s really the worst, it’s alphabetical.. Here goes: AIG, Cargill, Chevron, Constellation Energy, Chinese National Petroleum Corporation, Dole, GE, Imperial Sugar, Philip Morris, and Roche. Highlights on some of the top offenders
For the full story, visit Multinational Monitor.
(C) maryjanie 2009
- - - --
Maverick News: Small Expectations
Maverick Media - 24 January, 2009 -on Pacificana.org
In describing the current economic crisis, for example, he said, "Our economy is badly weakened, a consequence of greed and irresponsibility on the part of some, but also our collective failure to make hard choices and prepare the nation for a new age." But the people suffering the most didn't "fail" to make "hard choices" about the greed and speculation on Wall Street. They didn’t get to choose at all. And they didn’t share in the gains that preceded the crash. Yet now they're being asked to take responsibility and sacrifice he also claimed that "our nation is at war against a far-reaching network of violence and hatred." This and other lines could have come from Bush's speechwriters.
Other troubling signs from Team Obama: calling for more US troops in Afghanistan without a clear explanation of what they’ll do there… giving a misleading impression about how soon and how many soldiers will be removed from Iraq by using the term "combat troops" – 100,000 mercenaries and up to 60,000 troops may remain… approving unspecified bailout amounts for unspecified purposes with unspecified oversight… picking a budget director who favors cutting Social Security for those under 60… picking an attorney general who supports continued immunity for illegal wiretapping and secret searches of library and bookstore data files… Plus, support for the war on drugs, the Patriot Act, and the death penalty.
- - - -
from http://pacificana.org/
THE STATE OF FREEDOM. Freedom House, an advocacy group founded in 1941 by Eleanor Roosevelt that fights tyranny around the world, says that freedom was in retreat in 2008. According to the group’s just released annual survey of political rights and civil liberties, this is the third year of decline in a row. Sub-Saharan Africa and the former Soviet Union led the way down, while South Asia showed some improvement.
The report, "Freedom in the World 2009" examines the state of freedom in all 193 countries and 16 territories. It analyzes developments that occurred in 2008 and assigns each country a freedom status – "free", "partly free" or "not free." Overall, 34 countries registered declines in freedom and 14 registered improvements.
The number of countries judged as "free" in 2008 was 89 – 46 percent of the world’s population. Sixty-two countries were listed as "partly free,” 20 percent of humanity. And 42 countries were classified as "not free; that’s the remaining 34 percent. Eight countries received the survey's lowest possible ranking for both political rights and civil liberties: North Korea, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Burma, Libya, Sudan, Equatorial Guinea and Somalia. Two territories are in the same category: Tibet and Chechnya.
Eleven other countries and territories received scores that were only slightly better: Belarus, China, South Ossetia, Laos – all in Asia, Saudi Arabia and Syria in the Middle East, Cuba, and, in Africa – Zimbabwe, Chad, Eritrea, and Western Sahara.
[snip]
The most significant progress occurred in South Asia, where several countries saw improvements linked to elections. In addition to improvements in Pakistan, Maldives and Bhutan, progress was also seen in Nepal, Kashmir, Malaysia and Thailand. Declines were registered in Afghanistan, Burma, Fiji, Papua New Guinea, Singapore and Tibet. China increased repression instead of delivering the human rights reforms promised in connection with hosting the Summer Olympics.
In the Former Soviet Union/Central and Eastern Europe, non-Baltic countries continued their decade-long decline in freedom, now ranking below Sub-Saharan Africa and the Middle East on several survey indicators. Russia and Georgia, which went to war over South Ossetia, were among the notable declines, as well as Armenia, Azerbaijan, Kyrgyzstan and Moldova. Democracy in Central and Eastern Europe remains strong, despite setbacks in Bulgaria and Macedonia.
After several years of modest gains, the Middle East and North Africa are experiencing trouble. Iraq was the only country to show improvement, mainly because of reductions in violence, political terror and government-sponsored Shia militias – although it’s still considered “Not Free.” Jordan, Bahrain, Iran, the Palestinian Authority and the Israeli-Occupied Territories also declined, freedom-wise.
Latin America managed to maintain its democratic character despite economic problems, an increase in violent crime in some countries and the rise of populist demagogues. Paraguay and Cuba saw improvements, although the Castro government continues to be pretty repressive. Colombia, Nicaragua, Mexico and Venezuela were among the countries where freedom took a hit.
Western Europe and North America continued to get the highest scores. The election of Obama could lead to reforms of counterterrorism policies. But freedom did decline in two European countries: Italy and Greece. The survey also expressed concern about potential threats to freedom of expression in Canada and England.
++++++++++
And now, the 10 Worst Corporations of 2008, courtesy of Multinational Monitor. Actually, it would have been easy to restrict the awards this year to Wall Street firms. But the rest of the corporate world wasn’t on good behavior, so this Top Ten list includes only one financial company. And since it’s pretty hard to say who’s really the worst, it’s alphabetical.. Here goes: AIG, Cargill, Chevron, Constellation Energy, Chinese National Petroleum Corporation, Dole, GE, Imperial Sugar, Philip Morris, and Roche. Highlights on some of the top offenders
For the full story, visit Multinational Monitor.
(C) maryjanie 2009
News is turning 'funny' and religious instead of being factual now....
the $170 MILLION INAUGURATION:
"OBAMA'S inauguration has been financed partially [but how much actually ?] by BAILED-OUT WALL STREET executives: [you did not know this either ? right !]
so while OUR country is in the middle of the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression, but this isn't stopping them rich donors and the OUR government [read: our paid to govt taxes] from spending $170 million, or more, on the inauguration of the new Prez Obama . The actual swearing-in ceremony will cost $1.24 million, according to Carole Florman, spokeswoman for the Joint Congressional Committee on Inaugural Ceremonies."
Who is paying for what here ? Who agreed to those image-boosting fancy-militaristic ceremonial shows to be paid for by US, the ones who can barely afford that old TV?
and ARE OUR OLD NEWSPAPERS ARE SHIFTING ALLIANCES OR JUST BEING TORN UP TOO ?
It has been reported that "USA Today, The Wall Street Journal, The Los Angeles Times, The Washington Post, The Chicago Tribune, The San Francisco Chronicle, The Baltimore Sun, The San Jose Mercury News and The Kansas City Star have something in common, aside from some of the biggest names in an endangered industry. By the start of February, not one of them will have the same top editor it had when 2008 began. Most of them will have different publishers, too."
Does this mean we have a new slant and new commercial owners to tell us what is happening and how to think about our new "news"? Where do the truth & facts lie?
then, "the Vatican will soon have its own channel on YouTube, where the Catholic faithful or the curious will be able to see Pope Benedict or Church events."
Is that cool or more publicity for strict religious teachings to those who do not want to belong or be preached to or convinced of that Catholic or Christian point of view?
(C) maryjanie 2009
"OBAMA'S inauguration has been financed partially [but how much actually ?] by BAILED-OUT WALL STREET executives: [you did not know this either ? right !]
so while OUR country is in the middle of the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression, but this isn't stopping them rich donors and the OUR government [read: our paid to govt taxes] from spending $170 million, or more, on the inauguration of the new Prez Obama . The actual swearing-in ceremony will cost $1.24 million, according to Carole Florman, spokeswoman for the Joint Congressional Committee on Inaugural Ceremonies."
Who is paying for what here ? Who agreed to those image-boosting fancy-militaristic ceremonial shows to be paid for by US, the ones who can barely afford that old TV?
and ARE OUR OLD NEWSPAPERS ARE SHIFTING ALLIANCES OR JUST BEING TORN UP TOO ?
It has been reported that "USA Today, The Wall Street Journal, The Los Angeles Times, The Washington Post, The Chicago Tribune, The San Francisco Chronicle, The Baltimore Sun, The San Jose Mercury News and The Kansas City Star have something in common, aside from some of the biggest names in an endangered industry. By the start of February, not one of them will have the same top editor it had when 2008 began. Most of them will have different publishers, too."
Does this mean we have a new slant and new commercial owners to tell us what is happening and how to think about our new "news"? Where do the truth & facts lie?
then, "the Vatican will soon have its own channel on YouTube, where the Catholic faithful or the curious will be able to see Pope Benedict or Church events."
Is that cool or more publicity for strict religious teachings to those who do not want to belong or be preached to or convinced of that Catholic or Christian point of view?
(C) maryjanie 2009
Mother Jones article about Obama and our concerns exposed now
this is a partial repost from
http://www.motherjones.com/interview/2008/12/eugene-jarecki.html
by Political filmmaker Eugene Jarecki
" I think a lot of people see in Barack Obama a chance to feel young again.....
Eugene Jarecki: America tends to fall victim to an overzealous belief in the cult of personality. For Americans, history seems to begin way back with Jesus, Mohammad, and Genghis Khan, and then sometime later there is Hitler and Martin Luther King, until we reach George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, and now Barack Obama. That is a wrong-headed view of history. Surely the big individuals in our collective history matter, but they are always a reflection of mass movements underneath them. ....
What is happening right now is that the public voted for change, so it has a great deal of idealism invested. It is imperative that the public look at these appointments and ask itself, "So far, does this look like what I was expecting?" Instead, what is happening is that the public has gone lame duck. We cannot afford that. Left to its own devices, Washington will absolutely devour Barack Obama. .....
This country is a work in progress, you are a vital part of it, and it will go to hell in a handbasket without your vigilance," is hard…And yet it's true. "
-----
Has anyone yet admitted and explained to us, the gullible public, why most of the news media promoted Obama so fervently and diligently ? and how they definitely continously helped create his ordination into sainthood, also by using both FDR and Lincoln as collaborating pillars of the past- implying openly that he was now fulfilling their programs / missions too. Such significant forefathers to lean on for fame and fortune and future programs. my, my...
And while the now Prez claimed he did not run a racially slanted campaign [except when he spoke in an obvious dialect to certain crowds, slyly laughing along with everyone who pretended they didnt get the joke on others ] and while he instead assisted and let 'others' say it for him - as all the pop talk was about being a "black president" vs. being a effective president - or we can use any adjective other than a color-bound one to describe what was now wanted.
He did not have to say or openly imply that race was an issue, everyone else was saying it for him and insuring that "America fulfill it's promise" to one group within it's national boundaries anyhow.And right after winning, everyone could say it aloud, like one of the 7 deadly prohibited words in TV, he was "black", not mixed, not mulatto, not ...well just "black", obviously so with a dark toned wife and children to prove his choice of lifestyle and genotype. But...he was not admitting to be that before the game was over. He won. Now he could be ...well, anything he chose to image and status himself as being, having won the power to rule. Wow. That's a great trick.
A small, if the USA census numbers are correct,the portion of USA - about 14% are African-American - our grouped populations [check the stats out please ]. So Obama's image as a minority is correct, but as representing more of the USA population is a questionable statement. He does not represent a majority across this nation, and his experience is also not full or wide. His intelligence, charm, charisma and personality is clearly a big benefit, especially as an American President. Diplomatically anyhow.
Of course, looks make images and our choices in marriage make our alliances & appearances seem stable too. Who do we CHOSE to be ? How wonderful to have these choices not every person worldwide has, to chose to be in this group or that one or another preferable group. But the adulation this man bought, in the pre-winning days, in the alternative Democratic votes and the obtaining the USA elections, was evident.
All the media was full of propaganda,and [not announced as ] PR,and all the hard-soft-any-but-sell-us promotions, along with fancy grandstanding... and lots of money-paid-for-campaign manuevers too [ all the advertising - selling - of an image to get those votes, and maybe more ? ]. And the clever sales stories like all consumer advertising was fed repeatedly and grandly by the [paid] news media and so people engorged on the ideal that many now may doubt any human man can fulfill.
But the work was not all done by one political party's due diligence or Democrat's appea. Some of the work was done by those voting against, the prior-old-ruler, opposing what was, as usual,as much wanting & voting for a 'new' image for America. After 8 years. Of course. Time for change, no matter who said it. It was an obvious and good line.
Bush insured that the next prez would not look like him in any way, especially in his last harsh sad years. The economic catastrophe also happening deep into the future insured that a "new" paradigm had to be presented, no matter if it doesn't work...yet...if when it can or ever does .... and the regeneration of younger voters via the internet and cell phone technology gadget proliferation helped turn the dream into a promise that instant change and improvement are as good as the consumerist stuff bought. And the fun & games of such media confirmation also gave Obama the advantage that prior presidents never even had - to be able reach their "millenium" little ones anywhere they happened to be at that moment, to come to vote and to wear colorful t-shirts advertising their dreams in full colored face [red,white & blue]. New times, but old advertising ploys, played well, once again.
and now... after the fact and the elections have been completed and shifted over
the results are ......?????? hmmmmmmmm......
fear and difficult worries and dismay are entering the public dialogues once again. even in the news media, that was so sure and repetitively conformist to PC idealism, is saying the same as has been newsworthy & sensationalist all along... we are not in a new millenium with new gadgets to get us to change out of our losses and difficulties.
welll
we'll see...sadly...but we must see clearly now.
no prez is powerful enough to make the changes he promised so blithely before.
not even if his race is now openly stated and used to build up his power. Black Power! the shout of 3-4 decades ago. Has it become a better reality ?
http://www.motherjones.com/interview/2008/12/eugene-jarecki.html
by Political filmmaker Eugene Jarecki
" I think a lot of people see in Barack Obama a chance to feel young again.....
Eugene Jarecki: America tends to fall victim to an overzealous belief in the cult of personality. For Americans, history seems to begin way back with Jesus, Mohammad, and Genghis Khan, and then sometime later there is Hitler and Martin Luther King, until we reach George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, and now Barack Obama. That is a wrong-headed view of history. Surely the big individuals in our collective history matter, but they are always a reflection of mass movements underneath them. ....
What is happening right now is that the public voted for change, so it has a great deal of idealism invested. It is imperative that the public look at these appointments and ask itself, "So far, does this look like what I was expecting?" Instead, what is happening is that the public has gone lame duck. We cannot afford that. Left to its own devices, Washington will absolutely devour Barack Obama. .....
This country is a work in progress, you are a vital part of it, and it will go to hell in a handbasket without your vigilance," is hard…And yet it's true. "
-----
Has anyone yet admitted and explained to us, the gullible public, why most of the news media promoted Obama so fervently and diligently ? and how they definitely continously helped create his ordination into sainthood, also by using both FDR and Lincoln as collaborating pillars of the past- implying openly that he was now fulfilling their programs / missions too. Such significant forefathers to lean on for fame and fortune and future programs. my, my...
And while the now Prez claimed he did not run a racially slanted campaign [except when he spoke in an obvious dialect to certain crowds, slyly laughing along with everyone who pretended they didnt get the joke on others ] and while he instead assisted and let 'others' say it for him - as all the pop talk was about being a "black president" vs. being a effective president - or we can use any adjective other than a color-bound one to describe what was now wanted.
He did not have to say or openly imply that race was an issue, everyone else was saying it for him and insuring that "America fulfill it's promise" to one group within it's national boundaries anyhow.And right after winning, everyone could say it aloud, like one of the 7 deadly prohibited words in TV, he was "black", not mixed, not mulatto, not ...well just "black", obviously so with a dark toned wife and children to prove his choice of lifestyle and genotype. But...he was not admitting to be that before the game was over. He won. Now he could be ...well, anything he chose to image and status himself as being, having won the power to rule. Wow. That's a great trick.
A small, if the USA census numbers are correct,the portion of USA - about 14% are African-American - our grouped populations [check the stats out please ]. So Obama's image as a minority is correct, but as representing more of the USA population is a questionable statement. He does not represent a majority across this nation, and his experience is also not full or wide. His intelligence, charm, charisma and personality is clearly a big benefit, especially as an American President. Diplomatically anyhow.
Of course, looks make images and our choices in marriage make our alliances & appearances seem stable too. Who do we CHOSE to be ? How wonderful to have these choices not every person worldwide has, to chose to be in this group or that one or another preferable group. But the adulation this man bought, in the pre-winning days, in the alternative Democratic votes and the obtaining the USA elections, was evident.
All the media was full of propaganda,and [not announced as ] PR,and all the hard-soft-any-but-sell-us promotions, along with fancy grandstanding... and lots of money-paid-for-campaign manuevers too [ all the advertising - selling - of an image to get those votes, and maybe more ? ]. And the clever sales stories like all consumer advertising was fed repeatedly and grandly by the [paid] news media and so people engorged on the ideal that many now may doubt any human man can fulfill.
But the work was not all done by one political party's due diligence or Democrat's appea. Some of the work was done by those voting against, the prior-old-ruler, opposing what was, as usual,as much wanting & voting for a 'new' image for America. After 8 years. Of course. Time for change, no matter who said it. It was an obvious and good line.
Bush insured that the next prez would not look like him in any way, especially in his last harsh sad years. The economic catastrophe also happening deep into the future insured that a "new" paradigm had to be presented, no matter if it doesn't work...yet...if when it can or ever does .... and the regeneration of younger voters via the internet and cell phone technology gadget proliferation helped turn the dream into a promise that instant change and improvement are as good as the consumerist stuff bought. And the fun & games of such media confirmation also gave Obama the advantage that prior presidents never even had - to be able reach their "millenium" little ones anywhere they happened to be at that moment, to come to vote and to wear colorful t-shirts advertising their dreams in full colored face [red,white & blue]. New times, but old advertising ploys, played well, once again.
and now... after the fact and the elections have been completed and shifted over
the results are ......?????? hmmmmmmmm......
fear and difficult worries and dismay are entering the public dialogues once again. even in the news media, that was so sure and repetitively conformist to PC idealism, is saying the same as has been newsworthy & sensationalist all along... we are not in a new millenium with new gadgets to get us to change out of our losses and difficulties.
welll
we'll see...sadly...but we must see clearly now.
no prez is powerful enough to make the changes he promised so blithely before.
not even if his race is now openly stated and used to build up his power. Black Power! the shout of 3-4 decades ago. Has it become a better reality ?
BBC explains part of what confuses us all, money down the drains
this is a partial reposting from
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7874667.stm
"Walden Bello is a university professor, senior analyst at Focus on the Global South, and president of the Freedom from Debt Coalition.
Week after week, we see the global economy contracting at a pace worse than that predicted by the gloomiest analysts.
We are now, it is clear, in no ordinary recession but are headed for a global depression that could last for many years.
The origins of the present crisis lie in the strategies adopted by economic and political elites to resolve the crises of stagflation - the coexistence of low growth with high inflation - which followed rapid growth in the post-World War II era, both in the G8 economies and in the underdeveloped economies.
Stagflation, however, was but a symptom of a deeper problem: the reconstruction of Germany and Japan and the rapid growth of industrialising economies like Brazil, Taiwan, and South Korea added tremendous new productive capacity and increased global competition, while income inequality within countries and between countries limited the growth of purchasing power and demand, thus eroding profitability.
Dilemma
This produced the dilemma of overproduction.
One "escape route" from the conundrum of overproduction, and for maintaining and raising profitability, was "financialisation".
Unsold Japanese cars in a UK showroom
Overproduction: many cars made, but no-one to sell them to
With investment in industry and agriculture yielding low profits as a result of over-capacity, large amounts of surplus funds have been circulating in or invested and reinvested in the financial sector - that is, the financial sector began turning on itself.
The result has been a divergence between a hyperactive financial economy and a stagnant real economy.
This was not accidental - the financial economy exploded precisely to make up for the stagnation owing to overproduction of the real economy.
Profits, not value
One indicator of the super-profitability of the financial sector is the fact that 40% of the total profits of US financial and nonfinancial corporations is accounted for by the financial sector although it is responsible for only 5% of US gross domestic product (and even that is likely to be an overestimate).
The problem with investing in financial sector operations is that it is tantamount to squeezing value out of already created value. It may create profit, yes, but it does not create new value - only industry, agriculture, trade, and services create new value.
Because profit is not based on value that is created, investment operations become very volatile and prices of stocks, bonds, and other forms of investment can depart very radically from their real value.
Profits then depend on taking advantage of upward price departures from the value of commodities, then selling before reality enforces a "correction", that is, a crash back to real values. The radical rise of prices of an asset far beyond real values is what is called the formation of a bubble.
Virus
We are far from over the worst of this crisis.
In the US real-estate sector, millions more mortgages are likely to go into default over the next few years.
Securities with a value of as much as $2 trillion dollars (£1.4 trillion) have already been injected, like a virus, into the global financial system.
Massive injections of taxpayers' cash have failed to kickstart lending again. Not surprisingly, with global capitalism's circulatory system seizing up, it was only a matter of time before the real economy would contract, as it has with frightening speed in the last few weeks.
Globalisation has ensured that economies that went up together in the boom would also go down together, with unparalleled speed, in the bust, the end of which is nowhere to be discerned. [snip]
Discussions at the World Social Forum in Belem focused on many aspects of the financial crisis that are not being publicly discussed at official or business level.
For instance, while strong calls for re-regulation are made, none of these proposals address the fact that the General Agreement on Trade in Services (Gats) - a treaty created under the auspices of the World Trade Organization (WTO) - actually seeks to deregulate trade in services, including financial services.
These liberalising international treaty rules deprive governments of the right to intervene.
The calls for re-regulation would require a dismantling of the whole architecture of treaties agreed over the past 10 years, mainly through the WTO
Governments' hands tied
Under Gats in the EU, governments cannot limit the size or the value of the financial services operations.
This prevents governments from intervening to ensure that a financial service company does not become "too big to fail" or have a destabilising effect on the country that hosts it.
Industrialised countries have gone further by committing themselves to more liberalisation and deregulation under a Gats annex that precludes regulation and opens the way for any new financial service, however speculative
agreements which have been working towards opening up the financial sector, and which were backed by the US and the EU.
Pigeons against backdrop of City of London
The City of London's success was based on deregulation
These were subject to concerted and secretive lobbying of negotiators by financial corporations, resulting in negotiators collaborating closely with the financial industry.
The liberalisation of financial services was included in trade treaties without any guarantee of whether the right regulation and supervision was in place.
In fact, the EU requested many countries to eliminate particular prudential rules, some of which had been put in place after the Asian crisis." [snip]
(C) maryjanie 2009
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7874667.stm
"Walden Bello is a university professor, senior analyst at Focus on the Global South, and president of the Freedom from Debt Coalition.
Week after week, we see the global economy contracting at a pace worse than that predicted by the gloomiest analysts.
We are now, it is clear, in no ordinary recession but are headed for a global depression that could last for many years.
The origins of the present crisis lie in the strategies adopted by economic and political elites to resolve the crises of stagflation - the coexistence of low growth with high inflation - which followed rapid growth in the post-World War II era, both in the G8 economies and in the underdeveloped economies.
Stagflation, however, was but a symptom of a deeper problem: the reconstruction of Germany and Japan and the rapid growth of industrialising economies like Brazil, Taiwan, and South Korea added tremendous new productive capacity and increased global competition, while income inequality within countries and between countries limited the growth of purchasing power and demand, thus eroding profitability.
Dilemma
This produced the dilemma of overproduction.
One "escape route" from the conundrum of overproduction, and for maintaining and raising profitability, was "financialisation".
Unsold Japanese cars in a UK showroom
Overproduction: many cars made, but no-one to sell them to
With investment in industry and agriculture yielding low profits as a result of over-capacity, large amounts of surplus funds have been circulating in or invested and reinvested in the financial sector - that is, the financial sector began turning on itself.
The result has been a divergence between a hyperactive financial economy and a stagnant real economy.
This was not accidental - the financial economy exploded precisely to make up for the stagnation owing to overproduction of the real economy.
Profits, not value
One indicator of the super-profitability of the financial sector is the fact that 40% of the total profits of US financial and nonfinancial corporations is accounted for by the financial sector although it is responsible for only 5% of US gross domestic product (and even that is likely to be an overestimate).
The problem with investing in financial sector operations is that it is tantamount to squeezing value out of already created value. It may create profit, yes, but it does not create new value - only industry, agriculture, trade, and services create new value.
Because profit is not based on value that is created, investment operations become very volatile and prices of stocks, bonds, and other forms of investment can depart very radically from their real value.
Profits then depend on taking advantage of upward price departures from the value of commodities, then selling before reality enforces a "correction", that is, a crash back to real values. The radical rise of prices of an asset far beyond real values is what is called the formation of a bubble.
Virus
We are far from over the worst of this crisis.
In the US real-estate sector, millions more mortgages are likely to go into default over the next few years.
Securities with a value of as much as $2 trillion dollars (£1.4 trillion) have already been injected, like a virus, into the global financial system.
Massive injections of taxpayers' cash have failed to kickstart lending again. Not surprisingly, with global capitalism's circulatory system seizing up, it was only a matter of time before the real economy would contract, as it has with frightening speed in the last few weeks.
Globalisation has ensured that economies that went up together in the boom would also go down together, with unparalleled speed, in the bust, the end of which is nowhere to be discerned. [snip]
Discussions at the World Social Forum in Belem focused on many aspects of the financial crisis that are not being publicly discussed at official or business level.
For instance, while strong calls for re-regulation are made, none of these proposals address the fact that the General Agreement on Trade in Services (Gats) - a treaty created under the auspices of the World Trade Organization (WTO) - actually seeks to deregulate trade in services, including financial services.
These liberalising international treaty rules deprive governments of the right to intervene.
The calls for re-regulation would require a dismantling of the whole architecture of treaties agreed over the past 10 years, mainly through the WTO
Governments' hands tied
Under Gats in the EU, governments cannot limit the size or the value of the financial services operations.
This prevents governments from intervening to ensure that a financial service company does not become "too big to fail" or have a destabilising effect on the country that hosts it.
Industrialised countries have gone further by committing themselves to more liberalisation and deregulation under a Gats annex that precludes regulation and opens the way for any new financial service, however speculative
agreements which have been working towards opening up the financial sector, and which were backed by the US and the EU.
Pigeons against backdrop of City of London
The City of London's success was based on deregulation
These were subject to concerted and secretive lobbying of negotiators by financial corporations, resulting in negotiators collaborating closely with the financial industry.
The liberalisation of financial services was included in trade treaties without any guarantee of whether the right regulation and supervision was in place.
In fact, the EU requested many countries to eliminate particular prudential rules, some of which had been put in place after the Asian crisis." [snip]
(C) maryjanie 2009
Letters to Editors re No More Bailouts, please !!!!
Move on.org sent letters to editors of various Los Angeles & OC newspapers. I was happy to join in this effort and gain access - maybe- to being a larger shout to our media who inform our govt representatives who vote any way they please anyhow....
"Please inform "our" govt officals and politicians - who do not seem to care what their Public thinks or wants - to stop saving their precious friends in banks, hedge funds, ratings companies, and all sorts of colluding greedy actors: we, the people, who work to save for our independent older age, refuse to give another 1c to any "business" that makes a profit at OUR EXPENSE.
No more bailouts...in fact, let's take some of what was wrongly promised by the Paulson crowd BACK INTO OUR TREASURY SAVINGS.
and let's nationalize the Federal Bank that issues money based on No thing that increases our debt and diminishes our so-precious-long-held-savings every time they print up so-easily more cash to 'save' themselves.
Please do not let anyone continue to put our working persons and retired persons at risk of begging on the streets of our urbanized world. Stop the free-giving-
-and-guessing and let those who 'didnt know' or 'made a small mistake' or 'didnt look' or 'misunderstood' their professional duties...let those lose their highly paid positions and return what they received but did NOT EARN [on the job].
If there is a mass fall out of no-back-up of our long-held cash and savings, then let the blame be put and pained on those who allowed this or created this to happen.
Be it government, lobbyists, banks, businesses, funds, rating companies, SEC officials, or hogs...may they fail, fall, recind and reinburse the places where they took money for services that defeated the USA people.
Chips may fall and for one, I am willing to now decease and leave this crumbling scene as long as those who helped 'cause' and collude to make this USA 'bubble' a fake delusion of wealth and growth.
Stop the repaying of thieves now !
(C) maryjanie 2009
"Please inform "our" govt officals and politicians - who do not seem to care what their Public thinks or wants - to stop saving their precious friends in banks, hedge funds, ratings companies, and all sorts of colluding greedy actors: we, the people, who work to save for our independent older age, refuse to give another 1c to any "business" that makes a profit at OUR EXPENSE.
No more bailouts...in fact, let's take some of what was wrongly promised by the Paulson crowd BACK INTO OUR TREASURY SAVINGS.
and let's nationalize the Federal Bank that issues money based on No thing that increases our debt and diminishes our so-precious-long-held-savings every time they print up so-easily more cash to 'save' themselves.
Please do not let anyone continue to put our working persons and retired persons at risk of begging on the streets of our urbanized world. Stop the free-giving-
-and-guessing and let those who 'didnt know' or 'made a small mistake' or 'didnt look' or 'misunderstood' their professional duties...let those lose their highly paid positions and return what they received but did NOT EARN [on the job].
If there is a mass fall out of no-back-up of our long-held cash and savings, then let the blame be put and pained on those who allowed this or created this to happen.
Be it government, lobbyists, banks, businesses, funds, rating companies, SEC officials, or hogs...may they fail, fall, recind and reinburse the places where they took money for services that defeated the USA people.
Chips may fall and for one, I am willing to now decease and leave this crumbling scene as long as those who helped 'cause' and collude to make this USA 'bubble' a fake delusion of wealth and growth.
Stop the repaying of thieves now !
(C) maryjanie 2009
Salon.com's Greg Greenwald on Obamania and now.....
this is a partial reposting from
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/02/14/brooks/
this was written in salon.com and is also about Greg Greenwald's talk on Bill Moyers PBS show about how media operates with political interests
[snip]
"Indeed, if one reviews most of the political controversies of the last decade, one finds exactly this dynamic: the political and media establishment joining together to deliberately distort American public opinion [snip]
The overarching role of the Beltway journalist is to obscure and distort those widely-held views on the part of the citizenry and thus prevent them from having any impact, protect political power from those beliefs.
What makes this journalistic servitude to the Washington establishment most repellent is that these same pundits generally -- and David Brooks in particular -- endlessly hold themselves out as the Spokespeople of the Ordinary American, even as they work tirelessly to protect the Washington political class from their beliefs, interests and sentiments. That's how people like David Brooks pile media deceit ("we speak for ordinary Americans") on top of political deceit
The most significant fact of American political life is that political journalists (of all people) see their role primarily as defenders of, servants to, spokespeople for the Washington establishment. That's how they obtain all of their rewards and remain relevant. The concept of journalists as watchdogs over political power has been turned completely on its head by power-revering servants
Brooks is about as typical and illustrative as it gets. They benefit substantially from the prevailing rules of political power and, thus, their only concern is to preserve and strengthen it and protect it from the growing dissatisfaction and anger of the peasant class. The more they do that, the more they are rewarded."
[snip]
"Shrillness" – the first cousin of "Unseriousness" – is the conceptual instrument used to deter and (when that fails) demonize those who view the political and media establishment as corrupt at its core. It's a way of demanding that everyone just calm down, avoid impetuous and inflammatory language, and stop acting as though there's anything seriously wrong with our political and media elites:
But it's not as though there's anything to get excited or angry about
And fine: there are some narrow disagreements among people of good faith and some small problems here and there that require some modifications -- little things like torture, chronic high-level lawbreaking, immunity for the political class (juxtaposed with the sprawling prison industry for ordinary Americans), rampant domestic spying, sky-high walls of government secrecy, full-scale economic meltdown, massive and growing inequities in wealth, endless wars, sleaze and corruption oozing from every Beltway pore, complete media complicity with all of it -- but there's no reason to get all indignant or agitated by it or act as though crimes are being committed or radical changes are needed or anything.
[snip]
During the 2008 election, Obama co-opted huge portions of the Left and its infrastructure so that their allegiance became devoted to him and not to any ideas. Many online political and "news" outlets -- including some liberal political blogs -- discovered that the most reliable way to massively increase traffic was to capitalize on the pro-Obama fervor by turning themselves into pro-Obama cheerleading squads. Grass-roots activist groups watched their dues-paying membership rolls explode the more they tapped into that same sentiment and turned themselves into Obama-supporting appendages. Even labor unions and long-standing Beltway advocacy groups reaped substantial benefits by identifying themselves as loyal foot soldiers in the Obama movement.
The major problem now is that these entities -- the ones that ought to be applying pressure on Obama from the Left and opposing him when he moves too far Right -- are now completely boxed in. They've lost -- or, more accurately, voluntarily relinquished -- their independence. They know that criticizing -- let alone opposing -- Obama will mean that all those new readers they won last year will leave; that all those new dues-paying members will go join some other, more Obama-supportive organization; that they will prompt intense backlash and anger among the very people -- their members, supporters and readers -- on whom they have come to rely as the source of their support, strength, and numbers.
As a result, there is very little political or media structure to Obama's Left that can or will criticize him, even when he moves far to what the Beltway calls the "center..[snip]
Part of the political shrewdness of Obama has been that he's been able to actually convince huge numbers of liberals that it's a good thing when he ignores and even stomps on their political ideals, that it's something they should celebrate and even be grateful for. Hordes of Obama-loving liberals are still marching around paying homage to the empty mantras of "pragmatism" and "post-partisan harmony" -- the terms used to justify and even glorify Obama's repudiation of their own political values
Political ideas and values that have no meaningful pressure being exerted on their behalf will always be those that are most ignored. That's just the most basic rule of politics.
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/02/14/brooks/
this was written in salon.com and is also about Greg Greenwald's talk on Bill Moyers PBS show about how media operates with political interests
[snip]
"Indeed, if one reviews most of the political controversies of the last decade, one finds exactly this dynamic: the political and media establishment joining together to deliberately distort American public opinion [snip]
The overarching role of the Beltway journalist is to obscure and distort those widely-held views on the part of the citizenry and thus prevent them from having any impact, protect political power from those beliefs.
What makes this journalistic servitude to the Washington establishment most repellent is that these same pundits generally -- and David Brooks in particular -- endlessly hold themselves out as the Spokespeople of the Ordinary American, even as they work tirelessly to protect the Washington political class from their beliefs, interests and sentiments. That's how people like David Brooks pile media deceit ("we speak for ordinary Americans") on top of political deceit
The most significant fact of American political life is that political journalists (of all people) see their role primarily as defenders of, servants to, spokespeople for the Washington establishment. That's how they obtain all of their rewards and remain relevant. The concept of journalists as watchdogs over political power has been turned completely on its head by power-revering servants
Brooks is about as typical and illustrative as it gets. They benefit substantially from the prevailing rules of political power and, thus, their only concern is to preserve and strengthen it and protect it from the growing dissatisfaction and anger of the peasant class. The more they do that, the more they are rewarded."
[snip]
"Shrillness" – the first cousin of "Unseriousness" – is the conceptual instrument used to deter and (when that fails) demonize those who view the political and media establishment as corrupt at its core. It's a way of demanding that everyone just calm down, avoid impetuous and inflammatory language, and stop acting as though there's anything seriously wrong with our political and media elites:
But it's not as though there's anything to get excited or angry about
And fine: there are some narrow disagreements among people of good faith and some small problems here and there that require some modifications -- little things like torture, chronic high-level lawbreaking, immunity for the political class (juxtaposed with the sprawling prison industry for ordinary Americans), rampant domestic spying, sky-high walls of government secrecy, full-scale economic meltdown, massive and growing inequities in wealth, endless wars, sleaze and corruption oozing from every Beltway pore, complete media complicity with all of it -- but there's no reason to get all indignant or agitated by it or act as though crimes are being committed or radical changes are needed or anything.
[snip]
During the 2008 election, Obama co-opted huge portions of the Left and its infrastructure so that their allegiance became devoted to him and not to any ideas. Many online political and "news" outlets -- including some liberal political blogs -- discovered that the most reliable way to massively increase traffic was to capitalize on the pro-Obama fervor by turning themselves into pro-Obama cheerleading squads. Grass-roots activist groups watched their dues-paying membership rolls explode the more they tapped into that same sentiment and turned themselves into Obama-supporting appendages. Even labor unions and long-standing Beltway advocacy groups reaped substantial benefits by identifying themselves as loyal foot soldiers in the Obama movement.
The major problem now is that these entities -- the ones that ought to be applying pressure on Obama from the Left and opposing him when he moves too far Right -- are now completely boxed in. They've lost -- or, more accurately, voluntarily relinquished -- their independence. They know that criticizing -- let alone opposing -- Obama will mean that all those new readers they won last year will leave; that all those new dues-paying members will go join some other, more Obama-supportive organization; that they will prompt intense backlash and anger among the very people -- their members, supporters and readers -- on whom they have come to rely as the source of their support, strength, and numbers.
As a result, there is very little political or media structure to Obama's Left that can or will criticize him, even when he moves far to what the Beltway calls the "center..[snip]
Part of the political shrewdness of Obama has been that he's been able to actually convince huge numbers of liberals that it's a good thing when he ignores and even stomps on their political ideals, that it's something they should celebrate and even be grateful for. Hordes of Obama-loving liberals are still marching around paying homage to the empty mantras of "pragmatism" and "post-partisan harmony" -- the terms used to justify and even glorify Obama's repudiation of their own political values
Political ideas and values that have no meaningful pressure being exerted on their behalf will always be those that are most ignored. That's just the most basic rule of politics.
clever news bits found...
The Securities and Exchange Commission said it could not account for $8 billion in assets held by the Stanford Financial Group
body scanners at Tulsa airport : For the first time, some airline passengers will skip metal detectors and instead be screened by body scanning machines that look through clothing for hidden weapons
British researchers have found that stock traders tend to take bigger risks when their testosterone levels register at higher levels. Morning saliva tests were used to track the changing levels. What all this suggests, of course, is that when guys are in heat, we may start making bad decisions
When images of bulls-eyes, houseflies or other targets are etched into the bottom of a urinal, spillage is reduced by 80%.
A study of candy bars from eight major retailers found the average confection sat for 140 days, or about 4.5 months, before reaching the consumer.
In California, laws are copyrighted, which means a digital copy of the states Code of Regulations costs $1,556 and a paper version costs $2,315. The state generates about $880,000 annually by selling its laws.
21% of American with salaries of $100,000 or more say they are living from paycheck to paycheck.
29% of American who are in a committed relationship lie to their partner about their spending habits.
what more information of Value could you ask for ?
body scanners at Tulsa airport : For the first time, some airline passengers will skip metal detectors and instead be screened by body scanning machines that look through clothing for hidden weapons
British researchers have found that stock traders tend to take bigger risks when their testosterone levels register at higher levels. Morning saliva tests were used to track the changing levels. What all this suggests, of course, is that when guys are in heat, we may start making bad decisions
When images of bulls-eyes, houseflies or other targets are etched into the bottom of a urinal, spillage is reduced by 80%.
A study of candy bars from eight major retailers found the average confection sat for 140 days, or about 4.5 months, before reaching the consumer.
In California, laws are copyrighted, which means a digital copy of the states Code of Regulations costs $1,556 and a paper version costs $2,315. The state generates about $880,000 annually by selling its laws.
21% of American with salaries of $100,000 or more say they are living from paycheck to paycheck.
29% of American who are in a committed relationship lie to their partner about their spending habits.
what more information of Value could you ask for ?
Bank Bail Outs are not for us, Americans, but for elite financiers only
a Letter sent to Senator Barbara Boxer:
Thank you for actually working on the working-person's behalf....I have heard you in person at UCLA Public Affairs and knew then I could trust you to do your best...
and while the list of how our billions are spent that you sent finally telling us of what was voted on ... all that put everyone in the USA for the next 4-5 generations in debt....those $$$ intended to make more programs and also keep up the ones that were created and funded before, when we THOUGHT ERRONEOUSLY we were a rich nation...
I am dismayed at funding so many, just to "keep up with prior projects"
and so much is going to BANKERS AND FINANCIAL INSTITUIONAL TYPES AND THOSE WHO WORK with our money and who then take it for themselves or just hold it for their profiteering on our cash later.
I am against the original proposition of bailing out the banks and financiers.... those who worked so hard to earn for mostly themselves and did cheat the rest of us by their later-claimed-naivitee and their so called 'mistakes' = = = they are =unforgiveable === as they had profited ....before the fall of this empire!
I am still against the bailing out of companies that profited before, pocketed or even reinvested monies and who only later - now - find their risks have failed. They have failed, all of us.
We do not need to SAVE OR RESCUE FAILED managers or board members of any kind of institutions from their own stupidity.
There is no actual accountability revealed or admitted... but only scare tactics are repeated in their sad stories told on most new media.... to coax us to make our giving them 'stability' or whatever nice word it is to insure their continuation.
If an earthquake happens, whatever is in it's path may collapse.... so be it with the earth changes that have taken place with the lies and from professionals not-looking at faked ratings and fixed bundles...let the collapse first happen, even if it affects us alllllllllllll.... or else there will be no correction made.Nothing learned.
Criminal behavior [even if not unlawful, still criminal in essence] repeats as it gets away with it's games and ploys. To bail out the failures is to ally ourselves and prop up those who have failed us. This is a failing manuever.
And all the threats that are announced repeatedly ::: about "losing American jobs", "losing YOUR houses", losing YOUR banks...INSTEAD OF saying more honestly " you are losing those who lost your security," [if we ever really had any before ? ]
It is a gaming gambling act to help the greedy managers and institutions/corporations continue to do some more of their greedy acts.
I am NOT FOR ANY BAIL OUTS.none! and I am very sorry that those we elect, before and now again, were perhaps forced to agree to give-away ALL our future for programs that look-like they are "necessary" [ tho maybe not so true as is propagandized tho ] - i e. why is the taxed public paying for day care and forcing real parents to give up their children for 'another job' ? And why are helping the disabled and elderly who are discriminated against in employment with ageism and stigmas called "entitlements" when they are just being helped to survive instead of burden their families or live homelessly on city streets and beg ? Why are foolish mortgage purchasers being helped while the majority responsible ones are being ignored and left to their own earnings to pay only ?
Why are more college tuitions being paid for by govt instead of offering pay-back-loans, or work-study programs and part time work by students while they study ? It was so before, why not now ? It is not a gift, an entitlement, but an assist only to the poor working class level, not to anyone earnings more than $50,000, which is not poor at all !!!! Let's get our numbers corrected here !
Not give-aways... but cautious loans carefully taken on that MUST BE REPAID before any more credit is allowed. No more purchasing for fun and technological- keeping -up-with-their-peers with gadgets. No more easy-take-outs but honest work and real food. Like most of the people on this small globe do still, as before, because it keeps people on the ground, in actual life, counting their change and then sharing it.
And why are those who foolishly bought big houses they could not afford the payments then - or in 1 year or two when interest rose more could pay less so - why are they given credits and help ? Because they "hoped" to get back more and gambled ? and lost? Because they were sold a false bill of housing goods and now need to bailed out of their errors and dreams ? when all the rest of home-payors who did not act so conspicuously consuming greedily are not helped at all?
None should be so "assisted" - and let the housing market, and most of new construction that feeds on the myth of "everyone must own their own big house on that hill" be stopped dead in its greedy development by contractors tracks. Let people rent like they did before.... and join their families in housing units ..... instead of having 'separate rooms separate houses' to luxuriously prove something they are not - self-sufficient w/o debt... at least not given more than the responsbible accountable usual affordable old mortgage interest of ages before.
NO MORE MONEY OUT OF OUR POCKETS TO ANYONE !
jobs are needed and can be created and given to Americans, not doled out of country, not manufactured elsewhere, not luring illegal people to come here and work more cheaply... but not paid for by taxpayers. Let those who will surely privatize those projects for creating more labor, and then make the profits, let those corporations create the jobs. Let the organizations who benefit with profits and risks, return a fair share of the benefits to THEIR communities, or move out. We can imagine who will profit from 'the jobs created'...it's not the strangled middle class or surging numbers of working class stiffs and tired laborers.
NO MORE BAILOUTS OF ANY KINDS, PLEASE !!!!!
I heard back in Fall 2008 that USA Today said 70% of USA did NOT want bailouts, and their so-called representatives went ahead and agreed with Paulson et. al to just go ahead and do it..why not ? What is this ? what happened here ?
Where is the voice of the people polled or representated....why are Americans afraid or too complacent to cry out, to strike or even walk in a protest with pretty signs and get photographed ? Where is the active, rebellious, audible voice ? or is that never again to be relied upon as a voice-heard at all ?
who knows what is wanted by the greater than it's 51% majority ? so the hell with the rest of us ? huh ? 49% is not small number in any group.
This is not personal to you,Senator Boxer, but my deep fury and hurt and fear and dismay at the whole of 'our govt' as it appears to us from any media we have access to.
Even the BBC news says the same story....we don't count for anything nothing - because it is done - but Not In Our Name- all done...completed, decided, voted on and paid by lobbyists, politicians, govt 'officials' and then merely reported by the docile reporters. They,we, tell us what we did not want. Or we did not vote for. Or maybe no one asked us directly about our concerns ? Those presumptions of how we and our children want our tax dollars wasted, spent, sunk into more debt are incorrect.
Sure wish I could leave this sinking empire !
(C) maryjanie 2009
Thank you for actually working on the working-person's behalf....I have heard you in person at UCLA Public Affairs and knew then I could trust you to do your best...
and while the list of how our billions are spent that you sent finally telling us of what was voted on ... all that put everyone in the USA for the next 4-5 generations in debt....those $$$ intended to make more programs and also keep up the ones that were created and funded before, when we THOUGHT ERRONEOUSLY we were a rich nation...
I am dismayed at funding so many, just to "keep up with prior projects"
and so much is going to BANKERS AND FINANCIAL INSTITUIONAL TYPES AND THOSE WHO WORK with our money and who then take it for themselves or just hold it for their profiteering on our cash later.
I am against the original proposition of bailing out the banks and financiers.... those who worked so hard to earn for mostly themselves and did cheat the rest of us by their later-claimed-naivitee and their so called 'mistakes' = = = they are =unforgiveable === as they had profited ....before the fall of this empire!
I am still against the bailing out of companies that profited before, pocketed or even reinvested monies and who only later - now - find their risks have failed. They have failed, all of us.
We do not need to SAVE OR RESCUE FAILED managers or board members of any kind of institutions from their own stupidity.
There is no actual accountability revealed or admitted... but only scare tactics are repeated in their sad stories told on most new media.... to coax us to make our giving them 'stability' or whatever nice word it is to insure their continuation.
If an earthquake happens, whatever is in it's path may collapse.... so be it with the earth changes that have taken place with the lies and from professionals not-looking at faked ratings and fixed bundles...let the collapse first happen, even if it affects us alllllllllllll.... or else there will be no correction made.Nothing learned.
Criminal behavior [even if not unlawful, still criminal in essence] repeats as it gets away with it's games and ploys. To bail out the failures is to ally ourselves and prop up those who have failed us. This is a failing manuever.
And all the threats that are announced repeatedly ::: about "losing American jobs", "losing YOUR houses", losing YOUR banks...INSTEAD OF saying more honestly " you are losing those who lost your security," [if we ever really had any before ? ]
It is a gaming gambling act to help the greedy managers and institutions/corporations continue to do some more of their greedy acts.
I am NOT FOR ANY BAIL OUTS.none! and I am very sorry that those we elect, before and now again, were perhaps forced to agree to give-away ALL our future for programs that look-like they are "necessary" [ tho maybe not so true as is propagandized tho ] - i e. why is the taxed public paying for day care and forcing real parents to give up their children for 'another job' ? And why are helping the disabled and elderly who are discriminated against in employment with ageism and stigmas called "entitlements" when they are just being helped to survive instead of burden their families or live homelessly on city streets and beg ? Why are foolish mortgage purchasers being helped while the majority responsible ones are being ignored and left to their own earnings to pay only ?
Why are more college tuitions being paid for by govt instead of offering pay-back-loans, or work-study programs and part time work by students while they study ? It was so before, why not now ? It is not a gift, an entitlement, but an assist only to the poor working class level, not to anyone earnings more than $50,000, which is not poor at all !!!! Let's get our numbers corrected here !
Not give-aways... but cautious loans carefully taken on that MUST BE REPAID before any more credit is allowed. No more purchasing for fun and technological- keeping -up-with-their-peers with gadgets. No more easy-take-outs but honest work and real food. Like most of the people on this small globe do still, as before, because it keeps people on the ground, in actual life, counting their change and then sharing it.
And why are those who foolishly bought big houses they could not afford the payments then - or in 1 year or two when interest rose more could pay less so - why are they given credits and help ? Because they "hoped" to get back more and gambled ? and lost? Because they were sold a false bill of housing goods and now need to bailed out of their errors and dreams ? when all the rest of home-payors who did not act so conspicuously consuming greedily are not helped at all?
None should be so "assisted" - and let the housing market, and most of new construction that feeds on the myth of "everyone must own their own big house on that hill" be stopped dead in its greedy development by contractors tracks. Let people rent like they did before.... and join their families in housing units ..... instead of having 'separate rooms separate houses' to luxuriously prove something they are not - self-sufficient w/o debt... at least not given more than the responsbible accountable usual affordable old mortgage interest of ages before.
NO MORE MONEY OUT OF OUR POCKETS TO ANYONE !
jobs are needed and can be created and given to Americans, not doled out of country, not manufactured elsewhere, not luring illegal people to come here and work more cheaply... but not paid for by taxpayers. Let those who will surely privatize those projects for creating more labor, and then make the profits, let those corporations create the jobs. Let the organizations who benefit with profits and risks, return a fair share of the benefits to THEIR communities, or move out. We can imagine who will profit from 'the jobs created'...it's not the strangled middle class or surging numbers of working class stiffs and tired laborers.
NO MORE BAILOUTS OF ANY KINDS, PLEASE !!!!!
I heard back in Fall 2008 that USA Today said 70% of USA did NOT want bailouts, and their so-called representatives went ahead and agreed with Paulson et. al to just go ahead and do it..why not ? What is this ? what happened here ?
Where is the voice of the people polled or representated....why are Americans afraid or too complacent to cry out, to strike or even walk in a protest with pretty signs and get photographed ? Where is the active, rebellious, audible voice ? or is that never again to be relied upon as a voice-heard at all ?
who knows what is wanted by the greater than it's 51% majority ? so the hell with the rest of us ? huh ? 49% is not small number in any group.
This is not personal to you,Senator Boxer, but my deep fury and hurt and fear and dismay at the whole of 'our govt' as it appears to us from any media we have access to.
Even the BBC news says the same story....we don't count for anything nothing - because it is done - but Not In Our Name- all done...completed, decided, voted on and paid by lobbyists, politicians, govt 'officials' and then merely reported by the docile reporters. They,we, tell us what we did not want. Or we did not vote for. Or maybe no one asked us directly about our concerns ? Those presumptions of how we and our children want our tax dollars wasted, spent, sunk into more debt are incorrect.
Sure wish I could leave this sinking empire !
(C) maryjanie 2009
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
News is turning 'funny' and religious instead of being factual now....
WHAT RECESSION?
the $170 MILLION INAUGURATION:
"OBAMA'S inauguration has been financed partially [but how much actually ?] by BAILED-OUT WALL STREET executives: [you did not know this either ? right !]
so while OUR country is in the middle of the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression, but this isn't stopping them rich donors and the OUR government [read: our paid to govt taxes] from spending $170 million, or more, on the inauguration of the new Prez Obama . The actual swearing-in ceremony will cost $1.24 million, according to Carole Florman, spokeswoman for the Joint Congressional Committee on Inaugural Ceremonies."
Who is paying for what here ? Who agreed to those image-boosting fancy-militaristic ceremonial shows to be paid for by US, the ones who can barely afford that old TV?
and
ARE OUR OLD NEWSPAPERS ARE SHIFTING ALLIANCES OR JUST BEING TORN UP TOO ?
It has been reported that "USA Today, The Wall Street Journal, The Los Angeles Times, The Washington Post, The Chicago Tribune, The San Francisco Chronicle, The Baltimore Sun, The San Jose Mercury News and The Kansas City Star have something in common, aside from some of the biggest names in an endangered industry. By the start of February, not one of them will have the same top editor it had when 2008 began. Most of them will have different publishers, too."
Does this mean we have a new slant and new commercial owners to tell us what is happening and how to think about our new "news"? Where do the truth & facts lie?
then, "the Vatican will soon have its own channel on YouTube, where the Catholic faithful or the curious will be able to see Pope Benedict or Church events."
Is that cool or more publicity for strict religious teachings to those who do not want to belong or be preached to or convinced of that Catholic or Christian point of view?
(C) maryjanie 2009
the $170 MILLION INAUGURATION:
"OBAMA'S inauguration has been financed partially [but how much actually ?] by BAILED-OUT WALL STREET executives: [you did not know this either ? right !]
so while OUR country is in the middle of the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression, but this isn't stopping them rich donors and the OUR government [read: our paid to govt taxes] from spending $170 million, or more, on the inauguration of the new Prez Obama . The actual swearing-in ceremony will cost $1.24 million, according to Carole Florman, spokeswoman for the Joint Congressional Committee on Inaugural Ceremonies."
Who is paying for what here ? Who agreed to those image-boosting fancy-militaristic ceremonial shows to be paid for by US, the ones who can barely afford that old TV?
and
ARE OUR OLD NEWSPAPERS ARE SHIFTING ALLIANCES OR JUST BEING TORN UP TOO ?
It has been reported that "USA Today, The Wall Street Journal, The Los Angeles Times, The Washington Post, The Chicago Tribune, The San Francisco Chronicle, The Baltimore Sun, The San Jose Mercury News and The Kansas City Star have something in common, aside from some of the biggest names in an endangered industry. By the start of February, not one of them will have the same top editor it had when 2008 began. Most of them will have different publishers, too."
Does this mean we have a new slant and new commercial owners to tell us what is happening and how to think about our new "news"? Where do the truth & facts lie?
then, "the Vatican will soon have its own channel on YouTube, where the Catholic faithful or the curious will be able to see Pope Benedict or Church events."
Is that cool or more publicity for strict religious teachings to those who do not want to belong or be preached to or convinced of that Catholic or Christian point of view?
(C) maryjanie 2009
LA City is doing us harm, taking our rents & taxes for other purposes...see
from LA WEEKLY =re LA housing cost this is a repost from http://www.laweekly.com/2009-01-15/news/l-a-39-s-hidden-housing-disaster
[snip]
$962: Last year’s [2008] average cost of renting in Los Angeles, 43 percent higher than in 2000. 49: That’s L.A.’s bottom-of-the-barrel “housing affordability” rank out of 50 big American cities, with San Francisco ranked last, according to a 2008 survey by San Francisco nonprofit SustainLane.com. from 2003 to 2006. 7,369: The number of affordable units lost during the same period, mostly through conversions to luxury units but also demolitions related to new housing.
13,713: The net number of rent-controlled apartments and houses lost between 2001 and 2007 to demolition sparked by new construction and, even more often, to condo conversions sparked by the housing bubble’s rush to home ownership.
If the city’s numbers are accurate, Los Angeles has been losing a massive supply of affordable housing, while city leaders repeatedly take credit for approving 10,000 to 14,000 new units during each boom year — one of the busiest construction periods since the end of World War II. In the face of widespread neighborhood resistance to this most recent boom, city planners approved often-sprawling luxury complexes in Hollywood, along Wilshire, on the Westside, in the Valley and downtown — while the city was hemorrhaging its existing cheap rental stock.
City Controller Laura Chick says 90 percent of the units built during the construction frenzy were for those earning at least $135,000......
Apartments built before 1979 are rent-stabilized, allowing property owners to charge new tenants at market rate but restricting rent increases on existing tenants. Owners make up for the lost revenue by taking less profit, or raising rents for other tenants. How about the mayor’s $5 billion housing plan? Villaraigosa has not produced any documents proving that lenders or other sources are even offering such funds. But if they were, would it make a difference? [snip]
- - - - -- - - - -
another repost here from http://www.laweekly.com/2008-12-11/news/l-a-slams-residents-with-stiff-fees-and-taxes/
LA WEEKLY again [snip]
in May 2006, the City Council announced a trash-collection fee that Villaraigosa sold to residents by publicly promising it would go to hiring 1,000 new cops. In concert with that, the City Council has boosted the trash fee 330 percent, from $11 to $36.32.
The fee hike goes far beyond the actual cost of collecting and dumping trash. By this fall, it had generated a $137 million mountain of cash. But Villaraigosa’s vow that the excess funds would go to hiring cops proved untrue. An audit by city Controller Laura Chick has shown that Villaraigosa and Police Chief William Bratton spent only $47.2 million hiring new officers. Much of the rest went to raises and perks for the powerful police union. Although no laws were broken in the failure to spend the money as promised, Chick says (in a careful parsing of the actions by her political ally, Villaraigosa) that the mayor “incorrectly stated that the fees would be used exclusively to hire new officers, which we [now] know is not the case.”.... . Soon, water rates will jump by $5.25 on a typical water bill, but costs will be far higher for those who regularly water their lawn.....
the revised 2008-2009 city budget, which has increased car-towing fees by more than 100 percent to $100, hiked parking tickets dramatically, and almost doubled city campsite fees to $10 per night at places....[snip]
who is taking actions to change and improve these LA CITY neglects and corruptions?
Who else is writing, calling, informing and not-allowing our city to be taken by politicos stealing our livelihood and taxes?
are you ? pass this info on and let the rest of the concerned citizens KNOW what is happening....local issues are global as they happen here and elsewhere ....where peoople do not have the luxuries and freedoms we take for granted in Los Angeles, California, USA and the Americas !
(C) maryjanie 2009
[snip]
$962: Last year’s [2008] average cost of renting in Los Angeles, 43 percent higher than in 2000. 49: That’s L.A.’s bottom-of-the-barrel “housing affordability” rank out of 50 big American cities, with San Francisco ranked last, according to a 2008 survey by San Francisco nonprofit SustainLane.com. from 2003 to 2006. 7,369: The number of affordable units lost during the same period, mostly through conversions to luxury units but also demolitions related to new housing.
13,713: The net number of rent-controlled apartments and houses lost between 2001 and 2007 to demolition sparked by new construction and, even more often, to condo conversions sparked by the housing bubble’s rush to home ownership.
If the city’s numbers are accurate, Los Angeles has been losing a massive supply of affordable housing, while city leaders repeatedly take credit for approving 10,000 to 14,000 new units during each boom year — one of the busiest construction periods since the end of World War II. In the face of widespread neighborhood resistance to this most recent boom, city planners approved often-sprawling luxury complexes in Hollywood, along Wilshire, on the Westside, in the Valley and downtown — while the city was hemorrhaging its existing cheap rental stock.
City Controller Laura Chick says 90 percent of the units built during the construction frenzy were for those earning at least $135,000......
Apartments built before 1979 are rent-stabilized, allowing property owners to charge new tenants at market rate but restricting rent increases on existing tenants. Owners make up for the lost revenue by taking less profit, or raising rents for other tenants. How about the mayor’s $5 billion housing plan? Villaraigosa has not produced any documents proving that lenders or other sources are even offering such funds. But if they were, would it make a difference? [snip]
- - - - -- - - - -
another repost here from http://www.laweekly.com/2008-12-11/news/l-a-slams-residents-with-stiff-fees-and-taxes/
LA WEEKLY again [snip]
in May 2006, the City Council announced a trash-collection fee that Villaraigosa sold to residents by publicly promising it would go to hiring 1,000 new cops. In concert with that, the City Council has boosted the trash fee 330 percent, from $11 to $36.32.
The fee hike goes far beyond the actual cost of collecting and dumping trash. By this fall, it had generated a $137 million mountain of cash. But Villaraigosa’s vow that the excess funds would go to hiring cops proved untrue. An audit by city Controller Laura Chick has shown that Villaraigosa and Police Chief William Bratton spent only $47.2 million hiring new officers. Much of the rest went to raises and perks for the powerful police union. Although no laws were broken in the failure to spend the money as promised, Chick says (in a careful parsing of the actions by her political ally, Villaraigosa) that the mayor “incorrectly stated that the fees would be used exclusively to hire new officers, which we [now] know is not the case.”.... . Soon, water rates will jump by $5.25 on a typical water bill, but costs will be far higher for those who regularly water their lawn.....
the revised 2008-2009 city budget, which has increased car-towing fees by more than 100 percent to $100, hiked parking tickets dramatically, and almost doubled city campsite fees to $10 per night at places....[snip]
who is taking actions to change and improve these LA CITY neglects and corruptions?
Who else is writing, calling, informing and not-allowing our city to be taken by politicos stealing our livelihood and taxes?
are you ? pass this info on and let the rest of the concerned citizens KNOW what is happening....local issues are global as they happen here and elsewhere ....where peoople do not have the luxuries and freedoms we take for granted in Los Angeles, California, USA and the Americas !
(C) maryjanie 2009
Sunday, December 14, 2008
Guadalupe has her own Day ! Celebrated on Dec.12
Merry, Mary, Merry,... Guadalupe... her special day is actually so close to the Winter's Solstice that it is time to be Merry that those longer days of light begin around December 21st.
Because red-suited fat guys are not all that this season represents. In the land of deserts and conquerors, another honored person still exists, called Nuestra Senora or Virgen [ meaing pure, not a sexual state ], but always Guadalupe [ and with the familiarity and maternal warmth in her projected image].
December 12th is another way to celebrate our winter holidays. December 12th is the celebrated day of "Our Lady" or "Virgin", actually Tonantzin... and only later called "Guadalupe" by the Spaniards.
For a change, away from credit-eating stores trying to sell us more stuff, discounted or just so-advertised, we need to try another version of celebration. Go downtown to the church at La Plazaita, across from the commercialized Olvera street and enter where the hearts of Mexicans press together - families who bring their prayers, their flowers and candles, and show their beloved children to honor Nuestra Senora ["de las Americas", added later] Guadalupe.
Don’t wait for the commercialized, consumerist, propagandized, later day in December to celebrate. Next year you too can bring your own family down, by bus if you prefer, to La Plazita Church across from Olvera St. in downtown LA in the late afternoon and immerse yourself in an allied culture from near our own borders. Bring your children, your cameras, your appetite, and your curiosity. And a candle or flowers, too. Parking is in nearby lots. The experience is exquisite. And fun!
But who is this special woman, the Guadalupe, the iconic image seen everywhere else also in LA ?
The story is essentially told like this =
that a special devotion to Guadalupe started almost 475 years ago when the image of a beautiful brown-skinned woman appeared to an Indian, Juan Diego, on Tepeyac hill near Mexico City.
Although it was December, the apparition, [later named ] "Guadalupe", told Juan Diego to take the Castilian roses she produced right there for him -- those roses which were out of season and not found in those arid lands in the cold winter. She told him to gather the beautifully blooming flowers in his cloak and to present them to the high Catholic bishop, to show them as a sign of her presence. She also requested that a temple be built in her name by the Catholics who were dominating the religious countryside.
Juan Diego had to return to the Spanish Bishop 3 times before he was given any credence. Then, finally, when the poor humble Indian unfolded his cactus-fiber cloak, the actual beautiful roses fell out and at the same time, miraculously, Guadalupe's image was emblazoned on his tilma - shirt -- and showed the dark-skinned Aztec princess, standing in front of the sun and on top of a crescent moon.
Juan Diego has been depicted as just one plain and humble man from the native population, those who were preferably seen by their Spanish lighter-skinned rulers as ignornant peasants - being just a devout, and submissive people who repeatedly were only there to carry out orders.
He was just allowed to deliver a message man-to-man to the ruling conquerors and their religious counter-parties. The princess apparently did not deign to appear or make herself known directly to those who now ruled these Mexican lands.
The Catholic version likes to claim that seven years after Guadalupe's apparition, some 8 million Indians were converted to their religion. Conversion may be the most important aspect of a religious group appropriating another group's apparitions, or a relevation, a visitation, and an actualization of a venerated figure, now a female ... and of more color.
Many people now still pray to her as a miracle worker no matter what they think about the formal Church where she has been appropriated. They will pray to Guadalupe even when they ostensibly must also pray to a grey-bearded God. Many mix their own traditional beliefs with the overlaid dominant Christian versions of who [all] rules the earth and heavens.
In 1754, 200 years after her noted sighting, Pope Benedict XIV declared that Our Lady of Guadalupe then patron of what was then called New Spain. Much later,
in 1946, Our Lady of Guadalupe was also decreed as the Patroness of the Americas by the Catholic all-male hierarchy. In 2002, Juan Diego was canonized in the Basilica in Mexico City.
It is not clear if Guadalupe was ever herself actually canonized, or made a 'saint' instead of her messenger. However, she has obviously been fully appropriated as if she is a saint or part of the religious iconography. How else could you explain the churches that continue to incorporate her images and utilize the veneration given to her in their own religious masses and prayers?
Some assume she must be the Virgin Mary of European depiction which seems to give more credence to the taking - of what was not actually Christian at all - as theirs. Who now is to say who Guadalupe actually is or was?
The main shrines of Guadalupe in Mexico D.F. had been preceded by the more indigenous temple on Tepeyac hill, honoring the earth and fertility goddess Tonantzin of that land - She represents our lady, our mother as earth is our mother, who, like Our Lady of Guadalupe, was also associated with the moon. In pre-Hispanic times. That temple in Mexico D.F. has been the site of large scale pilgrimages for a long period of time.
The original temple, which was dedicated to the Queen of Tepeyacac, was built near where Juan Diego had said he had seen her apparition,it is said. Tenochtitlan also was the Aztec capital city prior to the arrival of the Spanish. The area was known then as Atzacualpa or Atzacualco.
It is written that most Mexican Catholics believe that Guadalupe was a manifestation of the semitic Virgin Mary in their land, now the Americas, yet this was not found to be written down then by those same Mexicans.
So we now have to ask :
"how did the natives record this event or even make known her appearance or presence?
What media was used then? Where has it been preserved and recorded ?
Who depicted Guadalupe before the Catholics conquered and overlaid their story with their patriarchal dominant religious views and beliefs and with their parchment and ink ?
What was written over any original native recordings ?"
Though Guadalupe is NOT recorded as a saint nor raised to special religious status, she is still defined, re-framed and utilized as a duplication and apparition of the same Holy Mary that Catholics already own for their own religious stories and carefully crafted histories of special December winter events. All female deities are frequently defined by the Christian stories of a mother with child, named Mary...all later ones related to their original venerated woman.
Guadalupe is also seen and described as the sorrowful mother, a figure who embodies the suffering of Mexican & Latina populations. Many woman identify with this image as understanding their sad and difficult lives ...in a patriarchial male-dominated world. Even still today.
Interestingly, stories & controversy abound about the credibility of proof of Guadalupe’s visit. Some consider it miraculous that the tilma maintains its structural integrity after nearly 500 years, since replicas made with the same type of materials lasted only about 15 years before disintegrating. In addition, the tilma resisted an ammonia spill that made a considerable hole, which was reportedly repaired in two weeks with no external help. (It is not surprising to note that the Catholic bishop kept the original tilma containing the sacred image in his private chapel. Upon completion of the main church, he then transferred the sacred image so that all others too may see it...taking the now sacred object for only Catholic use, and also keeping the valuable icon safe from and for the native people of whom she belongs.)
In 1921, an anarchist placed an offering of flowers next to the image. A bomb hidden within the flowers exploded and destroyed the shrine. However, the image suffered no damage. So, there seems that perhaps there are also supernatural physical “proofs” and forces that are still in existence, reminding us all about of her presence and relevance in Mexico City.
For further information to be learned on Guadalupe, you can visit: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Our_Lady_of_Guadalupe
(c) MariaJ 2008
Because red-suited fat guys are not all that this season represents. In the land of deserts and conquerors, another honored person still exists, called Nuestra Senora or Virgen [ meaing pure, not a sexual state ], but always Guadalupe [ and with the familiarity and maternal warmth in her projected image].
December 12th is another way to celebrate our winter holidays. December 12th is the celebrated day of "Our Lady" or "Virgin", actually Tonantzin... and only later called "Guadalupe" by the Spaniards.
For a change, away from credit-eating stores trying to sell us more stuff, discounted or just so-advertised, we need to try another version of celebration. Go downtown to the church at La Plazaita, across from the commercialized Olvera street and enter where the hearts of Mexicans press together - families who bring their prayers, their flowers and candles, and show their beloved children to honor Nuestra Senora ["de las Americas", added later] Guadalupe.
Don’t wait for the commercialized, consumerist, propagandized, later day in December to celebrate. Next year you too can bring your own family down, by bus if you prefer, to La Plazita Church across from Olvera St. in downtown LA in the late afternoon and immerse yourself in an allied culture from near our own borders. Bring your children, your cameras, your appetite, and your curiosity. And a candle or flowers, too. Parking is in nearby lots. The experience is exquisite. And fun!
But who is this special woman, the Guadalupe, the iconic image seen everywhere else also in LA ?
The story is essentially told like this =
that a special devotion to Guadalupe started almost 475 years ago when the image of a beautiful brown-skinned woman appeared to an Indian, Juan Diego, on Tepeyac hill near Mexico City.
Although it was December, the apparition, [later named ] "Guadalupe", told Juan Diego to take the Castilian roses she produced right there for him -- those roses which were out of season and not found in those arid lands in the cold winter. She told him to gather the beautifully blooming flowers in his cloak and to present them to the high Catholic bishop, to show them as a sign of her presence. She also requested that a temple be built in her name by the Catholics who were dominating the religious countryside.
Juan Diego had to return to the Spanish Bishop 3 times before he was given any credence. Then, finally, when the poor humble Indian unfolded his cactus-fiber cloak, the actual beautiful roses fell out and at the same time, miraculously, Guadalupe's image was emblazoned on his tilma - shirt -- and showed the dark-skinned Aztec princess, standing in front of the sun and on top of a crescent moon.
Juan Diego has been depicted as just one plain and humble man from the native population, those who were preferably seen by their Spanish lighter-skinned rulers as ignornant peasants - being just a devout, and submissive people who repeatedly were only there to carry out orders.
He was just allowed to deliver a message man-to-man to the ruling conquerors and their religious counter-parties. The princess apparently did not deign to appear or make herself known directly to those who now ruled these Mexican lands.
The Catholic version likes to claim that seven years after Guadalupe's apparition, some 8 million Indians were converted to their religion. Conversion may be the most important aspect of a religious group appropriating another group's apparitions, or a relevation, a visitation, and an actualization of a venerated figure, now a female ... and of more color.
Many people now still pray to her as a miracle worker no matter what they think about the formal Church where she has been appropriated. They will pray to Guadalupe even when they ostensibly must also pray to a grey-bearded God. Many mix their own traditional beliefs with the overlaid dominant Christian versions of who [all] rules the earth and heavens.
In 1754, 200 years after her noted sighting, Pope Benedict XIV declared that Our Lady of Guadalupe then patron of what was then called New Spain. Much later,
in 1946, Our Lady of Guadalupe was also decreed as the Patroness of the Americas by the Catholic all-male hierarchy. In 2002, Juan Diego was canonized in the Basilica in Mexico City.
It is not clear if Guadalupe was ever herself actually canonized, or made a 'saint' instead of her messenger. However, she has obviously been fully appropriated as if she is a saint or part of the religious iconography. How else could you explain the churches that continue to incorporate her images and utilize the veneration given to her in their own religious masses and prayers?
Some assume she must be the Virgin Mary of European depiction which seems to give more credence to the taking - of what was not actually Christian at all - as theirs. Who now is to say who Guadalupe actually is or was?
The main shrines of Guadalupe in Mexico D.F. had been preceded by the more indigenous temple on Tepeyac hill, honoring the earth and fertility goddess Tonantzin of that land - She represents our lady, our mother as earth is our mother, who, like Our Lady of Guadalupe, was also associated with the moon. In pre-Hispanic times. That temple in Mexico D.F. has been the site of large scale pilgrimages for a long period of time.
The original temple, which was dedicated to the Queen of Tepeyacac, was built near where Juan Diego had said he had seen her apparition,it is said. Tenochtitlan also was the Aztec capital city prior to the arrival of the Spanish. The area was known then as Atzacualpa or Atzacualco.
It is written that most Mexican Catholics believe that Guadalupe was a manifestation of the semitic Virgin Mary in their land, now the Americas, yet this was not found to be written down then by those same Mexicans.
So we now have to ask :
"how did the natives record this event or even make known her appearance or presence?
What media was used then? Where has it been preserved and recorded ?
Who depicted Guadalupe before the Catholics conquered and overlaid their story with their patriarchal dominant religious views and beliefs and with their parchment and ink ?
What was written over any original native recordings ?"
Though Guadalupe is NOT recorded as a saint nor raised to special religious status, she is still defined, re-framed and utilized as a duplication and apparition of the same Holy Mary that Catholics already own for their own religious stories and carefully crafted histories of special December winter events. All female deities are frequently defined by the Christian stories of a mother with child, named Mary...all later ones related to their original venerated woman.
Guadalupe is also seen and described as the sorrowful mother, a figure who embodies the suffering of Mexican & Latina populations. Many woman identify with this image as understanding their sad and difficult lives ...in a patriarchial male-dominated world. Even still today.
Interestingly, stories & controversy abound about the credibility of proof of Guadalupe’s visit. Some consider it miraculous that the tilma maintains its structural integrity after nearly 500 years, since replicas made with the same type of materials lasted only about 15 years before disintegrating. In addition, the tilma resisted an ammonia spill that made a considerable hole, which was reportedly repaired in two weeks with no external help. (It is not surprising to note that the Catholic bishop kept the original tilma containing the sacred image in his private chapel. Upon completion of the main church, he then transferred the sacred image so that all others too may see it...taking the now sacred object for only Catholic use, and also keeping the valuable icon safe from and for the native people of whom she belongs.)
In 1921, an anarchist placed an offering of flowers next to the image. A bomb hidden within the flowers exploded and destroyed the shrine. However, the image suffered no damage. So, there seems that perhaps there are also supernatural physical “proofs” and forces that are still in existence, reminding us all about of her presence and relevance in Mexico City.
For further information to be learned on Guadalupe, you can visit: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Our_Lady_of_Guadalupe
(c) MariaJ 2008
Photographer wins "Peace" photo acceptance.
Yes, the photo of smiling parrots shown here too were taken by a top-notch Los Angeles based PHOTOGRAPHER of nature, wildlife and special skies.
It is ALEXANDRIA SHANKWEILER. A self-developed artist with a special vision and fine eyes for beautiful details, she captures that unique moment when animals, insects, skies and water form to tell a deeper story.
Alexandria was featured in the October 2007 National Geographic's photography contest for her original and unique photo of zebras.
She has now again won acceptance into the prestigious American Juried Art Salon's 2008 Fall-Winter show. The accepted work is titled "*Peace.*"
It is a digital photograph and can be viewed at http://www.artjury.com/TotheGalleries.html
and click on "2008 Fall-Winter show" or http://www.artjury.com/GalleriesCandD/GalleryD.html
The competition is juried twice a year and attracts thousands of entries from throughout the world. Jurists are very selective and include fine artists of various media. The jurists include gallery owners, directors and well known college and university art professors in North America. It is also a website that includes many art news articles and is a source of art information all around.
Alexandria has been published by local newspapers, photographing events and
adding her special insight into human interactions.
The artist,can be contacted at: (310-621-5627)
Her personal website is www.photosbyalexandria.com
(C) maryjanie 2008
It is ALEXANDRIA SHANKWEILER. A self-developed artist with a special vision and fine eyes for beautiful details, she captures that unique moment when animals, insects, skies and water form to tell a deeper story.
Alexandria was featured in the October 2007 National Geographic's photography contest for her original and unique photo of zebras.
She has now again won acceptance into the prestigious American Juried Art Salon's 2008 Fall-Winter show. The accepted work is titled "*Peace.*"
It is a digital photograph and can be viewed at http://www.artjury.com/TotheGalleries.html
and click on "2008 Fall-Winter show" or http://www.artjury.com/GalleriesCandD/GalleryD.html
The competition is juried twice a year and attracts thousands of entries from throughout the world. Jurists are very selective and include fine artists of various media. The jurists include gallery owners, directors and well known college and university art professors in North America. It is also a website that includes many art news articles and is a source of art information all around.
Alexandria has been published by local newspapers, photographing events and
adding her special insight into human interactions.
The artist,can be contacted at: (310-621-5627)
Her personal website is www.photosbyalexandria.com
(C) maryjanie 2008
Thursday, November 13, 2008
Is la.indymedia.org the only website to share KPFK questions & info ??????
[a repost from www.la.indymedia.org
Thursday, Nov. 13, 2008 at 2:54 PM
good sharing of expenses allocation...website some of us would never have found..thanks !!!!
and comments of those of us who never know/ see/write to each other directly, and here, we are = THANKS TO INDY MEDIA as if this were a blogspot.... oh well, maybe it's all we can find in this small city of LA and the hidden-off-to-sponsors-access is KPFK ...
also anyone wanting to look further, check out
http://www.pacificana.org
you can contribute to their 'forum' as well
and even if we dont learn much about KPFK directly
from the main players [and they are playing with our money, our radio station, our access to participation of our sponsorship..... it is the only other site I can find.
who knows more ?
(C) maryjanie 2008
Thursday, Nov. 13, 2008 at 2:54 PM
good sharing of expenses allocation...website some of us would never have found..thanks !!!!
and comments of those of us who never know/ see/write to each other directly, and here, we are = THANKS TO INDY MEDIA as if this were a blogspot.... oh well, maybe it's all we can find in this small city of LA and the hidden-off-to-sponsors-access is KPFK ...
also anyone wanting to look further, check out
http://www.pacificana.org
you can contribute to their 'forum' as well
and even if we dont learn much about KPFK directly
from the main players [and they are playing with our money, our radio station, our access to participation of our sponsorship..... it is the only other site I can find.
who knows more ?
(C) maryjanie 2008
Friday, November 7, 2008
KPFK's mother, Pacifica is showing signs of economic...strain?
[this is a repost from
pacificaradio.wordpress.com/2008/10/22/layoffs-in-pacifica-including-me/
and Indymedia article
http://la.indymedia.org/news/2008/11/221818.php
Pacifica is doing it's own elimination of good staffers and most of KPFK's subscribers have no idea of what is going on...what is happening to our [we pay for it] stations?
[This is a repost from Pacificana.org site that is the only place that has information silenced out of Los Angeles about the "sisterhood" of 5 USA radio stations - as it is so called, a "sisterhood" even if the whole set does not act as in the feminine-nurturing-relationships that most women do respond- called Pacifica.
A few good persons have been laid off, =meaning fired, sent away, eliminated = on the easy excuse of "economics" which may not be all that meets the listeners' and readers' ears. And KPFK isteners know nothing about what is happening that affects Our Local Station in Los Angeles - because of continual wash-outs , blank-outs, dead-sound-spaces, cover-ups, or no-transparency-at-all.
It is here reproduced to let all other subscribers/ volunteers also be informed ...since KPFK is rather akwardly silent about it's internal workings and conflicts and dysfunctioining...sadly so.
If anyone else has heard about this on KPFK on-air waves, please let us all know if possible, when it was stated or talked about so we who cannot listen 24/7 any more may give some credit to the radio station - for sharing some vital information - which is for what we pay our pledges repeatedly.
But...If no one else has heard about this either, let us all make it known that
WE WANT TO KNOW WHAT IS HAPPENING TO OUR STATIONs,
to hear it on air with more than a mere 1x brief airing, if that. Otehrewise, denials, avoidances, excuses and dissimulations are no longer acceptable. ]
See website listed below for a comment to the author below if anyone wants to add one to him on his website.
"Layoffs in Pacifica, including me
22 October 2008, 3:21 pm
Filed under: Pacifica written by Nathan Moore
[was] Pacifica's network programming coordinator
It is with some sadness that I write this blog post. I have been laid off from Pacifica. Effective last week, the National Programming Coordinator position was eliminated due to budget hardship.
On October 6th, while on paternity leave with my new daughter, I received a registered letter from Pacifica CFO Lonnie Hicks officially informing me of the Board-approved reduction in force. Lonnie writes in part “This is a very bad situation for all concerned and I am truly sorry to be the one to bring this bad news.” Finances are so bad, evidently, that no severance pay or COBRA coverage was offered to those of us laid off.
I am not, of course, the only person being laid off in this period of hardship for Pacifica. Four others in National Office alone were laid off, several others saw their hours much reduced, and the network has not hired a new HR Director or Executive Director yet - saving those salary costs, whether intentional or not. The hardship isn’t just limited to National Office. WBAI is currently undergoing layoffs, and supposedly layoffs will also be happening at KPFK in the coming weeks.
It’s a period of contraction at Pacifica. I understand that it is necessary at this time. Although, of course, it’s never fun to be one of those on the cut list.
But beyond the difficulty this brings to my personal situation, the cuts would seem to break up what modest accomplishments I and others had made toward network building, cooperation, and growth. Lacking finances and political will, it was sometimes a struggle to wrangle those changes, but we managed to make some things happen.
Stations were talking to each other, were working together, were carrying a bit more of each others’ programming. In spite of tight/no budgets, we were producing an ambitious lineup of high-quality national specials. I feel like we were laying the groundwork for growth.
But now that work ceases, and I have to mourn some.
I mourn for the five Pacifica stations, seemingly destined to be scattered and isolated, most of them beset by internecine fighting that hampers creativity of production and growth of listenership.
I mourn for the scores of affiliate stations that yearn for Pacifica to be more, to reliably produce exceptional national programming that can only be achieved when resources are pooled.
I mourn for Pacifica’s long and storied history that has manifested into too much stagnancy and too little creativity; that has failed so far to make itself relevant to younger generations, like my generation, such that its future might be more assured.
I mourn for progressives and radicals, that in Pacifica have a media institution with such tremendous potential to effect social change, but that has realized only a fraction of it.
Pacifica will go on in some fashion. It has survived past crises, and it always goes on. And I sincerely hope it can rebuild sooner than later. Unfortunately, Pacifica governance decisions are made very slowly (if at all), and I haven’t heard of any plans to actually grow finances. In this era, when the media landscape itself is changing significantly, I hope Pacifica can find its way forward.
But it seems it won’t include me. In all likelihood, this is my last blog post here, but I’ll leave the blog up for future reference.
In the meantime, I’m off to go find some work. All the best."
pacificaradio.wordpress.com/2008/10/22/layoffs-in-pacifica-including-me/
pacificaradio.wordpress.com/2008/10/22/layoffs-in-pacifica-including-me/
and Indymedia article
http://la.indymedia.org/news/2008/11/221818.php
Pacifica is doing it's own elimination of good staffers and most of KPFK's subscribers have no idea of what is going on...what is happening to our [we pay for it] stations?
[This is a repost from Pacificana.org site that is the only place that has information silenced out of Los Angeles about the "sisterhood" of 5 USA radio stations - as it is so called, a "sisterhood" even if the whole set does not act as in the feminine-nurturing-relationships that most women do respond- called Pacifica.
A few good persons have been laid off, =meaning fired, sent away, eliminated = on the easy excuse of "economics" which may not be all that meets the listeners' and readers' ears. And KPFK isteners know nothing about what is happening that affects Our Local Station in Los Angeles - because of continual wash-outs , blank-outs, dead-sound-spaces, cover-ups, or no-transparency-at-all.
It is here reproduced to let all other subscribers/ volunteers also be informed ...since KPFK is rather akwardly silent about it's internal workings and conflicts and dysfunctioining...sadly so.
If anyone else has heard about this on KPFK on-air waves, please let us all know if possible, when it was stated or talked about so we who cannot listen 24/7 any more may give some credit to the radio station - for sharing some vital information - which is for what we pay our pledges repeatedly.
But...If no one else has heard about this either, let us all make it known that
WE WANT TO KNOW WHAT IS HAPPENING TO OUR STATIONs,
to hear it on air with more than a mere 1x brief airing, if that. Otehrewise, denials, avoidances, excuses and dissimulations are no longer acceptable. ]
See website listed below for a comment to the author below if anyone wants to add one to him on his website.
"Layoffs in Pacifica, including me
22 October 2008, 3:21 pm
Filed under: Pacifica written by Nathan Moore
[was] Pacifica's network programming coordinator
It is with some sadness that I write this blog post. I have been laid off from Pacifica. Effective last week, the National Programming Coordinator position was eliminated due to budget hardship.
On October 6th, while on paternity leave with my new daughter, I received a registered letter from Pacifica CFO Lonnie Hicks officially informing me of the Board-approved reduction in force. Lonnie writes in part “This is a very bad situation for all concerned and I am truly sorry to be the one to bring this bad news.” Finances are so bad, evidently, that no severance pay or COBRA coverage was offered to those of us laid off.
I am not, of course, the only person being laid off in this period of hardship for Pacifica. Four others in National Office alone were laid off, several others saw their hours much reduced, and the network has not hired a new HR Director or Executive Director yet - saving those salary costs, whether intentional or not. The hardship isn’t just limited to National Office. WBAI is currently undergoing layoffs, and supposedly layoffs will also be happening at KPFK in the coming weeks.
It’s a period of contraction at Pacifica. I understand that it is necessary at this time. Although, of course, it’s never fun to be one of those on the cut list.
But beyond the difficulty this brings to my personal situation, the cuts would seem to break up what modest accomplishments I and others had made toward network building, cooperation, and growth. Lacking finances and political will, it was sometimes a struggle to wrangle those changes, but we managed to make some things happen.
Stations were talking to each other, were working together, were carrying a bit more of each others’ programming. In spite of tight/no budgets, we were producing an ambitious lineup of high-quality national specials. I feel like we were laying the groundwork for growth.
But now that work ceases, and I have to mourn some.
I mourn for the five Pacifica stations, seemingly destined to be scattered and isolated, most of them beset by internecine fighting that hampers creativity of production and growth of listenership.
I mourn for the scores of affiliate stations that yearn for Pacifica to be more, to reliably produce exceptional national programming that can only be achieved when resources are pooled.
I mourn for Pacifica’s long and storied history that has manifested into too much stagnancy and too little creativity; that has failed so far to make itself relevant to younger generations, like my generation, such that its future might be more assured.
I mourn for progressives and radicals, that in Pacifica have a media institution with such tremendous potential to effect social change, but that has realized only a fraction of it.
Pacifica will go on in some fashion. It has survived past crises, and it always goes on. And I sincerely hope it can rebuild sooner than later. Unfortunately, Pacifica governance decisions are made very slowly (if at all), and I haven’t heard of any plans to actually grow finances. In this era, when the media landscape itself is changing significantly, I hope Pacifica can find its way forward.
But it seems it won’t include me. In all likelihood, this is my last blog post here, but I’ll leave the blog up for future reference.
In the meantime, I’m off to go find some work. All the best."
pacificaradio.wordpress.com/2008/10/22/layoffs-in-pacifica-including-me/
KPFK's hub called Pacifica is eliminating selected staff...why ?
[this is a repost from an Indymedia post
=http://la.indymedia.org/news/2008/11/221819.php and
pacificaradio.wordpress.com/2008/09/24/nicole-sawayas-departure-letter-from-p...]
Pacifica is KPFK's coordinating central source, and it's recent Executive Director has ALSO been eliminated....what is going on ??? Who decides who stays and who goes? Who is benefitting from these firings? And why does KPFK keep silent about it ?
[This is another re-post from the website listed below that I just discovered, which informed me that there are some unexplained and unannounced actions being taken in non-transparent silence apparently.
Has any KPFK listener heard about this on air ? And was more or even the information below given ? And can you share with us all when it might have been aired, if at all, so we can find archives to listen to it also ourselves ?
Share what you know. Many of us who care tremendously know nothing until we stumble on a vital piece of news...accidentally. That is not what KPFK represents itself to be acting as = a hider, denier, avoider and broken black box of scrambled encryptions.
Did you know all this before ?]
"Nicole Sawaya’s departure letter from Pacifica, September 2008 pm Filed under: News & Culture, Pacifica ...Nicole's letter here in full....
September 24, 2008
To: Pacifica National Board, Local Station Boards, All management and staff, Affiliate stations, collaborators, and stakeholders in Pacifica
Fr: Nicole Sawaya, executive director/CEO
On August 3rd I gave notice to the Pacifica Board that I would be leaving. September 30th (end of our fiscal year) will be my last day. Concurrently, I had written myself out of the FY09 budget, as the Foundation is hard-pressed to support two well-paid executives. You lead from the top.
Lew Hill is the founder of Pacifica, now almost a 60 year old non-profit media organization. If I could have a conversation with anyone to explain my departure, it would be with Lew Hill. So, I decided to write him a letter.
Feel free to read it, and to share with others who care about Pacifica. All I ask is that this preface always accompany the letter as it sets the context.
I thank you for the opportunity to serve!
Peace.
********************
September 23, 2008
Dear Lew Hill,
Greetings. My name is Nicole Sawaya, and currently, I’m the executive director and chief executive of the radio endeavor you started called Pacifica. It’s changed a lot.
You wouldn’t believe what your “killer app”, as some might portray it in 21st century lexicon, has spawned. Now there are 5 stations licensed to Pacifica in densely populated and roiling urban areas – millions of human beings within ear shot, all with easy access to the cheapest and most accessible broadcast mediums on the planet, radio. Yes, the planet.
There is an Archive of programming and folios spanning decades – a repository and collection of voices that truly belongs to the people as part of the history of our country and the world. And, there are over a hundred smaller stations scattered through rural and urban settings — cities and towns and ridge tops — affiliated with Pacifica and broadcasting our programming – a network that has been in place for quite awhile.
Beyond that, your notion that the listeners would voluntarily financially support radio, journalism and cultural exchange, created a model for many, many non-commercial educational radio stations to apply. Your vision of public ownership of the airwaves put into practice with the radio license you applied for and grew as the first non-profit community licensee station, gained great traction and has been replicated exponentially.
We don’t exchange The Subscriber radios anymore for pledges, and you wouldn’t recognize how the fundraising marathons have changed – it’s a bit like an on-air shopping experience. But listeners continue to support us voluntarily with their hard earned money, and they’re not necessarily just bound to radios to listen to us.
An aside: When I was (briefly) general manager of your first station, KPFA, there was a Subscriber radio in the office, but it was tucked away and dusty. When I discovered it, soon after taking the job, I was so excited to learn of its history. It completely inspired me as Pacifica was heading to its 50th anniversary. So elegant, so innovative for its time, so smart.
Mr. Hill, what you conceived has had one of the highest impacts in media history. Not just the staunch belief in listener support, but your notions that journalistic enterprises should remain unfettered from any sort of business support in order to maintain credibility; that to help in striving for a more peaceful and just world, radio (or what we now refer to as media) programming should give access to myriad viewpoints and in-depth news, coupled with an exposure to the arts and to cultures and happenings from all over the world; that innovation is vital, have all lived on. You were a pioneer.
Fast forward to today.
Our country is at war. Our government is a death machine abroad and a fear machine at home. Our broadcast media is, in general, mind-numbingly useless, filled with shameless propagandists and completely profit driven. The earth’s climate is changing radically and the gap between rich and poor is larger than the Grand Canyon, with by far the larger group on the poor end. I could go on, but it would take a while.
Your Pacifica is showing signs of stress as well.
Sadly, it is no longer focused on service to the listeners but absorbed with itself and the inhabitants therein. I call it Planet Pacifica, a term I coined during my hiring process. There is an underlying culture of grievance coupled with entitlement, and its governance structure is dysfunctional.
The by-laws of the organization have opened it up to tremendous abuse, creating the opportunity for cronyism, factionalism, and faux democracy, with the result of challenging all yet helping nothing. Pacifica has been made so flat, that it is concave – no leadership is possible without an enormous struggle through the inertia that committees and collectives and STV’s (no, not sexually transmitted viruses, but single transferable votes) can engender.
Pacifica calls itself a movement, yet currently it is behaves like a jobs program, a cult, or a social service agency. And oftentimes, the loudest and most obstreperous have the privilege of the microphone. There are endless meetings of committees and “task forces”– mostly on the phone – where people just like to hear themselves talk.
Sometimes they get lucrative contracts from their grandstanding. It’s been grueling for someone in my position, someone like me who is not a process person, much less a political gamer. I keep asking: what’s the endgame? Paralysis has set in, coupled with organizational drift.
The programming isn’t attracting many listeners anymore, either. It skews towards the narrow in its editorial stance, leans towards the niche, and change to the programming can’t occur without a fight. The listening audience is small, in other words, the stations have yet to grow into their large signals.
Business practices are oftentimes shoddy and opaque and mirror the culture of our times – lots of self-interest with a focus on individual needs as opposed to performance, affordability, or the common good. And we’ve hit some tough economic times without having the general will to do the hard work necessary in order to ensure sustainability – contracting rather than continually expanding the size of our financial obligations.
Basically, resources and airtime have been allocated for internal political purposes at the expense of service to audience, innovation, or the care and feeding of our broadcast physical infrastructure. Some of this has to do with the fact that very few people either on air or off air actually have radio experience, other than being part of Pacifica.
That was not the case with you, nor is it with me.
Conversely, there are many dedicated and smart people working within Pacifica. They may not work at full speed – it is rather “comfortable” especially for those who work unsupervised – but they make a consistent effort to give voice to the voiceless and hold government and power accountable. And those who work without self-interest or giving constant grief to management (a four-letter word in Pacifica) are to be applauded.
The overall media landscape has changed fundamentally. I find it exciting and wanted very much to bring Pacifica into the 21st century. The demographic of our country has changed as well, not to mention all the new generations now active and alert to the world around them. It is, to quote Victor Hugo, the best of times and the worst of times. Apparently, it’s always been like that.
Pacifica could take advantage of technology, both at the front end (content and programming) and the back end (infrastructure and business applications), but that would require the general will of the internal stakeholders, and that general will is not cohesive enough or even amenable to altering the status quo.
I have given notice and will be leaving Pacifica shortly. Despite my best intentions and determined and focused efforts, I was continually thwarted to do the job I was hired to do. I did my best to apply my knowledge, expertise, and creativity to Pacifica, and we made some forward progress.
I gave to those responsible for the governance and oversight, plans, clarity, and transparency. They cannot deny knowledge of the state of the network. Whether they act on it, or just call in consultants to tell them what time it is, is another issue. I tried to dispel magical thinking in all arenas and was relentless in my attempts to get some best practices and collaborations in place.
I had some success.
It’s not necessary for me to alliterate those successes. Despite being handed an enfeebled situation and having no resources to work with, I gave it my best shot and worked hard. And despite having to fight for every inch of standing, not to mention authority, I have enjoyed working with those who actually work and accomplish bona fide deliverables of consequence and service.
We stand now on the shoulders of hundreds, if not thousands of those who have contributed internally. And Pacifica is much loved and valued by its listener supporters. Pacifica will carry on, and it has been a challenging opportunity to, albeit briefly, help out.
I hope that all stakeholders remember that Pacifica is a public trust, a veritable weapon of mass information, and keep a big vision in play rather than petty politics.
Thanks for being a bold and brave broadcaster.
With much respect,
Nicole"
pacificaradio.wordpress.com/2008/09/24/nicole-sawayas-departure-letter-from-p...
=http://la.indymedia.org/news/2008/11/221819.php and
pacificaradio.wordpress.com/2008/09/24/nicole-sawayas-departure-letter-from-p...]
Pacifica is KPFK's coordinating central source, and it's recent Executive Director has ALSO been eliminated....what is going on ??? Who decides who stays and who goes? Who is benefitting from these firings? And why does KPFK keep silent about it ?
[This is another re-post from the website listed below that I just discovered, which informed me that there are some unexplained and unannounced actions being taken in non-transparent silence apparently.
Has any KPFK listener heard about this on air ? And was more or even the information below given ? And can you share with us all when it might have been aired, if at all, so we can find archives to listen to it also ourselves ?
Share what you know. Many of us who care tremendously know nothing until we stumble on a vital piece of news...accidentally. That is not what KPFK represents itself to be acting as = a hider, denier, avoider and broken black box of scrambled encryptions.
Did you know all this before ?]
"Nicole Sawaya’s departure letter from Pacifica, September 2008 pm Filed under: News & Culture, Pacifica ...Nicole's letter here in full....
September 24, 2008
To: Pacifica National Board, Local Station Boards, All management and staff, Affiliate stations, collaborators, and stakeholders in Pacifica
Fr: Nicole Sawaya, executive director/CEO
On August 3rd I gave notice to the Pacifica Board that I would be leaving. September 30th (end of our fiscal year) will be my last day. Concurrently, I had written myself out of the FY09 budget, as the Foundation is hard-pressed to support two well-paid executives. You lead from the top.
Lew Hill is the founder of Pacifica, now almost a 60 year old non-profit media organization. If I could have a conversation with anyone to explain my departure, it would be with Lew Hill. So, I decided to write him a letter.
Feel free to read it, and to share with others who care about Pacifica. All I ask is that this preface always accompany the letter as it sets the context.
I thank you for the opportunity to serve!
Peace.
********************
September 23, 2008
Dear Lew Hill,
Greetings. My name is Nicole Sawaya, and currently, I’m the executive director and chief executive of the radio endeavor you started called Pacifica. It’s changed a lot.
You wouldn’t believe what your “killer app”, as some might portray it in 21st century lexicon, has spawned. Now there are 5 stations licensed to Pacifica in densely populated and roiling urban areas – millions of human beings within ear shot, all with easy access to the cheapest and most accessible broadcast mediums on the planet, radio. Yes, the planet.
There is an Archive of programming and folios spanning decades – a repository and collection of voices that truly belongs to the people as part of the history of our country and the world. And, there are over a hundred smaller stations scattered through rural and urban settings — cities and towns and ridge tops — affiliated with Pacifica and broadcasting our programming – a network that has been in place for quite awhile.
Beyond that, your notion that the listeners would voluntarily financially support radio, journalism and cultural exchange, created a model for many, many non-commercial educational radio stations to apply. Your vision of public ownership of the airwaves put into practice with the radio license you applied for and grew as the first non-profit community licensee station, gained great traction and has been replicated exponentially.
We don’t exchange The Subscriber radios anymore for pledges, and you wouldn’t recognize how the fundraising marathons have changed – it’s a bit like an on-air shopping experience. But listeners continue to support us voluntarily with their hard earned money, and they’re not necessarily just bound to radios to listen to us.
An aside: When I was (briefly) general manager of your first station, KPFA, there was a Subscriber radio in the office, but it was tucked away and dusty. When I discovered it, soon after taking the job, I was so excited to learn of its history. It completely inspired me as Pacifica was heading to its 50th anniversary. So elegant, so innovative for its time, so smart.
Mr. Hill, what you conceived has had one of the highest impacts in media history. Not just the staunch belief in listener support, but your notions that journalistic enterprises should remain unfettered from any sort of business support in order to maintain credibility; that to help in striving for a more peaceful and just world, radio (or what we now refer to as media) programming should give access to myriad viewpoints and in-depth news, coupled with an exposure to the arts and to cultures and happenings from all over the world; that innovation is vital, have all lived on. You were a pioneer.
Fast forward to today.
Our country is at war. Our government is a death machine abroad and a fear machine at home. Our broadcast media is, in general, mind-numbingly useless, filled with shameless propagandists and completely profit driven. The earth’s climate is changing radically and the gap between rich and poor is larger than the Grand Canyon, with by far the larger group on the poor end. I could go on, but it would take a while.
Your Pacifica is showing signs of stress as well.
Sadly, it is no longer focused on service to the listeners but absorbed with itself and the inhabitants therein. I call it Planet Pacifica, a term I coined during my hiring process. There is an underlying culture of grievance coupled with entitlement, and its governance structure is dysfunctional.
The by-laws of the organization have opened it up to tremendous abuse, creating the opportunity for cronyism, factionalism, and faux democracy, with the result of challenging all yet helping nothing. Pacifica has been made so flat, that it is concave – no leadership is possible without an enormous struggle through the inertia that committees and collectives and STV’s (no, not sexually transmitted viruses, but single transferable votes) can engender.
Pacifica calls itself a movement, yet currently it is behaves like a jobs program, a cult, or a social service agency. And oftentimes, the loudest and most obstreperous have the privilege of the microphone. There are endless meetings of committees and “task forces”– mostly on the phone – where people just like to hear themselves talk.
Sometimes they get lucrative contracts from their grandstanding. It’s been grueling for someone in my position, someone like me who is not a process person, much less a political gamer. I keep asking: what’s the endgame? Paralysis has set in, coupled with organizational drift.
The programming isn’t attracting many listeners anymore, either. It skews towards the narrow in its editorial stance, leans towards the niche, and change to the programming can’t occur without a fight. The listening audience is small, in other words, the stations have yet to grow into their large signals.
Business practices are oftentimes shoddy and opaque and mirror the culture of our times – lots of self-interest with a focus on individual needs as opposed to performance, affordability, or the common good. And we’ve hit some tough economic times without having the general will to do the hard work necessary in order to ensure sustainability – contracting rather than continually expanding the size of our financial obligations.
Basically, resources and airtime have been allocated for internal political purposes at the expense of service to audience, innovation, or the care and feeding of our broadcast physical infrastructure. Some of this has to do with the fact that very few people either on air or off air actually have radio experience, other than being part of Pacifica.
That was not the case with you, nor is it with me.
Conversely, there are many dedicated and smart people working within Pacifica. They may not work at full speed – it is rather “comfortable” especially for those who work unsupervised – but they make a consistent effort to give voice to the voiceless and hold government and power accountable. And those who work without self-interest or giving constant grief to management (a four-letter word in Pacifica) are to be applauded.
The overall media landscape has changed fundamentally. I find it exciting and wanted very much to bring Pacifica into the 21st century. The demographic of our country has changed as well, not to mention all the new generations now active and alert to the world around them. It is, to quote Victor Hugo, the best of times and the worst of times. Apparently, it’s always been like that.
Pacifica could take advantage of technology, both at the front end (content and programming) and the back end (infrastructure and business applications), but that would require the general will of the internal stakeholders, and that general will is not cohesive enough or even amenable to altering the status quo.
I have given notice and will be leaving Pacifica shortly. Despite my best intentions and determined and focused efforts, I was continually thwarted to do the job I was hired to do. I did my best to apply my knowledge, expertise, and creativity to Pacifica, and we made some forward progress.
I gave to those responsible for the governance and oversight, plans, clarity, and transparency. They cannot deny knowledge of the state of the network. Whether they act on it, or just call in consultants to tell them what time it is, is another issue. I tried to dispel magical thinking in all arenas and was relentless in my attempts to get some best practices and collaborations in place.
I had some success.
It’s not necessary for me to alliterate those successes. Despite being handed an enfeebled situation and having no resources to work with, I gave it my best shot and worked hard. And despite having to fight for every inch of standing, not to mention authority, I have enjoyed working with those who actually work and accomplish bona fide deliverables of consequence and service.
We stand now on the shoulders of hundreds, if not thousands of those who have contributed internally. And Pacifica is much loved and valued by its listener supporters. Pacifica will carry on, and it has been a challenging opportunity to, albeit briefly, help out.
I hope that all stakeholders remember that Pacifica is a public trust, a veritable weapon of mass information, and keep a big vision in play rather than petty politics.
Thanks for being a bold and brave broadcaster.
With much respect,
Nicole"
pacificaradio.wordpress.com/2008/09/24/nicole-sawayas-departure-letter-from-p...
Tuesday, September 2, 2008
Bloggers are not just manly types
Dear Bloggers any-everywhere:
Hi Guys. We sure hope ya'll are gettin all the attention you want and deserve with all those opinions and grand-standing we read, but only if the things you say merits a positive response, that is.
But reading letters [i.e. Salon.com and various other sites ] on activist topics of interest, there is a distinct slant of 'talking to one another man-to-man out in public view' - with a lot of bravado, word-pushing, and shoving- some-insults around too.
It might be more valuable if Bloggers were to keep it all more constructive, healing, helpful. Sharing of information so not everyone has to do the same research is the best part of blogs, giving expertise or honest opinions elicit our interest too. And that blogging is not just being male-focused but becomes educational and relation- ship-building. We sure need more of this.
And some good humor and in-good-fun kidding, that's delightful. But the "let me set you straight, man !" tone that often prevails is a big waste of everyone's time, including the writer's. The put-downs, insult-labeling, demeaning is at least 1/2 or 1/3 of all there is to be read, sadly.
Many of the signs and signals blog writers give off is to provoke others - by being angry, oh so manly, and proudly aggressive while hoping someone will focus on their words to give them some more meaning in life, or a purpose maybe? And why are most bloggers sounding like they are males, regardless of pseudonyms used ?
Since males dont contribute to the lifeline of humans except by accident, [and they never do know for sure, do they ? ] I guess kittens and female-gendered types are the only ones who really count in this weird world we all live in. Women give do birth to what makes more of humanity, wanted or not. And some of have more than 1 gun to shoot, the metallic kind, I mean.
And dont we see as many women bravely 'protesting' and activists working for a better world? It is not at all limited to the male mentality or training or conditioning either. So why be so proud of not being a woman ? I dont comprehend this.
Well, women have even joined in the self-exploded suicide-homicide doings and even build explosives, but in other cities, no? Or is doing violence and death only a man's prerogative any more, not only male "martyrs" or ardent patriots or religious zealots sacrificing themselves for their cause.
A 'real man' does not define himself as better or different than his mother or wife or female-lover or the species that does more work without pay [including helping the mentally sick as well as others].
A real man shows his caring, courage, intelligence, and cooperative side to form communities, to create in the arts, to contribute in any field [land or intellectual/work arena] and he does not put down any other human who have not actually physically attacked and harmed him. If anyone's mother has done so, then please let us know, so we can sympathize with them, and let them use that as the excuse for their rage and their brand of self-advertising.
Blog away and enjoy it. And may we all learn from each other's weaknesses and ploys.
(C) maryjanie 2008
Hi Guys. We sure hope ya'll are gettin all the attention you want and deserve with all those opinions and grand-standing we read, but only if the things you say merits a positive response, that is.
But reading letters [i.e. Salon.com and various other sites ] on activist topics of interest, there is a distinct slant of 'talking to one another man-to-man out in public view' - with a lot of bravado, word-pushing, and shoving- some-insults around too.
It might be more valuable if Bloggers were to keep it all more constructive, healing, helpful. Sharing of information so not everyone has to do the same research is the best part of blogs, giving expertise or honest opinions elicit our interest too. And that blogging is not just being male-focused but becomes educational and relation- ship-building. We sure need more of this.
And some good humor and in-good-fun kidding, that's delightful. But the "let me set you straight, man !" tone that often prevails is a big waste of everyone's time, including the writer's. The put-downs, insult-labeling, demeaning is at least 1/2 or 1/3 of all there is to be read, sadly.
Many of the signs and signals blog writers give off is to provoke others - by being angry, oh so manly, and proudly aggressive while hoping someone will focus on their words to give them some more meaning in life, or a purpose maybe? And why are most bloggers sounding like they are males, regardless of pseudonyms used ?
Since males dont contribute to the lifeline of humans except by accident, [and they never do know for sure, do they ? ] I guess kittens and female-gendered types are the only ones who really count in this weird world we all live in. Women give do birth to what makes more of humanity, wanted or not. And some of have more than 1 gun to shoot, the metallic kind, I mean.
And dont we see as many women bravely 'protesting' and activists working for a better world? It is not at all limited to the male mentality or training or conditioning either. So why be so proud of not being a woman ? I dont comprehend this.
Well, women have even joined in the self-exploded suicide-homicide doings and even build explosives, but in other cities, no? Or is doing violence and death only a man's prerogative any more, not only male "martyrs" or ardent patriots or religious zealots sacrificing themselves for their cause.
A 'real man' does not define himself as better or different than his mother or wife or female-lover or the species that does more work without pay [including helping the mentally sick as well as others].
A real man shows his caring, courage, intelligence, and cooperative side to form communities, to create in the arts, to contribute in any field [land or intellectual/work arena] and he does not put down any other human who have not actually physically attacked and harmed him. If anyone's mother has done so, then please let us know, so we can sympathize with them, and let them use that as the excuse for their rage and their brand of self-advertising.
Blog away and enjoy it. And may we all learn from each other's weaknesses and ploys.
(C) maryjanie 2008
Monday, September 1, 2008
There still are two Americas. I live in the other one. John McSame wants me to stay there
do the right thing ! but who is right ? who decides ?
Freedom is one thing you may not have unless you freely share it with everyone else.
why do we always need leadership with the "testicular fortitude" to go anywhere ?
why not use wisdom instead of fort-force instead ? or intuition ? or trust in the life flow ?
= and another story =
1 -OLD VERSION:
The ant works hard in the withering heat all summer long, building his house and laying up supplies for the winter.
The grasshopper thinks the ant is a fool and laughs and dances and plays the summer away. Come winter, the ant is warm and well fed.
The grasshopper has no food or shelter, so he dies out in the cold.
MORAL OF THE STORY: Be responsible for yourself!-MODERN VERSION:
The ant works hard in the withering heat all summer long, building his house and laying up supplies for the winter.
The grasshopper thinks the ant is a fool and laughs and dances and plays the summer away.
Come winter, the shivering grasshopper calls a press conference and demands to know why the ant should be allowed to be warm and well fed while others are cold and starving.
CBS, NBC, PBS, CNN, and ABC show up to provide pictures of the shivering grasshopper next to a video of the ant in his comfortable home with a table filled with food. America is stunned and sickened by the sharp contrast.
How can this be, that in a country of such wealth, this poor grasshopper is allowed to suffer so?
Kermit the Frog appears on Oprah with the grasshopper, and when they sing, 'It's Not Easy Being Green' everybody in the audience cries.
Jesse Jackson stages a demonstration in front of the ant's house where the news stations film the group singing, 'We shall overcome.' Then has the group kneel down to pray to God for the grasshopper's sake and for Justice in today's racist society.
Nancy Pelosi & John Kerry exclaim in an interview with Larry King that the ant has gotten rich off the back of the grasshopper, and both call for an immediate tax hike on the ant to make him pay his fair share.
Finally, the EEOC drafts the Economic Equity & Save the Grasshopper Act retroactive to the beginning of the summer.
The ant is fined for failing to hire a proportionate number of green bugs and, having nothing left to pay his retroactive taxes, his home is confiscated by the government.
An old law firm represents the grasshopper in a defamation suit against the ant, and the case is tried before a panel of federal judges appointed from a list of single-parent welfare recipients.
The ant loses the case.
The story ends as we see the grasshopper finishing up the last bits of the ant's food while the government house he is in, which just happens to be the ant's old house, crumbles around him because he doesn't maintain it.
The ant has disappeared in the snow.
The grasshopper is found dead in a drug related incident and the house, now abandoned, is taken over by a gang of crack selling spiders who terrorize the once peaceful neighborhood.
now...what to do ???????
Freedom is one thing you may not have unless you freely share it with everyone else.
why do we always need leadership with the "testicular fortitude" to go anywhere ?
why not use wisdom instead of fort-force instead ? or intuition ? or trust in the life flow ?
= and another story =
1 -OLD VERSION:
The ant works hard in the withering heat all summer long, building his house and laying up supplies for the winter.
The grasshopper thinks the ant is a fool and laughs and dances and plays the summer away. Come winter, the ant is warm and well fed.
The grasshopper has no food or shelter, so he dies out in the cold.
MORAL OF THE STORY: Be responsible for yourself!-MODERN VERSION:
The ant works hard in the withering heat all summer long, building his house and laying up supplies for the winter.
The grasshopper thinks the ant is a fool and laughs and dances and plays the summer away.
Come winter, the shivering grasshopper calls a press conference and demands to know why the ant should be allowed to be warm and well fed while others are cold and starving.
CBS, NBC, PBS, CNN, and ABC show up to provide pictures of the shivering grasshopper next to a video of the ant in his comfortable home with a table filled with food. America is stunned and sickened by the sharp contrast.
How can this be, that in a country of such wealth, this poor grasshopper is allowed to suffer so?
Kermit the Frog appears on Oprah with the grasshopper, and when they sing, 'It's Not Easy Being Green' everybody in the audience cries.
Jesse Jackson stages a demonstration in front of the ant's house where the news stations film the group singing, 'We shall overcome.' Then has the group kneel down to pray to God for the grasshopper's sake and for Justice in today's racist society.
Nancy Pelosi & John Kerry exclaim in an interview with Larry King that the ant has gotten rich off the back of the grasshopper, and both call for an immediate tax hike on the ant to make him pay his fair share.
Finally, the EEOC drafts the Economic Equity & Save the Grasshopper Act retroactive to the beginning of the summer.
The ant is fined for failing to hire a proportionate number of green bugs and, having nothing left to pay his retroactive taxes, his home is confiscated by the government.
An old law firm represents the grasshopper in a defamation suit against the ant, and the case is tried before a panel of federal judges appointed from a list of single-parent welfare recipients.
The ant loses the case.
The story ends as we see the grasshopper finishing up the last bits of the ant's food while the government house he is in, which just happens to be the ant's old house, crumbles around him because he doesn't maintain it.
The ant has disappeared in the snow.
The grasshopper is found dead in a drug related incident and the house, now abandoned, is taken over by a gang of crack selling spiders who terrorize the once peaceful neighborhood.
now...what to do ???????
what is war?
question from about media-speak::
“what is the difference between a war protester and an ANTI war protester."
war protester = one who protests wars - any and all, not just the current one that USA utilized for govt/corptopcracacy purposes [ this is not 'the people's' war]
anti war protester = a protester who is anti-wars, none specifically mentioned.
One who identifies as being ‘anti-war’ in all cases, not necessarily a weakling.
war monger = one who monges & longs for more military-dominating wars.
war veteran = [most are] one who has earlier been assured they are powerful, superior and loyal for being sacrificed & indoctrinated as a 'soldier' or combat fodder, in return for later life benefits & pensions, plus a bit of heroic self-images interspersed for later self-identification. Also those who are militarily drafted by coercion or bribed. Those with blind alliances to their 'buddies', who can form male bonding only under life-threatening circumstances - and consisting mostly of 89% males - using the common language used by male sports teams, 'games' being a common denominator, and war-buddy bondage of men.
[also those called “insurgents”, “freedom-fighters”, “the enemy”, “rebels”, etc.]
war victims = all women, children, families, any populations from where warring military forces enter and in any areas where wars are played-out, including live animals, living vegetation, and any life around. Also those who chose to obey and enter the military life and have then been hurt are called ‘heroic wounded victims', while the other living lives are called "victims" only.
war games = military-like maneuvers & tactics and strategies decided from an elite heirarchy [some of whom have worked their way up thru years of submissive beliefs of what is patriotism, most with lengthy secure careers in the military, those who feel powerful playing real-life-destroying games, violence being integral to the allure of the FORCE arousing games. Adrenalin arousal is an integral aspect of those involved, along with illusions of power & grandiosity, labeled as “we deserve”, and “they are evil”.
war victory = an illusion and propaganda that does not count-in the real work, time, effort, suffering of the non-uniformed populations affected by the acts of uniformed military 'personnel'. It is a claim made by those who have killed and destroyed ‘the most’, as destruction is related to domination, taking over and owning others’ women, properties, and even men’s lives.
Victory is mostly a claim made by those who were most dangerous, damaging, violent and technologically-equipped to destroy everything around and all others, including civilians, land crops, entire cities, and cultures included. It is a take-over, theft by violence and extortion, acts of ‘righteous’ transfer of ownership with the later created ‘his-story’ of heroics, necessity, and religious deserving.
All around and all concerned within the victory-making suffer tremendously for this transfer and theft by force.
war as an inherited custom = "we have always had wars" is often used to given validity and credence to behaving and demanding obedience of all intimidated populations [within and around either side of the war-creating powers]. Those who often claim to be in "self defense" are also "offensive" and can use any minor acts of others to valid their magnified retaliatory reactions...or media-created [propagandized inflated-information] event to claim their "RIGHT" to hurt others. These ‘rights’ are used to then take other’s women and properties and lands and lives. Competition for resources is claimed to the 'need for war' but violence, but the destruction is not actually required to be included in the competitive processes.
any other versions of why so many protest these antics ? whatever they can be labeled as, war is not a healthy choice for any lives.
(C) maryjanie 2008
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
