I had an thought the other day, is there another reason for the fact that the largest corporations in the country have higher profits than ever yet they aren't hiring more workers? OK, other than the inherent flaws in Supply Side economics. Why would employers increase their workforce when there isn't a larger market for their products if they were given more money? They wouldn't, it's as simple as that.
My hypothesis is that their behavior is based more in ideology rather than economics. One of the sacred tomes for conservatives is Ayn Rand's gargantuan novel Atlas Shrugged. The premise of the novel is that in a dystopian future, where the 'burdens' that politicians and greedy workers place on the job creators of America, the rich all decide that America doesn't deserve their genius so they abandon the country to create a utopia somewhere else. This was done under the overarching pseudonym 'John Galt.' After the cultural impact that the novel had, the term 'Going Galt' came to signify the possibility that a similar tactic might be employed by the corporate heads in our country.
If you look at the majority of these disgustingly rich individuals (the Koch Brothers, and the Walton Family are great examples), and you can see them modeling themselves as Randian heroes in opposition to the lowly workers. Through union-busting and putting out propaganda against any talk of forming a union... they defeat the Proletariat before they even put up a fight.
My point is this, for the past 30 years our country has been operating under the premise that if we gave the wealthiest of the wealthy billions upon billions in tax cuts, they would hire more workers and grow the economy out of the goodness of the hearts. Shockingly, that hasn't happened. Any growth that we've experienced as a nation is a byproduct of bubbles that have been inflated beyond any reasonable value (Tech, Housing), only to have said bubble burst and jolt our economy into recession. The wealthy have pocketed the vast majority of this money for themselves.
I will call this phenomenon 'John Galt Syndrome.' It's the best possible situation that corporations could hope to achieve. They continue to rake in outrageous profits that they wouldn't be able to if they did really 'Go Galt,' they are able to refuse to put money into an economy that desperately needs investment and they are able to put unlimited amounts of money into political campaigns of Republicans that have vowed to regulate and ask of them even less than they are expected to now (Thanks Citizens United!). So, there you have it. Right wing ideologues are able to fulfill their ideology all while making an ungodly amount of money. And if that doesn't work, there's always government bailouts! It isn't Socialism when its given to bankers and not poor people.
I am part of the 99 Percent and I'm pretty fair in assuming that you are too. Let's change this paradigm and set up an economy that actually works.
Occupy
Thursday, October 20, 2011
Wednesday, May 4, 2011
Bin Laden has won, while America cheers
Osama bin Laden is dead. Ten years after the tragedy of 9/11, the figurehead of Al Qaida was shot in the head in Pakistan. The amount of euphoria that has poured out of so many Americans is kind of shocking to me. People who don't care about politics or foreign policy were on the streets shouting "USA!" And as this seemingly monumental moment in American history makes me wonder, how important is this news? And what can we learn from it?
What does this ultimately mean? Is the War on Terror over? Can we leave Afghanistan and Iraq? Are we now magically free of danger? The answer to these are obviously No. Directly after the horrific events of 9/11, world opinion was on the U.S.'s side. There was a candlelight vigil in downtown Tehran (Iran) in support of America. This proves that Islam is NOT a monolith. The world saw what radical Islam was capable and rejected it. How we got from that support to the mess that we're in now is due to the ineffective diplomacy (or lack thereof) by the Bush Administration.
Before the Afghan invasion, the Taliban offered to hand over Osama bin Laden to a third party where he could be put on trial. This could have be done without a single soldier setting foot in Afghanistan. This was unacceptable to the Bush Administration. They were using loaded terms such as 'crusade' (which hearkens back to the Christians' Crusades against Muslim 'barbarians'). Bush wanted bin Laden dead and, more importantly, the political benefits of being a wartime President and a conquering hero.
He quickly lost interest in the capture of bin Laden when there wasn't quick success. After bin Laden's escape in the mountains of Tora Bora, resources weren't allocated to finding him. Attention was turned towards convincing the American people of Iraq's involvement in the 9/11 plot. There was NEVER any proof of such connection.
It's important to look at what bin Laden's goals were. He didn't plan to topple the United States with one grandiose act, but to draw them out. In quotes, he made it quite clear what his plan was - draw the U.S. into a ground war in Asia and bleed the economy dry. His plan was to bankrupt us just the way that he and the Mujahadeen defeated the Soviet Union in their invasion of Afghanistan.
We have spent $1.2 Trillion in our wars in the Middle East, along with tax cuts and a Medicare prescription drug plan that were completely unpaid for. It's clear to see that bin Laden's strategy has been successful, as you can see by the harsh austerity proposals that are becoming more and more commonplace. If we continue these wars, the problem will only become worse. It is important to note this - Osama bin Laden has won. He has affected our economy in a near lethal way and we show no signs of wanting to reverse the damage.
I don't mean to sound 'unpatriotic,' but I am not heartened by the news of bin Laden's murder. By answering his display of violence with violence of our own, we proved that we aren't on a moral high ground in relation to terrorists. Thousands of our soldiers are dead and hundreds of thousands of Afghanis and Iraqis are dead. I don't see a winner in this. Death shouldn't be something to be cheered for.
What does this ultimately mean? Is the War on Terror over? Can we leave Afghanistan and Iraq? Are we now magically free of danger? The answer to these are obviously No. Directly after the horrific events of 9/11, world opinion was on the U.S.'s side. There was a candlelight vigil in downtown Tehran (Iran) in support of America. This proves that Islam is NOT a monolith. The world saw what radical Islam was capable and rejected it. How we got from that support to the mess that we're in now is due to the ineffective diplomacy (or lack thereof) by the Bush Administration.
Before the Afghan invasion, the Taliban offered to hand over Osama bin Laden to a third party where he could be put on trial. This could have be done without a single soldier setting foot in Afghanistan. This was unacceptable to the Bush Administration. They were using loaded terms such as 'crusade' (which hearkens back to the Christians' Crusades against Muslim 'barbarians'). Bush wanted bin Laden dead and, more importantly, the political benefits of being a wartime President and a conquering hero.
He quickly lost interest in the capture of bin Laden when there wasn't quick success. After bin Laden's escape in the mountains of Tora Bora, resources weren't allocated to finding him. Attention was turned towards convincing the American people of Iraq's involvement in the 9/11 plot. There was NEVER any proof of such connection.
It's important to look at what bin Laden's goals were. He didn't plan to topple the United States with one grandiose act, but to draw them out. In quotes, he made it quite clear what his plan was - draw the U.S. into a ground war in Asia and bleed the economy dry. His plan was to bankrupt us just the way that he and the Mujahadeen defeated the Soviet Union in their invasion of Afghanistan.
We have spent $1.2 Trillion in our wars in the Middle East, along with tax cuts and a Medicare prescription drug plan that were completely unpaid for. It's clear to see that bin Laden's strategy has been successful, as you can see by the harsh austerity proposals that are becoming more and more commonplace. If we continue these wars, the problem will only become worse. It is important to note this - Osama bin Laden has won. He has affected our economy in a near lethal way and we show no signs of wanting to reverse the damage.
I don't mean to sound 'unpatriotic,' but I am not heartened by the news of bin Laden's murder. By answering his display of violence with violence of our own, we proved that we aren't on a moral high ground in relation to terrorists. Thousands of our soldiers are dead and hundreds of thousands of Afghanis and Iraqis are dead. I don't see a winner in this. Death shouldn't be something to be cheered for.
Friday, March 11, 2011
Killing The Myth of Reagan Part One: Supply-Side Economics
Ronald Reagan is seen as a deity by a large portion of our population. According to Conservatives, he single-handedly defeated the Soviet Union and ended the Cold War, he cut taxes for everyone and brought our nation to its rightful place as the 'shining city on a hill' for the rest of the world to aspire to be. This... is a bit of a reach. Beyond the Iran-Contra scandal - which simultaneously implicated the Reagan Administration in helping an enemy state (Iran) as well as illegally arming Guerrillas in Nicaragua in direct violation of Congressional decree - the one aspect that Reagan was most popular for (Reaganomics) is deeply flawed.
Reading in textbooks, it's a bit difficult to understand what Reaganomics was exactly. We're simply supposed to nod and agree that it was great for everyone. The crux of Reaganomics was the theme of 'Supply side economics' - that if more money was given to the wealthy (the business owners), that would spur them to hire more workers, create jobs and grow the economy. To facilitate this, Reagan passed the biggest tax cut in American history. Taxes were cut for everyone, but the vast majority of them were given to the wealthy. The highest tax rate was lowered from 70% to 28%.
At first, this doesn't seem bad. We're told that tax cuts are good for everyone. No one likes taxes. But, a government needs funds to function. And while Conservatives may rail against 'Big Government,' no one can actually decide what to cut. This is a phenomenon that occurs again and again in polling. Americans want to shrink government (buying into a Conservative talking point), but when asked exactly what programs to eliminate they cannot name one. Social Security, Medicare, Unemployment insurance, Military and Education funding are hugely popular. So, with all of these programs needing funding, tax revenue needs to track their increases. This was completely undercut by Reagan's tax cuts. How was the gap bridged? Through borrowed money, adding to the National Debt. This tactic was relied upon by every single 'fiscally conservative' President from Reagan onward. Here's a link to a chart showing how the debt progressed from Jimmy Carter through George W. Bush: http://www.pensitoreview.com/Wordpress/wp-content/themes/mimbo2.2/images/Natl_Debt_Chart.jpg
This might be worth it if the growth of the economy grew exponentially. After all, these tax cuts should directly lead to job creation. There is a flaw in the Supply Side model, one that is quite obvious. If the only ones who are getting more money are the wealthy business owners, why should they hire more workers? The number of consumers wouldn't rapidly increase because those not in the top tax rates have the same amount of money. In economic terms, with demand stagnant there is no catalyst for supply to grow. If the money isn't put back into the economy, then it has to go one place - right in the richest people's pocket. In 1980, the average CEO made roughly 42 times more money than their average employee. Today, they make more than 300 times. With all this wealth concentrated in the hands of the few, it doesn't circulate through the economy. There are really only so many yachts and houses you can own. And as the rich get even richer, the poor get poorer.
The whole point of the high tax rate on the wealthy was to promote reinvestment in business. Through the high tax rates, business owners faced a stiff penalty if they decided to keep an astronomical amount from their business. If they weren't going to keep the money, then profits were usually put right back into businesses. This reinvestment paid for new factories, technology, research and development and, yes, jobs. These jobs gave the American public a larger portion of the income in the nation and increased the demand for products and services. It is this increased demand that can grow the economy consistently.
Our nation is now riddled with debt that has mainly been piled on during Republican administrations. From two perpetual wars, to even more tax cuts for the wealthy, to the Medicare Prescription Drug entitlement, huge costs have been put on the nation's credit card. The national debt is now over $14 Trillion, and Republicans are pushing to close the gap by cutting Social Services (i.e. Social Security, Medicare). These cuts will hurt low income individuals almost exclusively. I see another option - roll back the Reagan tax cuts and have the wealthy pay their share while stabilizing our economy.
The economy did grow during Reagan, which seems odd. It deceivingly appears to confirm Reaganomics' validity. Two other factors were key factors in why the economy grew and are also explanations for why our economy is in such dire shape now - deregulation and reliance on bubbles, and offshoring labor. Since this blog is huge already, I guess I'm going to have to break it into three parts. If you stuck with me this far, Thank You! This isn't the most interesting subject in the world but it's VERY important. I'll try to have Part 2 done this weekend and Part 3 done next week.
I spent this late night ranting and listening to some old school Saliva. I figured you should be able to have the same experience
Reading in textbooks, it's a bit difficult to understand what Reaganomics was exactly. We're simply supposed to nod and agree that it was great for everyone. The crux of Reaganomics was the theme of 'Supply side economics' - that if more money was given to the wealthy (the business owners), that would spur them to hire more workers, create jobs and grow the economy. To facilitate this, Reagan passed the biggest tax cut in American history. Taxes were cut for everyone, but the vast majority of them were given to the wealthy. The highest tax rate was lowered from 70% to 28%.
At first, this doesn't seem bad. We're told that tax cuts are good for everyone. No one likes taxes. But, a government needs funds to function. And while Conservatives may rail against 'Big Government,' no one can actually decide what to cut. This is a phenomenon that occurs again and again in polling. Americans want to shrink government (buying into a Conservative talking point), but when asked exactly what programs to eliminate they cannot name one. Social Security, Medicare, Unemployment insurance, Military and Education funding are hugely popular. So, with all of these programs needing funding, tax revenue needs to track their increases. This was completely undercut by Reagan's tax cuts. How was the gap bridged? Through borrowed money, adding to the National Debt. This tactic was relied upon by every single 'fiscally conservative' President from Reagan onward. Here's a link to a chart showing how the debt progressed from Jimmy Carter through George W. Bush: http://www.pensitoreview.com/Wordpress/wp-content/themes/mimbo2.2/images/Natl_Debt_Chart.jpg
This might be worth it if the growth of the economy grew exponentially. After all, these tax cuts should directly lead to job creation. There is a flaw in the Supply Side model, one that is quite obvious. If the only ones who are getting more money are the wealthy business owners, why should they hire more workers? The number of consumers wouldn't rapidly increase because those not in the top tax rates have the same amount of money. In economic terms, with demand stagnant there is no catalyst for supply to grow. If the money isn't put back into the economy, then it has to go one place - right in the richest people's pocket. In 1980, the average CEO made roughly 42 times more money than their average employee. Today, they make more than 300 times. With all this wealth concentrated in the hands of the few, it doesn't circulate through the economy. There are really only so many yachts and houses you can own. And as the rich get even richer, the poor get poorer.
The whole point of the high tax rate on the wealthy was to promote reinvestment in business. Through the high tax rates, business owners faced a stiff penalty if they decided to keep an astronomical amount from their business. If they weren't going to keep the money, then profits were usually put right back into businesses. This reinvestment paid for new factories, technology, research and development and, yes, jobs. These jobs gave the American public a larger portion of the income in the nation and increased the demand for products and services. It is this increased demand that can grow the economy consistently.
Our nation is now riddled with debt that has mainly been piled on during Republican administrations. From two perpetual wars, to even more tax cuts for the wealthy, to the Medicare Prescription Drug entitlement, huge costs have been put on the nation's credit card. The national debt is now over $14 Trillion, and Republicans are pushing to close the gap by cutting Social Services (i.e. Social Security, Medicare). These cuts will hurt low income individuals almost exclusively. I see another option - roll back the Reagan tax cuts and have the wealthy pay their share while stabilizing our economy.
The economy did grow during Reagan, which seems odd. It deceivingly appears to confirm Reaganomics' validity. Two other factors were key factors in why the economy grew and are also explanations for why our economy is in such dire shape now - deregulation and reliance on bubbles, and offshoring labor. Since this blog is huge already, I guess I'm going to have to break it into three parts. If you stuck with me this far, Thank You! This isn't the most interesting subject in the world but it's VERY important. I'll try to have Part 2 done this weekend and Part 3 done next week.
I spent this late night ranting and listening to some old school Saliva. I figured you should be able to have the same experience
Wednesday, March 9, 2011
Words I Never Said
I was listening to the new Lupe Fiasco album, Lasers, and heard a song that really stuck with me. It was "Words I Never Said" and here are the lyrics:
It’s so loud Inside my head
With words that I should have said
As I drown in my regrets
I can’t take back the words I never said
I can’t take back the words I never said
I really think the war on terror is a bunch of bullshit
Just a poor excuse for you to use up all your bullets
How much money does it take to really make a full clip
9/11 building 7 did they really pull it
Uhh, And a bunch of other cover ups
Your child's future was the first to go with budget cuts
If you think that hurts then, wait here comes the uppercut
The school was garbage in the first place, that's on the up and up
Keep you at the bottom but tease you with the uppercrust
You get it then they move you so you never keeping up enough
If you turn on TV all you see’s a bunch of “what the fucks”
Dude is dating so and so blabbering bout such and such
And that ain't Jersey Shore, homie that's the news
And these the same people that supposed to be telling us the truth
Limbaugh is a racist, Glenn Beck is a racist
Gaza strip was getting bombed, Obama didn’t say shit
That's why I ain't vote for him, next one either
I’ma part of the problem, my problem is I’m peaceful
And I believe in the people.
Chorus
Now you can say it ain't our fault if we never heard it
But if we know better than we probably deserve it
Jihad is not a holy war, wheres that in the worship?
Murdering is not Islam
And you are not observant
And you are not a muslim
Israel don’t take my side cause look how far you’ve pushed them
Walk with me into the ghetto, this where all the Kush went
Complain about the liquor store but what you drinking liquor for?
Complain about the gloom but when’d you pick a broom up?
Just listening to Pac ain't gone make it stop
A rebel in your thoughts, ain't gon make it halt
If you don’t become an actor you’ll never be a factor
Pills with million side effects
Take em when the pains felt
Wash them down with Diet soda
Killin off your brain cells
Crooked banks around the World
Would gladly give a loan today
So if you ever miss payment
They can take your home away
Chorus
I think that all the silence is worse than all the violence
Fear is such a weak emotion that's why I despise it
We scared of almost everything, afraid to even tell the truth
So scared of what you think of me, I’m scared of even telling you
Sometimes I’m like the only person I feel safe to tell it to
I’m locked inside a cell in me, I know that there’s a jail in you
Consider this your bailing out, so take a breath, inhale a few
My screams is finally getting free, my thoughts is finally yelling through
It’s so loud Inside my head
With words that I should have said
As I drown in my regrets
I can’t take back the words I never said
It leaves me with an interesting thought - do people really regret the things they don't say more than what they do? I think that the answer is yes. To take this beyond the petty issues and move toward the big picture, all you have to look at is the complete apathy of the average voter on politics and the inner-workings of the US. Our nation is in crisis, and in the hands of political parties that more and more resemble each other. As Republicans and Democrats take more and more corporate money, the less they give a fuck about the "Average American." This is not the view that is shown on our corporate media. Politics is shown as a horse race between ideologically opposed groups. The actual agenda is one that trends to the Right with no counterbalance. No matter your viewpoint, Gridlock is the word that best describes our Legislative situation.
Where does this leave the American public? Either to become entirely partisan and root for 'your side' in this sham of a horse race or to become apathetic. Just under 57% of registered voters voted for President in 2008 and only 37.8% voted in the midterms last year. That's a lot of voluntarily voiceless citizens. And while these people may not regret the decision to not vote in the short term, they sure as hell will have an opinion on what tax rates, spending, cuts, social issues that their 'representatives' will enact in laws in the future.
I, myself, will internalize this song and learn the lesson. Centrism and 'balance' does not equal fact. I truly believe that Liberalism is the correct lens to view the world through which you can build the best, most just society. Rush Limbaugh is a racist. Fox News DOES gin up support for causes that benefit only the wealthy through scare tactics and pitting 'real Americans' (White people) against the 'enemy' (non-whites).
The content of the speech is not the most important issue. Whether or not you agree with Lupe Fiasco on his opinions, you have to respect his willingness to share them. John Stuart Mill's philosophy on Speech in a democracy stated that it was bad to silence individuals' speech, whether they were incorrect or not. In a society with an open forum for ideas, all can be shared equally and the best of them can rise to the top. With today's media, there is a loudspeaker repeating the same ideas over and over that can drown out many if not all others. It is up to all of us to think for ourselves and say what we think. Vote. Become politically active by finding something that you're passionate about. Anything less can lead nowhere but regret...
It’s so loud Inside my head
With words that I should have said
As I drown in my regrets
I can’t take back the words I never said
I can’t take back the words I never said
I really think the war on terror is a bunch of bullshit
Just a poor excuse for you to use up all your bullets
How much money does it take to really make a full clip
9/11 building 7 did they really pull it
Uhh, And a bunch of other cover ups
Your child's future was the first to go with budget cuts
If you think that hurts then, wait here comes the uppercut
The school was garbage in the first place, that's on the up and up
Keep you at the bottom but tease you with the uppercrust
You get it then they move you so you never keeping up enough
If you turn on TV all you see’s a bunch of “what the fucks”
Dude is dating so and so blabbering bout such and such
And that ain't Jersey Shore, homie that's the news
And these the same people that supposed to be telling us the truth
Limbaugh is a racist, Glenn Beck is a racist
Gaza strip was getting bombed, Obama didn’t say shit
That's why I ain't vote for him, next one either
I’ma part of the problem, my problem is I’m peaceful
And I believe in the people.
Chorus
Now you can say it ain't our fault if we never heard it
But if we know better than we probably deserve it
Jihad is not a holy war, wheres that in the worship?
Murdering is not Islam
And you are not observant
And you are not a muslim
Israel don’t take my side cause look how far you’ve pushed them
Walk with me into the ghetto, this where all the Kush went
Complain about the liquor store but what you drinking liquor for?
Complain about the gloom but when’d you pick a broom up?
Just listening to Pac ain't gone make it stop
A rebel in your thoughts, ain't gon make it halt
If you don’t become an actor you’ll never be a factor
Pills with million side effects
Take em when the pains felt
Wash them down with Diet soda
Killin off your brain cells
Crooked banks around the World
Would gladly give a loan today
So if you ever miss payment
They can take your home away
Chorus
I think that all the silence is worse than all the violence
Fear is such a weak emotion that's why I despise it
We scared of almost everything, afraid to even tell the truth
So scared of what you think of me, I’m scared of even telling you
Sometimes I’m like the only person I feel safe to tell it to
I’m locked inside a cell in me, I know that there’s a jail in you
Consider this your bailing out, so take a breath, inhale a few
My screams is finally getting free, my thoughts is finally yelling through
It’s so loud Inside my head
With words that I should have said
As I drown in my regrets
I can’t take back the words I never said
It leaves me with an interesting thought - do people really regret the things they don't say more than what they do? I think that the answer is yes. To take this beyond the petty issues and move toward the big picture, all you have to look at is the complete apathy of the average voter on politics and the inner-workings of the US. Our nation is in crisis, and in the hands of political parties that more and more resemble each other. As Republicans and Democrats take more and more corporate money, the less they give a fuck about the "Average American." This is not the view that is shown on our corporate media. Politics is shown as a horse race between ideologically opposed groups. The actual agenda is one that trends to the Right with no counterbalance. No matter your viewpoint, Gridlock is the word that best describes our Legislative situation.
Where does this leave the American public? Either to become entirely partisan and root for 'your side' in this sham of a horse race or to become apathetic. Just under 57% of registered voters voted for President in 2008 and only 37.8% voted in the midterms last year. That's a lot of voluntarily voiceless citizens. And while these people may not regret the decision to not vote in the short term, they sure as hell will have an opinion on what tax rates, spending, cuts, social issues that their 'representatives' will enact in laws in the future.
I, myself, will internalize this song and learn the lesson. Centrism and 'balance' does not equal fact. I truly believe that Liberalism is the correct lens to view the world through which you can build the best, most just society. Rush Limbaugh is a racist. Fox News DOES gin up support for causes that benefit only the wealthy through scare tactics and pitting 'real Americans' (White people) against the 'enemy' (non-whites).
The content of the speech is not the most important issue. Whether or not you agree with Lupe Fiasco on his opinions, you have to respect his willingness to share them. John Stuart Mill's philosophy on Speech in a democracy stated that it was bad to silence individuals' speech, whether they were incorrect or not. In a society with an open forum for ideas, all can be shared equally and the best of them can rise to the top. With today's media, there is a loudspeaker repeating the same ideas over and over that can drown out many if not all others. It is up to all of us to think for ourselves and say what we think. Vote. Become politically active by finding something that you're passionate about. Anything less can lead nowhere but regret...
Monday, February 21, 2011
Merging Sports and Politics: The NFL Lockout
People look to sports as something that is a refuge from politics and divisive topics. I admit that it's really easy to look at it that way - there isn't much that my dad and I agree upon but we both really love football and the Chicago Bears in particular. But, this ideal is really a lie. Nothing is separate from politics, because while professional sports masquerades as completely privately owned, owners deliver ultimatums to taxpayers demanding millions for new stadiums or they'll take the hometown team to wherever will pony up the money. And then, after taking the money, they still charge $90 a ticket. In fact, during the chaos of Hurricane Katrina, the Louisiana Superdome housed countless homeless individuals. That was the first time that any of them had stepped foot in the stadium that they helped build with their tax dollars.
One interesting aspect of the current Super Bowl champions - The Green Bay Packers - is that there is no one owner of the team. It is collectively owned by the citizens of Green Bay, Wisconsin. Written in the bi-laws of the team is a clause that any profit made from the sale of the team must be donated to the United Way. The Packers are quite literally a product of Socialism. During the Super Bowl broadcast, this fact was not mentioned once. Sure they had time to show Cameron Diaz feeding popcorn to Alex Rodriguez, but not to mention that the Packers had a completely opposite ownership structure to that of the Dallas Cowboys and Jerry Jones' $1 Billion stadium that the game was played in.
The negotiations between the NFL owners and the Player's Union is the interaction that I'm really most interested in at the moment. If you listen to casual sports fans, you're likely not to find that much interest. They see the disagreement as millionaires fighting with billionaires, something that just does not matter to the common fan. But the fact is this - if March 4th passes and there is not a new collective bargaining agreement between the players and the owners, there will be a lockout and there might not be any NFL football next year.
How did it come to this? Well, there was an agreement between the sides in 2006. It was set to last for seven years, but the owners dissolved the agreement after the 2010 season in hopes of getting a greater share of profits. The NFL makes $9 Billion a year. The original agreement was a 60/40 split in favor of the owners after taking an agreed upon amount off the top for the owners (This is to account for stadiums and other 'additions' that improve the game that the players agree to help subsidize the owners). So, in real terms as of last year, out of the $9 Billion the owners kept $1 Billion off the top and split the remaining $8 Billion 60/40.
Coming into these negotiations, the owners' position is that they want to keep the 60/40 split but increase the amount off the top to $2 Billion. The players' counteroffer is a 50/50 split with the original $1 Billion. So, who is right here? The NFL is a growing business and profits will only increase. Upon getting the offer for the $2 Billion subsidy for the owners, the players asked to see the financial activities of the teams to see both where the money would go and whether or not they actually need it. The owners refused.
My take is this, NFL owners are trying desperately to retake any losses that they supposedly took in the 2006 agreement and then some. Owners have been preparing for this lockout for years. They have secured guaranteed TV contracts that will pay the owners next season whether there is any football or not. They have started rescinding coaches' health care as well as players'. Their plan is this - settle in with the TV money and paint the players as greedy athletes who are at fault for there being no football until the players finally cave.
This cannot happen. The players are the talent that feeds this machine and without them, all the owners really have is REALLY expensive fields. How can anyone think that the players should agree to the ultimatum placed before them? With an additional $1 Billion taken away from the players over the length of the contract (7 years), you're asking the players to voluntarily give away $7 Billion. The average player only plays 3.4 years, and that lack of revenue is a huge hit to the amount of money that a player can make in their career.
The main hope for the NFLPA (the players union) is that fans side with them in this struggle. Players want to play this game and only ask for an equitable share of the money that this sport generates. I ask everyone to educate themselves on the matter and show this country that organized labor is a vital part of this country's greatness (I'm also talking to you Governor Walker)
Head to nfllockdown.com and sign the petition to send a message to the owners
Also, this ad was rejected for play at the Super Bowl because of 'content' issues. I guess supporting the game is just too controversial. Watch the ad and pass it on... It's powerful
One interesting aspect of the current Super Bowl champions - The Green Bay Packers - is that there is no one owner of the team. It is collectively owned by the citizens of Green Bay, Wisconsin. Written in the bi-laws of the team is a clause that any profit made from the sale of the team must be donated to the United Way. The Packers are quite literally a product of Socialism. During the Super Bowl broadcast, this fact was not mentioned once. Sure they had time to show Cameron Diaz feeding popcorn to Alex Rodriguez, but not to mention that the Packers had a completely opposite ownership structure to that of the Dallas Cowboys and Jerry Jones' $1 Billion stadium that the game was played in.
The negotiations between the NFL owners and the Player's Union is the interaction that I'm really most interested in at the moment. If you listen to casual sports fans, you're likely not to find that much interest. They see the disagreement as millionaires fighting with billionaires, something that just does not matter to the common fan. But the fact is this - if March 4th passes and there is not a new collective bargaining agreement between the players and the owners, there will be a lockout and there might not be any NFL football next year.
How did it come to this? Well, there was an agreement between the sides in 2006. It was set to last for seven years, but the owners dissolved the agreement after the 2010 season in hopes of getting a greater share of profits. The NFL makes $9 Billion a year. The original agreement was a 60/40 split in favor of the owners after taking an agreed upon amount off the top for the owners (This is to account for stadiums and other 'additions' that improve the game that the players agree to help subsidize the owners). So, in real terms as of last year, out of the $9 Billion the owners kept $1 Billion off the top and split the remaining $8 Billion 60/40.
Coming into these negotiations, the owners' position is that they want to keep the 60/40 split but increase the amount off the top to $2 Billion. The players' counteroffer is a 50/50 split with the original $1 Billion. So, who is right here? The NFL is a growing business and profits will only increase. Upon getting the offer for the $2 Billion subsidy for the owners, the players asked to see the financial activities of the teams to see both where the money would go and whether or not they actually need it. The owners refused.
My take is this, NFL owners are trying desperately to retake any losses that they supposedly took in the 2006 agreement and then some. Owners have been preparing for this lockout for years. They have secured guaranteed TV contracts that will pay the owners next season whether there is any football or not. They have started rescinding coaches' health care as well as players'. Their plan is this - settle in with the TV money and paint the players as greedy athletes who are at fault for there being no football until the players finally cave.
This cannot happen. The players are the talent that feeds this machine and without them, all the owners really have is REALLY expensive fields. How can anyone think that the players should agree to the ultimatum placed before them? With an additional $1 Billion taken away from the players over the length of the contract (7 years), you're asking the players to voluntarily give away $7 Billion. The average player only plays 3.4 years, and that lack of revenue is a huge hit to the amount of money that a player can make in their career.
The main hope for the NFLPA (the players union) is that fans side with them in this struggle. Players want to play this game and only ask for an equitable share of the money that this sport generates. I ask everyone to educate themselves on the matter and show this country that organized labor is a vital part of this country's greatness (I'm also talking to you Governor Walker)
Head to nfllockdown.com and sign the petition to send a message to the owners
Also, this ad was rejected for play at the Super Bowl because of 'content' issues. I guess supporting the game is just too controversial. Watch the ad and pass it on... It's powerful
Friday, February 18, 2011
Fighting the Fox Noise machine with facts
The protests at the Statehouse in Wisconsin against Scott Walker's proposals set up the classic Right/Left conflict in our Infotainment media - The Right calls unions lazy and overpaid and everything up to and even including un-American while the Left mumbles something about how those claims are false without really creating a rival narrative. This position is stupid. The majority of Americans who pay only a passing glance at the news believe what is shouted loudest at them, whether or not it is true.
ACORN's demise was relished by the Right because of the Slam Dunk investigative video from James O'Keefe and Andrew Breitbart that proved that the organization was corrupt and openly facilitated prostitution and countless other seedy offenses. The Right trumpeted that Obamacare was really, truly only about one thing - Death Panels that would allow the "Government" (Note the scare quotes) would have final say as to if you got life saving treatments or died.
There's one commonality of those two stories - they're complete bullshit. O'Keefe used highly edited filming that, after seeing the unbiased version, clearly showed that he and his 'prostitute' did not wear their outfits inside the building, and that nearly all of the employees chose not to help them and one even called the authorities on them. None other than the California Attorney General took a look at the unedited tapes and said that there were absolutely no crimes displayed. The Death Panel nonsense really was nothing more than the delusions of Sarah Palin. It was started as an amendment by a Republican representative that called for the option of individuals to have a meeting with a doctor paid for that allowed them to construct a living will if they saw fit. There was no mandatory facet of this provision or any language that prevented individuals from demanding every last bit of possible life-saving measures. After all the negative press, the provision was stripped from the bill before it ever even passed the House.
Looking at the Democratic response to these two incidences, another commonality can be seen. After withstanding the initial salvo from the Right, the Democrats calmly say that the claims are untrue and leave it at that. While this response at first seems logical and well thought out, it cannot handle the barrage that is the Right Wing Noise Machine. Fox News feeds talk radio and vice versa. Each becoming louder than before until the 'disproved' story until it reached a tipping point when the Mainstream media then must take the story seriously and thus report it as if it were fact. Then, after ACORN is defunded or the provision in 'Obamacare' is removed by the Democrats to stop the Right from making hay on the issue, the Right can claim victory and that they were right all along because 'why would they have caved in if we weren't right all along?' After this song and dance, it doesn't matter if the initial claim was disproved or not - the Right won because they were able to scream down the truth with convincing lies.
This is how the events in Wisconsin tie into the narrative. Walker came into the Governorship with a projected $121 million budget surplus at the end of the year. He promptly began his term this year by giving out $140 million in business tax cuts, creating a budget deficit. His answer for this? Breaking public unions and stripping their ability to collectively bargain.
Never mind that the three unions he gave exceptions to (Police, Firefighters and State Troopers) were the only unions who supported him in the election or that stripping the right to collectively bargain would have no effect on the deficit. Walker's fight is one of politics, trying to eliminate the major fundraisers for the Democratic Party - public unions. It's blatantly partisan and any claim to the contrary is insane. Balancing the budget isn't going to happen by taking public employees' pensions away from them. Doing that will only make the poor poorer and the rich richer.
I hope that the Democrats, and the 'supposedly' liberal media will not let the unions be hung out to dry. That false claims will be shouted down with facts. That unions can and will be strengthened and rightfully celebrated as the institutions that helped create the middle class and might again once more.
ACORN's demise was relished by the Right because of the Slam Dunk investigative video from James O'Keefe and Andrew Breitbart that proved that the organization was corrupt and openly facilitated prostitution and countless other seedy offenses. The Right trumpeted that Obamacare was really, truly only about one thing - Death Panels that would allow the "Government" (Note the scare quotes) would have final say as to if you got life saving treatments or died.
There's one commonality of those two stories - they're complete bullshit. O'Keefe used highly edited filming that, after seeing the unbiased version, clearly showed that he and his 'prostitute' did not wear their outfits inside the building, and that nearly all of the employees chose not to help them and one even called the authorities on them. None other than the California Attorney General took a look at the unedited tapes and said that there were absolutely no crimes displayed. The Death Panel nonsense really was nothing more than the delusions of Sarah Palin. It was started as an amendment by a Republican representative that called for the option of individuals to have a meeting with a doctor paid for that allowed them to construct a living will if they saw fit. There was no mandatory facet of this provision or any language that prevented individuals from demanding every last bit of possible life-saving measures. After all the negative press, the provision was stripped from the bill before it ever even passed the House.
Looking at the Democratic response to these two incidences, another commonality can be seen. After withstanding the initial salvo from the Right, the Democrats calmly say that the claims are untrue and leave it at that. While this response at first seems logical and well thought out, it cannot handle the barrage that is the Right Wing Noise Machine. Fox News feeds talk radio and vice versa. Each becoming louder than before until the 'disproved' story until it reached a tipping point when the Mainstream media then must take the story seriously and thus report it as if it were fact. Then, after ACORN is defunded or the provision in 'Obamacare' is removed by the Democrats to stop the Right from making hay on the issue, the Right can claim victory and that they were right all along because 'why would they have caved in if we weren't right all along?' After this song and dance, it doesn't matter if the initial claim was disproved or not - the Right won because they were able to scream down the truth with convincing lies.
This is how the events in Wisconsin tie into the narrative. Walker came into the Governorship with a projected $121 million budget surplus at the end of the year. He promptly began his term this year by giving out $140 million in business tax cuts, creating a budget deficit. His answer for this? Breaking public unions and stripping their ability to collectively bargain.
Never mind that the three unions he gave exceptions to (Police, Firefighters and State Troopers) were the only unions who supported him in the election or that stripping the right to collectively bargain would have no effect on the deficit. Walker's fight is one of politics, trying to eliminate the major fundraisers for the Democratic Party - public unions. It's blatantly partisan and any claim to the contrary is insane. Balancing the budget isn't going to happen by taking public employees' pensions away from them. Doing that will only make the poor poorer and the rich richer.
I hope that the Democrats, and the 'supposedly' liberal media will not let the unions be hung out to dry. That false claims will be shouted down with facts. That unions can and will be strengthened and rightfully celebrated as the institutions that helped create the middle class and might again once more.
Monday, February 14, 2011
The Murderous Anti-Abortion movement - Fuck You
First off, it's been way too long since I've posted on this blog... I guess it just takes the right story to rile me up and bring forth the word vomit.
Watching Maddow tonight and saw the latest batch of death threats from the "Pro Lifers." This constant threat of violence has single-handedly kept Topeka, Kansas from having an abortion provider in over a year. Abortion, by the way, is not a sin but a Constitutionally protected right that all women in this country should have access to.
How is this OK? How can someone who claims the moral high ground be so obviously depraved? Sure, these movements claim that by killing these 'murderers' they're saving countless souls. Doesn't this COMPLETELY undercut the moniker of Pro Life? Sure all life is sacred unless the person is willing to perform legal women's health care services... in that case, kill the motherfucker. Let's look beyond the hypocrisy that these live in - that most of these people believe in the Death Penalty and War (I guess Muslim or American soldiers lives aren't that sacred) - and cut to the heart of the matter; that this constant threat of violence (along with the tacit approval of those who oppose abortion) creates a de facto ban on abortion.
Is that something we're ok with? What does the Law mean if a group can Terrorize a practice and all of those involved until it goes away? Where does it end? Guns and fanaticism take a precendent over even the fucking Supreme Court? If a challenge to Roe v. Wade was put before the Supreme Court today it would be Affirmed because Kennedy would rule with the Liberal minority for a 5-4 decision. If even the archaic Conservative Supreme Court can't overturn Roe v. Wade, then this fucking crazy movement wants this nation even to the right of them.
So, fuck you 'Pro Life' movement. And fuck you religious individuals who secretly approve of what these nuts are doing. Until religious leaders or the damn Public disavow this group from all semblance of legitimacy then those silent are complicit. Abortion is not a happy thing. But it is a legal act if done within the parameters of the law. Until this threat of violence is lifted, women are not free (especially poor women)
Randall Terry, Operation Rescue and ever single other Anti-Abortion group:
Fuck you for being sexist
Fuck you for trying to control women's bodies
Fuck you for ignoring the fucking rule of law
Fuck you, seriously...
FUCK YOU
Watching Maddow tonight and saw the latest batch of death threats from the "Pro Lifers." This constant threat of violence has single-handedly kept Topeka, Kansas from having an abortion provider in over a year. Abortion, by the way, is not a sin but a Constitutionally protected right that all women in this country should have access to.
How is this OK? How can someone who claims the moral high ground be so obviously depraved? Sure, these movements claim that by killing these 'murderers' they're saving countless souls. Doesn't this COMPLETELY undercut the moniker of Pro Life? Sure all life is sacred unless the person is willing to perform legal women's health care services... in that case, kill the motherfucker. Let's look beyond the hypocrisy that these live in - that most of these people believe in the Death Penalty and War (I guess Muslim or American soldiers lives aren't that sacred) - and cut to the heart of the matter; that this constant threat of violence (along with the tacit approval of those who oppose abortion) creates a de facto ban on abortion.
Is that something we're ok with? What does the Law mean if a group can Terrorize a practice and all of those involved until it goes away? Where does it end? Guns and fanaticism take a precendent over even the fucking Supreme Court? If a challenge to Roe v. Wade was put before the Supreme Court today it would be Affirmed because Kennedy would rule with the Liberal minority for a 5-4 decision. If even the archaic Conservative Supreme Court can't overturn Roe v. Wade, then this fucking crazy movement wants this nation even to the right of them.
So, fuck you 'Pro Life' movement. And fuck you religious individuals who secretly approve of what these nuts are doing. Until religious leaders or the damn Public disavow this group from all semblance of legitimacy then those silent are complicit. Abortion is not a happy thing. But it is a legal act if done within the parameters of the law. Until this threat of violence is lifted, women are not free (especially poor women)
Randall Terry, Operation Rescue and ever single other Anti-Abortion group:
Fuck you for being sexist
Fuck you for trying to control women's bodies
Fuck you for ignoring the fucking rule of law
Fuck you, seriously...
FUCK YOU
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)