Skip to content

Both Sides get their say, but one shouts

Tuesday, February 14, 2012

This morning I ranted at my long suffering wife after reading this paragraph from this morning’s Times:

Now, the comment deadline ushers in a critical phase. Equipped with arguments from every side, regulators will turn their focus to completing details of the rule.

The article is about the comment period that recently closed regarding the Volker rule. The article itself led off with several paragraphs detailing the massive numbers of comments that were submitted by the financial industry and their high priced lawyers, accountants and enablers. How, I ranted, after reporting on that, can you say that the SEC had heard from all sides?

Well, of course I had no objective data to confirm my preconception, though I would have bet both my fortune and my sacred honor that I was right. Well, it turns out I was right, as this portion of a comment, submitted by  Occupy the SEC shows:.

Of the comment letters received about 90% are from financial institutions, and another 5% are from foreign governments objecting to the priority the US regulators have gifted to US traders in US Government Bonds. The remaining 5% are from ordinary folks, like Mr. Volcker, Occupy the SEC and other public interest groups.

It’s interesting that 95% of the comments reflect the views of the 1%, and the views of the 99% are embodied in the comments of the remaining 5% of commenters.

The system is gamed from the start. The Volker rule itself is a Rube Goldbergian device to accomplish what could more easily and effectively be accomplished by reenacting Glass Steagall, something that worked for more than 50 years. Because the simple expedient of separating commercial banks from investment banks is off the table, the SEC must engage in complex rulemaking to try to reach some of the same objectives the simple solution accomplished with ease. The rule as proposed by the SEC is already shot full of holes, and now the banks are circling in for the kill.

Filed in Media | | Comments (0)

Still not convinced, but wavering

Monday, February 13, 2012

As regular readers (if any exist) of this blog all know, I am agnostic shading slightly toward atheistic with regard to the existence of god. Today I write that despite recent events,  I remain so, though I admit that my lack of faith has been shaken by recent developments.

Some might argue (though oddly enough, so far as I know, no one has) that only a good and loving god could have raised Ricky Santorum to a commanding lead in the polls. Certainly, they might say, no purely natural explanation can be given for the fact that, if only transitorily, the majority of one of America’s two political parties has embraced the 13th century, thus almost miraculously enhancing the chances that the semi-sane party will prosper. As they might go on to say, this is proof not only of god’s loving kindness, but of his (or her) highly developed sense of humor. Only the god who watches out for fools, drunks and the United States of America could have given us such a gift, and as a bonus, they might say, he has induced the entire Congressional delegation of the Republican party to make common cause with the pedophile enabling Bishops of the Roman Catholic Church to make contraception unavailable to millions of American women. Only a god, they might say, with a keen sense of irony could have arranged events in such a way. Not only that, they might say, but we liberals get to watch the Republicans frog march themselves to their doom, against what one must hope is their better judgment, drawn ineluctably by the logic of the situation they have created for themselves, for truly has it been said, as you sow, so shall you reap. Manna from heaven, it could surely be argued, was not a greater or more unlooked for gift.

 

I admit that this is all certainly evidence that is consistent with the existence of a god. (Loki maybe) But while such seeming happy miracles are necessary elements in the theist’s case, they are not sufficient to prove it.  No, I would say that in order to make his (or her) case, god would have to deliver the presidency, the House and the Senate to the Democrats this fall. This would require that he (or she) prevail not only against the money arrayed against the hapless Democrats, but more miraculously, against the Democrats incredible talent for snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. There could be no natural explanation for such an outcome this year. Alternatively, he (or she) could give us Ricky in August. What fun that would be.

Filed in Religion | | Comments (1)

The leeches condemn the leeched

Sunday, February 12, 2012

 This article in the New York Times has already engendered a lot of comment. Dean Baker says that the economics of the piece are a bit off (worth reading), but the real importance of the piece is the fact that governmental benefits are used most where they are condemned the most. Our blue state money is exported to red state beneficiaries, who condemn us for voting for it, and insist they don’t really want it, or at least don’t think anyone else should have it, all the while never considering doing without it. It contains some interesting character studies, such as this one about a tattoo artist who condemns his customers for getting benefits from which his family has benefitted and which he will obviously need himself:

Brian Qualley, 49, has a sister who survived a brain tumor but was disabled by its removal. The government pays for her care at an assisted-living facility. Their mother scrapes by on Social Security.

Mr. Qualley said that the government should provide for those who need help, but that too much money was being wasted. Mr. Qualley, who owns a tattoo parlor in Harris, north of North Branch, said some of his customers paid with money from government disability checks.

“They’re getting $300 or $400 tattoos, and they’re wearing nice new Nike shoes that I can’t afford,” he said, looking up from working a complicated design into the left leg of a middle-aged woman. “I guess I shouldn’t say it because it’s my business, but I think a tattoo is a little too extravagant.”

But Mr. Qualley said he did not want to reduce benefits for the current generation of retirees. Rather, he said his own generation should get less, because they have time to prepare. This is a common position among the young and healthy in Chisago.

Mr. Qualley said he was saving some money for retirement, although, he added, “I don’t have a 401(k) or anything like that.”

“I also have a job that I don’t necessarily ever want to — or have to — retire from,” he said.

What if his hands start to shake as he gets older?

“Actually,” he said, the electric needle falling silent in his hand, “it’s my shoulders and neck that bother me most.”

Saving for retirement, but no 401k? Social Security here he comes. 

There’s a great graphic on line showing where the folks on government benefits live. I can’t reproduce it here but suffice it to say that it’s not unlike the soda/coke map I discussed in a recent post. 

I come back time and again to the obvious solution:it’s time to re-open negotiations with the Confederacy. 

Filed in American Life, Hypocrisy | | Comments (0)

Friday Night Music

Friday, February 10, 2012

Okay, there’s one topic that dominated the news this week. Who would have thought, in this day and age, that in the midst of a depression the party out of power would want to make access to birth control a central issue in the campaign. I say it again, Obama is the luckiest guy on earth, though sometimes he does seem to fail appreciate the gifts he is given.

Anyway, this song seems pretty appropriate. A song from the women of America to the Bishops of America. Okay, you have to mentally modify the lyrics a little-but just a little. After all, bishops don’t go out with girls. Their preferences lie elsewhere.

Filed in Music | | Comments (1)

Opposing birth control no political winner

Thursday, February 9, 2012

A few thoughts on the ginned up birth control controversy. First, Obama cannot win votes by caving, he can only lose them. 

From what I understand, the pundits are convinced that this is a big deal, believing as they always do that the great unwashed are too stupid and unsophisticated to do anything but side with the Bishops, never mind that the Bishops have been covering up child abuse for years and aren’t among the most popular guys around, even among Catholics. And besides, people like birth control, even Catholics. 

This reminds me most of the Terry Schiavo incident, when Republicans really thought they had a winner, and a number of Democrats, including one Joe Lieberman (he was a nominal Democrat then), immediately went into a defensive crouch, with many ready to sign up with the Republicans on the issue. Then lo and behold the people of the United States did rise up and stun the beltway pundits and the Republicans by overwhelmingly siding with the forces of reason. It was the beginning of the end of Bush’s power as president, and one of the factors leading to Democratic victories in 2006 and 2008. No one in the beltway saw it coming, (though some from the hinterland, including yours truly, did) and a number of Democrats were shaking in their boots until the public made its feelings known. 

In this case the polls already show that his people are with him, and so is almost everybody else. Let’s hope that for once, Obama sticks to his guns. He may have no choice, as the Catholics have now defined the only acceptable compromise as total surrender. 

Filed in Obama, Politics, Religion | | Comments (0)

A suggestion for Little Ricky

Wednesday, February 8, 2012

From the Times, reporting on Romney’s Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Day:

But from the moment Mr. Romney stepped to the podium, flanked by two teleprompters, even he knew that he was not having a good day.

A bit of advice to Little Ricky (the enemy of my enemy is my friend): You might want to tar Romney as the guy who needs two teleprompters. I know it’s meaningless, but the base seems to feel that teleprompter use somehow proves one is unfit for office.  (of course, to make sure you don’t flub your lines, make sure to use a Teleprompter.

Filed in Republicans | | Comments (0)

Catholic Bishops running interference for Republicans

Tuesday, February 7, 2012

 This is must reading. The folks at Hullabaloo make a compelling case that all the moaning and groaning from the Catholic Bishops is just anti-Obama politics. The Catholics have been paying for birth control and even abortions in several states under similar insurance mandates for years. Somehow, they’ve found a way to mollify their tender consciences. They can’t possibly argue, ala Mitt, that somehow it’s different when the feds make you do it.

On the larger issue, if the Republicans want to make this election about contraception, were I Obama I’d say bring it on. He’s not getting many votes from the anti-contraception crowd anyway, and the issue would certainly energize half his base. Anyone who wants to run in this day and age on an anti-birth control platform is seriously delusional.

Filed in Hypocrisy, Religion | | Comments (0)

Feingold to Obama: Join me in exile and let the country suck it

Tuesday, February 7, 2012

Umm, Fuck Russ Feingold. His unilateral disarmament purity position is, in part, responsible for the fact that the Senator from his old seat in Wisconsin is a Republican. Elections have consequences that we all have to live with. Russ may not mind a country firmly anchored in the Middle Ages, but I do.  I don’t like PACs, either, but the prospect of a Republican president and Congress in 2013 fills me with existential dread. Martyrs end up dead.

Filed in Democrats | | Comments (0)

The foreign workers Republicans never attack

Monday, February 6, 2012

 I saw a butchered version of the exchange referenced in this article on the Daily Show. Stewart was trying to play it for laughs, or course, so he cut off the portion about the H-1B visa issue. The basic story is that a woman asked Obama why her husband had to compete with holders of  H-1B visas. These are the folks that are increasingly allowed into this country to perform highly skilled work at low wages because, somewhat mysteriously, Americans are simply unable or unwilling to perform the work. Obama apparently seemed genuinely surprised that the woman’s husband was ready, willing and able to perform work the corporations insisted Americans wouldn’t do, which is why he asked for the husband’s resume. Whether he’ll actually follow up is another question; though he should. It would be a great campaign issue if he took these Visas on. Suddenly, we’d be hearing Republicans defend (relatively) highly paid foreign workers coming in for American jobs, while still attacking all those Mexicans coming in to take the farm labor jobs that Americans are just itching to perform.

Could it be that people like Obama have really believed the corporate bullshit justifying these Visas? I’ve written before about my sister, who worked at the Hartford, and had to train her replacement H-1B visa holder to take the job that the Hartford had decreed that she and her co-workers no longer wanted to perform. All that was news to her, of course, and to the rest of the folks who were being replaced by foreign workers. At the Hartford the whole thing didn’t work out that well, apparently, but as the linked article states, many times these visa holders are just the first steps toward full scale outsourcing.

The corporate justification for this sort of thing helps create a situation in which the lie become true. If, as in my sister’s case, you start eliminating computer analysts, then pretty soon there will be a shortage of analysts in this country, since no one is going to try to enter a field from which they’ve been barred because they are citizens of this country. If these corporations want to keep these visas, then perhaps we should consider a modification to the law. Give a right of private action to 1) any worker who can prove they were employed by a corporation, were ready, willing and able to continue to perform the job, and were replaced by an H-1B worker, or 2) any worker who can prove they were ready, willing and able to perform a job filled by an H-1B worker. Allow class actions and provide for ample statutorily computed damages, a little like the Truth in Lending Act. The law would be enforced and it wouldn’t cost the government a dime, except for the salaries of the judges hearing the cases. As things stand now, there is every incentive for these corporations to lie to obtain cheap workers. It might help just a bit to make it easy for affected workers to exact some justice.

Filed in Corporate Crime | | Comments (0)

Yet more grifting

Monday, February 6, 2012

 A few days ago I wrote about Jan Brewer’s book buying scam. Here’s how it works. Start a PAC. Have the PAC buy multiple copies of your own book at full price. Repeat until you run out of suckers. Apparently, it’s a common scam. Christine O’Donnell, the woman who is not a witch, gave her unused campaign dollars, originally harvested from the rubest of rubes, to her new shiny PAC, which apparently became pretty much the only buyer for her book. The book, by the way, proves that she’s no witch, for if she were she could have at least cast a spell to get someone to buy it other than herself.

Filed in Grifters, Republicans | | Comments (0)