A zillionaire for raising the minimum wage

The radio program On Point, hosted by Tom Ashbrook discussed income inequality with Nick Hanauer. I heard a bit of the program Tuesday evening before arriving home to a house without power. Hanauer was an initial investor of Amazon, has founded or funded over 30 companies, and now is one of the super-rich. He has the plane, yacht, and multiple fancy homes. His message is that if the 1% don't work to re-balance the wealth in the economy the whole thing will come crashing down. Alas, there is no transcript of the show, so I summarized while listening on the web. The audio is 47 minutes.

Capitalism is the greatest engine for creating wealth, but it can benefit everyone or it can benefit the few. It is the role of democracy to make sure it benefits everyone. The problem isn't inequality. The problem is high levels of inequality. And we're at record high levels now and the spread is widening. Such levels lead to pitchforks in the streets and damage to democracy.

The upheavals in Ferguson, MO over the shooting death of Michael Brown are an example of the disenfranchised beginning to fight back.

It doesn't make sense for the rich to push for policies that extend and accentuate the inequality gap. First reason: Throughout human history when the inequality got this severe, the pitchforks have always come out – unless there is a police state in place. But a lot of Americans think we're a peaceful society. We don't do that stuff here. True statement?

A correction to what capitalism is: It isn't an efficient allocation of resources. It is creating new solutions to human problems.

Of course, fellow super-rich consider Hanauer to be bonkers. They buy into the "trickle-down" idea that the more money the job creators have, the more jobs they create and the better off everyone is. But it isn't true. Jobs are part of a feedback loop between customers and businesses. When workers have more money, businesses have more customers and need more workers.

Those at the top would rather believe the efficient market hypothesis because if markets are efficient then those at the top deserve to be rich and others deserve to be poor. But markets aren't efficient, they're effective – if well managed.

Hanauer notes that five years ago income inequality was a taboo subject in polite society. But now many of the rich agree that inequality is an issue that needs discussion. But what to do is still an open debate with many of the rich hesitant about the tradeoffs they would need to make. Even so, they recognize the central point (and the second reason to close the inequality gap): When their customers have no money the businesses owned by the rich have no customers.

Reason three: High levels of inequality stretch the society apart. The rich become disconnected from the rest, which reduces empathy and increases contempt (by the rich for the poor and by the poor for the rich), a dangerous and corrosive mix. The poor no longer have a stake in the society. The situation can get wildly out of control very quickly (a tipping point). Alas, if the rich feel aggrieved one thing they are very good at is contacting their senator.

Complaining about the rich and ranting about what the bankers are doing is not a theory of growth. This is: The more people, entrepreneurs and customers, who are included in prosperity the more innovative the economy becomes and the more it grows. The more participants in the economy the more it grows. This is reason four.

Thirty years ago the American middle class was the largest and richest in the world. That's no longer true. Canada is no longer the poor cousin. Their cities are much more vibrant than American cities. A measure of an economy should be how much better the middle class is doing than in other countries.

Today's politicians don't make decisions based on sound economic policy, they make decisions based on rules-of-thumb, which were taught as good economics maybe 50 years ago but are now being shown to be false. One of those is tax cuts to the rich benefit the entire economy. Another is the rich are job creators, the more money they have the more jobs they create. The people at the top matter, the people at the bottom do not. Trickle-down economics works. The bigger the big get the better off everyone is. When you raise the price of employment, you get less of it. The GOP budget encapsulates those rules. Some of these rules are used because of confusion, some because rich people know who will be advantaged by using them.

Seattle raised the minimum wage to $15 an hour. It raised the wages of tipped workers to somewhere around $9 an hour – the federal minimum for tipped workers is around $2. So why is the restaurant scene in Seattle booming? Because even tipped workers can now afford to eat in restaurants. The poor getting richer is not bad for the economy.

We as a country can choose policies that spread prosperity. Raising minimum wage, especially of tipped workers, is one such policy. Another is to help the small business compete against the big. Also, balance the power between owners and workers.

Our policies used to help people become rich. They now reward people for being rich.

We've already outsourced all the jobs that can be. The job of hotel maid can't be outsourced. But why should that job be a low-paying job? Walmart made $27 billion in profit last year. Why can't it use $10 billion of that to pay each of its million workers another $10,000 a year, which would get them off food stamps – and give them enough money to buy more products from Walmart? Why shouldn't the service job of today match the manufacturing job of 50 years ago that provided a middle-class income? The big reason why it doesn't is power. Manufacturing workers had unions.

Will the rich see this understanding and change their ways? Maybe not. But another goal of Hanauer's message is to wake up the other 99.8% of us, remind us we're the source of growth and prosperity, and get us to demand policies that spread prosperity.

Hanauer was invited to be on the show because he had written an article for Politico making the same points he made on the air. It is easier and more complete to read that rather than listen to the show.

A quote from the article:

In any large group, some people absolutely will not do the right thing. That’s why our economy can only be safe and effective if it is governed by the same kinds of rules as, say, the transportation system, with its speed limits and stop signs.

And some more ideas:

Want to reduce the size of government? Reduce the need for government. Pay workers well and they don't need food stamps or rent assistance or medical care.

Democrats say raising the minimum wage is a justice issue, all about fairness. And that's why they lose the argument. Republicans campaign on growth, but they provide the wrong solution. Minimum wage is a growth issue.

There can never be enough super-rich Americans to power the economy. Paying a CEO 1000 times more than the average worker does not benefit the economy. That CEO does not buy 1000 shirts for every shirt the average worker buys. Instead, that CEO puts the cost of 998 shirts into savings.

A problem with the Occupy movement is their message that capitalism is bad. What is bad is mismanaged capitalism, which concentrates wealth. Smart capitalists will make sure capitalism is sustainable, and that means spreading prosperity.

Tim Worstall is a contributor to Forbes and thinks Hanauer's ideas are insane. Some of his rebuttals:

A central story by Hanauer is that when Henry Ford raised wages to $5 a day he boosted sales of his cars. But Ford had 14,000 employees, which wouldn't put a big change in annual sales of 200,000. The raise cost Ford $9 million a year. If all employees bought a car that would increase sales by $7.75 million. That doesn't increase profits. The reason why Ford went to $5 a day was to reduce turnover so he didn't have to hire 50,000 a year to fill 14,000 jobs.

Worstall considers the price of labor and says, "People who employ more expensive labor use it more sparingly." Raising the minimum wage changes the way companies use their workers – though it seems Worstall doesn't factor in the number of workers may need to stay the same or grow to handle increased customers.

Worstall says Hanauer dismisses the effect of savings – it was savings that allowed Hanauer to invest in Amazon. So Hanauer should use his money to fund more companies rather than tell companies to raise wages. Even I see a disconnect here, and my last economics class was a long time ago. Hanauer won't invest in a company (which would create jobs) unless he knows that company is likely to make money. And for that it needs customers, which would come from a healthy middle class.

I note that Worstall doesn't refute one of Hanauer's central themes – when their customers have no money the businesses owned by the rich have no customers.

Happy Labor Day!

Take it to the square

I'm not sure why I did not get a paper version of The Washington Spectator this month. It's only now, half way through the month, that I've gotten around to reading it online. The article that caught my attention is a review of the book The Machine: A Field Guide to the Resurgent Right by Lee Fang. The review is written by Samir Chopra so most of the quotes are of Chopra's words. This book is a thorough review of the relentless takeover of American society and politics by the Koch brothers.

Chopra starts off by confirming the actions of the Koch brothers and their puppet GOP are all about Power.

The modern Republican Party supposedly suffers from ideological confusion. It is for the regulation of gay marriage and reproductive rights; it is against the regulation of industrial pollution, healthcare insurance, and workplace safety. It is for the reduced power of the executive branch, except when it comes to spying on Americans and declaring war. It is for the religious freedom of Christian evangelicals but not Muslim Americans. These seemingly disparate platforms actually display a coherent unity: the American Right is committed to preserving all hierarchy and imposed order: men over women, white over black, rich over poor, bosses over workers, Christian majorities over Muslim minorities. This love of hierarchy, of entrenched power, is manifest in the most visible face of opposition to the Obama Presidency: the Tea Party and the new crop of Republican representatives it has sent to Congress.

The rest of the review -- and the whole of the book -- delve into how the Koch brothers have thoroughly derailed Obama's agenda and voter mandate. Distressing reading, and perhaps a guidebook on how they might be resisted. I'll only mention one more item.

Fang shows how the Tea Party never was, or is, a grassroots phenomenon; its birth is found in the tobacco industry’s resistance to government regulation, packaged in a verbal and visual co-optation of the language and symbols of the Boston Tea Party. Indeed, every instance of supposed bottoms-up Tea Party activism is shown to be corporate funded and organized to advance a corporate agenda, whether in pursuing tax breaks or derailing climate change legislation.

Yes, distressing. Add to that Nate Silver's prediction that the Senate will likely flip to GOP this November and I'm feeling glum. I'm also thinking about how this might play out. So a prediction -- with the warning that you have no reason to trust my fractured and cloudy crystal ball, especially since I fear I'm right yet hope I'm wrong.

So, the Senate flips to GOP. That means at the national level absolutely nothing gets done in the next two years. Anything Congress gets past a Dem filibuster and passes Obama vetoes and Congress won't have the votes to override. Anything Obama proposes is severely criticized and ignored. I know this isn't all that different than what is happening now (though there was that bipartisan budget deal not long ago).

Which leads us to what comes after the 2016 election. The House will stay GOP -- it is too gerrymandered to change. Will enough Dem voters (the ones who tend not to vote in midterm elections) be enough to flip the Senate back to Dem? We're likely to get a Dem president. Will he or she be as hobbled as Obama? Will the takeover be so complete that it won't matter? Strange that this prediction has more questions than answers.

A second Washington Spectator article is about Art Pope, North Carolina's local equivalent to the Koch brothers. Pope sprinkled enough money around politicians that he got himself appointed as the state budget director. Which means if you annoy him he defunds you. That is what is happening to the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill because they are teaching economic theories that Pope disapproves of. Yup, another Power. As expected, Pope is working to discredit the Moral Monday protests. Thankfully, that work is backfiring.

A third Washington Spectator article is written by Gigi Ibrahim and is about the new documentary The Square by Jehane Noujaim. It is about Egypt's rough road after the Tahrir Square protests that ousted Hosni Mubarak three years ago. Ibrahim reminds us:

The Square returns us to Tahrir and the beginning of a revolution that not only inspired other revolutions in the Arab world in Yemen, Bahrain, Libya, and Syria, but the entire world: Wisconsin, Trafalgar Square, Catalonia Square, Syntagma Square, Zuccotti Park and most recently the Maidan in Kiev.

Ibrahim concludes by saying:

Squares are not just physical places. They are an idea that becomes a state of mind. One of the lessons we must learn is that unless Tahrir is taken to our cities, councils, factories, universities, where alternative systems of democratic power can be organized and nurtured, then the idea of a revolution in a public square may become our very own limitation to freedom.

Will Americans take to the Square? We did in Wisconsin and Occupy Wall Street. Though we now talk about the 1% those protests didn't accomplish much.

Another prediction: If we take it to the Square it will be because too many Americans have so little prospect and hope they have nothing to lose. It will likely get bloody. It certainly won't end well.

Will you see me in the Square? Right now I’m sitting pretty good with a comfortable retirement. But I can see the squeeze on the middle class could get to the point where it affects me. The last economic mess sucked a lot of value out of the poor and handed it to the rich. Another such downturn could possibly wipe out my pension and savings, leaving me with nothing to lose.

If the Square becomes a big part of American life, I plan to be there, whether or not my savings crashed. I have much more empathy with the poor and with justice than I would have with the 1%.

A year of progressive victories

Peter Dreier is a Distinguished Professor of Politics at Occidental College. Last year he wrote an article for Huffington Post listing the 25 best progressive victories for the year. This year's list makes it an annual event. He has extensive documentation for each of his choices, so his article is long. And all those words mean I'd have to read them all to get a good summary. So I'll just give some highlights (and leave out some points).

1. Some notable progressives were elected this year, with Bill de Blasio of NYC at the top of the list.

2. Labor is starting a comeback with its protests for living wages.

3. There is momentum towards increasing the minimum wage locally and nationally.

4. The Occupy Wall Street movement has effectively changed the discussion of income inequality with its terms 99% and 1%.

6. In spite of the Supremes gutting a key part of the Voting Rights Act, local and state efforts have prevented some bad laws from being enacted and even got a few good ones passed.

7. LGBT rights have indeed made big progress with nearly doubling the number of states with marriage equality (Utah still up in the air) and the election of some gay mayors.

9. Maryland abolished the death penalty, the 18th state to do so, and other states are using it a lot less.

10. While laws to lessen gun violence are stuck at the national level, progress is being made at the state and local level.

11. Though Michigan just passed a law banning abortion insurance from healthcare policies, several other states have blocked restrictions to abortion or improved access to it.

12. There have been a few victories against Wall Street. That includes the Volker Rule to curb speculative trading by banks.

13. Environmental issues grow, including emphasis on sustainability, blockage of the Keystone Pipeline, and making fracking a national issue.

14. A continuing series of rallies for immigration reform.

15. Growing opposition to corporate-backed education reform, including teachers refusing to administer standardized tests.

16. For years the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) would draft corporate-friendly policies and get them passed by various states. Now many of its corporate contributors have been exposed and then embarrassed enough to drop out.

17. Links to shadowy campaign money are being exposed. Public financing of campaigns is growing.

18. There is mounting protest of excessive student debt along with experiments in funding higher education to keep it affordable.

22. The Affordable Care Act, despite glitches and efforts to repeal it, is poised to expand healthcare coverage and be the stepping stone to healthcare cost reductions.

24. In spite of corporate-run media, several progressives have become popular figures. At the top of the list are Senator Elizabeth Warren and Rev. William Barber who leads NC's Moral Monday movement.

The country and world are watching Detroit

Yeah, I know it's been a week since I last posted. The weekend was so busy I needed to go back to work to rest up. And my work week doesn't leave much time to write.

Saturday morning I joined a crew to Board Up Blight. This was a team that assembled at the Scott Center, part of Cass Community Social Services, associated with the Cass Community United Methodist Church. The Saturday crew was brought together through the Hands4Detroit program run by the Detroit district of the UMC. There were several other projects elsewhere in Detroit and Pontiac. Apparently the total number of volunteers was over 1100 (some showing up that morning). A few sites had more volunteers than they could keep busy.

The crew of 20 that I joined walked a couple blocks north of the Scott Center, an area southwest of Davison and Lodge. There are currently 7 houses on the block and at least that many vacant lots. Out of those 7 houses only one is currently occupied. Of the rest… One was badly burned, not much more than a few walls and chimney that didn't look stable. A couple others showed scars of fire. All were quite thoroughly trashed.

Our job was to board up first floor windows and doors, haul out the yard trash, and cut down overgrown shrubs and small trees -- especially the kind that grow when no one is looking. We hauled out a great deal of trash. I wondered a bit over the cancelled checks from 1979 and the intact newspaper from 1975. There were also lots of body parts -- from a manikin. We worked from about 9:30 to noon, had a lunch break and then 1:00 to 2:00. The street looked a lot better when we were done, though it was lined with garbage bags and cut branches for someone to haul away. All this effort prompted the lone resident to do a bit of yard work of his own.

I don't know how long these houses have been vacant. A year? Ten? Even so, I thought about the banks sucking value from the city through foreclosures and leaving teams like ours to clean up after them.

From there I went downtown to Grand Circus Park and the International People's Assembly Against the Banks and Against Austerity. This was put on by Detroit Eviction Defense and Moratorium Now, two groups that have sponsored protests I've participated in. There were probably other groups involved in the planning. The assembly had been going since 10:00 that morning. Alas, the whole thing looked a lot smaller than I expected -- just a couple tents and a handful of booths along Woodward.

When I got there one of the tents held a workshop talking about the power structures in Detroit. They are, in order:

Economic, the wealthy people and the big companies (they were named), including the car companies. If these people want something done, it gets done. That doesn't mean it is in the best interest of the city and its citizens.

Political, including city and state officials. The state is listed because many of Detroit's difficulties are a result of state action, such as the Emergency Manager law and various revenue sharing programs the state doles out or (more frequently) withholds.

Media, the big corporate owned newspapers and the independent weeklies. Corporate papers are important because they control what residents think and if the papers don't discuss possible solutions (the ones that aren't in a corporation's benefit) residents don't know about them. We were urged to read the independents and to be our own media. That's what I'm doing now.

Non-profit, mostly foundations set up by the economic powers. The powers also fill their boards. This allows the rich to hide behind a non-profit which enforces their power. It also allows the rich to do a little something about the collateral damage their policies create.

We all assembled under one tent for the afternoon series of speakers. Some were video clips or written statements from fellow strugglers elsewhere in the world.

The first statement was from the Haitian community in Oakland about the situation in Haiti. Since the earthquake (nearly 4 years ago?) the situation is still dire for many people. Most of the aid money has ended up in the pockets of the rich. The poor still live in tents.

The next message was from Portland, OR. That was followed by a video from the Philippines. This speaker seemed to know a great deal about the situation in Detroit.

Laura Gottesdiener is the author of the book A Dream Foreclosed. She said Detroit is on the front lines in the battle between the 1% and the 99%. The rest of the country and the world are watching intently. If the 1% succeeds in Detroit, they'll have a much easier time elsewhere. This isn't a fight over buildings. It is a fight for democracy.

Lamont Lilley of Moral Monday in North Carolina listed the issues they are fighting there: Murders by cops, cutoff of WIC (a piece of welfare), voter ID laws, high unemployment, child poverty (80% in some places), college unaffordable, good schools segregated. All this was the reason for Moral Mondays. We must build on our similarities. Organization plus voice is power.

We heard a statement from the Brazilian president of International Democratic Women. Their work is to oppose imperialism. She listed the effects of austerity on women and children worldwide. One item I noted is that women are welcomed into the workforce in many countries because that allows the owners to drive down wages for all workers.

Next was a statement from the American group Women's Health Women's Hand. Austerity was introduced around the world before it hit America. Women and children suffer most.

Marva and David live in Cleveland and have been fighting foreclosure of their home for several years. They listed a few reasons for their situation in Ohio. Here are a couple: (1) The courts are crooked and routinely refuse loan modifications. (2) Credit Default Swaps, a big part of the economic collapse and the Great Recession, in this case work like mortgage insurance for banks but without the insurance regulations. The bank isn't reimbursed for the price of the mortgage, they're reimbursed for 30 times the price of the mortgage. If they can force a foreclosure on a $300K mortgage they collect $9 million. No wonder they don't want to reduce the amount of principle to match the current appraised value.

A speaker suggested that we stop buying goods and services that support our oppression. Let's have a "don't buy a damn thing" day.

We saw a video from a French bank worker in support of our cause. His message (with transcript) is at the bottom of this page.

Sharon Black of the People's Power Assembly in Baltimore spoke. She repeated that everyone is watching the situation in Detroit. They are with us. October 24th is the 75th anniversary of the first minimum wage law. This year that date should be a "Raise Wages Day." She told us there are daily protests in Washington over the shutdown. Since I hadn't heard about that it suggests the power of corporate media to hide important parts of the story.

Eva from North Carolina reminded us the youth are bearing the brunt of poverty and austerity.

A United States Postal Service union worker talked to us. The USPS is the biggest employer outside Walmart and its union is the biggest union. A couple years ago Congress demanded the USPS fund its pension system 75 years in advance. Why? To break the union, even if it breaks the USPS. Which is fine with many because it allows that service to be privatized. It also allows postal services to be offered by Walmart.

An aside: Though NPR and their stations don't have commercials, they do offer sponsorships, in which an organization can broadcast a brief (5 second?) message. I've been amazed at the number of different sponsors to Michigan Radio who use that brief time to say they sell postage stamps. The most important thing they want to tell us is they sell stamps? Something doesn't sound right.

A speaker told us about conditions in the Philadelphia schools, which are quite similar to Detroit's schools. Talk of school reform seems to consist of attacks on teachers and communities of color. Various budgetary shenanigans by politicians means the school system has debt, which means a chunk of the budget now goes to banks, not teaching. Funding appears to be a shell game. There is a push to privatize -- backed by the investors of private schools. The legislature is gutting the teacher seniority system. That means a teacher can't speak out about problems without risking having a job next year. These austerity measures are being actively opposed -- by the students who are staging protests. Various groups are borrowing from NC's Moral Mondays and hosting Full Funding Fridays.

We saw a video from former workers of a GM plant in Colombia. Workers there are not allowed to organize. That means a lot of workers are injured, mostly repetitive stress problems. Injuries are why these guys are former workers.

Tovah from Oakland told us 48% of the foreclosures are Latino. I don't know if this is a city or state number. The city of Stockton also faces bankruptcy, so is watching Detroit carefully.

Raquel Seda of Puerto Rico spoke. She reminded us that it is a US colony and has a long history of austerity. There is lots of privatization there, especially of higher education.

Sarah Flounders recently visited Syria for an extended stay. She gave us a different scenario of the war there (though perhaps she was referring to American intervention). It is all about privatizing the country, including the schools, for the benefit of the (American?) wealthy. Maybe she was referring to the current situation without official USA intervention. She says 10,000 of the soldiers are American mercenaries. She reminded us that bombs dropped overseas also drop on American cities. Money to pay for those bombs comes out of what would have gone into city finances. Cities can't pay their bills and must offer fewer services, causing damage as if a literal bomb had dropped (the effects of which I saw that morning). She supported her last comments with a diagram. In the federal discretionary spending (not including Social Security and similar programs) the military takes up 54% and is mandated to grow at 5-10% a year. Which means for the budget to balance (like the GOP is howling for) the rest of the gov't must shrink.

The leaders passed out flyers of the next scheduled protest (so all you in Detroit listen up). An important hearing on Detroit's bankruptcy will be held the morning of Wednesday, Oct. 23. So the Moratorium Now folks are planning to have enough protesters to completely encircle the Federal Courthouse (231 W. Lafayette). Be there by 8:00 am. Their demands: cancel the fraudulent debt, stop attacks on worker's pensions, stop the privatization of jobs and services, restore federal grants to city workers instead of private corporations, end Emergency Management, and (I'll add) stop the looting of the Detroit Institute of Art.

I was still wearing my Hands4Detroit shirt from my morning labors. That prompted one person to ask to take a picture of it. You can see the logo at the bottom of this page.

Another person commented on the shirt, so I went over to talk. It turns out the guy she was with (and maybe her too) was a reporter for the Michigan Citizen, one of Detroit's independent news weeklies. I agreed to be interviewed and talked about my work that morning. I've been perusing their site and haven't found an article about the Assembly. A search for my name came up empty. I did see a video that looks like it was taken at the Assembly (though I didn't watch it) but it is dated the day before.

The Assembly broke for dinner. A nearby restaurant supplied the food. I saw what they were serving -- vegetarian, heavy on the potatoes -- and knew it wouldn't fit with my current diet. The evening session would be entertainment, so it was time for me to go home.

I didn't promptly sit down and tell you about it because I had to prepare for Sunday, which you'll see below.

Sunday morning was the usual worship service. I and the rest of the Stewardship Committee performed a little skit as part of the fall fund campaign.

A good chunk of the afternoon was taken up by the annual CROP Walk to raise money for Church World Service and their campaign to reduce worldwide hunger. As part of that I walked two miles.

I'm a part of the Dedicated Reconciling United Methodists (DRUM), a local chapter of the Reconciling Ministries Network. RMN is the group that put on the Convo I attended over Labor Day weekend and wrote about on the blog I maintain for DRUM. Amazingly, that post has been read by over 1200 people! That's 10 times more than any other posting on that blog.

On the first Sunday of the month DRUM and the Church and Society committee of Nardin Park UMC in Farmington Hills put on an inclusive service, for those who don't feel so welcome in regular services. Attendance has varied from 3 to perhaps 18. This past Sunday was my turn to speak about my experiences at Convo. It wasn't a full service, though we sang a couple hymns and shared a prayer. What I did most of Friday, all of Saturday evening, and a spare hour on Sunday afternoon was to organize my notes for this gathering. Alas, rainstorms discouraged attendance and there were only six of us.

After that I figured I was close to the Whole Foods store in West Bloomfield and should do some shopping. Then I made a stop at my usual food store for a couple more things. By the time I got home it was too late to do any writing.

Monday included a visit to a dermatologist and my nutritionist. And I was back to teaching on Tuesday, appreciating the rest.

An envy-ridden moral code

Melissa McEwen on Shakesville alerted me to an article in Forbes. It was bad enough to read McEwen's few choice paragraphs from the Forbes article. I read the first paragraph there and couldn't bring myself to read the rest. The Forbes article is by Harry Binswanger and his one line summary is "I defend laissez-faire capitalism, using Ayn Rand's Objectivism."

From what I glean from the first paragraph and McEwan's excerpts is that because Henry Ford (for example) created the Ford Motor Company and came up with the idea of the assembly line, he gets all the credit -- and profit -- and the workers should be grateful he gave them a job. The 1% should be thanked and honored by the 99%, not ridiculed.

On to a couple choice paragraphs:

There is indeed a vampire squid wrapped around the face of humanity: the Internal Revenue Service. And, at a deeper level, it is the monstrous perversion of justice that makes the IRS possible: an envy-ridden moral code that damns success, profit, and earning money in voluntary exchange.

An end must be put to the inhuman practice of draining the productive to subsidize the unproductive. An end must be put to the primordial notion that one's life belongs to the tribe, to "the community," and that the superlative wealth-creators must do penance for the sin of creating value.

Sheesh, absolutely no concept of community, no concept of justice, and no concept that such great wealth is made possible by the workers and by what we do together (such as government provided infrastructure). Binswanger's moral code? It's based on greed and power.

Community based charity

The "cover story" for NPR's All Things Considered this evening was about giving, and in particular giving to help others after a disaster, such as Sandy. Dan Shea, managing editor of New Orleans Times-Picayune during and after Katrina, notes that we as a nation are pretty good about responding to a disaster and its immediate needs. We're not so good at maintaining that giving through the months and years needed to completely rebuild.

One of the important organizations helping in New York is Occupy Sandy, a part of Occupy Wall Street. They had spent a few months camping in a park, feeding thousands from camp stoves, and building bicycle-powered generators when police confiscated the gas-powered kind. All that was training for disaster relief work. However, they are clear they are not a charity, but a community building organization.

If the government doesn't handle care for the poor and disaster recovery work, who does? There are so many poor people and disaster relief requires so much in resources our current system of charities would be swamped, simply unable to handle the load. Would we expect private citizens to donate enough (and to a diverse list of organizations) to cover all the need? At the current rate of giving, no, there wouldn't be enough.

A few years ago Mike Ruff moved to New Hampshire, famous for its "Live Free or Die" motto. He joined the Free State Project, working for a smaller government and one that leaves charity work to the private sector. He wants to make happen what I think can't work.

I looked up the Free State Project. Its declaration is that "government exists at most to protect people's rights, and should neither provide for people nor punish them for activities that interfere with no one else." They are asking 20,000 like-minded people to move to New Hampshire, "enough to make a real difference!" -- meaning enough to make a difference in elections, voting in legislators who favor minimal gov't.

For Mike Ruff and others in the movement, it also means active civic engagement, including charity work. They feel interpersonal gov't organizations can't meet the needs of the needy, those big groups are too big, too impersonal, and can't really figure out the needs of the community. Local groups of 150 people or so can do what the gov't can't. All that is something to consider. The participants also discover a genuine community where both workers and clients feel well cared for and everyone is able to use their creativity.

I could see great benefit if this kind of charity work spread around the nation. We are all desperate for a greater sense of community. We would all benefit from such close civic engagement.

But I’m left with some big questions:

* What happens if this community based system doesn't raise enough money to meet all the needs for which the gov't used to provide?

* Suppose our gov't cuts services to the needy by lowering taxes and citizens see that money in their paychecks. Will be able to encourage citizens to invest that money into community organizations? Since our society is so self-centered at the moment that is an important concern.

* How do we convince citizens that their time, talents, and efforts are also needed?

* Does anyone coordinate the giving (of both money and labor) so that all the various needs are met? Or does the needs of immediate disaster relief have to compete for dollars with long-term disaster relief and both of those compete with the everyday needs of the poor? Doesn't that increase overhead?

* Will charities in Montana adequately respond to disasters (like Sandy) that happen in New Jersey?

The Free State people don't trust gov't to protect them and take care of the needy. They may have a point, especially if the gov't is an oppressive power (though I acknowledge by their definition it already is). But while community based charity sounds wonderful, I don't yet believe it can take care of the needy in the same way a government can.

Moral hazard

A few days ago I wrote about the Occupy movement and their Rollover Jubilee program to buy up debt and forgive it. The Marketplace Radio program, which reports on economic news, did a feature on the Jubilee. They noted the term did indeed come from the Old Testament. Then they talked about moral hazard. If people know they can take out loans and not have to pay them back, they won't.

I'm so tired with that argument. So I replied. This is what I sent to the show:

If the Rolling Jubilee is buying debt for pennies on the dollar it isn't a case of the borrower won't pay back the debt, but can't pay back the debt. So it is right to forgive it, clear the books, and move on. Moral hazard, you insist? Let's talk about the moral hazard of putting people into mortgages there is no hope of repaying, ruining their credit score in the process. How about the moral hazard of betting on the economy to crash and reaping millions (maybe billions) from the misery of others. Perhaps we talk about the moral hazard of messing up the refinance process and foreclosing on the homeowner anyway. Let's consider the moral hazard of taking a government bailout then paying executives big bonuses. Then there is the moral hazard of demanding lower taxes to push up the cost of education, burdening students with giant loans. There's even the moral hazard of unaffordable health insurance so those without get stuck with impossible medical bills. Please stop sticking it to the victim.

Solving the debt crisis

I tend to let messages pile up in my email inbox. I've been going through it and filing and deleting lots of stuff -- occasionally finding a message suggesting I read an article that no longer exists. And sometimes finding an old article that still exists and still is somewhat relevant. Two years ago Paul Krugman wrote about the difficulty in resolving parts of the economic mess, in particular the debt and mortgage mess. It wasn't (and still isn't) getting resolved because of the "moralizers" (his term) insist that those who were stupid enough to run up such big debts should pay for that stupidity by having to pay what they owe. Taxpayers shouldn't have to pay for that upgraded bathroom that was done just before the collapse.

I could get into a whole lot of scenarios where a person can't pay that debt through no fault of their own. That's exactly what foreclosure defense is all about. But I'll leave that to the reader, only noting that Krugman says some people have lost their jobs because they refuse to bail out their neighbors.

Now contrast that with a new effort by the Occupy movement. They call it the People's Bailout or the Rolling Jubilee (though they don't say, I suspect they are using the word "jubilee" in the Bible's Old Testament sense). Their idea is to raise money to buy debt (available for pennies on the dollar) and then abolish it. They figure with $50K they can wipe out $1 million of debt. To help with that goal they are hosting a People's Bailout Telethon on Thursday with a hefty lineup of entertainers. They note they cannot purchase a particular individual's debt. They will be purchasing random blocks of loans and abolishing whatever is in that block.

The Occupy folks are also doing a great deal of work to help New York residents recover from Sandy. Their work appears quite impressive. If the government won't help in an emergency, the people will organize to provide that help, not for charity, but to build community.

As part of their efforts they have come up with another crazy/great idea. They are using the Amazon wedding registry to list all the tools and supplies they need -- such as the 18 inch utility and wrecking bar.

One more Sandy story: One of the organizations helping with recovery is Team Rubicon, made up of war veterans. These former military people find the work therapeutic. They can use their military skills for good rather than for killing people. This story is part of Newsweek's Hero issue.

I'm still using my rights

I was off to another protest today. The foreclosure defense team met outside a home in the Grandmont section of Detroit. Most of the homes are probably from the 1920s and look to be in good shape. They also look like they have character, missing from my suburban box. This is one of the better parts of Detroit (in contrast to the area three miles south where I helped board up homes). But BofA insisted on foreclosure.

When the dumpster appeared last week, the first sign of eviction, the defense team appeared and drove around the neighborhood picking up leaf bags and filling the dumpster. The eviction team was not pleased, but it caught the attention of BofA. One of our chants today was, "Dumpsters are for leaves, not for BofA thieves." Probably a bit obscure for most people.

Today, after a bit of speaking at the house, about 75 of us walked about a mile to a BofA branch bank, chanting along the way. That let the residents know we were around if they had mortgage troubles. We protested in from of the BofA branch for a while (a tight fit with so many of us and not much space between the building and the street). The homeowners tried to give a letter to the branch manager, but were refused entry into the bank. We shouted our displeasure for a while, then walked back.

Many of the team will serve as witnesses in court on Tuesday morning as the owners make their case that the bank played fast and loose with the facts. Alas, Tuesday is a work day for me.

A button I saw today: "No, you can't take my rights. I'm still using them."

From there I went off to a suburban cinema to see the Metropolitan Opera HD broadcast of the relatively new (only 8 years old) opera The Tempest by composer Thomas Ades. I've heard of him before but haven't heard much of his music. There isn't much memorable melody, but the emotion comes across quite well. The words are taken from Shakespeare, though condensed and updated. I was fascinated by the character Ariel, mostly because her singing was an octave above what I would have expected -- as in really high. It was a great afternoon.

How much change is enough change?

More thoughts on the March on Wall Street South.

It didn't take me long to notice many of the crowd were not friends of Obama. They had signs about socialism and even communism. When I got on the bus in Detroit I was handed an 8 page newspaper from the Workers Party. In Charlotte I saw t-shirts with the name and image of Fidel Castro. Various groups listed various "crimes" the Obama supposedly committed -- leaving Guantanamo open is one that comes to mind. They said the Democrats were as much under the influence of corporate money as the Republicans. No, they say, Obama is not on the side of the worker.

This is not to say they liked the GOP. That party was barely mentioned. The opinion seemed to be the GOP is dangerous to workers and their rights, it's obvious, let's move on to a more useful discussion. Obama is seen as a greater threat because he appears to be the president for the working man and in their eyes he isn't

All that talk of communism and socialism did make me wonder if I was amongst the right people. But I've already said in previous posts that I've wondered how much Obama is under the influence of corporate masters. All that talk did get me thinking about other economic systems. And with all that time on the bus not sleeping I was able to do a lot of thinking. So here is an attempt to organize that thinking.

First, a disclaimer. I did not study political science in high school or college. I think I have a basic understanding of various political and governmental systems, but I'm not an expert and may have important points wrong. I welcome replies from someone more knowledgeable.

Second, the working premise. The current system of government, and perhaps the current economic system, isn't working. Yeah, if you're part of the 1% (or the 0.1%) it works very well. But for the rest of us, we fall further behind and see less hope that our prospects, and that of our children, will improve.

Third, the question to be explored. What minimum amount of change will set things right? Is it enough to tweak the edges? Or must the whole government/economy system be rethought? Many Americans look for a bit of tweaking and hope or trust that Obama will do it. Many people at the march are convinced the current system needs to be scrapped and a new one instituted. The continuation of that question is if the system must be replaced, what do we replace it with? I'm well aware that those in power will not allow the current system to change without a fight. And that fight could be bloody.

Is it enough to…

* Tax the rich? Increase income, capital gains, estate, social security, corporate income, and whatever other taxes the rich are paying less now than they were in the 1980s? Yes, this step is necessary to replenish our national shared resource, properly educate everyone, and restore a lot of what was lost over the last 30 years (discussed elsewhere). But I don't think that is sufficient because once the tax system is overhauled the rich will continue to use their political influence to get Congress to reconstruct various tax reductions. Which will happen the next time the GOP controls the government.

* Get money out of politics? I see it is vital that we add three amendments to the Constitution:

* Declare that corporations are not people and can be regulated.
* Declare that money is not speech and political donations can be regulated for amount and transparency.
* Declare that campaigns will be completely publicly financed.

Again, necessary, but not sufficient. Even if a politician is not influenced by a campaign donation, those with money can (and have) hired an army of lobbyists to "explain" things to politicians. Those without that kind of money simply won't have the presence in Washington to have enough influence to counteract such an army.

I'm not sure what other kinds of tweaks can be made. I'm open to suggestions. Without those suggestions I now turn to a deeper, more fundamental change to or system of government and economy. What follows is the second version of what I wrote. I realized I needed to know a bit more, even if it is Wikipedia.

Capitalism is a system in which goods and services are provided for a profit. There are a number of flavors of capitalism, depending on how much and what kind of support or intervention comes from the government. The advantages of capitalism are economic growth, self-organization (no need for a central planning committee), and support for political freedom -- the lack of a central committee diminishes a tyrant's power to coerce. Put another way political freedom needs capitalism (though China shows capitalism does not need political freedom).

But capitalism has problems. There is little concern for the worker and the environment, or more generally, the wellbeing of all people. Whatever is best for profits is what will be done. Karl Marx describes the difference between the wages paid a laborer and the value the owner receives for that labor. This becomes part of the owner's profit. There is also a big imbalance between the seller and buyer. It may be difficult for the buyer to accurately assess the quality of the merchandise and the market may reward dishonesty. Capitalism leads to unfair distribution of wealth and power, something we see a lot these days.

Even so, the worker has (some) freedom in taking his skills to whatever employer he or she sees as the best match of compensation and work satisfaction. The employee has incentive to work harder or better because his compensation should increase.

The first thing I learned when looking up Communism is there is a difference between a communist society and a country with a communist government. I think my fellow marchers were referring to the first, not the second, though from the number of Fidel Castro shirts, maybe not. The definition of communism is, "a revolutionary socialist movement to create a classless, moneyless, and stateless social order structured upon common ownership of the means of production, as well as a social, political, and economic ideology that aims at the establishment of this social order."

There is a lot of discussion on how to build the various institutions (food distribution, education, etc.) that exist under capitalism. Some think that the workers can be trusted to develop the necessary administrative bodies.

It seems we haven't had a true large scale communist society. There have been local communes, such as monastic communities. Whole countries don't make it to communism because those who win the revolution (the battle that gets rid of capitalism) and are supposed to guide the people to a truly shared society keep power for themselves.

The problems of communism include slow or stagnant technological advance and reduced incentives and prosperity. There is also the problem of feasibility -- is it possible to create and maintain a truly shared society without serious violation of human rights? What does the community do if a member doesn't agree that all is held in common?

There are serious problems attributed to communist governments. Famines and purges have resulted in death counts far exceeding other kinds of government.

So communism supposedly takes better care of the worker, but that worker has lost incentive to work, since his labors have become separate from his compensation. It would supposedly also take care of the environment, but communist states have an abysmal environmental record.

I talked to a couple people during and after the march about communism. One said that someone (probably well known by those in favor of this system) has studied what Karl Marx wrote, how that got implemented, what went wrong, and how to avoid those problems in new communist systems. The other said that a central planned economy worked well in Russia between the end of the Revolution and when Stalin seized power. Alas, I don't know any more about either statement.

There is this shining goal of a communist society. But it is doubtful it could actually be achieved and whether achieving it would be the paradise envisioned. And attempts to get there have always been circumvented by the powerful resulting in a hellish place to live.

There are two descriptions of Socialism, one as a steppingstone from capitalism to communism and the other is a system in its own right. In the latter it is an economic system organized for common ownership where goods are produced for current human need and not private profit. Distribution would be based on individual contribution. The worker gets full value for the labor contributed. In addition the worker would not feel alienated by the work. Each worker could develop personal interests and talents rather than laboring for others. There are a wide variety of organizing principles to accomplish the goal of common ownership and proper allocation of resources.

Socialism as a word has been used to refer to various other things. This includes a generous welfare state in Nordic countries that keeps capitalism but adds extensive benefits and income redistribution, promotion of labor unions, and promotion of egalitarian ideals. Other uses of the word have nothing to do with socialism, but have been used to mask pro-capitalism ideas.

Yes, socialism has problems too. It also suffers from reduced incentives and prosperity. Again, there is a question of feasibility -- there is a problem in accurately pricing goods and labor. Another problem is it can't be as efficient as capitalism and social governments have budgeting problems.

Some of these socialist systems sound better than communism. There doesn't seem to be as much of a problem of human rights (though what happens when a worker insists on profit or doesn't want to share?) and a worker does have incentive to work hard, and perhaps even work at an enjoyable task.

I've heard (though don't have sources to back me up) that suicides are higher in Nordic countries because the ever helpful state blunts ambition and leads to boredom.

I contemplated the idea of a socialist corporation, in which the workers own it. The corporation is part of a capitalist system. I've found it is called a worker cooperative. The workers decide what is best for them and the cooperative, and it may not be to maximize profit. Since the workers are the owners there is no exploitation of the workers. As I pondered this idea (while on the bus and without the help of Wikipedia) I wondered how the cooperative raises money for expansion. They can't do it by selling stock to outsiders because the cooperative would then not be worker-owned. They can get loans from banks or they set some earnings aside for reinvestment. When banks get stingy with loans it could be difficult to expand the company.

While there are serious problems with capitalism, there are also serious problems with communism and socialism. I don't want to go with either of them. However, worker cooperatives sound like a good idea. This appears to be enough change. The question is how do we support them and how do we move away from the form of capitalism we already have?

I may not have studied Political Science, but I just got a lot more knowledgeable.

On the road again

I usually don't do much to celebrate or honor Labor Day. Most of the time I visit family and when I'm not doing that I am busy getting ready for the Fall season.

This weekend I firmly joined the Labor Movement.

The adventure started a week ago when I took part in protests in downtown Detroit. One of the announcements was a trip to Charlotte, North Carolina to participate in a march against Wall Street South. The city is sometimes referred by that name because several large banks, including Bank of America have headquarters or large regional offices there. The date was chosen because it was the day before the Democrat's national convention in Charlotte.

There were 33 of us who boarded the bus just north of downtown Detroit. The first shot is of the bus. We departed at 7:25.

The first bit of rain started just south of Toledo. We went on to strip mall in Seven Hills, south of Cleveland, to pick up five more people. We got there at 10:00 in a light drizzle. The Wendy's was closing and the gas station didn't have restrooms. The only place open was a pizza shop. Several, including the leaders, thought pizza sounded like a fine idea. And that meant we were still there at 11:00. I spent the time walking several laps up and down the strip mall. The drizzle soon stopped. Just before the leaders began boxing up remaining slices of pizza and heading out the door a downpour began. The bus couldn't get close to the shops, so many of us got wet.

There was another rest stop at 2:00 in Parkersburg, West Verginia. Again, it was close to an hour before we were back on the road. Another at Beckley, WV (I don't remember the time). Breakfast at an IHOP in Wytheville, Virginia at 5:30. Yup, I wondered why so early, but this was apparently a favorite place of our drivers. One more stop at 8:30 for gas. They told us we all had to disembark before the driver could pull up to the pump. That was a good time for breakfast and it turned out we were again there for close to an hour.

With all these stops it was hard to get more than an hour of sleep at a time. I sat in front of a guy who liked to pontificate on all manner of topics (though with his inner city accent it was sometimes tough to tell what he was talking about). After each stop it could take him an hour to wind down. So, no, I didn't get all that much sleep.

We arrived in Charlotte at 10:50 instead of 9:30. The rally was supposed to start at 11:00, but you can see from this view of the park and the stage, not everyone had arrived and they weren't ready. I didn't feel so bad about putting my lunch plans in action.

I had arranged with my cousin, who lives near Charlotte, for him and his family to meet me at a particular entrance to the park. We then went to a nearby burger restaurant for an enjoyable hour together.

Back in the park the crowd had grown and the speakers were getting the crowd warmed up. Yes, that is a mockup of a drone. It was on wheels and marched with us.

A reporter from the Sacramento Bee asked if I would allow him to interview me. So I did. We talked about conditions in Detroit. Alas, my comments didn't make it into the online edition.

Some photos as we assembled leading up to the 1:00 start time for the march. A few people had clever signs, such as this one which is a variation of Star Trek's Borg.

Lots of organizations brought signs, so there were plenty for everyone.

There was a percussion ensemble close to the front of the line. There were a few other drummes through the crowd. This group also had cheerleaders, which you can see a bit of in the green outfits just to the left of the TV truck.

I'm pretty sure this guy did the whole march.

Heading out of the park.

And I'm finally on the street. The butterflies were held by a Hispanic contingent from Georgia. Their phrase is "No Papers, No Fear." This group is from Georgia, which had enacted an Arizona style "Show your papers" law.

This is the banner my group brought from Detroit. I carried a sign, "Bail out people, not banks!" One of our chants was "Banks got bailed out, we got sold out."

Yes, there were lots of cops along our route. Not all of them were from Charlotte (I recognized shoulder patches from Raleigh). They essentially marched the four miles with us. I had wondered why so many of them were walking their bikes. Then I saw how effectively the bikes could be used as a barricade to block side streets.

That pink sign was carried by Code Pink. The whole slogan was "Bust up Wells Fargo."

Here we are rounding a corner so I can see how much of the group is ahead of me.

And now that I've rounded the corner you can see how many are behind me. In the foreground are a few people from Detroit.

The original estimate I had hear was there would be maybe 10,000 marchers showing up. As we headed out of the park I saw someone counting. The Wall Street South website says 2,500. The Sacramento Bee (link above) says 400. The WSS site mentions our 15 hour trip from Detroit and has many great photos.

Part of the Hispanic contingent in front of me. Yup, most of their chants were in Spanish. One of their signs said, "No human is illegal."

This has nothing to do with the march, just some cool civic art we passed.

Yes, there was a gay contingent. They weren't too far away from the Detroit group. I sometimes walked faster than the rest and soon found I was in a different group.

We stopped in front of the Bank of America headquarters for speeches. At that point I was quite a ways back in the line and didn't hear much of what was being said. We were there because of BofA's many documented shenanigans and their eagerness to foreclose on homes.

We marched in front of the convention center where the Democrat's festivities will be, but didn't stop. A big attraction was the water bottle refilling station set up across from the center. The weather was sunny with temps in the mid 80s. I don't know the humidity level, but it was up there. It took a while for us to refill our bottles.

Our second stop was the headquarters of Duke Energy, apparently the top producer of dirty energy, such as coal. This time I was close to the sound system and could hear what was said.

From there we marched back to the park. The whole route was about 4 miles and took three hours.

There were a few more speakers and invitations to come to events later that evening and the next day. At 5:00 there was an announcement that severe weather was heading our way and could people please help dismantle the stage and clean up the park. But my bus was waiting.

We were loaded and on the highway about 5:40. We had a supper stop in Elkin at a Cracker Barrel restaurant. Back on the road at 8:30. There were stops just across the borders of West Virginia and Ohio, and a stop for gas near Akron. Our shortest stop was to let off the Cleveland contingent. It was short because nothing was open at 5:00 am., and the stop for gas (and other things) had been only a half hour before. Even so there was a stop at a turnpike rest area at 6:30 (fortunately only 15 minutes though it seemed like one stop too many) and into Detroit at 8:00 am. The trip was 36.5 hours, 30 of those hours were in transit. Yeesh.

I was home by 9:00, ate breakfast, and was in bed by 10:30. I slept until 2:30 this afternoon.

There is a lot more I want to write about this adventure, but it will have to wait. My Fall semester begins tomorrow and the schedule is suddenly crowded.

A declaration of war

Timothy Kincaid of Box Turtle Bulletin takes an extensive look at the gay issues in the GOP platform now "emphatically approved" by the full convention.

* End the Death Tax. Estates of straight couples automatically pass to the spouse. Estates of gay couples get taxed. Ending the estate tax for everyone would end the disparity. This is the only pro-gay thing in the platform. Kincaid doesn't mention whether repealing the estate tax is a good thing for the society and economy as a while. In my opinion it isn't.

* There is a fine statement that says discrimination is unacceptable and immoral. But sexual orientation and gender identity are noted for their absence. Yup, discrimination against gay people is moral.

* In a long sentence about restoring the relationship between the Executive and the Congress (where they list Obama's sins) is the phrase "refusing to defend the nation's laws in federal courts" which can only refer to Obama's refusal to defend the Defense of Marriage Act.

* Defense of Marriage against an activist judiciary. Can't have them ordering marriage equality.

* Defense of Marriage. The Act is a good thing and a constitutional amendment is even better.

* First Amendment rights. Faith based institutions should not have to denounce their faith to fully participate in public programs. We support the Boy Scouts, condemn blacklisting religious groups that refuse adoptions to same-sex couples, and condemn hate campaigns against against advocates of traditional marriage. Kincaid says this does not condemn hate campaigns that are waged by advocates of traditional marriage. This is a declaration of war against gay people.

* The plank encouraging adoption thankfully doesn't mention gay people, which implies they don't mind us adopting. And their support of adoption is quite a good statement.

* If we're going to have enough money to do significant research on cancer and diabetes, we must stop funding research on AIDS.

* That stuff about Defense of Marriage -- we intend to enforce it in the military too.

* We should not couple foreign aid with a country's laws on homosexuality and abortion, but should allow faith-based groups access to grants for projects in foreign countries. Yes, the "rule of law" excludes gay rights.

Kincaid concludes:

It’s an angry rant by an increasingly isolated people who seem to mistrust and resent the rest of the world around them; and no one more so than those of us who are gay.

The Occupy Wall Street organizations are actively protesting the GOP convention. They say to use the Occupy blog as a news source because the mainstream media won't be covering the protests. I can't independently verify that claim because the only news source I listen to on a daily basis is NPR and I've been avoiding their convention coverage lately. Even so, it is good to see the OWS descriptions and photos.

At the bottom of their post is the message from OWS to law enforcement (which were out in "insane" numbers): We will be peaceful. We're not the enemy. You're getting screwed just like we are.

Standing up to banks

I had told my friend and debate partner I might go to a movie this afternoon. Didn't make it. Instead, I followed suggestions in the Moratorium Now email I had gotten. They held a protest at the Federal Building in Detroit this afternoon at 3:00, followed by one at the City-County Building at 4:00. Busy people.

We held a protest at the Federal Building because Senator Carl Levin has an office inside. He could help with specific cases of mortgage foreclosure, but doesn't appear to have done much. There were a lot of police watching our protest and, at their insistence, we were at the street corner rather than in front of the building entrance. I (and others) think they were city police (and affected by budget cuts) even though there was a line of Homeland Security SUVs parked along the street.

When the group began to head to the other site, I went back to my car to feed more quarters into the meter. At our demonstration site one guy was loading his car with many of the signs and flyers. A policeman came up to him and said that if he didn't take everything -- whether or not he brought it -- he would be given a ticket. So I helped him gather up flyers.

Another protester had ducked into a local business to charge his phone (which I thought took hours) and missed seeing the protesters head to the other site. I assured him they were gone. That gave me someone to talk to on the walk.

We were at the City-County Building to protest Detroit's Financial Consent Decree. The terms of that decree state that the city pays banks first for loans and bonds. That doesn't leave enough for essential city services and schools. One man explained it this way: The big banks (Bank of America, Wells Fargo, etc.) came into Detroit with their subprime loans that blew up. So the banks began evicting people. That destroyed Detroit's already weak tax base and those same banks now are squeezing the city government. The banks stole money from city residents. Why should the city give them even more money? The banks should compensate the city for the theft. Detroit pays the banks over $600 million a year. That could fund all the city services Detroit needs.

I passed the Federal Building on my way to my car. Hmm. No police standing around.

There was a break in the schedule. I used it to go to Fairlane Mall in Dearborn (the closest one) for a bathroom break and a chance to sit somewhere cool for an hour. The temperature in Detroit topped 80 degrees, but since we were chased from the entrance of our targeted building we could do our protesting in the shade. It was actually rather pleasant.

In the evening I attended part of the program at the Occupy Detroit headquarters on Michigan Ave. (which is why Dearborn was close). They served a vegetarian supper (one bowl was marked "sweet potato and ginger stuff") then held a panel on foreclosure. This was part of the Occupy Midwest meeting, though I didn't stay for reports from around the region.

The first speaker at the panel was a foreclosure prevention lawyer. She said that even with all the paperwork in hand and even with the bank clearly in the wrong, nine times out of ten the judge is going to side with the bank. She told the story of a bank foreclosing on behalf of a trust. After some research she discovered the trust didn't exist. The bank admitted as much. The judge still sided with the bank.

There needs to be street action in addition to the legal action. In just Detroit ten thousand people have lost their homes to foreclosure. Why aren't these people out in the street protesting? Ten thousand people on the street and this mess would be over. One reason is a failure to pay a mortgage is seen as a private disgrace, not something shared with neighbors.

The second speaker was Jennifer Britt. The team has been doing amazing work to keep Jennifer in her home, including vigils to keep the dumpster from parking in front of her house (it hasn't actually showed up). I had considered taking part in this effort, but much of it happened when I was on vacation.

Jennifer's problems started back in 2006 when her husband died. The bank did not properly record the death and transfer the mortgage to her. And since her name wasn't on the mortgage they refused to discuss it with her or her lawyers. The situation went south from there. There is still $124K owed on the mortgage. The house is now worth $20K. Part of the reason why the vigil has worked so well is Jennifer's steely determination that the house is hers and she is going to stay in it.

During the last few months the foreclosure prevention team has canvassed Jennifer's neighborhood and found a few more who are facing foreclosure or eviction. With knowledge they aren't alone the neighborhood is functioning as a community.

Then Jerome Jackson spoke. My friend and debate partner has met him. Jerome is disabled and got a house through a government agency agreeing to pay part of the mortgage. But the agency stopped paying. Again, it is the case that Jerome could manage payments related to what the house is now worth, but can't pay the original mortgage. Through it all Jerome has shown the same steely determination to stay put.

Various others spoke, most allied in some way with Moratorium Now, an agency demanding at least a moratorium on foreclosures. Their second demand is to readjust all mortgages to the current value of the home. I think it was the head of the group that talked about the state of the mortgage business.

Most banks or mortgage companies, when they give out a mortgage, turn around and sell it to someone else. That means the bank may give a mortgage to someone who can't pay it off (what the whole subprime mess was all about) yet carries none of the risk if the mortgage goes bad. It is this other company, the underwriter, that takes the risk. Due to the subprime mess it sounds like all financial institutions have gotten out of the underwriting business -- except for the semi-government institutions of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (one of the flyers in front of me has a logo for "Frauddie Mac. We make stealing homes possible."). That means every house with a mortgage is public housing, backed by our tax dollars (I'm not sure if this is every mortgage or every mortgage written after a particular date, one of the flyers says the gov't controls 75% of all mortgages -- then again, my credit union does mortgages and I don't think they use an underwriter). And that means the gov't, if it had a backbone, could do something about it. The speaker said Obama could act by declaring a moratorium without having to get the consent of Congress. (Which makes me think that if Obama did he would easily win in November, in spite of the GOP crying foul. But is Obama too beholden to the banks?)

I may not be able to get to Occupy Detroit weekly meetings. I did give out my email address, so I should find out about action events in a timely manner.

On behalf of democracy

Over the last couple weeks Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder signed a deal with various officials from Ontario and Canada to build a second bridge across the Detroit River. Snyder did it in a way that circumvented the state legislature, which has refused to agree to the bridge.

The existing bridge is privately owned by Matty Maroun. A new bridge would cut into his profits. The legislature wouldn't agree with Snyder because Maroun had bought them off. Maroun offered to pay for the new bridge himself (he's part of the 1%) but Canada flatly refused Maroun's requirements.

Maroun is now furious with Snyder and promptly started collecting signatures (he is able to pay for a large army of gatherers) to force the issue onto the November ballot. It took him less than a week to do so. The committee that collected the signatures is named "The People Should Decide."

Hold that thought.

I wrote about Michigan's Emergency Manager Law and how it is used by the 1%. A proposal to repeal it is now on its way to the November ballot. A group with the title "Citizens for Fiscal Responsibility" are fighting hard to keep the proposal off the ballot.

The GOP has been trumpeting lately -- such as every vote on marriage equality -- that the people should decide. And here we have a case of two issues backed by the GOP, the 1%, the Tea Party, or general fiscal conservatives (take your pick) where they feel one should go before the voters and one should not.

Let's be clear: Neither conservative effort is on behalf on democracy.

Maroun wants his bridge proposal to go before voters because he paid for the work to make it qualify and he is convinced he has the financial muscle to lie to voters in such a way to get them to vote for what he wants.

But the EM repeal proposal was brought by the 99%. It would have strong backing. The 1% doubt they would be able to convince the rest of us to vote it down. So better to keep it off the ballot.



Jack Lessenberry, political analyst for Michigan Radio and Metro Times, says there are at least four, likely eight, and perhaps eleven big proposals on the November ballot. Add in the candidates for president, Senate, House, state legislature, judges and justices, university regents, and dog catcher and the whole thing will be "as long as the proverbial bedsheet." Which makes it too long to fill out in the voting booth (especially after standing in line). "In other words, today’s ballot is like a complicated take-home test -- except that for most of us, it is illegal to take it home." Lessenberry's advice: plan to be away from home all day so you can legally apply for an absentee ballot.



The Doonesbury comic strip today explained the difference between Obama and Romney. Real easy to do.

Theft of the commons

Michigan has an Emergency Manager law. If a city or school system completely screws up its finances an Emergency Manager is appointed to set things right. The EM replaces the elected officials until the financial crisis is past. In the last couple years Gov. Snyder got a law passed to strengthen the powers of the EM, including revising union contracts.

That last adition prompted a team to collect signatures to put a referendum of the EM law (or maybe the union contract part of the law?) on the November ballot. They say the EM law is a violation of democracy. It also has lots of racial overtones because the cities and school districts that have or had EMs were all black (though there are reports the white suburb of Allen Park might need an EM soon). The effort to overturn the law is currently tied up in court (over -- of all things -- font size).

I hear about the struggles in Detroit and see how an Emergency Manager could be a good thing. For decades the plans of the mayor and city council depended on luring more people back into the city even though they are giving current residents little reason to stay. Many past mayors got and held office because they stirred up racial resentments and accused the white suburbs trying to steal the black city's cultural assets. The city is about to go bankrupt and all we hear is the squabbling between the city and the state. An EM would probably be less politically motivated by that stale vision, more inclined to see the city as it is now, not stuck searching for a past glory. Under an EM the city busses would run and the streetlights would work.

Though I don't know if it is true of Detroit I can also see a city getting its finances into trouble through such things as a patronage system that overloads the payroll with the mayor's cronies, corrupt officials who see the job as a way to line their own pockets, union contracts that are unreasonable (such as a job that pays tens of thousands, yet has a pension that pays in the millions), or have promised voters such low taxes and such expensive and generous services that a balanced budget cannot possibly be achieved.

My friend and debate partner gave me the book Ypsilanti Vampire May Day by Peter Linebaugh and published by Occupy Ypsilanti. For all my international readers, Ypsilanti is a real town just east of Ann Arbor and home to Eastern Michigan University. Yeah, this is the second book review for today.

The major idea of the book's 70 pages is that the 1% is out to steal the community's common areas and suck the blood out of everything and everyone else. Linebaugh traced that idea through a couple centuries of history, including the history of Ypsilanti, where the first grab was of Native American land by Europeans. Part of this history is of Alexander and Demetrios Ypsilantis, who helped fight for the independence of Greece from the Ottoman Empire. Along the way, a lot of the common areas were turned into service of the 1% and everyone else became laborers of their goals.

The solution to this theft? Workers unite! (The latest issue of Newsweek has an article on a novel on the effects of the Great Recession. One character wears a t-shirt with the image of Karl Marx and the words, "I told you so!")

As part of his story Linebaugh talks about the Emergency Manager appointed for Benton Harbor (a black community). This EM sold a public park, in spite of loud public protest, to a developer who turned it into a golf course -- which most of the residents can't afford to use. The EM is a tool of the 1% especially since the only one he answers to is the governor.

This little book prompted me to think about the Emergency Manager law again. There are signs, such as how hard the GOP is fighting to keep the referendum off the ballot. I earlier mentioned Allen Park -- the reason why it might need an EM is because its property tax revenues have dropped due to the housing slump and the state gov't has slashed payments to cities that were instituted when the tax structure was reworked a couple decades ago. Both halves of that equation are because of GOP policies that favor the 1%. The clincher was to think through the implications of the union contract part that was added to the law. Financially starve a city (as is happening in Allen Park), appoint an EM, then gut all union contracts.

Yes, the EM law is the tool of the 1% and is anti-democracy.

A fine way to mark the day

I joined about 75 people in protest today (including my friend and debate partner). I thought it an appropriate way to spend an hour of my birthday. We were in front of Flagstar Bank in Dearborn Heights to protest the foreclosure of the home of Jennifer Britt. I'll let the notice on the Occupy Detroit blog explain the circumstances to you. There were lots of tooting of horns of people driving by. Alas, the bank manger didn't come out to talk to us. The truck from TV station Fox 2 Detroit was there, so I might be on TV later tonight. We stayed on (or near) the sidewalk and didn't disrupt traffic or business at the bank, so the police merely watched.

One of the leaders talked to me for a few minutes. He said in foreclosure prevention work it is possible to see the effect of the work. They've prevented 8 foreclosures so far. In general government protests it is hard to tell if anything is happening.

I got on the mailing list, so I hope I'll be doing more of this.

This is an afternoon post because I'm off to a concert that is a part of the Great Lakes Chamber Music Festival.