A 37-year-old man has been executed in Iran after being found guilty
of heresy and insulting prophet Jonah, according to human rights
activists.
Mohsen Amir-Aslani was arrested nine years ago for his activities
which the authorities deemed were heretical. He was engaged in
psychotherapy but also led sessions reading and reciting the Qur’an and
providing his own interpretations of the Islamic holy book, his family
said.
Amir-Aslani was hanged last week for making “innovations in the
religion” and “spreading corruption on earth”, but human rights
activists said he was a prisoner of conscience who was put to death
because of his religious beliefs. He had interpreted Jonah’s story in
the Qur’an as a symbolic tale.
Iran’s judiciary, which was responsible for the handling of his case,
has since denied that Amir-Aslani’s execution was linked to his
religious beliefs.
Instead, the authorities allege that he had illicit sexual
relationships with a number of people who participated in his sessions
and the type of activities he was involved in did not follow an official
interpretation of the religion. It was not clear if Amir-Aslani had
official permission to conduct his sessions.
“Mohsen held sessions in his own house dedicated to reciting the
Qur’an and interpreting it. He had his own understandings [of the
religion] and had published his views in the form of a booklet and made
it available to his fans,” an unnamed source told the New York-based
group, the International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran (ICHRI).
According to the source, Iran’s ministry of intelligence was behind
Amir-Aslani’s arrest. “He was initially held for making innovations in
Islam and providing his own interpretations of the Qur’an but later he
was accused of insulting prophet Jonah and also faced accusations of
having sex outside marriage,” the source said. “They alleged that he had
sexual relationships with a group of the people who participated in his
classes.”
Iran’s judiciary has presented little evidence in public relating to
the allegations of illicit sexual activities. The judge who presided
over his case, Abolghassem Salavati, is known in Iran for leading numerous unfair trials, including many that resulted in execution.
Amir-Aslani’s wife, Leila, told the opposition website Roozonline
that she was hoping a high court would strike down his conviction but
his sentence was eventually upheld. She told Roozonline that his
conviction stemmed from his religious views and no evidence was
presented to back up the charges related to his alleged sexual
activities.
Iranian authorities are sensitive towards those practising Islam in
ways not conforming to the official line. In recent years, several
members of Iran’s Gonabadi dervishes religious minority have been
arrested and are currently serving lengthy prison terms.
Amnesty said last week that a group of nine Gonabadi dervishes were
on hunger strike in protest at their treatment in prison. They were
Mostafa Abdi, Reza Entesari, Hamidreza Moradi and Kasra Nouri, as well
as the five lawyers representing them who have also been jailed: Amir
Eslami, Farshid Yadollahi, Mostafa Daneshjoo, Afshin Karampour and Omid
Behrouzi.
“The men were mostly detained in September 2011, during a wave of
arrests of Gonabadi dervishes. They were all held in prolonged solitary
confinement, without access to their lawyers and families, and were
sentenced, after two years and following grossly unfair trials, to jail
on various trumped-up charges,” Amnesty said. “The men are prisoners of
conscience, imprisoned solely for practising their faith and defending
the human rights of dervishes through their legitimate activities as
journalists and lawyers.”
In Iran, Gonabadi dervishes face persecution, discrimination,
harassment, arbitrary arrests and attacks on their prayer houses,
Amnesty said.
-------------------------------------------------------------
How do the anti-Semites who claim to be "progressives" explain this from their "religion of peace"?
Tuesday, September 30, 2014
Why the Economy is Still Failing Most Americans
Some basic truths from Robert Reich. It would pay all to listen -- after all, GLOBAL "unrest" has been growing -- the "ultra - rich" must understand there's no place to hide. Folks must begin to understand that we're all in this together.
I do not think the destruction of western civilization would do anyone any good. We pioneered individual freedom, managed to build a real middle class, and brought true prosperity to more folks than any other culture has.
I hope our ultra - rich come to their senses.
--------------------------------------------------------------
http://robertreich.org/
I was in Seattle, Washington, recently, to congratulate union and community organizers who helped Seattle enact the first $15 per hour minimum wage in the country.
Other cities and states should follow Seattle’s example.
Contrary to the dire predictions of opponents, the hike won’t cost Seattle jobs. In fact, it will put more money into the hands of low-wage workers who are likely to spend almost all of it in the vicinity. That will create jobs.
Conservatives believe the economy functions better if the rich have more money and everyone else has less. But they’re wrong. It’s just the opposite.
The real job creators are not CEOs or corporations or wealthy investors. The job creators are members of America’s vast middle class and the poor, whose purchases cause businesses to expand and invest.
America’s wealthy are richer than they’ve ever been. Big corporations are sitting on more cash they know what to do with. Corporate profits are at record levels. CEO pay continues to soar.
But the wealthy aren’t investing in new companies. Between 1980 and 2014, the rate of new business formation in the United States dropped by half, according to a Brookings study released in May.
Corporations aren’t expanding production or investing in research and development. Instead, they’re using their money to buy back their shares of stock.
There’s no reason for them to expand or invest if customers aren’t buying.
Consumer spending has grown more slowly in this recovery than in any previous one because consumers don’t have enough money to buy.
All the economic gains have been going to the top.
The Commerce Department reported last Friday that the economy grew at a 4.6 percent annual rate in the second quarter of the year.
So what? The median household’s income continues to drop.
Median household income is now 8 percent below what it was in 2007, adjusted for inflation. It’s 11 percent below its level in 2000.
It used to be that economic expansions improved the incomes of the bottom 90 percent more than the top 10 percent.
But starting with the “Reagan” recovery of 1982 to 1990, the benefits of economic growth during expansions have gone mostly to the top 10 percent.
Since the current recovery began in 2009, all economic gains have gone to the top 10 percent. The bottom 90 percent has lost ground.
We’re in the first economic upturn on record in which 90 percent of Americans have become worse off.
Why did the playing field start to tilt against the middle class in the Reagan recovery, and why has it tilted further ever since?
Don’t blame globalization. Other advanced nations facing the same global competition have managed to preserve middle class wages. Germany’s median wage is now higher than America’s.
One factor here has been a sharp decline in union membership. In the mid 1970s, 25 percent of the private-sector workforce was unionized.
Then came the Reagan revolution. By the end of the 1980s, only 17 percent of the private workforce was unionized. Today, fewer than 7 percent of the nation’s private-sector workers belong to a union.
This means most workers no longer have the bargaining power to get a share of the gains from growth.
Another structural change is the drop in the minimum wage. In 1979, it was $9.67 an hour (in 2013 dollars). By 1990, it had declined to $6.84. Today it’s $7.25, well below where it was in 1979.
Given that workers are far more productive now – computers have even increased the output of retail and fast food workers — the minimum wage should be even higher.
By setting a floor on wages, a higher minimum helps push up other wages. It undergirds higher median household incomes.
The only way to grow the economy in a way that benefits the bottom 90 percent is to change the structure of the economy. At the least, this requires stronger unions and a higher minimum wage.
It also requires better schools for the children of the bottom 90 percent, better access to higher education, and a more progressive tax system.
GDP growth is less and less relevant to the wellbeing of most Americans. We should be paying less attention to growth and more to median household income.
If the median household’s income is is heading upward, the economy is in good shape. If it’s heading downward, as it’s been for this entire recovery, we’re all in deep trouble.
I do not think the destruction of western civilization would do anyone any good. We pioneered individual freedom, managed to build a real middle class, and brought true prosperity to more folks than any other culture has.
I hope our ultra - rich come to their senses.
--------------------------------------------------------------
http://robertreich.org/
I was in Seattle, Washington, recently, to congratulate union and community organizers who helped Seattle enact the first $15 per hour minimum wage in the country.
Other cities and states should follow Seattle’s example.
Contrary to the dire predictions of opponents, the hike won’t cost Seattle jobs. In fact, it will put more money into the hands of low-wage workers who are likely to spend almost all of it in the vicinity. That will create jobs.
Conservatives believe the economy functions better if the rich have more money and everyone else has less. But they’re wrong. It’s just the opposite.
The real job creators are not CEOs or corporations or wealthy investors. The job creators are members of America’s vast middle class and the poor, whose purchases cause businesses to expand and invest.
America’s wealthy are richer than they’ve ever been. Big corporations are sitting on more cash they know what to do with. Corporate profits are at record levels. CEO pay continues to soar.
But the wealthy aren’t investing in new companies. Between 1980 and 2014, the rate of new business formation in the United States dropped by half, according to a Brookings study released in May.
Corporations aren’t expanding production or investing in research and development. Instead, they’re using their money to buy back their shares of stock.
There’s no reason for them to expand or invest if customers aren’t buying.
Consumer spending has grown more slowly in this recovery than in any previous one because consumers don’t have enough money to buy.
All the economic gains have been going to the top.
The Commerce Department reported last Friday that the economy grew at a 4.6 percent annual rate in the second quarter of the year.
So what? The median household’s income continues to drop.
Median household income is now 8 percent below what it was in 2007, adjusted for inflation. It’s 11 percent below its level in 2000.
It used to be that economic expansions improved the incomes of the bottom 90 percent more than the top 10 percent.
But starting with the “Reagan” recovery of 1982 to 1990, the benefits of economic growth during expansions have gone mostly to the top 10 percent.
Since the current recovery began in 2009, all economic gains have gone to the top 10 percent. The bottom 90 percent has lost ground.
We’re in the first economic upturn on record in which 90 percent of Americans have become worse off.
Why did the playing field start to tilt against the middle class in the Reagan recovery, and why has it tilted further ever since?
Don’t blame globalization. Other advanced nations facing the same global competition have managed to preserve middle class wages. Germany’s median wage is now higher than America’s.
One factor here has been a sharp decline in union membership. In the mid 1970s, 25 percent of the private-sector workforce was unionized.
Then came the Reagan revolution. By the end of the 1980s, only 17 percent of the private workforce was unionized. Today, fewer than 7 percent of the nation’s private-sector workers belong to a union.
This means most workers no longer have the bargaining power to get a share of the gains from growth.
Another structural change is the drop in the minimum wage. In 1979, it was $9.67 an hour (in 2013 dollars). By 1990, it had declined to $6.84. Today it’s $7.25, well below where it was in 1979.
Given that workers are far more productive now – computers have even increased the output of retail and fast food workers — the minimum wage should be even higher.
By setting a floor on wages, a higher minimum helps push up other wages. It undergirds higher median household incomes.
The only way to grow the economy in a way that benefits the bottom 90 percent is to change the structure of the economy. At the least, this requires stronger unions and a higher minimum wage.
It also requires better schools for the children of the bottom 90 percent, better access to higher education, and a more progressive tax system.
GDP growth is less and less relevant to the wellbeing of most Americans. We should be paying less attention to growth and more to median household income.
If the median household’s income is is heading upward, the economy is in good shape. If it’s heading downward, as it’s been for this entire recovery, we’re all in deep trouble.
Monday, September 29, 2014
Islamic State Militants Execute Female Iraqi Human Rights Activist
So, here's a report of another atrocity from the "religion of peace" (trademark applied for).
Another sign of their "tolerance".
----------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/09/25/samira-nuaimi-killed_n_5880900.html
BAGHDAD (AP) — Militants with the Islamic State group tortured and then publicly killed a human rights lawyer in the Iraqi city of Mosul after their self-proclaimed religious court ruled that she had abandoned Islam, the U.N. mission in Iraq said Thursday.
Gunmen with the group's newly declared police force seized Samira Salih al-Nuaimi last week in a northeastern district of the Mosul while she was home with her husband and three children, two people with direct knowledge of the incident told The Associated Press on Thursday. Al-Nuaimi was taken to a secret location. After about five days, the family was called by the morgue to retrieve her corpse, which bore signs of torture, the two people said, speaking on condition of anonymity because of fears for their safety.
According to the United Nations Assistance Mission in Iraq, her arrest was allegedly connected to Facebook messages she posted that were critical of the militants' destruction of religious sites in Mosul. A statement by the U.N. on Thursday added that al-Nuaimi was tried in a so-called "Sharia court" for apostasy, after which she was tortured for five days before the militants sentenced her to "public execution." Her Facebook page appears to have been removed since her death.
"By torturing and executing a female human rights' lawyer and
activist, defending in particular the civil and human rights of her
fellow citizens in Mosul, ISIL continues to attest to its infamous
nature, combining hatred, nihilism and savagery, as well as its total
disregard of human decency," Nickolay Mladenov, the U.N. envoy to Iraq,
said in a statement, referring to the group by an acronym. The statement
did not say how she was killed.
Among Muslim hard-liners, apostasy is thought to be not just conversion from Islam to another faith, but also committing actions that they believe are so against the faith that one is considered to have abandoned Islam.
Mosul is the largest city held by the Islamic State group in the self-declared "caliphate" it has carved out, bridging northern and eastern Syria with northern Iraq. Since overrunning the once-diverse city in June, the group has forced religious minorities to convert to Islam, pay special taxes or die, causing tens of thousands to flee. The militants have enforced a strict dress code on women, going so far as to veil the faces of female mannequins in store fronts.
In August, the group destroyed a number of historic landmarks in the town, including several mosques and shrines, claiming they promote idolatry and depart from principles of Islam.
Al-Nuaimi's death is the latest in a string of attacks by the militant group to silence female activists and politicians. In July in the nearby town of Sderat, militants broke into the house of a female candidate in the last provincial council elections, killed her and abducted her husband, the U.N. said. On the same day, another female politician was abducted from her home in eastern Mosul; she remains missing.
Hanaa Edwer, a prominent Iraqi human rights activist, said at least five female political activists have been killed in recent weeks by the Islamic State group in Mosul, including al-Nuaimi, who Edwer said was also running for a seat on the provincial council.
"But it is not just women being targeted," Edwer said. "They will kill anyone with a voice. It is terrifying."
The Gulf Center for Human Rights said Wednesday that al-Nuaimi had worked on detainee rights and poverty. The Bahrain-based rights organization said her death "is solely motivated by her peaceful and legitimate human rights work, in particular defending the civil and human rights of her fellow citizens in Mosul."
The Islamic State extremists' blitz eventually prompted the United State to launch airstrikes last month, to aid Kurdish forces and protect religious minorities in Iraq.
This week, the U.S. and five allied Arab states expanded the aerial campaign into Syria, where the militant group is battling President Bashar Assad's forces as well as Western-backed rebels. Despite making gains in some of the country's more isolated areas, where airstrikes have paved the way for successful ground operations by Kurdish and Iraqi forces, the cities of Mosul and Fallujah remain major strongholds of the group, which has buried itself among large civilian populations.
The militant group recently killed 40 Iraq soldiers and captured 68 near Fallujah and then paraded their captives through the city in a show of brawn.
Nearly a dozen countries have also provided weapons and training to Kurdish peshmerga fighters, who were strained after months of battling the jihadi group.
In other developments Thursday, German Defense Minister Ursula von der Leyen visited northern Iraq for talks with Kurdish leaders about the fight against Islamic State extremists and Berlin's efforts to help with arms deliveries.
Thursday also marked the start of German arms deliveries to the semi-autonomous Kurdish region, with the ultimate goal of supplying 10,000 Kurdish fighters with some 70 million euros ($90 million) worth of equipment.
"We are involved with relief shipments and the airlift, but we know that this is not sufficient," said von der Leyen. "Much more is needed to get these (millions of people) through the winter."
___
Another sign of their "tolerance".
----------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/09/25/samira-nuaimi-killed_n_5880900.html
BAGHDAD (AP) — Militants with the Islamic State group tortured and then publicly killed a human rights lawyer in the Iraqi city of Mosul after their self-proclaimed religious court ruled that she had abandoned Islam, the U.N. mission in Iraq said Thursday.
Gunmen with the group's newly declared police force seized Samira Salih al-Nuaimi last week in a northeastern district of the Mosul while she was home with her husband and three children, two people with direct knowledge of the incident told The Associated Press on Thursday. Al-Nuaimi was taken to a secret location. After about five days, the family was called by the morgue to retrieve her corpse, which bore signs of torture, the two people said, speaking on condition of anonymity because of fears for their safety.
According to the United Nations Assistance Mission in Iraq, her arrest was allegedly connected to Facebook messages she posted that were critical of the militants' destruction of religious sites in Mosul. A statement by the U.N. on Thursday added that al-Nuaimi was tried in a so-called "Sharia court" for apostasy, after which she was tortured for five days before the militants sentenced her to "public execution." Her Facebook page appears to have been removed since her death.
Among Muslim hard-liners, apostasy is thought to be not just conversion from Islam to another faith, but also committing actions that they believe are so against the faith that one is considered to have abandoned Islam.
Mosul is the largest city held by the Islamic State group in the self-declared "caliphate" it has carved out, bridging northern and eastern Syria with northern Iraq. Since overrunning the once-diverse city in June, the group has forced religious minorities to convert to Islam, pay special taxes or die, causing tens of thousands to flee. The militants have enforced a strict dress code on women, going so far as to veil the faces of female mannequins in store fronts.
In August, the group destroyed a number of historic landmarks in the town, including several mosques and shrines, claiming they promote idolatry and depart from principles of Islam.
Al-Nuaimi's death is the latest in a string of attacks by the militant group to silence female activists and politicians. In July in the nearby town of Sderat, militants broke into the house of a female candidate in the last provincial council elections, killed her and abducted her husband, the U.N. said. On the same day, another female politician was abducted from her home in eastern Mosul; she remains missing.
Hanaa Edwer, a prominent Iraqi human rights activist, said at least five female political activists have been killed in recent weeks by the Islamic State group in Mosul, including al-Nuaimi, who Edwer said was also running for a seat on the provincial council.
"But it is not just women being targeted," Edwer said. "They will kill anyone with a voice. It is terrifying."
The Gulf Center for Human Rights said Wednesday that al-Nuaimi had worked on detainee rights and poverty. The Bahrain-based rights organization said her death "is solely motivated by her peaceful and legitimate human rights work, in particular defending the civil and human rights of her fellow citizens in Mosul."
The Islamic State extremists' blitz eventually prompted the United State to launch airstrikes last month, to aid Kurdish forces and protect religious minorities in Iraq.
This week, the U.S. and five allied Arab states expanded the aerial campaign into Syria, where the militant group is battling President Bashar Assad's forces as well as Western-backed rebels. Despite making gains in some of the country's more isolated areas, where airstrikes have paved the way for successful ground operations by Kurdish and Iraqi forces, the cities of Mosul and Fallujah remain major strongholds of the group, which has buried itself among large civilian populations.
The militant group recently killed 40 Iraq soldiers and captured 68 near Fallujah and then paraded their captives through the city in a show of brawn.
Nearly a dozen countries have also provided weapons and training to Kurdish peshmerga fighters, who were strained after months of battling the jihadi group.
In other developments Thursday, German Defense Minister Ursula von der Leyen visited northern Iraq for talks with Kurdish leaders about the fight against Islamic State extremists and Berlin's efforts to help with arms deliveries.
Thursday also marked the start of German arms deliveries to the semi-autonomous Kurdish region, with the ultimate goal of supplying 10,000 Kurdish fighters with some 70 million euros ($90 million) worth of equipment.
"We are involved with relief shipments and the airlift, but we know that this is not sufficient," said von der Leyen. "Much more is needed to get these (millions of people) through the winter."
___
Iran executes man for heresy Mohsen Amir-Aslani convicted of insulting prophet Jonah and making ‘innovations in religion’ through interpretations of Qur’an
O.K. now, this from "The Guardian" -- a little more information about the very famous "religion of peace". Perhaps they have regressed to the 12 century -- then again, can you say "Inquisition"?
If civilization really is going to collapse, perhaps it's only fitting to see what the future holds. We all know damn well that every religion would love to maintain orthodoxy in a very similar way. Look at our KKKonservative-right-wing-"Christians" -- they too hate blasphemy, heresy, and any sort of original thought.
Follow link to original.
-----------------------------------------------------
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/29/iran-executes-man-heresy-mohsen-amir-aslani
If civilization really is going to collapse, perhaps it's only fitting to see what the future holds. We all know damn well that every religion would love to maintain orthodoxy in a very similar way. Look at our KKKonservative-right-wing-"Christians" -- they too hate blasphemy, heresy, and any sort of original thought.
Follow link to original.
-----------------------------------------------------
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/29/iran-executes-man-heresy-mohsen-amir-aslani
NEW YORK: Flight Delayed Because Hasidim Wouldn't Sit Next To Women
Have not been well for the last few days. Upon browsing the interwebs today (feeling much better, thank you) I came across this rather disturbing item at "Joe.My.God.".
Perhaps some folks should be prevented from flying -- since only God(s) and/or Angels actually fly.
Please follow link to original.
-------------------------------------------------
http://joemygod.blogspot.com/
A flight from New York City to Tel Aviv was delayed on Wednesday because ultra-Orthodox passengers refused to sit next to women.
--------------------------------------------------------
ALL RELIGION SUCKS! They ALL HATE women.
Perhaps some folks should be prevented from flying -- since only God(s) and/or Angels actually fly.
Please follow link to original.
-------------------------------------------------
http://joemygod.blogspot.com/
A flight from New York City to Tel Aviv was delayed on Wednesday because ultra-Orthodox passengers refused to sit next to women.
According to the passengers who were on the plane, their fellow ultra-Orthodox travelers refused to sit next to women prior to the takeoff, which not only delayed the flight, but caused actual chaos to ensue on the plane. "People stood in the aisles and refused to go forward," said Amit Ben-Natan, a passenger who was on board the plane. "Although everyone had tickets with seat numbers that they purchased in advance, they asked us to trade seats with them, and even offered to pay money, since they cannot sit next to a woman. It was obvious that the plane won't take off as long as they keep standing in the aisles."The airline has promised to look into "future steps" to prevent the issue from recurring.
Galit, another traveler on the flight, said the ultra-orthodox passengers suggested she and her spouse split up to better accommodate their desired seating arrangements: "Why should I agree to switch places?" she said with anger. After she refused, the haredi man seated next to her conceded, but it was only temporary: "I ended up sitting next to a haredi man who jumped out of his seat the moment we had finished taking off and proceeded to stand in the aisle." It seems that after takeoff a large portion of the haredi travelers took to the aisle to pray which, according to their fellow travelers, crowded the aisle and caused the flight to be unbearable. "I went to the bathroom and it was a mission impossible, the noise was endless," Galit said.
--------------------------------------------------------
ALL RELIGION SUCKS! They ALL HATE women.
Wednesday, September 24, 2014
"Religion Of Peace"
French tourist seized in Algeria was beheaded by a group aligned with ISIS --- please tell me more about the "religion of peace".
BARBARIANS! We must defeat them to save civilization.
BARBARIANS! We must defeat them to save civilization.
Tuesday, September 23, 2014
Art Pepper - Star Eyes
Art Pepper (Alto Saxophone)
Paul Chambers (Bass)
Philly Joe Jones (Drums)
Red Garland (Piano)
John Coltrane Septet 1956 ~ How Deep Is The Ocean ?
Al Cohn - Tenor Sax (1st solo)
Zoot Sims - Tenor Sax (2nd solo)
John Coltrane - Tenor Sax (3rd solo)
Hank Mobley - Tenor Sax (4th solo)
Red Garland - Piano
Paul Chambers - Bass
Art Taylor - Drums
Monday, September 22, 2014
Those Lazy Jobless
The latest column from Dr. Krugman.
Please follow link to original.
--------------------------------------------
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/22/opinion/paul-krugman-those-lazy-jobless.html?_r=0
Please follow link to original.
--------------------------------------------
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/22/opinion/paul-krugman-those-lazy-jobless.html?_r=0
Last week John Boehner, the speaker of the House, explained
to an audience at the American Enterprise Institute what’s holding back
employment in America: laziness. People, he said, have “this idea” that
“I really don’t have to work. I don’t really want to do this. I think
I’d rather just sit around.” Holy 47 percent, Batman!
It’s
hardly the first time a prominent conservative has said something along
these lines. Ever since a financial crisis plunged us into recession it
has been a nonstop refrain on the right that the unemployed aren’t
trying hard enough, that they are taking it easy thanks to generous
unemployment benefits, which are constantly characterized as “paying
people not to work.” And the urge to blame the victims of a depressed
economy has proved impervious to logic and evidence.
But
it’s still amazing — and revealing — to hear this line being repeated
now. For the blame-the-victim crowd has gotten everything it wanted:
Benefits, especially for the long-term unemployed, have been slashed or
eliminated. So now we have rants against the bums on welfare when they
aren’t bums — they never were — and there’s no welfare. Why
First
things first: I don’t know how many people realize just how successful
the campaign against any kind of relief for those who can’t find jobs
has been. But it’s a striking picture. The job market has improved
lately, but there are still almost three million
Americans who have been out of work for more than six months, the usual
maximum duration of unemployment insurance. That’s nearly three times
the pre-recession total. Yet extended benefits for the long-term
unemployed have been eliminated — and in some states the duration of
benefits has been slashed even further.
The result is that most of the unemployed have been cut off. Only 26 percent of jobless Americans are receiving any kind of unemployment benefit, the lowest level in many decades. The total value
of unemployment benefits is less than 0.25 percent of G.D.P., half what
it was in 2003, when the unemployment rate was roughly the same as it
is now. It’s not hyperbole to say that America has abandoned its
out-of-work citizens.
Strange
to say, this outbreak of anti-compassionate conservatism hasn’t
produced a job surge. In fact, the whole proposition that cruelty is the
key to prosperity hasn’t been faring too well lately. Last week Nathan
Deal, the Republican governor of Georgia, complained that many states
with Republican governors have seen a rise in unemployment and suggested that the feds were cooking the books. But maybe the right’s preferred policies don’t work?
That
is, however, a topic for another column. My question for today is
instead one of psychology and politics: Why is there so much animus
against the unemployed, such a strong conviction that they’re getting
away with something, at a time when they’re actually being treated with
unprecedented harshness?
Now,
as anyone who has studied British policy during the Irish famine knows,
self-righteous cruelty toward the victims of disaster, especially when
the disaster goes on for an extended period, is common in history.
Still, Republicans haven’t always been like this. In the 1930s they
denounced the New Deal and called for free-market solutions — but when
Alf Landon accepted the 1936 presidential nomination, he also emphasized
the “plain duty” of “caring for the unemployed until recovery is attained.” Can you imagine hearing anything similar from today’s G.O.P.?
Is it race? That’s always a hypothesis worth considering in American politics. It’s true that most of the unemployed are white, and they make up an even larger share
of those receiving unemployment benefits. But conservatives may not
know this, treating the unemployed as part of a vaguely defined,
dark-skinned crowd of “takers.”
My
guess, however, is that it’s mainly about the closed information loop
of the modern right. In a nation where the Republican base gets what it
thinks are facts from Fox News and Rush Limbaugh, where the party’s
elite gets what it imagines to be policy analysis from the American
Enterprise Institute or the Heritage Foundation, the right lives in its
own intellectual universe, aware of neither the reality of unemployment
nor what life is like for the jobless. You might think that personal
experience — almost everyone has acquaintances or relatives who can’t
find work — would still break through, but apparently not.
Whatever
the explanation, Mr. Boehner was clearly saying what he and everyone
around him really thinks, what they say to each other when they don’t
expect others to hear. Some conservatives have been trying to reinvent
their image, professing sympathy for the less fortunate. But what their
party really believes is that if you’re poor or unemployed, it’s your
own fault.
Friday, September 19, 2014
The Red Garland Quintet - Soul Junction (Full Length)
Red Garland: piano
Donald Byrd: trumpet
John Coltrane: tenor saxophone
George Joyner; bass
Art Taylor; drums
Errors and Emissions Could Fighting Global Warming Be Cheap and Free? By PAUL KRUGMAN
Dr. Krugman's latest column. Please follow link to original,
------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/19/opinion/paul-krugman-could-fighting-global-warming-be-cheap-and-free.html
------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/19/opinion/paul-krugman-could-fighting-global-warming-be-cheap-and-free.html
This just in: Saving the planet would be cheap; it might even be free. But will anyone believe the good news?
I’ve just been reading two new reports on the economics of fighting climate change: a big study by a blue-ribbon international group, the New Climate Economy Project, and a working paper
from the International Monetary Fund. Both claim that strong measures
to limit carbon emissions would have hardly any negative effect on
economic growth, and might actually lead to faster growth. This may
sound too good to be true, but it isn’t. These are serious, careful
analyses.
But
you know that such assessments will be met with claims that it’s
impossible to break the link between economic growth and ever-rising
emissions of greenhouse gases, a position I think of as “climate
despair.” The most dangerous proponents of climate despair are on the
anti-environmentalist right. But they receive aid and comfort from other
groups, including some on the left, who have their own reasons for
getting it wrong.
Where
is the new optimism about climate change and growth coming from? It has
long been clear that a well-thought-out strategy of emissions control,
in particular one that puts a price on carbon via either an emissions
tax or a cap-and-trade scheme, would cost much less than the usual
suspects want you to think. But the economics of climate protection look
even better now than they did a few years ago.
On
one side, there has been dramatic progress in renewable energy
technology, with the costs of solar power, in particular, plunging, down by half just since 2010.
Renewables have their limitations — basically, the sun doesn’t always
shine, and the wind doesn’t always blow — but if you think that an
economy getting a lot of its power from wind farms and solar panels is a
hippie fantasy, you’re the one out of touch with reality.
On
the other side, it turns out that putting a price on carbon would have
large “co-benefits” — positive effects over and above the reduction in
climate risks — and that these benefits would come fairly quickly. The
most important of these co-benefits, according to the I.M.F. paper,
would involve public health: burning coal causes many respiratory
ailments, which drive up medical costs and reduce productivity.
And
thanks to these co-benefits, the paper argues, one argument often made
against carbon pricing — that it’s not worth doing unless we can get a
global agreement — is wrong. Even without an international agreement,
there are ample reasons to take action against the climate threat.
But
back to the main point: It’s easier to slash emissions than seemed
possible even a few years ago, and reduced emissions would produce large
benefits in the short-to-medium run. So saving the planet would be
cheap and maybe even come free.
Enter
the prophets of climate despair, who wave away all this analysis and
declare that the only way to limit carbon emissions is to bring an end
to economic growth.
You
mostly hear this from people on the right, who normally say that
free-market economies are endlessly flexible and creative. But when you
propose putting a price on carbon, suddenly they insist that industry
will be completely incapable of adapting to changed incentives. Why,
it’s almost as if they’re looking for excuses to avoid confronting
climate change, and, in particular, to avoid anything that hurts
fossil-fuel interests, no matter how beneficial to everyone else.
But
climate despair produces some odd bedfellows: Koch-fueled insistence
that emission limits would kill economic growth is echoed by some who
see this as an argument not against climate action, but against growth.
You can find this attitude in the mostly European “degrowth” movement, or in American groups like the Post Carbon Institute;
I’ve encountered claims that saving the planet requires an end to
growth at left-leaning meetings on “rethinking economics.” To be fair,
anti-growth environmentalism is a marginal position even on the left,
but it’s widespread enough to call out nonetheless.
And
you sometimes see hard scientists making arguments along the same
lines, largely (I think) because they don’t understand what economic
growth means. They think of it as a crude, physical thing, a matter
simply of producing more stuff, and don’t take into account the many choices — about what to consume, about which technologies to use — that go into producing a dollar’s worth of G.D.P.
So
here’s what you need to know: Climate despair is all wrong. The idea
that economic growth and climate action are incompatible may sound
hardheaded and realistic, but it’s actually a fuzzy-minded
misconception. If we ever get past the special interests and ideology
that have blocked action to save the planet, we’ll find that it’s
cheaper and easier than almost anyone imagines.
Thursday, September 18, 2014
America's Political Spectrum Is Not Left to Right, It's Top to Bottom—And It has Failed the People Every day, there are populist uprisings, both large and small, all across this country.
Here's a little something by Jim Hightower, from "Alternet" -- please follow link to original.
----------------------------------------------------
http://www.alternet.org/tea-party-and-right/americas-political-spectrum-not-left-right-its-top-bottom-and-it-has-failed?paging=off¤t_page=1#bookmark
My father, W.F. "High" Hightower, was a populist. Only, he didn't know it. Didn't know the word, much less the history or anything about populism's democratic ethos. My father was not philosophical, but he had a phrase that he used to express the gist of his political beliefs: "Everybody does better when everybodydoes better."
Before the populists of the late 1800s gave its instinctive rebelliousness a name, it had long been established as a defining trait of our national character: The 1776 rebellion was not only against King George III's government but against the corporate tyranny of such British monopolists as the East India Trading Company.
The establishment certainly doesn't celebrate the populist spirit, and our educational system avoids bothering students with our vibrant, human story of constant battles, big and small, mounted by "little people" against ... well, against the establishment. The Keepers of the Corporate Order take care to avoid even a suggestion that there is an important political pattern -- a historic continuum -- that connects Thomas Paine's radical democracy writings in the late 1700s to Shays' Rebellion in 1786, to strikes by mill women and carpenters in the early 1800s, to Jefferson's 1825 warning about the rising aristocracy of banks and corporations "riding and ruling over the plundered ploughman," to the launching of the women's suffrage movement at Seneca Falls in 1848, to the maverick Texans who outlawed banks in their 1845 state constitution, to the bloody and ultimately successful grassroots struggle for the abolition of slavery, and to the populist movement itself, plus the myriad rebellions that followed right into our present day.
WHAT POPULISM IS NOT: An empty word for lazy reporters to attach to any angry spasm of popular discontent. (And it's damn sure not Sarah Palin and today's clique of Koch-funded, corporate-hugging, tea party Republicans.)
WHAT IT IS: For some 238 years, it has been the chief political impulse in America's body politick -- determinedly democratic, vigilantly resistant to the oppressive power of corporations and Wall Street, committed to grassroots percolate-up economics, and firmly rooted in my old daddy's concept of "Everybodyness," recognizing that we're all in this together.
Although it was organized into a formal movement for only about 25 years, Populism has had an outsized, long-term, and ongoing impact on our culture, public policies, economic structure and governing systems. Even though its name is rarely used and its history largely hidden, and neither major party will embrace it (much less become it), there are many more people today whose inherent political instincts are populist, rather than conservative or liberal.
Yet the pundits and politicos frame our choices in terms of that narrow con-lib ideological spectrum, ignoring the fact that most of us are neither, or a bit of both. Our nation's true political spectrum is not right to left, but top to bottom. People can locate themselves along this vertical rich-to-poor spread, for this is not a theoretical positioning: It's based on our real-world experience with money and power. This is America's real politics.
Every day, there are populist uprisings, both large and small, all across this country. Towns taking on Big Oil frackers, cities raising the minimum wage, fast-food workers demanding a living wage, states taking on GMO labeling, Moral Monday, Truthful Tuesday, and other movements spreading across the South to fight for social justice.
----------------------------------------------------
http://www.alternet.org/tea-party-and-right/americas-political-spectrum-not-left-right-its-top-bottom-and-it-has-failed?paging=off¤t_page=1#bookmark
My father, W.F. "High" Hightower, was a populist. Only, he didn't know it. Didn't know the word, much less the history or anything about populism's democratic ethos. My father was not philosophical, but he had a phrase that he used to express the gist of his political beliefs: "Everybody does better when everybodydoes better."
Before the populists of the late 1800s gave its instinctive rebelliousness a name, it had long been established as a defining trait of our national character: The 1776 rebellion was not only against King George III's government but against the corporate tyranny of such British monopolists as the East India Trading Company.
The establishment certainly doesn't celebrate the populist spirit, and our educational system avoids bothering students with our vibrant, human story of constant battles, big and small, mounted by "little people" against ... well, against the establishment. The Keepers of the Corporate Order take care to avoid even a suggestion that there is an important political pattern -- a historic continuum -- that connects Thomas Paine's radical democracy writings in the late 1700s to Shays' Rebellion in 1786, to strikes by mill women and carpenters in the early 1800s, to Jefferson's 1825 warning about the rising aristocracy of banks and corporations "riding and ruling over the plundered ploughman," to the launching of the women's suffrage movement at Seneca Falls in 1848, to the maverick Texans who outlawed banks in their 1845 state constitution, to the bloody and ultimately successful grassroots struggle for the abolition of slavery, and to the populist movement itself, plus the myriad rebellions that followed right into our present day.
WHAT POPULISM IS NOT: An empty word for lazy reporters to attach to any angry spasm of popular discontent. (And it's damn sure not Sarah Palin and today's clique of Koch-funded, corporate-hugging, tea party Republicans.)
WHAT IT IS: For some 238 years, it has been the chief political impulse in America's body politick -- determinedly democratic, vigilantly resistant to the oppressive power of corporations and Wall Street, committed to grassroots percolate-up economics, and firmly rooted in my old daddy's concept of "Everybodyness," recognizing that we're all in this together.
Although it was organized into a formal movement for only about 25 years, Populism has had an outsized, long-term, and ongoing impact on our culture, public policies, economic structure and governing systems. Even though its name is rarely used and its history largely hidden, and neither major party will embrace it (much less become it), there are many more people today whose inherent political instincts are populist, rather than conservative or liberal.
Yet the pundits and politicos frame our choices in terms of that narrow con-lib ideological spectrum, ignoring the fact that most of us are neither, or a bit of both. Our nation's true political spectrum is not right to left, but top to bottom. People can locate themselves along this vertical rich-to-poor spread, for this is not a theoretical positioning: It's based on our real-world experience with money and power. This is America's real politics.
Today's workaday majority can plainly see
that a privileged few at the top are separating their fortunes as fast
as they can from the well-being of the rest of us. We've also seen that
after the 2008 economic collapse, both major parties rushed to wipe the
fevered brows of the pampered few with our tax dollars and did little
about the crash in wages, income, wealth and economic power of the
bottom 90 percent. Six years later, Congress continues to ignore the
ongoing destruction of the middle class and the unconscionable rise in
poverty -- unless you count last year's cuts to food stamp funding and
jobless benefits as "doing something."
Our system of
representative government has, in a word, collapsed. Most Congress
critters are not even trying anymore -- not listening to the people, not
even knowing any regular folks, and not representing their interests.
But what we also have is a ripening political opportunity for a
revitalized, 21st-century populist movement.Every day, there are populist uprisings, both large and small, all across this country. Towns taking on Big Oil frackers, cities raising the minimum wage, fast-food workers demanding a living wage, states taking on GMO labeling, Moral Monday, Truthful Tuesday, and other movements spreading across the South to fight for social justice.
Wednesday, September 17, 2014
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
