Thursday, October 16, 2008
Sunday, October 12, 2008
Monday, October 06, 2008
Lemon Socialism or Innovative Environmentalism?
1. Lemon Socialism
I don't think there's much choice about the bailout -- it's extortion, but they have all the guns. If you don't give us the money, we'll shut down the whole economy! And they meant it! So, it's like a banker-robbery -- as opposed to the old fashioned kind where the people robbed the bank. The only hope is that the corporations behind Obama want a stable system -- and they'll do what is required in order to make that happen. Which is after all what FD Roosevelt did. It's a shame there really is no "left" that could offer any kind of alternative! Amazing, we in effect nationalize major industries but still think of it as a rescue or a bailout. Damn!
2. The Bush Greenhouse Plan
On the other hand, Republican environmentalists propose that the way to deal with greenhouse gases is to bring the economy to a screeching halt. That will deal with energy issues, imports of foreign consumer items, whatever -- no eat, no heat, no houses, no growth! Earth first, fuck the people!
I don't think there's much choice about the bailout -- it's extortion, but they have all the guns. If you don't give us the money, we'll shut down the whole economy! And they meant it! So, it's like a banker-robbery -- as opposed to the old fashioned kind where the people robbed the bank. The only hope is that the corporations behind Obama want a stable system -- and they'll do what is required in order to make that happen. Which is after all what FD Roosevelt did. It's a shame there really is no "left" that could offer any kind of alternative! Amazing, we in effect nationalize major industries but still think of it as a rescue or a bailout. Damn!
2. The Bush Greenhouse Plan
On the other hand, Republican environmentalists propose that the way to deal with greenhouse gases is to bring the economy to a screeching halt. That will deal with energy issues, imports of foreign consumer items, whatever -- no eat, no heat, no houses, no growth! Earth first, fuck the people!
Friday, October 03, 2008
Communist Manifesto Birthday! 160 years!
On the failures of "really existing capitalism"
The Communist Manifesto Turns 160
by Barbara Ehrenreich
This year marks the 160th anniversary of The Communist Manifesto and
capitalism--a "free enterprise"--seems willing to observe the occasion
by dropping dead. On Monday night, some pundits were warning that the
ATMs might run dry and hinting that the only safe investment left is
canned beans. Apocalypse or extortion? No one seems to know, though the
populist part of the populace has been leaning toward the latter. An
e-mail whipping around the web this morning has the subject line "Sign on
Wall Street yesterday," and shows a hand-lettered cardboard sign saying,
"JUMP! You Fuckers!"
The Manifesto makes for quaint reading today. All that talk about
"production," for example: Did they actually make things in those days?
Did the proletariat really slave away in factories instead of call
centers? But on one point Marx and Engels proved right: within
capitalist societies, or at least the kind of wildly unregulated
capitalism America has had, the rich got richer, the workers got poorer,
and the erstwhile middle class has been sliding toward ruin. The last
two outcomes are what Marx called "immiseration," which, in translation,
is the process you're undergoing when you have cancer and no health
insurance or a mortgage payment due and no paycheck coming in.
Marx predicted that capitalism would fall in a spirited, proactive,
fashion: the workers, fed up with immiseration, would revolt, seize the
"means of production" and insist on running the show themselves, that
being the original, pre-Soviet, notion of socialism. The revolution
didn't happen, of course, at least not here. For the past several years,
American workers have sweetly acquiesced to declining wages, rising
prices, speed-ups at work, disappearing pensions and increasingly
threadbare health insurance. While CEO pay escalated to the eight-figure
range and above, so-called ordinary Americans took on second jobs and
crowded into multi-generational households with uncomfortably long waits
for the bathroom.
But all this immiseration--combined with fabulous enrichment at the
top--did end up destabilizing the capitalist system, if only because ,
in the last few years, America's substitute for decent wages has been
easy credit. Until about a year ago, we got almost daily messages, by
telemarketer and by mail, urging us to consolidate our debts, refinance
our homes, transfer our debts from credit card to another and try tasty
new mortgages that didn't even require a down payment. All too often, we
bit. It sounded so reasonable, for example, not to let our assets just
"sit" in our houses but to start spending that money now.
At the other, Learjet, end of the economic spectrum, there was the
problem of what to do with too much money. Yes, this can be a problem.
Some of the super-rich have to hire consultants to help them spend their
money: Where do you get a $20,000 bottle of wine or find a Picasso for
the bathroom wall? More seriously, there was the problem of what to
invest in. As Chuck Collins of the Working Group on Extreme Inequality
has pointed out, huge concentrations of wealth can function like rogue
waves, smashing around recklessly in their search for ever higher
returns. A lot of these money waves flowed, directly or indirectly, into
the dodgy credit schemes that were engulfing the un-rich majority,
leaving even the fat cats imperiled by the toxic debts of the subprime
class.
Marx's argument was that the coexistence of great wealth for the few and
growing poverty for the many is not only morally objectionable, it's
also inherently unstable. He may have been wrong about the reasons for
the instability, but no one can any longer deny it's there. When the
greed of the rich collided with the needs of the poor--for a home, for
example--the result was a global credit meltdown.
Obviously, the way to address the crisis is to deal with the poverty and
inequality that led to it: bail out people facing foreclosures, increase
food stamp allotments, extend unemployment insurance and make a
massive job-generating, public investment in infrastructure--and, since
medical debts are the number-one cause of personal bankruptcy, enact
universal health insurance immediately. But not even Obama, whose lawn
sign I still proudly display, seems to have the stomach for such a
"trickle upwards" approach. He has announced that he won't bother taking
the bailout as an opportunity to change the bankruptcy law so that
people facing foreclosure can renegotiate their mortgages.
So happy birthday, Communist Manifesto--although I'm hoping that
capitalism survives this one, if only because there's no alternative
ready at hand. At the very least, we should get some regulation and
serious oversight out of any bailout deal, meaning that, yes, the
economy will look a little less like "free enterprise." But one thing we
should have learned in the last week, if not the last year, is that,
when applied to enterprise, "freedom" can be just another word for
someone else's pain.
This article can be found on the web at:
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20081013/ehrenreich
Visit The Nation
http://www.thenation.com/
Subscribe to The Nation:
https://ssl.thenation.com/
Speculation: Pelosi on Tap?
Just a thought:
If McCain and Palin are elected and McCain croaks, she becomes president -- but who becomes vice president? The speaker of the House, I think. Isn't that how Gerald Ford moved to the top? So, Nancy Pelosi becomes vice president?!! You may speculate on how that might work out --
If McCain and Palin are elected and McCain croaks, she becomes president -- but who becomes vice president? The speaker of the House, I think. Isn't that how Gerald Ford moved to the top? So, Nancy Pelosi becomes vice president?!! You may speculate on how that might work out --
Investment Climate Takes a Beating
Indian executive killed by workers’ mob
By James Lamont in New Delhi
Published: September 23 2008 16:35 | Last updated: September 23 2008 16:35
The brutal killing of a multinational company chief in an industrial dispute has sent shockwaves through India’s business community.
Lalit Kishore Chaudhury, the chief executive of Graziano Trasmissioni India, an Italian car parts company, was beaten to death at his company offices in one of the country’s largest industrial zones on the outskirts of Delhi on Monday in a violent industrial protest.
A meeting with former employees to resolve a long-running dispute dissolved into a riot in which protesters overpowered security guards and turned on Mr Chaudhury and his staff. About 20 people were injured.
The attack at Graziano’s Greater Noida plant was sparked by the company’s dismissal of 200 workers in a pay dispute and has raised alarm among foreign companies operating in India. Many have already taken measures to give their personnel greater protection, following the wave of bomb attacks in Delhi this month.
The Italian government said on Tuesday it was “deeply shocked” by the violence that led to Mr Chaudhury’s death.
“The incident is all the more worrying as the Italian Company Graziano Trasmissioni, after many successful years, had been facing for several months violent forms of protest by selfproclaimed workers’ representatives. The situation had been repeatedly brought to the attention of the competent Indian authorities,” it said.
The company, a fully-owned subsidiary of Graziano Italy, makes gears and transmission systems for vehicles. Mr Chaudhury had worked at the company for the past decade.
Niccolo Tassoni, commercial counsellor at the Italian embassy in New Delhi, said attackers armed with metal bars and hammers had broken up the plant.
“It’s the first time I’ve heard of this kind of problem for an Italian company in India. It’s quite shocking.”
The Confederation of Indian Industry described Mr Chaudhury’s death as an “unwanted and gory act of violence”. It urged workers not to use violence to settle disputes with employers.
“Dialogue is always the way to find a solution. We can’t have unruly people taking the law into their own hand. We’ve had industrial violence in the past. We had it in Calcutta in the 1960s. But it was never of this kind,” said Jayant Bhuyam, deputy director general of the CII.
“The investment climate and image takes a beating [from an incident like this]. To assuage feelings, it takes time. One incident tarnishes the whole image,” he said.
Since the attack, the police have made sweeping arrests, charging about 13 people with murder. But business representatives in Noida criticised the police for their slow response to Monday’s violence at the plant.
Mr Chaudhury’s death comes against the background of a high profile stand-off between protesters and Tata, the industrial conglomerate, in Singur in West Bengal.
Farmers, backed by the opposition Trinamool Congress, have laid siege to land intended for the plant that will produce the Nano, billed as the world’s cheapest car and a flagship of India’s technical advance. Activists have staged often violent protests demanding that the government return 400 acres to farmers who had not accepted compensation for their relocation.
Business has warned that the damage inflicted on a project of such international acclaim threatens to deter foreign investment in India’s fast growing economy.
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2008
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Looking for simple solutions to your real-life financial challenges? Check out WalletPop for the latest news and information, tips and calculators.
By James Lamont in New Delhi
Published: September 23 2008 16:35 | Last updated: September 23 2008 16:35
The brutal killing of a multinational company chief in an industrial dispute has sent shockwaves through India’s business community.
Lalit Kishore Chaudhury, the chief executive of Graziano Trasmissioni India, an Italian car parts company, was beaten to death at his company offices in one of the country’s largest industrial zones on the outskirts of Delhi on Monday in a violent industrial protest.
A meeting with former employees to resolve a long-running dispute dissolved into a riot in which protesters overpowered security guards and turned on Mr Chaudhury and his staff. About 20 people were injured.
The attack at Graziano’s Greater Noida plant was sparked by the company’s dismissal of 200 workers in a pay dispute and has raised alarm among foreign companies operating in India. Many have already taken measures to give their personnel greater protection, following the wave of bomb attacks in Delhi this month.
The Italian government said on Tuesday it was “deeply shocked” by the violence that led to Mr Chaudhury’s death.
“The incident is all the more worrying as the Italian Company Graziano Trasmissioni, after many successful years, had been facing for several months violent forms of protest by selfproclaimed workers’ representatives. The situation had been repeatedly brought to the attention of the competent Indian authorities,” it said.
The company, a fully-owned subsidiary of Graziano Italy, makes gears and transmission systems for vehicles. Mr Chaudhury had worked at the company for the past decade.
Niccolo Tassoni, commercial counsellor at the Italian embassy in New Delhi, said attackers armed with metal bars and hammers had broken up the plant.
“It’s the first time I’ve heard of this kind of problem for an Italian company in India. It’s quite shocking.”
The Confederation of Indian Industry described Mr Chaudhury’s death as an “unwanted and gory act of violence”. It urged workers not to use violence to settle disputes with employers.
“Dialogue is always the way to find a solution. We can’t have unruly people taking the law into their own hand. We’ve had industrial violence in the past. We had it in Calcutta in the 1960s. But it was never of this kind,” said Jayant Bhuyam, deputy director general of the CII.
“The investment climate and image takes a beating [from an incident like this]. To assuage feelings, it takes time. One incident tarnishes the whole image,” he said.
Since the attack, the police have made sweeping arrests, charging about 13 people with murder. But business representatives in Noida criticised the police for their slow response to Monday’s violence at the plant.
Mr Chaudhury’s death comes against the background of a high profile stand-off between protesters and Tata, the industrial conglomerate, in Singur in West Bengal.
Farmers, backed by the opposition Trinamool Congress, have laid siege to land intended for the plant that will produce the Nano, billed as the world’s cheapest car and a flagship of India’s technical advance. Activists have staged often violent protests demanding that the government return 400 acres to farmers who had not accepted compensation for their relocation.
Business has warned that the damage inflicted on a project of such international acclaim threatens to deter foreign investment in India’s fast growing economy.
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2008
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Looking for simple solutions to your real-life financial challenges? Check out WalletPop for the latest news and information, tips and calculators.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)