After Mayor Bloomberg
Seeking to position themselves favorably in the early stages of the New
York mayoral campaign, four presumptive Democratic candidates outlined
their credentials to a business-oriented audience.
Friday, November 30, 2012
Thursday, November 29, 2012
Former Vice President, Al Gore. (photo: Mario Anzuoni)
Secretary of State Al Gore?
29 November 12
With opposition to Susan Rice mounting daily, Michael Tomasky proposes six alternative nominees for the top post at Foggy Bottom. Head of the list? The winner of the 2000 election.
hings maybe aren't looking so great for Susan Rice. The throw-down yesterday by Maine GOP Sen. Susan Collins, who extended the Republican case against Rice
back to the Clinton years, is one of those Washington smoke signals,
and it's not a positive one. Let me therefore set aside for a day the
question of the merits of Rice and raise another one: Who would make for
some credible, interesting, outside-the-box choices to run Foggy
Bottom? There are ample non-Rice options that would provide the nation
with a strong chief diplomat and would piss off the wingnuts in the bargain. Here are half a dozen.
1. Al Gore. I first heard this suggestion from my
friend David Greenberg, the historian who writes for Slate, and I
though, nahhh. But it grew on me pretty fast. Tell me why not. He'd be
great. He's known around the world. He's respected around the world,
about 90 percent of which surely wishes he'd been the president instead
of the guy he beat. I'm not saying he'd change the world; no one can do
that. But he'd get a hearing everywhere. He knows a huge number of world
leaders, and he knows the issues cold. He could dive right into the
pool's deepest end, in the Middle East, on Iran, you name it.
What about his climate-change crusade, you wonder? Far
from having to drop his signature issue, Gore could use his new
position to push it with even greater vigor in a global context. Gore,
and probably Gore alone, would be capable of elevating the climate
change issue to the position it deserves on the national and global
stage.
What we don't know that much about is the Gore-Obama
relationship. In 2007 and 2008, Gore clearly tilted toward Obama (Gore's
mere refusal to endorse Hillary Clinton over Obama indicated as much).
Gore didn't endorse Obama until right after he'd secured the nomination,
but the two were said to have talked regularly. That's good enough.
Finally: Man, would I love to see the Republicans try
to swat down a Gore nomination. How? They'd poke around in his finances,
remind America that he's now divorced. But unless there were some kind
of smoking gun on the former point, no one would care. They could not
really block Gore; too much stature, too obviously qualified. Can you
imagine? John McCain would grind his teeth, assuming those still are his
teeth, down to dust. That would be awesome to watch.
2. Jon Huntsman. A Republican reviled by the wingnuts,
Huntsman has already served the anti-Christ in a diplomatic capacity,
as his ambassador to China. He seems to have done an acceptable job in
that posting, so why not just continue and augment the relationship? He
clearly likes Obama pretty well and obviously (between the lines) was
cheering for his reelection over a man he clearly dislikes.
It's hard to see Huntsman having confirmation
problems. There would be a number of no votes and a lot of kvetching,
but he couldn't be blocked. He might even do a good job, too. And
putting him at State would clear out of Hillary's way in 2016 the GOP's
leading sane candidate.
3. Richard Lugar. Yes, he's a pretty conservative
Republican. But to mad-dog conservatives, he's a sell out, an Obama
apologist, a treacherous Decembrist. He was defeated, as you'll recall,
by a primary opponent who ran to his right, who defeated him on the
basis of just such accusations. Those were absurdly exaggerated, but in
fact, on a mere personal level, he was one of Obama's best buddies while
Obama was in the Senate. So the president likes and presumably trusts
him.
True, this one wouldn't go down so well with liberals.
But hey, the president's the boss. If Lugar doesn't listen to his boss,
his boss can just fire him. But I doubt Lugar would do that. He's
Midwestern nice. He is rather old, though. Eighty. Travel is probably
too grueling.
4. Colin Powell. Yet another Republican turncoat,
Powell obviously endorsed Obama twice. And, uh, yeah, he held the job
once before. Maybe this time he could tell the truth instead of make up
fairy tales and undo the one black spot on his otherwise praiseworthy
escutcheon.
Liberals would not like this by and large, so Powell
would have to address that infamous U.N. briefing at any confirmation
hearings. But all he'd have to do is find the right words with which to
throw the blame back on Dick Cheney, and much (not all, but much) would
be forgiven from the left. The right would go nuts.
5. Dianne Feinstein. OK, nothing about this pick would
make Republicans go beserk. They kind of like her, at least on
foreign-policy questions, on which she's awfully hawkish. She has been
way too pro-Israel to be the honest broker in the Middle East the United
States needs, but maybe that could work to her advantage-because the
Israelis trust her, she could tell them things others can't and they'd
listen.
6. Jim Webb. Also not a choice to anger Republicans at
all, but possibly an interesting thought. Actually, maybe Webb makes
more sense for the Pentagon, no? The more that I think about that, it
makes all kinds of sense. Maybe the Army people wouldn't want a Navy man
calling the shots, I don't know. But Webb to the Pentagon seems like a
decent idea to me.
There you have it. I'm sure there are others (but no,
not Bill Clinton-an ex-president holding a lower office is just a little
too odd). Unsupportable as these attacks on Rice are, they may reach a
point (and maybe very soon) where the president has to conclude that
he's going to spend his political capital elsewhere. I'm not yet saying
he should or shouldn't conclude that. But if he does, he has other
places to turn.
Wednesday, November 28, 2012
Barry Soltz, a resident and a voter of the 34th NY State Senate District tell Senator Jeffrey Klein that he betray the people who voted for him— as a Democrat not at a DINO.
Democrats and some liberal leaders have accused Mr. Klein of wanting nothing more than to amass power for himself.
video by Rafael Martínez Alequín
video by Rafael Martínez Alequín
 |
Pedro Espada Jr. Convicted Felon
Top Breakaway Democrat Favors G.O.P. Coalition in State Senate
By THOMAS KAPLAN
When the State Legislature meets in January, Senator Jeffrey D. Klein
and a faction of four fellow Democrats may hold the chamber’s fate in
their hands.
Tuesday, November 27, 2012
Excited for Return to Brooklyn, Anthony Gets the Ending Wrong
By NATE TAYLOR
Carmelo Anthony tried his best to start a new rivalry with a Knicks win
at Barclays Center, a few miles from his childhood home, but he missed
the potential game-winning shot.
In Hero of the Catholic Left, a Conservative Cardinal Sees a Saint
By SHARON OTTERMAN
Meyer Liebowitz/The New York Times
Dorothy Day, shown in Manhattan in 1972, was a prominent Roman Catholic social activist and antiwar campaigner.
Cardinal Timothy M. Dolan, New York’s conservative archbishop, has
embraced the canonization cause of the Brooklyn-born social activist
Dorothy Day.
In Hero of the Catholic Left, a Conservative Cardinal Sees a Saint
By SHARON OTTERMAN
Meyer Liebowitz/The New York Times
Dorothy Day, shown in Manhattan in 1972, was a prominent Roman Catholic social activist and antiwar campaigner.
Cardinal Timothy M. Dolan, New York’s conservative archbishop, has
embraced the canonization cause of the Brooklyn-born social activist
Dorothy Day.
Monday, November 26, 2012
An Imperfect God
By YORAM HAZONY
Leif Parsons
The “perfect” God that philosophers have tried and
failed to establish is nowhere to be found. Not even in the Bible.
Sunday, November 25, 2012
An Unusual Absence in the Race for Mayor
By SAM ROBERTS
The prospect of no major Jewish candidate in 2013 reflects New York City’s shifting demographics and a splintered electorate.
Kentucky State Rep. Tom Riner authored legislation inserting god into the homeland security department. (photo: Fox News)
A Year in Jail for Not Believing in God?
24 November 12
In Kentucky, a homeland security law requires the state's Homeland Security Officers to acknowledge the security provided by the Almighty God-or risk 12 months in prison.
n
Kentucky, a homeland security law requires the state's citizens to
acknowledge the security provided by the Almighty God-or risk 12 months
in prison. The law and its sponsor, state representative Tom Riner, have
been the subject of controversy since the law first surfaced in 2006,
yet the Kentucky state Supreme Court has refused to review its
constitutionality, despite clearly violating the First Amendment's
separation of church and state.
"This is one of the most egregiously and
breathtakingly unconstitutional actions by a state legislature that I've
ever seen," said Edwin Kagin, the legal director of American Atheists',
a national organization focused defending the civil rights of atheists.
American Atheists' launched a lawsuit against the law in 2008, which
won at the Circuit Court level, but was then overturned by the state
Court of Appeals.
The law states, "The safety and security of the
Commonwealth cannot be achieved apart from reliance upon Almighty God as
set forth in the public speeches and proclamations of American
Presidents, including Abraham Lincoln's historic March 30, 1863,
presidential proclamation urging Americans to pray and fast during one
of the most dangerous hours in American history, and the text of
President John F. Kennedy's November 22, 1963, national security speech
which concluded: "For as was written long ago: 'Except the Lord keep the
city, the watchman waketh but in vain.'"
The law requires that plaques celebrating the power of
the Almighty God be installed outside the state Homeland Security
building-and carries a criminal penalty of up to 12 months in jail if
one fails to comply. The plaque's inscription begins with the assertion,
"The safety and security of the Commonwealth cannot be achieved apart
from reliance upon Almighty God." Tom Riner, a Baptist minister and
the long-time Democratic state representative, sponsored the law.
"The church-state divide is not a line I see," Riner told The New York Times
shortly after the law was first challenged in court. "What I do see is
an attempt to separate America from its history of perceiving itself as a
nation under God."
A practicing Baptist minister, Riner is solely devoted
to his faith-even when that directly conflicts with his job as state
representative. He has often been at the center of unconstitutional and
expensive controversies throughout his 26 years in office. In the last
ten years, for example, the state has spent more than $160,000 in string
of losing court cases against the American Civil Liberties Union over
the state's decision to display the Ten Commandments in public
buildings, legislation that Riner sponsored.
Although the Kentucky courts have yet to strike down the law, some judges have been explicit about its unconstitutionality.
"Kentucky's law is a legislative finding, avowed as
factual, that the Commonwealth is not safe absent reliance on Almighty
God. Further, (the law) places a duty upon the executive director to
publicize the assertion while stressing to the public that dependence
upon Almighty God is vital, or necessary, in assuring the safety of the
commonwealth," wrote Judge Ann O'Malley Shake in Court of Appeals'
dissenting opinion.
This rational was in the minority, however, as the
Court of Appeals reversed the lower courts' decision that the law was
unconstitutional.
Last week, American Atheists submitted a petition to the U.S. Supreme Court to review the law.
Riner, meanwhile, continues to abuse the state representative's office, turning it into a pulpit for his God-fearing message.
"The safety and security of the state cannot be achieved apart from recognizing our dependence upon God," Riner recently told Fox News.
"We believe dependence on God is essential. ... What
the founding fathers stated and what every president has stated, is
their reliance and recognition of Almighty God, that's what we're
doing," he said.
Saturday, November 24, 2012
Gary Hershorn/Reuters
Hector Camacho, Flamboyant Boxer, Dies
By BRUCE WEBER
Mr. Camacho, 50, emerged from a delinquent childhood in New York City’s
Spanish Harlem to become a world champion in three different weight
classes.
Friday, November 23, 2012
Fruiday True News Updated: Quinn Politically Married to A Sexual Harasser
Why You Shouldn't Shop at Walmart Today
Portrait, Robert Reich, 08/16/09. (photo: Perian Flaherty)
Portrait, Robert Reich, 08/16/09. (photo: Perian Flaherty)
By Robert Reich, Robert Reich's Blog
22 November 12
A half century ago America's largest private-sector employer was General Motors, whose full-time workers earned an average hourly wage of around $50, in today's dollars, including health and pension benefits.
Today, America's largest employer is Walmart, whose average employee earns $8.81 an hour. A third of Walmart's employees work less than 28 hours per week and don't qualify for benefits.
There are many reasons for the difference - including globalization and technological changes that have shrunk employment in American manufacturing while enlarging it in sectors involving personal services, such as retail.
But one reason, closely related to this seismic shift, is the decline of labor unions in the United States. In the 1950s, over a third of private-sector workers belonged to a union. Today fewer than 7 percent do. As a result, the typical American worker no longer has the bargaining clout to get a sizeable share of corporate profits.
At the peak of its power and influence in the 1950s, the United Auto Workers could claim a significant portion of GM's earnings for its members.
Walmart's employees, by contrast, have no union to represent them. So they've had no means of getting much of the corporation's earnings.
Walmart earned $16 billion last year (it just reported a 9 percent increase in earnings in the third quarter of 2012, to $3.6 billion), much of which went to Walmart's shareholders - including the family of its founder, Sam Walton. The wealth of the Walton family now exceeds the wealth of the bottom 40 percent of American families combined, according to an analysis by the Economic Policy Institute.
Is this about to change? Despite decades of failed unionization attempts, Walmart workers are planning to strike or conduct some other form of protest outside at least 1,000 locations across the United States this Friday - so-called "Black Friday," the biggest shopping day in America when the Christmas holiday buying season begins.
At the very least, the action gives Walmart employees a chance to air their grievances in public - not only lousy wages (as low at $8 an hour) but also unsafe and unsanitary working conditions, excessive hours, and sexual harassment. The result is bad publicity for the company exactly when it wants the public to think of it as Santa Claus. And the threatened strike, the first in 50 years, is gaining steam.
The company is fighting back. It has filed a complaint with the National Labor Relations Board to preemptively ban the Black Friday strikes. The complaint alleges that the pickets are illegal "representational" picketing designed to win recognition for the United Food & Commercial Workers (UFCW) union. Walmart's workers say they're protesting unfair labor practices rather than acting on behalf of the UFCW. If a court sides with Walmart, it could possibly issue an injunction blocking Black Friday's pickets.
What happens at Walmart will have consequences extending far beyond the company. Other big box retailers are watching carefully. Walmart is their major competitor. Its pay scale and working conditions set the standard.
More broadly, the widening inequality reflected in the gap between the pay of Walmart workers and the returns to Walmart investors, including the Walton fammily, haunts the American economy.
Consumer spending is 70 percent of economic activity, but consumers are also workers. And as income and wealth continue to concentrate at the top, and the median wage continues to drop - it's now 8 percent lower than it was in 2000 - a growing portion of the American workforce lacks the purchasing power to get the economy back to speed. Without a vibrant and growing middle class, Walmart itself won't have the customers it needs.
Most new jobs in America are in personal services like retail, with low pay and bad hours. According to the Bureau of Labor and Statistics, the average full-time retail worker earns between $18,000 and $21,000 per year.
But if retail workers got a raise, would consumers have to pay higher prices to make up for it? A new study by the think tank Demos reports that raising the salary of all full-time workers at large retailers to $25,000 per year would lift more than 700,000 people out of poverty, at a cost of only a 1 percent price increase for customers.
And, in the end, retailers would benefit. According to the study, the cost of the wage increases to major retailers would be $20.8 billion - about one percent of the sector's $2.17 trillion in total annual sales. But the study also estimates the increased purchasing power of lower-wage workers as a result of the pay raises would generate $4 billion to $5 billion in additional retail sales.
This seems like a good deal all around.
Robert B. Reich, Chancellor's Professor of Public Policy at the University of California at Berkeley, was Secretary of Labor in the Clinton administration. Time Magazine named him one of the ten most effective cabinet secretaries of the last century. He has written thirteen books, including the best sellers "Aftershock" and "The Work of Nations." His latest is an e-book, "Beyond Outrage." He is also a founding editor of the American Prospect magazine and chairman of Common Cause.
Portrait, Robert Reich, 08/16/09. (photo: Perian Flaherty)
Portrait, Robert Reich, 08/16/09. (photo: Perian Flaherty)
go to original article
Why You Shouldn't Shop at Walmart Today
By Robert Reich, Robert Reich's Blog
22 November 12
half century ago America's largest private-sector employer was General Motors, whose full-time workers earned an average hourly wage of around $50, in today's dollars, including health and pension benefits.
Today, America's largest employer is Walmart, whose average employee earns $8.81 an hour. A third of Walmart's employees work less than 28 hours per week and don't qualify for benefits.
There are many reasons for the difference - including globalization and technological changes that have shrunk employment in American manufacturing while enlarging it in sectors involving personal services, such as retail.
But one reason, closely related to this seismic shift, is the decline of labor unions in the United States. In the 1950s, over a third of private-sector workers belonged to a union. Today fewer than 7 percent do. As a result, the typical American worker no longer has the bargaining clout to get a sizeable share of corporate profits.
At the peak of its power and influence in the 1950s, the United Auto Workers could claim a significant portion of GM's earnings for its members.
Walmart's employees, by contrast, have no union to represent them. So they've had no means of getting much of the corporation's earnings.
Walmart earned $16 billion last year (it just reported a 9 percent increase in earnings in the third quarter of 2012, to $3.6 billion), much of which went to Walmart's shareholders - including the family of its founder, Sam Walton. The wealth of the Walton family now exceeds the wealth of the bottom 40 percent of American families combined, according to an analysis by the Economic Policy Institute.
Is this about to change? Despite decades of failed unionization attempts, Walmart workers are planning to strike or conduct some other form of protest outside at least 1,000 locations across the United States this Friday - so-called "Black Friday," the biggest shopping day in America when the Christmas holiday buying season begins.
At the very least, the action gives Walmart employees a chance to air their grievances in public - not only lousy wages (as low at $8 an hour) but also unsafe and unsanitary working conditions, excessive hours, and sexual harassment. The result is bad publicity for the company exactly when it wants the public to think of it as Santa Claus. And the threatened strike, the first in 50 years, is gaining steam.
The company is fighting back. It has filed a complaint with the National Labor Relations Board to preemptively ban the Black Friday strikes. The complaint alleges that the pickets are illegal "representational" picketing designed to win recognition for the United Food & Commercial Workers (UFCW) union. Walmart's workers say they're protesting unfair labor practices rather than acting on behalf of the UFCW. If a court sides with Walmart, it could possibly issue an injunction blocking Black Friday's pickets.
What happens at Walmart will have consequences extending far beyond the company. Other big box retailers are watching carefully. Walmart is their major competitor. Its pay scale and working conditions set the standard.
More broadly, the widening inequality reflected in the gap between the pay of Walmart workers and the returns to Walmart investors, including the Walton fammily, haunts the American economy.
Consumer spending is 70 percent of economic activity, but consumers are also workers. And as income and wealth continue to concentrate at the top, and the median wage continues to drop - it's now 8 percent lower than it was in 2000 - a growing portion of the American workforce lacks the purchasing power to get the economy back to speed. Without a vibrant and growing middle class, Walmart itself won't have the customers it needs.
Most new jobs in America are in personal services like retail, with low pay and bad hours. According to the Bureau of Labor and Statistics, the average full-time retail worker earns between $18,000 and $21,000 per year.
But if retail workers got a raise, would consumers have to pay higher prices to make up for it? A new study by the think tank Demos reports that raising the salary of all full-time workers at large retailers to $25,000 per year would lift more than 700,000 people out of poverty, at a cost of only a 1 percent price increase for customers.
And, in the end, retailers would benefit. According to the study, the cost of the wage increases to major retailers would be $20.8 billion - about one percent of the sector's $2.17 trillion in total annual sales. But the study also estimates the increased purchasing power of lower-wage workers as a result of the pay raises would generate $4 billion to $5 billion in additional retail sales.
This seems like a good deal all around.
Robert B. Reich, Chancellor's Professor of Public Policy at the University of California at Berkeley, was Secretary of Labor in the Clinton administration. Time Magazine named him one of the ten most effective cabinet secretaries of the last century. He has written thirteen books, including the best sellers "Aftershock" and "The Work of Nations." His latest is an e-book, "Beyond Outrage." He is also a founding editor of the American Prospect magazine and chairman of Common Cause.
A half century ago America's largest private-sector employer was General Motors, whose full-time workers earned an average hourly wage of around $50, in today's dollars, including health and pension benefits.
Today, America's largest employer is Walmart, whose average employee earns $8.81 an hour. A third of Walmart's employees work less than 28 hours per week and don't qualify for benefits.
There are many reasons for the difference - including globalization and technological changes that have shrunk employment in American manufacturing while enlarging it in sectors involving personal services, such as retail.
But one reason, closely related to this seismic shift, is the decline of labor unions in the United States. In the 1950s, over a third of private-sector workers belonged to a union. Today fewer than 7 percent do. As a result, the typical American worker no longer has the bargaining clout to get a sizeable share of corporate profits.
At the peak of its power and influence in the 1950s, the United Auto Workers could claim a significant portion of GM's earnings for its members.
Walmart's employees, by contrast, have no union to represent them. So they've had no means of getting much of the corporation's earnings.
Walmart earned $16 billion last year (it just reported a 9 percent increase in earnings in the third quarter of 2012, to $3.6 billion), much of which went to Walmart's shareholders - including the family of its founder, Sam Walton. The wealth of the Walton family now exceeds the wealth of the bottom 40 percent of American families combined, according to an analysis by the Economic Policy Institute.
Is this about to change? Despite decades of failed unionization attempts, Walmart workers are planning to strike or conduct some other form of protest outside at least 1,000 locations across the United States this Friday - so-called "Black Friday," the biggest shopping day in America when the Christmas holiday buying season begins.
At the very least, the action gives Walmart employees a chance to air their grievances in public - not only lousy wages (as low at $8 an hour) but also unsafe and unsanitary working conditions, excessive hours, and sexual harassment. The result is bad publicity for the company exactly when it wants the public to think of it as Santa Claus. And the threatened strike, the first in 50 years, is gaining steam.
The company is fighting back. It has filed a complaint with the National Labor Relations Board to preemptively ban the Black Friday strikes. The complaint alleges that the pickets are illegal "representational" picketing designed to win recognition for the United Food & Commercial Workers (UFCW) union. Walmart's workers say they're protesting unfair labor practices rather than acting on behalf of the UFCW. If a court sides with Walmart, it could possibly issue an injunction blocking Black Friday's pickets.
What happens at Walmart will have consequences extending far beyond the company. Other big box retailers are watching carefully. Walmart is their major competitor. Its pay scale and working conditions set the standard.
More broadly, the widening inequality reflected in the gap between the pay of Walmart workers and the returns to Walmart investors, including the Walton fammily, haunts the American economy.
Consumer spending is 70 percent of economic activity, but consumers are also workers. And as income and wealth continue to concentrate at the top, and the median wage continues to drop - it's now 8 percent lower than it was in 2000 - a growing portion of the American workforce lacks the purchasing power to get the economy back to speed. Without a vibrant and growing middle class, Walmart itself won't have the customers it needs.
Most new jobs in America are in personal services like retail, with low pay and bad hours. According to the Bureau of Labor and Statistics, the average full-time retail worker earns between $18,000 and $21,000 per year.
But if retail workers got a raise, would consumers have to pay higher prices to make up for it? A new study by the think tank Demos reports that raising the salary of all full-time workers at large retailers to $25,000 per year would lift more than 700,000 people out of poverty, at a cost of only a 1 percent price increase for customers.
And, in the end, retailers would benefit. According to the study, the cost of the wage increases to major retailers would be $20.8 billion - about one percent of the sector's $2.17 trillion in total annual sales. But the study also estimates the increased purchasing power of lower-wage workers as a result of the pay raises would generate $4 billion to $5 billion in additional retail sales.
This seems like a good deal all around.
Robert B. Reich, Chancellor's Professor of Public Policy at the University of California at Berkeley, was Secretary of Labor in the Clinton administration. Time Magazine named him one of the ten most effective cabinet secretaries of the last century. He has written thirteen books, including the best sellers "Aftershock" and "The Work of Nations." His latest is an e-book, "Beyond Outrage." He is also a founding editor of the American Prospect magazine and chairman of Common Cause.
Portrait, Robert Reich, 08/16/09. (photo: Perian Flaherty)
Portrait, Robert Reich, 08/16/09. (photo: Perian Flaherty)
go to original article
Why You Shouldn't Shop at Walmart Today
By Robert Reich, Robert Reich's Blog
22 November 12
half century ago America's largest private-sector employer was General Motors, whose full-time workers earned an average hourly wage of around $50, in today's dollars, including health and pension benefits.
Today, America's largest employer is Walmart, whose average employee earns $8.81 an hour. A third of Walmart's employees work less than 28 hours per week and don't qualify for benefits.
There are many reasons for the difference - including globalization and technological changes that have shrunk employment in American manufacturing while enlarging it in sectors involving personal services, such as retail.
But one reason, closely related to this seismic shift, is the decline of labor unions in the United States. In the 1950s, over a third of private-sector workers belonged to a union. Today fewer than 7 percent do. As a result, the typical American worker no longer has the bargaining clout to get a sizeable share of corporate profits.
At the peak of its power and influence in the 1950s, the United Auto Workers could claim a significant portion of GM's earnings for its members.
Walmart's employees, by contrast, have no union to represent them. So they've had no means of getting much of the corporation's earnings.
Walmart earned $16 billion last year (it just reported a 9 percent increase in earnings in the third quarter of 2012, to $3.6 billion), much of which went to Walmart's shareholders - including the family of its founder, Sam Walton. The wealth of the Walton family now exceeds the wealth of the bottom 40 percent of American families combined, according to an analysis by the Economic Policy Institute.
Is this about to change? Despite decades of failed unionization attempts, Walmart workers are planning to strike or conduct some other form of protest outside at least 1,000 locations across the United States this Friday - so-called "Black Friday," the biggest shopping day in America when the Christmas holiday buying season begins.
At the very least, the action gives Walmart employees a chance to air their grievances in public - not only lousy wages (as low at $8 an hour) but also unsafe and unsanitary working conditions, excessive hours, and sexual harassment. The result is bad publicity for the company exactly when it wants the public to think of it as Santa Claus. And the threatened strike, the first in 50 years, is gaining steam.
The company is fighting back. It has filed a complaint with the National Labor Relations Board to preemptively ban the Black Friday strikes. The complaint alleges that the pickets are illegal "representational" picketing designed to win recognition for the United Food & Commercial Workers (UFCW) union. Walmart's workers say they're protesting unfair labor practices rather than acting on behalf of the UFCW. If a court sides with Walmart, it could possibly issue an injunction blocking Black Friday's pickets.
What happens at Walmart will have consequences extending far beyond the company. Other big box retailers are watching carefully. Walmart is their major competitor. Its pay scale and working conditions set the standard.
More broadly, the widening inequality reflected in the gap between the pay of Walmart workers and the returns to Walmart investors, including the Walton fammily, haunts the American economy.
Consumer spending is 70 percent of economic activity, but consumers are also workers. And as income and wealth continue to concentrate at the top, and the median wage continues to drop - it's now 8 percent lower than it was in 2000 - a growing portion of the American workforce lacks the purchasing power to get the economy back to speed. Without a vibrant and growing middle class, Walmart itself won't have the customers it needs.
Most new jobs in America are in personal services like retail, with low pay and bad hours. According to the Bureau of Labor and Statistics, the average full-time retail worker earns between $18,000 and $21,000 per year.
But if retail workers got a raise, would consumers have to pay higher prices to make up for it? A new study by the think tank Demos reports that raising the salary of all full-time workers at large retailers to $25,000 per year would lift more than 700,000 people out of poverty, at a cost of only a 1 percent price increase for customers.
And, in the end, retailers would benefit. According to the study, the cost of the wage increases to major retailers would be $20.8 billion - about one percent of the sector's $2.17 trillion in total annual sales. But the study also estimates the increased purchasing power of lower-wage workers as a result of the pay raises would generate $4 billion to $5 billion in additional retail sales.
This seems like a good deal all around.
Robert B. Reich, Chancellor's Professor of Public Policy at the University of California at Berkeley, was Secretary of Labor in the Clinton administration. Time Magazine named him one of the ten most effective cabinet secretaries of the last century. He has written thirteen books, including the best sellers "Aftershock" and "The Work of Nations." His latest is an e-book, "Beyond Outrage." He is also a founding editor of the American Prospect magazine and chairman of Common Cause.
half century ago America's largest private-sector employer was General
Motors, whose full-time workers earned an average hourly wage of around
$50, in today's dollars, including health and pension benefits.
Today, America's largest employer is Walmart, whose
average employee earns $8.81 an hour. A third of Walmart's employees
work less than 28 hours per week and don't qualify for benefits.
There are many reasons for the difference - including
globalization and technological changes that have shrunk employment in
American manufacturing while enlarging it in sectors involving personal
services, such as retail.
But one reason, closely related to this seismic shift,
is the decline of labor unions in the United States. In the 1950s, over
a third of private-sector workers belonged to a union. Today fewer than
7 percent do. As a result, the typical American worker no longer has
the bargaining clout to get a sizeable share of corporate profits.
At the peak of its power and influence in the 1950s,
the United Auto Workers could claim a significant portion of GM's
earnings for its members.
Walmart's employees, by contrast, have no union to
represent them. So they've had no means of getting much of the
corporation's earnings.
Walmart earned $16 billion last year (it just reported
a 9 percent increase in earnings in the third quarter of 2012, to $3.6
billion), much of which went to Walmart's shareholders - including the
family of its founder, Sam Walton. The wealth of the Walton family now
exceeds the wealth of the bottom 40 percent of American families
combined, according to an analysis by the Economic Policy Institute.
Is this about to change? Despite decades of failed
unionization attempts, Walmart workers are planning to strike or conduct
some other form of protest outside at least 1,000 locations across the
United States this Friday - so-called "Black Friday," the biggest
shopping day in America when the Christmas holiday buying season begins.
At the very least, the action gives Walmart employees a
chance to air their grievances in public - not only lousy wages (as low
at $8 an hour) but also unsafe and unsanitary working conditions,
excessive hours, and sexual harassment. The result is bad publicity for
the company exactly when it wants the public to think of it as Santa
Claus. And the threatened strike, the first in 50 years, is gaining
steam.
The company is fighting back. It has filed a complaint
with the National Labor Relations Board to preemptively ban the Black
Friday strikes. The complaint alleges that the pickets are illegal
"representational" picketing designed to win recognition for the United
Food & Commercial Workers (UFCW) union. Walmart's workers say
they're protesting unfair labor practices rather than acting on behalf
of the UFCW. If a court sides with Walmart, it could possibly issue an
injunction blocking Black Friday's pickets.
What happens at Walmart will have consequences
extending far beyond the company. Other big box retailers are watching
carefully. Walmart is their major competitor. Its pay scale and working
conditions set the standard.
More broadly, the widening inequality reflected in the
gap between the pay of Walmart workers and the returns to Walmart
investors, including the Walton fammily, haunts the American economy.
Consumer spending is 70 percent of economic activity,
but consumers are also workers. And as income and wealth continue to
concentrate at the top, and the median wage continues to drop - it's now
8 percent lower than it was in 2000 - a growing portion of the American
workforce lacks the purchasing power to get the economy back to speed.
Without a vibrant and growing middle class, Walmart itself won't have
the customers it needs.
Most new jobs in America are in personal services like
retail, with low pay and bad hours. According to the Bureau of Labor
and Statistics, the average full-time retail worker earns between
$18,000 and $21,000 per year.
But if retail workers got a raise, would consumers have to pay higher prices to make up for it? A new study by the think tank Demos
reports that raising the salary of all full-time workers at large
retailers to $25,000 per year would lift more than 700,000 people out of
poverty, at a cost of only a 1 percent price increase for customers.
And, in the end, retailers would benefit. According to
the study, the cost of the wage increases to major retailers would be
$20.8 billion - about one percent of the sector's $2.17 trillion in
total annual sales. But the study also estimates the increased
purchasing power of lower-wage workers as a result of the pay raises
would generate $4 billion to $5 billion in additional retail sales.
This seems like a good deal all around.
Robert B. Reich, Chancellor's Professor of Public
Policy at the University of California at Berkeley, was Secretary of
Labor in the Clinton administration. Time Magazine named him one of the
ten most effective cabinet secretaries of the last century. He has
written thirteen books, including the best sellers "Aftershock" and "The
Work of Nations." His latest is an e-book, "Beyond Outrage." He is also a founding editor of the American Prospect magazine and chairman of Common Cause.
In the Bronx, Distilling the Spirit of Puerto Rico
By KARA NEWMAN
A trip to visit the famous Bacardi rum distillery in Puerto Rico inspired a doctor to open the only distillery in the BThursday, November 22, 2012
Man Arrested in Deaths of 3 Brooklyn Merchants Is Called ‘Serial Killer’
By J. DAVID GOODMAN
Salvatore Perrone, of Staten Island, was charged in three killings, and
the police commissioner said Mr. Perrone had been seeking more victims.
Wednesday, November 21, 2012
Infographic
The Onion's Guide To Hosting A Perfect Thanksgiving
Every host wants to pull off the perfect holiday gathering with a delicious, stress-free meal that leaves friends and family happy and satisfied. Here are some helpful tips to ensure your Thanksgiving is pleasant and memorable:- Accommodate your vegan guests by providing a few unappetizing dishes
- If guests bring dishes of their own, give the dog a bite first to confirm none is laced with poison
- Invite guests to lend a hand in the preparation by periodically dropping a utensil in the kitchen, shouting an obscenity, and slamming the oven door shut
- Instead of worrying about dirty dishes, leave them outside overnight for the raccoons to lick good and clean
- Keep bringing out food to avoid participating in any conversations
- I told you a thousand times to cook the stuffing in a separate dish, and now it’s all soggy. What the fuck is wrong with you?
- Say a phrase like “Here it is!” or “It’s time, everybody!” when bringing out the turkey
- Have children sit at a smaller table so they feel gigantic
- Cook a dish representative of each guest’s ethnicity and then say, “This is for you,” as you hand it to them in front of everyone
- Avoid potentially awkward situations with creative seating arrangements; for example, try putting a chair or two on top of the table and maybe one in the bathroom
Tuesday, November 20, 2012
Michael Moore | An Open Letter to President Obama
Michael Moore, MichaelMoore.com
Michael Moore: "All that stands in the way is your understandable desire to sing 'Kumbaya' with the Republicans. Don't waste your breath. Their professed love of America is negated by their profound hatred of you. Don't waste a minute on them. Fix the sad mess we're in."
READ MORE
Michael Moore, MichaelMoore.com
Michael Moore: "All that stands in the way is your understandable desire to sing 'Kumbaya' with the Republicans. Don't waste your breath. Their professed love of America is negated by their profound hatred of you. Don't waste a minute on them. Fix the sad mess we're in."
READ MORE
Monday, November 19, 2012
Quinn poised for Vito vote boost
Council move would help her & ‘grope’ pol
- Last Updated: 3:37 AM, November 19, 2012
- Posted: 1:30 AM, November 19, 2012
EXCLUSIVE
Christine Quinn, who wants to be the first female mayor of New York, is expected to give her blessing to a district change that would help the political career of Vito Lopez — who is accused of sexually harassing four female staffers, sources told The Post.
The redistricting could help elect the alleged lecher to the City Council. In return, Quinn would curry favor with what’s left of Lopez’s Brooklyn political machine for her mayoral campaign.
The district boundary change, expected to slide through the council in three weeks, will flip the disgraced pol’s Brooklyn house one district west, from the 37th to the 34th, by a half-block.
J.C. Rice
A district boundary change could help get disgraced pol Vito Lopez
(above) elected to the City Council. the change would move his Brooklyn
home from the 37th to the 34th district, where he has a better chance of
winning a seat.
Lopez has a vastly better chance of winning the seat from the 34th District, which aligns better with his power base in Bushwick.
The seat is due to be vacated because of term limits next year by Diana Reyna, his former aide but now a political adversary.
“Anything that is done [by the redistricting commission] is done because Quinn wants it done,” said a source close to the commission. “I don’t know why anyone would be doing him a favor.”
“This is a disaster for Quinn,” another insider told The Post. “A woman running for mayor helping the most notorious abuser of women in New York politics. That’s what this looks like.”
Quinn told The Post yesterday that she had nothing to do with moving the district line. A spokesman said she has not decided whether she will oppose the plan.
“I think that is the most ludicrous thing I have ever heard,” she said when asked of Lopez’s reputed council aspirations and of her own role in abetting them. “He wouldn’t get three votes! And I can’t imagine he would do it. He should [just] resign from the Assembly.”
Lopez no longer controls the Brooklyn Democratic Party but is close to new leader Frank Seddio.
He won re-election to his Assembly seat this month with 90 percent of the vote, despite two probes in a sex-harassment controversy that left him stripped of his influential housing-committee chairmanship.
He’s being investigated on the harassment allegations by the Staten Island district attorney.
The loss of power has soured Lopez on remaining in the Assembly, and he’s expected to quit if elected to the council.
Staying in office — any office — helps him financially. Lopez is sitting on about $1 million in unspent campaign funds. He can use it to pay his legal bills but, by law, only while holding elected office.
Quinn appoints five members of the redistricting commission. Mayor Bloomberg appointed seven members. The remaining three were appointed by the council’s minority leader, James Oddo.
The full council has three weeks to reject the plan; if it does not — as is expected — the redistricting goes to the federal Department of Justice, which must green-light it.
sally.goldenberg@nypost.com
Democratic Contenders for New York Mayor Agree Narrowed Field Is a Plus
By DAVID W. CHEN
As news spread of Scott M. Stringer’s decision to run for city
comptroller rather than mayor in 2013, the remaining hopefuls scrambled
to woo his supporters.
Sunday, November 18, 2012
Here's a thought: This Thanksgiving, you might want to give thanks that you weren't/aren't a victim of the white rampage through the Americas that began in the 15th century and resulted in the vast torture, death and exploitation of the indigenous peoples.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FEAST and FAMINE
By Rafael Martínez Alequín
As we approach Thanksgiving 2012, Your Free Press takes this opportunity to wish all its readers a happy Thanksgiving. It is a cliché, but true nonetheless, that our attention is too much diverted by turkey and mythology when it should be focused on gratitude. It is human to react with thanks when life goes well, just as it is natural to curse one's fate when tribulation strikes. Godly men and women turn into atheist, at least temporarily, after watching thousands of children starve. Lottery winners and late-inning home-run hitters attribute their good luck to the personal intervention of the "Good Lord."
It is easy to focus on what we lack, especially in these days of lowered expectations. We don't have, and probably never will have, the prosperity that seems to be our parents' and our own birthright back in the 1950s and '60s. It takes two incomes to buy what one used to provide. Even so, we live as only a very small percentage of the human race has ever been privileged to live. Royalty has gotten by as paupers by comparison. Yet, most of humanity does not live in such plenty. Million in this country and elsewhere do not have enough to eat. Others live under daily threat of death from their governments or from the forces of a foreign government because of the political opinions they hold or are suspected of holding.
Most of us here in America do not suffer these deprivations, though we would be naive if we didn't recognize that all too many of us are ill-nourished or subject to racial and political harassment, and worse. Even across this country, hundreds of thousands are homeless, thanks to the policies of both local and federal governments. Surely we ought to give some thought to the ill-housed and homeless, to the hungry and the brutalized, even as we reflect on our own good luck. What joy can there be in our prosperity if a neighbor down the block, Haiti or in Central and South America or Afghanistan, Bangladesh or the Sudan, is deprived of the basic necessities or tortured for her or his political beliefs?
We can turn away from all of this, just as we eventually must turn away from the television when one too many emaciated Africans or mutilated Mexicans have been put before us. Portraits of happy Pilgrims sitting down to dinner with their happy Indian brothers and sisters seem more appropriate to the season. How much guilt can we expected to bear? Is it our fault we were born into a dominant culture? Must we always be reflecting on the sins of our ancestors and elected officials?
Of course, the answer is no. Life would not be bearable if we had to wear mental hairshirts all the time. Life is to be lived, enjoyed, reveled in. This is a lesson we can learn from the saints, both religious and secular: Those who do the most good seem to enjoy themselves the most. enjoy not just the virtue they practice but all the other good things of life—food, love, intellect, companionship—the entire range of possibility open to human experience. They show us that we have nothing to fear from our own compassion. It does not diminish but enlarges our life. How much greater our joy could be, then, if on Thanksgiving Day, or any other time, we can say that we have tasted the full of life, the joys of our own mind and flesh as well as the happiness and pain of others. That, surely, would be something to be thankful for.
Goodbye, Frustration: Roth Reflects on Retirement
By CHARLES McGRATH
Philip Roth discussed his decision to stop writing fiction: “I knew I
wasn’t going to get another good idea, or if I did, I’d have to slave
over it.”
Saturday, November 17, 2012
Top Prosecutor in Brooklyn Is Rebuked by U.S. Judge
A federal judge chastised Charles J. Hynes, the Brooklyn district
attorney, for defending and promoting a prosecutor in his office whose
illegal tactics sent an innocent man to prison for 15 years.
Friday, November 16, 2012
Hevesi, Jailed for Corruption, Is Given Parole
By DANNY HAKIM
Alan G. Hevesi, who has been incarcerated since April 2011, will be released by Dec. 19, the State Parole Board said.
Ex-Director of Agencies Controlled by Lopez Pleads Guilty to Contempt
By BENJAMIN WEISER and WILLIAM K. RASHBAUM
Christiana Fisher, the former director of social service agencies that
Assemblyman Vito J. Lopez controlled, admitted she had allowed
inaccurate documents about a salary increase to be delivered to a grand
jury.
Thursday, November 15, 2012
You Didn’t Build That Alone!
The
suggestion that I reflect on lessons learned from my six decades’ love affair
with real estate has been thought-provoking. My first thought was of Isaac Newton’s comment about seeing
further by standing on the shoulders of giants.
Lessons From the Past, Guidelines for
the Future
By Daniel Rose
November
2, 2012
It
has been my good fortune to have learned from a number of giants of our
time. Their message about the
importance of character and
competence—doing the right thing and doing it with professionalism—has been proven time and again. Learning not the “tricks of the trade”
but “the trade itself,” and earning a reputation for reliability and for
operational expertise have always been a winning combination.
Another
message is the importance of understanding the “conventional wisdom” of the
moment but also knowing when it is crucial to think “outside the box.” Our tendency is to assume that all
trends continue, but in the real world fluctuating economic cycles and
demographic changes, changes in public taste or values, and the occurrence of
“black swan” (unforeseeable) events do occur. Charles Mackay’s 1841 classic Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds—which should
be on every student’s required reading list but never is—tells of the “bubbles,”
manias and witch-hunts of the past and those that inevitably will occur in the
future. “Bernie Madoff,”
“sub-prime mortgages,” “Lehman Brothers”—these are stories with old plots but
new names.
In
America today, we are at economic and social inflection points whose timing and
impact are unclear, unlike the decades after World War II when my career began.
From
the mid 1970’s, when I first saw
116 acres of nearly empty fields across I-95 from the Pentagon, to the moment
in 1991 when Pentagon City received the Urban Land Institute award for the
nation’s best mixed use development, what I was doing seemed obvious. Similarly, developing office towers in
Boston’s burgeoning financial district in the 1970’s—when good sites, enthusiastic public
officials, plentiful prospective tenants and abundant mortgage money were all
available—seemed like “shooting
fish in a barrel,” as was my brother Fred’s development of residential towers
in Manhattan. No one would claim
that today’s paths are as clear.
At
this moment—Autumn 2012—the problems of the national economy are so formidable
that they overshadow everything else.
American resilience, flexibility and common sense ultimately will prevail.
But it may require a crisis and an aroused citizenry demanding that our
short-sighted legislators retreat from the destructive partisanship and resulting gridlock that
make it impossible for government to function effectively. Our excessive government expenditures
and inadequate tax revenue produce deficits that are not sustainable, and
Americans are worried.
To
make matters worse, public confidence in our national institutions is at an
all-time low. America is suffering from a profound crisis of authority; we have
little trust in the integrity or competence of our political leaders, our
bankers, our corporate chieftains, our educators, our news media, our law
courts, even our religious leaders.
When polls show a 10% public approval rating of the job
Congress is doing, one wonders on what planet that 10% is living.
Fears
of a “fiscal cliff”--$600 billion in automatic tax increases and governmental
spending cuts set for the end of this year—are already dampening private
spending, postponing business investment and coloring short term economic
decisions. Uncertainty about tax
rates, the continuity of
government programs and the threat of another governmental shutdown over a debt
ceiling increase encourage caution which weakens an already feeble recovery. Add negative external factors—a
worsening Eurozone crisis, slower growth in China and in emerging-market
economies, turmoil in the Middle East which may lead to higher oil prices—and
it is difficult to be optimistic in the short term. With interest rates historically low, government options are
few. After the 2012
elections, Congress will be under pressure to face the entitlement reform and increases in
revenue we desperately need to balance our budgets over time; but short term
pain seems likely.
The
pendulum always swings back eventually, however. 2015 is the year auto industry forecasters predict the first
16 million car sales per year since the financial crisis began; and just as
current pessimism can be a “self-fulfilling prophecy,” so can auto industry
optimism. Volkswagen is opening a
new plant in Chattanooga, planning to double its U.S. sales. Honda is expanding production
facilities in Greensburg, Indiana; Kia is expanding in Georgia, and Hyundai in
Alabama—all these facilities will be ready before 2015.
Goldman
Sachs expects housing starts to reach 1.4 million in 2015, up from 700,000 this
year. The durable goods sector of the economy—which produces products that last
more than three years—also is preparing for an upsurge in demand in 2015. The multiplier effect will be
impressive. By 2015, personal debt
is likely to be reduced, home equity values increased and, most important, America
is predicted by some to achieve energy independence from Middle East oil by
then, with a corresponding lowering of oil prices.
Although
Europe may face an economic and social “lost decade”—as Japan did in the 1990’s—our economy can rebound if our legislators make the short term, intermediate term
and long term compromises and
trade-offs
indicated in “Simpson-Bowles” thinking ($3 trillion in budget cuts and $1
trillion in added revenues over the coming decade). Reduced military budgets will require informed discussion
and deliberation about our engagement in “wars of necessity vs. wars of choice”
(Richard Haas) and about fighting our battles by “hard vs. soft power” (Joseph
Nye).
When
Americans spend less on consumer
goods and invest more on education, scientific research and public
infrastructure (and infostructure); when we borrow less and save more; when an
appropriate balance between “public goods” and “private goods” is restored; when
“equality of opportunity” again becomes an accepted American goal, and when our
politicians are no longer openly for sale to the highest bidder, we can regain
our momentum toward a constructive future.
No
crystal ball is unclouded and there are no easy answers, but we must make
prudent “guesstimates” and assess reasonable probabilities. In the world of real estate, Joel
Kotkin believes that the suburbanization of America will continue; but Alan Ehrenhalt points to trends showing
exurbia shrinking, suburban middle classes re-attracted to the city and some
inner city poor moving to older suburbs. If the tax-deductibility of home
mortgage interest is lessened or mortgage lending standards are tightened, the
negative impact on suburbs will be significant. Richard Florida feels that future workers will change jobs
more frequently and will prefer the flexibility that renting homes rather than
owning them permits. Edward
Glaeser praises high density center city development for its face-to-face
interaction, stimulus to creativity, competition, social and economic diversity
and social mobility. Everyone
predicts continuing gentrification (Harlem is now 10% middle income non-black
and Jane Jacobs would be dismayed to see her economically-diverse West Village
now commanding the highest rents in New York). That future development will be ecologically sound and
environmentally sensitive is a given.
My
own belief is that high density rental housing—with smaller apartments, smaller
rooms and lower rents—built over
suburban mass transit stations (with retail and recreational facilities
adjoining) will be an increasingly popular model. The
appeal of housing, retail, recreational and cultural facilities in downtown
office and industrial centers will
continue to increase; Rose
Associates’ current highest quality residential conversion of the 66-story, one
million sq. ft. Art Deco office
tower at 70 Pine Street near Wall Street is an example. The conversion of unused rail
facilities into Lower Manhattan’s wildly successful “High Line” is another.
Over
the long term, the mutually reinforcing factors of increasing automation and
globalization will transform American society. The automation story is told eloquently in the recent N.Y.
Times headline “Skilled Work Without the Worker”; and globalization’s impact on
sending jobs overseas is universally recognized. The prospect of well-paying high tech and managerial employment
for the well-educated few and low-paying “service” employment for the
less-educated is a challenge our
society must face constructively.
Educating
our youth appropriately in light of the new socio-economic patterns requires
dramatic new educational thinking.
Stimulating
economic growth and increasing national income while apportioning the proceeds
appropriately require new
economic thinking.
Balancing
the needs of the young, the old and the underprivileged while providing
necessary incentives and rewards for those producing our income require new
social thinking.
A) Education
In 1870, when British factory owners found that their
illiterate workers could not compete effectively against literate German factory
workers, and when British politicians realized that the Reform Bills of 1832
and 1867 had given the vote to illiterate farmers who could vote against them,
Britain passed its first compulsory education law not to benefit the workers and farmers but to help the nation (i.e. the rich and powerful). In 21st century America, the
1% must realize that an educated, motivated and productive 99% is in their
best interest in an internationally competitive world.
Universal pre-school education—which instills in a
child the self-discipline, self-confidence, curiosity and future-mindedness
that are necessary pre-conditions for later educational success—is an important
first step. And the message
must continue through elementary school to avoid “Head Start fade-out.” The rest of the world—especially China
and India—is increasingly providing good pre-schooling. Europe already does—98% of Finland’s
children receive excellent pre-schooling while fewer than half of American
children do.
High quality teachers (drawn from the top 10% of the
academic pool, as in Finland, rather than the bottom 25% of the academic pool,
as in the U.S.) are key ingredients in the educational process at all
levels. Pay, perquisites and
prestige should be high enough to
attract and keep the best teachers.
Teachers must be held to high entry standards, given opportunity and
encouragement to continue their professional development, and appropriate recognition for outstanding performance.
When some are determined by fair and widely-approved methods to be clearly
inadequate, they should be removed from teaching. (In Europe, teachers are considered professionals; in
America they are viewed as union members, and treated accordingly.)
All children should be encouraged to advance to the
highest level of their potential.
At the high school level, German- and Swiss-style
vocational and apprenticeship options should be offered to those desiring them,
and we must rethink the whole question of education and “life-preparation” for
those for whom conventional schooling has not been successful.
At the college level, we should encourage the
expansion and improvement of community colleges and junior colleges, which can
be either “final” or “transitional” to four year colleges.
A “bigger bang for the educational buck” should be a
national priority, with higher quality and lower costs achieved by longer
school days and school years; so should an end to “lifetime tenure” for senior
professors and more efficient use of faculty, including on-line education used
where applicable and “live” teaching available for face-to-face interaction
when discussion, questioning, debate and personal intellectual involvement are
indicated.
Higher education in the sciences (four year college,
graduate and postgraduate) should be available without cost—as a national
investment—for all who qualify.
Expanded intramural athletics and an end to
inter-collegiate athletics would lower college costs by as much as 10%, and
produce healthier college students and fewer who later become “couch potatoes.”
Producing an educated public with the knowledge and
skills required in the 21st century should be our highest national priority,
and the necessary expenditure to achieve that must be considered our most
important investment in our future.
B) Our Economy
How to stimulate economic growth and how to apportion
the proceeds appropriately are the questions our politicians should be
debating, not “big government” vs. “small government” but how to achieve smart
government—transparent, efficient, respected for its fairness and wisdom. We should consider revenue producers
like the V.A.T. (Value Added Tax), universal in Europe, that tax consumption
rather than production without lessening incentives for high earners (with the
proceeds specifically dedicated to scientific research programs, an
infrastructure bank, etc.).
Since we cannot indefinitely distribute (or
redistribute) wealth we have not created, we must begin by allowing and
encouraging our free market economy to “make the pie bigger.” This requires: a) national savings guided by our
financial sector to productive use by our innovators and entrepreneurs; b)
incentives and rewards for wealth producers and c) necessary investment in
human capital, industrial capital, mineral capital and social capital
(infrastructure, institutions, etc.).
The proceeds (the U.S. $16 trillion GDP) of our “farm”
should then be allocated (by market forces or by government dictate): a) to
reward our “farmers”; b) to replenish our “seed corn,” and c) to distribute to
“others.”
In the past, the American economy grew because we
reinvested much of our proceeds in “the future.” Today we live for the present,
and consume not only all we produce but all we can borrow from others or steal
from the next generation by increasing the national debt and incurring
multi-trillion dollar unfunded pension liabilities.
The economist Arthur Okun wished to be remembered for
Okun’s Law which states “That which is not sustainable will not be
sustained.” Where are you, Arthur,
when we really need you?
C)
Social
Thinking
Although our cyclical economic problems can be dealt
with by short term stimulus and long term rebalancing, our social problems are structural
and more complex.
An important one is the growing stratification in
American life—not by color, religion or ethnicity but by education. The less-educated have demonstrably
fewer “life chances” in employment, health, family stability and life
satisfaction generally. One
quarter of U.S. students do not finish high school, and some 40% have no
post-high school training. How
they will fare in an increasingly competitive world is problematic.
In that competitive world, America appears to be
facing a “new normal” of inadequate job creation for our growing population. The
resulting levels of unemployment and underemployment will likely have profound
social effects.
When Work
Disappears by William Julius Wilson
and Citizens Without Work, the 1930’s classic by E. Wight Bakke, describe the
destructive psychological impact of long term unemployment, and Nobel Laureate
Edmund Phelps’ Rewarding Work
discusses the degree to which our employment—or lack of it—defines us. Providing employment, no matter how
uneconomic, is less destructive than creating a culture of dependency, which
demoralizes and immobilizes its victims. Dealing constructively with this will
be one of our great challenges in the years ahead.
Conclusion:
Future
historians may describe the period from 1945 to 2000 as “America’s Golden
Age.” During that time, “American”
was the thing to be, New York was the place to be, real estate development was
one of the things to do; and I was fortunate to have it all.
Born
the week of the 1929 Great Crash, I celebrated my 70th birthday
shortly before the World Trade Center terrorist attack; and I experienced all
the national moods in between.
The
“we’re all in this together” mindset of the Great Depression; the cocky
determination of WWII; the G.I. Bill and Levittown optimism of the decades
following the war; the sense of relentless progress in the Civil Rights
advances; the social turmoil of the hippy, Beatnik late ‘60’s; the smug complacency of our economic
advances in the ‘80’s and ‘90’s; the troubled soul-searching after the George
W. Bush years; the anxiety of the Great Recession. All were temporary reflections of the conditions of their
time; but the fundamental characteristics of American society remained
constant.
The
current widespread pessimism and loss of self-confidence America is
experiencing will pass in due course; but I believe it will require some upheaval
or the emergence of a charismatic new leader to galvanize us into action.
The
self-absorption and focus on narrow material self-interest that pervades all
aspects of American life today is, I hope, temporary. A more communal-minded, future-minded ethos, with less
emphasis on material possessions and more on life experiences and satisfactions
will prevail in time. And our
young people may focus less on the verb “to have” and more on “to do” and “to
be.” With such values, our rich
won’t deny proper free school breakfasts to our poorest school children; a da
Vinci, a Mme. Curie or an Einstein born to poor parents will have the
opportunity to develop his/her God-given talents; the vitality of our cities,
the dynamism of our cultural life and our justifiable pride in the justice and
fairness of our society will again be the envy of the world.
Printed
on every U.S. dollar bill (above the pyramid) is the motto Annuit Coeptis—“God
has favored our undertaking.” Our
Founding Fathers believed it, and I do, too—now and for the future.
Narrow
material self-interest reigns today, but as Shelley said, “If Winter comes can
Spring be far behind?”
(Daniel
Rose’s talks may be found on www.danielrose.org)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)