LET'S HAVE A REVOLUTION! (Part 3)

EDUCATION

I have arrived at the third and final post of how I’d like to see the stimulus money used to stimulate the economy. Why education? Because in an ever changing, increasing complex technological environment we need to be sure we can provide a competent workforce to retain and expand business.

So, how best to accomplish this? How about first, we abandon “No Child Left Behind?” Our students would be better served by finding ways to attract intelligent, effective, enthusiastic people to teaching. Also, ensuring they all have had breakfast and that each school has adequate supplies of paper, pens, computers, etc.

The imbalance between schools in wealthier areas as opposed to poorer areas needs to be corrected. The federal government needs to establish a minimum standard for every school in the country that must be met by states that want federal funding. Too often, wealthier districts receive a share of the money that they don’t really need thereby reducing what is available to poorer districts.

I’m going to invent a new word here; no, I am not a socialist, I am a societalist. I want to see ALL Americans living their dreams and I don’t want a single child to have to continue living in a nightmare.

Safety in schools has become a real issue and we need to talk to those on the ground to find out what THEY think would be most effective. The answers might surprise us all.

Scholarships for those who cannot afford to go to college without it. Too often it is NOT our best and brightest continuing their education but simply those whose family can afford to send them. Current programs don’t go far enough. We need to be able to walk into the poorest school in the most dismal area of any city and tell a child even if you graduate high school with one pair of pants and no shoes, if you have the grades and the desire, you will go to college. Because the most important thing we can do for the future of our country is to ensure that the best minds are at work on all the challenges our country may face.

And to those who will now argue about the cost, I give you these thoughts. We have the stimulus so we use that to get started. Certain federal tax monies goes back to the states annually even now. Many states have an education lottery so there is that money. And, if we have a healthy economy and educated people getting good jobs, we can have an annual scholarship fund drive. Attach it to the IRS form where the political donation block is already. I’m betting with the right kind of campaign explaining the scholarship program, many Americans will gladly contribute.

Let’s ask for something in return; pay for a doctor’s education and then have him/her work in one of the critical areas of the country for four years. Kind of a domestic Peace Corp. I’m sure we could find other areas in need for graduates in other fields to serve.

I know we have some educators who contribute/visit here at the Swash Zone and I’d be very interested to hear their ideas.

So, what do YOU think about education and the stimulus package?

LET'S HAVE A REVOLUTION! (Part 2)

HEALTHCARE

So, how will healthcare impact the economy and why should it be included in the stimulus package? If we are going to attract and retain businesses, we need to have a healthy workforce and access to health insurance that doesn’t break the bank, either for the individual or the employer.

The problem with throwing out some ideas and solutions is that this one issue is probably the most complex and intertwined with other aspects of the economy.

There are those who believe that illegals, medicaide and frivolous lawsuits are placing such a burden on the system that it is driving up costs for all of us. And they have a point but when dealing with these issues we must also consider the illegal immigration problem in general, welfare and entitlements and legal reforms.

Finding ways to encourage illegals to stay home, work for welfare programs and some sort of tort reform may go a long way to easing these burdens. So, what else could we do?

Of course we have people who don’t want more government involvement and given the federal government’s dismal track record, I can understand their reluctance. But, in being realistic, I do not see how we can bring about any meaningful changes without SOME government oversight and intervention.

There are people who really understand the working of healthcare and advocate some sort of personal account system which, on the surface, sounds like it could be a workable plan in that is promotes consumer responsibility by rewarding them for saving money.

Another interesting plan was commented on by TAO at another blog which is the Swiss model. All Swiss citizens must purchase a government sponsored minimum health insurance plan. It can be deducted from your paycheck like any other deduction. If you want more coverage and can afford it, you are free to purchase it. The one thing this system allows for is the right of a medical facility to refuse treatment to anyone without insurance. While this does relieve the burden currently borne by facilities compelled to treat the noninsured, it also means we would be at greater risk of illegals in this country developing and spreading communicable diseases so how to solve the burgeoning population can’t be ignored.

The cost of medications is another thorny issue that must be addressed as more of the poor and elderly have to decide between the electric bill and their pills. Why do we pay so much more for medications than even our closest neighbors in Canada? I’ve heard many explanations but the one that seems most plausible is this; while drug company medications enjoy a protected patent period in the US, no such agreements exist in other countries. If they want to sell their wares abroad, they must negotiate the pricing or the other countries simply threaten to produce a generic. The drug companies claim that the higher prices they can get here and not in other countries go toward funding research. Seems like we can find a way to help fund some research, let the drug companies pony up a little and stop this protection racket that has broken our backs. I don’t mind paying for medication and even a little more to go toward research but we have carried the whole load for far too long.

So, what would YOU like to see happen in healthcare reform?

INTERNATIONAL WOMEN’S DAY 2009

Yesterday (March 8, 2009) was International Women's Day. In the spirit of starting a new tradition, let us honor the women of the Swash Zone, including our contributors Maleeper, Rockync, and Squid; our daughters, mothers, sisters, and wives; and our friends across the blogosphere, Cara, Interrobang, Jennifer, Libby, and Lindsay, and others too numerous to mention.

In 1975, International Women’s Day won official recognition by the United Nations and is now a national holiday in 16 countries including Canada, China, Armenia, Russia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Bulgaria, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Macedonia, Moldova, Mongolia, Tajikistan, Ukraine, Uzbekistan and Vietnam … but sadly not the United States.

Below are some of the global United Nation themes used in past International Women's Day commemerations:

- 2008: Investing in Women and Girls
- 2007: Ending Impunity for Violence against Women and Girls
- 2006: Women in decision-making
- 2005: Gender Equality Beyond 2005: Building a More Secure Future
- 2004: Women and HIV/AIDS
- 2003: Gender Equality and the Millennium Development Goals
- 2002: Afghan Women Today: Realities and Opportunities
- 2001: Women and Peace: Women Managing Conflicts
- 2000: Women Uniting for Peace
- 1999: World Free of Violence against Women
- 1998: Women and Human Rights
- 1997: Women at the Peace Table
- 1996: Celebrating the Past, Planning for the Future

The question for today: What would be an appropriate theme for International Women's Day 2009?

Questioning Profanity

This is a post about the word F*** & the increasing inability of our world to imaginatively & sensitively communicate. So those of you with sensitive eyes might want to stop reading.

I’m old enough to remember a time when to say the word “F***” was considered oh so crude & boorish. Down right offensive even. And for those of us of the female persuasion – tantamount to creating a small scandal.

But no more. The word “F***” is now freely & boldly used by both genders & by people of all classes, creeds, religions, etc, etc, etc. For we on the western side of the Atlantic this is a fairly recent development. We are still swaggeringly making use of this word to sound oh so daringly cool. But then there are the Brits who seem to use the word so often (for so long) that I’m not entirely sure what they actually think it means anymore. As for the rest of the world – my feeble impression is that it is similarly following us all down the road of rhetorical despair.

(Lord only knows what F*** sounds like in other languages.)

Now – speaking HONESTLY for myself – if anyone were to hear what I say under my breath, muttering to myself throughout the day, one would hear the word “F***” uttered freely, with great frequency & often with gusto. Somehow it just seems to fit so many different moods & situations. However – I try to limit my use of the word “in public” or out loud for all to hear. When I do so slip it sends a message to the hearer – "gee . . . Squid is really worked up about such & so or Squid is passionate about such & so . . . . . . or . . . . . don’t mess with Squid ‘cause she’s having a moment."

Now I try not to ever cause offense & genuinely am extremely careful about whom I allow to hear me say THE word. My parents would keel over whilst swooning if ever they heard “F***” escape their daughter’s lips. My poor mother cringes whenever she hears me use the word “sucks” – an absolutely favorite word of mine. Suits more situations even than "F***." It would never occur to me to use the “F-word” in a professional context. I would also never aim the word at anyone in the manner of “F*** you!” – nope – that’s too offensive for me to say to anyone no matter how angry I may be.

OK – so now that I have confessed to my own rhetorical transgressions . . . there are times when I am acutely aware of the over use of this word – increasingly so – in my world – and I am not just referring to the sound of “bleeping” on TV reality shows . Is the tossing off of this word becoming so acceptable that it is beginning to lose its bite, its radical-ness, its bluntness – or whatever mystique it has ever laid claim to? And if so, what does this mean? Are we becoming such a boorish culture that we have lost the ability to express ourselves in any more creative of a fashion? Are we now so devoid of sensitivity that we do not care who we offend? And – if we keep using the word so much that we completely desensitize ourselves to its actual meaning (which in truth, is quite offensive depending on how the word is used – Mother-f***** is extremely offensive I think) then what will we do next? What word in our language can top "F***?" Is there such a word? The “C-word” is also rising in popularity (much to my utter dismay) though its gendered specificity makes it even more offensive – another discussion for another day perhaps. “F***" is a much more egalitarian word – I’ll give it that much!

Any my final ULTIMATE question – to what extent does our use of language define us as individuals? And as a culture? As a society? Honestly holding myself up to scrutiny - What does it say about Squid that she frequently declares that things "suck" & curses "F***" under her breath?

So those are my rhetorical thoughts for the day. Even we on-line folk, it occurs to me, have an abbreviation for it – do we not? “WTF?” Comments are welcome, but please tread carefully – let’s not cause offense to anyone. OK?

LET'S HAVE A REVOLUTION! (Part One)

I made a comment about having a new revolution, somewhat tongue in cheek, in the comment section of Shaw’s blog, Progressive Eruptions. I’ve also been engaged in dialog over at Jenn’s Thinking Out Loud about how would WE want to see our tax dollars spent and the seed of an idea was formed…

We are not so unlike those radical rascals back in 1776 who became increasing dissatisfied with an unresponsive government and finally decided to take matters into their own hands, which started a grassroots movement, which started a revolution, which formed a country.

Myself, I have been increasing dissatisfied and frustrated by progressive administrations and congresses since 1970. Somewhere along the way, there was a total disconnect from the actual PEOPLE who, in fact, ARE America.

While I still believe President Obama sincerely has this country’s best interests at heart, I’m disappointed with the stimulus package. It seems to me a lot of money is being strewn all over the ground with no real strategy as to how it will all come together to stop the bleeding and reverse the depression. While I think programs like tattoo removal for gang members wishing to improve their lot in life is admirable and that STD treatment and education is a big plus, do they belong in the stimulus package?

Here’s another example: My own state of North Carolina plans on using part of the money to rehab a low income housing project that has fallen into shameful disrepair from years of neglect by the state. Yes, short term, it will provide some jobs and after viewing the pictures, the place seriously needs attention, but is that the best use of the stimulus money? Should the state be able to use stimulus money to make up for their irresponsibility? Don’t get me wrong, I want them to improve that housing complex because no child should have to come home to that, but it should be state funds paying for the work.

OK, Rocky, so how do YOU think we should be using the stimulus? Let me first acknowledge that I have no special experience or education in economics, a little in finance and none whatsoever in politics, but it seems to me first you need a list of priorities:

Create jobs, bring in businesses – why can’t the money be used to bring back manufacturers with low interest loans and other incentives, but only those willing to commit contractually to staying in the US. And there are a lot of bright, young minds with great ideas and no cash. Why not pair them with experienced business owners to develop their ideas, create a business plan and a financial strategy and, if their plans look viable and profitable, give them loans with a grace period so they can build their business. More business, more workers, more consumers. Put money into R&D and into market development. And let’s make sure agriculture is included under “industry.” We need cleaner, cheaper, better food production and we need to support research into alternative growing methods, etc.

How about getting a fair trade agreement on the table that’s actually fair to US businesses so they can compete. Bring Canada to the table because they are our closest neighbor and we would progress much further with them as our ally. Once the economy is on an upsweep, we can work on other problems.

Forget wasting money on border walls, etc. Want to solve the illegal immigration problem? Make it more economically feasible for them to stay home! Once we build a solid industry, why not work with Mexico on agreements to allow certain manufacturing processes to go south of the border. Cooperative agreements that are a two way street and benefit everyone. Mexico will have to clean up its act and its streets and improve their infrastructure. We need to start looking at a cooperative union of the Americas much like the EU because that is the future in this globalized society. (I’m sure that’s going to raise some blood pressures!) But I think we can form a mutually beneficial consortium without sacrificing our respective national identities and it may just help to stem the burgeoning illegal immigration problem.

Don’t think my ideas will work? Good, go to the comments and tell me so, but include in your comments why not and what YOU think would work! I want this one post to be constructive and interactive, so please, try to keep the snark to a minimum. But, if you had control over the stimulus money, what would you do with it?

Twinkle, twinkle, evil Starr,

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

Ken Starr, the man who thought you should go to jail for using the word "breast" on the internet even in conjunction with words like cancer and mammography, yet led the taxpayer funded multi-million dollar investigation into the President's sex life and published it on the internet in lurid and pornographic detail, is still alive. Yes, it's amazing, but some reptiles do live a long time.

Starr, the sex-obsessed fighter against dirty pictures and swear words, hasn't changed much, he's just picking on another obsession of his - homosexuals. Ken somehow obtained a law degree and was admitted into the bar somewhere, but really he's a preacher of a puritanical bent and of the sort our founding fathers loathed so much that they eloquently and passionately expressed that loathing in word and deed. One of those deeds and words was the the declaration of independence; that manifesto of the natural and inalienable nature of human rights.

Ken Starr will have none of it. We have no rights but what the government allows and what the government allows, the government can disallow. That may have been a bit much even for George III, but in any event it's at odds with the entire philosophy from which the United States grew and a worldwide quest for freedom from religious and secular tyranny emerged.

Kenn Starr will have none of it. Ken, whose resemblance to a circumcised penis is striking, has the ill nature to go along with his appearance and so is arguing to uphold California's outrageous proposition 8. A majority he says, can simply remove the rights of a minority and so there's no real reason we couldn't restore slavery, expulsion of Chinese citizens and remove the voting rights of women and non white males.

Did I mention that Ken is a Republican? When we put the puzzle piece that is Ken Starr together with other pieces from the Bush Justice Department, we start to see a picture of America that resembles the great tyrannies of the past and present; and America that has been tricked into going not only back to the nations under God we broke from, where the ruler's right came from God and yours, if you had any, were at the grace and whim of that ruler.

How close we are to the precipice -- it's no wonder that we hear such bellowing and howling from the greedy devils. We have come so close, they have made a tower of slime almost tall enough to reach our liberty. They can almost taste our soul.

Obama's bear market

"No thanks, that lifeboat has more equipment than I think it needs, Who could have expected the Liberals to put that iceberg there ( doesn't iceberg sound Jewish?) and besides there's no first class section where my Gucci shoes won't get wet . I think we should all go down with the ship."

Back When George W. Bush set in motion the auto-destruct cycle for our economy, it was customary for the professional blowhards to explain that he had inherited a recession and so it wasn't really fair or proper to call it Bush's recession and since the bubble began to inflate, perhaps we shouldn't call it a recession at all. ( Dow's up, don't bitch that your income isn't.)

Now of course Bush's Debacle is Obama's Bear according to Bloomberg and we can be sure the Republicans at Fox News will explain to us just how he caused it all with his socialist machinations. The recent losses are, says Fox, the market voting against Obama. Let's not dwell on the election they lost when the people voted against Bush.

Unfortunately the Republicans won't go down with this ship. They'll be trying to climb on our shoulders. screaming about "principles" while we drown.

THE FINANCIAL CRISIS EXPLAINED IN SIMPLE TERMS

This is contributed by one of my Octopod offspring:

Heidi is the proprietor of a bar in Berlin. In order to increase sales, she decides to allow her loyal customers - most of whom are unemployed alcoholics - to drink now but pay later. She keeps track of the drinks consumed on a ledger (thereby granting the customers loans).

Word gets around and, as a result, increasing numbers of customers flood Into Heidi's bar. Taking advantage of her customers' freedom from immediate payment constraints, Heidi increases her prices for wine and beer, the most-consumed beverages. Her sales volume increases massively.

A young and dynamic customer service consultant at the local bank recognizes these customer debts as valuable future assets and increases Heidi's borrowing limit.

He sees no reason for undue concern since he has the debts of the alcoholics as collateral (and can purchase credit default insurance from a triple A-rated company like AiG).

At the bank's corporate headquarters, expert bankers transform these customer assets into DRINKBONDS, ALKBONDS and PUKEBONDS. These securities are then traded on markets worldwide. No one really understands what these abbreviations
mean and how the securities are guaranteed.

Nevertheless, as their prices continuously climb, the securities become top-selling items.

One day, although the prices are still climbing, a risk manager (subsequently fired due his negativity) of the bank decides that slowly the time has come to demand payment of the debts incurred by the drinkers at Heidi's bar.

However they cannot pay back the debts.

Heidi cannot fulfill her loan obligations and claims bankruptcy.

DRINKBOND and ALKBOND drop in price by 95%. PUKEBOND performs better, stabilizing in price after dropping by 80%.

The suppliers of Heidi's bar, having granted her generous payment due dates and having invested in the securities, are faced with a new situation.

Her wine supplier claims bankruptcy; her beer supplier is taken over by a competitor.

The bank is saved by the Government following dramatic round-the-clock consultations by leaders from the governing political parties.

The funds required for this purpose are obtained by a tax levied on non-drinkers.

My only caveat: All satires tend to over-simplify a complex situation. This one blames borrowers as if they were deadbeat drunks.  In fact, there were also cowboy lenders who sold sub-prime mortgages that, over time, doubled monthly payments to borrowers.

After the housing bubble burst, mortgaged properties entered a deflationary phase.  As borrowers lost equity in their homes, mortgage debt far exceeded the collateral value of the properties.  As borrowers lost jobs, they could no longer keep up the payments on their homes. All in all, a very sad situation.

So how deep does this crisis go?  The total market for credit default swaps (a form of insurance on these derivatives) is $55 trillion.   Not exactly chump change!

UPDATE: Our contributor, Brian Krenz, has posted a more accurate and detailed account of the credit crisis in the form of a short animatic video.  Have a look here.

About that mystery project I am working on, the tentatively tentacled title is: Broken Pensions - American Dreams Stolen.

Out of touch, off base and irrelevant

Well of course I'm a demented, deranged, hair-on-fire, crazy Liberal Kike, personally responsible for the economic debacle -- at least that's what some Rush Limbaugh supporters tell me and who am I to argue? I'm obviously "out of touch, off base, and irrelevant" in my displeasure with the Republicans -- just like a two thirds majority of America.

The Democrat, liberal, immigrant loving, freedom hating big spenders are taking the country straight to hell now that my fringe element minority of 65% has removed the thrifty, honest and morally upright Republican majority from control -- that is if the "terrorists" don't take over DesMoines and kill us all with flouride first.

Yes, that's right, Republicans stand for limited government, but not just yet, and markets so free they're lawless. They're all for the unlimited freedom to obey, for massive military spending without oversight, for massive transfers of wealth to offshore corporations -- without oversight; and so much do they believe in it, they are happy to listen to your phone calls, read your mail, intercept your e-mails and faxes and peek in your windows to make sure you're happy about it.

What are we going to do, now that they're gone? And how sad it is just when they were about to turn the Democrat sabotaged economy around with even more borrowing, spending and tax cuts for billionaires.

So anyway, when you read John Yoo's memo to Bush in Newsweek asserting that "First Amendment speech and press rights may also be subordinated to the overriding need to wage war successfully," you can be sure it's only the Jew-bastard Liberals lying through their long noses. Even so, unlimited power for the President is only another way of looking at limited government. Ask Rush to explain it to you.

Don't Rush me

Thinking back to the dear dead days of Father Coughlin and the childhood of right wing hate radio, it seems like neither active opposition nor the deliberate ignoring of their brand of theater is as effective as allowing their own success to put them outside the pale of justification for or acceptance of their propaganda. Coughlin whose bigotry and anti-Semitism trapped him when Hitler became an enemy, had his network taken away after he became an embarrassment to the Church and indeed to the country.

Nobody outside of the lunatic fringe can really, if they are honest, think Rush Limbaugh's bombast has been anything other than full support for all that's torpedoed America, from his apparent acceptance of torture, to his steadfast denial of the growing sickness of our economy; from denying the dishonest origins of the Iraq war to the dishonest, scabrous, sleazy and relentless attacks on those who opposed the outrages of the George Bush presidency. He has become identified with the vicious kind of campaign that helped sink the Palin/McCain candidacy by making Obama seem all the more a man of integrity. I don't think I'm being fatuously optimistic to think he may go down with the ship he helped sink.

"I think a lot of people like to hear what he’s saying but I think it’s also a little bit polarizing and confrontational"

said Ron Paul in an uncharacteristic understatement during a telephone interview with CNN's John Roberts this morning.

" I guess the Democrats think its to their advantage if he’s leading the charge.”

I would add that it's to the world's advantage, but that's just my opinion. If I were a Republican, even a more characteristic Republican than Paul, like Michael Steele for instance, who said on CNN Saturday:

“Rush Limbaugh, his whole thing is entertainment. Yes it’s incendiary, yes it’s ugly.”

I would have to agree that it sure as hell is and yes, his dirty, nasty, mean spirited and unencumbered by honesty rhetoric is just the kind of thing to associate him with the party people rightly associate with bringing down a prosperous economy, putting our country in danger and protecting crooks and tyrants in their quest to make a mockery of liberty and the institutions that protect it.

"some of us would like to see an approach that would emphasize personal liberties, civil liberties, looking at the drug war… It’s really the old Republican Party because even Limbaugh was a big supporter of Bush so he doesn’t have anything new either when it comes to bringing our troops home, not expanding the war in Afghanistan."

said Congressman Paul. Some of us of course have been saying that for a number of years -- Democrats to be specific -- and we do remember being called traitors for agreeing with what the "new" GOP now seems to be trying to be seen saying. We remember being called traitors, loonies, dementia sufferers, Marxists and a long list of epithets of unrestrained hyperbole by Limbaugh and his fellow polemicists.

Although as a habitual Democrat, I wouldn't mind seeing Limbaugh go down with his leaky, worm eaten ship of shame, it would be far better for us all if there really were a new Republican Party that really did believe a bit more along Libertarian lines and particularly if it were led by someone who is capable of maintaining a dialog rather than hiding larcenous demagoguery behind a smokescreen of war and pretended patriotism. So far no one but Mr. Paul comes to mind.