Wednesday, December 23, 2015
Christmas Is a Mothers Love
Tuesday, December 1, 2015
UAW Gets Bad Rap
The United Auto Workers (UAW) recently agreed to new, four-year
contracts with auto manufacturers. The
agreements were ratified by the slimiest of margins. A large number of workers, almost a majority,
were, and still are, displeased with their hourly wage – their spendable income
– the income badly needed to stimulate the economy.
As is always the case, the UAW came
under the altogether familiar, harsh and irrational criticism they always
encounter when wages are at the heart of a dispute. Management and their bidders immediately
point to the total compensation package each worker receives to create an image
of greed and unreasonableness within the union and its members.
In early October Fiat Chrysler Automobile (FCA) workers rejected
the first contract offer. What followed
were company press releases designed to divert attention from wage issues to
create the image of extravagant demands.
The releases focused on auto workers earning more than $100,000 yearly
in BOTH wages and benefits at FCA, Ford and GMC. They naturally avoided any discussion of wage
compensation - the heart of the dispute.
So, let’s look at wages. Let’s
see just how greedy these folks really are.
Auto
workers have NOT had an increase in pay for a decade. Under the new UAW agreement “veteran
workers” will receive 3 percent increases in 2015 and 2017. On average the numbers look like the
following:
Current Increases New Yrly.
$15.78
$6.72 $31,470
$16.66
$7.34 $36,109
$17.53
$8.47 $41,870
$18.41
$9.59 $48,589
$19.28 $10.42 $56,181
The new pacts put workers hired since 2007 on a path to full wages within eight years. The membership complained that was too long. It became a major bone of contention.
Next is the fact that different salary levels exist in different plants around the country. Therefore, another response to worker demands was that the total compensation packages in southern plants are some $40,000 less than in northern plants. It is certainly less expensive to live in Alabama than it is to live in a major metropolitan area like Detroit. While Alabamans may live comfortably, those in Detroit are struggling. Using Alabama as a means to club Michigan into submission is no different than sending jobs overseas to reduce wage costs to slave labor levels. This tactic provides not one scintilla of benefit to the American economy.
The numbers clearly reveal that UAW workers are hardly going to get rich. Spendable incomes needed to generate an equivalent lifestyle to that enjoyed in the 1960’s would require wages – JUST A WAGES – to exceed $100,000 today. How negatively would our economy have been impacted if wages had kept pace with inflation? If the average American workers had gradually advanced forward to making the $100,000 a year income commensurate with meeting the demands of inflation, commensurate with maintaining equal levels of spending power over the years, would we have been less prosperous? Based upon today’s realities, auto worker demands for increased wages - spendable income – the income badly needed to stimulate the economy – are hardly out of line. If anything, they are very meager.
Which bring us to benefits.
If we are to believe those costs are exorbitant then we need information that is not readily provided and available. When dealing with the large numbers of individuals under UAW contracts it is safe to conclude the administrative costs alone are likely considerable. Are those costs met with just union dues or are they part and parcel of the health care package contained in the contract? We would also need to know how aggressively union officials seek out and employ the most competitive bids for health insurance products and services.
What we already know is that health care costs alone stretch and burden budgets for everyone today. A family cannot be without that very expensive security and protection. To suggest that auto workers or any other employee is getting fat off of this reality is truly disingenuous.
And the final point: Is the company burdened or threatened by all these deceptively perceived extravagances?
Ford Motor Company reported record profits again this year. As we have seen on more than one occasion, their financial security and mismanagement is insured by federal and state governments as their higher echelon employees enjoy lavish lifestyles.
This is issue and struggle is reminiscent of the awful battle Minnesota Governor Mark Dayton had to fight in attempting to attain increased salary levels for his state commissioners. Why are we so terrified at the prospect of an affluent middle class when we know that was the key factor in ONCE establishing America as the greatest country in the world??? We can be our worst enemies.Saturday, November 14, 2015
Change Never As Easy As Just Voting
Contemporary
American vernacular requires we read between the lines whenever the concept of change
is bandied about.
For example; when the Minnesota Vikings assured us that Percy Harvin wasn’t going anywhere, we all knew his days were numbered. Sure enough, a few weeks later he was a Seattle Seahawk.
Or when a large corporation buys a smaller concern and everyone is assured that nothing will change, we know big changes are on the horizon.
Then there are all those politicians and political pundits who are forever speculating that changes are forthcoming that never materialize. Such will be the end result of our most recent midterm elections.
We will, of course, hear from the Republican faithful. They’ll be boasting that the outcome is a clear and overwhelming mandate for change and the rebuke of President Obama’s policies almost none of which have been enacted during the last six years.
Democrats will be scurrying about scaring their flock into believing the end is near and they had better marshal their forces to avoid cataclysmic destruction in 2016.
Yes – The same old rhetoric. No change there.
How about the fact that the 2014 midterm elections found voter turnout to be dramatically down from general election turnouts? History has shown that midterm voter turnout has steadily decreased since 1840. Further study also reveals this almost always bodes well for Republicans. So, no change there.
Certainly, it is huge that Republicans now have total control of the legislative branch of our government? But wait…Voting trends since 1948 clearly reveal that Americans love divided government. Every President from Harry Truman to now Barack Obama has had to govern with the opposition party in control of the legislative branch during a portion of their time in office. Okay – So nothing changes there.
Certainly, future Republican control of the senate will allow those rascals to easily pass whatever legislation suits their fancy. Gone – ALL GONE - is The Affordable Care Act, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, the minimum wage, unemployment insurance…unless or more accurately until…the Democrats, under Harry Reid’s tutelage, take a page from the Republican’s play book and implement the silent filibuster to block any and all Republican initiatives. THIS REPUGNANT legislative maneuver could have met its demise on January 24, 2013. It survived because Democratic senate majority leader Harry Reid refused to support its extinction thus securing its continuance by a 78 to 16 vote. This was after Reid stated the practice had become abusive and should be suspended. Could it be that ole Harry knew his party would be in the minority by 2015 and therefore didn’t want to lose this dagger in the heart of democracy as a future weapon? Wonder how he would have known that?
And let’s not forget that the president has the veto pen. Anything that does not meet with his satisfaction he can veto and send back to the senate. Unlike the silent filibuster that now requires 60 senate votes to suspend, a veto override still requires a two-thirds majority vote of 66 senators. The Republicans will have 53 or 54 such votes leaving them far short of the necessary punch needed to mandate their will. And hence intransigence lives on.
If change is what we truly seek, it can only come about through the following:
· The bigoted and obstructionist John Bircher Society devotees of congress that now hold their seats under the banner of The Tea Party must be expunged. That means ending the gerrymandering of congressional districts.
· The election of a strong decisive leader to the Oval Office who has the ability to gain and hold unquestionable public support.
· Following the six-point program outlined by former Oklahoma Republican Congressman Mickey Edwards in his treatise on “How to Turn Republicans and Democrats into Americans.”
· A massive uprising by the American people in the form of committed and unrelenting activism.
Change cannot occur without the combination of a large voting contingency dedicated to electing well-intentioned public servants and activism. It will never occur in the hands of those whose primary ambition is the feathering of their own political nests rather than a commitment to the betterment of America. A consensus in conjunction with a strong voter turnout will always result in change…but, that is entirely in the hands of “we the people”.
Voting The Common Good
Elections can be troubling.
The motivations of the electorate in their decision-making process can be based on factors that are void of the general welfare and common good of the nation.
Some make their decision based on fear of the opposition, sometimes outright hatred of the opposition.
Others base their decision solely on political party indoctrination.
Then there are those one issue voters who are seemingly unaware of any possible negative ramifications to our country from what will benefit them the most.
How do we avoid the entrapment of all this clutter to cast a truly civic minded vote? The answer was provided by a wise high school civics teacher. Brother (Christian Brother) Michael Brian emphasized there is no substitute for the truth and the truth may not always be in your own self-interest.
The astute teacher further added that we must all be equally committed to exposing ALL lies and deceit as well as ALL forms of fear and hatred promulgated on both sides of the political spectrum.
Brother Michael concluded by saying this is hard work which, unfortunately, way too few are willing to perform. Then the words that still resonate to this day; “No one ever said democracy was easy. Nothing worthwhile ever is.”
Polarization and tribalism have reached epic levels
in America. This intransigence has resulted in our turning away from political considerations and an along with it an aggressive search for the truth. This in turn has resulted in an abandonment of our civic responsibility to the collective general welfare of the
nation. If we continue to foster this
mindset, we will get ever closer to the day when the Rod Blagojevichs of this
country will occupy the oval office.
Wednesday, November 4, 2015
Vision a Bit Shortsighted
Tuesday, October 20, 2015
Activism Needs Proper Focus
While “Black Lives Matter” (BLM) may be well
intentioned, they lack the proper focus, proper objectives and the skilled and
savvy leadership necessary to positively impact any meaningful change.
First, they must deal with their chosen name; “Black Lives Matter.”
The suggestion that discrimination against blacks in this country should be the only or primary objective diminishes the horrors and importance of others who also suffer discrimination. Latinos, Muslims, gays, women the underprivileged and poor, and in many cases white males are also outcasts and victims of incredible levels of discrimination. Ending black suffering and deaths to any meaningful degree requires fighting all forms of discrimination and hatred. The enemy is bigotry. As long as it has any kind of a foothold in America, on any level, blacks will be always be victimized. Therefore, the title, by its very nature, is misleading and shortsighted. It conjures up doubts as to the proper and the most worthwhile agenda.
The Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and other historically successful civil rights leaders were keenly aware of this reality. King’s efforts extended to the horrible and disgraceful discrimination of war. He railed against the poor and underprivileged being the primary victims of our wars, emphasizing that the privileged - as Robert Kennedy noted – could “hide out” in college while those far less fortunate did the fighting and dying. This correct and necessary moral high ground resulted in King’s receiving strong support within non-black communities to help with his fight. Populist support is necessary to succeed against any form of discrimination.
Next is the problem in attacking the beast at its root causes.
Let begin by affirming the obvious. Of course, black discrimination manifests itself through racist police officers. “Black Lives Matter” is determined to focus on the false premise that that discrimination is the primary and only cause for recent violent police tactics. A review of the record nationwide demonstrates abusive and violent police behavior toward every segment of our population.
Unarmed Alfonso Limon Jr., 21, was shot to death by Oxnard, California police officers. He was of Spanish speaking descent.
Victor Hernandez, also of Spanish speaking decent, was dragged out of a car, tasered and beaten by Roseville, Minnesota police as he lay on the ground. The cops weren’t pleased with his slow response to their commands which stemmed from the fact that Hernandez didn’t speak English.
Then there’s Brandie Redell – a white woman – who was beaten by two Davenport, Iowa cops.
And, of course, there was Tampa, Florida resident Brian Sterner. Sterner is a white paraplegic. He was thrown out of his wheelchair by Hillsborough Country deputy Sherriff Charlette Marshall-Jones. Three other officers looked on without alarm or objection. Jones is a black woman and all three of the police onlookers – two females and one male - where all black.
In reviewing these records,
one quickly learns that some police departments and police officers are infused
with an arrogant mindset. This arrogance permeates demeaning and abusive
encounters. Records show time again rude,
condescending, disrespectable, obnoxious and intimidating police conduct. Strong evidence reveals these are just
isolated incidents but are commonplace. Because
this uncivilized demeanor and verbal abusive has gone unchallenged for years,
police have come to believe they are now also immune from acting in an unlawful
manner. All of this indifference has
resulted in the current widespread cruel and extreme violence that plagues us
today.
This entrenched lack of civility, and NOT JUST racism, is the PRIMARY reason for the violent abuse of power exerted by law enforcement officials. For “Black Lives Matter” to succeed they need to expand their thinking beyond bigotry to include all forms of abusive behavior. Their demands must center on more effective methods in the selection and hiring of officers, vastly improved training programs designed to instill a proper law enforcement mentality. They need to demand additional comprehensive training for current police officers along with periodic psychological testing to determine if their experiences have turned them bitter and revengeful toward the public. They must insist that these and other officers, incapable of the proper mindset and unable to adapt to the rigors of the job, be removed from police departments. Without this focus and agenda, “Black Lives Matter” will fail in their quest to protect the general public, and thus blacks, from unnecessary and brutal methods of law enforcement.
Finally, the cruel and wasteful
loss of black lives extends beyond police departments and needs to be part of
the BLM agenda.
Literally hundreds of young, principally, black males are killed on our streets every year by those who do not have the force of a badge behind their bloodshed.
New Orleans Mayor Mitch Landrieu told the Aspen Ideas Festival that; “something is wrong with our country if young African-American men are being killed in the street in huge numbers and most Americans look away. It’s mass murder in slow motion. America must make combating violence a national priority. If we can mobilize to address tragedies around the world, we can do it at home.”
“Black Lives Matter” has the potential to be an effective movement. Therefore, BLM needs to step up and pursue these additional everyday non-police street carnages every bit as aggressively as they pursue police violence if they wish to be deemed credible and succeed.
Dr. King led a movement that demanded an end to the repression of all the poor and underprivileged in our country, NOT JUST BLACKS. King’s movement included all forms of bigotry and abuse of power. It is these realities and that mindset, along with the proper understanding as to the exact nature of the problem and the corrective measures needed which are crucial to BLM success. For without it, any hope to diminish the needlessly loss of human dignity and life, to any real degree, is nothing more than a pipedream.
Tuesday, October 13, 2015
Media Deterioration Foretold
In the advent of
television, networks executives were willing to accept news programing as a
lost-leader. The noble enterprise was
partially steeped in a responsibility to provide for the common good and general
welfare of the nation. But in a larger sense, they saw an opportunity to create
greater financial gain, through the news, by drawing as large an audience as
possible and then by advertising their entertainment programing during the news
programs. This, they hoped, would lead
to creating greater viewership for their cash cows. Then, with the advertising success of “60
Minutes”, that noble endeavor and thought process was abandoned.
Edward R. Murrow was a journalist in the truest and strictest sense of the word. He threw stones at giants recognizing it was NOT his responsibility to protect them, as we often see today, but to expose them. He clearly understood the primary function of journalism to be the preservation of our Republic – a concept that is lost on the majority of today’s so-called journalists.
The finest dissertation on journalism was Murrow’s speech delivered on October 15, 1958 to the Radio-Television News Directors Association and Foundation. He foretold of the evolution of contemporary news television programming. He warned of the dangers that lay ahead if we failed to recognize the real value in television. His warnings went unheeded and his predictions came to fruition; “If we go on as we are, then history will take its revenge and retribution will not limp in catching up.”
His biggest concern was that money, rather than duty, and responsibility would direct the focus and dramatically dictate the future of broadcast journalism. “Upon occasion, economics and editorial judgment are in conflict. And there is no law which says that dollars will be defeated by duty.”
“Just once in awhile let us exalt the importance of ideas and information. Let us dream to the extent of saying on a given…night, (we select a prime time spot) a time normally occupied by Ed Sullivan (or “Survivor”) is given over to a clinical survey on the state of American education. And a week or two later, a time normally used by Steve Allen (or “Dancing With The Stars”) is devoted to a thorough going study to American policy in the Middle East. Would the corporate image of their respective sponsors be damaged? Would the shareholder rise up in their wrath and complain? Would anything happen? Other than a few million people would have received a little illumination on subjects that may well determine the future of this country and therefore the future of the corporations.”
Today, this recommendation is viewed as a total absurdity. Furthermore, any journalist who wishes to remain employed would never even propose such an idea.
Never mind “a thorough going study” which might jeopardize reports such as the dog that saved Dubuque, or our pressing “need to know” that Charlie Sheen has a plethora of women that shared his home and his bed or the awful threat of jeopardizing Princess Diana’s monopolization of news coverage when Mother Teresa died…“And if there are any historians about fifty or a hundred years from now, and there should be preserved the kinescopes for one week of all three networks, they will there find recorded in black and white, or perhaps in color, evidence of decadence, escapism and insulation from the realities of the world in which we live…”
The problem that remains is that youthful perspectives by both modern day journalists and consumers are solely based upon contemporary exposure. This becomes a major concern in a society where history is no longer taught and is therefore absent from most thought processes – an America where it is easy to conclude, by their actions, that most journalists have never heard of Edward R. Murrow.
What Murrow could NOT foresee was cable television. He saw the threat of manipulation and deterioration of television journalism coming from just three national networks. Murrow’s cautions are now far more pervasive. There are far more news outlets – some filling 24/7-timeframes – most employing Murrow’s predicted sickness of titillation derived from the sensationalism of yellow journalism and a political agenda for profits. Unfortunately, there is only one means to right this ship. Viewership must drastically dwindle causing a severe downturn in advertising revenue. If we refuse or are reluctant to shut them off – to heed Murrow’s wisdom – to pursued only agenda free, credible sources; i.e., “60 Minutes”, PBS News Hour, PBS Documentaries, National Public Radio and Television; then we may indeed and very soon; “…see…the whole struggle…lost.”
Saturday, October 3, 2015
“War on Women” Untenable
It’s a “War on Women” is the contemporary battle cry used whenever any viewpoints or programs offered run contrary to the thinking of a particular segment of our population. It has been used so often and misused so egregiously that it is losing its desired effect.
“War on Women” is dragged out and
bandied about to elicit an emotional response.
Those who disagree with what certain radical female elements support are
typically painted as bigoted. In some cases,
they may be bigoted. However, what is
lost in this tired old cliché is the fact that most are not bigoted. This has the effect of hiding the central
facts and arguments – of shutting down any and all discussion surrounding the
actual nature and truth of the disagreements.
In some cases, those making the accusation are unable to formulate a
rational argument in support of their positions. So, they just paint opposition as bigots and
no such arguments are necessary. There
is no need to present any evidence as to the opposition’s flawed thinking. Afterall, nothing a bigot says should be
given any weight – any credibility. This
is extremely disingenuous.
Women have always been paid less than men in the workplace. It is also true that American businesses have always strived to do whatever they can to lower and keep labor costs down.
This mentality gave rise to labor unions. It has also been the major impetus for closing American based factories and reopening them is countries where slave labor wages can be paid.
Women where gladly embraced in the work force in a number of positions primarily because they could be hired for far less than their male counterparts. This also allowed companies to pay less to their male employees. This in turn created a viable environment that wasn’t previously present to lower wages. With male wages lowered and as never-ending America inflation continued, a two-income family became necessary.
Rates of pay for women in the workplace have nothing to do with a “war on women.” It is precisely what has been transpiring in the American workplace for decades. This is what must be addressed if we truly desire to correct the problem and not some silly notion of bigotry.
The
effort to close planned parenthood clinics, the supreme Court “Hobby Lobby” ruling, limiting abortions to
within the first six weeks of gustation and a whole host of other state
restrictions on abortion practices is not a “War
on Women.” It is a war
on abortion.
There are Americans who see the practice as immoral. They want abortion abuses stopped. In some cases, they want all abortions eliminated. They are focused on what they believe is the saving of human life. None of this has any scurrilous connection to hating women. Finding common ground for reasonable compromises to this contentious issue must be the goal. Adopting a “War on Women” mentality only makes that exceedingly more difficult to accomplish.
Finally, discrimination is discrimination. There is no hiding it, and there should be no tolerance or acceptance of it on any level. Yet we ignore it with regards this issue.
Women have, through their long struggle to gain equality, managed to build a discriminatory environment. There are now various strongholds that only women occupy. There are professional positions and in variety of industries that would never consider a male for employment – ONLY A WOMAN. To be sure, these women are, for the most part, eminently qualified to hold their positions. That is not the concern. The concern is that whenever a woman leaves a position another woman will inevitability fill that vacancy. That certainly is not common when a man leaves a position. What is common is that if the man is replaced by a woman, a man will never again occupy that position. The outrage here is that there is clearly a discriminatory practice that is now acceptable in hiring. No outrage is expressed.
There are so many professional women organizations the list could stretch from New York to Los Angles. “Women In Engineering,” “Women In Broadcasting,” “Alliance For Women in the Media,” “Association for Women in Science” and easily a hundred others. All of these titles clearly communicate that NO MALES are welcome. They are female bastions only. Again, we as a people, have been reluctant to call this behavior exactly what it is – Discrimination.
To further exasperate the problem, women attack anything resembling a male bastion. They demand that any such organization be disbanded and/or severely altered. The “Augusta National Golf Club” in Georgia serves as the best example and therefore the many others references are hardly necessary.
There can be little doubt that anyone who might challenge this thinking and behavior would be charged with initiating a “War on Women.” This intimidation allows for the despicable silence necessary to nurture these injustices.
It is time to move for an end to the double
standard we have adopted toward discrimination and bigotry. It will be almost impossible to progress on many important issues is we fail to allow for far more reasonable and rational discussions to
ensue. Such an approach would obviously demand the suspending of any
and all references to a “War on
Women”
along with any other forms of bias and bigotry.
Monday, August 24, 2015
Laura Jean Needs To Be Emulated
Little Laura Jean |
So why should we care if the Yankees continue to make a mockery out of our most sacred sport? Why? Because it sends a message – a message that legitimizes corruption and therefore weakens not only baseball’s image but American culture and value structure as well.