Another Jobless Jobs Bill

September 26, 2012

Democrats furious that Republicans refuse to support veterans jobs bill creating zero jobs for veterans

_

Last week, Democrats failed to pass S. 3457, the ‘‘Veterans Jobs Corps Act of 2012’’, falling two votes shy when Republicans forced a point-of-order vote, as the bill exceeded spending limits contained in the Budget Control Act.  Had it passed, the measure would have created zero jobs for unemployed, post-9/11 veterans.

Co-sponsor Patty Murray (D, WA) implied her Republican colleagues were using veterans as “political pawns.”  Just before the vote on S. 3457, Senate Democrats shot down a similar GOP bill that would have also created zero jobs for veterans.  Both sides accused the other of being out of touch.

Across the social media interwebs, angry proglodytes slandered Republicans as heartless bastards for depriving needy veterans of zero jobs.

_

Potential Jobs

What exactly would the brainchild of Murray and Bill Nelson (D, FL) have done?

  • Create a pilot program “to assess the feasibility and advisability of providing veterans seeking employment with access to computing facilities” to match vet’s jobs skills with available jobs;
  • Ensure that there are at least one disabled veterans’ outreach program specialist and one local veterans’ employment representative per 5,000 square miles”;
  • Require States to consider military training “when approving or denying a commercial driver’s license” or EMT certificate;
  • Conduct a trial program to provide retraining programs at off-base locations.

These impactful initiatives, costing $1 billion over five years, were to have been funded by making passport applicants pay their back taxes.  Nelson had the gall to call the bill, which was essentially a glorified online resumé bank, “commonsense legislation.”  Tom Coburn (R, OK) described it as “a gimmick” and “crap.”   (Coburn was later caught on a live mic describing the kettle as “black.”)

Check that list again to see if any actual jobs would have been created.  Nope, zero.  But wait — advocates insisted the measure would have “potentially created jobs for up to 20,000 veterans.

That’s $50,000 per potential job.  According to White House figures, 707,000 vets are unemployed.  At this rate, it would cost $35,350,000,000 to provide each of them with a potential job.  We’d need to spend $1,000,000,000,000 to give every unemployed person in America a potential job.

_

Redundant

‘Even so,’  you say, ‘surely we ought to do something to help veterans find jobs?’  Of course.  We already do.

In August, the White House bragged that its Joining Forces Initiative had exceeded its goal of 125,000 vets hired by private employers.  The same companies pledged to hire another 250,000 by 2014.  The top participant in the program, Amazon.com, actively seeks out veterans, and did so long before any financial incentives were offered by the government.

The bipartisan Vow to Hire Heroes Act, signed into law last November, established a slew of job assistance programs with catchy names:

  • The Veterans Job Bank, aneasy to use online service that connects unemployed veterans to job openings with companies that want to hire them”, lists over half a million jobs openings “specifically targeted at Veterans”;
  • My Next Move for Veterans, an “easy-to-use online tool … that allows veterans to enter information about their experience and skills in the field, and match it with civilian careers”;
  • A Veteran Gold Card allows post-9/11 veterans to “access six months of personalized case management, assessments and counseling at the roughly 3,000 One-Stop Career Centers located across the country.”;
  • Hero 2 Hired (H2H), a “comprehensive employment program … that offers everything a … job seeker needs to find their next opportunity” — job listings, those indispensable “career exploration tools,” training resources, “virtual career fairs,” plus nifty Facebook and mobile apps;
  • The Veterans Retraining Assistance Program (VRAP) for 45,000 qualified applicants each year;
  • A hundred hiring fairs sponsored by the Dept. of Commerce, which also went to the considerable effort of creating “strategic partnerships to deal with specific populations of veterans and their unique challenges”;

There’s also a Military Spouse Employment Partnership, a Wounded Warrior Transition Assistance Program, and yet another “virtual employment resource center”, VetSuccess.gov. 

So you can see how GOP senators are such evil fucks for refusing to spend $1 billion on another online job bulletin board.
_

CCC My Ass

S. 3457’s sponsors said the bill was “inspired by”  FDR’s Civilian Conservation Corps.  It’s nothing of the sort.

The CCC was operated by the Army and directly employed 250,000 young men at a time, providing them good pay, shelter, food and clothing. They planted 3 billion trees, created 800 new parks, upgraded nearly every state park in the nation, stocked nearly a billion fish, built hundreds of thousands of miles of roads and trails, performed erosion control on 40 million acres of farmland, and spend 6.5 million work-days fighting fires.  The CCC ran for nine years, cost a bargain $3 billion, and gainfully employed a total of 2.5 million.

S. 3567 is a resumé posting service.

We’re 1,345 days into obama’s administration, and that’s the best he and the Democrats can come up with.  In comparison:

March 4, 1933  FDR takes office

March 27           CCC bill introduced to Congress

March 31           Congress passes CCC

April 7                First enrollee

July 1                  1,500 CCC camps running with 317,000 participants

_

200,000 Chain Saws

The two parties in power offer conflicting approaches to job creation.  Democrats rely on a recipe of hiring incentives, retraining programs, re-invent Monster.com several times over, more retraining programs.  The GOP places it faith in tax breaks, tax breaks, spam, easing regulations, tax breaks, and spam. Truth is, neither the Gops nor the Dems have any clue whatsoever how to create jobs, for veterans or anyone else.

As noted above, under the Democrats’ brilliant plan, it would take $35 billion to help every unemployed vet check online to see if by chance a job was waiting for them.  I have a plan to use that dough to give 250,000 out-of-work vets — the same number the CCC employed — a job for the next three years.  And I’ll put them to good use, clearing the dangerously overgrown forests of the American West.

Wildfires consumed a record number of acres this season, costing billions in damages and related costs.  Thanks to global warming, wildfires are seven times worse than they were in the 1970’s.  Unless the overgrowth is cleared, things will only get worse.

I’ll ask the US Military to provide some planning and logistical support gratis, and the program is fully funded without need to increase the federal deficit.

I call it the War on Forest Fires Program (WOFF)

Scope

WOFF is a three-year program with a goal of:  a) reducing wildfire volume by 1/3;  b) providing gainful employment and on-the-job training for 250,000 veterans currently without jobs.

WOFF will employ crews of ex-military personnel across the Western United States to clear overgrown brush and trees on Federal, State, and local land.  Private landowners will be able to contract with WOFF to clear their land.

The total cost of the program is $35.7 billion, and is fully funded by savings in the military budget.  WOFF will also generate significant cost savings to the Federal, state, and local governments in the billions of dollars, resulting from reduced losses to wildfire.  Additional benefits will be acrued from indirect stimulus of the economy through purchases.

Personnel & Salary

All 227,000 unemployed veterans of the post-9/11 era will be employed in fuel-reduction activities.  Pay will be based on experience and former rank. They will receive, on average, the median the 2012 Army E5 salary, or c. $34,000.

A further 23,000 veterans of the Gulf war era will be hired for supervisory and administrative roles.  Pay will be based on experience and former rank. They will receive, on average, the high end of the 2012 Army E6 salary, or c. $40,000.

Housing, food, and clothing will be provided for all participants in the program, as will travel expenses for regular familial visits.

During the fire season, the entire compliment of WOFF will be available to augment existing civilian fire-fighting personnel.

Salary

Old vets             $2.8 billion

Young vets       $25.9 billion

Total salary      $28.7 billion

Equipment

Forestry equipment will be purchased from American manufacturers.  While the actual equipment required will be diverse, the following examples can serve as a rough estimate of costs (extensions reflect a 15% volume discount.)

Item                   Qty.            Ext.

pulaski             216,000    $27,000,000

chain saw       216,000    $171,000,000

‘bobcat’              10,000   $204,000,000

forestry dozer     1,000    $102,000,000

Total equipment               $504,000,000

All additional equipment and materials shall be provided on loan, at no charge, from the US Military.

Administrative Costs & Supplies

Assume 25% overhead based on salaries.

$6.5 billion

Total Program Cost

$35.7 billion

Funding

To fund the program, I shall not rely on passport applications.  First thing we need to do is end the war in Afghanistan.  It’s costing us $300 million a day, and I’m earmarking the first 119 days’ of savings for WOFF.

Alternately, 23 of the 4,702 oversees military bases (4.9%) can be shut down for an average savings of $1.5 billion per base.

Program Benefits

Significant financial benefits will be realized from WOFF.

A detailed analysis by The Western Forestry Leadership Coalition estimates the total costs of wildfires exceeds $3,000 per acre.

To date in 2012, 8.7 million acres have burned in the United States, for a total cost of around $30 billion dollars.

If WOFF’s goal of reducing fires by 1/3 is achieved, the program will have paid for itself in just over three years.

_

How Hard Can it Be?

It took FDR 36 days to put a quarter of a million men back to work with the CCC — just one of the many programs he implemented in his first 100 days.  The current Dems and Gops in Washington have spent the past twelve years bickering, posturing, and floating asinine schemes while our economy dies and one in five can’t find work.

As my back-of-the-envelope exercise above shows, It shouldn’t be that hard to come up with real solutions to our pressing problems.  Yet, apparently, it is beyond the faculties of our Congress and our President.

Patty Murray and Bill Nelson are incompetent, delusional imbeciles.  Their colleagues in Congress, on both sides of the aisle, are all incompetent, delusional imbeciles.  (Bernie Sanders gets a pass.) So, let’s fire the lot of them and elect instead some ordinary citizens with brains and real common sense.

And vote for Jill Stein.

(c) 2012 by True Liberal Nexus.  All rights reserved.

Advertisements

Why Occupy Failed

December 6, 2011

Occupy Wall Street has failed.

No doubt many will protest  this judgement, noting that the unconventional movement did much to raise awareness or change the public discussion.  Others will insist that Occupy has yet begun to fight, and will be back in the Spring, pitching tents and drumming on drums in a city plaza near you.

Yet by its own measure, the movement is a failure.  “We will continue to occupy” the several Occupys assured us, “until our demands are met.”  With the dispersal of the OLA camp, the last of the 24/7 presences are gone.  The occupii exited with barely a whimper.  The many homeless, who’d swelled the occupii ranks, simply returned to their usual places of encampment.  The rest sought the refuge of that room above the garage their parents always keep ready for them.

Even had the physical occupations continued, the movement remained stalled so long as it was incapable formulating any specific goals to “occupy” for.  Three months of Working Groups and twice-daily General Assemblies could not come up with a uniform list of demands, or even a “consensus” on whether to have any demands at all.


Occupying for Occupying’s Sake

The insistance on physically holding public spaces was based on a false reading of the “Arab Spring” and Tahrir Square protests.  In Tunisia, Egypt, or Syria, where anti-government protests are quickly and brutally broken up, it was necessary to maintain a continuous presence.  In America, where the government allows its citizens to protest quite freely, a 24/7 presence is neither required nor justified.

By protesting ’round the clock, the occupii acted like cargo cultists, blindly aping the Egyptians’ tactics, treating “occupation” as some magic talisman that brings about revolution.

Before very long, the occupations became about little more than the right to occupy.  The First Amendment’s protection of free speech and peacable assembly was twisted into the right to commandeer public property indefinitely.  In places like Oakland, factions of anti-police, anti-city hall malcontents hijacked the protests.  The original bogeymen, bankers and politicians, were forgotten as the occupii directed their rage at cops, mayors and college deans.


Occupussy

How quickly it’s forgotten that the successful revolution in Tunisia was sparked by the death of a fruit vendor at the hands of the police.  That the protestors in Tahrir Square endured beatings and stabbings by mounted pro-Mubarek thugs.  That protesters in Syria are murdered daily, yet more keep coming out.

Here in the US, the occupii found it intolerable when Oakland restricted their protests to the hours of 6 a.m. to 10 p.m., rejected as insulting Los Angeles’ offer of free office space and farmland, cried ‘tyranny’ when New York asked for a few hours to clean Zucotti park.  If the occupii want to know real tyranny, they should visit Argentina, and speak to the relatives of the 30,000 anti-government protesters who “disappeared” during the 1970s.  They should visit the streets of Berlin, Budapest, or Prague, and imagine ‘occupying’ while a 36 ton T-54 trundles down at you.  They should google the words “tiananmen square.”

Despite their vow to “fight like an Egyptian”, the occupii couldn’t stand up to some “nudging and bumping” by police horses.  The entire movement seemed to melt when hit with a few ounces of pepper spray.  These protesters aren’t tough like the Egyptians — they’re a bunch of occupussies.


We Are Our Demands

Although several regional groups did issue lists of demands, these all proved vague and overbroad.  What started as a singular message  — end corruption on Wall Street — was diffused until every pet cause, every simmering resentment, every inchoate dream, made the roster.

For the occupi cadre, the very concept of issuing specific demands was anathema:

[N]o single person or group has the authority to make demands on behalf of general assemblies around the world.  We are our demands. This #ows movement is about empowering communities to form their own general assemblies…. Our collective struggles cannot be co-opted.

The demand for demands is an attempt to shoehorn the Occupy gatherings into conventional politics, to force the energy of these gatherings into a form that people in power recognize, so that they can … divert, co-opt, buy off, or … squash any challenge to business as usual.

The unwillingness to articulate concrete demands so frustrated sympathetic observers, they felt obliged to pitch in by drawing up suggested demands for Occupy to adopt.  In the October 12th issue of Rolling Stone, Matt Taibbi offered five, narrowly-targeted goals:

  1. Break up the “Too Big to Fail” monopolies
  2. Pay for your own bailouts via a miniscule tax on stocks trades
  3. No public money for private lobbying
  4. Repeal the carried-interest tax break
  5. Ban upfront bonuses for bankers

In a December 4th editorial, the L.A. Times offered its own list of five demands for OLA:

  1. Sweeping financial reform
  2. Makes taxes more fair
  3. Combat corporate influence in politics
  4. Address rising tuition and student debt
  5. Downgrade marijuana from Schedule I status

[h/t Fionnchu]

While the last two objectives might necessitate spin-off movements (Occupy UC & Occupy Humboldt County) the Times’ list was at least a step in the right direction.


The One, Real Occupy Demand

What Taibbi, the L.A. Times, and most of America failed to realize is that, for the occupii, formal demands are moot.  For the occupii reject our present system of government as unworkable.  Occupy was envisioned not as a protest or rally, rather a revolution.  It’s one goal, one demand: to replace our current system of government with an anarchist, direct democracy.  They truly intended to camp-out in public until the rest of the world agreed to scrap our current civilization and replace it with the occupii’ vision of utopia.

David Graeber, a prominent anarchist, and one of the original organizers of #OWS, explains:

Anarchism is a revolutionary political philosophy, theory, and way of living that strives toward a more free and equal society without government, authority, domination, capitalism, or oppression. Key to the anarchist analysis is its unflinching criticism of authority, or of some people holding established power over others.  Anarchism considers government in any form … unnecessary, harmful, and undesirable…. The General Assemblies and committees within Occupy are experiments in this kind of self-management.

The occupii reject as futile any attempt at working within a system that is “absolutely and irredeemably corrupt.”  What’s the point of asking the government to reinstate Glass-Steagall or reverse Citizens United, when we’re on the verge of abolishing government entirely?  Anarchists wish to see human relations that would not have to be backed up by armies, prisons and police. Anarchism envisions a society based on equality and solidarity, which could exist solely on the free consent of participants.”

Graeber proudly points to occupi’s adherence to five anarchist principles:

1)    The refusal to recognise the legitimacy of existing political institutions — “acting as if the existing structure of power does not even exist.”  Just as Ghandi urged the Indian people to flaunt British regulations on trade, the occupii flaunted city curfews.

2)   The refusal to accept the legitimacy of the existing legal order — “[O]rganisers knowingly ignored local ordinances … simply on the grounds that such laws should not exist.”

3)   The refusal to create an internal hierarchy, but instead to create a form of consensus-based direct democracy — “From the very beginning … organisers made the audacious decision to operate not only by direct democracy, without leaders, but by consensus.”  To avoid either the co-opting of a “formal leadership structure” or a majority “bend[ing] a minority to its will”,”all decisions will, of necessity, have to be made by general consent.”

4)   The embrace of prefigurative politics

“Zuccotti Park, and all subsequent encampments, became spaces of experiment with creating the institutions of a new society – not only democratic General Assemblies but kitchens, libraries, clinics, media centres and a host of other institutions, all operating on anarchist principles of mutual aid and self-organisation – a genuine attempt to create the institutions of a new society in the shell of the old.”


Occupy = Anarchy

And now we understand.  Occupy was never about something as mundane as ending corruption on Wall Street — it was about transforming society from the bottom up. The little occupy camps were demos of the future anarchist utopia to come.  Once the American people saw anarchy in action, they’d realize that “if we are to live in any sort of genuinely [i.e. direct] democratic society, we’re going to have to start from scratch….”

Graeber admits that

We may never be able to prove, through logic, that direct democracy [is] possible. We can only demonstrate it through action. In parks and squares across America, people have begun to witness it as they have started to participate.

The occupii expected to transform society by showing everyone the wisdom & beauty of things like “Positive Speech,” a “less aggressive and more conciliatory type of communication” that avoids “negative statements which close the door to constructive debate.”  Example: “‘Don’t touch that dog or it will bite you’ could be phrased as ‘Be careful with that dog because it could bite you and neither of us would like that.'”

Leaders would be replaced by “Moderators” whose job was to “bring together the general sense of the Assembly rather than follow a protocol, Ideally, this figure should not need to exist. (everybody should respect everybody).”

In fact, all the quirks of Occupy — the GAs, the hand jive, etc. — have long been hallmarks of the heretofore pathetically inconsequential anarchist movement.  These “new forms of organization” are the anarchists’ very ideology, Graeber emphasized in a 2002 New Left Review article. “It is about creating and enacting horizontal networks instead of top-down structures like states, parties or corporations; networks based on principles of decentralized, non-hierarchical consensus democracy. Ultimately … it aspires to reinvent daily life as whole.  (Emphasis added.)

Offering a trial sample of anarchy in action is not the worst strategy, as good historical examples are hard to come by.  Tenuous claims are made to assisting the civil rights movement, Vietnam protests, women’s ERA, and the downfall of Miloslovec. The disastrous Paris Commune of 1871 (see excursus below) is sometimes mentioned, but occupii tend to omit anarchy’s crowning achievement: its crippling, via obtuseness and intransigence, of the Republican coalition in the Spanish Civil War, ushering in nearly four decades of Franco’s fascist tyranny.


Time’s Up

This article began with a declaration of Occupy’s failure.  Its founders are convinced Occupy has already succeeded far in excess of their wildest dreams.  ‘We’ve only just begun’, the occupii insist, ‘just give us more time, and we can change the world.’

Perpetual irrelevance breeds habitual indolence.  Having puttered away for decades in obscure organic co-ops & peace centers, having attended innumerable & fruitless gripe sessions in UU community halls, the anarchists who started Occupy never learned how to act decisively or effectively.  This September, they went virtually unnoticed, as usual, while engaged in their latest, futile fist-shake at society: a tiny protest near Wall St.  Suddenly and unexpectedly, OWS made the headlines — courtesy of one cop’s injudicious use of pepper spray — and ignited a dense duff of accumulated resentment among the general population.

The occupii interpreted this spontaneous public outcry as an acceptance of their radical philosophy.  “[I]f any significant number of Americans do find out what anarchism really is, they might well decide that rulers of any sort are unnecessary.”  In that, they are mistaken.  Ordinary people want direct, concrete action taken now, by leaders using the existing political and societal system.  Ordinary people are not willing to wait until an alternate utopia grows “organically” at the speed of mildew.  Ordinary people are certainly not ever going to join experimental tent communes.  Not in a million years.

The clock has run out for Occupy.  Media attention is an evanescent thing.  In this game, dirty laundry is always trumps.  Kim Kardassian and Ginger White did more do sink Occupy than any mayor or police force.

We can only hope that the radicalism and sheer idiocy of the occupii experiment did not overly tarnish the broader, sane movement to end corruption on Wall Street and in Washington.  Now that Occupy has failed, ordinary people can take over, applying the sound principles of hierarchy, leadership, focus, and working within the system.  The occupii should follow the army adage: either lead, follow, or get out of the way.  Since you’ve proven you can’t lead, and refuse to follow, y’all know what to do.


(c) 2011 by True Liberal Nexus.  All rights reserved.


Excursus — Occupy Paris, 1871  (after the jump)

Read the rest of this entry »


Why the #Occupy Movement Will Fail — Part 2

October 19, 2011

Part 2 –  “Vague and Overbroad”

From our fellow true liberal, Fionnchu, the twelve demands made by the #Occupy Chicago group:

  1. Reinstate Glass-Steagall
  2. Repeal Bush-era tax cuts
  3. Prosecute “the Wall Street criminals” who caused the 2008 financial crisis.
  4. Overturn Citizens United v. United States
  5. Pass the “Buffett Rule”; Close Corporate Tax loopholes
  6. Strengthen SEC, Consumer Protection Board Regulatory Powers
  7. Limit the influence of lobbyists on legislation
  8. Prohibit ex-government regulators from working in the industries they once regulated
  9. Eliminate Corporate Personhood
  10. Give Equal Time for Free to all political candidates
  11. Pass the Fair Elections Now Act
  12. Forgive Student Debt

The old copy-editor in me couldn’t resist tidying up that list a bit. For the full, wordy wording of the list, see here.


Marketing 101

Lack of focus and muddled messaging is one of the primary reasons the #Occupy movement will ultimately fail.  The mental laziness evidenced in OWS Chicago’s rambling, stream-of-conscienceness demands is appalling.  The average person’s grocery list jotted on the back of an envelope — 1. Produce; 2. Dairy; 3. Meat; 4. Dry Goods; etc. —  is better thought-out.

Horrors, people, I used to work for “The Man”, but he taught me how to influence behavior through effective messaging.  I now pass those teachings on to you so you can bring down The Man with his own weaponry.  So stop the chanting and drumming for a moment, and listen up.

For better impact & clarity, these twelve points can be grouped under three broad, catchy headings:

  1. Put Muzzles &  Choke Collars on the Rabid Dogs of Wall Street   (1, 3, 6)
  2. End the Corporate Whoredom of Politicians  (4, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11)
  3. Stop the Ultra-Rich From Pillaging, & Turning the Rest of Us Into Peasants  (2, 5, 12)

That’s all for today’s marketing lesson.  Class dismissed.  You may now rejoin the tie-dye or pumpkin-painting committees.


Vague and Overbroad

Unless not bathing for several months, crapping in public, and having anonymous sex in tents is all the Occupyers ever had in mind, nothing will come of this movement without a bit of planning.

“The Chicago protesters have vowed to stay in the streets until their demands are met”, but living outdoors in the Windy City will soon be a frakking freezing prospect.  So unless they are down with frostbite in delicate places, the Occupyers would be wise to establish some specific steps toward achieving their demands, along with concrete milestones.

So, ignoring for the moment the worthiness of these twelve demands, let’s examine just how clear, and how practicable they are.


1. Reinstate Glass-Steagal

Clarity:  Very Specific

Feasibility: High

SitRep: From 1933 to 1999, Glass-Steagal regulated banks, speculation, and established the FDIC.  For 66 years, it deterred the reckless financial practices that had brought on the Great Depression.  In 1999, Congress freed investment banks from the regulations of Glass-Steagal, which led to rampant & reckless speculations, the collapse of banks like CitiGroup, the TARP bailout, and the eventual onset of the Great Recession.  Bipartisan attempts to reinstate Glass-Steagal have gotten nowhere. President obama has occasionally called for minor tweaks to investment regulations.

Concrete Steps:

a) Demand that the president commit to a firm date when he will introduce legislation to Congress for a full reinstatement of Glass-Steagal;

b) Demand a pledge to vote to reinstate Glass-Steagal from every member of Congress;

c) Issue a pledge to refuse to vote for anyone running for federal office in 2012 who does not make this commitment;

d) Issue a pledge to refuse to vote for president obama if he does not give and then meet a deadline to introduce legislation to reinstate Glass-Steagal.


2. Repeal Bush Tax Cuts

Clarity:  Very Specific

Feasibility:  Straightforward, but Unlikely

SitRep:  President obama lied to us.  During his 2008 campaign, he vowed to repeal the Bush tax cuts, then reneged when given the Democratic super-majority to do so.  Now that he’s lost that friendly Congress, he promises to repeal the cuts — if we re-elect him & reward him with another Democratic majority in 2013.  Fool me once ….

Concrete Steps: #Occupy should demand that obama:

a)  Publicly & repeatedly say these words: “I broke my promise. I lied to you. I am sorry. I let John Boehner do me up the ass, and I liked it!  I am easily the most dickless of Dickless Wonders the World has ever seen”;

b)  Within 30 days, introduce to Congress stand-alone legislation repealing the Bush Tax Cuts;

Occupyers should:

c) Sign a pledge to refuse to vote for obama in 2012 if he does not meet these demands.


3. Prosecute Wall Street Criminals

Clarity:  Vague and Overbroad

Feasiblity:  Impossible

SitRep: Those “criminals”, Goldman Sachs, were already investigated, and found to be only slightly guilty.  They made $4 trillion on the scam, paid a $500 billion penalty, which was so surprisingly light that Wall Street reacted by raising GS stock value by $800 billion in one day.  In other words, they made out like bandits.

Just the other day, obama said “it might have been greedy, but it was legal.”

Concrete Steps:  Too late shutting the barn door once the horse has escaped.  Now, all you can do is ask yourself, WWDHD? (What Would Dirty Harry Do?)


4. Overturn Citizens United

Clarity: Very Specific

Feasibility: Hard but Do-able

SitRep:  SCOTUS ruled 5-4 to consider a corporation a person for the purposes of free speech & campaign contributions.   80% of Americans polled oppose the ruling.

Concrete Steps:

Plan A (complicated)  

Requires:

a) A dead SC justice — Alito, Kennedy, Roberts, Scalia, Thomas (pick one);

c) a POTUS pledged to appointing judges who’ll rule this way;

c) a Senate willing to confirm said appointees:

d) an appeal


Plan B (simple)

Pass a Constitutional Amendment.  (See Article V of your operating manual)


5.  Pass Buffett Rule

Clarity: Very Specific

Feasibility: Straightforward

Concrete Steps:  See procedure for Glass-Steagal above.


6. Strengthen SEC, Consumer Protection Board Powers

Clarity:  Vague and Overbroad

Feasibility: Straightforward — if clarified

Concrete Steps:  Draft specific elements, divided between those that can be enacted by presidential policy, and those that require legislation.  Demand deadlines for appropriate action as per above.


7. Limit Influence of Lobbyists

Clarity:  Ephemeral

Feasibility: if clarified, Achievable in long-term

Concrete Steps:  No means exist to tackle the problem head-on, but would be greatly ameliorated if real campaign finance reform were enacted.  The public should also think twice about voting for a candidate who brags about raising one billion dollars in campaign contributions.


8. Ban Ex-Regulators from Working in Same Industry

Clarity: Very Specific

Feasibility:  Piece of Cake

Concrete Steps:  Simply add a standard non-compete clause to every regulator’s contract.   The inverse, prohibiting industry execs from becoming regulators, is perhaps even more important.

Can be implemented either by:

a) Presidential policy, or;

b) Act of Congress, or;

c) Constitutional Amendment


9. Eliminate Corporate Personhood

Clarity:  Specific, but sweeping

Feasibility: Dangerous and impractical

SitRep: Treating a corporation as an individual person for certain purposes is a sound and well-established tenet of our western legal system.

Entirely eliminating corporate personhood is, in fact, a radical, unprecedented proposal with unforeseen dangers.  Many advantages to the commonweal, such as limited liability for investors, the ability for the government to regulate & tax, or the courts to prosecute, single entities, would be lost.

Concrete Steps:  Stick to a constitutional amendment denying personhood to corporations in the specific instance of free speech & campaign contributions. (see #4 above.)


10.  Equal Access for Candidates

Clarity:   Vague and Overbroad

Concrete Steps:  Before the feasibility of this can be assessed, the Occupyers need to define exactly what this “equal time for free” entails (debates? media? voters’ guides?), what constitutes “reasonable intervals”, and how the FEC would be empowered to do so.

Overarching campaign finance reform would be a simpler resolution of this issue.


11. Pass Fair Elections Act

Clarity:  Specific

Feasibility:  Difficult

SitRep:  The bill was reintroduced to Congress yet again in April.  It has bipartisan sponsorship, but never gets out of committee. Gets no press coverage whatsoever.

Concrete Steps:  Formal demands for pledges from Congress members to pass, and the president to sign, with pledges to not vote for those who refuse.  Accost candidates in public — including that queen of all contribution whores, barack obama — and ask why they don’t support this.


12. Forgive Student Debt

Clarity:  Specific but sweeping

Feasibility:  Unlikely, but Achievable in long-term

SitRep:  Most of the world’s nations, realizing that a skilled & educated populace yields strength & prosperity, offer free higher education to every citizen.  In the US, the focus is not on that common good, rather on the personal advantage of greater earning power derived from holding a degree.

Unlike other nations, colleges in the US are largely private or state run. There is no federal university system.

Further, the cost of a private college education in the US is grossly over-inflated.  Any federal grant program would in part subsidize these inflated prices.

Concrete Steps:  Draft legislation – with specifics – that: 1) forgives all current outstanding federal student loans; 2) creates a federal college grant program; 3) provides funding, possibly through a tax on the admissions revenue of private colleges & universities.

Before this proposal has any chance of succeeding, the sway over our culture by anti-social memes needs to be broken.  Prepare for a long slog on that one.  And if you’re thinking of joining the Occupyers, pack your long-johns.


(C) 2011 by ‘tamerlane’.  All rights reserved.


Why the #Occupy Movement Will Fail

October 18, 2011


Occupy Wall Street ______ County

Notes/Decisions from the Oct 16th planning Meeting

[Editor’s note:  this is a digest of the actual meeting minutes posted by the local Occupy group in tamerlane’s neck of the woods.]

Hello All, thanks to those who came out to the meeting yesterday.  I made a big mistake in not getting everyone to signup for the mailing list

DECISIONS REACHED:



1) The Next Rally

  • Everyone should be involved with printing and handing out the flyer


  • Rally to be organized organically
  • Peacekeepers Lorianne, Pamela, Guari, Mia, Heather will help move the flow of people
  • The Plaza will have musicians and speakers organized on the fly for those that want to step up. I didnt consense on this but i think Jefferey’s small amp is fine
  • The sign crew should get cardboard, more tables, and sticks (I think it was heather that said she has sticks too)

  • People should organize carpools… then drive one car in.


2) The Rally After That

  • Other than the time and place, no logistics are planned.


3) Continued Movement



  • The group agreed to attempt to keep visibility and movement, nothing has been planned.

4) Working Groups, Roles


  • Outreach to Latinos*: Jeffrey    [* 8% of county population]

  • Music: Jeffrey, Lorianne, Janie


  • Non-Violence Training Coordinators: Joe and Pamela


  • Goals: ??


5) Other Possible Actions to support




  • Possible support of Michael Moore talk
  • Nov 9th, End corporate person hood (talk?) need more info…


  • Halloween OWS themed costumes


  • Oct 28, 29 (Cant remember name now…alternatives to violence?) workshop, Gauri had details



6) Resources to be shared on website

  • Guidelines for dealing with law enforcement
  • Non-Violent theory and guidelines

If you know of a good online source for info on any of these, please send them to me




7) Political Action items brought up

  • we had no consensus

6 ) [again] Next Planning Meeting


  • If it rains we will need to find a new location and leave a sign at the bandshell.  

  • 
Also lets have another facilitator other than me.

[Ya think?]

minitru increas plus luv islam

October 24, 2010

worker tamerlane contribut truwork

ingsoc, islam everwis pax, everwis luv. BB build plus big mosque, increas luv, pax islam. BB everwis doublplus good.

minitru increas luv islam, luv pax, luv luv, luv tru, luv ingsoc, luv BB.

worker juan williams contribut untruwork fox emmanuel goldstein factor, increas unluv islam, increas plus untru. minitru memorihol worker juan williams, inform miniluv worker juan williams commit thinkcrim.

2010 keep worker tamerlane all control duplicat.


Barack the Toxic

September 28, 2010

One key job of a sitting president, especially in an election year, is to conduct oneself in a way that helps your Party win races.  If you’re a popular president, you must tirelessly stump for candidates.  If you’re unpopular, you can still act forceful and in-charge. Even if people disagree with you, their primal instincts will push them toward complying with a confident troop leader.

As president, your legislative calendar should be carefully crafted and timed to boost your comrades fighting for office.  Bills should be introduced that make your guys look good, while forcing the other guys to either dodge or take unpopular stands.  A steady stream of feel-good executive orders & speeches should emanate from the Oval Office throughout the Fall.  “Third-rail” issues should be scrupulously avoided.

Needless to say, obama, neither savvy politician nor experienced legislator, much less a leader, has failed on all these counts.  Ultimately, obama doesn’t care: the common complaint among Democratic candidates this year has been that the White House has told them, in no uncertain terms, that they are on their own.

Even worse than these sins of omission, the obama administration has committed several missteps toxic to an already struggling Democratic party:

Health Care Reform

Way back in 2009, 3/4 of Americans favored health care reform, with at least 2/3 supporting universal single payer.  Possessing momentum, a mandate, and a 60-vote majority, enacting HCR should’ve been a slam-dunk.  Yet the entire Democratic machine stood flat-footed as the nascent TP staged protests against HCR, before belatedly dispatching Nancy Pelosi to engage in a puerile pissing match.  The bill went over like a lead zeppelin in congress, ambushed by blue dogs who’d slipped their leashes.  It was in any case an academic exercise, as the HCR bill exited the White House stillborn; a perverted creation of BO’s secret sessions with industry lobbyists, a Health Care Reform with no “care” and scant “reform” in it.

And thus was an eminently popular idea, whose time had clearly arrived, become an albatross draped about the neck of every Democrat running for office, with Martha Coakley the honorary first recipient.

The Oil Spill

As terrible as this disaster was, it nevertheless offered the obama administration a rare opportunity to gain respect, by presenting a striking contrast of executive vigor to Bush’ callousness & ineptitude during Katrina.

Instead, obama ended up looking even more callous and impotent.  Consequently, in the political chess game, Katrina as a dig against the GOP is permanently off the board.    (Maneuverability on this issue was not helped by the self-coronated “Green Economy President’s” advocation a month earlier for expanded offshore drilling.)

Trying to act like he actually cared, BO blurted out some tough guy nonsense about ‘a boot on BP’s throat’.  Which was as convincing as the muttered oaths of the wimp who’s had his lunch money stolen yet again.

A potential fatal blow to the drill-baby-drillers, the oil spill became instead a Democratic failure.  To add injury to insult, a chance to push for accelerating the transition to renewable energy was lost.

TARP

A Bush program that everyone beyond Wall Street utterly abhorred, BO eagerly gobbled up the sloppy seconds.  And, Presto!  The GOP’s plague with the middle class voter, their eternal coddling of the rich & greedy, infected the Democrats as well.

Immigration

A full 70% of Americans favor increased controls on illegal immigration.  Only proglydites, whose vote you presumably already have, and libertarians & capitalists, whose vote you’ll never get, favor illegal immigration. Yet the obama administration went out of its way to combat Arizona’s SB1070 via legal action and public condemnation.  Now, there were many paths to tread on this subject —  decrying racial profiling while simultaneously announcing a cosmetic boost to border patrol, for example, or simply ignoring it — that skirted a controversial, compromising stand.  Instead, obama firmly linked all Democrats with illegal immigration.  Every news story now includes an obligatory reference to ‘conservatives seek stronger border controls, while liberals (!) favor easing restrictions on immigration.’

The Mosque

The political equivalent of a high voltage power line lying in a puddle, sparking and buzzing,  the Ground Zero mosque was unhesitatingly taken up by obama.

Nearly 80% of Americans oppose the construction of that mosque as insensitive and in bad taste.  Yet the administration spent a good two weeks devoting its efforts to defense of the mosque, raising the canards of racism and 1st Amendment rights.  As a result, the Democrats came across as jihadiphile desecrators of hallowed ground.

Legislative Calendar

On Capitol Hill, the White House has chosen to: half-heartedly launch a repeal of DADT without first lining up enough votes; punt on the Bush tax cuts expiration after a three-and-out botching of the accompanying PR spin; threatened to force on its own congressmen a pre-election vote on a GOP-friendly, White House proposal for a $200 billion tax cut to businesses.

The list could go on.

What kind of Party leader repeatedly takes positions that 2/3 to 3/4 of Americans oppose?  One answer is that obama is simply a bungling idiot, & his “handlers” by extension.

Or, realizing BO’s low approvals were irreparable, the White House may have instead consciously chosen to rally its extremist base.   From the Paris Communards to the Moral Majority, this has been a standard, and not altogether unwise, tactic.

Another explanation for obama’s string of toxic stances exists: that he is a manchurian candidate, a trojan horse snuck into the Democratic Party and designed to destroy it from within.  If so, then BO’s intentionally took these toxic missteps (or at least his creators knew he’d take them).

What will it take for the Democratic Party to realize its leader is poison?   Apparently, nothing short of a midterm clobbering.

(c) 2010 by ‘tamerlane.’  All rights reserved.


Another Democrat Candidate Loses A True Liberal’s Vote

March 31, 2010

Chris Kelly is running for Attorney General of California.  Recently he contacted tamerlane (aka, “Ima Puma”).   Tamerlane/Ima replied.

Hi Chris,

I’m a social liberal and registered independent who’ll be voting in the upcoming Democratic state primary.  And I won’t be voting for you.

You started with as good a chance as the other half-dozen AG candidates I knew nothing about, until you sent me an email entitled, “Don’t Sue President Obama”.  In it, you waxed rapturous about the “landmark” health care reform bill.

Except that bill had scant “reform” in it, and nothing to do with health “care”.

You also lied.  You wrote, “I was there when [Bill & Hillary Clinton] worked hard to achieve [universal health care] but fell short of the finish line.  Well, yesterday, President Barack Obama and Congressional Democrats took us across that finish line…”

… the ‘finish line’ of universal health care?   As my fellow ranchers often say, I may have been born at night, but it wasn’t *last* night!  That bill is a steaming turd, a sell-out to the insurance lobby, and an insult to the 3/4 of Americans who were crying out for universal, single payer health care.

Chris, you seem like a decent guy, and somebody I’d eagerly support under normal circumstances.  But if you want to hitch your wagon to the biggest fraud in the White House since Andrew Johnson, do so at your own peril.   Because of your blind devotion to obama, I won’t be voting for you, not in the primary, and not in the general.

Think about it.  And feel free to contact me to discuss.

Best,

— Ima