Category Archives: Corporations

The Balanced Budget Fraud.

Posted on by

It may sound like a good idea to require the federal government to balance the budget, but it’s nothing more than a thinly-disguised way for Teapublicans to shrink government and give corporations free reign to exploit people and resources.

Make no mistake, as soon as a balanced budget amendment is passed, if it ever is, Teapublicans will cut taxes at the first opportunity. That will result in less revenue, which, in turn, will result in large budget cuts. Of course, those cuts will not affect corporate welfare or the military-industrial complex. Instead, there will be cuts to regulatory agencies and safety nets. Already we’ve seen the GOP propose the repeal of the Affordable Care Act which will deny affordable health insurance to more than 16 million Americans. We’ve seen GOP-sponsored budgets that propose cuts to Medicaid, Medicare, Social Security and Supplemental Nutrition programs. We’ve seen Teapublican initiatives to defund the Department of Education, the Environmental Protection Agency, the IRS, and the Department of Labor.

All of this will be made much easier if Teapublicans can muster enough votes to pass a balanced budget amendment.

The truth is, our federal government has often operated at a deficit. Not because of bad management or negligence. But out of necessity. Indeed, the Constitution was created to replace the failed Articles of Confederation over federal deficits. The fledgling government had run up substantial debts during the Revolutionary War and, without a central government, it had no way of collecting the funds to repay those debts. And that’s but one example: Had FDR not expanded government programs to put people back to work, we likely would have never emerged from the Great Depression. Had the US not operated at a deficit, we would not have been able to conduct military operations for WWII and most of our other all-too-frequent wars.

The Reagan administration operated at massive deficits in an attempt to outspend the Soviet Union. The Bush administration operated at enormous deficits in order to create the Homeland Security Department and to prosecute the Afghan and Iraq Wars. And the Obama administration has operated at deficits (albeit steadily decreasing deficits) in order to wind down operations in Iraq and Afghanistan and to dig our economy out of the trench created by Bush.

Since 1975, only two administrations have produced surpluses, and both of them were Democrats! Taking it a step further, in the past 100 years, there have been eight Democratic presidents and nine Republicans. Five of the eight Democrats oversaw deficits smaller than they inherited, while seven of the nine Republicans oversaw deficits larger than they inherited.

Given their history, do you really think Teapublicans are pushing a balanced budget amendment out of a sense of fiscal responsibility?

Moreover, balanced budget requirements are no guarantee of fiscal responsibility. In Arizona, for example, once the legislature passed a balanced budget requirement, Teapublicans set about starving the state with tax cuts. Of course, those tax cuts have not been shared equally. The state not only cut taxes for the wealthy. It has cut corporate taxes for 24 of the past 25 years. Meanwhile, it has raised sales taxes to push the costs of government onto those who can least afford it. The resulting lack of revenue has, in turn, led to catastrophic cuts to education and other services.

Since no Teapublican will ever again agree to raise taxes, the state is caught in a downward spiral fueled by ideologues, greedy corporations, self-serving politicians, dark money donations to lapdog candidates, and a series of “studies” and propaganda from conservative “think tanks.” It’s a death spiral from which the state may never recover.

The Reality Of Tar Sands Oil.

Posted on by

It’s telling that, among the priorities of the new Teapublican-controlled Congress, several bills came to the forefront. In addition to further attempts to repeal Obamacare, Teapublicans prioritized the Keystone XL pipeline and reduced funding for the Environmental Protection Agency. And who would this legislation benefit? Certainly not the general public. The primary beneficiaries are the Koch brothers whose companies would be able to refine even more of Canadian tar sands oil without interference from those burdensome government regulations.

Perhaps it’s mere coincidence that the Koch brothers and their ideological friends contributed millions to Teapublican congressional and senate campaigns, laundering the money through a complicated network of non-profits in order to disguise the original donors.

The Kochs and their Teapbulican friends would have you believe that the Keystone XL pipeline is a job creator – one that would create thousands of jobs in the US – when, in fact, studies have shown that it would create only a few thousand temporary jobs and fewer than 500 permanent jobs. What they don’t talk about is the fact that, in order to build the pipeline for its Canadian owners, the government would have to use eminent domain to take private land from ordinary Americans who would see no real benefit from the pipeline. Moreover, the pipeline would cross Native American reservations – so-called independent nations – who oppose the pipeline. It would also cross the nation’s largest, and most important, aquifer.

Even more disturbing is the fact that no one yet knows how to clean up the highly toxic tar sands oil after the inevitable pipeline breaks. We have already seen such spills in Michigan and Arkansas and, after months of trying to clean up the spills, the states’ only “remedy” was to allow the oil to sink to the bottom of the waterways where it will take many generations to disintegrate on its own.

And since Koch facilities near Chicago and Detroit have already been refining this gooey muck, we already know the consequences. A by-product of refining tar sands oil is a fine, black powder known as petcoke – sort of a poor man’s coal. Not knowing what to do with the petcoke, and not wanting to dispose of it in an environmentally-safe way, the Koch refineries have created piles of the stuff. Uncovered and exposed to the elements, it is picked up by the slightest breeze and deposited on surrounding neighborhoods where it covers homes, streets, lawns and vehicles. It also invades the lungs of anyone in the area who breathes!

Moreover, scientists tell us the effects of actually burning the planet’s dirtiest oil is “game over” with regard to climate change!

Of course, the Koch brothers and their lapdogs on the right refuse to consider such inconveniences. There is money to be made now. They will reap the profits from refining and selling the oil, all the while denying any responsibility for dealing with the long-term consequences. In other words, they will do what most every other large corporation does: Privatize the profits while socializing the consequences.

Do you still think the few jobs created by the pipeline are worth the damage to our environment? Do you still think the GOP has your best interests in mind?

Democracy Lost.

Posted on by

In recent years, much has been written about growing inequality. It is, indeed, one of the most important issues of our time. And the effects of big money on our democracy have been devastating.

Sure, you may still be able to vote to elect those who are supposed to represent you. But that, alone, does not constitute democracy. Not only are the choices of candidates limited to two individuals – the only two who were able to climb their way up the political ladder in order to receive their parties’ blessings and, more important, their campaign funds. All too often, those who are elected are promised large campaign donations by corporations and industries in exchange for political favors. It is not necessarily quid pro quo, but the expectation for a return on the investment is there. So, too is the pressure.

In reality, such high stakes lobbying has long been a part of politics. But, over the past 35 years, things have gotten even worse.

In the late seventies, large US corporations began to see their hold on the world economy slip. New, lower-priced, high-quality imports – many of them made with robotics – from Japan and Germany began to push aside American-made products. US corporations responded by relocating manufacturing – first to the South, then off-shore – in search of lower-priced labor.

Perhaps, the most destructive response was the move to tie CEO compensation to the value of the companies’ share prices. This ushered in an era of ever-increasing CEO salaries and even more lucrative stock options for CEOs – a legalized form of insider trading. The result was for US corporations to seek ever lower-priced labor in countries where there is no regulation and no employee benefits. At the same time corporate profits have soared, employee salaries and corporate investments in the future have diminished – almost guaranteeing that the future will belong to foreign-based corporations. But why would our CEOs care? They and their money will be long gone before it matters.

Our corporations have used the threat of off-shoring jobs to extort our state and city governments. In exchange for their extortion, those governments have assumed many of the risks of corporate relocation or expansion by paying for needed infrastructure, cutting regulations, and delaying or eliminating corporate taxes.

Now these corporations are attempting to extort the federal government.

Unwilling to pay US income taxes on profits made off-shore, these corporations are stashing cash in foreign banks until the federal government agrees to “repatriate” the money at a greatly reduced tax rate. Of course, they’re justifying the extortion by saying that “repatriation” will lead to greater investments and more jobs in the US – the great “trickle down” fraud.

In reality, the money is more likely to be doled out to CEOs and other executives in the form of bonuses (as a reward for robbing ordinary taxpayers) and stock options.

In the meantime, corporations and billionaires have been working to rig the system. Realizing that buying Congress and our state legislatures is cheaper than paying lobbyists, people like the Koch brothers have stuffed the pockets of candidates willing to do their bidding. To pave the way, they pushed conservatives to stack the Supreme Court with ideologues such as Alito, Roberts, Scalia and Thomas. That inevitably led to favorable court rulings giving corporations the rights of people and all but eliminating limitations on political donations. They got the IRS to change its rules allowing “non-profits” to fund political campaigns. When they won control of legislatures, they gerrymandered congressional districts making it all but impossible for anyone but “their people” to win office. And they introduced Voter ID laws to suppress the votes of minorities and the poor.

In 2014, their efforts finally came to fruition. Having already bought the House in 2010, they now own the Senate. It’s no coincidence that the first bills to reach the House and Senate floors were to repeal “Obamacare” and to build the Koch…er…Keystone XL Pipeline. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has also made it clear that issues such as raising the minimum wage, equal pay for equal work, unemployment insurance and student loan costs will be pushed aside in favor of gutting regulations on health care and financial services and eviscerating the EPA.

If you’re still worried about the effects of so-called “dark money” on our democracy, don’t. Last year, our democracy officially became an oligarchy.

What’s The Matter With Kansas Now?

Posted on by

In 2004, Thomas Frank wrote the book “What’s The Matter With Kansas?” which looked into the state’s religious and political extremism. It was a fascinating read. But it’s time for him to write a sequel because the answer to that question is now more clear. What’s wrong with Kansas is Governor Sam Brownback and his version of Horse and Sparrow economics (feed the horse enough oats and a few will pass through to fall on the road for the sparrows to eat), aka Trickle Down economics, aka Supply Side economics, aka Reaganomics, aka Voodoo economics.

Most economists have known for years that this economic policy doesn’t work. Even the architects of Reaganomics now repudiate the philosophy. But Brownback is certain that he knows better. So, since he was elected governor, he has implemented Reaganomics on steroids. He cut taxes for the wealthy and eliminated taxes for thousands of corporations, promising that businesses would flock to the state bringing thousands of new jobs with them.

It hasn’t quite worked that way.

There have been no businesses flocking to Kansas from neighboring states. And the resulting loss in tax revenue ($333 million in 2014 alone) has not only caused the state to burn through the $700 million reserve fund that existed before Brownback took office, it has led to cuts for public schools, community colleges and state universities. But Brownback steadfastly refuses to return taxes to their previous levels or to raise taxes even a little bit. So the governor and the state’s Republican legislature are hoping to meet this year’s $710 million deficit by cutting funding to pensions for public employees and by cutting the budget for roads and infrastructure.

And Kansas isn’t alone in this right wing-fueled misery. After more than 20 years of corporate tax cuts and, with almost nothing left to cut, the Arizona Republican-led government is facing a $1 billion annual deficit. After the failed policies of a Republican governor, Pennsylvania’s new Democratic governor is facing a $2.3 billion deficit. And, after Gov. Scott Walker’s $541 million tax cuts in 2014, Wisconsin is now facing a two-year deficit of $2.2 billion. In all, there are 16 states facing deficits…most of them controlled by tax-cutting Republicans. Meanwhile, Democratic-controlled states like California and Minnesota have some of the nation’s lowest unemployment figures, the nation’s best job creation and…wait for it…budget surpluses!

So tax cuts combined with budget cuts equals few new jobs, reduced revenue and even larger deficits, while reasonable taxes, reasonable spending on education and other services equals more jobs, more revenue and thriving economies.

It can’t be any more clear than that.

How Much Is Enough?

Posted on by

In 2014, the US spent $612.5 billion on defense. Although numerous sources have reported that this number exceeds the military budgets of the next 12 biggest spenders combined, I find that most people still have trouble getting their minds around the number and even more difficulty putting it into perspective.

So let’s look at it another way. In 2014, the US and its closest known allies spent an astonishing $1.15 trillion on defense.

Meanwhile our known “enemy” nation states of North Korea and Iran spent a total of $13.8 billion. If we add Pakistan, which is home to many extreme jihadists, and our one-time enemies who are now close trading partners (China and Russia), our potential adversaries (at least theoretically) spent a grand total of $223.4 billion on defense. Combined, that is little more than one-third of the US defense budget alone, and roughly one-fifth of the combined military budgets of the US and its close allies.

The US and its allies not only spend more money than the so-called rogue nations and the former communist bloc. They have more weapons of every kind; more sophisticated weaponry; and the financial means to build ever newer and better weapons. This is, of course, great comfort to our military-industrial complex consisting of Boeing, Halliburton, General Dynamics, General Electric, Lockheed-Martin, Raytheon and more.

It is, however, small comfort to US taxpayers who are expected to pay for this ever-growing budget item, especially since the only real threats to our homeland appear to come from relatively small groups of terrorists whose weaponry consists of handguns, AK47s, IEDs and captured weaponry that we previously sold to corrupt or failed governments.

Take into account that the costs of the Afghan War, the Iraq War, the war against ISIS, military aid to other countries, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and veterans’ benefits are paid for out of budget line items separate from our defense budget, and you quickly discover that the vast majority of our taxes now go to defense. Yet the Department of Defense is asking for significant increases for 2015 and 2016, and it’s almost certain to get them.

One can only conclude that we are the most gullible, most paranoid people on Earth.

The True Cost Of America’s War Machine.

Posted on by

President Obama just released his proposed budget for 2016. Out of a total budget of $1.15 trillion, $625.2 billion is earmarked for our military. And that doesn’t include the $70.5 billion for veterans’ benefits. That means $695.7 billion, or 60.4 percent of our total annual budget, will be dedicated to planning for war and dealing with the impact of war on our servicemen and women. In addition, the budget calls for $41.6 billion for international affairs – much of it likely dedicated to providing weapons to other nations.

Virtually all of this money will be used to line the pockets of defense suppliers and their executives. Worse, much of it will be wasted on equipment that is unwanted, ineffective and unnecessary. One need only look at the colossal waste that is the F35 fighter (which is hopelessly behind schedule and over budget), the materiel left behind in Iraq and Afghanistan (much of it now in the hands of ISIS and the Taliban), and the Abrams tanks being built over the objections of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

By comparison, only 22 percent of our budget – $255.6 billion – will directly aid our citizens. $60.6 billion is allocated to Medicare and healthcare, $31.4 billion for Social Security and unemployment insurance, $27.4 billion for transportation, $13.3 billion for food and agriculture (including food stamps), $41.6 billion for energy and the environment and $74.1 billion for education. But the dirty secret is that much of the money for these budget items will provide large subsidies for big pharma, big agriculture, big oil, and big coal. Still more money will be used to clean up after big corporate polluters or to provide them with low-cost transportation and infrastructure.

Of course, it’s unlikely that President Obama’s budget will ever pass Congress. Teapublicans will probably increase the amount of military spending and corporate subsidies while cutting funds for the EPA, the Labor Department and education…maybe even Medicare and Social Security.

But imagine if, like in many European nations, things were reversed. What if we spent 60.4 percent of our federal budget to improve the lives of individuals and 22 percent on the military? What if all of our children could receive a world class education for free? What if no Americans went hungry or homeless? What if all Americans received healthcare? What if all Americans could comfortably retire at age 65? What if our transportation systems were, once again, the best in the world? What if, instead of subsidizing large corporations and the inflated salaries of their executives, we made them pay their fair share of taxes?

What if, instead of allocating nearly 4 percent of our GDP (the world’s largest economy) to defense, we spent only 2.1 percent like China (the world’s 2nd largest economy). Or what if we spent only 2.2 percent like the United Kingdom and France? Better yet, what if we spent only 1 percent like Canada? Collectively, the US and our NATO allies spend an amount on defense that exceeds that of our alleged enemies many times over. If necessary, NATO (even with a smaller US military) could overwhelm any possible opponent or collection of opponents.

Moreover, if we spent our money on improving lives, instead of the weapons intended to destroy them, we likely wouldn’t need such overwhelming military force.

The Sad State Of Arizona (2015 Edition)

Posted on by

Before the GOP-created Great Recession, Arizona’s state economy was based on the fantasy that construction could continue until the entire Sonora Desert was covered by homes, shopping malls and golf courses. So since the housing market crashed, Arizona’s economy has languished.

While other states were trying to mend their losses by diversifying, stimulating their economies and raising taxes, Jan Brewer and the GOP-dominated legislature chose, instead, to make cuts. Deep, desperate budget cuts. Yet, despite facing a large deficit, they chose to further reduce revenue by cutting taxes for corporations. At the same time, they put teachers out of work by cutting the funding of public schools. Indeed, since 2009, only Oklahoma has cut more from student funding than Arizona. As a result, the state’s per student funding is now just 69 percent of the national average and its student performance stands at 47th out of 50 states and the District of Columbia. Only 1 in 18 students who enter an Arizona high school will receive a degree from a college or technical school, and those who do earn a degree will likely be buried in student loan debt.

Not content with destroying schools and jobs, the GOP also did what it could to destroy tourism, the state’s 2nd-largest industry, by closing state parks and highway rest stops. And to make the state even less appealing to tourists, they passed the anti-Latino law, SB1070, which made tourists and conventions spurn the state costing us tens of millions of dollars in lost revenue.

It was as if the GOP was intent on pushing our citizens into its ideological clown car and driving us off a fiscal cliff.

Now along comes the new GOP governor, Doug Ducey, who must have frozen his brain while peddling questionable franchises for Cold Stone Creamery. During the campaign, he and his supporters ran millions of dollars in misleading attack ads accusing his Democratic opponent of raising tuition to the state’s universities. But, now that Ducey has been sworn into office, he has presented a budget that would cut $75 million in funding for post-secondary education. And, though he pledged to increase K-12 education funding during the campaign, he is attempting a shell game in which he proposes to take as much from the already stressed school administration and operations budgets as he would add for classrooms. Moreover, his budget completely ignores the hundreds of millions of dollars a court awarded public schools as the result of previous cuts to education in violation of the state constitution.

Of course, one budget item that will increase is the money allocated to corrections. True to the GOP’s commitment to line the pockets of private prison corporations, Ducey proposes building yet another privately-operated prison at a cost of $5.3 million. But there is no money for the education and rehabilitation of prisoners, so after they serve their time, they are all too likely to commit more crimes. And since the privately-operated health care system for prisons doesn’t track or treat infectious diseases, they are also likely to spread infectious diseases into our communities.

In their obviously delusional minds, Ducey and the Teapublicans still seem to believe that, by further cutting the state’s already low corporate taxes, they will be able to attract corporations to relocate to Arizona bringing with them thousands of high-paying jobs. Anyone who has ever consulted with corporations seeking a place to expand or relocate knows that’s a fantasy.

Corporations, at least good corporations, look for places to expand that offer quality transportation, abundant resources, an abundant high-skilled and well-educated workforce, abundant and low-cost energy, a high quality of living, and affordable taxes…usually in that order. Arizona’s approach will only result in the relocation of corporations that offer low-skill, low-paying jobs or gun manufacturers who are drawn to the state by our heavily-armed population and our virtually non-existent gun laws. Even then, they will only come to Arizona if the state is willing to pay for changes in needed infrastructure, provide further tax cuts and pay for other incentives. All of which explains why, when high tax states like California and Minnesota are thriving with low unemployment and budget surpluses, Arizona has failed to emerge from recession and faces annual budget deficits of $1 billion or more.

In the competition to build a sustainable, thriving economy, it would seem that Arizona can only compete in a contest of Biggest Loser against other red states like Kansas and Mississippi. And the biggest losers of all will be our students.

State Of The World.

Posted on by

On the day following President Obama’s inspiring State of the Union address, I think it appropriate to wonder, if a world leader were to make a State of the World address, what would it be? What would be the calls to action? What accomplishments would it tout? What dire warnings would it contain?

If I was that world leader, my address would include the following:

Accomplishments? There are very few. Charities and non-governmental organizations have nibbled at the edges of some problems, such as access to clean water, housing and food. But most of these are mere symptoms of larger issues. For example, many nations have contributed to refugee camps while ignoring, or even exacerbating the conflicts that created the refugees in the first place. We have killed terrorists while creating others as a result of those very same killings, all the while ignoring the causes that led to much of that terrorism in the first place. And though we have discussed environmental problems, we have solved few. Sometimes, these two larger issues overlap. For example, at the current rate of killings (an elephant is killed every 15 minutes), African elephants could disappear from the wild in just 11 years. The reason for the slaughter? Ivory is expensive and highly sought after for jewelry, so terrorists are killing the elephants to claim the ivory in order to fund their terrorist activities.

According to a new scientific study, the world’s oceans are on the precipice of mass extinctions. The oceans are being overfished and horribly polluted. Coral reefs are being destroyed by cruise ships and, most especially, container ships in order for large corporations to increase manufacturing profits by exploiting low labor costs in underdeveloped countries. There are large “islands” of trash and plastics floating in our oceans. BP and other oil companies have polluted our waters with oil spills consisting of millions of barrels of crude oil. Fracking is pumping benzenes and other toxic chemicals into our aquifers and polluting our drinking water, even causing earthquakes. Chemical companies and large corporate farms are responsible for toxic runoff from farmlands that have created “dead zones” in our oceans at the mouths of rivers. Those same chemical companies have contributed to the near catastrophic collapse of bee colonies needed to pollinate our food plants. As a result of the tsunami at Fukishima, radioactive water is pouring into the ocean unabated. And the effects of that mess are, as yet, unknown.

Back on land, white rhinos are now extinct in the wild and virtually non-existent in zoos. Black rhinos are greatly endangered. Amur Tigers are virtually extinct and all large cats are endangered. Pandas, which have long been on the edge of extinction, are now even more threatened by climate change. Mountain and Lowland Gorillas are endangered, in addition to Orangutans – both as the result of wars and habitat loss. Rain forests are being denuded in order to exploit them for exotic hardwoods and palm oil. Some forests are being cleared under the mistaken belief that the land can be used for agriculture.

Polar ice sheets and glaciers are melting at phenomenal rates inevitably leading to rising seas that will displace millions and millions of people. And the cost of relocating many of the world’s largest cities will run into the hundreds of billions, likely trillions, of dollars. The loss of ice pack in the Arctic is also threatening the existence of Polar Bears and other species. Of course, it has been well-established that ice melt is the result of our love affair with fossil fuels, but only a few nations are taking the problem seriously. As a result, 2014 was the warmest year on record. Global warming is leading to larger, more violent and more numerous storms. To make matters worse, the Koch-bought US Congress is intent on passing laws that will defund the Environmental Protection Agency, cut environmental regulations for large corporations and maintain tax breaks for the world’s largest polluters, all the while denying their impact on climate change.

Economic inequality and religious extremism have led to an explosion of wars and terrorism worldwide, resulting in the deaths of millions and the displacement of millions more. The immigration of those fleeing violence and economic oppression has led to the rise of hate, racism and right wing extremism in the refugees’ host nations. Meanwhile, economic inequality continues to get worse. It is estimated that, by 2016, 1 percent of the world’s population will own more than 50 percent of the world’s wealth! Yet conservative politicians in the US, Europe and elsewhere continue to vote to cut taxes for large corporations and the wealthy. The beneficiaries then contribute to political campaigns to help elect those who will do their bidding, and the cycle repeats. (Actually, it’s less of a cycle than a death spiral.)

Such is the sad state of the world today. And, thanks to conservative politics, things are only getting worse.

How Our Media Are Failing Us.

Posted on by

The US news media were once the envy of the world. TV news gave us legendary journalists such as Edward R. Murrow, Walter Cronkite, David Brinkley and Chet Huntley to name just a few. These were people who proudly informed Americans, exposed corruption and provided context for politics. So what happened? How did we go from Walter Cronkite to Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Bill O’Reilly. There is no single answer. Instead, a number of factors have led to the demise of journalism in the US. Here are the most prominent:

1- Media Have Chosen Sides: Newspapers have long leaned to one side or another. The Wall Street Journal was always conservative as The New York Times was always liberal. But despite their leanings, they at least tried to present both sides. That no longer is the case. Fox News Channel gets its daily talking points from the Republican National Committee and, since the end of the Fairness Doctrine, talk radio has become more than 90 percent right wing with almost no liberal counterparts.

2 – Infotainment And Ratings: Far too many so-called “news” shows have become infotainment – more devoted to creating high ratings than presenting actual news and information. They focus on the most bizarre, sensational and macabre stories rather than news that matters. As a result, we know more about the murder trial of the day than what Congress is doing.

3 – Equating Equal Time With Accuracy And Fairness: Fearful of backlash from the party faithful, the media tend to report both sides of a political story rather than dig for the truth. I call this the “We report, you decide” syndrome. This is no substitute for actual journalism. With no reporter focused on getting to the truth, the falsehoods from one side become accepted as fact.

4 – The Horse Race Syndrome: During the run-up to elections, the news media have refused to report the truth. They are more interested in reporting the results of polls with the idea of finding a winner. As a result, we hear two disparate views of issues with no context available to help us choose a candidate.

5 – Accepting Politically-Biased Nomenclature: Republican strategists are constantly trying to win a literal war of words. For example, Estate Taxes were once widely accepted as a way of preventing dynasties in the US – so that the extremely wealthy could not pass unimaginable wealth onto their heirs. But once the GOP labeled them Death Taxes, the media picked up the term and, as a result, public opinion began to change. The same thing happened when the abortion foes changed the description from anti-abortion to Pro-Life.

6 – Newsroom Cutbacks: In the late 1970’s, the owners of news organizations began seeking greater profits. They found them by eliminating foreign news bureaus and eliminating many reporters and staff photographers. As a result, they now rely on stock photos and wire services. Reporters no longer have the time to investigate corruption or to check facts.

7 – Laziness: Too many reporters are willing to accept what they are told by one source. It requires too much effort and too much time to seek other sources or to research the issue in order to provide context. It’s more convenient to go with the story half-finished. For example, business reporters often report that US corporate income taxes are the highest in the world. What they neglect to say is that is only the stated tax rate, not the effective tax rate which is often just one or two percent. And they never report the amount of subsidies and other forms of corporate welfare received by the very corporations that complain of high income taxes.

7 – Expediency: In the rush to be first, news media no longer take the time to verify the story through multiple sources. False stories are often repeated over and over before the mistake is uncovered and, if it is, the retraction (if there is one) is scarcely noticed. This was never more apparent than with Lara Logan’s false and misleading 60 Minutes report on Benghazi. The original story was nearly an hour. The retraction was only a minute or two.

8 – Economic Self-Interest: The vast majority of our media are now owned by just 6 conglomerates. (And if the Time-Warner/Comcast merger is completed, that number will drop to 5.) These corporations are less concerned with news than they are with profits. There are no longer firewalls between news departments and corporate operations. So if a story will harm the corporation, it is too often buried.

9 – Fear Of Retribution: Chuck Todd’s recent admission about treatment of Teapublicans on Meet the Press is exhibit A. When he said that he didn’t dare challenge a Republican lie or they would not appear on the show, he was, in effect, being a whistle-blower for the profession of journalism.

10 – Overwhelming Number Of Lies: As Politifact.com found, Teapublicans tell nearly 3 times as many lies as Democrats. They tell bigger whoppers, too. It’s hard for journalists to keep up. And with fewer journalists willing to challenge the lies, the politicians keep on telling them. Eventually the lies become accepted as fact. There are hundreds, if not thousands, of examples. One of the most popular lies is that the Keystone XL Pipeline will create thousands of jobs. Yet independent studies show that the number of jobs is grossly inflated and that they don’t justify the environmental risks.

Despite the media’s many failings, all is not lost. There are still numerous, credible news outlets. But the best way to be informed is to actually work at it. After all, that’s what our Founding Fathers expected of us. It’s not even all that daunting. The Web can be a very convenient and useful tool. The basic rule is to never accept anything from a biased source, or even a single source, as fact. Seek out information from independent sources, as well as conservative-leaning and liberal-leaning sources. Then check the information through Websites such as FactCheck.org, Politifact.com and Snopes.com.

The very future of our nation depends on it.

Greed Versus Poverty.

Posted on by

“For the first time in history it is now possible to take care of everybody at a higher standard of living than any have ever known. Only ten years ago the ‘more with less’ technology reached the point where this could be done. All humanity now has the option of becoming enduringly successful.” – Buckminster Fuller, 1980.

I recently spotted this quote on Facebook and it made me think: What is the true state of the world in 2014? How far have we come since 1980?

Well, here are the sobering statistics:

– According to the human rights group, Walk Free, 36 million people live in slavery worldwide.
– In the US, approximately 250,000 women and children are held as sex slaves.
– In the US, nearly 2.5 million children were homeless at some point in 2013.
– In the US, 48 million people live in poverty.
– Worldwide, more than 3 billion people – nearly half the world population – live on less than $2.50 per day.
– In the US, 1 in 6 children don’t have enough to eat.
– Worldwide, 1 in 8 people suffer from chronic malnourishment and approximately 5,000,000 children die of malnutrition each year.
– Worldwide, many millions of people don’t have access to clean water.
– Worldwide, billions of people don’t have access to modern medical care.
– In the US, approximately 12 million people don’t have access to affordable health care even after implementation of the Affordable Care Act.
– Worldwide, climate change causes 350,000 deaths each year and that number is certain to grow.

As Fuller stated, it is now possible to solve these problems. Yet too many voters still believe in the fraud that is called “trickle-down economics”…a trickle that never comes. Too many politicians would rather give the wealthy and large corporations another tax cut than help these “freeloaders.” Others are too busy campaigning for office to be troubled with real problems. And the political problems aren’t just in the US. The rest of the industrialized world is not much better. Much of Europe has fallen back into recession as the result of economic austerity programs. In response, their populations have taken a nasty turn toward fascism.

We should all strive to avoid blaming others for our lack of progress and, instead, look for solutions.

Imagine what could be done to improve lives if the US corporations that have $2.1 trillion stashed in offshore tax havens paid just 10 percent in taxes on that money. Imagine if corporate CEOs devoted just a portion of their multi-million dollar annual salaries to pay their employees a living wage. Imagine if all of the world governments agreed to cut in half the $1.75 trillion in annual military spending and dedicated it to giving people access to health care, food and clean water. Imagine if our politicians weren’t bought and paid for by corporate lobbyists who are rewarded with billions in government contracts…more than $4 trillion between 2007 and 2012. Imagine if the billions dedicated to lobbying was used, instead, to help end human suffering.

We certainly have the means to achieve Fuller’s vision. All we need is the will (and the heart) to demand it.