by Robert Reich
« March 2020 | Main | May 2020 »
by Robert Reich
Posted at 07:41 PM in Robert Reich, Coronavirus, Trump | Permalink | Comments (0)
The old saying “this too, shall pass” is not about the passing of time but the withdrawal of agreement. Unconscious agreement with a limiting situation is fear or a refusal to find some benefits within it. Collectively and individually, we create scenarios for our ultimate Good and we usually do it unconsciously. It happens with the help of a higher consciousness that sees the future unfolding. In other words, there is an aspect of Mind that seems to say “if I (or we) keep moving in this direction, there will be dire consequences.” It is like the alcoholic who gets himself to a recovery group. The higher self within knows the drinking person is headed for disaster. It is not the addicted personality that goes to the meeting. It is the one who knows.
When we allow that higher awareness to see through the temporary condition, we become the master of it. Things disappear in our experience that no longer serve us. “ Life is for us and never against us” is a very real and active principle. There is no Devil, no destructive, punishing power. There is only Life in its eternal quest to become more love, more joy, more vitality, more peace, more abundance. The Power for Good lives in us at the level of deep self-identity. The more we identify as victims of anything, the more the temporary circumstance will seem to have a life of its own. It doesn’t. It is simply there for our edification.
Having that said, what have you gained from this imposed isolation? What realizations about humanity have you had? Can you discern any possible awareness that is emerging in us? If we are to make the world a better place we will have to have a new awareness about who we are and what is precious to us. If nothing else, that seems to be something we are all experiencing right now. Once identified we ask ourselves, ‘what need I do to promote the well being of all that is precious to myself and humanity?’ The answers will come if we stay out of fear and activate gratitude.
Stay tuned in,
Carol Carnes www.carol-carnes.com
Posted at 07:35 PM in Dr. Carol Carnes, Living Consciously | Permalink | Comments (0)
A Jobs Program for Inessential Workers
by John Lawrence, April 30, 2020
Turn inessential workers into essential workers by putting them to work building green infrastructure. This is essential work that is not getting done. Much of the previous inessential work they did is better left undone even in a recovery. It is still inessential. It'll always be inessential compared to what needs to be done in creating and building green infrastructure. Building out solar and wind renewable energy could employ thousands if not millions of people. Repairing roads, bridges, waterways, clean water systems, airports, railroads and all other infrastructure could employ millions. This is essential work that has remained undone despite the fact that the American Society of Civil Engineers has given the US a D rating for infrastructure. High speed rail needs to be built. The widespread adoption of electric cars has to be mandated, and construction of a national electric vehicle charging network to power them has to be built.
Unemployed people still need jobs. Mark Cuban said on CNN this morning that there should be a jobs program similar to that of the New Deal. He is exactly right although he didn't make the necessary connection about the essential work that's still being left undone and the inessential work that doesn't need to be done even in a recovery. Forget Cuban's sports and entertainment enterprises. I hate to tell you that they are basically inessential. What is essential is greatly expanding the public health undertakings of the Federal government which has been totally behind the curve in this pandemic.
We must ask ourselves what is essential and not go back to a new normal in which all the inessential businesses of the past are brought back just in order to provide employment to the millions who have lost their jobs. The pre-pandemic economy was 70% consumerism. The economy post epidemic should be much less a consumerist economy and much more an investment economy. The four components of gross domestic product are personal consumption, business investment, government spending, and net exports. Of these government spending must be ramped up to provide the essential jobs in infrastructure building as well as in the areas that the pandemic has made clear are indeed essential: health care, education, transportation, agriculture.
Government spending must go up; personal consumption must go down. It's as simple as that. As for business investment, it's a lost cause as business will only do what's profitable for itself as has been made abundantly clear. Investment in fossil fuels and plastics which the big oil companies are making is only destructive to a green economy, not constructive. As far as exports are concerned, the dollar has already been weakened as much as it could possibly be by zero interest rates, so increased exports, although desirable, are not likely to happen any time soon.
Private enterprise knows only one thing in terms of the economy "reopening": get back to consumer spending. It ain't going to happen. People are still afraid of the virus. The pandemic is not over. They will use their money to pay off debts instead of going in debt to the hilt like they are used to. People will save their money instead of entertaining themselves to death. Why? Maybe they have learned their lesson that a high employment economy predicated on the fact that people will always have a job and always have a prepensity to consume is just a chimera. Rather than living paycheck to paycheck, I hope people will understand that there may come a rainy day, and they need to save for that. That lesson has really been brought home by the coronavirus pandemic.
The true heroes are essential workers not the military. The military itself was brought to its knees by COBID-19. There is a lesson there. It's more important to spend our collective money on preparing for the coming pandemic of global warming than on a bloated military. It is more important to house the homeless and guarantee the economic rights of shelter and health care to all Americans as in the 1948 UN Declaration of Human Rights. It is more important to help people all over the world escape from extreme poverty because poverty breeds health crises which then can spread all over the world. It's more important to make peace with our rivals rather than try to control them with military threats and sanctions.
May the next President (and I hope to heaven that it's not Donald Trump) see the light of a more rational, compassionate and humane world, one more concerned about the health and welfare of all the world's peoples. I hope Governor Cuomo's values of being tough, smart, disciplined and most importantly loving spread to every corner of US and world society, and we get on with essential business instead of the inessential business of amusing, entertaining and consuming ourselves to death.
Posted at 11:31 AM in John Lawrence, American Culture, Cars, Climate Change, Consumerism, Coronavirus, Debt, Economic Democracy, Ethics, Morality, Values, Food, Fossil Fuels, Global Warming, Green New Deal, Gross National Happiness, Health Care, Homelessness, Human Rights, Inequality, Infrastructure, Jobs, Labor, Medicare for All, Oil, Peace, Plastic, Renewable Energy, Sanctions, Solar, The Economy, The Environment, The Military, The Military Industrial Complex, United Nations | Permalink | Comments (0)
"Congress needs to act at the scale of the crisis, and they should start by canceling rent, mortgage, and utility payments for the duration."
As families across the U.S. struggle to pay for necessities during the coronavirus pandemic and the corresponding economic shutdown, an intensifying call is being directed at Congress to cancel rent, mortgage, and utility payments—in tandem with a full moratorium on evictions and shutoffs—until the crisis is over.
As part of that movement, the parent-led group ParentsTogether Action presented 600,000 petition signatures it had gathered after conducting a survey of 1,200 families across the country about their financial wellbeing since the coronavirus began spreading across the U.S. over the last two months, forcing millions of businesses to close and lay off or furlough workers.
About half of the families surveyed said they won't be able to pay their rent, mortgage, or utility bills on May 1 without cutting back on other essentials such as groceries, while 43% percent of the respondents said they also expected to be unable to pay in June.
"This economic crisis is a five-alarm fire and our government is just letting it burn. Millions of families can't afford rent or other basic necessities," said Justin Ruben, co-director of ParentsTogether. "They are begging for relief that, for many, just isn't coming. Congress needs to act at the scale of the crisis, and they should start by canceling rent, mortgage, and utility payments for the duration."
Many households are still anxiously awaiting the arrival of unemployment benefits and the $1,200 one-time payment the federal government is sending to many Americans. But 60% of those surveyed said they had yet to receive either, and more than a quarter said they had already spent their stimulus check.
On social media, ParentsTogether posted a video showing several parents describing their struggles amid the public health and economic crisis.
No family should be worried about losing their home during a pandemic. Congress should #CancelRent! pic.twitter.com/V5RuBPEEHV
— ParentsTogether Action (@ptogetheraction) April 29, 2020
One woman at risk for severe illness or death if she contracts Covid-19 said her husband had to stop working at his essential job to avoid exposing her.
"He's not working, therefore that means either no bills or no rent, no food, and no medication," she said.
"Right now I am unable to return to work because I have to take care of my daughter," another said. "We need the elected people out there to understand that this crisis is really taking a toll on our family."
Local officials across the country have urged for a rent cancellation, while at the federal level Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) introduced legislation to cancel rent and mortgage payments during the crisis. The bill has been endorsed by several national economic justice groups and is co-sponsored by progressive lawmakers including Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), and Jesus "Chuy" Garcia (D-Ill.).
No family should be worried about losing their home during a pandemic. Congress should #CancelRent! pic.twitter.com/V5RuBPEEHV
— ParentsTogether Action (@ptogetheraction) April 29, 2020
In a video posted to social media, Ocasio-Cortez expanded on how rent and mortgage payments could be suspended temporarily during the crisis.
Rep. @AOC: "Here's the path to canceling rent -- we're going to lay it out right here.
— The Hill (@thehill) April 28, 2020
WATCH: @RepAOC lays out a method by which rent and mortgages can be suspended to help both renters and mom and pop landlords. pic.twitter.com/2mzG593PmD
"When you think about how this is structured, it's not hard," the congresswoman said. "Let's say we want to start with three months. Suspend mortgage payments for three months, tack that on to the end of the repayment period. So let's say you have a ten-year mortgage, just suspend it three months and make it a ten-year and three-month mortgage."
ParentsTogether said their polling shows that the coronavirus relief passed by Congress so far "isn't reaching the people who need it most."
"Representative Ilhan Omar has responded by introducing legislation that would cancel rents and home mortgage payments nationwide," Ruben said. "It's time other members of Congress join her in bringing tangible relief to the millions unable to pay their bills."
Posted at 06:49 PM in Common Dreams, Coronavirus, Rent | Permalink | Comments (0)
by Robert Reich
Posted at 06:35 PM in Robert Reich, Coronavirus, Work | Permalink | Comments (0)
Why is the Federal Reserve Bailing Out Corporations With No Strings Attached?
by John Lawrence
A recent Washington Post article made the statement, "The U.S. plans to lend $500 billion to large companies. It won’t require them to preserve jobs or limit executive pay." The writer seemed to think this wasn't right. The bottom line is that it's not the U.S. government lending the money; it's the Federal Reserve which is not accountable to the people of the United States. It is not under any obligation to be democratic. It is privately owned by the big Wall Street banks and its main purpose is to provide liquidity to them. That's pretty much it. It was set up in 1913 in order to prevent runs on banks during banking panics. Since banks operate in terms of fractional reserve banking, which means they are allowed to loan out more money than they have in deposits, if everybody tries to get their money out of the bank at the same time. the bank has a liquidity crisis. That's where the Federal Reserve steps in.
The Fed is in charge of monetary policy and Congress is in charge of fiscal policy. The Fed sets interest rates in order to keep the value of the dollar stable and to control inflation. Congress authorizes budget expenditures which the taxpayers of the US are theoretically responsible for. In the past, as inflation has increased, the Fed has raised interest rates in order to slow economic expansion. If the economy goes into or is headed towards recession the Fed will lower interest rates in order to encourage economic expansion. Lately there has been no inflation despite interest rates being at approximately zero. So they really can't be reduced any further in order to increase economic activity despite the coronavirus pandemic which is forcing the economy into recession.
Since the Great Recession of 2008, the Fed has assumed a different role. Instead of setting monetary policy just by adjusting interest rates, it has engaged in a policy known as quantitative easing. Basically, this means that the Fed has printed money and bought Treasury bonds and other securities from the Big Banks in order to provide them with liquidity. Since the U.S. government itself has been running massive deficits and issuing tons of Treasury bonds to cover its debts, the Fed has been taking up the slack not only for the Wall Street banks but for the US government itself with Wall Street acting as the middle man for buying Treasuries. As the Fed has taken on this expanded role, it has also started bailing out corporations as well. It's a bailout nation with the Congress authorizing bailouts on the fiscal side and the Fed doing bailouts on the monetary side. They are coordinating their policies more than they traditionally have in the past.
There has been much confusion mostly deliberately caused by public officials about the public role of Congress and the separate private role of the Federal Reserve. In the book "Secrets of the Temple, How the Federal Reserve Runs the Country," author William Greider states: "The combat [between Congress and the Fed] and instability would continue because its real source was the political contract struck between democracy and capital back in 1913, the implicit decision that democratic politics could not be trusted to act responsibly in the national interest. Therefore, the authority and responsibilities of elected politicians were permanently curtailed. Put another way, the elected government was allowed to be permanently irresponsible - free to indulge its own follies [like running budget deficits] and protected from the accountability by the higher authority, the nonelected central bank. The creation of the Federal Reserve represented a great retreat from democratic possibilities. The maturing of self-government was forever stunted."
So while the Chairman of the Fed usually speaks in cryptic terms unintelligble to the average American, his or her purpose was not to elucidate but to obfuscate. The Fed's role has always been on the side of sound money which the bond market insists upon and not on the side of labor. If somebody has to suffer, that role is allocated to working Americans. This was the case during the Great Recession of 2008 when the Fed bailed out the big banks but mortgagees got screwed. This is nothing new. Throughout history indebted farmers were let to go bankrupt, and the banks got preferential treatment. The Fed has always been on the side of capital not on the side of labor.
So the writers of the Washington Post article can sniff that the Fed is not imposing restrictions on the capital it is loaning to corporations, the fact of the matter is that the Fed has always been on the side of capital, not on the side of average Americans, and there is no reason to expect anything else. Democrats in Congress can put restrictions on money given to corporations that they can't use it to enhance CEO salaries or buy back their own stock, but the Fed has no interest in doing anything other than to make sure that the monied interests prevail.
Posted at 10:45 AM in John Lawrence, Coronavirus, Corporations, Federal Reserve, Off the Top of my Head | Permalink | Comments (0)
"Big corporations have shown time and again that they will put their shareholders and executives ahead of their workers if given the choice."
A Federal Reserve program approved by Congress and aimed at providing emergency relief to large companies contains a "catch" which will permit the corporations to lay off employees and spend the money on executive pay, according to a Washington Post report.
Through the Primary Market Corporate Credit Facility, the Fed will provide $500 billion to companies by buying bonds. The corporations will be required to pay the Fed back with interest.
But after a change was made to the program by the Federal Reserve weeks after it was approved, the companies will not be required to abide by rules and restrictions set under the CARES Act.
As the Post reports:
Unlike other portions of the relief for American businesses, however, this aid [from the Fed] will be exempt from rules passed by Congress requiring recipients to limit dividends, executive compensation and stock buybacks and does not direct the companies to maintain certain employment levels.
Critics say the program could allow large companies that take the federal help to reward shareholders and executives without saving any jobs. The program was set up jointly by the Federal Reserve and the Treasury Department.
The Paycheck Protection Program (PPP), which was passed as an aid package meant for small businesses, came with the stipulation that companies certify that the funds are used to "retain workers and maintain payroll or make mortgage payments, lease payments, and utility payments."
Bharat Ramamurti, a member of the Congressional Oversight Commission, told the Post that offering funds to corporations without restrictions will result in the companies neglecting their employees' needs.
"Big corporations have shown time and again that they will put their shareholders and executives ahead of their workers if given the choice," Ramamurti told the Post. "That's why I'm so concerned that the Treasury and the Fed have chosen to direct hundreds of billions of dollars to big companies with no strings attached."
According to the Post, "The first version of the Fed program to buy bonds from large companies...probably would have compelled recipients of the aid to limit executive pay and dividends. That version of the program, described in a March 23 term sheet issued by the Fed, offered direct loans and bond purchases to companies."
"But on April 9," wrote Jeffrey Stein and Peter Whoriskey, "the Fed altered the design of the program to exclude direct corporate lending. The Fed program will still essentially lend money to large companies—by buying their bonds—but the Fed will not be compelled by the Cares Act to ensure that companies abide by the divided and CEO pay rules."
Historian James Gleick wrote that with no restrictions on how they spend the money, corporations will "line up at the trough."
Lining up at the trough: the Fed and the Treasury Department are circumventing Congress to give hundreds of billions to the largest corporations with no restrictions. https://t.co/tfrEDsxUt6
— James Gleick (@JamesGleick) April 28, 2020
Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin told the Washington Post that lawmakers from boths ides of the aisle had agreed in March that direct loans, such as loans through the PPP or the $46 billion bailout offered to airlines, would require companies to spend the money for specific needs including employee retention, but said they agreed that "capital markets transactions would not carry the restrictions."
But economist Eswar Prasad warned against "relying on the good will of the companies" that use the program.
"A few months down the road, after the government purchases its debt, the company can turn around and issue a bunch of dividends to shareholders or fire its workers, and there's no clear path to get it back," Prasad said.
Posted at 08:32 PM in Common Dreams, Corporations, Federal Reserve | Permalink | Comments (0)
It is interesting how our behavior with others changes during a time like this. A man two buildings over, whose porch faces mine, now lifts his arm in greeting if he happens to see me. That never happened before, but now we are sharing an experience. We have become comrades of a sort simply because of circumstances. I wonder if this will remain after the crisis subsides and we go about the business of being highly individualized again.
We are always sharing the experience of living, yet rarely do we feel so connected as we do now. We have found ways to be together without being in close proximity. That is a testament to an aspect of our nature often overlooked. It is the need to be seen and known by others and to see and know them as well. What is the point of being human if not to share that experience?
We don’t consider the depth of the casual question “How are you?” It is like one soul asking another how they are managing in this earthly and temporary incarnation. What if our intention were to seriously inquire as to the well being of a fellow traveler? How are you managing to keep your soul intact? What do you do with the appearance of cruelty? Are you finding beauty everywhere? How do you deal with loss? No, we ask “what’s new?” and hardly expect an answer.
Personally I am optimistic that this time away from each other will serve to bring us closer. Moreover, will cause us to think deeply about how we are as a species on this Blue Garden called Home. I do not want to continue to support, albeit unconsciously, anything that does not encourage love and compassion for ourselves, Nature, the environment and future generations of intrepid souls who venture into this dimension. We are all in this together. Let’s live as if that simple truth were the key to our shared well-being .
Stay tuned in,
Carol Carnes www.carol-carnes.com
Posted at 08:25 PM in Dr. Carol Carnes, Living Consciously | Permalink | Comments (0)
When The Pandemic Is Over, The World Must Come Together
by John Lawrence, April 28, 2020
These are the fateful words of Mikhail Gorbachev, Nobel Prize Laureate and the first and only President of the Soviet Union. Recently, he recalled how the threat of nuclear war was reduced by the treaties in the 1980s made possible by his friendly relationship with Ronald Reagan. Writing in Time magazine, he said, "The leaders of the U.S. and the Soviet Union declared that a nuclear war can never be won and must never be fought." Despite the fact that the Cold War was declared to be over, the neocons running foreign policy today have been doing their best to create another one. The pandemic has made it clear that there are more important challenges than U.S.-Russian rivalry, and that the world has more to gain by cooperating even with supposed enemies or rivals than it does by perpetuating idiotic animosities. We have common enemies that affect us all with the coronavirus pandemic being just one of them.
Gorbachev mentioned "poverty and inequality, the degradation of the environment, the depletion of the earth and the oceans." Global warming is an existential threat that must be addressed now or there won't be a habitable earth left to fight over. "We have so far failed to develop and implement strategies and goals common to all mankind." Not only that the U.S. under Trump has retreated from any kind of cooperation with the other nations of the earth even our supposed allies. Instead U.S. foreign policy has been based on ordering other nations around as if we were the supreme bully. Trump's latest blunder is to defund the World Health Organization (WHO) in the middle of a pandemic.
"Progress towards the Millennium Development Goals, adopted by the U.N. in 2000, has been extremely uneven." The U.S. under Trump does not really support the U.N. in any way because it wants to be the ruler of nations not part of an organization that attempts to have a forum for the cooperation of nations. The United Nations Millennium Declaration, signed in September 2000 commits world leaders to combat poverty, hunger, disease, illiteracy, environmental degradation, and discrimination against women. The Eight Millennium Development Goals are:
I had never even heard of the Eight Millennium Development Goals although I think I'm pretty well informed. All of the media time spent on Trump's self-serving bragging could have been better spent informing us about this WHO program. But instead the media spends its time either chastising Trump's stupidity or praising his glory depending on which channel you watch. He has changed from campaign rallies to hour long daily commercials for himself.
"What we urgently need now is a rethinking of the entire concept of security. Even after the end of the Cold War, it has been envisioned mostly in military terms." Yes, military hubris crowds out any prospect of peace let alone a prospect of eliminating extreme poverty. Bill Gates is singlehandedly doing his best to eliminate poverty and disease in the world. He basically is a one man United Nations surrogate. He presciently tried to warn us of the pandemic in a Ted talk. Now he is spending millions of his own money on developing a coronavirus vaccine. There are some good people in the world - even billionaires. That I am sure of. It's just that not a lot of them occupy positions of power in the U.S. government.
Gorbachev continued: "The overriding goal must be human security: providing food, water and a clean environment and caring for people's health. To achieve it, we have to develop strategies, make preparations, plan and create reserves. But all efforts will fail if nations continue to waste money by fueling the arms race. I'll never tire of repeating: we need to demilitarize world affairs, international politics and political thinking."
Gorbachev is calling on national leaders to cut military budgets by 10% to 15%. It is not enough. The mindset, even among Democrats, is that we need a huge military to defend ourselves from perceived threats and perceived enemies. They don't have the mindset that they could make the world a better place by defusing tensions among nations that they perceive as threats. It might start by apologizing to Iran for overthrowing their democratically elected leader Mossaddegh and installing the brutal Shah. That would go a long way to establishing a peaceful relationship with Iran. It could start there. Instead the U.S. only fuels tensions by applying sanctions and carrying on like the rest of the world should bow down to the almighty dollar.
Posted at 08:08 PM in John Lawrence, Climate Change, Coronavirus, Foreign Policy, Global Warming, Green New Deal, Health Care, Human Rights, Inequality, Iran, Neocon Principles, Pollution, Poverty, Russia, Trump | Permalink | Comments (0)
This post originally appeared as an opinion piece in the Washington Post. It’s adapted from a longer article, which you can read here.
It’s entirely understandable that the national conversation has turned to a single question: “When can we get back to normal?” The shutdown has caused immeasurable pain in jobs lost, people isolated, and worsening inequity. People are ready to get going again.
Unfortunately, although we have the will, we don’t have the way—not yet. Before the United States and other countries can return to business and life as usual, we will need some innovative new tools that help us detect, treat, and prevent COVID-19.
It begins with testing. We can’t defeat an enemy if we don’t know where it is. To reopen the economy, we need to be testing enough people that we can quickly detect emerging hotspots and intervene early. We don’t want to wait until the hospitals start to fill up and more people die.
Innovation can help us get the numbers up. The current coronavirus tests require that health-care workers perform nasal swabs, which means they have to change their protective gear before every test. But our foundation supported research showing that having patients do the swab themselves produces results that are just as accurate. This self-swab approach is faster and safer, since regulators should be able to approve swabbing at home or in other locations rather than having people risk additional contact.
Another diagnostic test under development would work much like an at-home pregnancy test. You would swab your nose, but instead of sending it into a processing center, you’d put it in a liquid and then pour that liquid onto a strip of paper, which would change color if the virus was present. This test may be available in a few months.
We need one other advance in testing, but it’s social, not technical: consistent standards about who can get tested. If the country doesn’t test the right people—essential workers, people who are symptomatic, and those who have been in contact with someone who tested positive—then we’re wasting a precious resource and potentially missing big reserves of the virus. Asymptomatic people who aren’t in one of those three groups should not be tested until there are enough tests for everyone else.
The second area where we need innovation is contact tracing. Once someone tests positive, public-health officials need to know who else that person might have infected.
For now, the United States can follow Germany’s example: interview everyone who tests positive and use a database to make sure someone follows up with all their contacts. This approach is far from perfect, because it relies on the infected person to report their contacts accurately and requires a lot of staff to follow up with everyone in person. But it would be an improvement over the sporadic way that contact tracing is being done across the United States now.
An even better solution would be the broad, voluntary adoption of digital tools. For example, there are apps that will help you remember where you have been; if you ever test positive, you can review the history or choose to share it with whoever comes to interview you about your contacts. And some people have proposed allowing phones to detect other phones that are near them by using Bluetooth and emitting sounds that humans can’t hear. If someone tested positive, their phone would send a message to the other phones, and their owners could get tested. If most people chose to install this kind of application, it would probably help some.
Naturally, anyone who tests positive will immediately want to know about treatment options. Yet, right now, there is no treatment for COVID-19. Hydroxychloroquine, which works by changing the way the human body reacts to a virus, has received a lot of attention. Our foundation is funding a clinical trial that will give an indication whether it works on COVID-19 by the end of May, and it appears the benefits will be modest at best.
But several more-promising candidates are on the horizon. One involves drawing blood from patients who have recovered from COVID-19, making sure it is free of the coronavirus and other infections, and giving the plasma (and the antibodies it contains) to sick people. Several major companies are working together to see whether this succeeds.
Another type of drug candidate involves identifying the antibodies that are most effective against the novel coronavirus, and then manufacturing them in a lab. If this works, it is not yet clear how many doses could be produced; it depends on how much antibody material is needed per dose. In 2021, manufacturers may be able to make as few as 100,000 treatments or many millions.
If, a year from now, people are going to big public events—such as games or concerts in a stadium—it will be because researchers have discovered an extremely effective treatment that makes everyone feel safe to go out again. Unfortunately, based on the evidence I’ve seen, they’ll likely find a good treatment, but not one that virtually guarantees you’ll recover.
That’s why we need to invest in a fourth area of innovation: making a vaccine. Every additional month that it takes to produce a vaccine is a month in which the economy cannot completely return to normal.
The new approach I’m most excited about is known as an RNA vaccine. (The first COVID-19 vaccine to start human trials is an RNA vaccine.) Unlike a flu shot, which contains fragments of the influenza virus so your immune system can learn to attack them, an RNA vaccine gives your body the genetic code needed to produce viral fragments on its own. When the immune system sees these fragments, it learns how to attack them. An RNA vaccine essentially turns your body into its own vaccine manufacturing unit.
There are at least five other efforts that look promising. But because no one knows which approach will work, a number of them need to be funded so they can all advance at full speed simultaneously.
Even before there’s a safe, effective vaccine, governments need to work out how to distribute it. The countries that provide the funding, the countries where the trials are run, and the ones that are hardest-hit will all have a good case that they should receive priority. Ideally, there would be global agreement about who should get the vaccine first, but given how many competing interests there are, this is unlikely to happen. Whoever solves this problem equitably will have made a major breakthrough.
World War II was the defining moment of my parents’ generation. Similarly, the coronavirus pandemic—the first in a century—will define this era. But there is one big difference between a world war and a pandemic: All of humanity can work together to learn about the disease and develop the capacity to fight it. With the right tools in hand, and smart implementation, we will eventually be able to declare an end to this pandemic—and turn our attention to how to prevent and contain the next one.
Posted at 07:39 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Posted at 07:38 PM in Dr. Carol Carnes, Living Consciously | Permalink | Comments (0)
Silver Lining of the COBID Pandemic: Cleaner Air and Less Global Warming
by John Lawrence, April 27, 2020
Because of less economic activity, the air is cleaner all around the world. Researchers have seen a drop in air pollutants as a result of fewer cars on the road and less exhaust from factories due to the shelter-in-place orders issued by world governments. While we've heard a lot about the greenhouse gas, carbon dioxide, which is emitted into the atmosphere by burning fossil fuels, nitrogen pollution is a particularly potent greenhouse gas as it is over 300 times more effective at trapping heat in the atmosphere than carbon dioxide. NASA satellite data shows recent nitrogen dioxide levels are down about 30% over major metropolitan areas including Washington, DC, New York City, Philadelphia and Boston. Nitrogen dioxide is a major cause of air pollution which results in lung disease. People living in environments where there is much air pollution already have compromised pulmonary systems and are more vulnerable to lung disease and the coronavirus which attacks lungs. Breathing polluted air is an underlying condition.
Carbon dioxide emissions are also down. In China, carbon emissions were down an estimated 18 percent between early February and mid-March due to reductions in coal consumption and industrial output. This saved some 250 million metric tons of carbon pollution - more than half the annual carbon emissions of the United Kingdom. Los Angeles’s notorious smog has lifted, giving way to clear blue skies and, according to Environmental Protection Agency data for March, better air quality than the city has experienced in almost 40 years. Carbon monoxide emissions are down by 50% in New York. You can see the stars in Delhi, a city where people wore masks long before the coronavirus to protect themselves from thick car fumes and industrial exhaust.
So as economies around the world suffer, gasses which contribute to air pollution and global warming are down. While governments around the world lollygag with GHG reduction, it takes a pandemic to actually do something about it. Even though the pandemic may destroy economies, it might save the planet from an even more disastrous fate - global warming. However, once economies reopen, pollution and GHG emissions are very likely to increase back to their former levels or even higher. If only there were a way to keep global warming at the current level and even to reduce it further which must be done if planet earth is to escape the fate of runaway global warming, a fate much worse than the worst pandemic.
How ironic that the 50th anniversary of Earth Day saw improvements to the environment while lockdowns around the world prevented people from being out in the environment. There has been a glimpse into a cleaner world in which electric vehicles could keep the air as clear as it is now every day. Yet governments of the world tarry, hesitant to do anything to disrupt economic activity. Amid these small gains for air quality, President Trump has directed the EPA to rewrite the air quality regulations he says pose "unnecessary and outdated barriers to growth." This will undoubtedly hasten air quality destruction and GHG pollution especially as the nation reopens its economy. Trump's 2019 repeal of the Clean Power Plan implemented under former President Barack Obama was replaced with the Affordable Clean Energy Rule in 2019. The Environmental Protection Network says that that replacement "will cause more people, especially in front-line communities, to have heart attacks; suffer from asthma, bronchitis, and other respiratory illnesses; visit a hospital; and miss days of work and school."
Trump wants to restart the economy at any price including sacrificing more people to COBID-19. Some will succumb to the virus. Others will develop lung cancer from the pollutants in the air. Still others will get various cancers from the lack of clean water being served up in several locations around the country, not just Flint, Michigan. Among his many environmental sins, Trump has also tried to force California to lower its tailpipe emission standards. Courts are in the process of dealing with that. Hopefully, more rational and compassionate heads will prevail when Trump is voted out of office, the US rejoins the Paris Accords and reenters the nuclear agreement with Iran. Tensions around the world need to be reduced so that nations can get on with the business of cooperating over current and future pandemics as well as the present and future danger of global warming. These issues are way more important than relying on the military to solve every threatening situation. The military is helpless to do anything about either a pandemic or global warming. In fact it is only making the real dangers to society and the human race worse and consuming trillions of dollars that could be put to better use elsewhere. We need to get our priorities straight.
Posted at 07:02 PM in John Lawrence, Climate Change, Coronavirus, Global Warming, Off the Top of my Head, The Environment | Permalink | Comments (0)
by Andrea Thompson, April 24, 2020
from WhoWhatWhy blog
An artist’s rendering of AeroMINEs along the edge of a roof and combined with solar arrays. Photo credit: Sandia National Laboratories
This story originally appeared in Scientific American and is republished here as part of Covering Climate Now, a global journalism collaboration strengthening coverage of the climate story.
Solar panels perched on the roofs of houses and other buildings are an increasingly common sight in the US, but rooftop wind systems have never caught on. Past efforts to scale down the towering turbines that generate wind power to something that might sit on a home have been plagued by too many technical problems to make such devices practical. Now, however, a new design could circumvent those issues by harnessing the same principle that creates lift for airplane wings.
Overall, electricity generated by renewable sources has grown in the US in recent years, and wind power has been a major driver of that trend. It accounts for more than 40 percent of electricity from renewables in the US (though only 7 percent of all electricity production). Unlike solar energy cells, which are limited to collecting energy during daylight hours, wind turbines can run all night in any place with the right conditions — namely, in open plains or gentle hills with consistently sufficient wind speeds. But in addition to those requirements, large turbines need open space, which is not always available near towns and sprawling cities. Installing rooftop wind systems on homes and city buildings could help harness more of this resource.
When it comes to wind power, size matters. The amount of energy an individual turbine can generate is proportional to the area its blades sweep — so devices that are small enough to fit on a roof are less powerful. “What’s kept distributed wind from being successful is that most of the systems are basically miniaturized wind turbines,” says Brent Houchens, a mechanical engineer at Sandia National Laboratories. The smaller devices do not produce enough energy to be cost-effective. Plus, their quickly spinning blades create noisy vibrations, and their many moving parts are more prone to breakage. Compared with passive rooftop solar panels, wind turbines have the potential to be quite high-maintenance.
Houchens and his colleagues think they have engineered a solution that overcomes these obstacles by borrowing from a fundamental principle of air flight. The curved shape of an airplane wing — called an airfoil — alters the air pressure on either side of it and ultimately produces lift. Houchens’ colleague Carsten Westergaard, president of Westergaard Solutions and a mechanical engineer at Texas Tech University, says he hitched two airfoils together so that “the flow from one airfoil will amplify the other airfoil, and they become more powerful.” Oriented like two airplane wings standing upright on their side, the pair of airfoils directly face the wind. As the wind moves through, low pressure builds up between the foils and sucks air in through slits in their partly hollow bodies. That movement of air turns a small turbine housed in a tube and generates electricity.
Thanks to this design, the device — which the researchers call an AeroMINE (“MINE” stands for Motionless, Integrated Extraction) — can pull wind energy from a larger area (essentially, the AeroMINE’s rectangular face) than its turbine blades could on their own in a traditional setup. Houchens likens such standard turbines to cookie cutters that leave wasted dough behind. The new device makes use of all the available wind, allowing it to extract more energy.
AeroMINEs also do not generate the same vibrations and noise as regular turbines; they are “less noisy than a ventilation fan,” Westergaard says. The relative simplicity of their design means there are fewer moving parts to malfunction. The turbine, which is housed inside a building, would be easier to access if it does need repairs. This arrangement also keeps the blades isolated from any contact with people or wildlife. The team is designing the system so that it could be used in conjunction with rooftop solar panels, plugging into the existing infrastructure to harvest the energy they generate.
“I do think this technology could be groundbreaking” for areas with good wind conditions, says Luciano Castillo, a mechanical engineer at Purdue University, who is not involved in the project but has worked with Westergaard in the past. He also thinks the simplicity of AeroMINEs could make them a good option for developing countries, because the new devices do not require specialized parts or tools and are relatively easy to fix. Castillo and Westergaard both see the potential to use the design underwater to harness tidal energy as well.
Jay Apt, co-director of the Carnegie Mellon Electricity Industry Center, who is also not involved in the project, agrees that the simplicity of the design is attractive. But he is unsure whether the system can be scaled up to efficiently generate energy at a low enough cost in a real-world setting. Houchens says that with suitable wind conditions, he and his colleagues think AeroMINEs can be competitive with the current cost of rooftop solar power.
The team, which has received funding from Sandia and the Department of Energy, has tested scaled-down models in wind tunnels to fine-tune the design. In June the researchers have plans to test a four-meter-tall version of the device on a single-story mock building at the Scaled Wind Farm Technology (SWiFT) facility, part of Texas Tech’s National Wind Institute.
Related front page panorama photo credit: Adapted by WhoWhatWhy from Sandia National Laboratories.
Posted at 05:00 PM in Green New Deal, Renewable Energy, Wind | Permalink | Comments (0)
Why is it that lawmakers can order workers to stop working, and small business owners to lock their doors, but not order landlords, bankers, and Wall Street investors to also suspend their activities?
When I was a child, I heard my parents say that when we save our money it works for us. I remember having to dress up in my church clothes when I went to the bank to deposit my birthday checks or money I saved from my allowances.
These ideas that banks and Wall Street are secular versions of church, and that money works for everyone are deeply at play in our society today.
In the name of protecting the common good, Governors across the country have ordered people to stay at home, and all non-essential worksites shuttered. But aside from some states adopting short-term bans on evictions and foreclosures, no leaders have gone further in ordering the financial economy to “stop working” and set aside the primacy of their business interests for the common good by forgiving rents and waiving mortgage interest while deferring mortgage principal payments.
"If federal leaders and state governors fail to demand that banks and Wall Street pause too, efforts to shore up families with stimulus checks and business owners with paycheck protection, will be undermined, as those funds will pass quickly through the hands of families and into the already full pockets of Wall Street, deepening inequality and increasing the pain of the many, for the benefit of the few. "
The shut-down of much of our economy has thrown millions out of work and into a perilous place, because while much of the human economy of workers working, small businesses serving, and people shopping for their everyday needs, has been all but stopped, financial services firms continues to work hard, collecting monthly rents, mortgages and other debts. Some small business owners—restaurateurs, hair salons, clothing, book and hardware store owners have received government loans to keep paying their workers, they’ve received no similar protection from landlords demanding their monthly rent while their businesses are closed. This will wind up sinking many of the businesses we depend on and love. As the little virus attacks people’s bodies, the bigger disease of an overly powerful corporate capture of our economy continues to wreak havoc on families, small businesses, and communities long after the health crisis is resolved.
If federal leaders and state governors fail to demand that banks and Wall Street pause too, efforts to shore up families with stimulus checks and business owners with paycheck protection, will be undermined, as those funds will pass quickly through the hands of families and into the already full pockets of Wall Street, deepening inequality and increasing the pain of the many, for the benefit of the few.
As families scramble to get together their monthly mortgage payments, banks continue with business as usual. Last week, Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell was asked by the David Wessell of Brookings Institution whether Big Banks would be allowed to continue to distribute tens of billions of dollars annually as shareholder dividends (half of which go to people in the top 1%), he replied, “That’s a perfectly normal thing in our capitalist system.” Normal has been thrown out the window for workers and small business owners, it should be for the titans of our economy as well.
Why is it that Governors can order workers to stop working, and small business owners to lock their doors, but not order landlords, bankers, and Wall Street investors to also suspend their activities, to pause as labor and the commercial sector have? Why do people have to sacrifice but not the owners of capital?
Some landlords have demonstrated compassion and solidarity with their tenants. New York City landlord Mario Salerno is one of them. At the beginning of April, tenants in each of Salerno’s 18 Brooklyn apartment building found notes taped to the door saying: “Due to the COVID-19 pandemic affecting all of us, I am waiving rent for the month of April, 2020. Stay safe, help your neighbors and wash your hands!!! Thank you, Mario.” When asked by the New York Times about the hundreds of thousands of dollars he stood to lose as a result of the rent forgiveness, Salerno said that was not important: “My concern is everyone’s health. I told them just to look out for your neighbor and make sure everyone has food on their table.” More landlords could follow Mr. Salerno’s example if they knew the mortgage payments that they owed on their rental properties could be deferred.
In contrast, forty large corporations, many of whom are controlled by Wall Street private equity funds, have bought up more than two million units of rental housing in the United States. So, far all have been silent on the issue of rent forgiveness. Most picked up their properties, often at fire sale prices and with the help of federal government assistance, after the 2008 housing crisis. Unless these powerful firms are ordered to put public health and family well-being before corporate profits, they are likely to again swoop in and extend their control of America’s housing stock even further as millions of families and smaller landlords lose their homes and businesses.
Ordering landlords and mortgage holders to change the terms of their contracts is not unprecedented. Following the 2008 housing crash, the Federal Home Ownership Refinance Program (HARP), gave mortgage holders the right to renegotiate their federally backed mortgages on more affordable terms. Its success allowed many families to keep their homes.
I haven’t gotten dressed up to go to the bank in more than half a century, it is time our leaders stop treating Wall Street like a church, and to instead demand the same sacrifices of capital that they have of workers and merchants.
Posted at 11:14 AM in Common Dreams, Banking, Capitalism, Finance, Inequality, Wall Street | Permalink | Comments (0)
Emerson said “prayer is the contemplation of the facts of life from the highest point of view.” Well, two things are apparent right now. We have the facts and we are encouraged to pray. The facts are simple: life as we have known it has ceased to be. Are we to pray for the return of how it was? What, then, is the highest point of view possible? Could it be that this is Divine intervention? Is it an opportunity? Were we hurtling toward our self-created destruction as a species? The highest point of view is that we have been stopped from moving forward in the direction we were going!
When I say Divine Intervention I do not mean an old man in the sky looked down and declared us doomed and arranged things so that we could think about things. No, I mean our innate Intelligence, collectively, had the sense to manifest a possibility; but first we had to stop, look and listen. It may be hard to think we are in charge of this, but we are. Here is a wild idea and by offering it, I in NO WAY diminish the loss of lives inherent in massive shifts. It is inevitable. What if the gift is that we are forced to think about our relationship to each other, to the planet, to nature, to the cosmos, to the future? What if the highest point of view is emerging, first as righteous indignation, then as personal commitment and empowerment?
What if we decide to be grateful for the discovery of just how fragile our so-called security really is; how quickly we went from supermarket lines to lines to receive free food; how much more involved in civic matters we need to be; how precious life really is? Most of all, the highest point of view of the facts is gratitude. That is a leap to be sure but if we make it together, we can do amazing things.
“I am grateful to be awakened to the power of Mind. I use my thoughts to create a world that epitomizes freedom and justice for all.”
Stay tuned in,
Carol Carnes www.carol-carnes.com
Posted at 11:10 AM in Dr. Carol Carnes, Living Consciously | Permalink | Comments (0)
How the World Could Change When the Current Crisis is Over
by John Lawrence, April 26, 2020
Perhaps we will rethink what is essential and what is inessential. Here's my list of what is essential: 1) Health care; 2) Food; 3) Water; 4) Sanitation (Waste water and trash collection); 5) Education; 6) Transportation; 7) Electricity; 8) The Internet; 9) Grocery stores. 10) Elder care.11) Police, Fire and Paramedic services. Here are some things that are considered inessential now: 1) Spectator sports; 2) Spectator music events; 3) Parades; 4) Conventions; 5) Bars; 6) Restaurants; 7) Barber and beauty parlors; 8) Tattoo parlors; 9) Political campaign events; 10) Large parties like wedding receptions.
Everyone can come up with their own list of what they consider to be essential and what they consider to be inessential. In my opinion the least essential of inessential services are tattoo artists. There are a lot of products and services in our mass consumer culture which are also frivolous and have nothing to do with what is essential or beneficial to human well being.. It seems that the most essential workers are the least paid while the least essential are well paid indeed. Is advertising really essential? You can look up everything you might want or need online using google or amazon. Why do you have to have some irrelevant product or service pounded into you by TV advertising? It's a historical relic. I record most programs so that I can fast forward through the commercials. If I watch a live program, I put it on pause while I do something else for awhile, and then I fast forward through the commercials. In my opinion everything advertised on TV, especially pharmaceuticals, is inessential. They should be prescribed by a doctor. It's the doctor's business to know which pharmaceuticals you need, not yours.
Are hedge funds essential? Is jewelry essential? Are the products of the wedding-industrial complex essential? Many people are having weddings during the pandemic without paying the tens of thousands of dollars that current weddings fashioned by the wedding-industrial complex demand. There are many frivolous consumer items which advertising insists that people need that they don't really need, that are completely inessential. Some are nice to have, but inessential, and some are downright destructive to peoples' health and welfare.
The most essential activity at this time in history is saving the planet from global warming. Production of renewable energy alternatives is absolutely essential. The provision of green infrastructure is absolutely essential. Fossil fuels need to be left in the ground. Getting rid of plastics which pollute the oceans and other waste products that aren't biodegradable is absolutely essential. Rethinking payscales for essential workers like agricultural workers and grocery store workers is essential. If these are the most essential workers, they should be paid more. The same goes for doctors, nurses, certified nursing assistants, the CNAs who do most of the caregiving at nursing homes. CNAs make little more than minimum wage and yet they are exposed to the coronavirus. What this means is that so much that is really essential now is either being ignored or very little money is being allocated to it while huge amounts of money are being allocated to fruitless and frivolous activities.
The most fruitless activity is war and the provoking of war. The trillion dollar annual budget of the military-industrial complex has been shown to be fruitless and meaningless when the real war is against a virus. Unhealthy conditions in poverty stricken areas of the world including refugee camps can breed disease which affects the whole world including "privileged" people in the more advanced nations. Poverty and disease need to be eradicated in all parts of the world. The military cannot do that. Oh, they can be repurposed a little bit to help out with a pandemic, but they can not really do the job that needs to be done. In particular they are vulnerable to the pandemic themselves and all of the weapons of war cannot protect them. The real war needs to be against poverty and disease which are the breeders of war and pandemics. The real war needs to be against global warming. The real essential workers are construction workers who need to be constructing advanced green infrastructure.
What is clear is that real essential workers need to be paid more which argues for a lessening of economic inequality. So much of the wealth is held by people who are absolutely inessential to the health, welfare and betterment of people all around the world. A Green New Deal needs to be prioritized. Wealth needs to be taxed to pay for it. New York state needs to tax Wall Street to make up for its budget deficit. Priorities, priorities. The helping professionals and care workers need to be given more respect and money. Taxing inessential workers like hedge fund managers is what needs to pay for it.
Posted at 10:58 AM in John Lawrence, Advertising, Consumerism, Fossil Fuels, Global Warming, Green New Deal, Health Care, Hedge Funds, Inequality, Infrastructure, Internet, Medicare for All, Off the Top of my Head, Pharmaceuticals, Plastic, Pollution, Poverty, Tax the Rich, Teachers, The Environment, The Military, The Military Industrial Complex, The Poor, Wages, Wall Street, War, Waste, Water | Permalink | Comments (0)
As we move through this crisis, we see the tragedy of the rich superpower with its privatized, dysfunctional health care system failing its people, while its impoverished neighbor — under constant attack from the superpower — reaches out to help the world.
While Bernie Sanders paid a political price for uttering something positive about Cuba’s literacy program, the current pandemic has shown the whole world the heroic side of Cuba’s health care system.
I saw this heroism firsthand when I worked with Cuban doctors in poor, remote villages in Africa. It was the 1970s and I was a young woman employed as a nutritionist with the UN Food and Agriculture Organization. My colleagues were good people who were helping to feed hungry children. They also made hefty salaries and lived a wealthy lifestyle they could never afford back home. The Cubans were different. They lived simply, worked under the harshest conditions, and earned almost nothing for their services. Their motivation was purely to help people in need.
They called it internationalism and said it was their revolutionary duty to repay their debt to society. They quoted Che Guevara: “The life of a single human being is worth a million times more than all the property of the richest man on earth.”
I was inspired, and ended up moving to Cuba. Four years, a marriage, and a baby later, I was accused by the Cuban government of writing articles critical of the revolution and deported. Certainly, I saw and experienced aspects of the Cuban system I disliked, but I never lost my admiration for the country’s public health system and its commitment to international solidarity.
It is truly inspiring that this small, poor island has basic health indicators equal, or better, to those of the world’s richest countries. This is even more remarkable after it has faced a brutal US blockade and sanctions for sixty years. Cuba’s infant mortality rate of 4 per 1,000 live births is lower than in the United States — and that’s according to the CIA! There’s little food on the store shelves and shortages in the pharmacies, but, as Cubans say, “We live like poor people, but we die like rich people.” That’s because their life expectancy of seventy-nine years is the same as in the United States, despite the fact that Cuba spends less than about $800 per person per year on health care compared with $11,000 in the United States.
Like most of the world, Cuba is now grappling with coronavirus. As of April 20, there were 1,137 confirmed cases, with 38 deaths. But Cuba’s free and universal health care system, including a robust cadre of health professionals, puts the island in a better position to deal with this crisis than most countries. With its intense focus on training health professionals, Cuba has the highest density of physicians in the world. Its ratio of medical professionals to patients is roughly three times higher than in the United States.
Cuba not only trains its own doctors; it trains doctors from all over the world. The island of only 11 million people is home to the world’s largest international medical school, the Latin American School of Medicine (ELAM). Since its founding in 1999, the school has trained over 35,000 young people from 138 countries, including the United States. And here’s the kicker: it’s free.
Pastors for Peace, the group that selects US students coming from the “humblest and neediest” communities, says the scholarships include full tuition, dormitory housing, three meals per day, textbooks, school uniforms, and a small monthly stipend. While graduates from US medical schools leave saddled with six-figure debts, the only debt ELAM students have is a commitment to practice medicine in low-income and medically underserved communities. That’s why you’ll find ELAM graduates like Dr. Melissa Barbar on the front-lines in the Bronx fighting coronavirus today.
If that doesn’t make you teary-eyed, just look at the brigade of doctors taking off for international missions to the most COVID-19 affected area of Italy, Lombardy. “We are not superheroes,” intensive care specialist Leonardo Fernandez told Reuters as the first brigade left Havana. “We are revolutionary doctors.” As of April 1, Cuba had sent 800 medical personnel to fight COVID-19 in sixteen countries, from Angola to Andorra, and more are on their way.
For Cuba, medical assistance has been a hallmark of the revolution: helping Chilean earthquake victims in 1963; Nicaraguans and Hondurans devastated by Hurricane Mitch in 1998; Indonesia tsunami victims in 2004; Haitians after the disastrous 2010 earthquake and subsequent cholera outbreak. Teams were also dispatched to Liberia, Guinea, and Sierra Leone to fight Ebola in 2014.
Gradually, this “army of white coats,” as Fidel Castro called them, not only responded to emergencies overseas but began serving as family doctors in poor communities around the world. Poorer countries pay only the medical teams’ expenses or seek international support to compensate Cuba; wealthier countries pay more.
But the Trump administration poses a significant challenge to Cuban social programs. When he came to power, his administration launched an all-out attack on the Cuban economy: placing new restrictions on US travel to the island, reducing the amount of remittances Cuban Americans could send back home, interfering with the transport of Venezuelan oil to the island, and trying to sabotage Cuba’s medical collaborations.
Anti-Cuba zealots in the Trump administration have been enticing Cuban doctors working overseas to defect, paying journalists to write negative stories, slapping sanctions on Cubans in charge of the program, and strong-arming countries to expel Cuban doctors.
The crux of the attack has been to paint the program as a form of modern slavery because the doctors only receive about a quarter of the money the countries pay for their services. But Cuban health professionals volunteer for these assignments — they want the experience, they earn much more than they would back home, and they know the rest of the money goes to support Cuba’s national health care system.
The Trump administration has been successful in convincing the right-wing governments that came to power in Bolivia, Brazil, and Ecuador since 2018 to send about 9,000 Cubans packing. In a tragic twist, these same countries are now overwhelmed with coronavirus and lamenting the loss of experienced professionals.
As we move through this crisis, we see the tragedy of the rich superpower with its privatized, dysfunctional health care system failing its people, while its impoverished neighbor — under constant attack from the superpower — reaches out to help the world. We see Trump desperate to deflect from his catastrophic bungling of this pandemic, including defunding the WHO in what a prestigious medical editor called “an appalling betrayal of global solidarity,” while Cuba’s army of white coats have become the embodiment of global solidarity.
But if you are an American with political ambitions, you might think twice before saying something good about Cuba’s health care system.
Posted at 06:38 PM in Common Dreams, Coronavirus, Cuba, Disease, Doctors, Health Care | Permalink | Comments (0)
Posted at 06:21 PM in Robert Reich, Climate Change, Corporations, Extreme Weather, Fossil Fuels, Global Warming, Green New Deal, Renewable Energy | Permalink | Comments (0)
How many weeks have we been in isolation? I have lost track but yesterday was the first morning I questioned even getting out of bed. I had to make myself dress and put on a bit of make-up. It has become a spiritual practice to remain calm and centered, optimistic and present during this time. Spiritual practice is often dull and boring. I have had to make myself meditate on more than one occasion over the years. At other times it is easy. It would be naïve to expect to not have differing emotions during this time. We have not experienced this before. We want to notice it all, perhaps even write about it, but try to remember, “right now I am alive and well and life is good.”
Staying in touch with family and friends is necessary now, just as it was before. Talking about things other than the situation is important. I had a lovely video talk with my son the other night, mostly about music. My daughter and I share ideas about everything from how to play the ukulele to how to make a good soup. We do not limit our time together to the situation we are sharing, albeit at a distance.
When I am alone I like to picture how I will be living once the restrictions are lifted. I am in a place of uncertainty as far as my career is concerned. At an age when normal people retire, I am seeking ways to take our teaching out into the world. Likely I will be doing online classes and gatherings. I will need a new computer and so I am researching those on the internet. It is good to be present in our current reality but not to the point of being mired in it. It will all change as things always do. It ill be different but we will be the same; that is, creative, intelligent, gifted, loved, needed and with a wonderful possibility open to us. Do your spiritual practice and include everything in it.
Stay tuned in,
Carol Carnes www.carol-carnes.com
Posted at 06:12 PM in Dr. Carol Carnes, Living Consciously | Permalink | Comments (0)
The Solution for New York State's Budget Crisis: A Wealth Tax on Wall Street
John Lawrence
There's a storm a'brewing between Governor Andrew Cuomo and Mitch McConnell, the Senate majority leader. New York is facing a $15 billion revenue shortfall due to the coronavirus. Cuomo wants the Federal government to fill the gap, but Mitch has said, "Let the states go bankrupt." McConnell has told the blue states,"Drop Dead." New York state is a democratic state which won't vote for Donald Trump so McConnell is now all concerned about the budget deficit. The solution lies in the fact that New York City, the richest city in the world is located in New York state. Wall Street, home of the biggest and richest banks in the world is located in New York City. JPMorgan Chase's CEO Jamie Dimon is a billionaire. Goldman Sachs' CEO, Lloyd Blankfein, is a billionaire. Wall Street banks have just been given $1.5 trillion by the Federal Reserve. Besides that between 2008 and 2015, the Federal Reserve contributed about $4.5 in quantitative easing (QE) to the big Wall Street banks.
In addition New York is the hedge fund capital of the universe. They are worth trillions of dollars. So a wealth tax on Wall Street billionaires, banks and hedge funds could easily fill New York State's budget gap. In addition to that consider Manhattan real estate. The median price of homes currently listed in Manhattan is $1,550,000. At $238 million, 220 Central Park South penthouse is the most expensive home sold in the U.S. Come on, Governor Cuomo. Just raise the property taxes on Manhattan real estate. Property tax is a wealth tax. A wealth tax on New York City assets could easily fill the budget gap. What are you waiting for? Democrats control the majority in both houses of the New York State legislature. No Mitch McConnell there. The state can just vote to raise taxes on billionaires, banks and hedge funds.
OK, here's the likely scenario. If Cuomo proposes a wealth tax on Wall Street banks, hedge funds and billionaires, all of which have received massive bailouts from the Federal Reserve, the affected parties will massively lobby New York state legislators and Republicans at the national level including Mitch McConnell. According to New York Public Radio in 2012:
Hedge funds, hedge fund executives, and their immediate family members gave $23.4 million dollars to state and local politicians from the start of 2005 through February of this year, according to a report released Wednesday by Common Cause New York, an advocacy group that campaigns for open government.
While this is the first time Common Cause has tracked these donations in New York, contributions from the hedge funds in federal campaigns leapt from only $2.4 million in 2000 to $19 million in 2008.
I'm sure the affected parties have contributed much more since 2012 and will ride McConnell's ass and ply him and other Republicans with money, and then Congressional Republicans will change their tune regarding bailing out New York state. The result will be that New York state will not have to tax Wall Street although 15 billion is just a small blip on one billionaires' balance sheet. Remember a billion is a thousand million. C'mon, Governor Cuomo, it's a no brainer.
Posted at 11:28 AM in John Lawrence, Billionaires, Coronavirus, Corporations, Federal Reserve, Hedge Funds, Off the Top of my Head, Wall Street | Permalink | Comments (0)
U.N. Chief António Guterres declared the pandemic "an unprecedented wake-up call" and urged world leaders to pursue a "green recovery."
The 50th annual global Earth Day coming amid the coronavirus pandemic sparked fresh demands from Fridays for Future founder Greta Thunberg, United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres, and others for the international community to simultaneously tackle the COVID-19 and climate crises.
"Today is Earth Day and that reminds us that the climate and environmental emergency is still ongoing and we need to tackle both the corona pandemic, this crisis, at the same time as we tackle climate and environmental emergency, because we need to be able to tackle two crises at once," said 17-year-old Thunberg.
She emphasized that while it is always "important" and "essential" to be guided by science, "during crises like this it is even more important that we listen to scientists, science, and to the experts. That goes for all crises, whether it's the corona crisis or whether it's the climate crisis."
Thunberg's comments came in a livestreamed conversation with Johan Rockström, a Swedish professor who is joint director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK) in Germany, hosted by the Nobel Prize Museum. The teen activist, also a Swede, has twice been nominated for the Nobel Peace Price.
Thunberg's youth-led climate action movement Fridays for Future marked Earth Day by releasing a short video entitled "Our House Is On Fire," evoking a speech the activist delivered at the World Economic Forum's annual summit in Davos, Switzerland in January 2018.
"We believe it's time people realize that climate change isn't going to happen, but that it's already happening," Fridays for Future U.S. spokesperson Joe Hobbs said in a statement. "We hope that by watching this video people will realize they need to take action now, instead of putting it off until later."
During a video address Wednesday, Guterres said: "On this International Mother Earth Day, all eyes are on the COVID-19 pandemic—the biggest test the world has faced since the Second World War. We must work together to save lives, ease suffering, and lessen the shattering economic and social consequences.
"But there is another deep emergency—the planet's unfolding environmental crisis," he added. "Biodiversity is in steep decline. Climate disruption is approaching a point of no return. We must act decisively to protect our planet from both the coronavirus and the existential threat of climate disruption."
Guterres declared that "the current crisis is an unprecedented wake-up call" and outlined six "climate-related actions to shape the recovery and the work ahead," urging world leaders to pursue a green recovery from the pandemic that ensures "a healthy and resilient future for people and planet alike."
As the coronavirus has spread across the globe, killing nearly 180,000 people, infecting more than 2.59 million, and devastating the world's economy, climate and environmental activists have called for a global Green New Deal and just recovery that prioritizes a rapid transition to renewable energy and other efforts to reduce planet-heating emissions and pollution more broadly. Recent studies tying poor air quality to COVID-19 deaths have added weight to those demands.
The U.N. chief's comments Wednesday were welcome by 350.org, a global environmental advocacy group leading the calls for a just recovery from the public health crisis:
#EarthDay2020 BREAKING: Secretary General of @UN calls on governments to use their economic response to the Coronavirus pandemic to respond to the "even deeper emergency" of #ClimateCrisis with #JustRecovery for all (via @ReutersUK
— 350 dot org (@350) April 22, 2020
) https://t.co/COCJ4AqycV #FightEveryCrisis
Author and activist Bill McKibben, co-founder of 350.org, discussed Earth Day, the climate crisis, and the COVID-19 pandemic on Democracy Now! Wednesday morning. McKibben's interview echoed his piece for The New Yorker last week entitled "How We Can Build a Hardier World After the Coronavirus."
Among the key messages that the coronavirus pandemic is sending the world, according to McKibben, is the importance of listening to science. As he put it during the show: "If they say stand six feet apart, we stand six feet apart. If they say it's time to stop burning coal and gas and oil, then that's what we need to do."
"Similarly, we're learning lessons about delay in timing here that are crucial," McKibben continued. "As you know, the countries that flattened the coronavirus curve early on are doing far better than those like ours, which delayed. That's a pretty perfect analog to the 30 years that we've wasted in the climate crisis."
"And I think third, maybe most powerfully," he added, "the lesson that we're learning is social solidarity is almost everything."
Addressing how the ongoing coronavirus-related lockdowns have caused a massive decline in emissions and pollution around the world, McKibben said that "there are people on Earth who are getting literally their first lungfuls of clean air this month in their lives... Even as we all live through the horror of this pandemic, there are people who are glimpsing the way that the world could be."
Posted at 08:00 PM in Common Dreams, Climate Change, Coronavirus, Global Warming, Green New Deal | Permalink | Comments (0)
If you were a sailor of olden times who had been tossed out of his bunk one time too many by the roiling seas, perhaps you would have created the hammock. It made life so much better. The automobile was an improvement over horses for many reasons; faster, cleaner and more efficient. Roads were built to accommodate cars and our highway systems are the result. Everything we take for granted from umbrellas to shoes, came from someone wanting to improve our experience. At the same time, there are some inventions that should never have seen the light of day; such as the Atomic Bomb, certain plastics, pesticides and a long list of chemicals and pharmaceuticals, machine guns and weaponry of all kinds.
There are beneficial aspects to each of those, yet we seem to lack some discernment in choosing which ought to be widely in use. Just as every piece of music or art is not a masterpiece and would intentionally not be shown publicly, so would many things we use daily have been better left un-produced; but just try and convince us to get rid of them! If they are faster, less effort or can produce multiples quickly, we are loathe to let them go, even if they are polluting our world or are dangerous to our long term health.
We need discernment and it is sorely lacking in this modern world. The willingness to do without something for the greater good is the indicating trait of a spiritually mature mind. Knowing we are greater than anything we create, we can be more discerning in what we allow to see the light of day. Much of our careless behavior is rooted in superstitious religiosity. There is some discernment needed there, too. Religion is our invention. Perhaps it is no longer a viable image of the universe and our place in it. Perhaps it is even harmful to the psychological health and in some cases, the physical safety of those who are afraid to let it go.
Stay tuned in,
Carol Carnes www.carol-carnes.com
Posted at 07:51 PM in Dr. Carol Carnes, Living Consciously | Permalink | Comments (0)
In 1918 Pandemic, There Were 3 Spikes Over a 10 Month Period, Each More Deadly Than the Last
by John Lawrence
John M. Barry's book, “The Great Influenza,” was an exhaustive analysis of the Spanish flu which ravaged the US between 1918 and 1920. In 2005, the National Academies of Sciences named it the year’s outstanding book on science or medicine. There are lessons that can be drawn from this book that apply to the current pandemic. First no vaccine was available throughout the entire pandemic. One wouldn't become available until 1930. Just as today there were many snake oil salesmen offering one only to have it proven worthless. Doctors were not too concerned about the first wave of Spanish flu because it wasn't that deadly.
Then a more strident form of the virus revealed itself and it turned out to be much more deadly. Throughout fall 1918, this aggressive form of the virus swept through the U.S. and the world in a second wave, ultimately killing 0.65 percent of all Americans and double that percentage of young people. Italy lost 1 percent of its population to the virus, the worst death rate of any developed country. Troops returning to the United States from European countries brought back the newly aggressive virus. No one can predict whether COBID-19 will mutate into a more deadly form of the virus. At present it has not been studied enough. Those people who just want to wing it like President Trump or suggest bogus remedies are likely to have a deleterious effect on the process of getting rid of the virus and getting back to normal. Governor Cuomo said it, "This is no time to act stupid."
In the current pandemic, San Francisco's mayor was the first to order a citywide lockdown. It was the same in 1918 — and it helped the city avoid widespread deaths initially. San Francisco's public health director quarantined all naval installations, organized a citywide effort to prepare and urged people to wear masks. Despite those efforts, the city was still struck by the pandemic's third wave, in winter 1919. In the end San Francisco suffered the most deaths of any city on the West Coast.
Philadelphia was next. Wilmer Krusen, Philadelphia's public health director, only agreed to monitor the situation a full week after the virus first appeared in the city. Krusen insisted to reporters — who believed him — the influenza was only “old-fashioned influenza or grip.” He allowed a major parade to be held on Sept. 28, where several hundred thousand people were jammed along the route. Within 72 hours, every bed in the city's 31 hospitals was filled. People were trying to bribe nurses $100 to let them in. On the third day after the parade, 117 people died in a single day. Krusen didn't ban public meetings until Oct. 3. Is this a lesson for Georgia's governor who wants to reopen? Or a lesson for Trump who minimized the effects of the virus saying it would be gone by summer.
In some areas, including Phoenix, San Francisco and parts of Michigan and Georgia, the third wave killed more people than the second wave. Officials in Savannah, Ga., who had reopened public gathering places, re-closed them on Jan. 15 with even stricter rules than before. Is this a harbinger of Georgia's wanting to reopen prematurely like they did in 1919? They haven't learned their lesson, I guess. Maybe they should study their own history.
Anyway what you don't want to do is open, than close, then reopen, then close. That would be self defeating and only prolong the whole situation. There should be no more public gatherings until a vaccine is available and testing has show conclusively that the chances of getting the coronavirus are less than one in a thousand. The statisticians can figure out how many tests would be necessary to determine that.
Posted at 07:25 PM in John Lawrence, Coronavirus, Off the Top of my Head | Permalink | Comments (0)
Posted at 07:23 PM in Robert Reich, Coronavirus, Corporations | Permalink | Comments (0)
Or how to destroy American society from the top down.
My mom contracted polio when she was 14. She survived and learned to walk again, but my life was deeply affected by that virus. Today, as our larger society attempts to self-distance and self-isolate, my family has texted about the polio quarantine my mom was put under: how my grandma fearfully checked my aunt’s temperature every night because she shared a bedroom with my mom; how they had to put a sign on the front door of the house that read “quarantine” so that no one would visit.
Growing up with a polio survivor, I learned lessons about epidemics, sickness, disability, and inequality that have forever shaped my world. From a young age, I saw that all of us should be valued for our intrinsic worth as human beings; that there is no line between the supposedly deserving and the undeserving; that we should be loved for who we are, not what we do or how much money we have. My mom modeled for me what’s possible when those most impacted by inequality and injustice dedicate their lives to protecting others from what hurts us all. She taught me that the dividing line between sickness and wellbeing loses its meaning in a society that doesn’t care for everyone.
Here’s the simple truth of twenty-first-century America: all of us live in a time and in an economic system that values our lives relative to our ability to produce profits for the rich or in the context of the wealth we possess. Our wellness is measured by our efficiency and -- a particular lesson in the age of the coronavirus -- our sickness, when considered at all, is seen as an indication of individual limitations or moral failures, rather than as a symptom of a sick society.
About 31 million people are today uninsured in America and 14 states have not even expanded Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act. The healthcare system is seemingly structured in defiance of the people it should serve, functioning as yet another way to maximize profits at the expense of millions. In this coronavirus moment, many more Americans are finally awakening to the bitter consequences, the damage, wrought when even a single person does not have access to the resources he or she needs to live decently or, for that matter, survive. With the spread of a pandemic, the cost to a nation that often treats collective care as, at best, an afterthought should become apparent. After all, more than 9,000 medical workers, many not adequately protected from the disease, have already contracted it.
For decades, both political parties have pushed the narrative that illness, homelessness, poverty, and inequality are minor aberrations in an otherwise healthy society. Even now, as the possibility of a potentially historic depression looms, assurances that the mechanics of our economy are fundamentally strong (and Covid-19 an unexpected fluke) remain commonplace. And yet, while that economy’s productivity has indeed increased strikingly since the 1970s, the gains from it have gone to an increasingly small number of people (and corporations), while real wages have stagnated for the majority of workers. Don’t be fooled. This crisis didn’t start with the coronavirus: our collapsing oil and gas industry, for instance, points to an energy system that was already on the brink and a majority of economists agree that a manufacturing decline had actually begun in August 2019.
The Cost of Inequality
It should no longer be possible to ignore the structural crisis of poverty and inequality that has been eating away at American society over these last decades. Historic unemployment numbers in recent weeks only reveal how expendable the majority of workers are in a crunch. This is happening at a moment when it’s ever clearer how many of the most “essential” tasks in our economy are done by the least well-paid workers. The ranks of the poor are widening at a startling clip, as many more of us are now experiencing what dire insecurity feels like in an economy built on non-unionized, low-wage work and part-time jobs.
In order to respond to such a crisis and the growing needs of millions, it’s important to first acknowledge the deeper history of injustice and pain that brought us all here. In the last years of his life, Martin Luther King, Jr., put it well when he said that “the prescription for the cure rests with an accurate diagnosis of the disease.” To develop a cure not just for this virus but for a nation with the deepest kind of inequality at its core, what’s first needed (as with any disease) is an accurate diagnosis.
Today, more than 38 million people officially live below the federal poverty line and, in truth, that figure should have shocked the nation into action before the coronavirus even arrived here. No such luck and here’s the real story anyway: the official measure of poverty, developed in 1964, doesn’t even take into account household expenses like health care, child care, housing, and transportation, not to speak of other costs that have burgeoned in recent decades. The world has undergone profound economic transformations over the last 66 years and yet this out-of-date measure, based on three times a family’s food budget, continues to shape policymaking at every level of government as well as the contours of the American political and moral imagination.
Two years ago, the Poor People’s Campaign (which I co-chair alongside Reverend William Barber II) and the Institute for Policy Studies released an audit of America. Its centerpiece was a far more realistic assessment of poverty and economic precariousness in this country. Using the Census Bureau’s Supplemental Poverty Measure as a baseline, which, among other things, measures family income after taxes and out-of-pocket expenses for food, clothing, housing, and utilities, there are at least 140 million people who are poor -- or just a $400 emergency from that state. (Of that, there are now untold examples in this pandemic moment.)
As poverty has grown and spread, one of the great political weapons of politicians and the ruling elite over the past decades (only emphasized in the age of Trump) has been to minimize, dismiss, and racialize it. In the 1970s, President Richard Nixon’s “Southern Strategy” coded it into Republican national politics; in the 1980s, in the years of Ronald Reagan’s presidency, the fabricated image of “the welfare queen” gained symbolic prominence. In the 1990s, President Bill Clinton’s welfare “reforms” enshrined such thinking in the arguments of both parties. Today, given the outright racism and xenophobia that has become the hallmark of Donald Trump’s presidency, "poor" has become a curse word.
It is, of course, true that, among the 140 million poor people in the U.S., a disproportionate number are indeed people of color. The inheritance of slavery, Jim Crow, never-ending discrimination, and the mass incarceration of black men in particular, as well as a generational disinvestment in such populations, could have resulted in nothing less. And yet the reality of poverty stretches deep into every community in this country. According to that audit of America, the poor or low-income today consist of 24 million blacks, 38 million Latinos, eight million Asian-Americans, two million Native peoples, and 66 million whites.
Those staggering numbers, already a deadweight for the nation, are likely to prove a grotestque underestimate in the coronaviral world we now inhabit and yet none of this should be a surprise. Although we couldn’t have predicted the exact circumstances of this pandemic, social theorists remind us that conditions were ripe for just this kind of economic dislocation.
Over the past 50 years, for instance, rents have risen faster than income in every city. Before the coronavirus outbreak, there was not a single county in this country where a person making a minimum wage with a family could afford a two-bedroom apartment. No surprise then that, throughout this crisis, there has been a rise in rent strikes, housing takeovers, and calls for moratoriums on evictions. The quiet fact is that, in the last few decades, unemployment, underemployment, poverty, and homelessness have become ever more deeply and permanently structured into this society.
Covid-19 and the Descent Into Poverty
Over the years, one political narrative has been trumpeted by both parties: that we don’t have enough to provide for every American. This scarcity argument has undergirded every federal budget in recent history and yet it falls flat when we look at the 53% of every federal discretionary dollar that goes to the Pentagon, the trillions of dollars that have been squandered in this country’s never-ending war on terror, not to speak of the unprecedented financial gains the wealthiest have made (even in the midst of the current crisis). Of course, this economic order becomes a genuine moral scandal the moment attention is focused on the three billionaires who possess more wealth than the bottom half of society.
Since the government began transferring wealth from the poor to the very rich under the guise of “trickle-down” (but actually gusher-up) economics, key public institutions, labor unions, and the electoral process have been under attack. The healthcare system has been further privatized, public housing has been demolished, public water and sanitation systems have been held hostage by emergency managers, and the social safety net has been eviscerated.
In these same years, core government functions have been turned over to the private sector and the free market. The result: levels of poverty and inequality in this country now outmatch the Gilded Age. All of this, in turn, laid the groundwork for the rapid spread of death and disease via the Covid-19 pandemic and its disproportionate impact on poor people and people of color.
When the coronavirus first became a national emergency, the Fed materialized $1.5 trillion dollars in loans to Wall Street, a form of corporate welfare that may never be paid back. In the following weeks, the Fed and a congressional bipartisan stimulus package funneled trillions more in bailouts to the largest corporations. Meanwhile, tens of millions of Americans were left out of that CARES Act: 48% of the workforce did not receive paid sick leave; 27 million uninsured people and 10% of the insured who couldn’t even afford a doctor’s visit have no guarantee of free or reasonably priced medical treatment; 11 million undocumented immigrants and their five million children will receive no emergency provisions; 2.3 million of the incarcerated have been left in the petri dish of prison; three million Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program recipients saw no increase in their benefits; and homeless assistance funds were targeted at only about 500,000 people, although eight to 11 million are homeless or housing insecure. Such omissions are guaranteed to prove debilitating, even potentially lethal, for many. They also represent cracks in a dam ready to break in a nation without a guaranteed living wage or universal healthcare as debt mounts, wages stagnate, and the pressures of ecological devastation and climate change intensify.
Recently, news reports have made it far clearer just where (and whom) Covid-19 is hitting hardest. In New York City, now the global epicenter of the pandemic, for instance, the areas with the highest rates of positive tests overlap almost exactly with neighborhoods where the most “essential workers” live -- and you undoubtedly won’t be surprised to learn that most of them are poor or low-income ones, 79% of them black or Latino. The five zip codes with the most coronavirus cases have an average income of under $27,000; while, in the five zip codes with the least, the average income is $118,000.
Across the Black Belt of the southern states, the poor and black are dying from the coronavirus at an alarming rate. In many of those states, wages are tied to industries that rely on now interrupted regular household spending. They also have among the least resources and the most vehement anti-union and wage-suppression laws. That, in turn, leaves so many Americans all that more vulnerable to the Covid-19 crisis, the end of which is nowhere in sight. Chalk this up, among other things, to decades of divestment in public insitutitions and the entrenchment of extremist agendas in state legislatures. The Black Belt accounts for nine of the 14 states that have not expanded Medicaid and for 60% of all rural hospital closures.
Nor are these the only places now feeling the consequences of hospitals being bought up or closed for private profit. In Philadelphia, for instance, Hahnemann Hospital, which had served that city’s poorest patients for more than 170 years, was recently bought and closed by a real-estate speculator who then attempted to extract a million dollars a month from the local government to reopen it. Now, as the coronavirus ravages Philadelphia, Hahnemann’s beds sit empty, reminiscent of the notorious shuttering of New Orleans’ Charity Hospital in the wake of Hurricane Katrina in 2005.
In fact, lessons from the catastrophe of Katrina resonate heavily today, as the poor suffer and die while the rich and their political allies begin to circle the ruins, seeing opportunities to further enhance their power. After Katrina, many poor and black residents of New Orleans who had to evacuate were unable to return, while the city became a laboratory for a new onslaught of neoliberal reforms from health care to housing. One state legislator was overheard telling lobbyists, “We finally cleaned out public housing in New Orleans. We couldn’t do it, but God did.” It hardly takes a stretch of the imagination to envision similar braggadocio in the post-coronavirus era.
Inescapably Bound Together
The dual crises of pandemic and inequality are revealing ever more clearly how the descent into poverty is helping to destroy American society from the inside out. In a remarkably brief span of time, these crises have also highlighted our collective interdependence.
One of my earliest memories is of helping my mom walk when I was younger than my youngest child is now. As we slid down the wintry streets of Milwaukee, Wisconsin, my small hand in hers, she suddenly fell and I went down alongside her. I had been unable to keep us from crashing to the ground.
And yet, even when I couldn’t do what needed to be done alone, I recognized, with the clarity that perhaps only a child can have, how much we as a family (and, by extension, as a people) were inescapably bound together -- that when one of us falls, so many of us fall. And that’s why, whatever Donald Trump or Jared Kushner or the rest of that crew in Washington and across the country may think, we can no longer tolerate leaving anybody out.
Hasn’t the time finally come to reject the false narrative of scarcity? Isn’t it time to demand a transformative moral agenda that reaches from the bottom up?
If the wealthy were to pay a relatively modest amount more in taxes and we shrank our war economy to support the common good, then universal health care, living wages, and a guaranteed income, decent and affordable housing, strong programs for the poor, and even more might finally be within reach. This crisis is offering us a striking demonstration of how an economy oriented around the whims of the rich brings death and destruction in its wake.
A society organized around the needs of the poor, on the other hand, would improve life for all of us -- and especially in this Covid-19 moment, exactly this might be possible.
Posted at 07:18 PM in Common Dreams, Coronavirus, Inequality | Permalink | Comments (0)
Bernie, Where Are Ya Now, Buddy?
by John Lawrence, April 21, 2020
Can I take back my vote for Joe Biden? Now that I've lost my job and my employer based health insurance, I don't have a job, and I don't have health insurance. Medicare for All has never sounded so good. This is the situation for so many in this age of pandemic. Fortunately, it doesn't apply to me. I already have Medicare. Fortunately, for the rich, the poor who could profit the most from Medicare for All don't vote in anywhere the same numbers as do the rich. That's why voting by mail is something Republicans don't want. It means more poor people would be voting.
Does anybody care that Medicare for All is a "socialist" program advocated by a "socialist." They only have a similar system in every other developed country and most underdeveloped ones as well. Now that unemployed people have more time off, they will have ample time to think about Medicare for All vs the health care system they have (or don't have) now. Maybe they will come to the conclusion that Medicare for All is really in their best interests despite all the propaganda about it being "socialist." Bernie tried to tell us that health care was a human right not just a right for employed people. It would seem like a better deal now that "we are all in it together" except that we're not really despite all the sugary sentiment. If we were all in it together, people would be as concerned about their unemployed neighbor's health care as they are about their own especially if a sick neighbor is likely to spread the sickness to you which certainly is the case with a very contagious coronavirus.
Bernie's website says:
Today, more than 30 million Americans still don’t have health insurance and even more are underinsured. Even for those with insurance, costs are so high that medical bills are the number one cause of bankruptcy in the United States. Incredibly, we spend significantly more of our national GDP on this inadequate health care system—far more per person than any other major country. And despite doing so, Americans have worse health outcomes and a higher infant mortality rate than countries that spend much less on health care. Our people deserve better.
30 million? More like 130 million with a pandemic taking out its vengeance on the American people and in fact the world's people. In an op-ed in the New York Times, Bernie said the coronavirus outbreak has exposed the “absurdity and cruelty of our employer-based, private health insurance system” as “tens of millions of Americans” lose their jobs, incomes and healthcare as a result of the pandemic.Our neighbor to the north takes care of every Canadian citizen. All they have to do is present their health care card to any doctor's office or hospital and they are taken care of, no questions asked and never getting a bill. Some people have questioned the 'waiting times'. They haven't been to an emergency room in the US lately even with health insurance. First you have to wait a couple hours in the waiting room before you're even taken back to a stall in the emergency room. Then, if you need to be admitted to the hospital, you have to wait in the stall for several hours until a room is available. All this time, as much as a day if you're lucky, you're not given anything to eat or drink.
Rich people are afraid that if Medicare for All becomes the law of the land, they will just get the same level of service as the hoi polloi. They needn't worry. Even with Medicare for All they could pay a lot more and get a gold plated policy. This is the arrangement they have in the Netherlands. The rich can always pay more and get treated better, but with Medicare for All everyone is guaranteed adequate medical services at about half the price they are paying now with co-pays, premiums, deductibles and every other way the health care system in America has invented to fleece you. No wonder so many Americans go bankrupt. The health care system is the leading cause of bankruptcy in America.
The American diet consists of junk food, heavily advertised on TV, but guaranteed to give you diabetes and obesity if consumed over a lifetime. All those juicy hamburgers, fries and pizza and a lack of enticing pictures of fruits and vegetables means that you will need insulin and cholesterol medicine at some point. You will end up taking a bunch of pills every day for underlying heart disease and a ton of other diet caused maladies. Then you will pay through the nose to pharmaceutical corporations for the privilege of consuming them. Medicare for All would eliminate the travesty that pharmaceutical companies are perpetrating on the American people.
Wendell Potter was formerly in charge of public relations with Humana until his conscience got the better of him.. His job was to make sure that Americans would not be favorably persuaded by Medicare for All. He wrote: "The industry knows from years of focus group message testing that terms like “socialized medicine” and “government-run health care” scare many Americans and that many of us respond favorably to terms like “choice” and “competition.” Based on this knowledge, there were several big lies I helped craft — and that are still in circulation today."
Today those Democratic candidates that wanted a Medicare for All Who Want It option have been shown to be dead wrong. They said “If you like your employer-based plan, you can keep it." Well today many of those that liked their employer-based plan are not liking it so much especially those who are unemployed and without a plan.
Posted at 06:34 PM in Bernie Sanders, John Lawrence, Coronavirus, Democrats, Drugs, Health Care, Medicare for All, Off the Top of my Head | Permalink | Comments (0)
"The oil price collapse creates a historic opening: a public buyout of the fossil fuel sector to enact a managed decline of extraction and ensure a just transition for workers and communities."
The price of U.S. crude oil collapse to below zero for the first time on record, falling to negative-$37 per barrel and forcing oil producers to pay buyers to take the product off their hands.
As The Guardian reported last week, 160 million barrels of oil are being stored in tankers near shipping ports around the world due to the sharpest drop in oil demand in a quarter of a century because of the coronavirus pandemic and the resulting global lockdown.
BREAKING: Oil drops below $2 a barrel https://t.co/t3BgDHfs0s pic.twitter.com/Hk39WgzrAk
— Bloomberg (@business) April 20, 2020
Monday's free-fall saw oil prices drop 105% in a matter of hours and came after extensive negotiations between President Donald Trump, Russia, and Saudi Arabia in which the U.S. president asked the two countries to cut their oil output by 10 to 15%.
"Trump's attempt to prop up oil prices was front-page news a few days ago," economist Paul Krugman tweeted, calling the effort "a complete bust."
Trump's attempt to prop up oil prices was front-page news a few days ago. So I'm surprised at how little attention is being given to the fact that it has been a complete bust pic.twitter.com/uizM31RVWp
— Paul Krugman (@paulkrugman) April 16, 2020
It's worth underscoring that Trump spent the last few weeks diligently working with Saudi Arabia and Russia to prop up oil prices. https://t.co/uf8AUHy78f
— Jeet Heer (@HeerJeet) April 20, 2020
The plummeting of oil markets on Monday, the last day oil producers can trade barrels for next month, solidified a trend which has been evident since the coronavirus pandemic brought economies around the world to a halt last month.
Critics urged U.S. policymakers not to approach the collapsing markets as a problem that can be solved by propping up the oil industry. As David Roberts wrote at Vox Monday, the sector has been in decline for years and any taxpayer funds which go to propping it up further would be "wasted."
First, fracking was a financial wreck long before COVID-19 hit. U.S. fracking operations have been losing money for a decade, to the tune of around $280 billion. Overproduction has produced a supply glut, low prices, and an accumulating surplus in storage.
[...]
Both oil and gas prices were persistently low leading into 2019. Due to oversupply and mild winters in the U.S. and Europe, there is a glut of both natural gas and oil, such that the entire world’s spare oil storage is in danger of being filled.
The fossil fuel industry, Roberts reported, is "furiously lobbying" for relief funds, but others on social media joined him in denouncing the possibility of a bailout.
Oil prices have crashed below $11 as demand has collapsed, and the cost of storing the oil for future use is now too high. But highly indebted oil companies being propped up by the Fed keep pumping anyway. The solution is to let these oil companies go bankrupt and stop pumping.
— Peter Schiff (@PeterSchiff) April 20, 2020
Our thoughts on bailing out the oil industry: No
— Public Citizen (@Public_Citizen) April 20, 2020
Some climate action advocates reiterated earlier calls to nationalize the oil industry, a move which New Republic journalist Kate Aronoff said last month would "ensure the country's energy demands are met responsibly as it transitions to a net-zero-emissions economy, without the need to appease [fossil fuel] companies' shareholders."
"This is our chance to publicly own oil and gas companies," the Sunrise Movement tweeted Monday.
What if we took public ownership of oil & gas companies?
— Sunrise Movement 🌅 (@sunrisemvmt) April 20, 2020
Hahaha, jk
...unless? 👀 https://t.co/Q5OiiNrGlW
The oil price collapse creates a historic opening: a public buy out of the fossil fuel sector to enact a managed decline of extraction and ensure a just transition for workers & communities.
— Common Wealth (@Cmmonwealth) April 20, 2020
Read more in our GND series by @johannabozuwa @carlaskandier https://t.co/WY54Rbe7lB
Roberts agreed that the collapse of oil markets represents an opportunity to begin a shift toward renewable energy in the U.S., but said Trump is not likely to heed the warnings of groups including the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL), which wrote in a recent report, "The pandemic exposes and exacerbates fundamental weaknesses throughout the sector that both predate the current crisis and will outlast it."
"At best [policymakers] can slow down the transition to clean energy a bit. They cannot stop it," wrote Roberts. "Meanwhile, other countries will be establishing a commanding position in some of the biggest growth industries of the 21st century."
"It would be a shame to emerge from this crisis still clinging to the past rather than facing, and preparing for, the future," he added.
Posted at 07:33 PM in Common Dreams, Fossil Fuels, Oil | Permalink | Comments (0)
American and Russian diplomats have publicly praised calls for a global ceasefire, but say they cannot sign on to a blanket agreement.
The U.S. and Russia are reportedly standing in the way of an international agreement for a global ceasefire called for by the United Nations, claiming their militaries must retain the ability to attack enemies even as countries around the world face thousands of coronavirus cases.
The Trump administration is reluctant to agree to a universal ceasefire, Foreign Policy reported Friday, because of U.S. counterterrorism operations and partially because a ceasefire could impede key ally Israel's ability to conduct military operations throughout the Middle East.
President Donald Trump's position puts him at odds with "a broad global consensus for a ceasefire over all violent conflicts in the midst of COVID-19," tweeted author Henry Tam.
There is a broad global consensus for a ceasefire over all violent conflicts in the midst of #COVID19;
— Dr. Henry Tam (@HenryBTam) April 20, 2020
Except for Trump & Putin, who insist conflicts, deaths, & their countries' arms exports should continue: https://t.co/ntD0QCjtBS
While both the U.S. and Russia have "publicly praised" the idea of a global ceasefire, according to Foreign Policy reporter Colum Lynch, White House officials insist the U.S. must be able to continue its operations around the world despite the pandemic, which has killed more than 160,000 people worldwide so far and has infected more than 2.3 million.
"The U.S. pushback against a globally encompassing ceasefire may come from the Trump administration's increasingly heavy dependence on elite counterterrorism operations and covert strikes to kill Islamic State and Iranian-linked military operatives over the past six months," wrote Lynch.
Russian President Vladimir Putin is reportedly reluctant to support a blanket ceasefire due to Russia's continued operations in Syria and its support for groups in Libya and other countries, according to The Guardian.
Luc Dockendorf, a career diplomat from Luxembourg, summarized the American and Russian positions as supporting the ceasefire for other countries only.
Great powers be like: “We support @antonioguterres’s call for a #GlobalCeasefire for *everybody else* but reserve our right to continue blowing shit up” https://t.co/zYsVSVe4Xp
— Luc Dockendorf (@LucDockendorf) April 17, 2020
Since U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres first called for an immediate global ceasefire last month—saying that "the fury of the virus illustrates the folly of war"—French President Emmanuel Macron attempted to garner support from Trump and Putin by making the agreement non-binding.
Under Macron's proposal, countries could be exempt from the ceasefire "to continue to carry out military operations against individuals and armed groups designated as terrorists by the U.N. Security Council," Lynch reported.
Macron's draft would make the ceasefire "impossible to enforce," Simon Tisdall wrote at The Guardian Sunday, potentially putting vulnerable populations in as much danger of violence as they are now.
A U.S. State Department spokesperson told Foreign Policy of Macron's proposal that "the United States supports the Secretary General's call for a global ceasefire, but have noted that we will continue to fulfill our legitimate counterterrorism mission."
Although U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Kelly Knight Craft indicated last week that an agreement based on Macron's limited, non-binding proposal could be reached in the coming days, even that process has met impediments due to the Trump administration's objections. The U.S. demanded in March that the resolution include the phrase "Wuhan virus" to refer to the coronavirus, and last week demanded that language praising the World Health Organization (WHO) for its response to the pandemic be removed—an impasse which had not been resolved as of Friday. Trump held funding for WHO last week—at least temporarily—drawing condemnation from public health experts.
Humanitarian group UNICEF urged all countries to halt violent conflicts during the pandemic, calling on world leaders to "protect children under attack."
As we face the unprecedented challenges of #covid19, children need #peace more than ever.
— Kent Page (@KentPage) April 17, 2020
To protect #ChildrenUnderAttack, we need a global ceasefire, NOW.
Please RT if you agree with these #FridayFeelings! v/@unicef@un @unpeacekeeping @unpeacebuilding @unmissmedia pic.twitter.com/hZIrM1Yd6j
"As we face the unprecedented challenges of COVID-19, children need peace more than ever," tweeted UNICEF strategic communications advisor Kent Page.
Posted at 06:04 PM in Common Dreams, Peace, Russia, The US | Permalink | Comments (0)
We talk of going out to be “in Nature” as if we were somewhere else in our homes and offices. They are, as Emerson stated, as much a part of Nature as trees and meadows. Life is forever “groping towards consciousness.” We have become conscious of ourselves as citizens of a global village. We are beginning to realize this and at some point we will act accordingly. It is our Nature to adjust our way of living to the demands of the moment.
It is strange to be aware of awareness! That is where we are right now. We have become conscious of our own evolutionary impulse; that driver inherent in us that pushes us to improve and build and enlighten ourselves in the process. It is also our nature to release, to let go of or even destroy those things and memes which no longer serve the village. Some will resist the changes necessary for the good of the whole, but that is merely fear of loss. If the more progressive of us can convince the others that what is perceived as loss is an opening for gain, then we will move forward in a healthy way.
Ernest Holmes as well as futurist Barbara Marx Hubbard, said that once we become conscious of evolution, we then must direct it. It is no longer on automatic. We must come to know that the Creative God is within us. Have we reached that point? Are we not aware of our own bad choices and our previous tendency to believe that some Natural Power would take care of us and ensure our survival? Emerson would say that we have within us that Power, and we must intervene on our own behalf. For those who fear the loss of faith, consider Jesus’ own words, “the Father is within.” We are well-equipped to make the world as we would like it. It will not be as simple as it could be, but it will be done.
Affirm: “My thoughts and actions support the natural prosperity of humanity. I begin with myself and share what I know, believe and have proven. I am naturally drawn to those who are capable of real and lasting change. Together we lift the consciousness of the whole.”
(That is the real purpose of Church.)
Stay tuned in,
Carol Carnes www.carol-carnes.com
Posted at 05:54 PM in Dr. Carol Carnes, Living Consciously | Permalink | Comments (0)
Antibodies Tests Are Worthless: Here's Why
by John Lawrence
Suppose you do 1000 antibody tests and 100 people have the antibodies. That means there could be 900 people out there who are asymtomatic who have the virus and are spreading it. Besides having antibodies does not necessarily mean that you couldn't get it and spread it again. Why do you have to get a flu shot every year even though you have antibodies to the flu? The simple answer is because it mutates and COBID-19 can mutate too. Who knows a COVID-20 could already be out there. The only safe way to determine if it's safe to go out is to test for the virus on a random population, and if all hospital admissions have come down to zero.
Some but not all businesses could open now using the same model as grocery stores have adopted: 1) only a few people in the store or shop at the same time. 2) masks are worn; 3) maintain 6 feet distancing and (4) frequent disinfecting of all surfaces. If that can be accomplished, there's no reason not to open a particular business or shop. The model has worked effectively with grocery stores. There's no reason it can't be replicated. There are certain things that should not open for at least a year or until sufficient random testing has established that you have a .001 chance of contracting the virus. Those things are mass gatherings such as concerts, sporting events, parades, religious services and conventions. Other than mass gatherings, if social distancing can be maintained, even bars and restaurants could reopen on a limited basis. Of course profits will be less than they would be if you could crowd more people into a rented space. Business rentals go by the square foot, and a 1000 square foot business rental might only be able to accommodate a quarter as many people with proper distancing than it would have otherwise.
A lot of workarounds have already been established: delivery services, pick-up and take-out services etc. These should all be continued especially for more vulnerable populations. Essential services like meat packing and nursing homes which have been hotbeds of virus transmission need to step up their mitigation procedures. People should be tested and the places disinfected daily and people quarantined as necessary. Any necessary service in which social distancing can't be maintained needs to have an abundance of testing, disinfecting and contact tracing. You couldn't do all these things often enough.
Remember 40,000 deaths in the US at present writing of this article have been caused by one person entering this country carrying the virus. Even after hospital admissions have come down to zero, there still will be some COBID-19 out there. Even if one person attending a professional sports game or rock concert has it, it could start another pandemic One instance of the coronavirus is all it takes, so why take the chance of infecting others or yourself especially right now when the deaths and hospital admissions are still mounting. We may be at half time in the sense that "the curve is flattening," but we're still a long way off before the chances of getting it or transmitting it have come down statistically to one in a thousand.
Posted at 01:19 PM in John Lawrence, Coronavirus, Off the Top of my Head | Permalink | Comments (0)
A central bank-financed UBI can fill the debt gap, providing a vital safety net while preventing cyclical recessions.
According to an April 6 article on CNBC.com, Spain is slated to become the first country in Europe to introduce a universal basic income (UBI) on a long-term basis. Spain’s Minister for Economic Affairs has announced plans to roll out a UBI “as soon as possible,” with the goal of providing a nationwide basic wage that supports citizens “forever.” Guy Standing, a research professor at the University of London, told CNBC that there was no prospect of a global economic revival without a universal basic income. “It’s almost a no-brainer,” he said. “We are going to have some sort of basic income system sooner or later ….”
“Where will the government find the money?” is no longer a valid objection to providing an economic safety net for the people. The government can find the money in the same place it just found more than $5 trillion for Wall Street and Corporate America: the central bank can print it. In an April 9 post commenting on the $1.77 trillion handed to Wall Street under the CARES Act, Wolf Richter observed, “If the Fed had sent that $1.77 Trillion to the 130 million households in the US, each household would have received $13,600. But no, this was helicopter money exclusively for Wall Street and for asset holders.”
“Helicopter money” – money simply issued by the central bank and injected into the economy – could be used in many ways, including building infrastructure, capitalizing a national infrastructure and development bank, providing free state university tuition, or funding Medicare, social security, or a universal basic income. In the current crisis, in which a government-mandated shutdown has left households more vulnerable than at any time since the Great Depression, a UBI seems the most direct and efficient way to get money to everyone who needs it. But critics argue that it will just trigger inflation and collapse the dollar. As gold proponent Mike Maloney complained on an April 16 podcast:
Typing extra digits into computers does not make us wealthy. If this insane theory of printing money for almost everyone on a permanent basis takes hold, the value of the dollars in your purse or pocketbook will … just continue to erode …. I just want someone to explain to me how this is going to work.
Having done quite a bit of study on that, I thought I would take on the challenge. Here is how and why a central bank-financed UBI can work without eroding the dollar.
In a Debt-Based System, the Consumer Economy Is Chronically Short of Money
First, some basics of modern money. We do not have a fixed and stable money system. We have a credit system, in which money is created and destroyed by banks every day. Money is created as a deposit when the bank makes a loan and is extinguished when the loan is repaid, as explained in detail by the Bank of England here. When fewer loans are being created than are being repaid, the money supply shrinks, a phenomenon called “debt deflation.” Deflation then triggers recession and depression. The term “helicopter money” was coined to describe the cure for that much-feared syndrome. Economist Milton Friedman said it was easy to cure a deflation: just print money and rain it down from helicopters on the people.
Our money supply is in a chronic state of deflation, due to the way money comes into existence. Banks create the principal but not the interest needed to repay their loans, so more money is always owed back than was created in the original loans. Thus debt always grows faster than the money supply, as can be seen in this chart from WorkableEconomics.com:
When the debt burden grow so large that borrowers cannot take on more, they pay down old loans without taking out new ones and the money supply shrinks or deflates.
Critics of this “debt virus” theory say the gap between debt and the money available to repay can be filled through the “velocity of money.” Debts are repaid over time, and if the payments received collectively by the lenders are spent back into the economy, they are collectively available to the debtors to pay their next monthly balances. (See a fuller explanation here.) The flaw in this argument is that money created as a loan is extinguished on repayment and is not available to be spent back into the economy. Repayment zeros out the debit by which it was created, and the money just disappears.
Another problem with the “velocity of money” argument is that lenders don’t typically spend their profits back into the consumer economy. In fact, we have two economies – the consumer/producer economy where goods and services are produced and traded, and the financialized economy where money chases “yields” without producing new goods and services. The financialized economy is essentially a parasite on the real economy, and it now contains most of the money in the system. In an unwritten policy called the “Fed put”, the central bank routinely manipulates the money supply to prop up financial markets. That means corporate owners and investors can make more and faster money in the financialized economy than by investing in workers and equipment. Bankers, investors and other “savers” put their money in stocks and bonds, hide it in offshore tax havens, send it abroad, or just keep it in cash. At the end of 2018, US corporations were sitting on $1.7 trillion in cash, and 70% of $100 bills were held overseas.
Meanwhile the producer/consumer economy is left with insufficient investment and insufficient demand. According to a July 2017 paper from the Roosevelt Institute called “What Recovery? The Case for Continued Expansionary Policy at the Fed”:
GDP remains well below both the long-run trend and the level predicted by forecasters a decade ago. In 2016, real per capita GDP was 10% below the Congressional Budget Office’s (CBO) 2006 forecast, and shows no signs of returning to the predicted level.
The report showed that the most likely explanation for this lackluster growth was inadequate demand. Wages were stagnant; and before producers would produce, they needed customers knocking on their doors.
In ancient Mesopotamia, the gap between debt and the money available to repay it was corrected with periodic debt “jubilees” – forgiveness of loans that wiped the slate clean. But today the lenders are not kings and temples. They are private bankers who don’t engage in debt forgiveness because their mandate is to maximize shareholder profits, and because by doing so they would risk insolvency themselves. But there is another way to avoid the debt gap, and that is by filling it with regular injections of new debt-free money.
Continue reading "A Universal Basic Income Is Essential and Will Work" »
Posted at 05:16 PM in Ellen Brown, Debt, Federal Reserve, The Federal Government, Universal Basic Income | Permalink | Comments (0)
It is possible that we, as a species, have never been more aware of the natural world; how she functions quite well without us, how much we affect her, how we compromise our own health and well -being by not respecting her. The Mother shrugs off those who do not cooperate with her laws. She is indifferent to the pain and sorrow we cause for ourselves. However, if we act in accord with her purpose, which is to produce Beauty and Bounty, we thrive.
Beauty in this sense is harmony, balance, a give and take system. Beauty is delight and enjoyment. It is love and goodness. Bounty is supply; everything from rainfall to volcanoes that produce more land. Bounty is our daily bread and our clean air. Beauty and Bounty, these are what the Mother has to give. That is all we need, but we have made the terrible mistake of thinking we are smarter than Mother; that we have dominion over her; that she is ours to do with as we choose. This attitude has extended to include any species, gender or type we deem expendable.
We are living in the day of reckoning. Either we wake up and get in tune with our Source and It’s visible representative (Nature) or we will eliminate ourselves from the ongoing evolution of Consciousness. If we continue to behave like marauding pirates, we will feel her sting and it will be swift and shocking. Our salvation is the rise of the Feminine in us, that aspect of every Sentient Being which does no harm. It is trying to happen right now. Let it be. Let our own higher nature become how we perceive reality. See through the eyes of awe and wonder. Pay attention to the gifts of Nature and be grateful. That is where we must begin. SUPPORT AND vote for the active Feminine wherever you see it.
Stay tuned in,
Carol Carnes www.carol-carnes.com
Posted at 05:13 PM in Dr. Carol Carnes, Living Consciously | Permalink | Comments (0)
Explainer: Quantitative Easing for the People
by John Lawrence, April 19, 2020
Let's say a Wall Street bank has a mortgage that's been defaulted on. That qualifies as a "toxic asset" meaning the guy isn't paying his mortgage. The bank then pleads with the Federal Reserve to take it off its hands because the bank is running low on money that it thought would be coming in if the guy had made his monthly payments. So the Fed adds "liquidity" by saying to the bank, "Give me that mortgage. I will take it off your hands and pay you the full value of the amount borrowed, and then I will be the mortgage holder for the "toxic asset." So the bank is made whole, and the Fed is now the holder of the toxic mortgage. The Fed has "taken it on its balance sheet" and taken it off the balance sheet of the Wall Street bank. This is what happened during the Great Recession of 2008. It's what Quantitative Easing is all about. Theoretically, some day the Fed will sell this mortgage in the marketplace, but who wants to buy a mortgage that no one is paying either interest or principal on especially if the mortgagee is long gone. Instead the toxic asset disappears in what amounts to the Fed's black hole.
Although the Fed will do this for a bank especially for those banks that are too big too fail, they will not do this for Joe Blow. Joe blow, for instance, may have a toxic asset of $30,000 in credit card debt or $100,000 in student loan debt. Why couldn't Joe Blow approach the Federal Reserve and say please will you take this toxic asset off my hands? That would mean adding "liquidity" to Joe Blow's bank account by taking the credit card debt or student loan debt onto the Fed's balance sheet and paying off Joe's creditors. This would make the Fed Joe's creditor. Perhaps some day, when Joe is better off, the Fed might be able to move Joe's debt off its balance sheet and put it back on Joe's account. At least theoretically that could happen.
What is happening today with the coronavirus relief package and the stimulus checks is a variation on QE which amounts to QE for the people. Where is all the money coming from you say? Will it just be added to the deficit and the national debt, God forbid? Right now interest on the national debt is $479 billion. The more money the nation borrows, the more interest on the debt crowds out other items in the Federal budget like social security, Medicare and the military. But there is a neat little trick that is played between the Treasury department which issues the bonds that comprise national debt and the Federal reserve which has the aforementioned capacity to make debts disappear down a black hole.
Those toxic assets that the Fed took off of banks' balance sheets? Some of them were Treasury bonds. Now more than ever the Fed will be taking Treasury bonds off the big banks balance sheet for two reasons: 1) they can't be all sold in the open market because there are no buyers and 2) the US taxpayers will not have to pay interest on these bonds because although the government pays interest to the Fed on these bonds all profits the Fed makes are returned to the Treasury after deducting minimal expenses at the end of the year. So one hand really does wash the other or, if you prefer, the Federal government is playing a shill game with the Federal Reserve. The Federal Reserve monetizes the debt which is the same as saying that it disappears down a black hole on the Fed's balance sheet. The middleman in this whole operation is Wall Street since the Fed by law cannot buy Treasury bonds directly from the Treasury Department. So by monetizing the debt, the Fed is doing two things: 1) it is taking the pressure off of interest paid in the Federal budget and 2) it is guaranteeing that the Federal government will have whatever amount of money it needs to pay its bills without having to increase taxes.
Now this is good news for pandemic relief. Deficit hawks are muted because they know how this shill game is played, and it's no skin off their backs. The Fed essentially prints money (although it's doe with a couple of keystrokes on a computer) and bails out the whole economy. There is no inflation since unions which drove up the price of labor were essentially muted during the Reagan administration which saw most manufacturing jobs transferred to China. So then Fed can print away giving everyone a taste of a Universal Basic Income (UBI). (See Ellen Brown's accompanying article.) Since the cat is out of the bag there is no reason why this same game couldn't be played to relieve American consumers of student loan debt and credit card debt although you can get rid of credit card debt in bankruptcy. Not so for student loan debt.
Also money for infrastructure could be obtained this same way by having the Fed monetize the debt. This would create good union jobs according to Bernie Sanders. But this is exactly what the bond market and the Fed doesn't want - good union jobs - because that would create wage inflation. When wages go up prices go up, and the bond market would not be pleased because inflation eats up the yields on their bonds. What the Fed and the monied interest want is an economy in which workers are deeply indebted because that means a ton of interest going to the banks which are totally in cahoots with the privately owned Fed. If your a worker, the Fed is not really your friend. They are the banker's friend. The Fed was set up in the first place to bail out banks not American consumers. Now it is giving American consumers a taste of a bail out because the coronavirus presents a unique situation with everybody being out of work. When things get back to normal, the Fed will go back to just bailing out banks, and relieving pressure on the national debt.
Posted at 05:00 PM in Ellen Brown, John Lawrence, Coronavirus, Federal Reserve, Infrastructure, Recession, Student Loans, Taxes, The Economy, The Federal Government, The National Debt, Unemployment, Universal Basic Income, Wages, Wall Street | Permalink | Comments (0)
Opening up the Economy Safely and Expeditiously
by John Lawrence, April 18, 2020
Some stores and businesses can open up providing they can maintain six feet of distance among the people gathering there. This means that crowds have to be limited to very low density. Mitigation efforts have to continue. If the mitigation efforts used at grocery markets which limit crowd density can be used in other businesses, then why not open them? On the other hand increased mitigation must be brought to bear in places where it has totally failed up to this time like meat packing plants and nursing homes. Where mitigation efforts have succeeded, they can be expanded to other venues. Low density crowds will be unprofitable for many situations like sporting events and concert venues. These must be canceled until further notice.
Offices which can maintain physical separation could reopen with the proviso that there be no meetings. Those could be done with Zoom so people can maintain social distancing. Bill Gates had a great idea in his YouTube special. Instead of people driving through testing sites where a tester shoves a swab up your nose, send the test kits to peoples' homes and let each individual shove the swab up their own noses. This eliminates the extreme risk to the tester while at the same time reducing the need for the PPE that is necessary for the tester thus reducing overall cost. It takes a very intelligent man to figure out that each person is capable of shoving a swab up their own noses. Plus it saves time waiting in line at testing sites, and should reduce the cost of each test kit. The individual testing at home then sends the test kit on to the lab in the mail.
The New Yorker reported:
The current trouble is a critical shortage of the physical components needed to carry out tests of any variety. Among these components are so-called viral transport media, which are used to stabilize a specimen as it travels from patient to lab; extraction kits, which isolate viral RNA from specimens once they reach the lab; and the reagents that do the actual work of determining whether the coronavirus that causes COVID19 is present in the sample. Perhaps the most prosaic shortage, but also the most crucial, is a lack of test swabs, which look like glorified Q-tips. Specially designed to preserve viral specimens, they’re what a doctor sticks up your nose or down your throat to collect the necessary biological material. The swab shortage is happening for the same reason that all the other test components are limited—namely, a global pandemic has created a global demand for them ...
And guess what? None of the stuff necessary for testing is manufactured in the United States. To add to the confusion Trump signed an order leaving it up to the states to certify COVID tests. Now companies are coming out of the woodwork with tests that have to be individually certified by the states, and any test so certified is allowed to be used. There is no standardization and the FDA is out of the picture. It's the wild west. So who knows if any of these tests are valid, and they are not cheap. There was an implication at the national level that COVID testing would be free. It should be, but it's not. It's a profit center just like everything else. One San Diego county woman was charged $1500 for a COVID test at Scripps hospital. The whole situation begs for national leadership, but none is being provided, and there was no planning or forethought that might have limited the confusion surrounding the whole process. The CDC totally fumbled the ball producing defective test kits that delayed the process of testing by 6 weeks.
The US needs to consider sending one at home test to every American along with a mail-in ballot for the election. This would expedite not only containing the COVID virus and normalizing the economy, but also expediting the voting process for the next election. We shouldn't have to stand in line to be tested or to vote.
Posted at 01:44 PM in John Lawrence, Coronavirus, Off the Top of my Head | Permalink | Comments (0)
Morning Report: Faulconer Pushes to Buy Hotels as Homeless Housing
from Voice of San Diego, April 17, 2020
Mayor Kevin Faulconer announced the city’s plan to turn Golden Hall into a temporary homeless shelter with more than 240 beds in an effort to stop the spread of the coronavirus. / Photo by Adriana Heldiz
Mayor Kevin Faulconer announced the city’s plan to turn Golden Hall into a temporary homeless shelter with more than 240 beds in an effort to stop the spread of the coronavirus. / Photo by Adriana Heldiz
Hundreds of homeless San Diegans are now sheltered at the Convention Center to help stop the spread of COVID-19 among the homeless community. At the same time, the tourism industry has come to a halt over the virus, leaving hotels citywide empty.
Mayor Kevin Faulconer thinks he’s found an opportunity in those facts, and he’s leading a charge to acquire “hundreds and hundreds” of hotel rooms from owners stung by the lost revenue to turn them into permanent housing for homeless San Diegans.
“There’s never been this much of an opportunity, and there’s never been this much of a need,” Faulconer said of the effort, a partnership between the city, county and the San Diego Housing Commission.
The move to strike lease-to-own deals for distressed hotels would rely on funds from the federal government that the commission already has on hand, and could be expanded by new stimulus funds from the state or federal government. The city would rely on the county to provide behavioral health services, like addiction or mental health treatment tied to new permanent supportive housing.
Faulconer said he’s been in contact with mayors from around the state, Sen. Kamala Harris and Gov. Gavin Newsom over the program. He’s hoping to act quickly, to both take advantage of the struggling hotels that might not otherwise be available, and to provide new housing options much more quickly than low-income housing that needs to be built from scratch.
In a special meeting Friday morning, the Housing Commission’s board of directors could greenlight negotiations for 10 hotels around the city, though that’s meant to give the city options and it’s unlikely to acquire all of them.
Posted at 06:38 PM in Coronavirus, Homelessness, San Diego | Permalink | Comments (0)
from Capital and Main, April 15, 2020
By Sasha Abramsky
More than 2 million Californians have recently lost their jobs and many are now without health coverage.
International Longshore and Warehouse Union workers at the normally packed Wilmington, CA dispatch hall. (Photo: Mario Tama/Getty Images)
Since cities and states began issuing stay-at-home orders in early March to counter the spread of COVID-19, a mind-boggling 16 million-plus jobs have been lost, at least temporarily, representing the speediest and deepest economic collapse since the Great Depression. Many of those unemployed men and women also lost their employer-provided health insurance coverage at a moment when a pandemic is raging — and when containment strategies rely on early identification and isolation of carriers. The perverse structure of the American health insurance system means that huge numbers of people, if they don’t have a family member whose insurance will cover them, are having the continuity of their health care disrupted. To worsen matters, the largest private insurance companies are poised to introduce steep premium increases.
Historically the jobs that are most vulnerable to being lost at the start of a recession are those that are low paid, physically demanding and involve long hours. Many workers in such jobs already have precarious health situations.
“People whose incomes are below the median, or the 25th percentile, tend to be less healthy,” says Marianne Page, professor of economics at the University of California, Davis, and director of the campus’s Center for Poverty Research. They are, in consequence of their poorer general health, particularly at risk of succumbing to COVID-19. And yet it is the members of this very group that that are the most likely to now be losing their health coverage.
In California alone, the Economic Policy Institute estimated that by April 4 more than 2 million people had recently filed for unemployment insurance — and many of these had likely lost insurance coverage as a result. Since then, the job losses have only increased, along with the numbers of people losing their insurance.
Assuming the companies that fired them still exist, these individuals can sign on for COBRA, allowing them to pay out of pocket, for up to 36 months, for the health insurance that their employers previously paid for; but COBRA can run to thousands of dollars per year per family member, a sum that many — probably most — of the newly unemployed simply cannot access at the moment.
“It’s a staggering number of people,” acknowledges Anthony Wright, executive director of the Sacramento-based Health Access California advocacy organization. Worsening the situation is that some employers have cut back their employees’ hours and, once they are no longer deemed full-time, stopped paying their health care benefits.
As a result, in the middle of a pandemic a tsunami of uninsured are now signing up for Medi-Cal, or using the reopened enrollment period for the state’s insurance exchange to shop around for new, subsidized, insurance coverage for themselves and their families. Many insurance companies worry that, unless Congress releases federal funds to help provide treatment for COVID-19 sufferers, their bills for covering those who get sick during the pandemic will be so high over the coming months that they could force smaller insurance companies on the exchange into bankruptcy and larger companies to increase premiums by as much as 40 percent, according to an estimate from Covered California, the agency that manages California’s Affordable Care Act (ACA) health insurance exchange.
California has created the country’s most user-friendly insurance exchange, under the ACA, and has made enormous strides in recent years in expanding Medicaid coverage to the near-poor – an expansion that is largely, although not entirely, paid for by the federal government — and, at the state’s expense, to young undocumented immigrants. Nevertheless, it is an enormous logistical and financial challenge to get California’s newly uninsured re-covered with decent insurance at speed.
“We’ve aggressively expanded coverage through the ACA,” notes Chris Hoene, executive director of the California Budget and Policy Center. Over the past decade, California’s pool of uninsured residents has dropped from nearly one in five people to only seven percent of a population of nearly 40 million. But, he asks, “Will California have the resources” to continue driving down that number by expanding coverage to those, especially the undocumented, who are left out of the federal eligibility criteria?
* * *
At the very least, the pandemic is a huge test of California’s financial and moral mettle. The state’s Department of Finance, and the chairs of legislative budget committees, recently warned all California government agencies of extraordinarily tough budget conditions as a result of the state’s burgeoning pandemic-related bills and the loss of tax revenue as jobs disappear and capital gains on the stock market evaporate. And while Senate President pro tem Toni Atkins has told journalists that continuing to expand health care coverage remains a legislative priority, California is going to have to navigate uncharted financial waters in coming years as the economic fallout from the pandemic cuts deeply into state revenues.
Add into the mix the fact that many legal immigrants have been pushed out of the safety net system by President Trump’s regulatory changes and that undocumented immigrants never had safety net protections to begin with. California, with 27 percent of its population foreign-born, faces a particular challenge in keeping access to medical care open for its 10 million-plus immigrants. “The impact is on their health and on the economy,” argues Sarah Dar, director of health and public benefits policy at the California Immigrant Policy Center. “Because of people getting sick and not being able to work. This moment highlights the stark downside of this system of leaving people uninsured.”
While many documented immigrants have recently lost jobs that came with health insurance, and like their citizen neighbors are now scrambling to find new insurance options, most undocumented adults in the state work low-income jobs lacking any kind of security of employment, and which never came with health insurance to begin with. They have never had easy access to doctors and medicines.
Given the sheer numbers of undocumented in the state – roughly two and a half million — the possibility of containing COVID-19 through comprehensive testing, treatment and quarantining of carriers becomes ever more daunting. The community health centers on which many undocumented residents rely for basic health care needs, did receive $1.3 billion, to be distributed to CHCs around the country, when Congress passed the CARES Act. But given the scale of need, that’s simply a drop in the bucket. On a daily basis the CHCs remain overwhelmed with patients, understaffed and chronically under-resourced.
* * *
“I don’t have access to unemployment or any benefits. It’ll be a really big struggle,” says Pablo, a 38-year-old undocumented worker in Los Angeles’ garment district, who, until his factory closed down in mid-March, was working for piece rates that came out to far below hourly minimum wage. “I’ve never been homeless, but if there’s no way to work I’ll have to sleep in my car. I’ve been limiting food, rationing the food I have.”
In addition to all the usual stresses that come with being undocumented and ineligible for public benefits, these days Pablo worries that he might get sick with COVID-19 and have no access to treatment, other than via the emergency room, and no way to pay for that treatment should he prove to be infected. “Any time I feel ill I start thinking whether I could get it. I recently found out someone I know died of the coronavirus here in Los Angeles. I’ve had a lot of anxiety and stress. I’m afraid to go to the doctor.”
California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s administration has made health care coverage a priority, and has been aware from the get-go that the more people are covered the better public health outcomes will be for all.
Even before the pandemic, Newsom was looking for ways to fund an expansion of Medi-Cal to cover low-income undocumented seniors. His budgets have generously funded the Covered California insurance exchange, and early on in the pandemic the exchange re-opened the enrollment period so that Californians who found themselves without insurance could quickly access affordable plans.
In addition, the legislature recently waived the requirement that Medi-Cal recipients produce documentary proof, every 60 days, of financial eligibility to remain covered by the program – meaning that coverage for those Californians enrolled in Medicaid will remain untouched at least through the duration of the pandemic. And early on in the response, Newsom’s administration requested a waiver from the federal Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services to allow Medi-Cal providers to do telemedicine visits with patients, and to streamline the process for doctors to get reimbursed for treating patients covered by Medi-Cal.
While some states have made it cumbersome and time-consuming to enroll in ACA-mandated subsidized insurance, California’s process is quick, and coverage begins at the start of the month following enrollment. And for those who qualify for Medi-Cal, coverage is retroactive, so that if someone enrolls midmonth, their medical expenses going back to the first day of that month are paid for.
But all that still might not be enough to get the undocumented into treatment centers. Or to convince those who have insurance, but who, after losing their jobs, have had to buy lower-standard plans that come with higher deductibles and co-pays, to risk the inflated medical bills that will come with prolonged treatment. Without federal intervention to cover the cost of COVID-19 treatment, “We’ll have a bunch of people making decisions not to be treated,” Chris Hoene worries. “And that’s a public health risk to them and to the community at large.”
Anthony Wright agrees. “We’re not going to be able to control the virus unless we get everyone covered and able to get tested and access the treatment they need,” says the advocate, who has long been a leading voice in campaigns to universalize health care access in the state. “While the Affordable Care Act provided a lot of patches, it’s still patchwork, and the system leaves a lot of gaps that people will fall through. And we need quick action to contain the virus.”
Copyright 2020 Capital & Main
Posted at 06:25 PM in California, Coronavirus, Health Care | Permalink | Comments (0)
Along with measures like rent freezes and guaranteeing workers’ rights, really addressing a global pandemic involves public health planning that cross borders and confronting global inequality and the climate crisis.
Mexico—I’m squatting on a round piece of concrete, and a 72-year-old man is sitting in the gutter, his walking stick beside him. He tells me that after being deported from the United States, he has been hiking the streets of Mexico City trying to find somewhere to stay. But all the refuges are closed due to the pandemic, including the one we’re sitting outside of, where I volunteer. He has run out of insulin for his diabetes and says he can’t walk anymore.
I’m aware that he may not survive much longer. He’s the fifth person that day that I have to turn away and I can’t stand it.
Back in the migrant refuge, we organize working groups and events to add structure to the empty days and try to prevent tension building up. It’s bad enough that many of the refugees here have fled violence, only to wait months for their visas, to now be stuck inside because of the quarantine, unable to work, even informally.
Over a period of less than two weeks, some 7,000 migrants have been deported from the US, with the virus as the excuse. And here too, Mexico is deporting refugees and migrants to the Guatemalan border, even though it is closed and there’s no interstate transport operating there. Hondurans and others are stranded, with nowhere to stay and no way to return to their country. Many may be killed if they do return. So far, the contingency measures seem to be doing more harm than good.
Here, we watch the videos of people cheering for health workers in London, and they are inspiring, but they don’t really connect. We know our health system won’t be able to handle much. We also know that with 65% of the workforce being informal and with no such thing as unemployment benefits, the economic impact of quarantining will be devastating to us. Already, in my city of Puebla, half the population has no access to water, or not enough. Soon, people will get kicked out of homes, and hunger – already on their minds – will likely become common.
The national government has declared that only essential shops and services can stay open. Those who can, are taking the quarantine seriously. But so many people aren’t able to stay at home that it is a bit futile. The woman with the mole stall outside the Oxxo shop near my house is still serving food, the street stalls selling phone cases and gadgets on 8th street are still there, the indigenous woman who sits on the ground selling beautiful Mexican “rag” dolls, is still there. I estimate that around 60% of shops and stalls are still going.
In Central America and Mexico, only 20% of old people have a pension. Many are still working, in close to slave-like conditions. And in South Africa, distancing is impossible when settlements can have just 380 toilets for 20,000 people. Risk, fear, and violence, are part of life for many in poor countries. Poverty is a never-ending war, and being defenseless and unsafe – health wise and economically, means life is up for grabs all the time. It’s understandable then that people react with some self-preserving indifference to the quarantine. And that’s why it isn’t reasonable to take the Chinese and European models for responding to the pandemic and transplant them on to poorer countries.
When I see tweets about “these sad times” I feel frustrated. Yes, these are tough times, but things have been horrific for a long time now for the majority of the world – for poorer people and for brown people. But the mainstream media, history books, and movies, teach us to see the world through the eyes of the white first world. That’s where the heroes come from, where news matters.
It has never been considered urgent to update the world on the daily deaths from starvation (24,600) or on the numbers of people working in forced labor or marriage (40.3 million). Awareness of the savage impact of the US’s war on Afghanistan is low. In 2018, there were an estimated 228 million cases of malaria, globally, and 405,000 deaths from it – mostly children. But the people dying are the poorest of the poor, in African countries and in India. Malaria, starvation, exploitation, femicides, slum cities and more are crises that the world won’t stop for.
When I see tweets about “these sad times” I feel frustrated. Yes, these are tough times, but things have been horrific for a long time now for the majority of the world – for poorer people and for brown people.
The so-called “third” world is the dispensable world. The year 2008 was a “financial crisis,” but the ongoing global inequality that leaves over half the world living in undignified conditions is not a crisis, it is acceptable.
Meanwhile, the economic and social consequences of the pandemic contingency measures will be much more severe in poorer countries and poorer communities. Already, some 2,500 people are murdered each month in Mexico, and violent crime is only likely to increase as more and more people lose their incomes. Sexual assault rates are also likely increasing.
Add to this the huge global resource inequality which means that most poorer countries can not respond to the virus in the same way as Europe and parts of Asia, even if they want to. The Central African Republic, for example, has just three ventilators for its population of 5 million people. While the US has around 160,000 ventilators – and that isn’t enough, Mexico has just a few hundred.
The US and Europe are hogging access to medical equipment, masks, and testing materials. The New York Times reported that African and Latin American countries have been told by manufacturers that orders for testing kits won’t be filled for months, because almost everything they produce is going to the US and Europe. Prices on these goods have also skyrocketed, making it harder for poorer regions to acquire them. So far, the numbers of confirmed cases in poorer countries are lower, but analysis of those numbers should bare in mind that such countries don’t have access to the reagents used for testing and are stuck doing nothing, unable to test even health care workers.
While the #StayAtHome movement is an incredible display of human solidarity and of our ability to actually work together for the common good, it also puts the onus of the solution to the pandemic on individual people. And indeed, we are part of the solution. But governments and corporations should be held accountable for the inequalities they have perpetuated and that are decisive in who lives or dies, and how many.
In this world, where suits and window dressings and hotel lobbies are designed with the utmost care, but health and poverty prevention plans are not, it is pointless to talk about beating this virus without addressing the context it is flourishing in. Along with measures like rent freezes and guaranteeing workers’ rights, really addressing a global pandemic involves public health planning that cross borders and confronting global inequality and the climate crisis.
Posted at 06:02 PM in Common Dreams, Coronavirus, Latin America, Poverty | Permalink | Comments (0)
All Those Americans Who Didn't Have $400 to Cover an Emergency Now in Food Lines
by John Lawrence, April 17, 2020
If you don't have $400 to cover an emergency, you sure don't have enough money to cover a pandemic. Ten thousand cars waited hours in line for emergency food assistance in San Antonio last week. Meanwhile lawmakers are deadlocked over a bill to create more money for small businesses. Democrats want money also for hospitals and states and local governments. Governor Cuomo has stated that New York state is totally broke, and expenses are only increasing. San Diego Mayor Kevin Faulkner announced that there would be a $250 million budget shortfall which would be partly made up by laying off city employees. San Diego relies on the tourist industry and the Tax on Transiency (TOT taxes) which are collected by the hotels. Right now tourists are staying home and self-isolating.
Almost 40% of American adults wouldn't be able to cover a $400 emergency with cash, savings or a credit-card charge that they could quickly pay off according to the Federal Reserve's "Report on the Economic Well-Being of U.S. Households in 2018" published in May 2019. This gem is from the report's executive summary:
Results from the survey show that many adults are financially vulnerable and would have difficulty handling an emergency expense as small as $400. In addition, volatile income and low savings can turn common experiences—such as waiting a few days for a bank deposit to be available—into a problem for some. At the same time, there is evidence of coping strategies, such as supplementing income through gig work and seeking financial support from family members.
If waiting a few days for a bank deposit to be available creates a hardship, how much of a hardship must it be to lose your job and not know where your next meal is coming from with a pandemic going on for months. Even though Americans, as many as 40%, have little or no savings, they are encouraged to go out and spend, spend, spend. Maybe the government should run ads encouraging Americans to save, save, save. Most Americans are in debt up to their eyeballs, yet they are encouraged by all the propaganda on TV to buy more stuff. It's practically a criminal enterprise, and yet consumer spending comprises 70% of GDP. There is no incentive for Americans to save. Banks are paying zero interest and threatening to go to negative interest rates. That means you would be encouraged to spend your money at an even greater rate or put it in the stock market. The Federal Reserve will do whatever it takes to prop up the stock market because, if it tanked, the 50% of Americans that have 401ks would see all their accumulated wealth go down the drain. The government has a vested interest in seeing that that does not happen.
The function of the Federal Reserve used to be "to take the punch bowl away just as the party got started." Otherwise, the economy would overheat and inflation would take off. Now the last thing they're worried about is inflation. They pump as much money into the economy as necessary to keep the economy going, and, since consumers are the main engine in energizing the economy, the Fed is suddenly concerned about consumers. But consumers don't have huge amounts of reserves, and neither do small businesses which provide about 50% of the jobs. So the Fed's job now is to just keep pumping more punch into the punch bowl. Inflation is not a problem any more since unions don't have the power to demand higher wages as they used to do. The union movement has been incapacitated by corporations which have moved jobs to China and elsewhere - wherever they could get the cheapest labor.
In the 2008 Great Recession it was banks, not consumers, that needed a bailout. Most consumers did not lose their jobs so they could continue to consume, and the Fed as well as the Federal government ignored the plight of Americans who lost their homes since there weren't that many of them comparatively. Now it's a different story. Banks are flush, and vast hordes of people are wondering where their next meal is coming from and when the pandemic will be over.
Posted at 05:32 PM in John Lawrence, American Culture, Coronavirus, Federal Reserve, GDP, Jobs, Off the Top of my Head, The Economy | Permalink | Comments (0)
from NBC 7, San Diego, April 14, 2020
A Carmel Valley woman is putting out a word of warning to uninsured people in need of a COVID-19 test after she was billed nearly $1,500 by a local hospital.
“It is not free. If you do not have insurance you will likely get a bill,” Melissa Chalmers told NBC 7.
Chalmers, 44, did not have medical insurance when she was tested at Scripps Memorial Hospital La Jolla in March.
She was not unlike many people who assumed COVID-19 testing was free of charge, in light of the federal ‘Families First Coronavirus Response Act.’ But the provision only relieves co-payment obligations for those who have medical insurance.
Chalmers, who owns a small consulting business, says she had Coronavirus symptoms on March 16. She wanted to get tested to not only protect herself but those around her.
“When my chest started to feel really tight, is when I felt maybe it is COVID and I should go in and get tested," Chalmers said.
She said she drove to Scripps La Jolla and was told she needed to be tested immediately. After receiving the test, she was sent home to self-quarantine.
Seven days later, test results came back negative. But then, she received a bill for $1,496. The hospital reduced the payment to $897.60.
“When I got the bill and seeing that it was, even at a discount rate, almost $900, I was completely in shock, said Chalmers.
The bill breakdown shows a $320 charge for lab services, $1,176 for emergency services for a total of $1,496. The bill deducts $598.40 for ‘patient adjustments’ for a total bill of $897.60.
After talking with the Scripps finance department, Chalmers said the bill was reduced to around $700. She has agreed to a monthly payment plan that will extend over 12 months.
Scripps Health said it could not comment directly on her case for privacy reasons, but released this statement:
“The Families First Coronavirus Response Act passed by Congress on March 18 eliminated co-payments for most people with health insurance coverage for testing for the novel coronavirus. For any patient without insurance, Scripps offers a wide range of payment plans, bill reduction options, financial assistance and other programs to help them pay their outstanding medical bill.”
Meanwhile, health care advocates say Melissa Chalmers’s case underscores a serious problem for those without medical insurance.
“It’s disturbing and it’s dangerous for uninsured Americans to be getting gigantic bills if the go in and do the responsible thing, which is to go get tested for the Coronavirus if they fear that they’re ill,” said Carmen Balder, Executive Director of the non-profit group Consumer Watchdog.
Balder is strongly urging uninsured Californians to sign up for Medi-Cal.
“Especially if this coronavirus epidemic has put you in a more dire financial situation, you could qualify for Medi-Cal coverage, certainly enough to get the coverage and testing that you need."
Meanwhile, Melissa Chalmers wants to put out a simple message for those without insurance.
“If your symptoms are not life-threatening, unfortunately, at this time I would honestly advise to just stay at home and self-isolate and quarantine and try to get over it ad get better, rather than go get tested,” Chalmers said.
Posted at 05:18 PM in Coronavirus, San Diego | Permalink | Comments (0)
Amplifying fresh critiques of wealthy inequality that have mounted throughout the coronavirus pandemic, Amazon founder Jeff Bezos—the world's richest man—has added nearly $24 billion to his already massive fortune in 2020 as virus-related lockdowns across the globe have forced people to stay inside and fueled increased e-commerce demand.
Explaining the source of a nearly 5% jump in Bezos' net worth Tuesday, Forbes reported that Amazon stock surged 5.3%, "hitting a new record close of $2,283 per share. The stock is now up over 20% so far this year, outpacing the benchmark index (the S&P 500 is down over 12%)."
Turns out Jeff Bezos has got the biggest coronavirus stimulus of all ... https://t.co/10BrXbnIZ6
— Will Tooke (@willtooketv) April 15, 2020
Bezos was worth $138 billion as of Tuesday, according to the Bloomberg Billionaires Index. He is Amazon's CEO and president, and owns an 11.2% stake the e-commerce giant, which has come under fire for how it has treated workers during the outbreak.
While Bezos tops the index, Fortune noted that the 18th spot now belongs to his ex-wife MacKenzie, "who was left with a 4% stake in Amazon as part of the couple's recent divorce settlement. Her net worth has climbed $8.2 billion to $45.3 billion."
The index updates followed a Forbes report from Saturday about how "market gains led to a combined $51.3 billion boost for 10 of the world's billionaires since the market closed a week ago, on April 2." Bezos gained $6.8 billion in that time, an increase second to only that of Amancio Ortega of the Spanish fast-fashion retailer Inditex.
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), a longtime labor rights advocate and foe of millionaires and billionaires, tweeted the Forbes report Wednesday and highlighted how the wealth increases of Bezos and other billionaires contrast with the millions of Americans who have lost their jobs because of the ongoing public health crisis.
$33.4 billion. That's how much the wealth of Jeff Bezos and six other billionaires increased last week while millions of Americans were filing for unemployment.
— Bernie Sanders (@SenSanders) April 15, 2020
Our society cannot sustain itself when so few have so much, while so many have so little. https://t.co/XwlhIXTMzS
As Common Dreams reported last week, U.S. unemployment claims during the pandemic have soared to 16.8 million, which one economist noted "is a mind-boggling 2,500% increase over the pre-virus period."
That contrast between U.S. billionaires and the nation's newly unemployed was also pointed out on Twitter Wednesday by Public Citizen, which cited the Forbes report.
Billionaire wealth increases last week:
— Public Citizen (@Public_Citizen) April 15, 2020
Jeff Bezos: +$6.8B
Mark Zuckerberg: +$6.2B
Warren Buffett: +$5B
Elon Musk: +$4.2B
Larry Ellison: +$4B
Larry Page: +$3.6B
Bill Gates: +$3.6B
Meanwhile, more than 16 million Americans have filed for unemployment in the past month.
While millions of people across the United States have lost their incomes due to COVID-19, Amazon has filled 100,000 new jobs since March and plans to add 75,000 more "to help meet customer demand and assist existing employees fulfilling orders for essential products," according to a Sunday blog post on the company's website. The retailer has "increased pay for hourly employees by $2/hour in the U.S., C$2/hour in Canada, and €2/hour in many E.U. countries."
Amazon has "made over 150 process updates to help protect employees—from enhanced cleaning and social distancing measures to piloting new efforts like using disinfectant fog in our New York fulfillment center," the blog post said. The company is also building a lab to test its front-line workers for COVID-19 and has "distributed personal protective gear, such as masks for our employees, and implemented temperature checks across our operations worldwide."
However, workers at Amazon warehouses and Whole Foods Market—the grocery chain acquired by Amazon in 2017—have expressed fear and frustration about working conditions, and accused the company of not doing enough to protect employees. Just this week, Amazon also elicited condemnation for firing three workers who publicly criticized the company's pandemic response and treatment of employees.
"Instead of firing employees who want justice," Sanders tweeted Tuesday, "maybe Jeff Bezos—the richest man in the world—can focus on providing his workers with paid sick leave, a safe workplace, and a livable planet."
The safety of Amazon facilities in the midst of a pandemic has raised particular alarm. According to Business Insider:
More than 74 U.S. warehouses alone have now reported cases of the virus, and concerns from workers about safety and sanitation have ballooned, leading to employee walkouts and protests.
On Tuesday, Business Insider broke the news that Amazon had seen its first warehouse worker death, an operations manager who worked at the company's Hawthorne, California warehouse. The man died on March 31.
Some Amazon employees told Business Insider that they feel they have to choose between paying their bills and risking the health of themselves and vulnerable family members.
"I was grateful at first for the unlimited [unpaid time off] and $2 increase, but as things got worse and the virus was spreading more and more, it didn't matter. I don't want to be there, but I need the income," said one worker who cares for an elderly relative. "The stress of bringing it home to him makes me physically ill."
Posted at 04:55 PM in Bernie Sanders, Common Dreams, Coronavirus, Inequality | Permalink | Comments (1)
Is the Coronavirus Interrupting Humanity’s Ability to Kill Itself?
by John Lawrence, April 16, 2020
Instead of spending a trillion dollars annually for the instruments of and preparations for war, perhaps we should have spent it on ventilators and PPE. If we're all in this together, does this mean all of humanity or only all of us Americans? Will getting back to normal mean getting back to war? Trump and Pompeo are a continuation of the neocon mentality of Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and Perle. These folks are never satisfied unless they have an enemy or a perceived enemy to deal with. If there's not one conveniently around, they'll go out of their way to create one. Then of course we'll need more military aircraft, more aircraft carriers, more smart missiles and more of the other implements of war. What, are we taking a break from war now that the coronavirus is occupying our attention?
Well, the coronavirus has had some good effects. There is less global warming. There hasn't been a recent school shooting. Air pollution is dropping rapidly in cities around the globe. Less fossil fuels are being taken out of the ground and consumed. People have been getting along quite nicely without crowding into sports and concert venues. Money isn't being wasted as flagrantly as it was before. Of course, that's bad for the economy in which money wasting contributes to the 70% consumer economy.
There is a renewed respect for the true heroes, not the armed forces, but the health care workers on the front lines. There is a realization that what is important is not American hegemony but the health and welfare of all the people in the world. As long as some are susceptible to the conditions creating ill health, a virus spawned anywhere, even in the poorest ghetto in Africa, can affect the whole world. The economic systems of the whole world can grind to a halt whether they be capitalistic, communistic or some variation or combination thereof.
Is there a renewed respect for cooperation instead of competition? The coronavirus is humbling. It doesn't respect power. Anyone from the richest and most powerful person in the world to the poorest and least powerful can be taken down by this virus. It has outsmarted and outwitted the ablest and the proudest among us. It has made us aware that we are all human and all susceptible no matter in which nation we live, no matter where we live anywhere in the world. It has made us aware of what is essential and what we can do without.
The pandemic is a dress rehearsal for what needs to be done to combat global warming, another pandemic that affects every human being in the whole world for generations to come. Unlike the coronavirus, global warming will not kill us in as rapid and dramatic a way, but it will kill us just as surely over a longer period of time. Instead of getting back to normal in terms of fossil fuel consumption and creating enemies as a justification for armaments buildups, let's get back to a new normal where priorities are realigned with the health and betterment of all people starting with the least among us. We need to make amends with out mother as well, Mother Earth that is.
Instead of creating and exacerbating relationships with our enemies, let us heal them instead. We were getting along just fine with Iran as long as the nuclear deal was in effect. Everyone was behaving. First, Trump opts out of that, and then goes out of his way to exacerbate tensions. Even with a pandemic affecting Iran to a great degree, the Trump administration has no pity on the average Iranian citizen. His and Pompeo's only concern is to totally wreck their economy with sanctions. Perhaps during a pandemic sanctions there should be a moratorium on sanctions. They are only making relations between the US and other countries, even friendly countries, worse.
The origin of the nasty relationship between the US and Iran was in the 1953 coup orchestrated by the CIA which overthrew Iran's democratically elected Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh and installed the Shah in his place. It was the first covert action by the United States to overthrow a democratically-elected government during peacetime. Maybe as a first step to restoring peaceful relations with Iran the US should formally apologize for betraying its own democratic values by ousting a democratically elected leader and installing a cruel dictator. By the way it was all about the fact that Mosaddegh wanted to nationalize Iran's oil. On Aug. 19, 2013, the CIA publicly admitted for the first time its involvement in the 1953 coup against Iran's elected Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh. It still has not apologized though.
Posted at 04:32 PM in John Lawrence, Coronavirus, Foreign Policy, Global Warming, Iran, Off the Top of my Head, Pollution, The Military, The Military Industrial Complex, Trump | Permalink | Comments (0)
Trump Wants Absolute Authority But Zero Responsibility
by John Lawrence, April 15, 2020
How does a democracy elect a complete fool and idiot for its Supreme Leader? It's not a great advertisement for democracy. Part of the idiocy is he sanctions China when all the PPE is manufactured in China. There are 150 countries and 50 US states all competing for PPE. If you were China would you show any favoritism towards the US? Hell no. Other countries will be more highly favored and will receive their shipments first. Trump has gone out of his way to antagonize China first with a trade war, then by arresting the CFO of Huawei, Meng Wanzho, and accusing her of fraud. Meng was still in Canada awaiting an extradition request by the US when the coronavirus first broke out in the US.
Huawei was accused of violating US sanctions against selling equipment to Iran. Leaving aside the argument that one country should be in the position of dictating to another country with whom they can do business, consider the conundrum the US is now in as it begs China for priority in the distribution of PPE and other vital necessities. What is Trump going to do sanction them again for not giving the US the products it needs to combat the coronavirus?
On top of that, the US under Trump refuses to let Iran have even humanitarian assistance combating the coronavirus. I guess we're not in this together after all especially when it comes to Iran. The United States sent Iran a blunt message last month: the spread of the coronavirus will not save it from U.S. sanctions that are choking off its oil revenues and isolating its economy. So in other words the Trump administration hopes that everyone in Iran dies. At least they will not get any mercy from the US. Iran, devastated by the coronavirus, asked the U.S. to lift sanctions on humanitarian grounds. The New York Times reported:
As Iran struggles with a devastating coronavirus outbreak, a broken economy and a severe shortage of medical equipment, it says that American trade sanctions are taking Iranian lives and has called for the United States to lift them on humanitarian grounds.
Iran’s plea is gaining traction around the globe, winning support from allies like Russia and China, but also the European Union, the United Nations secretary general, rights groups and nearly three dozen members of Congress, who have appealed to the Trump administration to suspend the sanctions for as long as Iran is battling the coronavirus.
Iran, a global epicenter of the virus, has confirmed more than 47,000 cases and more than 3,000 deaths, although public health experts estimate the real toll to be several times higher.
“We had always said the sanctions are unjust but coronavirus revealed this injustice to the world,” Foreign Minister Javad Zarif said in a recent video message, which he began by removing a surgical mask from his face with blue latex gloves. He referred to the sanctions as “economic terrorism.”
Trump has isolated the United States. Increasingly, the other countries of the world including US allies are disagreeing and actually finding fault with the way the Trump administration is conducting itself. Iran even applied to the IMF for a loan. Iranian President Hassan Rouhani said last week the IMF would be guilty of discrimination if it withholds the money for the country, which is a member of the IMF. Despite that US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo told the IMF not to grant them a loan. This is just downright mean, cruel and heartless. Despite that Iran has a few friends in the world including China and Russia. The US is doing everything it can do to tweak all three country's noses in the middle of a worldwide pandemic.
Are we really all in this together? I don't think so. In one of the few instances of aid, Britain, France, and Germany used a special trading mechanism for the first time on March 31 to send medical supplies to Iran in a way that does not violate the sanctions. It's also important to point out that, if Hillary Clinton had been elected instead of Donald Trump, the US would never have sanctioned Iran in the first place since it was complying with the JCPOA nuclear plan agreed upon by Iran and the five permanent members of the UN Security Council - China, France, Russia, United Kingdom, United States—plus Germany) together with the European Union. Trump is a rogue President whose sanctions are creating antagonism and chaos in the world community. This is becoming even more obvious in this time of pandemic.
Posted at 04:22 PM in John Lawrence, China, Coronavirus, Iran, Off the Top of my Head, Sanctions, Trump | Permalink | Comments (0)
"The Treasury Department is pointing out opportunities for banks and debt collectors to steal Americans' relief checks out from under them."
President Donald Trump's Treasury Department has given U.S. banks a green light to seize a portion or all of the one-time $1,200 coronavirus relief payments meant to help Americans cope with financial hardship and instead use the money to pay off individuals' outstanding debts—a move consumer advocates decried as cruel and unacceptable.
"These payments are supposed to help individuals and families put food on the table during this crisis, not enrich debt collectors."
—Maura Healey, Massachusetts Attorney General
"The Treasury Department effectively blessed this activity on a webinar with banking officials last Friday," The American Prospect's David Dayen reported Tuesday.
In an audio recording from the webinar obtained exclusively by the Prospect, Ronda Kent, chief disbursing officer at the Treasury Department's Bureau of the Fiscal Service, told bankers that "there's nothing in the law that precludes" financial institutions from seizing a person's payment and using it to pay off the individual's debts.
"After a third of U.S. renters couldn't make rent this month, the Treasury Department is pointing out opportunities for banks and debt collectors to steal Americans' relief checks out from under them," Jeremy Funk, spokesperson for consumer advocacy group Allied Progress, said in a statement responding to Kent's comments.
"It's the middle of a pandemic," said Funk. "This money should be going toward food, rent, and medicine—it's not the time to hand out favors to debt collection industry donors or pad some big bank's bottom line," said Funk. "Secretary Mnuchin needs to ensure that these $1,200 checks go straight into Americans pockets where they belong."
Listen to the recording:
Americans with direct deposit information on file with the Internal Revenue Service are expected to begin receiving the $1,200 payments in their bank accounts this week, provided that their banks do not opt to seize the money.
Those for whom the government does not have direct deposit information—a group that is disproportionately low-income—could be forced to wait up to five months to receive paper checks in the mail.
The direct payments were authorized under the CARES Act, a massive coronavirus stimulus package President Donald Trump signed into law last month.
As Dayen explained, Congress explicitly exempted the one-time stimulus payments from collection under the CARES Act "if the debt is owed to federal or state agencies, unless the debt involves a child support payment."
"But Congress did not extend this exemption to private debt collection," Dayen wrote. "The payments are defined as tax credits and not federal benefits, making them subject to 'garnishment,' in which a debt collector that wins a judgment in court can seize anything of value held by the debtor."
"Congress did give Treasury the authority under Section 2201(h) of the CARES Act to write rules exempting the payments from private debt collectors," Dayen noted, but the Treasury Department—headed by former Goldman Sachs executive Steve Mnuchin—has thus far refused to exercise that authority despite pressure from Democratic members of Congress and state attorneys general.
This can even happen in the case of a "charged-off" account with a negative balance that a customer abandoned & thought was closed. If direct deposit was set up with the IRS to go to that account, the bank can keep the money & pay off old debt with it. https://t.co/by1oQ1cNkL
— David Dayen (@ddayen) April 14, 2020
On Monday, Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey issued guidance stating that the $1,200 payments "are exempt from seizure or garnishment by creditors under Massachusetts law."
"These payments are supposed to help individuals and families put food on the table during this crisis, not enrich debt collectors," Healey said in a statement. "With this guidance... my office is putting the debt collection industry on notice that these payments are off limits."
Healey on Monday also signed onto a letter (pdf) led by New York Attorney General Letitia James urging Mnuchin to issue "a regulation or guidance designating CARES Act payments as 'benefit payments' exempt from garnishment." The letter was signed by 25 state attorneys general.
"During this public health and economic crisis, the states do not believe that the billions of dollars appropriated by Congress to help keep hard-working Americans afloat should be subject to garnishment," the letter states.
"Absolutely obscene. This money is for food, medicine, housing. The essentials of life."
—Mike Siegel, Texas congressional candidate
Dayen noted that "legally speaking, banks have the right to 'offset' any deposits to pay off delinquent loans, overdraft fees, or other charges."
"Banks have more immediate access to the coronavirus checks by virtue of having them deposited into accounts at their institutions," Dayen wrote. "They're also in front of the line for repayment of debts ahead of other private debt collectors."
The possibility that banks could seize individuals' relief payments as millions of people across the U.S. face layoffs, pay cuts, and reductions in work hours sparked outrage on social media.
"This is beyond predatory," tweeted finance expert and investigative journalist Nomi Prins.
Banks win again: those $1,200 checks heading to your account? Banks can siphon off any amount you might owe them. @ddayen https://t.co/kNZUfuLrxP
— Bartlett Naylor (@BartNaylor) April 14, 2020
Absolutely obscene. A violation of every ounce of trust the people have in Congress.
— Mike Siegel (@SiegelForTexas) April 14, 2020
This money is for food, medicine, housing. The essentials of life.
If private banks want to collect debts from our stimulus checks, we need to rethink banking. #HandsOff https://t.co/P8sZzTToHH
Jess Scarane, a progressive running to unseat Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.), tweeted that "this 'stimulus' gets worse and worse for working people every day."
"Even the meager help we thought individuals would get can end up in the hands of banks," said Scarane, "while people continue to struggle to put food on their tables and survive."
Posted at 11:11 AM in Common Dreams, Coronavirus, Trump | Permalink | Comments (0)
Posted at 10:58 AM in Robert Reich, Coronavirus, Trump | Permalink | Comments (0)
Full On Conspiracy Theory Re COVID-19 That Just Might Have Some Truth In It
by John Lawrence, April 15, 2020
Remember that Harvard professor, Charles Lieber, who was paid ginormous sums of money to work at a Wuhan University laboratory? According to Lieber's Wikipedia page, "Lieber demonstrated the first direct electrical detection of proteins, selective electrical sensing of individual viruses and multiplexed detection of cancer marker proteins and tumor enzyme activity." Washington Post reported on April 2, "scientists don’t rule out that an accident at a research laboratory in Wuhan might have spread a deadly bat virus that had been collected for scientific study." Given that both the Chinese and US governments have incentives to lie about the origin of COVID-19, it is not beyond doubt that Lieber was involved in research that led to an accidental leak of an “engineered bioweapon” or a “deliberate release” according to the Washington Post. Lieber may have or may not have been involved, but what was he doing in Wuhan, the epicenter of the origin of COVID-19?
The meme that the coronavirus was transmitted from bat to human in a Wuhan "wet market" is evidently false. In the same article the Post reported,
Scientists have identified the culprit as a bat coronavirus, through genetic sequencing; bats weren’t sold at the seafood market, although that market or others could have sold animals that had contact with bats. The Lancet noted in a January study that the first covid-19 case in Wuhan had no connection to the seafood market.
There’s a competing theory — of an accidental lab release of bat coronavirus — that scientists have been puzzling about for weeks. Less than 300 yards from the seafood market is the Wuhan branch of the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention. Researchers from that facility and the nearby Wuhan Institute of Virology have posted articles about collecting bat coronaviruses from around China, for study to prevent future illness. Did one of those samples leak, or was hazardous waste deposited in a place where it could spread?
Richard Ebright, a Rutgers microbiologist and biosafety expert, told me in an email that “the first human infection could have occurred as a natural accident,” with the virus passing from bat to human, possibly through another animal. But Ebright cautioned that it “also could have occurred as a laboratory accident, with, for example, an accidental infection of a laboratory worker.” He noted that bat coronaviruses were studied in Wuhan at Biosafety Level 2, “which provides only minimal protection,” compared with the top BSL-4.
The market where, allegedly, the first case was transmitted from bats to humans did not even sell bats! On April 14, Josh Rogin of the Washington Post reported:
Two years before the novel coronavirus pandemic upended the world, U.S. Embassy officials visited a Chinese research facility in the city of Wuhan several times and sent two official warnings back to Washington about inadequate safety at the lab, which was conducting risky studies on coronaviruses from bats. ...
The Chinese researchers at WIV [Wuhan Institute of Virology] were receiving assistance from the Galveston National Laboratory at the University of Texas Medical Branch and other U.S. organizations, but the Chinese requested additional help. The cables argued that the United States should give the Wuhan lab further support, mainly because its research on bat coronaviruses was important but also dangerous.
The cables noted that the labs investigating bat coronaviruses were not using proper containment gear making it more likely that a virus could escape from the lab. The article continues:
As the cable noted, the U.S. visitors met with Shi Zhengli, the head of the research project, who had been publishing studies related to bat coronaviruses for many years. In November 2017, just before the U.S. officials’ visit, Shi’s team had published research showing that horseshoe bats they had collected from a cave in Yunnan province were very likely from the same bat population that spawned the SARS coronavirus in 2003.
The research was designed to prevent the next SARS-like pandemic by anticipating how it might emerge. But even in 2015, other scientists questioned whether Shi’s team was taking unnecessary risks. In October 2014, the U.S. government had imposed a moratorium on funding of any research that makes a virus more deadly or contagious, known as “gain-of-function” experiments.
As many have pointed out, there is no evidence that the virus now plaguing the world was engineered; scientists largely agree it came from animals. But that is not the same as saying it didn’t come from the lab, which spent years testing bat coronaviruses in animals, said Xiao Qiang, a research scientist at the School of Information at the University of California at Berkeley. ...
Inside the Trump administration, many national security officials have long suspected either the WIV or the Wuhan Center for Disease Control and Prevention lab was the source of the novel coronavirus outbreak. According to the New York Times, the intelligence community has provided no evidence to confirm this. But one senior administration official told me that the cables provide one more piece of evidence to support the possibility that the pandemic is the result of a lab accident in Wuhan.
So is this another example of how the governments of China and the US have lied to the peoples of the world about the origin of COVID-19. And why is a Chinese lab doing research on coronaviruses if they hadn't intended to weaponize it possibly for future use? I'm sure American labs connected to the Pentagon have investigated every possibility of biological warfare as well. This research, except possibly how you could cure such diseases even before a vaccine is developed, should not be taking place, and American researchers shouldn't be taking $50,000 a month from the Chinese government to do research at Wuhan Institute of Virology.
Posted at 08:16 AM in John Lawrence, China, Coronavirus, Off the Top of my Head | Permalink | Comments (0)
"It's a scandal for Republicans to loot American taxpayers in the midst of an economic and human tragedy," declared Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse.
Democratic lawmakers and progressive critics expressed outrage Tuesday after a nonpartisan congressional body found that nearly 82% of benefits from a Republican tax provision in the most recent coronavirus relief package will go to the nation's millionaires and billionaires and cost taxpayers an estimated $90 billion this year alone.
"While Democrats fought for unemployment insurance and small business relief, a top priority of President Trump and his allies in Congress was another massive tax cut for the wealthy."
—Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse
The finding came in a new Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) analysis released by Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) and Rep. Lloyd Doggett (D-Texas) detailing the expected impact of the GOP provision, which was part of the $2 trillion Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act signed into law by President Donald Trump last month.
"This analysis shows that while Democrats fought for unemployment insurance and small business relief, a top priority of President Trump and his allies in Congress was another massive tax cut for the wealthy," Whitehouse said in a statement. "Congress should repeal this rotten, un-American giveaway and use the revenue to help workers battling through this crisis."
Noting the current health and financial conditions created by the ongoing coronavirus pandemic, Whitehouse added that "it's a scandal for Republicans to loot American taxpayers in the midst of an economic and human tragedy."
So here’s what we’ve found out about the CARES Act today: After waiting weeks for it to arrive, it turns out banks can seize your $1,200 check if you’re overdrawn or otherwise indebted on an account, per @ddayen’s excellent scoop. https://t.co/oPlpNev3FI
— Alex 😷 Sammon (@alex_sammon) April 14, 2020
The tax provision in question "temporarily suspends a limitation on how much owners of businesses formed as 'pass-through' entities can deduct against their nonbusiness income, such as capital gains, to reduce their tax liability," the Washington Post explained. "The limitation was created as part of the 2017 Republican tax law to offset other tax cuts to firms in that legislation."
Less than 3% of people set to benefit from the suspension earn under $100,000 per year, according to the JCT. The controversial provision is part of a set of tax changes in the coronavirus package that is expected to add about $170 billion to the national deficit over the next decade.
As the Post reported, the new JCT analysis also "included the impact of another tax change in the coronavirus relief legislation that allows firms to write off 100% rather than 80% of their losses, reversing another change in the 2017 tax law."
The JCT analysis (pdf) came after Whitehouse and Doggett sent a letter to Trump administration officials requesting information that could help explain the origins of the GOP provisions to the relief package. It also followed reporting that Trump, his son-in-law and senior adviser Jared Kushner, and real estate investors in the president's "inner circle" could benefit from the legislation's tax giveaways.
Never let a disaster go to waste when you can seize the moment to further enrich your buddies, those who need it the least - in a supposed #COVID19 bill that also abandoned health care workers with no funding for critical protective equipment. https://t.co/huaYaLqfNU
— Charles Idelson (@cidelson) April 14, 2020
Doggett tried to put the impact of the tax changes into context Tuesday by pointing out that "for those earning $1 million annually, a tax break buried in the recent coronavirus relief legislation is so generous that its total cost is more than total new funding for all hospitals in America and more than the total provided to all state and local governments."
"Someone wrongly seized on this health emergency to reward ultrarich beneficiaries, likely including the Trump family, with a tax loophole not available to middle class families," the Texas congressman added. "This net operating loss loophole is a loser that should be repealed."
The analysis requested by Whitehouse and Doggett also riled other Democrats in Congress, including Sen. Ron Wyden (Ore.) and Rep. Barbara Lee (Calif.).
Not even a pandemic can stop Republicans from giving tax handouts to the wealthy https://t.co/EcedqYDC2z
— Ron Wyden (@RonWyden) April 14, 2020
Instead of giving relief to Americans who are struggling to make ends meet, Senate Republicans snuck in tax breaks and corporate giveaways for their wealthy friends. We should be prioritizing the needs of working-class Americans — not millionaires. https://t.co/xVWiU4HjBn
— Barbara Lee (@BLeeForCongress) April 14, 2020
Reporting on the analysis elicited sharp condemnation of congressional Republicans—including calls to #VoteThemAllOut in November—and arguments that wealthy Americans should be paying more, not less, in taxes to help get the country through this public health crisis:
PROTECTING THE WEALTHY: Senate Republicans used the latest relief bill as a Trojan horse to sneak in a tax giveaway for millionaires.
— Tax March (@taxmarch) April 14, 2020
"About 82 percent of the benefits of the policy go to about 43,000 taxpayers who earn more than $1 million annually.”https://t.co/hPgMtU7tpe
This is why Trump and the GOP don’t want oversight on the stimulus (disaster relief for capital) package. It’s corrupt, even criminal. It’s what prolongs our crisis. It the opposite of solidarity. Exploitation. It’s why you need to vote in November. https://t.co/BVVOkoqPKJ
— Eric Klinenberg (@EricKlinenberg) April 14, 2020
Jeesus. People earning more than $1 million should be paying *more* taxes, especially now.
— Jeff Jarvis (@jeffjarvis) April 14, 2020
Tax change in coronavirus package overwhelmingly benefits millionaires, congressional body finds https://t.co/q4ABtLOxZ5
The JCT analysis was released as the fourth phase of coronavirus relief legislation remained stalled in Congress. Critics of the federal response to the pandemic—which includes "paltry" $1,200 checks to Americans that banks can reportedly seize to pay down outstanding loans and fees—have urged the public to learn from the crisis and push for a major shift in government going forward.
"After an era of right-wing ascendance, the pendulum is poised to swing toward justice and equity," Amy Hanauer of the Institute for Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP) wrote Tuesday in an op-ed for Common Dreams. "What we need now is a more fundamental transformation that addresses fissures that were there before this virus hit and that are making this virus hit harder."
Posted at 08:51 PM in Common Dreams, Coronavirus, Democrats, Republicans | Permalink | Comments (0)
The most important power we have is not mitigated by our surroundings. It is the power to choose what we think about, what we do with our minds, how we react or respond to our own memories, what weight we give them. In times like these, when we have fewer distractions or perhaps different ones, we might be more aware of our thought processes than we would be in normal circumstances. When life is repetitive and predictable we often do not notice our internal reactions. We move through the day on autopilot. Right now we have an opportunity to get above our own tendency to justify our thoughts as normal.
Even though we are house-bound, we are not exactly alone. We have several devices that connect us to our loved ones. We have input from television, yet how we relate is different from touch, from feeling the energy of a living, breathing human. We are more likely to be aware of our own human-ness. Here we are away from the sensual world, in our own little realm, alone with our thoughts.
All the while, the universe is still in business. Nature is reclaiming her dominion. The planet is recovering a bit from our bad choices. Is it possible to think about this time as somehow contributing to our greater good? It is not easy to be so optimistic in the face of the death and suffering this pandemic has caused. It is however, necessary. The old song “Look for the silver lining, when ever a cloud appears in the sky” is appropriate. What have you learned about yourself in the past few weeks? What have you found to be no longer necessary to your well-being? What will you do differently when this is behind us?
There is some underlying Intelligence at work here. Let’s use it to our advantage so that we can be more fully alive and better prepared to contribute to our shared well-being.
Affirm “I take this time to relax into my thoughts, I release the ones that do no good. I create new ones that elevate and heal. I am still the one Spirit intended me to be. Nothing is lost. All is well. “
Stay tuned in,
Carol Carnes www.carol-carnes.com
Posted at 08:29 PM in Dr. Carol Carnes, Living Consciously | Permalink | Comments (0)
Where is the Money Coming From for Stimulus and Relief?
by John Lawrence, April 14, 2020
Where are the deficit hawks like the Tea Party who insist on a balanced budget and less government spending? In recent weeks the Federal Reserve has coughed up $1.5 trillion and the Federal government has spit up $2.2 trillion, and there's more on the way. Just 12 years ago the Fed spent $4.5 trillion plus the $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP), the Federal government spent to purchase toxic assets from banks. Where is all this money coming from and do we the taxpayers have to pay it back? There's good news and bad news. The good news is that the Fed just created its money out of thin air with a few keystrokes on a computer. When the Fed takes Treasuries and other financial assets on its balance sheet, American taxpayers are not liable to pay back this money. It just disappears into a black hole. On the other hand the $3 trillion that was created on the "fiscal side" by the Congress of the US goes right on the deficit and the debt, and, theoretically, the American taxpayer is liable to pay this money back.
Practically, however, the American taxpayer will never have to pay back the national debt because, with Wall Street acting as the middle man, it will mostly just be transferred to the Fed's balance sheet. They do this in order to add "liquidity" to the economy. That's their rationale at least as cover for this shell game. In practical terms the Fed has taken on the role of not only bailing out the big Wall Street banks but also major "too big to fail" corporations like Boeing which has screwed up so much with its 737 MAX that it will probably never be profitable again.
So you might think that all this free money created by the Fed and even the Congress which went mainly to rich people in 2008 might also be spent on the hoi polloi for relief from the recession caused by the coronavirus. You might also think that Trump's huge tax cut should be reversed so that there is money there for the relief of American taxpayers. Never fear, you indeed can have it all just like the banks and hedge funds have had it all up to now. In its infinite wisdom the Fed and the superannuated Tea Party finally realize that the shell game played by the Fed can also be played to benefit them. Money created out of thin air by the Fed or by the Congress and Treasury Department in cahoots with the Fed can also benefit them, and without their having to pay more taxes.
The tax breaks perpetrated by the Republican party and most recently by Trump have made it necessary for the Fed just to create money out of thin air to keep the economy going. What the chairman of the Fed realizes is that American GDP is made up mostly of American consumer purchases. American consumerism represents 70% of the American economy so if average people don't have money to spend, American business is in deep shit. But no need to raise taxes on the rich to put it in the American consumer's hands so that they can go out and buy stuff. Instead the Fed just creates the money out of thin air and dispenses it to the people just as it had done previously just with the banks. Now the banks are flush, and the economy will go down the drain unless the American people have money to spend so they can keep up their 70% of GDP. George W Bush said, "Get down to Disney World in Florida. Take your families and enjoy life, the way we want it to be enjoyed." But, unfortunately, Disneyland is closed.
So why should we ever have to pay taxes again? Let the Fed just give everyone what amounts to a Universal Basic Income. Well, it's not quite as simple as that. The powers that be need to at least keep up the pretense that the government taxes and spends rather than that the Fed just prints whatever money is necessary to keep "liquidity" in the system which now includes the American consumer. That is just considered good fiduciary practice and fiscal prudence and will keep the American dollar more in good standing with the rest of the world than it would be otherwise. In the meantime, although people will lose their jobs and their businesses, the Fed will do its part to see that the American economy doesn't collapse altogether so it will keep the printing press going as long and as much as it takes.
Posted at 08:28 PM in John Lawrence, Consumerism, Coronavirus, Federal Reserve, Finance, The Federal Government, Universal Basic Income | Permalink | Comments (0)
Employer-based health insurance during the current coronavirus outbreak, said one researcher behind the study, "is like an umbrella that melts in the rain."
A new study out Tuesday estimates that worker layoffs unleashed by the coronavirus pandemic in the United States have already caused more than 1.5 million people to lose their employer-provided health insurance in recent weeks, with another 5.7 million likely to become uninsured by the end of June.With a total of 7.3million newly uninsured Americans by this summer, the new research—titled "Intersecting U.S. Epidemics: COVID-19 and Lack of Health Insurance"—reveals the devastating consequences of a health system so heavily reliant on employer-based insurance, especially in the face of an unprecedented public health emergency like the current outbreak.
"Millions of Americans are newly vulnerable to financial catastrophe, as we face an epidemic of life-threatening illness," said study co-author Dr. Steffie Woolhandler, a primary care doctor, distinguished professor at Hunter College and lecturer at Harvard Medical School. "The COVID-19 epidemic highlights the folly of tying health coverage to jobs. Our health care system saddles people with medical bills when they're least able to afford them because they've been laid off or are too sick to work. Health insurance in the U.S. is like an umbrella that melts in the rain."
"The COVID-19 epidemic highlights the folly of tying health coverage to jobs. Our health care system saddles people with medical bills when they're least able to afford them because they've been laid off or are too sick to work."
—Dr. Steffie WoolhandleThe study was published in The Annals of Internal Medicine,the official journal of the American College of Physicians, the largest U.S. medical specialty society in the U.S. with 159,000 members. Woolhandler and her co-author Dr. David Himmelstein, an internist and distinguished professor at CUNY's Hunter College and lecturer at Harvard Medical School, looked at state-by-state unemployment data to determine estimates about the number of people now out of work who relied on their employer for insurance. According to their report:
We estimated the likely effects of current job losses on the number of uninsured persons by using data from the U.S. Census Bureau's March 2019 Current Population Survey on health insurance coverage rates among persons who lost or left a job. The uninsurance rate among unemployed persons who had lost or left a job was 26.3% versus 10.7% among those with jobs. Applying the 15.6–percentage point difference to the 9.955 million who filed new unemployment claims last week, we estimate that 1.553 million newly unemployed persons will lose health coverage. This figure excludes family members who will become uninsured because a breadwinner lost coverage and self-employed persons who may lose coverage because their businesses were shuttered, but are ineligible for unemployment benefits. If, as the Federal Reserve economist projects, an additional 47.05 million people become unemployed, 7.3 million workers (along with several million family members) are likely to join the ranks of the U.S. uninsured population.
Himmelstein and Woolhandler further argue that their new research "exposes the imprudence of tying health insurance to employment, and the need for more thoroughgoing reform. "
"In this emergency, Congress should make all of the uninsured automatically eligible for Medicare."
—Dr. David Himmelstein
"A trickle of families facing the dual disaster of job loss and health insurance loss can remain under Washington's radar," they continued. "However, the current tsunami of job and coverage losses along with a heightened risk for severe illness demands action."
Dr. Himmelstein said states are too overwhelmed by the catastrophe now unfolding to adequately address the current situation—especially as things get worse, not better in the coming weeks and months—and called for the federal goverment and Congress to step in.
"The states can't do it because tax revenues are plunging, and they're required to balance their budgets," Himmelstein warned. "Congress and the President have provided free testing for coronavirus, but no new coverage for those who need treatment. In this emergency, Congress should make all of the uninsured automatically eligible for Medicare."
New @AnnalsofIM study from PNHP co-founders Drs. @swoolhandler and David Himmelstein estimates 7.3M Americans will lose health coverage by June 30, because of the #COVID19 pandemic. https://t.co/FwGG4ef8NA pic.twitter.com/tTuJjiIwuK
— Physicians for a National Health Program (@PNHP) April 7, 2020
The call for lawmakers to immediately open Medicare enrollment has been issued by other progressive voices as well. As Common Dreams reported earlier Tuesday, Public Citizen and others have said opening the program to the recently unemployed is the easiest and quickest way to provide coverage to those who need it.
"With millions of people losing their jobs because of a pandemic, it's both crazy and immoral for them to be stripped of health insurance," said Robert Weissman, president of Public Citizen. "If we had a Medicare for All system, this kind of problem wouldn't occur. But we can't wait to win Medicare for All. The solution to this immediate problem is to enroll all unemployed people in Medicare."
While expanding Medicare for the out-of-work and uninsured would be a short-term way to stem the pain for millions, advocates for Medicare for All—including Himmelstein and Woolhandler—say that the coronavirus may finally be the catastrophe that wakes the nation up to the need for a permanent solution to its healthcare woes and the unsustainable and inhumane design of the current for-profit system.
"A decade ago," the two researchers concluded in their report, "Victor Fuchs forecasted that 'National health insurance will probably come to the United States after a major change in the political climate—the kind of change that often accompanies a war, a depression, or large-scale civil unrest.' Such a major change may be upon us."
Posted at 01:57 PM in Common Dreams, Coronavirus, Health Care, Medicare, Medicare for All | Permalink | Comments (0)
Spring is all about new beginnings. Life reappears as the bleakness of winter gives way to the eruption of green. What was underneath the hard, cold ground peeks its head out and suddenly there are Tulips and daffodils. Spring is not a metaphor, it is a statement of Truth. Life is forever becoming itself in a cycle of revealed diversity that never ends.
The Christian holiday of Easter was originally a festival to celebrate the Spring Equinox and the arrival of new life. Humans have an intuitive sense that we are not unlike the Tulips; that we are recycled, as it were, and are forever becoming a new version of Love/Intelligence. The account of the death and resurrection of Jesus is one way of speaking about this grand realization; we do not die; we resume living in a newly revealed form. That is not folklore. It is real. We are not hoping it is true, we know it is true.
Here we are, as a global family, having the very real experience of gestation. That may seem like an exaggeration but when have we all been involved in a shared experience of this magnitude? We are not at war; there is no famine; we are simply cocooned, somewhat forced into introspection. Yes, many are suffering more than the rest of us, but those folks are also on the receiving end of our care and concern. The best of us is being expressed through the distribution of food and supplies. We are having the first hand experience of just how much we are our brothers keeper. This does not negate the best aspects of capitalism, rather it tempers the greed inherent in it. We can have a both/and society if compassion and love are allowed to be the drivers.
Prosperity never made anyone a money grabbing crook. That is the result of a belief in Lack as a fundamental truth. Knowing that we are part of an ever renewing system ought to elicit the relaxation response in us. As long as we participate in the giving and receiving cycle with gratitude and generosity, we will be more aware of how alive we really are and shall always be.
Stay tuned in,
Carol Carnes www.carol-carnes.com
Posted at 01:38 PM in Dr. Carol Carnes, Living Consciously | Permalink | Comments (0)
Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | |||
5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 |
12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 |
19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 |
26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 |
John Coltrane: One Down, One Up
(*****)
Dizzy Gillespie, Charlie Parker: Town Hall, New York City, June 22, 1945
(*****)
Monk and Coltrane: Thelonious Monk and John Coltrane at Carnegie Hall
Best album of 2005 (*****)