I'll stop whining, at least for a little while

Here's a question

When the SEC was investigating Robert Allen Stanford, which government agency told it to "stand down"?

Which government agency was running interference for Mr. Stanford?

A Good Weekend in Albany

Great Depression Cooking

The Banks Get You Coming And Going

So, with the economy in freefall thanks to the banks and George W., there are 5 million people in the US on unemployment benefits.

Thirty states have deals with banks to issue unemployment benefits in the form of pre-paid debit cards. But the banks are set up to take the skim from those benefits.

Call to check your balance? That costs 50 cents.

Use the card twice in the same day? That's $1.50.

They'll even allow overdrafts, and then charge you $20.00 for the overdraft.

Oh yeah, and they get about 3% of each transaction.

All this from the people who got us in this mess, and then got bonuses with taxpayer money.

What's on my iPod tonight?

Out of the thousands of songs my iPod had to choose from, this is what it chose to fling at me while I prepared dinner:

A Night In Tunisia, Jimmy Rowles

Looking At You, Rebecca Kilgore

When I Come Back Around, Jamie Lidell

Rebecca, Pat McGee Band

I'll Get Even With You, Leann Rimes

Ever The Sun Will Rise, Tony Levin

Fire, Crazy World of Arthur Brown

Billie's Blues, Billie Holiday

Good Times, Bad Times, Led Zeppelin

Workingman's Blues #2, Bob Dylan

All Along The Watchtower, Jimi Hendrix

The Tracks Of My Tears, Smokey Robinson and the Miracles

No Greater Love, Ahmad Jamal

Spell Check Strikes Again

A news story about the California budget legislation quoted the Lt. Gov. as saying:

And then, when you have recalescent Republicans that have taken a no new tax pledge and seem to really just want to throw this state, and the nation, into chaos and further decline in the economy.

Looks like the spell checker turned recalcitrant into recalescent, which is an interesting word in and of itself, having to do with the glow that steel gives off as it cools.

Seems circular somehow

So, the Seattle municipal water company was ordered by the court to refund customers for an improper fire hydrant surcharge.

So, the water company is raising the money for the refund with a new refund surcharge.

A Roger Bertholf book review

Editor's note: political diversity is welcome here, especially when it comes from my friends.
---------------------

“The Progress Paradox: How Life Gets Better While People Feel Worse” by Gregg Easterbrook (Random House, 2003)

In this carefully researched and extensively referenced book, Gregg Easterbrook, a contributing editor of the Atlantic Monthly and visiting fellow of the Brookings Institution, poses the simple question: Why do so many citizens of Western countries express such collective malaise over their state of affairs when, by virtually any objective measure of human existence, they are better off than well over 99% of all the homo sapiens who have ever walked this earth? His question demands historical perspective, something many of this generation lack, and he does not answer it conclusively, but his exploration into the possible reasons is careful and reasoned. Despite the premise in its title, there are several things this book is not: It is not a “feel good about how well off you are” admonition. It is not a dismissal of all things bad about Western society. It does not preach that you’ve got no reason to complain, and it doesn’t even suggest that Western society is necessarily good in all respects.

Politically, Easterbrook is difficult to define. He clearly embraces the overwhelming superiority of democratic government, free market economies, moral values, personal accountability, reduction of the federal debt, and fiscal restraint, which would generally align him with most conservatives. Yet, he rails against social and economic inequities, greed of corporate executives (outright theft from shareholders—and now, taxpayers—is one of the more generous descriptions he applies to CEO largesse), greenhouse gas emissions, egregious waste of petroleum resources by SUVs, lack of universal healthcare in the U.S., and the plight of the poor in underdeveloped countries, an agenda that would cause even the most liberal activist to blush. A liberal who happens to support democratization of the world, decries deficit spending, and suggests that we’ve never had it better? Or, a conservative who blames corporate greed for economic inequity, urges us to consume less and be more charitable, and frets over global warming? You can decide, if that is important to you. It wasn’t to me.

One by one, Easterbrook convincingly challenges commonly-held notions of Western society’s decline. Income? Even at the lowest strata of society, income and quality of life have improved; this is true not only in Western countries, but in underdeveloped countries, as well, with the one exception—frequently cited by Easterbrook—of sub-Saharan Africa. Health? Longevity in the Western world has nearly doubled in just four generations, and although Easterbrook considers it a national disgrace that universal healthcare is not provided in the United States, he points out that some form of healthcare is available to almost everyone, albeit inequitable and to many, woefully inadequate. Gas prices? Inflation-adjusted prices for gasoline are no higher than they were a half a century ago. Armed conflicts? There are fewer wars being waged today than at any time in modern history. The environment? The Environmental Protection Agency, created in 1970, has been, arguably, the most successful government agency the history of the United States. Our water is cleaner, and our air is less polluted, than at any time since the advent of industrialized society. The single exception that Easterbrook points out is greenhouse gases, not universally defined as a pollutant, but a serious concern to him. Crime? Crime has steadily decreased over the past two decades, and sociologists are unable to explain why (Easterbrook amusingly observes how movies and television dramas exaggerate the frequency with which police are involved in shootouts—85% of policemen, he notes, serve their entire career without ever discharging their weapon in the line of duty, except on a firing range).

Easterbrook points out that many of these problems were once considered insolvable, but many have been solved, or at least dramatic progress has been made. So, he wonders, why doesn’t anyone acknowledge these societal gains? Why is the perception so common that we are worse off than our forebears of just a couple of generations ago? In his analysis of this question, Easterbrook makes the remarkable argument that qualities such as charity, forgiveness, and humility have a basis in evolutionary biology; these qualities, he suggests—with considerable research to support his view—are not simply moral teachings founded in religious precepts; evidence suggests that these qualities confer an evolutionary advantage, by a variety of social and biological mechanisms. This is a counterintuitive notion that Easterbrook develops at great length, citing many sociological, psychological, and epidemiological studies that demonstrate the influence of moral behavior on longevity and overall happiness with life.

The last two chapters are titled, revealingly, “Changing Our World,” and “Changing Their World,” the latter in reference to what can be done by affluent societies to improve the desperate conditions in many underdeveloped countries, as well as countries with fabulous wealth that does not translate into a higher living standard for the majority of their population (oil-rich countries in the Middle East, Africa, and Russia being prime examples). Of course, helping the poor is not a novel cause; it has been embraced by many who say, rightfully, that it is the compassionate thing to do. But Easterbrook’s argument for raising the standard of living, not only for the disadvantaged citizens of affluent Western countries (particularly the U.S.), but for the world in general, is unique in that it is based on three premises: We have the wealth to do it if we make sensible decisions about what we need and don’t need; it is the right thing to do; and it is to our advantage, as a society and individually, to make such a commitment.

Easterbrook suggests that “. . .if we decide well, the future may hold an ever-better life, about which our descendants will complain.”

Roger Bertholf

Another Victim Of The Economy

Rod Blagojevich explains his job loss this way:

There are tens of thousands of Americans who are losing their job every single day. I just happen to be among the ranks

He wasn't impeached, he was just laid off

They Just Can't Be Expected To Live That Way

Regarding bank executives and bonuses, from the NYT:

“Without a doubt, $18 billion is a lot of money, but it’s a drop in the bucket on Wall Street,” said Gustavo Dolfino, president of the WhiteRock Group, a headhunter for the banks. “These bonuses are down, and the salaries are not enough for these people. They can’t live on $150 to $180,000, so they haven’t saved any money. They put it on credit lines and at bonus time, they thought they’d pay it off.”

So the taxpayer, with a median income of $49K a year, must pick up the tab.

Question: What are the bank executives doing to prevent taxpayers from suffering unacceptable living circumstances?