Tuesday, May 12, 2009
Call 800-517-5696 today to protest more war funding!
This important vote could come up this week; possibly next week… Act today.
Insist on a response in writing.
Call 800-517-5696 today to protest more war funding!
Do you want the United States government to spend tens of billions of dollars more to fund the war in Iraq and expand the war in Afghanistan?
Next week, your representative will be asked to vote on a war supplemental bill that would do just that.
Call toll-free on May 12
800-517-5696
Say no to more spending on two wars. Urge your representative to use our tax dollars to:
bring the troops home
take care of them upon their return
rebuild Iraq and Afghanistan
take care of health, education, and energy here at home
Oppose more war funding.
The U.S. government already spends $1.9 million every minute on the military — and that doesn't include funding for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
This is the position of our Organizing Council:
All of this money could be going towards the creation of a public health care system. Any country that can spend this kind of money on wars and militarism that includes funding over 800 U.S. foreign military bases dotting the globe; subsidizing the Israeli killing machine; and fighting wars in three countries at the same time certainly can afford to provide its own people a first-rate, world-class public health care system that is comprehensive, all-inclusive and universal which is publicly funded, publicly administered and publicly delivered. Everyone in. All the profiteers out. Health care for people not for profit.
As a working class mother I did not raise my children to go fight wars and kill other people so oil companies can profit.
I voted for Barack Obama very reluctantly and this war funding is not the change I voted for.
Please call today.
Call 800-517-5696 today to protest more war funding!
Maggie Bird
President,
Midwest Casino Workers Organizing Council
Two-million casino workers employed in the Indian Gaming Industry go to jobs in smoke-filled casinos getting poverty wages without any rights under state, federal or tribal labor laws.
The same government funding these wars created this injustice in the Indian Gaming Industry and refuses to right this wrong.
Distributed by:
Alan L. Maki
Director of Organizing,
Midwest Casino Organizing Council
58891 County Road 13
Warroad, Minnesota 56763
Phone: 218-386-2432
Cell phone: 651-587-5541
E-mail: amaki000@centurytel.net
Check out my blog:
Thoughts From Podunk
http://thepodunkblog.blogspot.com/
Insist on a response in writing.
Call 800-517-5696 today to protest more war funding!
Do you want the United States government to spend tens of billions of dollars more to fund the war in Iraq and expand the war in Afghanistan?
Next week, your representative will be asked to vote on a war supplemental bill that would do just that.
Call toll-free on May 12
800-517-5696
Say no to more spending on two wars. Urge your representative to use our tax dollars to:
bring the troops home
take care of them upon their return
rebuild Iraq and Afghanistan
take care of health, education, and energy here at home
Oppose more war funding.
The U.S. government already spends $1.9 million every minute on the military — and that doesn't include funding for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
This is the position of our Organizing Council:
All of this money could be going towards the creation of a public health care system. Any country that can spend this kind of money on wars and militarism that includes funding over 800 U.S. foreign military bases dotting the globe; subsidizing the Israeli killing machine; and fighting wars in three countries at the same time certainly can afford to provide its own people a first-rate, world-class public health care system that is comprehensive, all-inclusive and universal which is publicly funded, publicly administered and publicly delivered. Everyone in. All the profiteers out. Health care for people not for profit.
As a working class mother I did not raise my children to go fight wars and kill other people so oil companies can profit.
I voted for Barack Obama very reluctantly and this war funding is not the change I voted for.
Please call today.
Call 800-517-5696 today to protest more war funding!
Maggie Bird
President,
Midwest Casino Workers Organizing Council
Two-million casino workers employed in the Indian Gaming Industry go to jobs in smoke-filled casinos getting poverty wages without any rights under state, federal or tribal labor laws.
The same government funding these wars created this injustice in the Indian Gaming Industry and refuses to right this wrong.
Distributed by:
Alan L. Maki
Director of Organizing,
Midwest Casino Organizing Council
58891 County Road 13
Warroad, Minnesota 56763
Phone: 218-386-2432
Cell phone: 651-587-5541
E-mail: amaki000@centurytel.net
Check out my blog:
Thoughts From Podunk
http://thepodunkblog.blogspot.com/
Sunday, May 10, 2009
US House speaker Pelosi in Iraq discusses economy
The most interesting part of this story is this part at the very end because it tells what is happening with our tax-dollars going to Iraq:
I wonder where the United States stands on the list of corruption riddled nations?
If one were to follow Obama's "stimulus spending" I am sure the United States would move right to the top of the list.
If we really knew the truth about how our tax-dollars are being stolen through corruption we would likely find it would be enough money to finance a pretty darn good health care system.
It's like Minnesota's former socialist Farmer-Labor Party governor Elmer Benson always used to tell me:
Then there is this statement in the article below from Associated Press:
Nancy Pelosi, a "fierce critic" of this war? Come on; get real. Pelosi and the Democrats haven't done a darn thing to end this dirty imperialist war for oil and regional domination in Iraq. As far as corruption. Corruption is part and parcel of imperialist wars because the wars are a corrupt business venture from the beginning... there isn't anything too honest about stealing another country's oil. And Nancy Pelosi is as corrupt as politicians get; one only has to look at the corporations she gets her bribes (campaign contributions) from.
Notice, the article doesn't mention if Pelosi discussed corruption with the U.S. installed puppet Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki.
And if Iraq is "riddled with corruption," just imagine what kind government it must be in Afghanistan among the poppy growers; or, what about corruption in Pakistan?
And it's all your tax-dollars!
And this country can't afford socialized health care?
Come to think of it this health care system we have in this country must have its share of corruption, too--- don't ya think? How else could it be that only the insurance companies get a seat at Obama's table when it comes to health care reform?
Where's the change?
Here in Minnesota we don't have to look far for corruption... A Roseau County Commissioner who is spending our tax-dollars pleads guilty to tax-evasion and the Tea Party people don't even demand his resignation; every single state legislator is on the "to bribe list" of the Minnesota Indian Gaming Association; and the Ford Motor Company has been bribing Minnesota politicians for over 80 years while the St. Paul City Council appoints an heir to the most crooked and corrupt real estate family in Minnesota history to make plans for the real estate speculators to make a killing from killing off two-thousand jobs when Ford closes the St. Paul Ford Twin Cities Assembly Plant and the corruption riddled Minnesota Democratic Farmer-Labor Party spends twenty-million dollars--- tax-payer dollars--- building a road out into the Big Bog for a Berger, Ltd., a Canadian multi-national corporation, to truck away the profits as our primary freshwater aquifer is destroyed after the Berger family of Quebec holds a party in Mike Hatch's Attorney General Office for all those they have bribed with Lori Swanson serving the h'orderves. And in the center of it all is good old honest Democrat James Oberstar who stands in front of two-hundred people at the Freeman Forum on "Water, Water everywhere" and calls me a liar for stating that he is involved in the peat mining boondoggle in the Big Bog as the Blandin Foundation tells public radio station KAXE they will lose their funding if they mention this corrupt peat mining fiasco.
With a government imposed by the United States on the people of Iraq, how can that government be anything but corrupt... after all, the whole idea was to export our system of government to Iraq... a thoroughly corrupt form of government... only a complete fool would think that there would be any chance of anything other than a corrupt government in Iraq considering who is teaching these Iraqi politicians--- the most well bribed politicians in the world... politicians like Nancy Pelosi. They should send Jim Oberstar over to Iraq to teach them how to take bids for roads and bridges:






Give the Democrats a few bucks to spend on a bridge or a war and it will turn in to a corruption riddled fiasco and disaster with the bodies piled high or laying in the bottom of a river.
Something to think about around the dinner table.
Alan L. Maki
US House speaker Pelosi in Iraq discusses economy
http://apnews.myway.com//article/20090510/D983ASC80.html
May 10, 6:36 AM (ET)
By QASSIM ABDUL-ZAHRA
BAGHDAD (AP) - U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi made a surprise one-day visit to Baghdad Sunday and discussed U.S.-Iraqi economic relations with the prime minister, the government spokesman said.
Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki asked Pelosi, a California Democrat, to shield Iraq from the demands for reparations from neighboring countries dating back to the actions by the previous ruler Saddam Hussein, spokesman Ali al-Dabbagh said.
"Al-Maliki requested the United States protect Iraqi funds and put an end to the demands of other countries which feel they were harmed during the two Gulf wars of the former regime," he added.
Kuwait still claims billions of dollars in war reparations from Iraq dating from the 1990 invasion and has refused appeals by Baghdad to reduce their demands and forgive about $15 billion in Iraqi debt.
A fierce critic of the U.S.-led Iraq war, Pelosi originally opposed the 2007 increase in U.S. troops credited with contributing to a substantial reduction of violence in much of country in the past two years.
She has praised President Barack Obama's plans to bring home two-thirds of the 130,000 U.S. troops in Iraq by August 2010.
In the past, Pelosi has pushed the Iraqi government to make greater efforts at political reconciliation.
Pelosi last visited Iraqi in May 2008, when she also met with al-Maliki, and came in January 2007, shortly after Democrats took control of Congress.
Also Sunday, Iraqi police announced the arrest of trade minister's brother, who was wanted along with several other officials for allegedly embezzling some $7 million from the country's ration program.
Sabah al-Sudani was caught by police Wednesday in southern Iraq carrying large amounts of cash and two passports, in what the government is describing as an attempt to flee the country.
When the security forces first tried to arrest him and other suspects on April 29 in Baghdad, guards at the Trade Ministry opened fire, allowing them to escape.
The incident was embarrassing for the government, which has been begun responding to the rising public outcry against corruption. Al-Maliki called Saturday for a new campaign against corruption.
Corruption watchdog Transparency International rated Iraq in 2008 as the third most corrupt country in the world after Somalia and Myanmar.
But the Iraqi government has long downplayed the corruption riddling the country's ministries and hamstringing its reconstruction efforts after years of war.
__
Associated Press Writer Sinan Salaheddin contributed to this report.
Also Sunday, Iraqi police announced the arrest of trade minister's brother, who was wanted along with several other officials for allegedly embezzling some $7 million from the country's ration program.
Sabah al-Sudani was caught by police Wednesday in southern Iraq carrying large amounts of cash and two passports, in what the government is describing as an attempt to flee the country.
When the security forces first tried to arrest him and other suspects on April 29 in Baghdad, guards at the Trade Ministry opened fire, allowing them to escape.
The incident was embarrassing for the government, which has been begun responding to the rising public outcry against corruption. Al-Maliki called Saturday for a new campaign against corruption.
Corruption watchdog Transparency International rated Iraq in 2008 as the third most corrupt country in the world after Somalia and Myanmar.
But the Iraqi government has long downplayed the corruption riddling the country's ministries and hamstringing its reconstruction efforts after years of war.
I wonder where the United States stands on the list of corruption riddled nations?
If one were to follow Obama's "stimulus spending" I am sure the United States would move right to the top of the list.
If we really knew the truth about how our tax-dollars are being stolen through corruption we would likely find it would be enough money to finance a pretty darn good health care system.
It's like Minnesota's former socialist Farmer-Labor Party governor Elmer Benson always used to tell me:
"If you ended corruption in this country the entire goddamn capitalist system would collapse overnight and we wouldn't need a revolution."
Then there is this statement in the article below from Associated Press:
"A fierce critic of the U.S.-led Iraq war, Pelosi originally opposed the 2007 increase in U.S. troops credited with contributing to a substantial reduction of violence in much of country in the past two years."
Nancy Pelosi, a "fierce critic" of this war? Come on; get real. Pelosi and the Democrats haven't done a darn thing to end this dirty imperialist war for oil and regional domination in Iraq. As far as corruption. Corruption is part and parcel of imperialist wars because the wars are a corrupt business venture from the beginning... there isn't anything too honest about stealing another country's oil. And Nancy Pelosi is as corrupt as politicians get; one only has to look at the corporations she gets her bribes (campaign contributions) from.
Notice, the article doesn't mention if Pelosi discussed corruption with the U.S. installed puppet Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki.
And if Iraq is "riddled with corruption," just imagine what kind government it must be in Afghanistan among the poppy growers; or, what about corruption in Pakistan?
And it's all your tax-dollars!
And this country can't afford socialized health care?
Come to think of it this health care system we have in this country must have its share of corruption, too--- don't ya think? How else could it be that only the insurance companies get a seat at Obama's table when it comes to health care reform?
Where's the change?
Here in Minnesota we don't have to look far for corruption... A Roseau County Commissioner who is spending our tax-dollars pleads guilty to tax-evasion and the Tea Party people don't even demand his resignation; every single state legislator is on the "to bribe list" of the Minnesota Indian Gaming Association; and the Ford Motor Company has been bribing Minnesota politicians for over 80 years while the St. Paul City Council appoints an heir to the most crooked and corrupt real estate family in Minnesota history to make plans for the real estate speculators to make a killing from killing off two-thousand jobs when Ford closes the St. Paul Ford Twin Cities Assembly Plant and the corruption riddled Minnesota Democratic Farmer-Labor Party spends twenty-million dollars--- tax-payer dollars--- building a road out into the Big Bog for a Berger, Ltd., a Canadian multi-national corporation, to truck away the profits as our primary freshwater aquifer is destroyed after the Berger family of Quebec holds a party in Mike Hatch's Attorney General Office for all those they have bribed with Lori Swanson serving the h'orderves. And in the center of it all is good old honest Democrat James Oberstar who stands in front of two-hundred people at the Freeman Forum on "Water, Water everywhere" and calls me a liar for stating that he is involved in the peat mining boondoggle in the Big Bog as the Blandin Foundation tells public radio station KAXE they will lose their funding if they mention this corrupt peat mining fiasco.
With a government imposed by the United States on the people of Iraq, how can that government be anything but corrupt... after all, the whole idea was to export our system of government to Iraq... a thoroughly corrupt form of government... only a complete fool would think that there would be any chance of anything other than a corrupt government in Iraq considering who is teaching these Iraqi politicians--- the most well bribed politicians in the world... politicians like Nancy Pelosi. They should send Jim Oberstar over to Iraq to teach them how to take bids for roads and bridges:






Give the Democrats a few bucks to spend on a bridge or a war and it will turn in to a corruption riddled fiasco and disaster with the bodies piled high or laying in the bottom of a river.
Something to think about around the dinner table.
Alan L. Maki
US House speaker Pelosi in Iraq discusses economy
http://apnews.myway.com//article/20090510/D983ASC80.html
May 10, 6:36 AM (ET)
By QASSIM ABDUL-ZAHRA
BAGHDAD (AP) - U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi made a surprise one-day visit to Baghdad Sunday and discussed U.S.-Iraqi economic relations with the prime minister, the government spokesman said.
Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki asked Pelosi, a California Democrat, to shield Iraq from the demands for reparations from neighboring countries dating back to the actions by the previous ruler Saddam Hussein, spokesman Ali al-Dabbagh said.
"Al-Maliki requested the United States protect Iraqi funds and put an end to the demands of other countries which feel they were harmed during the two Gulf wars of the former regime," he added.
Kuwait still claims billions of dollars in war reparations from Iraq dating from the 1990 invasion and has refused appeals by Baghdad to reduce their demands and forgive about $15 billion in Iraqi debt.
A fierce critic of the U.S.-led Iraq war, Pelosi originally opposed the 2007 increase in U.S. troops credited with contributing to a substantial reduction of violence in much of country in the past two years.
She has praised President Barack Obama's plans to bring home two-thirds of the 130,000 U.S. troops in Iraq by August 2010.
In the past, Pelosi has pushed the Iraqi government to make greater efforts at political reconciliation.
Pelosi last visited Iraqi in May 2008, when she also met with al-Maliki, and came in January 2007, shortly after Democrats took control of Congress.
Also Sunday, Iraqi police announced the arrest of trade minister's brother, who was wanted along with several other officials for allegedly embezzling some $7 million from the country's ration program.
Sabah al-Sudani was caught by police Wednesday in southern Iraq carrying large amounts of cash and two passports, in what the government is describing as an attempt to flee the country.
When the security forces first tried to arrest him and other suspects on April 29 in Baghdad, guards at the Trade Ministry opened fire, allowing them to escape.
The incident was embarrassing for the government, which has been begun responding to the rising public outcry against corruption. Al-Maliki called Saturday for a new campaign against corruption.
Corruption watchdog Transparency International rated Iraq in 2008 as the third most corrupt country in the world after Somalia and Myanmar.
But the Iraqi government has long downplayed the corruption riddling the country's ministries and hamstringing its reconstruction efforts after years of war.
__
Associated Press Writer Sinan Salaheddin contributed to this report.
Friday, May 8, 2009
Health care reform: The Public Health Care Option--- Everyone in... All the profiteers out
This is a good editorial/newscast to get our discussion going: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/30629823#30629823 because it shows what we are up against. I would encourage everyone to watch and listen closely to this several times.
I would note that not only single-payer universal health care has been excluded from any discussions by Obama and the United States Senate; but, public health care has also been excluded.
As many of you know, I pushed hard for single-payer and led the fight to get it to the floor of the Minnesota Democratic Farmer-Labor Party (MNDFL) State Conventions where it finally passed and became part of the MNDFL Action Agenda.
The Midwest Casino Workers Organizing Council has always viewed single-payer universal health care the same way Canada’s Tommy Douglas viewed single-payer--- as a step towards real public health care; or, as Tommy Douglas put it: socialized health care.
We should not play around here.
There will be no serious consideration of single-payer by Democrats; certainly not by Republicans.
Politically, single-payer is dead. Obama and the Democrats have killed single-payer. It was a nice thought; but, political reality is something much different. It is one thing to have polls showing overwhelming support for single-payer--- but, just like polls don’t die in wars; polls don’t mount successful campaigns for reforms--- people do. People are not going to be brought out in support of a concept that is “good” when they know something else is better and the real McCoy… public health care is better than single-payer and this is what will drive a movement capable of winning real health care reform.
Everyone knows that any country that can fight trillion dollar wars simultaneously in three countries; support, to the tune of tens-of-billions of dollars annually, the Israeli killing machine; and finance over 800 U.S. military bases on foreign soil dotting the globe--- this is a country that can afford to finance 800 public health care centers spread out across the United States providing its own citizens with free world-class health care second to none.
It is time to stop fooling ourselves; we need to bring the issue of public health care forward at this time.
Canada is a relatively poor country compared to the United States. The Canadians needed to start with single-payer; we don’t because the United States is the wealthiest country in the world. We need to go all out to fight for a public health care system.
Here in Roseau County, Minnesota; when we brought forward ALL options for health care reform… this is what passed unanimously at the Roseau County DFL Convention:
no-fee/no-premium, comprehensive, all-inclusive universal public health care from cradle-to-grave; publicly administered, publicly financed and publicly delivered
The first time single-payer universal health care passed unanimously; but, as the Party hacks dug in, in opposition to single-payer, then the people decided they had nothing to lose so they supported what they really wanted all along--- public health care; and in doing so, got a compromise: support for single-payer.
This is an important lesson and teaches us something about how to struggle for reforms. Don’t begin asking for a compromise because you will get nothing from those whose only goal is maximizing profits--- and campaign contributions.
There is nothing at all vague about what people really want when given every opportunity. Single-payer was always the begrudging second choice when public health care was included. This is supposed to be a democracy. The American people are entitled to the kind of health care system they really want.
There is a political lesson here.
Here in Minnesota, the DFL Party hacks only gave up their opposition to single-payer using all kinds of manipulations and control to allowing single-payer to be considered by state convention delegates after they became aware the popular movement was growing for public health care. The Party hacks hoped to derail the movement for public health care by allowing a vote on single-payer knowing that single-payer would meet its demise in the halls of Congress. In fact, most of Minnesota’s elected DFL politicians have refused to support single-payer mandate from the grassroots.
Now is the time to begin a discussion with the potential to drive a movement for what is really needed: a public health care system--- Everybody in… ALL profiteers out.
It will be the struggle for: no-fee/no-premium, comprehensive, all-inclusive universal public health care from cradle-to-grave; publicly administered, publicly financed and publicly delivered that drives the movement for successful health care reform in this country. Until public health care is placed on the table we will get nothing from Obama and the Democrats. Now is the time to move beyond single-payer universal health care in saying: Everyone in… all the profiteers out; public health care is the real solution.
A movement simply can’t be built fighting for part of the pie when people want, and are entitled to, the entire pie. With single-payer universal health care we only get a small slice of the population in action; not enough involvement for a winning movement.
There is a reason why doctors have come to the forefront in leading the single-payer movement… they want to protect their high incomes.
On the other hand, working people are defending their standard of living, as well as their health, by advocating public health care with: Everybody in… All profiteers--- including doctors with high incomes--- out.
Place the doctors on the public pay-roll just like teachers, professors, postal workers, municipal employees and librarians. Doctors employed by the Indian Health Service are perfectly happy being on the public pay-roll. Plus, we already have a very large Public Health Service employing many doctors… so, doctors on the public pay-roll is nothing new, not even in the United States… the great bastion of free enterprise.
There are no obstacles to public health care that can not be easily overcome--- once we exert the pressure required on the House and Senate; if they can’t be convinced to do what is right according to what the American people want, then the time has come to sweep the entire bunch right out of office with a new broom and a clean sweep.
What we need to win public health care is 800 citizen committees all over the United States clamoring for: Everybody in... profiteers out---
Alan L. Maki
Director of Organizing,
Midwest Casino Workers Organizing Council
58891 County Road 13
Warroad, Minnesota 56763
Phone: 218-386-2432
Cell phone: 651-587-5541
E-mail: amaki000@centurytel.net
I would note that not only single-payer universal health care has been excluded from any discussions by Obama and the United States Senate; but, public health care has also been excluded.
As many of you know, I pushed hard for single-payer and led the fight to get it to the floor of the Minnesota Democratic Farmer-Labor Party (MNDFL) State Conventions where it finally passed and became part of the MNDFL Action Agenda.
The Midwest Casino Workers Organizing Council has always viewed single-payer universal health care the same way Canada’s Tommy Douglas viewed single-payer--- as a step towards real public health care; or, as Tommy Douglas put it: socialized health care.
We should not play around here.
There will be no serious consideration of single-payer by Democrats; certainly not by Republicans.
Politically, single-payer is dead. Obama and the Democrats have killed single-payer. It was a nice thought; but, political reality is something much different. It is one thing to have polls showing overwhelming support for single-payer--- but, just like polls don’t die in wars; polls don’t mount successful campaigns for reforms--- people do. People are not going to be brought out in support of a concept that is “good” when they know something else is better and the real McCoy… public health care is better than single-payer and this is what will drive a movement capable of winning real health care reform.
Everyone knows that any country that can fight trillion dollar wars simultaneously in three countries; support, to the tune of tens-of-billions of dollars annually, the Israeli killing machine; and finance over 800 U.S. military bases on foreign soil dotting the globe--- this is a country that can afford to finance 800 public health care centers spread out across the United States providing its own citizens with free world-class health care second to none.
It is time to stop fooling ourselves; we need to bring the issue of public health care forward at this time.
Canada is a relatively poor country compared to the United States. The Canadians needed to start with single-payer; we don’t because the United States is the wealthiest country in the world. We need to go all out to fight for a public health care system.
Here in Roseau County, Minnesota; when we brought forward ALL options for health care reform… this is what passed unanimously at the Roseau County DFL Convention:
no-fee/no-premium, comprehensive, all-inclusive universal public health care from cradle-to-grave; publicly administered, publicly financed and publicly delivered
The first time single-payer universal health care passed unanimously; but, as the Party hacks dug in, in opposition to single-payer, then the people decided they had nothing to lose so they supported what they really wanted all along--- public health care; and in doing so, got a compromise: support for single-payer.
This is an important lesson and teaches us something about how to struggle for reforms. Don’t begin asking for a compromise because you will get nothing from those whose only goal is maximizing profits--- and campaign contributions.
There is nothing at all vague about what people really want when given every opportunity. Single-payer was always the begrudging second choice when public health care was included. This is supposed to be a democracy. The American people are entitled to the kind of health care system they really want.
There is a political lesson here.
Here in Minnesota, the DFL Party hacks only gave up their opposition to single-payer using all kinds of manipulations and control to allowing single-payer to be considered by state convention delegates after they became aware the popular movement was growing for public health care. The Party hacks hoped to derail the movement for public health care by allowing a vote on single-payer knowing that single-payer would meet its demise in the halls of Congress. In fact, most of Minnesota’s elected DFL politicians have refused to support single-payer mandate from the grassroots.
Now is the time to begin a discussion with the potential to drive a movement for what is really needed: a public health care system--- Everybody in… ALL profiteers out.
It will be the struggle for: no-fee/no-premium, comprehensive, all-inclusive universal public health care from cradle-to-grave; publicly administered, publicly financed and publicly delivered that drives the movement for successful health care reform in this country. Until public health care is placed on the table we will get nothing from Obama and the Democrats. Now is the time to move beyond single-payer universal health care in saying: Everyone in… all the profiteers out; public health care is the real solution.
A movement simply can’t be built fighting for part of the pie when people want, and are entitled to, the entire pie. With single-payer universal health care we only get a small slice of the population in action; not enough involvement for a winning movement.
There is a reason why doctors have come to the forefront in leading the single-payer movement… they want to protect their high incomes.
On the other hand, working people are defending their standard of living, as well as their health, by advocating public health care with: Everybody in… All profiteers--- including doctors with high incomes--- out.
Place the doctors on the public pay-roll just like teachers, professors, postal workers, municipal employees and librarians. Doctors employed by the Indian Health Service are perfectly happy being on the public pay-roll. Plus, we already have a very large Public Health Service employing many doctors… so, doctors on the public pay-roll is nothing new, not even in the United States… the great bastion of free enterprise.
There are no obstacles to public health care that can not be easily overcome--- once we exert the pressure required on the House and Senate; if they can’t be convinced to do what is right according to what the American people want, then the time has come to sweep the entire bunch right out of office with a new broom and a clean sweep.
What we need to win public health care is 800 citizen committees all over the United States clamoring for: Everybody in... profiteers out---
No-fee/no-premium, comprehensive, all-inclusive universal public health care from cradle-to-grave; publicly administered, publicly financed and publicly delivered.
Alan L. Maki
Director of Organizing,
Midwest Casino Workers Organizing Council
58891 County Road 13
Warroad, Minnesota 56763
Phone: 218-386-2432
Cell phone: 651-587-5541
E-mail: amaki000@centurytel.net
Wednesday, May 6, 2009
Language petition sign and pass on
We urge you to take the time to add your support to this important petition.
Please distribute and forward this e-mail widely.
We were #176 to sign
The Midwest Casino Workers Organizing Council supports this petition and we are in full support of removing any and all barriers to revitalizing the Dakota and Ojibwe language in Minnesota. We represent forty-thousand casino workers employed in smoke-filled casinos paid poverty wages who are without any rights in the Indian Gaming Industry. When we win union recognition our contracts will be multi-lingual including in the Dakota and Ojibwe languages.
In solidarity and struggle,
Maggie Bird
President,
Midwest Casino Workers Organizing Council
Alan L. Maki
Director of Organizing,
Midwest Casino Workers Organizing Council
Alan L. Maki
58891 County Road 13
Warroad, Minnesota 56763
Phone: 218-386-2432
Cell phone: 651-587-5541
E-mail: amaki000@centurytel.net
Check out my blog:
Thoughts From Podunk
http://thepodunkblog.blogspot.com/
Subject: Language petition sign and pass on
Date: Wed, 6 May 2009 14:14:30 -0500
From: Henry Flocken
To: Adrian Liberty, Anton Treuer
, Ben Burgess ,
Binesiidagoshin, Bob Jourdain
, , Candi Aubid
, Christine Gale , Dale
Greene Sr., Dana Trickey
,
, David Aubid , David
Treuer, Dennis Jones , Diane
Kingbird, Diane Manuel ,
Don Day, Ed Flocken ,
, Henrietta , James Vukelich
, John Morrin , John
Red Horse, , judy
Fairbanks, Kim Anderson ,
Lee Staples, Lisa Jackson
, Melissa Azhawakibekwe ,
Mike Myers, Mike Swan ,
, ,
Niigaanaanakwad, Niigaanikwe
, Pam Aspinwall ,
, Tabahta Boyd , Theresa
Wilson, Todd Dahlberg
, Val Tanner , Wazhashk
Wiish
Hello Friends & Family
Please take a moment to help support some of the work that I have been
involved in for the past few years. The following is a link to an
online petition that we are trying to get passed around to support
language in the state of Minnesota. A lot of people have worked very
hard to be heard at the state level. Please help us have a strong voice
and take a moment to sign this petition and please feel free to share
with your family and friends that feel would like to support this
effort. Do not delay this legislative session is coming to an end and
we do not have much time to get the word out.
Here is the link for the petition: http://petitionspot.com/petitions/DOLRA
*Please note our new address we have moved*
*Stop by and see our new space*
Miigwech,
Pidamayaye,
Betty Jane Schaaf
*Wicoie Nandagikendan *
*Early Childhood Language *
*Immersion Project*
/Curriculum Specialist/
1433 Franklin Avenue E. Suite 6
Minneapolis Minnesota 55404
Phone (612)721-4246
Fax (612)721-2426
Email Bettyjaneschaaf@yahoo.com
Please distribute and forward this e-mail widely.
We were #176 to sign
The Midwest Casino Workers Organizing Council supports this petition and we are in full support of removing any and all barriers to revitalizing the Dakota and Ojibwe language in Minnesota. We represent forty-thousand casino workers employed in smoke-filled casinos paid poverty wages who are without any rights in the Indian Gaming Industry. When we win union recognition our contracts will be multi-lingual including in the Dakota and Ojibwe languages.
In solidarity and struggle,
Maggie Bird
President,
Midwest Casino Workers Organizing Council
Alan L. Maki
Director of Organizing,
Midwest Casino Workers Organizing Council
Alan L. Maki
58891 County Road 13
Warroad, Minnesota 56763
Phone: 218-386-2432
Cell phone: 651-587-5541
E-mail: amaki000@centurytel.net
Check out my blog:
Thoughts From Podunk
http://thepodunkblog.blogspot.com/
Subject: Language petition sign and pass on
Date: Wed, 6 May 2009 14:14:30 -0500
From: Henry Flocken
To: Adrian Liberty
Binesiidagoshin
Greene Sr.
Treuer
Kingbird
Don Day
Red Horse
Fairbanks
Lee Staples
Mike Myers
Niigaanaanakwad
Wilson
Wiish
Hello Friends & Family
Please take a moment to help support some of the work that I have been
involved in for the past few years. The following is a link to an
online petition that we are trying to get passed around to support
language in the state of Minnesota. A lot of people have worked very
hard to be heard at the state level. Please help us have a strong voice
and take a moment to sign this petition and please feel free to share
with your family and friends that feel would like to support this
effort. Do not delay this legislative session is coming to an end and
we do not have much time to get the word out.
Here is the link for the petition: http://petitionspot.com/petitions/DOLRA
*Please note our new address we have moved*
*Stop by and see our new space*
Miigwech,
Pidamayaye,
Betty Jane Schaaf
*Wicoie Nandagikendan *
*Early Childhood Language *
*Immersion Project*
/Curriculum Specialist/
1433 Franklin Avenue E. Suite 6
Minneapolis Minnesota 55404
Phone (612)721-4246
Fax (612)721-2426
Email Bettyjaneschaaf@yahoo.com
Monday, May 4, 2009
Banned by Obama
I was banned from making the following post on my Blog on the Organize for America website maintained by Barack Obama for the stated purpose of allowing people to share their views and opinions about what needs to be done to set things right in this country.
So much for "change."
Alan L. Maki
Obstreperous citizens' movement demanding fundamental reform
obstreperous
Main Entry: ob·strep·er·ous
Pronunciation: \əb-ˈstre-p(ə-)rəs, äb-\
Function: adjective
Etymology: Latin obstreperus, from obstrepere to clamor against, from ob- against + strepere to make a noise
Date: circa 1600
1 : marked by unruly or aggressive noisiness : clamorous
2 : stubbornly resistant to control : unruly
synonyms see vociferous
— ob·strep·er·ous·ly adverb
— ob·strep·er·ous·ness noun
From a passage in:
Obama's Grade at 100? What About Our Grade?
By: Robert Borosage
http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-entry/2009041829/obamas-grade-100-what-about-our-grade
But what Obama has been missing has been an independent, obstreperous citizens' movement demanding fundamental reform. Roosevelt had the labor movement... socialists and communists challenging him from the left. Johnson had the civil rights movement forcing his hand.
This kind of opposition isn't easy. No president likes to face disruption, particularly from what he would consider his base. There are similar stories told about both Roosevelt and Johnson meeting with leaders of the movements and saying something to the effect of, "I agree with you, now go out there and make me do it." But in reality, Roosevelt wanted to squelch and tame labor. And Johnson repeatedly ordered Hubert Humphrey to bring the civil rights demonstrations to an end, saying that they weren't helping the cause. King got a lot of pressure —to say nothing of wiretaps and FBI investigations—to get back in step.
Yet it is precisely these movements—independent, disruptive, passionate, demanding bolder reform, taking on entrenched powerful interests—that enabled Roosevelt and Johnson to achieve far more than they ever thought possible. The New Deal we remember—Social Security, the Wagner Act, Fair Labor Standards, the SEC and Glass Stegall, progressive taxation—came not in the first 100 days, but as Roosevelt, under pressure from his left, geared up for re-election. The Voting Rights Act surely would not have been passed without Selma and many other sacrifices transforming public opinion to enable Johnson to act.
The absence of these movements on the left opens dangerous space for ersatz populist movements on the right. We saw that with the tea-bag parties that the Fox News Channel huckstered. We've seen conservatives conflate the trillions going to bolster the banks with vital spending in the recovery plan to get the economy going. They are weaving a corrosive message that ties big spending in Washington with Wall Street wastrels. The country would be far better served with an angry populist movement that indicts Wall Street but demands greater support for working families and Main Street. But anyone building that movement will have to understand that they might earn respect, but they won't be loved in the White House.
Robert Borosage
Suggestion: Start a Frank Marshall Davis Roundtable for Change in your neighborhood, workplace or school.
Let's talk about the politics and economics of livelihood.
Two great books by Frank Marshall Davis to get discussion going:
"Singin' the Blues, Memoir of a Black Journalist and Poet"
"Writings of Frank Marshall Davis: A Voice of the Black Press" ed. by John Edgar Tidwell; University Press of Mississippi, 2007. ISBN-10: 1578069211
Obstreperous citizens' movement demanding fundamental reform
Alan L. Maki
Founder,
Frank Marshall Davis Roundtable for Change
So much for "change."
Alan L. Maki
Obstreperous citizens' movement demanding fundamental reform
obstreperous
Main Entry: ob·strep·er·ous
Pronunciation: \əb-ˈstre-p(ə-)rəs, äb-\
Function: adjective
Etymology: Latin obstreperus, from obstrepere to clamor against, from ob- against + strepere to make a noise
Date: circa 1600
1 : marked by unruly or aggressive noisiness : clamorous
2 : stubbornly resistant to control : unruly
synonyms see vociferous
— ob·strep·er·ous·ly adverb
— ob·strep·er·ous·ness noun
From a passage in:
Obama's Grade at 100? What About Our Grade?
By: Robert Borosage
http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-entry/2009041829/obamas-grade-100-what-about-our-grade
But what Obama has been missing has been an independent, obstreperous citizens' movement demanding fundamental reform. Roosevelt had the labor movement... socialists and communists challenging him from the left. Johnson had the civil rights movement forcing his hand.
This kind of opposition isn't easy. No president likes to face disruption, particularly from what he would consider his base. There are similar stories told about both Roosevelt and Johnson meeting with leaders of the movements and saying something to the effect of, "I agree with you, now go out there and make me do it." But in reality, Roosevelt wanted to squelch and tame labor. And Johnson repeatedly ordered Hubert Humphrey to bring the civil rights demonstrations to an end, saying that they weren't helping the cause. King got a lot of pressure —to say nothing of wiretaps and FBI investigations—to get back in step.
Yet it is precisely these movements—independent, disruptive, passionate, demanding bolder reform, taking on entrenched powerful interests—that enabled Roosevelt and Johnson to achieve far more than they ever thought possible. The New Deal we remember—Social Security, the Wagner Act, Fair Labor Standards, the SEC and Glass Stegall, progressive taxation—came not in the first 100 days, but as Roosevelt, under pressure from his left, geared up for re-election. The Voting Rights Act surely would not have been passed without Selma and many other sacrifices transforming public opinion to enable Johnson to act.
The absence of these movements on the left opens dangerous space for ersatz populist movements on the right. We saw that with the tea-bag parties that the Fox News Channel huckstered. We've seen conservatives conflate the trillions going to bolster the banks with vital spending in the recovery plan to get the economy going. They are weaving a corrosive message that ties big spending in Washington with Wall Street wastrels. The country would be far better served with an angry populist movement that indicts Wall Street but demands greater support for working families and Main Street. But anyone building that movement will have to understand that they might earn respect, but they won't be loved in the White House.
Robert Borosage
Suggestion: Start a Frank Marshall Davis Roundtable for Change in your neighborhood, workplace or school.
Let's talk about the politics and economics of livelihood.
Two great books by Frank Marshall Davis to get discussion going:
"Singin' the Blues, Memoir of a Black Journalist and Poet"
"Writings of Frank Marshall Davis: A Voice of the Black Press" ed. by John Edgar Tidwell; University Press of Mississippi, 2007. ISBN-10: 1578069211
Obstreperous citizens' movement demanding fundamental reform
Tell Barack Obama to close down the 800 U.S. military bases on foreign soil dotting the globe, stop wasting our precious resources on wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan and stop subsidizing the Israeli killing machine; and, instead, open up 800 public health care centers spread out across the United States providing free health care for everyone.
Alan L. Maki
Founder,
Frank Marshall Davis Roundtable for Change
Sunday, May 3, 2009
Obstreperous citizens' movement demanding fundamental reform
obstreperous
Main Entry: ob·strep·er·ous
Pronunciation: \əb-ˈstre-p(ə-)rəs, äb-\
Function: adjective
Etymology: Latin obstreperus, from obstrepere to clamor against, from ob- against + strepere to make a noise
Date: circa 1600
1 : marked by unruly or aggressive noisiness : clamorous
2 : stubbornly resistant to control : unruly
synonyms see vociferous
— ob·strep·er·ous·ly adverb
— ob·strep·er·ous·ness noun
Obama's Grade at 100? What About Our Grade?
By: Robert Borosage
http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-entry/2009041829/obamas-grade-100-what-about-our-grade

But what Obama has been missing has been an independent, obstreperous citizens' movement demanding fundamental reform. Roosevelt had the labor movement... socialists and communists challenging him from the left. Johnson had the civil rights movement forcing his hand.
This kind of opposition isn't easy. No president likes to face disruption, particularly from what he would consider his base. There are similar stories told about both Roosevelt and Johnson meeting with leaders of the movements and saying something to the effect of, "I agree with you, now go out there and make me do it." But in reality, Roosevelt wanted to squelch Long and tame labor. And Johnson repeatedly ordered Hubert Humphrey to bring the civil rights demonstrations to an end, saying that they weren't helping the cause. King got a lot of pressure —to say nothing of wiretaps and FBI investigations—to get back in step.
Yet it is precisely these movements—independent, disruptive, passionate, demanding bolder reform, taking on entrenched powerful interests—that enabled Roosevelt and Johnson to achieve far more than they ever thought possible. The New Deal we remember—Social Security, the Wagner Act, Fair Labor Standards, the SEC and Glass Stegall, progressive taxation—came not in the first 100 days, but as Roosevelt, under pressure from his left, geared up for re-election. The Voting Rights Act surely would not have been passed without Selma and many other sacrifices transforming public opinion to enable Johnson to act.
The absence of these movements on the left opens dangerous space for ersatz populist movements on the right. We saw that with the tea-bag parties that the Fox News Channel huckstered. We've seen conservatives conflate the trillions going to bolster the banks with vital spending in the recovery plan to get the economy going. They are weaving a corrosive message that ties big spending in Washington with Wall Street wastrels. The country would be far better served with an angry populist movement that indicts Wall Street but demands greater support for working families and Main Street. But anyone building that movement will have to understand that they might earn respect, but they won't be loved in the White House.
Robert Borosage
Sunday, April 26, 2009
At what point do human priorities take precedence over popularity polls?
In my previous post I concluded by asking this question:
Yesterday I received an e-mail from Becky Spilde in Madison, Wisconsin asking me why I didn't answer my own question.
I was thinking about this all morning and then I got a call from a peace activist friend who lives near Hancock, Michigan--- Mike Salmi. He asked me the same thing.
Here in the United States human priorities will never take precedence over popularity polls until people are fighting for the things they require to live and make life better and these battles become so overbearing, no one, including the politicians and the media, can ignore the issues and the problems.
Its that old saying: The wheel squeaking the loudest gets the grease.
This is very sad, especially given the fact Barack Obama has taken people suffering and hurting the worst for granted and played people for fools and suckers with all of his talk about "hope" and "change" knowing full well what people hurting and suffering would take those words to mean.
Obama is not just a flim-flam man and opportunist; he is worse. Obama is just plain mean and rotten.
I had a lot of e-mail yesterday after being on Mitch Berg's radio program. Democrats got really riled up because I told Mitch Berg that I couldn't care less if conservatives forced Obama from office or limited him to one term... my statement was something like, "I hope you get Obama out; he is no darn good."
I meant just what I said. Let Obama and the Democrats and Republicans fight among themselves; what do I care, none of them are any darn good. All of them read the popularity polls... as long as the numbers in these polls favor them they couldn't care less if people die in wars or go to school hungry or go without access to health care.
A kid going to school hungry means absolutely nothing to any Democrats or Republicans--- unless people start getting fed up and start becoming very vocal in insisting kids receive a good breakfast and lunch in school for free. When politicians don't respond, their numbers in popularity polls begin to drop, and then they are forced to act if they want to remain in office.
Most of the problems people are experiencing could be solved relatively easily if these politicians really cared.
As I have repeatedly pointed out: Polls don't die in wars; people do.
Caring politicians would say the heck with polls, stop the wars.
To the corrupt politicians in the Democratic and Republican parties they don't care about people dying in their dirty imperialist wars as long as their numbers are high in the popularity polls. The only time they will care about people dying in wars is when their numbers start to drop in the popularity polls... this is the kind of sick capitalist society we are living in.
After voicing my views on Mitch Berg's conservative radio program, a DFL state representative called me all irate and fuming... she said, "How dare you lump us together with the Republicans and tell this right-wing talk show host you hope he and his friends drive Barack Obama from office after everything we do for people."
I asked her, "What exactly have you done for people? What have you done for Minnesota's 40,000 casino workers you are forcing to work in smoke-filled casinos at poverty..." And before I could continue with saying "wages," she slammed down the phone and hung up.
This state representative was angered because I asked her to state what the MNDFL was doing for people. She knew the answer was "nothing."
When I see people making statements like this:
It makes me sick.
The jerk who said this has his head up some dumb donkey's ass.
Ask a parent who is forced to send their kid to school hungry what kind of "friend" they have in Barack Obama.
Ask someone losing their home to foreclosure how good a "friend" they have in Barack Obama.
Ask the family of some GI returning "home" stuffed in a body-bag before being placed in a flag-draped coffin to be buried what kind of "friend" they have in Barack Obama.
Ask the thousands of autoworkers losing their jobs and being forced to have their contracts shredded what kind of "friend" they have in Barack Obama.
Ask people in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan whose loved ones are being killed everyday what kind of "friend" they have in Barack Obama.
I wonder why none of the pollsters ever take a poll of just the people hurt and suffering to find out how popular politicians are with them?
As long as Barack Obama is popular in the polls he isn't going to lift a finger to help working people. Why should he? He is Wall Street's friend... working people have never had any friends on Wall Street.
Like I told Mitch Berg... Barack Obama is no better than George Bush.
Something to think about.
Alan L. Maki
At what point do human priorities take precedence over popularity polls?
Yesterday I received an e-mail from Becky Spilde in Madison, Wisconsin asking me why I didn't answer my own question.
I was thinking about this all morning and then I got a call from a peace activist friend who lives near Hancock, Michigan--- Mike Salmi. He asked me the same thing.
Here in the United States human priorities will never take precedence over popularity polls until people are fighting for the things they require to live and make life better and these battles become so overbearing, no one, including the politicians and the media, can ignore the issues and the problems.
Its that old saying: The wheel squeaking the loudest gets the grease.
This is very sad, especially given the fact Barack Obama has taken people suffering and hurting the worst for granted and played people for fools and suckers with all of his talk about "hope" and "change" knowing full well what people hurting and suffering would take those words to mean.
Obama is not just a flim-flam man and opportunist; he is worse. Obama is just plain mean and rotten.
I had a lot of e-mail yesterday after being on Mitch Berg's radio program. Democrats got really riled up because I told Mitch Berg that I couldn't care less if conservatives forced Obama from office or limited him to one term... my statement was something like, "I hope you get Obama out; he is no darn good."
I meant just what I said. Let Obama and the Democrats and Republicans fight among themselves; what do I care, none of them are any darn good. All of them read the popularity polls... as long as the numbers in these polls favor them they couldn't care less if people die in wars or go to school hungry or go without access to health care.
A kid going to school hungry means absolutely nothing to any Democrats or Republicans--- unless people start getting fed up and start becoming very vocal in insisting kids receive a good breakfast and lunch in school for free. When politicians don't respond, their numbers in popularity polls begin to drop, and then they are forced to act if they want to remain in office.
Most of the problems people are experiencing could be solved relatively easily if these politicians really cared.
As I have repeatedly pointed out: Polls don't die in wars; people do.
Caring politicians would say the heck with polls, stop the wars.
To the corrupt politicians in the Democratic and Republican parties they don't care about people dying in their dirty imperialist wars as long as their numbers are high in the popularity polls. The only time they will care about people dying in wars is when their numbers start to drop in the popularity polls... this is the kind of sick capitalist society we are living in.
After voicing my views on Mitch Berg's conservative radio program, a DFL state representative called me all irate and fuming... she said, "How dare you lump us together with the Republicans and tell this right-wing talk show host you hope he and his friends drive Barack Obama from office after everything we do for people."
I asked her, "What exactly have you done for people? What have you done for Minnesota's 40,000 casino workers you are forcing to work in smoke-filled casinos at poverty..." And before I could continue with saying "wages," she slammed down the phone and hung up.
This state representative was angered because I asked her to state what the MNDFL was doing for people. She knew the answer was "nothing."
When I see people making statements like this:
"Labor and its allies now have a friend, a people's advocate" in the White House. ... it is obvious that the Obama administration represents a qualitative break with rightwing extremism and free-market fundamentalism. Not to see this, not to acknowledge this, not to welcome this, no matter whether you live in or outside U.S. borders, is to act like the ostrich that sticks its head in the sand and misses what is happening on the ground. "
It makes me sick.
The jerk who said this has his head up some dumb donkey's ass.
Ask a parent who is forced to send their kid to school hungry what kind of "friend" they have in Barack Obama.
Ask someone losing their home to foreclosure how good a "friend" they have in Barack Obama.
Ask the family of some GI returning "home" stuffed in a body-bag before being placed in a flag-draped coffin to be buried what kind of "friend" they have in Barack Obama.
Ask the thousands of autoworkers losing their jobs and being forced to have their contracts shredded what kind of "friend" they have in Barack Obama.
Ask people in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan whose loved ones are being killed everyday what kind of "friend" they have in Barack Obama.
I wonder why none of the pollsters ever take a poll of just the people hurt and suffering to find out how popular politicians are with them?
As long as Barack Obama is popular in the polls he isn't going to lift a finger to help working people. Why should he? He is Wall Street's friend... working people have never had any friends on Wall Street.
Like I told Mitch Berg... Barack Obama is no better than George Bush.
Something to think about.
Alan L. Maki
Thursday, April 23, 2009
AP Poll: Americans high on Obama, direction of US
Based on conversations with people I talk to I would say this poll is very accurate.
However, one important thing has to be noted: President Barack Obama has yet to receive organized criticism from the left--- those who are being hurt by his policies.
All organized criticism of Obama has come from the right; and make no mistake, Obama is a very conservative and right-wing President--- there is nothing in the least liberal, progressive or left about him no matter how many times Rush Limbaugh or Shawn Hannity call him a "socialist." Obama is clearly Wall Street's man brought in to do a very dirty job which will most likely lead to him being a one-term (or less) President.
Once the people who are having the problems, as cited below, begin to organize Obama will take severe criticism from the left; and the resulting mass movements of the people are likely to have the effect of a new broom sweeping Obama from public office and exposing the Democrats for what they really are: part of the way big-business dominates, manipulates and controls the American people in order to keep Wall Streets profits flowing into the coffers of parasitic vultures who have the high-sounding names of banker, investor and industrialist; what they do in life is live off of the labor of the working class because it is labor, with no small amount of help from Mother Nature, that creates all wealth. We work; they profit. Working people die in their wars; they profit.
There are certain things that no poll can ever consider and this one has not:
- The pain and anguish of those experiencing the death of loved ones dying in wars.
- The pain associated with being unemployed.
- The pain of being foreclosed and evicted from one's home.
- The pain of being homeless.
- The pain of hunger.
- The suffering from not having access to health care.
- The feeling which comes from being illiterate.
- Living in communities where the air, water and land is constantly being contaminated and polluted.
- The deep despair which sets in when looking about one's own community and seeing all of this.
What this poll does not tell us is how many people are living like this--- and that number is in the tens of millions... billions world-wide.
For these people to have any improvement in their lives they will, out of necessity, have to turn left for solutions to their problems.
If these people decide to throw in their lot with the teabaggers there problems will only intensify and worsen--- for some, perhaps many--- without any direction from the left--- it will probably be: live and learn.
It is to Obama's advantage to buy off as much of the middle class liberals, progressives and the left as he can in order to thwart grassroots and rank-and-file initiatives while keeping people confused by calling for hope based upon creating false illusions that the "bottom is in sight."
More and more people are beginning to understand that capitalism is on the skids to oblivion and we are all being dragged in the dark down the rough, bumpy and treacherous road to perdition and there are few exits except those to the left.
Working people need to consider--- than bring forward--- a serious progressive left-wing alternative which includes the socialist solution.
We are not talking about Barack Obama's political future and his survival; we are talking about working people and their families surviving--- something Barack Obama is not concerned with.
We need a people's agenda pushed by a people's lobby that is the voice and expression of a massive, united and militant all-people's front for real change.
No poll has ever felt the pains of hunger or the pains of war; nor has any poll ever put food on the family table, stopped unjust imperialist wars or put people back to work--- working class movements based upon unity and militant, united struggle have.
Any nation that can finance and fund more than 800 foreign military bases dotting the globe as the United States does, certainly has the wealth to do much better than it is by its own people.
What we need instead of 800 U.S. military bases on foreign soil is 800 public health care centers scattered across the United States strategically placed to bring free health care to everyone.
You know, just to show how really screwed up Barack Obama's priorities really are (as if fighting three imperialist wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan isn't enough to demonstrate his criminal uncaring incompetence); Barack Obama wants to bring broadband communications into every home instead of making sure every family has access to health care first. If this doesn't reflect Obama's screwed up priorities I don't know what does.
Something to think about around the dinner table while discussing this poll...
At what point do human priorities take precedence over popularity polls?
Alan L. Maki
http://apnews.myway.com//article/20090423/D97O490O0.html
Apr 23, 6:35 AM (ET)
By RON FOURNIER and TREVOR TOMPSON
WASHINGTON (AP) - For the first time in years, more Americans than not say the country is headed in the right direction, a sign that Barack Obama has used the first 100 days of his presidency to lift the public's mood and inspire hopes for a brighter future.
Intensely worried about their personal finances and medical expenses, Americans nonetheless appear realistic about the time Obama might need to turn things around, according to an Associated Press-GfK poll. It shows most Americans consider their new president to be a strong, ethical and empathetic leader who is working to change Washington.
Nobody knows how long the honeymoon will last, but Obama has clearly transformed the yes-we-can spirit of his candidacy into a tool of governance. His ability to inspire confidence - Obama's second book is titled "The Audacity of Hope" - has thus far buffered the president against the harsh political realities of two wars, a global economic meltdown and countless domestic challenges.
"He presents a very positive outlook," said Cheryl Wetherington, 35, an independent voter who runs a chocolate shop in Gardner, Kan. "He's very well-spoken and very vocal about what direction should be taken."
Other AP-GfK findings could signal trouble for Obama:
_While there is evidence that people feel more optimistic about the economy, 65 percent said it's difficult for them and their families to get ahead. More than one-third know of a family member who recently lost a job.
_More than 90 percent of Americans consider the economy an important issue, the highest ever in AP polling.
_Nearly 80 percent believe that the rising federal debt will hurt future generations, and Obama is getting mixed reviews at best for his handling of the issue.
And yet, the percentage of Americans saying the country is headed in the right direction rose to 48 percent, up from 40 percent in February. Forty-four percent say the nation is on the wrong track.
Not since January 2004, shortly after the capture of former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein, has an AP survey found more "right direction" than "wrong direction" respondents. The burst of optimism didn't last long in 2004.
And it doesn't happen much.
Other than that blip five years ago, pessimism has trumped optimism in media polls since shortly after the invasion of Iraq in the spring of 2003.
The "right track" number topped "wrong direction" for a few months after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, according to non-AP media polls, and for several months late in the Clinton administration.
So far, Obama has defied the odds by producing a sustained trend toward optimism. It began with his election.
In October 2008, just 17 percent said the country was headed in the right direction. After his victory, that jumped to 36 percent. It dipped a bit in December but returned to 35 percent around the time of his inauguration and has headed upward since.
Obama is keenly aware that his political prospects are directly linked to such numbers. If at the end of his term the public is no more assured that Washington is competent and accountable and that the nation is at least on the right track, his re-election prospects will be doubtful.
Obama himself has conceded as much.
"I will be held accountable," he said a few weeks into his presidency. "You know, I've got four years. ... If I don't have this done in three years, then there's going to be a one-term proposition."
The AP-GfK poll suggests that 64 percent of the public approves of Obama's job performance, down just slightly from 67 percent in February. President George W. Bush's approval ratings hovered in the high 50s after his first 100 days in office.
But Obama has become a polarizing figure, with just 24 percent of Republicans approving of his performance - down from 33 percent in February. Obama campaigned on a promise to end the party-first mind-set that breeds gridlock in Washington.
Most Americans say it's too soon to tell whether he's delivered on his promise to change Washington. But twice as many say Obama is living up to his promises as those who say he's not (30 percent to 15 percent).
Worries about losing their jobs, facing major medical expenses, seeing investments dive and paying their bills remain high among Americans, the poll shows, just slightly lower than two months ago.
Still, seven in 10 Americans say it is reasonable to expect it to take longer than a year to see the results of Obama's economic policies.
Just as many people say Obama understands the concerns of ordinary Americans and cares about "people like you."
That's a sharp contrast to Bush, who won re-election in 2004 despite the fact that 54 percent of voters on that Election Day said he cared more about large corporations than ordinary Americans.
A majority of Americans believe the Obama administration is following higher ethical standards than the Bush administration.
Most also say he's changing things about the right amount and at the right speed. But nearly a third say he's trying to change too many things too quickly.
Obama is not the first president who sought to tap the deep well of American optimism - the never-say-die spirit that Americans like to see in themselves.
Even as he briefly closed the nation's banks, Franklin Delano Roosevelt spoke in the first days of his presidency of the "confidence and courage" needed to fix the U.S. economy. "Together we cannot fail," he declared.
In the malaise following Jimmy Carter's presidency, Ronald Reagan reminded people that America has always seen itself as a "shining city upon a hill," as one of its earliest leaders, John Winthrop, put it.
Obama started his presidency on a dour note, describing the U.S. economy in nearly apocalyptic terms for weeks as he pushed his $787 billion stimulus plan through Congress.
He turned the page in late February, telling a joint session of Congress and a television audience of millions: "We will rebuild. We will recover, and the United States of America will emerge stronger than before."
Of those who say the country is on the right track in the AP-GfK poll, 73 percent are Democrats, 17 percent are independents and 10 percent are Republicans.
"When Obama came in," said D.T. Brown, 39, a Mount Vernon, Ill., radio show host who voted against Obama, "it was just a breath of fresh air."
Others said their newfound optimism had nothing to do with Obama, but rather with an era of personal responsibility they believe has come with the economic meltdown.
"I think people are beginning to turn in that direction and realize that there's not always going to be somebody to catch them when things fall down," said Dwight Hageman, 66, a retired welder from Newberg, Ore., who voted against Obama.
The AP-GfK Poll was conducted April 16-20 by GfK Roper Public Affairs and Media. It involved telephone interviews on landline and cell phones with 1,000 adults nationwide. The margin of sampling error is plus or minus 3.1 percentage points.
---
Associated Press News Survey Specialist Dennis Junius and AP writer Christine Simmons contributed to this report.
---
On the Net:
Poll site: http://www.ap-gfkpoll.com
However, one important thing has to be noted: President Barack Obama has yet to receive organized criticism from the left--- those who are being hurt by his policies.
All organized criticism of Obama has come from the right; and make no mistake, Obama is a very conservative and right-wing President--- there is nothing in the least liberal, progressive or left about him no matter how many times Rush Limbaugh or Shawn Hannity call him a "socialist." Obama is clearly Wall Street's man brought in to do a very dirty job which will most likely lead to him being a one-term (or less) President.
Once the people who are having the problems, as cited below, begin to organize Obama will take severe criticism from the left; and the resulting mass movements of the people are likely to have the effect of a new broom sweeping Obama from public office and exposing the Democrats for what they really are: part of the way big-business dominates, manipulates and controls the American people in order to keep Wall Streets profits flowing into the coffers of parasitic vultures who have the high-sounding names of banker, investor and industrialist; what they do in life is live off of the labor of the working class because it is labor, with no small amount of help from Mother Nature, that creates all wealth. We work; they profit. Working people die in their wars; they profit.
There are certain things that no poll can ever consider and this one has not:
- The pain and anguish of those experiencing the death of loved ones dying in wars.
- The pain associated with being unemployed.
- The pain of being foreclosed and evicted from one's home.
- The pain of being homeless.
- The pain of hunger.
- The suffering from not having access to health care.
- The feeling which comes from being illiterate.
- Living in communities where the air, water and land is constantly being contaminated and polluted.
- The deep despair which sets in when looking about one's own community and seeing all of this.
What this poll does not tell us is how many people are living like this--- and that number is in the tens of millions... billions world-wide.
For these people to have any improvement in their lives they will, out of necessity, have to turn left for solutions to their problems.
If these people decide to throw in their lot with the teabaggers there problems will only intensify and worsen--- for some, perhaps many--- without any direction from the left--- it will probably be: live and learn.
It is to Obama's advantage to buy off as much of the middle class liberals, progressives and the left as he can in order to thwart grassroots and rank-and-file initiatives while keeping people confused by calling for hope based upon creating false illusions that the "bottom is in sight."
More and more people are beginning to understand that capitalism is on the skids to oblivion and we are all being dragged in the dark down the rough, bumpy and treacherous road to perdition and there are few exits except those to the left.
Working people need to consider--- than bring forward--- a serious progressive left-wing alternative which includes the socialist solution.
We are not talking about Barack Obama's political future and his survival; we are talking about working people and their families surviving--- something Barack Obama is not concerned with.
We need a people's agenda pushed by a people's lobby that is the voice and expression of a massive, united and militant all-people's front for real change.
No poll has ever felt the pains of hunger or the pains of war; nor has any poll ever put food on the family table, stopped unjust imperialist wars or put people back to work--- working class movements based upon unity and militant, united struggle have.
Any nation that can finance and fund more than 800 foreign military bases dotting the globe as the United States does, certainly has the wealth to do much better than it is by its own people.
What we need instead of 800 U.S. military bases on foreign soil is 800 public health care centers scattered across the United States strategically placed to bring free health care to everyone.
You know, just to show how really screwed up Barack Obama's priorities really are (as if fighting three imperialist wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan isn't enough to demonstrate his criminal uncaring incompetence); Barack Obama wants to bring broadband communications into every home instead of making sure every family has access to health care first. If this doesn't reflect Obama's screwed up priorities I don't know what does.
Something to think about around the dinner table while discussing this poll...
At what point do human priorities take precedence over popularity polls?
Alan L. Maki
http://apnews.myway.com//article/20090423/D97O490O0.html
Apr 23, 6:35 AM (ET)
By RON FOURNIER and TREVOR TOMPSON
WASHINGTON (AP) - For the first time in years, more Americans than not say the country is headed in the right direction, a sign that Barack Obama has used the first 100 days of his presidency to lift the public's mood and inspire hopes for a brighter future.
Intensely worried about their personal finances and medical expenses, Americans nonetheless appear realistic about the time Obama might need to turn things around, according to an Associated Press-GfK poll. It shows most Americans consider their new president to be a strong, ethical and empathetic leader who is working to change Washington.
Nobody knows how long the honeymoon will last, but Obama has clearly transformed the yes-we-can spirit of his candidacy into a tool of governance. His ability to inspire confidence - Obama's second book is titled "The Audacity of Hope" - has thus far buffered the president against the harsh political realities of two wars, a global economic meltdown and countless domestic challenges.
"He presents a very positive outlook," said Cheryl Wetherington, 35, an independent voter who runs a chocolate shop in Gardner, Kan. "He's very well-spoken and very vocal about what direction should be taken."
Other AP-GfK findings could signal trouble for Obama:
_While there is evidence that people feel more optimistic about the economy, 65 percent said it's difficult for them and their families to get ahead. More than one-third know of a family member who recently lost a job.
_More than 90 percent of Americans consider the economy an important issue, the highest ever in AP polling.
_Nearly 80 percent believe that the rising federal debt will hurt future generations, and Obama is getting mixed reviews at best for his handling of the issue.
And yet, the percentage of Americans saying the country is headed in the right direction rose to 48 percent, up from 40 percent in February. Forty-four percent say the nation is on the wrong track.
Not since January 2004, shortly after the capture of former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein, has an AP survey found more "right direction" than "wrong direction" respondents. The burst of optimism didn't last long in 2004.
And it doesn't happen much.
Other than that blip five years ago, pessimism has trumped optimism in media polls since shortly after the invasion of Iraq in the spring of 2003.
The "right track" number topped "wrong direction" for a few months after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, according to non-AP media polls, and for several months late in the Clinton administration.
So far, Obama has defied the odds by producing a sustained trend toward optimism. It began with his election.
In October 2008, just 17 percent said the country was headed in the right direction. After his victory, that jumped to 36 percent. It dipped a bit in December but returned to 35 percent around the time of his inauguration and has headed upward since.
Obama is keenly aware that his political prospects are directly linked to such numbers. If at the end of his term the public is no more assured that Washington is competent and accountable and that the nation is at least on the right track, his re-election prospects will be doubtful.
Obama himself has conceded as much.
"I will be held accountable," he said a few weeks into his presidency. "You know, I've got four years. ... If I don't have this done in three years, then there's going to be a one-term proposition."
The AP-GfK poll suggests that 64 percent of the public approves of Obama's job performance, down just slightly from 67 percent in February. President George W. Bush's approval ratings hovered in the high 50s after his first 100 days in office.
But Obama has become a polarizing figure, with just 24 percent of Republicans approving of his performance - down from 33 percent in February. Obama campaigned on a promise to end the party-first mind-set that breeds gridlock in Washington.
Most Americans say it's too soon to tell whether he's delivered on his promise to change Washington. But twice as many say Obama is living up to his promises as those who say he's not (30 percent to 15 percent).
Worries about losing their jobs, facing major medical expenses, seeing investments dive and paying their bills remain high among Americans, the poll shows, just slightly lower than two months ago.
Still, seven in 10 Americans say it is reasonable to expect it to take longer than a year to see the results of Obama's economic policies.
Just as many people say Obama understands the concerns of ordinary Americans and cares about "people like you."
That's a sharp contrast to Bush, who won re-election in 2004 despite the fact that 54 percent of voters on that Election Day said he cared more about large corporations than ordinary Americans.
A majority of Americans believe the Obama administration is following higher ethical standards than the Bush administration.
Most also say he's changing things about the right amount and at the right speed. But nearly a third say he's trying to change too many things too quickly.
Obama is not the first president who sought to tap the deep well of American optimism - the never-say-die spirit that Americans like to see in themselves.
Even as he briefly closed the nation's banks, Franklin Delano Roosevelt spoke in the first days of his presidency of the "confidence and courage" needed to fix the U.S. economy. "Together we cannot fail," he declared.
In the malaise following Jimmy Carter's presidency, Ronald Reagan reminded people that America has always seen itself as a "shining city upon a hill," as one of its earliest leaders, John Winthrop, put it.
Obama started his presidency on a dour note, describing the U.S. economy in nearly apocalyptic terms for weeks as he pushed his $787 billion stimulus plan through Congress.
He turned the page in late February, telling a joint session of Congress and a television audience of millions: "We will rebuild. We will recover, and the United States of America will emerge stronger than before."
Of those who say the country is on the right track in the AP-GfK poll, 73 percent are Democrats, 17 percent are independents and 10 percent are Republicans.
"When Obama came in," said D.T. Brown, 39, a Mount Vernon, Ill., radio show host who voted against Obama, "it was just a breath of fresh air."
Others said their newfound optimism had nothing to do with Obama, but rather with an era of personal responsibility they believe has come with the economic meltdown.
"I think people are beginning to turn in that direction and realize that there's not always going to be somebody to catch them when things fall down," said Dwight Hageman, 66, a retired welder from Newberg, Ore., who voted against Obama.
The AP-GfK Poll was conducted April 16-20 by GfK Roper Public Affairs and Media. It involved telephone interviews on landline and cell phones with 1,000 adults nationwide. The margin of sampling error is plus or minus 3.1 percentage points.
---
Associated Press News Survey Specialist Dennis Junius and AP writer Christine Simmons contributed to this report.
---
On the Net:
Poll site: http://www.ap-gfkpoll.com
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
Indian Health Summit
-----Original Message-----
From: Alan Maki [mailto:amaki000@centurytel.net]
Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 2009 8:47 PM
To:
Joan Kim
Phone: 301-897-2789 x117
Fax: 301-897-9587
Email: jkim@thehillgroup.com or
Kimi De León
Phone: 301-897-2789 x132
Fax: 301-897-9587
Email: kdeleon@thehillgroup.com
Cc: 'Jim Hart'; 'John Kolstad'; 'Kip Sullivan'; 'Carl Levin'; 'Sen.Jim Carlson'; 'rep.bill.hilty@house.mn'; 'rep.tom.anzelc@house.mn'; 'rep.tom.Rukavina@house.mn'; 'rep.tony.sertich@house.mn'; 'ddepass@startribune.com'; 'mmiron@bemidjipioneer.com'; 'bswenson@bemidjipioneer.com'; 'Chris Spotted Eagle'; 'jgoldstein@americanrightsatwork.org'; 'teresa_detrempe@klobuchar.senate.gov'; 'peter.erlinder@wmitchell.edu'; 'peter.makowski@mail.house.gov'; 'esquincle@verizon.net'; 'Walter Tillow'; 'nursenpo@gmail.com'; 'Steve Early'; 'Joshua Frank'; 'Ta, Minh'; 'Rhoda Gilman'; 'David Shove'; 'ken nash'; 'Ken Pentel'; 'WCS-A@yahoogroups.com'; 'MARKOWIT@history.rutgers.edu'; 'tdennis@gfherald.com'; 'Myers, John'; 'loneagle@paulbunyan.net'; 'Thomas Kurhajetz'; 'mhoney@u.washington.edu'; 'moderator@portside.org'; 'debssoc@sbcglobal.net'; 'Tom Meersman'; 'peterb3121@hotmail.com'; 'laurel1@dailyjournal-ifalls.com'; 'jscannel@aflcio.org'; 'rgettel@uaw.net'; 'gdubovich@usw.org'; 'info@jamesmayer.org'; 'mzweig@notes.cc.sunysb.edu'; 'rachleff@macalester.edu'; 'advocate@stpaulunions.org'; 'elizabeth_reed@levin.senate.gov'; 'Alan Uhl'; 'Charles Underwood'
Subject...
Re: Question on Indian Health Summit
To whom it may concern;
Could you tell me if there will be a discussion at the Indian Health Summit--- July 7-9, 2009 in Denver, Colorado--- concerning the issue of casino workers in the Indian Gaming Industry and the impact to their health of second hand smoke in their workplaces?
Link: http://conferences.thehillgroup.com/healthsummit/contact.html
Could you advise me if there have been any discussions about this with the American Cancer Society and/or the Heart and Lung Foundation?
I am very concerned since I find nothing on this important topic among any of the materials you are distributing for the Indian Health Summit.
With health care costs become an important topic for discussion it would seem that this issue would at least merit some kind of mention at an Indian Health Summit considering the large number of Native Americans employed in the Indian Gaming Industry.
Perhaps you would be interested in having me address one of the plenary sessions since this topic has not been considered previously.
I would point out that I have contacted my of the local offices and administrators of the Indian Health Services concerning this issue and no one will speak to me.
With the Indian Health Services being part of the Department of Interior and associated with the Bureau of Indian Affairs, it would only seem logical that no further casino “Compacts” would be approved unless they contain provisions banning and prohibiting smoking.
I would also suggest that the Indian Health Services insist that all existing “Compacts” be re-opened so a ban and prohibition on smoking can be inserted into them.
“Compacts” are nothing more than contracts and the Obama Administration has seen fit to insist that previously negotiated contracts with labor unions be re-negotiated so there is definitely a precedent that has been established for doing this and I am sure you will agree with me that there could not be a better argument made for renegotiating these “Compacts” than to protect the health of hundreds of thousands of workers employed in these casinos who, in addition to working in these smoke-filled working environments are not protected under any state or federal labor laws, which makes this problem of being employed in a work environment detrimental to human health even a more serious concern.
Perhaps the Indian Health Services could make a recommendation to the Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Secretary of the Department of Interior that the Secretary of Labor, Hilda Solis, becomes involved so that the protection of casino workers’ rights under all state and federal labor laws protecting all other workers in the United States be included at the time the Compacts are re-opened to protect the health of casino workers.
If you have any doubts second-hand smoke contributes to an unhealthy work environment and that second-hand smoke is recognized as a leading contributor to a variety of cancers and heart and lung diseases please do not hesitate to request additional information. I will be more than happy to attend your Indian Health Care Summit with the necessary resource materials.
With some two-million workers now employed in the Indian Gaming Industry we want to make sure everything possible is being done to protect the health and well-being of these workers.
If I have addressed this letter to the wrong persons, would you please provide me with the name of the proper person/s and department/s this letter should be sent to.
If you think this issue concerning the impact of second-hand smoke on the health of casino workers is not significant enough to be discussed at the Indian Health Summit would you be so kind as to advise me of your decision and how it was reached?
Thanking you in advance for your timely consideration;
Alan L. Maki
Director of Organizing,
Midwest Casino Workers Organizing Council
58891 County Road 13
Warroad, Minnesota 56763
Phone: 218-386-2432
Cell phone: 651-587-5541
E-mail: amaki000@centurytel.net
Check out my blog:
Thoughts From Podunk
http://thepodunkblog.blogspot.com/
Cc: Maggie Bird
President,
Midwest Casino Workers Organizing Council
From: Alan Maki [mailto:amaki000@centurytel.net]
Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 2009 8:47 PM
To:
Joan Kim
Phone: 301-897-2789 x117
Fax: 301-897-9587
Email: jkim@thehillgroup.com or
Kimi De León
Phone: 301-897-2789 x132
Fax: 301-897-9587
Email: kdeleon@thehillgroup.com
Cc: 'Jim Hart'; 'John Kolstad'; 'Kip Sullivan'; 'Carl Levin'; 'Sen.Jim Carlson'; 'rep.bill.hilty@house.mn'; 'rep.tom.anzelc@house.mn'; 'rep.tom.Rukavina@house.mn'; 'rep.tony.sertich@house.mn'; 'ddepass@startribune.com'; 'mmiron@bemidjipioneer.com'; 'bswenson@bemidjipioneer.com'; 'Chris Spotted Eagle'; 'jgoldstein@americanrightsatwork.org'; 'teresa_detrempe@klobuchar.senate.gov'; 'peter.erlinder@wmitchell.edu'; 'peter.makowski@mail.house.gov'; 'esquincle@verizon.net'; 'Walter Tillow'; 'nursenpo@gmail.com'; 'Steve Early'; 'Joshua Frank'; 'Ta, Minh'; 'Rhoda Gilman'; 'David Shove'; 'ken nash'; 'Ken Pentel'; 'WCS-A@yahoogroups.com'; 'MARKOWIT@history.rutgers.edu'; 'tdennis@gfherald.com'; 'Myers, John'; 'loneagle@paulbunyan.net'; 'Thomas Kurhajetz'; 'mhoney@u.washington.edu'; 'moderator@portside.org'; 'debssoc@sbcglobal.net'; 'Tom Meersman'; 'peterb3121@hotmail.com'; 'laurel1@dailyjournal-ifalls.com'; 'jscannel@aflcio.org'; 'rgettel@uaw.net'; 'gdubovich@usw.org'; 'info@jamesmayer.org'; 'mzweig@notes.cc.sunysb.edu'; 'rachleff@macalester.edu'; 'advocate@stpaulunions.org'; 'elizabeth_reed@levin.senate.gov'; 'Alan Uhl'; 'Charles Underwood'
Subject...
Re: Question on Indian Health Summit
To whom it may concern;
Could you tell me if there will be a discussion at the Indian Health Summit--- July 7-9, 2009 in Denver, Colorado--- concerning the issue of casino workers in the Indian Gaming Industry and the impact to their health of second hand smoke in their workplaces?
Link: http://conferences.thehillgroup.com/healthsummit/contact.html
Could you advise me if there have been any discussions about this with the American Cancer Society and/or the Heart and Lung Foundation?
I am very concerned since I find nothing on this important topic among any of the materials you are distributing for the Indian Health Summit.
With health care costs become an important topic for discussion it would seem that this issue would at least merit some kind of mention at an Indian Health Summit considering the large number of Native Americans employed in the Indian Gaming Industry.
Perhaps you would be interested in having me address one of the plenary sessions since this topic has not been considered previously.
I would point out that I have contacted my of the local offices and administrators of the Indian Health Services concerning this issue and no one will speak to me.
With the Indian Health Services being part of the Department of Interior and associated with the Bureau of Indian Affairs, it would only seem logical that no further casino “Compacts” would be approved unless they contain provisions banning and prohibiting smoking.
I would also suggest that the Indian Health Services insist that all existing “Compacts” be re-opened so a ban and prohibition on smoking can be inserted into them.
“Compacts” are nothing more than contracts and the Obama Administration has seen fit to insist that previously negotiated contracts with labor unions be re-negotiated so there is definitely a precedent that has been established for doing this and I am sure you will agree with me that there could not be a better argument made for renegotiating these “Compacts” than to protect the health of hundreds of thousands of workers employed in these casinos who, in addition to working in these smoke-filled working environments are not protected under any state or federal labor laws, which makes this problem of being employed in a work environment detrimental to human health even a more serious concern.
Perhaps the Indian Health Services could make a recommendation to the Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Secretary of the Department of Interior that the Secretary of Labor, Hilda Solis, becomes involved so that the protection of casino workers’ rights under all state and federal labor laws protecting all other workers in the United States be included at the time the Compacts are re-opened to protect the health of casino workers.
If you have any doubts second-hand smoke contributes to an unhealthy work environment and that second-hand smoke is recognized as a leading contributor to a variety of cancers and heart and lung diseases please do not hesitate to request additional information. I will be more than happy to attend your Indian Health Care Summit with the necessary resource materials.
With some two-million workers now employed in the Indian Gaming Industry we want to make sure everything possible is being done to protect the health and well-being of these workers.
If I have addressed this letter to the wrong persons, would you please provide me with the name of the proper person/s and department/s this letter should be sent to.
If you think this issue concerning the impact of second-hand smoke on the health of casino workers is not significant enough to be discussed at the Indian Health Summit would you be so kind as to advise me of your decision and how it was reached?
Thanking you in advance for your timely consideration;
Alan L. Maki
Director of Organizing,
Midwest Casino Workers Organizing Council
58891 County Road 13
Warroad, Minnesota 56763
Phone: 218-386-2432
Cell phone: 651-587-5541
E-mail: amaki000@centurytel.net
Check out my blog:
Thoughts From Podunk
http://thepodunkblog.blogspot.com/
Cc: Maggie Bird
President,
Midwest Casino Workers Organizing Council
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
The Truth About Tea Parties and Teabaggers
This post by right-wing bigot Nancy L. LaRoche to the "e-democracy forum" pretty much tells us the truth behind all the statements coming from the two-bit, half-assed fascist right-wing talk radio big-mouths who host these programs that somehow these teabaggers are putting on some kind of "non-partisan" events open to all who decry wasteful government spending.
Check out this response to me very closely because the truth is in what Nancy L. LaRoche posted in opposition to what I posted.
Here is what I posted which she is responding to:
Now, notice what she says:
This is a very frank admission that only those from the right side of the political spectrum are welcome at these "Tea Parties."
This statement here makes Mitch Berg, Chris Baker, Shawn Hannity, Rush Limbaugh and the rest of the chicken shit patriot crowd so eager to send others off to kill and die in these dirty imperialist wars being waged for control of the oil fields and gas pipeline routes along with regional domination and control of the poppy and heroin trade nothing but outright liars afraid to defend their fascist, racist, warmongering, pro-capitalist, pro-imperialist ideas. They lie when they say these "Tea Parties" were organized by "concerned citizens" from grassroots, when, in fact, these right-wing bigots and blowhards of talk radio have organized these "Tea Parties" for two reasons: 1.) As promotional publicity stunts to promote the now largely discredited right-wing talk radio; and, 2.) To try to move the country further to the right THAN WHAT BARACK OBAMA, THE DEMOCRATS AND THE WALL STREET CROWD are already trying to take us. Make no mistake, Barack Obama is not liberal, progressive or left in any sense of the meaning of these words... Obama is definitely not a "socialist" as these racist, bigots of right-wing talk radio are charging.
In other words, the teabaggers are not going to allow me (or any known "leftist" to address their Tax Day Rallies with the message that military spending is wasteful government spending.
The organizers of these "Tea Parties" do not want people hearing the truth that the most excessive, wasteful government spending is for wars and militarism.
These right-wing blow-hards like Mitch Berg are afraid to have me addressing their crowds saying things like:
Now, this self-avowed, Bircher--- this two-bit, half-assed fascist--- Nancy L. LaRoche declares that I have denied people with differing viewpoints from my own the right to speak at anti-war rallies.
This is another outright and brazen two-faced lie and she is well aware she is a liar in making this statement.
I have never in my life prevented anyone--- from any political perspective or persuasion--- with an anti-war view to speak at any anti-war rally.
To the extent it has been within my power (as one vote on a committee), I have never allowed anyone with a pro-war view to speak at an anti-war rally.
Why would I give consideration to anyone with a pro-war view to speak at an "anti-war rally?" Only a complete idiot and fool like this Birchite, Nancy L. LaRoche, would make such a statement... it is up to her and her warmongering friends who support these wars but never go off to fight them to organize their own "pro-war rallies."
However, I have organized (and participated as a debater in debates I had no part in organizing) dozens of debates all over Minnesota--- some ninety debates, in fact--- prior to the start of the war in Iraq, around the question and issue:
Participants in these debates, generally consisted of two or three pro and con views. As the main organizer of these debates across Minnesota I did not seek out and select participants according to my personal left-wing views. In fact, these debates included retired military people--- both pro and con--- on the question and the issue. In fact, there were even some right-wing talk show hosts who participated in these debates--- several times as the moderators. Not once was I ever accused of stacking these debates. And not once was the discourse anything but cordial. I would note, the bigots and the Birchites did condemn these debates because they included the anti-war view! You see, these two-bit, half-assed fascists do not believe in democracy or any concept of democracy. To them, democracy is only them getting out their views. These is an obviously perverted view of democracy; the same perverted view of democracy that almost thoroughly permeates right-wing talk radio--- with a very few notable exceptions of those who hold genuinely conservative views but welcome all other views into the "battle of ideas in our modern world."
Nancy L. LaRoche intentionally tries to blend "debate" with demonstrations and rallies. She does this intentionally as do all of her bigoted friends because they know that people get their ideas together when they hear the many sides to these complex and complicated questions in the process of public and democratic debate--- and, then, after formulating opinions based upon what they believe to be the best information they can gather; from this informed position they go out a try to convince others to rally and demonstrate with them to try to move government, corporations or whatever in the direction they think society should be moving.
But, where has the debate been on the Obama/Wall Street agenda?
In fact, there has been no debate.
In fact, the "left" which our bigoted, Birchite friend Nancy L. LaRoche so bemoans, has had no voice what-so-ever in a debate, which I would remind the reader, has largely been an attack on socialism.
Denying a voice to the adherents of the socialist viewpoint and perspective under these circumstances can hardly pass for democracy.
By Nancy L. LaRoche's own words here, these "Tea Party" and tax-protests are nothing more than right-wing rallies; her own words give lie to the words of those like Mitch Berg, Chris Baker, Shawn Hannity and Rush Limbaugh along with the "fair and unbiased" FOX news crew that these rallies are anything but anti-communist, pro-war and pro-corporate bash the working class and attack the rest of the world rallies.
That two-bit, half-assed fascists from both the Republican and Democratic Parties participate in these rallies does not mean these rallies are open to all who oppose wasteful government spending; it means that those on the right from both political parties support and sponsor--- and exclude--- anyone not right-wing from participation.
After all, when you openly state as Nancy L. LaRoche has done that "leftists for peace" are excluded; here in the state of Minnesota you are excluding a good 40% of the population.
And, if you are "not going to pass the bullhorn" to leftists to speak about their concerns about inappropriate government spending no one, not Mitch Berg or Chris Baker or Shawn Hannity or Rush Limbaugh, can make the claim they are speaking for all Americans... they are speaking for a very, very narrow slice of America... perhaps 3% to 4% of the population... no more than this.
But, here we are supposedly talking about bringing people of "all political persuasions together" in these Tea Parties who are opposed to "government waste."
Are these "Tea Parties" also "pro-war parties and rallies?" If we listen to Nancy L. LaRoche they really are.
Not only do the American people have to ask:
We also have to ask:
Nancy L. LaRoche knew better than to demand the microphone at an anti-war rally because she was pro-war.
In her small little demented and perverted mind, patriotism is equated with being pro-war. Waving a flag is equated with being pro-war. That she convinced someone to put down a peace sign and hold the American flag tells us absolutely nothing... did she convince that person to become pro-war? No. And she knows it. That person waved the American flag to demonstrate that peace is patriotic, and war is unpatriotic.
I'm not a "flag-waver" but I will stand my patriotism for this country up against the chicken shit patriotism of these right-wing bigots hosting these Fox radio programs any day... and it they who run from the challenge of debating these issues.
That they can convince a few stupid fools like Nancy L. LaRoche to join them tells us everything we need to know about this perverted crowd of "teabaggers."
Nancy L. LaRoche tells us that she and her friends "don't bite." However, they sure want to give the working class a good "teabagging."
"Come out and understand out side" Nancy L. LaRoche, requests. Other than a bunch of chauvinistic, jingoistic, racist crap decrying socialism based upon a caricature of socialism the teabaggers have created in order to knock down like some strawman in order to proclaim victory, what is Nancy L. LaRoche's "side?"
Teabaggers have more in common with the "steal the land from the Indians," pro-slavery, pro-Hitler crowd than with the sons and daughters of the American Revolution and Tom Paine and Benjamin Franklin or Thomas Jefferson.
Again, I reiterate my suggestion for real--- face-to-face--- debates in every city where the teabaggers are planning their events... come on Nancy L. LaRoche, your idols Mitch Berg and Chris Baker refuse to debate me... let's me and you tour these sixteen cities debating the issues involved... let's me and you debate what constitutes wasteful government spending...
bak, bak, bak, baaakkk, bak, bak, baakk, baaakkkkk, bak, bak.
No doubt Hitler was a "teabagger," just like Mitch Berg and Chris Baker in every sense of the word.
Something to think about around the dinner table--- if you can keep from gagging.
Yours in the struggle,
Alan L. Maki
From a posting to "e-democracy" to which the "moderator," Rick Mons, would not allow me the above response.
Check out this response to me very closely because the truth is in what Nancy L. LaRoche posted in opposition to what I posted.
Here is what I posted which she is responding to:
Alan wrote: "Yes, you want people to attend your "Tea Party" rallies but you exclude those with a left view from speaking... wow! Real democratic.
Invite me to speak; I'll be there."
Now, notice what she says:
Alan: Do you leftist protesters pass their bullhorns and allow the other side to speak at their rallies?
This is a very frank admission that only those from the right side of the political spectrum are welcome at these "Tea Parties."
This statement here makes Mitch Berg, Chris Baker, Shawn Hannity, Rush Limbaugh and the rest of the chicken shit patriot crowd so eager to send others off to kill and die in these dirty imperialist wars being waged for control of the oil fields and gas pipeline routes along with regional domination and control of the poppy and heroin trade nothing but outright liars afraid to defend their fascist, racist, warmongering, pro-capitalist, pro-imperialist ideas. They lie when they say these "Tea Parties" were organized by "concerned citizens" from grassroots, when, in fact, these right-wing bigots and blowhards of talk radio have organized these "Tea Parties" for two reasons: 1.) As promotional publicity stunts to promote the now largely discredited right-wing talk radio; and, 2.) To try to move the country further to the right THAN WHAT BARACK OBAMA, THE DEMOCRATS AND THE WALL STREET CROWD are already trying to take us. Make no mistake, Barack Obama is not liberal, progressive or left in any sense of the meaning of these words... Obama is definitely not a "socialist" as these racist, bigots of right-wing talk radio are charging.
In other words, the teabaggers are not going to allow me (or any known "leftist" to address their Tax Day Rallies with the message that military spending is wasteful government spending.
The organizers of these "Tea Parties" do not want people hearing the truth that the most excessive, wasteful government spending is for wars and militarism.
These right-wing blow-hards like Mitch Berg are afraid to have me addressing their crowds saying things like:
The United States government, dominated by Wall Street bankers and coupon clippers, is wasting trillions upon trillions of dollars of tax-payer monies borrowed from Wall Street bankers and plunging our nation into debt to finance a vast and far-flung network of over 800 U.S. military bases on foreign soil dotting all parts of the globe with the only purpose of protecting Wall Steet's profits and investments in low wage areas to steal resources instead of building 800 public health care centers right here in the United States providing free health care from cradle to grave for everyone.
Now, this self-avowed, Bircher--- this two-bit, half-assed fascist--- Nancy L. LaRoche declares that I have denied people with differing viewpoints from my own the right to speak at anti-war rallies.
This is another outright and brazen two-faced lie and she is well aware she is a liar in making this statement.
I have never in my life prevented anyone--- from any political perspective or persuasion--- with an anti-war view to speak at any anti-war rally.
To the extent it has been within my power (as one vote on a committee), I have never allowed anyone with a pro-war view to speak at an anti-war rally.
Why would I give consideration to anyone with a pro-war view to speak at an "anti-war rally?" Only a complete idiot and fool like this Birchite, Nancy L. LaRoche, would make such a statement... it is up to her and her warmongering friends who support these wars but never go off to fight them to organize their own "pro-war rallies."
However, I have organized (and participated as a debater in debates I had no part in organizing) dozens of debates all over Minnesota--- some ninety debates, in fact--- prior to the start of the war in Iraq, around the question and issue:
Should the United States Government Go To War in Iraq?
Participants in these debates, generally consisted of two or three pro and con views. As the main organizer of these debates across Minnesota I did not seek out and select participants according to my personal left-wing views. In fact, these debates included retired military people--- both pro and con--- on the question and the issue. In fact, there were even some right-wing talk show hosts who participated in these debates--- several times as the moderators. Not once was I ever accused of stacking these debates. And not once was the discourse anything but cordial. I would note, the bigots and the Birchites did condemn these debates because they included the anti-war view! You see, these two-bit, half-assed fascists do not believe in democracy or any concept of democracy. To them, democracy is only them getting out their views. These is an obviously perverted view of democracy; the same perverted view of democracy that almost thoroughly permeates right-wing talk radio--- with a very few notable exceptions of those who hold genuinely conservative views but welcome all other views into the "battle of ideas in our modern world."
Nancy L. LaRoche intentionally tries to blend "debate" with demonstrations and rallies. She does this intentionally as do all of her bigoted friends because they know that people get their ideas together when they hear the many sides to these complex and complicated questions in the process of public and democratic debate--- and, then, after formulating opinions based upon what they believe to be the best information they can gather; from this informed position they go out a try to convince others to rally and demonstrate with them to try to move government, corporations or whatever in the direction they think society should be moving.
But, where has the debate been on the Obama/Wall Street agenda?
In fact, there has been no debate.
In fact, the "left" which our bigoted, Birchite friend Nancy L. LaRoche so bemoans, has had no voice what-so-ever in a debate, which I would remind the reader, has largely been an attack on socialism.
Denying a voice to the adherents of the socialist viewpoint and perspective under these circumstances can hardly pass for democracy.
By Nancy L. LaRoche's own words here, these "Tea Party" and tax-protests are nothing more than right-wing rallies; her own words give lie to the words of those like Mitch Berg, Chris Baker, Shawn Hannity and Rush Limbaugh along with the "fair and unbiased" FOX news crew that these rallies are anything but anti-communist, pro-war and pro-corporate bash the working class and attack the rest of the world rallies.
That two-bit, half-assed fascists from both the Republican and Democratic Parties participate in these rallies does not mean these rallies are open to all who oppose wasteful government spending; it means that those on the right from both political parties support and sponsor--- and exclude--- anyone not right-wing from participation.
After all, when you openly state as Nancy L. LaRoche has done that "leftists for peace" are excluded; here in the state of Minnesota you are excluding a good 40% of the population.
And, if you are "not going to pass the bullhorn" to leftists to speak about their concerns about inappropriate government spending no one, not Mitch Berg or Chris Baker or Shawn Hannity or Rush Limbaugh, can make the claim they are speaking for all Americans... they are speaking for a very, very narrow slice of America... perhaps 3% to 4% of the population... no more than this.
But, here we are supposedly talking about bringing people of "all political persuasions together" in these Tea Parties who are opposed to "government waste."
Are these "Tea Parties" also "pro-war parties and rallies?" If we listen to Nancy L. LaRoche they really are.
Not only do the American people have to ask:
Where is the change?
We also have to ask:
Where are the debates on these issues?
Nancy L. LaRoche knew better than to demand the microphone at an anti-war rally because she was pro-war.
In her small little demented and perverted mind, patriotism is equated with being pro-war. Waving a flag is equated with being pro-war. That she convinced someone to put down a peace sign and hold the American flag tells us absolutely nothing... did she convince that person to become pro-war? No. And she knows it. That person waved the American flag to demonstrate that peace is patriotic, and war is unpatriotic.
I'm not a "flag-waver" but I will stand my patriotism for this country up against the chicken shit patriotism of these right-wing bigots hosting these Fox radio programs any day... and it they who run from the challenge of debating these issues.
That they can convince a few stupid fools like Nancy L. LaRoche to join them tells us everything we need to know about this perverted crowd of "teabaggers."
Nancy L. LaRoche tells us that she and her friends "don't bite." However, they sure want to give the working class a good "teabagging."
"Come out and understand out side" Nancy L. LaRoche, requests. Other than a bunch of chauvinistic, jingoistic, racist crap decrying socialism based upon a caricature of socialism the teabaggers have created in order to knock down like some strawman in order to proclaim victory, what is Nancy L. LaRoche's "side?"
Teabaggers have more in common with the "steal the land from the Indians," pro-slavery, pro-Hitler crowd than with the sons and daughters of the American Revolution and Tom Paine and Benjamin Franklin or Thomas Jefferson.
Again, I reiterate my suggestion for real--- face-to-face--- debates in every city where the teabaggers are planning their events... come on Nancy L. LaRoche, your idols Mitch Berg and Chris Baker refuse to debate me... let's me and you tour these sixteen cities debating the issues involved... let's me and you debate what constitutes wasteful government spending...
bak, bak, bak, baaakkk, bak, bak, baakk, baaakkkkk, bak, bak.
No doubt Hitler was a "teabagger," just like Mitch Berg and Chris Baker in every sense of the word.
Something to think about around the dinner table--- if you can keep from gagging.
Yours in the struggle,
Alan L. Maki
From a posting to "e-democracy" to which the "moderator," Rick Mons, would not allow me the above response.
The posting was from: Nancy L LaRoche Date: 07:23 CDT Short link
Alan Maki wrote:
"Yes, you want people to attend your "Tea Party" rallies but you
exclude those with a left view from speaking... wow! Real democratic.
Invite me to speak; I'll be there."
Alan: Do you leftist protesters pass their bullhorns and allow the other side to speak at their rallies? I've attended some anti-war protests and had great conversations with those opposed to my views. I didn't demand the microphone.
In fact, at one three years ago I made friends with a homeless Native American
who was given an anti-war sign to carry. After we talked for a while, he put
his sign down and picked up a flag. That's what democracy is - the right to
have differing opinions and discuss openly with others. You seem to want to
dismiss and shut up those who disagree.
Come out and talk with us May 2. Try to understand our side face to face.
Again, we don't bite.
Monday, April 20, 2009
Is American "science" taking the road to fascism along with the "tea baggers?"
In this article below a group of scientists and professors claim that "over population" is the number one environmental problem we are facing. This smacks of a fascist mentality.
Notice: climate change comes in second and a failed capitalist system isn’t even questioned; and, there isn’t a single mention about the need for peace and to re-order priorities away from war and military spending.
This in spite of the fact that militarism and production for war has consumed almost thirty percent of all the iron ore mined on the Iron Ranges of Minnesota, Wisconsin and Michigan in the last one-hundred and thirty-five years and there is no figure available that I can find documenting how much industrial production has been wasted on militarism and war.
How is it that this kind of group of scientists would not even consider militarism and wars after the Black Forest of Europe and huge, huge tracts of forested land in the Soviet countries and all over the rest of Europe have been destroyed in two major wars? Not to mention the number of trees that have been required to rebuild from wars and the forestry requirements to fight wars.
That these scientists can get away with this kind of “study” in the name of science is atrocious… it demonstrates the weaknesses of the anti-war, anti-imperialist movements in this country and the poor job environmentalists have done in demonstrating the impact of militarism and war on our ecosystems.
Nor does this reflect the tremendous waste under capitalism.
Instead, too many people are the primary problem; and, it has been the capitalist system of production which has encouraged an out of control population… if everyone was assured a decent job with adequate pay with a real education where real life problems from war to socialism to population could be freely discussed free from religious reaction population would not even be a question.
But note: this article claims 100 million people on earth would be good; but 10 million would be better.
What kind of “science” is this?
We have to ask: Where are the professors and educational community who should be on top of exposing a “study” like this with such a conclusion?
Rather than looking at population as it is and what needs to be done to create a better world, we get this.
Tax-payer funds are being used for something as racist and anti-working class as this. This is what passes for “science” in the United States.
Where are the progressive voices of the university community? Out cheering Barack Obama on?
Note where protection of our freshwater aquifers is--- right at the bottom.
Not a single mention that the capitalist mode of production and the corporate drive for profits has largely driven the population explosion.
And, we need to ask: Where is the challenge to this from the student movements?
Where is the left-wing media to take this kind of report on?
One can only imagine what scientists like Albert Einstein would have to say about this kind of study coming out of an American University.
Alan L. Maki
From:
Science News
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/04/090418075752.htm
Worst Environmental Problem? Overpopulation, Experts Say
ScienceDaily (Apr. 20, 2009) — Overpopulation is the world’s top environmental issue, followed closely by climate change and the need to develop renewable energy resources to replace fossil fuels, according to a survey of the faculty at the SUNY College of Environmental Science and Forestry (ESF).
Just in time for Earth Day (April 22) the faculty at the college, at which environmental issues are the sole focus, was asked to help prioritize the planet’s most pressing environmental problems.
Overpopulation came out on top, with several professors pointing out its ties to other problems that rank high on the list.
“Overpopulation is the only problem,” said Dr. Charles A. Hall, a systems ecologist. “If we had 100 million people on Earth — or better, 10 million — no others would be a problem.” (Current estimates put the planet’s population at more than six billion.)
Dr. Allan P. Drew, a forest ecologist, put it this way: “Overpopulation means that we are putting more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere than we should, just because more people are doing it and this is related to overconsumption by people in general, especially in the ‘developed’ world.”
“But, whether developed or developing,” said Dr. Susan Senecah, who teaches the history of the American environmental movement, “everyone is encouraged to ‘want’ and perceive that they ‘need’ to consume beyond the planet’s ability to provide.”
The ESF faculty pointed to climate change as the second most-pressing issue, with the need to develop renewable energy resources to replace fossil fuels coming in third.
“Experimenting with the earth’s climate and chemistry has great risks,” said Dr. Thomas E. Amidon, who invented a process for removing energy-rich sugars from wood and fermenting those sugars into ethanol. “This is a driver in climate change and loss of biodiversity and is a fundamental problem underlying our need to strive for sustainability.”
Rounding out the top 10 issues on the ESF list are overconsumption, the need for more sustainable practices worldwide, the growing need for energy conservation, the need for humans to see themselves as part of the global ecosystem, overall carbon dioxide emissions, the need to develop ways to produce consumer products from renewable resources, and dwindling fresh water resources.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Adapted from materials provided by SUNY College of Environmental Science and Forestry, via Newswise.
Alan L. Maki
58891 County Road 13
Warroad, Minnesota 56763
Phone: 218-386-2432
Cell phone: 651-587-5541
E-mail: amaki000@centurytel.net
Check out my blog:
Thoughts From Podunk
http://thepodunkblog.blogspot.com/
Notice: climate change comes in second and a failed capitalist system isn’t even questioned; and, there isn’t a single mention about the need for peace and to re-order priorities away from war and military spending.
This in spite of the fact that militarism and production for war has consumed almost thirty percent of all the iron ore mined on the Iron Ranges of Minnesota, Wisconsin and Michigan in the last one-hundred and thirty-five years and there is no figure available that I can find documenting how much industrial production has been wasted on militarism and war.
How is it that this kind of group of scientists would not even consider militarism and wars after the Black Forest of Europe and huge, huge tracts of forested land in the Soviet countries and all over the rest of Europe have been destroyed in two major wars? Not to mention the number of trees that have been required to rebuild from wars and the forestry requirements to fight wars.
That these scientists can get away with this kind of “study” in the name of science is atrocious… it demonstrates the weaknesses of the anti-war, anti-imperialist movements in this country and the poor job environmentalists have done in demonstrating the impact of militarism and war on our ecosystems.
Nor does this reflect the tremendous waste under capitalism.
Instead, too many people are the primary problem; and, it has been the capitalist system of production which has encouraged an out of control population… if everyone was assured a decent job with adequate pay with a real education where real life problems from war to socialism to population could be freely discussed free from religious reaction population would not even be a question.
But note: this article claims 100 million people on earth would be good; but 10 million would be better.
What kind of “science” is this?
We have to ask: Where are the professors and educational community who should be on top of exposing a “study” like this with such a conclusion?
Rather than looking at population as it is and what needs to be done to create a better world, we get this.
Tax-payer funds are being used for something as racist and anti-working class as this. This is what passes for “science” in the United States.
Where are the progressive voices of the university community? Out cheering Barack Obama on?
Note where protection of our freshwater aquifers is--- right at the bottom.
Not a single mention that the capitalist mode of production and the corporate drive for profits has largely driven the population explosion.
And, we need to ask: Where is the challenge to this from the student movements?
Where is the left-wing media to take this kind of report on?
One can only imagine what scientists like Albert Einstein would have to say about this kind of study coming out of an American University.
Alan L. Maki
From:
Science News
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/04/090418075752.htm
Worst Environmental Problem? Overpopulation, Experts Say
ScienceDaily (Apr. 20, 2009) — Overpopulation is the world’s top environmental issue, followed closely by climate change and the need to develop renewable energy resources to replace fossil fuels, according to a survey of the faculty at the SUNY College of Environmental Science and Forestry (ESF).
Just in time for Earth Day (April 22) the faculty at the college, at which environmental issues are the sole focus, was asked to help prioritize the planet’s most pressing environmental problems.
Overpopulation came out on top, with several professors pointing out its ties to other problems that rank high on the list.
“Overpopulation is the only problem,” said Dr. Charles A. Hall, a systems ecologist. “If we had 100 million people on Earth — or better, 10 million — no others would be a problem.” (Current estimates put the planet’s population at more than six billion.)
Dr. Allan P. Drew, a forest ecologist, put it this way: “Overpopulation means that we are putting more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere than we should, just because more people are doing it and this is related to overconsumption by people in general, especially in the ‘developed’ world.”
“But, whether developed or developing,” said Dr. Susan Senecah, who teaches the history of the American environmental movement, “everyone is encouraged to ‘want’ and perceive that they ‘need’ to consume beyond the planet’s ability to provide.”
The ESF faculty pointed to climate change as the second most-pressing issue, with the need to develop renewable energy resources to replace fossil fuels coming in third.
“Experimenting with the earth’s climate and chemistry has great risks,” said Dr. Thomas E. Amidon, who invented a process for removing energy-rich sugars from wood and fermenting those sugars into ethanol. “This is a driver in climate change and loss of biodiversity and is a fundamental problem underlying our need to strive for sustainability.”
Rounding out the top 10 issues on the ESF list are overconsumption, the need for more sustainable practices worldwide, the growing need for energy conservation, the need for humans to see themselves as part of the global ecosystem, overall carbon dioxide emissions, the need to develop ways to produce consumer products from renewable resources, and dwindling fresh water resources.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Adapted from materials provided by SUNY College of Environmental Science and Forestry, via Newswise.
Alan L. Maki
58891 County Road 13
Warroad, Minnesota 56763
Phone: 218-386-2432
Cell phone: 651-587-5541
E-mail: amaki000@centurytel.net
Check out my blog:
Thoughts From Podunk
http://thepodunkblog.blogspot.com/
Thursday, April 16, 2009
An open letter to "Tea Party" activists
What I see in your Tea Party "movement" is:
1. racism
2. vicious anti-communism
3. warmongers
4. people sucked in by Wall Street
5. a gross distortion of "patriotism."
I would encourage all of you to read "Citizen Tom Paine" by Howard Fast and his other historical novels on the American Revolution to get some kind of basic grounding and understanding as to what constitutes fighting for freedom, justice and liberty.
You really have a very shallow understanding of the issues.
For instance---
Why no mention of this "little" fact:
Our government is wasting trillions of dollars maintaining over 800 U.S. military bases on foreign soil dotting the globe in countries where we have no business when, instead, we should be establishing 800 public health care centers spread out across the United States providing free health care for everyone.
It is easy for you all to say things like you do using assumed names and monikers... I am wondering if you would dare to say such pathetically stupid, harmful and hurtful things if you had to sign your real names and provide contact information?
I would challenge any of you to debate these issues: anytime, anyplace anywhere.
Any takers?
Bak, bak, bak, bak, baaakkk, bak, bak, bak, baaaaakkkkkkkk.
Just a bunch of chicken shit patriots.
Give me a call if you can converse intelligently.
Alan L. Maki
218-386-2432
Please note: for the fourth time I placed this comment (above) on the official Minnesota Tea Party blog and each time I received this message:
And my comment has never been posted. So much for these Wall Street manipulated puppets believing in democracy.
1. racism
2. vicious anti-communism
3. warmongers
4. people sucked in by Wall Street
5. a gross distortion of "patriotism."
I would encourage all of you to read "Citizen Tom Paine" by Howard Fast and his other historical novels on the American Revolution to get some kind of basic grounding and understanding as to what constitutes fighting for freedom, justice and liberty.
You really have a very shallow understanding of the issues.
For instance---
Why no mention of this "little" fact:
Our government is wasting trillions of dollars maintaining over 800 U.S. military bases on foreign soil dotting the globe in countries where we have no business when, instead, we should be establishing 800 public health care centers spread out across the United States providing free health care for everyone.
It is easy for you all to say things like you do using assumed names and monikers... I am wondering if you would dare to say such pathetically stupid, harmful and hurtful things if you had to sign your real names and provide contact information?
I would challenge any of you to debate these issues: anytime, anyplace anywhere.
Any takers?
Bak, bak, bak, bak, baaakkk, bak, bak, bak, baaaaakkkkkkkk.
Just a bunch of chicken shit patriots.
Give me a call if you can converse intelligently.
Alan L. Maki
218-386-2432
Please note: for the fourth time I placed this comment (above) on the official Minnesota Tea Party blog and each time I received this message:
Please Note: Your comment is awaiting moderation.
And my comment has never been posted. So much for these Wall Street manipulated puppets believing in democracy.
Sunday, April 12, 2009
Barack Obama sees "glimmers of hope"
Today, Barack Obama sees, "glimmers of hope."
Does anyone other than Obama see these "glimmers of hope?"
But, where's the change?
Barack Obama says the housing market is key to economic recovery.
Others say different.
I don't know what they are growing in that White House garden, but Obama must be puffing on something other than ordinary tobacco because he also said today that "home losses" were a big part of the "hardships" Americans are being forced to endure while the media is telling us one out of every nine homes in this country is not occupied and he is doing nothing to stop the foreclosures and evictions when a moratorium for the duration of this depression would be so easy--- especially if he is seeing "glimmers of hope."
These two articles tend to tell us Barack Obama is wrong and hallucinating when he says he sees, "glimmers of hope" and that "the housing market is key to economic recovery."
We really do need to take some time to study this situation because if the President of the United States and his economic advisers don't know what is required for "economic recovery" any more than his military advisers understand what constitutes peace we are in some real deep doo-doo.
Quite frankly, I think we have some way over-paid economists being led around by a President who hides behind the skirt of Rosy Scenario and this definitely does not bode well for us working people.
If the auto and steel industries don't work, the housing problem sure can't be fixed.
What is interesting is that China has become the world's largest steel AND auto producer.
Anyone care to figure out how all of this fits together in a world faced with a global capitalist economic melt-down?
Check out these articles; one from Canada and China, the other from France:
Global steel industry awaits auto turnaround
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20090412/bs_wl_afp/commoditiesmetalssteelsector
PARIS (AFP) – Steel is on edge and the global industry is cutting back hard, hanging on for either a budget blast from China, new credit for vast Middle Eastern building schemes or resurrection of the US auto industry.
Demand has dwindled and steelmakers, notably the giant of them all, ArcelorMittal, are damping down surplus furnace capacity while waiting for credit to flow, construction cranes to turn and factories to roll.
A decision by ArcelorMittal last week to pursue temporary production cutbacks, slashing European output by more than half from the end of April according to a union source, dramatises the extraordinary ride and role of steel in the last few years.
In just months the global industry has gone from a boom driven largely by China, emerging markets and a property extravaganza in the Middle East to a narrow line between excess capacity and the costs of waiting for recovery.
"Over the past six months, demand for steel has dropped dramatically and, as a result, producers have been cutting production," analysts at Barclays Capital said in a study last week.
In another report, Morgan Stanley predicted "the current demand shock to lead to excess steel capacity."
Consequently, the bank said, steel plants should operate at rates below 75 percent of capacity until 2012.
"The steel market is not very different from base metals as a whole, but steel has reacted more rapidly and dramatically since September," said commodities analyst Perrine Faye of London-based FastMarkets.
She said the future of the steel industry depended on three factors -- the impact of Chinese economic stimulus efforts, a pick-up in the Middle East construction sector and a revival of the once mighty US auto industry.
"Chinese imports and exports are at a standstill. Everyone is waiting for the Chinese stimulus package to see if it will revive demand."
The Chinese government last month announced a four-trillion-yuan (580-billion-dollar) package of measures that it said could contribute 1.5 to 1.9 percent to the country's economic growth.
Industry experts have meanwhile spoken optimistically of China's prospects.
Thomas Albanese, chief executive at steel maker Rio Tinto, said earlier this year that the company foresaw "a short, sharp slowdown in China, with demand rebounding over the course of 2009, as the fundamentals of Chinese economic growth remain sound."
Analysts have said steel inventories are falling in China in anticipation of projects expected to emerge from the country's huge stimulus package.
"It is encouraging that the inventory of steel products, especially long products, which are mostly used in construction projects, have started to fall (since the end of March), likely suggesting that end-demand is gathering momentum," Frank Gong, a Hong Kong-based economist for JPMorgan, wrote in a research note.
On-the-ground evidence suggested that the Chinese industry had been re-stocking in the first two months of the year, followed by a pause in March before major infrastructure projects were expected to start in the second quarter, Gong wrote.
In the Middle East, according to Faye, the big problem is a shortage of credit, notably for real estate developers and builders.
Construction planners had "counted on a higher price for oil and on credit to finance their huge projects."
In addition, demand for such facilities, especially in the Gulf, has died.
"They were hoping that Americans and Europeans would buy apartments. But property prices have collapsed in the Middle East as well."
In the United Arab Emirates more than half the building projects, worth 582 billion dollars or 45 per cent of the total value of the construction sector, have been put on hold, a study by Dubai-based market research group Proleads found in February.
In Dubai, one of the states of the UAE, prices in the real estate sector have slumped by an average of 25 percent from their peak in September after rallying 79 percent in the 18 months to July 2008, according to Morgan Stanley.
Faye said the fate of the steel sector was in addition tied to that of the struggling US auto industry, once a thriving steel market but one in which two of its giant players, General Motors and Chrysler, are staring at bankruptcy.
The two companies are currently limping along thanks to billions of dollars in government aid.
"We are waiting to see if the auto sector in the US will get out of the crisis intact," she said.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090411.wrcover11/BNStory/Business
China's runaway steel train
April 11, 2009 at 12:47 AM EDT
FENGRUN, CHINA and TORONTO — Yu Jianshui fidgets in his big leather chair
as he chain-smokes his way through an interview. Times are tough at the
Tangshan Fengrun Zhengda Iron and Steel Co. Ltd.
With China suffering its sharpest economic slowdown in decades, Mr. Yu, the
firm's general manager, complains that he is getting fewer and fewer orders
for his main product, huge bars of raw steel known as billets. In his 23
years in steel, “this is the worst I've ever seen.”
Yet under the corrugated metal roofs of his steel mill, blast furnaces
still blast and two assembly lines still roll out 3,000 tonnes of steel a
day.
It is the same story elsewhere in Fengrun, a gritty steel town where the
red flag of the People's Republic flies from giant-like loading derricks.
After shutting briefly when steel prices dipped last fall, most of
Fengrun's more than 100 mills have come back to life to exploit a price
uptick this winter, churning out countless tonnes of pipe, girders, rolled
steel and heavy cable.
And that, Mr. Yu says, is the problem: Not that so many mills are going out
of business, but that so many are still going.
China simply makes too much steel. The government estimates that China's
annual production is about 100 million tonnes more than it should be, a
figure equal to the whole annual output of the industry in the United
States.
Worse, China has far too many steel companies, more than 700 at last count.
Add in iron companies and companies that roll or otherwise shape steel, and
the total comes to more than 7,000. Despite repeated government attempts to
force them to consolidate into fewer, bigger companies, most of them are
still small and inefficient.
By rights, many companies should have closed. Instead, they march on like
zombies, China's industrial undead.
That was not such a problem when China was growing at 10 per cent or more a
year and demand was soaring for products made in the “workshop of the
world.” No matter how much steel China made and how many companies were
making it, there was always a market somewhere.
Now it's a problem, and not just for China and its steel makers. In China
and around the world, demand for steel is plummeting. Producers are cutting
back: Japan's output fell 39 per cent and Germany's 31 per cent in February
from the same month last year.
But China's crude steel production in February actually grew 4.9 per cent,
even as steel exports hit a 52-month low, falling 62 per cent on a yearly
basis. Since last October, most steel makers have been losing money. Prices
for Chinese hot-rolled steel fell to about $400 (U.S.) a tonne in March,
less than half the peak of $980 a tonne hit last year. Even China's Iron
and Steel Association has cautioned that overproduction has risked flooding
the market with unwanted steel.
In its latest master plan for steel, drawn up this winter, Beijing says it
will force the industry to slim down and consolidate. But such edicts have
been issued many times before, and instead, production has continued to
proliferate. Few believe this time is likely to be different.
The impact of China's overproduction is being felt around the world. As
demand for steel products plunges, China's continued strong production is
hurting producers in other countries. Just this week, a group of American
makers of steel pipe used in oil drilling filed complaints with U.S. trade
officials alleging unfair competition from Chinese imports they say have
been dumped on the domestic market.
“That is the challenge of China,” says Michael Willemse, an analyst
with CIBC World Markets in Toronto. “They can be very disruptive to the
global market if their capacity-expansion plans are not consistent with
consumption needs of the industrial economy.”
MINERS STILL HAPPYChina's romance with steel goes back a long way. Chinese
in the Han Dynasty, 1,800 years ago, produced an early form of steel by
combining wrought iron and cast iron.
In the disastrous Great Leap Forward of 1958 to 1961, Mao Zedong made grain
and steel production the centrepiece of his plan to surpass the decadent
West. The Great Helmsman encouraged the people to build backyard steel
furnaces in every commune and neighbourhood. To meet wildly unrealistic
production goals, they melted down pots and pans and burned furniture for
fuel.
When Deng Xiaoping abandoned Maoist economics in 1978, China began building
its steel industry in earnest. As foreign investment poured in and the
economy took off, China ramped up production. In the present decade, it has
grown at an average of more than 20 per cent a year. It now exceeds the
combined production of Japan, the United States, Russia, India, South
Korea, Germany, Ukraine and Brazil.
China became the world's biggest consumer and producer of steel, accounting
for a third of the world's total output.
Like the auto industry in North America, steel in China came to be
considered an essential industry, too big to fail. It directly employs 3.58
million people. Millions more live off it in support roles. As of 2007, it
contributed 4 per cent of China's gross domestic product and 9 per cent of
industrial profits.
For a long time, everyone seemed to benefit. Chinese steel makers were
growing and making money. Foreign steel makers were selling lots of steel
to China, which was a net importer of steel until 2006. Iron ore producers
in resource-rich countries such as Canada made a fortune as the steel boom
pushed up prices for ore.
Indeed, the relatively stable demand from China has helped coking coal and
iron prices weather the global economic collapse better than most
commodities – and if Chinese steel makers remain at their current
production levels, that would not be unwelcome to the international iron
ore and coking coal producers.
At a time when financing for most mining firms has all but disappeared,
China has been a lone source of capital, playing sugar daddy abroad to
shore up the future of the domestic steel industry. Last week, Wuhan Iron
and Steel Group Corp., or WISCO, one of China's largest steel producers,
agreed to invest a total of $240-million to acquire a 20-per-cent stake in
Consolidated Thompson Iron Mines Ltd. and a 25-per-cent stake in the
company's Bloom Lake iron ore development project in Quebec.
But for China, the continuing steel push, once a sign of strength, has
become a sign of weakness.
The sector's prodigious growth made it a vivid symbol of China's rise. Now,
it tells the story of chronic overinvestment and overcapacity, manipulated
lending, political interference in markets and overreliance on heavy
industry – faults that are being exposed by the crisis across many of the
country's industries, and that could cost China dearly as the global
recession grinds on.
Steel is not the only industry plagued by too much capacity and too many
companies. China has 5,000 cement makers, 3,800 glass makers, 3,500 pulp
and paper producers, and no less than 24,000 chemical companies.
“It's a kind of a perpetual theme here,” says Jack Perkowski, now a
merchant banker in Beijing who came to China from the United States almost
20 years ago to start a car parts company – and was startled to find
there were already 150 companies making piston rings.
“If you look at any product, there are usually only half a dozen or so
companies making it in most countries. In China, there are hundreds or
thousands making that same product.”
The reasons behind China's capacity issue say a lot about how China works
– or doesn't – and points to a slew of other problems.
Outsiders tend to think of China as a centralized state with an
all-powerful government that can order industries around at will. In fact,
real power often lies with provincial and local officials, the powerful
barons of the Chinese political system.
Like Canadian premiers, they fight among themselves to attract industry.
And steel is a particular favourite, a “pillar industry” that produces
a crucial raw material for many other prestige industries, like automobiles
and appliances. In China, Mr. Perkowski says, “every town and every
village has to have a steel mill.”
The result is a highly dispersed, even balkanized industry, with production
spread around a half-dozen major steel-producing provinces and a dozen or
more smaller rivals. Those provinces compete constantly to outdo each other
at steel production.
The perennial winner is Hebei province, a traditional industrial powerhouse
in northeastern China, surrounding Beijing and the port of Tianjin.
According to the industry watcher mysteel.net, Hebei – where Mr. Yu's
Fengrun mill is located – won the output “championship” for the
seventh successive year in 2008, producing more than 100 million tonnes.
A value-added tax introduced in 1996 gives the provincial barons even more
incentive to lure steel companies and win bragging rights. A quarter of the
revenue from the VAT goes to local governments.
Balkanization makes for massive inefficiency. In a country like China that
lacks high-grade iron ore, the ideal would be to produce steel in big,
modern plants near coastal ports, making it cheaper to bring in ore and
coking coal, and easier to export production. Instead Chinese mills often
have to bring in their ore over hundreds of kilometres of rail track,
pushing up their costs.
Pushing up pollution, too. A report last month from the Alliance for
American Manufacturing claimed that China's steel industry, with its
massive consumption of coal and electricity, produced half of the carbon
dioxide from world steel production, making it a huge contributor to the
greenhouse gases said to cause global warning. It also claimed that
governments help the industry with more than $15-billion a year in energy
subsidies, adding to pollution and overproduction.
China's government-directed banking system plays a part in runaway steel
output, too. In China, the big banks are run by the state. Their local
branches are often closely tied to local officials.
Eager to reap the taxes they get from steel companies, those officials
arrange with banks to provide financing for new mills. In China, where
labour and land is cheap, mills can be built in a fraction of the time it
takes in the West for a fraction of the cost.
If steel prices are rising, they quickly generate handsome profits. But
that adds to China's capacity and, in time, overcapacity. That, in turn,
puts downward pressure on prices. In a normally functioning market, Mr.
Perkowski says, that would lead to an industry shakeout. Weaker, smaller
mills would close. Production would fall to meet demand.
Not in China. With “everyone incentivized to keep producing,” he writes
in his 2008 book Managing the Dragon, “this capacity never closes.
Instead, the plant churns out product at ever-diminishing prices. As long
as it can sell at a price equal to the variable costs of production, it
keeps producing.” Even if it can't cover those costs, friendly banks may
step in to cover its losses.
“This is a topsy-turvy, helter-skelter model of economic growth where
each province has its own plans and the central government just sits on top
and screams,” says Hans Mueller, an independent consultant based in
Tennessee who follows China's steel industry.
The screaming does not seem to do much good. Beijing's latest master plan
would hold crude steel output to its current level of about 500 million
tonnes. It would move more steel-making capacity to the coastal regions.
And it would raise the minimum size of blast furnaces to 400 cubic metres,
up from 300 at present, with the intention of forcing smaller,
less-efficient mills to close.
The aim is to make its industry more like other countries', with a few big
dominant players. China's top three companies account for only about a
fifth of the country's total production, compared with well over half for
the top three in the United States, Russia or South Korea. South Korea, in
fact, gets 87 per cent of its production from just two giant mills.
To bang heads together, China's cabinet set a goal last month of raising
the share of output from its top five steel companies to 45 per cent of the
total from 28 per cent at present.
Canada's Teck Cominco Ltd., a major producer of coking coal used to make
steel, is betting on the consolidation of the Chinese steel industry.
Although it doesn't sell coal to China now, it hopes to in the future once
more Chinese production moves to the coast, creating demand for seaborne
coal.
Selling to China's coastal regions was a key driver behind the company's
$14-billion (Canadian) takeover last year of Fording Canadian Coal Trust
– a deal that has left Teck straining under more than $9-billion (U.S.)
in debt. “It's one of the reasons that we believe in the coal assets,”
said Teck spokesman Greg Waller. “There is going to be a fundamental
change in the valuation of metallurgical coal in the future.”
If history is any guide, it could take a long time for Teck's coal to get
to China's coast. The Chinese “have been talking about this as a matter
of national state policy since 2001 and the number of steel firms went up
and up and up,” says Daniel Rosen, principal of Rhodium Group, a New York
consultancy. “The reality went in a totally different direction.”
In fact, Beijing's massive four-trillion-yuan economic stimulus program
threatens to worsen steel's obesity issue. Much of the money will be used
for steel-gobbling projects like railway expansion. To further cushion the
industry from the global recession, Beijing is raising a rebate on steel
exports.
Yet despite the likelihood of continued Chinese steel overproduction, the
country's growth could very well serve as the cornerstone for a global
economic recovery.
Na Liu, China strategist at Scotia Capital, says China's iron and copper
imports hit record highs in February, and net imports of aluminum and zinc
are at their highest in several years. China's recent willingness to pay
$140 a tonne for coking coal helped support a 2009 benchmark coal contract
of $129 a tonne that was much higher than many expected.
As for steel, low prices coupled with China's relatively high cost of
production may have already tipped the trade balance in favour of imports.
Russian steel producers “have been selling into the Chinese market at
very competitive prices, and China might actually have become a net
importer of steel in March,” Mr. Liu says.
While China's labour and regulatory costs give it a major advantage over
other steel-producing nations, the bulk of those benefits will eventually
disappear.
“Gradually, Chinese steel mills are going to lose their cost advantages,
as environmental protection and other regulatory costs begin to go
higher,” Mr. Liu says.
Back in Fengrun, Mr. Yu knows his industry may need to change.
“When I was a kid, the country's power was measured by how much steel it
produced,” he says.
Now, he complains that the industry has too much capacity and too many
players. “They can't all survive,” he says. “Some of these companies
have to die off.”
Does anyone other than Obama see these "glimmers of hope?"
But, where's the change?
Barack Obama says the housing market is key to economic recovery.
Others say different.
I don't know what they are growing in that White House garden, but Obama must be puffing on something other than ordinary tobacco because he also said today that "home losses" were a big part of the "hardships" Americans are being forced to endure while the media is telling us one out of every nine homes in this country is not occupied and he is doing nothing to stop the foreclosures and evictions when a moratorium for the duration of this depression would be so easy--- especially if he is seeing "glimmers of hope."
These two articles tend to tell us Barack Obama is wrong and hallucinating when he says he sees, "glimmers of hope" and that "the housing market is key to economic recovery."
We really do need to take some time to study this situation because if the President of the United States and his economic advisers don't know what is required for "economic recovery" any more than his military advisers understand what constitutes peace we are in some real deep doo-doo.
Quite frankly, I think we have some way over-paid economists being led around by a President who hides behind the skirt of Rosy Scenario and this definitely does not bode well for us working people.
If the auto and steel industries don't work, the housing problem sure can't be fixed.
What is interesting is that China has become the world's largest steel AND auto producer.
Anyone care to figure out how all of this fits together in a world faced with a global capitalist economic melt-down?
Check out these articles; one from Canada and China, the other from France:
Global steel industry awaits auto turnaround
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20090412/bs_wl_afp/commoditiesmetalssteelsector
PARIS (AFP) – Steel is on edge and the global industry is cutting back hard, hanging on for either a budget blast from China, new credit for vast Middle Eastern building schemes or resurrection of the US auto industry.
Demand has dwindled and steelmakers, notably the giant of them all, ArcelorMittal, are damping down surplus furnace capacity while waiting for credit to flow, construction cranes to turn and factories to roll.
A decision by ArcelorMittal last week to pursue temporary production cutbacks, slashing European output by more than half from the end of April according to a union source, dramatises the extraordinary ride and role of steel in the last few years.
In just months the global industry has gone from a boom driven largely by China, emerging markets and a property extravaganza in the Middle East to a narrow line between excess capacity and the costs of waiting for recovery.
"Over the past six months, demand for steel has dropped dramatically and, as a result, producers have been cutting production," analysts at Barclays Capital said in a study last week.
In another report, Morgan Stanley predicted "the current demand shock to lead to excess steel capacity."
Consequently, the bank said, steel plants should operate at rates below 75 percent of capacity until 2012.
"The steel market is not very different from base metals as a whole, but steel has reacted more rapidly and dramatically since September," said commodities analyst Perrine Faye of London-based FastMarkets.
She said the future of the steel industry depended on three factors -- the impact of Chinese economic stimulus efforts, a pick-up in the Middle East construction sector and a revival of the once mighty US auto industry.
"Chinese imports and exports are at a standstill. Everyone is waiting for the Chinese stimulus package to see if it will revive demand."
The Chinese government last month announced a four-trillion-yuan (580-billion-dollar) package of measures that it said could contribute 1.5 to 1.9 percent to the country's economic growth.
Industry experts have meanwhile spoken optimistically of China's prospects.
Thomas Albanese, chief executive at steel maker Rio Tinto, said earlier this year that the company foresaw "a short, sharp slowdown in China, with demand rebounding over the course of 2009, as the fundamentals of Chinese economic growth remain sound."
Analysts have said steel inventories are falling in China in anticipation of projects expected to emerge from the country's huge stimulus package.
"It is encouraging that the inventory of steel products, especially long products, which are mostly used in construction projects, have started to fall (since the end of March), likely suggesting that end-demand is gathering momentum," Frank Gong, a Hong Kong-based economist for JPMorgan, wrote in a research note.
On-the-ground evidence suggested that the Chinese industry had been re-stocking in the first two months of the year, followed by a pause in March before major infrastructure projects were expected to start in the second quarter, Gong wrote.
In the Middle East, according to Faye, the big problem is a shortage of credit, notably for real estate developers and builders.
Construction planners had "counted on a higher price for oil and on credit to finance their huge projects."
In addition, demand for such facilities, especially in the Gulf, has died.
"They were hoping that Americans and Europeans would buy apartments. But property prices have collapsed in the Middle East as well."
In the United Arab Emirates more than half the building projects, worth 582 billion dollars or 45 per cent of the total value of the construction sector, have been put on hold, a study by Dubai-based market research group Proleads found in February.
In Dubai, one of the states of the UAE, prices in the real estate sector have slumped by an average of 25 percent from their peak in September after rallying 79 percent in the 18 months to July 2008, according to Morgan Stanley.
Faye said the fate of the steel sector was in addition tied to that of the struggling US auto industry, once a thriving steel market but one in which two of its giant players, General Motors and Chrysler, are staring at bankruptcy.
The two companies are currently limping along thanks to billions of dollars in government aid.
"We are waiting to see if the auto sector in the US will get out of the crisis intact," she said.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090411.wrcover11/BNStory/Business
China's runaway steel train
April 11, 2009 at 12:47 AM EDT
FENGRUN, CHINA and TORONTO — Yu Jianshui fidgets in his big leather chair
as he chain-smokes his way through an interview. Times are tough at the
Tangshan Fengrun Zhengda Iron and Steel Co. Ltd.
With China suffering its sharpest economic slowdown in decades, Mr. Yu, the
firm's general manager, complains that he is getting fewer and fewer orders
for his main product, huge bars of raw steel known as billets. In his 23
years in steel, “this is the worst I've ever seen.”
Yet under the corrugated metal roofs of his steel mill, blast furnaces
still blast and two assembly lines still roll out 3,000 tonnes of steel a
day.
It is the same story elsewhere in Fengrun, a gritty steel town where the
red flag of the People's Republic flies from giant-like loading derricks.
After shutting briefly when steel prices dipped last fall, most of
Fengrun's more than 100 mills have come back to life to exploit a price
uptick this winter, churning out countless tonnes of pipe, girders, rolled
steel and heavy cable.
And that, Mr. Yu says, is the problem: Not that so many mills are going out
of business, but that so many are still going.
China simply makes too much steel. The government estimates that China's
annual production is about 100 million tonnes more than it should be, a
figure equal to the whole annual output of the industry in the United
States.
Worse, China has far too many steel companies, more than 700 at last count.
Add in iron companies and companies that roll or otherwise shape steel, and
the total comes to more than 7,000. Despite repeated government attempts to
force them to consolidate into fewer, bigger companies, most of them are
still small and inefficient.
By rights, many companies should have closed. Instead, they march on like
zombies, China's industrial undead.
That was not such a problem when China was growing at 10 per cent or more a
year and demand was soaring for products made in the “workshop of the
world.” No matter how much steel China made and how many companies were
making it, there was always a market somewhere.
Now it's a problem, and not just for China and its steel makers. In China
and around the world, demand for steel is plummeting. Producers are cutting
back: Japan's output fell 39 per cent and Germany's 31 per cent in February
from the same month last year.
But China's crude steel production in February actually grew 4.9 per cent,
even as steel exports hit a 52-month low, falling 62 per cent on a yearly
basis. Since last October, most steel makers have been losing money. Prices
for Chinese hot-rolled steel fell to about $400 (U.S.) a tonne in March,
less than half the peak of $980 a tonne hit last year. Even China's Iron
and Steel Association has cautioned that overproduction has risked flooding
the market with unwanted steel.
In its latest master plan for steel, drawn up this winter, Beijing says it
will force the industry to slim down and consolidate. But such edicts have
been issued many times before, and instead, production has continued to
proliferate. Few believe this time is likely to be different.
The impact of China's overproduction is being felt around the world. As
demand for steel products plunges, China's continued strong production is
hurting producers in other countries. Just this week, a group of American
makers of steel pipe used in oil drilling filed complaints with U.S. trade
officials alleging unfair competition from Chinese imports they say have
been dumped on the domestic market.
“That is the challenge of China,” says Michael Willemse, an analyst
with CIBC World Markets in Toronto. “They can be very disruptive to the
global market if their capacity-expansion plans are not consistent with
consumption needs of the industrial economy.”
MINERS STILL HAPPYChina's romance with steel goes back a long way. Chinese
in the Han Dynasty, 1,800 years ago, produced an early form of steel by
combining wrought iron and cast iron.
In the disastrous Great Leap Forward of 1958 to 1961, Mao Zedong made grain
and steel production the centrepiece of his plan to surpass the decadent
West. The Great Helmsman encouraged the people to build backyard steel
furnaces in every commune and neighbourhood. To meet wildly unrealistic
production goals, they melted down pots and pans and burned furniture for
fuel.
When Deng Xiaoping abandoned Maoist economics in 1978, China began building
its steel industry in earnest. As foreign investment poured in and the
economy took off, China ramped up production. In the present decade, it has
grown at an average of more than 20 per cent a year. It now exceeds the
combined production of Japan, the United States, Russia, India, South
Korea, Germany, Ukraine and Brazil.
China became the world's biggest consumer and producer of steel, accounting
for a third of the world's total output.
Like the auto industry in North America, steel in China came to be
considered an essential industry, too big to fail. It directly employs 3.58
million people. Millions more live off it in support roles. As of 2007, it
contributed 4 per cent of China's gross domestic product and 9 per cent of
industrial profits.
For a long time, everyone seemed to benefit. Chinese steel makers were
growing and making money. Foreign steel makers were selling lots of steel
to China, which was a net importer of steel until 2006. Iron ore producers
in resource-rich countries such as Canada made a fortune as the steel boom
pushed up prices for ore.
Indeed, the relatively stable demand from China has helped coking coal and
iron prices weather the global economic collapse better than most
commodities – and if Chinese steel makers remain at their current
production levels, that would not be unwelcome to the international iron
ore and coking coal producers.
At a time when financing for most mining firms has all but disappeared,
China has been a lone source of capital, playing sugar daddy abroad to
shore up the future of the domestic steel industry. Last week, Wuhan Iron
and Steel Group Corp., or WISCO, one of China's largest steel producers,
agreed to invest a total of $240-million to acquire a 20-per-cent stake in
Consolidated Thompson Iron Mines Ltd. and a 25-per-cent stake in the
company's Bloom Lake iron ore development project in Quebec.
But for China, the continuing steel push, once a sign of strength, has
become a sign of weakness.
The sector's prodigious growth made it a vivid symbol of China's rise. Now,
it tells the story of chronic overinvestment and overcapacity, manipulated
lending, political interference in markets and overreliance on heavy
industry – faults that are being exposed by the crisis across many of the
country's industries, and that could cost China dearly as the global
recession grinds on.
Steel is not the only industry plagued by too much capacity and too many
companies. China has 5,000 cement makers, 3,800 glass makers, 3,500 pulp
and paper producers, and no less than 24,000 chemical companies.
“It's a kind of a perpetual theme here,” says Jack Perkowski, now a
merchant banker in Beijing who came to China from the United States almost
20 years ago to start a car parts company – and was startled to find
there were already 150 companies making piston rings.
“If you look at any product, there are usually only half a dozen or so
companies making it in most countries. In China, there are hundreds or
thousands making that same product.”
The reasons behind China's capacity issue say a lot about how China works
– or doesn't – and points to a slew of other problems.
Outsiders tend to think of China as a centralized state with an
all-powerful government that can order industries around at will. In fact,
real power often lies with provincial and local officials, the powerful
barons of the Chinese political system.
Like Canadian premiers, they fight among themselves to attract industry.
And steel is a particular favourite, a “pillar industry” that produces
a crucial raw material for many other prestige industries, like automobiles
and appliances. In China, Mr. Perkowski says, “every town and every
village has to have a steel mill.”
The result is a highly dispersed, even balkanized industry, with production
spread around a half-dozen major steel-producing provinces and a dozen or
more smaller rivals. Those provinces compete constantly to outdo each other
at steel production.
The perennial winner is Hebei province, a traditional industrial powerhouse
in northeastern China, surrounding Beijing and the port of Tianjin.
According to the industry watcher mysteel.net, Hebei – where Mr. Yu's
Fengrun mill is located – won the output “championship” for the
seventh successive year in 2008, producing more than 100 million tonnes.
A value-added tax introduced in 1996 gives the provincial barons even more
incentive to lure steel companies and win bragging rights. A quarter of the
revenue from the VAT goes to local governments.
Balkanization makes for massive inefficiency. In a country like China that
lacks high-grade iron ore, the ideal would be to produce steel in big,
modern plants near coastal ports, making it cheaper to bring in ore and
coking coal, and easier to export production. Instead Chinese mills often
have to bring in their ore over hundreds of kilometres of rail track,
pushing up their costs.
Pushing up pollution, too. A report last month from the Alliance for
American Manufacturing claimed that China's steel industry, with its
massive consumption of coal and electricity, produced half of the carbon
dioxide from world steel production, making it a huge contributor to the
greenhouse gases said to cause global warning. It also claimed that
governments help the industry with more than $15-billion a year in energy
subsidies, adding to pollution and overproduction.
China's government-directed banking system plays a part in runaway steel
output, too. In China, the big banks are run by the state. Their local
branches are often closely tied to local officials.
Eager to reap the taxes they get from steel companies, those officials
arrange with banks to provide financing for new mills. In China, where
labour and land is cheap, mills can be built in a fraction of the time it
takes in the West for a fraction of the cost.
If steel prices are rising, they quickly generate handsome profits. But
that adds to China's capacity and, in time, overcapacity. That, in turn,
puts downward pressure on prices. In a normally functioning market, Mr.
Perkowski says, that would lead to an industry shakeout. Weaker, smaller
mills would close. Production would fall to meet demand.
Not in China. With “everyone incentivized to keep producing,” he writes
in his 2008 book Managing the Dragon, “this capacity never closes.
Instead, the plant churns out product at ever-diminishing prices. As long
as it can sell at a price equal to the variable costs of production, it
keeps producing.” Even if it can't cover those costs, friendly banks may
step in to cover its losses.
“This is a topsy-turvy, helter-skelter model of economic growth where
each province has its own plans and the central government just sits on top
and screams,” says Hans Mueller, an independent consultant based in
Tennessee who follows China's steel industry.
The screaming does not seem to do much good. Beijing's latest master plan
would hold crude steel output to its current level of about 500 million
tonnes. It would move more steel-making capacity to the coastal regions.
And it would raise the minimum size of blast furnaces to 400 cubic metres,
up from 300 at present, with the intention of forcing smaller,
less-efficient mills to close.
The aim is to make its industry more like other countries', with a few big
dominant players. China's top three companies account for only about a
fifth of the country's total production, compared with well over half for
the top three in the United States, Russia or South Korea. South Korea, in
fact, gets 87 per cent of its production from just two giant mills.
To bang heads together, China's cabinet set a goal last month of raising
the share of output from its top five steel companies to 45 per cent of the
total from 28 per cent at present.
Canada's Teck Cominco Ltd., a major producer of coking coal used to make
steel, is betting on the consolidation of the Chinese steel industry.
Although it doesn't sell coal to China now, it hopes to in the future once
more Chinese production moves to the coast, creating demand for seaborne
coal.
Selling to China's coastal regions was a key driver behind the company's
$14-billion (Canadian) takeover last year of Fording Canadian Coal Trust
– a deal that has left Teck straining under more than $9-billion (U.S.)
in debt. “It's one of the reasons that we believe in the coal assets,”
said Teck spokesman Greg Waller. “There is going to be a fundamental
change in the valuation of metallurgical coal in the future.”
If history is any guide, it could take a long time for Teck's coal to get
to China's coast. The Chinese “have been talking about this as a matter
of national state policy since 2001 and the number of steel firms went up
and up and up,” says Daniel Rosen, principal of Rhodium Group, a New York
consultancy. “The reality went in a totally different direction.”
In fact, Beijing's massive four-trillion-yuan economic stimulus program
threatens to worsen steel's obesity issue. Much of the money will be used
for steel-gobbling projects like railway expansion. To further cushion the
industry from the global recession, Beijing is raising a rebate on steel
exports.
Yet despite the likelihood of continued Chinese steel overproduction, the
country's growth could very well serve as the cornerstone for a global
economic recovery.
Na Liu, China strategist at Scotia Capital, says China's iron and copper
imports hit record highs in February, and net imports of aluminum and zinc
are at their highest in several years. China's recent willingness to pay
$140 a tonne for coking coal helped support a 2009 benchmark coal contract
of $129 a tonne that was much higher than many expected.
As for steel, low prices coupled with China's relatively high cost of
production may have already tipped the trade balance in favour of imports.
Russian steel producers “have been selling into the Chinese market at
very competitive prices, and China might actually have become a net
importer of steel in March,” Mr. Liu says.
While China's labour and regulatory costs give it a major advantage over
other steel-producing nations, the bulk of those benefits will eventually
disappear.
“Gradually, Chinese steel mills are going to lose their cost advantages,
as environmental protection and other regulatory costs begin to go
higher,” Mr. Liu says.
Back in Fengrun, Mr. Yu knows his industry may need to change.
“When I was a kid, the country's power was measured by how much steel it
produced,” he says.
Now, he complains that the industry has too much capacity and too many
players. “They can't all survive,” he says. “Some of these companies
have to die off.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
