#and farmers and factory workers and etc to support all of them in turn

[gwarden123]

Who’s paying for all of this? Simple raiding wouldn’t be enough. Like, the Empire’s fancy armour and heavy machinery and tanks are broadly equivalent to the kind of equipment the United States Armed Forces have in comparison to other countries. It’s big, and expensive, and uses some of the most advanced technologies we’ve developed. The amount of money the United States spends on its military is ridiculous. The amount is so vast, they don’t accurately know how much it is.

There’s a scene I really like in Ran by Akira Kurosawa. The daimyo has been betrayed by his sons and he and his army has fled for the countryside. And his army of samurai can’t feed themselves. Because a specialised class of elite warriors specialises themselves out of the chain of production. It needs a people much larger than themselves to support their existence.

[kisscookin]

Hi kisscookin, idk what to call you is it alright to call you that? I'm the one who ask you about totalitarian socialism thing btw... so you don't approve it? How abt China right now? They're also kinda.. have the same thing don't you think?

And btw.. I'm not Chinese so don't worry to answer my question if you don't approve it, or if you approve it.. I just want to know what people think abt them..

You can reply in private if you want...

Sorry if I seem to be too obtrusive.. I just.. want someone to talk about deeper things.. like.. my friends are kinda don't really know or don't care abt looking things behind the veil of what usually are known by general masses.. so.. I really want to discuss smt with like minded people..

And also.. I want to be your friend and talk about things.. if you don't mind cause I think you seem to be a nice and well informed person.. hmm. Thankyou.., I hope I hear from you soon! Take care! 💕💕 🍀

hi lovely ♡ actually I'm very happy that you asked me those questions! politics, history and international issues are my cup of tea! I love talking about it and giving everyone random lectures like I'm professor lol (one day I will hehe)

yes, I don't approve totalitarian systems. with authoritative systems.... I don't know, I would argue. but nevertheless I'm big "fan" of democracy.

don't worry, most of my friends also are not interested in such topics. if you want to chat with me more about issues that bother you or interest you, hit me up in DMs!

I've read bunch of books about China, Asian history in XX century, communists, totalitarian systems, especially USSR and Third Reich. also I passed my uni exams with the best grades so I think I possess enough knowledge to answer your question haha 😊

First of all, China is specific and unique in every meaning of this word. even communism there is... not really communism. to discuss China political system, we have to turn back time to overthrowing Qing dynasty, if I'm not wrong. that overthrowing happened in approx. 1920's — at the peak of the bolshevic revolution. bolshevic wanted to take world so badly and expand their sick ideology to every country. they didn't make it on the West side, because Poland stopped them in 1920 — that even is called The Warsaw Battle or The Miracle over the Vistula River in rough translation. the bolshevic started to mix and stir things up on the East side. they started to introduce their ideology step by step in China. that intensified when Joseph Stalin came to power. let's end the thread regarding USSR.

years later, in Chinese revolution (that lasted till 1945), there were two opposing sides. Kuo MinTang (called shortly KMT) and Mao Zedong's partisan army. Mao knew very well that China is indeed super unique country. he deducted that in order to take over China and introduce communism, he has to modify 'original' ideology that was based on Marx and Engels ideas. (btw Marx never worked as worker in factory! Engels was giving money to him and his family lol but Marx still managed to write 1000 pages book about working class. apparently very boring). because at that time China was rather poor, agricultural country, it was impossible to conduct revolution of the prolet. almost no factories as that time. he gained support and power through farmers, peasants, ex soldiers, killers, bandits. the most frustrated and furious group of Chinese people at that time. in big mental shortcut that's how he and his 'staff' came into power. of course KMT lost the battle of China, but its different story.

generally there were some similarities and differences between China People's Republic and rest of communist world back in the day. but differences started appearing more after Mao Zedong's death.

nowadays I would say that China is more authoritative country rather that totalitarian. I know they label themselves as communist country, and there's still only one ruling party, but look at the market — capitalism! stock markets, private property, private businesses, international trade, international investments, etc. everything that I've mentioned defines capitalism! but with the mix of communist party, propaganda, censorship it creates new political system — Chinese system lol but seriously that specific and differential country have to produce specific system, in order to make it work.

even though I 'admire its own uniqueness through diplomat's eyes, its still inhuman political system. free speech right is not followed, Uygur death camps, censorship, inhuman work conditions, air pollution, random rockets in space and more and more.....

I will never approve inhuman, oppressive system, but regarding of Chinese political situation, I don't think it will change in like 50 years. what should happen in order to overthrow ruling party? kinda impossible I guess.....

let me know what you think. feel free to comment I'm curious.

[mostlysignssomeportents]

Ant, Uber, and the true nature of money

The US election news has largely overshadowed a seismic moment in global finance: Ant, a fintech company that spun out of Alibaba/Alipay, was scheduled to have the world's largest IPO, topping even Aramco, the Saudi sovereign wealth fund.

Then Chinese regulators canceled it.

As Yves Smith writes in her excellent Naked Capitalism breakdown, the consensus narrative on this is capricious Chinese regulators changed their minds and jerked the rug out from under Ali's billionaire owner Jack Ma.

The reality is a lot chewier.

https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2020/11/china-takes-step-against-securitization-consumer-borrowing-with-suspension-of-ant-ipo.html

To understand it, you need to understand the difference between the Chinese and American "money story." In the US, there is widespread, unquestioning faith in the fairytale that money predates the state and is separate from it.

In this story, people come together to trade but are plagued by disparate goods: if I want to pay for your chickens with a cow, how do you make change? They spontaneously decide that something (gold?) is money and price their cows and chicks in it.

Then, governments come along tax our gold away, and then to add insult to injury, governments abandon gold and insist that paper is as good as gold, print too much of it and crash the economy!

This probably sounds familiar to you, but it's just not true.

The actual historical reality, supported by history, archaeology and anthropology, is that governments created money by creating tax. The first "money" was the Babylonian ledgers that recorded how much of their crops farmers owed to the state and their creditors.

Money took a leap forward with imperial conquest: emperors solved the logistical problem of feeding and billeting their occupying soldiers by charging the occupied a tax that had to be paid for in coins stamped with the emperor's head.

They paid the soldiers in these coins, and demanded that their conquered populations somehow get the coins in order to pay their tax, with violent consequences if the tax wasn't paid. So the people sold food and other necessities to soldiers to get the coins.

Money, in other words, is how states provision themselves, and it derives its value from the fact that you have to pay your taxes in it. Governments spend money into existence by buying labor and goods from the public, and then tax it out of existence once a year.

The money the government spends, but does not tax, is the public's money - the money left over for us to transact. All the money in circulation is the sum total of all the money the government spent but didn't tax - that is, the government's deficit is the public's asset.

When governments run "balanced budgets" (or budget surpluses), they remove money from the economy, leaving the public with less to spend. That can be a good thing - a way to fight inflation, which is when too much money chases too few assets.

Low government spending slows growth by taking away the private sector's ability to spend. When the private sector is at full employment, when it is buying all the stuff that's for sale, you need to do something to keep inflation at bay.

During WWII, the USG competed with the private sector for stuff and labor. Uncle Sam spent lots of new money into existence, paying people to build munitions - but then convinced people to buy war bonds, burying that new money for years to come.

https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2019/07/taxes-for-revenue-are-obsolete.html

But when governments run so lean that there isn't enough money in the economy for the private sector to buy the stuff it needs, it seeks out other forms of money, like bank loans (which generate interest income for shareholders - one reason the market likes austerity).

In theory, bank lending is tightly regulated. Banks are the government's fiscal agents, creatures of the state, only able to trade because of a government charter. But when there isn't enough money in the system, unregulated banks spring into existence.

Another word for "unregulated bank" is "fintech" (h/t Riley Quinn).

And now we're back to China and the money story. Chinese finance regulators have always treated money as a public utility, to be spent or withdrawn to accomplish public purposes.

During the country's rapid industrialization, regulators loosened the flow of money to allow for rapid capacity-building, directing the country's productive capacity to building factories that would multiply that capacity.

But when they shut off the spigot and told factory owners that their future growth would come from making and selling things, the wealthy rebelled and sought out money from unlicensed banks or banks that were willing to break the rules.

This led to a string of subprime debt crises over the past five years, as regulators crushed these wildcat money-creators as fast as they popped up.

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2016-02-17/china-s-600-billion-subprime-crisis-is-already-here

China's 1% fought back. They emigrated:

https://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2012/08/rich-chinese-flee/

They used cryptocurrency (aka fintech) to evade capital controls, inflating the Bitcoin price-bubble and the Vancouver/Sydney/etc real-estate price bubble as they laundered their money and stashed it in safe-deposit boxes in the sky:

https://www.ft.com/content/bad16a88-d6fd-11e6-944b-e7eb37a6aa8e

As China's shadow economy ballooned it also grew in criminality. There was the wave of Chinese debt-kidnappings, which became so widespread that hostage-taking was described as "China's small claims court."

https://foreignpolicy.com/2017/08/08/chinas-police-think-hostages-arent-their-problem/

No wonder regulators fought back.

China's regulators didn't win a decisive victory, but they retained enormous control over their money-supply, and that REALLY paid off when the pandemic hit and they suspended all debts, rents, and taxes and mothballed the entire productive economy.

https://pluralistic.net/2020/09/01/cant-pay-wont-pay/#jubilee-now

Contrast with the US where the finance sector is an industry, not a public utility. Finance flexed its political muscle and diverted nearly the whole stimulus to itself, then crushed the productive economy by demanding debt service and rents.

https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2020/09/michael-hudson-how-an-act-of-god-pandemic-is-destroying-the-west-the-u-s-is-saving-the-financial-sector-not-the-economy.html

The ability to use finance as a utility is one of China's crucial assets, and it defends that asset ferociously. And THAT'S why the Ant IPO got killed. Ant's major source of income is short-term, high-interest lending, what Chinese regulators call "pawnbrokering."

China's pawnbrokers are a $43B shadow banking sector, and the country's regulators have been cracking down on them for the past year.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-03-12/china-is-said-to-scrutinize-43-billion-pawn-shop-lending-boom

$43B is a drop in the bucket of China's shadow economy (valued at $9T!), but it has real metastatic potential.

Ant's innovation is to fintechify the pawnbroker industry, by tying it to apps (on the front end) and to a US-style debt-brokerage (on the back end).

IOW: Ant's business model is that desperate people use an app to request and quickly receive high-risk, high-interest loans.

Then Ant sells the loans to "investors" (AKA "securitization"). Converting debts into income streams for third parties is the true basis of the finance industry. It's the means by which socially useless intermediaries extract ever-mounting rents from the productive economy.

And as Smith writes in her breakdown, the fact that Chinese finance regulators weren't going to let Ant explode his mass-scale, app-based payday-lending pawnbrokerage is not a surprise. They've been telling Jack Ma this for MONTHS, publicly and privately.

Ma thought he could simply bull his way past the Chinese regulators - that because he runs Alibaba and its subsidiaries, that they would defer to him. But the whole point of a finance regulator is NOT to let the finance sector write its own rules.

That's because bankers will cheerfully set the whole economy on fire to turn a buck (see, e.g., America).

Ant was on track for the largest IPO in world history due to investors' appetite for converting Chinese money from a public utility to a private enrichment vehicle.

So yeah, you're goddamned right the Chinese regulator wasn't going to let him do it. Their whole JOB is to not let him do it.

If you read this far, you may be asking yourself why, if governments don't need taxes to fund programs, they bother to tax at all?

There are two important reasons. The first is to fight inflation, by removing existing money from circulation so that when the government spends new money into existence to pay for the things it needs, that money isn't bidding against the existing supply.

But the other reason is to deprive the wealthy of the power that money brings, lest they use that power to pervert policy. Jack Ma's billions are what got him to the brink of a disastrous IPO for his unregulated bank.

And the US election demonstrates just how badly public policy fares when concentrated money is brought to bear on it for parochial purposes. Take Prop 22, the California ballot initiative to allow Uber and Lyft to misclassify their employees as independent contractors.

No on Prop 22 is a no-brainer. Vast numbers of gig workers are full-time employees, not contractors, and Lyft and Uber and other gig economy companies have pioneered labor misclassification as a tactic for paying literal starvation wages.

https://pluralistic.net/2020/10/14/final_ver2/#prop-22

And yet, Prop 22 passed, thanks to the largest-ever spending on any ballot initiative in California history: $205 million ($628,854/day!), spent pn 19 PR firms (including Big Tobacco's cancer-denial specialists).

https://jacobinmag.com/2020/11/proposition-22-california-uber-lyft-gig-employee/

The spend included a bribe to the NAACP Chair's consultancy that made sub-minimum wage jobs with no benefits for people of color (the majority of gig workers) seem like a blow for racial justice.

All told, Uber/Lyft's campaign outspent 49 out of 53 CA House races COMBINED.

And it was a bargain. Lyft and Uber have stolen $413m from California's employment insurance fund since 2014 - and that's just one cost they ducked through this victory. Far more important are the savings they'll realize on worker safety and job-related death claims.

The gig economy companies are the epitome of the financial economy destroying the productive economy. None of these companies turn a profit, after all - all they do is destroy actual, profitable businesses.

Currently the entire restaurant sector is being laid to waste by Postmates and Uber Eats (even as both lose vast sums):

https://pluralistic.net/2020/09/19/we-are-beautiful/#man-in-the-middle

And the workers who lost out with Prop 22 are being "chickenized" - having all the risk of operating a business shifted onto their side of the ledger:

https://pluralistic.net/2020/07/14/poesy-the-monster-slayer/#stay-on-target

(No surprise, one of Prop 22's signature achievements was denying workers the right to unionize).

The desperation of chickenized workers is downright dystopian:

https://pluralistic.net/2020/09/02/free-steven-donziger/#phone-trees

and chickenization (not automation) is the major cause of falling wages:

https://pluralistic.net/2020/06/17/on-face-interaction/#zombie-robots

Lyft, Uber, Postmates, and the whole gamut of gig economy companies are all haemorrhaging money. Uber alone lost $4.7B in the first half of 2020. That's how you can tell they aren't tech companies: tech companies profited during the pandemic.

Gig-economy companies aren't part of the productive economy - they're part of the finance economy. They rely on investors, not profits from delighted customers, to stay afloat. They make nothing. They destroy everything: workers' lives, productive businesses.

They will never be profitable. Ever.

Take Uber. The company only exists because the Saudi royals amassed so much money that they could bend reality. The "Saudi Vision 2030" plan calls for the creation of new sources of post-oil wealth.

To that end, the Saudis have poured money into the Softbank VC fund, which then supported global-scale, money-losing, predatory businesses in the hopes of securing a monopoly (or, failing that, unloading the company onto dazzled suckers).

When the company IPOed last year, it had already lost $10b. It loses $0.41 on every dollar you spend on your fare. And yet, the Saudis got away clean, off the backs of investors who assumed that a pile of shit this big must have a pony under it somewhere.

Some believed the company's lies about the imminence of self-driving cars. Uber is not going to make a self-driving car.

https://pluralistic.net/2020/09/30/death-to-all-monopoly/#pogo-stick-problem

Some believed the company's lies about profitability via growth. It can't grow to profitability. By its own disclosures, profitability depends on every public transit system in the world shutting down and being replaced by Ubers. #Nagahappen.

https://48hills.org/2019/05/ubers-plans-include-attacking-public-transit/

The Saudi strategy - and its punishing, economy-destroying reality-distortions - are exemplary of what happens when government let too much money accumulate in unaccountable, private hands. Prop 22 will kill and starve workers, and the public will pick up the pieces.

The businesses that profit from these deaths and immiseration will fail anyway, but not before their major backers and top execs make hundreds of millions or billions.

Recall: the Ant IPO was set to smash the existing record: Saudi Aramco (AKA the money behind Uber).

Meanwhile, all the blood and treasure squandered on Prop 22 - the $205m spent on the Yes side, the $20 spent by unions on the No side - won't save Uber or other gig economy companies.

Not only are they bleeding money, but as Edward Ongweso Jr explains, "Uber is losing legal challenges in France, Britain, Canada, Italy," turning drivers into employees or allowing "lawsuits reclassifying them as such."

https://www.vice.com/en/article/3annmb/proposition-22-passes-in-california-but-uber-and-lyft-are-only-delaying-the-inevitable

And other US states - NY, MA, NJ - are working to end the misclassification of Uber drivers and other gig workers.

Permitting Uber and other gig economy companies to flout the law did not make the economy better. All it did was transfer more money to the wealthy.

And the money they wealthy amass is converted to political power, usurping money's role as a public utility and converting it to a means to seek private gains at public expense.

[8-evil-annoying-catboys]

if the government was competent and the people in charge actually gave a fuck about the impending doom climate change represents, here are some things that could be done:

universal basic income, varied by region to represent 150% or more of the local cost of living, to make up for the lost jobs represented by the following points (although this would be paid to EVERYONE, jobless or not), aka to keep poor people from drowning, paid for by reduction of military spending and a tax on the extremely wealthy who can definitely afford to be cut down a peg (and would still receive the income anyway, both to keep the spirit of fairness and to avoid them throwing a hissy fit over it). also, regulations such as rent control and price caps on necessities such as food/toiletries/etc. to lower the total cost of living, therefore saving the government some money by reducing how much this income would have to be. this would also mean that these industries wouldn’t need to be subsidised since the workers would already be receiving the money needed to live, which would in turn save the government the money they otherwise have to spend on subsidising, for example, farmers, because there would be no reason that selling crops at a low price would hurt them if they were already receiving more money than they needed to support themselves from the government anyway.

complete end to the fossil fuel industry and a total overhaul of the automobile industry. recall of all cars that use gas, but with a replacement program wherein people who need cars still can get a fully electric car and/or have their car modified to become a fully electric car. this accompanied by an investment into sustainable (aka, not fossil fuel powered) public transportation to reduce the demand for personal cars in the first place, and an option for those who don’t need their car that much or won’t after the new transit system is implemented, can be paid back the price of their car when they bought it, in full. optionally, car loan forgiveness can accompany this, but with a replacement car or a full repayment of the car’s price at the time of purchase, that may be unnecessary.

complete ban on plastic fishing gear, to start, since that makes up the majority of plastic pollution in the ocean. ban the rest of plastics in increments and begin a mission to clean up the existing plastic pollution, which would in turn create more jobs because you’d need to pay people to do this. another necessary action that would create more jobs would be to find a reliable replacement for plastic straws, since many of the current alternatives don’t work for disabled people who need to use straws. any other disposable plastic products that are also a necessity for disabled people or other marginalised groups would also require a replacement in this way. in the meantime, before the complete ban of plastics, a ban on production of new plastics, requiring that all materials that are still allowed to be made of plastic must be made of 100% RECYCLED plastic ONLY.

complete overhaul of the meat industry. ban on factory farming. regulations requiring produce be sold only within a certain distance of where it was raised. encouragement for the public to start gardening and raising their own food as much as possible, including creating community gardens on unused plots of land in urban areas where many residents may not have land necessary to start a garden on their own property, and creating food forests.

scrap or overhaul of the national park system. by this, i don’t mean allow companies to build over that land, of course don’t fucking do that, but allowing indigenous americans to practice hunting and cultivating the way they’ve done it for thousands of years, because THEY KNOW WHICH NATIVE PLANTS NEED HUMAN INTERACTION TO SURVIVE.

along that line, extreme repopulation system for endangered animals and animals whose numbers have been significantly reduced as a result of colonisation (see: bison) to restore indigenous ecosystems to their precolonial balance, or at least to get as close to that balance as possible.

some sort of program to eradicate homelessness and rid the land of extraneous housing (ie, nobody is living there nor will anyone ever live there even after all homeless people are housed, because there are more empty houses in the us than homeless people) thereby increasing the amount of land available for native plants and animals’ habitats. this would probably look something like, if you own multiple houses you have to pick one or maybe two to keep (MAYBE a summer home is ok, i’m honestly not sure if that would work for this though), the rest the government pays you the price you paid for it and takes it either to house the homeless or to clear the land and allow the ecosystem to take over that property again. the government would not start clearing land in this way until after the entire population is housed to avoid any miscalculation in regards to how much housing is necessary and how much should be given back to the earth.

confiscate prívate jets (with full repayment of the cost, optionally, since anyone who can afford a fucking private jet has too much money already) and replace airlines with trains and boats, at least until we find a way to fuel planes in a way that doesn’t contribute to the greenhouse effect. flights booked prior to this change may be fulfilled, or they may be replaced with a train and/or boat, with the consumer having the option of changing departure time so that the arrival time is the same as it would have been on the flight, or leaving the departure time the same with the knowledge that the arrival time will likely be later. this would also require construction of cross country trains, maybe bullet trains but maybe not, with extreme consideration of where the tracks run to avoid disturbing important ecosystems or native sacred areas. the construction would also create a lot of temporary jobs, again making up for the gap after the loss of jobs in industries that harm the environment.

in general, complete removal or reconstruction of any industry that, as it currently is, harms the global or local environment. in the case of reconstruction, the end goal would be for the industry to be 100% sustainable, and the speed at which this happens would depend on how detrimental the industry is to the ecosystem currently and how well green tech has addressed the issue already, with focus most pointed to industries that are most harmful and that already have a fully developed sustainable alternative. grants and subsidies to efforts to expand green tech to address industries where a fully sustainable and reliable alternative doesn’t exist yet.

full-scale efforts to reverse previously made damages to the environment (cleaning up pollution, planting trees and native plants that have been seriously reduced in their natural habitat, etc.) in any ways possible, and grants/subsidies to scientific endeavours to find ways to reverse damages that we currently don’t know how to reverse or if it’s even possible, creating more jobs in STEM and more jobs that needn’t require a college education at the same time that we put in the effort to heal our planet.

programs to shift towards green energy only; for example, providing low-cost or free solar panels to homeowners

and these are just a few ideas. i could probably think of way more, and i’m just one person. can we be creative and put the needs of our people and our planet before the desires of corporations, please? jesus fucking christ.

[swifty-fox]

Please tell me about 1920s Russian socioeconomic policy

PLEASE LET ME TELL YOU ABOUT 1920′s RUSSIAN SOCIOECONOMIC POLICY

 so 1920′s Russian socio-economic policy was in a few short words. entirely fucked.  Granted the issue goes farther back than 1920′s! basically up until then Russia had been functioning as a mostly closed society in that they rejected the industrial age of the mid to late 1800′s. They believed that they were superior as a country and did not want interference from other religions and cultures (the Great Schism took no prisoners) So essentially at the turn of the 20th century Russia was still almost in the middle ages (granted there was some technology leakage etc. it was more prevalent in upper society to be more modernized) BUT they still had peasants and serfs and people living as they had done hundreds if not thousands of years ago (something like 80% of Russians were impoverished and working as serfs ((that might only be white Russians there's like 32 ethnic Russian groups nobody likes to talk about)) ) 

cutting for length

so naturally people are like mad pissed about that right? they want to be part of the progression of the world they want to be educated and to travel and to have access to medicine and technology and all the benefits of ‘modern’ society. but Tsar Nikolai says no. This is a huge part of his downfall, his unwillingness to change (also vague antisemitism ((they used to conduct these things called Pogroms which was basically localized exterminations of Jewish people. it was fucked up and vastly condemned by a lot of people but the powers that be used the Jewish people as a scapegoat because uhhh 1800′s and 1900′s be like that)), being REALLY bad at war, Rasputin, excessive spending and wealth, a little spice of police brutality and a few massacres as well as aggressive heavy-handed tactics against terrorists. Great family man. Bad leader.) 

Anyways fast-forward through the Russian revolution that's a whole can of worms

Now we have a new government. not a better government but a NEW one with vastly different ideas of what they’re going to do. 

Another sidetrack, lets talk about Communist Theory for a sec. I’m going to go into Karl Marx’s original intention as Russian Communism is actually a twice bastardized idea of Communist (Lenin developed his theory of communism from people like Georgi Plekhanov and  Nikola Chernechevskey’s book What Is To Be Done?  who were also putting their own spin on Marxism) 

ANYWAYS. The basic idea of of Karl Marx’s Communist theory is that society will eventually, over the course of hundreds or thousands of years, develop through capitalism and unto a utopian world where we have no need for things live government or taxes or money. The concept here being over hundreds or thousands of years and NATURALLY.

The Bolsheviks (Led by Lenin) Looked at that and said mmmm no lets do it in like twenty years. 

it’s 1921 and Lenins NEW ECONOMIC POLICY (fondly nicknamed NEP) enters STAGE LEFT (get it) 

The basic idea of NEP was to blend capitalist (i.e a private market) with communist ideals (i. e. no market) and Fast-Track us to glorious utopian communism in not a few hundred years but in a few years! 

sounds doable right? 

the basic idea of NEP was that there would be limited private property that would ultimately be mostly owned by people that Lenin approved of (allies, benefactors, heroes of the glorious revolution for mother Russia and so on) There were things called prodravzyorstka  which was forced grain requisitions by the communist party for the good of the people  basically soldiers would come in and take most of the famers grain and left them to starve. There was also an imposed a tax on farmers that could be paid in -you guessed it!- more grain! NEP abolished that and instead allowed for a cash payout the harder that farmers worked. Productivity went up like 40% in the years following! Pretty great!!

It also incentivized and supported the formation of unions (they were communists remember, those bitches love unions) All in all it was....pretty decent? It wasn’t exactly communist as essentially it was just tax returns or the government buying grain from peasants rather than the peasants having to sell the grain themselves. Pretty great right! 

But it created an imbalance. Again, that Russia wanted to do was industrialized! they wanted to become modern but they didn't want to follow the way any other country did it and they wanted to do it in a fraction of the time! As the government and the ECONOMY began relying on the small farms for grains and vegetables and resources, the big factories and institutions that were privately owned were STRUGGLING!  as a result, they had to raise their prices to try to pay for themselves. But now those same farmers couldn't afford the industrial things they needed! like equipment for their farm tools and tractors or household goods. So now they have to raise THEIR food prices in response. It was a great way to inflate the economy after WII and the revolution. But obviously we all know where this is going. 

And then Boom. Lenin dies. The man had one too many strokes and croaks out in his country home without a successor named. The government is in chaos. Nobody knows what to do. Shortly before his death lenin wrote a (frankly quite funny) letter saying all his successors were fucking idiots and he hated them all.

In steps Stalin. If you think Lenin was bad...Stalin is a fucking bastard. The guy is even MORE antisemetic, brutal, corrupt, mysogynistic and RACIST. The man really hated the chinese. he also hated Georgians (the country not the state) which is pretty funny because he was Georgian. 

Anyways, he abolishes NEP and implements something called the Five Year Plan (NEP 2 for the jokesters out there) 

Stalin shifts the focus away from boosting agricultural development and focuses on rapid industrialiation in, you guessed it, FIVE YEARS. The stats on this plan are fucking insane man get this:

Staling wanted an 111% increase in coal production, 200% increase in iron production and 335% increase in electric power!!! in FIVE YEARS. 

(he also eliminated a class of people called “kulaks” which were richer farmers by turning the poor farmers against them. By elimate I mean they were murdered and their property distributed amongst the poorer farmers.)

I could go on and on about all the ways this failed, all the brutality, unethical and unsafe work enviroments, the continued programs, the amoutn of people who were murdered, the prison(slave) labor used, the rounding up and mass murder of anyone who spoke out against Stalin, the Five Year Plan or the russian government. This is really where the Soviet Union as we know it as westerners got its reputation. 

Also he caused TWO famines because he made all the farmers move into the city to be industry workers so they ddint have any food and didnt accept help from the Red Cross or other countries because MUHHH MOTHERLAND

but you know what it kiiinda worked? Capital increase was almost 160%, consumer goods increased by 87% and total output was up almost 120%!

But also it caused one of the worst famines in the western world with an estimated 6million (some people argue as many as 10million. We will never know the true number because it was mostly peasants and ethnic people suffering) people dying across the entire Soviet Union. Poeple were dying out on the streets in broad daylight, people were selling their dead children to be food. You can see pictures if you google it but they’re very graphic.

Generally, the Five-Year-Plan was lauded as a massive failure and a hotbed of absolutely disgusting human abuse and cruelty. And you knwow what Stalin said? He said nah it went well and implemented about FIVE MORE (theres been twelve in all but they exent up into the early 90′s) I wont touch on them as they were all pretty much iterations of Stalins original one and they all sucked.

Basically Russian Socioeconomic Policy is a hotbed of bad decisions, human rights violations and a LOT of interpersonal drama that i do not have the time to get into. (like the fucking DRAMA between Stalin and Nadezhda Krupskaya (lenins wife))

theres also a LOT more to it I just tried to condense like 40 years into one post so please feel free to go out and research your own! I used Peter Kenez’ “A History of the Soviet Union From the Beginning to its Legacy” while in class. It’s a little dry but effective 

theres also this book by my professor who is a DELIGHT https://www.amazon.com/Red-Arctic-Exploration-Soviet-1932-1939/dp/0195114361 and while I havent read it im sure its told with the same humor and zeal that he conducted his lectures 

also this bOOK THIS BOOK RIGHT HERE is SUCH a good read!

https://www.amazon.com/Vasily-Grossman-Soviet-Century-Alexandra-ebook/dp/B07P9HJMLM/ref=sr_1_4?dchild=1&keywords=the+soviet+century&qid=1589727805&sr=8-4 if you read any of them read this one! it examines the entire rise and fall of the communist party through the story of Grossman who was a jewish-russian writer and pretty famous in his own right though he died penniless and scorned. He’s got a couple movies based off his books out there two which were shelved for criticizing the party for decades! please read it i beg you

[vgyubin]

hello! it’s heather again and this time, i’m here to introduce you to vain glory’s world canon, choi chanwook, primarily known as na yubin. he’s significantly less pleasant to be around than siwoo, so... this’ll be fun. i do not have a profile page or a plots page up for him yet, so we’re really just out here winging it, yk? read under the cut for a tl;dr on his history and some personality pointers, but beware that there are mentions of drugs near the end. like this if you want to plot.

his parents married young and definitely pissed their families off in the process. everyone who knew them told them that they should wait, just in case they weren’t truly in love. but they were like... no, fuck that, we know what we want. they married at 19.

neither party went to college because they didn’t have the money to pay for it themselves and their families were too mad to fork up the cash to send them through school. they drifted around for a while, unable to find a good place where they were happy & could afford the rent. but they were happy to be together, so?

eventually settled down in the countryside & fell into hard labor jobs -- his mother became a farmer, his father became a factory worker. she worked by day and would be heading to bed just as he would be waking up to head to his third shift job.

they tried for a child for years, to no avail. she kept having complications with her pregnancies, or she wouldn’t get pregnant at all. they went through a lot during this time period and found themselves almost falling out of love. they fought all the time and considered divorce, but didn’t want to prove their families right.

anyway, choi chanwook came to them about ten years after they first started trying.

didn’t have a lot growing up because his parents didn’t have much money, but he was thankful for everything he did have, and his imagination was good enough for him anyway, yk??

watched a lot of tv instead of hanging out with other kids, because he didn’t have many friends; he lacked the excitement of youth, so most kids wouldn’t choose him over anyone else to hang out w. eventually started watching music shows.

was also into stargazing at night. so, he fell in love w stars both figuratively and literally.

he liked idols because it seemed like they had everything. nice clothes, pretty faces, friends, endless adoration, money, luxury...

when he was 14, he asked his parents if he could attend an idol trainee audition in seoul and they didn’t know what the fuck to say because he had never expressed interest in music before, but he had also never even really asked for anything so how/?? could they say no??? said yes bc they didn’t know what else to say.

by PURE LUCK, he passed three rounds of auditions and then became a trainee.

he trained really hard, passed out countless times, pushed himself to his limits.

four years later, he debuted as an idol! was given the stage name “na yubin” because the company thought that it fit his soft public image; plus, he didn’t want to use his birth name, anyway? wanted to protect his parents because they’re pretty private people. his birth name is not public information!!!!

lowkey he wasn’t that talented at the time...... the company put him in the back during choreo and only gave him a couple seconds of lines, but he was really handsome so he garnered a LOT of attention from day 1. almost every comment on his groups’ debut vid was about him. on variety shows, mcs talked to him a lot and questions fans sent in were almost all for him..... got a stupid amount of clout.

he was adored for his genuine, humble personality. seemed to make friends with literally everyone he crossed paths with.

group schedules turned into solo schedules, and every time his group had a comeback, they got more and more views because of people wanting to support yubin. he liked the attention!!! really!!!! but the company pushed him way too far and he ended up doing modeling, acting, mcing, etc and it got..... really tiring...... plus, his individual popularity resulted in him drifting away from his group members.

started taking uppers to get him through rigorous schedules. mainly adderall but also ritalin and concerta. and theeeen he started getting really fucking paranoid and also felt on edge because of crazy fans, unrealistic expectations, etc, so he started taking downers, too!!! fun!!!! so now he’s on a dangerous mix of both. yummy.

started getting an attitude problem and a MAJOR ego.........

anyway it’s 2020 and he’s a big bitch. only really cares about his parents...... that’s it..... thinks he’s better than most people. might have underlying insecurities, but? who can say for sure. he can still play nice when he wants to because once upon a time, he was the warmest boy you could meet. but...... he’s very, very cold when it comes down to it. he was never meant for the limelight, and it killed him without actually killing him. 

[howellrichard]

How to Adapt to Working from Home

Hiya Gorgeous!

People often assume I’m an extrovert. I can’t blame them, given my penchant for speaking in front of thousands of people and connecting online every day. But the truth is, I love being alone. Solitude is my happy place, and working from home has always come naturally to me.

That doesn’t mean it’s for everyone. Many find it easier to focus at an office. But as we practice social distancing to flatten the coronavirus curve, many of you have suddenly found yourselves with remote jobs… whether you like it or not.

If you’re feeling the whiplash, you’re not alone.

Folks all over the world are dealing with sudden, unexpected life changes, myself included! But since I have been doing the work-from-home thing successfully for a long time, I’m hoping I can help make this transition a little easier. So today I’m sharing what I’ve learned about what it takes to stay happy and productive while working remotely.

We’ll also talk about ways to create and maintain BOUNDARIES. Full disclosure: This is the area I struggle with most. I love what I do—it’s my life’s work! And if I’m not careful, that line between work and life gets pretty darn blurry.

When our world is turned upside down, it’s easy to bury ourselves in work or lose sight of what’s best for us. But I know that I’m happiest, healthiest and best-equipped to lead when I prioritize self-care and keep my boundaries strong. I think you’ll find that to be true for you, too!

Pulling back the curtain on common work-from-home pitfalls.

So, practically overnight you may have gone from commuting to the office to commuting to the… kitchen table (or home office if you’re lucky enough to have one!). That’s big, and on the surface it might sound like a dream come true. No more sitting in traffic or putting on real pants, right?

But with the need for social distancing accelerating at lighting speed, you probably didn’t have much time to prepare. That means you may be missing out on some of the best practices that can make working from home a win.

Whether you’re brand new or a seasoned pro at working from home, these symptoms indicate that remote work isn’t working for you. (No worries, though. Tips on how to make it work coming soon!)

Look out for these common pitfalls:

Breaking frequently because you’re distracted by household chores like laundry.

Not taking ANY breaks and sitting at your computer for hours at time.

Eating meals at your desk.

Rolling out of bed with only a few minutes to spare before work.

Working into the evenings instead of shutting down at day’s end.

Being constantly distracted by the people and pets you live with.

Difficulty balancing work with caring for your kids.

Having more anxious thoughts or dreams about work than usual.

Feeling isolated and disconnected from your coworkers.

Feeling like you can’t disconnect and transition into “home mode” at the end of the day.

I didn’t write this list just to stress you out. But if any of those sound familiar, there are some proven practices you can engage to protect your productivity (and your mental health!) while working from home. Now, ready to talk solutions?

How to Quickly Adapt to Working from Home

These practices have been essential for cultivating my balanced work-from-home life. I hope they help you stay happy and productive, whether you’re working from home or just staying home more than usual. And it doesn’t end when you go back to the office—you can keep using these ideas to improve your work/life balance, no matter where you are!

1. Create a consistent schedule with start-up and wind-down times.

Establishing start and stop times for your work day helps you maintain boundaries. I encourage you to try this out, even if you normally keep a flexible schedule! Your day is no longer bookended by getting to and leaving the office, so this gives you back that definition. Plus, establishing routines can provide a sense of normalcy in uncertain times.

Take it a step further by creating start-up and wind-down rituals. That means that the first hour of your day is dedicated to getting grounded and set up for success with the work ahead—and the last hour is dedicated to wrapping up that work so that you can “clock out” on time. My team and I started doing this recently and it has been a game changer!

2. Set clear objectives for each day.

This might be something you do during your start-up ritual! Pick two or three top priorities and keep them visible all day long. (I write mine in my Results Journal, but do whatever works for you!) Whenever possible, batch activities like meetings, inbox time, etc. together on your calendar. That way, you’ll have long periods of dedicated focus to work toward your top objectives.

3. When it comes to hygiene, act like you’re going to leave the house.

Take a shower, put on clothes… you know the drill! I’m not saying you have to do full hair and makeup—if yoga pants are your jam, go for it. But good hygiene is part of taking care of yourself and maintaining your routine. Plus, it can make you feel more centered and motivated.

4. Establish a dedicated workspace.

All of a sudden, work is home and home is work. Whaaat? When the two share a space, it can be pretty hard to maintain boundaries. Don’t worry if you don’t have an office, just be intentional about creating separate spaces for work and the rest of your life (aka don’t work in your bed!). Also, tidy up your space. Chaos in your workspace creates chaos in your mind.

5. Take real breaks.

When you go to the office, you automatically get a little fresh air and movement, even if it’s just walking from your front door to the car. You’re also more likely to walk to meetings and water cooler chats throughout the day. Fear not if you feel a bit stagnant or sluggish when you first start working from home—it’s totally fixable.

The key is to take real, mindful breaks. Take a few minutes for deep breathing in the morning or for stretching in the afternoon. Avoid the eat-at-your-desk trap and give yourself recess! Eat lunch outside if you can or do a quick yoga session in your living room. Just make simple self-care breaks a part of your day.

Need a dose of calm on your break? Grab my free Instant Stress Reduction guided meditation below!

6. Connect virtually.

If you’re new to working from home, you might feel disconnected at first. Luckily, there are a lot of ways to connect virtually. Have video meetings whenever you can using a tool like Zoom. Use Slack to check-in with your coworkers about work-related topics as well as fun stuff like photos of your at-home workspace and wins for the day. Just don’t keep chat notifications on all day. I’ve been there and it’s a recipe for getting nothing done!

7. Have kids? Read this.

I know that many of you aren’t just dealing with a surprise work-from-home scenario. You’re dealing with a whole new paradigm of parenting during the day, too. (You deserve a medal for this, by the way!) Trying to work while your kids are home can be really tough—and that’s especially true if you’re suddenly having to homeschool them. One of my amazing colleagues is a pro in this department (she homeschools and works from home on the reg!), so I asked her for a few tips…

Keep a routine, but it doesn’t have to be rigid. Set clear boundaries between school and play time, and make sure everyone knows what to expect.

Plan for together AND alone time each day so you can all stay connected while still having your space.

Make a list of activities to choose from and get your kids’ input. If they’re bored during free time, they’ll have a resource to go to.

Be gentle with yourself and seek support. If your partner is home, work out a schedule to trade shifts with the kids. Lean on your loved ones and fellow parents, too. They can’t be with you in person right now, but they can still be there for you from afar. (There may even be a loving aunt or grandparent who’d love to read your child a story on Facetime if you need a quick break.)

These are just a few of the ideas my friend shared to help those working from home with kids. Would you be interested in a blog post dedicated to this topic? Let me know in the comments!

And here’s my final tip…

Remember, you are a whole person who is likely going through a lot of stress right now. Please be kind to yourself. There aren’t hard and fast dividing lines between the many roles in your life. You’re a friend, parent, employee, boss, lover, artist, patient, thriver… all of these beautiful parts of you are intertwined. Try seeing this as an opportunity to explore those connections and to plug into the activities that give you energy and comfort. With a few simple boundaries, working from home can be a powerful way to bring all the parts of yourself together.

And as you adapt to this new reality, spread kindness around to those who can’t work from home. From medical and emergency workers, to the hospitality industry, to those who are keeping our supply chains running (farmers, factory workers, truck drivers, etc.)—many are braving traditional work climates because remote work isn’t an option. Recognize those who may be losing income or risking their safety to help others—and look for ways to help them in return. They’re looking out for us, so let’s make sure we have their backs, too!

Your turn: Are you working from home right now? If so, how’s it going? And if you have tips to share, please do!

Peace & boundaries,

The post How to Adapt to Working from Home appeared first on KrisCarr.com.

[ayittey1]

The Golden Age of African  Peasant Prosperity

 The period 1880-1950 may be characterized as the golden age of peasant Prosperity in Africa. Though colonialism was invidious, one of its little-known and acknowledged "benefits" was the peace it brought Africa. The slave trade and competition over resources had fueled many of the tribal wars in precolonial Africa – just as competition over mineral resources, in particular diamonds, fueled wars in Angola, Congo, Liberia, and Sierra Leone in the twenty-first century. The slave trade generates intense emotional reaction among blacks. Unfortunately, however, there is much confusion and mythology about African participation in that abominable trade, which I have tried to clarify in an addendum at the end of this chapter.

The abolition of the slave trade in the 1840s eliminated a cause bellum and made apparent the need to provide an alternative to the trade in human cargo. Toward this end, cash‑crops were introduced into Africa. About this time, the industrial revolution was gathering momentum in Europe. Factories needed raw materials and markets for manufactured products. Colonies could provide both: raw materials and markets. Tribal wars and rivalries virtually came to halt, although they flared up occasionally. Their amelioration gave Africa a much-needed atmosphere of peace for productive economic activity. In addition, skeletal forms of infrastructure (roads, railways, bridges, schools, post office, etc.) were laid down during this period, which greatly facilitated the movement of goods and people. This infrastructural development really gave production and economic expansion a tremendous boost. The secret to economic prosperity in Africa is not hard to find. A mere three words unveil this secret: peace and infrastructure and economic freedom.

It is instructive to note that the economic system used by the natives of Africa to engineer their economic prosperity in the 1880-1950 period was their own indigenous system. Except for a few places in Africa, notably in the Portuguese colonies, plantation agriculture was unknown. Cash crops were grown by peasant farmers on their own individual plots, using traditional farming methods and practices. In other words, the natives prospered using their own existing indigenous system with only minor modifications and improvements. For example, the cultivation of cocoa was not mechanized; it was a highly labor-intensive undertaking. Transportation of cocoa in the early twentieth century was by human porterage, which gave rise to the pricing of cocoa by the "head load@. The building of roads and the introduction of motor vehicles tremendously improved the transportation of cocoa and boosted exports and there were other improvements as well: insecticides, spraying machines, and so on. But the basic system of land tenure and the peasants' discretion over what crops to grow etc. were unchanged. African peasants were generally not forced to cultivate any cash crops. Forced labor in the French, Belgian, and Portuguese colonies was mainly for construction purposes.

The fundamental point is that African natives had the economic freedom to decide for themselves what crops they could cultivate C cash crops or food crops C and what to do with the proceeds. This economic freedom was a notable feature of their indigenous economic system. Indeed, Kendall and Louw (1986) - two white South Africans - noted: "The freedom that characterized tribal society in part explains why black South Africans responded so positively to the challenges of a free market that, by the 1870s, they were out-competing whites, especially as farmers" (p.4).

Though this freedom was circumscribed under colonialism in central and southern Africa, the peasants prospered during the colonial era. Why, then, were they unable to continue prospering after independence? The answer is obvious: Their economic freedom was somehow snatched from them. According to the Heritage Foundation and The Wall Street Journal Index of Economic Freedom (2004) only 9 African countries can be classified as AMostly Free@ in 2004: Botswana, Uganda, South Africa, Cape Verde Islands, Morocco, Mauritania, Tunisia, Namibia, and Mauritius. No African country received a “Free” rating.

 The move away from economic freedom came first in South Africa, where according to Kendall and Louw (1986):

Black success had tragic consequences. White colonists feared black competition and this fear, combined with the whites' desire for cheap labor, resulted in a series of laws that systematically denied blacks access to the marketplace and stripped them of any meaningful form of land ownership (p.4).

 The truth is that white farmers felt threatened by blacks. Not only were blacks better farmers but they were also competing with white farmers for land. Moreover, they were self-sufficient and hence not available to work on white farms or in industry, particularly in the Transvaal gold mines where their labor was badly needed. As a result a series of laws was passed that robbed blacks of almost all economic freedom. The purpose of these laws was to prevent blacks from competing with whites and to drive them into the work force. (p.12)

In 1869, 1876, and 1884 the Cape Assembly passed a series of Location Acts (the first set of apartheid laws) that sought to protect white farmers from black competition and to force blacks to become wage laborers by working for white farmers. Then came the Native Land Act of 1913; the rest is history. Even during the apartheid era, South African officials grudgingly acknowledged the industriousness of black farmers. For example, in 1985, the Development Bank, a quasigovernment agency, began financing small agricultural credit programs, which involved dispensing a package of aid (seed, fertilizer, a few implements, and basic advice) to black subsistence farmers at a cost of $150 per farmer. According to the Bank's general manager, Johan Kruger, these programs were “quite remarkably successful”. The farmers significantly upgraded the production of about 25,000 of these smallholdings and greatly improved their ability to feed their families. “The perception that blacks can't farm and that people can't make a living on small pieces of land in South Africa is a fallacy”, Kruger said. “Provided they have the necessary support services and infrastructure, black farmers have shown that they can farm as well as whites” (The Washington Post, Dec 29, 1990; p.A14).

In the rest of Africa, the turn toward statism and the attendant restrictions on economic freedom came after independence. Support services and infrastructure were not provided by new elites. Traditional Africa was castigated by the elites as Abackward and primitive@. Peasant agriculture was neglected in favor of industry. Chiefs and Africa=s traditional rulers were stripped of their power and authority. Foreign ideologies were imposed on the Atingas, and their economic freedom was wrenched from them by "Swiss-bank socialists@, while their economic prosperity was taxed and squandered by vampire elites through a series of edicts, state controls, and decrees, as we saw in chapter 6.

 After independence, many African governments not only nationalized European companies, ostensibly to prevent "foreign exploitation", but also debarred the natives from many economic fields. For example, after Ghana gained its independence, mining operations were monopolized by the state, and indigenous gold‑mining was declared illegal. In fact, "Anyone caught indulging in illegal gold prospecting, popularly known as `galamsey' (gather them and sell), will be shot, a PNDC representative announced to a workers' rally in the Western Region" (West Africa, March 1, 1982; p.618).

In many other African countries, the natives were squeezed out of industry, trade, and commerce, and the state emerged as the domineering, if not the only, player. Indigenous operators were not tolerated. Indeed, there was a time when the director of the Club du Sahel, Anne de Lattre, would begin her meetings with the frightening remark, "Well, there is one thing we all agree on: that private traders should be shot" (West Africa, Jan 26, 1987; p.154). Under Sekou Toure of Guinea's nonsensical program of "Marxism in African Clothes@, unauthorized trading became a crime. The prices the Atingas received for their produce were dictated by governments, not determined by market forces in accordance with African traditions.

 Resources extracted from the Atingas were spent to develop the urban areas for the neglected, becoming more crowded and filthy. Recall how important the indigenous markets were in traditional Africa but post colonial African governments seldom cleaned, let alone even build, markets for the Atingas. Finally, after 30 years,

“Workers at Kenya's main market killed 6,000 rats, trucked away 750 tons of garbage and sucked 70 tons of human waste out of latrines in three days of the first major cleanup of the market in 30 years, a government minister said. The Wakulima Market, which supplies fresh food to most of Nairobi's three million residents, was a public health hazard, with rubbish piling up seven feet deep in some places, said Local Government Minister Musikari Kombo, who ordered the closing of the market for cleaning last week. "We were lucky to be spared a major outbreak of disease," he said. City workers used more than 42,000 gallons of water in the cleanup operation, he said” (The New York Times, Jan 5, 2005; p.A6).

 Botswana was the only black African country in the postcolonial period that did not persecute its Atingas but rather went back and built upon their indigenous roots. It paid off handsomely. In elegant brevity, Newsweek (July 23, 1990) put the issue poignantly: ABotswana built a working democracy on an aboriginal tradition of local gatherings called kgotlas that resemble New England town meetings; it has a record $2.7 billion in foreign exchange reserves (p.28).

 Excerpted is from my book, Africa Unchained

 Reference

 Louw, Leon and Frances Kendall (1987). After Apartheid: The Solution. Los Angeles: Institute for Contemporary Studies.

  iQUfU��9�

[messodology]

history repeating

10 years since the turn of the century, the divide between the rich and the poor was as bad as it had ever been, and continued to increase. New expensive technology, luxury cars, world travel, and lavish hotel stays have saturated popular media – more of what the average factory worker or the average redneck or farmer could never afford or hope to experience. Underneath it all, a pressing, chocking, driving feeling of unfairness, of misrepresentation, of inequity for a card carrying citizen of such a rich world power. Heralds of radical change emerge whenever history demands it. A charismatic impassioned man emerged as the herald of this time. Years ago, his older brother was lost to poor life choices, this made a strong impression on our hero. Ever since then, our herald’s innate convictions were cemented, and his visionary juices stirred to pursue zealously his ideals. He looked down on drunkards and the like. The herald’s name was a one-word, sharp, and easily recognized Brand. He didn’t bother with the traditional long-winded First-Last name pair. He knew his audience and he knew PR. He knew how to rile up his audience and fan the flames of discontent in the crowds of the common man, woman, and LGBTQ individuals. He has had significant experience in spreading his message, always very simple language, always harping on the same basic idea, and always associated his opposition with colorful hateful, easily memorable icons like "pigs", etc. The new leader’s ideals were meant to benefit his fellow citizens. His methods and associations, however, worked directly to sabotage his grand vision. With deep-seated fear, distrust, and general dislike of people, he would pursue rumors and conflicts aggressively. Any argument, indeed every argument, was one that would come to quick verbal blows. A notable socialite who knew him well remarked that he wouldn’t just argue with you, he would “punch you in the face with his argument”. He did not have a great head of hair, but that did not take away from his egotistical and narcissistic approach to life. Every dent to the ego was answered in spades. The herald had great disdain for the sitting chief of his beloved country, going so far as to challenge the chief’s legitimacy and qualification as the head of one of the most powerful nations in the world. Many world leaders were broadly critical of our hero, concerned about his stated policies and inexperience at government, but could not and did not do enough to prevent him from taking the reins. The opposition at the time of election was splintered, both ideologically and geographically. With two competing camps: capitalist agenda and far left socialism, it was difficult to come together in a unified voice. The opposition was also separated geographically, with support concentrated at the edges of the map of the immense territory of the country, with a wealth of natural resources and dearth of moral and effective governance over them. It is now 17 years since the turn of the century. The controlling party wavered and, with the power of the people behind him, he and his “common man” party assumed control of the nation. Some of the very first decrees overturned much of the legislature passed by the previous party; much of it aimed at protecting and improving the well-being of the poorer citizens. At the same time, the new party attacked any press that dared offer negative coverage of their administration and did all in its power to limit opposition with PR, falling back on true and tried methods that worked so well prior to the election. Key positions in managing roles were sacked and replaced by supporters, entire organizational structures were revamped to align to the new regime and limit opposition within the ranks. The year was 1917, the country was Russia, the herald, Lenin, the ruling party, Bolshevik, the opposition, White Guard and the Socialist-Revolutionary Party. History does have a peculiar sense of humor.

[michaelfallcon]

Voices Of The Global Coffee Supply Chain Respond To COVID-19

For the third and final of our latest series of reader polls on how COVID-19 is impacting the specialty coffee world—the first specifically for baristas and the second for the coffee consuming public—we ditched the more statistical approach in favor of in-depth individual answers. The results look a lot more like a survey than a poll—they are truly revealing, equal parts hopeful and gut-wrenching.

This survey was open to anyone whose employment pre-COVID fell within the coffee supply chain, anywhere in the world. To make sure the responses truly represented the global community, the survey was presented in a total of eight different languages: Arabic, Chinese, English, French, Italian, Korean, Portuguese, and Spanish.

The responses we received, nearly 170 in total, reflect both the transcontinental nature of coffee, the chain of hands that take a tiny ripe little cherry from oceans away and turn it into the beverage in your cup. Representing a total of 30 countries across six continents, we received thoughtful answers from producers, exporters, importers, green buyers, roasters, cafe owners, and baristas. Over the course of three rather open prompts, we wanted to find out, generally, how COVID-19 has changed life for those who make their lives in and around coffee.

We are reprinting a selection of those responses in full below. All answers were given anonymously. We have included each respondent’s country of residence and job title for context.

Some answers have been lightly edited and condensed for clarity.

How has the pandemic impacted your workplace?

All of us are doing our best and working from home; only key production personnel are authorized to be at the roastery to prepare wholesale orders or quantities for our coffee shops’ consumption. — Commercial Manager at a cafe/roastery, Bahrain

We had to shut down our shop in high season two weeks ago. No seating, no terrace, and kitchen closed. We opened a kiosk the next day selling coffee beans and take-away coffee. We keep a high safety standard for customers and staff to create a secure environment. Fortunately one of our regulars runs a drug store and provides us with disinfectant and masks. Everything seems to be unreal in our good old shop but our customers really appreciate what we do. All catering and coffee courses are canceled until December. — Cafe/roastery owner, Germany

The impact is still unfolding. Uganda has introduced a number of lock-down measures that are already impacting the poorest of the poor, the people with whom we work. Movements have been stopped, public and private transport cancelled. The motorbike riders are out of work, people in the villages where we work can’t get to health centers for safe delivery of babies, treatment of other illnesses. Although exports of goods are still permitted (and we still have committed customers at the moment in the US/UK/Korea for which we are so thankful), processing factories—mills, warehouses, etc—are heavily restricted. This is already leading to delays to orders. We hope it doesn’t lead to cancellations.

As a project we’ve always committed to pay our farmers cash on delivery, so we’re grateful that all our payments on the mountain are cleared. Our farmers and workers have all been paid for the season. However, as a project we absolutely now rely on our buyers coming through so that we can receive payments for the coffee and clear our business loans… We’re really hoping that we can get our orders out, that we can agree terms with our buyers that help them out, which allow us to support our farmers at a time when they need us most. — Director of a Producer Organization, Uganda

In New Zealand, all cafes, restaurants, retail shops, etc. are completely closed. We are primarily a wholesale coffee supplier direct to cafes, we don’t supply mainstream supermarkets, only a few boutiques. We do have a web store for direct to consumer sales but the lockdown restrictions stopped us from offering coffee online too, as roasters were only able to continue supply to essential supermarkets, not to home drinkers. Thankfully the online sales restriction was lifted after 9 days of shutdown, so we at least have that now. But volume wise, we are doing 90-95% less than we usually do, as almost our entire customer base is closed down. The lockdown is scheduled for 4 weeks, depending on the situation it may get extended. Even when it is lifted we will likely have a period of non-essential closures, takeaway only etc. Our borders will probably remain closed or essentially closed for months to come meaning next to no tourism (a huge industry in our country) so less coffee drinkers around in general. And it is likely that a lot of our wholesale customers may not reopen after this.

For what it’s worth I am completely supportive of the shutdown and after 12 days it appears to be effective, the curve is flattening. But it undoubtedly has a heavy impact on hospitality that will be hard to recover from.

My workplace as a result of the pandemic has introduced distancing practices in and stepped up general hygiene. Anyone who can work at home, is. As a result of the low sales volumes and general slow down of work, a lot of my colleagues have been placed on discretionary leave, being paid the minimum government subsidy until nationally we return to “alert level 2” (there’s a 4 step alert system, we’re in level 4 now). Nobody has been laid off, yet. — Head Roaster, New Zealand

Minimally. Panama is in total lockdown, agriculture exempted. Most of our coffee is sold to Asia, who continues to buy. Main problem is shipping logistics, especially via air. — Producer/exporter, Panama

In Jakarta, our government has not required us to do a complete lockdown. We are still allowed to operate but we only have one location purely for takeaways. We used to have three stores. Sales have dropped around 80% and it’s tough. We have put some of our recent hires on unpaid leave… hoping this will end soon. — Cafe owner, Indonesia

How has the pandemic impacted your job?

I’ve personally accepted more responsibility, since we’re down to a skeleton crew and the acting manager isn’t setting foot in the cafe because he doesn’t have insurance and he’s scared. Most days are either really busy or dead in the water. The days that we’re busy I make astoundingly good tips. Every day I wonder if it will be the last before the government shuts all of the restaurants down. — Barista/manager, United States

As a founder you wear all the hats in the business anyway so day to day hasn’t changed too much except now absolutely everything is done from my laptop except for packing all the online orders. — Founder of a cold brew coffee company, United Kingdom

For many small exporters, to finance one container requires quite a bit of financial muscle, not to mention the hefty interest rates from banks and/or private lenders. Because of the world-wide stay-at-home effort, roasters aren’t stocking up on green because of the uncertainty and consumers aren’t going out to coffee shops and restaurants to drink their coffee, which is reducing consumption. Once the consumer stops spending, the roaster slows down production, the importer starts sitting on green, and well, the exporter has to scramble to find a quick solution to stay afloat and continue to carry the loans until payment can be made from the importer/roaster. By holding up cash-flow, exporters will not be able to purchase as much coffee as projected, affecting the farmer who will have to sell to the co-op and be subject to the market price. The reduction in demand that is expected for 2nd and 3rd quarters will also have an affect on the quantity of coffee being purchased at specialty prices.

There is also a worry of a shortage of pickers for this harvest season for two reasons; pickers don’t want to leave home and risk getting infected while away from home and two, local governments don’t want pickers from other regions coming in to their regions potentially carrying the virus. This has prompted some local governments to start campaigns to hire locals to pick coffee, offering guaranteed medical coverage against the virus and other subsidies. — Importer/exporter, Colombia

Our management made the right decision to close the coffee house completely, and not work “to-go”, because even the slightest risk is a risk for all of us. — Barista, Russia

Sales have dropped a lot. Also forecasting has stopped as no roaster wants to take a long term guess. This is impacting how we can forecast purchases at origin as well. — Green coffee buyer, Australia

It’s gone for now! I’ve worked in the coffee industry since I was 18, I’m 25 now. It’s been my career aspiration to work in a coffee roastery. Eight months into my dream job and it’s been snatched away from me. I was also training for the Brewers cup, hours of training put in with a coffee that won’t make it to the national stage. — Production assistant/account manager, Ireland

What’s your life like right now?

I’m enjoying myself at home, trying to work on creative projects, suddenly needing to buy way more whole bean than I normally would. I visited my store yesterday to say hello to everyone, and I’m glad I’m not working through this time. The job right now simply isn’t what I was hired for, or what I had hired staff for, and although I know regulars keep showing up and the working staff are nothing but positive, I know I couldn’t suspend my fear and completely alter our operations without having an eventual breakdown. Sometimes I worry that I made the wrong choice, that I turned my back on a great company and wonderful coworkers, but this is far bigger than me, than any of us individually, and I have to remind myself that despite the uncertainty, staying home is the likely the best thing I can do for everyone in my community. — Barista/manager, Canada

Working from home and waiting for funding from the government so that I won’t have to shut down altogether. — Cafe owner, Brazil

It is better but still we hope that we will overcome it soon because still we are making just 50% of our regular numbers. — Cafe owner, Czech Republic

My wife and I run our cafe, where we have around 11 employees. The future is just uncertain. We were one of the first coffee roasters in Kazakhstan, and we have been here for the past eight years watching the culture grow. And now I’m scared we will have to start all over. — Cafe/roastery owner, Kazakhstan

My life is very precarious. I have expenses without any return. I am limited in practicing my profession, if not for video lessons to keep in touch with the community. How it will return to normal is my doubt. Our profession is at risk. — Barista, Italy

Filled with anxiety of no income but relaxing spending time with loved ones at home. — Head of coffee, South Africa

My life is a series of zoom calls, FaceTime, daily anxiety, and planning my alternate idea of a career that doesn’t rely on the global economy. I’ve been knitting a lot and filming crafting videos. — Roasting operations manager, United Kingdom

Boring and stressful. — Cafe owner, Trinidad

I filed for unemployment but with little clarity as to what the stimulus package is actually sending, my partner (also a barista) and I are making about a third of our wages from unemployment leaving our livelihood up in the air with rent and other bills still coming. We are also losing our health insurance through our full-time jobs. — Barista, United States

Additional Reporting

Poll results: Baristas 

Poll results: Coffee consumption

Voices of baristas

Voices of cafe owners

Voices of importers 

All COVID-19 coverage on Sprudge. 

Zac Cadwalader is the managing editor at Sprudge Media Network and a staff writer based in Dallas. Read more Zac Cadwalader on Sprudge.

Voices Of The Global Coffee Supply Chain Respond To COVID-19 published first on https://medium.com/@LinLinCoffee

[shebreathesslowly]

Voices Of The Global Coffee Supply Chain Respond To COVID-19

For the third and final of our latest series of reader polls on how COVID-19 is impacting the specialty coffee world—the first specifically for baristas and the second for the coffee consuming public—we ditched the more statistical approach in favor of in-depth individual answers. The results look a lot more like a survey than a poll—they are truly revealing, equal parts hopeful and gut-wrenching.

This survey was open to anyone whose employment pre-COVID fell within the coffee supply chain, anywhere in the world. To make sure the responses truly represented the global community, the survey was presented in a total of eight different languages: Arabic, Chinese, English, French, Italian, Korean, Portuguese, and Spanish.

The responses we received, nearly 170 in total, reflect both the transcontinental nature of coffee, the chain of hands that take a tiny ripe little cherry from oceans away and turn it into the beverage in your cup. Representing a total of 30 countries across six continents, we received thoughtful answers from producers, exporters, importers, green buyers, roasters, cafe owners, and baristas. Over the course of three rather open prompts, we wanted to find out, generally, how COVID-19 has changed life for those who make their lives in and around coffee.

We are reprinting a selection of those responses in full below. All answers were given anonymously. We have included each respondent’s country of residence and job title for context.

Some answers have been lightly edited and condensed for clarity.

How has the pandemic impacted your workplace?

All of us are doing our best and working from home; only key production personnel are authorized to be at the roastery to prepare wholesale orders or quantities for our coffee shops’ consumption. — Commercial Manager at a cafe/roastery, Bahrain

We had to shut down our shop in high season two weeks ago. No seating, no terrace, and kitchen closed. We opened a kiosk the next day selling coffee beans and take-away coffee. We keep a high safety standard for customers and staff to create a secure environment. Fortunately one of our regulars runs a drug store and provides us with disinfectant and masks. Everything seems to be unreal in our good old shop but our customers really appreciate what we do. All catering and coffee courses are canceled until December. — Cafe/roastery owner, Germany

The impact is still unfolding. Uganda has introduced a number of lock-down measures that are already impacting the poorest of the poor, the people with whom we work. Movements have been stopped, public and private transport cancelled. The motorbike riders are out of work, people in the villages where we work can’t get to health centers for safe delivery of babies, treatment of other illnesses. Although exports of goods are still permitted (and we still have committed customers at the moment in the US/UK/Korea for which we are so thankful), processing factories—mills, warehouses, etc—are heavily restricted. This is already leading to delays to orders. We hope it doesn’t lead to cancellations.

As a project we’ve always committed to pay our farmers cash on delivery, so we’re grateful that all our payments on the mountain are cleared. Our farmers and workers have all been paid for the season. However, as a project we absolutely now rely on our buyers coming through so that we can receive payments for the coffee and clear our business loans… We’re really hoping that we can get our orders out, that we can agree terms with our buyers that help them out, which allow us to support our farmers at a time when they need us most. — Director of a Producer Organization, Uganda

In New Zealand, all cafes, restaurants, retail shops, etc. are completely closed. We are primarily a wholesale coffee supplier direct to cafes, we don’t supply mainstream supermarkets, only a few boutiques. We do have a web store for direct to consumer sales but the lockdown restrictions stopped us from offering coffee online too, as roasters were only able to continue supply to essential supermarkets, not to home drinkers. Thankfully the online sales restriction was lifted after 9 days of shutdown, so we at least have that now. But volume wise, we are doing 90-95% less than we usually do, as almost our entire customer base is closed down. The lockdown is scheduled for 4 weeks, depending on the situation it may get extended. Even when it is lifted we will likely have a period of non-essential closures, takeaway only etc. Our borders will probably remain closed or essentially closed for months to come meaning next to no tourism (a huge industry in our country) so less coffee drinkers around in general. And it is likely that a lot of our wholesale customers may not reopen after this.

For what it’s worth I am completely supportive of the shutdown and after 12 days it appears to be effective, the curve is flattening. But it undoubtedly has a heavy impact on hospitality that will be hard to recover from.

My workplace as a result of the pandemic has introduced distancing practices in and stepped up general hygiene. Anyone who can work at home, is. As a result of the low sales volumes and general slow down of work, a lot of my colleagues have been placed on discretionary leave, being paid the minimum government subsidy until nationally we return to “alert level 2” (there’s a 4 step alert system, we’re in level 4 now). Nobody has been laid off, yet. — Head Roaster, New Zealand

Minimally. Panama is in total lockdown, agriculture exempted. Most of our coffee is sold to Asia, who continues to buy. Main problem is shipping logistics, especially via air. — Producer/exporter, Panama

In Jakarta, our government has not required us to do a complete lockdown. We are still allowed to operate but we only have one location purely for takeaways. We used to have three stores. Sales have dropped around 80% and it’s tough. We have put some of our recent hires on unpaid leave… hoping this will end soon. — Cafe owner, Indonesia

How has the pandemic impacted your job?

I’ve personally accepted more responsibility, since we’re down to a skeleton crew and the acting manager isn’t setting foot in the cafe because he doesn’t have insurance and he’s scared. Most days are either really busy or dead in the water. The days that we’re busy I make astoundingly good tips. Every day I wonder if it will be the last before the government shuts all of the restaurants down. — Barista/manager, United States

As a founder you wear all the hats in the business anyway so day to day hasn’t changed too much except now absolutely everything is done from my laptop except for packing all the online orders. — Founder of a cold brew coffee company, United Kingdom

For many small exporters, to finance one container requires quite a bit of financial muscle, not to mention the hefty interest rates from banks and/or private lenders. Because of the world-wide stay-at-home effort, roasters aren’t stocking up on green because of the uncertainty and consumers aren’t going out to coffee shops and restaurants to drink their coffee, which is reducing consumption. Once the consumer stops spending, the roaster slows down production, the importer starts sitting on green, and well, the exporter has to scramble to find a quick solution to stay afloat and continue to carry the loans until payment can be made from the importer/roaster. By holding up cash-flow, exporters will not be able to purchase as much coffee as projected, affecting the farmer who will have to sell to the co-op and be subject to the market price. The reduction in demand that is expected for 2nd and 3rd quarters will also have an affect on the quantity of coffee being purchased at specialty prices.

There is also a worry of a shortage of pickers for this harvest season for two reasons; pickers don’t want to leave home and risk getting infected while away from home and two, local governments don’t want pickers from other regions coming in to their regions potentially carrying the virus. This has prompted some local governments to start campaigns to hire locals to pick coffee, offering guaranteed medical coverage against the virus and other subsidies. — Importer/exporter, Colombia

Our management made the right decision to close the coffee house completely, and not work “to-go”, because even the slightest risk is a risk for all of us. — Barista, Russia

Sales have dropped a lot. Also forecasting has stopped as no roaster wants to take a long term guess. This is impacting how we can forecast purchases at origin as well. — Green coffee buyer, Australia

It’s gone for now! I’ve worked in the coffee industry since I was 18, I’m 25 now. It’s been my career aspiration to work in a coffee roastery. Eight months into my dream job and it’s been snatched away from me. I was also training for the Brewers cup, hours of training put in with a coffee that won’t make it to the national stage. — Production assistant/account manager, Ireland

What’s your life like right now?

I’m enjoying myself at home, trying to work on creative projects, suddenly needing to buy way more whole bean than I normally would. I visited my store yesterday to say hello to everyone, and I’m glad I’m not working through this time. The job right now simply isn’t what I was hired for, or what I had hired staff for, and although I know regulars keep showing up and the working staff are nothing but positive, I know I couldn’t suspend my fear and completely alter our operations without having an eventual breakdown. Sometimes I worry that I made the wrong choice, that I turned my back on a great company and wonderful coworkers, but this is far bigger than me, than any of us individually, and I have to remind myself that despite the uncertainty, staying home is the likely the best thing I can do for everyone in my community. — Barista/manager, Canada

Working from home and waiting for funding from the government so that I won’t have to shut down altogether. — Cafe owner, Brazil

It is better but still we hope that we will overcome it soon because still we are making just 50% of our regular numbers. — Cafe owner, Czech Republic

My wife and I run our cafe, where we have around 11 employees. The future is just uncertain. We were one of the first coffee roasters in Kazakhstan, and we have been here for the past eight years watching the culture grow. And now I’m scared we will have to start all over. — Cafe/roastery owner, Kazakhstan

My life is very precarious. I have expenses without any return. I am limited in practicing my profession, if not for video lessons to keep in touch with the community. How it will return to normal is my doubt. Our profession is at risk. — Barista, Italy

Filled with anxiety of no income but relaxing spending time with loved ones at home. — Head of coffee, South Africa

My life is a series of zoom calls, FaceTime, daily anxiety, and planning my alternate idea of a career that doesn’t rely on the global economy. I’ve been knitting a lot and filming crafting videos. — Roasting operations manager, United Kingdom

Boring and stressful. — Cafe owner, Trinidad

I filed for unemployment but with little clarity as to what the stimulus package is actually sending, my partner (also a barista) and I are making about a third of our wages from unemployment leaving our livelihood up in the air with rent and other bills still coming. We are also losing our health insurance through our full-time jobs. — Barista, United States

Additional Reporting

Poll results: Baristas 

Poll results: Coffee consumption

Voices of baristas

Voices of cafe owners

Voices of importers 

All COVID-19 coverage on Sprudge. 

Zac Cadwalader is the managing editor at Sprudge Media Network and a staff writer based in Dallas. Read more Zac Cadwalader on Sprudge.

from Sprudge https://ift.tt/3adI0uh

[pissed-off-elder-blog]

American Today III

         As long ago as 1776, in Wealth of Nations, Adam Smith gave us laissez-faire, the concept of the market as a sovereign area of human activity, and therefore a valid object of scientific knowledge.  He thought that the market could only be justified in light of individual integrity, and that a society governed by nothing but transactional self-interest was no society at all.  (Transactional self-interest is a phrase often used to describe Trump’s approach to governance.)      During the early 1800s and continuing through most of the rest of the nineteenth century, the first reformers focused on slavery, education, prisons, and women’s rights.  With the election of Ulysses Grant as President in 1868, the Gilded Age began and lasted until Theodore Roosevelt won the presidency at the turn of the century and introduced the Progressive Era.

Thanks to new products and technology, economic growth exploded in the Gilded Age as did wages and immigration from Europe. The Middle Class grew and prospered, but blue collar workers and farmers did not even get a sniff of the new prosperity. They worked extensive hours in savage conditions for paltry sums.  Politicians were corrupt.  Tycoons and Robber Barons ran the country.

At the tail end of The Gilded Age in 1899, Thorstein Veblen, almost forgotten now, the fourth of twelve children of Norwegian immigrant parents, wrote, A Theory of the Leisure Class, a withering criticism of Gilded Age capitalism.  The book shed a light on societal assumptions concerning labor and class.  A significant portion of those assumptions have over time creeped back and become embedded in the assumptions concerning politics, governance and culture in today’s America.

Veblen explained that the high value placed by Americans on non-productive use of time, i.e., leisure, was based on a belief that productive use of labor was unworthy, and that non-productive consumption was evidence of monetary ability to afford a life of idleness. The leisure class deplored the laboring masses.  (Remember Hillary’s “deplorables,“one word whose use cost her, the POE believes, an enormous number of votes in key states during the 2016 election)  

Veblen argues that in the past there have been harmonious, peaceful cultures that did not support such a class.  Men and women labored together, inspired by an instinctive pride in workmanship, a common yearning to model the elite workers, and a profound responsibility for the well-being of future generations. (Today’s supporters of a Green New Deal express the same responsibility.)

In the past, many class-ridden societies also existed and brought forth combative, commanding behavior that, over time, caused them to change for the worse.  Aggressive, elite men reveled in taking whatever they admired by “seizure.”  This truculent way of living and behaving became the essence of power and was admired even by the working class subjected to it.  

In the Gilded Age, technology sped up industrialization, and provided the leisure class the chance to grab even more influence.  Predation became the chronic, normal reserve of these parasites.  A calm, cooperative life morphed into the bleak, antagonistic industrial age darkened by human carnivores hungry only for profits and power.  They stomped on any workers who tried to stand up for themselves.

Classical economists mischaracterize these powerful men as prudent individuals acting carefully in their own self-interest.  For Veblen, they were robber barons admired for their mastery by the working class they pillaged.  (Think of Trump and his MAGA hatters)   The workers didn’t want to dethrone them; they wanted to imitate them.  The leisur class wanted to assert superiority by making an ostentatious display of their idleness, their conespicuous avoidance of labor, by engaging in activities reserved for the elite e.g., golf, tennis, badminton and croquet, ordinary signs of superior pecuniary achievement in measuring conventional reputability.  Veblen labeled such activities “Conspicuous Consumption.”  It included building estates with magnificent gardens and sundry luxuries, hunting expeditions to exotic foreign locations to bag big game trophies for display, World Tours, etc.

Veblen claimed that our modes of thought and our institutions must change with shifting situations, but they often seem locked in place, bound by the social and psychological inertia of conservation.  Why?  The leisure class is so protected from societal changes that if it adapts its views, it does so only slowly.  Snugly unaware (or scheming) the leisure class dawdles, or actively hampers social and economic causes that drive change. That tardiness, that delay born of by conservative complacency hinders and muzzles the lives of everyone else and the proper economic evolution of the nation.  

The mere existence of a leisure class works to make lower classes conservative by consigning them to a life of unrelenting labor and concern for the acquisition of basic human needs (food, clothing and shelter) that it reduces its available energy to such a point as to make them incapable of the effort required for the learning and adoption of new habits of thought.  The accumulation of wealth at the upper end of the pecuniary scale always implies privation at the lower.  Privation stands as an obstacle to innovation and change.  In this way, the industrial, technological and social progress of the whole society is retarded or turned back.  Such are the perpetuating effects of unequal distribution of wealth, and the leisure class creates these effects on purpose..

To classical economists, business men were generators of economic progress; To Veblen, they were predators if they invested in any venture solely to extract profits from it.  They created nothing, produced nothing, and did nothing of economic significance but seize profits.  It was the Gilded Age, after all, and Veblen believed they were building a frame of financial transactions above and beyond the factory floor—a filigree of loans, credits, capitalizations, etc. designed to use the disruptions of society caused by these debts to seize even more profits.  

And here we are, one hundred and thirty years later, living in an America turned back to a New Gilded Age that fully realizes the dreams of the meat eaters of the previous one, a fully financialized economy virtually unbound from annoying law and regulation.  The predators of the 21st century used the disruption wrought by the 2008 financial crisis to finalize capture of the government for themselves, to become the state.

In the Trump era, they have molded a society in which legislators and cabinet heads are former lobbyists for the business men and act as saboteurs of the departments they lead, shrinking the State Department’s budget, starving public schools, gorging big Pharma with Medicare funds, giving public lands and national parks to developers, and denying science and climate change,  Meanwhile, our predator President, a goblin of distraction, commands the news cycle, hurling raillery and abuse at his enemies, undermining the intelligence services and the military, brownnosing dictators, taking actions and turning phrases that suggest attempting a purge of the Pentago, and, andonandonandon in the same vein before throngs of be-hatted cultists who wallow is his invective with encouraging laughter, raucous shouts, and hellish chants.  At the same time, in the back rooms, his sycophants demolish the foundations of law and democracy.

END

NEXT: THE PROGRESSIVE ERA

[mcdouglecompany-blog]

John Stossel- Free Stuff 2020, Government Bullies Steal Houses, No Filming on Farms, Minimum Wage Hurts Beginners etc...

John Stossel- Free Stuff 2020, Government Bullies Steal Houses, No Filming on Farms, Minimum Wage Hurts Beginners, The Paid Leave Fairy Tale, Birthright Citizenship: What the Constitution and Common Sense Say.

  John Stossel- Free Stuff 2020

Mow Your Lawn or Lose Your House!

No Filming on Farms

Minimum Wage Hurts Beginners

The Paid Leave Fairy Tale

Birthright Citizenship: What the Constitution and Common Sense Say

  Free Stuff 2020

Watch this video at- https://youtu.be/G5odA8Gsmzs

John Stossel

Published on Jul 30, 2019

Presidential Candidates promise expensive new programs. We added up the cost. Never before have so many politicians promised to spend so much. Among some candidates, the 2020 presidential campaign has turned into a contest to see who can offer the most "free stuff." So far no one has tracked their promises, so the Stossel team did. Stossel compares the top five candidates, based on the betting odds. He looks at Senator Kamala Harris, Senator Elizabeth Warren, former Vice President Joe Bide, Mayor Pete Buttigieg and Senator Bernie Sanders' expensive promises, issue by issue: education, health care, climate, welfare, and … well, let's make it a contest! There's a grab-bag round too. Some examples of what the Democrats would spend if they become president: Sanders wants to "eliminate student debt" and "make public colleges and universities tuition-free." Sound nice, but he seldom mentions the $220 billion. price tag. Mayor Buttigieg promises to spend $31.5 billion to give teachers a pay raise. Kamala Harris likes that one too. Senator Harris also wants government to pay your rent if it's more than 30% of their income. $94 billion a year. The Democratic candidate promises keep on coming: Medicare for All, $3 trillion. Increase Food Stamps, $10.8 billion. Expand National Service, $2 billion. A federal job guarantee $158 billion. But the Republican incumbent is a big spender too, says Stossel. Since Donald Trump became President, spending has risen about $500 billion. But the Democrats want to spend MUCH MORE. Stossel's tally includes more than 50 spending proposals. Watch to see who wins the title, "Biggest Spender". Stossel says, no matter who wins, taxpayers are the losers. Since we completed this video Friday, Senator Harris proposed her own "Medicare for All" plan. She says it will be cheaper than Senator Sanders' version, but as of now there is no independent calculated cost. She also proposed a new plan to spend $75 billion on minority-owned businesses and historically black colleges.

--------- Don't miss a single video from Stossel TV, sign up here: https://tinyurl.com/y7eqz8th ---------

  https://youtu.be/MjV2autXVTc

Mow Your Lawn or Lose Your House!

John Stossel

Published on Jul 9, 2019

Florida man may lose home because he didn’t cut his grass. --------- Don't miss a single video from Stossel TV, sign up here: https://tinyurl.com/y7eqz8th --------- Jim Ficken left his home to take care of his recently deceased mother's estate. While away, the man he paid to cut his lawn died. The grass in Ficken's yard grew more than 10 inches long. The city of Dunedin has an ordinance against long grass. City officials fined Ficken $500 a day. Over time the fines added up to almost $30,000. "I was shocked," Ficken tells John Stossel, "It was just amazing that they would fine me that much." Ficken doesn't have $30,000, and now the city wants to foreclose on his home. Ficken's Lawyer, Ari Bargil of the Institute for Justice, points out that the city had other options: "Hire a lawn service to come out and mow the grass, and send Jim a bill for 150 bucks, but they didn't do that." The reason, says Bargil, is that the city "wants the money. Code enforcement is a major cash cow for the city." Dunedin collected $34,000 in fines in 2007. Last year, the fines ballooned to $1.3 million. "That's an almost 4,000% increase," Bargil tells Stossel, adding the city attorney "has called their code enforcement body a 'well-oiled machine.'" The city released a statement, saying they "have come under recent unfair criticism." They argue that Ficken is a "repeat offender" and has a "chronic history" of not maintaining his property. Stossel confronts Ficken, "The town says you're kind of a public nuisance." Ficken admits he is a "bit of a slob" but adds "I got everything taken care of when they notified me." Bargil argues Dunedin's big fines violate the 8th Amendment. It not only protects us from cruel and unusual punishment but also from "excessive fines." Stossel agrees: what's more excessive than politicians taking your home because you didn't cut your grass?

  No Filming on Farms

John Stossel

Published on Jul 16, 2019

Recently hundreds of animal activists have sneaked onto farms to do hidden-camera investigations. They often expose animal abuse. --------- Don't miss a single video from Stossel TV, sign up here: https://tinyurl.com/y7eqz8th --------- Their videos led companies like Wal-Mart and Wendy’s to impose stricter animal welfare requirements on companies that sell them meat. Of course, farm groups don’t like the secret recordings. Kay Johnson Smith of the Animal Agriculture Alliance tells John Stossel that the videos often mislead consumers into thinking farm conditions are worse than they are. She says “activists ... [are] stalking farms to try to capture something that the public doesn't understand.” Her group, and others, push state politicians to pass so-called “ag-gag” laws that make it a crime to mislead in order to get a job on a farm – that’s often how activists get on farms to film. “We call it farm protection,” says Johnson Smith. Stossel asks: “what about everybody else? Why do you get special protection?” She responds: “the agricultural community is the only business community that this sort of tactic is really being used on right now.” Stossel pushes back: “I'm an investigative reporter. I can't do my job if there are laws that prevent me from showing things. Nobody believes it if you don't see it.” “These activist groups want to eliminate all of animal agriculture,” Johnson Smith replies. Some activists do want to stop people from eating meat. But many of their undercover investigations show real animal abuse. Some led to convictions of abusive farm workers. “These groups are exposing issues that are happening,” Stossel points out. “If they really cared about animals,” says Johnson Smith, "they would stop [the abuse] right then. Instead, they go weeks and months without reporting anything to the farm owners ... [because] they want to make their sensational video!” The Agricultural Alliance now pushes for laws that would force activists to report abuse quickly. But that would kill investigations before they can document much, explains Amanda Howell of the Animal Legal Defense Foundation. One has to film for multiple days, Howell notes. Otherwise, “a company can say, ‘This is a one-off!’” Johnson Smith replies, “There are bad apples in every industry, but 99.9% of farmers do the right thing every single day ... farming isn’t always pretty.” Howell says that the only way for the public to learn the truth is if undercover investigations are allowed. “We should all be worried when corporations are supporting laws that impinge our right to free speech.” Stossel agrees. “Whatever you thinks of the activists, and I have problems with many of them, government shouldn’t pass special laws that prevent people from revealing what’s true.”

  https://youtu.be/JIKqN5z2Hh0

Minimum Wage Hurts Beginners

John Stossel

Published on Jul 23, 2019

Seattle was the first big city to pass a $15 minimum wage. --------- Don't miss a single video from Stossel TV, sign up here: https://tinyurl.com/y7eqz8th --------- People there were excited. “I think it's pretty awesome since I benefit from it,” one told us. Another added: “I wish it was all over the place, not just Seattle.” Now, five years after the law passed, the evidence is in: while some did earn more, entry-levels jobs decreased. (https://evans.uw.edu/sites/default/fi...) The politicians never mentioned that when they passed the bill says Erin Shannon of the Washington Policy Center (https://www.washingtonpolicy.org/): “It’s really presented by minimum wage advocates as ... a win-win for employers ... a win-win for workers.” But she pointed us to a factory that moved hundreds of jobs out of state, and to a store that stopped hiring beginners because of the $15 minimum wage. “The politicians, in Seattle especially, have no sense whatsoever about what it means to small businesses like us,” the owner of Retrofit Home tell us. A minimum wage hurts young people who need a first job, say three young people who won a contest organized by Stossel in The Classroom, which provides free videos and lesson plans about free markets to teachers. Dillon Hodes won the high-school level video contest. He says a friend who worked at Kroger saw her hours cut as the store implemented a $12 minimum. “Raising the minimum wage causes increased unemployment,” explains Rigel Noble-Koza, the college-level contest winner. Stossel says he learned things from Noble-Koza’s video, which noted that Iceland, Norway, Sweden and Switzerland have no national minimum wage. The minimum wage “stops us from actually getting a job,” says Esther Rhoads, who won the high school essay contest. She points out that the earliest advocates of the minimum-wage wanted to price black Americans out of the market. About hundred years ago, blacks were often paid less, but they were more likely to be employed than whites. (https://www.jstor.org/stable/2122891) Congressman Clayton Allgood said he hoped the min wage would stop: “cheap colored labor in competition with white labor.” “It was meant ... to keep the poor and the minorities from getting jobs,” Esther tells Stossel. The minimum also harms young people. Esther explains: “I'm 14, it'd be very difficult for me to find a job ... my labor wouldn't be worth $15 an hour.” “If only politicians were as smart as those kids,” Stossel says.

    https://youtu.be/M3jYM04y7Ic

The Paid Leave Fairy Tale

John Stossel

Published on Jun 4, 2019

Why mandated paid family leave is bad for business and bad for most women. --------- Subscribe to my YouTube channel: http://youtube.com/johnstossel Like me on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/JohnStossel/ Follow me on Twitter: https://twitter.com/johnstossel --------- Most 2020 presidential candidates support government mandated paid family leave. That means government will order businesses to provide a certain amount of paid time off for new parents. That sounds kind. Politicians and the media point out that only the U.S. and Papua New Guinea do not require paid time off for parents. "It's disingenuous to say [that]" explains Patrice Lee Onwuka, a senior policy analyst at Independent Women's Forum. Onwuka tells John Stossel that most full-time American workers already get paid leave. "About 17% of workers have paid parental leave … but you jump to 60, 70, 80 percent when you consider people have sick time off, overtime or all-encompassing personal time." These benefits are voluntarily provided to even lower-level employees.     "Chipotle workers, CVS workers, Walmart workers…," says Onwuka. "Why would CVS and Walmart provide this voluntarily?" asks Stossel. "For an employer to attract … good talent or retain their talent, they need to offer benefits that really resonate with workers," explains Onwuka. "Paid maternity and paternity leave is one of those benefits." "Politicians are so arrogant," says Stossel, "that they now tell people that mandating leave for all employees will be 'good for business.'  Somehow they don't know that business knows better what's good for business." In truth, says Stossel, mandated leave turns out to be "bad for business and not even good for most women."  Onwuka points out, "If we look at how the rest of the world has provided very generous, mandated paid leave plans, we see that it actually has a negative impact on women." Why would that be? Because mandatory leave makes companies fear hiring young women.  "If an employer has a young woman in front of him of child bearing age," say Onwuka, "he's thinking, okay, I have to provide paid time off. I have a potential other employee who's a male…" A family leave mandate makes the man a safer bet. "In California, the first state to mandate paid family leave, a study found women of childbearing age were more likely to be unemployed," explains Stossel. Comparing Europe to America, Onwuka explains, "American women are twice as likely to be in senior level positions, managerial positions, then women in Europe … it's very much tied to these mandates around paid leave and paid time off."

      Birthright Citizenship: What the Constitution and Common Sense Say

1st November 2018

SUBSCRIBE TO THE TOM WOODS SHOW

iTunes

Stitcher

YOUTUBE

Donald Trump has indicated his desire to overturn the practice of birthright citizenship, a position Ron Paul and Rand Paul alike have long held. Opponents claim the Fourteenth Amendment requires birthright citizenship. Does it?

Articles Mentioned

“The Question of Birthright Citizenship,” by Peter H. Schuck and Rogers M. Smith “Birthright Citizenship Is Not Actually in the Constitution,” by John Eastman

Free Resources!

1) Free guide on how to start your blog or website. Click here to get it. Plus, check out my step-by-step video taking you from no blog to a blog in about five minutes!

2) Free publicity for your blog. As a special thanks if you get your hosting through one of my affiliate links (this one for Bluehost, or this one for WP Engine), I’ll boost your blog. Click here for details.

3) Free History Course: The U.S. Presidents — Politically Incorrect Edition. Get access to this 22-lesson course: 22 videos, 22 mp3 files for listening on the go, and a bibliography of reliable books on the presidents. Get it at FreeHistoryCourse.com!.

4) $160 in Free Bonuses. Free signed copy of my New York Times bestseller The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History, plus a free 10-lesson bonus course on the foundations of liberty, plus a free year’s subscription to LibertyClassroom.com, when you subscribe to the Ron Paul Curriculum site through RonPaulHomeschool.com.

5) Free Books. Boost your intellectual ammunition with my free libertarian eBooks, including 14 Hard Questions for Libertarians — Answered, Bernie Sanders Is Wrong, and Education Without the State. Find them at TomsFreeBooks.com.

Audio by Chris Williams Audio.

Read the original article at TomWoods.com. http://tomwoods.com/ep-1273-birthright-citizenship-what-the-constitution-and-common-sense-say/

  For Several ACU Show on Birthright Citizenship visit-

http://acu.libsyn.com/size/5/?search=birthright+citizenship

  Click here to download the episode

[kawahidreamer-blog]

Furtherance unchaste install portable stage

As we know UK is a great country. It created a great culture and history with a small population, of course, comparing with some huge population countries such as India and China.

So why it is UK that used to be the most great country in the word.

First at all, UK is the earliest country achieved industrialization in the word. This leaded to many farmers come to the factory of cities and turned to be workers. Then it gathered a large number of population in the city. And the factory produced various products. It made the country more prosperous than others. Moreover, to study more different products, it have to keep research and development the new technics.

Secondly, UK is a sea country, advanced technics support a equipped army for occupying the transoceanic colonies. Then lots of colonies made a great deal of wealth for them.

Colonies provide wealth, land, labor, resource etc. these was the source of the power of the UK's.

Thirdly, when other countries was under the kings governing, UK have finished their Glorious Revolution in 1689. After that time, the parliament became the representative of people. It means that people have rights to adjust the law for themselves instead of focusing their time for resisting oppression from the king.

Based on these opinion, economic, technology, military, politics, all of these side of UK was superior than other countries.

This is why they could stand on the center of world stage.

When we mentioned stage, we will think about dance party, vocal concert. RK is a stage equipment company, which provide various portable stage, truss system, pipe and drapes and dance floor.

If you are interesting in portable stage, please do not hesitate to connect us.