#they could have said more about income inequality and poverty too but that's not the focus of the film | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

whump-tr0pes · 4 years ago

Text

HB4-32/Whumptober day 12

Honor Bound 4 - 32 (I Should Have Been Better) - @badthingshappenbingo

Requested for Ellis by anon

This is a series. Start here, continued from here.

This is a sequel to Honor Bound, Honor Bound 2, Honor Bound 3, and Vera.

AO3

Masterlist

Content warning: Welp, blowing through another boundary of mine today. Wheeeee. Read the fucking warning: gun violence, Ellis’s dead family, murder as revenge, suicidal ideations and gestures, death thoughts, human trafficking, dehumanization, the syndicates really are just awful people ok, noncon mention, DEATH OF A MINOR (who also happens to be a terrible person), blood, gendered slurs, thievery, starvation mention, income inequality, poverty, government takeover, emesis

Note: I do not show Ellis’s family’s deaths

Years ago

In the concealment of the near-darkness behind a dumpster, Ellis stood perfectly still. A light mist fell from the sky, dampening the hood over their head, casting their face in shadow.

Their hand wrapped tightly around the gun shoved deep into the pocket of their jacket. They rubbed their thumb gently against the edge of the trigger guard, the cold metal comforting them. Back, forth. Back, forth. The gun was what brought them peace, brought them justice. Every time they used it.

They tipped their head back and shivered at the cold mist of water on their face. They were soaked to the bone, now, having been standing in the shadow of that alley for hours. Waiting. Just waiting.

They weren’t sure why they still wore a hood. Maybe it made them feel safer, feel more anonymous. Maybe it made them braver, during the muggings.

It didn’t really matter, in the end. No one survived their muggings anyway. Just a simple crime gone wrong, everyone would think. ‘Who could do this? What kind of monster?’ they all probably thought.

I’m the monster you made when you murdered my family.

Eight months. For eight months, they’d been alone, walking through the world feeling their family’s blood smeared on their skin, the smell as strong as if the blood really did cling to their clothes. For eight months they’d been tormented by their own mind when it supplied how much their family must have screamed and suffered. And now… Christopher was gone, Chloe and Galen were… were gone, but every day their deaths stung like a new wound. Stabbed in the heart, over and over and over. They murdered Ellis that day, too. They just weren’t dead yet.

The muggings were the only thing that made them sane. They were the only thing that brought them back from that edge, when they’d find the gun in their hand and pointed at their own head. Doing this was the only thing that kept the voice in their head quiet enough to be ignored, the voice that urged them to drink enough that they wouldn’t wake up, to step out into traffic, to pull the trigger on themself. The muggings were what kept them alive.

And yet… they couldn’t make themself think of them as executions. If anything, they were retribution, tilting the scales of the world a little more balanced. Ellis couldn’t find justice for their family, so they’d settle by bringing justice to the people who murdered them.

They’d been standing in the alley for hours. They couldn’t risk doing this in a well-travelled location. The point was dread. The point was fear, the syndicate fuckers finding their people’s bodies in alleys and empty parking lots. If Ellis could make them feel just a sliver of the fear that the syndicates themselves created in the world, then it might be enough. If they killed enough syndicate people, it might eventually be enough.

Not yet, though. Nothing was enough yet.

Footsteps echoed down the alley. Two sets.

Two dead motherfuckers. They’d never tried to take two before. The gun in their hand had taken three lives, each one a lone syndicate member, confident in their ownership of the world. Never watching their backs.

These two would be the same. Walking down an alleyway in the north end of town, without their bodyguards. They probably thought they owned the fucking place.

Fuck, they kinda do.

Ellis slowly, carefully pulled the gun out of their pocket. They crouched so the dumpster would conceal them for just a moment longer, waiting for the two fuckers to walk past it, so Ellis could—

They froze as they heard one of them speak.

“I don’t understand why we had to go this way, mom. The clinic is just—”

“Yes, darling, the clinic is that way. But your father told you specifically not to use the belt on her again. If the clinic can get her healthy again before your father returns from his trip, then it’ll be a lovely little secret between us both. But if your father’s security sees you in and out of the clinic into which his plaything disappeared…” A sigh. “Really, Aaron. I would have thought we both taught you how to handle a whipping better than this.”

That’s right. They’re taking people off the streets now, people who piss the syndicates off, or just look too damn pretty or maybe bleed too damn well, whatever the fuck that means… Ellis bit their lip and let the rage stir inside them, rise to the surface, and it never had far to go. Rumors of disappearances had been slowly becoming fact, just a part of life now that everyone knew but did nothing about. Everyone had at least one story of someone they knew, or someone who knew someone they knew, disappearing one day, poof, gone. Only to wind up in some fucking dumpster or the bottom of the river, with marks of abuse and torture that made Ellis’s stomach turn. They couldn’t go a week without hearing another report of someone who’d gone missing months or years ago turning up dead, covered in scars, and branded.

Poor fucks. It’s slavery, it’s fucking torture and these lunatics call it playing.

The man – it sounded like a young man, and the woman spoke to him with a long-suffering air – drew closer to Ellis’s hiding spot. Their shoes clicked on the wet cement, his a low, resounding sound and hers a high, delicate one. Ellis could hear the soft hiss of rain is it fell on his coat. Their hand tightened around the gun and they blew a slow, silent breath out through their open mouth.

“Maybe I wouldn’t have whipped the fucking thing if you gave me one of my own. Everyone my age—”

“You can have one when you’ve proven you can properly maintain one, darling. If you continue to break your father’s toys—”

Vile, bitter rage swept through Ellis. They stepped out of the shadows.

The woman gasped and jumped back, looking down her nose at Ellis like they were… trash. Scum. Looking like Ellis like they were the type of thing she could take, use up, and dispose of and think nothing of it.

The young man, on the other hand, looked at Ellis with a burning hunger in his eyes. He looked eighteen, maybe twenty. A shock of pale blond hair was dampened and flat against his head, the exact same shade as his mother’s. Each of them wore a long coat with the collar pulled up against the cold wind and rain, each costing more than Ellis had had to eat in the past month.

“Step aside,” the woman said primly, but Ellis could hear her voice was trembling. Ellis raised the gun and her eyes went wide, fixed on the barrel. Her son fell back a step and then froze, and the terror on his face was…

Ellis swallowed dryly. If they could stare at the terror in his eyes for the rest of their life, it still wouldn’t be long enough.

“Wh-what…” The woman shuddered and her eyes flicked up to Ellis’s face. For a moment a chill of fear drew a cold finger down their back.

She’s never going to tell anyone what I look like.

The boy finally moved and Ellis slowly moved the gun to point at him. He shifted forward a half step, drawing closer to his mother… and then stepping in front of her.

“Aaron, no,” she whimpered, but she was frozen with fear. Ellis may as well have been pinning her down.

“M-mom,” he said, his hands shaking, before he drew himself upright, glaring Ellis down. They could see the mantle of power he was trying to draw around him, could see him struggling to be in control.

That’s who the syndicates were. Constantly in control.

“B-back off,” the boy said, and Ellis laughed in his face.

“You one of those fucks who plays with people?” they sneered, their hand tightening around the gun. “You one of those sick fucks that tortures people? You kill people, kid? Rape people?”

All at once, the fear dropped away, and malicious, arrogant self-satisfaction rushed up to replace it. The boy’s face became a mask of contempt. “They’re not people by the time I’m done with them, you fucking—”

BANG.

The bullet punched through the boy’s chest and flung him back against his mother. She screamed as blood spattered her face and they both slumped to the wet pavement.

“AARON!” she shrieked as he fell on top of her, pinning her under his weight. He choked for a moment, his eyes rolling sightlessly in his head before he convulsed, once, and died on top of his mother.

The woman wailed in horror as Ellis took a step closer, her fingers digging into the thick wool of his coat. “Aaron, NO!” She sobbed raggedly and looked up to Ellis. Ellis took another step forward until they were standing just beside the mother. Hate blazed in her eyes, and grief, and everything else that had made a home inside Ellis since their children were taken from them.

How does it feel, syndicate fucker?

“You killed him!” she sobbed. “You… you fucking bitch, you fucking… creature! I will tear you apart!”

Her pain filled them up, fed them. Their skin was on fire with it.

The woman screamed helplessly, and even through the rain, Ellis could smell the puddle of blood that was rapidly spilling out over the ground. Her face twisted in her agony and her voice echoed off the walls of the alley. “I will kill you! I WILL KILL YOU!”

“Naw, don’t think so,” Ellis said, and held the gun to the woman’s head. They watched her eyes as they pulled the trigger.

The bullet tore through the woman’s head and her skull slammed against the rain-slicked pavement. Blood colored the water.

Ellis’s bones ached with vicious retribution. Their hands shook as they tucked the gun back into their jacket. They couldn’t tear their eyes away from the woman lying splayed on the ground, pinned underneath her son. Her son, who not thirty seconds earlier had been talking about whipping some poor woman somewhere half to death just because he wanted his own “toy”.

There’s no hell deep enough for you people.

Ellis knelt down to complete the last part of their ritual. They slid a hand inside the boy’s coat and pulled out a cell phone and his wallet – and took the gold watch from his wrist as well. Then they heaved the boy off his mother like he was so much dead weight. Ellis pocketed the woman’s wallet, too. They stood and looked over the two dead syndicate members, their stomach starting to heave with the smell of blood, the sight of the dead, soulless eyes. It always came, after. The sickness. They refused to think of it as guilt. They turned and ran.

Rain pattered on the top of their hood, spraying their face, clearing their mind. Slowly, the bloodlust faded from their body. Slowly, they became human again, not the monster the syndicates had made. They ran across intersections, barely looking to see if the cars had stopped. They passed street signs, lights, restaurants that sold steaks covered in fucking gold while people starved just outside. The embargoes the syndicates had put on the cities were more like a siege. Only food, fuel, and medical supplies destined for syndicate homes, syndicate people, were allowed in. Everything else – you better fucking pray you have a good connection in the black market. Six weeks, it had been like this, and would be until the mayor decided to step down and give in to the syndicates’ demands.

They ran until their legs ached and their lungs burned. They ran until they didn’t know where they were anymore.

They slowed to a stop, leaning hard against the gray, featureless wall of an industrial building. They couldn’t hear the rush of traffic anymore. They heard only the dim hum of electricity, and the distant clanking of heavy machinery. The slid down the wall and sat with their back against it, rain soaking through the seat of their pants. They pulled out the wallets and looked through them.

The woman – Sherise Lawton, according to her ID – had three different credit cards tucked into the folds of her wallet. A picture was tucked into one pocket, one of her, her son, and a man Ellis assumed was her husband. It was an old picture. The kid looked barely ten years old. Ellis swallowed hard against a sudden wave of nausea and moved on.

A membership card to an exclusive gym downtown. A business card for an interior decorator. A receipt that had been handled so many times Ellis couldn’t make out what it was for. Six thousand units of… something, in cash. Ellis didn’t recognize the money. Ice clutched their chest, just another piece of evidence that the syndicates were taking everything: the government, the money, the schools, their fucking safety.

Safety doesn’t matter anymore. Everything I ever wanted to keep safe is gone.

Ellis pocketed the money and tossed the rest of it down the sidewalk. They opened the boy’s wallet.

They never looked past the first pocket. They pulled out the boy’s ID, his picture smiling, proud, excited.

Galen and Chloe could have had this. They could have had their first driver’s license, too. They shivered and pressed their hand to their mouth. Their eyes suddenly burned.

Their eyes flicked to the boy’s birth date. May 24, 2006.

It felt like a fist twisted in Ellis’s gut. Frantically, they tried to think of what day it was… but they could barely think of the year. Their heart pounded in their chest and their hands shook as they clutched the ID card.

2022. It’s 2022.

This boy was sixteen years old.

The ID fell from Ellis’s grip as they crumpled back against the wall, their chest heaving with sobs. He was sixteen. He was sixteen and I killed him. I murdered a sixteen-year-old. Ellis smashed their fist against their mouth, trying to muffle the strangled sobs that came from deep inside them.

Across town, a few miles away, there was a sixteen-year old kid lying dead in an alley with his blood staining his mother’s clothes. With a bullet from Ellis’s gun buried in his chest. Ellis lurched forward and vomited up everything they’d eaten that day, and kept heaving, choking as nothing came up but sour bile. They slumped onto their knees and covered their head with their arms, shaking violently, as the world lurched sickeningly around them. The rain fell harder, soaking their clothes.

Continued here

@untilthepainstarts, @womping-grounds, @free-2bmee, @quirkykayleetam, @walkingchemicalfire, @inpainandsuffering, @redwingedwhump, @burtlederp, @castielamigos-whump-side-blog, @whatwhumpcomments, @cursedscribbles, @whumpywhumper, @stxck-fxck, @omega-em-z-02, @whumps-the-word, @justwhumpitwhumpitgood, @justplainwhump, @moose-teeth, @slaintetowhump, @finder-of-rings, @inky-whump, @thatsthewhump, @orchidscript, @insanitywishes, @this-mightaswell-happen, @newandfiguringitout, @whumpkitty, @pretty-face-breaker, @cinnamonflavoredhugs, @inaridriscoll, @im-just-here-for-the-whump, @endless-whump, @grizzlie70, @oops-its-whump

44 notes · View notes

jordanianroyals · 4 years ago

Photo

6 February 2021: Queen Rania of Jordan called on the international community to address issues fueling rising inequality during the COVID-19 pandemic, stressing the need for equitable global COVID-19 vaccine distribution.

“We are all in a race against a pandemic, not against each other,” Queen Rania said, adding that any single country’s inability to recover from this crisis could lead to instability and insecurity for all.

She made these comments while participating virtually in the Warwick Economics Summit, conducted by CNN news anchor Becky Anderson. She explained that while some wealthy countries have pre-ordered enough vaccine doses to immunize their populations three times over, “lower income countries will at best only manage to vaccinate a tenth of their populations” this year.

“I see no reason why those who have excess supply can’t donate their surplus to poorer countries, and I’m glad that some countries have committed to doing just that,” the Queen said, echoing King Abdullah’s calls for vaccinations to be treated as a global public good.

“If we aren’t motivated by moral or ethical responsibility, then at least we should be motivated to act from a global health standpoint,” she said.

“This pandemic has revealed and reinforced cracks in our world order, along lines of income inequality, gender inequity, and social injustice,” Her Majesty said, adding that, while everyone has suffered some kind of loss since the start of the pandemic, “this loss hasn’t been felt equally.” (Source: Petra)

“While some people are enjoying the benefits of rebounding global markets, far too many people around the world are suffering from parallel pandemics of hunger, violence, and illiteracy,” she added. “In fact, for the first time in 20 years, extreme poverty is back on the rise.”

The Queen went on to highlight current challenges to global education, stating that COVID-19 has caused the greatest disruption to education in human history, with school closures affecting 1.6 billion learners.

“Access to education has never been fair, but the disparities that we are seeing today, both within and across countries, are quite staggering. A child’s fate hinges on which side of the digital divide they fall, and far too many – millions, in fact – are falling on the wrong side.”

Her Majesty underscored the need to strengthen education systems by developing remote learning solutions and making them universally accessible. “Online learning solutions aren’t just band-aid measures for temporary problems. They reinforce our education systems by offering contingency options.”

The Queen also called for the international community to prioritize closing the global education funding gap, noting that UNESCO has warned that it is approaching USD 200 billion per year.

“That might sound like a lot, but when you think about it, it’s only 10 percent of global military expenditures,” she said. “There is no excuse for us not to make an effort to close that gap.”

Describing school and daycare closures as “nothing short of a full-scale crisis for a lot of working moms,” Her Majesty explained that women worldwide have been disproportionately affected by the pandemic, adding that they are more likely to work in sectors impacted by lockdowns and are often the first to be let go or forced from their jobs.

“That is really tough on mothers and families, but it is also terrible for the global economy,” she said, noting that today marks an opportunity to ”revamp, rethink, and redesign the workplace so that it better meets the needs of men and women.”

Despite current challenges, Her Majesty pointed out that this period has also shown some of our strengths as an international community, particularly regarding global efforts to contain and cure COVID-19.

“If we take the development of vaccines, for example, it would have taken us years to get to this point had it not been for the coordination and collaboration of the medical community,” Queen Rania said. “That was a really shining, undeniable example of how a crisis can fuel innovation, and how, when we put our politics and national identities aside and work toward a common goal, we can achieve so much for so many.”

She went on to urge the audience to carry that spirit of collaboration forward into a “post-pandemic world,” and to make “all people’s wellbeing our new bottom line.”

“Whatever ‘normal’ we go back to, I know that we cannot go back to the ‘old normal’ that left too many people behind,” she stressed. “If we’ve learnt one thing from this crisis, it’s that we’re only as strong as the weakest among us.”

The 2021 Warwick Economics Summit, held virtually and accessible for free online for the first time this year, is one of the largest student-run economics conferences in Europe. Now in its 20th edition, the three-day Summit gathers university students from around the world to hear from global thought leaders on a broad range of social and economic topics.

#Queen Rania #interview

7 notes · View notes

newstfionline · 3 years ago

Text

Sunday, June 13, 2021

Rash of mass shootings stirs US fears heading into summer (AP) Two people were killed and at least 30 others wounded in mass shootings overnight in three states, authorities said Saturday, stoking concerns that a spike in U.S. gun violence could continue into summer as coronavirus restrictions ease and more people are free to socialize. The attacks took place late Friday or early Saturday in the Texas capital of Austin, Chicago and Savannah, Georgia. In Austin, authorities said they arrested one of two male suspects and were searching for the other after a shooting early Saturday on a crowded pedestrian-only street packed with bars and restaurants. Fourteen people were wounded, including two critically, in the gunfire, which the city’s interim police chief said is believed to have started as a dispute between two parties. In Chicago, a woman was killed and nine other people were wounded when two men opened fire on a group standing on a sidewalk in the Chatham neighborhood on the city’s South Side. In the south Georgia city of Savannah, police said one man was killed and seven other people were wounded in a mass shooting Friday evening.

Summer camps return but with fewer campers and counselors (AP) Overnight summer camps will be allowed in all 50 states this season, but COVID-19 rules and a pandemic labor crunch mean that many fewer young campers will attend, and those who do will have to observe coronavirus precautions for the second consecutive year. “Camp might look a little different, but camp is going to look a lot better in 2021 than it did in 2020, when it didn’t happen,” said Matt Norman of Atlanta, who is getting ready to send his 12-year-old daughter to camp. Even though most camps will be open, reduced capacity necessitated by COVID-19 restrictions and the labor shortage will keep numbers well below a normal threshold of about 26 million summer campers, said Tom Rosenberg of the American Camp Association.

Mexico says COVID-19 has affected a fourth of its population (Reuters) About a quarter of Mexico’s 126 million people are estimated to have been infected with the coronavirus, the health ministry said on Friday, far more than the country’s confirmed infections. The 2020 National Health and Nutrition Survey (Ensanut) showed that about 31.1 million people have had the virus, the ministry said in a statement, citing Tonatiuh Barrientos, an official at the National Institute of Public Health. According to Barrientos, not all of the people in the survey’s estimate necessarily showed symptoms. The survey was based on interviews with people at 13,910 households between Aug. 17 and Nov. 14 last year, and confirmed preliminary results released in December.

Peru on edge as electoral board reviews result of disputed presidential election (Guardian) Peru was on a knife-edge on Friday as its electoral board reviewed ballots cast in the presidential election, after a challenge to the tally by the losing candidate Keiko Fujimori. The final tally gave the leftist teacher Pedro Castillo a razor-thin 50.17% to 49.83% advantage over his rightwing rival Fujimori, which amounts to about 60,000 votes. However, the country’s electoral authority has yet to confirm the win, and Fujimori, the scion of a controversial political dynasty, has refused to concede. She alleges fraud, even though national and international observers said the vote was clean, and has called for up to 500,000 votes to be nullified or reexamined, forcing the electoral board to conduct a review of ballots.

For Cornwall, G7 summit brings disruption (AP) Towering steel fences, masses of police, protests on the beach: The Cornish seaside’s turquoise waters and white sandy beaches are looking decidedly less idyllic this week as leaders of the Group of Seven wealthy democracies descend for a summit. U.S. President Joe Biden and leaders from Canada, France, Germany, Italy and Japan are arriving for three days of talks starting Friday at the tiny village of Carbis Bay, near St. Ives in Cornwall. The region is a popular holiday destination in the southwestern tip of England. Locals may be used to crowds and traffic jams during the peak summer tourist season, but the disruptions caused by the summit are on another level. A naval frigate dominates the coastline, armed soldiers guard the main sites and some 5,000 extra police officers have been deployed to the area. Authorities have even hired a cruise ship with a capacity of 3,000, moored offshore, to accommodate some of the extra officers. A main road is closed for the whole week, and local train lines and bus services have been shut down. A 3-meter (10-foot) tall metal fence nicknamed the “ring of steel” has been erected around Treganna Castle in Carbis Bay, where world leaders will stay. Security is also tight in the nearby town of Falmouth, the main base for international media covering the summit.

World leaders are in England, but beautiful British beaches have stolen the show (Washington Post) When President Biden shared a photo to Twitter on Thursday of him standing alongside British Prime Minister Boris Johnson and gazing out onto an unspoiled, sandy white beach from the Group of Seven summit in Cornwall, England, the post was supposed to be a tribute to the “special relationship” between the United Kingdom and the United States. But to many, it was the image of the picturesque coast that stood out. It looked somewhat suspicious. Too good to be true. Others questioned the authenticity of the scene, wondering whether it was photoshopped. Although it is true that some of Britain’s beaches have a reputation for pebbles, angry seagulls that steal food from unsuspecting tourists and diapers that float in murky waters, the county of Cornwall boasts some of the country’s best seaside destinations—complete with calm, clear waters that are perfect for swimming in and long stretches of soft sand that attract families from around the world. Carbis Bay is one of several beaches that make up St. Ives Bay, which, according to the Cornwall tourist board, is considered by the “Most Beautiful Bays in the World” organization to be one of the world’s best. The bay is described as being “surrounded by sub-tropical plants and lapped by turquoise waters.”

Ransomware’s suspected Russian roots point to a long detente between the Kremlin and hackers (Washington Post) The ransomware hackers suspected of targeting Colonial Pipeline and other businesses around the world have a strict set of rules. First and foremost: Don’t target Russia or friendly states. It’s even hard-wired into the malware, including coding to prevent hacks on Moscow’s ally Syria, according to cybersecurity experts who have analyzed the malware’s digital fingerprints. They say the reasons appear clear. “In the West you say, ‘Don’t . . . where you eat,’ ” said Dmitry Smilyanets, a former Russia-based hacker who is now an intelligence analyst at Recorded Future, a cybersecurity company with offices in Washington and other cities around the world. “It’s a red line.” Targeting Russia could mean a knock on the door from state security agents, he said. But attacking Western enterprises is unlikely to trigger a crackdown. The relationship between the Russian government and ransomware criminals allegedly operating from within the country is expected to be a point of tension between President Biden and Russia’s Vladimir Putin at their planned summit in Geneva on Wednesday. The United States has accused Russia of acting as a haven for hackers by tolerating their activities—as long as they are directed outside the country.

Pandemic relapse spells trouble for India’s middle class (AP) India’s economy was on the cusp of recovery from the first pandemic shock when a new wave of infections swept the country, infecting millions, killing hundreds of thousands and forcing many people to stay home. Cases are now tapering off, but prospects for many Indians are drastically worse as salaried jobs vanish, incomes shrink and inequality is rising. Decades of progress in alleviating poverty are imperiled, experts say, and getting growth back on track hinges on the fate of the country’s sprawling middle class. It’s a powerful and diverse group ranging from salaried employees to small business owners: many millions of people struggling to hold onto their hard-earned gains. The outbreak of the pandemic triggered the worst downturn since the Great Depression of the 1930s and as it gradually ebbs, many economies are bouncing back. India’s economy contracted 7.3% in the fiscal year that ended in March, worsening from a slump that slashed growth to 4% from 8% in the two years before the pandemic hit. Economists fear there will be no rebound similar to the ones seen in the U.S. and other major economies.

‘Xi Jinping is my spiritual leader’: China’s education drive in Tibet (Reuters) Under clear blue skies, rugged peaks and the spectacular Potala Palace, one image is ubiquitous in Tibet’s capital city Lhasa: portraits of Chinese President Xi Jinping and fellow leaders. China is broadening a political education campaign as it celebrates the 70th anniversary of its control over Tibet. Civilians and religious figures who the government arranged to be interviewed on the five-day trip pledged loyalty to the Communist Party and Xi. Asked who his spiritual leader was, a monk at Lhasa’s historic Jokhang temple named Xi. “I’m not drunk ... I speak freely to you,” said the monk named Lhakpa, speaking from a courtyard overlooked by security cameras and government observers. “The posters [of Xi] coincide with a massive political education programme which is called ‘feeling gratitude to the party’ education,” said Robert Barnett, a Tibetan studies veteran scholar at the University of London’s School of Oriental and African Studies.

Long overlooked, Israel’s Arab citizens are increasingly asserting their Palestinian identity (Washington Post) Growing up in an Arab village in northern Israel in the 1990s, Mahmoud Abo Arisheh was sure of at least two things: He was Israeli, and he was not allowed to talk politics. “Be careful, or the Shin Bet will get you,” his parents told him, referring to Israel’s domestic security service. Decades later, much has changed: Abo Arisheh is a lawyer, a poet and a theater director in Jaffa. He attends protests and talks politics freely—in Arabic, Hebrew and English. And while his citizenship may remain Israeli, the identity most dear to him is that of a Palestinian. “I didn’t know anything about being Palestinian,” said the 32-year-old, “but then I opened my eyes.” And now, it seems, so are many others. In just the past month, Palestinian citizens of Israel—also known as Israeli Arabs—have risen up in mass, nationwide demonstrations to protest Israeli evictions and police raids. They have been arrested by the hundreds following some of the worst communal violence between Arabs and Jews in Israel’s post-independence history. For a community that is often overlooked despite numbering nearly 2 million people—or about 20 percent of the Israeli population—these are momentous days indeed.

Nigerian police fire tear gas to break up protests over rising insecurity (Reuters) Police fired tear gas and detained several demonstrators in the Nigerian cities of Lagos and Abuja on Saturday during protests over the country’s worsening security situation, Reuters witnesses said. Anger over mass kidnappings-for-ransom, a decade-long Islamist insurgency and a crackdown on protesters in Lagos last October has fueled demands for the government of President Muhammadu Buhari to do more to tackle violence and insecurity. Reuters witnesses in Lagos and Abuja saw police shooting their guns into the air and firing tear gas into the crowds to disperse the demonstrators, who held placards and chanted “Buhari must go”. Officers were also seen smashing mobile phones confiscated from protesters, who also denounced the country’s 33.3% unemployment rate.

#headlines #news

2 notes · View notes

matafi1208 · 3 years ago

Text

Child Poverty NZ

children who experience poverty at a young age go through worse cognitive, social-behavioral and health outcomes due to the low-income being generated in their households. lack of resources being purchased for the wellbeing’s of families and the large amounts of stress on parents and their children as a result of very low income lead to pathways of bad outcomes. “Poverty affects multiple outcomes for children at the same time”

source - https://www.msd.govt.nz/documents/about-msd-and-our-work/publications-resources/information-releases/weag-report-release/rapid-evidence-review-the-impact-of-poverty-on-life-course-outcomes-for-children-and-the-likely-effect-of-increasing-the-adequacy-of-welfare-benef.pdf

children who are born into low income families are more likely to become prone to health problems at a early age in their life. due to the low income being generated, families are limited to resources, food and medicine. In New Zealand, a child born into poverty has on ‘average’ 1.4 times higher risk to die during childhood than children born into high-income families. rheumatic fever, ear infections, gastroenteritis and developmental delay are all health effects that impact young children because of poverty. “In the 2002 National Nutrition Survey about four-fifths of households said they could always afford to eat properly; one in five said they could “sometimes afford to eat properly”

source - https://www.occ.org.nz/assets/Uploads/Reports/Poverty/A-fair-go-for-all-children.pdf

a key crisis which effects young children from poverty is housing crisis’s in state homes. poverty seems to become more life risky once the health of children are in jeopardy. In terms of housing, families are becoming more and more vulnerable to becoming sick due to cold, damp and moldy homes. poor quality homes being worked and improved on reduce large amounts of visits to the hospitals, gps and attendance for work and school will become more and more fewer. ’'“Take care of our children Take care of what they hear Take care of what they feel For how the children grow So will be the shape of Aotearoa”

source - https://thepolicyobservatory.aut.ac.nz/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/75092/Asher-and-St-John-Child-Poverty-Health-in-NZ-v3.pdf

Child Poverty in New Zealand: Why it matters and how it can be reduced.

over the years child poverty has always had a backstory as to why it continues at a rate where constant change is always required in order for it to change. for example the effects that impact the poverty upon children are a increase in relative housing costs because of policy changes , increase in energy costs and change in family structure. overall the major increase which spiked child poverty from the 1980s and 1990s to now is 1. solo parenting and 2. reduction in welfare benefits. “Investing in the future of our children, and especially our most disadvantaged and vulnerable children, is surely the best possible investment any society can make”.

source - https://web-b-ebscohost-com.libproxy.unitec.ac.nz/ehost/detail/detail?vid=7&sid=f63e9c52-f3e6-453d-9b2e-e2606a96fd61%40sessionmgr102&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZSZzY29wZT1zaXRl#db=a9h&AN=97806341&anchor=AN0097806341-6

Children in Crisis: Child Poverty and Abuse in New Zealand.

Citizens of Aotearoa who’ve returned home after 11 years of living abroad said they were “appalled to see that inequalities had blown out and that the level of child poverty had greatly increased”. A hui was announced by Te Whare Wananga o Waikato to discuss reports concerning child poverty in New Zealand. This provided a space for conversation regarding government policies, producing relevant resources for agencies and/or practitioner’s, between interested groups. A debate between government which emphasized vulnerability rather than poverty, was highlighted in an excerpt titled ‘The White Paper on Vulnerable children’. For example in 2012, 152,800 care and protection notifications were made to Child, Youth & Family Services. An investigation found cases of neglect, physical abuse, sexual abuse & emotional abuse. “Too many children live a life far below the norm, most of them let down by the very people, often the only people, who they should be able to trust and rely on to love and protect them”. - The White Paper On Vulnerable Children, 2012—The Sad Reality

Source - http://www.childrensactionplan.govt.nz/the-white-paper/the-sad-reality

the nz herald

Maori and pasifika households with children who are disabled are twice as more likely to be living in poverty than pakeha. Latest statistics show that the latest housing costs are still continuing to have a large impact on the livelihoods of young children living in poverty. With the government tackling these new targets in order to reduce the child poverty rates, so far they have supposedly been “unequally felt”. “ "In order to meet its Tiriti o Waitangi obligations, the Government must reprioritise, and have the reduction of poverty for tamariki Māori at the core of all its policies.”

source - https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/child-poverty-more-than-twice-as-likely-to-affect-maori-pasifika-disabled-children-as-pakeha/7ARXL2Y5O3XP2SP3FZIUOSCKBE/

2 notes · View notes

theculturedmarxist · 4 years ago

Link

For those that might not know, Grover Norquist is Washington’s anti-tax poster boy since the Reagan administration. Calling him an anti-tax lobbyist is missing the vast majority of other shit he’s responsible for or has had a hand in. He’s basically been integral in creating the immensely shitty situation in regards to a failed government and overpowered business lobby that we’re in today.

Anyway, I wanted to share the absolutely delusional bullshit these people say to each other, because it’s absolutely illuminating.

Grover Norquist On Taxes, Socialism And The Demonization Of The Rich

Grover Norquist is President of Americans for Tax Reform (ATR), a taxpayer organization that opposes all tax increases as a matter of principle and has been leading campaigns for tax reductions since 1986. ATR was founded at the request of President Reagan and asks all candidates for office in the United States to sign the Taxpayer Protection Pledge, a written commitment to vote against any tax hikes while they are in office. Rainer Zitelmann spoke with him:

Rainer Zitelmann: In Europe, governments are already looking beyond the coronavirus crisis and planning massive tax increases. In particular, there have been increasing calls for a wealth tax on the richest within society to pay for coronavirus measures and guard against future crises. Supporters of free market economics, on the other hand, are calling for tax cuts to get the economy back on track once the current crisis has abated. What do you think will happen in the United States? If Trump is re-elected, will he cut taxes again? And what will happen if Biden wins?

Grover Norquist: Once we’re looking back on coronavirus in our rearview mirror rather than having it flying at the windshield—then what? Little will happen before the November 2020 American presidential election. Democrats will demand higher taxes and massive spending, Republicans will propose tax cuts. But the Democrat-controlled house will block any tax reductions and the Republican-dominated senate and the Trump veto will block any tax increases or spending explosion. Should Trump win re-election, Republicans will move to enact their stated goal of reducing the corporate income tax to 15% from today’s 21%. They will push to index capital gains for inflation—so capital gain taxes would only be due on real gains, not inflationary gains. Should Biden win the presidency, and the Democrats capture the senate, Biden has promised $3.4 trillion of new taxes. That is three times what Hillary Clinton threatened/promised in 2016—and she lost for being too left wing. Spending will explode. Income tax will be increased, an energy tax will be imposed and eventually a Value Added Tax will be levied. Of course, this fork in the road would be exactly the same if there was no coronavirus. Republicans are the party of tax reduction and (modest) spending restraint. Democrats remain the party of endless tax hikes and endless spending sprees.

Zitelmann: In the United States, socialism used to be a dirty word—and it still is for many older Americans. In contrast, large numbers of younger Americans are committed to “socialism.” So why has anticapitalism become so popular in the United States, especially among younger people?

Norquist: The sad answer is that younger Americans do not know what socialism means. Millennials do not remember the Soviet Union. Or Stalin’s Gulags or the Warsaw Pact. They only know Russia. They could not even tell you what the initials U.S.S.R. stood for, or that Nazi is the abbreviation of National Socialist. Somehow, Bernie Sanders, who is well versed in Soviet history and Cuba’s tradeoff of “literacy” against political prisoners, has explained to younger Americans that “socialism” means Sweden and Denmark.

‘Sanders Had Already Won The Policy Debate’

Zitelmann: Sanders is now out of the race. However, you believe that his ideas have nevertheless prevailed. Why is that?

Norquist: You might think that Bernie Sanders’ withdrawal from the 2020 campaign and the likely victory of Vice President Joe Biden represents a move to the center by the Democrats. Sadly, no. I would argue that Bernie Sanders left the race not because he failed to get enough delegates to win but because he had already won the policy debate. Biden’s threatened tax hikes total $3.4 trillion dollars over a decade. That is three times more than Hillary Clinton threatened. Biden promises to ban fracking, plastic bags (he said plastic, let’s generously assume he meant only plastic bags), expand Medicare with a “public option,” meaning a door through which all Americans could be pushed into a one-size-fits-all, government-controlled health care system, and an energy/carbon tax. What is the difference between Biden and Bernie? They have the same Rolodexes. The same likely White House staffers. The same rhetoric.

Why The Rich Are Being Demonized

Zitelmann: In the Democratic primaries, all of the candidates seemed to be competing to outdo each in terms of their “rich-bashing” rhetoric. Even Michael Bloomberg, himself one of the richest men in the world, was forced to demand higher taxes on the rich before he was forced to withdraw from the race. Where does this hatred of the rich come from?

Norquist: The Democrats need trillions of dollars to buy votes to win the 2020 election. To do that they will require a great deal more money than the $3.8 trillion raised in taxes under the 2019 budget. And they can’t afford to admit that regular voters are the likely target of their new and additional taxes—an energy tax, a Value Added Tax and higher payroll taxes. So Democrat candidates, continuing the strategies adopted by Clinton and Obama, started by demonizing the rich and then promising to tax them—not you, the typical voter. Now, both Clinton and Obama did raise taxes on the middle class—but they talked so much about taxing the rich that even a well-educated voter could be forgiven for thinking that the new taxes were all on the rich. Every new tax voters heard about were announced as targeting the rich (or corporations which, of course, pass on their increased tax burdens to consumers in the form of higher prices and workers in lower wages). The left needs to demonize the rich. It is, after all, their justification for taxing them. Americans do not like the idea of taking money away from someone who earned it.

Zitelmann: A great deal of energy is expended on arguing that the “rich” did not earn their money.

Norquist: Yes, the logic is this: If the rich are only rich because they got lucky, then they never truly earned or deserve their fortunes. This is why Barack Obama told small businessmen in the 2009 campaign, “You did not build that,” when referring to their own small businesses. If you didn’t build it—it isn’t really yours. And, once Democrat logic is accepted, taking it away is not really theft. Nor wrong. Nor immoral. But demonizing the rich has a second advantage for the left. In addition to making it easier to tax the rich and trick voters/taxpayers into thinking they are not the true target of higher taxes, the war on the rich covers up the 50-year failure of the Great Society. The Great Society was launched in 1965 with the promise that the government knew how to help the poor become middle class and self-reliant. Government spending on housing, healthcare and education would instill the poor with middle-class values such as hard work, self-reliance and a willingness to work and save today for a better tomorrow, maintaining a long-term perspective. But the Great Society spent some $14 trillion in giving money to the poor, or more often paying well-paid government employees to “provide services” to the poor, and has little or nothing to show for it in terms of improvements in savings, income, education or work. So rather than admit that they wasted trillions of dollars and concede that they should shut down government job programs that only benefit the Democrat party’s base, the left pivoted to a new problem. Not that the poor are poor, but that there is a large gap between the rich and poor.

This new problem—inequality—can be solved without helping to lift a single poor person out of poverty and into the middle class. One only needs to reduce the wealth and income of the rich. That way we will be more equal. All worse off. But more equal. It is possible for modern Democrats to reduce inequality without doing anything to help poor people or communities. The middle class can suffer while we “reduce inequality.” That they can do. To tax the rich; first undermine their right to keep what they create. Demonize them. To avoid embarrassing questions about the failure of the left’s “war on poverty” you just need to shift the focus to inequality.

‘Immigration Is Our Strongest Competitive Advantage’

Zitelmann: Donald Trump has certainly done some positive things in terms of tax policy and deregulation. At the same time, however, he has increased what was already an extremely high level of national debt and is pursuing protectionist trade policies. I have the impression that Trump has no clear market economy compass. How capitalist is Trump?

Norquist: It’s not clear whether Donald Trump has ever read Hayek. But his tax cuts are straight out of the Ronald Reagan/Art Laffer/Milton Friedman playbook. His de-regulation goes further than all previous presidents combined. His judges will strengthen and repair America’s commitment to the rule of law for a generation. And his unwillingness to be dragged into every stupid idea some European intellectual thought up—windmills, solar to replace real energy that really powers a national economy—has been a godsend. Those who wish to embroil America in every war in every quadrant of the globe have no ally in Trump. Trump knows that war is the enemy of liberty and fiscal prudence. Free trade and immigration are issues where Trump departs from President Reagan and Adam Smith. But as President Trump said before the coronavirus crisis—we are running out of workers in the United States. And the higher wages and jobs growth he delivered reduced the grumpiness of American voters who no longer lash out at immigrants and foreign competitors suspected of stealing their jobs. Trump’s tax cuts, de-regulation, sound legal system and respect for property rights delivered growth to America before the virus and will return when the virus is behind us. Trump’s growth silenced the concerns that drive protectionism and tariffs and stoke fears of immigration. Yes, the wall will be built. America will gain control of its borders, but it will maintain large and open doors. Immigration is our strongest competitive advantage over China, Japan, Russia and most of the world. And yes, our trade agreements need to ensure that our intellectual property is not stolen and reduce the ability of governments anywhere to subsidize trade and disadvantage foreign competition.

Zitelmann: What are your thoughts on the Fed’s low interest rate policy? What does this mean for our market economy system?

Norquist: The danger of near-zero federal interest rates is that borrowing money is seen as “almost” free. The deficit is not the problem. Overspending is the problem. The deadweight cost of government is total spending. The deficit is one element of the problem—like the visible part of an iceberg. But it is the larger, hidden mass of the iceberg below the water line that ripped the Titanic apart. If deficit spending is held down, and taxes are not raised, then there is a limit on spending. That is good. But if deficit spending is “free” or “inexpensive” because interest rates (today) are low, then public opposition to more and more government spending is reduced and government spending will be allowed to increase and weaken the economy.

#republicans #grover norquist #subhuman #american politics #forbes #class warfare #class war #2020 presidential election #bernie sanders #bourgeoisie #bourgeois ideology #ideology #ideoloji #ideologia

5 notes · View notes

canttelliotte-blog · 4 years ago

Text

Incredibly long, overly detailed post I spent too much time on.

Tl:dr AITA for telling someone they were coming off as an ungrateful, privileged asshole who didn't seem to recognize or truly appreciate what they have? I blew up after a series of encounters, they seemed oblivious to their lifestyle and support and how truly different life could have turned out without it. I called them out after weeks of trying to be empathetic but couldn't take how helpless they were acting when I would kill for the kind the support they were complaining about and taking for granted.

I should use a throwaway because I know this person will probably see this but I don't have the energy. I'll try to keep this short (actually super long sorry) I feel like I already know I was sort of harsh and out of line. This whole thing has just been sticking with me and I feel really messed up about it.

Alright, so context, back story. I had a breakdown in February and tried to kill myself. By some miracle, I got a bed at one of the best mental hospitals on this side of the east coast. After a long history of chronic mental illness, being on disability for years with medicare, getting an opportunity like this was amazing. I had been on waiting lists for months before my attempt, but fate, acuity, and availability all lined up. A true miracle. Unless you have a family with money or amazing health insurance, getting a bed is just extremely difficult at this particular facility.

The reason being, they provide real treatment. Comprehensive, attentive, life-saving treatment. They actually provide real care with empathy, actual therapy, psychiatry, and groups, with educated staff, real food to eat, world-renowned providers, and treatment teams that listen and work with you to come up with effective long-term solutions/aftercare plans that set you up for long term success.

Out of pocket, this place is unfathomably expensive. The more exclusive programs on-campus are for the ultra-elite/ ultra-wealthy, taking celebrities like Selena Gomez. The institution itself is known for its education and research. It is not funded by the state like almost everywhere else. Most state-run facilities are atrocious. a disgusting holding cell, where you're stripped of your clothes, dignity, and rights, fed prison food, overmedicated, physically and chemically restrained, only to be thrown back on the street in 3-5 days with no aftercare, med refills, or plan. Been there, done that, many times, not the point. The point was, I got some really helpful expensive ass treatment by the luck of the draw.

While I was there, I met someone lovely. We instantly connected and expressed interest in one another. They seemed really cool, we talked at length about income inequality and how unfair it was that this kind of treatment wasn't the norm or easily accessible and how unfair that was. They seemed passionate and bright and we got along great. They were set to discharge only a few days after I got there, so we exchanged info before they left. We talked a bunch while I was still there (my discharge was a couple of weeks later) and decided to go on a few dates after I got out.

A few days after I got out, I unintendedly overdosed, confused about my meds, and was incoherent by the time I got to the ER. I was restrained and chemically sedated. I was confused and fought so was deemed severely acute, and got sent to a state-run facility similar to what I described above. It was all very traumatic and I shut down once I got home. I was lucky I made it out semi-okay, that they let me out at all.

I wasn't replying to anyone's messages but the person I had met kept reaching out wanting to hear from me and make sure I was okay. I was embarrassed but it was really sweet and soon we starting talking a lot again and really connecting.

As I got to know them, I definitely thought they were very cool, we seemed to have a lot in common, they made me laugh and we got along really well. I was really digging them and saw us potentially becoming a thing. After talking for some time, we decided to anxiously have our first date. It went okay but something was off.

I didn't really pick up on it at first but the more we talked, the more privileged they offhandedly revealed they were. I know it's judge-y and lame, but that kind of put me off. I've been poor my whole life and struggled hard for everything, it's a whole different world living in poverty, so it made me a bit uncomfortable. I still live in poverty, on disability, with food stamps, and can barely hold it together enough to have a part-time job, but I have no choice. It's rough. I've been homeless, lived in institutions, went through foster care, and have no familial support. I have one of the most serious debilitating mental illnesses. It's been very very hard.

I am biased but I haven't met anyone well off who gets it. Some people don't realize how hard things can be when you've really had nothing, and had to work hard for everything. Even simple things are taken for granted, not understood, or there are miscommunications or assumptions made due to the lack of understanding. That's just my personal experience, it's hard trying to explain things and it's invalidating sometimes, it can be hard to relate or connect due to the lack of understanding.

Honestly, though, it took me by surprise. We had both talked passionately about the struggles of being on disability, the importance of income inequality, how unfair the system is set up, the barriers against the poor receiving adequate mental health treatment. They explained how they advocated for social justice and regularly went to protests. I felt dumb because I did meet them at higher-end facility, but I assumed they ended up there by dumb luck as I did with how they presented and initially came across.

They made it seem like we were in the same boat, poor af, chronically mentally ill, and 4 ever struggling. It was just a surprise because that was very much was not the case.

They moved up here from Florida, (where admittedly their life was much harder and different), but since moving, they were being supported by their aunt and uncle, who were very, very well off. They had a very expensive private practice psychiatrist, multiple treatment providers, and an apartment in a very well-off area, that their aunt owned, so they paid no rent. Their car/insurance/phone everything was paid for.

They seemed to have money to burn, dancing around being well taken care of and not really having to worry. They were on disability though receiving payments and food stamps in addition, not reporting the assistance from their family. When I lightly inquired, they said their grandmother mostly controlled their finances and they didn't deal with bills etc. They spent freely, getting take out almost every night, etc. enjoying all the pleasure of life without a second thought.

I was uncomfortable with this like I said, but they did seem cool and understanding, we did get along and I wanted to give them a chance. I put my biased experience aside and tried to give it a go.

First example that really blew me away was their dog. They had several animals, including a cat and two dogs. Even for someone working, three animals is a huge expense. I only have one cat and while she's my world, it gets hard sometimes. The vet is expensive, litter, food, treats, it adds up. And she's only one animal!!! I provide for her and take care of her, but a $350 vet bill still packs a punch. Of course, I pay it, she's my baby, but it might mean only eating sandwiches for a few weeks. I love her, so I sacrifice, she is worth it in every way, but animals are expensive and a lot of work/responsibility.

When this person and I first started seriously talking, they mentioned the dog they were closest to was very sick with a rare condition. I don't know the full details, but I guess it took a while for the vet to figure out what was wrong, he was on a lot of medications, needed loads of tests and scans. There were weeks of extensive treatments/ blood transfusions, all in a long, painful, and strenuous attempt to save him. They tried for a long time in the hopes he would get better.

He, unfortunately, passed away a few weeks after we started talking. It was devastating to them and I tried my best to be supportive and help them grieve. They were understandably at a huge loss. Their mental health tanked. Their dog meant the world to them, I understand that completely. Pets are family.

A few weeks after he passed. They were talking a little about the course of treatment and how hard it had been and what a long, painful road it was. They kind of casually remarked that his treatment cost over $20,000.

I honestly thought I had misheard. I had to ask twice because I thought they meant $2,000. No. $20,000. $20,000.Holy shit.

I just...$20,000 is what I make in a year. A year. Dogs are family, I totally, totally get that. People will do anything to save their loved ones. A pet is like an uninsured child, even with pet insurance, it can be expensive. I get that. If you have that kind of money, you pay it, without a thought, no problem.

I just... wow. I still couldn't even wrap my mind around it. My cat is my world but it breaks my heart to say, if anything happened to her like that, it would kill me, but I would be forced to put her down. I just couldn't believe, $20,000. And they said it like, no big deal, of course, like anyone would/could afford that, it was obvious, a no-brainer. I just...wow.

Next, kicker. I  came over to hang out one night and watch movies. I had never been to their apartment before. They claimed it had been super messy and they made a big deal about how they had cleaned for me. Sweet, but unnecessary, I get mental illness is tough. It was two bedrooms, all to themselves, decent space and light, but definitely scattered and cluttered. They had a huge king-sized bed, a bidet in the bathroom, and a super nice living room set up. Big comfy couch, loads of nice blankets, and honestly the biggest tv I had ever seen. They joking bragged about having all the streaming options. No kidding. Hulu, Disney plus, Netflix, Amazon, HBO, Paramount, and at least half a dozen more I hadn't even heard of. It just seemed crazy and excessive paying for that many streaming services every month.  But to each their own I guess.

We were both huge fans of anime, and they sort of decided to venture to studio ghibli. They asked if I had seen a particular favorite of theirs. I hadn't. They searched and it was only available to rent. $17. I nearly had a heart attack. I was like no way, we could definitely find it streaming for free somewhere if we look, or watch something else, shortage of options. They were like no it's no biggie that's what I want to watch and clicked rent. Like no problem *sweats intensely* Anytime I spend money, I have a heart attack and second guess it, it takes me like 10 minutes to click buy and my heart always drops when I do. I overthink, whether I really need/deserve it/whether there's a cheaper option, or if it's truly necessary. I know that's a poverty thing. It's just like we could have easily found it somewhere for free with a little effort!

We go to order food, we both have celiac so finding takeout is a chore. They knew the area better so I was trusting them. They were very adamant about ordering expensive sushi. It was $36 for just one of the things they wanted. Not including delivery or tips or fees or anything else, which included appetizers and drinks, the whole nine. I wasn't feeling sushi. They were like fine, we'll order from two separate places then. Double the delivery fee, not something I ever do, it would be cheaper finding a place together, I could get something small and affordable but they wouldn't budge. I didn't really have money to order a big thing on my own, I wanted something small, but I felt pressured. I figured anything I got would be cheaper than having to split a big sushi order I didn't want. I was like okay fine.

They kind of seemed annoyed that I didn't just give in and get sushi. They were a little short with me, didn't give me many options of other places, and were weirdly controlling, not letting me look at their phone to find something. I kind of gave up and said like just a burger is fine. I figured it would be cheap and filling, probably $20 max. I didn't take into consideration that they live in an extremely expensive area. It ended up being almost $30, plus tip. For a burger. I almost wanted to cry. I would have picked somewhere else cheaper given the option. They didn't even tell me the price until after they ordered it. I was like oh how much like $15 and they were so casual like oh no, $30 with tip. When it arrived, it was cold and disgusting, really inedible. I picked at the fries, which gave me a stomach ache as they were not gluten-free friendly and had been cross-contaminated in the fryer. I assumed they picked a place that they knew was safe.

When I wasn't eating, they asked if it was bad. I said yeah and they were like oh well just order something else. Like no, I can't afford anything else, it doesn't work like that. I was like no it's fine I'm not really that hungry. I wanted to say, I trusted you, and you kinda fucked me. I guess they picked that place because there was a gluten-free brownie sundae (prepackaged and not cross-contaminated) on the menu that they really wanted. Obviously more important.

My stomach ached all night. They ate their food happily. No big deal to them, $30 wasted on food I didn't really want, that I couldn't end up eating and got me sick. If it were them, they would have just ordered something else. No big deal to them. It was more important they got their brownie sundae and expensive sushi than making sure I was able to get something edible. Didn't matter that was half my grocery money for the week. Bologna sandwiches it'll have to be then. Awesome.

We spent the night talking, I didn't let on to how sick I was or that I was upset about not being able to choose food. They picked all the movies. I wanted to go home, but it just got later and later, one more movie I just *needed* to see. I asked them several times as the clock was ticking if it was getting too late to drive me home. No, no they were fine. Let's just watch another one. Then casually, they went to their room and brought out their night meds, threw 'em back, and settled into the couch. I started to panic. I asked again, you're taking me home, right? I guess they decided they weren't. I was miles away from home, no public transit running or close by. They were like oh I'm so tired, it got so late. Just order a car. I pulled up uber, $25. That would definitely overdraft my account.

Thankfully, after they saw me sweating and looking panicked, they were like, oh, I feel so bad, I'll order the uber for you. (If they hadn’t, I would have had to explain like, getting home on my own wasn't the plan nor was staying the night. If they thought I would be cool with just staying, they should have said something, if they wanted me to stay, it should have been a discussion, not a surprise.)

I just felt really disrespected. I was simultaneously hungry and sick from dinner, broke and unprepared to stay over with no prior discussion. I didn't have meds, my cat didn't have food out, I was blindsided and essentially stranded/put in an awkward position. They didn't consider that it might be stressful or beyond my limitations to get home. Being able to just roll with punches isn't financially feasible for everyone. It just felt like they were self-centered and inconsiderate. The whole night was what they wanted, what they wanted to eat, where they wanted to order from, what they wanted to watch, changing plans to what was convenient for them without any regard toward how it might impact me. Just inconsiderate and self-centered behavior.

We did keep talking though, I just sort of chalked it up to miscommunication and sort of beat myself up for not speaking up. It was weird though, kept just casually mentioning shit that was so privileged and complaining about shit that made them sound so ungrateful. I don't think they realized how it came across, just completely oblivious to their access to resources and not appreciating their position or supports.

They started talking about starting ketamine treatments to combat their ongoing depression. They had received them in the past and went on about how life-changing and helpful it was, and that everyone should try it. Now, being on disability (and even with most insurances) the treatments are not covered. The clinics that administer them are all out of pocket, bougie as fuck, and extremely expensive.

They talked about having several rounds in the past like it was nothing. It's easily $250-400 a pop and they were going 1-2x a week for a long time. They kept talking about all their options like what a painstaking burden. Should they start with lozenges and work up to IV clinic or ask for patches, and start that way. They wanted to work up to twice a week again but their family was giving pushback. They wanted me to agree with them, saying it was so unfair and lame and unreasonable/closeminded of their family for not immediately agreeing. The same family that would be footing the bill. No, not unfair or unreasonable at all. You sound privileged as fuck.

I was super bothered they were endlessly going on about it and complaining about pushback and asking me to agree with them. My treatment-resistant depression hasn't responded to anything, I've been on every waiting list for MDMA-assisted treatment whenever they pop up but never been selected due to demand and availability. Even ECT is too expensive and not covered. I'd kill for an opportunity like that! And it wasn't even like their family was saying no, they were discussing it in family therapy and seriously considering it.

They talked about it so nonchalantly and kept going on and on about how amazing it was. Like great, tell me all about something else I'll never be able to afford. I'm sure Paris is great, and backpacking across Europe is awesome, like please do tell me more.

I finally mentioned like okay that sounds great, will never able to afford it, glad it's so helpful They told me that I could just buy it off the street. That's what they used to do occasionally. It's only a couple hundred dollars and you get way more. Like oh okay. Let me just not pay a third of my rent in the hopes that this jam band kids ketamine isn't fentanyl or some shit and maybe have a shot at not wanting to kill myself for a week, you know on the off chance it works. Sounds great, super safe, much more affordable. And like as ridiculous as it was to offer that as an alternative, that still wouldn't be something I could afford! They just came off so clueless and privileged and oblivious.

What really got me was how they eventually talked about their family. They did weekly family therapy with their aunt and uncle and occasionally their dad since moving up here. They stayed with their aunt and uncle (lived down the street) more often than not so they weren't alone. This was encouraged/appreciated/welcomed. They did activities together regularly to help with depression and loneliness/ managing symptoms. They had their grandma and brother, whom they saw often and cherished greatly. They portrayed the relationships as really solid and important. I thought wow, truly wholesome and wonderful. They seemed so loved, close, connected, cared for, and supported. Across the board, they had support.

But then tables would turn. They complained often their family was too close, too conservative, and not understanding. They didn't want them so involved in their life, their treatment, decision-making, and recovery process. They resented the support, complained they weren't a kid and were capable/in sound mind to make decisions/have control of their life. I tried to listen and be understanding but I didn't get it. They came off almost like a spoiled, ungrateful teenager.

You're getting help, love, and support all around, everyone wants to support you and see you do well and will give whatever that takes. Like legitimately whatever ?!? You don't have to work, pay for anything, and it is made sure you don't have to struggle for anything. Anything you need, you've got.

I get the concept that having family so close/involved could be crippling or invasive or just downright unproductive. But it was such a slap in the face they would complain to me of all people about having that kind of support.

Family/support is such a foreign concept to me personally. Like I said, I grew up in foster care. I've never had family involved, healthy relationships, or any sort of support like that. The concept of calling your aunt when you're sad and she offers kind words, support, and tells you to come over to do something fun? Like, can't relate. I could only take so much of them complaining about being taken care of.

Living with extreme mental illness, not being able to work for periods of time, living solely on disability paychecks and food stamps is damn is impossible to survive, especially where we live. Without the help they were being given, they wouldn't be able to survive. The cost of living is out of control, you can't even rent a room with a single disability payment. I know, I'm doing it. It takes everything for me to keep a part-time job, barely making enough to make ends meet. But if I don't. I'm homeless again. No matter what, no matter how bad symptoms get. And I have one of the hardest, most debilitating mental illnesses. I don't have any other choice.

Their aunt would pay for them to go to school or learn a trade or anything they wanted. They have a world-renowned private practice doctor that prescribes them literally anything they could want or need to help and they have a great bond/ working relationship. I have a psych who can barely remember my name and sees me for 5-15 minutes maybe once or twice a month. I was asking for medications recently to get through a hard time, nothing serious, but my state-assigned psych does not prescribe benzos. Period. Neither does my PCP. It's state rehab or psych facility for me or bust. Another thing they take for granted. They almost bragged to me about immediately getting two heavy-duty benzos and another maintenance medication, just by saying their panic attacks were slighting increasing. Meanwhile. I was at risk for DT's after relapsing and begging for basic Librium to maybe not die and was denied.

The real reality of being on disability is the bare minimum or bad treatment. My psychologist is thankfully amazing but it took 10 years and hitting absolute rock bottom and being homeless to find her. She's a diamond in the rough but only works with the sickest of the sick. I would be in a state institution right now if it weren't for her and I avoided it by the skin of my teeth.

So here's where I'm probably the asshole. After weeks, I broke. We were texting as usual and they started to sort of mope and complain. They were venting about having a hard time again and how symptoms were bad and there was just nothing they could do and it was so hard. They started going on about how helpless they were and how there was no opportunity to get better and everything was just super hard and impossible for them and how rough they had it. Their family was checking in on them too much and they were annoyed at them for being concerned and that they had no options and no chance and everything was just so hard and impossible.

I understand, that's depression. I'm pretty empathetic and understanding and have been up to this point but it just felt like the rich person complaining to the homeless guy sleeping on the street, how awful it was they forgot their umbrella that day, and how unfortunate it was to be getting wet. I just wanted to scream. If you're anxious take your benzos, take your other meds! Call your aunt. Text your on call therapist. Call your fancy psych who answers night and day. Utilize any of the resources you have and all the support you are given!

I was just tired of it. Things in my life have been super difficult, especially lately, and I have to figure it out alone. The voices were getting loud again which lead to a bad relapse that went off the rails, which I had to pull out of completely unassisted. I am in between jobs, my housing isn't stable, my bank accounts are low, my mental health is chronic and very severe, my treatment team was threatening to section me if I didn't reel it in. Things were bad. But I deal with it, alone.

I know it was wrong of me, but I couldn't take it. They have everything to help themselves!!! They could go to a fancy hospital, they could ask all their supports for help! They would receive the best care. All the medicines, the best treatment. Anything.

I basically kind of spelled it out for them. You have privilege, you have support, you have money, resources, a great treatment team, family, everything... please for the love of God, USE IT! You wouldn't have to worry about losing your job going into treatment, you wouldn't lose your housing. You wouldn't have to worry about falling behind on bills. You'd be fine.

How can you not see or appreciate all you have and or see how oblivious and privileged you come across and how hurtful that is? You're complaining to the wrong person.

I went on a bit too long. I was definitely coming from a place of hurt, mental illness, and jealousy. I wasn't trying to make them feel bad, I just wanted them to understand. That kind of support would make all the difference for so many that are struggling. They are sitting with gallons of water around them, complaining to be inconsolably parched and that don't know what to do, all while sort of offhandedly bragging about how much water they have and how they can easily get more. I've been carefully conserving a 16 oz Poland spring bottle, rationing for weeks not knowing if/when I will be able to refill. They aren't alone, expected to make it on just disability. They weren't recognizing their position, how they were coming across, how hurtful that was. I didn't get anyone to catch me, love me, support me. This is the real reality of living with extreme mental illness on disability looks like without that opportunity or support. This is hard fucking work. We are not the same. You got lucky. Now do something with it.

They ended up calling me a dick, saying I didn't understand, that I was being cruel and mean for no reason. We haven't talked since. I do feel bad, I just couldn't take it anymore.

So if you made it this far, lay it on me, AITA?

1 note · View note

guerillas-of-history · 5 years ago

Link

Edmundo Reyes is a slight, unassuming man of 55 who loves baseball and children’s literature. Until recently, he sold candy and soft drinks from his family’s corner grocery store in this city’s Nezahualcoyotl district.

In May, he left to visit relatives in the state of Oaxaca and never returned. His disappearance might have gone unnoticed but for the fact that it has set off a small war that has twice shut down a sizable chunk of the Mexican economy.

Unbeknownst to family and friends, Reyes was conducting a double life: He was a leader of a group calling itself the Popular Revolutionary Army, or EPR in Spanish. His comrades are convinced that he has been captured by “the enemy.”

To get back Reyes and another EPR militant said to have disappeared with him, the Popular Revolutionary Army has started bombing the pipelines of Pemex, Mexico’s national oil and gas company.

he attacks are the most spectacular campaign by a guerrilla army in Mexico since the 1994 uprising of the Zapatistas in the southern state of Chiapas.

Unlike the Zapatistas, the EPR has struck at a critical element of Mexico’s economic infrastructure: the pipelines that transport petroleum products from the Gulf of Mexico to the interior of the country and elsewhere.

The attacks on 10 pipelines in July and this month forced the temporary closure of some of Mexico’s largest factories, caused fuel shortages for millions of people and pushed up the price of oil futures in New York. The economic losses caused by the bombings total hundreds of millions of dollars, according to business groups here.

Yet the EPR is an “army” probably consisting of fewer than 100 people, including several members of five extended families with roots in Oaxaca, analysts and Mexican officials say.

Intelligence reports leaked to the Mexican media say the mild-mannered Reyes was an EPR leader.

“I’m not convinced that all the things they say about him are true,” said Nadin Reyes Maldonado, Reyes’ 25-year-old daughter, who is a nursery school teacher. “But when he appears again there are some things he’s going to have to explain to us.”

The story of the EPR harks back to another chapter of Latin American history, when leftist urban guerrillas inspired by Cuba’s Fidel Castro went underground to wage war against dictatorial governments. Some alleged EPR members are said to have been operating clandestinely for many years, though their struggle went largely unnoticed until the Pemex bombings.

“It’s been 17 years since I’ve seen my parents,” said Francisco Cerezo Contreras, a 33-year-old Mexico City resident whose father and mother are said to be EPR leaders.

“I have no idea where they went. They just left.”

The EPR launched itself publicly in 1996 in Guerrero, a Pacific Coast state with long traditions of armed resistance to the Mexican government. As many as 100 masked EPR members armed with assault rifles marched into the town of Aguas Blancas as residents were gathering to commemorate the killings a year earlier of 17 members of a peasants rights group by state police.

Mexico was by then well into its transition from a one-party state to a multiparty democracy. But to the EPR, Mexico remained a country of political impunity ruled on behalf of a wealthy few.

“Our political constitution is . . . a dead letter,” read the first EPR communique, explaining the group’s decision to take up arms. “Individual rights are violated every day, and the people are left out of the economic and political decisions of the country.”

Seems rooted in Oaxaca

Since then, the rebel group has split several times. It now appears to be rooted in the adjacent state of Oaxaca, whose social inequities and heavy-handed governing style have fed several militant movements.

Oaxaca remains one of the poorest states of Mexico: 68% of its residents live below the government’s poverty line, with monthly income less than $90. And more than one-third of the population is living in “extreme poverty,” according to government statistics.

On Tuesday, a little more than a week after its most recent bombings, the EPR issued a new communique denying widespread speculation that the group was linked to foreign rebels, including the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia.

“We have never received any training or financing from abroad,” the communique said. “We are an expression of the class struggle in this country.”

The group has bombed banks and other targets since 2001. Mexican authorities have identified most of the EPR leaders, but have been unable to apprehend them, said Jose Luis Piñeyro, a security expert at the Autonomous Metropolitan University here in the capital.

“There was a failure of civilian and military intelligence here,” Piñeyro said. “The EPR increased their technical and military capacity. They expanded their support base. None of this was detected.”

Authorities said the devices used against the Pemex pipelines were made from a combination of plastic explosives and potassium nitrate, also known as saltpeter.

Mexican Atty. Gen. Eduardo Medina Mora said Monday that the explosives were of a “common” variety, used in many industries.

They may have been stolen from a Mexican mining operation, or purchased on the open market.

‘Terrorist actions’

“Historically, these groups have financed themselves through kidnapping,” Medina Mora said. “But you don’t need a lot of money to undertake terrorist actions like those we’ve seen in our country in the last weeks.”

More impressive than the bombs themselves was the logistical sophistication of the operation this month: Six targets were struck simultaneously with 12 bombs.

“To do something like this, you have to have a minimal support base,” said Jorge Chabat, an analyst at the Center for Economic Research and Teaching. “You need a people who will protect you, hide you, a place where you can melt away.”

Friends and relatives say Reyes, the grocer from Nezahualcoyotl, was a member of an impoverished Oaxaca family. Too poor to complete his studies, he was self-educated, and migrated to Mexico City in search of work.

“He traveled often to Oaxaca to visit his mother,” said Adrian Ramirez, president of the Mexican League for the Defense of Human Rights.

“No one suspected that he could be linked to an insurgent group.”

Five extended families

Intelligence reports say members of five extended families make up much of the rank and file of the EPR faction responsible for the Pemex bombings. Many of the leaders are said to be men in their 50s with experience in the failed guerrilla groups of the 1970s.

One is Tiburcio Cruz Sanchez, also known as Francisco Cerezo and nicknamed “the Professor.” His wife, Emiliana Contreras, is also said to be an EPR member. Both are natives of Oaxaca.

Their son Francisco says his father was a university professor, “or at least that’s what they tell me,” Cerezo Contreras said.

Cerezo Contreras said his parents never explained why they left home. But he and his three siblings sometimes receive letters from them.

One, dated March 2006, is from their mother. Contreras tells her progeny to rely on “the strength that comes from having principles and the highest human values, including solidarity and the love of justice, which you learned from the time you were small.”

Two of Cerezo Contreras’ brothers, Hector, 27, and Antonio, 30, are in prison, convicted of bombing a Mexico City bank building in 2001. Cerezo Contreras says the charges were fabricated to make his family a “scapegoat” for the EPR’s actions.

Cerezo Contreras says he has never met Gabriel Alberto Cruz Sanchez, the EPR leader who is said to be his uncle. EPR communiques say that Cruz disappeared, along with Reyes, in May.

“These militant comrades are being brutally tortured in the office of the attorney general by the army, the federal police and by North American agents,” read an EPR communique released in June.

The Mexican government denies that the two men were arrested.

“We can affirm, without fear of being wrong, that no element of the Mexican state, federal or local, has detained these people or has them in custody,” Medina Mora said this week.

The fate of the two men is the subject of much speculation here. One theory is that they were detained by local authorities who tortured and killed them. Another theory has it that they were killed by members of a rival guerrilla group.

“Whether my father is in the EPR or not isn’t important to us,” Reyes said. “He’s missing. And that causes us fear and anguish.”

By Hector Tobar, September 20, 2007

Times Staff Writer.

#article #EPR #mexico #guerilla

22 notes · View notes

justonecynicsopinion-blog · 4 years ago

Text

Let's Help Make 'Black Lives Matter' MATTER: 10 Things America Needs To Do

"Walking between the pools of light cast by the street lights I saw the group of them from a block away, joking and jostling each other. In a dark patch I crossed the street. One of them noticed and they all stopped and stared, their heads rising like wolves testing the breeze for the scent of potential prey. The tallest one said something and two of them broke from the pack and meandered across to my side of the road, one putting a hand to the small of his back, the other digging one deep into a pocket."

Who is black in that anecdote? Who is white, yellow, brown, gay or trans? Does colour change anything in the story for the teller? Is the narrator 'blue,' a cop? Off duty? On duty? Does that change anything, substantially, in the story?

Black Police Are the Original BLM Leaders

They Volunteered For The Job of Protecting Blacks From Violence

The cold reality in America today is that guns are as easy to get as smartphones. That cold reality is what the police face every moment of every day.

Another cold reality is that, from the moment that humans got smart enough to band together instead of erring on the side of caution and scattering in the face of a mortal threat, the most dangerous risk any human faced was a more numerous group of humans. What empowered our species to come to dominate the planet was 'tribalism' (otherwise known as 'racism' and the root of 'nationalism'). It is permanently and indelibly hardwired into each and every human brain.

Familiarization with those 'not of our tribe' reduces the power of our instinctive tribalism over our reactions, but it never goes away. And tribalism is not exclusive to whites -- it is true of every human tribe out there.

What's the Most Crucial First Step BLM Has to Make to Succeed?

Black lives automatically matter less if you don't first acknowledge that blue-black lives matter just a bit more than all lives matter.

I'm not being 'cute': if the black community does not first and foremost stand up for the safety of black cops ("blue-black lives”) who are the ‘front line workers’ in their communities -- the first on scene when there’s trouble -- the claim that black Americans are faced with racism that systematically disadvantages them (places their lives in disproportionate jeopardy to that of others) is at best counter-productive, at worst not in their own best interests. Communities are successful only when we police our own people where we live, protecting each other from injury, trespass and property theft. If black cops tell you that they are more nervous about concealed weapons being drawn on them in their own community than in many others, then we can all begin to understand the knee-jerk, 'self-defence through offence' reactions of any cop in a similar situation where they are scared that a suspect may be going into his vehicle or his pocket, against the cops' specific instructions, to get a firearm.

The police have an EXTREMELY dangerous job in a country with more freely available weapons than there are citizens, and they're on high alert any time there's a confrontation, whether that's entirely justified or not. Add to this the fact that 911 calls come in SEVEN TIMES MORE in predominantly black areas and you have seven times the likelihood of high risk altercations taking place, regardless of what colour the police are.

Perception is not always reality and we don't like it when our most emotionally charged perceptions are proven false. The reality is that statistics prove that black men are NOT shot at a higher rate by white police than white men are, despite the impression that we're left with from media exposure. Racism on the part of white cops towards black civilians, outside of some 'bad actors,' is not the principal cause for needles deaths of black Americans: poverty, public education funding through property taxes and 'The War on Drugs' are.

Living in poor neighbourhoods is the highest risk factor for getting into dangerous altercations for people of any colour. In depressed areas crime may seem to be a good way to solve one's poverty, especially when the quality of public education is low. Young residents have far fewer opportunities to lift themselves out of poverty, regardless of individual ability and their interest in doing so. Living conditions can be so miserable and funding for social services like mental health treatment is so inadequate that taking drugs becomes a viable 'medication' for mental health issues. If the system that sets up the causes for unequal outcomes is not addressed, then the poverty, and subsequent risk of death from criminals and police altercations, will never be reduced.

"Defund the Police!" Really Means "Increase Social Support"

The 'systemic racism' in America lies in the fact that black communities continue to face profound inequality, not in the fact that more crime takes place in their neighbourhoods, per se. To fix the inequality problem we don't need less police, we need more health care, better social welfare support (a universal basic income, NOT more welfare for single mothers) and a vastly improved public school system across all American communities.

Using the overly provocative phrase "DEFUND THE POLICE!" detracts from the real message: "INCREASE SOCIAL SUPPORT“. Decreasing the amount of blue-blacks (and blues in general) in their own communities will only lead to the kind of mayhem and instability that holds the citizens of these areas further back in the competition we call life.

If we begin to place the 'right to zero-harm' for every citizen (including the criminals that exist throughout humanity, whether they are white collar criminals, grey collar criminals, blue collar criminals, or criminals whose full-time job is criminality), above that of the blues (the police), then civilization erodes very quickly into pandemonium. Civilization can only exist based upon mutually agreed-to regulations and laws that are enforced by a publicly funded and trusted police force and a judicial system that is fair across the board.

It is this lack of overall fairness, the current inequality of treatment evidenced by the incarceration rate of poor and black people in the US (especially poor black males from fatherless homes), as well as the lack of gainful employment that drives poor people into miserable lives that lead to drug use and crime, that is currently under debate. However, it is the underlying system, NOT the enforcers of the system, that needs reform. People of every stripe who seek simple answers to complex issues look at the most obvious, superficial symptom and claim that THAT is what needs changing, without understanding where the issues that cause the overall problem really lie.

Black Lives Matter: What's the Real Goal of the Movement?

Momentous 'movements' only change history when their aim is clear and the goal is simple. Either that, or, if the goal is complex and the steps numerous, the movement needs a powerful, central voice to coordinate and direct the movement's direction, step by step to achieve its ultimate goal.

Black Lives Matter simply doesn't matter if it has no clear goal that 'the movement' is aiming to achieve, and actionable steps to get there.

"End systemic racism" SOUNDS like just what America needs to improve the lives of many of its underclass, but a problem cannot be addressed if the meaning of its goal is unclear, or is far too complex to ever be achieved by simply shouting the goal over and over again. In the same vein, demanding worthwhile, straightforward social changes that unfortunately fail to address the roots of the underlying problems are just 'half measures.’ A current example is the recent demand to shift funding away from policing toward more social support like addressing inadequate mental health programs. While this is a necessary and wholly appropriate demand, especially given the growing militarization of the police, the enforcers (police) are largely a symptom, it is the laws -- from 'The War on Drugs’ to financing public education through local property taxes -- that are the cause of the problem.

"Systemic racism" means various things to the many and diverse participants in this growing movement. Definitions range from 'fixing the clearly unjust justice system,' to 'giving the underclass a leg up through improved education,' to 'equal outcomes for all, regardless of effort, ability, experience, or merit'. Other notions include 'ending police use of lethal violence against people of colour,’ to 'hand out large sums of cash to the descendants of former slaves,’ and even 'erase racism (tribalism) from humankind's hardwiring' (which would involve re-writing our genetic code).

"Systemic Racism" is Not Racism, It’s Policies, Programs & Laws

Policies, programs and laws expressly designed to keep the wealth-hoarders in charge, making ever more money, while increasing the inequality that prevents the poor from escaping The Poverty Trap. That trap is equally tough to escape no matter what colour you are and it is gettingmore and more difficult to break free from.

“Systemic Racism,” More Accurately, is “Systemic Inequality”

Systemic Inequality can only be addressed by changing programs, policies and laws in a meaningful, effective manner.

What is the Practical, Core Goal of the BLM Movement?

Once slavery was abolished in America, but not until electricity was available in most homes (outside of those households wealthy enough to employ servants), women were the de facto 'household work force,' they were the largely invisible 'engine under the hood’ of the economy. The Suffragette Movement that brought about the right to vote for white women (voting rights for black citizens in America didn't come to pass until much later) could not have come about until women began to be freed from household chores by electrical appliances. The success of the effort to win voting rights for women only came about once the cause of the problem of women being stuck at home 24/7 (i.e. washing clothes in a tub, hauling water, churning butter, hand-sewing clothing, etc.), was addressed. This continues to be the single biggest barrier to female emancipation in developing world countries (if women are out of sight -- even more so if they are all encased in black bags -- they are out of mind).

To solve any problem we cannot focus on the symptoms. The causes of the problem must first be addressed.

The underlying root cause for women not having the right to vote was not simply brutish male egos, it was a fundamental lack of power. Without the freedom to interact in the wider world outside of the home in sufficient numbers to be seen as a force to be reckoned with, without earning salaries to contribute to the household income, without sufficient education to qualify them to rise up into positions of power, women were powerless and could be ignored. Black and brown voices today face a similar challenge. Until the system that underlies their lack of power is changed and they are empowered to ENTER the world outside of their neighbourhoods by being released from ‘The Poverty Trap,’ until they can be given a leg-up to get the education required to fill white collar positions, they will be ignored by the same lawmakers that ignore the poor white voices demanding, for example, universal healthcare.

The ultimate goal of the BLM Movement MUST be to change the policies, programs and laws that undergird the system at its roots, NOT focussing on eliminating racism, whether in law enforcement or in the larger world. Black and brown lives only begin to matter to the wealth- hoarders at the top when their power is threatened, as happened with the Suffragette Movement. Those women were not demanding equal outcomes, they were demanding equal opportunity. That's a key benchmark for BLM to keep in mind if the movement is going to have any real long-term impact:

The fight is only winnable if it is for equal opportunity, NOT equal outcome.

What Goals Proved Achievable for Past Movements?

The Women's Suffrage Movement had a single goal: allow women to vote. Achieving that simple first goal opened up the Women's Rights Movement that followed, much to the betterment of the lives of 51% of the human population in developed countries over the ensuing decades.

The Abolitionist Anti-Slavery Movement had a clear and actionable simple goal: free the slaves.

A civil war had to be fought over it, but America, ‘land of the free,’ became better for achieving that simple goal.

The Black Lives Matter Movement’s single goal should be: end systemic inequality. Yes, the steps to get there are complex and numerous, but with a shared vision, it can be done.

Ending Systemic Inequality Requires a Fire, Not Just A Spark

Keeping a fire going requires the continual addition of fuel. The BLM protests that were sparked by the murder of George Floyd and many others have ignited a much needed conflagration, but like the Occupy Movement and Tea Party Movement that proceeded it, that fire is likely to die out without a unified, clear goal and shared understanding of all the policies, programs and laws that will need changing to result in the goal of ending Systemic Inequality. The fuel that will keep the fire burning will NOT be protests, it will be VOTING and ongoing organization and activism to demand changes to specific policies, programs and laws.

Why is the BLM ‘Fire’ Likely to Die Out?

A Lack of Consensus

The Occupy Movement was able to be crushed by the government for one reason: the occupiers lacked any clearly stated goal. Yes, they all wanted the corporations and the Wall Street gamblers who’d created the 2008 crisis to be held accountable, but they had no single voice to communicate that goal, no coherent steps they wanted to see followed, and no political (voting) power to push their progressive agenda forward.

The Tea Party lacked a clear, singular goal (the usual Conservative laundry list: less taxes, smaller government, immigration control, no black President, etc.), but had major political sway in red states. Yet, despite early success in garnering attention from Republican politicians, by 2016 Politico had declared the movement dead (and indeed the demographic who had initiated it, partly in response to being incensed by the young, diverse, urban, Progressive Occupiers, were older, white, rural and Conservative and have been literally dying off — Trump is their ‘last hurrah’).

To Succeed, Any Progressive Movement Needs:

1. Consensus on a simple, singular goal (a voice),

2. Clear steps to achieve that goal (a strategic plan),

3. The political power to make the steps happen (voter influence).

Without a clear understanding, among the majority, of exactly what the issues are that are causing inequality in American and around the world, we cannot solve complex problems like systemic inequality. A HUGE barrier to doing so is that the vast majority of our human population are not endowed with the ability to assimilate all of the information necessary to address the challenges, much less the ability to understand the roots and inter-connectivity of complex issues and then generate creative, effective solutions.

The majority can raise their voices in protest, but cannot offer up meaningful and effective solutions to the underlying causes of inequality without the leadership of some much more clever-than-average leaders. The solution the mass of protestors are currently offering up, as best I can parse it, is "White people are racist! They have more money than blacks and browns do and they should give a bunch of it to us!" Certainly the rich are currently enjoying ever-less taxation and staggering wealth-hoarding, and that hoarded cash will eventually go a long way to funding the steps necessary to fix the underlying problems (simply starting with making all public schools across America of equally high quality), but cash hand outs that get frittered away will not solve anything long-term. The only way to redistribute wealth that has ever proven effective is the system that the Nordic countries have had in place for many decades: Democratic Social Capitalism.

Taking action against injustice, against the unfairness of inequality, is not only essential to improving the human condition, it is the 'right thing' to do for the majority of us who feel morality in a tangible way, who 'sense' the weight of it in our lives. I was reminded of this in re-listening to Sam Harris and Richard Dawkins discussing the scientific basis of human morality on YouTube. Morality is not simply a concept to be embraced or debated, it is a product of our unique human consciousness and a foundational building block for human civilization. Without our hardwired morality (religion is a just a software manipulation of that hardwiring) there would be no cooperation, no civility, no society for us to live productively and peacefully within.

Of Course Conservatives Resist Change, But Progressives Are Our Future

We hate change, especially in the short-term. Some of us much more than others (they’re called Conservatives). Like our innate tribalism, Conservatism is is an integral part of the human condition. It cautions us to NOT 'fix what isn't broken' and thus helps us to survive to live another day. (I'm always speaking from the point of view of most of our species' existence: the 7,000,000 years we survived since our split from our common ancestor with the chimps, not the 0.1% that we have lived in cities -- what I call our 7,000 year-old 'New Normal.' The circumstances we live in today are most certainly NOT what our species evolved to thrive in most naturally.)

An illustration of the early roots of human Conservatism: if it had always proven wise to have one tribe member stay up all night to maintain a fire burning at the cave entrance to dissuade sabre-toothed tigers and cave bears from coming in to snack on us, experimenting instead with hanging a bunch of dry sticks on a length of cat gut to rattle together to wake us up if an intruder entered the cave probably wasn't a wise innovation. Those individuals who were 'hardwired for Conservatism' back in the day either won out and the fire-tending tradition was maintained instead of the 'trip-wire' innovation, or there were no survivors of that tribe.

In the LONG-TERM, the Progressive innovation of the 'trip wire' helped ensure the survival of the tribe willing to allow the inventor to install it at the back of the cave, where a larger group from a competing tribe could sneak in through the cave system and kill the males and make off with the women and children. While Conservatives fight change (and dream of a return to the bygone fantasy of a better life in the past) in the short-term, they benefit in the long-term from progress. Grandma did NOT want to use her new iPad, at least not until she realized she could watch her grand-kids growing up from afar.

One thing is true of our 'New Normal' and that is that civilization has only flourished over time due to progress. Time and again civilizations of humankind grew and prospered only on the back of Progressivism: innovation that improved the lot of the majority through mutual cooperation. It is only through Progressivism that our cities can grow ever larger, that our ability to feed a human population that is on course to destroy the planet by its ever-increasing volume, is possible. Only by making constant progress can we figure out how to live in peace, rather than tearing each others' throats out due to our hardwiring for irrational tribalism.

In other words, it is only through Progressivism, NOT Conservatism, that humanity can survive in our 'New Normal.'

Let’s Help Make Black Lives Matter MATTER!

10 Things America Needs to Do

We all, deep down, know what the situation is. Despite the abolition of slavery, the door was left open for those who opposed the movement to come up with innumerable subtle and manipulative ways to continue to benefit from the nearly free labour of black Americans, especially the men, by incarcerating them for a myriad of trivial, double-standard reasons and making the length of those imprisonments arbitrarily long. This was taken up another notch by making the prison system for-profit, incentivizing those at the top to increase the volume of imprisonment by increasing the number of crimes related to being poor in the first place (the War on Drugs').

Another intangible barrier to upward mobility was cemented into place by funding public schools from property taxes, thus ensuring that anyone living in poor areas would grow up within a very effective 'Poverty Trap' that would keep poor kids from getting a sufficiently high quality of education that they would graduate 'at parity' with kids from wealthier areas. The ceiling to attaining wealth was raised further by well-meaning, but disastrous 'social welfare for single mothers' programs which have seen young black males who don't have fathers at home being manipulated by criminals in their neighbourhoods to join in and ultimately become incarcerated in their tens of thousands across America. Felony conviction laws then make it nearly impossible for those who emerge from prison to land meaningful work, pushing them back into crime and prison (and working inside, essentially, as slaves for profit-making corporations owned by the rich).

So are there multi-layered issues for us to work through to solve the problem of inequality in America and around the world? Certainly, but it is time to stop blaming 'those not of our tribe' for our tribes' problems (whether your tribe is political, cultural, or colour-based) and get busy doing the effective things that will lead to real change:

1. Stop protesting in the streets! (It really doesn't make much PRACTICAL change happen other than satisfying our inherent love of chanting and marching together in large crowd while patting ourselves on the back and reveling in self-righteous moral outrage.) Put that same energy and investment of time into non-stop emailing, phoning and letter- writing to your Congressional and Senate representatives. They fear losing their seats and they'll listen to well-reasoned arguments and straightforward solutions that will have real impact if the messages come in large quantities.

2. Organize well-reasoned, fact-based (leave the tribal emotions outside) meetings in your living rooms and town halls to come up with REAL, actionable, effective solutions to chip away at the underlying causes, like providing financial incentives like a Universal Basic Income (UBI) to fathers/stepfathers who stick around to parent kids in poor neighbourhoods.

3. DO YOUR HOMEWORK! Educate yourself about the real causes of Systemic Racism and what can be done to change things, or at least allow those leaders among you who can explain the REAL causes (not simply manipulate your emotions to gain power for themselves) to lead (think: The Squad, Tulsi Gabbard and Bernie).

4. Get back to acknowledging and respecting high 'Fluid IQ,' merit-based advancement (equal opportunity, NOT equal outcome), higher education and respect for science and data, as demonstrated by John McCain, deGrasse Tyson, Sowell, AOC, the Obamas, Pelosi and many more on both sides of the debate, but don't accept any 'notions' or 'opinions' about policies that have no historical proof of having worked effectively (Democratic Social Capitalism has been WINNING in the Nordic countries for decades).

5. Fund the Police! Ensure that more funding is going to individual police salaries, rather than hiring more police officers so that really smart people begin taking on the jobs, rather than the 'bad apples' who can't find higher paying jobs and end up hired by desperate municipalities.

6. Increase social support! If there's funding to be found by cutting money ear-marked for the police to buy more military equipment, great, but America has a bottomless pit of funding for anything its citizens really need, its called The Federal Reserve. They just push buttons to create zero interest money to bail out billionaires, corporations and the profit-making of the Military-Industrial Complex. They can do the same for infrastructure and out-of-work Americans if the Houses approve it. Just say no to "PAYGO" — after all, it never applies to bail-outs!

7. Push for an end to property tax funding of public education. All schooling in America needs to be federally funded at the same level everywhere and all teachers need to get paid the same, substantial wage to encourage the really smart people to take on the jobs. In areas where it's clear that kids are chronically under-performing, change the system: bring in tutorial programs that target the most challenged kids, do more field trips and outdoor teaching the way they do in Finland, end the ancient standardized testing and customize programs for each type of kid.

8. End "The War on Drugs"! Addiction is a deep and insidious problem for human brains. It is a disease, not a 'lifestyle choice,' whether the addiction is to food, gambling, sun-tanning, or drugs. Marijuana is legal in Europe and Canada because it is just like alcohol -- a tax-collecting BONANZA! (And then pardon every single criminal conviction based upon the old laws.)

9. Get out and vote! and work tirelessly to convince your family, friends, neighbours and every young person you come into contact with to vote too! Trump won simply because less people voted, and suppressing the vote is the GOP's go-to strategy moving forward.

10. Lastly, end "Citizens United." That single corruption by the Supreme Court effectively ended the "American Democratic Experiment" by using common human greed to corrupt every single politician on both sides of America's single-party/two-colours, Neo-liberal system. No founder of America ever would have bastardized the Constitution by claiming that a profit-making corporation should be treated as a human citizen of the United States of America. Most politicians are now trapped by their common greed within the corporate lobbying cash hand-out system to both fund their campaigns and line their pockets.

***

I have been blogging and vlogging about insights into why we humans do the so-often counter- productive things we do, and how we can turn things around to live our lives to the fullest (the real meaning of life!) for over a decade. Check out more thoughts and insights at:

• JustOneCynicsOpinion.Blogspot.com

• YouTube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCfi00q5yaQ0nK8wXkEbvk3Q/

• Support my efforts: https://www.patreon.com/JustOneCynicsOpinion?fan_landing=true

1 note · View note

linkersint · 4 years ago

Text

The “Rich Getting Richer” Argument

This piece of writing is taken from Bestselling Author Rob Moore book “MONEY”. This book is all about philosophy of money, myths we have in mind about this concept, and how we can achieve financial stability and then financial freedom by understanding the nitty gritty of money!

We normally hear an argument that “RICH GETTING RICHER”. Mr Moore claim that this argument is a myth. Everyone can become rich if he/she follows its fundamental laws. Those who have more money are doing and behaving in certain way than those who are struggling with it. In below chapter, you will learn why “rich getting richer” argument is invalid.

****

from the book

You hear many people debating, ‘why do the rich get richer and the poor get poorer?’ Many people get frustrated about this and demand a redress of the balance through higher taxation, setting up unions, and greatly increased philanthropy.

There are simple economic laws that explain why the rich tend to get richer. These economic fundamentals bust many of the myths about the rich and poor divide, certainly in the first world. And guess what? The wealthy know and leverage these, and the poor don’t and are leveraged by them.

Common Sense?

Common sense suggests that something tends to move more easily in the direction it is already going than if it changes direction. You could call this momentum, or compounding or simple common sense. Newton’s first law of physics is this:

‘An object at rest stays at rest and an object in motion stays in motion, with the same speed and in the same direction unless acted upon by an unbalanced force’.

Of course you’re likely looking for a deeper argument than the rich get richer than ‘because they are already rich’, and the poor get poorer because ‘they are already poor’, but let’s not dismiss something for its simplicity. If you have not attained the levels you desire yet, keep going. Keep on, keeping on, you will get there.

Balanced Economics:

In any monetary system all expenditure must equal all receipts. This means that all spending equals all money received.

People don’t burn money (unless they are The KLF, the British band who set fire to a million pounds of their own money) and even if they did, that money would be out of the system and all existing money in the system would balance between expenditure and receipt. Even when more money is printed, that new money in the system, like all the existing money, balances where all expenditure equals all receipts.

Therefore, of that finite (but huge) amount of money in circulation at any one time: it distributes exactly from those who ‘spend’ the most (expenditure) to those who sell or receive the most (receipts).

If there is an inequality of balance, which there always is because products and services are not of equal value and humans value money differently, then money moves more freely and in higher amounts from those who value and focus on expenditure higher than receipt to those who value and focus on receipt higher than expenditure.

In other words, money moves from those who value it least (or value expenditure more than receipt), to those who value it most by saving, investing, compounding, (or value receipt more than expenditure). Money moves from consumers to producers.

No matter how many times you may try to use power, rule, unions, regulations, or governments to more equally distribute money, it will always reset its ‘balance’. So, if you want to redistribute wealth more towards you, don’t ever get dragged into the victim mentality of a higher power or system, begging or expecting them to redistribute it for you. The capitalist system is unlikely to change in your lifetime, so it is a huge waste and opportunity cost of your time and energy to fight against it. Instead, learn about and focus on the management, mastery, and rules of money, service, contribution, enterprise, momentum, compounding and velocity, and make it more important to you to understand and value money and wealth. And more will come your way. The more you learn, the more you earn.

Theoretical redistribution of wealth:

It has often been suggested that there should be a redistribution of wealth, from those who have the most to those who have the least. Before we delve into this, there already is a redistribution format: it is called taxation. In most developed countries, taxation is geared towards being a higher percentage of income the more one earns.

The main problem I see in theoretical wealth redistribution is that it doesn’t stay with or serve those it is distributed to. I’m certainly not against sharing wealth with those who need it more, in fact it is contribution that plays a big part in building wealth. However, you can’t manage more money until you learn how to manage what you already have, and the big abundant lack is in education as much as it is in redistribution.

Imagine if a wealthy person owns a betting shop. A gambler comes in and spends all his money, helping the owner make more money. The state increases taxes and redistributes much of the money back to the gambler. The gambler then goes back to the betting shop and makes more bets. The owner might have to increase his margins to compensate for the increased ‘taxation’. This costs the gambler, who keeps gambling, more money. And so the cycle continues, but doesn’t help or change anything other than perhaps the owner moves to another country if too much is taken from him, and the gambler spends more and has a bigger addiction.

Perhaps if the business owner was allowed to create fair profit, was given assistance, protection and tax breaks and incentives to start up, and there was fair competition so that prices self-regulated, then the system would work. Oh, wait a minute, that’s called capitalism. And for the gambler, education and help on the addiction is likely to be far more effective than feeding the habit. While this might seem an extreme example, most people manage their money like a gambler, wasting it and only just keeping their heads above water. It is education that is needed, in our schools and society, on how to manage and master money, not redistribution and handouts that de-incentivize work and contribution.

Lottery redistribution:

The National Endowment for Financial Education cites research estimating that 70 per cent of people who suddenly receive a large sum of money lose it within a few years. Forty-four percent of lottery winners had spent all of their winnings within five years of winning the lottery. Nine out of every ten lottery winners believe that their new family wealth will be gone by the third generation. Again, you can’t manage more money until you learn to manage what you already have. Interestingly, only 2 per cent of respondents said that they were less happy with life after winning the lottery, despite the data above suggesting a greater percentage can’t handle it, lose it, or feel it will be lost soon enough. Who says money doesn’t make you (more) happy?

So in fact, there actually is a seismic wealth redistribution right now: from the poor when they get large sums without knowing how to handle it, back to the rich.

Production vs consumption

Non-wealth, first-world poverty doesn’t contribute. It doesn’t create service, enterprise or economy, and doesn’t care enough about humanity to give value to others. Poverty in this sense consumes more than it produces, and is more selfish than selfless.

To be wealthy is to give service, to produce for other people in physical (consumable) or ethereal (information) form. To be poor is to consume: wasting or spending money and time-consuming depreciable. The wealthy produce for the poor to consume, and so redistribute wealth towards themselves from the first-world poor. Vast wealth comes from vast production nationally, globally, and in high volumes, whereas poverty comes from a negative differential between production and consumption. Individuals, geography, or governments could cause this.

The wealthy create enterprise and economy through jobs, value creation, increased flow and velocity of money, contribution to taxes, hope, belief and inspiration to others, service to vast numbers of people. The poor are independent on these to survive. Virtually all global wealth is now private: 99 percent according to Thomas Piketty in his book Capital. This means that producers finance all state benefits that poor consumers consume. Because poverty consumers more than it produces, this has to be economically balanced by large-scale production, and because of the 80/20 principle, the 20 per cent will produce for the 80 per cent to consume, roughly speaking. And so this will compound in the direction it is already going – the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer. It is hard to change the velocity once it has momentum, which explains why when starting a new vocation it can be hard to make money in the early years, yet those who’ve been doing it for decades seem to have vastly compounded wealth and passive income, more easily.

For redistribution of wealth to work, consumers would have to take responsibility to produce more than they consume. If you give a drug addict money, you know much of that is likely to go. If you give any consumer more money without the responsibility and education to produce with it, it will be consumed in the same manner all previous money was consumed. If a producer receives more money, mostly through cashflow, increased profits or leveraged loans (rarely through gifts and subsidies), they will invest it to produce more. Of course you could call this greed, but you could also call this growth, evolution and supply and demand. Greed and growth are only differentiated by an individual’s perception. As long as there is demand and a need for the human race to grow and evolve, producers will produce more and more and more, and consumers will keep consuming. The titans of wealth across the last 6000 years are the largest, most vast producers.

The question is: which will you choose to be, a producer or a consumer? Will you get sucked into debating the rights and wrongs of the rich and poor divide, or focus on service, solutions, scale, and contribution, and enjoy your fair share of wealth?

#real estate real estate agency wealth&money

1 note · View note

endangered-justice-seeker · 6 years ago

Photo

ClimaWhile the rich world braces for future climate change, the poor world is already being devastated by it

"Upside down" are the only words Manush Albert Alben has to describe life after the powerful Cyclone Idai.

Nearly two weeks since the powerful cyclone destroyed most of the city of Beira, Mozambique, it is a long way from normal. "There's no money, no groceries," Alben, a fisherman, said while sitting in his wooden pirogue on a local beach. "We are suffering but trying to hold on."Known for its busy port and views of the Indian Ocean, the 19th-century city used to be the fourth largest in the country. Now Beira will go down in history as being "90% wiped out" by global warming, said Graça Machel, a former Mozambican freedom fighter, politician and deputy chair of The Elders, who spoke to CNN on the phone after visiting the city.

"This is one of the poorest places in the world, which is paying the price of climate change provoked mostly, not only but mostly, by the developed world," the 73-year-old added. Hundreds of square miles are covered by water, flooding an area so vast it can be seen from space. Only when the water recedes completely, says Machel, will Mozambique be able to count the bodies.

Cyclone Idai is only the latest extreme weather event to blight the region, affecting more than half a million people and filling humanitarian camps with tens of thousands. The 2015-16 El Niño weather cycle, believed to be the strongest in 50 years, severely affected Southern Africa's food security, according to the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). Dry weather conditions in large swathes of Zimbabwe, Malawi, Zambia, South Africa, Mozambique, Botswana, Lesotho, Swaziland, and Madagascar led to about 32 million people being unable to afford or resources to acquire food in 2016. By 2018, drought, population growth and climate change nearly made Cape Town the first city in the world to run out of water. "[Cyclone Idai] is a tragic showcase of what can happen in many other similarly situated towns and cities in low and middle income countries," Denis McClean, spokesperson for the United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction, told CNN. "They are vulnerable and they are exposed."

Climate change is often described as a problem that will affect future generations. But the world's most vulnerable are already facing its devastating effects. The United Nations estimates that 4.2 billion people have been hit by weather-related disasters in the last two decades, with low-income countries suffering the biggest losses.Many of the world's poorest live in equatorial regions, which already have high average temperatures. This means a tiny rise can be sharply felt and lead to harsher impacts, according to a 2018 study in Geophysical Research Letter. Meanwhile, most of the world's richest nations are the largest emission producers -- by burning fossil fuels and modern farming practices that produce climate change causing emissions. Using climate model projections, the paper found that if global average surface temperatures reached the 1.5 or 2 degree Celsius (3.6 degree Fahrenheit) limit -- set by the Paris Agreement -- countries like Indonesia or the Democratic Republic of the Congo would feel the changes brought on by global warming more keenly than higher latitude countries like the United Kingdom.

The results are a stark example of the inequalities that come with global warming," wrote the study's lead author Andrew King, a climate researcher at the ARC Centre of Excellence for Climate Extremes and the University of Melbourne, Australia.That is not to say that developed countries are immune to its effects. Hurricane Harvey, a storm whose intensity was linked to climate change, caused biblical flooding in the summer of 2017 around Houston and surrounding counties. More than 120,000 people had to be evacuated or rescued, and about 80 people died. And preliminary analysis by researchers at the Environmental Change Institute (ECI) at the School of Geography and Environment in Oxford University, found that Europe's uncharacteristically hot and dry summer of 2018 was likely linked to climate change.

"High rates of poverty, a lack of resilient infrastructure, slums and a disappearance of protected infrastructure in low- and middle-income countries" create a cocktail of risk, said the UN's McClean. But cities, towns and villages may not stand a chance to withstand the scale and intensity of extreme weather events, which have "more or less doubled in the last 40 years," he said.When Super Typhoon Haiyan, which turned into a Category 5 hurricane from the warming waters in the ocean, struck the Philippines in 2013 it became one of the strongest tropical storms in history. Filipinos had never seen anything like it, McClean said. The people in the coastal city of Tacloban could not even describe the seven-meter tidal surge that came with the storm.

They simply did not have words to explain what was happening to them," he said. While it is too early to gauge the magnitude of Cyclone Idai, the UN World Meteorological Organization projects the disaster could be among the worst weather-related disasters in the southern hemisphere. The UN's estimates that Mozambique, Zimbabwe, and Malawi, may have lost $1 billion of infrastructure in the cyclone.

"They lost everything, including the references of their past and cultural heritage," Machel added. "Everything is washed away....[but] the social fabric is the one which will be extremely difficult to reconstruct," even when the roads are re-paved, she said. As events in Mozambique, Bangladesh and the Philippines have shown, climate change is a problem of the present. Not just the future.

Climate change is real !

387 notes · View notes

theliberaltony · 5 years ago

Link

via Politics – FiveThirtyEight

Dr. Royal S. Copeland, the field marshal in New York City’s battle against the 1918 influenza epidemic, knew his enemy was more than just a virus. As health commissioner, he oversaw a medical crisis that would eventually kill some 30,000 New Yorkers over three waves of the disease. In Copeland’s estimation, the problem was not only influenza but also the city’s crowded tenements and endemic poverty.

To modern eyes, the measures he took to stymie the spread might seem strange. In an extensive interview with The New York Times after the first wave of influenza had passed, Copeland touted the decision not to close New York’s public schools. It was, he reasoned, best to keep them open to give the city’s children respite from crowded apartments and, if need be, a point of access to the medical system. “We have practically 1,000,000 children in the public schools, about 750,000 of them from tenement homes. These homes are frequently unsanitary and crowded,” he said. “The children’s parents are occupied with the manifold duties involved in keeping the wolf from the door. No matter how loving they may be — and, of course, they are just as loving as any parents anywhere — they simply have not the time to give the necessary attention to the initial symptoms of disease.”

Even under normal circumstances, living in New York City requires a certain surrender of personal space: Subways are packed, apartments are small and bodegas get cramped with after-work shoppers. But not all New Yorkers have to live in a stressful crowd all the time, a fact the COVID-19 pandemic has laid all too bare. The city’s wealth inequality has always been apparent: financial safety nets, Whole Foods delivery and routine access to health care. But the pandemic has added a new layer to what affluence can afford some New Yorkers, including routine access to personal space and the flexibility that white-collar work allows. While over 100 years have gone by since the 1918 pandemic, some of Copeland’s worries about the difficult nature of city life — and the inequities of who lives the most comfortably — remain chillingly relevant.

We know already that the COVID-19 pandemic is affecting people of color more than white Americans. While the virus stalks the rich and poor — leading some to call it “the great equalizer” — those with lesser means have fewer places to hide from it. Dr. Andrew Goodman, a professor of public health at New York University who used to work for the city’s Health Promotion and Disease Prevention unit, pointed to the pandemic as “a more dramatic example of the health-inequity side of income inequality and racial inequality in the U.S.” Deaths from diseases that disproportionately affect minority communities, like diabetes and hypertension, “usually get spread out over time, and it doesn’t seem as dramatic,” Goodman said. “This is a more accelerated version.”

While there is a lot of uncertainty about the actual numbers of those infected — only a fraction of people who show symptoms are tested, so the rate of infection is almost certainly higher than what’s being reported — life in two New York City ZIP codes, one working class and one wealthy, gives us a glimpse into different ways of city living that might mean life or death in today’s New York.

Densely populated and working-class, East Elmhurst, Queens, has one of the highest rates of COVID-19 in New York City.

STEPHANIE KEITH / GETTY IMAGES

According to a running ProPublica tally of confirmed positive COVID-19 cases, the ZIP codes with the highest rate of infection are in a certain corner of Queens: East Elmhurst. One East Elmhurst ZIP code, 11370, is home to the notorious Rikers Island correctional facility, and has the highest recorded positive test rate in New York City — 127 percent worse than the city’s average. Jails like Rikers have become hotbeds for spreading the disease given their space constraints — well over 600 inmates and workers are infected with the virus at Rikers. East Elmhurst’s other, non-Rikers ZIP code, 11369, is a residential neighborhood and has the second worst positive test rate in the city, 121 percent greater than the average.

East Elmhurst has seen a high rate of individuals tested, and that might be in part because Elmhurst Hospital in neighboring Elmhurst, Queens — “the epicenter within the epicenter,” in the words of New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio — has set up a testing tent outside the hospital. According to 2018 data from the Census Bureau’s American Community Survey, 34,118 people live in the 1.1 square miles of East Elmhurst’s 11369 ZIP code. Sixty-four percent of its residents are Latino, and the median household income is $54,121, three-quarters of the median income in New York’s greater metro area. On the neighborhood’s northern border is LaGuardia Airport, and south of that are mosques and diners, a baseball field and blocks and blocks of houses cramped together. On those cramped blocks, the average household size is 3.2 people, 20 percent above the city average.

Nearly 11 percent of all households in ZIP code 11369 are also multigenerational, with three or more generations living under the same roof. It’s possible that the grouping of young and old together in one house could have something to do with higher infection rates. Researchers are still unclear about how many others a person infects when they have the virus, but early estimates were around 2 to 2.5 people. The elderly are more susceptible, and in Italy, doctors believe that the country’s culture of intergenerational living and familial closeness has had disastrous effects during the pandemic; Italy’s rate of death from COVID-19 is among the highest in the world.

Underlying conditions like asthma tend to be more prevalent in crowded environments, according to Dr. Y. Claire Wang, who specializes in public health and chronic disease prevention at the New York Academy of Medicine. The respiratory condition puts individuals at greater risk for COVID-19 complications, and households in city apartments with pests or mold, common problems in public housing units, often have higher rates of asthma, she said.

Things look different on the other side of the positive test rate list. ZIP code 11215 in Park Slope, Brooklyn, has among the city’s lowest rates of COVID-19, at 56 percent below average.1 Park Slope is a different New York from East Elmhurst in many ways. Two-thirds of its population is white, and at $123,583, the median household income is one and a half times greater than that of the average in New York’s greater metropolitan area. The neighborhood is named for its proximity to one of the city’s largest green spaces, Prospect Park, and it’s known for its gracious brownstones and tree-lined streets. The average household size in Park Slope is 2.4 people, and only 1.8 percent of households are multigenerational.

Residents of Park Slope, Brooklyn, tend to be affluent, with white-collar jobs easily adaptable to working from home.

ROY ROCHLIN / GETTY IMAGES

The racial and ethnic differences between Park Slope and East Elmhurst might prove particularly important as both neighborhoods weather the pandemic. Early statistical reports on the disease are already painting a picture of racial inequity. Earlier this week New York State released preliminary numbers that showed Latinos have the highest rate of COVID-19 fatality in New York City.

A Kaiser Family Foundation report on initial pandemic data reveals that minorities are bearing the brunt of infection and death from the virus in many places. Higher rates of chronic conditions in minorities put them at greater risk for serious complications from COVID-19. In Washington, D.C., where black residents make up 45 percent of the total population, they account for 29 percent of confirmed cases and 59 percent of deaths. In Michigan, black residents are 14 percent of the population, but represent 33 percent of confirmed cases and 41 percent of deaths.

“We say something as simple as ‘your ZIP code should not define your health’ — [but] in New York City, that’s often the story,” said Dr. Torian Easterling, the deputy commissioner of the Center for Health Equity and Community Wellness, a city agency that addresses racial and social inequities in health. He pointed to high rates of chronic diseases like diabetes and hypertension and a lack of access to healthy foods in minority communities as long-standing public health problems that have only been exacerbated by the onset of COVID-19.

During the 1918 pandemic, the white population had a higher rate of infection, according to a 2007 study of the outbreak by Thomas A. Garrett, then an economist at the St. Louis Federal Reserve. But that, Garrett surmised, had to do with the fact that the black population in the U.S. was still largely rural; the pandemic was a particular menace to cities. “[T]he nonwhite population in the United States has become much more urban. … A modern-day pandemic may result in greater nonwhite mortality rates because a greater percentage of the nonwhite population in the United States lives in urban areas,” he wrote. Census estimates from 2019 show that the majority of New York City residents are people of color.

Across New York, communities of color have long been more subject to chronic ailments like diabetes and hypertension. The COVID-19 pandemic has only exacerbated these trends.

JOHN NACION / NURPHOTO VIA GETTY IMAGES / ANGELA WEISS / AFP VIA GETTY IMAGES

Park Slope and the East Elmhurst ZIP code of 11369 are similarly dense, with roughly 32,000 and 31,000 people per square mile, respectively. But life in the neighborhoods is different in other ways that might contribute to their divergent rates of apparent COVID-19 infection. According to the latest Census Bureau count, the most prevalent jobs in East Elmhurst are clerical work, food service and construction. In Park Slope, management, entertainment, education and business are the most common professions. The typical East Elmhurst worker is required to leave home to perform their job, while the lines of work most common in Park Slope are adaptable to teleworking. And Latinos — East Elmhurst’s dominant ethnic group — are more likely than all other Americans to consider COVID-19 a threat to their financial stability, according to a recent Pew Research Center survey.

We’ve already seen how socioeconomic circumstances can correlate with Americans’ ability to stay at home. A recent New York Times analysis of anonymized cellphone data tracked the movements of Americans and found that those in the top 10 percent income bracket have limited their movements more than those in the bottom 10 percent. What Copeland said in 1918 could very likely still hold true: “I have no doubt that the most dangerous means of transmitting disease was the subway. … Many a man who was sick must have felt that he had to go to work.”

Copeland’s struggle against the currents of poverty and influenza would continue into 1920. Updating the public on the state of the epidemic, which had reemerged, Copeland told The New York Times that the health department was working to stop the eviction of tenants during the outbreak and described the struggle to attract nurses to the city’s hospitals, since wealthy individuals were offering them higher pay to work in private homes. He pleaded for better ventilation on subways and buses and criticized coffin-makers who were price-gouging the city’s residents. Even in death, New York was unrelenting.

And so it remains today. Early this week, the city announced that hospital morgues around New York were overflowing with the dead. An Associated Press report painted a grim picture of one Brooklyn hospital. Even with an infection rate much lower than those in Queens, “mounds of corpses” had become so difficult to navigate that hospital staff were stepping over them.

The great equalizer isn’t COVID-19 — it’s death. But in New York’s epidemic, death attends to the haves and have-nots differently: For the city’s poor, it hovers closely, and when it comes, it leaves them as crowded as ever.

#IFTTT #Politics – FiveThirtyEight #politics #538 #Clare Malone

2 notes · View notes

atheistforhumanity · 5 years ago

Link

An Example of How Bill O’Reilly Ruined A Generation With Mass Manipulation

Now, you might be thinking, “who the fuck is Bill O’Reilly, and why do I care?” That’s a valid question. Lovable Bill, is the predecessor of Tucker Carlson. He was the shining star of Fox News for most of my life, and he captures the hearts of minds of my parents generation with low brow commentary, manipulative opinions, and dog whistle racism. Bill pretended to be a regular class working Joe that spoke up for the little guy. Tucker Carlson outed his gimmick years ago before he would take Bill’s place, and take on the same fake persona.

So, how did Bill O’Reilly ruin a generation? It’s pretty simple really. Bill O’Reilly was born into the upper class and eventually took a place as an opinion show host pretending to be news, that spouted populist rhetoric in a way that always redirected opinions and anger away from the real perpetrators. Bill is literally one the most dishonest people to ever be on mainstream media, and for over a decade he delivered alternative facts to fox viewers, down played anything anti-capatalist, anti-conservative, and anti-racist. His motto has always been “no spin,” but I’ve never seen him present the whole truth in an accurate way my whole life. Bill is a more well spoken Donald Trump, who uses people’s prejudices, preconceptions, and complete unwillingness to research anything to manipulate people’s minds for a capitalist agenda.

But how does he do this, Ryan? I wish you would be more specific instead of making accusations. Well, it happens that I just came across a band new article written on Bill’s blog, where he tries to continue the glory of yesteryear before he was fired for sexually harassing several women in the work place.

If you take two minutes to read the article linked above, you’ll see that Bill is arguing that bad parenting is the real cause of income inequality. His argument is quite literally, people aren’t raised right and that’s why they can’t succeed financially. He says specifically that it’s not capitalism's fault.

Before I address specifics, let me point out what is generally manipulative about this argument. Bill has touched on a topic that literally any generation of conservatives can get fired up about, and will have built in bias to agree with. Remember, conservatism is literally resistance to change and an affinity for tradition. This also means that every generation bitches and complains about how the next generation raises kids. Remember when your parents told you that you would go to hell for watching Elvis shake his hips? Remember when there were no changing tables in men’s bathrooms? Remember when kids in school used to play “beat the fag” and then they cried victim when we said that was wrong? Yea...

The point is that he’s using a prevalent belief that many different people(but mostly conservatives) can tap into for different (mostly) unspecified reasons. Then he is attributing that common cultural division as responsible for income inequality. We’ll come back to that.

Second, is that Bill makes a point that on some level makes sense, but doesn’t support his larger claim. Are there a lot of bad parents out there? Sure. Do they have a negative effect on the child’s life as he suggests? Of course. Now we could argue all day about what makes a bad parent exactly or the prevalence of bad parents, but it’s irrelevant, because Bill hasn’t given us any solid reason to accept that this alone (or at all) is the cause of income inequality! It’s an outrageously dishonest argument. That doesn’t matter though, because this is how Bill’s followers respond...

Okay, I was going to screen shot some positive responses to Bill tweeting this article but I didn’t see any. Let’s just move on.

Now, let’s take a look at the substance of Bill’s piece.

Education: “If a young child is not exposed to learning by age two, that innocent, helpless person is already at risk in a competitive society. If there are no books in the home, no awareness-building games, no fun dialogue with the parents, the child may not develop a curiosity about life.”

That’s interesting, Bill, because public education and programs like Pre-K are socialist inspired initiatives supplied by the government for the benefit of everyone. Head start programs were first installed by LBJ, but the Black Panthers had actually initiated similar programs in inner cities to feed children breakfast before school.

To say that capitalism has no role in this issue is delusional. Capitalism accepts and even encourages inequality. Betsy Devos is the champion of capitalist education, where attendance is not guaranteed and any difficult or low performing students can be weeded out to create the appearance of success, under no public oversight.

The fight is always the same, liberals want to increase educational funding and conservatives don’t. This is why red states have teacher strikes all over the country and Republicans are fighting against publicly funded college.

If access to education from an early age is so important then we cannot withhold education and then blame those stuck in the cycle of poverty for their own inequity.

Environment/Work Ethic:

Here’s an old and tired argument from the right. People are poor because they don’t work hard enough. But, Bill, how could that be? The average unemployment rate in America is between 3-4%, and the worst is in Alaska with 6.4%. Clearly most Americans are working, you’re always bragging about how great this economy is. Republicans tell people who need assistance to get jobs, but surprise they already have them! We know people aren’t struggling to live because they’re not working, because we have clear numbers that show people are working full-time, but not earning enough to pay basic bills. It’s crazy, it’s almost like the cost of living just keep rising, but the amount people get paid doesn’t. All of this is happening despite the fact that corporate profits have soared, but it never translates into better wages.

While Bill drones on in his article about derelict parents, he never once actually looks at income. He sure doesn’t mention that the amount people are paid is literally up to the people at the top of the economic latter. They can choose to pay workers more or they can stash away more profit in their bank accounts. Guess which one they choose? Despite the fact that we have clear data that shows those who choose how much to pay workers are raising their own profits, the rich like Bill O’Reilly continually berate people as lazy. The entire argument is completely disingenuous because workers are at the mercy of employers.

And if you’re thinking, why doesn’t everyone just get a better job, you’re not thinking that statement through. The Bureau of Labor Statistics tracks how many jobs in the market pay minimum wage or less, and that’s roughly 2.3%.(Nearly 2 million people) You think, great, people can just get a better job. No, not really, because a large number of jobs pay just above the minimum wage and are not included in this figure. Even most retail jobs pay $1 above minimum at least. Pew Research wondered this too, and in 2004 they found that roughly 30% of all hourly workers were making more than minimum wage (7.25 at the time) and less than $10. Guess what, nearly 59% of the entire US workforce are hourly workers, and a third of them are were making $10 or less. I make 13$ an hour, live with a roommate, and am just able to live with no savings in 2019. If I had a wife making the same amount, we would drowned trying to raise even two kids. That’s a travesty.

Roughly 35% of all jobs require a college degree, which is a significant debt due to increases in education and cost of living. Education is very important, but unfortunately most people who are born poor, historically, don’t get to go to college. What does capitalism say about this? Well, again, in a free market system there is no mechanism to correct the disadvantage people are born into, and generally no desire among conservatives to do so. Conservatism is stuck in the past where the poor and uneducated make perfect laborers, but labor as a staple job market is dead in the 21st century. Hence the push toward service jobs, which is all an uneducated person do.

The numbers tell the real story. People are working, but not being paid enough. The people controlling the pay are increasing their own pay. Cost of living is rising faster than worker pay. Funding for education has been stagnant and the cost of higher education rising. All this and I haven’t even gotten into the politics that effect this issue.

How did Bill O’Reilly destroy a generation? By feeding them ignorant, pandering garbage like this article every night for years. By completely ignoring the real facts of any issue and directing your attention to a manipulative hot button, tailored to the bias of conservatives.

The sad thing is that Bill is completely representative of everyone championed by the right wing. They are unintelligent, malicious, racist, greedy, and completely dishonest.

#liberal #economic inequality #civil rights #workers rights #Bill O'Reilly #right wing media #fox news #tucker carlson #minimum wage #corporate america #conservatives #republicans

43 notes · View notes

newstfionline · 4 years ago

Text

Saturday, October 24, 2020

Migration has plummeted during the pandemic (Economist) If there is one thing that people remember about the covid-19 pandemic, it is the experience of sheltering in place. Those looking to move abroad have had little choice but to stay put, too. A new report from the OECD, a think-tank, shows that travel restrictions introduced in response to the pandemic caused migration to rich countries to fall by half in the first half of the year, compared with 2019. The sharpest declines occurred in East Asia and Oceania. Rich countries there have succeeded better than most at stopping the spread of covid-19. This is in part because they were quick to recognise the threat and institute strict travel restrictions. Some countries in the region, including Japan, South Korea and New Zealand have just about stopped accepting new immigrants entirely.

Couples doing fine (Washington Post) While lots of the early pandemic and quarantine led to speculation about a spike in divorces that would ensue following couples being crammed into close quarters for extended periods, couples are actually doing pretty okay according to the latest edition of the American Family Survey: 58 percent of married men and women aged 18 to 55 said the pandemic made them appreciate their spouse more; while 8 percent said that the pandemic weakened their commitment to one another, 51 percent said it’d deepened it. The numbers bear it out too: five states report divorce stats in real time, and on balance filings are down for 2020. Year-to-date, divorce filings are down 19 percent in Florida, 13 percent in Rhode Island, 12 percent in Oregon and 9 percent in Missouri. Only Arizona, as of now, is up.

Faulty password security (Foreign Policy) A Dutch “white hat”—or ethical hacker—claims to have logged in to the Twitter account of U.S. President Donald Trump … simply by guessing his password. Victor Gevers, a security researcher, discovered the vulnerability last Friday before alerting U.S. security authorities. Gevers allegedly gained access using the password “maga2020!” but did not succumb to the temptation of tweeting to the president’s 87 million followers. Gevers attributes the lack of account security to Trump’s age. “‘Trump is over 70—elderly people often switch off two-step verification because they find it too complicated. My own mother, for instance.”

IMF concerned over post-COVID social unrest across Latin America (Reuters) The International Monetary Fund is concerned that social unrest will make a comeback in “lots of countries” across Latin America once the COVID-19 pandemic recedes, a top IMF official said on Thursday. Economies across Latin America and the Caribbean are forecast to contract as a group by 8.1% this year, with an uneven 2021 bounce at just 3.6%, and most countries are not seen returning to pre-COVID output levels until 2023, the Fund said earlier on Thursday. “Some of the determinants of social unease are going to worsen and that generates our concern for the region, for lots of countries in the region,” Alejandro Werner, the Fund’s director for the Western Hemisphere, said in an interview with Reuters. “Coming out of the pandemic, we will have a level of economic activity and employment that will be much lower than before, a level of poverty and income distribution that is worse,” he added. Protests that sometimes turned violent rocked countries including Chile, Ecuador and Colombia even before the pandemic hit, fueled by anger over inequality, corruption and government austerity policies.

In hard-hit Peru, worry mounts over both COVID-19 and dengue (AP) PUCALLPA, Peru—Two of Lidia Choque’s close family members had already gotten sick with the new coronavirus when the mosquitos arrived. The 53-year-old woman lives in a wooden house near the airport of a Peruvian city in the Amazon rainforest. City fumigators usually visit several times during the rainy season to eliminate the pests, but this year, because of the pandemic, they were absent. When she went to a hospital after coming down with a fever and body aches, doctors delivered a double diagnosis: COVID-19 and dengue. “I couldn’t even walk,” she said. As Peru grapples with one the world’s worst SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks, another virus is starting to raise alarm: dengue. Health officials have reported over 35,000 cases this year, concentrated largely in the Amazon. The rise comes amid an overall dip in the number of new daily coronavirus infections, though authorities worry a second wave could strike as dengue cases rise.

French PM says 2nd virus wave is here, vastly extends curfew (AP) French Prime Minister Jean Castex announced on Thursday a vast extension of the nightly curfew that is intended to curb the spiraling spread of the coronavirus, saying “the second wave is here.” The curfew imposed in eight regions of France last week, including Paris and its suburbs, is being extended to 38 more regions and Polynesia starting Friday at midnight, Castex said. It is likely to last six weeks before a review, he said. The extension means that 46 million of France’s 67 million people will be under 9 p.m.-6 a.m. curfews that prohibit them from being out and about during those hours except for limited reasons, such as walking a dog, traveling to and from work and catching a train or flight.

Putin: Russia-China military alliance can’t be ruled out (AP) Russian President Vladimir Putin said Thursday there is no need for a Russia-China military alliance now, but noted it could be forged in the future. Putin’s statement signaled deepening ties between Moscow and Beijing amid growing tensions in their relations with the United States. The Russian leader also made a strong call for extending the last remaining arms control pact between Moscow and Washington. Asked during a video conference with international foreign policy experts Thursday whether a military union between Moscow and Beijing was possible, Putin replied that “we don’t need it, but, theoretically, it’s quite possible to imagine it.” Russia and China have hailed their “strategic partnership,” but so far rejected any talk about the possibility of their forming a military alliance. Russia has sought to develop stronger ties with China as its relations with the West sank to post-Cold War lows over Moscow’s annexation of Ukraine’s Crimea, accusations of Russian meddling in the 2016 U.S. presidential election and other rifts.

China hopes for change if Biden wins, but little likely (AP) Chinese leaders hope Washington will tone down conflicts over trade, technology and security if Joe Biden wins the Nov. 3 presidential election. But any shift is likely to be in style, not substance, as frustration with Beijing increases across the American political spectrum. Both Republican and Democratic lawmakers and their constituents seem disinclined to adopt a softer approach toward China, possibly presaging more strife ahead, regardless of the election’s outcome. U.S.-Chinese relations have plunged to their lowest level in decades amid an array of conflicts over the coronavirus pandemic, technology, trade, security and spying. Despite discord on so many other fronts, both parties are critical of Beijing’s trade record and stance toward Hong Kong, Taiwan and religious and ethnic minorities in Tibet and Xinjiang, where the ruling Communist Party has detained Muslims in political re-education camps. The American public is equally negative. Two-thirds of people surveyed in March by the Pew Research Center had “unfavorable views” of China, the highest since Pew started asking in 2005.

Myanmar’s second lockdown drives hunger in city slums (Reuters) After the first wave of coronavirus hit Myanmar in March, 36-year-old Ma Suu closed her salad stall and pawned her jewelry and gold to buy food to eat. During the second wave, when the government issued a stay-home order in September for Yangon, Ma Suu shut her stall again and sold her clothes, plates and pots. With nothing left to sell, her husband, an out of work construction laborer, has resorted to hunting for food in the open drains by the slum where they live on the outskirts of Myanmar’s largest city. “People are eating rats and snakes,” Ma Suu said through tears. “Without an income, they need to eat like that to feed their children.”

Bloated public salaries at heart of Iraq’s economic woes (AP) BAGHDAD—Long-time Iraqi civil servant Qusay Abdul-Amma panicked when his monthly salary was delayed. Days of waiting turned to weeks. He defaulted on rent and other bills. A graphic designer for the Health Ministry, he uses about half his salary to pay his rent of nearly 450,000 Iraqi dinars a month, roughly $400. If he fails to pay twice in a row his landlord will evict him and his family, he fears. Iraq’s government is struggling to pay the salaries of the ever-swelling ranks of public sector employees amid an unprecedented liquidity crisis caused by low oil prices. September’s salaries were delayed for weeks, and October’s still haven’t been paid as the government tries to borrow once again from Iraq’s currency reserves. The crisis has fueled fears of instability ahead of mass demonstrations this week. The political elite have used the patronage system to entrench their power. A major part of that patronage is handing out state jobs in return for support. The result has been a threefold increase in public workers since 2004. The government pays 400% more in salaries than it did 15 years ago. Around three quarters of the state’s expenditures in 2020 go to paying for the public sector—a massive drain on dwindling finances. “Now the situation is very dangerous,” said Mohammed al-Daraji, a lawmaker on parliament’s Finance Committee.

Israel warms to Sudan (Foreign Policy) An Israeli government delegation visited Sudan on Thursday, in the latest sign of warming ties between the two countries. Israeli officials reportedly met with Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, Sudan’s head of state during its transitional government. Reuters reported on Thursday that Sudan’s Prime Minister Abdalla Hamdok is ready to normalize relations with Israel as long as the country’s parliament approves the move. That approval may be some time in coming, as Sudan has yet to form a transitional parliament.

Gunfire and barricades in Guinea as President heads for third term (Reuters) Gunfire rang out across Guinea’s capital Conakry on Friday and security forces dispersed protestors after results showed President Alpha Conde winning re-election in a poll that the opposition says was unconstitutional. Conde won around twice as many votes as his nearest rival, opposition candidate Cellou Dalein Diallo, with 37 of 38 districts counted, preliminary results from the election commission showed on Thursday night. The president’s decision to run for a third term has sparked repeated protests over the past year, resulting in dozens of deaths, including at least 17 in skirmishes since Sunday’s vote. Conde says a constitutional referendum in March reset his two-term limit, but his opponents say he is breaking the law by holding onto power. Diallo’s camp said it has found evidence of fraud and will contest the result in the constitutional court.

Resentment, smoke linger in Nigeria’s streets after unrest (AP) Resentment lingered with the smell of charred tires Friday in Nigeria’s relatively calm streets after days of protests over police abuses, as authorities barely acknowledged reports of the military killing at least 12 peaceful demonstrators earlier this week. President Muhammadu Buhari in his first comments on the unrest didn’t mention the shootings that sparked international outrage, instead warning protesters against being used by “subversive elements” and “undermining national security and law and order” during a national address Thursday night. Soldiers remained in parts of Lagos, Nigeria’s largest city, on Friday. A 24-hour curfew had not yet been lifted. The protests turned violent Wednesday after the shooting as mobs vandalized and burned police stations, courthouses, TV stations and a hotel. Police battled angry crowds with tear gas and gunfire. The looting, gunfire, and street blockades continued Thursday.

#headlines #news

1 note · View note

wellesleyunderground · 5 years ago

Text

Wellesley in Politics: Meagan Harmon ‘08

Meagan Harmon ‘08 was appointed to the Santa Barbara City Council in early 2019 and is currently running in this fall’s Santa Barbara municipal election. Harmon is a lawyer who, after Wellesley, received a Master of Arts in Near and Middle Eastern Studies from Harvard University and a law degree from New York University School of Law.

Thanks for chatting with us, Meagan! You were appointed to the Santa Barbara City Council earlier this year. Tell us a little bit about the community in which you serve.

Thank you so much for the opportunity to share a little bit more about the work we’re doing in Santa Barbara! I represent Santa Barbara’s Sixth District, which covers the heart of our downtown and its adjacent neighborhoods. We have such an awesome group of folks living in the Sixth District; I am so honored to be serving them on City Council. Those of us living in the Sixth District have a little bit of a different profile than someone you might typically associate with Santa Barbara. First of all, we’re primarily renters - at least 80% of us rent, rather than own our homes so issues like housing affordability and availability and renters’ rights are of particular importance to us. There is a huge range of income levels in our district, from a few very wealthy folks, to many low and moderate income families (we are definitely of a microcosm of the economic demographics in the city more broadly). Many of our neighbors are Latinx, and many speak multiple languages at home or live in multi-generational households. I’m extremely proud of the many amazing, hard working people that live in our District and of how much they contribute to our city every day.

You mentioned in an interview that you are a relative newcomer to Santa Barbara. When the City Council seat opened up, what made you put your name forward this year?

I grew up in Lompoc, a small town to the north of Santa Barbara. It is a small, deeply connected county, though, so while I’ve only been living in the city for about three years, this place and the Santa Barbara way of life is elemental for me. That said, it was actually a pretty difficult decision for me to put my name forward for this position, but I’m so, so glad that I did. My daughter, Maura, is two years old and she’s both the reason I got involved and the reason it was such a difficult decision.

As most Wellesley folx will understand, service is a core value that I’ve tried to let guide and drive me in my life. Before I had my daughter, though, I thought of service in a really broad way, and on a global scale. I spent time as an international humanitarian aid worker, including a year working in rural Afghanistan, and tried to do good work within that framework. When Maura came into our family - and this is one of the most unexpected and beautiful ways that motherhood has changed and shaped me - she refocused me on the challenges and injustices occurring in my own neighborhood, on my own block, and in my own city. So she was really the catalyst to thinking about local government as a means to affect the kind of systemic change that I believe is necessary in our world. It is a little cliché, I guess, but I want her to come of age in a city that reflects and celebrates all our neighbors, so she really drove me be part of the process of getting us there.

By the same token, it made me hugely nervous to take on such a public role during this phase of my life. Being a mom is hard, and though I am so lucky to have a truly equal partnership with Maura’s dad, the responsibilities and expectations we place on mothers (not just the childcare piece, but the mental load piece and the sort of “aesthetics” of modern parenting) are very real and they can sometimes be harsh. I wasn’t sure I was ready to take it on, while also maintaining my professional life (I still work as a lawyer) and trying to keep some semblance of my personal life going.

Ultimately, I made the decision to step forward because I love my neighborhood and my neighbors and I wanted to work with them to bring our progressive values to City Hall. It seemed, at the time I took this step, that we were at a real crossroads in Santa Barbara - that we were, and still are, at a moment where we could implement policies that actually reflect the best of who we are, in contrast to what we see on the national stage. I wanted to be a part of that conversation. I also wanted to be part of paving the way for other moms of young kids to get involved in local government. I won’t lie, it can sometimes be super difficult and exhausting, but for the most part everyone has been so supportive and I think having the credibility to talk about the challenges faced by working families in Santa Barbara, as I’m currently living them myself, has allowed for some really productive legislative movement for our local families.

Issues of concern for you include housing and downtown revitalization, two significant issues for many communities across the country. In what ways, would you say that challenges faced by Santa Barbara in these areas are similar to what other communities are facing? Alternatively, how are Santa Barbara’s challenges unique?

As all Californians know, issues of housing affordability and availability have reached crisis levels in this state. Santa Barbara is experiencing that, too. We are seeing so many people priced out and dealing with housing insecurity because we don’t have enough rental units and the units we do have are far too expensive. That said, while it is absolutely true that the housing challenge isn’t unique to us, I do think the scale and scope of what we’re facing is pretty remarkable (in a bad way).

According to some sources, Santa Barbara is the 16th most expensive city in the entire country, and it is in the top five most expensive in California. It is almost whiplash-inducing to think about the wealth gap in Santa Barbara: we have such incredible wealth in our community, but there is a startling high rate of poverty, as well. In fact, Santa Barbara County has the third highest poverty rate in the state and, according to a 2018 report, more than 26% of children in our county live below the poverty line. With the ever increasing cost of housing in Santa Barbara, it won’t be a surprise if we see these numbers going up.

So, yes, housing is a huge challenge everywhere in California, but coastal communities like ours are faced with particular challenges that are exacerbated by the very extreme gap between those with economic status and privilege, and those who don’t enjoy those same advantages. Our housing prices - our rent prices in particular - are, in my view, the primary driver of increasing income inequality in our city. As city leaders, we have to lean hard into responsible, sustainable building that produces housing stock which is affordable to our working families. This is something I’m fiercely advocating for in my position on City Council.

I am sure that being on the City Council has introduced to a variety of concerns facing your community. What is one issue that, perhaps you had never thought about before, but you have learned is of importance to the larger Santa Barbara community?

This is such a good question! There are so many things that I had no idea about before taking office. One area that immediately comes to mind: dealing with parking, transportation corridors and speed limits on our local roads! I never thought too deeply about traffic and circulation before joining the Council, particularly because my family lives downtown and walks most of the time, but circulation planning requires a huge amount of time and effort (and a huge amount of study on my part as one of the decision makers). Take changing parking angles on a street, for example: that kind of change can have incredibly significant consequences both in terms of safety and circulation in our neighborhoods. So many experts are engaged in making these decisions for our city and I love being a part of the conversation. It has definitely opened my eyes to how much thought is required to make everything run efficiently and well - cities definitely do not plan themselves!

I noted that in my own community, voter turnout in municipal elections is tends to be relatively low. How would describe your own community’s engagement at the very local level? How does this influence how you campaign?

You’re absolutely right, voter turnout in municipal elections is pretty low in a lot of places in this country and that is true in Santa Barbara, as well. Now that I understand just how important our local elected officials are - I mean, we make a decision at a Tuesday meeting and it can literally change the quality of life for our neighbors by Wednesday morning - I can’t do enough to encourage folks to vote in their municipal elections.

It is true that local electeds don’t set policy on many issues that are taking center stage in today’s political discourse, but I honestly believe city government can and should be the front lines of transformative political and social change in this county. We don’t have a say in our immigration policy, for example, but municipal leaders can influence the national conversation by crafting policy that is grounded in service to all our neighbors. Here are a few examples of what I mean: we now require that translation services be made available so our whole community can participate in our meetings, our police department does not cooperate with ICE, and we recently passed a Just Cause eviction ordinance to protect the rights of all tenants in our city (after thirty years of politicians trying to do so!). So, while we don’t talk directly about things like immigration policy at our Council meetings and we can’t change what is coming from Washington through our votes, we can and do implement policies that reflect our values and that are themselves acts of resistance to immoral policies of exclusion.

That’s a very long-winded way of saying that my number one goal when I go door to door is to try and communicate how absolutely vital local government is in our everyday lives. I am in a unique position in this race because I’m unopposed, so I have the opportunity to get out and just chat with people about how important municipal elections are to determining the character of our city.

Since your appointment, what have you learned about city governance and being a public official?

I had never held public office before coming on the Council in February and, in many ways, it has been a very steep learning curve. My most important lesson learned thus far has been about how best to communicate difficult news or unfavorable decisions. On the dais, I strive to find creative solutions that speak to all our neighbors' needs and concerns, but sometimes that isn't possible and folks walk away disappointed. I've learned the incredible importance of speaking clearly and honestly about my decision making process; I see effective communication as one of the central tenants of my job as an elected official. In light of that, I really try to speak as openly as possible both from the dais and in private meetings. If I articulate my thinking well enough, though it may not change the response to a given outcome, it is better understood by stakeholders that I have engaged with all sides of the issue and truly, meaningfully considered it. I have found that goes a long way to making all parties feel heard and respected - a cornerstone of both the democratic process and our Santa Barbara identity.

Finally, we at Wellesley Underground are big proponents of self-care. With all that you have going on, how do you care for yourself?

Honestly, this is something I really struggle with. Sometimes it feels like there is never enough energy to go around, between my family, my city, my law practice, myself, and I end the day with a sense that while I may be doing it all, I’m definitely doing it all poorly. My key to self-care has been to give myself grace every day, which has become a very conscious practice for me. This is a lot about managing my thoughts and the way I “talk” to myself. The more aware I am of my own thoughts, the better I’m able to manage my stress. Also, I’m so lucky to live in a place with incredible natural beauty, so I’ve been trying to make time every week to get out and root myself in the world. My daughter loves being outside so seeing her joy has really inspired me to get engaged in our natural environment in a new way and that has been an unexpected, but wonderful source of self-care for me.

____

Follow Meagan on social media:

Facebook

Instagram: @meaganharmonsb

___

Interview by Cleo Hereford ‘09

#Wellesley in Politics Series #Wellesley in Politics #Meagan Froemming #Class of 2008 #Santa Barbara City Council

1 note · View note