THE RECOVERY MYTH

Politicians love to pretend that they can control capitalism so it comes as no great surprise to hear the US President talking about an economic recovery.
"Barack Obama has told Americans he sees signs of economic recovery, but urged them to be patient and look beyond their "short-term interests" The US president said his draft budget would build a stronger economy which would mean America did not face a repeat crisis in 10 or 20 years." (BBC News, 25 March)
This of course contradicts another "expert" on the economic scene."The world economy is set to shrink by between 0.5% and 1.0% in 2009, the first global contraction in 60 years. In its gloomiest forecast yet, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) says that developed countries will suffer a "deep recession". The global economic body says "the prolonged financial crisis has battered global economic activity beyond what was previously anticipated". (BBC News, 19 March)
To illustrate than none of the experts have a clue this is the same IMF that was predicting just two months earlier that world output would increase by 0.5%! In fact capitalism is an economic system that is based on slumps and booms and no amount of political "spin" can govern its unpredictability. RD

THE SIMPLE LIFE

Lev Leviev London, England Net Worth: $1.5 billionRank: 468

The growing economic crisis with its mounting unemployment and re-possessions poses dreadful conditions on the world's working class, but none of this matter to the capitalist class who continue to live in ease and luxury on the exploitation of these workers
"Computer mogul Michael Dell claims to live simply yet built a 33,000-square-foot manse in Austin, Texas, in 1997. Called "the castle" by locals for its high walls and tight security, the home sits on a 20-acre spread a mere stone's throw from Dell headquarters. It's not so simple for other members of the billionaires club. Oracle Chief Executive Larry Ellison, a hard-core Japanophile, blew an estimated $100 million building a 23-acre, 10-building, Japanese-inspired imperial villa in Woodside, Calif. But it doesn't stop there. In recent years, he has spent an estimated $200 million snapping up a dozen commercial and residential properties in the ritzy beachside enclave of Malibu, Calif. In January 2008, Russian-Israeli diamond magnate Lev Leviev bought the Palladio, an extravagant 17,000-square-foot manor outside London, for $65 million. (That works out to $3,823 per square foot, roughly twice the average in Greater London.) The home includes a bullet-proof front door, gold-plated pool, indoor cinema and hair salon. (Yahoo News, 13 March) RD

one rule for them , another rule for us 2

We read
Scottish Water's chief executive, Richard Ackroyd earns a basic salary of £263,000 plus a 40 per cent bonus.
Junior employees at Scottish Water have bonuses limited to around 5 per cent of their salary.

Recession? Wot Recession?

According to The Independent , the billionaire founder of Phones 4U, John Cauldwell, hired Leona Lewis to perform at his daughter Libby's 21st birthday party last week. The cost? £1,000,000.
Lewis winner of The X Factor in 2006, is meant to be concentrating on producing her second album, but took time out to perform seven songs – astonishingly, her longest-ever concert. And, at £140,000 a track, her most lucrative.

Meanwhile, the South African entrepreneur Sol Kerzner shelled out for his (fourth) wife Heather's 40th birthday celebrations at the Dorchester last week – serenading the fourth Mrs K were Donna Summer and Natalie Cole.

If anyone interested , Rod Stewart can be hired for £750,000.

THE INFALLIBLE FAILS AGAIN

"The Holy See is struggling to contain international anger over the Pope's claim on his first official visit to Africa that Aids "cannot be overcome through the distribution of condoms, which even aggravates the problems". The Pope's remarks about condoms, and a recent furore over his lifting of the 20-year excommunication of a British bishop who has questioned the Holocaust, has left him looking isolated and out of touch, prompting calls for a radical shake-up of the way the Holy See delivers its message." (Daily Telegraph, 19 March)
Having recently forgiven Galileo for his view that the Sun and not the Earth was the centre of the solar system (it took over 350 years) we imagine it might take the infallible one a few years before changing his position about condoms aggravating the spread of Aids. Infallibility is a difficult position to defend, as the millions of Roman Catholics who practice birth control by the use of condoms might one day convince the infallible one. RD

Homelessness and hopelessness

Sixty children become homeless in Scotland every day, according to housing campaigners Shelter. A study by the charity suggested 22,000 young people a year were affected by homelessness and poor housing - enough to fill every secondary school in Fife. The number of homeless families with children rose by 18% over five years. The report also found a 27% increase in the number of families with children in temporary accommodation over three years.

Shelter Scotland's director Graeme Brown said: "A decent, warm, safe home is crucial to all aspects of children's well being. Yet the facts show thousands of Scotland's children have to wake up every day in cold, damp, overcrowded homes, uncertain about their future."

In a separate study, researchers from Glasgow University suggested homeless people were four times more likely to die prematurely. More than 6,000 homeless adults in Glasgow were tracked over a five-year period and their mortality compared with 13,500 non-homeless residents. By the end of the study, 7% of the homeless group had died compared to 2% of the non-homeless group. The most common causes of death among the homeless subjects were drugs, alcohol, circulatory diseases and suicide.
Dr David Morrison, from the research group, said: "This study has shown we have a large population of young, vulnerable homeless people who are in terrible health."

The study indicated Glasgow residents living in the most deprived areas were three times more likely to die than their affluent counterparts. Being homeless increased the risk of death another threefold.

One rule for you , another rule for us

Got a lot of commuter travelling time between home and work ? Don't worry , House of Parliament will pick up the bill . Or they do for the Labour Party Minister of Employment , Tony McNulty , who has been claiming second-home expenses on a London house where just as it happens his parents live.

The MP lived in the house in Harrow with his parents before then moved into her home about eight miles away in Hammersmith, west London. Under parliamentary rules Mr McNulty can claim an allowance for a second home in his constituency even though it is only 11 miles from Westminster. The MPs' Additional Costs Allowance of up to £24,000 a year goes to MPs from outside inner London to cover the cost of staying away from their main home when carrying out parliamentary duties.

McNulty and his wife, Christine Gilbert, the chief schools inspector, have a combined annual income of more than £300,000 and between them own two London homes worth £1.2m.

he compared the defence of his actions to the excuses given by Nazi war criminals, who said they were “only obeying orders”.
“It is not against the rules – though I suppose you might say that is the Nuremberg defence,” he is reported to have said. He said he had decided to stop claiming the second-home allowance in January after he had “reflected” on the issue.

Another Labour Party mnister , Jacqui Smith, the home secretary, is under investigation for claiming £20,000 a year in expenses, arguing that a home she shares with her sister in London was her “principal residence”.

And what the hell , lets keep it all in the family . One third of government ministers employ a member of their family at taxpayers' expense, an official document revealed today. Jacqui Smith employs her husband Richard Timney as a Commons researcher based in her Redditch constituency.

The Labour Party - the party where all the members have their sticky fingers in the pie .

Organic Capitalism at Work

The profit motive is the dominating influence in a capitalist society; if you believe organic food is most important for your family’s well being then you will pay the extra money, however, if your wages are reduced by rising prices or you lose employment, you may be forced to buy food you really don’t want for your family, that is what a number of working class families are doing as this recent BBC report shows, of course rising prices won’t affect the family’s of the capitalist class, they can always provide whatever food they believe is best for them.

Call to relax standards to help farmers

Sales of organic food have dropped by ten percent in the last three months, according to figures from the consumer researchers TNS. In response, the two main bodies which certify organic food have asked the government for farmers to be allowed a break from the usual strict standards. The idea is to help them survive the downturn.

THE BBC MYTH

One of the pieces of nonsense that exists inside this buying and selling society is that the BBC remains aloof from crass commercialism, popularism and salesmenship. Wrong, wrong, wrong. Want to test it? Use your computer or your old man's computer. Get in to the BBC News and you will see matters of social importance, but if you are alarmed or interested in what you see you had better be swift. In 15 seconds time you will see this sort of bullocks appearing on your screen
"Liverpool draw Chelsea in Europe again. Gerrad assault charge is dropped. Man City faces Hamburg in Uefa cup." (BBC News, 20 March)
Please wait more than 15 seconds and go back to items about children dying and millionaires. We need you. Please test my 15 seconds experience; it may vary from town to town. RD

A DEFENDER OF CAPITALISM

It is well known that journalists defending capitalism often make a fool of themselves. It is even better known that Daily Mail journalists are particularly foolish in that regard. Here is one - Andrew Alexander proving that point.
"We are witnessing the death of capitalism, according to various excitable commentators, some alarmed and some drooling at the prospect. Neither need get worked up Capitalism will survive. And it will do so because it is natural - not, as some claim, an alien system imposed on gullible people." (Daily Mail, 11 March)
Mr Alexander then goes on to use the hoary, old fairy tale about a shipwrecked crew on a tropical island exchanging coconuts for fish and claims this would lead to the invention of money. It is a view that completely ignores the real history of humankind. The first period of human history had no concept of private property and the invention of money is a very late development in that history. There is plenty of evidence that society has developed through various stages of primitive communism, chattel slavery, feudalism and then capitalism. Far from being "natural" capitalism is just another stage in private property society. Mr Alexander is correct in one respect though. People who imagine that the latest slump in capitalism means its termination are completely wrong. Capitalism by its very nature has slumps and booms. Its abolition will only come about with the conscious political action of the working class. RD

THE "GREEDY MAN" MYTH

Another opposition to a socialist society that is often aired is that is impossible because of the existence of the "greedy man". Again we would point out that we could only get socialism when a majority were prepared to make it work. Even inside the cut-throat system that is capitalism there are many examples of people behaving in a co-operative fashion. Inside families many parents sacrifice themselves for the benefit of their children, many people volunteer to do unpaid work to help the needy and the sick. Perhaps one of the best examples of selfless endeavour on behalf of others is that of lifeboat volunteers who risk their lives to help other without pay. If the working class were really greedy they would dump a society that today leaves them in poverty while rewarding the capitalist class with immense wealth. RD

THE "LAZY MAN" MYTH

One of the opposition that socialist get when advocating a new society of common ownership and production solely for use, is that it would be impossible because of the "lazy man" who wouldn't work. These opponents overlook the fact that socialism could only come about when a majority were in favour of working to the best of their ability and taking according to their needs. Far from the working class being innately lazy, even inside capitalism they are desperate to work as recent figures illustrate.
"Startling new figures have revealed that on average there are 10 jobseekers for every vacancy advertised in the UK. In one area of the south-east, 60 workers are available for each job. This week, as unemployment is expected to burst through the 2 million barriers, The Observer can reveal that the spectre of mass unemployment is forcing the government to reinforce job centres, with civil servants diverted from child maintenance and disability claims."
(Observer, 15 March) RD

GREEDY BASTARDS

The Sunday Mail front page headline read ‘ GREEDY PIGS’ . This along with a continuous barrage of other adjectives of a similar nature re. the Banks, Bonuses, and the appeals of Red Nosed People for the rest of us to be charitable, reminds me of a more circumspect article by one of the comrades in the November 2004 issue of the Socialist Standard, it’s longer than our usual postings but well worth the reading.

The planet we live on has been arbitrarily divided into some two hundred nation states. In all of these states, the very richest and the poorest, there are people who die from the effects of poverty and, conversely, there are those who are immensely rich.
In the UK there is some disagreement about the number of people who die prematurely because they are poor, though the figure of an average of some four thousand per annum for hypothermia is generally accepted. For example, the death certificate may say `pneumonia' in the case of an elderly person who in fact dies of hypothermia because their income does not allow them a sufficiency of food and heat to keep them alive. Again, there are thousands denied the necessary medication to keep them alive while life-long poverty itself has an incalculable effect on human longevity.
The singer, Elvis Presley, sang:
"If Living was a thing that money could buy,
Then the rich would live and the poor would die."

In actual fact, the rich do live on average longer and, certainly, better lives, and in millions of cases every year throughout the entire world of capitalism the poor do die, not because the food, medicine or shelter they need is not available but because they are poor; because they do not represent a market that promises profits for capitalism.
Same economic regime
Admittedly, the numbers who die of poverty diseases in most of the developed countries are minuscule by comparison with the tens of thousands who die every single day in those very `poor' countries that are normally referred to as `undeveloped' or `developing'. Still, someone dying from the effects of poverty or medical neglect in this country or, say, the USA, is a victim of the same economic regime that causes that horrible phenomenon that the media refer to as the `Third World'.
In a grotesque way, it is comforting to think of the `Third World' as a number of far-away geographic locations. It gives people in the developed world a sense of misplaced gratitude to think that, however bad things might be where they are, they are worse in other places. As we have noted, the numbers vary dramatically between the `poor' nations and the `rich' ones but the basic problem, the reality of riches and poverty, demonstrates that `Third World' syndrome is a general economic consequence of capitalism rather than specific parts of the earth.
According to one United Nations Human Development Report, four men between them own more wealth than forty-seven of the poorest nations on earth. The same report claims that a mere four percent of the aggregated wealth of three of these men could provide food, clean water, medication and basic education for all those currently denied these necessities.
The problem, then, seems to be a simple one: there are a number of greedy bastards holding the very lives of millions of people in their hands. The UN Report mentions only four of these but there are hundreds of billionaires - people who have ownership of wealth in excess of one thousand million dollars - in the world.
So a chastising lecture on charity to these `greedy' people and a whip round with plastic buckets, and the problem of world hunger could be resolved in a flash. That is what the myriad competing charities imply when they seek alms - except that most of their donations come from the poor. At another level, that is what reformist political parties traditionally aimed to do by taxation and the argument seems justified when we consider what could be done with a mere four percent of the wealth of three of the billionaires. There are thousands of fabulously rich people who, however extravagantly they live and whether or not they engage in any useful activity, are likely to continue to get richer for the rest of their lives.
But the problem does not reside with greedy bastards; nor can it be resolved either by charitable donations or by the action of reforming governments. The problem is caused by the economic system which gives rise to the rich, the millionaires and billionaires, and as a consequence, also gives rise to those who endure mere want or deadly, killing poverty.
Charity is a popular, and we have to say, a cynical pastime for the rich. Lady Layabout's charity ball is an important item on the social calendar, like croquet on the lawn. Sometimes it may take the form of a fashion show where the well-heeled can see the sort of clothes only they can afford. The residual funds from these expensively organised, posh affairs may be donated to the deserving poor where it will no doubt offer momentary, ephemeral relief to some facet of poverty. Nowadays the charity industry - itself a big employer of labour - has proliferated and diversified but so, too, have the problems.
Not so dumb
Of course it is easy to think of a person with billions or even millions of pounds, euros or dollars as a greedy bastard. That person lives on the same planet as the rest of us; he or she knows about world hunger, about the extremes of lifestyles between themselves and the overwhelming majority around them. They can't be so dumb as to believe they could have earned their fabulous wealth by doing what the rest of us have to do, selling our mental or physical labour power for a wage or salary, and they know that however idly and extravagantly they live, their wealth is likely to continue increasing.
But they do not face a moral dilemma, nor should they. In a way, indeed, they are like the millions of poor people who dream about winning the lottery, except that in the case of the rich capitalists they have their own moral apologia and the power through their wealth to enforce that apologia on the rest of society.
Investment with a view to profit and capital accumulation is the powerhouse of capitalist society; without investment, production and distribution would stall, workers would have no jobs. This is the reality of capitalism from which springs the justifications that capitalists advance for their system.
Acceptance of those justifications is general and almost unchallenged throughout capitalist society. Media, churches, politicians, et al sing the praises of the `job creators'; nobody but the socialist questions motive or points out that capital invests in job creation purely for the purpose of generating profit through the exploitation of workers and that capital disinvests and relocates if it can find a place where it can intensify that exploitation. That is the nub of the question, not whether or not the millionaires and billionaires are moved by the miseries they create to give sums large or small to charity or whether they are forced by taxation to effect some amelioration of those miseries.
Riches and poverty are two sides of the same relationship and can only be ended when that relationship is ended; when society takes over the ownership and control of the means of wealth production and distribution and institutes a system of social organisation in which production and distribution are democratically administered in the interests of the needs of society as a whole.
As far as blaming `greedy bastards' is concerned we workers should remember that capitalists are not in a position to effect real change even if they wanted to - which, of course, they don't. Only the majority, the working class, can do that.
RICHARD MONTAGUE

A Ghoulish Business

As a precious metals refiner, Leon Toffel is used to dealing with fine dust. But some years ago, when he received globules of molten metal in the post, he realised there was a new market to be mined. Toffel's new client was a retiring crematorium worker.

Leon Toffel estimates that five per cent of his business comes from sources in crematoria. "We processed it like any other scrap," he said "When people retire, that's a classic time when they pass on stuff . To a certain extent, it's like a little pension pay-out."

In just two years, six workers at a crematorium in Nuremberg earned more than £100,000 by selling gold teeth to a local jeweller. Under German law, they could not be charged with theft because the gold was not said to belong to anyone after the process of cremation. For some, the story raised painful associations with The Holocaust.

Food for Thought 5

- Meanwhile the madness of capitalism continues. Two nuclear subs, one from Britain and one from France, collided in the Atlantic Ocean recently, both carrying nuclear weapons. How they managed this with the whole of the ocean to play in is a mystery, but imagine the stupidity and waste of this going on while people live in tents or need health care.

- Buying flowers seems like an innocent thing to do. In Canada, they may arrive from Columbia where women and children as young as ten work like slaves, long hours for low pay, no rights, and health problems that include infertility and lung disease.

- Capitalist development is coming to Cambodia. In Phnom Penh, ramshackle neighbourhoods are being bulldozed for commercial development without the inhabitants’ permission. It’s no good protesting as the machines arrive with military police, the riot squad and one hundred hired thugs with crowbars, i.e. supported by the government. As international aid floods into Cambodia, the rich elite are growing ever more powerful, while the poor are being pushed aside. Welcome to capitalism.
John Ayers

Food for Thought 4

Carol Goar of The Toronto Star thinks this is a time to ‘trim bloated pay Cheques’. She asks, ‘Is running a major corporation worth 400 times the average wage?’ and, ‘Is it really a sacrifice when a bank president trims his pay packet from $8.75 million to $3.8 million?’ Of course the answer is no and no, but it wouldn’t make any difference anyway, if the same system remains intact.

- It seems the economy is biting everywhere. Recently an evangelical Church charity lost its status when it was audited and it was found that donations were being used for trips to Hawaii, high fashion products, and personal expenses – caught with their hands in the cookie jar.

- Is the current economic crisis affecting poverty reduction? While the increases in the minimum wage are going ahead (up to $9.50/hour by March 31st.) the Toronto Star showed that the present Ontario government is long on promises, pledges, indications, but action on their 25 in 5 plan (25%poverty reduction in five years) is sorely lacking or waiting for a willing federal partner. The attitudes of the poverty bashing Harris years persist. Recently, Human resources Minister, Diane Finley rejected demand to pay unemployment insurance to all those who pay the premiums, saying,
“we do not want to make it lucrative for them to stay home and get paid for it.”
John Ayers

AMERICA IN RECESSION

"American businesses were forced to shed more than 23,000 jobs every day last month as recession tightened its grip on the economy, pushing the unemployment rate to a 25-year high. The rate jumped from 7.6 per cent to 8.1 per cent, the highest level since the downturn of the early 1980s. The US economy has lost 4.4 million jobs since the beginning of the slowdown, with more than half of these positions disappearing in the past four months alone." (Times, 7 March) RD

A NIGHTMARE FUTURE (2)

Socialists cannot foretell the future, but we are aware that society as presently constituted is powerless to save the planet for human existence. The short-term thinking that motivates a commodity producing society makes next quarter's balance sheet more important than long-term planning about the environment. Here is another example of capitalism endangering human existence.
"Carbon dioxide emissions from human activities are acidifying the oceans and threaten a mass extinction of sea life, a top ocean scientist warns. Dr Carol Turley from Plymouth Marine Laboratory says it is impossible to know how marine life will cope, but she fears many species will not survive. Since the Industrial Revolution, CO2 emissions have already turned the sea about 30% more acidic, say researchers. It is more acidic now than it has been for at least 500,000 years, they add. The problem is set to worsen as emissions of the greenhouse gas increase through the 21st Century. "I am very worried for ocean ecosystems which are currently productive and diverse," Carol Turely told BBC News. "I believe we may be heading for a mass extinction, as the rate of change in the oceans hasn't been seen since the dinosaurs. "It may have a major impact on food security. It really is imperative that we cut emissions of CO2." (BBC News, 11 March)
Inside a socialist society where production is solely for use not profit, human beings can plan rationally for our children's future without destroying the eco-system. RD

A NIGHTMARE FUTURE

In their relentless quest for profit capitalists must compete with each other to produce cheaper and cheaper commodities. Inevitably this means that they are turning the oceans into garbage heaps, polluting the air we breathe and melting the world's icecaps.
"Scientists will warn this week that rising sea levels triggered by global warming, pose a far greater danger to the planet than previously estimated. There is now a major risk that many coastal areas around the world will be inundated by the end of the century because Antarctica and Greenland ice sheets are melting faster than previously estimated. Low-lying areas including Bangladesh, the Maldives and the Netherlands face catastrophic flooding, while in Britain, large areas of the Norfolk Broads and the Thames estuary are likely to disappear by 2100. In addition cities including London, Hull and Portsmouth will need new flood defences." (Observer, 8 March)
What kind of a nightmare world is capitalism bequeathing to our children? RD

Is there a food shortage in the world?

Thanks to Alan for the following from the WSM_Forum This is question which we are asked often,sometimes as a genuine question, at other times to suggest that capitalism, if not the best of systems, is one of the least worse.Our reply that capitalism had to be developed into a form which we could then use to satisfy human needs worldwide.

So what we now have is a system, which is capable of producing on a massive scale everything we need and require to live a useful and healthy life, but the nature of capitalist distribution ,it is restriced to produce only when it is profitable to do so,means that access is rationed to those who can buy the goods and services produced.If demand, expressed in paying customers,falls,then production is choked off.

Only Socialism, as the next stage of historical development, as its organising tenet describes, "from each according to their ability, to each according to their needs", can then satisfy needs adequately, as production would not be switched off. or over. until "needs",the socialist "demand" is met.

A society without restrictions upon access to wealth produced, is then placed to harmonise production and distribution, into a steady state economy, with no winners and losers, such as we have today in capitalism or their state capitalist equivelent.

- Is there a food shortage in the world?
There is enough food in the world today for everyone to have the nourishment necessary for a healthy and productive life
http://www.wfp.org/hunger/faqs


The American Association for the Advancement of Science has noted that 78 per cent of the world’s malnourished children live in countries with food surpluses... There is enough food to go around now and for at least the next half-century. The world is not going to run out of food for all.
http://www.un.org/Pubs/chronicle/2001/issue3/0103p24.html

Ending hunger and food insecurity is not simply a matter of growing more food. Recent studies have shown that four out of five malnourished children in the developing world live in countries that boast food surpluses.... The key elements of a strategy for building a hunger-free world exist. What has been lacking until now is the political will to put them into practice.
http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2000/20001009.sgsm7581.doc.html

Scientific and technical advances in agriculture have yielded an era in which harvests are now outpacing population growth, resulting in unprecedented food abundance.... Inefficient distribution of food and inequities in income leave many without enough to eat. But today hunger is less the result of absolute food shortages than of political situations and policy decisions.
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?sec=health&res=9A0DE2D8113DF93AA3575AC0A960948260


Myanmar, once known as the rice bowl of Asia, still boasts a surplus of hundreds of thousands of tonnes of rice and maize. Yet a tenth of the population is going hungry,
http://www.wfp.org/content/one-tenth-burmese-go-hungry-despite-food-surplus

That is from a 10 min google search , you could have done the same and answered your question yourself . But do you see what the common thread is in all those links ...its not the technical side of food production , we can produce enough ...it's the distribution ...thats the real problem and thats the problem that free access socialism is equipped to address .