The Glasgow & Edinburgh Branches Blog. Towards a better understanding of the world, in order to change it.
Tuesday, March 17, 2009
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
"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
Monday, March 16, 2009
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
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
Sunday, March 15, 2009
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.
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.
Friday, March 13, 2009
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
- 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
Thursday, March 12, 2009
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
- 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
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
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
"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
"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
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
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 .
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 .
Monday, March 09, 2009
words
Guernsey's chief minister Lyndon Trott has been both in Washington and London trying to convince politicians Guernsey is not a tax haven but, as he puts it, "a place of low tax jurisdiction".
DRUG DEALERS EXPOSED
Harvard Medical School students like Kirsten Austad, left; Lekshmi Santhosh, Kim.
Sue and David Tian, members of the American Medical Student Association, object
to the influence of drug companies in the school’s educational curriculum
The capitalist society in its insatiable quest for profits corrupts everything it touches. Even in the supposedly benevolent field of health treatment this profit based society injures the very people it is supposed to benefit. If profits can be made human suffering comes a bad also-ran to company’s profit and loss considerations. Here is a particularly nasty example of this capitalist trait.
"In a first-year pharmacology class at Harvard Medical School, Matt Zerden grew wary as the professor promoted the benefits of cholesterol drugs and seemed to belittle a student who asked about side effects. Mr. Zerden later discovered something by searching online that he began sharing with his classmates. The professor was not only a full-time member of the Harvard Medical faculty, but a paid consultant to 10 drug companies, including five makers of cholesterol treatments. “I felt really violated,” Mr. Zerden, now a fourth-year student, recently recalled. “Here we have 160 open minds trying to learn the basics in a protected space, and the information he was giving wasn’t as pure as I think it should be.” Mr. Zerden’s minor stir four years ago has lately grown into a full-blown movement by more than 200 Harvard Medical School students and sympathetic faculty, intent on exposing and curtailing the industry influence in their classrooms and laboratories, as well as in Harvard’s 17 affiliated teaching hospitals and institutes." (New York Times, 3 March) RD
Sunday, March 08, 2009
THE FUTILITY OF REFORMS
- Another aspect of the economic downturn is the downward pressure on wages and benefits. General Motors now says it can’t afford pension and medical plans and a recent deal with the union, UAW, limits overtime, cuts cash bonuses and gets rid of cost-of-living pay raises. This is only a beginning. Concessions by the union are a condition of the $17.4 billion in government loans that the automakers have made so far. CAW Canada president, Ken Lewenza said,
“Labour costs clearly did not cause this worldwide crisis in the auto industry, and labour concessions cannot possibly solve that crisis but we can’t ignore the precarious financial state of these companies, the extraordinary government offers of aid and our need to remain fully competitive for future investment”.
In otherwords, we go with the system without much of a fight. It’s like we say, wages tend to rise in boom times, and fall in times of recession. Now we’ll spend the next twenty years trying to regain what we have lost. The futility of reform, the solution is revolution.
John Ayers
“Labour costs clearly did not cause this worldwide crisis in the auto industry, and labour concessions cannot possibly solve that crisis but we can’t ignore the precarious financial state of these companies, the extraordinary government offers of aid and our need to remain fully competitive for future investment”.
In otherwords, we go with the system without much of a fight. It’s like we say, wages tend to rise in boom times, and fall in times of recession. Now we’ll spend the next twenty years trying to regain what we have lost. The futility of reform, the solution is revolution.
John Ayers
recession is bad for your mental health
First discussed here , we now read that the UK government are now going to finance similar therapy services in England to help identify those who might be suffering from depression due to the downturn. Support workers will help those who have lost their jobs and suffer from depression and anxiety .
The BBC's Mark Sanders said the announcement was, in effect, an acknowledgement by the government that mental health problems could be caused by the recession.
The BBC's Mark Sanders said the announcement was, in effect, an acknowledgement by the government that mental health problems could be caused by the recession.
Saturday, March 07, 2009
Food for Thought 3
- The world recession continues to bite. Japan’s economy contracted at its fastest pace in 35 years when it shrank 3.3% in the last quarter. In China, an estimated 20 million migrant workers who had gravitated to the cities for industrial jobs are returning to their rural areas, their dreams of more wealth shattered. Welcome to capitalism!
- Canada continues to bleed jobs. A Toronto Star report (21/Feb/09) showed a loss of 322 000 manufacturing jobs between 2004 and 2008 and a loss of a staggering 129 000 total jobs in January, the largest decline in 30 years. There are now 1 310 100 officially unemployed in Canada, although we know that this is a highly manipulated number and is really much higher.
John Ayers
- Canada continues to bleed jobs. A Toronto Star report (21/Feb/09) showed a loss of 322 000 manufacturing jobs between 2004 and 2008 and a loss of a staggering 129 000 total jobs in January, the largest decline in 30 years. There are now 1 310 100 officially unemployed in Canada, although we know that this is a highly manipulated number and is really much higher.
John Ayers
CAPITALISM SUCKS
In the most developed capitalist society on earth we learn of this horror story.
"The US jobless rate jumped in February to 8.1%, according to official figures from the Labour Department. The number of people out of work rose by 651,000 during the month. Both figures were bigger than expected. ...President Obama said that the number of jobs lost so far in the recession was "astounding". Speaking in Ohio, he added: "I don't need to tell the people of this state what statistics like this mean," saying that he had signed his economic stimulus package in order to save jobs. The extra 161,000 jobs added to December and January's figures mean that almost two million jobs have been lost in the past three months." (BBC News, 6 March)
Think what this means, two million workers are being debarred from producing things that are necessary for human existence. Why? Because it isn't profitable enough. Two million workers and their kids are being impoverished not because of some failing on their part but because of this awful society we all live in. Don't you think it is time that those 2 million workers in the US thought of an alternative society? Shouldn't you? RD
"The US jobless rate jumped in February to 8.1%, according to official figures from the Labour Department. The number of people out of work rose by 651,000 during the month. Both figures were bigger than expected. ...President Obama said that the number of jobs lost so far in the recession was "astounding". Speaking in Ohio, he added: "I don't need to tell the people of this state what statistics like this mean," saying that he had signed his economic stimulus package in order to save jobs. The extra 161,000 jobs added to December and January's figures mean that almost two million jobs have been lost in the past three months." (BBC News, 6 March)
Think what this means, two million workers are being debarred from producing things that are necessary for human existence. Why? Because it isn't profitable enough. Two million workers and their kids are being impoverished not because of some failing on their part but because of this awful society we all live in. Don't you think it is time that those 2 million workers in the US thought of an alternative society? Shouldn't you? RD
Friday, March 06, 2009
Food for Thought 2
- The bailouts for capitalism continue – Chrysler needs another $5 billion and promises to cut 3 000 jobs, while GM is looking for another $30 billion while implementing a survival plan that includes cutting 47 000 jobs and closing 5 more plants. So we rescue them in order to ensure our jobs disappear. Sounds like a good deal for somebody.- CNN reported that since the bailouts began in late 2007, the total has reached $10.8 trillion, exactly equal to the US national debt.-
An Oprah show focused on home foreclosures, showing how those who lost their houses, had to leave everything behind and wander the streets, living in tent cities. The banks hire crews to clear the houses entirely, throwing everything into a dumpster, most of which is in good condition. So we have thousands of homeless people in tents and thousands of empty homes waiting for tenants. Could anything be crazier!
John Ayers
An Oprah show focused on home foreclosures, showing how those who lost their houses, had to leave everything behind and wander the streets, living in tent cities. The banks hire crews to clear the houses entirely, throwing everything into a dumpster, most of which is in good condition. So we have thousands of homeless people in tents and thousands of empty homes waiting for tenants. Could anything be crazier!
John Ayers
Thursday, March 05, 2009
Food for Thought
- In capitalism, everything becomes a commodity, something produced with a view to making a profit. Recycling material is no exception. The value of plastic bottles, aluminum, steel, glass, and paper has dropped more than 50% since last Fall. In addition, the low cost of oil makes new plastic cheaper than recycled plastic. Thus we get stockpiles which, if not sold, go into the landfill which recycling is supposed to avoid. And we rely on the brains of this system to save us from global environmental catastrophe!- For example, the recent visit of president Obama to Ottawa produced a decision to ‘look into’ carbon capture technology. This, according to a Toronto Star columnist, represents Obama coming around to Harper’s conservative approach to the environment, in this case, relying on new technology to keep our tar sands and America’s coal fields operating.
John Ayers
John Ayers
IT'S A MAD, MAD WORLD
"Supertankers that once raced around the world to satisfy an unquenchable thirst for oil are now parked offshore, fully loaded, anchors down, their crews killing time. In the United States, vast storage farms for oil are almost out of room. As demand for crude has plummeted, the world suddenly finds itself awash in oil that has nowhere to go. It's been less than a year since oil prices hit record highs. But now producers and traders are struggling with the new reality: The world wants less oil, not more. And turning off the spigot is about as easy as turning around one of those tankers. Oil companies and investors are stashing crude, waiting for demand to rise and the bear market to end, so they can turn a profit later. Meanwhile, oil-producing countries such as Iran have pumped millions of barrels of their own crude into idle tankers, effectively taking crude off the market to halt declining prices that are devastating their economies." (International Herald Tribune, 3 March)
Wednesday, March 04, 2009
KARL'S QUOTE'S
- On wages determining prices, Marx says,” I might appeal to practical observation to bear witness against this antiquated and exploded fallacy. I might tell you that the English factory operatives, miners, shipbuilders, and so forth, whose labour is relatively high priced, undersell by the cheapness of their produce all other nations; while the English agricultural labourer, for example, whose labour is relatively low priced, is undersold by almost every other nation because of the dearness of his produce…The dogma that wages determine the price of commodities, expressed in its most abstract terms, comes to this, that ‘value is determined by value’, and this tautology means that, in fact, we know nothing at all about value. Accepting this premise, all reasoning about the general laws of political economy turns into mere twaddle. It was, therefore, the great merit of Ricardo that in his work, ‘On the Principles of Political Economy’, published in 1817, he fundamentally destroyed the old, popular, and worn-out fallacy that ‘wages determine prices’, a fallacy which Adam Smith and his French predecessors had spurned in the really scientific parts of their researches, but which, nevertheless, they reproduced in their more exoterical and vulgar chapters.” Value, Price, and Profit pp26-29.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
-
Right now there are hundreds of campaigns globally for fossil fuel divestment as a strategy in the fight against climate change. Many are pr...
