Privatization Nightmare

I am posting this article in its entirety, as there is too much information just to summarize.  Lots of good links here.  If you have been following this issue, then you are aware that this has been going on for decades, under the guise that privatization saves the government, and hence us taxpayers, money.  Common sense alone would tell you otherwise.  Private corporations must make money,

and if they do not perceive that they will make money, they will not consider taking on such a project.  They will make money at the expense of wages and benefits for employees, and by reducing services.    Just the accounts of the privatization of prisons and parking meters are mind-boggling; you might want to do research on the results of privatization of toll roads, as well.  This is unconscionable.

Gramma Windy                                                   

Privatization Nightmare: 5 Public Services That Should Never Be Handed Over to Greedy Corporations By Dave Johnson, AlterNet Posted on November 17, 2011, Printed on November 20, 2011 http://www.alternet.org/story/153093/privatization_nightmare%3A_5_public_services_that_should_never_be_handed_over_to_greedy_corporations Who gains – and who loses – when public assets and jobs are turned over to the private sector? The corporate right endlessly promotes “privatization” of public assets and public jobs as a cash-raising or cost-saving measure. Privatization is when the public turns over assets like airports, roads or buildings, or contracts out a public function like trash collection to a private company. Many cities contract out their trash collection. To raise cash Arizona even sold its state capitol building and leased it back. The justification for privatization is the old argument that private companies do everything better and more “efficiently” than government, and will find ways to cut costs. Over and over we hear that companies do everything for less cost than government. But it never seems to sink in that private companies don’t do things unless the people at the top can make a bundle of cash; if the CEO isn’t making millions, that CEO will move the company on to something else. When government does something they don’t have to pay millions to someone at the top. So how do private companies save money? What costs do companies cut that government doesn’t? When you hear about “cost-cutting” here is something to consider: what if by “costs” the privatizers are talking about … us? The Human Cost A recent NY Times piece brought the human cost of privatization to people’s attention. In the article, A Hidden Toll as States Shift to Contract Workers, the Times’ Motoko Rich reports, With state budgets under pressure, Michigan says it can no longer afford the relatively high wages of the public workers, which range from $15 to $20 an hour, along with health and retirement benefits. According to Salary.com, certified nursing assistants in private long-term care facilities in the area earn a median salary of just over $25,000 a year, or about $12.25 a hour. Summary: when a public function is privatized the employees get paid less and lose benefits, but other state agencies pick up the costs that occur when people get paid less. Private managers and executives get a big chunk of the “savings” and then there are the costs to the larger economy from ever more people making less and less. From the Times article, Economists and other academics who study outsourcing are divided about whether it usually saves a government money. Recent data from Arizona shows that privately operated prisons often cost more to operate than state-run facilities. A study by the Project on Government Oversight, a nonprofit Washington group, found that in 33 of 35 occupations, using contractors cost the federal government billions of dollars more than using government employees. Laura Clawson at Daily Kos added to the NY Times story, in, Low-wage contract workers in Michigan veterans home come with hidden costs, What do you want to bet that guy gets health care, and retirement benefits, and earns more than $10 an hour? And that he's probably not the only person at J2S of whom those things are true. So while the hourly wage a nursing assistant working for J2S gets is $10, the state is paying J2S more. How much more, the New York Times does not report. But Eclectablog points out that the state pays J2S Healthcare Group $15 an hour for those $10 an hour nursing assistants. When a public job is contracted out, usually public employees are replaced by people who are paid much, much less and receive fewer, if any benefits. Corporate propagandists complain that public employees are overpaid, receive “lavish” benefits, and are difficult to fire. But the question we all should ask is: is it in the public interest for Americans to be paid less or more, and to receive or not receive benefits? If we believe it is better to be paid more and receive benefits then We, the People should do that. Corruption Incentive Along with people getting their pay cut, privatization creates an incentive for corruption on the part of public officials. When a company (or, really, the people at the top of a company) can make a bundle form privatization, then they have a really good reason to bring various forms of … uh … influence to bear on the public officials that make the decisions about whether or not to privatize. Five Privatization Nightmares Here are five nightmares resulting from privatization: Privatized Prisons Think through the implications of a privatized prison system: if people go to prison it means more profit for the big for-profit prison corporations. This puts corporations, with all of their influence over the government, in the position of wanting more of us sentenced to long terms in jail so they can make more money! Even worse, there is an added corporate benefit: cheap prison labor. Of course, the result you would expect from these incentives is exactly what has been happening. For example, you may have heard about the "Kids for Cash" scandal in which Pennsylvania judges pleaded guilty to sentencing kids to privatized detention centers in exchange for payoffs from the profit-making companies that ran the centers. First the judges arranged for public detention centers to be defunded. Then they started sentencing a disproportionate number of kids to private detention centers in exchange for bribes. The profit incentive to put more and more of us in prison is not just an isolated local problem. This year The Nation looked into prison privatization, in The Hidden History of ALEC and Prison Labor. They found that the notorious, Koch-funded American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), in an effort that is sponsored by the big for-profit prison corporations and companies that benefit from the cheap labor this provides, is helping to pass laws to put more and more of us in jail. According to The Nation, … prison labor for the private sector was legally barred for years, to avoid unfair competition with private companies. But this has changed thanks to the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) .... [and their] instrumental role in the explosion of the US prison population in the past few decades. ALEC helped pioneer some of the toughest sentencing laws on the books today, like mandatory minimums for non-violent drug offenders, “three strikes” laws, and “truth in sentencing” laws. … ALEC has also worked to pass state laws to create private for-profit prisons, a boon to two of its major corporate sponsors: Corrections Corporation of America and Geo Group (formerly Wackenhut Corrections), the largest private prison firms in the country. An In These Times investigation last summer revealed that ALEC arranged secret meetings between Arizona’s state legislators and CCA to draft what became SB 1070, Arizona’s notorious immigration law, to keep CCA prisons flush with immigrant detainees. ALEC has proven expertly capable of devising endless ways to help private corporations benefit from the country’s massive prison population. [. . .] Much of ALEC’s proposed labor legislation, implemented state by state is allowing replacement of public workers with prisoners. Parking Meters? Parking meters don’t sound like a big issue, but look what happened to Chicago. In a 2008 deal with Morgan Stanley, Chicago privatized its parking meters. In return for $1.15 billion Chicago gave up $11.6 billion of future revenue. Worse, the city gave up public control of its roads: If any road with parking meters is closed by the city for repairs, street fairs, parades, etc., the city has to come up with cash to cover loss of revenue. The lease eventually ended up under the control of Abu-Dhabi. Matt Tiabbi wrote in Rolling Stone about the effects of this deal, To start with something simple, it changed some basic traditions of local Chicago politics. Aldermen who used to have the power to close streets for fairs and festivals or change meter schedules now cannot — or if they do, they have to compensate Chicago Parking Meters LLC for its loss of revenue. So, for example, when the new ownership told Alderman Scott Waguespack that it wanted to change the meter schedule from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. Monday through Saturday to 8 a.m. to 9 p.m. seven days a week, the alderman balked and said he'd rather keep the old schedule, at least for 270 of his meters. Chicago Parking Meters then informed him that if he wanted to do that, he would have to pay the company $608,000 over three years. … Written into the original deal were drastic price increases. In Hairston's and Colon's neighborhoods, meter rates went from 25¢ an hour to $1.00 an hour the first year, and to $1.20 an hour the year after that. … "There are so many problems — I've had so many problems with them," says Hairston. "It tells you you've got eight minutes left, you get back in seven, and it charges you for the extra hour. Or you don't get a receipt. It's crazy." But to me, the absolute best detail in this whole deal is the end of holidays. No more free parking on Sunday. No more free parking on Christmas or Easter. Wisconsin Since the election of Governor Scott Walker, Wisconsin is a statewide privatization nightmare. In Privatization At The Heart Of Divisive Battles In Wisconsin, Huffington Post’s Amanda Terkel reports on the state’s privatization battles and the Governor’s efforts to privatize many public functions: During his tenure as county executive, Walker proposed privatizing park maintenance, the county zoo, psychiatric staff and other sectors. Most of the time, his ideas never went anywhere, but in March 2010, he was finally able to privatize courthouse security guards. The plan ended up backfiring and costing the county extra money whena judge ordered to reinstate the guards and give them back pay, meaning the government had to pay both the public workers and private guards for a period of time. … The project that he embarked on as a freshman governor in 2011 is little more than an extension of the philosophy he displayed as county executive: Walker is trying to undo the social contract and replace it with a private one. … A state audit released this month found Wisconsin's privatization occurred with insufficient oversight from the legislative branch and may have violated federal rules. State officials paid two contractors $27.6 million over two years to handle enrollment in food assistance and health care programs for low-income individuals. "[The state Department of Health Services] appears to have established and rapidly expanded the Enrollment Services Center with little organized planning, limited legislative oversight, and no formal efforts to determine the appropriate mix of contract and state staff," read the report's conclusion. [… one] measure, which recently passed the Republican-controlled Joint Finance Committee on a party-line vote, would require local governments to contract with private road builders for projects costing $100,000 or more in certain situations, rather than using their own public employees. "The only ones who seem to benefit are the road builders," said state Senate President Mike Ellis (R-Neenah) in a statement. [. . .] Tucked away in the state's budget repair bill was a provision that would allow the state to sell or contract out any state-owned energy asset in no-bid deals with private corporations. "The department may sell any state−owned heating, cooling, and power plant or may contract with a private entity for the operation of any such plant, with or without solicitation of bids, for any amount that the department determines to be in the best interest of the state," read the legislation. Questions were immediately raised about whether the arrangement would end up disproportionately benefiting GOP campaign donors, such as the Koch brothers -- speculation that Walker quickly denied. Louisiana Privatizing Public-Employee Health Plans Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal is trying to privatize state employees’ health insurance. Supposedly this will save the state money. But In the article, LEAKED: Secret Report On Jindal’s Privatization Plan, TPMuckraker reports on a secret report describing what will really occur. A confidential report at the center of the debate over Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal’s push to privatize state employees’ health insurance has been leaked. The so-called “Chaffe report,” published Tuesday by the Baton Rouge Advocate, seeks to “establish the fair market value of the operations” of the state’s Office of Group Benefits (OGB), which provides health care insurance for around 250,000 state workers, retirees and their dependents. The Advocate reported that the Chaffe report “concluded that premiums would increase under privatization.” According to a story at Colorlines, Bobby Jindal’s Plan to Privatize Health Insurance for 250,000 Workers, Jindal’s privatization plan is very good for Goldman Sachs but not Louisiana, Jindal’s plans to privatize the OGB would affect about 250,000 state public employees, retirees, and their dependents. His administration says hiring an outside contractor to run the program would save taxpayers money by eliminating about 150 jobs and generating a recurring savings of over $10 million, in addition to $150 million in up front cash. However, opponents say the OGB does not need fixing, especially since it already has a surplus of a half billion dollars, and that long-term, it would cost more taxpayers money in the form of reduced benefits and increased premiums. Critics, including Louisiana democrats, also accuse Jindal of attempting to raid the $500 million surplus money, to help plug the state’s $1.6 billion budget hole. “Bobby Jindal’s plan to sell the Office of Group Benefits could jeopardize the quality of health care received by more than 250,000 active and retired Louisiana workers and their dependents… OGB does not cost taxpayers a dime to run and selling it will not save the state of Louisiana any money.” Louisiana Democratic Party Chairman Claude “Buddy” Leach, Jr. said in a statement. “The only folks likely to benefit from the sale of OGB are the big Wall Street corporations like Goldman Sachs who want to turn it into a profit making venture and Bobby Jindal, who would love to get his hands on the office’s half billion dollar reserve fund.” Indeed, an employee of the state’s Office of Risk Management reported that Goldman Sachs helped write the OGB’s Request for Proposals, and offered the only bid for the advisory role. The employee also said that the surplus would be reportedly split between the state and the purchaser. A new state bill also seems to override Louisiana law that would prohibit the OGB’s surplus from being used by another department in the administration. Traffic-law enforcement (including red-light cameras – decisions are made on profit motive, not good judgment) Many cities are installing privatized speed and traffic cameras. But while public law enforcement is interested in justice and fairness, private systems are only interested in profit. So judgment and compassion are thrown out the window. For example, some municipalities have contracts requiring them to approve a certain percentage of all tickets, regardless of whether there is a violation that a judge would. The result is that the public, not understanding or caring that the enforcement has been privatized, comes to see local government as little more than one more scammer after their money and loses trust and faith in government in general. Profit incentives also threaten public safety, when companies set yellow-light duration times too low. Some localities even allow these companies to write low yellow-light duration into the contracts, trading public safety for private profit! In the report, Caution: Red Light Cameras Ahead: The Risks of Privatizing Traffic Law Enforcement and How to Protect the Public, US PIRG found that, Privatized traffic law enforcement systems are spreading rapidly across the United States. As many as 700 local jurisdictions have entered into deals with for-profit companies to install camera systems at intersections and along roadways to encourage drivers to obey traffic signals and follow speed limits. Local contracting for automated traffic enforcement systems may sometimes be a useful tool for keeping drivers and pedestrians safe. But when private firms and municipalities consider revenues first, and safety second, the public interest is threatened. [. . .] Contracts between private camera vendors and cities can include payment incentives that put profit above traffic safety. [. . .] some contracts, including those in the California cities of Bell Gardens, Citrus Heights, Corona and Hawthorne, potentially impose financial penalties on the city if traffic engineers extend the length of the yellow light at intersections with red-light cameras, which would reduce the number of tickets the systems can issue. Many Other Nightmares There are many other nightmares, as state and local governments, defunded by right-wing anti-government tax-cut schemes turn to privatization, sell off public assets and firing public employees to try to stay afloat. Areas being privatized include highways, airports, water systems, trash collection, bridges, parking garages, nursing homes, traffic schools, and, of course, schools. The Biggest Nightmare: Privatization Just Shifts Costs To Other Parts Of Government Or To The Economy Does government really “save” if one government agency saves some money by contracting out, but other government agencies have to pick up the same costs. For example, if the contracting results in pay cuts for working people, then another part of the government might then spend more on poverty, nutrition or health programs for the people who now make so little. So does privatization really cut costs, or does it just shift them? And if it does just shift them (it does) see if you can guess who privatization shifts these costs to? But even worse than this shifting of costs to other parts of the government is the bigger picture of what this does to our economy. The result of this “cost-cutting” is that people in the economy that were making $25/hour now only make perhaps $10/hour and most likely no longer get benefits. Same larger economy, $15 an hour less. After a while this adds up, and everyone has less, except for a few at the top. Kind of like … now. The Equation Of Privatization The equation of privatization works like this: tax cuts leave governments desperate to raise cash, so they sell off public assets (the things We, the People own together) or cut jobs. Then they rent them back or the public pays for their use. Defunded, Chicago has to sell its parking meters to raise cash; Arizona state capital, same thing. Privatization is the 1% taking public wealth so they can make money off of it for themselves. Instead of democracy collecting taxes from the 1% privatization leaves everyone poorer and paying rent to the 1%. Private Not Public Interest There is a fundamental conflict of interest between public and private. When things are privatized of course profit comes first, not public interest. Public functions are supposed to serve the public, us, We, the People. The ‘private’ in ‘privatization’ means that it is done for the private gain of a few. When a public function is privatized it means that instead of operating for the benefit of We, the People – the 99% – it is operated for the benefit of a few – the 1%. © 2011 Independent Media Institute. All rights reserved. View this story online at: http://www.alternet.org/story/153093/

[w2]

Bipartisan Economic Plan

The Democrats walk along the street handing out blankets to the homeless; the Republicans follow the Democrats down the street taking the blankets back.

To paraphase a Bible verse, don't let the right hand know what the left hand is doing.  Because if you do, the right hand will undo whatever the left hand did.

Gramma Windy

American Exceptionalism indeed...

Is my outrage misplaced?   Although I would have to say that outrage must be good for the heart, because this 80-year-old heart is still going strong, maintaining a low heartbeat and low blood pressure—‘course, no one is around to check either when I am reacting to news on TV or radio…

Is it not our Constitution that makes our country exceptional?  And don’t we love to recite the First Amendment, including the priceless phrase “…the right of the people peaceably to assemble…”

Mayor Bloomberg has just said that the first amendment “protects speech but it does not protect tents.”  Oh, WOW, just consider, the Supreme Court has ruled that money is speech, yet Bloomberg proclaims that tents are not speech.

If you want to watch the police state in action, as NYPD destroys Zuccoti Park village, you will have to watch Democracy Now, at freespeechtv or linktv, or access it on the internet at www.democracynow.org   as I believe they were the only journalists at the scene when the park was raided this morning.  If you are not moved, then I would have to say, as Rick Perry did in another context, “you have no heart.”   One of the most moving moments was perhaps when Amy Goodman leaned over and picked up out of the debris a battered paperback book, “Brave New World Revisited.”

 How is it that we applaud the Arab Spring, as it occurs in foreign countries, and condemn the governments that suppress those protests, and yet around our country storm troopers and riot police are invading encampments, beating and harassing and arresting protesters, evicting them and destroying their belongings?

 Shouldn’t the First Amendment trump park rules?  How is it that simply making rules about curfews and tents can stop the people’s right to freedom of speech and to peaceably assemble?  Who put limits on when or where these protests could take place?  Oh, right, remember the “Free Speech Zones” at national political conventions?

 A few days ago someone, probably on Fox News, opined that every parent watching these scenes of occupiers is fearful of spotting the face of a child in the crowd.  Well, don’t count me in that bunch.  I find myself, with hope, scanning the faces I see at those protests for any sign of a grandchild of mine, and do know this, I would stand with that grandchild, in spirit at least.

 Is Hope, in fact, still shut up in Pandora’s Box?

 Gramma Windy 

Will Rogers' on the Great Depression

Notes made on 10/15/11:  Many of you younger ones will possibly never heard of this man, but here is an introduction.

I just watched a PBS documentary on Will Rogers.  And WOW, is he timely.  Of particular interest to the occupy Wall Street movement would be a radio broadcast in October 1931, in which h he dispensed with jokes and discussed seriously the problems that were going on.  He was directly preceding a talk from President Hoover in which the latter was going to tout some of his policy.  This broadcast is known >>as the “Bacon, Beans, and Limousines” speech.  [You can watch/listen to this at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kyfvamwM4Yo  very moving.  There is not a word he says that is not applicable to today.] He began by pointing out that 17 million people were out of work.  He said that people shouldn’t be worrying about prohibition when the neighbor’s children did not have food to eat.  He pointed out that a few years ago people worried about whether the poor could get a drink, now “we fixed it so they cannot even get anything to eat.”  Speaking of jobless and hungry, he says that the unemployed and hungriest of men have contributed in some way to the wealth of every millionaire in America.  He says there is as much money as there ever was, it’s just in fewer hands.
Other sayings: 

·         Every time Congress makes a joke it’s a law and every time they make a law it’s a joke.

·         He referred to a president who “didn’t do nothin’ but that’s what we wanted done.”

·         Broadcasting over NBC, when he was announcing the station, “NBC—No Body Cares…Whatever you say tonight you can come back tomorrow night and deny it in case anybody remembers.”

·         When he nominated Henry Ford for president he mentioned that some people said he didn’t know enough history, but “What we need is a man who can make history, not one who can recite it.”  [Hmmm, maybe some of these Republican candidates could use that line.]

·         It takes nerve to be a Democrat, but it takes money to be a Republican.

·         If there’s anything that we do worse than any other nation, it’s to try to manage someone else’s affairs.

On Sleeplessness and Deep Breathing

Having endured many nights of sleeplessness and restlessness, sometime ago I decided to try deep breathing, though I had never heard it suggested as a remedy.   Several times over a period of weeks I tried the deep breathing exercise, but I could never remember later whether or not it worked.  I could not remember, though, lying there still wakeful and thinking that it hadn’t worked.  Although I couldn’t vouch for it, and never recommended it to anyone, still I would occasionally try again.
A couple of nights ago, still wakeful at 3:30 a.m., I decided to try again.  I began to take deep breaths, then I was dreaming that I was explaining to someone how the exercise worked, and was saying, “They say that even Republicans have tried it.”  I awoke to my terrier, Tessa, whistling in my ear that she wanted to go out.

So I am still not sure if it works.  Has anyone tried it? 

But I am sure that it is a bipartisan exercise.

Republicans Standing Tall

Notes made early in October:

Sometimes Republicans stand tall:

Rick Perry when he provides in-state college tuition for children who are illegal immigrants because brought here by their parents, and then speaks in eloquent defense of the need for this action.

Jon Hunstman when he supports science, as in evolution and climate change.

Ron Paul when he rails against the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Mitt Romney when he provided universal health care for Massachusetts residents.  [At the time he supported it as a model for a national program, but now says not, and says he would repeal Obamacare.]

Herman Cain when he was asked about abortion on Meet the Press:  It’s not the role of government to get in the way of anybody’s decision, it ultimately comes down to the decision of the family and the woman, “it is not up to me as president, nor some politician, nor a bureaucrat.”  [But now he says he is prolife at conception, would not allow any bureaucrats to get in the way of the life of the unborn, and that if they give him a bill to defund planned parenthood, he will sign it.  He would also sign a constitutional amendment banning abortion (Note: presidents don’t sign amendments.)

Rick Santorum ???

Michele Bachman ???

Newt Gingrich ???

Chris Christie when he appoints a Muslim to the court system and then defends his appointment and the man’s qualifications.   Then he stands even taller than he is wide.  As well, he supports immigrants, science of climate change, gun control, hmmm, something else.  Which may be enough to take him out of the running for Republican candidate for governor.

Make it a Special Day!

 I just learned that there is a move to persuade people to shop only small businesses on Saturday, November 26, the day after ‘Black Friday.’  Patronize your local small business shops that day, you might be surprised at the exciting holiday gifts you can pick up.   Oh, and take a break for lunch at a local Mom and Pop restaurant.

First Frost and First Snow

Saturday October 29

Who’d’ve thought?  First Frost and First Snow within a week.

On Sunday, the 23^rd, with the temperature at 36.5^o at 7:30 a.m. I wasn’t imagining any frost here.   As I started my early morning dash to Sheetz in Romney to pick up the Sunday papers, I turned on the wipers to clear the dew from the windshield, but the wipers skimmed the dew, because it was, in fact, frozen.  There was no other frost at my place, but as I drove down Jersey Mountain Road, I saw low-lying fields white with the frost, and later Hazel, who lives just down the road from me, said that they had had frost.  As their property lies lower than mine, they always get frost earlier in the fall, and later in the spring, than I do. 

It wasn’t until Friday, yesterday, that there was real frost here on my place, but I had to walk down to the lower lawn to check for sure, as it still was not as whited as the fields along Jersey Mountain Road on Sunday.  But the talk now was of snow.   On Thursday night, when I met with some friends for supper, talk was of possible rain or snow on Saturday, with temps not above 41^o, so we agreed to cancel our planned Adopt-a-Highway litter pickup.   Yesterday (Friday) when I lunched with my sister, Lois, in Martinsburg, she said that in Hagerstown  5 to 8 inches of snow was forecast.    I could hardly believe that, but when I stopped by for shopping at Lowe’s, Sheetz, and Target, the talk among customers and staff was all about expected snow.    When I arrived home a little before 5, I noticed the Weather Alert red light was on, so I listened, and they were indeed predicting rain mixed with snow, changing to snow mixed with rain, or something like that, beginning in the evening and continuing through the day on Saturday, possibly accumulating 4 or 5 inches.

And so it began, from rain throughout the evening, snowflakes appeared in the mix along about 9 p.m., and by bedtime it was pretty much snow, heavy, wet stuff, just beginning to cover the ground.  Now, at 1 p.m. on Saturday, we have probably a good three inches.  Beginning about 7 a.m., power began flickering off at intervals, making it impossible to watch my Saturday morning show, Up With Chris, or even to adequately dvr it.   Flickers began to increase in frequency, and now, as of about ten minutes ago, the lights went off, apparently quite seriously this time.  So I am constrained to finish this little epistle before the battery goes out on my laptop.

Can’t help thinking about those intrepid souls at Occupy WallStreet, in NY, Boston, and elsewhere, this is not going to make their vigil easy.  I know that a couple of days ago when snow fell in Denver on their occupy site, two of the protesters were taken to the hospital suffering from hypothermia.  A day or so ago in Zuccoti park an infiltrator, a right-winger associated with the likes of James O’Keefe and Breitbart, was passing out free bongs and wrappers to protesters and asking to take their photos as they smoked.  Someone got suspicious and asked was he going to turn those photos over to Fox?  He pretended innocence and asked why couldn’t he just pass out free stuff?  A distrustful  protester standing behind him had been chanting “f…f…f…” at him, and then asked, “Why don’t you give out something useful, like thermal underwear?  It’s going to get cold here.”  I thought  about him last night.

Monday

We probably had a good 4 to 5 inches of the white stuff, power was off about 8 hours, and again about an hour Sunday morning.  Today I hear that in the Northeast where snow was up to 3 feet and with strong winds, there are about 4 million people without power, and it may be days before some of them get it back.  Imagine, snow days on Hallowe’en. 

I was not at all looking forward to this snow.  While I am known to love the snow, I am more used to having time to look forward to it, after long, cold, frosty, gray, dull winter days, with ice beginning to form on the pond, snow has somehow seemed like a comfort to me, indeed, I have likened it to a downy comforter settling down warm, cozy, and silent around me.  I suppose that in light of the weather service predicting December and January to be colder by 2 or 3 degrees than normal, and with more precipitation, meaning snow, I was looking forward to winter with some trepidation.  So this early snow did not fill me with delight.

Weather is expected to become milder through the week, and I can cut some more turnip greens and kale, cut those last little cabbages that formed on cut cabbage stalks, and bring in the Brussels sprouts, which are beautiful this year, five plants of them.   Consider covering winter garden.  Gather more kindling and carry more firewood.  Get out the flannel sheets and long johns, and where did I leave those foot thingies with the cleats for walking on ice?

At 7:15 there was a scene on tv of sunrise behind the capitol, but here it is not up yet. 

9-9-9 plan and beyond

I began this post early in October, but because my internet was down for the month and beyond, have only just now been able to post it.

Herman Cain's 9-9-9 plan

Early October

Ah, simplicity itself.  9-9-9. How could anything be better?  Easy to understand too.  Fewer pages to read.  9-9-9.  As long as you don’t read it upside down, as Michele Bachmann suggested.

No wonder Herman Cain has surged ahead in the polls.  He has a message, a plan, that everyone can understand.  Or at least, they think they can understand it; I wonder how many have actually read it and can tell you what the 9-9-9 stands for, or what the economists have to say about how it would work. 9% corporate income tax.  9% personal income tax.  9% national sales tax.  No payroll taxes, no medicare taxes.  No deductions or tax credits.  No capital gains tax.  Ah, yes, simple indeed.

Here’s how it would work, according to Center for American Progress.  Poor America would see their taxes increase by 900%.  That’s great.  It would help to make up for all those years that 43% of Americans paid no federal income taxes at all.  There would be a substantial increase on the middle class.   Two examples:  A family with an income of $50,000 who presently pays $3,515 in taxes would see their taxes double to $7,500, a 100% increase.   A family with an income of $120,000 presently paying $31,600 would see an increase of $800, to $32,400.  The richest 1% of the population would see their taxes fall from 28% to 11%.  Well, what could be more fair?  They have been carrying such a heavy burden of taxes all this time.    Social Security and Medicare would be abolished.  People in need would get help from their state and local systems, and from churches, charities, and neighbors. 

This is deemed by critics the greatest shift of taxes from wealthy to poor ever.  It would explode the deficit to the highest it’s been since WWII, and it would bankrupt the country.  So they say.

Now admittedly I have not done in-depth research on this, since my internet was down for the month of October, but I understand you can go to Herman Cain’s website and read it for yourself, and then to the above cited source, or any other you can access, and see what the results would be.   I understand that Rich Lowrie, not an economist but a bank manager and associate of Koch Brothers’ Americans for Prosperity, developed his plan.

Now we have just learned that the 9-9-9 plan appeared originally as the default plan in SimCity 4 video game.  But Cain says that whoever says that is lying.

Update Monday Oct 17

Sometime ago someone suggested that Herman Cain was being bankrolled by some entity that specifically wanted to keep him in the game to give the Republicans cred as being inclusive.  But that seemed like a wild guess.  Now it seems that a half-dozen or more current and former members of Cain’s staff were formerly associated with Koch Brothers Americans for Prosperity.

Update Sunday Oct 23

Now Herman Cain has modified his 9-9-9 plan to a 9-0-9 plan for people below the poverty line.  They would pay no taxes.  And he is also considering an opportunity zone, where in order to improve job opportunities the minimum wage would be abolished.  Opportunity, indeed.  For whom?

NOTE:  The top 1% owns 40% of the wealth, gets 24% of the income, owns 50% of stocks.   The top 10% owns 90% of stocks, 75% of the wealth.  The top 400 families own as much wealth as the bottom 150 million people.

Who would benefit?  Last year Herman Cain had earned income of $800,000, on which he would have paid 9% income tax, which would have left him with just $692,000.  Although there is also that income from sale of stocks, etc., which brought him another $800,000, which, under his plan, would not have been taxed.  Oh, and of course, he would have had to pay sales taxes on merchandise purchased.

Monday October 31

Now Rick Perry has come out with his 20-20-0 plan.  Flat tax of 20% on everyone, 20% corporate tax, no sales tax.  No taxes on capital gains, dividends, investment.  When asked about the exorbitant benefit this would be to the rich, he says:  “I don’t care about that.  Just so they have more money to invest.”  Yeah, right.  His plan was devised by he of the flannel shirts, remember Steve Forbes?  Ran in ’96 on this plan.    Didn’t get him very far.

Now we hear that Mitt Romney will be presenting his own “flatter” tax scheme.  And, if I recall, Rick Santorum has his own 0-0-0 plan.  

I'm ba-a-ack

If you have been checking this site at all for updates, you have probably given up on me because of the lack of posts.  My internet was down for the month of October and beyond, but now it is back, and I have prepared several items that I will be posting over the next few days.   I hope there is something for your tastes.