Tag Archives: economic voting

June 16, 2013

Apathetic After Shock

By Just Torch

There has been a lot of talk recently, of course, about Edward Snowden and traitors.  There has been a great deal of public gnashing of teeth and wailing by our elected leaders over his release of the snazzy Micro$oft PowerPoint slideshow that was not meant for public consumption.  There was a really well done piece explaining how, under the definitions given in the US Constitution, Snowden has not committed treason.  Not going to talk about that today.  Not directly.

Instead, what I find bothersome is just how much acceptance there is about this from the vast majority of people.  I really shouldn’t be surprised, and I suppose I’m not really.  Still, I am disappointed.  When it broke, I had hoped that perhaps this would be sufficient to bring about a ground swell of anger and activity.  There was certainly an initial outburst of shock.  And, yet, very quickly since then …

There has been some small amount of noise at the fringes.  Reddit has been one place where a little activity has taken place.  The Daily Kos, EFF, and a lot of other organizations have quietly come out in opposition.  Note the key word being quietly.  These organizations sent out emails to their members.  I know.  I got some of them.  I certainly didn’t get all of them.  I’m not on all of their mailing lists.  There was some activity on the right.  Again, I know.  I saw some of it.  I heard about other, and I went looking to see if there was any in other places.  At the fringes, yes.  In the heart, in the mainstream?  No.  Not really.

stopwatching.us was set up to collect signatures.  I want to share with you a screen shot taken from that site on the morning of June 16, 2013.  It is a compilation that shows their “Selected Signatories.”  I’ve compiled the 4 categories that they have on four separate tabs – Organizations, Individuals, Businesses, and Members of US Congress – together for you to take in all at once.

Combined Selected Signatories

As of this morning, they have collected 178,350 signatures.  Please read that again.  That’s a sad number.

No one cares.  The majority of the country is so used to the intrusions of the PATRIOT Act, warrantless searches, surrendering our civil liberties in the name of security, and the concept that “If you have nothing to hide, then you have nothing to fear,”  that this kind of “revelation” is blasé.  No worries, mate.

According to one poll (as reliable as that may be), 54% of Americans think that Snowden did the right thing in exposing PRISM, but 53% still think he should be prosecuted.  A vast majority of people say they’re following the story closely.  My theory as to why?  Because to most people this is just the next episode in the Bourne Chronicles.  Most people are likely watching to see which scenario happens next.  Will he be subjected to “extraordinary rendition”?  Will he be found dead “by his own hand”?  Will he be mundanely arrested and extradited back to the US?  Will he become an “asset” of the Chinese or some other foreign government that would like access to the information he may still have not released yet?

They are not paying attention because they are interested in or concerned about the actual issues.  I see in both left of center and right of center blogs, as well as the main stream media the over-whelming theme of “Who cares?” about the program itself.  I actually read the words, “I am not sure I care if the government is reading my email or listening in on my phone calls as long as it keeps me safe.”  The majority of the coverage of this case is about who is Edward Snowden?  (My Google search for the term, “Who is edward snowden” returned 1,180,000,000 results)  What is Booz Allen Hamilton?  (A firm most of us had never heard of before.)  Should we be privatizing “national security”?  (A question that probably should have been asked 40 years ago, but which was answered as an inevitable part of the supply-side, conservative domination of the government over that time period.  What did y’all really expect?)  And, so on.  Very little about the intrusiveness of this program which in all likelihood has accomplished nothing in terms of actual security, despite claims to the contrary.
CONTINUED on PAGE 2

Leave a comment   |  tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | posted in Economy, FISA, Freedom, Internet, News, Personal Responsibility, Politics, Solutions, Voting, Wages, Why

June 2, 2013

Just the Bare Minimum?

By Just Torch

I am not picking on Nicholas Ruiz.  He is a good man, and I hope that he does succeed in his efforts to unseat John Mica in 2014.  However, it was Nick’s recent post, and the ensuing conversation we had, which has actually formed the spark and starting point for today’s epistle.  In particular, these words:

My politics are progressive. I aim to raise the minimum wage.

First, I am not opposed to raising the minimum wage.  I agree that it needs to be raised.  Let me be clear about that.  No one can live on the minimum wage at its current level and as it currently exists.  I have a conservative friend who argues that the minimum wage was never intended as a livable wage.  It is his contention that the minimum wage was intended only for kids that were getting their first jobs, interns learning a craft, and the like.  That is, quite simply horse puckey and shows either that he is completely ignorant of history, which would be very typical of most people, or that he has been brainwashed by the right, which would also be very typical.

A very brief history lesson on the minimum wage, and if you are interested in more, then I will trust that you know how to use either the library or the internet.  The minimum wage was first enacted in Australia.  It traveled from there to the UK, and did not finally make its way to the US nationally until 1938.  In 1907, a legal decision was rendered in Australia that clarified the intent of the minimum wage.  This was known as the Harvester case, and it made it clear that the minimum wage “means that the wages shall be sufficient to provide these things, and clothing and a condition of frugal comfort estimated by current human standards.”  In America, it was specifically summarized as being intended to achieve the “elimination of labor conditions detrimental to the maintenance of the minimum standards of living necessary for health, efficiency and well being of workers.”

A wholly different concept has been at various times discussed and even implemented, and that is a training wage.  Perhaps it is this which my friend has confused for the minimum wage.  That’s possible.  (Conservatives are often easily confused.)  A training wage is still often used at a new position.  An employer will pay a new employee a lower amount during training, and at the completion of that training period, a raise will go into effect.  Again, though, that is an entirely different animal and should not be confused with a minimum wage, which is intended to provide at least sufficient wage to live upon.  According to research done recently, one can not live on the minimum wages we are paying.

According to the National Low Income Housing Coalition, in West Virginia, a worker earning minimum wage has to work 63 hours a week to afford a two-bedroom unit at fair market rent.  That is the fewest hours in the country, and the highest is in Hawaii at 175 hours per week.  Ponder that for a moment.  At minimum wage in Hawaii, you have to work more hours in a week than there are just to afford rent on a standard two bedroom unit.

From their 2013 report, another way to look at it, in order to afford a two-bedroom rental unit at fair market value without paying more than 30% of one’s income, one would have to earn $19.14 an hour.  The lowest in the 2013 report, is in West Virginia at $12.35.  (Not counting Puerto Rico at $10.41)  The highest is still Hawaii at $32.14 an hour.  These are not wages to live extravagant lifestyles.  These are just to be able to afford a two-bedroom home.  Family friendly.

We are a long way from providing a minimum wage that would allow for even living in “frugal comfort.”

So then, what do we do?  Certainly, the minimum wage should rise.  The cost of living has gone up.  Inflation affects everything, and the minimum wage is no exception.  However, all wages, except at the top have been stagnant.  And, there is a question that has been bugging me about this.  One that I will tell you right up front that I do not have an answer to.  If we raise the minimum wage to where it really should be, say somewhere in the neighborhood of $14 to $18, then what happens to the rest of our wages?  Those would necessarily need to be raised as well, yes?  If not, then is the effect not to have brought everyone’s wages down?  Rather than the “rising tide that lifts all boats”, have we not, instead, sunk all but the biggest ships?  And, that is what the right has been doing to us for years.

CONTINUED on PAGE 2

2 Comments   |  tags: , , , , , , , , , , | posted in Economy, Finance, Politics, Solutions, Wages

May 12, 2013

Google Viewing Peer-To-Peer

By Just Torch

On March 11, 2012, I posted about peer-to-peer financing.  I wrote at the time that I felt this was a way for the people to use the system against itself.  It is not a perfect answer, but it was one tool that can be used.  I still believe this to be the case.  However, I heard something that is only slightly disturbing this week.  It is also reaffirming.

Google is getting involved.  Google directly, mind you.  Not their investing arm, Google Ventures.  Google is investing $125 million dollars and taking a seat on the board at Lending Club.  This indicates a number of things.

From a practical standpoint, neither Google nor Lending Club are speaking out directly about what their plans are specifically.  Speculation is that Google wants to implement their technology and bring Lending Club into the Google Wallet fold.  There is also, of course, their cut.  It’s just a good investment, when they’re going to get a slice of the loan fees generated; $350 million in loans in the last quarter.

It also, indicates that people are catching on more and more to this method of lending.  People are looking beyond banks more every day, and seeing other methods and ways to move beyond them.  Consider:

Chanda Lugere works for a bank, but when she wanted a loan to consolidate her credit card debt, which carried a high interest rate, the bank didn’t have much to offer. She tried other banks, but even with her excellent credit score she got nowhere.

So Lugere, who’s in her 30s, went online seeking alternatives.

People living in a 20th and 21st century capitalist society often find themselves in need of credit.  That is, sadly, a reality.  It was not always so, and it does not always have to be so, but it is the case now.  Do we have to go through the wringer to get it?  Do we have to sell our soul to the company store?  Not necessarily.  Peer-to-peer lending offers a way forward for people to get financing to reduce the interest they’re paying, while still returning a profit to those lending.  As I wrote in my previous piece on this topic, this not only has a solid financial basis, but a much higher social value.  For the borrower though, this saves them significantly and thus allows them to get out of debt much more quickly!  Chanda Lugere, mentioned above, got her loan at 6% which, while still high, is half of what she was paying.

Another issue that Google’s investment indicates though is that bigger businesses are catching on, and this part worries me.  If big business gets into the game, they will find ways to pervert it.  They will find ways to wrest control of the system even further away from the people.  Make no mistake about it, business was already involved.  As I pointed out in my previous piece, both of the big P2P lending facilitators, Lending Club and Prosper, were associated with WebBank.  This, as Robin Chase, founder of Zipcar put it, is not a true peer-to-peer system, but rather a “peer incorporated” system.  The smaller the corporation stays in relation to the overall system though, the more the peers are able to stay in control and to benefit from the system, rather than to become simply grease for the gears.
CONTINUED on PAGE 2

Leave a comment   |  tags: , , , , | posted in Economy, Finance, Solutions, Tax policy

March 10, 2013

Occupy Every Day

By Just Torch

Every once in a while it is important to revisit older topics, that we’ve discussed before.  Today, I would like to come back to a couple of those, because they remain important and relevant.

If we are going to maintain pressure and relevance, then we have to continue to remember to act, right?  One of the major knocks against the Occupy movement, for example, is that it lost focus.  Certainly the occupation of major parks, and the various actions that were taken beginning in September of 2011 were breathtaking and stoked the imagination.  They fired me up.  They captured the hopes of many who were struggling to find “hope and change” in an America that had yet again been lied to and misled.

And, then, they fell apart.  As with most inclusive movements, it fell prey to its own grand ideals.  Instead of staying focused on the financial purposes that it started with, it wanted to be leaderless and then it became amorphous and had so many tentacles and purposes that it lost its relevance.  Oh, to be sure, it still exists.  The movement that is.  I believe that there are still a few active occupations.  Somewhere… Maybe.  Even I have lost track, and interest.  They lost me when they got off track.  And, yes, I admit that I boisterously proclaimed that it was the last great hope for America.  I even went so far in my fervor at the time as to say that if it failed, then I would start voting for the most evil right wing candidate I could find in order to simply hasten the fall of America.  “Bring on the burning,” I said.

I retract those words, and acknowledge my own foolishness in having said them.  I can only say that I was fired up and hopeful.  I was excited and trying to get others equally fired up and motivated.  I do still believe that it had great potential.  Had there been some strong hands to guide it and maintain focus at the core, then it could have accomplished great things.  I do think that it had impact, in changing the focus of the conversation ever so slightly.  It was not the impact though that it could have had, and the damn Tea Partiers are still holding too much sway.  Largely that is because there was too heavy an influence in the Occupy movement that simply felt that they could somehow change the system without actually being participants in the system.

There are only two ways to change a political system.  One can either participate in and change it from with in, or one can violently overthrow it.  That’s it.  There are no other alternatives to changing it.  If you play a pussy-foot, half-in-half-out game then what happens is that you wind up supporting (whole heartedly) the status quo.  That is what happened with the occupy movement.  Too many wanted to try to maintain the illusion that they were above and beyond the system, while still enjoying the benefits of that system.  They wanted the technological benefits (the iPods, the smart phones, the lap top computers, the internet, the wifi, etc), they wanted the Constitutional protections, the responsiveness of the elected representatives, and all that the system had to offer.  They screamed for and demanded their rights.  “Whose park?  Our Park!” and “This is what Democracy looks like” they screamed.  Hell, I screamed, for I took my boys and went down to the streets, too.  But, for all too many of them, they didn’t then want to exercise their responsibilities.  They didn’t want to vote, or participate in the jury pools.  They didn’t want to pay taxes or support that same government that they railed against.  They didn’t want to participate by electing the candidates that would support the views that they wanted supported.  They were only half-in.
CONTINUED on PAGE 2

Leave a comment   |  tags: , , , , , , , | posted in Boycott, Economy, Freedom, Personal Responsibility, Politics, Solutions

March 3, 2013

Sanctions Against Americans

By Just Torch

In 2004, I worked for a small company.  (At least by standard definitions.  It always seemed to me to be at least a midsized company, but then, I think those definitions are a bit whack.  Still, we’ll stick with the standards for now.)  When the time came for the annual raise process, one of the things that was said was that we should be happy because we were receiving “3 times the average raise.”  Our president and CEO went on to tell us that the average raise in the country at that time was 4%.  Now, at the time, I didn’t check, because it didn’t matter.  What mattered was that he was a liar.  I had not, in fact, received a 12% raise, and I called him out on it. The next day, I did get an adjustment and my pay raise was increased to that 12%.  It’s probably a good thing I didn’t research it, because the actual average increase was only 3.5%.)

Those kinds of things can happen in a small company and they could happen back then, too.  It was a bit before the economy nearly completely collapsed.  It appeared the economy was, in fact, booming along.

Times are different, eh?  This year, the average pay increase in America is expected to be 3%.  Even less if you are working in the public sector.  In the county where I live, those employees haven’t had a merit pay raise in 5 years.  Federal Employees, generally, continue to be on hold for raises, and many of them are facing the possibility of furloughs thanks to the game of SequestrationTM that the Republicans and Democrats you all elected are playing this month.

Do I need to remind you, yet again, that those employees are your family and friends?  We are not talking about welfare for some faceless person that you can demonize and look down on.  People that you can pretend meet your stereotype of the drug addicted, slut that doesn’t have any desire to work but rather just wants to drain you for all you’re worth, right?  We are talking about the people that are out there working for a living supporting the daily functions that you, yes you whether you like it or not, rely on for the smooth functioning of the government.  And, yes, I did say smooth functioning of the government.  I am not talking about all the BS in congress, and the bickering and backbiting of the presidency.  I’m talking about the DOT, the food and health inspectors.  I’m talking about the people who process the payments to the Medicare doctors, and the checks to the Social Security recipients.  Air traffic controllers.  So called security personnel.  The civilian employees of the Defense Department.  The Veterans Affairs department.

I am talking about 1 million or so people who are part of the backbone of the government.  Not the ugly face of politics that so many people think of when they want to criticize and withdraw from it.  I’m talking about the part that matters.  You remember that part right?

I digress from the point I actually wanted to focus on today, because this too is an important point, and one you need to remember as you allow this game to be played out in your name.  When there is pain that is felt, it won’t be at the top.  Like any sanctions, it isn’t the leadership that pays the price.  It is the rank and file.  The people at the bottom.  Maybe even in the middle.  Sanctions are a political tool designed to foment revolution from within.  Either by causing sufficient discontent among the masses that the leadership can’t contain it and relents on their own, or by causing sufficient discontent that the masses literally arise in revolt.  Allowing this sequester to proceed is a calculated move by both the Democratic leadership and the Republican leadership to put sanctions on the American people with the precise same intent.

And, lest there be any misunderstanding, that is the precise reason that I am somewhat in favor of them myself.  I hope that this is a case of both parties having taken very careful aim before shooting themselves in the foot.  I hope that they have very carefully calculated this out correctly and will cause just enough damage to the people and the economy that it will finally cause sufficient discontent among the American masses to lead to an end of the far right domination of the politics in America.

I think I’ll hold my intended topic for next week.  It’ll keep.

Leave a comment   |  tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | posted in Economy, Finance, News, Personal Responsibility, Politics, Solutions, War of Definitions

November 25, 2012

Pro-Health Care Action: Take A Stand!

By Just Torch

The power of the boycott remains one of, if not, the most effective tools in the market place.  Particularly when combined with a vocal campaign to let the target know that is what is going on. In fact, it is almost pointless if the target is unaware of the action, as they may get the wrong message, and make the wrong changes.  If one simply avoids shopping somewhere and a store believes that their business is suffering because they’re offering the wrong products rather than because of the policies they have put into place, then they will make the wrong changes.

It is this economic vote which is both the strongest weapon in the consumer’s arsenal and the most difficult to wield.  It requires both perseverance and a willingness to sacrifice.  Perhaps it is only a small sacrifice of a selfish desire, but in this modern world of immediate gratification, that is a difficult thing for many to do.  It is also a group effort which is generally self-enforced.  Who really knows that you haven’t shopped at that store you’re supposed to be boycotting, except for you?  And, yet…

There is a long history of boycotts, and their effectiveness is undeniable.  Business groups hate them, and over the last few years those on the right would have you believe that they are somehow immoral, wrong, or anti-American.  This is really quite ironic.  After all, what at its core is a boycott?  At its core, a boycott is a decision to choose not to shop at a particular business, period. It is a choice made based on ethical reasons, or perhaps on reasons of solidarity.  Regardless of the reason, from the standpoint of the free marketer, is it not precisely what the market is supposed to do?  The consumer is to make a choice based on whatever factors they see fit including price, location, quality, etc and purchase the products they prefer from the supplier that they choose.  Well, that is precisely what the consumer is doing.  They are including in that, what we might call the moral quality of the supplier.  In the case of a company that is being boycotted, the consumer has found that supplier to be wanting in quality.

So, I choose to boycott Chick-fil-A, as I wrote back in April, because they openly discriminate against homosexuals.  When the rest of the world caught wind of this in July, I wrote again about how franchisees benefit from corporate names, and thus have to take the penalties that come with corporate blunders and foul policies.  It was reported that Chick-fil-A had bowed to public pressure and stopped their contributions to anti-gay advocacy groups.  Dan Cathy, the CEO, however announced this was a false report.  Thus, the boycott must continue.

Now a whole other band of greedy big business-men and women have forced those of us with consciences into action.  Again, we have to expand our list of restaurants to avoid.  Honestly, many of these places for me are not too difficult.  However, a small handful,…. well, I’ll almost miss them.

“Naturally, the Left is outraged. How dare a company try to stay profitable!”

No, Twitchy.  What we are outraged by is that this is unnecessary for the company to stay profitable.  The amount that prices would have to be raised is ridiculously small, and most of us would be willing to pay it.  Most of us are not the greedy, self-centered, selfish persons that the right wants us to be.

Papa John’s Pizza founder and CEO, John Schnatter, has announced that he would begin reducing employees’ hours in order to avoid having to either provide health care benefits or pay the penalty associated with the Affordable Care Act becoming the law of the land.  The additional cost, which he would pass on to customers, amounts to approximately $0.15 to $0.20 per order.  In other words, for less than a quarter per order, the third largest pizza delivery and take out chain in America could provide health insurance to its employees.  However, rather than do so, the CEO would rather make an example of his employees, and punish them in order to make his political point.  I cannot imagine that there are very many people who would be ordering from Papa John’s restaurants who would even notice a $0.25 increase on their order, much less actually care about that increase.

As a result, Papa John’s can be sure that I will no longer be ordering from them.  This is only slightly a shame.  Their pizza isn’t that good, but it was a convenience every once in a while.

You know the beautiful irony of this?  Even Schnatter himself has already admitted that this is just greed on his part.
CONTINUED on PAGE 2

3 Comments   |  tags: , , , , , , , , | posted in Boycott, Economy, Finance, Freedom, Politics, Solutions, Voting

November 18, 2012

The Hostess With The Leastest

By Just Torch

OH!  MY!  GODS!

Yeah, so suddenly everyone cares, right?  Very few of y’all cared about Hostess, Wonder Bread, Dolly Madison, Blue Ribbon, Butternut Breads, or any of the 27 brands that were part of the Hostess Brands, Inc.  The company was in bankruptcy twice in the last 8 years.  The first time in 2004 and the second time right now, but starting January 10, 2012.  It came out of the first bankruptcy in 2009.  That means, they managed to stay out of bankruptcy for less than three years before going right back in.  Is that a successful company?  No.  And, who does the right blame for this?  The unions, of course.

It’s never management’s fault.  It’s simply astounding how this works from their perspective.  There is always someone to blame, right?  It wasn’t management’s fault that they couldn’t stay current on their $700 million loan.  It wasn’t the fact that their board members gave themselves up to 80% raises.  It wasn’t that the previous management had failed to properly plan to live up to their commitments, and the contracts they had signed, thus leaving themselves with roughly $2 billion in unfunded pension liabilities.  It wasn’t the changing conditions of the Multi-Employer Pension Plans, and overall failure of supply side economics.  It wasn’t competition.  It wasn’t a changing market.  It wasn’t that their sales were down.  (11% from 2008 to 2011, and 28% since 2004)

Nope, it’s all because 92% of a 6600 member union said, “No” to the last offer which included more pay cuts (8% immediately), fewer benefits (27-32% wage and benefit reduction overall), and the hope of maybe something more in the future.

“They’ve already took away our pension and not brought that back; and they’re not negotiating with us on anything we’d like to see negotiated,” Rocha said.

Oh, and that 6600 member union, the Bakery, Confectionery, Tobacco Workers and Grain Millers’ International Union?  Yeah, on its most recent bankruptcy filing, Hostess listed that union’s pension fund, the Bakery & Confectionery Union & Industry International Pension Fund, as its largest unsecured creditor at $944.2 million.

Please read that again.  Out of more than a billion dollars in liabilities, almost $1 billion of that is owed to the union that the right would have you believe is being unreasonable by refusing to accept further cuts and promises of future compensation.  In other words, the group to which Hostess already owes nearly $1,000,000,000 said, “No, we will not extend you any more credit.”

Let me pause for a moment.  I would like you to consider this situation in full.  Consider all of these facts.  Take a moment or three to read through the links provided and any more that you may stumble upon or go looking for.  After you have done that, ask yourself these questions.

Why? Why would the union members have any faith in the management’s ability to lead the company out of a second bankruptcy and into a better position?  Why should they be willing to trust that giving up the now for a promise of the future would be a smart move, when the company isn’t even making good on the previous commitments they’ve made?

Do you continue to trust someone who has betrayed you over and over again?  Is that not why you enter into a contract?  Would you continue to trust someone who has lied and stolen from you?  Better question, would you enter into another contract with someone who has repeatedly broken contracts with you and is massively in debt to you already?

Strictly from a business perspective, what is going to happen here?  Hostess has asked the judge presiding over their bankruptcy for permission to liquidate their assets.  As a result, assuming the judge grants the request which is highly likely, the brand names will be sold off, and most of them will reappear on store shelves.  Likely they will be purchased, lock, stock and barrel, by Grupo Bimbo (the world’s largest bakery group, owner of Entenmann’s) or Yucaipa Companies (an investment firm out of LA), both of which have previously tried to buy Hostess in 2007.  They may wind up splitting the spoils, much like Bain Capital or any other vulture capitalists.

So, then what?  Well, then, all those employees who have been out of work will likely go back to work.  At least the vast majority of them.  And, thanks to the union, they will have had some help getting through the lean times.  Thanks to a strong union, because that is one thing that a union is able to do.
CONTINUED on PAGE 2

Leave a comment   |  tags: , , , , , , | posted in Boycott, Finance, Jobs, Politics, Solutions, Unions

August 5, 2012

Money for nothing, and your speech is free

By Just Torch

This space is not about Chick-fil-A today.

Chick-fil-A is simply a convenient example.  In fact, the first time that this space mentioned Chick-fil-A, it wasn’t devoted to Chick-fil-A either.  It was listed among several others that should be avoided if one is a socially conscious, even politically moderate person in the USA; much less if one is an actual Liberal.

I have seen a number of people saying essentially, “Enough already!  I don’t want to hear any more!” regarding Chick-fil-A.  I think that’s excellent.  Really, I do.  It means that the point is getting across in this short attention-span theater society that we live in.  Even more than that though, it means that a larger number of people than I expected are carrying it on longer than hoped.  The difficulty with any socially conscious movement is that it takes time and commitment.  Whereas those who came out in response to Mike Huckabee’s call to support Dan Cathy’s position by a day of support at Chick-fil-A only needed to show up one day and spend their money, and then they can get on with their lives as normal.  Those who are committed to a boycott must sustain it for a much longer term.  In fact, they must essentially be willing to commit to it forever, if that’s what it takes, and with Chick-fil-A, that is very likely, exactly what it will take.

Free Speech? – No matter how many times those on the right try to redefine this issue as a free speech issue, it is not.  I personally, find it a detestable stance, however it is Dan Cathy’s right to hold whatever beliefs he has and to state those beliefs.  The issue is the actions that WinShape have supported using the funds from Chick-fil-A sales and our unwillingness to allow our dollars to support that.  Mike Huckabee in the article linked above continues to show that he is, in fact, either a liar, stupid, or believes that his audience is stupid.

Huckabee said when he’s doing business with any company, “I’m not buying their politics. I’m buying their product. “

If that were true, then we would never, for example, hear anyone suggest using sanctions against North Korea, Cuba, Venezuela, Iran, China, etc.  Of course, you are supporting a company’s politics when you buy their products.  To tell your audience that you are not is simply disingenuous or worse yet, showing that you are, in fact, lacking in intelligence yourself.  So, which is it, Mr. Huckabee?  Are you a liar that is counting on the ignorance of your audience or are you an idiot?

See, here is the real crux of the problem for those on the right, and one that they don’t want to face.  This is precisely what they claim they want to see happening in the market place.  This is the “free market” at work.  The people see a business, and they’re not happy with it.  The reason they are not happy with it is irrelevant, isn’t it?  That is what the free market is theoretically about.  So, the people choose not to shop there.  The free marketers should be cheering this movement as an example of the triumph of their beliefs!

Ah, but wait.  This is like the free elections that we say we want around the world, isn’t it?  We want free elections in Palestine, for example, but if the results are not to our liking, then we support embargoes and other actions, further impoverishing the people and exacerbating the conditions out of which so-called terrorists are created.  The right does not like the reason, so they throw a fit and cry, “FOWL!”

A few weeks ago, the same people who are now screaming about how Chick-fil-A is being picked on, were throwing a temper tantrum because of this image:

Oreo Pride Cookie

The response from some on the right was to call for a boycott.  There were many that were all a twit and angry about this.  And, that was free speech!  That was just an image.  That was not action.  That was not spending money to support the suppression of equal rights for others.  hmmmmm, I sense a bit more hypocrisy here.

Here is another free speech issue.  A bakery in Lakewood, CO refusing to make a cake for a gay couple.  Actually, for any LGBT couples.  That is his right.  Again, I think it’s disgusting, but that is his right.  It is also the right of people to refuse to do business there and to protest it. That is their free speech.

Funny how that works, isn’t it?  Free speech means that you get to say what you believe, but it doesn’t mean that you are the only one who gets to, or that you are protected from the consequences of what you said or did.  The rest of us have that same right.

Leave a comment   |  tags: , , , , , , , | posted in Equal rights, Freedom, Politics, Solutions, Voting, War of Definitions

July 29, 2012

In for a penny. In for a pound.

By Just Torch

The internets and the air waves are aflame!  But, what is that which is burning?  It’s old news that has come to light, again.  While there is a whole paper to be written on that phenomenon, we’re going to move on to a more important aspect right now.  At least in this case, the news is still relevant, and that is why there are more important aspects that we should focus on.

I previously wrote on the importance of our economic vote.  In short, where you shop does, in fact, matter.  It is a constantly updating list also.  For example, I have recently become aware that I will have to forgo my occasional late night trips to Waffle House , because of their sizable corporate contributions to Karl Rove’s superPAC, American Crossroads.  As we, as consumers, make our choices, our impact will be felt, or our apathy will be shown.  Either way, we are making our stand.

  • Bringing Chick-fil-A back to the forefront of the news this week though are several events:As Equality Matters had reported in March, I linked to in April and we have actually known for at least a decade, Chick-fil-A through their charitable foundation, WinShape has been consistently giving to anti-gay marriage groups.  However, in an interview posted July 16th, the COO, Dan Cathy, acknowledged that, “We are very much supportive of the family — the biblical definition of the family unit. We are a family-owned business, a family-led business, and we are married to our first wives. We give God thanks for that.”  (We’ll accept that he’s not talking about all the various biblical definitions of marriage, and only the currently popular one man-one woman definition, since that’s the most likely definition to which he was referring….)  Snopes goes on to add other quotes that are even more damning, but that I can’t validate so I won’t include here.
  • The letter from Mayor Thomas M Menino of Boston to Dan Cathy of Chick-fil-A, strongly suggesting that Chick-fil-A abandon plans to find a location within Boston.
  • Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel made the statement that Chick-fil-A’s “values are not Chicago values.”
  • San Francisco Mayor Ed Lee tweeted,  “Closest #ChickFilA to San Francisco is 40 miles away & I strongly recommend that they not try to come any closer.”

I have a very good friend who grew up going to the original location in Jonesboro, GA.  He maintains that these positions are not consistent with the S. Truett Cathy who founded the chain and that his grandfather introduced him to repeatedly.  Now, the original Mr. Cathy is still alive and kicking and is still, at least titularly, the Chairman and CEO at 91.  Is he actively involved in the company any more?  Who’s to say?  He has not, that I’ve seen, been quoted in the latest flaps.  Honestly, it doesn’t matter.  It is the corporate position.

This same friend has expressed that he feels torn because the 975 franchisees (in 2007) spent years building up the business and wonders if these franchisees should be held accountable for the corporate policies.  Also, he points out that while he worked there in the past, the franchisee that he worked for, hired gay employees.

There is a significant flaw in this reasoning.  It is the same flaw that so many people in American make, and it is such a fundamental flaw that when I was having the conversation with him, it didn’t strike me at first either.  It wasn’t until later that it hit me.

This is precisely the reasoning that comes from the same line as those who would demand their rights without accepting their corresponding responsibilities.

The franchisees have benefited from the marketing and the “good name” of the Chick-fil-A corporation for the last 65 years.  They have benefited from the recipes.  The name recognition.  They’ve benefited in every way possible from the positives – the rights – of being associated with the Chick-fil-A name/brand.  And, now, it’s time to fully pay the piper.

They have certainly paid the franchise fees, which have historically been ridiculously low, by industry standards, thanks to the “cult like” screening process which allowed Chick-fil-A to make sure they were filtering out all of the “undesirables”.  These processes involved literally dozens of interviews over the courses of years.  Then, instead of charging a franchise fee of $25,000, like KFC does, Chick-fil-A would only charge $5,000.  Of course, they also made up for this in other ways.  It was no accident that their franchisees were earning roughly 1/3 what other franchisees were bringing in.  They have paid for their product, of course.

CONTINUED ON PAGE 2

7 Comments   |  tags: , , , , , , , , , | posted in Finance, Politics, Solutions, Voting

April 22, 2012

The power and importance of the economic vote!

By Just Torch

There are many types of voting.  We are typically focused on the political vote where we go into the booth and cast a ballot.  That is important!   It truly is.  However, we must never forget the other types of voting that we engage in much more frequently, and which are equally important.  In fact, for as long as money from corporations and the uber-wealthy can play an unlimited role, then other types of voting are more important.

Our economic vote is the most important.  Ask yourself this question.  Where do the corporations get the money to influence the campaigns and the elections the way that they do?  They get it from us.

We have some fundamental realities to deal with.  Most of us are frequently faced with a situation where a choice must be made and the deciding factor is “Which can I afford?”.  This is our economic need potentially outweighing our principles.

Another issue is that it is often difficult for the average consumer to identify where their dollars are going.  Who are they going to be supporting when they buy this particular item?  However, it is important to be as aware as possible.

Let’s take a few real examples.  From those examples, we can extrapolate out.  And, let me be clear, though it should be by now.  I support buying from small businesses whenever possible, but the same principles apply.  If you know that a small business or its owner violates the principles that you support, then you have the responsibility to shop elsewhere.  As an individual, you’re unlikely to make much impact on your own.  However, if we all do this, then the power of the group boycott comes into play and the impact can be quite large!  (Look for examples throughout history at the Montgomery Bus Boycott that really launched the Civil rights movement of the 50s & 60s, or the Grape Boycott of the 60s and 70s. or others.)

The Koch Brothers , David and Charles, are well known ultra right wing activists.  They are ridiculously wealthy having fortunes tied to manufacturing, trading, and investments.  Their primary activism has been in funding the astroturf Tea Party movement, PACs and in funding SuperPACs.  But, how would one, as an individual consumer, avoid contributing to them?  A lot of their products are industrial products and very hard to trace.  However, their paper products and a few other products are more readily identifiable and therefore avoidable.  You can easily vote with your dollars and keep some of your dollars out of their pockets, and thus start to defund some of their activities.  So, what products do the Koch brothers continue to make their billions off at the retail level?  Some very well known names.  Brands like AngelSoft, Quilted Northern, Brawnie and Dixie, for example.  A longer list can be found here.

Chick-Fil-A with those oh so yummy, and yet, really unhealthy original chicken sandwiches.  Personally, I can’t shop there.  I refuse to support a business which is so openly bigoted.  I do not have an issue with them being true to their Christian founding and thus choosing to not be open on Sundays.  I found that frustrating a few times since I really wanted a sandwich or their nuggets, but I could respect that choice.  However, upon learning that they openly discriminate against gays, I must choose to vote economically against them, by not giving them my dollars.

Zynga Games makes a lot of games that are very popular.  Even some that look like they might be fun to play with my friends.  And, they’re free!  w00t!  They’ve developed almost every game on Facebook these days, haven’t they?  Castleville, Cityville, Farmville, and their latest big hit Words with Friends.  I enjoy Scrabble ®.  However, because I find the business practices of Zynga to be offensive, I won’t play any of their games.  Why?  Because, when trying to build their business up, in order to attract and retain talent, they gave stock out in lieu of better pay.  Then, when preparing to go public, they demanded that stock back and threatened to fire the employees if they failed to comply.  Because, they didn’t want to create a “Google chef” situation.  I find that to be a deplorable example of greed and an unacceptable abuse of their employees, and will not support them in any way.  Particularly, when if I am going to play games, there are many free alternatives.

These are just some examples.  It is important though to be aware of who and what we are supporting with our dollars.  Pay attention to the companies where you shop.  Always shop locally when possible.  Always avoid the mega-super big box stores when possible!  Always share information with others to make sure that they know about the evils of the businesses that you’re aware of, so that they too can stop contributing to the madness.

The contrary is true also.  When you find out about businesses that are exhibiting the kinds of policies that you expect from a business, then take your dollars there, and spread the word.  We must use our economic vote and social networking as a tool to change the world in which we live.

We have to get the money out of politics, and we have to act directly to achieve that.  However, we have to act indirectly to achieve that also.  This is one of those ways.

Whatever others do, be the change you want to see in the world.

Leave a comment   |  tags: , , , , , , | posted in Finance, Politics, Solutions, Voting

Design a site like this with WordPress.com
Get started