RE: RE: Re: Economists for Bradley
> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Max Sawicky > > The Repugs are in general retreat on economic > policy, crushed by the neo-liberal debt reduction > juggernaut. In a related vein, I've spoken to some Progressive > Caucus types, and any notion of not repaying debt > is off the table. Max, obviously I'd rather see money being spent on health care and a range of social programs, but paying off the debt does seem to have the advantage of cutting debt payments in the future and potentially opening up more revenues then for that spending then. Given present politics where the GOP can block most major spending programs, debt repayment does not look so bad since it at least can make it easier to do spending in the future. I know national budgets are not like personal budgets, but the basic idea of drawing down debt and cutting future interest payments to rich bondholders does not seem like a terrible thing. I try to clear my credit care quickly for that reason. Yes, yes, capital investments like education are not consumption and they create growth for the future, but if we can't get that, debt repayment looks like decent strategy until we get a filibuster-proof Senate. Because tax cuts for rich people will just be feeding the wealthy on both ends -- at the IRS and in annual interest payments to government bondholders. Or is there a good reason not to feel bad about hundreds of billions of dollars being paid to those bondholders each year? -- Nathan Newman
RE: Re: RE: RE: Re: Economists for Bradley
> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Ellen Frank > So we spend $3.6 trillion in tax revenue to retire debt which > costs $230 billion to service, of which 13% or $30 billion may > be a net transfer to rich bondholders. Or, to put it another way, > we take $3.6 trillion in current income, all of which derives > by the way, from regressive payroll taxes, and hand it over > to rich bondholders, so as to avoid, 10 years hence, an upward > redistribution of $30 billion? Except that's a $30 billion per year upwards transfer by your numbers -- and I am genuinely interested the mathematics of why the whole $230 billion is not an upwards transfer? Yes, the taxes paid may be from rich people, but it is still a transfer to the wealthy that cannot be spent on public-minded goods. It would seem that once that debt is paid off, we will have an additional $230 billion per year to spend on other programs. The issue is not just wealth transfers but avoiding debt in general-- it seems smarter (except in recession) to keep debt service down. Maybe I am just applying household economics here, but compound interest and debt payments seems like pure waste and money down the drain. If we defer spending for a few years, we have far more money to spend later based on the same revenue stream. It is worth emphasizing that a lot of the debt payoff is really just storing up funds to be spent on social security payouts as the baby boom and Gen X retires. This has been part of the plan for social security since the 1983 Social Security reform, so it is not a new policy based on present surpluses but planned for a while. If the debt is not reduced, it will become hard to service Social Security just on current revenues in the future. > As for the argument I have heard many make that > reducing the federal interest burden will free up space > in the federal budget for progressive programs -- > as if they are now being crowded out by interest payments? > -- well, all I can say to that is that if we can't get > the Fed's to pass progressive programs when there's > a budget surplus two years running, why should we hope > we'll get them to pass progressive programs > 10 years from now when (if) the debt is paid off? > If the left can't use this surplus to push harder for > the things we need, then God help up when there's a > deficit. add this to what Max wrote: > From a liberal standpoint, can you not think of any public >endeavor that justifies foregoing seven percent of its >up-front cost per year? >Another problem is that the *religion* of debt reduction, >once it has taken hold, is difficult to uproot. This is the political analysis part of the equation, where I am more comfortable on this issue. I of course agree with Max that there are plenty of areas of spending that would justify debt and would create more wealth than the marginal costs of debt service. But we are unlikely to spend all the money not spent on debt repayment on such growth-oriented public spending, especially not under present circumstances with a solid majority of Republicans in the Senate able to filibuster any serious new program. If we prevent tax cuts now, while we fight for more progressive Senators and Congresspeople, it will be easier to do serious spending later. A likely deal right now (in a good scenario) is for half the money not spent on debt reduction to go to tax cuts mostly for the wealthy and half to go to social spending. Assuming that every dime of spending is for productive uses (rather than business subsidies, middle class income transfers etc), that still means that we are comparing debt reduction against social spending that must be twice as productive as Max's scenario to make up for the interest payments not eliminated. My view is to push for social programs as hard as we can -- since we are not going to win any serious spending at this point compared to the level of surpluses being discussed -- in order to outline the spending we would do if the GOP was not blocking it. If we emphasize, as Max does, the social investment aspect of the spending, that is a complement to any discussion of debt repayment. And we can argue that debt reduction is far preferable to tax cuts. The two positions are not inconsistent and in this case, good economics could be good politics. -- Nathan Newman
RE: Re: Re: Re: RE: RE: Re: Economists for Bradley
> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Ken Hanly > > I meant this as an ad hominem argument. If I understand > Nathan's views on Bradley's health care program they go > roughly like this: Universal health care would be a perfect > health care policy but is completely unattainable at present > in the US. Bradley's health care program at least gives > insurance coverage to many more poor people than the present > situation and would inject needed money into the system. > So I am just saying that given Nathan's mode of argumentation re Bradley's > health care system, if he used this same type of argument he > should conclude that he ought to support issuance of more > government bonds to finance social programs. Which I would. I said that social programs should be supported despite the economic analysis on debt retirement and its transfer to the wealthy. And if we could get a vote for Bradley's plan, I'd support it in a heartbeat, since that is massive spending transfers to the lowest-income folks. What I was objecting to on PEN-L was people attacking the plan out of hand. The fact is though that even his $60 billion per year health plan is far less that the total surpluses being discussing in the debt paydown debates. My point on debt paydown was more honest curiousity about the economy equity calculations of debt retirement, since Max has continued to verbally shudder at its every mention. Given that Republicans voted for an $800 billion tax cut last year and did not vote on any equivalent social program, it does seem a little bizarre that folks are acting like we are seriously debating debt paydown versus social programs. -- Nathan Newman
Most Important Cyber-Speech/Economic Case
Okay, I am going out on a limb and will say that the attached article describes the most important free speech case effecting economic power in the new information economy we have seen. This suit seeks to prevent information on how to break the copy protection on DVDs from circulating on the Web. In every other injunction legally issued in intellectual property cases, the party enjoined were enjoying direct economic gains from their use of the plaintiff's allegedly infringed or stolen intellectual property. If this case is upheld, we are moving into a new age where the government will use legal injunctions to enforce the ignorance needed to sustain the economic monopolies of the IP owners. Nathan Newman [EMAIL PROTECTED] === January 22, 2000 Judge Bars DVD Copier From Websites By The Associated Press SANTA CLARA, Calif. (AP) -- A judge has ordered Web site operators to stop disseminating a program that makes it easy to copy DVD movies and audio discs, a victory for the digital video and film industries. The software, called DeCSS, allows users to unlock the security code on DVDs and copy movies to personal computers. A DVD trade group sued the Web site operators, alleging theft of trade secrets. Santa Clara County Superior Court Judge William Elfving issued a preliminary injunction Friday barring the sites from offering DeCSS to users. He had refused last month to grant a temporary restraining order pending hearings on the trade group's lawsuit. His ruling follows a similar decision Thursday by a federal judge in New York, who ruled that three Web sites posting DeCSS had violated the 1998 Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Internet activists said Elfving's decision abridged the Web site operators' free speech rights, but he disagreed. ``If the court does not immediately enjoin the posting of this proprietary information, the (industry's) right to protect this information as a secret will surely be lost,'' Elfving wrote. Jeffrey Kessler, lead attorney for the DVD Copy Control Association trade group, said the decision ``establishes that the rules of intellectual property apply on the Internet, just like in all areas of commerce.'' Kessler was not worried the program would continue to circulate in defiance of the court order. ``Most people are law-abiding,'' he said. The lawsuit was filed last month against 27 named and 72 unnamed ``John Doe'' defendants. Lawyers for the site operators said the ruling was an affront to their belief in open sharing of technology. ``This isn't about hacking or privacy. It's about sharing legitimate information and code developed in the open-source community,'' said Tom McGuire, a spokesman for the San Francisco-based Electronic Frontier Foundation. McGuire said his group would contest both rulings.
RE: textbook
> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Rod Hay > > If we have a site where anyone can log in and amend the outline. We will > soon end up with a unrecognizable hodgepodge. I say we go with the one > we have now. Appoint an editorial committee. Have that committee approve > changes. Assign sections to volunteers and proceed from there. I might suggest that in addition to an editorial committee controlling the main text, it would be useful to have a web-based message board with threads corresponding to each section of the text. This would allow discussion and sub-threads for different sections-- with the editorial board compiling the best suggestions and incorporating alternative views of the topics in light of the discussion. This could be done through the archiving software used at CSF for example, which allows display of messages by thread topic, although it might not handle subthreads as well as other message board software. There is message board software out there, a decent one by O'Reilley that carries a small charge however, but there is probably freeware that would do the job as well. -- Nathan Newman
Re: CA tax initiative
Jim, My first question is where you are getting your info on the tax initiative. The story I had heard from my tax reform friends was that Prop 174 had sucked so much money out of the teachers unions that there wasn't going to be a tax-the-rich initiative this year. I am really excited to hear that SEIU is pushing one. As to studies, I would note some pretty good studies that have shown that California is not that high-tax a state when its low property taxes are combined with its relatively high corporate taxes. And it is relatively evident that labor and transportation costs are much more key to economic placement decisions. On a broader front, the whole issue raises the need for progressives to fight for national anti-whipsawing legislation in areas like tax breaks and tax policy. If we ever get near to the point of establishing a national VAT tax, we should fight for revenue-sharing to be built into it. Having each state setting different sales and income tax rates is a recipe for whipsawing and needs to be fought. ** *Nathan Newman: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * * UC-Berkeley* On Sat, 1 Jan 1994, Jim Devine wrote: > happy new year!! A friend asks me to ask pen-l the following questions: > > Leftists, laborites, and liberals are currently pushing a state-wide > initiative in California that will raise taxes on the rich and/or the > corporations. One of the backers in the SEIU, a biggie in CA. SO: > > has anyone done any research on the response that capitalists will > pursue to such an initiative, if passed? will they leave, or are > they just threatening to do so in order to influence the outcome? > are they able to leave in sufficient droves to ahve an impact? > will they be attracted to stay in CA if the money is to be spent on > such things as infrastructure and education? In general, what will > the initiative's impact be? > > I would also appreciate some details on what the initiative is > proposing. Someone must know. Nathan? Anders? > > in pen-l solidarity, > > Jim Devine BITNET: jndf@lmuacad. INTERNET: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Econ. Dept., Loyola Marymount Univ., Los Angeles, CA 90045-2699 USA > 310/338-2948 (off); 310/202-6546 (hm); FAX: 310/338-1950 > >
Re: what do do about pen-l
Just a suggestion, if it's possible. Could a quick note be sent to everyone on the original list to remind them of the new address? With the holidays over, this might spur a few people back. However, I think a lot of people may be like myself, recovering from the holidays and having few comments about the current high-profile news of Bobbitt, Kerrigan, the Menendez Brothers, Whitewater and the Inman-Safire feud. ** *Nathan Newman: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * * UC-Berkeley*
Does International Trade Lower Wages in the 1st World?
The January 15th ECONOMIST had an interesting article that argued that international trade with the third world has had little or no role in lowering wages in the US for unskilled workers. The prima facie evidence for this fact is the argument that if unskilled work had been migrating to third world countries because of lower wages, the relative prices of low-skill goods should have fallen. THE ECONOMIST cites studies that asset that this has not occurred. Instead, these studies argue that the culprit behind lower wages for unskilled work is purely technological. New technologies have decreased the demand for lower-skilled labor, so wages have fallen. Another interesting point was that US trade with low-wage countries (in this case defined as countries with wages less than half the US's) has only risen a small amount since 1960, from 2.0% of GDP in 1960 to 2.8% of GDP today. Of course, much of that lower-wage trade in 1960 was with Japan and poorer countries in Europe. So, if these studies are correct, is all the left-wing anguish over NAFTA misplaced? Should we instead be putting our efforts into a much sharper critique and organizing support for challenging automation when it does not go hand-in-hand with social justice? Or is the ECONOMIST wrong or just looking in the wrong place to see the damage multinationals are inflicting through the run-away shop into the third world? ** *Nathan Newman: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * * UC-Berkeley*
Re: Does International Trade Lower Wages in the 1st World?
On Thu, 20 Jan 1994, Jim Devine wrote: > I think that the distiction between movement to low-wage countries > by capital (and the concomitant increase of imports of goods produced > there by the advanced countries) and technological change that > lowers the demand for lower-skilled labor in the advanced countries > is largely false. The technological bias toward simplifying and > routinizing (deskilling) traditional jobs in the advanced countries > (which often have high skill relative to poor countries) *allows* > the movement of capital to the poor countries. Why does routinization help move jobs to the third world? Let's not act as though many of the jobs weren't already routinized, while many of the jobs being moved to Mexico are often quite high-productivity jobs (although the relation of productivity to skill is often a bit mixed). But you didn't address the issue raised in THE ECONOMIST which is that low-skill goods have not been dropping in relative price. This was taken to indicate that it is not low wage competition that is lowering the wages in such jobs. Now there may be a problem in that logic (promoted by Jagdish Bhagwati and by a paper by Robert Lawrence and Matt Slaughter), but it is a good question. Many of those who promote NAFTA argue it will lead to cheaper goods; if relative prices are not dropping, it might be argued that we are getting neither the bad nor the supposed good effects of trade with the third world. Or it could mean that the multinationals are snookering both the workers and the consumers and are pocketing the difference. SO what these researchers are picking up would then be not the lack of low wage competition effects but its masking by multinational increases in profits. Does anyone else on PEN-L have research to add to these reports? --Nathan Newman
Apple and the Unionization of Silicon Valley
PEN-Lers, Actually, Apple (against their will) has become a model employer of their janitorial staff. After a massive mobilization by SEIU and their Justice for Janitors campaign, including a threatened worldwide boycott of Apple computer, Apple conceded to the unions demands. Apple forced its landlord to hire a union contractor and Hewlett Packard almost immediately signed union contracts without a fight. With Oracle (or rather its landlord) agreeing to hire union workers with decent benefits, Silicon Valley is almost 100% unionized in the janitorial sector. This is one of the most dramatic accomplishments in unionization in many years. Following this success, SEIU has teamed up with a number of other unions (HERE, the Teamsters, ACTWU, maybe a couple others) to begin a mass community-wide organizing drive in San Jose. The unions involved have deployed 20 organizers and fourteen apprentices from the AFL-CIO Organizing Institute. Most innovatively, the unions are not beginning in the workplace but starting door-knocking in the ethnic communities around the area to create a mass community base as they target multiple industries all at once. They are knocking on 1400 doors each day, 10,000 doors a week. The goal is to build a mass community base, then blitz low-wage service and light-manufacturing throughout the San Jose area. For me, it is one of the most exciting union campaigns in existence, since it involved not only multi-union collaboration but a serious application of community organizing as a method of union organizing. And much of this campaign is ultimately derived from the capitulation of Apple Computer to the original community-based campaign against the company. ** *Nathan Newman: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * * UC-Berkeley* On Wed, 26 Jan 1994, Jon Coifman wrote: > As long as we're at it, it should also be noted that Apple has a less than > stellar record on union activities among the janitorial staff at its > Cupertino, CA headquarters. Memory has not been kind regarding the > datails, but my recollection is that the decision to dump a contract with a > unionized maintance firm about a year and a half ago caused quite a flap. > Perhaps somone on the net remembers the outcome. > > Jon Coifman, > (via Macintosh) > Austin, TX > > >
RE: on urban violence (fwd)
On Tue, 15 Feb 1994, Doug Henwood wrote: > Jipson Art asked for more info on my assertion that NYC has a lower crime > rate than suburbs gone wild like Dallas and Atlanta, and that there is no > relation between pop density and crime. Here are the details. Doug, The problem with your table is (to be a sociologist for a minute), I don't trust the validity of crime statistics between different cities. Murder rates are relatively reliable, although even that can be problematic at times. Do police departments treat homicide, manslaughter and "accidents" in the exact same way? What crimes are pursued or even reported vary based on the racial breakdown of the cops and the communities served. Another issue is how crime effects most in the community. DC is known for having a high murder rate, but most of the murders are concentrated in the drug trade against other criminals, which is different from some other cities where murder effects the rest of the population more directly. The bottom line is whether higher crime rates in Atlanta or Dallas reflect more crimes or a higher willingness to report crimes to the police? The city of Berkeley where I live has the highest rate of felonies per capita in the state. It is a rather dangerous city but this may also reflect the rather abnormal (but generally non-lethal) outbreaks of riots on Telegraph Avenue. I would say that it is a fair statement that the majority of crimes are not reported to the police, especially crimes that are between gangs or others involved in criminal activity. (The low crime rate in LA is awfully suspicious on this point). Given this, while statistics are always useful, crime stats have to be taken with a bit of skepticism. Crime, even murder, is not a homogeneous category and the left needs to challenge the numerical game of measuring crime. Crime is an intangible in people's lives that harms their sense of security, or freedom, and hope for the future (not to different or unrelated to the effects of capitalism as a whole). It is also part of a social process that simplistic solutions like "three strikes and you're out" focused on those numbers will inevitable miss. I caught Jerry Brown on C-SPAN (where they were filming his new radio show). He did an amazingly good job of challenging the idiocy of the current hysteria over "three strikes" while focusing on jobs, opportunity and hope. He even had on a woman involved in the East Bay Conservation Corps to embody his alternative, all without sounding "soft." One of the best lines he gave was noting that when he was governor, he beat his breast as much as anyone over crime and increased sentences and so on, prison populations soared, yet crime increased. Jerry does a great "sinner redeemed" routine in his populist attacks. It may be worth catching his show. --Nathan Newman
Re: Chiapas and the "progressive Internationalists"
Trond, While I appreciate the PNP/PIP distinction, it is always interesting how that leads to support for the same actions even with expectations that are sharply different. Chiapas is a perfect movement for PIP; the Zapatistas are not pure isolationists even if they are resisting NAFTA--remember, Jim, myself and other PIPers all were against NAFTA. Frankly, Chiapas is one of the last holdouts of feudalism and the uprising is a call for dismantling that feudalism while at the same time democratizing the Mexican state. But the fact is that the salience of the Chiapas uprising (both for leftists internationally and the Mexican state) is the existence of NAFTA. Because of a more integrated economy, the Mexican state is more subject to leverage from outside forces and the full mobilization of the anti-NAFTA forces has quickly focused on Chiapas as a lever to assist its allies like Cardenas, RMALC and those seeking a more progressive international economic order. If NAFTA wasn't an issue, the Zapatistas would have been bombed and murdered, the world would have tskked tssked a bit, and that would have been the end of it. NAFTA and the general ongoing economic integration between the US and Mexico gives US and other developed left forces a material incentive to assist third world democratic forces, while creating the economic interdependence to make such interventions potentially effective. I agree with Trond that the Zapatistas are infinitely realistic; it's one of the most well-timed, well-executed rebellions I can remember. And it's paid off in an immediate destabilization of the Mexican government and immediate negotiations by that government with the rebels. If they were calling for the conversion of Mexico to one-state socialism, that would be pie-in-the-sky, but instead there demands fit a process of PIP. PIP never means simple capitulation to neoliberalism; the resistance to integration is part of building the worldwide movement for socialism. We have to separate analysis of where we are going (PIP) from methodologies for building international solidarity (where PIP and PNP will have frequent convergence). Such PIP methodologies will include specific injustices (such as NAFTA) combined with the broad-based creation of instruments of international solidarity and democracy (unions, the Sao Paulo Forum, the Rio Summit, and carefully analyzed support for international governance such as the EC and the UN). Chiapas will no doubt strengthen the ability of forces in North America to justify cross-national monitoring of democratic procedures, labor abuses and human rights violations. And NAFTA, flawed as it is, will become a vehicle through its commissions for such joint mobilization. A very PIP result. --Nathan Newman, UC-Berkeley On Mon, 21 Feb 1994, Trond Andresen wrote: > Tom Weisskopf defined the two main sides in that "Global Economic > Integration discussion" as the "progressive internationalist position" > (PIP) and the "progressive nationalist position" (PNP). > > Myself, I belong to the PNP faction. During the discussion, it was > made clear that f.inst. Jim Devine's and Nathan Newman's strategy for > socialism was to first let capitalism globalize into the end result, a > "World Capitalist Gvt.", then on a world scale somehow overthrow this > gvt. and establish world socialism. Jim and Nathan belong to the PIP > faction, as I understood them. > > So what has this to do with Chiapas? Well, reading Harry's piece, what > strikes me is the fierce will to self-determination in this movement. > But I cannot understand how the PIP people can look at such struggles > as other than well-meant but futile attempts to stop the merciless > wheel relentlessly grinding towards a completely capitalist-globalized > world. > > From my viewpoint (PNP) the Chiapas struggle is not only something that > I symphatize with, I also see their goals as perfectly realistic and > achievable, and to say the least, infinitely more down-to-earth, than the > pie-in-the-sky "let-capitalism-globalize-and-then-we-will-make > socialism"-strategy. > > IMHO, of course. :-) > > - > Trond Andresen([EMAIL PROTECTED]) > Department of Engineering Cybernetics > The Norwegian Institute of Technology > N-7034 Trondheim, NORWAY > > phone +47 73 59 43 58 > fax +47 73 59 43 99 > > > >
RESOURCE: Gopher Site with Wide Array of Progressive Information (fwd)
Hi all, This is a post to remind people about the resource for progressives we have here at UC-Berkeley for progressives called the Economic Democracy Information Network (EDIN) gopher. We are looking for new sources of files and other gopher sites, especially labor and economic-oriented sites. (Labor files are a top priority since there are so few labor files in cyberspace). Please check out the gopher at garnet.berkeley.edu 1250 and if you have other resources to add or know of some we should have "pointers" to, let me know. Thanks. ** * Nathan Newman: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * * UC-Berkeley* == Subject: About the EDIN Gopher ABOUT THE EDIN PROJECT'S GOPHER The Electronic Democracy Information Network (EDIN) Gopher is one of several ventures by the EDIN Project. The following is the mission statement of the EDIN Project. If you'd like more information on the EDIN Project or would like to comment on the EDIN gopher, please send e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] You can connect to the EDIN gopher by connecting to garnet.berkeley.edu 1250 or you will find it listed under the California list of gophers in the "Mother of All Gophers" list. Some notable recent additions to the EDIN gopher are extensive connections to state government legislative information and a new directory devoted to "Political Movements and Theory" with files on the organization and theory of groups ranging from the IWW to Ayn Rand. -- ECONOMIC DEMOCRACY INFORMATION NETWORK (EDIN) From revitalizing inner city communities to creating sustainable development to converting to a peacetime economy, information resources and rapid communication are becoming increasingly important in both our economic and political system. To help avoid the danger of a split between the information haves and have-nots, EDIN will provide community groups throughout California and in the nation greater access to the burgeoning world of information by both providing more information and easier access to electronic communication. COMPONENTS OF EDIN PROJECT: EDIN On-Line Server: This will be the site which will coordinate the gathering of existing economic and social information and providing it electronically in an understandable form, both immediately in text form and over time as we develop the software to transmit information in innovative graphical forms. EDIN will facilitate research and communication on economic issues by EDIN users in different locations around the state. Infrastructure: By working with such groups as public libraries and other public access facilities, we will work to establish walk-in and dial-in access to community groups engaged in community development efforts. Training and Community Involvement: Teams of trainers will work with already existing networks of groups to get them on-line and help facilitate their use of the EDIN system. GOALS OF EDIN PROJECT: Link Economic Information: EDIN would be the first archive to have information on the economic aspects of conversion, community development, and the environment, linked together so that users can approach a problem from several angles at once. Ease of Use: EDIN will make it easy to sort through a broad array of information and quickly determine what you actually want. It will be simple to customize EDIN to your needs. Economic Literacy: EDIN will over time connect its information to glossaries, tutorials, and other tools for facilitating learning about a complex economic topic which interests and intimidates you. In doing so, it will create a new way of promoting economic literacy. Community-Based: EDIN will be based around the idea that the community needs to actively shape its direction; it will be rebuilt and reshaped through a process that strives to serve the community's needs as they understand them. In this way, it will give community groups a way to participate in shaping the coming information society. =
Re: The New World Order/Running Shoes of Capitalism
New Balance is your answer. I used to always buy them at half the cost of Nikes. Great shoes, great price. But then, I've never been accused of being hip to the proper attire. ** *Nathan Newman: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * * UC-Berkeley* On Fri, 25 Feb 1994 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Michael Perelman's recent postings on Nike in the world economy have > been as fascinating as they are revolting. One question that is bound > to pop into the mind of anyone trained in economics in this country is > how sales prices are holding up in what seems to be a rather competitive > industry. In other words, what prevents one of these firms from gaining > huge market share by cutting prices in half (at a higher volume they > could still afford to pay Michael Jordan!). It seems to me that the > answer to this question is a very important part of the story. > >
Re: Running further with those shoes
On Tue, 1 Mar 1994, Jim Devine wrote: > I get my sneakers at Price Club, a warehouse store with wholesale > prices and zero ambiance. Which with its merger with Costco (a non-union store) may be helping to undermine salaries and the standard of living of food and commercial workers in the US. Not a moral highhorse BTW. I've been shopping at Price Club for years. THe issue is how manufacturing exploitation may be in league with or an alternative to retail sector exploitation. --Nathan Newman
Re: Running Further with Internal Funds
On Wed, 2 Mar 1994, Heather.L.Grob.1 wrote: > In response to Tom's question, > > I have no explanation for why shoe industries may need to generate internal > funds. Maybe some pen-ller has?Perhaps, if so, its for r and d, to > meet Nike's advertising strategy, to build plants in other countries, Nike doesn't build plants in other countries. They basically don't make shoes at all; they hire subcontractors and buy shoes from them. Nike is basically a marketing and distribution company, not a manufacturing company. Advertising is mainly what they do, so it's hardly surprising that is a large part of their costs. > to meet demand for running shoes in other parts of the world (making up > transaction costs in order to gain a greater market share in other > countries?)? Since I don't know the shoe industry it's all speculation > based on the assumption that these are homogenous goods. > > Gotta run! > In running pen-ller solidarity, > Heather Grob ([EMAIL PROTECTED]).
WHERE WE STAND: Manifesto for Committees of Correspondence
[The following is a draft statement of shared principles and purpose of the Committees of Correspondence, issued for public discussion on June 1, 1992.] WHERE WE STAND - A declaration of principles of the Committees of Correspondence Goals and Vision. We are motivated by the profound conviction that our country needs a humane alternative to the anti-human system of capitalism. For the majority of working people, and especially racially and nationally oppressed people, this system does not work. After the 1980s Decade of Greed, the top 1 percent of wealth-holders have more property than the bottom 90 percent. Capitalism is fundamentally militarist, elitist, racist, sexist, homophobic and destructive of the environment on which all life depends. The tragic consequences are human and individual: ever more numerous homeless, the majority of them children; millions trapped in low-wage, dead-end jobs, and millions more unemployed, two-thirds of whom never receive unemployment insurance; one in seven Americans without health insurance. Instead of promoting community, capitalism pits people against each other, to the detriment of us all; it criminally abuses women and children in the name of "family values." Our national resources continue to be senselessly squandered on preparations for war. This looting of society and nature casts a shadow of pessimism across the land, shattering parents' dreams of a better future for their children. There is a spiritual crisis; a profound alienation of people from institutions unresponsive to their needs. This crisis can only be addressed by radical democratization, the realization of full equality, the empowerment of people to control all aspects of decision making affecting their daily lives, making institutions, public and private, advance their well-being. Only a massive and organized popular movement can turn our country onto a saner path. * We are for full employment; universal health care; quality, multicultural public education and child care. * We are for affirmative action and massive infusion of resources into cities and other areas as steps toward freedom of people from racial and national oppression. Without justice, there is no peace. * We are for economic, political and social equality of women and for reproductive rights and freedom from sexual harassment. * We defend democratic principles embodies in the Bill of Rights, which are being dangerously eroded. * We advocate disarmament, the universal abolition of nuclear weapons and peacetime conversion. * We will work with people around the world to preserve, protect and restore the environment. * We believe that in the long run there must be a fundamental realignment of the political system, new electoral initiatives and the creation of new vehicles to attain political empowerment. Our vision has an international dimension, seeking ties and cooperation with popular movements and working-class organizations in all countries. We view socialism as the struggle for democracy carried to its logical conclusion. Our vision is not a utopia, but a practical response and solution to the contradictions of capitalist society. We will continue to participate in the ongoing public discussion of how to redefine socialism in light of world experience and contemporary realities. We welcome all those who would like to participate with us in this exploration, while we struggle together to address the immediate problems of our people. We suggest the following characteristics for U.S. socialism: A society where the promise of democracy is fulfilled by the practice of self-government. A society of social justice, which guarantees employment, housing, education and health care as human rights. A society which preserves and builds upon all previous economic and scientific achievements, and which step-by- step redistributes the vast wealth and power now held in a few hands. * * * Theoretical framework. This socialist vision is informed and nourished by the Marxist view of history. People make their own history, based upon their needs, circumstances and understanding of the necessity to struggle to transform society. Organization and theory are tools for reshaping reality. We recognize and respect the right of members to think independently about all questions. This frees theory from being "officialized," made into a dogma, which tends to lead to its degeneration. Marxism, like any other science, requires freedom of thought and inquiry, the clash of opposing views. Its integrity is preserved by the standards of internal consistency, inclusiveness and testing through practice which govern all science. Marxism arose, historically, from revolutionary movements for democracy. It is still evolving. Marxists continue to have much to learn from people who approach the problems of society from othe
RESOURCE: Archive for Committees of Correspondence, Socialist Organization
ANNOUNCING GOPHER SITE FOR COMMITTEES OF CORRESPONDENCE -- Documents and Journal of new Socialist Regrouping For those not familiar with the Committees of Correspondence, a copy of its founding statement of purpose, WHERE WE STAND, will follow this post. In summary, the Committees of Correspondence is a socialist organization established in 1992 out of a coming together of ex-CPUSA members, other sectarian socialist members looking for a more open socialist approach, and independent leftists attracted to the open democratic forum for socialist discussion and action created by the Committees of Correspondence (CoC). A gopher site has been created to archive a wide variety of CoC materials, including documents from the 1992 Berkeley conference, other general articles, and all issues of Dialogue and Initiative, the discussion journal of the CoC To access the archive, you need gopher access to the Internet. From most University machines, you should be able to access the gopher by typing the following at the prompt. Type: gopher garnet.berkeley.edu 1250 This will link you to the Economic Democracy Information Network (EDIN) gopher maintained by the UCB Center for Community Economic Research. There's a wide variety of links to progressive info on the Internet, but you will want to use the cursor to move down the menu you will see until you reach a line labelled "Political Movements and Theory." Hit return. You will see another menu. Move to "Socialist Political Groups." Hit return. Then you will see a "Committees of Correspondence" menu item. Move to it and hit return. You can now look at any of the available documents. If you use IGC (Peacenet/Labornet, etc.), it's even simpler. When you log-in to Peacenet, you will see a menu of choices (e-mail, conferences, etc.). Hit "i" for Internet. THat will link you to the IGC gopher. Move to the "Other Progressive Gophers" line. Under that menu, you will find the Economic Democracy Information Network gopher listed. Choose it and follow the above directions. You can also access the EDIN gopher through the "Mother Gopher" at Minnesota. Go down the hierarchy of nations and states until you find California. The Economic Democracy Information Network (EDIN) is listed under the list of California gophers. If you have other files relevant to the CoC, please send them to me and I will try to include them. --Nathan Newman, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
AB 2451 - California to Put All Government Info On-line
*** Please repost *** DATE: March 8, 1994 TO: Interested Parties FROM: Assemblyman Tom Bates (D-Oakland) RE: Legislation to bring California on-line I am writing to ask for your support of Assembly Bill 2451, which I have introduced in the California Assembly. It requires that all state public information, which is currently computerized, be available free to the public via the Internet. This bill will be voted on by the Assembly Committee on Government Operations within a few weeks. A copy of the bill is attached. I believe this legislation will help make government more efficient and more accessible. Governor Pete Wilson has said, *Each time a person must set aside time during regular working hours to visit a government office, there is an economic loss to society. Each time that visit is prolonged because of long waiting lines...the loss is compounded.* I agree. Under A.B. 2451, citizens will be able to obtain state information directly at their place of work, local libraries, at schools or in their own homes. Legislative bills are currently available on the Internet thanks to groundbreaking legislation authored by Assemblywoman Debra Bowen. This bill builds on that first measure and expands the information available. You can do three things to support this effort. 1. Write/fax the Assembly Government Operations Committee today. The bill will be considered in committee soon, within a few weeks. Letters/faxes should be addressed to: Hon. Curtis Tucker, Jr. Chairman, Assembly Government Operations Committee State Capitol Sacramento, CA 95814 Greeting: Dear Chairman Tucker and Members of the Committee: You can fax direcly to the committee at 916-327-3517. Please fax me a copy at 916-445-6434, 510-428-1599 or mail it to Assemblyman Tom Bates, State Capitol, Sacramento, CA 95814. An email address is being set up now. 2. Join the Electronic Town Hall Meeting. Tell me what you think about this legislation. CPSR is hosting a discussion on this bill and other related California legislation and policy. My staff and I will be following and participating in the discussion. To subscribe to the list [EMAIL PROTECTED] send the following email message: subscribe calgovinfo to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To send a message to the calgovinfo listserv, mail to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] The list is currently un-moderated and public. 3. Help spread the word. Please repost this memo to other newsgroups and individuals. - BILL NUMBER: AB 2451BILL TEXT INTRODUCED BY Assembly Member Bates JANUARY 4, 1994 An act to add Article 3 (commencing with Section 11720) to Chapter 7 of Division 3 of Title 2 of the Government Code, relating to information technology. AB 2451, as introduced, Bates. Information technology. Existing law establishes the Office of Information Technology in the Department of Finance and imposes on the office various duties concerning the use of information technologies within state government. This bill would require the office to develop a plan by January 1, 1996, for free statewide computer-assisted public access to government information that has been computerized and is subject to public disclosure. The bill would require implementation of the plan to begin no later than January 1, 1996, and that the plan be operational no later than January 1, 2000. The bill would require the office to make various reports to the Legislature during the development and implementation of the plan. Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes. State-mandated local program: no. THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Article 3 (commencing with Section 11720) is added to Chapter 7 of Division 3 of Title 2 of the Government Code, to read: Article 3. Public Access to Government Information 11720. The Legislature finds and declares that it is essential to good government that information that is available to the public under the California Public Records Act, the Ralph M. Brown Act, and the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act be made available to the citizens of the state, irrespective of where they reside, in a timely manner, and at the least possible cost. It is the intent of the Legislature that this goal shall be achieved by the enactment of a plan that implements the following strategic goals outlined in the report issued by the Office of Information Technology in the Department of Finance entitled "Strategic Direction for Information Technology in California State Government 1993-1999": (a) To bring government closer to the people. (b) To enhance the value of government services. (c) To make government more responsive to changing public needs. (d) To reduce the cost of government. 11721. (a) The Office of Information Technology in the Department of Finance shall work with all state a
RESOURCE: EDIN Archive for Labor files and gophers
** PLEASE REPOST To OTHER LISTS ** ARCHIVE OF LABOR RESOURCES ON THE INTERNET Given the general lack of labor-related resources on the Internet, the Economic Democracy Information Network (EDIN) has been upgrading and expanding its "Labor Issues" section to serve the Internet community. The Labor Issues section now has extensive connections to government resources such as the Department of Labor, the Federal Register's labor legal code, and proposed legislation around labor issues. There are also archives of files dealing with US unions, international labor issues, women and the workplace, gays and workplace, and labor and people of color. Finally, for fans of ACTIV-L (and misc.activism.progressive on USENET), there is a new (specially-prepared for EDIN) archive of the labor-related newsbriefs that have appeared on that mailing list/newsgroup. We are very interested in receiving new files or pointers to gopher/ftp sites dealing with labor issues, so please send such files or information on where to find them to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To access the EDIN archive, you need gopher access to the Internet. From most University machines, you should be able to access the gopher by typing the following at the prompt. Type: gopher garnet.berkeley.edu 1250 This will link you to the Economic Democracy Information Network (EDIN) gopher maintained by the UCB Center for Community Economic Research. There's a wide variety of links to progressive info on the Internet, but you will want to use the cursor to move down the menu you will see until you reach a line labelled "Labor Issues." Hit return. If you use IGC (Peacenet/Labornet, etc.), it's even simpler. When you log-in to Peacenet, you will see a menu of choices (e-mail, conferences, etc.). Hit "i" for Internet. That will link you to the IGC gopher. Move to the "Other Progressive Gophers" line. Under that menu, you will find the Economic Democracy Information Network gopher listed. Choose it and follow the above directions. You can also access the EDIN gopher through the "Mother Gopher" at Minnesota. Go down the hierarchy of nations and states until you find California. The Economic Democracy Information Network (EDIN) is listed under the list of California gophers. --Nathan Newman: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Economic Democracy Information Network a project of UC-Berkeley's Center for Community Economic Research
Economists for a California Single-Payer Plan?
Hi folks,
As it looks more and more likely that a single-payer initiative will be
on the California ballot this fall, it would be nice to get left
academics moving in a proactive way to defend it on economic grounds.
Is there a list of progressive economists in California who could be
contacted to get involved in the campaign. I'm not involved heavily in
the statewide campaign and maybe this is already happening, but it would
be nice if PEN-L could help round up a list of pro-single-payer economists.
If we get a list, maybe we can beat the right-wing to publishing their
inevitable "One hundred million economists declare single-payer to be the
enemy of democracy and jobs."
Any ideas?
**
* Nathan Newman: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *
* UC-Berkeley*
Financing of California Single-Payer Plan
Elaine Bernard raises some worries about getting the Feds to pony up
their money for a statewide single-payer system. It will be interesting
to see if Clinton's support for "innovation" at the statewide level will
extend to a single-payer system. But we've got to win the sucker at the
polls in November, so we'll cross that bridge when we get to it. The
initiative is set-up to be flexible on that issue.
The basic financing for the California Single-Payer system is as
follows. In addition to getting public monies where possible:
An 8.9% payroll tax by employers of 50 or more employees
(7.0% for 25-50 employes, 6.0% for 10-25 employes, 4.4% for 10 or fewer)
2.5% income tax surcharge for all citizens making less than $250,000 per year
(or $500,000 per year for a married couple)
5.0% income tax surchange for all citizens making more than $250,000 per year
******
*Nathan Newman: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *
* UC-Berkeley*
WIRED Magazine Banned in Canada-- Serious Reality Check
To all,
The following text led to issue 2.04 of WIRED MAGAZINE being ordered off
magazine stalls all over Canada. The following post is the press release
by WIRED about their being baneed.
--Nathan Newman
===
Subject: WIRED Text Banned in Canada - Revised 4/4/94
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
=-=-=-=-=Copyright 1993,4 Wired Ventures, Ltd. All Rights Reserved-=-=-=-=
-=-=For complete copyright information, please see the end of this file=-=-
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
WIRED 2.04
Electric Word
*
Paul and Karla Hit the Net
^^
Recent events in Canada have proven once again that - for better or
worse - the information genie has escaped into cyberspace and can't be
put back in the bottle. When an Ontario judge issued an order barring
media coverage of a sensationalized murder trial, Canadians used the
Net to break the ban.
The case concerns Paul "Bernardo" Teale and his wife, Karla Homolka
Teale, who were each charged in the grisly murders of two teenagers.
Paul Teale now stands accused of 48 sex-related charges, while Karla
Homolka entered into a plea bargain: She pleaded guilty to
manslaughter and is expected to testify against Paul.
The nonstop press coverage prompted Paul Teale's lawyer to ask for a
media gag order until the conclusion of his trial, on the grounds that
it would be impossible to impanel an impartial jury. Faced with the
concurrence of the Crown, the Court and Karla, Paul Teale's lawyer
switched camps. But it was too late!
Despite legal intervention by several major Canadian media outlets,
the court imposed a ban on the publication of the details of the
crimes.
At first the ban had its desired effect. When the US television show A
Current Affair featured the case, it was banned in Canada, and
Canadian cable stations blacked out CNN coverage of the case.
With the conventional media halted, the infosphere took over. First,
two BBSes in Toronto began to post daily details of the trial. In
August, an irregular posting directly to newsgroup "control"
("approved" by "Justice Kovacs") created alt.fan.karla-homolka.
By December, after phone calls by law-abiding Net surfers to systems
managers, the Usenet group had been banned by systems managers and
university officials at sites all over Canada.
After the banning of alt.fan.karla-homolka, two new Usenet groups were
created: alt.pub-ban and alt.pub-ban.homolka.
Some Net users theorized that if they cross-posted all over the Net,
the Royal Canadian Mounted Police would be in the impossible position
of scrambling through cyberspace plugging leaks. One Net dweller
jokingly proposed the ideal tactic: "The solution is obvious. Take the
discussion to rec.sport.hockey. You silly Canadians would never ban
that group."
Other curious Canadians searched the pay-per-view news and magazine
databases on Nexis and CompuServe for stories published by US
newspapers. Most of the banned articles were re-posted verbatim to
alt.true-crime, a group overlooked by the Mounties.
As the infosphere grows to encompass the planet, the question is no
longer whether certain information is too sensitive to be made public.
The real question becomes whether it is even possible to keep certain
information out of cyberspace. In the Teale-Homolka case, the ban was
not so much broken as rendered irrelevant by the voracious online
community: It is estimated that one in four Canadians knows the banned
facts.
- Anita Susan Brenner and B. Metson
* * *
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=WIRED Online Copyright Notice=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Copyright 1993,4 Wired Ventures, Ltd. All rights reserved.
This article may be redistributed provided that the article and this
notice remain intact. This article may not under any circumstances
be resold or redistributed for compensation of any kind without prior
written permission from Wired Ventures, Ltd.
If you have any questions about these terms, or would like information
about licensing materials from WIRED Online, please contact us via
telephone (+1 (415) 904 0660) or email ([EMAIL PROTECTED]).
WIRED and WIRED Online are trademarks of Wired Ventures, Ltd.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Press Release by WIRED Magazine on banned issue
Subject: WIRED's Press Release Regarding the Ban - 3/23/94 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Taara Eden Hoffman 544 Second Street Director of Publicity San Francisco, CA 94107 USA +1 (415) 904 0666 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cyberspace Cannot Be Censored * WIRED Responds to Canadian Ban of Its April Issue Wednesday, March 23, 1994, San Francisco WIRED's April issue has been banned in Canada. WIRED's offense? Publication of a story called "Paul and Karla Hit the Net," a 400-word article about how Canadians are getting around a Canadian court decision to ban media coverage of details in the Teale-Homolka murder case. This article does not reveal details of the case. Instead, the article explains why the media ban has proven unenforceable and reports how information on the case is readily available to Canadians. According to a survey conducted by the Ottawa Citizen newspaper, 26 percent of those polled said they knew prohibited details of the trial, because they are continuously leaked by Canadian court witnesses, police, and others to the international media. Once this information is published, it pours back into Canada via fax, videocassettes, magazines and photocopies of articles, e-mail, Internet newsgroups, and other online services. In the United States, People magazine, and the TV show, A Current Affair as well as the New York Times and other publications and shows have covered the story and the ban. As WIRED's story and the action of Canada's Attorney General make clear, the ban is not only a waste of time and money,but has actually had the opposite effect of what was intended. Rumors and sensationalized accounts of the case abound, and the Teale-Homolka trial is one of the hottest topics of discussion among Canadians. "Banning of publications is behavior we normally associate with Third World dictatorships," said WIRED publisher Louis Rossetto. "This an ominous indication that the violation of human rights is becoming Canadian policy." According to Rossetto, the Canadian Government's recent seizure of gay and lesbian periodicals under the guise of controlling "pornography" and its behavior in the Teale-Homolka case have made Canada a leading violator of free speech rights, and have set a scary precedent for other nations that would like to control what its citizens read and think. "Information wants to be free," said Jane Metcalfe, WIRED's president. "At the end of the 20th century, attempts to ban stories like this one are condemned to be futile. That WIRED's criticism of the ban has itself been banned is supremely ironic and utterly chilling." Since WIRED supports free speech, WIRED is making the text of its "banned" story with details on how readers can get more information on the case available on the Internet. Canadians and people around the world can discover exactly what the Canadian government is trying to keep hidden.
Re: Reality Check: Canada Checks in!
On Thu, 7 Apr 1994, Sam Lanfranco wrote: > Whee! First attacks on Economists as have genetic tendencies then the > Barrows Hall gang at Berkeley tossing barbs at we friendly World Series > Loving Canadians. Sorry to have to set the record straight re WIRED. > > WIRED was not banned in Canada. I have a perfectly good copy of it here > on my desk with the other Mister Bill (Gates not Clinton) on the cover. > W, not exactly perfectly good. It is missing pages 27/28 and > 29/30. Canada didn't ban the book, only those pages with the "Paul and Karla > Hit the Net" article which those lurking behind Sproul Hall had the gall > to send here in violation of Canadian law. Thanks for the correction, Sam. I'm glad the censors in Canada have the surgical precision of a smart bomb, wiping out civil liberties and the free press in careful measure. The censoring of USENET groups seems to have been slightly less surgical. I am curious. Do you approve of this censorship, especially the attacks on direct e-mail messages on the Internet? I know the right to a fair trial is important, but it is chilling to give the government the ability to completely shutdown coverage of legal trials. I can imagine that the government would have loved to shutdown coverage of the Rodney King LA Police trials in the name of a "fair trial." It also brings up the interesting issue of how an international communication system like the Internet is going to interact with national laws and censorship. --Nathan Newman, squirming with a bit of pride over the US First Amendment
Collective Responsiblity -- Bosnia and the US Left
To PEN-Lers, I am cross-posting this message on Bosnia from another list, pnews, where there is a vigorous debate over whether the US Left is collaborating with genocide in either opposing US intervention or merely remaining silent. The real issue is whether simply dismissing all US government intervention as "imperialist" has just become an excuse to absolve the Left of responsibility for analyzing and engaging with the rise of fascism around the world. I am in the pro-bombing, pro-intervention camp (although I wish there were alternatives), and I wonder how other PEN-Lers feel? This is not strictly economic but it relates to European integration and the global system. So? * Nathan Newman: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * -- Forwarded message -- Date: Tue, 12 Apr 1994 17:14:34 -0400 (EDT) From:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Collective Responsiblity To Nathan Newman & PNEWS In OVERCOMING THE PAST from New Left Review, in that article Nathan refers to, Adam Michnik writes about this collective responsibility and colective memory. He says that they are "duty bound to be ashamed of what Polish fascists have done." And he is right. It matters not that we do no evil directly to anyone, but to permit evil to be done and do nothing about ending it is also evil and I think there is much to be ashamed of when we can see the killing and not take any action towards stopping it. Just as in Africa I was appalled at seeing the soldiers in Rwanda hacking to death those women even though I've seen death before. Politics doesn't prevent us from doing what is right and if it does it may be the wrong politics. In Somalia I was opposed to intervention. I felt the problem of hunger and starvation could be solved by other means, and did not recognize this kind of urgency, and sending in American troops did result in more lives lost. And perhaps we also saved some lives? In the late 50s in my travels in Europe for the US Government, I found a document which I still have. It is called "PAPERS CONCERNING THE TREATMENT OF GERMAN NATIONALS IN GERMANY 1938- 1939." It was a document presented by the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs to the Parliament in 1939 and it described Buchenwald and the wholesale slaughter of Jewish German Nationals. This was public knowledge in 39 and nothing was done. In the article from New Left Review, Jurgen Haberman writes: "There is no collective guilt. Whoever is guilty must answer for it individually. At the same time, however, there is such a thing as collective responsibility for the mental and cultural context in which mass crimes become possible." Though Europe is the subject, I think this also applies to the US Left and to the cavalier disregard we have taken towards these crimes while we endlessly debate "political correctness" as if the killings are mere abstractions. Adam is right to be terrifyied by the message he is hearing from Yugoslavia of the finish of democratic Europe and in its place the "utopia of ethnically pure states." This fascism lies very close to the surface and I would rather see as Haberman suggests 40 years a stable democracy under the Americans than for the alternative to happen. That shouldn't imply I approve of American sytle capitalism anymore than it does for Haberman to approve of capitalism, but it is a clear picture of what the present alternatives may be. I rather have capitalism and change it then see the fascism of ethnically pure states arrise in Yugoslavia and that's what we may get if we don't step in. An interesting prospect, besides the cruelty which fascism leaves in its path, as seen on nightly regularly on television. Hank Roth
Re: zoning, etc.
Hi,
Sorry if I sounded dictatorial in the last message. I was trying to do
the opposite since I recognize the existence of the delete key. What you
have to recognize is the element of intimidation when discussions suddenly
vear off into jargon. I do worry about the absolute fear the general
public has about discussions around the economy and, while the "educated
layman" may be able to hit the delete key, they may instead just sign-off,
feeling that they are incompetent for the discussion. Which is frankly
what most people do all the time when hearing about economic debates.
One thing progressives need to do is figure our how to frame economic
discussions in a way that continues to engage the public and the left.
That seems to be at least one function of PEN-L: developing that mode of
argumentation.
As Sam noted this is an issue about the use of the Commons, and not just
based on scarce time but constructing a community of discussion,
including defining who will feel welcome to participate and who will feel
like interlopers.
This goes two ways, since both those who want to discuss high eonomic
theory and those who want practical discussions of political application
might in turn feel alienated.
Part of what I tried to do in the last message was to encourage an
enumeration of the uses of this space so as to recognize and encourage
all forms of activity that generally occur within the PEN-L list.
I'm sorry if that wasn't clear.
**
*Nathan Newman: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *
* UC-Berkeley*
Re: Bosnia
On Wed, 13 Apr 1994 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > This is a response to Nathan Newman's posting: > > After having spent the last eight years researching, studying > and teaching in and about Yugoslavia and its constituent parts, I > find the kind of gut reaction of Nathan and others to the events in > Bosnia to be frustrating. First, "gut reactions" are not to be dismissed. Moral repugnance is what drives my disgust with homelessness, exploitation, death squads, and children rooting through garbage in Rio. I may add a level of analysis to think tactically about the response and I have done so with thinking about Bosnia, but at some point, your "gut" gets its say, especially in a situation in Bosnia where the answer is so muddled. I find it particularly frustrating to hear > the call for "pro-intervention" when it was German and US intervention > in organizing and promoting the breakup of Yugoslavia on ethnic > grounds that started the bloodshed in the first place, and it has > been US intervention recently that has discouraged peaceful settlement. I fully agree with your blame of US and German support for Slovenia and Croation separatism for the present crisis, but that just intensifies our responsibility to push for any means to stop the slaughter thus provoked. And as noted by others, the US stopped supporting secessionism a while ago. > If Nathan or any others think that Bosnia can be put back together > under a Muslim dominated government, which appears to be the current > US goal, they have been smoking some of the most power halucigens > currently known. The fact is, once the US, Germany, the EC and the > UN encouraged and facilitated the breakup of Yugoslavia on ethnic > grounds *without any guarantees to the protection of minorities* the > fate of Bosnia was sealed. Possibly, but I care less about "Bosnia" than the Bosnians, real people who suffer death and terror. The goal is to stop the murder of civilians in the safe havens of Bosnian cities. The actions in Sarajevo were relatively successful and if the present bombings protect civilians in Gorazde, I will deem it a success. Bosnia may be integrated into some form of "federation" with Croatia as the current negotations seem to be leading and parts may be absorbed into Serbia, but the issue is now just the protection of basic humanity. I recognize the tragedy and understand how frustrated everyone is with this death. I don't know if my position is "right" but I also don't except simple formulas that see US/UN intervention in simple Cold War terms. --Nathan Newman
Re: Collective Responsiblity -- Bosnia and the US Left
On Wed, 13 Apr 1994, Jim Devine wrote: > When I see someone on the left advocating intervention in the > former Yugoslavia, I have to ask: "intervention by whom?" > The intervention that is currently going on is by the US/UN/NATO. > does the Left have any say in how this force is used? do the > people of the US have any say in how this force is used? do the > people of the world or of the former Yugoslavia have any say? > I hope that I am not being presumptuous to answer all these > questions with "no." The point of the original post was that in the face of the mass murder and mass rape of Bosnians, the political issues of "who decides" starts to pale in the face of the issue "Will intervention stop the bloodbath?" As Habermas stated in the New Left Review and Hand Roth and I support, better to make Bosnia safe for capitalism today so that there are people left to fight for socialism tomorrow. In Solidarity (if dispute today), Nathan Newman
Chicago Convention for Socialists & Progressives (fwd)
This is a special invitation to attend the July founding convention of the Committees of Correspondence, a new formation seeking to bring socialists and progressives together. About 2000 people have joined the CoC in the last two years, including union leaders, environmentalist including one of the Green candidates for Governor of California, scholars such as Manning Marable and Angela Davis, and community activists like Diane Greene of CISPES. We hope you can participate in this exciting new coming together of left and progressive forces. For more info, please feel free to e-mail me at [EMAIL PROTECTED] === COMMITTEES OF CORRESPONDENCE PLAN JULY CONVENTION IN CHICAGO === Call to CoC Convention on July 22-24 in Chicago, Illinois The Committees of Correspondence warmly invites your participation in the founding convention of a new political organization. This event will advance the dialogue about the future shape of progressive politics in our country and will fulfill the goals of founding a new left organization made by the conference on Perspectives on Democracy and Socialism in the 90s, held in Berkeley in July 1992 and attended by over 1000 participants from around the country. We encourage the involvement of all those who would like to join in this undertaking. This convention will be open to diverse voices and experiences, seeking to learn from and build on our rich and varied histories in the struggle for a just society. Whatever the character of your struggle for fulfillment of any aspect of human needs, in neighborhood, school or workplace, we invite your full and equal participation. Our call for the creation of this organization is an affirmation of the politics of struggle against class exploitation and all forms of human oppression. We affirm the need to respect and to continue what is valuable in many left traditions. But we also believe that new departures are necessary. Our politics are based on a thoroughgoing democratic transformation of society, which we call socialism. Our vision of political activism is anchored in the commitment to human emancipation. We are committeed to creating an organization whose open, democratic, mutually supportive and pluralistic practices harmonize with the kid of society we seek. WHERE: Bismarck Hotel Randolph at La Salle Chicago, IL 60601 To register for convention, just send a $25 registration fee to the Committees of Correspondence at 11 John St., Room 506, NY, NY 10038. Scholarships are available, so call (212) 233-7151 for more info. For voting status, you must join the CoC by June 11th. Send $25 for membership to the above address/$10 for students and low-income members. For hotel rooms, call (312) 236-0123 for reservations. The following is the Statement of Principles approved at the 1992 conference: -- [The following is a draft statement of shared principles and purpose of the Committees of Correspondence, issued for public discussion on June 1, 1992.] WHERE WE STAND - A declaration of principles of the Committees of Correspondence Goals and Vision. We are motivated by the profound conviction that our country needs a humane alternative to the anti-human system of capitalism. For the majority of working people, and especially racially and nationally oppressed people, this system does not work. After the 1980s Decade of Greed, the top 1 percent of wealth-holders have more property than the bottom 90 percent. Capitalism is fundamentally militarist, elitist, racist, sexist, homophobic and destructive of the environment on which all life depends. The tragic consequences are human and individual: ever more numerous homeless, the majority of them children; millions trapped in low-wage, dead-end jobs, and millions more unemployed, two-thirds of whom never receive unemployment insurance; one in seven Americans without health insurance. Instead of promoting community, capitalism pits people against each other, to the detriment of us all; it criminally abuses women and children in the name of "family values." Our national resources continue to be senselessly squandered on preparations for war. This looting of society and nature casts a shadow of pessimism across the land, shattering parents' dreams of a better future for their children. There is a spiritual crisis; a profound alienation of people from institutions unresponsive to their needs. This crisis can only be addressed by radical democratization, the realization of full equality, the empowerment of people to control all aspects of decision making affecting their daily lives, making institutions, public and private, advanc
RESOURCE: EDIN Archive for Progressive Resources On-Line
** PLEASE REPOST To OTHER LISTS ** ARCHIVE OF PROGRESSIVE RESOURCES ON THE INTERNET The Economic Democracy Information Network (EDIN) is an archive of files and gopher connections for progressive activists and researchers. We have directories covering issues ranging from the economy. labor unions, race and racism, gender issues, trade, socialist organizations, and information on local, state, national and international government organizations. See the outline of the EDIN directories at the end of this message. We are very interested in receiving new files or pointers to gopher/ftp sites dealing with progressive issues, so please send such files or information on where to find them to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To access the EDIN archive, you need gopher access to the Internet. From most University machines, you should be able to access the gopher by typing the following at the prompt. Type: gopher garnet.berkeley.edu 1250 This will link you to the Economic Democracy Information Network (EDIN) gopher maintained by the UCB Center for Community Economic Research. There's a wide variety of links to progressive info on the Internet. If you use IGC (Peacenet/Labornet, etc.), it's even simpler. When you log-in to Peacenet, you will see a menu of choices (e-mail, conferences, etc.). Hit "i" for Internet. That will link you to the IGC gopher. Move to the "Other Progressive Gophers" line. Under that menu, you will find the Economic Democracy Information Network gopher listed. Choose it and follow the above directions. You can also access the EDIN gopher through the "Mother Gopher" at Minnesota. Go down the hierarchy of nations and states until you find California. The Economic Democracy Information Network (EDIN) is listed under the list of California gophers. --Nathan Newman: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Economic Democracy Information Network a project of UC-Berkeley's Center for Community Economic Research = ECONOMIC DEMOCRACY INFORMATION NETWORK == located at garnet.berkeley.edu 1250 to send files for inclusions, send info to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] OUTLINE OF EDIN GOPHER: 1. About the EDIN Gopher/ 1. About the EDIN Gopher. 2. Copyright Notice. 3. Do You Have Documents You Want to Add to EDIN?. 4. Information About Gopher/ 2. The Economy (General Resources)/ 1. Budget of the United States Government, Year 1995/ 2. CCH Report on the Crisis in California (draft)/ 3. Census Information (various)/ 4. Commerce Business Daily/ 5. Corporate Report Stories OnLine (limited selection)/ 6. Credit Unions/ 7. Economic Resources (Communities for a Sustain. Future)/ 8. Economics Gophers and Telnet Connections/ 9. Political Economy of Growth Dataset Project/ 3. Economic Conversion and Peace Resources/ 1. Conflict Resolution Consortium/ 2. Economic Conversion Information Exchange/ 4. Labor Issues/ 1. Become a Union Organizer: The Organizing Institute. 2. Government Info and Legislation on Labor/ 1. Department of Labor & Agencies/ 2. US Labor Code- CFR 29/ 3. US Labor Legislation/ 3. Resources for Labor Research/ 1. LABORFILMS list. 2. Labor And Employment Law Books (abstracts)/ 3. Labor History Collections (from St. Louis)/ 4. List of Comparative Indust. Rel. resources. 5. List of Union BBSs. 6. Syllabi for Industrial Relations courses/ 7. UC Labor Statistics Series / 4. ACTIV-L Labor News Briefs/ 5. Electronic Discussion Lists Dealing with Labor/ 6. US Unions (Archive of files)/ 7. Unions Around the World (archive)/ 8. Labor and People of Color/ 9. Women and the Workplace/ 9. Gays and the Workplace / 10. Other Labor-Related Gophers/ 5. Race and Racism/ 1. ARC Race File: articles on communities of color../ 2. Archive of Race/Racism Files/ 3. African-Americans/ 1. African American Women/ 2. African-Americans: Biblio. of Materials (UMich) / 3. On-Line Resources on African-Amer. (Arthur McGee)/ 4. University of Missouri Black Studies Gopher/ 4. Asian-Americans/ 1. Asian-Americans: Film/Video Materials (Umich) 5. Latinos/ 1. Chicano-LatinoNet (UCLA)/ 2. Latinos: Film/Video Materials (UMich). 6. Native Americans/ 1. American Indian-Native American Women/ 2. FTP site for Native American Resources/ 3. National Indian Policy Center/ 4. NativeNet / 5. On-Line Resources: Native Americans (Arthur McGee)/ 7. Fourth World--
RESOURCE: EDIN Archive for Progressive Resources On-Line (fwd)
** PLEASE REPOST To OTHER LISTS ** *** Note: two new ports added to EDIN gopher at garnet.berkeley.edu 1251 and garnet.berkeley.edu 1252. If the gopher is busy, try those ports for access. ARCHIVE OF PROGRESSIVE RESOURCES ON THE INTERNET The Economic Democracy Information Network (EDIN) is an archive of files and gopher connections for progressive activists and researchers. We have directories covering issues ranging from the economy. labor unions, race and racism, gender issues, trade, socialist organizations, and information on local, state, national and international government organizations. See the outline of the EDIN directories at the end of this message. We are very interested in receiving new files or pointers to gopher/ftp sites dealing with progressive issues, so please send such files or information on where to find them to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To access the EDIN archive, you need gopher access to the Internet. From most University machines, you should be able to access the gopher by typing the following at the prompt. Type: gopher garnet.berkeley.edu 1250 or ports 1251 and 1252 This will link you to the Economic Democracy Information Network (EDIN) gopher maintained by the UCB Center for Community Economic Research. There's a wide variety of links to progressive info on the Internet. If you use IGC (Peacenet/Labornet, etc.), it's even simpler. When you log-in to Peacenet, you will see a menu of choices (e-mail, conferences, etc.). Hit "i" for Internet. That will link you to the IGC gopher. Move to the "Other Progressive Gophers" line. Under that menu, you will find the Economic Democracy Information Network gopher listed. Choose it and follow the above directions. You can also access the EDIN gopher through the "Mother Gopher" at Minnesota. Go down the hierarchy of nations and states until you find California. The Economic Democracy Information Network (EDIN) is listed under the list of California gophers. --Nathan Newman: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Economic Democracy Information Network a project of UC-Berkeley's Center for Community Economic Research = ECONOMIC DEMOCRACY INFORMATION NETWORK == located at garnet.berkeley.edu 1250 (and 1251 or 1252) to send files for inclusions, send info to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] OUTLINE OF EDIN GOPHER: 1. About the EDIN Gopher/ 1. About the EDIN Gopher. 2. Copyright Notice. 3. Do You Have Documents You Want to Add to EDIN?. 4. Information About Gopher/ 2. The Economy (General Resources)/ 1. Budget of the United States Government, Year 1995/ 2. CCH Report on the Crisis in California (draft)/ 3. Census Information (various)/ 4. Commerce Business Daily/ 5. Corporate Report Stories OnLine (limited selection)/ 6. Credit Unions/ 7. Economic Resources (Communities for a Sustain. Future)/ 8. Economics Gophers and Telnet Connections/ 9. Political Economy of Growth Dataset Project/ 3. Economic Conversion and Peace Resources/ 1. Conflict Resolution Consortium/ 2. Economic Conversion Information Exchange/ 4. Labor Issues/ 1. Become a Union Organizer: The Organizing Institute. 2. Government Info and Legislation on Labor/ 1. Department of Labor & Agencies/ 2. US Labor Code- CFR 29/ 3. US Labor Legislation/ 3. Resources for Labor Research/ 1. LABORFILMS list. 2. Labor And Employment Law Books (abstracts)/ 3. Labor History Collections (from St. Louis)/ 4. List of Comparative Indust. Rel. resources. 5. List of Union BBSs. 6. Syllabi for Industrial Relations courses/ 7. UC Labor Statistics Series / 4. ACTIV-L Labor News Briefs/ 5. Electronic Discussion Lists Dealing with Labor/ 6. US Unions (Archive of files)/ 7. Unions Around the World (archive)/ 8. Labor and People of Color/ 9. Women and the Workplace/ 9. Gays and the Workplace / 10. Other Labor-Related Gophers/ 5. Race and Racism/ 1. ARC Race File: articles on communities of color../ 2. Archive of Race/Racism Files/ 3. African-Americans/ 1. African American Women/ 2. African-Americans: Biblio. of Materials (UMich) / 3. On-Line Resources on African-Amer. (Arthur McGee)/ 4. University of Missouri Black Studies Gopher/ 4. Asian-Americans/ 1. Asian-Americans: Film/Video Materials (Umich) 5. Latinos/ 1. Chicano-LatinoNet (UCLA)/ 2. Latinos: Film/Video Materials (UMich). 6. Native Americans/ 1. American Indian-Native American Women/ 2. FT
CROSSROADS Magazine Back Issues Now On-line
ANNOUNCING GOPHER SITE FOR CROSSROADS Magazine Back Issues For those not familiar with CROSSROADS Magazine, its stated purpose is to "promote a candid appraisal of new realities; to foster dialogue on the U.S. left; to push forward the development of effective strategies for progressive and socialist activism. CROSSROADS aims to provide a forum for the re-examination of long-held Marxist tenets and the revitalization of Marxist thought. CROSSROADS covers the full range of struggles against racism, sexism, homophobia and for peace, equality, democracy, social justice, self-determination and protection of the environment, while stressing the centrality of anti-racism to building a popular movement rooted in U.S. realities." Subscriptions are $24 for one year/$42 for two years/$19 per year student rate/$30 International/$45 International Air Mail/$40 Institutions. Send them to CROSSROADS at P.O. Box 2809 Oakland, CA 94609. An archive site has been established for back issues of CROSSROADS. So far issues from February to June 1994 have been archived, but others will follow. Included are issues dealing with Black History Month, the Chiapas Uprising, Women & Organizing, the legacy of El Salvador Solidarity, a special Youth issue, and an issue on Stonewall 94. To access the archive, you need gopher access to the Internet. >From most machines with direct access to the Internet (including Unviersity machines), you should be able to access the gopher by typing the following at the prompt. Type: gopher garnet.berkeley.edu 1251 This will link you to the Economic Democracy Information Network (EDIN) gopher maintained by the UCB Center for Community Economic Research. There's a wide variety of links to progressive info on the Internet, but you will want to use the cursor to move down the menu you will see until you reach a line labelled "Progressive Magazines and On-Line News Servics" Hit return. You will see Crossroads listed among other magazines like Mother Jones.Move to that line and hit return. You will see the various issues listed. If you use IGC (Peacenet/Labornet, etc.), it's even simpler. When you log-in to Peacenet, you will see a menu of choices (e-mail, conferences, etc.). Hit "i" for Internet. That will link you to the IGC gopher. Move to the "Other Progressive Gophers" line. Under that menu, you will find the Economic Democracy Information Network gopher listed. Choose it and follow the above directions. You can also access the EDIN gopher through the "Mother Gopher" at Minnesota. Go down the hierarchy of nations and states until you find California. The Economic Democracy Information Network (EDIN) is listed under the list of California gophers. --Nathan Newman, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Center for Community Economic Research
Call for Articles for UC LABOR CENTER REPORTER
A CALL FOR ARTICLES ON LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT DEADLINE FOR NEXT ISSUEOCTOBER 25, 1994 Do you have an interest in labor? Would you like to publish? The Labor Center Reporter (LCR) is produced, and published by graduate students, faculty, and staff of the Center for Labor Research and Education at the University of California, Berkeley. The purpose of the publication is to provide provocative, in depth analysis of labor issues to our readership of over 800 labor unions nationwide. The Labor Center Reporter editorial board is calling for articles on labor; especially articles about innovative approaches to organizing and case studies of how unions are responding to a volatile global economy. Topics in previous issues have included: *NAFTA *Worker Retraining and Defense Conversion *Women and Family Issues in the Workplace *Health Insurance Reform *Information Sources for Labor: A Guided Tour We encourage authors from other organizations and institutions to submit articles. Articles should be 3-7 double spaced pages (or approximately 750-1500 words). You can make a difference! Copies should be sent to The Labor Center Reporter, Institute of Industrial Relations 2521 Channing Way # Berkeley, CA 94720- Or fax to (510) 642-6432. Or email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] The deadline for submission of articles is October 25, 1994. For more information, contact John Sladkus at (510) 643-6815 or email at [EMAIL PROTECTED] John Sladkus Institute of Industrial Relations 2521 Channing Way # Berkeley, CA 94720- Voice: (510) 643-6815 Fax: (510) 642-6432
Call DC for Free- 1-800-768-2221
You can call Capitol Hill to tell your Congressperson or Senator what you think AND charge the religious right for your call. Far-right Traditional Values Coalition leader Rev. Lou Sheldon paid for a toll-free number so anti-gay supporters could call congressional members and express their political views. Well, progressives can use the same number and give the opposite views directly to DC. The 1-800-768-2221 phone number connects you directly to Capitol Hill. Spread this post and the phone number as far as possible. Let's make some calls and push up the phone bill for the religious right. *Nathan Newman: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
The Left List: E-mail Discussion on the Democratic Left
=== === A LIST FOR ACTIVISTS CONCERNED WITH BUILDING A DEMOCRATIC LEFT IN THE UNITED STATES AND IN THE WORLD The Left List is a discussion forum dedicated to bringing together activists organizing for fundamental social change and creating a common meeting ground for electronic discussion, debate and collaboration. It is dedicated to those wishing to create a radical alternative to capitalism, whether you call it socialism, sustainable development, or radical democracy. To join the list, please send a note to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Place the following command in the body of the message: subscribe left-l e.g. subscribe left-l Nathan Newman You will then be a member of the Left List and send messages for redistribution to the following address: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please make your first post an introduction of yourself, the kinds of activism you are engaged in and a general sense of what you think we need to build a democratic left. Put the words: INTRO: in the Subject header. To leave the list just send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]: signoff left-l The Left List is an uncensored forum for the discussion of building a broad democratic left in the United States and within the world that can seek fundamental change in our economic and social system. It seeks to create a common meeting ground for activists of all stripes who are dedicated to the principles of building an economy and society controlled by its workers and communities in a grassroots democratic manner. Through dialogue, debate and challenging one another, we can address the challenges of the 1990s of building a new democratic left in the post-Cold War period. Possible projects of this list include (but are not limited to) developing a broad discussion FAQ on democratic socialism that can be used for promoting a democratic left on the Internet and in the world, developing an archive of facts and statistics relevant to supporting socialist and progressive arguments, developing a detailed program of short-term radical reforms that could be promoted publicly, and developing a listing of democratic left organizations across the country to encourage others to join them. Discussions have ranged from discussions on building democracy in unions to where the left should be on Haiti. DECISION-MAKING ON THE LEFT LIST All binding decisions on rules of procedure shall be made by majority vote of participants on the list. All decisions shall be preceded by a period of discussion and members shall have four days to register their votes. A majority of those voting shall decide the issue. Where multiple options are available, ranked voting procedures shall be used. If anyone violates the rules established by majority voting, the moderator(s) shall send warnings. After three warnings on the same offense, the moderator shall propose a vote of expulsion on the offending member of the list. List members will have four days to register their votes on expulsion. If a majority votes for expulsion, the offending member will be removed from the list by the list manager. If a majority votes not to expel the member, the moderator will propose discussion on abolishing or modifying the rule that was broken (since the failure to expel may indicate that the rule is considered overly strict). In the case of a personally abusive assault by one member on another or in gross violations of the charter rules where the offending member refuses to stop, the moderator may suspend the offending member from the list pending the outcome of the vote on the member's expulsion. ROLE OF THE MODERATOR(S) The moderator(s) primary role is to track enforcement of democratically-agreed to rules of the list and send private warnings to remind members of them. Additionally, moderator(s) can encourage threads that have lost vitality but are still of interest to a few members to convert themselves to cc: lists away from the main list. Also, moderators should take on themselves the task of encouraging new issues for discussion or new tacks on an old discussion. ROLE OF THE LIST MANAGER The list manager (who may or may not be a moderator) performs the mechanical tasks of adding and removing members from the list. All "housekeeping" messages will be sent to the list manager. The list manager will only involuntarily remove someone from the list based on the decision of the majority or, in the extreme, suspend them based on the decision of the moderator(s). ELECTION OF MODERATOR(S) List members will decide how many moderators should exist on the list and all moderators must be approved by majority vote of the list members.
LEFTNEWS: List of News Items of Interest to the Left
LEFT NEWS- An Edited List of News Items of Interest to the Democratic Left -- A Companion List to LEFT-L and LEFT-ORG LEFT NEWS is an edited list that distributes electronic posts of news and files of interest to democratic left activists. The list will aim to have a reasonable volume of high quality posts, carefully selected by the list manager and associated editors. The list manager is Nathan Newman at [EMAIL PROTECTED] Associated with the general Left List, it is dedicated to those wishing to create a radical alternative to capitalism, whether you call it socialism, sustainable development, or radical democracy. To join the list, please send a note to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Place the following command in the body of the message: subscribe leftnews i.e. subscribe leftnews Nathan Newman You will then be a member of the Left List and receive all messages. If you wish to send a news item to the list, send the messages for redistribution to the following address: [EMAIL PROTECTED] The list manager will check for relevancy and forward on the post if it is a news item or a general interest news analysis. Otherwise, it will be forwarded to LEFT-L if that is the more appropriate distribution list. To leave the list just send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]: signoff leftnews If you regularly receive news reports in electronic form and would like to apply for direct "send" abilities to the list, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] State the kinds of news items you would like to post and the likely volume.
Immigration and Job Competition: Longer article
Hi all, The following is a short summary piece I did a year ago while working with some of the immigrant rights groups in the Bay Area. One of the prime issues I researched was the job displacement of low-income workers by new immigrants, especially among African Americans. Folks at the National Network for Immigrant Rights and the No. Cal Coalition for Immigrant & Refugee Rights gave their general approval to the analysis, so I have some confidence in its general worth as a very introductory summary of a complex topic. *Nathan Newman: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** CONTOURS OF THE DEBATE ON IMMIGRATION AND JOBS ECONOMIC CONSEQUENCES OF IMMIGRATION: DO IMMIGRANTS HELP THE US ECONOMY? This is the wrong question because for two reasons, there is no single "US economy" anymore. First, the economy in the US is sharply divided between those in inner-city poverty areas and suburban/wealthier areas. By any economic measure, immigrant low- wage workers benefit consumers in an economy by producing more than they consume and thus lower costs for others; a suburban family benefits through low-cost child care or through purchase of cheaper goods. However, inner-city natives might lose out because the effects of lower wages (due to competition for jobs) would outpace benefits due to lower prices. Secondly, it is a bad question because "the US economy" can no longer be analyzed apart from the world economy. American workers compete not only with immigrants in the US, but with low- wage workers from the countries from where they immigrate. Whatever debates exist over the effects of immigration on employment for less-skilled US workers, it is fair to say that such effects are overwhelmed by the effects of the transfer of manufacturing jobs to other countries, especially in its effects on the deindustrialization of the cities. To focus on immigration is to focus on the least significant competition facing native workers. Also, third world poverty and debt policies are driving forces in lowering standards of living in other countries, leading both to the desire of residents to immigrate to the US and the desire of US businesses to relocate jobs to those countries. So any wage policy addressing the needs of American workers must address the needs of potential immigrants to the US. Researchers Vernez and Ronfeldt argue that "heavy immigration into California . . . let many low-wage industries continue expanding while their counterparts nationwide were contracting in the face of foreign competition." Their data show that in California "manufacturing grew five times the national average whereas wages grew 12 percent more slowly in the state, and 15 percent more slowly in Los Angeles." The implications for labor are clear: either manufacturing is exported to take advantage of cheap foreign labor, or cheap foreign labor is imported in numbers large enough to depress wages here. The other issue raised by the relation of trade to immigration is the differential effects of trade on different economic sectors. For economic goods that are easily traded across borders (especially manufacturing), immigration does not have much effect on wages in the US, since such production will easily go across the border to low-wage workers if those workers do not come to the US. However, for "non-tradeable" (mostly personal services such as janitorial work), the effects on wages are a much more debated issue. DO IMMIGRANTS USE MORE GOVERNMENT BENEFITS THAN THEY PRODUCE IN TAXES? Again, this is the wrong question, since the effects of "New Federalism" at the federal level and state polices have skewed which level of government has responsibility for immigrant social needs and which level receives revenue. Every study shows that immigrants pay far more in taxes than they consume in social services; however, the taxes they pay go mostly to either state or federal coffers, while local governments, especially in the area of health care, are burdened with the costs without compensatory revenue. One study in Los Angeles County estimated that immigrants, including undocumented workers, pay about twice as much in taxes -- roughly $4.3 billion -- as they consume in county services. Unfortunately, $2.6 billion of those taxes go to the federal government leaving the county overwhelmed by the costs of immigrant services without the revenues produced by their work in the community. But this is not an issue about immigration but about the broader issue of tax fairness and funds being provided by state and federal sources to deal with local needs. WHY ARE IMMIGRANTS EMPLOYED AT A HIGHER RATE THAN AFRICAN- AMERICAN WORKERS? In one comprehensive study in Chicago, ninety-four percent of Mexican immigrant fathers who were interviewed were employed, compared with 68 percent of b
Re: Norway EU update after Finland's YES
On Mon, 24 Oct 1994, Trond Andresen wrote: > People by now know most of the arguments, so the task for the NO side > is to a large degree to "vaccinate" the public against all "the > megaphones" that bwill scream and cajole YES!!! into their ears in the > coming weeks. Thank God that political commercials are not allowed on > Norwegian TV. (Btw, to the U.S. for a moment: I heard that Oliver North > has by now used 16 million dollars on his election campaign. Is any > semblance of democracy possible when such is allowed???) Hey, at least Ollie North is getting funding from a range of people. Here in California, a guy named Michael Huffington (whose name recognition was 2% eight months ago) has spent that $16 million equivalent out of his own inherited oil money. Why take money from special interests when you can be your own special interest? --Nathan Newman
IGC Job Announcements: Labornet, Program, & Finance jobs
Hi all, This message contains announcements for three jobs over at the Institute for Global Communications (PeaceNet, EcoNet, ConflictNet, LaborNet). They include a new staff position created to support LaborNet, their section dealing with labor, and a general program coordinator and finance person. Institute for Global Communications Job Announcement LaborNet Program Coordinator LaborNet is a community of labor unions, activists and organizations using computer networks for local, regional and global information sharing and collaboration, with the intent of increasing the human rights and economic justice of workers. We provide electronic mail, conference forums, databases, mailing lists, and Internet services to over 350 members in the U.S. LaborNet is seeking to expand its membership and activities through this new position. Description of Duties: o Outreach to unions and labor activists. o Provide ongoing assistance to new and existing users through training, telephone, and on-line support. o Assist conference facilitators to develop on-line conferences. o Regularly monitor LaborNet conferences and work in collaboration with with the LaborNet Steering Committee to manage the network. Qualified candidates will have most of the following skills: o Has been a member of a labor union o Good written and verbal communications skills o Experience with computers o Committed to a vision of social justice o Office management experience o Experience using computer networks Pay: o 15 hours per week with a wage of $12 per hour. o After a 6 month review, this position and the number of hours may be expanded, contingent on sales. People of color and women strongly encouraged to apply. Deadline for application is November 30, 1994. To apply, mail, fax or email your resume and cover letter to: LaborNet Hiring Committee Institute for Global Communications 18 De Boom Street, San Francisco, CA 94107 Fax: (415)546-1794 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Institute for Global Communications Job Announcement IGC Program Coordinator The Institute for Global Communications is a non profit organization that operates 4 national computer networks: PeaceNet, EcoNet, ConflictNet and LaborNet. IGC is committed to progressive social change, and works on issues such as peace, human rights, environmental sustainability, social and economic justice, and non-violence. IGC Networks have 10,000 subscribers, and are fully connected to the Internet. In addition to offering an on-line service, IGC Networks provides Internet Publishing Services. IGC is currently hiring a Program Coordinator to work in the San Francisco Office. The Program Coordinator is responsible for developing relationships with organizations and individuals that wish to make use of the IGC Networks to accomplish their goals of progressive change, and to support those clients once they are on-line. Approximately half of this person's time will be used to develop Internet publishing resources such as Gopher and World Wide Web, and working with existing clients to develop other on-line tools (databases, mailing lists, private conferences, general networking). The rest of the time will involve developing new relationships and doing outreach with organizations in an effort to get them on-line and then make the most effective use of the networks as possible. Qualified candidates will have most of the following skills: o good writing, phone and public speaking skills; o experience using the on-line medium; o experience working on progressive political and social issues; o organized and self-motivated; o ability to work closely with a team of people; o experience in the visual presentation of information via WWW and Gopher; o editorial management experience. Pay and Benefits Full-time. $22,500 - $27,000 per year. 3 weeks vacation, health & dental insurance People of color strongly encouraged to apply. Deadline for applications is November 15, 1994. Starting date by January 1, 1995 To apply, mail, fax or e-mail your resume and cover letter to: Program Coordinator Search Committee Institute for Global Communications 18 De Boom Street, San Francisco, CA 94107 Fax: 415/546-1794 E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] No calls, please. === Job Announcement *** Finance Specialist *** Institute for Global Communications The Institute for Global Communications is a non-profit organization that operates four international computer networks: PeaceNet, EcoNet, ConflictNet and LaborNet. IGC is committed to progressive social change, and works on issues such as
ACTION: Call Advertisers in Scab Bay Area Newspapers
*** ACTION ALERT **
CALL ADVERTISERS SUPPORTING SCAB NEWSPAPERS
The monopoly San Francisco News Agency, which operates both the
San Francisco CHRONICLE and SF EXAMINER has launched an all-out assault
on its unionized workers.
Not only has it refused to come to acceptable terms with its
workers and is now operating a scab newspaper, today it sent letters to
all striking employees threatening to permanently replace them.
Hypocritically, the editorial in today's CHRONICLE said, "Mean
managers we may be, but we love our staff, each and every one, and at the
moment we miss them sorely." They miss them so sorely they have intend to
fire ("permanently replace" in lawyer speak) every one of them who does
not return to work by Wednesday.
Not only should all Bay Area residents boycott the newspapers,
but everyone should call advertisers who continue to fund the scab
newspaper and tell them you will no longer shop at their stores if they
continue to advertise in the SF CHRONICLE or EXAMINER.
Here is an initial list of advertisers to call (with phone numbers). All
had advertisements in the Thursday, Nov. 3rd CHRONICLE. Contact both the
corporate advertising office and use the general numbers and slow down
their business:
NORDSTROM 1-415-243-8500 (main SF store/Advertising Center)
1-800-695-8000 (mail order)
EMPORIUM1-213-227-2000 (corporate office in LA)
1-800-626-4800 (mail order number)
MACY'S 1-800-820-2663 (Advertising Office)
1-800-622-9748 (Corporate office)
VIRGIN ATLANTIC 1-415-616-3935 (SF Sales--Aileen Manion)
1-212-206-6612 (Ask for marketing)
1-800-862-8621 (National #)
DELTA AIRLINES 1-800-221-1212 (passenger info)
1-404-715-2600 (ask for advertising dept.)
ESPN(Call your cable company)
FIDELITY INVESTMENTS1-800-678-4667
WORLD SAVINGS 1-800-642-0257 (Loan Service office)
1-415-446-6000 (Home office)
BROOKS BROTHERS 1-800-274-1816 (corporate office)
MORTON'S STEAKHOUSE 1-415-986-5830
IMAGNIN 1-800-354-9040
1-415-362-2100
DESIGN METRO ITALIA 1-510-420-0383
Call these companies and threaten to boycott them if they
continue to advertise.
Solidarity.
*Nathan Newman: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Fight SF Scab Advertisers-- Day #2
*** ACTION ALERT ** CALL ADVERTISERS SUPPORTING SCAB NEWSPAPERS Day #2 of Scab Publication The monopoly San Francisco Newspaper Agency, which operates both the San Francisco CHRONICLE and SF EXAMINER has launched an all-out assault on its unionized workers. Some advertisers have withdrawn advertising for the duration of the strike, but others continue to advertise in these publications. We mst make it clear to these advertisers that they will lose sales by such scab advertising. Not only has the SF Newspaper Agency refused to come to acceptable terms with its workers and is now operating a scab newspaper, yesterday it sent letters to all striking employees threatening to permanently replace them. Any advertiser that supports the newspapers under these conditions should be threatened with boycott. Not only should all Bay Area residents boycott the newspapers, but everyone across the country should call national advertisers who continue to fund the scab newspaper and tell them you will no longer shop at their stores if they continue to advertise in the SF CHRONICLE or EXAMINER. Here is an list of advertisers to call (with phone numbers). All had advertisements in the Friday, Nov. 4thCHRONICLE. Contact both the corporate advertising office and use the general numbers and slow down their business: EMPORIUM1-213-227-2000 (corporate office in LA) 1-800-626-4800 (mail order number) Emporium had multiple ads on Dy 1 and has even more on Day 2. Today, they have 4-1/2 full pages of advertising. Make calling Emporium your top priority, especially since they have a history of union-busting among their own employees. MACY'S 1-800-820-2663 (Advertising Office) 1-800-622-9748 (Corporate office) Macy's had advertising on both Day 1 and Day 2. They reportedly are pulling advertising from future scab newspapers, but it is worth it to call them and reinforce that message (and thank them for pulling the ads.) CAMBRIDGE SOUNDWORKS1-800-367-4434 (ex. 2, ask for advertising) Talked to advertising folks, but they were pretty determined to keep advertising. Keep calls going in. Especially, if you're not in California, keep dialing the 800- numbers and let them know that supporting a scab newspaper will cost them money. JC PENNY1-800-222-6161 (Catalog Ordering-general complaint) 1-510-225-0110 (Regional office that places ads) CIRCUIT CITY1-510-847-9201 (Division Office) 1-804-527-4000 x4058 (Main Corporate office) NEIMAN MARCUS 1-415-362-3900 (Main SF store) 1-214-741-6911 (Advertising nationally) WHOLE EARTH ACCESS 1-510-428-1600 (Corporate office) MR. LIQUOR 1-415-731-6222 A small store which is really debating whether to continue advertising. Worth a call. TOWER RECORDS/VIDEOS1-800-541-0070 (Corporate office, ask for advertising) GLENDALE FEDERAL BANK 1-800-834-1000 (connects to a local branch) THE GOOD GUYS 1-415-615-6000 (Corporate office, ask fr advertising) HOME SAVINGS1-800-765-4000 == Advertisers who advertised on the first day of the scab CHRON: == NORDSTROM 1-415-243-8500 (main SF store/Advertising Center) 1-800-695-8000 (mail order) VIRGIN ATLANTIC 1-415-616-3935 (SF Sales--Aileen Manion) 1-212-206-6612 (Ask for marketing) 1-800-862-8621 (National #) DELTA AIRLINES 1-800-221-1212 (passenger info) 1-404-715-2600 (ask for advertising dept.) ESPN(Call your cable company) FIDELITY INVESTMENTS1-800-678-4667 WORLD SAVINGS 1-800-642-0257 (Loan Service office) 1-415-446-6000 (Home office) BROOKS BROTHERS 1-800-274-1816 (corporate office) MORTON'S STEAKHOUSE 1-415-986-5830 IMAGNIN 1-800-354-9040 1-415-362-2100 DESIGN METRO ITALIA 1-510-420-0383 Call these companies and threaten to boycott them if they continue to advertise. Solidarity. *****Nathan Newman: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
SF Free Press on Web Server-- Union-made Virtual News
The San Francisco Free Press Published by The Conference of Newspaper Unions IS NOW AVAILABLE ON A WORLD WIDE WEB SERVER It can be reached at http://ccnet.com/SF_Free_Press/ Please spread this throughout the internet and write into the paper with articles, letters and solidarity. We are working to make it a daily paper within a couple of weeks and are getting unions to take bundles.
Day #3: Fight SF Scab Advertisers
NES 1-800-221-1212 (passenger info) 1-404-715-2600 (ask for advertising dept.) ESPN(Call your cable company) FIDELITY INVESTMENTS1-800-678-4667 WORLD SAVINGS 1-800-642-0257 (Loan Service office) 1-415-446-6000 (Home office) BROOKS BROTHERS 1-800-274-1816 (corporate office) MORTON'S STEAKHOUSE 1-415-986-5830 IMAGNIN 1-800-354-9040 1-415-362-2100 DESIGN METRO ITALIA 1-510-420-0383 Call these companies and threaten to boycott them if they continue to advertise. Solidarity. *Nathan Newman: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Day #7: Fight SF Newspaper Scab Advertisers
rtising nationally) WHOLE EARTH ACCESS 1-510-428-1600 (Corporate office) MR. LIQUOR 1-415-731-6222 A small store which is really debating whether to continue advertising. Worth a call. GLENDALE FEDERAL BANK 1-800-834-1000 (connects to a local branch) THE GOOD GUYS 1-415-615-6000 (Corporate office, ask fr advertising) HOME SAVINGS1-800-765-4000 == Advertisers who advertised on the first day of the scab CHRON: == NORDSTROM 1-415-243-8500 (main SF store/Advertising Center) 1-800-695-8000 (mail order) VIRGIN ATLANTIC 1-415-616-3935 (SF Sales--Aileen Manion) 1-212-206-6612 (Ask for marketing) 1-800-862-8621 (National #) DELTA AIRLINES 1-800-221-1212 (passenger info) 1-404-715-2600 (ask for advertising dept.) ESPN(Call your cable company) FIDELITY INVESTMENTS1-800-678-4667 WORLD SAVINGS 1-800-642-0257 (Loan Service office) 1-415-446-6000 (Home office) BROOKS BROTHERS 1-800-274-1816 (corporate office) MORTON'S STEAKHOUSE 1-415-986-5830 DESIGN METRO ITALIA 1-510-420-0383 Call these companies and threaten to boycott them if they continue to advertise. Solidarity. *Nathan Newman: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
SF STRIKE: Advertisers Pulling Ads!!!
*** ACTION ALERT ** ADVERTISERS PULLING ADS FROM SF SCAB NEWSPAPERS -- KEEP CALLING OTHER SCAB ADVERTISERS Over a week into the strike at the San Francisco News Agency, the joint operating company of the SF CHRONICLE and SF EXAMINER, solidarity on the picket lines remains strong while advertisers continue to desert the newspapers. As one union spokeperson describes it, "We've got them dropping like files!" Over one hundred advertisers have promised to drop their advertising for the duration of the strike, including Nordstrom's, Delta Airlines and Radio Shack. Other prominent advertisers are getting their ads for free, as the SF News Agency tries to maintain the facade of support and income from advertisers. But community support and calls from customers (including those on the Internet) have had a decisive impact. But some advertisers continue to support the scab newspapers, so we need to keep those calls coming. Here are the priority companies to call: EMPORIUM1-213-227-2000 (corporate office in LA) 1-800-626-4800 (mail order number) Emporium had had the most advertising of any company on every day of the strike. Make calling Emporium your top priority, especially since they have a history of union-busting among their own employees. CIRCUIT CITY1-510-847-9201 (Division Office) 1-804-527-4000 x4058 (Main Corporate office) They've advertised on multiple days, so call away. COPELAND SPORTS 1-415-495-0928 (SF Store) This company is a prime target that refuses to pull their ads. They are located just a couple of blocks from strike HQ, so your calls may be supplemented by handbilling by strikers. MERVYN'S1-800-637-8967 This is another company that refuses to pull their ads, so keep the calls coming. THE GOOD GUYS 1-415-615-6000 (Corporate office, ask fr advertising) They look like they are susceptible to pursuasion so keep the calls coming in. MACY'S 1-800-820-2663 (Advertising Office) 1-800-622-9748 (Corporate office) Macy's had advertising on almost all days. They are getting their ads for free at the scab newspapers and are paying for ads at the union-made FREE PRESS. But call them and tell them to stop advertising at the scab newspapers Other TOP PRIORITY calls for multiple-day advertisers VIDEO ONLY 1-415-563-5200 (Main SF outlet) 1-206-575-7522 (Seatlle corporate office) Has history of pulling ads during strikes so call to encorage them to do so. MACY'S 1-800-820-2663 (Advertising Office) 1-800-622-9748 (Corporate office) Macy's had advertising on almost all days. Call them and tell them to stop advertising. Paying for ads with the striker's FREE PRESS, but unclear whether they will pull ads from the CHRON. IMAGNIN 1-800-354-9040 1-415-362-2100 A multi-day advertiser, so target them. TOWER RECORDS/VIDEOS1-800-541-0070 (Corporate office, ask for advertising) Again, a multiple-day advertiser. Call them hard. JC PENNY1-800-222-6161 (Catalog Ordering-general complaint) 1-510-225-0110 (Regional office that places ads) CAMBRIDGE SOUNDWORKS1-800-367-4434 (ex. 2, ask for advertising) Talked to advertising folks, but they were pretty determined to keep advertising. Keep calls going in. Especially, if you're not in California, keep dialing the 800- numbers and let them know that supporting a scab newspaper will cost them money. WHOLE EARTH ACCESS 1-510-428-1600 (Corporate office) With a vaguely progressive image (partly borrowed from the unaffiliated WHOLE EARTH CATALOG), this company should be hit hard for their advertising. Keep those calls coming and please e-mail back with any responses you receive from the advertisers. In Solidarity, Nathan Newman
FREE PRESS: SF Newspaper Strike Ends!!
FROM the weekend addition of the (soon to be defunct) FREE PRESS: Sat Nov 12 08:48:38 PST 1994 _ STRIKE ENDS! TENTATIVE PACT INCLUDES PAY HIKES, JOB PROTECTIONS By Eric Brazil and Carl Nolte Special to the Free Press SAN FRANCISCO -- Eight striking labor unions reached a dramatic early morning agreement Saturday that will end San Francisco's 11-day-old newspaper strike if it is approved by union members. Picket lines were removed at 4:35 Saturday morning, and the unions suspended their advertising and circulation boycotts against the morning Chronicle and evening Examiner. The agreement provides for modest pay increases and Teamster job protections -- and delivered a stunning political victory for Mayor Frank Jordan. Under the proposed pact, 2,600 advertising representatives, truck drivers, printers, reporters and other workers will get an average 3 percent per year pay raise for a contract that will expire in 1998. It will also allow managers to modify the newspaper delivery system with gradual job reductions through attrition, and provides additional pay increases for newspaper librarians. Jordan brought the two sides together on the third day of the strike and kept them at the table even when prospects seemed bleak. Both management and the unions praised his work, which appeared to be vital to ending the bitter confrontation. Union negotiators hailed the agreement as a victory for the newspaper unions -- and for labor organizations nationwide. "The success of this strike will serve as a rallying point for unions across the country," said Doug Cuthbertson, chairman of the Conference of Newspaper Unions. "Some pundits have said that the union movement is on the wane in San Francisco. We proved them wrong." Andy Cirkelis, secretary-treasurer of Teamsters Local 921, said: "We stopped a lot of harm that was coming our way. ... Labor should be proud. We can't forget the solidarity and community support.'' Management negotiator Richard Jordan had a different assessment. "I don't know who won," he said. "We certainly don't think that we won. It was a tragedy for everyone. It should have been avoided, but if it weren't for the efforts of the mayor, this could have been worse." Even before the deal was completed, Mayor Jordan was airborne, heading for Asia on a long-planned trade mission. The unions' contracts expired Nov. 1, 1993. The strike began exactly a year later, when management failed to return to the bargaining table some 20 hours after the strike deadline had passed. On Nov. 4, Jordan summoned negotiators for both sides to his office to meet with federal mediators, and the talks continued for eight consecutive days. The talks nearly broke down several times -- most recently late Friday night, when Jordan, normally a mild-mannered man, lost patience with both sides. Jordan was under twin pressures -- to get the strike resolved and to lead the Asia trade mission. While most of the San Francisco delegation had left without Jordan, Vietnamese Prime Minister Vo Van Kiet refused to deal with the lower-level members. The mission would have collapsed if Jordan had not made his midnight departure Friday -- yet if the strike became a protracted dispute, the cost to the city and the mayor himself would have been enormous. No one will go to work until the contract is ratified by all eight unions. Most unions were planning to schedule ratification meetings Sunday, and the Chronicle and Examiner might be produced with union personnel as early as Monday. The two papers had continued to publish slimmed-down editions since the strike began, using nonunion management personnel and hired strikebreakers. In addition, the strikers' newspaper, the Free Press was published daily online on the internet. The use of the strikebreakers produced a good deal of hostility on the picket lines and some violence. One of the key problems in resolving the strike was a question of amnesty. The unions said they would not go back to work until all the strikers were taken back, and management wanted to hold off on restoring some people who they said had been violent. The tentative deal provides that everyone will get their jobs back except those who are convicted of felony charges. The agreement provides a raise of approximately $105 a week over the life of the contract and apparently solves the key issue of the strike: how to change the newspapers' distribution system without losing jobs. The unions claimed that management had planned to cut up to 150 driver jobs held by Teamsters, but the agreement apparently provides for changes
ANALYSIS: Which Voters left the Dems (fwd)
ANALYSIS OF NOVEMBER 8 CONGRESSIONAL ELECTIONS --By Nathan Newman In the November 13th Sunday NEW YORK TIMES, they listed a thorough breakdown of sub-group voting patterns dating back to 1980. It is worth looking over to understand which groups moved away from the Democrats in the last two years. However, remember that turnout figures are different in Presidential years. In 1994, turnout was 39% of eligible voters, so it is worth emphasizing that 80% of the voting population did not vote for the "Republican landslide" involving just 20% of the voting population. That said, here are some of the more interesting shifts: Neither blacks nor Latinos changed their voting patterns significantly; blacks maintained their roughly 88% Democratic voting pattern, while Latinos voted Democratic at a 70% rate. However, between 1992 and 1994, there was a significant shift in white voting patterns. Where whites voted 50-50 Dem-Repub in 1992, 58% of whites voted Republican in 1994--an 8% shift. White men shifted even more--from 51% Rep in 1992 to 62% in 1994. (It is worth noting that the highest previous Republican vote by white men was 57% in 1984 when Reagan was reelected). By age group, there was almost no shift in voting patterns by those under age 30. They voted 54% Dem in 1994 compared to 55% in 1992. Those age 45-59 also maintained roughly the same voting pattern--about 51% Dem. But those age 60 and older shifted strongly towards the Republicans, from 56% Dem in 1992 to 51% Dem in 1994. But the age group that turned the Congress over to the Republicans were those age 30-44. They voted 53% Dem in 1992, but voted only 48% Dem in 1994--the only age group that voted by a majority for Republicans. A couple of shifts did occur in the Democratic "base": Households with a union member voted more Democratic in 1992 than they had in over a decade (67% that year) but voted Dem by only 63% in 1994. Gays, lesbians and bisexuals voted Dem 77% of the time in 1992, but only 60% voted Dem in 1994. This may be an artifact of the sample size and which gays turned out this year, but is significant. But the real story of the election is when you look at voting patterns by income level. What shows up is a loss of support for the Dems from the poorest voters and a general diminishment in class-polarized voting patterns. Here is a table of the voting patters, using 1982 (the last big gain in House seats for Democrats, 1992, and 1994): 1982 1992 1994 Dem Shift (82-94) Dem Rep Dem Rep Dem Rep Income level Under $15,000 7327 69316238-11% $15,000-29,999 6040 57435248 -8% $30,000-49,000 5248 52484951 -3% Over $50,000 3763 47534654 +9% Between 1982 and 1994, there was a loss of between 8-11% of the vote from working class voters making less than $30,000 per year. Democrats managed to lose the votes of those who have suffered the most under Reaganomics and who will be hurt most by Newt Gingrich and his gang. There are two ways to analyze this result, both of which probably contributed to the result. The first answer is that different people turned out in 1994 than in 1982, given the low turnout of off-year elections. In 1994, more of the poorer voters were religious conservatives motivated by cultural issues of the Christian Coalition. That is born out by surveys showing that 20% of voters identified themselves as "White born again Christians" who voted 76% for the Republicans. Such "white born-again Christians" voted only 54% Republican back in 1982, and were not mobilized in the same way as in 1994. But the other part of the story is why poorer voters not interested in the Christian Right agenda did not turn-out and why even religious voters were more interested in voting on cultural issues than on their economic self-interest. The answer is that Clinton's failure to deliver on health care and a real improvement in the economy for such lower-paid workers disillusioned them. The Democrats demonstated how limited their party is in delivering benefits to working Americans, so they saw little difference in the parties and voted on cultural divisions rather than economic divisions. Interestingly, richer Americans decided the same thing and many more upper-middle class Americans decided the same thing and voted more Democratic than they had under Reagan--probably inspired by opposition to the religious conservatives. Without a strong economic message for working Americans, voters turn to cultural issues to define their politics. And in an economy that is destroying the standard of living of most Americans, cultural politics becomes m
187resist: E-mail list Organizing Against 187
PLEASE REPOST To all, The November 8th election is not the end of organizing against Prop 187--it's only the beginning as community groups throughout the state begin organizing social service workers to refuse to implement the measure, organize new rallies, and promote a boycott against California for passing this unconstitutional law. Organizations and coalitions ranging from the Lawyer's Committee on Civil Rights to the union representing workers at the SF AIDS Foundation are building a new Immigrant Rights Movement to resist 187. A new e-mail list has been established to get information out about this movement in the SF Bay Area. To subscribe to information about the movement against 187, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the Subject: line, type the words: sub 187resist You will be added to the mailing list. In Solidarity Across Borders, * Nathan Newman: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Dec 10 RALLY AGAINST 187 in San Francisco
RALLY AGAINST 187 on International Human Rights Day December 10 Mission St. San Francisco On December 10th, a broad coalition of groups statewide are sponsoring rallies against Proposition 187 in commemoration of International Human Rights Day. The passage of 187 is not the end of organizing, but the beginning. Plans are underway to promote resistance to implementation of 187 among social workers and educators, to stage civil disobediance, and to rally national and international boycott pressure against California for passing this racist unconstitutional law. In the Bay Area, the rally will be in downtown San Francisco: The rally will begin at 11am on December 10 at 24th and Mission St. At noon, those assembled will march to the State Building (at Van Ness & McAllister) For continual updates, call 415-822-5203 Or subscribe to the 187resist e-mail list. (Send message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] In Subject line, type "sub 187resist") SOLIDARITY ACROSS BORDERS PROTEST 187 on December 10th
Need Analysis of NAFTA and Immigration Issues?
Hi all, One service PEN-Lers could do for the anti-187 fight is to find or write some very short, popular articles on the relation of free trade to immigration. Other aspects of immigration are appreciated of course, but it would be wonderful to compile a whole collection of PEN-L briefs on the subject, all referenced with your academic credentials. Then these briefs or quotations can be inserted into local articles or school newspapers as "authoriative sources." So please, could folks write some analysis of immigration and economic issues, and put your academic credential at the top. I'll make sure they are distributed around. * Nathan Newman: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
187resist: Gopher and E-lists on Prop 187
== Resist Prop 187: Resources Beyond Borders == Hi all, Over 240 people from all over the country have subscribed to the 187resist e-mail list. Information is being exchanged on rallies not only in California but throughout the country, from Los Angeles to Chicago to Philadelpia. To faciliate the movement against Prop 187 and against the national anti-immigrant attacks, the following resources have been established: = 187resist = This e-mail list focuses on information exchange--news and organizing events from around the country. If you subscribe, please only post substantive news about what organizing is happening in your area, or listing a question addressed to the whole list. To Subcribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the Subject: line--NOT THE BODY OF THE MESSAGE, THE SUBJECT: line, type: Subject: sub 187resist To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] in the Subject: line-- signoff 187resist = 187politics = A just created list to allow debate and strategy discussions on how to fight against Prop 187 and the right-wing movement behind it. This will include the pros and cons of certain strategies, how to link other racist attacks like "three strikes" laws to the fight against 187, and how world economic issues like NAFTA relate to immigration fights. To Subcribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the Subject: line--NOT THE BODY OF THE MESSAGE, THE SUBJECT: line, type: Subject: sub 187politics To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] in the Subject: line-- signoff 187politics === 187resist Gopher Server === This 187resist gopher server will archive all discussion lists and link users to immigration files at UCLA's LatinoNet and Berkeley's Economic Democracy Information Network (EDIN). It also gives official documents on Prop 187 and breakdowns in voting patterns by county and demographic groups. To connect to the 187resist gopher, access it at: garnet.berkeley.edu 1870 Or you can find it listed under California gophers in the "Mother Gopher" list at University of Minnesota. Solidarity Across Borders *Nathan Newman: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: CA tax initiative
Jim, My first question is where you are getting your info on the tax initiative. The story I had heard from my tax reform friends was that Prop 174 had sucked so much money out of the teachers unions that there wasn't going to be a tax-the-rich initiative this year. I am really excited to hear that SEIU is pushing one. As to studies, I would note some pretty good studies that have shown that California is not that high-tax a state when its low property taxes are combined with its relatively high corporate taxes. And it is relatively evident that labor and transportation costs are much more key to economic placement decisions. On a broader front, the whole issue raises the need for progressives to fight for national anti-whipsawing legislation in areas like tax breaks and tax policy. If we ever get near to the point of establishing a national VAT tax, we should fight for revenue-sharing to be built into it. Having each state setting different sales and income tax rates is a recipe for whipsawing and needs to be fought. ** *Nathan Newman: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * * UC-Berkeley* On Sat, 1 Jan 1994, Jim Devine wrote: > happy new year!! A friend asks me to ask pen-l the following questions: > > Leftists, laborites, and liberals are currently pushing a state-wide > initiative in California that will raise taxes on the rich and/or the > corporations. One of the backers in the SEIU, a biggie in CA. SO: > > has anyone done any research on the response that capitalists will > pursue to such an initiative, if passed? will they leave, or are > they just threatening to do so in order to influence the outcome? > are they able to leave in sufficient droves to ahve an impact? > will they be attracted to stay in CA if the money is to be spent on > such things as infrastructure and education? In general, what will > the initiative's impact be? > > I would also appreciate some details on what the initiative is > proposing. Someone must know. Nathan? Anders? > > in pen-l solidarity, > > Jim Devine BITNET: jndf@lmuacad. INTERNET: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Econ. Dept., Loyola Marymount Univ., Los Angeles, CA 90045-2699 USA > 310/338-2948 (off); 310/202-6546 (hm); FAX: 310/338-1950 > >
Re: what do do about pen-l
Just a suggestion, if it's possible. Could a quick note be sent to everyone on the original list to remind them of the new address? With the holidays over, this might spur a few people back. However, I think a lot of people may be like myself, recovering from the holidays and having few comments about the current high-profile news of Bobbitt, Kerrigan, the Menendez Brothers, Whitewater and the Inman-Safire feud. ** *Nathan Newman: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * * UC-Berkeley*
Does International Trade Lower Wages in the 1st World?
The January 15th ECONOMIST had an interesting article that argued that international trade with the third world has had little or no role in lowering wages in the US for unskilled workers. The prima facie evidence for this fact is the argument that if unskilled work had been migrating to third world countries because of lower wages, the relative prices of low-skill goods should have fallen. THE ECONOMIST cites studies that asset that this has not occurred. Instead, these studies argue that the culprit behind lower wages for unskilled work is purely technological. New technologies have decreased the demand for lower-skilled labor, so wages have fallen. Another interesting point was that US trade with low-wage countries (in this case defined as countries with wages less than half the US's) has only risen a small amount since 1960, from 2.0% of GDP in 1960 to 2.8% of GDP today. Of course, much of that lower-wage trade in 1960 was with Japan and poorer countries in Europe. So, if these studies are correct, is all the left-wing anguish over NAFTA misplaced? Should we instead be putting our efforts into a much sharper critique and organizing support for challenging automation when it does not go hand-in-hand with social justice? Or is the ECONOMIST wrong or just looking in the wrong place to see the damage multinationals are inflicting through the run-away shop into the third world? ** *Nathan Newman: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * * UC-Berkeley*
Re: Does International Trade Lower Wages in the 1st World?
On Thu, 20 Jan 1994, Jim Devine wrote: > I think that the distiction between movement to low-wage countries > by capital (and the concomitant increase of imports of goods produced > there by the advanced countries) and technological change that > lowers the demand for lower-skilled labor in the advanced countries > is largely false. The technological bias toward simplifying and > routinizing (deskilling) traditional jobs in the advanced countries > (which often have high skill relative to poor countries) *allows* > the movement of capital to the poor countries. Why does routinization help move jobs to the third world? Let's not act as though many of the jobs weren't already routinized, while many of the jobs being moved to Mexico are often quite high-productivity jobs (although the relation of productivity to skill is often a bit mixed). But you didn't address the issue raised in THE ECONOMIST which is that low-skill goods have not been dropping in relative price. This was taken to indicate that it is not low wage competition that is lowering the wages in such jobs. Now there may be a problem in that logic (promoted by Jagdish Bhagwati and by a paper by Robert Lawrence and Matt Slaughter), but it is a good question. Many of those who promote NAFTA argue it will lead to cheaper goods; if relative prices are not dropping, it might be argued that we are getting neither the bad nor the supposed good effects of trade with the third world. Or it could mean that the multinationals are snookering both the workers and the consumers and are pocketing the difference. SO what these researchers are picking up would then be not the lack of low wage competition effects but its masking by multinational increases in profits. Does anyone else on PEN-L have research to add to these reports? --Nathan Newman
Apple and the Unionization of Silicon Valley
PEN-Lers, Actually, Apple (against their will) has become a model employer of their janitorial staff. After a massive mobilization by SEIU and their Justice for Janitors campaign, including a threatened worldwide boycott of Apple computer, Apple conceded to the unions demands. Apple forced its landlord to hire a union contractor and Hewlett Packard almost immediately signed union contracts without a fight. With Oracle (or rather its landlord) agreeing to hire union workers with decent benefits, Silicon Valley is almost 100% unionized in the janitorial sector. This is one of the most dramatic accomplishments in unionization in many years. Following this success, SEIU has teamed up with a number of other unions (HERE, the Teamsters, ACTWU, maybe a couple others) to begin a mass community-wide organizing drive in San Jose. The unions involved have deployed 20 organizers and fourteen apprentices from the AFL-CIO Organizing Institute. Most innovatively, the unions are not beginning in the workplace but starting door-knocking in the ethnic communities around the area to create a mass community base as they target multiple industries all at once. They are knocking on 1400 doors each day, 10,000 doors a week. The goal is to build a mass community base, then blitz low-wage service and light-manufacturing throughout the San Jose area. For me, it is one of the most exciting union campaigns in existence, since it involved not only multi-union collaboration but a serious application of community organizing as a method of union organizing. And much of this campaign is ultimately derived from the capitulation of Apple Computer to the original community-based campaign against the company. ** *Nathan Newman: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * * UC-Berkeley* On Wed, 26 Jan 1994, Jon Coifman wrote: > As long as we're at it, it should also be noted that Apple has a less than > stellar record on union activities among the janitorial staff at its > Cupertino, CA headquarters. Memory has not been kind regarding the > datails, but my recollection is that the decision to dump a contract with a > unionized maintance firm about a year and a half ago caused quite a flap. > Perhaps somone on the net remembers the outcome. > > Jon Coifman, > (via Macintosh) > Austin, TX > > >
RE: on urban violence (fwd)
On Tue, 15 Feb 1994, Doug Henwood wrote: > Jipson Art asked for more info on my assertion that NYC has a lower crime > rate than suburbs gone wild like Dallas and Atlanta, and that there is no > relation between pop density and crime. Here are the details. Doug, The problem with your table is (to be a sociologist for a minute), I don't trust the validity of crime statistics between different cities. Murder rates are relatively reliable, although even that can be problematic at times. Do police departments treat homicide, manslaughter and "accidents" in the exact same way? What crimes are pursued or even reported vary based on the racial breakdown of the cops and the communities served. Another issue is how crime effects most in the community. DC is known for having a high murder rate, but most of the murders are concentrated in the drug trade against other criminals, which is different from some other cities where murder effects the rest of the population more directly. The bottom line is whether higher crime rates in Atlanta or Dallas reflect more crimes or a higher willingness to report crimes to the police? The city of Berkeley where I live has the highest rate of felonies per capita in the state. It is a rather dangerous city but this may also reflect the rather abnormal (but generally non-lethal) outbreaks of riots on Telegraph Avenue. I would say that it is a fair statement that the majority of crimes are not reported to the police, especially crimes that are between gangs or others involved in criminal activity. (The low crime rate in LA is awfully suspicious on this point). Given this, while statistics are always useful, crime stats have to be taken with a bit of skepticism. Crime, even murder, is not a homogeneous category and the left needs to challenge the numerical game of measuring crime. Crime is an intangible in people's lives that harms their sense of security, or freedom, and hope for the future (not to different or unrelated to the effects of capitalism as a whole). It is also part of a social process that simplistic solutions like "three strikes and you're out" focused on those numbers will inevitable miss. I caught Jerry Brown on C-SPAN (where they were filming his new radio show). He did an amazingly good job of challenging the idiocy of the current hysteria over "three strikes" while focusing on jobs, opportunity and hope. He even had on a woman involved in the East Bay Conservation Corps to embody his alternative, all without sounding "soft." One of the best lines he gave was noting that when he was governor, he beat his breast as much as anyone over crime and increased sentences and so on, prison populations soared, yet crime increased. Jerry does a great "sinner redeemed" routine in his populist attacks. It may be worth catching his show. --Nathan Newman
Re: Chiapas and the "progressive Internationalists"
Trond, While I appreciate the PNP/PIP distinction, it is always interesting how that leads to support for the same actions even with expectations that are sharply different. Chiapas is a perfect movement for PIP; the Zapatistas are not pure isolationists even if they are resisting NAFTA--remember, Jim, myself and other PIPers all were against NAFTA. Frankly, Chiapas is one of the last holdouts of feudalism and the uprising is a call for dismantling that feudalism while at the same time democratizing the Mexican state. But the fact is that the salience of the Chiapas uprising (both for leftists internationally and the Mexican state) is the existence of NAFTA. Because of a more integrated economy, the Mexican state is more subject to leverage from outside forces and the full mobilization of the anti-NAFTA forces has quickly focused on Chiapas as a lever to assist its allies like Cardenas, RMALC and those seeking a more progressive international economic order. If NAFTA wasn't an issue, the Zapatistas would have been bombed and murdered, the world would have tskked tssked a bit, and that would have been the end of it. NAFTA and the general ongoing economic integration between the US and Mexico gives US and other developed left forces a material incentive to assist third world democratic forces, while creating the economic interdependence to make such interventions potentially effective. I agree with Trond that the Zapatistas are infinitely realistic; it's one of the most well-timed, well-executed rebellions I can remember. And it's paid off in an immediate destabilization of the Mexican government and immediate negotiations by that government with the rebels. If they were calling for the conversion of Mexico to one-state socialism, that would be pie-in-the-sky, but instead there demands fit a process of PIP. PIP never means simple capitulation to neoliberalism; the resistance to integration is part of building the worldwide movement for socialism. We have to separate analysis of where we are going (PIP) from methodologies for building international solidarity (where PIP and PNP will have frequent convergence). Such PIP methodologies will include specific injustices (such as NAFTA) combined with the broad-based creation of instruments of international solidarity and democracy (unions, the Sao Paulo Forum, the Rio Summit, and carefully analyzed support for international governance such as the EC and the UN). Chiapas will no doubt strengthen the ability of forces in North America to justify cross-national monitoring of democratic procedures, labor abuses and human rights violations. And NAFTA, flawed as it is, will become a vehicle through its commissions for such joint mobilization. A very PIP result. --Nathan Newman, UC-Berkeley On Mon, 21 Feb 1994, Trond Andresen wrote: > Tom Weisskopf defined the two main sides in that "Global Economic > Integration discussion" as the "progressive internationalist position" > (PIP) and the "progressive nationalist position" (PNP). > > Myself, I belong to the PNP faction. During the discussion, it was > made clear that f.inst. Jim Devine's and Nathan Newman's strategy for > socialism was to first let capitalism globalize into the end result, a > "World Capitalist Gvt.", then on a world scale somehow overthrow this > gvt. and establish world socialism. Jim and Nathan belong to the PIP > faction, as I understood them. > > So what has this to do with Chiapas? Well, reading Harry's piece, what > strikes me is the fierce will to self-determination in this movement. > But I cannot understand how the PIP people can look at such struggles > as other than well-meant but futile attempts to stop the merciless > wheel relentlessly grinding towards a completely capitalist-globalized > world. > > From my viewpoint (PNP) the Chiapas struggle is not only something that > I symphatize with, I also see their goals as perfectly realistic and > achievable, and to say the least, infinitely more down-to-earth, than the > pie-in-the-sky "let-capitalism-globalize-and-then-we-will-make > socialism"-strategy. > > IMHO, of course. :-) > > - > Trond Andresen([EMAIL PROTECTED]) > Department of Engineering Cybernetics > The Norwegian Institute of Technology > N-7034 Trondheim, NORWAY > > phone +47 73 59 43 58 > fax +47 73 59 43 99 > > > >
RESOURCE: Gopher Site with Wide Array of Progressive Information (fwd)
Hi all, This is a post to remind people about the resource for progressives we have here at UC-Berkeley for progressives called the Economic Democracy Information Network (EDIN) gopher. We are looking for new sources of files and other gopher sites, especially labor and economic-oriented sites. (Labor files are a top priority since there are so few labor files in cyberspace). Please check out the gopher at garnet.berkeley.edu 1250 and if you have other resources to add or know of some we should have "pointers" to, let me know. Thanks. ** * Nathan Newman: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * * UC-Berkeley* == Subject: About the EDIN Gopher ABOUT THE EDIN PROJECT'S GOPHER The Electronic Democracy Information Network (EDIN) Gopher is one of several ventures by the EDIN Project. The following is the mission statement of the EDIN Project. If you'd like more information on the EDIN Project or would like to comment on the EDIN gopher, please send e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] You can connect to the EDIN gopher by connecting to garnet.berkeley.edu 1250 or you will find it listed under the California list of gophers in the "Mother of All Gophers" list. Some notable recent additions to the EDIN gopher are extensive connections to state government legislative information and a new directory devoted to "Political Movements and Theory" with files on the organization and theory of groups ranging from the IWW to Ayn Rand. -- ECONOMIC DEMOCRACY INFORMATION NETWORK (EDIN) From revitalizing inner city communities to creating sustainable development to converting to a peacetime economy, information resources and rapid communication are becoming increasingly important in both our economic and political system. To help avoid the danger of a split between the information haves and have-nots, EDIN will provide community groups throughout California and in the nation greater access to the burgeoning world of information by both providing more information and easier access to electronic communication. COMPONENTS OF EDIN PROJECT: EDIN On-Line Server: This will be the site which will coordinate the gathering of existing economic and social information and providing it electronically in an understandable form, both immediately in text form and over time as we develop the software to transmit information in innovative graphical forms. EDIN will facilitate research and communication on economic issues by EDIN users in different locations around the state. Infrastructure: By working with such groups as public libraries and other public access facilities, we will work to establish walk-in and dial-in access to community groups engaged in community development efforts. Training and Community Involvement: Teams of trainers will work with already existing networks of groups to get them on-line and help facilitate their use of the EDIN system. GOALS OF EDIN PROJECT: Link Economic Information: EDIN would be the first archive to have information on the economic aspects of conversion, community development, and the environment, linked together so that users can approach a problem from several angles at once. Ease of Use: EDIN will make it easy to sort through a broad array of information and quickly determine what you actually want. It will be simple to customize EDIN to your needs. Economic Literacy: EDIN will over time connect its information to glossaries, tutorials, and other tools for facilitating learning about a complex economic topic which interests and intimidates you. In doing so, it will create a new way of promoting economic literacy. Community-Based: EDIN will be based around the idea that the community needs to actively shape its direction; it will be rebuilt and reshaped through a process that strives to serve the community's needs as they understand them. In this way, it will give community groups a way to participate in shaping the coming information society. =
Re: The New World Order/Running Shoes of Capitalism
New Balance is your answer. I used to always buy them at half the cost of Nikes. Great shoes, great price. But then, I've never been accused of being hip to the proper attire. ** *Nathan Newman: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * * UC-Berkeley* On Fri, 25 Feb 1994 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Michael Perelman's recent postings on Nike in the world economy have > been as fascinating as they are revolting. One question that is bound > to pop into the mind of anyone trained in economics in this country is > how sales prices are holding up in what seems to be a rather competitive > industry. In other words, what prevents one of these firms from gaining > huge market share by cutting prices in half (at a higher volume they > could still afford to pay Michael Jordan!). It seems to me that the > answer to this question is a very important part of the story. > >
Re: Running further with those shoes
On Tue, 1 Mar 1994, Jim Devine wrote: > I get my sneakers at Price Club, a warehouse store with wholesale > prices and zero ambiance. Which with its merger with Costco (a non-union store) may be helping to undermine salaries and the standard of living of food and commercial workers in the US. Not a moral highhorse BTW. I've been shopping at Price Club for years. THe issue is how manufacturing exploitation may be in league with or an alternative to retail sector exploitation. --Nathan Newman
Re: Running Further with Internal Funds
On Wed, 2 Mar 1994, Heather.L.Grob.1 wrote: > In response to Tom's question, > > I have no explanation for why shoe industries may need to generate internal > funds. Maybe some pen-ller has?Perhaps, if so, its for r and d, to > meet Nike's advertising strategy, to build plants in other countries, Nike doesn't build plants in other countries. They basically don't make shoes at all; they hire subcontractors and buy shoes from them. Nike is basically a marketing and distribution company, not a manufacturing company. Advertising is mainly what they do, so it's hardly surprising that is a large part of their costs. > to meet demand for running shoes in other parts of the world (making up > transaction costs in order to gain a greater market share in other > countries?)? Since I don't know the shoe industry it's all speculation > based on the assumption that these are homogenous goods. > > Gotta run! > In running pen-ller solidarity, > Heather Grob ([EMAIL PROTECTED]).
WHERE WE STAND: Manifesto for Committees of Correspondence
[The following is a draft statement of shared principles and purpose of the Committees of Correspondence, issued for public discussion on June 1, 1992.] WHERE WE STAND - A declaration of principles of the Committees of Correspondence Goals and Vision. We are motivated by the profound conviction that our country needs a humane alternative to the anti-human system of capitalism. For the majority of working people, and especially racially and nationally oppressed people, this system does not work. After the 1980s Decade of Greed, the top 1 percent of wealth-holders have more property than the bottom 90 percent. Capitalism is fundamentally militarist, elitist, racist, sexist, homophobic and destructive of the environment on which all life depends. The tragic consequences are human and individual: ever more numerous homeless, the majority of them children; millions trapped in low-wage, dead-end jobs, and millions more unemployed, two-thirds of whom never receive unemployment insurance; one in seven Americans without health insurance. Instead of promoting community, capitalism pits people against each other, to the detriment of us all; it criminally abuses women and children in the name of "family values." Our national resources continue to be senselessly squandered on preparations for war. This looting of society and nature casts a shadow of pessimism across the land, shattering parents' dreams of a better future for their children. There is a spiritual crisis; a profound alienation of people from institutions unresponsive to their needs. This crisis can only be addressed by radical democratization, the realization of full equality, the empowerment of people to control all aspects of decision making affecting their daily lives, making institutions, public and private, advance their well-being. Only a massive and organized popular movement can turn our country onto a saner path. * We are for full employment; universal health care; quality, multicultural public education and child care. * We are for affirmative action and massive infusion of resources into cities and other areas as steps toward freedom of people from racial and national oppression. Without justice, there is no peace. * We are for economic, political and social equality of women and for reproductive rights and freedom from sexual harassment. * We defend democratic principles embodies in the Bill of Rights, which are being dangerously eroded. * We advocate disarmament, the universal abolition of nuclear weapons and peacetime conversion. * We will work with people around the world to preserve, protect and restore the environment. * We believe that in the long run there must be a fundamental realignment of the political system, new electoral initiatives and the creation of new vehicles to attain political empowerment. Our vision has an international dimension, seeking ties and cooperation with popular movements and working-class organizations in all countries. We view socialism as the struggle for democracy carried to its logical conclusion. Our vision is not a utopia, but a practical response and solution to the contradictions of capitalist society. We will continue to participate in the ongoing public discussion of how to redefine socialism in light of world experience and contemporary realities. We welcome all those who would like to participate with us in this exploration, while we struggle together to address the immediate problems of our people. We suggest the following characteristics for U.S. socialism: A society where the promise of democracy is fulfilled by the practice of self-government. A society of social justice, which guarantees employment, housing, education and health care as human rights. A society which preserves and builds upon all previous economic and scientific achievements, and which step-by- step redistributes the vast wealth and power now held in a few hands. * * * Theoretical framework. This socialist vision is informed and nourished by the Marxist view of history. People make their own history, based upon their needs, circumstances and understanding of the necessity to struggle to transform society. Organization and theory are tools for reshaping reality. We recognize and respect the right of members to think independently about all questions. This frees theory from being "officialized," made into a dogma, which tends to lead to its degeneration. Marxism, like any other science, requires freedom of thought and inquiry, the clash of opposing views. Its integrity is preserved by the standards of internal consistency, inclusiveness and testing through practice which govern all science. Marxism arose, historically, from revolutionary movements for democracy. It is still evolving. Marxists continue to have much to learn from people who approach the problems of society from othe
RESOURCE: Archive for Committees of Correspondence, Socialist Organization
ANNOUNCING GOPHER SITE FOR COMMITTEES OF CORRESPONDENCE -- Documents and Journal of new Socialist Regrouping For those not familiar with the Committees of Correspondence, a copy of its founding statement of purpose, WHERE WE STAND, will follow this post. In summary, the Committees of Correspondence is a socialist organization established in 1992 out of a coming together of ex-CPUSA members, other sectarian socialist members looking for a more open socialist approach, and independent leftists attracted to the open democratic forum for socialist discussion and action created by the Committees of Correspondence (CoC). A gopher site has been created to archive a wide variety of CoC materials, including documents from the 1992 Berkeley conference, other general articles, and all issues of Dialogue and Initiative, the discussion journal of the CoC To access the archive, you need gopher access to the Internet. From most University machines, you should be able to access the gopher by typing the following at the prompt. Type: gopher garnet.berkeley.edu 1250 This will link you to the Economic Democracy Information Network (EDIN) gopher maintained by the UCB Center for Community Economic Research. There's a wide variety of links to progressive info on the Internet, but you will want to use the cursor to move down the menu you will see until you reach a line labelled "Political Movements and Theory." Hit return. You will see another menu. Move to "Socialist Political Groups." Hit return. Then you will see a "Committees of Correspondence" menu item. Move to it and hit return. You can now look at any of the available documents. If you use IGC (Peacenet/Labornet, etc.), it's even simpler. When you log-in to Peacenet, you will see a menu of choices (e-mail, conferences, etc.). Hit "i" for Internet. THat will link you to the IGC gopher. Move to the "Other Progressive Gophers" line. Under that menu, you will find the Economic Democracy Information Network gopher listed. Choose it and follow the above directions. You can also access the EDIN gopher through the "Mother Gopher" at Minnesota. Go down the hierarchy of nations and states until you find California. The Economic Democracy Information Network (EDIN) is listed under the list of California gophers. If you have other files relevant to the CoC, please send them to me and I will try to include them. --Nathan Newman, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
AB 2451 - California to Put All Government Info On-line
*** Please repost *** DATE: March 8, 1994 TO: Interested Parties FROM: Assemblyman Tom Bates (D-Oakland) RE: Legislation to bring California on-line I am writing to ask for your support of Assembly Bill 2451, which I have introduced in the California Assembly. It requires that all state public information, which is currently computerized, be available free to the public via the Internet. This bill will be voted on by the Assembly Committee on Government Operations within a few weeks. A copy of the bill is attached. I believe this legislation will help make government more efficient and more accessible. Governor Pete Wilson has said, *Each time a person must set aside time during regular working hours to visit a government office, there is an economic loss to society. Each time that visit is prolonged because of long waiting lines...the loss is compounded.* I agree. Under A.B. 2451, citizens will be able to obtain state information directly at their place of work, local libraries, at schools or in their own homes. Legislative bills are currently available on the Internet thanks to groundbreaking legislation authored by Assemblywoman Debra Bowen. This bill builds on that first measure and expands the information available. You can do three things to support this effort. 1. Write/fax the Assembly Government Operations Committee today. The bill will be considered in committee soon, within a few weeks. Letters/faxes should be addressed to: Hon. Curtis Tucker, Jr. Chairman, Assembly Government Operations Committee State Capitol Sacramento, CA 95814 Greeting: Dear Chairman Tucker and Members of the Committee: You can fax direcly to the committee at 916-327-3517. Please fax me a copy at 916-445-6434, 510-428-1599 or mail it to Assemblyman Tom Bates, State Capitol, Sacramento, CA 95814. An email address is being set up now. 2. Join the Electronic Town Hall Meeting. Tell me what you think about this legislation. CPSR is hosting a discussion on this bill and other related California legislation and policy. My staff and I will be following and participating in the discussion. To subscribe to the list [EMAIL PROTECTED] send the following email message: subscribe calgovinfo to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To send a message to the calgovinfo listserv, mail to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] The list is currently un-moderated and public. 3. Help spread the word. Please repost this memo to other newsgroups and individuals. - BILL NUMBER: AB 2451BILL TEXT INTRODUCED BY Assembly Member Bates JANUARY 4, 1994 An act to add Article 3 (commencing with Section 11720) to Chapter 7 of Division 3 of Title 2 of the Government Code, relating to information technology. AB 2451, as introduced, Bates. Information technology. Existing law establishes the Office of Information Technology in the Department of Finance and imposes on the office various duties concerning the use of information technologies within state government. This bill would require the office to develop a plan by January 1, 1996, for free statewide computer-assisted public access to government information that has been computerized and is subject to public disclosure. The bill would require implementation of the plan to begin no later than January 1, 1996, and that the plan be operational no later than January 1, 2000. The bill would require the office to make various reports to the Legislature during the development and implementation of the plan. Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes. State-mandated local program: no. THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Article 3 (commencing with Section 11720) is added to Chapter 7 of Division 3 of Title 2 of the Government Code, to read: Article 3. Public Access to Government Information 11720. The Legislature finds and declares that it is essential to good government that information that is available to the public under the California Public Records Act, the Ralph M. Brown Act, and the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act be made available to the citizens of the state, irrespective of where they reside, in a timely manner, and at the least possible cost. It is the intent of the Legislature that this goal shall be achieved by the enactment of a plan that implements the following strategic goals outlined in the report issued by the Office of Information Technology in the Department of Finance entitled "Strategic Direction for Information Technology in California State Government 1993-1999": (a) To bring government closer to the people. (b) To enhance the value of government services. (c) To make government more responsive to changing public needs. (d) To reduce the cost of government. 11721. (a) The Office of Information Technology in the Department of Finance shall work with all state a
RESOURCE: EDIN Archive for Labor files and gophers
** PLEASE REPOST To OTHER LISTS ** ARCHIVE OF LABOR RESOURCES ON THE INTERNET Given the general lack of labor-related resources on the Internet, the Economic Democracy Information Network (EDIN) has been upgrading and expanding its "Labor Issues" section to serve the Internet community. The Labor Issues section now has extensive connections to government resources such as the Department of Labor, the Federal Register's labor legal code, and proposed legislation around labor issues. There are also archives of files dealing with US unions, international labor issues, women and the workplace, gays and workplace, and labor and people of color. Finally, for fans of ACTIV-L (and misc.activism.progressive on USENET), there is a new (specially-prepared for EDIN) archive of the labor-related newsbriefs that have appeared on that mailing list/newsgroup. We are very interested in receiving new files or pointers to gopher/ftp sites dealing with labor issues, so please send such files or information on where to find them to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To access the EDIN archive, you need gopher access to the Internet. From most University machines, you should be able to access the gopher by typing the following at the prompt. Type: gopher garnet.berkeley.edu 1250 This will link you to the Economic Democracy Information Network (EDIN) gopher maintained by the UCB Center for Community Economic Research. There's a wide variety of links to progressive info on the Internet, but you will want to use the cursor to move down the menu you will see until you reach a line labelled "Labor Issues." Hit return. If you use IGC (Peacenet/Labornet, etc.), it's even simpler. When you log-in to Peacenet, you will see a menu of choices (e-mail, conferences, etc.). Hit "i" for Internet. That will link you to the IGC gopher. Move to the "Other Progressive Gophers" line. Under that menu, you will find the Economic Democracy Information Network gopher listed. Choose it and follow the above directions. You can also access the EDIN gopher through the "Mother Gopher" at Minnesota. Go down the hierarchy of nations and states until you find California. The Economic Democracy Information Network (EDIN) is listed under the list of California gophers. --Nathan Newman: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Economic Democracy Information Network a project of UC-Berkeley's Center for Community Economic Research
[PEN-L:3671] THE NATION: Drop the Prop (187 that is)
(Hi all, this article talks about the Dec 10th protests and the
electronic organizing from the 187resist list --Nathan)
---
>From THE NATION, January 9/16, 1995
"Drop the Prop"
by Rose George
"One, two, three, four! We don't want your racist law!" Even
before they start chanting, the college students who marched against
Proposition 187 on December 10 seem to have gotten their wish, as the
California initiative lies blocked in a federal court. But the
anti-immigrant message underpinning 187--and the recent mass high school
walkouts in California--still inspired more than 3,000 students to put
down their term papers and take to the streets to mark the first National
Day of Action for a nascent student movement. Rallies in San Francisco,
Philadelphia, and Amherst, among other places, rounded off a week of
teach-ins and vigils, sit-ins and protests at more than twenty campuses
across the country.
In four frantic weeks at the end of the term, student
organizations managed to mobilize an impressive array of people around an
issue that, when not dismissed as merely "Latino," is seen as
California's problem. To be sure, the Mexican flags were flying in
solidarity with the "victims of 187," but the louder message of the
marchers was the one that got the feet on the street: Bigotry has no borders.
"This is one of the most multicultural gathers of student
activists that I've ever seen," said Swarthmore College professor Meta
Mendel-Reyes as she surveyed the packed Free Quaker Meeting House in
Philadelphia, where 500 students from eight colleges had gathered to
protest 187's racist scapegoating. Day-Glo antennae, mocking the
demeaning term "alien" waved from brown, black, white, Republican,
Democrat and anarchist heads. Statements read out from students
organizing in Madison, Boulder, Ann Arbor, Austin and Chicago were signed
by groups as diverse as the Palestine Solidarity Committee, the Bryn Mawr
Republicans and the Grassroots Queers. Clearly, the discriminatory ethos
of 187 (embodied most recently in the Republican's proposed welfare
reform bill) hit a raw nerve among more that the "immigrant" solidarity
groups. "One eighty-seven is an issue that transcends racial and ethnic
distinctions," said University of Texas student Sheila Contreras, "and a
LOT of people are angry."
Channeling this fury into coordinated action has been possible in
large part because of the information superhighway. Diverse though they
may be, these students have a couple of things in common: access to free
e-mail and enough Internet savvy to know how to use it. When Nathan
Newman of U.C. Berkeley's Center for Community Economic Research set up
the "187resist" list (an electronic discussion group using e-mail), he
was astounded at the response. Set up on November 20 with the Bay Area's
Movimiento por los Derechos de los Immigrantes, "187resist" had 500
subscribers within six days. Accordin to Newman, who is involved in a
project to get Bay Area community groups and labor unions on-line, this
was an unprecedented rate of response for a progressive list.
Equally astounding was the way the list served as a primary
mobilizing tool. "E-mail lists have definitely assisted organizations in
the past by spreading info," said Newman. "but this was the first time I
ever personally saw organizing happening in real time as organizations
formed in response to electronic messages." On-line discussions
mirroring the passion of dorm-room debates breathed life into dormant
campus coalitions. Organizing tips ("if 187 is not an issue on your
campus, make it one!") came in info packets circulated by more
established groups, such as Swarthmore's Coalition Against Xenophobia,
Princeton's CAP-187 and the 187 veterans in California.
Nor are the halls of academia untouched by the students' energy.
Petitions and resolutions are currently circulating on the Internet,
including an appeal to four academic professional associations to boycott
California's conference facilities. So far it has collected 300
electronic signatures (to join the discussion, write to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] with the following message: Subscribe 187-L
your name).
Veterans of the huge Gulf War protests, the last large-scale
student mobilization, may sniff at the low numbers. But it's early yet,
and the ball is rolling. Other boycotts are up for discussion; teach-ins
and rallies are planned for next year. If student activists continue to
ally disgust for an increasingly vicious political culture with an
effective use of cyberspace's immediacy; they could lead organizing into
the next century.
-- 30 ---
[PEN-L:3756] Who are Corporate Criminals?
Hi, The subject header is a serious question. I am working on creating some propaganda for street organizing (and net organizing) that addresses right-wing scapegoating versus the true abuses in favor of the wealthy. THe form of the sheet will probably start with: WHO IS THE CORPORATE ELITE TRYING TO CRIMINALIZE? Answer, the homeless, welfare mothers, immigrants, urban black males, etc. Now, where PEN-L help would be useful (and here's the challenge) is your best examples of true corporate abuse. In a line or so, can you describe an example of a big corporation breaking the law, receiving welfare from the government, or using the international economy in an abusive way. The challenge is to write your answer as succintly and quickly as possible. One sentence is the ideal. If you want to add some detail, it might be added to follow-up information sheets. But please concentrate on a good example that can be explained quickly or is obvious. Here are the questions to answer: WHO ARE THE REAL CORPORATE CRIMINALS? Polluters, big-time S&L folks, defense fraud examples, etc. WHO ARE THE CORPORATE WELFARE RECIPIENTS? WHO ARE THE TRUE CORPORATE ILLEGAL ALIENS? Examples of corporations destroying jobs here and commiting illegal acts around the globe--child slavery, union-busting etc. WHO HAVE RECEIVED CORPORATE AFFRIMATIVE ACTION? Special regulatory breaks for big business--the special concessions that lock in power of the wealthy. Cable franchises etc. WHO ARE THE CORPORATE TAX EVADERS? Tax loophole list I will repost the list of best examples. Thanks all, * Nathan Newman: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
[PEN-L:3893] Re: papal economics
On Sat, 21 Jan 1995, Doug Henwood wrote: > Sorry to clutter the list with theological dispute, but what the hell does > it mean to be Catholic if you don't accept the church, the pope, and the > rest of the hierarchy? Be a Whiskeypalian, or some other kind of renegade, > but why be Catholic? Shared guilt? But seriously, why do so many Jews call themself Jewish and atheist? Come on, there are five centuries of identity and cultural differences built into "religious" identities. The opposition of Catholics and Protestants in Northern Ireland is hardly only about papal authority. Why do leftists hold onto the word "socialist" when various socialist leaders around the world disgraced it over the years. Why not switch to completely different words? Because whether you are talking about religious, political or ethnic differences, words and identity and culture are intertwined. > >As the Holy Roman > >Catholic Church was to feudalism, the World Bank/IMF is to > >capitalism. It's a better use of time to attack the latter, no? > > No no no! Don't take anticlericalism away from us! Religion is - often? > always? I'm open to argument - a system of domination and mystification, a > myth that people take literally. Call me old fashioned but it all seems > like superstition to me, and Enlightenment dinosaur that I am, I want it to > go away. As a defender of the Enlightenment, defending religion is not always in opposition to it. The abolitionists, many of the populists, and much of the leadership of the civil rights movement were both Enlightenment figures in their analysis of rights yet although religion defenders as well. The formal separation of the institutions of Church and State may be Enlightenment views, but eliminating the authority of religion in the private sphere actually is in opposition to much of enlightenment thought. To subsume all moral authority under the public sphere is not separation of church and state but the elimination of the private sphere all together and ends up being merely secular duplication of the old feudal Catholic order (or pure Stalinism). The Catholic Church (to paraphrase an old adage) has no army divisions and no large economic power. Pope John Paul II has only moral authority and the voluntary submission of many (not all) Catholics to that authority. We can argue with the Pope and compete for the allegiance of religious Catholics on points were we may disagree with the Pope's views, but I see anticlericalism as fundamentally anti-democratic and rather dangerous in light of the experience of the 20th century. The IMF, on the other hand, has real power that is exercised without moral authority but with the economic power of money and the political will of established states. That is a proper target for left organizing. --Nathan Newman
[PEN-L:3933] Re: papal economics
On Mon, 23 Jan 1995, bill mitchell wrote: > >Nathan's right: anti-clericalism fought the _established_ church. > >Now we don't have that any more. It's fine as far as I'm concerned > >if some people have religion. That doesn't alwsys always mean > >that they're closed to reason. > > > Jim: > > religion is one of things that it is difficult to have choice over. the > Roman catholics particularly get innocent minds when they are young and lay > heavy guilt trips on them with the most preposterous range of mystical > claims about things more reasoned people call natural - including natural > body functions. even when they grow older and see beyond it, the guilt often > remains to haunt their sexuality and other personal areas of their lives. As opposed to what capitalists do to young minds in making mass starvation acceptable, while making people accept alienation and subservience to capitalist authority acceptable? Or what, to be honest, various left cults have done over the years to young recruits? Of course, we can condemn the individual teachings around sex, but that is different from calling for the state to disorganize non-state institutions--which is what anti-clericalism often amounts to in the 20th century. > so while Nathan says being anti-religion (read > anti-anti-people-and-freedom-religions) is tantamount to being > anti-democratic, i have to disagree. democracy requires an equality of > choice, and it cannot exist properly when all these loons from the catholic > church are behaving as they do. even the liberationist theologians in south > america know that. I think this line of thought is extremely dangerous, since it brings up the idea of "fit parents" versus "unfit parents." Many in the right wing are now talking about improving the choice of children by taking them out of the hands of mothers who might undermine their values. If we get into a game of having the state try to steal the minds of other peoples' children from their parents and their church, where does the idea of "unfit" upbringing end? --Nathan Newman
[PEN-L:3939] BAYLEFT: New E-mail List of News & Events in SF Bay Area
PLEASE REPOST = BAYLEFT: New List for News & Events of the SF Bay Area Left = BAYLEFT is an e-mail list for news and events of interest to the Bay Area left. The goal is a low volume list with short news articles of interest to the Bay Area left and postings of left meetings and political actions in the area. BAYLEFT is a moderated list so the volume of messages will be kept low. To subscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message, send the message: sub bayleft FirstName LastName If you want to get a single posting on any day with a digest of all posts, add the following line in your subscription post: set bayleft digest In Solidarity, Nathan Newman, moderator
[PEN-L:4235] Re: Info on WWW and Gopher sites
Hi all, To give folks a small preview. THe EDIN gopher (now located at garnet.berkeley.edu 1251) will soon be a WEB site. It's still under conversion, but people can check out its economic and progressive info at: http://garnet.berkeley.edu:/ --Nathan Newman On Sun, 19 Feb 1995, H.Toyama wrote: > Greetings. > I'm looking for gopher and WWW sites specific to Progressive economic > resources on Internet, such as Radical economics, the social structure of > accumulation school, and the Regulationist economics in France, etc. > > I am thinking about introducing those sites to Japanese students majoring > economics, and to those who are interested in that resources by means of > the monthly journal in Japan, whose title is "Keizai seminar" in Japanese( > Economic seminar in English). > > If you know of any such sites that you've found useful in the past, > please post them, or pass them on to me via E-mail at > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Thank you very much in advance! > > Hironori Toyama(Shizuoka University) > E-mail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Fax:054-238-4273 > > > > > > $B!!(B > > >
[PEN-L:4257] CONTRACT WITH AMERICA CALL TO ACTION 3/29 (fwd)
-- Forwarded message -- Date: Thu, 23 Feb 95 09:03:07 EST From: Rich Cowan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: CONTRACT WITH AMERICA CALL TO ACTION 3/29 2/23/95, 8:00 a.m. Dear Friends: Here it is at last, the polished, completed March 29 Call to Action. 22 campuses have already informed us of their organizing plans! All we ask is that you circulate, print out, and endorse this call; as soon as we have a reasonable number of endorsers, we will release this document to the media with phone numbers of all endorsing organizations. Please see the end of the call for an endorsement form. Thanks for all of your input and edits on this! -rich ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) FORMAL CALL FOR A NATIONAL DAY OF CAMPUS ACTION ON MARCH 29, 1995 AGAINST THE PROPOSED "CONTRACT WITH AMERICA" I. The Call The "Contract With America" currently under consideration in Congress purports to advance economic opportunity and make government more accountable and responsible to the people. After learning about the details of the Contract, we question the sincerity of these goals. In recent weeks we have heard about proposals which would: o deny many young people the opportunity to attend college o punish the poorest people for their economic status o undo decades of efforts to reduce racism and other forms of discrimination, and o allow big business to evade social and environmental responsibility. Congressional forces who won the last election claim to be acting on these measures IN OUR NAME. However, this slim electoral victory is no automatic mandate to enact mean-spirited laws that were disguised during the election campaign. We must make it clear that if these measures are enacted, it will be WITHOUT OUR CONSENT. A Contract we never signed is not a Contract with America; it is a Contract on America. We, the undersigned, therefore call for a National Day of Campus Action Against the "Contract With America" on March 29, 1995. We call for students, faculty, and staff organize forums, rallies, pickets, teach-ins, direct action or other activities on March 29 to educate their campuses and communities, and to build resistance to the reactionary agenda of social inequality and environmental disregard proposed in the Contract. II. Call for Solidarity Communities across the country are now mobilizing to stop portions of the Contract which would eliminate popular government programs and protections. While local actions may focus on one or two key issues, we are also acting on March 29 to show solidarity with people resisting other parts of the Contract, including those working to: 1. Save student aid and increase funding for education: Newt Gingrich has said that Pell Grants insult students by insinuating that they are too lazy to pay for their college education (Boston Globe, 2/3/94, p. 21). It is estimated that proposed cuts would affect 6 million students and shove as many as 2 million students out of higher education. The Alliance to Save Student Aid (including US Student Association), Student Aid Action of Antioch College, and the National Association of Graduate and Professional Students are building resistance to these measures, and there is a new email discussion focusing on this threat to Education Rights (send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED], body "sub can-er firstname lastname"). We call for March 29 actions to save our education. 2. Preserve pro-environmental regulations: The fine print in the "Job Creation and Wage Enhancement Act" will gut environmental protections. In response, the Public Interest Research Groups are holding an emergency "Free the Planet" conference from February 24-26 at University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia. On March 29, speak out for the environment. 3. Protect and extend women's rights: The fine print in the "Taking Back our Streets Act" would repeal the Violence Against Women Act, and while the Contract With America sought to avoid mentioning the divisive abortion issue, Republicans attempted to take funding for the defense of abortion clinics out of the proposed Crime Bill. The National Organization for Women and other women's groups are moving to stop this legislation with a National March on Washington on April 9, 1995. On March 29, rally on your campus for women's rights. 4. Defend the rights of poor people and end poverty: The "Personal Responsibility Act" would impose punitive government restrictions on poor women and their children, as well as recipients of any form of government assistance, by freezing additional benefits for children born on welfare or to mothers under 18, and reducing benefits if paternity is not established. National coalition building by welfare and Civil Rights groups, such as the National Welfare Rights Union, is the leading edge of the resistance to these measures. We call for March 29 actions to stop the attack on welfare mothers, their children, and Ameri
[PEN-L:4287] Two Immigrant Hotel Workers fired for Union Organizing
Release: Feb. 24, 1995 To give support, write the Lafayette Committee for Immigrant Workplace Justice c/o Hotel & Restaurant Employees (HERE), Local 2850 548 20th St. Oakland, CA 94612 (510) 893-3181 or e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] == Two Immigrant Hotel Workers fired for Union Organizing Workforce keeps fighting for union at Lafayette Park in CA == LAFAYETTE, CA: The National Labor Relations Board is now investigating charges of massive labor law violations at the Lafayette Park Hotel, including the firing of two workers and the suspension of two others as punishment for pro-union activity at the hotel. The mostly immigrant workforce of the Lafayette have mounted one of the most vigorous organizing drives seen in a hotel in the East Bay. The fight at the Lafayette is crucial since no new hotel has been organized in the counties of Alamada or Contra Costa in decades. Organizing the Lafayette could mean the beginning of a drive to organize the mostly immigrant workforce of the hotels in the suburbs of Northern California. But the hotel management is mounting a nasty campaign to bust the union before it even is formed. With nearly a majority of workers signing cards demanding a union, the hotel has retaliated by hiring the well-known union-busting firm American Consulting Group to run an intimidation campaign against the workers. This management campaign has included one-on-one meetings to pressure workers to repudiate the union, new policies to prohibit workers from talking to each other on the job, forcing housekeepers to scrub floors on their hands and knees, and, finally, suspending and firing the main leaders of the union campaign. Reyna Ramos, born in Nicaragua and a housekeeper for nine years at the Lafayette Park, was one of the rank-and-file union organizers who was fired on February 2. It was on that day that Reyna and another housekeeper, Sorocco Zapien, for the first time publicly distributed union flyers during the morning break to other workers in view of management. Less than two hours later during lunch, the management reviewed Reyna's and Sorocco's carts--the first time ever that the management reviewed their carts. No other cart was reviewed besides those two. While no more flyers were found, they found some food, so Sorocco was suspended and Reyna was fired for "stealing" candy bars. Another worker was fired for having given the food to the housekeepers from a minibar. Quite obviously, since such discipline had never happened before, the real reason was to get rid of pro-union leaders and scare the other workers. "The real reason I was fired," states Ramos, "is because I was one of the leaders of the union drive. Basically I was the housekeeper who talked for all of my friends in the housekeeping department because they speak mostly Spanish." Stephanie Ruby, a staff organizer for HERE Local 2850 which has been assisting the workers at the Lafayette Park to organize, notes that this sort of illegal, punitive action against pro-union workers is a standard tactic to deny workers the right to organize. "Unfortunately, when workers try to organized, this is what happens -- they pick off the strong leaders to scare other people from organizing." Other violations of labor law that are being reviewed by the National Labor Relations Board include: other suspensions of union activists, harassment of pro-union workers, manadatory meetings to deliver the anti-union message along with one-on-one meetings to intimidate workers, restrictions on breaks for workers since the union drive began, changes in parking policy to prevent contact with union organizers. the imposition of the "no talking" policy after the organizing drive began, massive increases in management surveillance during work hours, and dicrimination against union activists and favoritism towards workers who are known to have not joined the union. Racism has been rife in the workplace as the immigrant workers have been harassed while favored white workers have largely been untouched by management harassment. The community has begun to organize in solidarity with the Lafayette Park workers. On February 5th, over 30 religious, academic and community leaders led a delegation to meet with management to demand just policy and the right of workers to organize. But the campaign continues and the workers will be mounting a much broader community mobilizations over the next month. If you would like to support the Lafayette workers, even if you aren't located in the Bay Area, contact the Lafayette Committee for Immigrant Workplace Justice at: c/o Hotel & Resta
[PEN-L:4295] NEW: EDIN Web site for Progressive Net Info
** PLEASE REPOST ** = New EDIN Web Site of Progressive Info & Web Links http://garnet.berkeley.edu:/ = The Economic Democracy Information Network (EDIN) is pleased to announce the creation of its Web site to supplement its long-established (in Net time :) gopher site. Hailed as one of 29 "Highlights of the Internet" by PC COMPUTING, the EDIN gopher site (at garnet.berkeley.edu 1250) has been a key site on the Internet for a whole range of progressive economic, labor, diversity, gender, socialist, environmental and social welfare information. EDIN is a project of UC-Berkeley's Center for Community Economic Research. The new Web site encorporates that past information and adds new links and plans for innovative projects over the next year, including a broad RACE & THE CALIFORNIA ECONOMY information site. One of the hottest parts of EDIN is the 187resist gopher, which archives files and discussion lists on the battle around defeating anti-immigrant attacks--THE NATION magazine described our work as something that "could lead organizing into the 21st century." Other information located originally at EDIN includes a Labor Issues archive where the Los Angeles Manufacturing Action Project, the Labor Project for Working families, files on labor unions around the world, and four major union mailing lists are archived. EDIN assisted in the creation of an archive of health information around single-payer to inform the public during the California fight for Prop 186. EDIN also archives the Report on the Crisis in California, the University Conversion Project, key NAFTA and GATT discussion documents, selections from the Applied Research Centers RACEFILE, prison and criminalization issues from CTWO's RAPSHEET, archives of Third party information for the New Party, Green Party, and Peace & Freedom Party, socialist information around the Committees of Correspondence, Democratic Socialists of America and the National Organzing Committee along with international groups like RED FORUM. It has one of the most extensive extensive archives of progressive e-mail lists on the Net and gives full back issue access to magazines like CROSSROADS and DIALOGUE & INITIATIVE. Beyond the information stored at EDIN, the EDIN web will link you to labor, environmental, and racial liberation information across the Net, from Arthur McGee's archive of on-line resources to the National Association Of Broadcast Employees/CWA to the Chiapas Web site to the Queer Resources Directory to MOTHER JONES magazine. CHECK OUT EDIN at http://garnet.berkeley.edu:/ to see the range of information for progressives on the Net *Nathan Newman: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** Center for Community Economic Research UC-Berkeley
[PEN-L:4309] FROM Nathan: PLEASE DO THIS for Immigrant Worker Justice
*** NOTE: I want to add on top of the following note that this is a crucial fight and a test of the effectiveness of e-mail as an organizing tool. This is a moderate size hotel chain, so our support can make a real difference in helping these workers. So, please take the time to edit the letter and either e-mail it or fax it. Thanks-- Nathan To supporters of immigrant and workplace justice, We are asking everyone who reads this to take a few moments to edit the letter below with your name or, hopefully, your organization's name in support of the mostly immigrant workforce fighting to organize a union at the Lafayatte Park Hotel in Lafayette, California. Two immigrant workers have already been fired for pro-union activity, many others have been suspended or disciplined, and the whole workforce is under massive intimidation by a hired union-busting firm, American Consulting Group. Housekeepers have been overburdened with new work and punished by being forced to scrub floors on their hands and knees, a "no talking" rule has been imposed on workers, one-on-one intimidation meetings have been held to try to force workers to repudiate the union, and racism has been rife in the workplace as the immigrant workers have been harassed while favored white workers have largely been untouched by management harassment. We are asking all supporters of justice to send letters of support to the workers to bolster their confidence and let them know that they have supporters across the Bay Area and around the country. In a few weeks time, we will ask supporters to call and fax the employers as well, but right now the workers need to hear from you. (The letters may also be used with employers to show support at a later time as well). Please reedit the following letter, adding your address and phone number and e-mail it to [EMAIL PROTECTED] And if you can get a letter from an organization, please do so. Put it on institutional letterhead and fax it to (510) 893-5362 and/or send a copy as well to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your support is needed. Thank you. The Lafayette Committee for Immigrant Workplace Justice c/o HERE Local 2850 548 20th St. Oakland, CA 94612 (510) 893-3181 --- Cut here : Re-edit the following letter -- Name/Organization Address Phone # To the Lafayette Hotel Organizing Committee, I/we am writing to express my/our organization's solidarity and support for your efforts. I/we especially salute the courage and sacrifice of Reyna Ramos and her nephew Javier Perez who were unjustly fired for asserting basic human rights to organize in their workplace. And we salute the sacrifice of the rest of the organizers who have been disciplined unfairly for their pro-union views. In a time when governments are attacking immigrants, it is inspiring to see immigrant workers standing up bravely and demanding their rights. I salute you. The fight at the Lafayette Hotel is crucial and I extend all the support I can give you. As needed, I pledge to phone, fax and/or physically attend delegations at the hotel as needed to bring a just settlement and recognition of the union. If the hotel management does not stop its union-busting tactics, I also pledge to boycott not only the Lafayette Park but the other five hotel properties in Northern California managed by Ellis Alden's Western Lodging Group and to spread news of the boycott far and wide. In closing, let me add that your courage is an inspiration to us all. In Solidarity, (Name/Organization)
[PEN-L:5463] Re: Clinton Does Suck-- Will Sign Welfare Bill
On Thu, 1 Aug 1996, Max B. Sawicky wrote: > > Clinton did announce that he would introduce legislation to restore > > welfare benefits to legal immigrants and reverse the provisions in the > > bill cutting back food stamps. That has to be a top priority. > > The measures you cite are indeed noxious, but I think they > distract from the principal issue, which is that under the > elimination of matching aid and basic entitlement rules, > public assistance will wither away. > > The only reason to agitate on the secondary stuff is that it > is more amenable to reversal, not an inappropriate goal. Max, I appreciate your overall post, but calling the wholesale elimination of welfare for a specific group based (largely) on racism is not a "secondary" issue. Yes, the long-term undermining of the mechanisms of matching grants is important strategically, but the assault on immigrants is a wholesale moral violation of basic civil rights. --Nathan
[PEN-L:5506] Re: Clinton Does Suck-- Will Sign Welfare Bill
I think what motivates Clinton is both fear from having lost his election in 1980 and an egoistic desire for a landslide "mandate" much as Reagan had in 1984. No big issues, just a personal stamp of approval by the populace. In terms of psychobabble, it's the child of an alcoholic looking for approval. Sad and opportunistic to work out one's self-esteem problems by butchering the lives of innocent children. --Nathan On Thu, 1 Aug 1996 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Someone (sorry, I forget who) mentioned that Clinton did not need to sign the > welfare bill because he does not have to worry about being re-elected. I > agree. The question then becomes, why did he sign the bill? ALSO, Clinton > attracts many conservative democrats who are pro-choice. If Dole takes a > neutral stand on choice, I wonder if the closeness of the position of both > democrats and republicans on welfare will chase conservative democrats into > the republican camp and strengthen the dole campaign? > > maggie coleman [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
[PEN-L:5513] [SOLUTIONS] Four Ways to Abolish Affirmative Action
S OOO L U U T IIIOOO N N S S O O L U UT IO O NN N S S O O L U UT IO O N N N S S O O L U UT IO O N NN S S OOO L UUU T IIIOOO N N S SOLUTIONS: Ideas for building a new economy VOL. 1, NUMBER 2 To subscribe to this twice-monthly newsletter of progressive policy solutions and analysis, send a "subscribe" message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] FOUR WAYS TO ABOLISH AFFIRMATIVE ACTION --by Anders Schneiderman In California, the California Civil Rights Initiative has revived the debate over affirmative action. Conservatives say affirmative action just replaces one form of discrimination with another. We should ensure that everybody is given a fair chance, but affirmative action isn't the way to do it. I can certainly understand their sentiment. Affirmative action is a very blunt instrument, and it has its share of problems. But if we're going to get rid of affirmative action, what do we replace it with? When asked that question, conservatives are pretty vague. Usually they say we should replace affirmative action with better schools in poor neighborhoods and with more access to higher education for the "economically disadvantaged." That solution certainly wouldn't hurt, but it doesn't address the real issue: racial discrimination is alive and well today. If you just listened to conservatives--or for that matter, the so-called "liberal" media--you wouldn't know that racial discrimination is still a problem. Conservatives like to say that because of affirmative action, equally qualified whites have less chance of getting a job than blacks do. They don't back up this claim with statistics, because all the evidence points in the opposite direction. For example, every few years, some researchers send out teams of black and white testers with identical resumes to apply for the same job. Researchers consistently find that the white applicant is significantly more likely--usually about 20% more likely--to get the job. They find similar discrimination when tests apply for business loans, mortgage loans, and rental housing. And that's when the applicants have identical resumes, which in the real world is rarely the case. More often, discrimination is more subtle. "Institutional racism" can occur where the individuals making decisions about loans or jobs are not bigots, but because of the 'rules of the game,' the outcome is still discriminatory (see Solution #3 for an example). This form of discrimination has been documented exhaustively, and not just by liberal softies, but by organizations like the Chicago Federal Reserve. So if discrimination is still a problem, and affirmative action isn't a good solution, then what do we do? I thought about it for a while and came up with four answers. 1) LOCK 'EM UP! We have laws on the books banning discrimination based on race or gender, but the laws don't have teeth. If discrimination is a crime, let's start treating it like a crime. If you can get 25 years to life for stealing a pizza in California, it's time to get equally tough on stealing a job, housing, or a loan. When we send in testers and find blatant discrimination, we shouldn't just warn or fine the company; we should put some people behind bars. It's also time to start using the RICO act in the "war on discrimination." If a company is letting its employees get away with discrimination, we should go after the company and its assets just as we would if we caught them tolerating or encouraging drug smuggling. We might even use this approach to create new sources of Federal funding. I can see it now: "Top Testers," brought to you by Uncle Sam. I don't know about you, but I'd definitely tune in to watch the Feds bust in the suburban doors of some discriminating banker and run his ass down. 2) BE ALL THAT YOU CAN BE Of all the institutions in society, the U.S. military is the only one which come anywhere near achieving racial equality in hiring and promotion (when it comes to gender equality, it's another story). The military still has significant racial problems, but it has made extraordinary progress. Since conservatives are insisting on pumping billions of dollars into the military despite the fact that the Cold War is over, we might as well get our money's worth by putting them to work using their expertise in fighting racism. The idea is simple. Every corporation, non-profit, and government agency would hire the military to teach them how to get rid of racial discrimination in hiring and promotion.They'd show managers how to apply what
[PEN-L:5512] [SOLUTIONS] Don't Deport Social Security Solution
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D S OOO L U U T IIIOOO N N S S O O L U UT IO O NN N S S O O L U UT IO O N N N S S O O L U UT IO O N NN S S OOO L UUU T IIIOOO N N S =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D SOLUTIONS: Ideas for building a new economy VOL. 1, NUMBER 2 To subscribe to this twice-monthly newsletter of=20 progressive policy solutions and analysis, send a=20 "subscribe" message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] DON=D5T DEPORT THE SOLUTION TO SOCIAL SECURITY -- by Nathan Newman, [EMAIL PROTECTED] You are moving to Florida. We all are, slowly. Or so we are told by the policymakers loudly=20 proclaiming the =D2crisis=D3 in Social Security. They tell us=20 that, according to their demographic projections, the US will=20 soon (say in the year 2040) be a nation of retirement homes. =20 To prepare for this destiny, they call for cutting benefits=20 for present retirees and privatizing the system so we can=20 salt away piles of cash in our collective mattresses (or 401K=20 plans if you prefer). Then, as our nation slowly ages into=20 collective senility, we can draw down those cash reserves to=20 employ the remaining working age population to empty the bed=20 pans of the baby boomers as they turn 90. Now, I don=D5t know about you, but no fiscal=20 rearrangement of Social Security financing can make that=20 vision of the future very attractive. The assumption here is=20 that we are going to have so few people working that we won=D5t=20 be producing enough wealth to support the population that=20 will then be retiring, so we essentially have to ship wealth=20 from the present to this projected dying, unsustainable=20 future. Luckily, this nightmare vision (which is taken oh-so=20 seriously by talking heads on television each day) is based=20 on time-honored stupidities involved in taking current=20 projections and assuming nothing else will change. All these=20 calculations assume that the United States will happily=20 become a nation of retirees consuming more than we=20 produce, while we ignore a world of nations with young=20 workers begging to immigrate to the US, perform needed work,=20 and pay Social Security taxes. At the moment, our government is busily at work=20 deporting the long-term solution to Social Security, but over=20 time expanded immigration will emerge as the obvious,=20 sustainable solution not only to Social Security but a range=20 of problems that would emerge if we really became one large=20 national Florida. As the number of retirees expands, we will=20 encourage more and more immigrant workers both as a source of=20 working taxpayers and just to perform the services needed by=20 this projected aging population. Now, if this is so inevitable, you may be asking, why=20 (except for obvious racism against brown-skinned foreigners)=20 are we not implementing more immigration right now if Social=20 Security is in such crisis? Well, this is the really deceptive part of the debate=20 over the Social Security =D2crisis=D3: the present system of=20 financing Social Security is not only producing plenty of=20 money to take care of retirees, it=D5s producing massive=20 surpluses each year that are covering deficit spending in=20 other areas. In 1994 (the year Republicans and others began=20 declaring a =D2crisis=D3), Social Security taxes brought in over=20 $383 BILLION dollars. Only $320.8 billion was spent on the=20 payments to retirees in that same year, leaving over $60=20 billion to cover the deficit for other forms of spending. No=20 big crisis there. By 1999, total Social Security spending will rise to=20 $411.4 billion, but total revenues will have increased to=20 $510.8 billion, meaning that the surpluses will rise to just=20 about $100 billion per year. Again, no crisis. It is only on the assumption of continuing=20 restrictions on immigration that, somewhere around the year=20 2015, we will eventually stop generating huge surpluses each=20 year and start breaking even on expenses versus Social=20 Security tax revenue. Only at that point will we be anywhere=20 near entering a =D2crisis.=D3 And, as noted, the demographic assumptions of this=20 eventual crisis are ludicrous.Here are the population=20 projection from the official Social Security trustees report: - Year 1960 200
[PEN-L:5519] Re: Clinton Does Suck-- Will Sign Welfare Bill
The Committees of Correspondence specifically passed a resolution at the national convention in July rejecting an endorsement of Clinton. This was linked to resolutions supporting organizing in bringing together the various third party efforts on the left into a viable electoral alternative. Quite a few folks were at the Labor Party convention and were promoting it. The endorsement of Clinton in 1992 was actually done by the national leadership and was highly controversial and would probably not have passed in general convention. The only lefty type organization I know of that has endorsed Clinton is the Communist Party USA. Even DSA will probably refuse an endorsement. --Nathan On Fri, 2 Aug 1996 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Nathan Newman wrote: > > > In terms of psychobabble, it's the child of an alcoholic looking for > > approval. Sad and opportunistic to work out one's self-esteem problems by > > butchering the lives of innocent children. > > I think we should leave psychobabble to the psychobabblers. > > Nathan: will the COC sing the same old "lesser evil" song (as they did in > the last presidential election when they endorsed Clinton), or will they > refuse to support Clinton and the Democratic Party candidates in November? > > Jerry > > > >
[PEN-L:5523] Re: Clinton Does Suck-- Will Sign Welfare Bill
On Fri, 2 Aug 1996, Doug Henwood wrote: > >In terms of psychobabble, it's the child of an alcoholic looking for > >approval. Sad and opportunistic to work out one's self-esteem problems by > >butchering the lives of innocent children. > > Have you been watching too much daytime TV, Nathan? Clinton is the > rentiers' president. His proudest accomplishments are NAFTA, deficit > reduction, and now welfare "reform." His personal psychology may give it a > little twist - and shouldn't anyone who even runs for president be regarded > as exhibiting some form of psychopathology? - but these are policies with a > history. I was mostly joking in response to character analysis of Clinton (use of the word "psychobabble" is not usually used with views you take too seriously.) Clinton of course has history as President, as well as a history as an anti-war protester, organizer for the McGovern campaign, and relatively tough (especially for a Southerner) anti-corporate licymaker in his first term as Governor in Arkansas. It was his defeat that made him such a cautious suck-up to the business class--Dukakis had a similar move to the Right from his first term as Governor in Massachusetts to his defeat then more conservative policy in his comeback. The real issue is how corporations make rightwing policies the only succesful route for politicians, no matter what their personal political beliefs. Which is one reason why I am sometimes skeptical of focusing on the perfect people to run--they'll betray us in the end if we don't have the strength to keep them accountable. --Nathan
[PEN-L:5560] CHRON: Welfare Bill Deadly in recessions
Here's an economic analysis of the welfare bill. Jonathan Marshall, a generally pro-market writer, has been writing some of the only real economic analysis of the welfare bill that deals with issues of the broader macroeconomic effects.--NN _ Monday, August 5, 1996 =B7 Page B1 © 1996 San Francisco Chronicle _ ON ECONOMICS -- Little Room For Welfare Variances The architects of the sweeping new welfare reform law have downplayed one inconvenient fact of economic life: the ups and downs of the business cycle. That oversight could prove trouble for hundreds of thousands of people caught in poverty during recessions. Until now, welfare has been like a car on a roller coaster, carrying poor riders through the peaks and troughs of the economy. But the new law makes small allowance for those swings, providing relatively little additional money for serving people who try to climb aboard during economic downturns. For the first time in its history, welfare -- also known as Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) -- will no longer be an entitlement, open to any family with children that meets its income standards. In the past, as more people became needy, welfare spending automatically adjusted. From now on, however, the federal government will hand over a block grant to the states and let them decide who to serve. Unless Congress votes to increase the grant during recessions, states will end up trying to cope with more people in need while their budgets are being squeezed by falling tax revenues. BIG SWINGS In a new study based on California welfare data, economist Hilary Hoynes at the University of California at Berkeley estimated that the number of welfare recipients can swing at least 15 percent from peak to trough of the business cycle. On the national level, every 1 percentage point rise in the unemployment rate adds about 200,000 people to the welfare rolls, according to a recent study by Elizabeth Powers, an economist at the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland. To cover their benefits, welfare spending would have to rise about $700 million a year, she estimated. That means if unemployment rose 3 percentage points during a recession, welfare spending would have to rise about $2.1 billion annually. Yet the new welfare law provides a rainy-day fund of at most $2 billion over five years to cover soaring needs during a recession, ``well below the needs suggested by recent experience,'' Powers observed. THERE'S A PROBLEM For example, federal welfare spending jumped $6 billion, or three times that reserve amount, in a three-year period after the onset of the 1990 recession. Even granting that some of the increase was caused by factors other than the recession, such as immigration, critics say there is a problem. ``The political will to raise state taxes is small,'' said Gary Burtless, an economist at the Brookings Institution in Washington, D.C. ``When times are tough, states will spend less, just when the problem requires spending more.'' June O'Neill, head of the Congressional Budget Office, said Congress will probably come through with supplemental welfare appropriations in a recession, as it usually does with extensions to unemployment insurance. But she agreed that states will have an incentive to be tougher than in the past. Before, due to federal matching of state welfare spending, if a state cut a dollar of welfare benefits, it would lose anywhere from $1 to $4 of federal matching funds. Under a block grant, it won't lose anything by cutting benefits. As a result, most states will now move quickly to reduce welfare spending by as much as 25 percent, predicted Mark Rom, a public policy analyst at Georgetown University. POOR DON'T VOTE For one thing, he noted, the poor don't vote in large numbers. For another, states want to dissuade welfare recipients from migrating to them in search of higher benefits. Last year, five governors sought to cut assistance to the poor by more than 10 percent. New York's Gov. Pataki, for instance, proposed a one-quarter cut in benefits ``to end New York's lure as a welfare magnet and to create an economic incentive to work.'' Many experts predict that states will compete to lower benefits in a ``race to the bottom'' at the expense of the poor. But Robert Rector, a welfare analyst at the conservative Heritage Foundation in Washington, D.C., says the old system of welfare discouraged states from reducing dependency since spending cuts led to the loss of federal matching funds. ``So the major reason for ending the welfare entitlement is to end that irrationality,'' he said. If states get se
[PEN-L:5764] Taxes: Dole, Clinton & the Left
On Tue, 20 Aug 1996, Max B. Sawicky wrote: > > Clinton Camp Hits Dole on Taxes > > > >President Clinton's campaign today launched an attack on Republican > > presidential nominee Bob Dole's record of supporting tax increases. Clinton > > . . . > > career in Washington, Dole voted to increase 450 different taxes and fees. > So Clinton is positioning himself to Dole's right. > Ain't that special! Is this political genius or > what? Hold a second. This is where the Left really loses it when attacking bad tax increases is a "rightwing" position. The fact is that Dole has consistently raised taxes on the poor and working class. THe 1983 tax bill he authored and the 1993 Social Security reform both significantly raised taxes on working families. Dole should be condemned for those taxes and his lack of tax equity. To his credit, Clinton has raised taxes on the wealthy and cut them on the working poor (even as he's screwing the unemployed poor). According to the attached article from the August 6th New York Times, the effective tax rate on the wealthy is actually higher now then in the late 1970s and the tax rate on the working poor is about half what it was then. That's a real difference. Tax equity is important and the Left often downplays the issue in promoting general tax increases. Yet public opinion polls consistently show support for increasing taxes on the wealthy. The Left should be joining in the bashing of Dole for his past regressive tax increases. Every regressive tax is one more reason for people to resent government. --Nathan Newman August 6, 1996 Despite Cuts and Increases, Taxes Stay About the Same By LOUIS UCHITELLE Since the mid-1960s, the revenue from federal taxes -- individual and corporate income taxes, Social Security and Medicare taxes, gasoline and cigarette taxes, and half a dozen others -- has never fallen below 17.2 percent of the national income nor risen higher than 19.7 percent. When one tax goes down, another goes up. And the Dole proposals, if they were all to become law, would not break the bounds. [ Part cut of article] Still, if federal taxes have remained a steady portion of national income, the mix has changed drastically. President Ronald Reagan's tax cut, enacted in 1981, reduced the tax rate by 23 percent over three years, benefiting the wealthiest Americans in particular by bringing down the maximum tax rate on taxable income to 50 percent from 70 percent. The 1986 tax bill brought another cut in the top rate, to 28 percent, although more income could be taxed. And in 1990 and 1993, Presidents George Bush and Bill Clinton gradually raised the top income tax rate to 39.6 percent for individuals, while the income tax rate paid by businesses fell to 34 percent under Clinton from 48 percent in the early Reagan years -- although the tax base of corporate America has broadened. But while the tax rates on income fell, steady increases in payroll taxes, mainly to finance Social Security and Medicare, offset taxpayers' gains. So did increases in gasoline taxes and in other federal charges, keeping federal tax revenue in the range of 17 percent to 20 percent. To help pay government bills, the taxes paid at state and municipal levels have moved up slightly in recent years, to about 14 percent of national income. But if the rates are much lower, the federal tax burden has shifted down the income scale. In the late 1970s, the wealthiest 20 percent of American households had an effective federal tax rate -- that is, the percentage of their income paid out to Washington -- of 27.2 percent, while the poorest 20 percent paid out 9.2 percent of their income, according to the Congressional Budget Office. That shifted to 24.1 percent for the wealthiest group in 1985, in the wake of the Reagan tax cuts, a drop of 3 percentage points, and to 10.4 percent for the poorest 20 percent, a rise of more than a percentage point. By this year, the tax increases enacted under Reagan, in 1986, Bush, in 1990, and Clinton, in 1993, had pushed America's wealthiest 20 percent, with an average household income of about $124,000, back up to paying 28.1 percent of their income, while the share paid by the poorest 20 percent, with $8,700 in average annual income, had been cut in half, falling to 5 percent. The 15 percent tax reduction proposed by Dole would shift this mix, raising the amount paid by the lowest-income and lowering it for the highest-income households by percentages still to be estimated. Copyright 1996 The New York Times Company -- .
[PEN-L:5771] Re: Taxes: Dole, Clinton & the Left
't but such a system is politically vulnerable, since those paying a particular regressive tax may not be the ones receiving progressive expenditures, creating an opening for those seeking to cut "your taxes" that "you" aren't benefiting from. Politically, to be raw about it, there are solid majorities for taxes on the upper-income. It is easier to defend such taxes so it will be easier to defend the programs they fund. > > opinion polls consistently show support for increasing taxes on the > > wealthy. The Left should be joining in the bashing of Dole for his past > > regressive tax increases. Every regressive tax is one more reason for > > people to resent government. > > I want to bash Dole for trying to destroy the public sector and > Clinton for letting it happen. Hey, I agree with that. I just want us to highlight the places where tax equity should be discussed in the campaign. > The truly regressive tax change in the 1980's was in 1981. Dole > should be credited for reducing the damage by voting for six or > so tax increases after 1981. That's why Newt G. once called Dole > "tax collector for the welfare state." Check your compass. Dole should not be praised for helping to replace progressive income taxes with regressive taxes. The whole series of tax changes from 1981 to 1983 was a shell game that ended up merely shifting the tax burden rather than reducing it overall. Dole supported every tax change and was one of the chief architects of the whole shebang. > A few comments on Uchitelle -- > > > By LOUIS UCHITELLE > > > > . . . > > The 1986 tax bill brought another cut in the top rate, > > to 28 percent, although more income could be taxed. And > > Careful . . . The base-broadening at the top and changes in > the corporate income tax significantly offset the distributional > effect of the personal rate reductions, though in net terms the > tax system might have become slightly less progressive overall. But it also set the system up for increased taxes on the rich by raising the top rate. This is what happened in 1990 and then more deeply in 1993. A cleaner tax code is much better for equity since it blocks out the tax loopholes that distort understanding of the real taxes paid (or not paid) by the wealthy. --Nathan Newman
[PEN-L:5779] Re: Taxes: Dole, Clinton & the Left
On Wed, 21 Aug 1996, Eric Nilsson wrote: > Indeed, an argument can be made that the SS payroll tax is more > like "deferred compensation" that it is a tax (and that the > apparent regressiveness of the payroll tax is exactly countered > by the progressiveness of SS benefits!). Except benefits have historically had only tangential relationship to what was paid in. Current retirees are getting a sweet retirement deal (well-earned given the productivity increases of society, but still not really a savings plan). As a Gen-Xer, I got to tell you the defenders of Social Security are going to go down if they wish this problem away with actuarial mumbo-jumbo. Social Security wasn't supported originally because it was progressive actuarially but because the Townsend movement had built a constituency along with others for getting income into the hands of the elderly population. Benefits have risen with the ability of the working population to pay and Gen-Xers rightly fear they will fall with rising anti-tax attitudes and aging baby-boomers. > > Most Gen-Xers really don't believe they'll collect their share of Social > > Security. That's a reality. Most friends, very liberal friends, just > > assume they aren't collecting. > That's what they believe because they don't know the "facts." > Gen-Xers will get SS benefits when they retire. And, it is possible > that the real value of their benefits will be greater than those > of current retired people. Relatively small changes in the > SS payroll tax now will guarantee an adequate SS Trust Fund > far into the future when Gen-Xers retire. "Changes"-does that mean further increases? Look, I know the numbers and the numbers being sold by privatizers look even better. GIve people 12.3% of their income to invest themselves and their retirement take-home pay will be much better than under social security for many folks. And with a regressive tax, many who will lose out because benefits won't be as progressive as under the present system will still vote to privatize it because at least a private system will make it "their money"--i.e. a bird in the hand is better than two in the bush. Social Security is a really rotten, regressive tax. As progressives we should be fighting to make that the wealthy pay their fair share of the costs and cut the tax burden on average working folks. Defending marginal tax rates on working people of over 30% while rich stockholders pay less is the reason the Left has lost so many debates on taxes in the last two decades. --Nathan Newman
[PEN-L:5782] From Each Their Means (Re: Taxes: Dole, Clinton & the Left
On Wed, 21 Aug 1996, Eric Nilsson wrote: > Nathan is very concerned about the SS program in > the US. He seems to think it is a bad deal from the > point of view of the average worker, that the SS system > will likely fail before people of his generation retire, and > that privatization of the SS program is the best way to go. How can you read a post so wrong? I think the Social Security system as a whole has been a pretty good program, I have written that I think the failure of the Social Security system is overrated (mostly because more immigration will no doubt increase the available workers) and I think privatization is a horrible idea. What I believe in, frankly, is "From each according to their ability, to each according to their needs." From that viewpoint, the Left should not be promoting any system based on individual "investment" and returns but rather concentrate on whether it is treating present taxpayers fairly and current recipients fairly. Social Security does pretty well in regards to its recipients but my point is that is does very poorly from a socialist viewpoint in regards to "from each" according to their ability. It overtaxes those with less income and spares the rich of most obligation to pay for the retirement of the elderly. On the broader political front, the Left has gotten creamed on every issue in the last few years associated with tax increases, especially broad based tax increased. Most notably, health care has died in Congress and a single payer initiative was creamed at the polls in 1994 here in California. If people were thrilled with broad-based payroll taxes, single-payer would have won. Instead, voters rejected it 72%-28% Yet poll after poll shows that people overwhelmingly support higher taxes on the wealthy. This would seem to indicate that if the Left wants to expand social programs, a top priority has to be tax equity and targetting the wealthy rather than the average voter as a source of tax payments for expanded social programs. Making Social Security more progressive would be a step in that direction. That folks seem so determined to defend present tax inequity when we continually get slaughtered on the tax issue astounds me. --Nathan Newman
[PEN-L:5792] ACLU Needs Academics writing about labor law (fwd)
-- Forwarded message -- Date: Fri, 16 Aug 1996 10:40:03 -0400 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Academics writing about labor law On behalf of the ACLU Taskforce on Civil Liberties in the Workplace, I am interested in finding academics who write and/or teach about labor issues. We are interested in starting a dialogue. If you are interested, please send your name, title, institution, addresses (including e-mail), and specific area(s) of interest, if any, to[EMAIL PROTECTED] Do not reply to LABNEWS. Thanks a lot. Rebecca Locketz, Field Coordinator
[PEN-L:6197] Research Jobs at Hotel Workers Union
-- Forwarded message -- Date: Mon, 16 Sep 1996 12:00:24 -0400 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: HERE recruitment *HOTEL WORKERS UNION SEEKS RESEARCHERS FOR EXCITING CAMPAIGNS NATIONWIDE* The Hotel Employees and Restaurant Employees International Union (HERE) has several positions open for "comprehensive campaign" research staff with its groundbreaking Nevada organizing program. Positions are also available in California, Connecticut, and Washington, DC. Using creative research strategies, HEREs Research Department has helped the Union double its Nevada membership in less than 10 years (from 20,000 to 40,000) making it one of the fastest growing private sector local unions in the U.S. To build on this success, HERE and the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) in Nevada have now teamed up for an exciting multi-union organizing campaign involving the health care and non-union hotel/casino sectors -- a project which the AFL-CIO has identified as one of its top priorities for financial support. HERE research staff are responsible for profiling organizing targets and developing strategies to complement worker organizing. Ideal researcher candidates will have activist experience; demonstrated research skills; excellent writing and speaking ability; familiarity with basic financial concepts; and ability to work with organizers to develop winning strategies. Salary is negotiable on the basis of experience; excellent benefits. Women and people of color are encouraged to apply. Send cover letter and resume to: Recruitment, HERE Research Department, 1219 28th St., NW, Washington, DC 20007-3389, Fax: 202-333-0468, E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] No phone calls, please. Please circulate this notice to others who might be interested. Thank you.
RE: Marxism and monopoly
>On Behalf Of Chris Burford > > a) what are the probabilities of the breakup of Microsoft being enforced? > It seems that yesterday's critical ruling was a response to the breakdown > of negotiations at the weekend. The judicial approach to this case had > clearly been designed to promote negotiations. Of course the point is negotiations-- that is the point of our whole cumbersome judicial process, where most accused of crimes are encouraged to plea bargain and most civil cases settle, whether one their own or increasingly in court-ordered mediation or arbitration. AT&T was broken up not on a judge's ordeer but through a negotiated deal and consent decree. Note the recent tobacco settlement where the state governments negotiated a deal. What is odd about such deals is that they end up acting as surogate regulatory schemes but without direct democratic input or strong follow-up, since all the decisions are often packed into singular high-stakes negotiations and deals. It's an insanely bad and terrible approach to regulation of the economy, undemocratic in the broadest sense in that it gives power to unelected judges and backroom deals, rather than the broad social give-and-take of democratic politics. > I submit that anti-trust legislation is a powerful bourgeois reformist > device for keeping capitalism on the road. Otherwise its natural tendency > to monopoly would cause such sharpening of the contradictions > that it would > place the public ownership of the means of production overtly on > the agenda. Of course antitrust is pro-capitalist and pro-reform-- it's explicit goal is to save competition from the worst excess of its capitalists. Progressives in the US have often seized on it because it is one of the only tools that existed for years for broad regulation of the economy, but it's reformist at its core, often in ways that undermine the broader rationality and efficiencies that private monopolies or (better) state-run systems would achieve. THe breakup of AT&T was not done in the ultimate interests of consumers but in the interests of its competitors and ultimately the Bell companies themselves who were increasingly freed from government regulation as a result of the breakup. > But to pose the question about methods to socialisation the ownership of > the means of production of Microsoft products. Part of the issue is raising the social basis for the rise of the computer industry and the Internet in particular. I just published an article in THE AMERICAN PROSPECT on the government policies that created the basis for open source software and highlighted an expansion of that role as an alternative to Microsoft. It is not socializing Microsoft per se but socializing its desireable functions that should be our focus. Microsoft is attractive to consumers - and maintains public support - because most consumers know a true "free market" would mean incompatible products and a lack of integration. If government was doing its job of assuring strong computer standards and requiring adherance to those standards through its regulatory, research funding and government procurement functions, Microsoft's monopoly could neither thrive nor be attractive in any way. Check out STORMING THE GATES http://www.prospect.org/archives/V11-10/newman-n.html There are a number of articles on government policy, the Net and open source software, including a useful article by Larry Lessig about the absurdies of how legislators themselves deny the already existing regulatory structure governing the Internet at http://www.prospect.org/archives/V11-10/lessig-l.html The bottomline is that the breakup of Microsoft is undesireable (and recognized as such by most consumers). I say that as someone who worked at an organization NetAction that officiallly promoted such a policy, although I did everything I could in my own research and writing to promote other alternative remedies, from disclosure of source code to "behavior modification" - ie. regulation. Most commentators note that such behavior modification remedies would, horrors, require continual monitoring of Microsoft beyond the immediate court decision. It's called regulation and leftists should be trumpeting it loudly as an alternative to a ham-handed breakup of Microsoft, whose benefits are dubious and would serve consumers rather poorly in the end. -- Nathan Newman
Open Source v. MS - American Prospect article
Hi all, I mentioned to folks earlier that I had an article on the history and role of government promoting open source software appearing in THE AMERICAN PROSPECT. I am including a quick release on it with URLs. There is also a roundtable on the issues involved, where they put me in with two libertarians (Eric Raymond and a REASON magazine guy) along with a corporate technology lawyer, so if folks have any thoughts for the next round of comments I have to submit by Monday, it would be appreciated. Thanks -- Nathan Newman --- In this month's special issue by THE AMERICAN PROSPECT on "After Microsoft: The Open Source Society", former NetAction staffer Nathan Newman has an article "Storming the Gates" on the history of open source software and its challenge to Microsoft. The article is located at http://www.prospect.org/archives/V11-10/newman-n.html This is part of a general set of articles in the current magazine discussing Open Source and other technology issues. Based on his longer NetAction report "The Origins and Future of Open Source Software: A NetAction White Paper" at http://netaction.org/opensrc/future/, Newman's article addresses the public policy implications of open source software as an alternative to Microsoft. Noting the often overlooked history of government policy's promotion of free and open source code software in building the Internet, his article highlights the need for the federal government to combine its antitrust restrictions on Microsoft with positive support for an open source alternative. As well, THE AMERICAN PROSPECT has convened an online roundtable to discuss Nathan Newman's article and others in the issue, including Newman himself, open source advocate Eric Raymond, REASON magazine's Jeff Taylor, and technology lawyer Jonathan Band. The roundtable is at http://www.prospect.org/controversy/open_source/
re: janitors strike
>On Behalf Of Michael Perelman > > I usually don't forward David Bacon's excellent reports, but this one > raises a question for me: why do the janitors have so much relative > success, while other unions that would seem to have fewer advantages > have floundered? Of course, it is hard to move the janitorial jobs > abroad. Of course not being threatened with export of jobs helps, but that is true in a lot of service and even many manufacturing areas where unions have been far less successful. The answer is: Organize, organize, organize...this relative success is built on two decades of organizing. Many years ago, as janitors unions suffered the same collapse as other previously unionized areas in the early 1980s, SEIU decided to make a stand in that industry as a showcase for new organizing tactics. (That Sweeney came out of locals representing that industry added to that decision). Whole new areas of tactics (or at least their revival) were deployed in the new Justice for Janitors campaigns, from direct action to corporate campaigns to consumer boycotts. And as David Bacon's article notes, the campaigns were fought not for immediate economic gains but focused overwhelmingly on winning a stronger ability to organize new workers, whether card check agreements or in this case fighting to make sure contracts up and down the West Coast would come up for renewal in the same year. The union decision was that in individual strikes they probably could have fought for higher immediate economic gains at points, but it would have been a pyrrhic victory as nonunion companies took over the industry. Note that the LA janitors, despite their relative success, are still making amazingly low wages. This year is setup to be the "big bang" win that brings to fruition decades of hard organizing. That kind of long-term strategy for organizing was once almost unheard of across the union movement; it's become more common and the most successful unions today are the ones like SEIU and HERE that started making long-term organizing strategy a priority early on. -- Nathan Newman
RE: Regulation theory
Without claiming great expertise and relying on memory of readings from a number of years ago, Regulation theory refers largely to a framework of analysis echoing Gramsci's Fordist analysis arguing that late capitalism in the 1930s entered into a new form of social organization where regulated macroeconomic policy combined with labor market regulation through unions and other workplace laws to encourage a high wage/high consumption model of growth in developed nations. I am not sure how it relates directly to the origins of capitalism in the West other than possibly the focus on connecting consumption factors to workplace and macro econ policy. -- Nathan Newman > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Louis Proyect > Sent: Friday, April 28, 2000 11:58 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [PEN-L:18408] Regulation theory > > > There's an article in the Braudel Center journal I referred to yesterday > (in reference to Frank and his critics )dealing with Maori capitalism in > New Zealand, which is apparently influenced by regulation theory. > Wallerstein also refers to it in his article as one of among different > contending interpretations of why capitalism arose in the west. > (As opposed > to Marxism, world systems theory and one or two others.) With all the > brilliant people on PEN-L, can somebody provide a 2 or 3 paragraph > explanation? I am just not motivated to read a whole book with everything > else I am involved with right now. > > Louis Proyect > > (The Marxism mailing list: http://www.marxmail.org) >
RE: The Center for Economic and Policy Research
>On Behalf Of Michael Perelman > > The Center for Economic and Policy Research Now, if anyone is willing to risk it, what are the principle differences now between EPI, the Preamble Center, and now CEPR? How do their sources of funds or other political alliances differ? -- Nathan Newman
Re: Capital dreams
> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Rod Hay > > It would seem that lotteries have joined religion and tv as "opiates of > the masses." So by the logic of this paper can the Left write papers upholding the virtues of the Gulag as a promoter of freedom in its promise of eventual release from torture and work? I love the "sense of open-ended possibility" as utility maximization. Brave New World's "soma" becomes the ultimate in social utility, which of course brings us to the obvious additional conservative argument for promoting rampant drug use as rational utility maximization - hell, what else brings such a complete sense of "open-ended possibility" as a hallucinogenic? Can we file this paper under the category of the idiocy of contemporary conservative thinkers? -- Nathan Newman > > Rod Hay > > Michael Perelman wrote: > > > The summary of this article suggests that it throws some light on the > > nature of dreams of well in a capitalist society. > > > > "Lotteries, Liberty, and Legislatures" > > > >BY: LLOYD R. COHEN > >George Mason Law School > > > > Document: Available from the SSRN Electronic Paper Collection: > > http://papers.ssrn.com/paper.taf?abstract_id=210008 > > > > Paper ID: George Mason Law & Economics Working Paper No. 00-01 > > Date: February 2000 > > > > Contact: LLOYD R. COHEN > > Email: Mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Postal: George Mason Law School > > 3401 N. Fairfax Drive > > Arlington, VA 22201 USA > > Phone: (703) 993-8048 > > > > Paper Requests: > > Contact Allen Moye, Associate Director for Public Services, > > George Mason University School of Law Library, 3401 North > > Fairfax Drive, Arlington, VA 22201. Phone:(703)993-8062. > > Fax:(703) 993-8113. Mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > ABSTRACT: > > The central purpose of this paper is to show that lottery play > > is not economically irrational and uninformed. The paper > > presents a theory of lottery tickets not as misguided inputs > > into wealth production as some critics believe but as valuable > > inputs in creating a sense of open-ended possibility, > > specifically the possibility of escaping one's current life by > > acquiring great wealth. In the course of the discussion the > > claim that the lottery is a regressive tax is investigated and a > > variety of empirical predictions are generated as to patterns of > > purchase both across groups and by individuals. Finally the > > insights gained from the earlier discussion are employed as a > > springboard to reground the normative use of the assumption of > > rational utility maximization. > > > > JEL Classification: H29 > > > > -- > > > > Michael Perelman > > Economics Department > > California State University > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Chico, CA 95929 > > 530-898-5321 > > fax 530-898-5901 > > -- > Rod Hay > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > The History of Economic Thought Archive > http://socserv2.mcmaster.ca/~econ/ugcm/3ll3/index.html > Batoche Books > http://Batoche.co-ltd.net/ > 52 Eby Street South > Kitchener, Ontario > N2G 3L1 > Canada >
[PEN-L:6632] 50% Marginal Tax Rate for Working Families
Speaking of minimum wage workers, do folks realize that if working families get any increase in wages above the minimum wage, they face the highest marginal tax rate of any income group? In fact, they are taxed at a rate equal to roughly 50% of any additional income. Here's what they pay just in FICA (SS & Medicare) and Income Taxes: 7.65% Employer side of FICA 7.65% Employee side of FICA 15.00% Income tax Total: 30.3% tax rate -- already ridiculously high But what kicks in for working families with two kids making above $11,300 per year is that the Earned Income Tax Credit begins being phased out. >From $11,300 to $26,000, the EITC is phased out at a rate of $202 of credit lost for every $1000 earned. This adds an additional de facto 20.2% tax rate on top of the already existing 30.3% paid for income taxes and FICA. That's a 50.5% tax rate on any raises above the minimum wage or families with two kids. (Since the credit is less with one kid, the lost credit is only $159 for evey $1000 earned, or a 46.1% marginal tax rate.) It is worth noting that marginal tax rate is higher than the 43% tax rate faced by most middle income taxpayers (FICA and income tax for those making roughly $30-60,000 per year), much more than the marginal tax rate for professional income above $60,000 per year (only 34% to 39% up to $250,000 per year since no social security taxes are paid on those amounts). What this means is that even if we raised the minimum wage from $5.15 to $10 per hour, a working mother with kids would have almost half of the increase taken up by taxes and lost EITC. Without showing all the math and ignoring the employer side of the FICA tax, such a minimum wage hike for a mother with two kids working full-time would increase her nominal income from $10,712 to $20,800 per year. However, of that nominal additional $10,088 in income, the takehome pay of that working mom would increase only $5926. 41% of that additional income goes to the federal government (plus an additional 7.65% for the employer side of the FICA tax--or a total federal share of that increase of $4919). The rate would be even higher if we were measuring from slightly above the minimum wage to the raised wage because of how EITC works. You don't have to be a rightwinger to think there is a problem when the federal government gets almost half of any raise given to the poorest workers. We know why the rightwing doesn't care about this tax burden (although I think Jack Kemp has talked about it in passing at points) but where are leftwingers in denouncing this kind of tax burden on the working poor? One solution we should advocate is ending the phaseout of the EITC (except maybe with a long phaseout for very high incomes). Essentially we would trump the Republicans and Clinton and advocate a $2000 tax credit for a first child and an additional $1000 tax credit for a second child (essentially what the EITC adds up to at its peak). This would have to be paid for with higher rates on the wealthy (say by having them pay the marginal 50% tax rate now faced by the working poor) but that would be a much more progressive situation than the present system. This proposal if passed would have the additional advantage of institutionalizing the EITC not as a program just for the poor but a tax credit used by all income groups. It also simplifies the tax code for a lot of people since they wouldn't have to do the calculations on phasing out the EITC. ---Nathan Newman Progressive Communications [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[PEN-L:6649] [ENODE] WHY MICROCHIPS CREATE MEGABANKS
EN NOOOE
ENN N O O D D E
== N N N O O D D
EN NN O O D D E
EN NOOOE
Vol 1, No. 5
October 10, 1996
To subscribe to this monthly newletter on information
technology and society, send the message "subscribe" to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
HOW MICROCHIPS CREATE MEGABANKS, OR
HOW COMMUNITY BANKS ARE BECOMING ROADKILL
ON THE INFORMATION SUPERHIGHWAY
-- Nathan Newman, Progressive Communications,
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
IT'S A WONDERFUL LIFE pictured the local banker as a fixture
of the community--whether as evil oppressor like Mr.Potter or
local savior like Jimmy Stewart's George Bailey. Either way, it
was hard to think of the community without seeing it as a
reflection of the local banks.
Those local banks are increasingly a thing of the past, done
in by regulatory changes but more importantly by technology that
has encouraged bigger, more national and even international
banks. Electronic banking is a key part of the strategy of banks
trying to go global. Part of this change is shear survival:
banks have less and less a percentage of people's savings, so
banks are fighting each other for every dime. The Federal Reserve
has found that in the last twenty years, household financial
assets deposited in interest-bearing accounts has dropped from
27.5 percent of family assets down to 16 percent. The median
value of those assets has fallen substantially just in the last
few years as more and more of those assets are moved into mutual
funds and other investments. With mutual funds exploding from
just $57 billion in 1979 to $2 trillion by 1996, banks are
rushing to use new technology to hold onto their place in the
financial lives of people.
Bigger banks have used technology to both slash their costs
and expand their operations, usually at the expense of
traditional community banks. The disappearance of the local bank
branch is just the most obvious sign of the deep cost-cutting
involved. Automatic teller machines were the first wave of
electronic banking to begin to replace the local branch, while
Internet banking is coming up fast. With alternatives costing as
little as 15 percent of comparable branch transactions (and with
the costs dropping quickly), banks are seeking every opportunity
to push into electronic banking.
All banks are looking to cash in on to an estimated 15% of
customers who, according to at least one major survey, would
prefer to conduct routine banking over a computer. In 1995,
754,000 households banked by computer, according to a study
performed by Jupiter Communications, a New York consulting firm.
They project that as many as 13 million households will be
banking from home by the year 2000.
If any entrant into Internet banking shows the promise (or
the threat) of banking without geography, its the appearance in
1995 of Security First Network Bank (SFNB), the first independent
bank with no physical branches doing all business electronically.
The creation of an otherwise obscure Savings & Loan from Kentucky
in October 1995, SFNB built on a collaboration with Hewlett-
Packard to launch the bank and a software subsidiary, Five Paces,
to sell Internet-banking software to other banks. Within months,
SFNB had a few hundred customers which grew to 4000 customers in
all fifty states who had opened checking accounts by August
1996. An initial $100 deposit gets a customer an ATM card or a
VISA debit card and the ability to check balances any time on
Security First's home page on the World Wide Web. By the end of
1996, SFNB will be offering customers on-line discount stock
brokerage and insurance services and even a few physical branches
around the country. With $44.6 million in assets, SFNB is
obviously not a big player yet but its success is a threat to
more established banks.
And nowhere is that threat felt more than in northern
California where a majority of Security First's initial customers
have come, showing clearly that while the Internet is global, the
Bay Area is where everything seems to break ground first. Wells
Fargo and Bank of America, the largest banks in the region, have
suddenly realized that their traditional regional territory is
under threat from banks that can reach their traditional
customers from anywhere over the Internet. Mack Hicks, a Vice
President at Bank of America, sees the Internet ending the
relevancy of economic regions, especially for banks: "In an
industrial society, cities were appropriate because of the
regional nature of business and the delivery of services,
[PEN-L:6651] Re: Marginal Tax Rates
On Sat, 12 Oct 1996, Robert Cherry wrote: > Nathan Newman is correct that the working poor have a very high marginal > tax rate as a result of MEANS-TESTED PROGRAMS. This includes not only the > EIC but also foodstamps which have a 24 percent phase-out rate. It was one > of the reasons why having a phased-out health credit (the Republican response > to Clinton's Health Plan) was scrapped. The marginal tax rate for the > working poor with children would have been over 80 percent. With the rightwing appropriating old left rhetoric and arguments like "empowerment and "local participation" in order to gut welfare and cut federal programs, it does seem like we need to appropriate more publicly the rhetoric of the Right that intelligently serves our policy needs. With means testing benefits becoming a popular trend on the right and center, a strong focus on the "supply side economics" critique of such means testing seems all the more needed. Universal benefits are the most intelligent approach to benefits from that perspective and we should challenge those conservatives trying to promote "tax cuts for the rich" in the same breath they promote means testing. >Newman, I think, misses two points, however. First, while the minimum > wage may do little income-wise for the working poor with children, it wish > shift away from transfers to earnings. This may have some value especially > when individual eligibility for the EIC can change. Second, about 40 percent > of the working poor do not qualify for the EIC; they need the minimum wage > increase. I wouldn't ever oppose an increase in the minimum wage--I have a Yes on 210 bumber sticker on my car to raise the California minimum wage to $5.75 and would love to take it higher. My point is that if we fail to address regressive tax policy, raising the minimum wage does little for a whole range of folks. The other reason to focus on tax policy is that taxes and the rhetoric and reality around it works against progressives, and for good reason as this argument shows. Middle income tax payers are paying higher marginal tax rates than the wealthy. In that situation, "flat taxes" along with other regressive policy changes start to sound reasonable while just gutting social spending starts to seem like a survival strategy for the overtaxed working families. --Nathan Newman
[PEN-L:6710] Re: Marginal Tax Rates
On Mon, 14 Oct 1996, Max B. Sawicky wrote: > Nathan Newman wrote: > > > > My point is that if we fail to address regressive tax policy, raising the > > minimum wage does little for a whole range of folks. > > The Federal personal income tax is not regressive. Up to the top > decile, the payroll tax isn't regressive either. The EITC is part of the income tax and for working families making between $11,500 and $26,500 (a not inconsiderable number of families), the marginal tax rate for the income tax is around 35%---higher than for all but the richest families. Add in a payroll tax of 15.6% that is regressive (the rich don't pay it on their new income and the poor do--the definition of regressive), regressivity in the tax code is very real. I didn't even mention adding in state sales and local taxes which are even more regressive. A few years back, Citizens for Tax Justice estimated that in many states, the poorest 20% of families are paying as much as 15% of their income in such local and state taxes. > By knocking the tax code, you appropriate the message of the Right > but only strengthen them politically. It makes it possible for them > to play on the popular illusion that the income tax is regressive and > that under the flat tax, the rich would really pay their fair share. The Right doesn't play on an illusion in propounding the idea that a flat tax is better. They play on the reality of people's experience where they pay heavy amounts of tax while knowing that the wealthy often keep most of their income after loopholes and deductions. California passed Prop 13 largely because progressives sat back and denied the tax burden of rising property rates on small homeowners. Rightwingers seized on that dissatisfaction and tied it to a massive tax protection for commerical property as well. If we don't deal with the regressivity of the tax code, the Right wing will with a few simple ideas: Payroll tax: Privatize social security and everyone keeps the tax in their own retirement accounts. EITC phaseout: abolish EITC in favor of non-refundable tax credits for families Income tax: flat tax with high standard deductions Of course, these results will end up more regressive than problems in the present system, but they will be addressing real dissatisfactions out there. Denying there is a problem with a tax code that everyone hates and sees as irrational and unfair (in many cases for good reason) is a recipe for losing big just as we lost during the Prop 13 tax revolt. --Nathan Newman
