Weekend Economists Give Two Thumbs Up for Roger April 5-7, 2013

[Demeter]

Roger Ebert, the Pulitzer Prize-winning movie critic whose gladiatorial “thumbs up, thumbs down” assessments turned film reviewing into a television sport and whose passion for independent film helped introduce a new generation of filmmakers to moviegoers, has died. He was 70.

Ebert, who had battled cancer in recent years, died Thursday in Chicago, according to the Chicago Sun-Times. He had undergone several surgeries to remove cancerous tumors from his thyroid and salivary glands, ultimately losing his jaw to the disease, and was hospitalized in December for a broken leg. While his cancer diagnosis and the resulting treatments forced him to pull back from criticism in 2006, he remained active as a writer and maintained a powerful presence on social media sites that included his award-winning blog, Roger Ebert’s Journal. Earlier this week he had announced that he would be stepping back from writing reviews. In May 2008, he had returned to writing movie reviews for the Chicago Sun-Times but essentially said goodbye to the TV show that made him famous. Cancer had robbed him of his voice, and Ebert refused to face another surgery that could restore it.

As the longtime and prolific critic for the Sun-Times, he wrote reviews while co-hosting -- originally with Gene Siskel of the rival Chicago Tribune -- a popular nationally syndicated TV show that, in the 1980s, was known as “At the Movies.”

Ebert was the first movie critic to win journalism's most prestigious award, collecting his Pulitzer in 1975, but he had the greatest impact through his TV forum, which began that same year on Chicago public television.

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/movies/moviesnow/la-et-mn-roger-ebert-dead-20130404,0,2960510.story

Already volumes have been written in tribute to Roger Ebert, and as I have no knowledge of ever reading or seeing his reviews (when your life is confined to the PG world, a lot passes you by), I am counting on loyal readers of this thread to fill in my ignorance with their well-earned competence.

And while we are at it, we can review the economic fantasies of present-day story-tellers!

Have at it, Weekenders!

[Demeter]

1. We haven't had an official bank failure (in the US) for a month

but what could compare to Cyprus! Still, check back here later for any possible updates.

[Demeter]

10. BUT WE HAVE ONE TONIGHT, FROM TANSY'S NECK OF THE DESERT...

Gold Canyon Bank, Gold Canyon, Arizona, was closed today by the Arizona Department of Financial Institutions, which appointed the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) as receiver. To protect the depositors, the FDIC entered into a purchase and assumption agreement with First Scottsdale Bank, National Association, Scottsdale, Arizona, to assume all of the deposits of Gold Canyon Bank. The two branches of Gold Canyon Bank will reopen on Monday as branches of First Scottsdale Bank, National Association...

As of December 31, 2012, Gold Canyon Bank had approximately $45.2 million in total assets and $44.2 million in total deposits. In addition to assuming all of the deposits of the failed bank, First Scottsdale Bank, National Association agreed to purchase essentially all of the assets...The FDIC estimates that the cost to the Deposit Insurance Fund (DIF) will be $11.2 million. Compared to other alternatives, First Scottsdale Bank, National Association's acquisition was the least costly resolution for the FDIC's DIF. Gold Canyon Bank is the fifth FDIC-insured institution to fail in the nation this year, and the first in Arizona. The last FDIC-insured institution closed in the state was Western National Bank, Phoenix, on December 16, 2011.

A BAGATELLE, REALLY...PALTRY, EVEN!

[Tansy_Gold]

13. My back-up bank.

Nothing like getting the news via WEE!

[Demeter]

15. Sorry about that

[Demeter]

2. Obama Budget Is Dismissed by G.O.P. and Attacked by Left A UNANIMOUS "NO"! BIPARTISANSHIP!

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/06/us/politics/obama-budget-is-dismissed-by-gop-and-attacked-by-left.html?_r=0

The House speaker, John A. Boehner, on Friday waved aside reports that President Obama would seek a new budget compromise next week, accusing the president of again demanding tax increases in exchange for “modest entitlement savings.”

“If the president believes these modest entitlement savings are needed to help shore up these programs, there’s no reason they should be held hostage for more tax hikes,” Mr. Boehner said. “That’s no way to lead and move the country forward.”

At the same time, liberals quickly vented their anger about Mr. Obama’s plans, saying they would not accept changes to Social Security and Medicare that would threaten the programs and harm beneficiaries.

“Evidently the president either does not understand or does not care how critically important Social Security and Medicare are, not just to seniors but to middle-aged and younger workers for whom these programs are likely to be even more crucial,” said Eric Kingson, co-chair of the Strengthen Social Security Coalition.

MORE

[Demeter]

4. Desperately Seeking “Serious” Approval PAUL KRUGMAN

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/04/05/desperately-seeking-serious-approval/

Sigh. So Obama is going with the “chained CPI” thing in his latest proposal — changing the price index used for Social Security cost adjustments. This is, purely and simply, a benefit cut. Does it make sense in policy terms? No. First of all, there is no reason to believe that the chained index is a better measure of inflation facing seniors than the standard CPI. It’s true that the standard measure arguably understates inflation for the typical household — but seniors have a different consumption basket from the young, one that includes more medical expenses, and probably face true inflation that’s higher, not lower, than the official measure.

Anyway, it’s not as if the current level of real benefits has any sacred significance. The truth — although you’ll never hear this in Serious circles — is that we really should be increasing SS benefits. Why? Because the shift from defined-benefit pensions to defined contribution, the rise of the 401(k), has been a bust, and many older Americans will soon find themselves in dire straits. SS is the last defined-benefit pension still standing — thank you, Nancy Pelosi, for standing up to Bush — and should be strengthened, not weakened.

So what’s this about? The answer, I fear, is that Obama is still trying to win over the Serious People, by showing that he’s willing to do what they consider Serious — which just about always means sticking it to the poor and the middle class. The idea is that they will finally drop the false equivalence, and admit that he’s reasonable while the GOP is mean-spirited and crazy. But it won’t happen. Watch the Washington Post editorial page over the next few days. I hereby predict that it will damn Obama with faint praise, saying that while it’s a small step in the right direction, of course it’s inadequate — and anyway, Obama is to blame for Republican intransigence, because he could make them accept a Grand Bargain that includes major revenue increases if only he would show Leadership (TM).

Oh, and wanna bet that Republicans soon start running ads saying that Obama wants to cut your Social Security?

I'LL RAISE YOU, PAUL, AND BET THAT THE LIBERALS AND PROGRESSIVES BEAT THE GOP RACE TO THE MEDIA....

[Hotler]

18. THEY'RE COMING FOR YOUR FUCKING MONEY!

There is no money left that isn't on loan from China. They're coming for your Social Security and they're going to steal it. "Not a dimes bit of difference." gee who said that? Both sides of the isle are bought and paid for by the 1%ers. I wonder what dirt the PTB have on Obama that he would be at ease working to let the 1%ers steal the peoples money. Is it Wall St. or the MIC pulling the strings? Both? NEOCONS? There is nothing done in Washington DC that doesn't end up putting money in someone's pocket. The fact that we are talking about the S.S. give away means that the deal has already gone down and the rest of what goes on in DC is just for show.

Thankyou for letting me vent.
hot

[Demeter]

21. It's Official: A Democratic President Proposes to Cut Social Security; What can we do to stop this?

http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/its-official-democratic-president-proposes-cut-social-security?akid=10292.227380.jGa-IG&rd=1&src=newsletter820467&t=12&paging=off

April 5, 2013 |


Mark this day. For the first time in history, a Democratic president has officially proposed to cut the Democratic Party's signature New Deal program, Social Security:

President Obama next week will take the political risk of formally proposing cuts to Social Security and Medicare in his annual budget in an effort to demonstrate his willingness to compromise with Republicans and revive prospects for a long-term deficit-reduction deal, administration officials say.

In a significant shift in fiscal strategy, Mr. Obama on Wednesday will send a budget plan to Capitol Hill that departs from the usual presidential wish list that Republicans typically declare dead on arrival. Instead it will embody the final compromise offer that he made to Speaker John A. Boehner late last year, before Mr. Boehner abandoned negotiations in opposition to the president’s demand for higher taxes from wealthy individuals and some corporations.

The way this was explained to me is that the liberal Democrats in the House put out a leftward proposal and the Democrats in the Senate put out a moderate proposal, which the president tacitly endorsed. The Crazy Republicans then came back with a rightward proposal so now the president has simply set forth a compromise between the Senate Dems and the Crazy Republicans. And it's his final, final offer this time. God help us if the Republicans wise up and take this deal. After all, it's a more conservative budget than even their hero Ronald Reagan ever submitted.

This is what he proposes:

I'm going to quote Mike Lux here:

If Obama includes it in his budget, he is claiming this as a policy idea he supports before he even starts negotiations with the Republicans. This is terrible policy and terrible politics at the same time. In a budget document that has no actual policy impact but that symbolically represents what he stands for and who he wants to fight for, he will alienate senior citizens and the families who worried about taking care of them, he will split his political party down the middle, and-- by being the first one to formally propose cuts to Social Security-- he will hand Republicans a big political weapon to hurt Democrats in 2014.

I understand the president has political reasons he wants to do this. He wants to look like the most reasonable guy in the room, and he wants the Republicans to look like they are the extremists who won't compromise. He doesn't want the attacks that will come from the deficit hawk crowd if offers nothing on "entitlement reform," and he feels like this is a modest cut compared with the budget ax the Republicans are threatening. He feels like he can lessen the impact of the Social Security cuts by adjusting the formula to protect the oldest and poorest recipients.

But, folks, this is rotten public policy, and all those political reasons pale in comparison to the damage he is doing here. With the demise or curtailment of most pensions, the drop in family wealth due to the collapse of the housing sector in 2008, the big unemployment numbers cutting into many families' life savings, the flattening or decrease of wages for most workers, and the inflation in many essentials among those who are working driving down the ability to save for retirement, this is the absolute last time we should be looking at cutting incomes for retirees.

As to the idea that Obama will keep the most vulnerable low-income seniors from harm, I am very appreciative of that fact that he cares about them and is trying to preserve them from cuts. Obama's compassion for the poorest of the poor is something to be lauded, one of his best values. But I used to do a lot of organizing with moderate income senior citizens, and I know a lot of middle-income seniors. I can tell you that even for those a little above the cut-off line but still living mostly on Social Security, they are not living in luxury, they are in fact just making it. When groceries or utilities or out-of-pocket health care expenses spike, it hurts and hurts bad. I have been in the apartments of seniors when utility prices were going on one of their periodic jumps, have seen what they can afford to eat, have felt the cold in their apartments in the winter because they can't heat their place. I know in my heart, because I have seen the evidence up close and personal, that for a lot of seniors the $500 a year they will have lost from chained CPI a few years from now if this cut goes into effect will result in more seniors dying of hypothermia or malnutrition.

Most Americans, over 80 percent in polls I have seen, understand that cutting Social Security benefits is a terrible idea, and I believe that if that is what happens people will be angry. But even if the politics were not on our side, this is a moral issue pure and simple. The president should not propose cutting Social Security, and Democrats in Congress should raise hell and oppose him if he does. As Democrats, according to all that rhetoric I kept hearing during the campaign last year, we believe in fighting for the middle class, and this proposal punches the middle class-- both older Americans and the families who care for them-- in the gut.

Ok, so what do we do now?

First, we cannot simply sit back and expect the GOP to do our dirty work for us. After all, the way things are going, the President or could start offering up new tax cuts for all we know. He's either a terrible negotiator or he really, really wants these cuts. Either way, counting on him holding the line is probably not a good idea.

So, we have to buck up the Democrats. I know, I know. But they still have to face voters while the president has run his last election. They should be made very, very aware of what they are contemplating: attacks from both the left and the right in the next election. Any incumbent Democrat who could face a primary challenge will be facing withering criticism for voting to cut SS, veterans benefits and medicare. And if they are lucky to fight them off and win they will be attacked by the Republicans challenger on exactly the same issues. These are very, very popular programs which, by the way, don't actually need to be cut. Anyone who votes for this will hear about it. If you have a Democratic congressional rep, give them a call and let them know that you willhold it against them. (Also too, if you have a Republican representative. They have to face voters too and it can't hurt to remind them of that. And after all, they are just looking for reasons to oppose this ...)

And call your Senators starting today. The pattern so far has been that Speaker Boehner will only suspend the Hastert Rule (allowing legislation to the floor without a Republican majority) if it is already passed with a bipartisan Senate vote. Best to try to stop it here first.

Meanwhile prepare for a barrage of savvy, world weary commentary from your fellow liberals telling you that this is no big thing and that Democrats will not suffer even a tiny bit if they vote for a common sense proposal like this one. You will be shushed and told to calm down and take a chill pill. In other words, you will be gaslighted by fellow liberals who are embarrassed that you aren't being coolly accepting of something that is completely unacceptable. This is how this works. Tell them to STFU and move out of the way.

And recall this:

Responding to a flood of angry phone calls and letters from their elderly constituents, a growing number of Congressmen and Senators are seeking to repeal or revise the "Medicare Catastrophic Coverage Act of 1988" enacted in June of that year. The amount and the tenacity of elderly opposition to the law, particularly to the new taxes that will fund it, took many Congressmen by surprise. It also has provoked an open and widespread grass-roots rebellion within the nation's largest senior citizen lobby, the American Association of Retired Persons (AARP), whose national office pushed hard for the original legislation. Already, some 30 bills have been introduced to repeal the catastrophic act in whole or in part or to change the way it is financed. More bills are expected.

The cool kids should think twice before predicting a complacent acceptance of this proposal because sometimes the people do stand up and object. Especially when it comes to these programs. They don't call it the third rail for nothing.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Update: Right on schedule:


As if on cue, from the Speaker: “If the president believes these modest entitlement savings are needed to help shore up these programs, there’s no reason they should be held hostage for more tax hikes.”

Textbook. It’s what you invite when you pre-emptively move to the middle.
Hey, there are plenty of things the president propose to meet them in the "new middle." He could agree to raise the medicare and SS age, for instance, in exchange for tax cuts. No worries. There's lot's of room for further negotiation.

[Demeter]

24. Austerity Is Killing Europeans -- Literally. Why Are We So Determined to Follow In Their Footsteps?

http://www.alternet.org/austerity-killing-europeans-literally-why-are-we-so-determined-follow-their-footsteps?akid=10273.227380.XDbxHE&rd=1&src=newsletter818648&t=6&paging=off

How much sicker does the patient have to get before the doctors stop prescribing poison?

Here are some selected news stories out of Europe:

New York Times: ”Unemployment in Euro Zone Reaches a Record High”
WSJ: “Sixth Quarter of Contraction Looms for Euro Zone”
Der Spiegel: “Shredded Social Safety Net: European Austerity Costing Lives”
WSJ: “Spain Says Budget Gap Is Wider Than Reported”
New York Times: “European Car Sales Point to Continuing Slump”
WSJ: “Italy Unable to Form Government”
New York Times: “Debt Rising in Europe”

Paul Krugman’s right: This isn’t a recession. It’s Europe’s Second Depression, and it’s on track to last even longer than the first one. Austerity economics has been imposed across most of the Eurozone, to a greater or lesser degree, with devastating economic results: This is Europe’s sixth consecutive quarter of economic contraction. Europe’s Austerity Recession (or Depression) has now lasted longer than the one brought on by the financial crisis of 2008.

The first downturn was brought on by private greed and public negligence. This one’s been brought on by public insanity fueled by private interests. And the austerity poison is literally deadly: The Lancet, a respected medical journal,reports a sharp increase in suicides and epidemics as the rest of European austerity measures...Meanwhile, manufacturing output is plunging across the Eurozone. Spain saw the worst decline in employment since 2009. Unemployment hasn’t been this high in the Eurozone since record-keeping began in 1995. And Europe’s infrastructure has a dimming future.

“Europe’s carefully maintained autobahns, high-speed TGV trains and vast network of modern airports have long been the envy of the world,” writes Reuters. “But thanks to austerity budgets that are slashing infrastructure spending …, that may not be true for much longer.”

No wonder last month’s European Union summit was marked by protests and Italy’s leaders still can’t form a government. What can we learn from Europe’s misery? For our political leaders the answer seems to be: Nothing. In fact, Washington seems determined to follow in Europe’s footsteps. We’ve already had a couple of rounds of austerity ourselves – in the last deficit deal, and now in the “sequester” cuts. The President and the Republicans both employ pro-austerity rhetoric which argues that deficits are our biggest problem. They just disagree about where and how it should be imposed. The President occasionally offers half-hearted stimulus programs, but he never actually fights for them. The Republican platform has become increasing extremist, emphasizing the radical dismantling of our social contract and a deregulated environment in which citizens would become the hapless prey of corporate predators. President Obama may challenge the GOP verbally on a couple of points, but he continues to propose pre-“conservatized” ideas, which the GOP promptly and predictably pushes further to the right. (His new budget is likely to be the next example of this.) And by endlessly repeating the false idea that deficits are our most urgent economic problem, he has performed an invaluable service to the cause of harmful austerity economics.

In other words, The Republicans want to place the country on an express train to hell, and the President usually suggests we take the local instead.

MORE


Richard (RJ) Eskow is a blogger and writer, a former Wall Street executive, an experienced consultant, and a former musician. He has experience in health insurance and economics, occupational health, benefits, risk management, finance and information technology.

[Demeter]

3. Why Jay-Z has 5 careers, and you don’t

I BEG TO DIFFER....WE ALL HAVE MULTIPLE CAREERS....WE JUST DON'T GET PAID FOR MOST OF THEM, AND THOSE THAT DO PAY, DON'T PAY WELL ANY MORE.

Few have the resources to be Renaissance men today, experts say..WHAT DO THEY KNOW? IF BEING A RENAISSANCE MAN MEANS HAVING MICHELANGELO PAINT YOUR CEILING, THEN NO. IF IT MEANS PAINTING YOUR OWN CEILING....

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/why-jay-z-has-5-careers-and-you-dont-2013-04-05

Given the still shaky job market, many Americans would like to dabble in a variety of fields. But as today’s disappointing jobs report shows, many are struggling to land even one job: employers only added 88,000 jobs in March, less than half of the 200,000 economists were expecting. Career experts say that unlike Jay-Z — who made the transition this week from hip-hop mogul to sports agent — most people aren’t well enough established in one vocation to simultaneously venture into another.

Before you can be a Renaissance man or woman with expertise, you need to build up a reputation in one space, they say. But achieving that kind of knowledge is also becoming more difficult at a time when people are changing jobs more frequently and often juggling multiple roles at once, experts say. “It used to be, you had 20 or 30 years to set yourself apart,” says Rachel Weingarten, a marketing and personal brand strategist based in New York City.” Now you have a microsecond to make yourself stand out.”

Workers change companies about every five years on average, and roughly 5% of employees are working multiple jobs at once, according to the most recent data available from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Of course, unlike Jay-Z, these jobs may be more about just paying the bills than taking a stab at careers as a rapper, producer, actor and minority owner of a sports team.

The median tenure at one job is shortest for younger workers ages 20 to 24, who change companies about once a year. Those ages 25 to 35 change jobs roughly every three years. Changing companies can have its upsides, giving workers a chance to sample different environments and move up the ladder more quickly, experts say, but if workers are changing roles frequently, they may not get to develop the skills or the resources to build a more permanent career path, Weingarten says....

ANY EXPERT WHO BELIEVES IN A "PERMANENT CAREER PATH" DESERVES A PINK SLIP

[Demeter]

5. The Big Stall ROBERT B. REICH

http://robertreich.org/post/47194731154

Bad news on the economy. It added only 88,000 jobs in March – the slowest pace of job growth in nine months. While the jobless rate fell to 7.6 percent, much of the drop was due to the labor force shrinking by almost a half million people. If you’re not looking for work, you’re not counted as unemployed. That means the percentage of working-age Americans either with a job or looking for one dropped to 63.3 percent — its lowest level since 1979. The direction isn’t encouraging. The pace of job growth this year is slower than its pace last year.

What’s going on? The simple fact is companies won’t hire if consumers aren’t buying enough to justify the new hires. And consumers don’t have enough money, or credit, or confidence to buy enough. It’s likely Americans are beginning to feel the pinches of January’s hike in the payroll tax combined with the government budget cuts known as the sequester. Increases in gas prices haven’t helped. All are taking money out of the pockets of most people – whose job situation remains precarious. So they can’t and won’t buy much.

One indicator: Retailers cut their staffs in March — by 24,100.

Yes, the stock market has rebounded. But only a small portion of Americans are affected by the rebound. The richest 1 percent own 35 percent of all shares of stock; the richest 10 percent own 90 percent. And, yes, housing prices have stopped falling, and construction of new homes has picked up. The construction sector added 18,000 jobs in March. But the turnaround in housing isn’t because prospective homeowners have been able to get new mortgages. It’s because investors are buying or building homes to rent. And a buoyant rental market doesn’t make most people feel wealthier.

Perhaps the most disturbing aspect of all this is that we’re in the fifth year of a supposed economic recovery from the second-worst economic downturn of the past century, and we’re still not nearly back on track. Instead, we’ve had the most anemic recovery in history. A Gallup survey released Thursday showed that the percentage of Americans holding full-time jobs has remained essentially unchanged over the past year. With 12 million people out of work and another 8 million holding part-time jobs who’d rather have full-time ones, this just isn’t nearly good enough. We’re experiencing the burden of austerity economics and the continued scourge of widening inequality. Both are squeezing average Americans. Yet it’s impossible to have a buoyant and sustained recovery without a large and growing middle class.

WHEN YOU STARVE A GOVERNMENT OF, BY, AND FOR THE PEOPLE, YOU STARVE THE PEOPLE.

[Demeter]

6. How Worker-Owned Companies Work

http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/15425-how-worker-owned-companies-work

Economist Richard Wolff is a proponent of democracy at work: an alternative capitalism that thrives on workers directing their own workplaces. In the documentary film Shift Change, producers Mark Dworkin and Melissa Young tell the stories of successful cooperative businesses from Spain to San Francisco. We caught up with Dworkin and Young to find out what makes cooperative businesses work....

SEE LINK FOR INTERVIEW

[Fuddnik]

7. I just got a dvd in the mail with one of Wolff's lectures. (Amazon)

The man is brilliant. I've read his books and watched his lectures on LinkTV. We need to bring Mondragon (Spain) here. It would end corporate rule as we know it.

WOLFF-KUCINICH 2016.
or
WOLFF-CHOMSKY!

Put some real brains in government.

[bread_and_roses]

54. Wolff is terrific - and as you say, brilliant

and easy to listen to - not wonky, explains things clearly.

[Demeter]

11. Sequester Furloughs Start… With a Whisper

http://news.yahoo.com/pm-note-sequester-furloughs-quietly-start-obama-apologizes-223809731--abc-news-politics.html

- Parts of the federal government are finally showing the effects of the furloughs prescribed by sequestration - one month and four days after the law went into effect. The Northern Division of Maryland's Federal Public Defender's office was closed all day today, with only one assistant federal public defender on hand. Upon calling the office, a message attributed the closure to "furloughs," which Katherine Newberger, the one lawyer on duty, confirmed were because of sequestration.

At the Department of Labor, where most furloughs don't go into effect until April 15, 150 employees waived that delay and have already begun taking their unpaid time off, as well. Several government agencies made doomsday predictions ahead of the onset of sequestration. They warned the budget cuts would lead to furloughs that would cripple the offices they rely on to maintain order and safety in America. But most agencies have yet to actually implement those furloughs.- http://abcn.ws/10Dz7kf

WH Warns of Sequestration 'Headwind' On Jobs- Alan Krueger, chairman of the White House Council of Economic Advisers, said the jobs numbers released Friday are an example of the recovery, but he warned that sequestration cuts are a "headwind" on job growth. http://abcn.ws/14JTotv (Arlette Saenz)

Signs of Solyndra? Fisker Lays Off 75 Percent of Employees - ABC's Matthew Mosk reports - Stunned workers filed out of Fisker's Anaheim headquarters Friday morning with their belongings in boxes. One told ABC News that the employees had no advance notice the layoffs were coming, and they were told they would receive no severance. Among Fisker employees, the worker said, there was an overwhelming sense of sadness Friday that even after building a new, environmentally-focused line of gracefully-designed, high-end American cars, they had not been able to find financial success. http://abcn.ws/13YrtXB

[Demeter]

14. "Green" car maker Fisker fires 75 percent of workforce

http://news.yahoo.com/green-car-maker-fisker-fires-75-percent-u-193738231--finance.html

Fisker Automotive, the struggling government-backed hybrid sports car maker, on Friday terminated most of its rank-and-file employees in what sources said was a last-ditch effort to conserve cash and stave off a potential bankruptcy filing.

Fisker, which raised $1.2 billion from investors and tapped nearly $200 million in government loans, has "at least" $30 million in cash on hand, according to a source familiar with the company's finances.

About 160 workers were fired at a Friday morning meeting at Fisker's Anaheim, California, headquarters, according to a source who attended the meeting. They were told that the company could not afford to give them severance payments. Fisker confirmed in a statement that it let go about 75 percent of its workforce but did not specify the number of workers affected. It called the move "a necessary strategic step in our efforts to maximize the value of Fisker's core assets."

"Unfortunately we have reached a point where a significant reduction in our workforce has become necessary," Fisker said, adding that it was still searching for a strategic partner.
The mass termination triggered a lawsuit seeking class-action status from angry former employees. A lawyer for the fired employees said he expects the company to file for bankruptcy "sooner rather than later."

MORE

[Demeter]

34. Long-Term Unemployed Prepare For Sequester Pinch

http://www.npr.org/2013/04/06/176401906/long-term-unemployed-prepare-for-sequester-pinch?ft=1&f=1001

Almost five million Americans are considered long-term unemployed, meaning they have been searching for work for at least six months.

This week, their plight is getting a bit tougher as the government cuts their unemployment benefits because of the automatic reductions in federal spending that took effect recently.

people who have been out of work for at least 27 weeks...have regular unemployment benefits run out, and once they do the federal government provides extended benefits...next check will be smaller, a casualty of the budget stalemate in Washington...The cuts in the budget for long-term unemployment benefits are not big; about 10 percent. Maurice Emsellem of the National Employment Law Project says the actual reductions in people's checks will be bigger than that, at least over the next few months.

"Because the sequester is calculated on a fiscal year, which started in October, the amount of the cut has to be condensed into a much shorter time period," Emsellem says. "So they have until the end of September to implement a year's worth of cuts in benefits."

THIS IS INSANE!

[Demeter]

8. The Downside of Expecting America's Agriculture System to Feed the World

THERE'S A DOWNSIDE TO EXPECTING THE GOOD OLD US OF A TO BE COMPETENT AT ANYTHING, THESE DAYS....CORRUPTION OF THE 1% AND THE TERROR REIGN OF THE CORPORATIONS HAS DESTROYED EVERYTHING WE WERE.

http://www.alternet.org/food/downside-expecting-americas-agriculture-system-feed-world?akid=10276.227380.OtMFjK&rd=1&src=newsletter818889&t=20&paging=off

Following World War II, with the onset of the “Green Revolution,” feeding the world became a national mantra. But that idea has created big problems...Sooner or later the question comes up, whether it is between two friends sharing a pot of stew made from local grassfed beef and their garden harvest, livestock farmers gathered on a pasture walk, neighbors working together to tend a flock of backyard chickens, or organic vegetable producers discussing yields at a conference.

“But can we feed the world this way?”

As we try to move humanity away from dominant power regimes and thoughtless extraction of the earth’s resources, toward a way of life that honors the earth and all of her creatures, I think this is the most maddening question we can be asking ourselves.

Nevertheless, we’ve all been conditioned to reflexively turn to this question as we challenge our methods and consider new paths toward sustainability.

But following World War II, with the onset of the “Green Revolution,” feeding the world became a national mantra. It was a ubiquitous “good” that handily justified the discovery that the petrochemicals used in warfare could find postwar applications if dumped on our food supply. However, 75 or 100 years ago, such a question would never have entered into our dialogue. To ask a local farmer or homesteader how his or her production methods were going to feed the world would have been absurd. The local producer’s job was to support the family, the community, and his or her bioregion–not the world.

“Feeding the world” consoled farmers as they incurred mountains of debt to afford the fossil-fuel-intensive machinery and expansive acreage that would enable them to crank out tons of food for which they would garner increasingly lower prices. “Feeding the world” was the elixir offered as our grandparents attempted to adjust their palates to a food supply that was suddenly tasteless as local food disappeared from the market. “Feeding the world” was the slogan tossed about as rural people the world over surrendered ties to the land, moved to cities, and trusted that the food system would take care of itself. “Feeding the world” was the background tune playing in the bank, on the car radio of the seed salesman, in the office of the accountant as farmers were counseled to “get big or get out,” to expand their production and change their growing practices to participate in a global food supply, rather than a regional one. “Feeding the world” was the motto that let Americans turn their heads and not notice the polluted waters, the increasing severity of floods, soil loss, or the fact that the little farm next door had suddenly disappeared.

Can the local, sustainable food movement in the United States feed the world? Hell, no. Nor can the industrial agricultural paradigm. No one can feed the world. One country cannot do it, nor can any specific model of production. The earth must be allowed to reclaim its natural productivity. That’s why we need local and regional food systems, designed to work harmoniously with local ecosystems. While certain ecological lessons may apply, it would be absurd to think what works for us here in upstate New York for producing food is going to necessarily work in Africa. Heck, many of the methods that work on farms 10 miles from our house won’t work on our steep hillside farm. There is no such thing as a universally applicable production practice nor a universally acceptable diet.But those petrochemicals and farming practices that feed the world are washing away our topsoil and leaving what remains nutritionally deficient. Ironically, the goal to feed the world has led to a form of agriculture that has made it increasingly difficult for the people of the world to feed themselves. And the fact that fossil fuels are not quite as abundant as they once were, nor as cheap, means that even if we could generate yields of global proportions in perpetuity, we wouldn’t be able to deliver the goods in any cost-effective manner.

How are our daily habits impacting humanity’s access to a nutritious food supply? Our daily sustenance should not require that other people in the world go without nourishment. Our daily sustenance should not demand excessive fossil fuels for growing, processing, and transporting the food to our tables. Beyond that, our consumption habits ideally should not be requiring people in foreign lands to destroy their own access to clean water and fertile soils for the sake of dying our clothing, building our electronics, or making our children’s toys.This is not to say that we shouldn’t be concerned about global starvation. But if enabling everybody to have access to good, nutritious food is really our goal, we need to look deeper than crop yields and feed conversion ratios. In addition to the complicated politics involved, we need to examine our individual actions.

Feeding the world starts with individual accountability. It needs to be considered in every home, in every business. But the question must be reframed. Rather than asking farmers if the methods they use can feed the world, we need to look in the mirror and ask ourselves, “Do my choices help enable the world to feed itself?” If the answer is no, then it is time to make different choices.

There is not one of us who is blameless when the question is reframed (myself included). But it is not solely up to the farmers to feed the world. It is up to each and every one of us to strive to live a life of personal accountability that will enable this earth to heal, and enable this world to feed itself.

And, just as no single agricultural practice will be universally applicable, nor will any single life path. There are many routes to a healed planet. What matters is that we keep asking ourselves to be accountable, and that we keep making the changes that are direly needed.

Thus, I leave you with one question: What can you do today that will enable the world to feed itself?

Shannon Hayes wrote this article for YES! Magazine, a national, nonprofit media organization that fuses powerful ideas with practical actions. Shannon is the author of Radical Homemakers: Reclaiming Domesticity from a Consumer Culture, The Grassfed Gourmet and The Farmer and the Grill. Her newest book is Long Way on a Little: An Earth Lover's Companion for Enjoying Meat, Pinching Pennies and Living Deliciously. She is the host of Grassfedcooking.com and RadicalHomemakers.com. Hayes works with her family on Sap Bush Hollow Farm in Upstate New York.

[Demeter]

9. Remembering Roger Ebert, In His Own Words Katey Rich

http://www.cinemablend.com/new/Remembering-Roger-Ebert-His-Own-Words-36794.html

When you're remembering one of the most prolific, thoughtful, funny and inimitable writers who's even worked, you realize very quickly that your own words aren't going to do it justice. Everyone who has jobs like ours at Cinema Blend has grown up in Roger Ebert's shadow, either reading his columns for the Chicago Sun-Times, watching his weekly episodes of At the Movies, or later following his Twitter feed or blog posts. When Ebert died yesterday at the age of 70, after a recurrence of cancer, it felt like a sudden end to what had been a decades-long conversation. Roger Ebert was writing and talking about movies even after he had lost the physical ability to speak, and he did so until hours before his death.

With a loss as big as this one, everyone takes a step back and remembers in their own way. And, for most of us, that involved looking at Ebert's work. It's incredible how much of the man's career is available online, from the extensive archives at RogerEbert.com to endless YouTube clips from At The Movies. Below you can find the favorite links and videos that we've dug up-- much of it Ebert's writing, but some other people are included too. But first, a personal remembrance from Nick Venable, who says what a lot of us have been feeling today:

I started writing for Cinema Blend four years ago reviewing DVDs, always jealous of the website higher-ups for getting to talk about new releases in theaters, which took no time to understand is what people want to read about. And Roger Ebert’s legacy had a lot to do with that. For over 40 years, he made hearing about a movie second-hand fall just short of seeing the film itself, and gave away none of the important bits that friends ruin. And though I grew up watching At the Movies at whatever ridiculously late hour it played here, I didn’t truly appreciate Ebert’s opinions until the Internet age allowed me to read his Sun-Times words on a regular basis.

As such, the most indispensable piece of Ebert’s legacy for me is his collection Your Movie Sucks, a scathing example of cinematic target practice that contains all the negativity of a Nietzsche-inspired manifesto, but with an endless amount of humor and diamond razor-sharp wit. One read from cover to cover, without any room for neutrality or positivity to squeeze its way inside, and I’d learned everything I needed in order to share my specific opinions about a terrible film, regardless of the judgment that others may try to drown me with. Too bad I never quite learned how to be as eloquent. Nobody needs anyone to tell them that Boat Trip was a piece of shit, but the fact that we’ll no longer have him around to warn us about such clutter is a dirty shame. Incidentally, he gave A Dirty Shame a single star, and called it “the only comedy I can think of that gets more bad laughs than good ones.” R.I.P., Mr. Ebert, and may whatever comes next be better than The Hot Chick: 1/2 star.

MORE AT LINK INCLUDING VIDEOS

[Demeter]

12. JPMorgan Works to Avert Split of Chief and Chairman Roles

http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2013/04/05/behind-the-scenes-jpmorgan-works-to-sway-shareholders-on-dimon-vote/

JPMorgan Chase is working behind the scenes to avert a major potential embarrassment. In anticipation of a crucial vote at next month’s annual meeting, board members are planning to sit down with some of the bank’s biggest shareholders to make their case that JPMorgan’s influential chief executive, Jamie Dimon, should keep his chairman title, according to several people briefed on the plans. The campaigning, which shareholders indicate is unusually proactive this year, reflects the growing worries within JPMorgan that investors may be dissatisfied with management because of the continuing fallout from a multibillion-dollar trading debacle.

In the past, such investors say they usually received only a phone call from executives in the investor relations department or met with them in person. Along with director meetings, the company this year is also contacting smaller shareholders who previously might not have heard from the big bank at all. Voting to split the roles would send a powerful message. Few big banks have separated the chairman and chief executive positions. And when they do, it generally occurs during a broader management shake-up, as in the case of Bank of America and Citigroup.

“As we approach our annual meeting, we are conducting our normal shareholder outreach program, which offers an opportunity to review company matters with investors and which sometimes includes conversations with directors,” Joe Evangelisti, a JPMorgan spokesman, said. “As we mentioned in our proxy filed last week, a director can be available for discussions with major shareholders.”

A few big shareholders can make a difference in either direction. Last year, roughly 40 percent of the JPMorgan investors supported a proposal to split the roles. Firms that advise some of the nation’s largest shareholders are expected to recommend again that JPMorgan separate the posts of chief executives. Other big investors, including some that voted to keep the roles together last year, remain undecided, according to a number of shareholders who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of policies against talking to the media.

“If you separate the roles, there is another set of eyes and ears,” said Michael S. Levine, a portfolio manager at OppenheimerFunds. “That is not a bad thing, because there is more accountability.” But in comparison to its peers, he said, JPMorgan has done “arguably the best job.” On proxy matters, Oppenheimer, which owns 20 million JPMorgan shares, typically votes in line with the recommendations of the advisory firm, Institutional Shareholder Services.

While a shareholder vote in favor of splitting the positions would not be binding, it would put pressure on the board to split the roles. Such an outcome would also indicate that many shareholders had lost faith in Mr. Dimon, 57, a precipitous fall for an executive who successfully steered the bank through the turmoil of the financial crisis. If the vote goes against the company and the board decides to split the role, some board members and shareholders are concerned that Mr. Dimon might resign rather than accept what would most likely be regarded as an affront. Several shareholders have said privately that succession is a major factor in their decision-making process. In meetings with directors, the shareholders said they expected to ask about succession planning, and the board’s ability to exert influence on bank management. In recent years, companies have been moving to split the role of chairman and chief executive, either proactively or at the urging of shareholders. The move is aimed at creating stronger, independent boards, to keep management in check. Last year, Citigroup’s board, let by a strong-willed chairman, Michael E. O’Neill, voted to oust the chief executive, Vikram S. Pandit. In February, a group of JPMorgan shareholders filed a resolution to divide the chairman and chief executive posts. Since then, those investors have been working to gather support for the proposal...

MORE

[Demeter]

16. Fiduciary Duty to Cheat? Stock Market Super-Star Jim Chanos Reveals Perverse New Mindset of Finance

http://www.alternet.org/economy/fiduciary-duty-cheat-stock-market-super-star-jim-chanos-reveals-perverse-new-mindset?akid=10276.227380.OtMFjK&rd=1&src=newsletter818889&t=4&paging=off

Hustlers. Cheaters. Crooks. American business has always had them, and sometimes they’ve been punished. But today, those who cheat and put the rest of us at risk are often getting off scot-free. The recent admission of Attorney General Eric Holder that systemically dangerous megabanks may escape prosecution because of their size has opened a new chapter in fraud history. If you know your company won’t be prosecuted, a perverse logic says that you shouldcheat and make as much money for shareholders as you can.

Jim Chanos is one of America’s best-known short-sellers, famed for his early detection of Enron’s fraudulent practices. In deciding which companies to short (short-sellers make their money when the price of a stock or security goes down), Chanos acts as a kind of financial detective, scrutinizing companies for signs of overvaluation and shady practices that fool outsiders into tlhinking that they are prospering when they may be on shaky financial footing. Chanos teaches a class at Yale on the history of financial fraud, instructing students in how to look for signs of cheating and criminal activity. I caught up with Chanos in his New York office to ask what’s driving the current era of rampant fraud, who is to blame, what can be done, and the ways in which fraud costs us financially and socially....

INTERVIEW AT LINK

[Demeter]

17. MY EYES CAN'T STAY OPEN

Carry on in my absence!

[Hotler]

19. $21 trillion held in offshore havens.

"This could be a game-changer," said Mr. Murphy, the author of a book about offshore tax shelters. "Secrecy is the key product these places sell. Whether you are a criminal laundering money or just someone trying to evade or avoid taxes, secrecy is the one thing you want."

Old news I know.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/100619555?__source=xfinity|mod&par=xfinity

[DemReadingDU]

37. only $21 trillion?

Ha, that is what is found so far. probably the tip of the iceberg

[Hotler]

20. "My Songs Know What You Did in The DARK."

"So light'em up, up, up.
Light'em up, up, up
Light'em up, up, up......

[Demeter]

22. 45 Years After MLK Assassination, What Have We Learned?

http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/45-years-after-mlk-assassination-what-have-we-learned?akid=10287.227380.w-c9Pi&rd=1&src=newsletter819894&t=10&paging=off




If you attended elementary school in the 1960s, as I did, you first experienced American politics as a string of assassinations, with a lot of strife in between. The murder of President John F. Kennedy in 1963 was profoundly shocking. The murder of Martin Luther King, Jr., in 1968 was devastating, but half-expected. Americans living in the 20th century had no memory of a president being cut down, but the murder of civil rights activists -- and even random black men -- by angry whites was a thing that happened from time to time. Medgar Evers. Schwerner, Cheney and Goodwin. Emmett Till. Today, on the 45th anniversary of King's slaying, my mind is swimming in the memory soup of that time.

The night before his slaying, King addressed a gathering at the Mason Temple in Memphis, Tenn., where he had come to lead a labor march with the city's striking sanitation workers, who were seeking a living wage and workplace safety after two of their brethren were crushed to death in a garbage truck compactor, leaving behind families with no survivor's benefits. The American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees was engaged in a campaign to organize the workers. King's final speech is best remembered for the way in which he seemed to predict his own death, saying:

Like anybody, I would like to live a long life. Longevity has its place. But I'm not concerned about that now. I just want to do God's will. And He's allowed me to go up to the mountain. And I've looked over. And I've seen the Promised Land. I may not get there with you. But I want you to know tonight, that we, as a people, will get to the Promised Land!

Often forgotten is the fact that this was an organizing speech, replete with instructions for behavior during the march, and for a boycott of certain food manufacturers because, King said, "they haven't been fair in their hiring practices." Among those he listed for boycotting: Coca-Cola, Wonder Bread, Hart's bread and Sealtest dairy products. He also urged his audience to move their money out of the big, white-owned banks, and into financial institutions controlled by African Americans. In 1968, King was one the most powerful political figures in the United States, able to muster gatherings of thousands on little notice, and preparing to gather hundreds of thousands for a march against poverty. His mission had broadened to include labor rights, poverty alleviation and an end to the war in Viet Nam. With that broadened mandate, King stood poised to bridge the century-old gap, deliberately dug by white elites, between African-Americans and working-class whites. If you were invested in maintaining that gap, Martin Luther King was, in 1968, a very dangerous man.

MORE







Adele M. Stan is AlterNet's Washington correspondent. She co-edited, with Don Hazen, the AlterNet book, Dangerous Brew: Exposing the Tea Party's Agenda to Take Over America. Follow her on Twitter: www.twitter.com/addiestan . Send tips to: [e-mail]

[Demeter]

23. Conspiracy to Kill Martin Luther King Jr: Not a Theory But a Fact, According to Our Own Legal System

http://www.alternet.org/civil-liberties/conspiracy-kill-martin-luther-king-jr-not-theory-fact-according-our-own-legal-system?akid=10287.227380.w-c9Pi&rd=1&src=newsletter819894&t=4&paging=off


Should the United States government be allowed to assassinate its own citizens? That question was in the air briefly not long ago. April 4 is an excellent day to revive it: On April 4, 1968, the government was part of a successful conspiracy to assassinate the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

That’s not just some wing-nut conspiracy theory. It’s not a theory at all. It is a fact, according to our legal system. In 1999, in Shelby County, Tennessee, Lloyd Jowers was tried before a jury of his peers (made up equally of white and black citizens, if it matters) on the charge of conspiring to kill Dr. King. The jury heard testimony for four full weeks. On the last day of the trial, the attorney for the King family (which brought suit against Jowers) concluded his summation by saying: “We're dealing in conspiracy with agents of the City of Memphis and the governments of the State of Tennessee and the United States of America. We ask you to find that conspiracy existed.” It took the jury only two-and-half hours to reach its verdict: Jowers and “others, including governmental agencies, were parties to this conspiracy.”

I don’t know whether the jury’s verdict reflects the factual truth of what happened on April 4, 1968. Juries have been known to make mistakes and (probably rather more often) juries have made mistakes that remain unknown. But within our system of government, when a crime is committed it’s a jury, and only a jury, that is entitled to decide on the facts. If a jury makes a mistake, the only way to rectify it is to go back into court and establish a more convincing version of the facts. That’s the job of the judicial branch, not the executive. So far, no one has gone into court to challenge the verdict on the King assassination.

Yet the version of history most Americans know is very different because it has been shaped much more by the executive than the judicial branch. Right after the jury handed down its verdict, the federal government’s Department of Justice went into high gear, sparing no effort to try to disprove the version of the facts that the jury endorsed -- not in a court of law but in the “court” of public opinion. The government’s effort was immensely successful. Very few Americans are aware the trial ever happened, much less that the jury was convinced of a conspiracy involving the federal government.

MORE

Ira Chernus is Professor of Religious Studies at the University of Colorado at Boulder and author of “MythicAmerica: Essays.” He blogs at MythicAmerica.us.

[Demeter]

31. How the Government Killed Martin Luther King, Jr. By Carl Gibson

http://www.nationofchange.org/how-government-killed-martin-luther-king-jr-1365089091

Before scoffing at this headline, you should know that in 1999, in Memphis, Tennessee, more than three decades after MLK's death, a jury found local, state, and federal government agencies guilty of conspiring to assassinate the Nobel Peace Prize winner and civil rights leader. The same media you would expect to cover such a monumental decision was absent at the trial, because those news organizations were part of that conspiracy. William F. Pepper, who was James Earl Ray's first attorney, called over 70 witnesses to the stand to testify on every aspect of the assassination. The panel, which consisted of an even mix of both black and white jurors, took only an hour of deliberation to find Loyd Jowers and other defendants guilty. If you're skeptical of any factual claims made here, click here for a full transcript, broken into individual sections. Read the testimonies yourself if you don't want to take my word for it.



It really isn't that radical a thing to expect this government to kill someone who threatened their authority and had the power to organize millions to protest it. When MLK was killed on April 4, 1968, he was speaking to sanitation workers in Memphis, who were organizing to fight poverty wages and ruthless working conditions. He was an outspoken critic of the government's war in Vietnam, and his power to organize threatened the moneyed corporate interests who were profiting from the war. At the time of his death, he was gearing up for the Poor People's Campaign, an effort to get people to camp out on the National Mall to demand anti-poverty legislation – essentially the first inception of the Occupy Wall Street movement. The government perceived him as a threat, and had him killed. James Earl Ray was the designated fall guy, and a complicit media, taking its cues from a government in fear of MLK, helped sell the "official" story of the assassination. Here's how they did it.



The Setup

The defendant in the 1999 civil trial, Loyd Jowers, had been a Memphis PD officer in the 1940s. He owned a restaurant called Jim's Grill, a staging ground to orchestrate MLK's assassination underneath the rooming house where the corporate media alleges James Earl Ray shot Dr. King. During the trial, William Pepper, the plaintiff's attorney, played a tape of an incriminating 1998 conversation between Jowers, UN Ambassador Andrew Young, and Dexter King, MLK's son. Young testified that Jowers told them he "wanted to get right with God before he died, wanted to confess it and be free of it."

On the tape, Jowers mentions that those present at the meetings included MPD officer Marrell McCollough, Earl Clark, an MPD lieutenant and known as the department's best marksman, another MPD officer, and two men who were unknown to Jowers but whom he assumed to be representatives of federal agencies. While Dr. King was in Memphis, he was under open or eye-to-eye federal surveillance by the 111th Military Intelligence Group based at Fort McPherson in Atlanta, Georgia. Memphis PD intelligence officer Eli Arkin even admitted to having the group in his own office. During his last visit to Memphis in late March of 1968, MLK was under covert surveillance, meaning his room at the Rivermont was bugged and wired. Even if he went out to the balcony to speak, his words were recorded via relay. William Pepper alleges in his closing argument during King v. Jowers that such covert surveillance was usually done by the Army Security Agency, implying the involvement of at least two federal agencies.

Jowers also gave an interview to Sam Donaldson on "Prime Time Live" in 1993. The transcript of the interview was read during the trial, and it was revealed that Jowers openly talked about being asked by produce warehouse owner Frank Liberto to help with MLK's murder. Liberto had mafia connections, and sent a courier with $100,000 to Jowers, who owned a local restaurant, with instructions to hold the money at his restaurant.

John McFerren owned a store in Memphis and was making a pickup at Liberto's warehouse at 5:15 p.m. on April 4th, roughly 45 minutes before the assassination. McFerren testified that he overheard Liberto tell someone over the phone, "Shoot the son of a bitch on the balcony." Other witnesses who testified included café owner Lavada Addison, who was friends with Liberto in the 1970s. She recalled him confiding to her that he "had Martin Luther King killed." Addison's son, Nathan Whitlock, also testified. He asked Liberto if he killed MLK, and he responded, "I didn't kill the nigger but I had it done." When Whitlock pressed him about James Earl Ray, Liberto replied, "He wasn't nothing but a troublemaker from Missouri. He was a front man ... a setup man."

The back door of Loyd Jowers' establishment led to a thick crop of bushes across the street from the Lorraine Motel balcony where Dr. King was shot. On the taped confession to Andrew Young and Dexter King, Jowers says after he heard the shot, Lt. Earl Clark, who is now deceased, laid a smoking rifle at the rear of his restaurant. Jowers then disassembled the rifle, wrapped it in a tablecloth and prepared it for disposal.

The corporate media says it was James Earl Ray who shot MLK, and he did it from the 2nd floor bathroom window of the rooming house across the street from the Lorraine Motel. The official account alleges the murder weapon was dropped in a bundle and abandoned at Dan Canipe's storefront just before he made his getaway. But even those authorities and media admit that the bullet that tore through MLK's throat didn't have the same metallurgical composition as the bullets in the rifle left behind by James Earl Ray. And Judge Joe Brown, a weapons expert called to testify by Pepper in the 1999 trial, said the rifle allegedly used by James Earl Ray had a scope that was never sighted in, meaning that the weapon in question would have fired far to the left and far below the target.

The actual murder weapon was disposed of by taxi driver James McCraw, a friend of Jowers. William Hamblin testified in King v. Jowers that McCraw told him this story over a 15-year period whenever he got drunk. McCraw repeatedly told Hamblin that he threw the rifle over the Memphis-Arkansas bridge, meaning that the rifle is at the bottom of the Mississippi river to this day. And according to Hamblin's testimony, Canipe said he saw the bundle dropped in front of his store before the actual shooting occurred.

The Conspiracy

To make Dr. King vulnerable, plans had to be made to remove him from his security detail and anyone sympathetic who could be a witness or interfere with the killing. Two black firefighters, Floyd Newsum and Norvell Wallace, who were working at Fire Station #2 across the street from the Lorraine Motel, were each transferred to different fire stations. Newsum was a civil rights activist and witnessed MLK's last speech to the striking Memphis sanitation workers, "I Have Seen the Mountaintop," before getting the call about his transfer. Newsum testified that he wasn't needed at his new assignment, and that his transfer meant that Fire Station #2 would be out of commission unless someone else was sent there in his stead. Newsum talked about having to make a series of inquiries before finally learning that his reassignment had been ordered by the Memphis Police Department. Wallace testified that to that very day, while the official explanation was a vague death threat, he hadn't once received a satisfactory answer as to why he was suddenly reassigned.

Ed Redditt, a black MPD detective who was assigned to MLK's security detail, was also removed from the scene an hour before the shooting and sent home, and the only reason given was a vague death threat. Jerry Williams, another black MPD detective, was usually tasked with assembling a security team of black police officers for Dr. King. But he testified that on the night of the assassination, he wasn't assigned to form that team.

There was a Black Panther-inspired group called The Invaders, who were staying at the Lorraine Motel to help MLK organize a planned march with the striking garbage workers. The Invaders were ordered to leave the motel after getting into an argument with members of MLK's entourage. The origins of the argument are unclear, though several sources affirm that The Invaders had been infiltrated by Marrell McCollough of the MPD, who later went on to work for the CIA. And finally, the Tact 10 police escort of several MPD cars that accompanied Dr. King's security detail were pulled back the day before the shooting by Inspector Evans. With all possible obstacles out of the way, MLK was all alone just before the assassination.

The Cover-Up

Around 7 a.m. on April 5, the morning after the shooting, MPD Inspector Sam Evans called Public Works Administrator Maynard Stiles and told him to have a crew destroy the crop of bushes adjacent to the rooming house above Loyd Jowers' restaurant. This is particularly odd coming from a policeman, since the bushes were in a crime scene area, and crime scene areas are normally roped off, not to be disturbed. The official narrative of a sniper in the bathroom at the rooming house was then reinforced, since a sniper firing from an empty clearing would be far more visible than one hidden behind a thick crop of bushes.

Normally, when a major political figure is murdered, all possible witnesses are questioned and asked to make statements. But Memphis PD neglected to conduct even a basic house-to-house investigation. Olivia Catling, a resident of nearby Mulberry Street just a block away from the shooting, testified that she saw a man leave an alley next to the rooming house across from the Lorraine, climb into a Green 1965 Chevrolet, and speed away, burning rubber right in front of several police cars without any interference. There was also no questioning of Captain Weiden, a Memphis firefighter at the fire station closest to the Lorraine, the same one from which Floyd Newsum had been transferred just a day before.

Memphis PD and the FBI also suppressed the statements of Ray Hendricks and William Reed, who said they saw James Earl Ray's white mustang parked in front of Jowers' restaurant, before seeing it again driving away as they crossed another street. Ray's alibi was that he had driven away from the scene to fix a tire, and these two statements that affirmed his alibi were withheld from Ray's guilty plea jury.

The jury present at Ray's guilty plea hearing also wasn't informed about the bullet that killed MLK having different striations and markings than the other bullets kept as evidence, nor that the bullet couldn't be positively matched as coming from the alleged murder weapon. Three days after entering the guilty plea, James Earl Ray unsuccessfully attempted to retract it and demand a trial. Incredibly, James Earl Ray turned down two separate bribes, one of which was recorded by his brother Jerry Ray, where he was offered $220,000 by writer William Bradford Huey and the guarantee of a full pardon if he would just agree to have the story "Why I Killed Martin Luther King" written on his behalf.

The Deception

One of the 70 witnesses that William F. Pepper called to testify in King v. Jowers was Bill Schaap, a practicing attorney with particular experience in military law, with bar credentials in New York, Chicago, and DC. Schaap testified at great length about how the government, through the FBI and the CIA, puts people in key positions on editorial boards at influential papers like the New York Times and Washington Post. He describes that although these editorial board members and news directors at cable news outlets may be liberal in their politics, they always take the government's side in national security-related stories. Before you write that off as conspiracy theory, remember how people like Bill Keller at the New York Times, as well as the Washington Post editorial board, all cheerfully led the march to war in Iraq ten years ago.

Another King v. Jowers witness was Earl Caldwell, a New York Times reporter who was sent to Memphis by an editor named Claude Sitton. Caldwell testified that the orders from his editor were to "nail Dr. King." In the publication's effort to sell the story of James Earl Ray as the murderer, the Times cited an investigation into how Ray got the money for his Mustang, rifle, and the long road trip to Tennessee from California. The Times said that according to their own findings as well as the findings of federal agencies, Ray got the money by robbing a bank in his hometown of Alton, Illinois. In Pepper's closing argument, he says that when he or Jerry Ray talked to the chief of police in Alton, along with the bank president of the branch that was allegedly robbed, neither said they had been approached by the New York Times, or by the FBI. Essentially, the Times fabricated the entire story in order to sell a false narrative that there was no government intervention and that James Earl Ray was a lone wolf.

So for the following 31 years after King's death, nobody dared to question the constant reiteration of James Earl Ray as the murderer of Martin Luther King. Even 13 years after a jury found the government complicit in a conspiracy to murder the civil rights leader, the complicit media continues to propagate the false narrative they sold us three decades ago and vociferously shout down any alternative theories as to what happened as "conspiracy theory," framing those putting forth such theories as wackjobs undeserving of any credibility. It's strikingly similar to how the Washington Post defended their warmongering in a recent editorial commenting on the invasion of Iraq, and had one of their reporters defend the media's leading of the charge into Iraq.

As we remember Dr. King and the important work he did, we should also reject the official account of his death as loudly as the government and media shout down anyone who tries to contradict their lies. As Edward R. Murrow said, "Most truths are so naked that people feel sorry for them and cover them up, at least a little bit."

Reader Supported News is the Publication of Origin for this work. Permission to republish is freely granted with credit and a link back to Reader Supported News.

WELL, THAT BEGS THE QUESTIONS: WHAT CAN WE DO ABOUT THIS? HOW CAN WE DO ANYTHING ABOUT THIS? WHEN THE GOVERNMENT COMMITS A CRIME, WHO IS THE LAW ENFORCEMENT ORGANIZATION?

[bread_and_roses]

60. This - literally - makes me weep with dispair ....

... which King would - rightly - deride as self-indulgent. But it conflates in my mind with my tears the night Obama was elected .... jaded that I am, I had hope ....

[kickysnana]

25. Sharing good food, anywhere on a budget.

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51XPYn78GQL._BO2,204,203,200_PIsitb-sticker-arrow-click,TopRight,35,-76_SX225_SY300_CR,0,0,225,300_SH20_OU01_.jpg

http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2008/11/the_pot_and_how_to_use_it.html

First, get the Pot. You need the simplest rice cooker made. It comes with two speeds: Cook, and Warm. Not expensive. Now you're all set to cook meals for the rest of your life on two square feet of counter space, plus a chopping block. No, I am not putting you on the Rice Diet. Eat what you like. I am thinking of you, student in your dorm room. You, solitary writer, artist, musician, potter, plumber, builder, hermit. You, parents with kids. You, night watchman. You, obsessed computer programmer or weary web-worker. You, lovers who like to cook together but don't want to put anything in the oven. You, in the witness protection program. You, nutritional wingnut. You, in a wheelchair.

And you, serving in Iraq or Afghanistan. You, person on a small budget who wants healthy food. You, shut-in. You, recovering campaign worker. You, movie critic at Sundance. You, sex worker waiting for the phone to ring. You, factory worker sick of frozen meals. You, people in Werner Herzog's documentary about life at the South Pole. You, early riser skipping breakfast. You, teenager home alone. You, rabbi, pastor, priest,, nun, waitress, community organizer, monk, nurse, starving actor, taxi driver, long-haul driver. Yes, you, reader of the second-best best-written blog on the internet.


We will begin with a scientific conundrum. You put Minute Rice and the correct amount of water into the Pot, and click to Cook. Minutes later, the Pot clicks over to Warm. Tomorrow night, you put whole grain organic rice and the correct amount of water into the Pot, and click to Cook. An hour later, the Pot clicks over to Warm. Both nights, the rice is perfectly cooked.

[Demeter]

26. An Asian friend of my acquaintance remarked

she didn't even know you could burn rice until she came to America....

[bread_and_roses]

33. that was good fun to read - thanks!

I heard about his blog on NPR yesterday - never knew he had one, or that it was "second most popular" or something like that. I am so out of it. But good for him! His "pot" meal recipes sound a lot like what MFK Fisher called "Sludge" in her "How to Cook a Wolf" about cooking poor (I am not, btw, a fan of MFK Fisher - find her both self-absorbed and self-indulgent in her writing - but hey, who am I? She is revered. I am weird However, none the less, I find occasional bits of hers very good - though not "Sludge," which no one in their right mind would want to eat).

[xchrom]

27. Government using increasingly loaded language in welfare debate{uk}

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2013/apr/05/goverment-loaded-language-welfare


The government is increasingly using value-laden and pejorative language when discussing benefits and welfare, a Guardian analysis has found, something poverty charities warn is likely to increase the stigmatisation of poor people.

The findings show that the work and pensions secretary, Iain Duncan Smith, has spoken of a mass culture of welfare dependency in every speech on benefits he has made in the past 12 months.

The analysis comes after complaints that the government is using exceptional cases such as that of Mick Philpott, the unemployed man jailed this week for the manslaughter of six children, to justify its programme of changes to the benefits system.

An examination of Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) speeches and press notices connected to benefits in the year to April 1 shows a significantly increased use of terms such as "dependency", "entrenched" and "addiction", when compared with the end of the Labour government.

[xchrom]

28. Portugal court rejects some government austerity measures

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/portugal-court-rejects-some-government-austerity-measures-1.1351536

Portugal's constitutional court has rejected four out of nine contested austerity measures in this year's budget in a ruling that deals a blow to government finances but is unlikely to derail reforms two years after the country's bailout.

The measures rejected by the court should deprive the country of at least 900 million euros ($1.17 billion) in net revenues and savings, according to preliminary estimates by economists.

The Diario Economico newspaper said the government put the impact of the court's ruling at 1.3 billion euros. It did not cite its sources. Debt-ridden Portugal agreed to a €78 billion bailout in 2011 from the European Union and International Monetary Fund.

The entire package of austerity measures introduced by the 2013 budget is worth about €5 billion and includes the largest tax hikes in living memory, which were mostly upheld.

[Demeter]

29. 6 Charts That Show How Conservative Politics Are Destroying America

http://www.alternet.org/economy/6-charts-show-how-conservative-politics-are-destroying-america?akid=10264.227380.FmB6fW&rd=1&src=newsletter818003&t=8

We've been in the clutches of conservative economic orthodoxy since 1980, and this is the result. These were compiled by Dave Johnson at Campaign for America's Future: In each of the charts below look for the year 1981, when Reagan took office.

Conservative policies transformed the United States from the largest creditor nation to the largest debtor nation in just a few years, and it has only gotten worse since then:



Working people’s share of the benefits from increased productivity took a sudden turn down:



This resulted in intense concentration of wealth at the top:



And forced working people to spend down savings to get by:



Which forced working people to go into debt: (total household debt as percentage of GDP )



None of which has helped economic growth much: (12-quarter rolling average nominal GDP growth.)



There are, of course, many reasons for all this. But there is no doubt that we've been in the clutches of conservative economic orthodoxy since 1980 and this is the result. Whether it's the cause or whether it's because it has no capacity to react to external events properly doesn't matter. It has failed. And is still failing.

[xchrom]

30. Senators Draft Higher Capital Requirement for Biggest U.S. Banks

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-04-05/senators-to-propose-higher-capital-for-banks-over-400-billion.html

The largest U.S. banks, including JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) and Bank of America Corp., would have to hold capital in excess of Basel III standards under a proposal being drafted by Senate Democrats and Republicans to curb the size of too-big-to-fail banks.

The current draft of the legislation would require U.S. regulators to replace Basel III requirements with a higher capital standard: 10 percent for all banks and an additional surcharge of 5 percent for institutions with more than $400 billion in assets. Senators Sherrod Brown, a Democrat from Ohio, and David Vitter, a Republican from Louisiana, have said they intend to introduce the bill this month.

The measure comes amid calls by regulators including Federal Reserve chairman Ben S. Bernanke to do more to rein in the size of so-called too-big-to-fail banks, a term used to describe institutions perceived to be so big and important that taxpayers would be compelled to prevent their failure. The proposal’s authors have said it incorporates ideas from FDIC Vice Chairman Thomas Hoenig, Dallas Federal Reserve President Richard Fisher and former FDIC Chairman Sheila Bair.

Analysts including Jaret Seiberg of Guggenheim Securities LLC’s Washington Research Group said that the bill doesn’t yet have enough support to become law. Still, its bipartisan support means it has a better chance of passage than other proposals.

[xchrom]

32. Finland Turns to Venture Funds to Rescue Economy: Nordic Credit

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-04-05/finland-turns-to-venture-funds-to-rescue-economy-nordic-credit.html

Finland is turning to venture capital financing as it searches for ways to jolt the economy out of a recession without jeopardizing its AAA rating.

The northernmost euro member wants to attract investors for a new 1 billion-euro ($1.28 billion) program and help startup companies without adding to its budget deficit. Finland is promising that investors who buy into the venture will take the lion’s share of potential profits. The program will also target growth companies.

“The debt crisis caused investors to retrench from this riskier startup funding,” Petri Peltonen, head of the enterprise and innovation department at Finland’s Economy Ministry, said in a telephone interview. “We’re now trying to attract private investors to take more risk that will help boost economic growth and create jobs.”

While Finland has weathered the crisis better than southern Europe, its economy contracted for a second time in four years in 2012, stretching government finances as the nation faces a fifth consecutive year of budget deficits. Finnish bonds with maturities longer than one year have lost 0.2 percent this year, compared with a 0.7 percent gain for euro-area government bonds, according to Bloomberg/EFFAS indexes.

[Demeter]

35. It was nice knowing you!

Not too bright or smart of Finland to go into the wolf's mouth for food...

[Demeter]

36. RIDDLE ME THIS: How long does it take the self-absorbed, narcissistic 1% to realize

that they are totally off track, and destroying the world?

ANSWER: When the 99% remove their bloated 1% heads from their bloated 1% necks.

I'm sorry, folks. The news is just too depressing for words. It's threatening to rain, so I'm going off to do paper work while the papers stay dry. Be back later. Maybe someone can find something cheering and hopeful?

[DemReadingDU]

38. It will be awhile

There is still food available and the ATMs are still dispensing cash

[xchrom]

39. Letter from Berlin: Franco-German Left Mired in Difficulties

http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/german-spd-growing-wary-of-partnership-with-french-president-hollande-a-892820.html

One year ago, the mood among Germany's Social Democrats (SPD) was one of elated optimism. In May 2012, Socialist Party candidate François Hollande won the country's presidential elections, opening up the possibility that a right-to-left changing of the guard might be possible in Germany too. Just weeks after his victory, Hollande invited the SPD leadership to Paris to allow them to bask in his popularity.

On Friday, SPD chancellor candidate Peer Steinbrück is once again in Paris. But even as the general election campaign in Germany ahead of the vote this fall has begun to heat up, the mood on the Franco-German left has cooled. With Hollande's public opinion poll scores plummeting, his country's economy in trouble and his government mired in scandal, he looks to have very little sparkle left to lend to his cross-border political ally.

And Steinbrück's campaign too seems to have reached an impasse. A new poll in Germany indicates that, were Germans able to vote directly for candidates (rather than for political parties), only one in four would cast their ballot for Steinbrück, against 60 percent for Chancellor Angela Merkel. Furthermore, only 32 percent approve of the job he is doing, his lowest such score since he entered federal politics in 2005, according to a survey released on Thursday evening by German public broadcaster ARD.

Taken together, the travails facing the two politicians amounts to a fading of hopes, particularly among euro-zone member states struggling under the ongoing euro crisis, that Hollande's election would mark a resurgence of the European left -- and an end to Merkel's austerity-first approach to the common currency's woes.

[xchrom]

40. US CONSUMER BORROWING UP $18.2B IN FEBRUARY

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_CONSUMER_CREDIT?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2013-04-05-15-23-32

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Americans borrowed more in February to buy cars and attend school, but were more careful with their credit cards.

The Federal Reserve said Friday that consumer borrowing rose $18.2 billion in February from January. That's up from a gain of $12.7 billion in the previous month.

The increase brought total borrowing to a seasonally adjusted $2.8 trillion. That's up from $2.78 trillion in January and a new record.

Nearly all of the gains were in a category that covers student and auto loans. That grew by $17.6 billion, up from $11.1 billion in January.

[xchrom]

41. Egypt After The Revolution: There's Not Much To Sell But Sex

http://www.businessinsider.com/prostitution-in-caro-egypt-2013-4



There's a point when the parents of a country get so desperate they sell whatever they can to make ends meet, including their daughters.

I was in Cairo, Egypt, last week, and this topic came up when I was talking to some Egyptians at my hotel.

An acquaintance named Ahmed was looking at his Facebook account on a small netbook computer on the check-in desk, when he said, "She's in Africa."

A flurry of Arabic went back and forth between Ahmed and two other men before the story was eventually explained to me. Ahmed had been dating a girl from rural Egypt who came to Cairo after the revolution to earn money to send to her family.


Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/prostitution-in-caro-egypt-2013-4#ixzz2PhGFbzaw

[bread_and_roses]

42. My two quarrels with Roger

I did read Ebert occasionally - we rarely go to see movies (or "films" as my friends in college would have corrected me) on the big screen -but sometimes when considering one I would check out what he had to say - simply because he was the only reviewer who's name I knew off the top of my head. Also, sometimes I would watch a movie on TV and be puzzled by it - liking it when I thought I shouldn't or the reverse, and would check out what he had to say to help me figure out why. This is only since the internet, of course - in the "olden days" that was not possible. Overall, I enjoyed his reviews. I mostly only really enjoy big special effect action films, so his nuances were lost on me, I'm afraid (I overstate somewhat - I do enjoy other movies - but I would never bother going to the "theater" to see "The Pianist," or "Cold Comfort Farm." )

However, I read his reviews of "Seabiscuit" and "Secretariat" just now - they were linked in tribute to Ebert off a racing site I visit - and both are - quite simply - dead wrong. I saw both these films and - evidently unlike Ebert - I know a little about racing and quite a lot about both the horses. I also read both books that the films are based upon - both are excellent and in both cases the films do them great injustice.

Ebert acknowledges that he is a very good friend of Bill Nack, who wrote "Secretariat: The Making of a Champion" and was a consultant on the film. Ebert doesn't think the friendship affected his opinion - and all I can do is . Nack is a good writer - very good - and the film that Ebert gave 4 stars is piss-poor, formulaic, sentimental, dishonest, and totally absent any hint for a casual viewer of how great this horse was. Ebert even mentions with approval one of the stupidest and most ridiculous moments in the film: Lane as Chenery looking deep into Secretariat's eyes and "communing" with him to decide he was fit to run. Blech. He says the film "has no time for foolishness" when it has little else. It spends endless time establishing Chenery as a sort of "ordinary housewife" when she was not - her family had bred and raced Riva Ridge, who won 2/3 of the Triple Crown, including the Derby, the year before Secretariat.

And that is only one of many glaring flaws - not to mention endless boredom - between the few racing scenes, which are mostly botched. They couldn't even find a TB to even approximate Secretariat's exceptional looks and bearing: there is one shot of about two seconds in a pre-race scene where the horse "actor" has an arched neck and looks to be near-prancing - the one and only shot where the horse even hints at an animal that brought grown men to tears - literally.
Ebert's review here: http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20101006/REVIEWS/101009986
Nack's article on Secretariat's career and death: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1005832/1/index.htm (a very good piece of writing, here's Nack describing Secretariat:

The colt had filled out substantially since I had last seen him ... he looked like some medieval charger—his thick neck bowed and his chin drawn up beneath its mass, his huge shoulders shifting as he strode, his coat radiant and his eyes darting left and right. ... Turcotte headed toward the pole and let Secretariat rip...
... the sight and sound of him racing toward us is etched forever in memory: Turcotte was bent over him, his jacket blown up like a parachute, and the horse was reaching out with his forelegs in that distinctive way he had. raising them high and then, at the top of the lift, snapping them out straight and with tremendous force, the snapping hard as bone, the hooves striking the ground and folding it beneath him.

And finally the film does the almost unforgivable - it makes a hash of the Belmont call - arguably the most famous racing call in all of racing history and one of the best known moments in sport. Secretariat's immortal Belmont with the real, inimitable call:

Some photos of Secretariat



http://www.kentuckytourism.com/!userfiles/Things%20To%20Do/kentucky-derby-secretariat.jpg



(one of the best known - and best - photos of Secretariat in a race)

On Seabiscuit, which Ebert gave 3 stars, he got three things right: The racing scenes are exceptional. William Macy's performance is a lot of fun, and Chris Cooper is very good as the trainer. Other than that, when Ebert says the movie is "a slow starter" he's right - but he neglects to mention that except for the racing scenes it's also a very very very slow goer. We get to watch what feels like forever of Jeff Bridges sitting doing nothing in front of his bicycle shop and also what feels like the entire months of his courtship of his second wife. The book - by Laura Hillenbrand - is truly excellent. The movie is a cornball formula that makes an interesting story boring, prettifies the great Depression, and is sentimental and almost uniformly trivial. But the racing scenes are wonderful.
Eberts review: http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20030725/REVIEWS/307250304/1023

edit to correct Nack spelling, to add a link I left out, and also to note that the photos appear automatically from the links - I did not copy and paste them.

[bread_and_roses]

44. My rant does have a connection to our perennial interests ....

I could not fit this in - had promised g'dtr and two friends I'd take them to see the 3-D version of "Jurassic Park" - speaking of films it was lots of fun! - and had to leave. Just now made it back.

The effort to make Penny Chenery into an "ordinary" "housewife" was so ludicrous precisely because she was the woman who came to race Secretariat. Not to diminish her courage in facing a very male world, nor her many achievements, nor her good works, but her background was hardly "ordinary." From the first link with bio info on her I found:

http://www.richestnetworth.com/penny-chenery-net-worth/

For high school, she attended Madeira, a school very focused on horses, in Greenway, Virginia. Following her graduation, she attended Smith College in Northampton, Massachusetts ...

... She was part of the family that owned Meadow Farm, a thoroughbred racing operation and horse breeding business in Caroline County founded by her father, Christopher Chenery.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Chenery

Christopher Tompkins Chenery (September 19, 1886 - January 3, 1973) was an American engineer, businessman, and the owner/breeder of record for Thoroughbred horse racing's U.S. Triple Crown champion Secretariat.

Chenery was born in Richmond, and raised in Ashland, Virginia. He was the brother of William L. Chenery, Editor-Publisher of Colliers Magazine... He studied at Randolph-Macon College and Washington and Lee University, graduating in 1909 with a Bachelor of Science in Engineering. He then went to work in the U.S. Pacific Northwest and Alaska, but his career was interrupted with service in the United States Army Corps of Engineers during World War I. After the war, Chenery established Chenery Corporation, which became the controlling shareholder of the Federal Water Service Company. He served as the water, gas, and pipeline company's president. Chenery was involved in two cases before the Supreme Court of the United States that are considered landmark cases of United States administrative law.[1] After disbanding the Federal Water Service Co, he founded and served as president and chairman of the board of another utility, the Southern Natural Gas Co. later Sonat, eventually purchased by the El Paso Corp. In the 1950s, he purchased Danziger Oil and used it to create the Offshore Production Corp. one of the first offshore drilling companies.

When Penny Chenery returned from Europe in 1946, her father encouraged her to advance her education by attending the Columbia School of Business. To make this proposition more attractive, Chris Chenery offered to pay his daughter's way, and give her an allowance equal to the amount of the highest paying job she could get if she did not go to business school.

... Penny Tweedy was a housewife and a ... She enjoyed camping in Montana with her husband, riding her horse, Crescent City, and fund-raising for the Red Cross.

... What is Penny Chenery's net worth? Penny Chenery's net worth is $10 million dollars.

She's worth $10 million or so. Eddie Sweat, Secretariat's groom, the human who had more to do with him day-to-day than anyone else, who practically slept with him, died in poverty.

http://articles.baltimoresun.com/1998-06-02/sports/1998153115_1_sweat-secretariat-crown-winner

NEW YORK -- He was Secretariat's best friend.

But when Eddie Sweat died in April at age 59, he was destitute. His family couldn't afford to bury him.

So a charitable organization paid for the funeral. And a former employer paid for Sweat's widow and two daughters to travel from their home in New York City to Sweat's home state of South Carolina.

Ah, yes - all "ordinary housewives" in the 60's had their own horse, and had energy and resources to do "good works."

Photo of Meadow Farm by John Musgrove - just your ordinary little horse-breeding operation ....you know, just like the ones all we "ordinary" women - wives and mothers or not - grew up in ...



Now, the WIKI doesn't tell us how Pater Chenery grew up - whether or not he was a poor boy who made his own way, or inherited money. Either way - it matters not to me, as the point is not to make demons of people but that by the time Penny came along they were certainly at least tag-alongs to the Oligarchy.

As to Seabiscuit's owner, he was indeed a self-made man, as portrayed in the movie. He'd been a bicycle repairman. Who became if not an Oligarch, then a tag-along. He did do good works too, and by Hillenbrand's account sounds like a decent man. And he was rich enough to pay $8000 for Seabiscuit in 1936 - that's $130,786.59 in 2012 dollars - while people were starving. He also paid jockey Red Pollard's many medical bills when he rode for him, and is frequently said to have "treated him like a son." But my memory of the book is that when 'Biscuit retired from racing, they went their separate ways, and Pollard drifted into poverty or near-poverty. Howard, however, was still rich.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_S._Howard

Charles Stewart Howard (February 28, 1877 – June 6, 1950) was an American businessman. He made his fortune as an automobile dealer and became a prominent thoroughbred racehorse owner.

Howard was dubbed one of the most successful Buick salesmen of all time... According to Laura Hillenbrand's biography of Seabiscuit, Howard's early Buick dealership in San Francisco was given a boost by the hand of fate; on the day of the 1906 San Francisco earthquake, he was one of the few individuals who had operational vehicles in the city, and was thus able to help the rescue effort significantly.

In 1921, long before he bought Seabiscuit, Charles Howard purchased the 16,000-acre (6,475 ha) Ridgewood Ranch at Willits in Mendocino County. ( [he] established the Frank R. Howard Memorial Hospital as a memorial to his son). Used as a secondary residence, by the 1930s Howard had converted part of the ranch into a thoroughbred horse breeding and training center.

That Ebert was blind to all this - especially the subtexts in the Secretariat movie, including a portrayal of Sweat that - well, I've gone on long enough. Let's just say that Sweat was a Black man, and there are more than a few well-known stereotypes in the portrayal.

I was angered watching the films, and angered again reading Ebert's reviews. Yes, how we love our rich people here in the good ol' USA - why, they're just like us, right?

[kickysnana]

45. To be able to keep a job as a newspaper film reviewer while even inkling non-corporate

view points I am sure was always a balancing act. Sometimes critics do not have the intellectual depth to see all sides, and sometimes they are just plain wrong. There are films and even TV shows I watched in the past that I see differently years later with more time, knowledge and experience. Some things I still just don't get but other people seem to.

I think he would have welcomed and listened to a viewpoint like yours and I even heard him once or twice change his mind. I did not watch him religiously, nor consider him anything other than a newspaper reviewer with a conscience, and of course a survivor, so I cannot write with any real depth on him myself. Almost dying often changes or deepens ones outlook.

But his courage and life outlook was inspiring to me so he did affect my life and I think he did make a positive difference in his life and career even if it wasn't a perfect one.

[bread_and_roses]

53. Oh, I'm not condemning him wholesale -

as I said I did sometimes read his reviews to check out a movie - knew he was well-regarded and in general I found his reviews approachable and - importantly - unpretentious, which I value.

In the instance of these two movies - Seabiscuit and Secretariat - he was treading on two - actually three - of my passions: the place of women, horses and especially TBs, and how we as a culture hagiography the rich. So - he was on dangerous ground with me on these two.

I honestly think in the case of "Secretariat" he was blinded by his regard for Bill Nack. Nack may have acted as consultant on the film but, believe me, the two are qualitatively miles apart. (And in fairness I will admit that I read the book years ago, and was so interested in Secretariat, and so little interested in Chenery, that I may well have missed any hagiography-ing he had going on.) It is just a bad, cornball film and does neither the magnificent horse nor the excellent book justice.

I thank you for the reply - not least because it sent me out searching for a little more, and I came across this gem:
http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2010/10/secretariat_was_not_a_christia.html in which Ebert takes to task another reviewer who did, in fact, excoriate some of the things I found so objectionable in the film. That reviewer responded in the comments, quote:

Now, clearly I could have written a more "normal" review, in which I said something like: "Secretariat" was kind of fun to watch, but it bugged me. It presents a prettied-up, phony-baloney vision of America in the early '70s, in a transparent effort to appeal to the "family-values" crowd who ate up "The Blind Side" -- people who want a comforting and unchallenging movie without any sex or swearing. There's nothing wrong with that as a way to make a buck, but this example is ultra-tame, scrubbed clean of any genuine conflict or drama, and I pretty much think it's crap.

... The most effective kind of propaganda depicts normal life, or rather an idealized vision of normal life, one that (as one of my readers put it) "makes a particular worldview seem natural, right and appealing." Viewed that way, of course, a very large proportion of Hollywood movies could be considered propaganda, which is a subject for another time. (The shoe may fit.)

... As I think I make clear, I was struck by the oddness of the film's idealized, "Ozzie and Harriet" portrait of American life

... On the film's racial issues: You suggest that I am demeaning the real-life Eddie Sweat, Secretariat's groom. I say nothing about Eddie Sweat. I am discussing a fictional character, the only black person ever seen in the film, who is presented as subordinate, unreflective, constantly cheerful and uniquely well equipped to communicate with an animal. Could there be such a person? Of course. But in the context of my perception of the film's total universe, this feels like an unwholesome and old-fashioned stereotype (for which there is a borderline-offensive name I will not use).

Nack also responded in the comments section and the negative reviewer does seem to have gotten it wrong on Pancho Martin, who evidently was more like the character in the movie than I knew - but I agree with the comments I quoted above. But even without the subtext I say again it was simply a bad, soppy, sentimental and trite movie.

We all have blind spots. Even my hero, Noam, has probably gotten something or another wrong over the years.

on edit: but I would also note that I don't think any "cultural" commentator attains the position Ebert did unless s/he adheres pretty closely to the preferred world-view of TPTB. That doesn't make Ebert a demon - it's just the way it is, and I think important to recognize.

[Demeter]

43. Mr. President, Please do not cut Social Security! By Robert Reich, former U.S. Secretary of Labor

PETITION TIME! SIGN AT LINK

http://signon.org/sign/mr-president-please-do-1?source=mo&id=65506-5294166-axkqwpx

[xchrom]

46. Americans buying up silver and gold coins

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/04/06/americans-buying-up-silver-and-gold-coins/



As the banking crisis struck in 2007-08, investor Will Mitchell sprang into action: After boning up on precious metals, he started buying fairly sizable amounts of silver bullion bars. Eventually, he switched to silver and gold bullion coins, which he considers easier to trade than bars.

The happy result: Even though precious metals prices have been falling lately, "my holdings of them are up [in value] about 100 percent since early 2008," says Mr. Mitchell, the owner of Startupbros.com in Tampa, Fla., a resource for entrepreneurs seeking to create an online business. "You can't ask for more than that."

Interest in these glittery investments – which soared five years ago – has been especially hot this year. In January, the US Mint sold 7.5 million American Eagle silver bullion coins to dealers – a monthly high, and not far from the 9.9 million silver American Eagles it sold in all of 2007. Demand was so strong that the Mint temporarily ran out of supplies and had to suspend sales for roughly 10 days. In addition, sales of American Eagle gold bullion coins hit highs not seen since June 2010.

Although sales of the one-ounce coins fell to more normal levels in February and March, the US Mint is still on track to sell a record number of silver American Eagles in 2013. Sales of gold American Eagles are also back to the high levels of 2011.

[Demeter]

56. OMG! Did they have to melt down the One Ring to issue that coin?

[xchrom]

58. I just knew some one would catch that! Nt

[bread_and_roses]

59. Too funny - but I think the One Ring ...

somehow re-emerged from the fires and Obama found it on his Epic Journey to the WH ...defeating our Frodo (Kucinich?) along the way ....

(not that I ever saw Kucinich as any sort of "savior" - I am at least not quite that naive .... he just seems to suit the conceit .... (using "conceit" in an archaic sense)

Just realized I should have put my post to AnneD under the coin one ....

[Demeter]

61. that WOULD have been serendipity!

[xchrom]

47. ACLU accuses Ohio courts of enacting ‘debtors’ prisons’

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/04/05/aclu-accuses-ohio-courts-of-enacting-debtors-prisons/

A report by the American Civil Liberties Union has accused courts in Ohio of jailing indigent defendants for not being able to pay court fines, an apparent revival of the 19th century practice of “debtors’ prisons.”

According to the Cleveland Plain-Dealer, the organization named seven courts in the state in its report (PDF), compiled over the course of 2012.

“Today across Ohio, municipalities routinely imprison those who are unable to pay fines and court costs despite a 1983 United States Supreme Court decision declaring this practice to be a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution,” the ACLU’s report said.

Courts in Cuyahoga, Erie and Huron counties were singled out in the report as the “worst offenders.” The ACLU said a survey of booking statistics for Huron County Jail revealed that 22 percent of the 1,171 people booked between May and October 2012 were incarcerated for not being able to pay their fines. And municipal courts in Parma and Sandusky counties jailed 45 and 75 people, respectively, between July 15 and August 31, 2012.

[DemReadingDU]

48. Sometimes there are valid reasons

For a couple years, spouse and I would go watch the proceedings of our village court that was held on every-other Wednesday. Usually a person is caught in one of the speed traps, so they go to court to pay the fine ($150) and court costs ($105).

But on some occasions, a person is stopped for speeding, who has an open container, drug paraphanilia, maybe some drugs, a suspended license, expired plates, no insurance, and the person rarely has a job. The fines total several thousands of dollars!

The magistrate always tells the person there are 2 options:
1. Go directly to jail
2. Take the necessary steps to first get a valid driver license and return every-other Wednesday to report what steps have been done.

So every person takes the 2nd option!


While some people do take the necessary steps to get a valid driver license and pay the fines, most do nothing. I think the magistrate has 6 months, by law, to see these people to get the valid license and pay fines, before they go off to jail for 3 days.

We have heard all kinds of excuses from these people. A few are valid and are truly unable to get the license and pay the fines. But most just don't have any respect for the laws and do whatever they want. They end up in jail, and after 3 days, they get out and repeat the same offenses which add more and more fines.

I don't have any answers to resolve these problems. It could be the system, or it could be the people. or both.

[bread_and_roses]

62. Well, jobs would be a good start

People have lost hope. And floating out there in the Zietgeist is the knowledge that the rich skate off free while the peons get slammed for stealing a chicken from the Lords of the Manor ... even if the person can't articulate that, it's out there, part of our collective body of knowledge. Some people just have given up, and that includes giving up on complying with a system that is royally screwing them over.

[xchrom]

49. UK under pressure to act on UK offshore havens

http://www.irishtimes.com/business/sectors/financial-services/uk-under-pressure-to-act-on-uk-offshore-havens-1.1350736

British prime minister David Cameron has come under pressure to act against Britain’s secretive offshore industry at the forthcoming G8 summit in Fermanagh in June, as leaked evidence continued to mount that politicians and tycoons from all over the world have used the British Virgin Islands to hide funds.

More than 130,000 people worldwide are named as holding secret offshore accounts in files leaked to a Washington- based watchdog, according to German newspaper Süddeutsche Zeitung , one of the media organisations involved in sifting through more than 2½ million emails and documents.

The study co-ordinated by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists has shed light on the secret world of offshore havens. The 260 gigabytes of data on a computer hard drive included information on 122,000 offshore trusts in 10 tax havens, including the British Virgin Islands, home to 40 per cent of the world’s offshore accounts and shells.

Those named include some of the wealthiest people in more than 170 countries. Not all necessarily have secret bank accounts and in some cases only conducted business through companies they control which are registered offshore.

[xchrom]

50. PORTUGAL PREMIER TO GIVE SPEECH ON ECONOMY CRISIS

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/E/EU_PORTUGAL_FINANCIAL_CRISIS?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2013-04-07-08-16-36

LISBON, Portugal (AP) -- Portugal's prime minister said he will address the nation Sunday over a crisis triggered when the country's highest court ruled some of the unpopular pay cuts in this year's budget are unlawful, depriving the government of about 1.4 billion euros ($1.8 billion) of expected revenue.

Pedro Passos Coelho will speak after his government said in a statement that the position taken by the Constitutional Court "places the country in serious difficulties in meeting obligations to which it is committed internationally and also the budgetary goals it must meet."

Passos Coelho met with President Anibal Cavaco Silva late Saturday after holding an emergency Cabinet meeting.

The government accepted the judges' decision, "but disagreed with it," government spokesman Luis Marques Guedes said. He said the ruling carries risks which Portuguese citizens should be made aware of.

[xchrom]

51. Portugal PM holds urgent budget talks after court ruling

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-22054967

Portugal's PM has criticised the top court's ruling that parts of the 2013 budget are unconstitutional, and has held urgent talks with the president.

PM Pedro Passos Coelho held an extraordinary cabinet meeting on Saturday and said the Constitutional Court had made meeting commitments to international lenders difficult.

The court had rejected four out of nine austerity measures in the budget.

The PM met the president late on Saturday to discuss the next steps.

[xchrom]

52. Bulgaria holds prayers to end suicides and despair

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-22039182

Bulgaria has begun three days of special prayers requested by the country's president because of national pessimism and a spate of suicides.

The move comes after seven people set themselves on fire, protesting against poverty and corruption. Five died and two were severely injured.

Religious leaders from various faiths agreed to hold special prayers.

Recent protests throughout the EU's poorest nation forced the previous government to resign in February.

[bread_and_roses]

55. For AnneD - "Goldencents" won yesterday

Thought of Anne when I saw the name - so had I been at the track I would have put one of my big spender $2-for-fun bets on him. She'll be glad to know that a $2 win bet would have garnered me $15 - damn good rate of return

I also was pleased that Goldencents was a "cheap" horse:

Goldencents, who surpassed $1 million in career earnings, comes from modest beginnings.

Bred in Kentucky by Rosecrest Farm and Karyn Pirrello out of the Banker's Gold mare Golden Works, the bay colt was bought for a mere $5,500 as a yearling at the 2011 Fasig-Tipton Kentucky October sale by Webb Carroll from a consignment of Pope McLean, agent. He got his early training at Webb Carroll Training Center, then sold for $62,000 to Dennis O'Neill, Doug's brother, at the 2012 Ocala Breeders' Sales Co.'s 2-year-olds and horses of racing age sale from Southern Chase Farm, agent.

Read more on BloodHorse.com: http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/77371/goldencents-surprises-in-santa-anita-derby#ixzz2Pn1kH05G

Those are very modest sums in the racing world*. So go Goldencents!

*on edit: for example, the colt that won the Wood yesterday cost $250,000 as a yearling, compared to Goldencents $5,500

[Demeter]

57. Ladies and Gentlemen

I worked from 4 AM until 11. I am tired. You go on posting, if you wish, but I am going for a bath and a nap. See you Monday!