Progressive Ponderings "Entitlements" – Part 3

By Joe Mayer

Just as "carbon credits," allowing corporations to delay removing their carbon output, add nothing to the well-being of nation or people, we have another "entitlement" problem that needs to be addressed. A bloodsucker has attached its tentacles to our health care system causing extraordinarily high prices (compared with other industrial nations), and frustration for patients and health care providers. It also eliminates part of our population from receiving basic health care protection, the poor in our midst. We have allowed this predator to step between provider and patient. This predator adds fifteen to thirty percent to the cost of health care while adding nothing to its quality or its universality.

HMOs and the Health Insurance industry, in order to sell policies, portray themselves as beneficent depositories of health care assurance. But when care is needed, their goal is to deny payment whenever possible. These "entitlement" corporate leeches are probably the single most frustrating obstacle in improving our health care system. Yet, nearly all politicians and providers include these corporate "entitlements" in proposed reforms. All have vested interests and are placing these interests above citizen needs and desires.

Knowing all the "entitlements" that flow to business and wealth is beyond what most of us can ascertain. We've probably just touched the surface of the schemes invented by the powerful in these three "Entitlements" Ponderings. A case could be made that a good portion of the Washington lobbying industry is seeking "entitlements" for their various plutocrats.

A November, 2007 Harris poll found big business is in extremely low regard as Americans begin to sense this governmental bias of business and wealth over citizen needs. This has resulted in some campaigning politicians advancing "populist" positions. This word "populist," referring to the "rights and wisdom of the common people" has also been given a negative connotation. Populism should be the basis of democratic decision-making but elitist propaganda and media ownership makes it sound like a revolutionary take-over.

Tom Donohue, president of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce sees this "populist rhetoric" as a threat to the "entitlement" of the wealthy to rule: "We plan to build a grass-roots business organization so strong that when it bites you in the butt, it bleeds." He then threatens to punish candidates who oppose business interests.

Donohue's outburst is unique. Usually money likes to manipulate in secret. Few media outlets published Donohue's remarks but will slyly promote his agenda.

This perceived "entitlement" of wealth to govern and thus promote extreme differences in economic inequality is the story of history. Today, also, wealth is seeking more entitlements. Historically, wealth, never satisfied, sought more wealth and drove us into wars, colonialism, enslavement, and extreme divisions among peoples and cultures. We're there again!

We have to listen to the words and recognize the doublespeak behind them – spreading democracy, advancing freedom, free markets, globalization, free trade, tax cuts, security, axis of evil, reform. As currently used by this imperial/ industrial/ wealth complex they hide the goals of power and wealth for the privileged. Add to this the "rugged individualism" as a virtue they have used to achieve this rarified stratosphere of superior living. It, individualism, masks the human need for social connections. It denies that some benefit because of their birth, race, gender and built-in prejudices. It thrives on hate and fear and lies. It is America today!

We face a long struggle but it is winnable. The current radical behavior of the United States on the international scene has awakened the world to America's imperial ambitions. We, subjected to the lies and manipulations of wealth and power, are slowly realizing what the remainder of the world has already concluded. Maybe things had to get this bad in order to wake us up. Justice, not "entitlements" for the wealthy, is the way to peace, to security, to love.

Progressive Ponderings "Entitlements" – Part 2

By Joe Mayer

One advantage of corporate ability to multi-locate is to become chartered in a country known as a "tax haven." In many cases this is as simple as securing a mailing address. Corporate physical assets remain in place and the corporation functions as if no change has taken place – except that now that its office is located in the "tax haven" and enjoys certain tax advantages. American law provides no penalties for this disloyal and unpatriotic action. In fact, many corporations that have made this move continue to receive contracts from Uncle Sam. Disloyalty places no constraints on corporate "entitlements" from the industrial/government complex.

The corporate world also believes that it is entitled to tax breaks and infrastructure enhancement if it is to locate a new plant in another area. Sometimes these tax breaks are called "tax increment financing," but whatever the name, the corporation demands subsidies (entitlements) for the new site from the local government. In fact, corporations often negotiate with multiple communities enticing each community to raise its subsidy in a bidding war. Once the corporation builds within a chosen community it has an advantage over older local businesses and doesn't contribute its fair share for its own police and fire protection, for infrastructure maintenance, for schools or amenities for its employees. Politicians frequently court businesses with these entitlements.

The federal government, through its various agencies, and states, through their system of public universities, are engaged in multiple areas of research. Often corporations partner with these agencies and institutions. When a product results from this research, the patent normally goes to the corporation that produces the product to sell to the public at monopolistic prices. This is the same public that paid for the research and now pays a higher price for the patented product. Many of our exorbitantly priced drugs fall into this category of corporate entitlements.

Airwaves are considered public. In order to broadcast radio and television, companies need a license. These licenses are worth thousands, millions, even billions of dollars. Yet our government not only sells them cheaply but also allows, even encourages, monopolistic practices of this public resource. Citizens pay high monthly fees into this "entitlement" give-away by our business/government complex.

Income from money making money is more sacred under capitalism than money earned by the sweat of the human brow. This assertion by the wealthy has resulted in "entitlements" in taxation through special treatment for dividends, capital gains, and municipal bonds. Although many of us enjoy this tax break, ninety percent of the benefit goes to a few percent of people who really own America.

Carbon, especially from burning fossil fuels, is choking our planet. Our lifestyles will have to change if we are to survive. The Bush/Cheney/corporate administration refuses to face the problem or seek workable solutions when such actions would decrease business profits. This cabal, asserting the "entitlement" of its "right to pollute" is proposing "carbon trading" as a solution. "Carbon trading" allows the "right to pollute." Buying and selling carbon "credits" really guarantees the right to pollute into the distant future. This whole carbon-trading scheme is a perfect example of how democracy has been sold out to "market forces." When harming our earth home becomes "marketable" we are selling out ourselves and our children.

Language is important. Human beings left behind by an economic system concerned only with profit are frequently in need of societal assistance. Instead of providing life-saving necessities we choose to blame the victims and reward the oppressors. "Entitlements" to the unfortunate are given a negative connotation by a society obsessed with getting its own entitlements under other schemes and names. What Christian scripture verses support this perversion of "Jesus saves"?

(To be continued...)

Progressive Ponderings: "Entitlements" – Part 1

By Joe Mayer

This past Saturday I attended an event at which the administrator of our County Health Department and a Doctor versed in community health spoke regarding our health care crisis. Rising costs due to our life styles and changes that influence costs were the basic subject matter. Neither spoke to the controversial issues of universal coverage, single payer, private vs. public. After their informative speeches we broke into discussion groups, each table with a state representative or state senator. My table included a "right-wing-blood-type" person who ranted on how sick he was of "entitlements" although the subject had not been mentioned that morning. This type always describes entitlements as going to unworthy, irresponsible, lazy, illegal human objects.

I couldn't get this rant off my mind. Our government, any government, is beseeched by its citizens to issue "entitlements" to selected petitioners. When issued to the disenfranchised of society we use the term negatively and call it socialism. But when monetary favors are issued to the wealthy and businesspersons, "entitlements" are incentives, promotion, research.

The largest "entitlement" is one that President Eisenhower warned us about just before he left office – the military/industrial complex. The "entitlements" of the war machine have the backing of most of our politicians and enable the presidents from each party to deceive us into war. In addition to no-bid benefits to the military industrial rip-off, the strongest military in the history of the world is on call to protect corporate assets and enforce trade agreements against the exploited people of the world. Other "entitlements" flow to the corporate and wealthy elite as the military limits or denies access to world resources. Wars also provide the benefit of unchecked corruption to politicians and business people alike.

Domestic security forces – the National Guard and state and local policing units – have always taken the side of property when conflict arises between business and labor. Asset protection, rather than people's safety, has been the normal use of domestic security that constitutes another business "entitlement."

The United States is the largest contributor of funds to the World Bank and the IMF. When these funds are lent out to 2nd and 3rd World Countries these agreements usually contain conditions demanding that U.S. personnel be hired to lead the projects and that equipment needed for the projects be purchased from U.S. corporations. Even these world financial institutions enforce "entitlements" to corporations and the wealthy.

So-called Free Trade Agreements are completely about the corporate world. They contradict many sovereign laws and restrict the rights of people. "Entitlements" from these agreements flow exclusively to corporations. Being able to multi-locate, corporations benefit from these entitlements on a worldwide basis.

The administration of Bush/Cheney (both with big-oil backgrounds) held a secret energy conference early in its governing tenure. Who attended and what policies were decided is still secret from the public but known to its corporate attendees. We do know that most energy costs have tripled, oil and gas companies have the largest profits in history, royalties are not being paid; in spite of these obscene profits they still get tax breaks and government incentives. The administration is reluctant to support alternative sustainable resources, and carbon is choking the planet. This "entitlement" may have the most disastrous consequences of all.

Corporations are not allowed to vote but have persuaded the courts that money is speech. Money in elections is the loudest voice. For years American citizens have decried this situation but money rebukes all efforts for change. If an individual expends money in political activity no tax breaks are provided. On the other hand corporations hire lobbyists and lawyers, and pay dues to trade associations and the Chamber of Commerce. These associations and the hired help frequently engage in political activity. The corporation records this expense as normal business expense and it is deductible, a cost of doing business, an "entitlement."

Now when "entitlements" are discussed, you can judge for yourself the intent of the words.

(To be continued...)

Progressive Ponderings: Deregulation

By Joe Mayer

Politicians frequently use "law and order" and "tough on crime" as election slogans. Many of these same politician use "deregulation" for the same purpose. The first slogans refer to citizen behavior – make more laws to crack down on individuals. The latter slogan refers to business and corporate behavior and advocates less regulation of businesses. Deregulation really means to "de-law" business practices. Politicians who advocate these opposing positions are really stating what we already know: They favor business and corporations over citizens.

Deregulation comes about in three ways: 1) Congress passes laws that allow/ encourage business and corporate behaviors that had previously been illegal; 2) The president appoints people to the various regulatory agencies who oppose laws that limit business practices; 3) The president appoints pro-business people to the court system so that many functioning laws are declared illegal. Currently America is affected by all three deregulatory methods.

Deregulation leads to monopolistic, or at least oligarchic, practices where buy-outs and mergers are given approval but which effectively limits consumer options for goods and services. In the past two decades this has occurred in communications (TV, radio, newspapers, telecom), health insurance and HMOs, pharmaceuticals, air travel, banking, insurance, agriculture markets/processing, energy (oil, gas, natural gas, coal, electrical power), among others.

One of the more disastrous results of deregulation happened in the savings and loan industry in the 1980s. Deregulation allowed takeovers that loaded many S&Ls with huge debt. When interest rates turned unfavorable, the takeover artists walked away with millions (billions) in profits while the public (taxpayer) picked up the government-guaranteed debt — $500 billion stated at the time but estimated as high as $1.4 trillion. The Bush family was involved through son/brother Neil. Deregulation in the case of S&Ls favored the privatization of profits while debt was off-loaded to the public. This is the goal of many deregulators.

A second, more recent, result of deregulation happened in the energy industry – ENRON. Deregulation allowed Enron energy traders, not producers, to create contrived shortages, especially in California, to drive the price so high it threatened many with bankruptcy. This time the price to the public besides artificially high-priced energy included the disruption of service (brown-outs and back-outs). Related to this is VP Cheney's secret energy committee. We still don't know all the players (corporate energy insiders) or the schemes decided upon. We do know the results: The highest energy prices in American history along with the highest energy corporation profits in history. Deregulation allowed fewer and fewer companies to control the energy market and allowed the vertical integration — control of oil from the ground to the gas tank. Such integration effectively eliminates competition.

As the world heats up, congressional/corporate sycophants — who deny science and refuse to acknowledge the world's environmental concerns — fight regulation with all the forces money can buy. Bush adamantly refuses any regulation that would transfer to corporations the costs for the pollution they produce. Again, profits are privatized while costs – health, global warming, environmental degradation, and economic insecurity – become the public's problem. Deregulation in the Department of the Interior and the Environmental Protection Agency have gutted consumer and public protections to the point of non-existence in some areas.

The acceptance of deregulation as a good thing is actually promoting the ideology that the market can solve all problems. Government (public programs) is bad; private enterprise is good. The low public opinion of business practices is at least partially due to deregulation.

The "free" in "free trade" is disguised deregulation by market ideologists. Current free trade agreements are designed to supplant national laws – many democratically agreed upon – with a new set of regulations engineered in secret by free trade proponents. These privately written and internationally imposed agreements infringe on national sovereignty. Every free trade agreement in modern times has favored multinational corporations over the rights of individuals and the authority of national constitutions and governments. In fact, the last sentence could serve as a definition of globalization.

Multinational corporations want to exchange national laws (regulations) with trade agreements that undermine sovereignty. Although all corporations are chartered with a nation, they have no loyalty to any one nation and often interfere in elections. Witness off-shoring to avoid taxes, the layoffs in one country to exploit labor in another. Playing one nation against another effectively lowers the common denominator of all nations regarding sovereignty. It is bewildering that the United States with only two dominant political parties has one party completely dedicated to policies that favor corporate practices over citizen needs and the second party leading strongly in that direction. The power of money overshadows all loyalties, commitments, and ideologies.

There is another method used by free market profiteers to deregulate on an international basis. Organizations ostensibly set up to alleviate world poverty use debt to inflict harsh economic and environmental measures on Third World countries. Structural adjustment (deregulation) programs mandated by these international organizations impose sovereignty-crushing, multinational-corporate enhancing laws. Wealth wins; the poor, the environment, communities, and nations lose.

CEOs of multinational corporations sometimes slip and inadvertently speak truth. One statement uttered in various forms states their goals: National governments are now irrelevant.

Deregulation, globalization, privatization, free trade, democracy promotion, free markets, ownership society, liberty, market economy, economic liberalism, tax cuts, reform, growth are all terms used glowingly by corporate government proponents and brandished by corporate media to disguise corporate takeover. All are interrelated. None of them state their objectives. None by itself suggests corporate dominance. None by itself sounds anti-democratic. Collectively they form a deceptive agenda of corporate dominance. Catchwords and slogans used repeatedly to propagandize have robbed citizens of their ability to choose and govern themselves wisely.

How did this happen? How did the corporate agenda overcome the democracy agenda? How did the corporate agenda become the American agenda? How did corporate balance sheets and economies become richer than many nations? How did the ideology of the rich become an ideology for those who are ruined, hurt, impoverished and imprisoned by it?

Among the many possible answers, media deregulation would have to be considered a major cause. Through deregulation of giant corporations, the corporate mind decides what to air and print, whose opinions to promulgate, who and what is important, and what is fair and balanced. Madison Avenue advertising sells soap, cars, beer and politicians with an equal amount of cunning and deceit. A nation ruled through propaganda has been the victim for so long that it brags of its superiority and pretends to promote democracy, which it doesn't understand. It is time to uncover the facts and make corporate stealth so clear that action is deliberate and decisive.