Gender equality again—or rather the lack of it. Why women put up with it escapes me.

Women are the only oppressed group in our society that lives in intimate association with their oppressors.

Evelyn Cunningham

I think it's about time we voted for senators with breasts. After all, we've been voting for boobs long enough.

Claire Sargent, 1992 Arizona senatorial candidate

---

A Huffington Post story of May 23 lays out the following:

Female 'A+' Students End Up Making As Much as Male 'C' Students

• by | By  Jillian Berman

If you want to make more money, it helps to do well in school, but it helps even more to be a white man.

The better your grades in high school, the more money you are likely to make later in life, according to a study by researchers at the University of Miami and Nova Southeastern University. But gender apparently matters more than grades: A woman with a 4.0 high-school GPA still makes less, on average, than a man with a 2.5 GPA, the study found.

The study also found that minorities tend to benefit less dollar-wise from getting good grades than their white counterparts, even though African-American and Latino high-school students with high GPAs are more likely to continue their schooling than white students with good grades.

The chart below, from the study, shows the difference in earnings for men and women based on high school GPA. Men are in red, women are in green. These are average salary figures for people aged 24-34.

Women do at least enjoy better percentage pay bumps than men as their grades improve: The study, based on high-school transcript data and interviews of more than 10,000 students, found that, for men, a one-point increase in GPA translated to an 11.85-percent increase in annual earnings, compared to a 13.77 percent annual earnings increase for women. Still, the higher percentage increase isn't enough for women to catch up to men because their base salary starts off so much lower.

The research, which will be published in the upcoming issue of the Eastern Economic Journal, adds to the growing body of evidence that women earn less than their male counterparts, even when they have similar qualifications. That gap begins as soon as women enter the workforce. Both high-school and college-educated young women earn less than men with the same degrees, according to a recent study from the Economic Policy Institute.

That gap only widens as women advance in their careers. That’s partly because women are more likely to take time off to have and raise children. In addition, women often face conscious and unconscious discrimination as they climb the corporate ladder.

Another factor is that women often end up in lower-paying fields like education and health care. While there is certainly some self-selection involved, many girls are also socialized from an early age to be less interested in careers that tend to make more money, like engineering or technology, experts say. In addition, some argue that majority-female occupations are often valued less monetarily simply because they’re made up of mostly women.

Other research shows that minority job-seekers face widespread discrimination when applying for jobs. Indeed, the black unemployment rate has been almost twice as high as the white jobless rate for the past 60 years.

May 23 2014: Good grief! It’s my birthday—and my 70th at that.

Let us celebrate the occasion with wine and sweet words.

Plautus

Presents don't really mean much to me. I don't want to sound mawkish, but - it was the realization that I have a great many people in my life who really love me, and who I really love.

Gabriel Byrne

---

 

One way or another—thanks to some marvelous friends—this last year has been a pretty happy one. Despite frustrations and setbacks in some areas. I feel much blessed.

The photo is yet another of my talented sister Lucy’s photos of France.

---

Is the internet more likely to accelerate change—or dissipate outrage?

“Real change doesn't start with the introduction of legislation. Instead, it starts years earlier when a visionary group frames a problem, advances research, and formulates possible solutions—and then keeps on pushing the issues into the public arena. Without those years of hard work from Demos, the [Credit CARD Act] would never have been conceived, much less made it into law.” 

Senator Elizabeth Warren

CARD Act signing in 2009—which so far has been estimated to have saved consumers over $50 billion in fees alone.

---

OF COURSE THE INTERNET WILL SUPPORT CHANGE. For a time I accepted the general view that the internet—and social media in particular—would accelerate change. Why so?

• It is a uniquely powerful global way of communicating and searching. It is an extraordinary and unprecedented global, and near instant, resource.
• We would have more access to the facts.
• We would be able to agitate and organize more effectively.
• We would be able to present more cogent arguments in a vastly more visually persuasive way (thanks to all the low-cost, yet powerful, graphic tools available via the internet)..

Yet here we are—with all kinds of disturbing things happening, and most of the trend lines going the wrong way—and there there is scant evidence of outrage. On the contrary, by and large, people—while many may well be privately worried sick—profess to be reasonably (given the circumstances) content.  Certainly, there is no feeling of mass outrage (of the kind that is strong enough to overcome the inertia of the status quo).

DISTURBING THINGS. What do I mean by “disturbing things?” Here are some examples. The list could be a great deal (pages—perhaps chapters) longer. We bury ourselves in distraction—much of it, ironically, being internet based—but meanwhile Rome burns.

• The fact that the earning power of most Americans is in decline.
• The fact that the Middle Class is being steadily squeezed into oblivion.
• The fact that we are no longer a genuine representative democracy.
• The fact that we have a truly lousy and expensive healthcare system whose costs are increasing—even now—significantly faster than inflation. This system works pretty well for the rich—and crucifies the less well off.
• The fact that Americans die several years sooner than the citizens of other developed nations.
• The fact that we not only imprison vastly more of our citizens than other developed nations, but we also treat many of them badly while in custody—and then make it near impossible for them to get a job when they get out.
• The fact that nearly half our unemployed are so despairing that they have given up even looking.
• The fact that Congress, large thanks to the intransigence of the Republican Party, is gridlocked.
• The fact that a whole series of issues of vital importance—from climate change to the quality of our food chain (highly suspect) is not even being addressed. We are being poisoned—and we are are being complicit—in our own premature deaths.

THE INTERNET SEEMS TO DISSAPATE OUTRAGE. Though the internet still seems to me to have the potential to be a force for change—and doubtless is enabling it in some sectors—I’m increasingly of the view that the internet acts as a sort of outrage shock-absorber, and may even be stopping more effective action—such as meeting up physically—from taking place.

Do I know that for sure? No, I have no hard data to back this up. I’m merely looking at the issues—and the relative lack of overt indignation—and wondering.

---

May 21 2014: Combine the photographic talents of my sister Lucy with the beauty of France—and the results are spectacular.

France, and the whole of Europe have a great culture and an amazing history. Most important thing though is that people there know how to live! In America they've forgotten all about it. I'm afraid that the American culture is a disaster.

Johnny Depp

---

I love France—and have been there many times, though have never actually lived there. Accordingly, I have mixed feelings about Johnny Depp’s comments. You only really get to know a country—I would suggest—when you live there for a considerable period of time, and have to experience the same pleasures and frustrations as the citizens of that country.

For instance, France is notoriously bureaucratic, but that is not something you normally encounter much during a three week vacation. Yes, Europeans really do take three week vacations—and are all the better for it. Similarly, a business trip to Paris doesn’t normally involve an encounter with its income tax system.

However, I’m also deeply fond of the U.S.—so don’t regard U.S. culture as a disaster. That said, I do think the American Way of Life would benefit from a drastic overhaul—and I worry greatly about the decline of this extraordinary country.

Be that as it may, France is an astonishingly beautiful country—rich in tradition—and with a culture we could learn much from. If you haven’t been there, you have missed a great deal.

Go visit—and wonder.

---

---

May 20 2014: If the Democrats had any sense…(they are better than the Republicans, but it’s a moot point) they would zero in on a small number of critical political reforms—and would lead with gender equality. In the context of 2014, it is totally unjust, unfair, and morally wrong for women to to paid, and otherwise treated, as second class citizens. We men haven’t done so well. So, let’s share everything 50/50 and see what happens. In the context of 2016, it would be—and should be—an election winning strategy. It would also be the right thing to do. And, by the way, it would boost the economy.

One of the factors a country's economy depends on is human capital. If you don't provide women with adequate access to healthcare, education and employment, you lose at least half of your potential. So, gender equality and women's empowerment bring huge economic benefits.

Michelle Bachelet

---

WATCH WHAT THEY DO, NOT WHAT THEY SAY.  All political parties are coalitions of interests—s0 the acid test is how they vote. Currently, and since the George W. Bush administration, congressional Republicans have voted as if they were all solidly ultra Right Wing. This adds up to a self righteous, extremist set of beliefs which demonstrate a remarkably lack of  social concern.  In essence, they seem to believe that you are on your own—and if misfortune strikes, well, it’s up to the individual to cope—in most cases—without government assistance . In essence, Republicans pretend not to believe in government—except where National Security and the Legal System are concerned. Everything else, they seem to think, should be the province of the private sector which will self regulate. 

• ANTI OBAMA. They are opposed to anything and everything Obama either stands for, or wants to do—regardless of the merits of the idea or the National Interest.
• PRO ULTRA RIGH. They are consistently pro the ultra rich—regardless of the interests of most Americans—and pro corporate management.
• ANTI FINANCIAL REGULATION. They are anti any and all financial regulation—even though the Great Recession, which practically wrecked this country, could have been prevented if there had been adequate regulation.
• HYPOCRITES RE FREE MARKET. Contrary to what they say, they are anti the free market—because the special deals they cook up with corporate lobbyists essentially give one group or other a competitive advantage—which is the antithesis of free competition.
• PRO UNFETTERED CAPITALISM. They purport to be in favor of unfettered capitalism—which essentially means the free market operating free of regulation. The argument is that left free, markets naturally regulate themselves. The evidence does not support that view.
• ANTI WORKER RIGHTS & TRADE UNIONS. They are vehemently opposed to worker rights and trade unions—even though U.S. corporations working abroad have no problem at all respecting worker rights and dealing with unions—and in many case are more profitable than in the U.S.
• RACIST. They are racist without actually talking about overtly about race. It is no accident that the Republican party is so strongly entrenched in the South and in the hearts of white males.
• ANTI WOMEN. They are anti-women in a host of different ways. If they were not, gender equality would now be the law.
• ANTI GOVERNENT. They are consistently ant-government regardless of the issue—even though a series of popular government programs underpins the American way of life. They have devoted particular efforts to destroying the credibility of government and thus destroying the trust—social capital—which helps to make government and a nation work. This deliberate and systematic destruction of the credibility of government—which we need whether we like it or not—has had entirely negative results.
• ANTI ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATIONS. They are consistently anti environment regulations even though the first serious pro environment legislation was passed by a Republican, Richard Nixon—and despite the fact that the health consequences of a polluted environment are self evident.
• MINDLESSLY PRO CORPORATIONS. They are pro corporations unconditionally despite the blatant malfeasance of many corporations—from financial institutions to fast food. They support the legal fiction that corporations are people when it is self-evident that they are not.
• MINDLESSLY PRO DEFENSE. They are mindlessly pro defense regardless of the requirement. Virtually all Americans want the U.S. to remain strong, able to defend itself, and capable of deterring aggression—but that does not mean we need to spend as much as we do (or as carelessly as we do). The MICC (Military Industrial Congressional Complex) has become a deeply corrupt corporate welfare system which costs this nation over $1 trillion a year (if all National Security expenditures are included).
• MINDLESSLY PRO LAW AND ORDER. They are mindlessly pro law and order even though the end result of ill considered law enforcement and excessive sentencing is to imprison a disproportionate number of citizens relative to the rest of the world and to have an an equally disproportionate impact on African Americans. Both the costs and social consequences of all this are devastating.
• ANTI IMMIGRATION REFORM. They are opposed to immigration reform despite the fact that the current situation is clearly so detrimental to the economy as a whole, and to millions of undocumented residents in particular.
• ANTI TAX REFORM & TAX INCREASES. Even though there is broad recognition that the existing tax system is excessively complex, grossly unfair, and offers too many loopholes which favor corporate interests and those of the ultra rich, Republicans are—generally speaking—opposed to tax reform—and are utterly opposed to any and all tax increases. No one likes tax increases but, in the US., we have the indefensible situation that currently the ultra rich, and many of the rich, pay a lower percentage of their income in taxes that those earning a fraction of their income. It makes no sense at all, for instance, that dividends should be taxed at a lower rate than regular earnings.
• ANTI NATIONAL PLANNING. They are opposed to any kind of industrial policy or national planning even though our competitors—who are mostly doing better than us (at least where the average citizen is concerned) all plan. In other words, Republicans reject planning—even though it demonstrably works—for ideological reasons.
• ANTI DIRECT ACTION TO HELP THE UNEMPLOYED. Unemployment undermines worker bargaining power so helps keep labor costs down. Republicans seem to believe that this is better for society than taking a range of possible actions to eliminate unemployment. They overlook the vast scale of the human misery involved together with the direct and indirect costs.
• PRO-AUSTERITY EVEN DURING A RECESSION. Even though the track record of austerity—tried both in the U.S. and Europe extensively since 2008—is one of dismal failure, Republicans seem addicted to it (with disastrous results).

Given the above, almost entirely negative, set of beliefs and policies—’most of which fly in the face of the evidence (and which Republicans do not adhere to anyway when in office) you would have to wonder why the Democrats have such a hard time getting their message across.

More on that issue later.

---

 

 

May 19 2014: Accidental attempted suicide—by chair

“I am not absentminded. It is the presence of mind that makes me unaware of everything else.”

G.K. Chesterton

---

TRADITION OF IMPRACTICALITY. I have written before about the family’s long tradition of impracticality—and I’m embarrassed to say I seem to be maintaining the tradition. My grandmother, for instance—a truly admirable woman, and someone I loved to bits—never learned to drive, was an erratic cook at best, and lived in a state of chaos. On the other hand, she did a vast amount of good both politically and on a personal level—so the fact that she couldn’t change a light bulb was a small matter in the scheme of things. And she spoke fluent French, was an outstanding poet, and was a completely wonderful person.

Paradoxically, my grandmother was an air raid warden in London during the Blitz in WW II—and apparently was quite expert at putting out incendiaries with a bucket of sand—so her impracticality wasn’t total—but based upon my observation of her during peace, it took a war to get here going. In WWI she was a VAD (Voluntary Aid Detachment)—a nurse’s aide who tackled the more unpleasant tasks because it wasn’t ladylike to be trained in nursing.

LATIN, A GREAT LANGUAGE OF LIMITED USE TODAY. The common denominator where my grandmother, mother, and my own lack of practicality is concerned is that all three of use grew up in houses where the practical was the province of servants. Whereas they, the servants, knew how to cook, clean, sew, and fix a leaky faucet—all useful, practical skills—I was taught italic handwriting (which I haven’t used for years) and Latin. Quite how such skills equipped me for life, I have yet to determine. That said, I have considerable affection for Latin—though have forgotten most of it.

I’m not entirely impractical—I do some things very well—but I have a tendency to think about abstract issues like unemployment rather than practical things like advancing my own immediate interests—or assembling a chair. I also have a peculiar sense of time (which is something I will endeavor to explain on some other occasion).

But, I’m dodging the issue. Let now now describe a perfect example of my impractical/absent-minded streak—which helps to explain why I haven’t blogged every day recently. I have been a casualty.

ENTER THE CHAIR. My colleague—who is exceptionally good at purchasing the right thing—bought me A new swivel chair recently. As normal, I worked late so didn’t start assembling the chair until it was dark—and then I chose a less well lit part of my study to do the deed because there was space. I could and should have brought over extra lighting—but I was tired and just wanted to get on with it.

THE CONSEQUENCES OF IMPRACTICALITY. The task was tricky but finally I thought I had it done. I set it down and then sat in it. I had inadvertently left out two bolts. As I leant back—feeling rather proud of myself—the whole chair collapsed backwards, the back of my head smashed against the tile floor, and I not only fell, but twisted my body severely in the process. Over three weeks later, I’m still feeling as if I had survived a severe kicking—and I’ll spare you the rest of the details—but much pain was, and is involved. Distracting, when one is trying to write.

Ironically, I was able to fix the chair the following day—when there was plenty of light—without difficulty.

DECIDEDLY EMBARRASSED. Yes, I feel extremely stupid—and now you know why I particularly admire anyone who has a practical skill. I was brought up to think of people who work with their hands as second-class citizens—never quite believed that—and have longed wished that I was more physically skilled myself.

But, I can write—and that, as far as I am concerned, is a gift beyond price.

And the good news? Well, the chair, now properly assembled, is the most comfortable working chair I have ever sat in.

 

May 15 2014: Is our media biased in favor of the plutocracy—and does it self-censor?

The media's the most powerful entity on earth. They have the power to make the innocent guilty and to make the guilty innocent, and that's power. Because they control the minds of the masses.

Malcolm X

---

MANIPULATED PUBLIC OPINION. I’m fascinated by how the U.S. media works—together with the quite extraordinary extent to which U.S. public opinion is manipulated.

No matter what the facts are, we are almost always deflected from an understanding of the reality—and the full implications of the consequences. Yet, on the other hand, most information is out there if you really go and look. But the important stuff has a tendency not to get the coverage it deserves—and as a consequence, a critical mass of outrage is rarely reached.

Clearly, secrecy plays a role too—to what extent, by definition, it is hard to know—but what intrigues me is how truly devastating news is neutralized to the point where it has almost no impact.

WE ARE TOLD WHAT TO THINK. It all adds up to a series of highly sophisticated and successful information operations which keep the U.S. population largely ignorant and unconcerned about a series of issues which are steadily degrading the American Way of Life. Here, the word “unconcerned” is worth stressing. If the media don’t appear to be concerned about an issue, then—by and large—people won’t be concerned either. We think of ourselves as independent thinkers guided by the facts—but the evidence would suggest, that is not true. Mostly, we are told what to think, what to  take in our stride, and what to worry about. And we accept this—primarily because everyone else seems to..

How do they do this? And who are ‘they?’

A number of methodologies seem to be involved in keeping public opinion relative docile in the face of facts which should have most Americans in a state of outrage. The following is a selection.

• OWN THE MEDIA WHICH THEN SELF CENSORS.
• OWN THE THINK TANKS
• IGNORE THE STORY
• LET THE STORY GET LOST IN THE SHEER VOLUME OF NEWS
• UNDERPLAY THE STORY
• BALANCE IT (which really means neutralize it) WITH AN OPPOSING POINT OF VIEW
• DENY ACCESS TO SOURCES
• DELAY THE STORY
• CONFUSE THE ISSUE
• EITHER DON’T GIVE—OR UNDERPLAY—THE CONTEXT
• RARELY—IF EVER—CONNECT THE DOTS
• LEAVE OUT INTERNATIONAL COMPARISONS
• DISTRACT, DISTRACT, DISTRACT.

WHO ARE THEY? They are the people who own the U.S.—the 1 percent, if you will—and who like it this way.

WHAT BROUGHT THIS PIECE TO MIND.  A major Princeton study by Martin Gilens and Northwestern’s Benjamin I. Page concluded:

Economic elites and organized groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on U.S. government policy, while average citizens and mass-based interest groups have little or no independent influence.”

In short, the U.S. is no longer a democracy. It has the trappings of one—but in reality, it is a plutocracy.

Now, this was a major study based upon examining 1,700 policies over 20 years—issued by a highly regarded university and coming to a highly significant conclusion. But was it covered by the corporate media? Largely, it was not.

An incident like this doesn’t prove the point, but it certainly illustrates it.

---