SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Mainstream Politics and Economics -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: koan who wrote (48536)7/12/2013 12:28:31 PM
From: TimF1 Recommendation

Recommended By
Thehammer

  Respond to of 85487
 
I have read that Adam Smith believed man was better than he really is?

Only if you have a very pessamistic view of mankind. Among other things Smith said - "“People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices.” He was not niave, he recognized that people would try to take advantage of other people. That was one of the reasons to be opposed to big government, as it gives them a channel to do so.

Government has to enforce people and industry, so they will not pour mercury into a river

Again that isn't government involving itself in commerce. Its government forbidding poisoning.

Involving itself in commerce is when it tries to direct commerce, or subsidize it, or penalize it, etc.

Even a very minimal government can create rules against dumping seriously toxic substances.



To: koan who wrote (48536)7/12/2013 2:28:51 PM
From: Broken_Clock  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 85487
 
Single Payer, West Virginia and Ontario
Mr. Tweddle’s Factory
by RUSSELL MOKHIBER
Allan Tweddle wants to build a manufacturing facility.

He would prefer to build it in West Virginia — where he lives.

But he’s going to build it in Ontario, Canada — where he was born.

Why?

Well, one factor is health care costs.

Canada has a single payer system.

You go to a doctor.

You present your medical card.

No bills. No deductibles. No co-pays.

They swipe your card and that’s it.

“Health care in Canada is paid by personal income taxes,” Tweddle says. “Instead of paying premiums to a profit driven insurance company, you pay it through your personal taxes and then the government provides universal health care.”

From a businessman’s perspective, health care costs are 20 percent cheaper in Canada than in the United States.

There are many other factors that were on the checklist that Tweddle went down before deciding to locate his facility in Ontario.

Education, the corporate tax rate (18 percent in Canada compared to 35 percent in the United States), federal government incentives.

“It was a no brainer,” Tweddle said.

Tweddle is chairman of the board of a company called Composite Transport Technologies.

He says the company will be producing a new technology for aircraft that will reduce the carbon footprint of those planes and save on fuel costs.

Tweddle is disappointed that he wasn’t able to decide to build the manufacturing facility in West Virginia, where he lives with his wife Barbara.

He says he could have built the facility in the Bridgeport/Clarksburg area where there is an airplane industrial cluster — including manufacturers Pratt & Whitney, Bombardier and Lockheed. (Tweddle says fully 30 percent of Lockheed’s C-130 transport plane is built in Clarksburg.)

Health care costs were one factor weighing against West Virginia.

Another factor was the education system.

He says West Virginia has one of the worst education systems and Ontario has one of the best.

“When you try to recruit young people to come and work for you, they ask about the education system,” Tweddle said.

Again, a no brainer.

Canada’s single payer system and education system are two good reasons more automobiles are being built in Ontario than in Michigan, he says.

“Several auto company executives are now saying publicly the reasons they are building in Ontario are health care costs and education,” Tweddle reports.

Why don’t American business groups come out for single payer?

“Many are for it,” Tweddle says.

Tweddle says that earlier this year, he was speaking with Steve Roberts, president of the West Virginia Chamber of Commerce.

“And he told me he was for a single payer system,” Tweddle said. “I”m not sure his board is for it, but he’s for it.”

Tweddle is not happy with the level of debate in the United States over the health care system.

“During the debate over Obamacare, the conservative Prime Minister of Canada — Stephen Harper — and the conservative prime minister of the UK — David Cameron — both said — not in these exact words — but they both said — stop lying about our system — we will never go back to the system you have in the United States for anything.”

Russell Mokhiber edits Single Payer Action.



To: koan who wrote (48536)7/12/2013 3:06:43 PM
From: Broken_Clock  Respond to of 85487
 
ow that the glorious 4th is past, it's time to take stock of our glorious nation and what we've become....

WEEKEND EDITION JULY 12-14, 2013



SHARE ON FACEBOOK SHARE ON TWITTER SHARE ON GOOGLE MORE SHARING SERVICES 10

The Rule of Law Went and Never Returned
The American Way of Torture
by ALEXANDER COCKBURN and JEFFREY ST. CLAIR
Torture is now solidly installed in America’s repressive arsenal, not in the shadows where it has always lurked, but up front and central, vigorously applauded by prominent politicians. Rituals of coercion and humiliation seep through the culture, to the extent that before Christmas American travelers began to rebel at the invasive pat-down searches, conducted by the TSA’s airport security teams, groping around bosoms and crotches.

Covertly, there was always plenty of torture, just as there were assassinations, high and low. After World War Two the CIA’s predecessor, OSS, imported Nazi experts in interrogation techniques. But this was the era of Cold War competition: Uncle Sam the Good against the dirty Russians and Chinese. The US government would go to desperate lengths to counter accusations that its agents in the CIA or USAID practiced torture.

One famous case was that of Dan Mitrione, working for the US Agency for International Development, teaching refinements in torture techniques to Brazilian and Uruguayan interrogators. Mitrione was ultimately kidnapped by the Tupamaro guerillas and executed, becoming the subject of Costa Gavras’ movie State of Siege. The CIA mounted major cover-up operations to try to discredit the accusations against Mitrione, quoted as having said to his students: “The precise pain, in the precise place, in the precise amount, for the desired effect.”

The American liberal conscience began to make its accommodation with torture in June, 1977, which was the month the London Sunday Times published a major expose of torture of Palestinians by the Israeli armed forces and the security agency, Shin Bet. Suddenly American supporters of Israel were arguing that certain techniques–sensory deprivation, prolonged stress positions while hooded, incarceration in “cells” the size of packing crates, etc–somehow weren’t really torture, or were morally justifiable torture under “ticking time bomb” theory.

Ahead lay the repellent spectacle of Professor Alan Dershowitz of Harvard Law School, and a supposed liberal defender of civil rights, recommending to Israel the notion of “torture warrants”, with the targets of the warrants being “subjected to judicially monitored physical measures designed to cause excruciating pain without leaving any lasting damage.’ One form of torture recommended by the Harvard professor was “the sterilized needle being shoved under the fingernails.”

With the Great War on Terror, launched after the World Trade Center attacks of 9/11/2001, torture made its march into the full light of day.

One hands-on executive in this itinerary was George Bush’s secretary of defense, Donald Rumsfeld. At Guantanamo, it was Rumsfeld who gave verbal and subsequently written
approval to torture suspects, using the notorious techniques of isolation, sleep deprivation and psychic degradation, with Rumsfeld micromanaging the humiliations. (For one prisoner’s horrifying torments in Guantanamo, read Richard Neville’s account of David Hicks’ book, Guantanamo, My Journey.)

In the case of Abu Ghraib in Iraq, there is again a trail of evidence showing it was Rumsfeld who personally decreed and monitored stress positions, individual phobias, such as fear of dogs, sleep deprivation, and waterboarding. One US army officer, Janis Karpinski, described finding in Abu Ghraib a piece of paper stuck on a pole outside a little office used by the interrogators.

It was a memorandum signed by Rumsfeld, authorizing techniques such as use of dogs, stress positions, starvation. On the paper, in Rumsfeld’s handwriting, was the terse instruction, “Make sure this happens!!”

James Bovard wrote in CounterPunch that “Perhaps Bush’s most important legacy is his embrace of torture:”

“In a June 2010 speech in Grand Rapids, Michigan, he declared, ‘Yeah, we water-boarded Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. I’d do it again to save lives.’ There is no independent evidence that Bush-era torture saved any American lives.

“The fact that a former president can stand up in public and admit that he ordered torture is a sea change for the American republic. (While he was president, Bush consistently denied that the U.S. government engaged in torture.) In reality, the Bush administration’s torture policies were simply the most vivid example of its belief that the president was entitled to do as he pleases. Assistant Attorney General Steven Bradbury declared in 2006, ‘Under the law of war, the president is always right.’”

On the home front torture as a drastic mode of social control flowered luxuriantly in the America’s prison system, whose population began to rocket up in the 1970s to its present 2.5 million total. Sanctioned male rape goes hand in hand with increasingly sadistic solitary confinement with prolonged sensory deprivation–a condition in which some 25,000 prisoners are currently being driven mad.

As the Bush years drew to a close liberals dared hope that the rule of law would return and with it respect for internationally agreed prohibitions on torture and treatment of combatants. Anticipation grew that the torturers, with the Bush high command at the apex, would face formal charges. Candidate Obama sedulously fanned that hope.

The moment of opportunity arrived on January 20, the day Obama was sworn in as president and declared that “As for our common defense, we reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals,” he said. He added that the United States is “ready to lead once more.”

On January 21, 1977, on his first day in office President Jimmy Carter fulfilled his campaign pledge issuing a pardon to those who avoided serving in the Vietnam war by fleeing the U.S. or not registering. If he’d waited a month or two, the honeymoon was already turning tepid and he might well have lost his nerve.

In his second full day in office, President Obama signed a series of executive orders to close the Guantanamo detention center within a year, ban the harshest interrogation methods and review military war crimes trials.

In his first state of the Union address, a week later Obama declared to the joint session of Congress that “I can stand here tonight and say without exception or equivocation that the United States of America does not torture. We can make that commitment here tonight.” Within days of this guarantee, Obama’s Justice Department lawyers were telling U.S. judges in explicit terms that the new administration would not be moving on from Bush’s policies on the legal status of renditions and of supposed enemy combatants.

These lawyers from Obama’s Department of Justice emphasized to judges that they, like DoJ lawyers instructed by Bush’s lawyers, held that captives seized by the US government and conveyed to secret prisons to be tortured, had no standing in US courts and the Obama regime has no legal obligations to defend or even admit its actions in any US courtroom. “Enemy combatants” would not be afforded international legal protections, whether on the field of battle in Afghanistan or, if kidnapped by US personnel, anywhere in the world.

The torture system is flourishing and the boundaries of the American empire are demarcated by overseas torture centers.