Letters from our readers
10 March 2009
You used the "d-word." Well, facts be facts: we're going to be in for a rough ride, but perhaps out of it will come a new paradigm designed to meet the needs of workers, where the reward system is geared to the needs of citizens and not to the rapacious (and criminal) few. Yet no one in official positions of power are talking about the meltdown of the capitalist system—not really, although there are carpings, quibblings, as if the whole thing with a few tweaks and adjustments could be fixed. I think the reality is fast overcoming these people—and anyway, such changes seem so tectonic as to be out of their control anyway. Yet there are objective reasons why we are at this pass. Few, if any, other than the SEP are addressing the real issues.
Also, your phrase "production of real value" is key, of course. All these financial machinations are like a dervish in a whirlwind, untethered to any real production or "the real economy." Also, where's my bailout? The super-rich and financial elite still sit on vast amounts of personal wealth, secure in the knowledge that it will not be touched. These monies need to be appropriated and used, instead of taking future monies out of the pockets of working people, the public treasury. Further, there should be an upper limit of how much wealth a person might own—oh, say, a million dollars or so. To a working person this sounds like a dream; to the super-rich and elite, one can only imagine their hyena howls of destitution at such a proposal. They didn't earn these monies though—they took them—through financial slight of hand. These funds need to—and must be recovered—by any means, including revolutionary ones. Let me repeat: it's not their money.
Also, I wonder, just how aware and scared these people are. Do they truly understand the historic nature of what's going on? I really don't think so—no matter how frantic and hysterical their pronouncements.
3 March 2009
Prime Minister Harper, in a recent interview with the Wall Street Journal, suggested that the mission in Afghanistan was to establish the "credibility" of NATO, without which "future missions" would be harmed. What future missions, one may well wonder.
Also, it has been announced that the Canadian Forces will enhance its training of reserve forces to include "domestic threats". One of the reasonings for this change is that the regular forces will be tied up overseas. It is noteworthy that the proposed training will extend through 2013—or two years after the CAF is supposed to have returned from Afghanistan.
6 March 2009
Dear Sir: In my opinion the 401(k) is the largest fraud ever from Wall Street. All will be wiped out from inflation. You will do better keeping your money in a coffee can.
6 March 2009
There is nothing a "truth commission" can do that the Senate Judiciary Committee cannot already do. Why won't they do it then? The Judiciary Committee is already fully formed; doesn't need to be brought into existence; and best of all, requires no one's permission to investigate, issue reports, make criminal referrals, etc.
The intent, or perhaps the necessity, of a separate "truth commission" may be to marginalize any investigation—by moving it out of and away from existing government bodies, as much as possible—and into a new, obscure and dependent body of undistinguished individuals and borrowed staff, limited funding and having but a short time to work.
The "Distraction Argument" was used successfully in the last Congress, both to prevent impeachment and to scotch investigations that might lead toward impeachment.
8 March 2009
Mrs. Thatcher's chickens finally come home to roost!
8 March 2009
There are two types people in the world: borrowers and lenders. Most are not the latter, which rule the former. The rich get richer and the poor get poorer. This has been society's M.O. since the dawn of time. My money is on the fact that this will not change.
It's just too bad I was not that extraordinarily wise at 18. I mean, who was?! We all were told to go [for] the good life, that only higher education was promising. And we all got screwed (well more than not). If I had the option, I don't know who I'd sue first exactly: my parents for not knowing, my high school for not teaching, my college for not enlightening, my bank for not caring, my government for not regulating, society for not putting up a fight...or me, for even trusting one of them! I mean, where does the buck stop exactly? This is gonna take years in therapy.
6 March 2009