Thursday, July 11, 2013

What is True Service?




What is true service, or how can one actually be of service to another person is a question that has been challenging me for the last few years.

Why?

Because about four years ago I found myself in a situation  that I honestly could not have gotten out of without the help of others; without people being of 'true service' to me. 

Allow me to set the stage.

About six years ago, I decided that I would take care of a parent, my mother, who was living with the onset of Alzheimer’s -- a debilitating, intractable terminal illness. I did this, largely on my own, for the next four years.

During the last couple of years Alzheimer’s became all-consuming for her as well as me. From then I was unable to complete book-editing assignments in order to bring in an income. My mother and I subsisted on what little savings I had along with her meager pension and social security allotment.  But money was not an issue; we managed.

Then, after my mother passed away, I was left in an isolated, exhausted, financially destitute and -- I can only describe it as an existentially bewildered and completely out-of-synch state of being.

Taking care of someone in your own family, especially a parent, is not like taking care of a friend or a stranger.  As they inevitably become increasingly dependent on you, the life-roles reverse. The very personal and intimate sense of a secure place in life that your parents provided for you as an infant, you now get to return to them as an adult. You experience the same kind of extraordinary bonding  -- their life is more valuable than your own -- that usually only takes place between a parent and their dependent young children.

Only a parent is nurturing a child into more life and there's a reward for them in the end; you, on the other hand,  are in an intensive 24/7 tilt-a-whirl relationship with life and death that abruptly ends one day with them leaving you and this world... 

Therefore, there's no way to taper off on your feelings and prepare for the loss. Not if you are committed to being there with them until their final breath. So when it happens, when those  last chortling breaths cease, the loss you feel is not the usual one, nor is the grief you experience normal grief.

For reasons I don't want to rehash here, but which I go into detail in my book,  An Odyssey in the Great American Safety Net, I was soon unceremoniously evicted from the home that I had been living in while taking care of my mother. Let's just say, to be kind, that it was done by an 'insensitive' sibling who was the executor of my mother's estate as well as an aggressively successful real-estate agent who wanted the house on the market and sold as soon as possible. Two years earlier, this very same sibling had taken me to court in order to have our mother taken out of my care and placed with 'professional care-givers' in a nursing home. That I had to fight Alzheimer’s, and her, at the same time was not only grossly unfair but mentally and emotionally exhausting . There are no two people alive with more different values than my sister and me.

During the time that remained for me to stay in my home -- a few months --  I sank into a deep funk. A close friend who was calling me regularly noticed the change in my condition and advised me to go a hospital. I reluctantly forced myself to get out of the house and check into an emergency room. There I was diagnosed with an acute stress/anxiety disorder that was causing me to feel a debilitating general sense of anxiety and gloom.  The treatment was a few days worth of anti-anxiety meds and the phone number of a public mental health facility that didn't have an appointment available for another three months. 

Once I was finally legally evicted, Social Services stepped in and placed me in a one-room motel room where I assumed that I was supposed to languor until I expired from despair and ennui.

I laid on top of the bed (during the six weeks I would be in the motel room I never once opened the bed and actually got in it) and as I stared up at the cigarette- and crack-smoke-stained ceiling I thought to myself: 'Lord, God, Life, Any Thing, I'm not getting out of here with my life or sanity intact without some help'. 

Help did not come immediately, but it came. Within the next three months I would meet a handful of the most extraordinary, selfless, and I would say saintly people, I have ever encountered. I didn't know any of them before this ignominy befell me, and yet they unquestioningly helped me find permanent housing, furniture, food -- and for the first time in longer than I could remember,  a sense of security and hope. 

When an experience like this happens to you -- and  you've taken the necessary time to recover and restore yourself  -- there develops inside of you a very strong desire to want to reciprocate for the help you received by being of service to others in similar situations.

Doing so is not as easy as one might think, which brings us back to the question of what is true service. During the years following my 'recovery', I worked as a volunteer teaching creative writing to youths in detention, as well as a counselor for people and families in crisis. None of these, and other similar activities, satisfied my desire to return the kind of service I received. For one thing, state-funded institutions want to see tangible results for  the  money they are spending to 'rehabilitate' people, so their approach invariably comes down to trying to change someone from being who they are into being something they should be -- basically, acting like a well-educated middle-class person.

That mold does not fit everyone (including me). If it did, I probably would have been more concerned for my financial well-being than for my mother's quality of life, turned her over to ($7.50 an hour) 'professional care givers' and avoided the dilemma. 

The kind of service that sticks out in my mind, and what defines for me what 'true service' is, is that which was provided for me when I needed it. The people who helped me never once asked what happened that got me into the situation I was in, nor did they ever offer unsolicited advice. Their attitude was 'you need help; how can we help you?' No more; no less.

You don't know what a relief that is when, in truth, you are too overwhelmed by your unsettling circumstances to understand what is happening to you. You are just living it, hoping you will survive, and that maybe you’ll figure it out later. As I described it in the book I wrote about my experience: 'What good would it do you to be able to name the make and model of the bus that just ran you over?'

So that has become my model for true service. One of the persons who helped me out the most when I was in need ministers a charitable outreach to the homeless in our community.  By and large, these  people are not coming to outreach in order to be rescued from how or where they are living, nor are they looking for counseling  or advice -- psychologically, spiritually, or otherwise. They simply want to be able to come to a place where they will be treated with the same kindness, respect and dignity as any other human being.

I respect that, and them. I know what it's like to be looked at like a one-dimensional 'social problem' in need of fixing. So lately I've been volunteering to help set up the outreach, which  twice a month provides free clothing, food, a  home-cooked  meal and medical checkups for those who want them.

On outreach day, sometimes I show up for a home-cooked meal. I don't talk with any one there about anything other than what they might want to talk to me about.    

Service.


Thursday, June 13, 2013

Poverty IS Like a Tragic Accident or Terminal Illness

To tell you the truth, until it happened to me -- when I needed  housing assistance and food stamps -- I did not know very much about the plight of other people who had to deal with similar circumstances.

I think one of the reasons is simple human nature. Most of us think that poverty -- like a freak tragic accident  or sudden terminal illness -- can only happen to other people.

The more we live, the more we acknowledge that that's a foolish, wishful thinking kind of assumption. Especially in regards to experiencing poverty in today's America. If the trends continue the way they have been in this zero-sum  economy with a growing population of super-wealthy (winners) on one side, buttressed by a growing population of  people living in moderate to acute poverty (losers) on the other, then the prognosis for one's financial  health in the American economy is not only ominously bleak, but, frankly, scary. 


According to the Social Work Journal,  'By age 35 nearly one-third of the U.S. population will have experienced a year in poverty. By age 65 more than half of all Americans will have spent a year below the poverty line, and by age 85, two-thirds. Rather than an isolated event that occurs primarily among what has been labeled the “underclass,” the reality is that the majority of Americans will encounter poverty firsthand during adulthood..'


So here we are now in 2013 -- with ever-growing numbers of people needing  housing and food assistance -- and the Republican dominated Congress of these United Sates is proposing to cut $20 Billion from SNAP or Food Stamps over the next decade. 

Why?

To cut our deficit?

Oh, if only it were so.

The truth -- and this is where it gets classically Orwellian (or just plain creepy) --  is that not only is it the very same Republicans who are calling for cuts in SNAP that bear major responsibility for the monumental deficits they  rung up under Presidents Reagan and the last Bush, but they are also the ones who promote and legislate lavish (tax-payer paid for) subsidies to already wealthy American citizens.

Here is just one (small) example of how this works, related specifically to the 2013 Farm Bill.(For a more thorough listing and analysis of these kinds of subsidies for the wealthy go to Inequality.org.)

Our pick of the litter: subsidies to agri-businesses in the name of 'crop insurance'. The Crop Insurance Program was originally designed  in 1938 to insure that proven productive farmers having an off year -- due to weather, soil erosion, pest infestation, what have you --  would be reimbursed for their crop losses and thus be able to remain in business for the next and hopefully better season. Nice idea: generous and practical.

Over the years, lobbyists for large agri-businesses have changed the program from insurance for failed crops, to blanket subsidies for farmers' revenues.  Here's how  it works:  if the price of, say,  soybeans goes down and the farmers' revenues go down accordingly; instead of allowing the much lauded free-market to sort it out, the federal government comes in and says here, we will (using taxpayers' money) make up your lost revenue. But we won't call it a subsidy, we'll call it 'crop insurance'.

Wouldn't it be nice if the federal government provided blanket revenue subsides to every business so that no one ever had a bad year?

No. 

It wouldn't work for the reasons socialist programs can't work -- they subsidize arbitrarily, not based on genuine merit or real need. 

Now isn't it ironic (or Orwellian if you want to go with the darker angle) that the same politicians for whom socialism is a dirty word are, in effect, practicing it. Well, in today's political world, words no longer have  literal meanings, they have a meaning that suits the user, and if the user has wealth and power; well, hopefully you've read  1984 so I don't have to rehash what happens next.   

So let's take this back to SNAP or food stamps.I wish I could report a  high-minded reason for why Congress wants to increase funding for crop insurance at the same timed it proposes to cut food stamps. . But what it really boils down to in the petty tit-for-tat circus-like political arena we are currently living in is: If you, the Democrats, want to help out poor people who vote for you then we, the Republicans, will help out the wealthy who vote for us.

Na-Na-Na-Na-Na-Na....

Maybe Orwellian was given them too much credit; come to think of it stupid or idiotic seem more apropos.And if I've insulted any professional clowns I also apologize for that.

This is not tit-for-tat to those affected by this legislation. A person who is working and struggling to make ends meet (and help prop up this lopsided economy) and is receiving some nutritional support and food security in order to sustain them is not comparable to someone who is being guaranteed to never have a bad year in revenues -- regardless of what they produce, or don't.  

 Need? Merit?

I don't know what else to tell you other than to ask you to please check out and sign the petition I wrote to Reform the 2013 Farm Bill that I will then forward to Congress.

I'd also like to invite you to read an excerpt from my latest book/memoir: An Odyssey in the Great American Safety Net.

Thank you,
James Abro 
Founder:  Advocate for Economic Fairness!




The proportion in poverty in 1969 stood at 12.1%. By 2011 it had risen to 15.0%. A larger proportion of Americans lived in official absolute poverty in 2011 than 42 years earlier. - See more at: http://inequality.org/absolute-poverty-america/#sthash.h3A2Heaa.dpuf
The proportion in poverty in 1969 stood at 12.1%. By 2011 it had risen to 15.0%. A larger proportion of Americans lived in official absolute poverty in 2011 than 42 years earlier. - See more at: http://inequality.org/absolute-poverty-america/#sthash.h3A2Heaa.dpuf
The proportion in poverty in 1969 stood at 12.1%. By 2011 it had risen to 15.0%. A larger proportion of Americans lived in official absolute poverty in 2011 than 42 years earlier. - See more at: http://inequality.org/absolute-poverty-america/#sthash.h3A2Heaa.dpuf
The proportion in poverty in 1969 stood at 12.1%. By 2011 it had risen to 15.0%. A larger proportion of Americans lived in official absolute poverty in 2011 than 42 years earlier. - See more at: http://inequality.org/absolute-poverty-america/#sthash.h3A2Heaa.dpuf
The proportion in poverty in 1969 stood at 12.1%. By 2011 it had risen to 15.0%. A larger proportion of Americans lived in official absolute poverty in 2011 than 42 years earlier. - See more at: http://inequality.org/absolute-poverty-america/#sthash.h3A2Heaa.dpuf
The proportion in poverty in 1969 stood at 12.1%. By 2011 it had risen to 15.0%. A larger proportion of Americans lived in official absolute poverty in 2011 than 42 years earlier. - See more at: http://inequality.org/absolute-poverty-america/#sthash.h3A2Heaa.dpuf

Tuesday, June 11, 2013

The Tony Awards -- an Insider's Perspective

I'd like to present for the first time a 'guest blog' -- one written by someone besides me.

Millions of us watched the Tony Awards the other night with an outsiders perspective -- probably finding it entertaining as well as offering us an opportunity to see many Broadway shows we won't get to see ( or can't afford to see) in person.

In the same way that many of us may shop at a Walmart or other wholesale outlets, and purchase and eat fruits and vegetables without knowing anything about what goes into their production, so it is true about much of the 'entertainment' we consume, including Broadway plays.

I read a 'review' of the Tony Awards by Fred Barton and asked his permission to reprint it here. 

Fred Barton is an American composer, lyricist, director, actor, singer, arranger, conductor, and pianist. He is  the co-creator and arranger and performer in the original company of the award-winning revue Forbidden Broadway. In 1985,  the show won a Drama Desk Award, and also won a special Tony Award in 2006.

So Mr. Barton is a Broadway insider; he knows what he is talking about. 

Here is his take on the Tony Awards:

"So I know you're dying to know. The fact that I had to run a search on the internet to locate the following information is everything that's wrong with Broadway today, and with the Tony [Awards]broadcast tonight. The unfortunate blonde with the aggressive street London accent, introduced only as "Velma Kelly in CHICAGO" is one Amra-Fay Wright, whose bio states that she has "starred in numerous musical extravaganzas worldwide," as well as the West End CHICAGO and other productions. She has no television credits, which is no disgrace, until you're on national television, and unable to find your teleprompter or have the forethought to memorize your five lines in case there's a fuck-up, and petulantly remark to millions of people that you or someone has fucked up and you don't know what to do. I wonder if she goes all Patti Lupone apeshit if someone misplaces her prop in a stage show, or if her fellow actor misses a cue.

The current Broadway cast members, en masse, should have flatly refused to appear unless they were identified by name, either by announcement or subtitle; my friend Judy McLane is not just some broad on the set in MAMMA MIA, she's fucking Judy McLane and deserves recognition; John Lloyd Young won the damn Tony Award himself, and did not deserve to appear as some anonymous fourth boy from the left in a generic JERSEY BOYS condescension. The producers of the show should be ashamed of themselves, although clearly shame is not on their list of skills. But the performers themselves bear some responsibility for this ignominious treatment; my friends, you're headlining on Broadway and people are paying big money to see you -- and even though Broadway is doing everything in its power to keep you down, to keep you anonymous, to keep you from being stars, and to keep you replaceable, you don't have to help them do it, even for a national TV appearance, which was designed to show you as grunts on a chain gang for the glory of others no more (and in some cases less) deserving."


Obviously, Mr. Barton did not watch the Tony Awards show with the same passive geniality as most. But I feel he makes some excellent points about  workers -- in this case actors -- and their relationship to the 'owners of their labors' that extend beyond Broadway and entertainers.  

I won't do him an injustice by paraphrasing him, so I'll repeat what I feel is the most poignant of his observations: The performers themselves bear some responsibility for this ignominious treatment; my friends, you're headlining on Broadway and people are paying big money to see you -- and even though Broadway is doing everything in its power to keep you down, to keep you anonymous, to keep you from being stars, and to keep you replaceable, you don't have to help them do it, even for a national TV appearance, which was designed to show you as grunts on a chain gang for the glory of others no more (and in some cases less) deserving.

I think we'd all feel better about our work, and create an even stronger economy,  if we heeded his advice to proudly value our work more highly. 

If you'd like to contribute a blog on a topic you feel passionate and informed about,  please message me on my Facebook page: 32 Beach Productions.

Tuesday, June 4, 2013

It's our Damn Country (and food) not Theirs...

This just off the morning news wires: "Though the week got off to a mixed start, the record books remain wide open this morning with the Dow seeking to extend a record Tuesday winning streak currently at 16. The Dow has not fallen on a Tuesday since January 8. The S&P 500, meanwhile, comes off yet another record close, with the Nasdaq chalking up a 12-1/2 year closing high."

Okay, so bully bully for them.

But at the same time, when the wealthiest Americans, including the owners of large farming conglomerates, are doing better than any time in recorded history, why is our Congress considering cutting the Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program (SNAP, or food stamps) by more than $20 billion dollars over the next decade?

I think the most obvious reason is a complete disconnect from the realities of the lives that the governed live as opposed to the lives lived by the people they govern.  According to the Center for Responsive Politics, the average wealth of a Congress person is around $14 million. How in the world are they supposed to relate to or understand what on an average day 50 million of their fellow citizens experience: food insecurity -- not knowing if, or when,  you might get your next meal.

They can't. But it's not their damn country,  it's ours. 

Even though I have received them, I am not in favor of food stamps. I think that a nation like the USA, with its enormous wealth, should be able to create an economy that provides its working citizens with enough income to afford to buy their own food.

Even though that's not the way it is right now, I would like to alert you to a progressive trend toward agricultural and financial independence taking place among some legislators in the Congress.

They need our support or otherwise big money, as usual, will snuff out their ideas. 

Here's one: Senator Sherrod Brown (D-OH) has introduced a critical amendment that would  have a transformative impact on our food and farm system. It's called the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition amendment and is aimed at encouraging food and agriculture market development, entrepreneurship, and education. The Brown amendment to the 2013 Farm Bill would help create a better future for our nation’s food supply by aiding small farmers to grow healthy foodstuffs for local populations -- while at the same timed increasing employment in those same communities.Senator Brown: “By increasing access to fresh, local foods, we can expand markets for agricultural producers around the country while improving health, creating jobs, and strengthening our economy.”

Another equally important bill is called The Local Farms, Food and Jobs Act of 2013.


This bill, if passed by Congress , would  increase support for farmers who are growing organic and sustainably produced fruits, vegetables, meats and other healthy foods for local and regional markets. It would also increase access to these healthy foods in underserved communities.  

So the news is not all bleak, but one must support these innovative legislative initiatives less they get bowled over by well-heeled lobbyists for large argri-businesses.

I'll repeat it more more time, like a cheesy cheerleader: It's our country, not theirs!

One small way you can participate is by signing a petition I created with Noelani Musicaro, a food-security activist, to Reform the Farm Bill of 2013 by including progressive legislative measures that will give us increased food and job security, not less.

Please read & sign: A Petition to Reform  The 2013 Farm Bill 

Please also support and join my Facebook group, Advocate for Economic Fairness!  

And please also check out Noelani Musicaro's Facebook page:  Figlie di Fortuna

Be well!  Stay healthy!  And fight the good fight! --  Rah! Rah! Rah!


Saturday, May 25, 2013

On Turning Fifty-Nine -- Like a Fine Wine?


Turning fifty-nine years of age is as good a time as any to reflect on where one is at in their life.


The last half of the last decade of my life was an especially 'picaresque' one (picaresque: realistic, and often humorous details of the adventures of a roguish hero of low social degree living by his or her wits in a corrupt society).


Yep, that about sums it up. Though, as per the definition, it begs for details:


That last half of the last decade of my life started out in a rather auspicious way. I traveled to India to join Yogi Amrit Desai (Founder of Kripalu Yoga) and a small entourage of people who were taking a 'lineage tour' of the places in India that were of seminal importance toYogi Desai's formidable spiritual development. Among the places we visited were the village where Amrit Desai grew up; the Temple in Malav dedicated to his guru, Shrii Kripalvanandji; and, the final leg of the journey for me, the Temple of Kayavarohan. Kayavarohan is a very special place' so please check out the video I linked it to.


It was the last leg of the journey for me because, while we were in a brief layover in Mumbai, I telephoned my 86-year old mother. She was completely disoriented, and living alone. I was writing a book on Yogi Desai and Kripalu, and I'd done the research I needed to do, so I decided to skip the next leg of the tour and return home.


While we were in Kayavarohan, Yogi Desai was gifted with a large Shiva icon to take back to the Amrit Yoga Institute in Florida. Yogi Desai didn't want to continue traveling with the 80 pound base of the statue in tow, so he asked if I'd take it back with me and then ship it to him in Florida.


Sure.


Shiva icons are made from Joytilingams -- black meteorite shards in the shape of phalluses. They are essentially Penises from Outer Space. What I was taking back with me was the base for one of these phallic icons, or it's female counterpart, Shakti. Essentially an 80-pound vagina. Yogi Desai explained to me in great (mind-blowing) detail what to tell customs agents if they asked about it.


So here I am returning to the States with an eighty-pound vagina to take care of my ailing eighty-year-old mother. (Dr. Freud, I dare you to take this one on...). Needless to say, when I got to customs in New York and was greeted by a gruff Brooklyn customs agent, I said 'It's just a freagin' rock.'


I should have expected things to get 'loopy' after that, though there was no way I could have predicted how much so.

My mother was diagnosed with Alzheimers, and I had to make the decision to either take care of her in her home, or give in to the prevailing cultural (and familial) whim to have her institutionalized.


I decided to keep her at home and take care of her myself with the help of local social services. This so infuriated another member of my family, an older sibling, that I was literally in and out of court every three months or so protecting my mother's right to stay in her own home, and my right to take care of her.


In the end, I was not only exhausted emotionally and physically, but rendered destitute. I no longer had a place to live and I was broke.


I then had to lean on social services again, and learn how to humbly rely on 'the kindness of strangers'. I document this experience in a memoir, 'An Odyssey in the Great American Safety Net'.


So what does all this have to do with turning fifty-nine and fine wine?


I guess it's okay when you are in your thirty's and forty's, and you've practiced yoga or some other spiritual discipline, to set up shop somewhere and hang out a shingle declaring yourself a spiritual teacher. But I think that at some point in your life it's time to take down the signs and just live it.


If there is someone in your life you love who is terminally ill, don't let them be placed in a 'warehouse for the infirmed and aged'. Take care of them. There are many social problems that need addressing in our culture. If any of them affect you personally, then commit yourself to changing them. My personal experience of dementia and destitution has made me acutely aware of how inadequate our social services system is in regards to responding to people with these needs, along with seeing how difficult and painful it is to live in illness and/or poverty in our society.


Fine wine? Well, you can't even make a mediocre wine without crushing some grapes.


Please share a 'crushed-grapes' story on my Facebook Page: An Invitation to Odyssey.


Or, if you feel inclined, join my group: Advocate for Economic Fairness!




.

Monday, May 20, 2013

Time to Declare Economic Independence & Claim Creative Frededom!

Nearly thirty-five years ago, in the fall of 1978, I was hired by the N.Y. Newspaper Guild to work as a freelance writer and editor on independent, alternative newspapers the Guild was publishing in New York, New Jersey and Pennsylvania.

Earlier in the year, unions representing  pressman, typesetters, machinists, photoengravers,  and commercial employees, including drivers, declared a strike against the owners of the three major New York City newspapers, as well as affiliate newspapers in New Jersey and Pennsylvania. The Guild, representing more than 4,000 reporters and editors, shortly thereafter joined the strike in solidarity. 

The ostensible reason for the strike was to protect union members' jobs from  being replaced by new technologies and automation. Instead of asking management to retrain workers in the use of these new technologies, the union demanded that their jobs -- even if outdated -- simply be retained until those workers retired. A futile and misguided endeavor that was pursued only because it had worked in the past.

Past is the key word here.  

Members of The Guild, however, depending on their age, saw the strike and the alternative newspapers in a different light.

Roughly speaking, if you were over thirty-five, you saw the alternative newspapers as just another  bargaining chip to help union leaders resolve the issues with management and achieve the union workers' demands. Again, the model for this was in the past.  

At the same time, if you were a Guild member under thirty-five, you saw yourself as not merely helping to publish  a temporary 'strike-newspaper',  but that you had just been handed an extraordinary opportunity to create an independent newspaper that one could then own, manage and work at.

The alternative newspaper came about because  of the  technological advances that were replacing pressman and typesetters . Micro-computing, still in its infancy, allowed one to literally create a digital newspaper from the back of a truck (which we did) anywhere you were (in  NY, NJ, or Pennsylvania)  and then drop it off at a local printer and voila! -- instant newspaper on demand.  Being young and idealistic at the time, I fancied us as some sort of modern-day  heirs to Thomas Paine with his self-published pamphlets advocating free-thinking and independence from economic tyranny (Common Sense).

The Guild had not financed a strike since the 1960s, so it had a considerable 'war chest'   (over a decade's worth of union dues monies) to invest in publishing and distributing the alternative newspapers. It did so in good faith for four months; and we worked day and night, taking time off only when we felt the long hours were taking a toll on our skills and denigrating our product.  

I wish that I could report a happy ending, but in the end, actually,  the Old School Guild Members weighed down our efforts to put out independent newspapers. Instead of pitching in, they complacently waited for the corporations and/or unions to settle their differences and once again take care of them by letting them go back to the simple 9-5 lives they were used to.

I was so pissed off at  their lack of initiative and foresight to not seize on such a  once-in-a-lifetime  opportunity that when the strike ended,  I felt they deserved what they got. Next to nothing. I watched grown men who had worked 20 or 30 years for a newspaper whimper away like scolded school kids clutching checks  for 2 or 3 grand. 

For there was a new kid on the block, and a new breed of owner named Rupert Murdoch who not only did not have any sympathy for unions or workers, but disdained them. The unions were crushed, and their members were forced to accept early retirements for ridiculously low buy-out packages that included cuts to their cherished health-care benefits and pensions. 

So what's the lesson to take away from all of this? 

I think the most obvious lesson is that in this day and age, the twenty-first century, one should no longer be so naive  as to expect a corporation or union to 'take care of  you' for life.

My father was a union member at a time when skilled laborers like him (without even a high school education) could own a home, buy a new car every few years, and give his children the opportunity to go to college. Those days are over now, and will not come back.   When  people would chide my father for paying union dues to a 'syndicate' run by the allegedly corrupt (he can no longer speak in his own defense) Jimmy Hoffa, my father would retort: 'Sure, Jimmy Hoffa is a thief.  But he's a good thief -- he doesn't take everything.'  There's more than  a grain of truth in that, which  no longer holds true for the persons controlling our present economy. There are people in our midst who would, literally, like to take it all -- or at least 98% of it. I know I've posted this video before, but if you haven't watched it, or want to watch it again, please do: Economic Reality 101

I'm not advocating waving flags of surrender in the face of this grim collapse of unions and  consequent wealth-grab; quite to the contrary, I'm challenging and inviting you to take control of your own creative destiny and financial independence.  

Here are just a few of the resources I've found that can help you do that:

Crowd-funding for your work or project:  Centup,  Kickstarter, Indiegogo,   
Long term loan/investment: PAVE  
Social Entrepreneurship: Ashoka Center,  Resource Generation, Skoll Foundation

There are plenty more.  I'm not a union or corporation so I'm not going to try to find them all for you.

Please share what you learn on my Facebook pages:Advocate for Economic Fairness!
                                                                              32 Beach Productions

I'll leave you with this from Thomas Paine. (I think he was talking about economic dependence): "A long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right."

Monday, May 13, 2013

Give Us a Break!

The two most damning misconceptions about poverty in America is that it is the result of a weak economy, and that poverty is, 'in fact' , caused by poor people.

Weak economy?  

The details of an historically unprecedented explosion in wealth among a small percentage of the population in America during the last 40 years has been well-documented. If you need a refresher please revisit this video from Upworthy:


Or this article from Alternet .

And yet, despite this, there is a significant number of people in our political elite who are waging a war against poor people.   "The war against working people should be understood to be a real war.... Specifically in the U.S., which happens to have a highly class-conscious business class.... And they have long seen themselves as fighting a bitter class war, except they don't want anybody else to know about it." -- Noam Chomsky

Why? I think the simple answer is greed. But if you are going to be greedy in public, one must then find a way to justify such an otherwise socially unacceptable behavior.

Here's where it gets interesting, and creepy: after you abscond the nation's wealth you then blame the poor for being poor, for creating the economically and socially degraded condition they find themselves in.

To pull this off requires advanced wizardry (or as they used to call it in my hood, blarney):  I'll just use one such person as an example, Paul Ryan -- the wanna be VP. It's his Christian faith, specifically Catholicism, that informs and inspires him to be tough on the poor -- "for their own good". As if the current wealth disparity isn't tough enough on poor people, let's clobber them further with self-righteous moral judgments.  

I quoted Chomsky above. Now I'll retell an anecdote from one of his books. Alexander the Great is having a  marvelous time reeking havoc on the world as he goes about plundering and conquering it. Then one day he comes upon a man who has set up shop on a small Mediterranean port, where he is making a modest living pilfering from the largess of wealthy seafarers.

When Alexander encounters the man, he is beside himself with contempt: "My dear sir, how dare you pirate these waters?" 

The man looks back with world-weary eyes: 'My dearest Lord, how dare yay pirate the whole world?'

Give us a break.

Please visit my Facebook group: Advocate for Economic Fairness!