Jebuff's slant, no spin

Real diplomacy is tough, long, and sometimes even successful...

A fascinating interview with Kofi Annan, revealing how his quiet, patient approach can solve thorny international conflicts. A real lesson to anyone who's interested in diplomacy. Thanks to my friends at the Graduate Institute for making this public.

Interview carried out on the occasion of the symposium: Diplomatic and judicial means of dispute settlement: can they get along? (23 October 2010).

The N word...

Given what's happening, I think it's time to bring it up.
Probably the most hated word in America.
I'm talking, of course, about Nationalization.
I recently posted a photo and comment on Facebook, asking what would change when the oil slick reaches the beaches of the Hamptons. A friend responded, saying she hoped that then we'd finally see some action.

Caution-beach

IMO it's hard to fault the post-accident actions so far, at least on the government side.
From the White House, "20,000 people working around the clock to contain and clean up this spill...17,500 National Guard troops, 1,900 vessels are aiding in the containment and cleanup effort... convened hundreds of top scientists and engineers from around the world. This is the largest response to an environmental disaster of this kind in the history of our country."
What's lacking is good policies to avoid this kind of accident in the first place. 
What I hope will change is the sensitivity when the people with power, money, and fancy beach houses realize they're living in the same environment as the rest of us, the unwashed masses and pelicans. Then we might see some real long-term policy changes. Like a carbon tax that really hurts, serious regulation or even partial nationalization of energy industries.
Nearly every grain in my free-market, MBA'd soul dismisses this instinctively. But there's a little bell in the back of my head that puts in question this gut reaction against even partial government control. That bell becomes an alarm when the obvious failures of soft-regulated free enterprise pop up before my eyes, or wash up over our bare, sandy feet.

Egret-over-oil

I'm not talking about ending the capitalist system. However, there are some companies that, by the nature of their business, are so vast, or deal with such levels of risk to the wider public, that we all become stakeholders in their activity. Energy is an obvious example, with the BP accident a perfect case study.

BP-Transocean-Haliburton-testify

These guys, for example, do not feel beholden to anybody but their bosses, and by extension, their boards and shareholders. But that does not mean the public interest is necessarily considered. The BP spill proves the contrary.
Clearly the current stockholders of those companies have not made their companies act with a sense of this wider responsibility. And it's not their fault. The system is not designed for them to act beyond their own financial interest, nor is the company really motivated to explain to them, much less the wider public, what the larger risks might be.
As a Democrat, I've always believed that it is the responsibility of the government to step in to defend the public good if no other market entities will do so. This failure in the current system could be addressed by the government taking a stake as shareholder in these companies and, linked with regulatory agencies, making sure that the interests of all stakeholders were represented, shareholders and the greater public.
It's time to bring the voices of future generations of people, and wildlife into boardrooms and annual meetings, where the current system has failed. Partial nationalization would do that. 

   

 

Some comments on BP & the oil spill

Who created the demand for the oil that  BP produces?

It's foolish to expect big oil to change when we don't change what we ask big oil to do. The buck doesn't stop "over there somewhere". Of course they are a bunch of profit motivated businessmen. That's what they do.
And indeed business should be reformed to act more ethically, integrate some moral responsibility into their  practices (more on that in a future post), but I'm sick that Americans, who consume more than any other country, who refuse to adjust their own carbon consumption, yet get all self-righteous when the businesses that cater to their indulgence screw up. 
If America weren't sucking it down, they wouldn't be digging it up.
Let's be honest, all this self-righteous bile aimed at BT is easier than blaming the real villains in the play, the consumers who are still driving 4x4s and complaining that the air-conditioning isn't on high enough.

So let's channel some of that anger currently directed at BP into cutting consumption. Check what kind of vehicle is in your garage, check your thermostats and light-bulbs, review your choices between the car, the bus or your bike.

If you're pissed off about BP corporate "greed", check the policies of the company you work for (or manage) and the practices of those in which you invest.

If you really want unbridled capitalism, right wing loonies...

Anybody else noticing how some of the far right-loonies are pretending to be smug, in spite of everything? It's as if as they lose influence, their reaction is either violence or denial. Ran into one comment today from one of these poor losers, pretending that without the tea-baggers, progressives would have nothing to talk about except our "disappointment" over Obama.
Disappointment?
Hell man, I think he's already one of the greatest Presidents ever. Saved the whole shebang from going down the economic tubes in his first months; built a meaningful, symbolic bridge to moderate Muslims (picked up the Nobel Prize for that one); and pushed through the beginnings of a health reform program that FDR couldn't do, Kennedy couldn't do, Johnson couldn't do, and Clinton couldn't do.
So I love how these jerks can only get their sad laughs by attributing to liberals emotions that they themselves are feeling.
"Disappointment"?
Only that we have to drag morons like him along.
Progressives are working hard and gaining ground bit by bit, pushing the country back in balance from the excesses of the past, learning the lessons from failed foreign policies, failed financial deregulation, gutted educational and social programs, and the loss of the common-sense notion that we are indeed our brothers keepers. Selfishness is not a virtue, and these reactionaries can't hide behind the old "it's actually better if I let you sink or swim on your own" attitude.
So I invited my right wing commenter pal to consider a move. "If you're afraid to pull your weight plus a little bit for your neighbor, pack up & head for the no-holes barred brutality of modern feudalism in the new Russia. It's fish or cut приманка there, and to hell with the next guy. You'll feel quite at home."

Street_star

HRC's impact this year in 15 bullet points...

Good afternoon, Since the House of Representatives voted to pass health reform legislation on Sunday night, the legislative process and its political impact have been the focus of all the newspapers and cable TV pundits. Outside of DC, however, many Americans are trying to cut through the chatter and get to the substance of reform with a simple question: "What does health insurance reform actually mean for me?" To help, we've put together some of the key benefits from health insurance reform. Let's start with how health insurance reform will expand and strengthen coverage: This year, children with pre-existing conditions can no longer be denied health insurance coverage. Once the new health insurance exchanges begin in the coming years, pre-existing condition discrimination will become a thing of the past for everyone. This year, health care plans will allow young people to remain on their parents' insurance policy up until their 26th birthday. This year, insurance companies will be banned from dropping people from coverage when they get sick, and they will be banned from implementing lifetime caps on coverage. This year, restrictive annual limits on coverage will be banned for certain plans. Under health insurance reform, Americans will be ensured access to the care they need. This year, adults who are uninsured because of pre-existing conditions will have access to affordable insurance through a temporary subsidized high-risk pool. In the next fiscal year, the bill increases funding for community health centers, so they can treat nearly double the number of patients over the next five years. This year, we'll also establish an independent commission to advise on how best to build the health care workforce and increase the number of nurses, doctors and other professionals to meet our country's needs.  Going forward, we will provide $1.5 billion in funding to support the next generation of doctors, nurses and other primary care practitioners -- on top of a $500 million investment from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. Health insurance reform will also curb some of the worst insurance industry practices and strengthen consumer protections: This year, this bill creates a new, independent appeals process that ensures consumers in new private plans have access to an effective process to appeal decisions made by their insurer. This year, discrimination based on salary will be outlawed. New group health plans will be prohibited from establishing any eligibility rules for health care coverage that discriminate in favor of higher-wage employees. Beginning this fiscal year, this bill provides funding to states to help establish offices of health insurance consumer assistance in order to help individuals in the process of filing complaints or appeals against insurance companies. Starting January 1, 2011, insurers in the individual and small group market will be required to spend 80 percent of their premium dollars on medical services. Insurers in the large group market will be required to spend 85 percent of their premium dollars on medical services. Any insurers who don't meet those thresholds will be required to provide rebates to their policyholders. Starting in 2011, this bill helps states require insurance companies to submit justification for requested premium increases. Any company with excessive or unjustified premium increases may not be able to participate in the new health insurance exchanges. Reform immediately begins to lower health care costs for American families and small businesses: This year, small businesses that choose to offer coverage will begin to receive tax credits of up to 35 percent of premiums to help make employee coverage more affordable. This year, new private plans will be required to provide free preventive care: no co-payments and no deductibles for preventive services. And beginning January 1, 2011, Medicare will do the same. This year, this bill will provide help for early retirees by creating a temporary re-insurance program to help offset the costs of expensive premiums for employers and retirees age 55-64. This year, this bill starts to close the Medicare Part D 'donut hole' by providing a $250 rebate to Medicare beneficiaries who hit the gap in prescription drug coverage. And beginning in 2011, the bill institutes a 50% discount on prescription drugs in the 'donut hole.' Thank you, Nancy-Ann DeParle Director, White House Office of Health Reform

the "socialism" red herring

Over at The Wit Continuum, http://thewitcontinuum.wordpress.com/, the question is asked about health care reform,
"is this the first step to a socialist form of government?"
My response... I don't believe the question is legitimate. Government exists to fulfill certain responsibilities in society. Those responsibilities shift over time. A look around the world clearly proves that today countries that offer public health care spend a lower % of GNP for better care for more people. It's simply a more efficient system, using competition to force all health finance providers to deliver better service for less.
Did public schools make the US "socialist"? Are public libraries a threat to democracy, just because they're public? Are there still private schools and libraries, despite the fact that the government assures a public option for education?? Of course.
This silliness over "socialism" is a red herring, an insurance lobby sound-byte  to divert attention from the real debate. The US is no more socialist than it was last week. It's just a better country.

Taking a break...

PC took a suicide dive off the dining room table today.
Considering this a sign. Repair or  replace... whichever; this may take some time.
Let's pick up the dialogue in January.
Warmest holiday wishes to all.
Best to the neighborhood.

Covers Chapter 3, "Crosstown Traffic"

One of my favorite Jimi Hendrix songs, Crosstown Traffic. Recorded in '67-'68 in New York (where else, given the title?) the song's intro features the "Hendrix chord", a dominant 7#9 (don't ask) about which music critic John Perry once wrote "it's the whole of the blues scale condensed into a single chord".

Hendrix Chord

The song features a strange and wonderful shifting of guitar back and forth between the right and left channels. Recording engineers always assign a channel dominance to inputs, which makes the stereo effect work, but it's usually subtle, and seldom so obviously meant to be heard as on this song. The effect is called "variable cross-feed" and may be a nod by Hendrix or his engineer to the title of the song.
The lyrics are obviously loaded with sexual references, ("tire tracks all across your back, yeah, I can see you've had your fun") a pre-curser to Prince's "Little Red Corvette".
The kazoo sound around the chorus was a super high tech design... a piece of Kleenex folded over a comb. Other trivia - Dave Mason of Traffic sang backup; more fun referencing the song title. 

Jimi Hendrix, "Crosstown Traffic", VH1 mashup

Irishman Foy Vance has done a brilliant version of "Crosstown", and I love him for it. This has become a favorite in my own repertoire. Don't know too much about him, but, as you can see on his website (http://www.foyvance.com/) Bonnie Raitt has said about him "One of the most soulful and powerful singers and writers I've heard in a long while." Coming from her, that's high praise indeed. Check out his acoustic solo take on the song...

Foy Vance, "Crosstown Traffic" Live

 

    

 

Switzerland, what the f***???

From my Facebook status...

And speaking of intolerance... Switzerland, what the fuck??? We knew you were a bit prissy, anal-retentive, and boring. But voting to ban minarets? What's next, the vote to chop off Muslim hands? Damned fondue-eating Christian Mullahs.

Was going to blog more about this, but as beaten to the punch by a great blog by my new neighbor, Rotten in Denmark

Minaret

One additional point - one ignorant rationalle for supporting this ban was the mistaken idea that there are no Christian Churches in the Muslim world. Dead wrong, see below.

And even if it was true, oh ye of the banning majority, wouldn't you be upset, indignant, if some Muslim majority country banned building church steeples? If you've read your Bibles, you'd know that retaliating unfairness in kind is hardly following the path of Jesus, right?
Policy based on fear and prejudice, completely contradictory to your own constitution and the religion you espouse.  Nice job, you clueless bozos.