[Futurework] NYTimes.com Article: Op-Ed Columnist: What Ails Florida?
This article from NYTimes.com has been sent to you by [EMAIL PROTECTED] FW How scary is this? [EMAIL PROTECTED] / advertisement ---\ NOMINATED FOR 7 BROADCAST FILM CRITICS AWARDS IN AMERICA has been nominated for 7 BFCA Awards including Best Picture, Best Actress Best Director, Best Writer, Best Young Actor/Actress, and Best Song. Ebert Roeper give IN AMERICA Two Thumbs Way Up! Watch the trailer at: http://www.foxsearchlight.com/inamerica \--/ Op-Ed Columnist: What Ails Florida? January 12, 2004 By BOB HERBERT MIAMI The State of Florida really knows how to hurt a kid. It has money for sports stadiums. It lavishes billions of dollars' worth of tax breaks and other goodies on private corporations. It even has money for a substantial reserve fund. But, in an episode of embarrassing and unnecessary tightfistedness, it has frozen enrollment in a badly needed state health insurance program for low-income children. Some 60,000 to 70,000 children who are eligible for KidCare, Florida's version of the popular and successful children's health insurance program, have been put on waiting lists. Even kids who already have serious health problems are being placed on the lists, which are lengthening every day. No one knows when - or if - the children will get coverage. We've had families tell us they've put off buying groceries so they can afford to take their child to the doctor, said Conni Wells, director of the Florida Institute for Family Involvement, which advises families on health matters. The institute has alerted officials to the plight of a family in Jacksonville that has three sons who need medical care now. The boys' father had been laid off for a while and during that period the children were covered by Medicaid. Now that the father has resumed working, the children have been bounced off Medicaid but qualify for coverage under KidCare. They're on a waiting list. (The family can't afford private health insurance.) One of the boys, a 14-year-old, broke his back a year ago and still needs extensive therapy. A younger brother needs an expensive growth hormone and has asthma. A third son also has asthma. Florida officials will not say when the children might actually get coverage. Most of the children on the waiting list are from families whose incomes are just over the poverty line. (The children of the very poor are covered by Medicaid.) The freeze was imposed at the end of July, ostensibly because of state budget problems. But the Florida budget problems are not as bad as those in many other states. Since last July Florida has qualified for nearly $1 billion in help from the federal government, which has come up with $400 million in increased Medicaid matching funds and more than $500 million in a fiscal relief grant. The cost of providing the authorized coverage for the tens of thousands of youngsters on the KidCare waiting lists is estimated at just $23 million for the remainder of this fiscal year. The money from the federal government could be used for that purpose, but Gov. Jeb Bush and the Florida Legislature have not been willing to take that step. These kids are not part of a particularly favored constituency. Their parents do not have much political clout, and may not even vote. Some of the kids may end up desperately ill (some may die), but as a group they are not the kind of kids who get a lot of attention or sympathy from the powers that be in Florida today. A spokesman for Governor Bush, Jacob DiPietre, told me yesterday that no immediate action is planned to provide health coverage to the children on the waiting lists. Be assured that the governor and his entire administration are concerned about the waiting list, he said. But he added, This is a problem that requires a long-term, sustainable solution. And he made a point of noting, The KidCare program is not an entitlement. Florida is one of 34 states that have made serious cuts in public health insurance programs for low-income people over the past two years. A study by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities found that from 1.2 million to 1.6 million men, women and children have lost coverage as a result. The cuts are spreading, not receding, as states look for solutions to budget problems that in many cases are far more severe than Florida's. On Thursday President Bush and Governor Bush made a joint appearance in Palm Beach, where the president picked up a quick million dollars for his re-election campaign. There was plenty of laughter and glad-handing, and little talk about such unpleasant matters as the denial of health care to low-income children. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/12/opinion/12HERB.html?ex=1074931580ei=1en=d822faa88beb6d27 - Get Home Delivery of The New York Times Newspaper. Imagine reading The New York Times any time anywhere you like!
[Futurework] FW Future of work
Speaking of this topic, a new book, Low-Wage America: how employers are reshaping opportunity in the workplace, eds. E. Appelbaum, A. Bernhardt and R. Murnane (New York: Russell Sage, 2003) sheds some interesting light: In 2001 about 27.5 million Americans, 23.9 percent of the labor, earned less than $8.70 an hour. Working full-time for the entire year at this wage produces annual earnings of just $17,400 - about equal to the poverty line for a family of four, and not nearly enough to sustain most working families.(p. 1) [Depending on the community] a family with two parents and two children requires between $27,000 and $52,000 annually in order to maintain a basic standard of living; the national median is about $33,5000. For a single working parent with two children, a basic family budget ranges from $22,000 to $48,600. Overall, in the late 1990s, fully 29 percent of working families with children under twelve had incomes lower than the basic family budget for their communities. (p.1) (Kind of bolsters the suspicion that not all the droves of women who have entered the workforce did so to find self-fulfillment. And no wonder there's a widespread Living Wage movement in the U.S. ) Following the initial overview chapter, 12 articles provide case studies and hard data on employment in the service sector, impacts of new technologies on employees, job quality and career opportunities, effects of outsourcing - all in the context of 'management discretion'. We Canadians are facing similar low market-wage figures, but our 'social-wage' provisions have until the last few years helped to keep poor families afloat. Suspecting further Canadian emulation of U.S.neocon social program cuts, my community and several others are revving up our own Living Wage campaigns. But it's a very tough slog, and leads to a certain fury. Anyway, read the book. Sally ___ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
[Futurework] Conference on Global Labor
Of possible interest to FWers.. Mimi-Conferenc_on_Global_Labor. Description: MS-Word document ___ Futurework mailing list Futurework@fes.uwaterloo.ca http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
[Futurework] US slippery slope
Anybody really alarmed there yet?? Sally [The New York Times] July 11, 2005 Unnecessary Powers The Patriot Act already gives government too much power to spy on ordinary Americans, but things could get far worse. Congress is considering adding a broad new investigative power, known as the administrative subpoena, that would allow the Federal Bureau of Investigation to gain access to anyone's financial, medical, employment and even library records without approval from a judge and even without the target knowing about it. Members of Congress should block this disturbing provision from becoming law. The Senate is at work on a bill to reauthorize parts of the Patriot Act that are scheduled to expire later this year. In addition to extending those provisions, the Senate Intelligence Committee is proposing to add an array of new investigative tools. The administrative subpoena is not the only one of the new provisions of the current bill that would endanger civil liberties, but it is the worst. When the F.B.I. wants access to private records about an individual, it ordinarily needs to get the approval of a judge or a grand jury. The proposed new administrative subpoena power would allow the F.B.I. to call people in and force them to produce records on its own authority, without approval from the judicial branch. This kind of secret, compelled evidence not tied to any court is incompatible with basic American principles of justice. It would also make it far easier for the F.B.I. to go off on fishing expeditions. The bill would allow the F.B.I. to order that the subpoenas be kept secret. That means record holders, like banks or employers, would not be able to inform the person whose private information was being handed over. It would also make it difficult for Congress, and the public, to know whether the F.B.I. was abusing its enormous new powers. Defenders of the bill argue that a subpoena could still be challenged in court, but this is a hollow right. In many cases, the person whose records would be turned over - who has the greatest incentive to fight the subpoena - would not know what was going on. The record holder, who would be in a position to challenge the subpoena, may have little incentive to spend the money and time to do so. The bill's defenders note that administrative subpoenas are already allowed in other kinds of investigations. But these are generally in highly regulated areas, like Medicaid billing. The administrative subpoena power in the new bill would apply to anything the F.B.I. deemed related to alleged foreign intelligence or terrorism, and could, in practice, give the F.B.I. access to almost any private records it wanted. The proposed new administrative subpoena power is a solution in search of a problem. In testimony before Congress, the F.B.I. could not point to examples of national security investigations that were deterred by its lack of administrative subpoena power. There could be a case that the F.B.I. should have this power in true emergencies, but that would require a very narrowly drawn provision that applied only in exigent circumstances. The Senate is considering something far more sweeping and dangerous: giving the F.B.I. an open-ended license to invade the privacy of ordinary Americans. ___ Futurework mailing list Futurework@fes.uwaterloo.ca http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
[Futurework] Fwd: Oasis Australia newsletter 13 July
Interesting view of current affairs in Australia, from a Basic Income advocate there... From: Allan McDonald [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Allan McDonald [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Oasis Australia newsletter 13 July Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2005 13:01:48 +1000 OASIS-Australia Organisation Advocating Support Income Studies in Australia Convener: Allan McDonald 28 Prince St Urangan Qld. 4655 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tel: 07 4128 9971 Newsletter13 July 2005 The 1st July Newsletter introduced the concept of economic fundamentalism as the driving force of the current federal government's political ideology. The newsletter also offered the proposal for a support income or basic income for Australia as a way to counter the divisiveness and insecurity which will be created by the proposed industrial relations legislation. In this and following newsletters we will be looking more closely at some of the areas where people may be affected. Again, references to basic economic principles and practices by page number alone will refer to Economics 4th edition, Jackson, McIver, McConnell and Brue. * * * First, some background to the current industrial relations proposals. In the early 20th century following Federation and through to the 1960's Australia developed as a nation with a strong commitment to social justice and cooperation. The basic wage was determined on the basis of the needs of a family. Employers were prepared to train cadets and apprentices in excess of their own requirements in the public interest. Public and private services were provided to regional and rural areas based on cross-subsidisation. Australia prided itself as an egalitarian society. Then in the 1970's changes began to occur. Changes in industrial relations. Changes in the provision of services nationally and regionally. Changes in the training of cadets and apprentices. These changes continued through to the 21st century, and they are still occurring. Why is it that today, in the 21st century, we have moved so far away from the social structures developed in the first half of the 20th century. The whole social structure of the nation has changed from one based on a strong sense of social justice and cooperation to one based on competition and individualism. Why have we changed? The answer, in simple terms, in layman's terms, is a change in economic theory, leading to a change in the way in which economic theory has influenced our political policies. A change from Keynesian economic theory to Monetary economic theory. Keynesian economic theory developed as an aid to government, advising and helping governments to maintain their social structures while still achieving economic growth. Monetary economic theory, on the other hand, developed with a strong emphasis on a free market economy, i.e. laissez faire capitalism. Keynesian and monetarists have important ideological differences. Keynesians feel that capitalism, and more particularly, the free market system suffers from inherent shortcomings. (p.360) The monetarist view is that markets are competitive and that the competitive market system provides the economy with a high degree of macroeconomic stabilityMonetarists have a strong laissez faire or free market orientation. (p.361) Monetarist economic theory supports a minimum of market regulation. In the global economy where there is no global regulatory body monetarist economic theory reigns supreme. Politically it is more acceptable than Keynesian economic theory to participating nations and it is also far more acceptable to participating corporations and businesses. Politically it is more acceptable to the producers of goods and services who are, in economic terms, endeavouring to maximise the efficient use of productive resources, of which labour is just one of these resources. The appeal to political parties is enhanced by the minimisation of regulation. Let the market decide is a good reason for doing nothing. The more recent move towards new classical economics, or rational expectation theory (RET) does nothing to hinder the move towards a deregulated free market environment. Concurrent with this shift in political ideology is a shift in the role of economists.The movement away from the wellbeing of society to the wellbeing of the economy, and the movement away from a controlled economy to an uncontrolled economy, has simplified the political processes and reduced the decision making of our political leaders. Economic policy advisers have virtually become policy makers. As a result, the theory of economics has spread to areas which are beyond its capacity to determine, and political parties bound by economic theory - the economic fundamentalists - are finding it more and more difficult to justify the effect of their actions on society without deception and misleading reporting. * * * Basically, economics is concerned with the efficient use of limited productive
[Futurework] Fwd: FYI:Chavez touts `21st Century Socialism' - respects private enterprise
Interesting alternative Date:Sun, 17 Jul 2005 11:17:33 EDT Chavez touts `21st Century Socialism' Friday, Jul 15, 2005 By: Gary Marx - Chicago Tribune CIUDAD GUAYANA, Venezuela -- Standing before a group of nascent entrepreneurs, Carlos Lanz looked less like a former communist guerrilla than an aging university professor as he laid out the next phase of Venezuela's revolution. Aiming a light pointer at graphics projected on a large screen, Lanz--who long ago laid down his weapon but not his ideals--outlined Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez's plans for transforming this oil-rich nation into something approaching a workers' paradise. Venezuela suffers a distortion because many of us are excluded from production, from wealth and services, said Lanz, 62, a key architect of Chavez's reforms. We are constructing a new economic model. The road so far has been rocky. Faced with violent protests and a bitter recall referendum, Chavez spent his first six years in office fighting for his political life even as he poured billions of dollars into social programs. But now, with the political opposition vanquished and oil prices near record highs, the Venezuelan leader is in a strong position to launch what he describes as 21st Century Socialism. Eschewing Marxism-Leninism, Lanz says, Chavez has developed an economic model called endogenous development whereby state oil money will finance the creation of thousands of small-scale cooperatives in agricultural and other areas to provide jobs and foster community development. A second leg of Chavez's master plan is something known as cogestion, roughly translated as co-management, where the state is helping workers purchase shares of companies they work in to give them a greater say in management. The goal of all this, they say, is to lift millions out of poverty by reducing Venezuela's reliance on oil, which has left the country with a weak manufacturing and agricultural base and over-dependent on imports of food and almost everything else. Managers are elected We hand over cheap raw material to The Empire [the United States] and the multinational corporations, and they sell us very expensive goods, said Lanz, who describes the nation's business elite as a parasitical oligarchy. So who benefits? People in the North. The son of a wealthy farmer who became a leftist rebel in the 1960s, Lanz is using cogestion to revamp CVG Alcasa, an obsolete state-owned aluminum plant in this scorching city about 330 miles southeast of the capital, Caracas. The key change Lanz has implemented in his three months at the helm is allowing workers to elect their own managers, the first step, he and others say, to improving efficiency. Now decisions are not made by one person in an office, explained Alcides Rivero, a 23-year Alcasa employee, as he walked past huge stacks of aluminum ingots. Now decisions are made around a table. We elect who will direct us. It's not imposed from the top. Critics say electing managers is fine but it won't lift an uncompetitive plant like Alcasa out of the red. They say Chavez's economic plan resembles the import-substitution polices that were tried with limited success in Latin America decades ago. This is nothing new, said Teodoro Petkoff, editor of Tal Cual, a respected Caracas newspaper critical of Chavez. This is a project that has short legs. Whether Chavez succeeds or fails in his economic gambit could have enormous impact across the continent, where the Venezuelan leader is gaining influence amid a resurgence of the Latin American left. The outcome also is crucial to the United States, which imports large quantities of Venezuelan oil despite Washington's hostility toward Chavez and Chavez's anti-Americanism. The former army paratrooper first came to national prominence leading a failed coup in 1992. He was elected president six years later and, after changing the constitution, re-elected in 2000, surviving a brief but bloody coup, a devastating opposition-led national strike and last August's presidential recall referendum. In that contest, he won with a decisive 59 percent of the vote after many had predicted his downfall; the United States had helped fund several opposition groups. Today, many of Chavez's most vocal critics have either left the country or are relegated to the inside pages of newspapers. The president and his allies control the National Assembly, 22 of 24 state governorships, the Attorney General's Office and the Venezuelan Supreme Court. Chavez supporters also form a majority in the National Electoral Council, which will oversee presidential elections next year. With his approval rating above 70 percent, Chavez is almost certain to win a six-year mandate in 2006 despite critics' assertions that he is a populist dem agogue who is undermining Venezuela's democracy. They control everything, lamented Petkoff. There is a serious danger of autocracy. An engaging personality whose
[Futurework] Poverty and work issues: still with us
Marchers urge minimum wage hike, increased welfare payouts By Paul Morse The Hamilton Spectator (Sep 28, 2005) Loretta Erie has known poverty all her life, from growing up poor in the North End to struggling to make ends meet now. Yesterday, Erie joined dozens of Hamilton residents on social assistance and anti-poverty activists on a march through downtown calling on the provincial government to give priority to dealing with poverty. My mother was single and raised four children, Erie said. I don't know how she did it, but she managed on welfare and child benefit cheques. The Hamilton anti-poverty protest, including a presentation to city council's social and public health services committee, is a preview of a larger provincial rally at Queen's Park tomorrow, organized by the Ontario Coalition for Social Justice. Today's social assistance rates must be brought in line with real costs of living, Erie said. Like her mother, Erie is a diabetic and suffers from serious arthritis. The 48-year old grandmother has fought hard to keep her head above water while watching friends lose hope, struggle with addictions, the law and the street. I feel like I'm going backward, she said. I was born in poverty and now I'm below it. Ten years ago next week, Mike Harris's Conservative government cut Ontario's social assistance by more than 20 per cent and later downloaded welfare costs onto municipalities. For Erie, that meant an Ontario Works $231 monthly welfare cheque. The next eight years were a hand-to-mouth existence relying on temporary low-paying jobs, soup kitchens and food banks as she fought for disability benefits. Today, Erie receives $800 a month in disability benefits. About $600 of that goes toward subsidized rent for her Market Street apartment, hydro, phone and other bills. That leaves a little better than $200 for food and necessities and I have to make tough choices, she said. Hamilton's Campaign for Adequate Welfare and Disability Benefits (CAWDB) wants the provincial government to raise Ontario's minimum wage to $10 from $7.45. We need to readjust the division of the income pie because the gap between the rich and poor is becoming too wide, said CAWDB co-ordinator Peter Hutton. Hutton, who is part of a high-profile city roundtable of business leaders, politicians and activists on poverty, says the roundtable is hearing that Hamilton faces special problems contributing to poverty. We seem to have an inordinate number of young mothers living in poverty because we have a higher teen pregnancy rate than other parts of the province. A lot of Hamilton's housing stock is also substandard, he said, and an increasing number of seniors are struggling with spiralling energy costs. We have people in Hamilton with electrical heating bills in the winter where they pay three or four times what another person would pay for a monthly mortgage. Hutton believes raising social assistance and disability benefits cannot happen without increasing the minimum wage. If you don't have a decent minimum wage, it's very difficult for people on social assistance to make the jump off it. But boosting the minimum wage is only part of the equation. Governments must give the national child benefit supplement back to people on welfare, Hutton said. The working poor get it, but people on assistance don't. It's supposed to help families with children but it ends up subsidizing governments. Hamilton and District Labour Council president Wayne Marston told protesters part of the solution is to increase the minimum hourly wage to two-thirds of a community's average industrial wage to become a true living wage. More than 93,000 people in Hamilton are living in poverty, Marston said. Across Canada, youth unemployment remains stuck above 13 per cent, he said. When young workers aged 15 to 24 do find jobs, they earn 25 per cent less than their parents did when they were that age. And, he said, 40 per cent of all new jobs created over the past year were temporary contracts. Councillors on the social and public health services committee agreed yesterday to bring a poverty roundtable report to committee of the whole and invite public presentations on poverty in November. CAWDB is making two buses available to send people to tomorrow's Walk, Wheel and Ride for Dignity rally at Queen's Park. The buses will leave at 9:30 a.m. from the Wesley Centre, 195 Ferguson Ave. N. [EMAIL PROTECTED] 905-526-3434 ___ Futurework
[Futurework] Fwd: Re: exporting Venezuelan self-management to the US?
Date:Tue, 8 Nov 2005 16:45:41 EST From:Roland Sheppard [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: exporting Venezuelan self-management to the US? In a message dated 11/8/05 11:17:39 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: At http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=45ItemID=9067 Michael Albert has a very useful, detailed account of his discussions in Venezuela, centering around workers' involvement in their workplaces, schools, neighborhoods, etc. There's one particularly intriguing part: Returning to my exchange with the oil official, when I asked about CITGO - the oil industry owned by Venezuela operating in the U.S. - moving toward having a workers council to self manage it, moving toward equal wages, and changing its division of labor, not only on behalf of those working at CITGO but as a demonstration inside the U.S. for other U.S. workers of the potential of self management and equity, the official was very excited, even wanting to immediately call others to talk about this idea. Later discussion of the related possibility of Venezuela making inroads, via CITGO or otherwise, into media and information dispersal in the U.S., instead of information incursions always occurring only in the reverse direction, caused still more excitement. We were told by the oil ministry officials and also by trade unionists and others how in Venezuela, like in Argentina, there was a movement, just getting up to speed, to recuperate failing or failed workplaces. You may have read about the latter movement through Jorge Martin's reports on the continent-wide conference of occupied factories. Since seeing the report on that conference I've wondered if there's any p ractical way to raise the example being set in Latin America with US workers struggling against Delphi, GM, failing airlines, etc. Michael's proposal certainly opens wide the door. That's not to say Delphi workers are ready to seize their plants -- although the disinvestment practiced by Delphi bosses is the same practice that inspired takeovers in Latin America. And we certainly have a rich history of occupations (sitdowns) in this country. Michael also reports: I also asked this trade union leader, who was explicitly responsible for international relations, about links with movements and unions in the U.S. She reported Venezuelan Chavista unions having links to the 'AFL-CIO in California, some grass-roots unions, and the antiwar movement,' but not with the national AFL-CIO because they are still giving money to those imposing old bureaucracy and fomenting coups. More evidence, in other words, of the possibility for information exchange about self-management and class-struggle methods. Andrew Pollack To unsubscribe send email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] with one line in the text saying: unsubscribe LABOR-L, or see instructions at: http://listserv.yorku.ca ___ Futurework mailing list Futurework@fes.uwaterloo.ca http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
[Futurework] Solstice belongs to everyone!
And so far, no one has figured out to tamper with it. So let's all celebrate together - here's to the light! Warm regards to you all, Sally ___ Futurework mailing list Futurework@fes.uwaterloo.ca http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
[Futurework] Fwd: FYI:Delta Ends 2005 With Huge Losses
This fellow Sheppard doesn't think small. Happy New Year to all. Sally Date:Tue, 3 Jan 2006 14:23:30 EST From:Roland Sheppard [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: FYI:Delta Ends 2005 With Huge Losses -- See bottom of Posting for LABOR-L Archive and Subscription Information The broke and mismanaged airlines should be nationalized, put under workers' control, and let those who have been doing the work do the work -- like in Venezueala. The unions should be demanding this as an alternative to bankruptcy and cuts in the standards of living of the workers, while management loots the companies. http://www.forbes.com/2005/12/30/grinstein-delta-losses-cx_gl_1230autofacescan 07_print.html Grinstein's Delta Ends 2005 With Huge Losses Greg Levine, 12.30.05, 3:58 PM ET No one likes to end the year on a heavy note. But it'd be a tad unrealistic to be too upbeat when reporting news about Delta Air Lines (otc: DALR - news - people ). On Wednesday, Faces In The News readers will recall, the beleaguered carrier had come to terms--tentatively--with its equally put-upon pilots. The fliers had agreed agreed to another round of salary cuts as part of Chief Executive Gerald Grinstein's strategy to pull the company out of bankruptcy. (see: Delta Pilots OK Grinstein's 14% Pay Cut Plan). The CEO had declared, Given the critical nature of our financial situation, this provides much needed financial relief. In 2005, that's about as good as it got for Delta. The Atlanta-based firm filed for Chap 11 protection on Sept. 14, the same day as another troubled legacy, Northwest Airlines (otc: NWACQ - news - people ). On the second to last day of the year, Grinstein's firm filed its monthly operating report with the bankruptcy court. On Friday, it reported losing $182 million in November, driving its red ink to some $12 billion since January 2001, by The Associated Press' calculations. The carrier also said it spent $2.39 billion in the 30-day period. At least there was no pilots' strike at Delta. That may look like heaven to riders of the London Underground. As of press time, workers on the nearly sesquicentennial Tube--running since 1863--were still poised on the brink of a New Year's Eve walkout. They might want to first investigate how popular their New York City counterparts were with the populace. Hey, maybe January will be sunnier--it's not unknown. Access LABOR-L archives and manage your subscription at https://listserv.yorku.ca/archives/labor-l.html ___ Futurework mailing list Futurework@fes.uwaterloo.ca http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
[Futurework] Fwd: Prepublication Announcement: Challenging the Chip
Title: Fwd: Prepublication Announcement: Challenging the Chi X-Keywords: Hello, If you're planning a summer or fall course on environment, justice, globalization, politics, labor, technology tc., you might be interested in our forthcoming new book, Challenging the Chip: Labor Rights and Environmental Justice in the Global Electronics Industry. See: http://www.temple.edu/tempress/titles/1788_reg.html It will be published by Temple University Press in June. Thanks Kind regards, David --- David A. SONNENFELD, Ph.D. Associate Professor Dept. of Community Rural Sociology Washington State University 2710 University Drive Richland, WA 99354-1671 U.S.A. tel. +1 (509) 372-7375 fax +1 (509) 372-7100 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] URL: http://www.tricity.wsu.edu/sonn ___ Futurework mailing list Futurework@fes.uwaterloo.ca http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
[Futurework] News re the source of our list name
Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 16:49:07 GMT To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: James Robertson[EMAIL PROTECTED] This is a quick newsletter update to let you know that the full text on my book 'Future Work' is now available free from my website in pdf format. You can find links to the 3 different sections here - http://www.jamesrobertson.com/books.htm#futurework The message of this book, when it was published over twenty years ago, was that world society was in the early stage of a 'great transformation' of the kind that has occurred from time to time in history, affecting every aspect of human life. One of its outcomes could be a liberation of work, taking further the earlier progressions from slavery to serfdom, and then from serfdom to employment ó all three of which have involved most people working for a minority superior to themselves. As that liberation takes place, more and more of us will work more freely under our own control than conventional employment has allowed. We will do what we see to be our own good, useful and rewarding work ó for ourselves, other people and society as a whole. How relevant are those ideas in 2006? Have they been by-passed by the economic orthodoxy of Thatcherism and Reaganism, by the collapse of state-based communism and socialism, and by the unstoppable 'progress' of globalised capitalism over the past twenty years? In my 2006 Preface I answer No, they haven't been by-passed. Quite the reverse. The world situation now makes the bookís ideas and arguments even more relevant than when it first came out. James Robertson 21st February 2006 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.jamesrobertson.com click on the link below to unsubscribe. http://www.auto-responder.co.uk/cgi-bin/maxuseradmin.cgi?function=manualdelete3[EMAIL PROTECTED]un=jamesrobertson ___ Futurework mailing list Futurework@fes.uwaterloo.ca http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
[Futurework] Fwd: [AU_CANADA] Sen. Hugh Segal talks about basic income
Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 18:47:14 -0600 Reply-To: au_canada - Basic Income / Alloc. Univ [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sender: au_canada - Basic Income / Alloc. Univ [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: Jim Mulvale [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [AU_CANADA] Sen. Hugh Segal talks about basic income To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Senator Hugh Segal (a Conservative appointee) was in Regina giving a talk this week. His topic was Rural Poverty. He mentions basic income as one piece of his proposal. I understand that he was also interviewed on the CTV show Canada AM this morning. The text of the news story is below. The web page that is the source is: http://www.canada.com/reginaleaderpost/news/story.html?id=9dd23105-a592-45b6-9142-1b26b3216657k=83347 Jim Mulvale Dept. of Justice Studies University of Regina Regina, Saskatchewan, CanadaS4S 0A2 Senator promises to make poverty an issue Anne Kyle Leader-Post Tuesday, February 21, 2006 Senator Hugh Segal speaks Monday in Regina. Conservative Senator Hugh Segal promised Monday to put poverty, particularly rural poverty, back on the political agenda through his work on the Senate Standing Committee on Agriculture and Forestry. The most important issue I think Canadians have to come to grips with is that two million of our fellow citizens in rural Canada are living in poverty,'' Segal told reporters following his presentation to the third annual Saskatchewan Institute of Public Policy luncheon in Regina. These men, women and children, he said, are living without adequate shelter, access to needed medical and social services, and sufficient or wholesome food, and have little or no hope of finding meaningful employment without leaving their homes, their histories, their families and their communities. They don't have enough money for any kind of quality of life and there is no quality of opportunity,'' Segal said. Canadians, politicians and policymakers can't just focus on poverty issues in the cities because that is where all the dynamic news might be, Segal said. We have to focus on the importance of our rural communities. Canada's rural communities are a strategic resource. They are important in terms of our national security, in terms of food production, and they are important in terms of environmental sustainability,'' he said. It is high time for governments of all affiliations -- federal and provincial -- to look at the poverty issue, Segal said, explaining why he asked the Senate Committee on Agriculture last November to do a detailed study on rural poverty. The obvious root causes of rural poverty are the closing or downsizing of primary industries -- relating to logging, mining, fishing and agriculture -- and the ensuing loss of employment. The remoteness of the community, lack of transportation, and the inaccessibility to job opportunities result in an exodus of young people in search of employment, he said. Segal suggests governments look at a cohesive national strategy aimed at decentralizing services to rural areas of the country to anchor rural communities and provide much-needed job opportunities. It is about an integrated policy focus that looks at and considers innovation, financing, tax, environmental and energy challenges in a co-ordinated and integrated way with an agricultural perspective,'' he said. Segal also proposes the creation of a basic income floor that would ensure people living in poverty would receive sufficient income support to live with a measure of self-respect and dignity. It is up to all levels of government to make the eradication of poverty a top priority, he said, warning if as a country we fail to address this growing social problem there will be a cost in terms of the growing problems of illegal drug use, violence and abuse within families and incidents of crime. It's about humanity and decency. I just don't think Canadians want to turn their back on people who through no fault of their own aren't able to make a living, particularly in rural Canada,'' he said. © The Leader-Post (Regina) 2006 ___ Futurework mailing list Futurework@fes.uwaterloo.ca http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
[Futurework] Fwd: Standard Tax Credit Bill
Title: Fwd: Standard Tax Credit Bill Date: Wed, 10 May 2006 23:49:33 -0700 (PDT) From: Al Sheahen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Standard Tax Credit Bill Dear Friends: It's official. The first-ever Basic Income Guarantee Bill was introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives by Congressman Bob Filner (D-CA)on May 2, 2006. Below isFilner's statementwith a link to the pages in the Congressional Record in whichhis speech appears. Below that, you'll find a link to the actual bill, which is numbered HR 5257. You can also access the bill and its statusby going to thomas.loc.gov (leave out the www), inserting the bill number, and clicking search. As you remember, the bill would transform the standard income tax deduction into a standard tax credit of $2000 per adult and $1000 per child. For the first time, it would give a refundable tax credit to everyone who filed an income tax return, even if the person had no income. As you know, the current Earned Income Tax Credit provides a small refundable tax credit, but only to those who have some earned income. Anyone who earns zero is ineligible. Our Bill would change that. It would also provide a tax cut for virtually everyone who earns less than about $60,000 a year. We encouraged Filner to hold a news conference to announce the bill, but apparently that is not the way it's donein Washington, apparently because the press never shows up. Getting the Bill to this point has been a trueteam effort by USBIG. It was Stan's idea to develop a bill. Karl came up with the concept of transforming the income tax deduction into a tax credit. Steve created the title: A Tax Cut for the Rest of Us Act. Along the way, important editing contributions were made by Mike, Eri, Michael and others. By the way, if you'd like to seeour final 8-pageproposal (which Karl and I originally presented at the 2005 USBIG Conference), let me know and I'll send it to you. It gives specifictaxexamples and the whole picture. Now the work begins. The Bill will be alive for the rest of the year. Filner is still involved in his primary election campaign, so it's up to us to carry the ball. I see two immediate goals: 1) get as many Congressional co-sponsors as we can. 2) get as much support as we can from like-minded organizations. Last year, we were unable to get any Republican co-sponsors, but we'll keep trying. This year, we want to make an attempt to get Democratic legislatorss to sign on. We've already personally visited with 16 social welfare organizations in Washington, such as Common Cause, Coalition on Human Rights, RESULTS, Center for Community Change, etc.) We intend to revisit them and othersandurge them all to endorse the bill and encourage their membership to contact their representatives toco-sponsor the bill. The larger purpose of both of these goals is to begin to seriously educateactivists, legislators, and voterson the wisdom of a full BIG at the poverty level of $10,000, so that when the U.S. political climate changes (which could be sooner rather than later), the topic of a Basic Income Guarantee will be backon the political table, from where it's been missingthe past 30 years or so. Iwelcome anytime you can spend on this effort, even if it's only writing to your legislators urging their support. Talk it up in your community. If you have more time,come to Washington the week of June 5-9. We'll make the rounds of some Congressional offices and organizations.Now would be a good time to start writing op-ed pieces andgoing on talk shows. If you have other ideas as to how to proceed, let's hear them. Let's use all our contacts with labor, business,and community organizations to start talking this up. Maybe this is a good time to implement another of Stan's ideas, to start setting up local BIG groups. Don't forget that Charles Murray, the darling of the Libertarians, has just published a book recommending a $10,000 BIG. It's a bit more restrictive than our ideal proposal, but it certainly gives more credibility to the overallBIG movement. We can use it. Best, Al A TAX CUT FOR THE REST OF US -- (Extensions of Remarks - May 02, 2006) [Page: E688] GPO's PDF --- SPEECH OF HON. BOB FILNER OF CALIFORNIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TUESDAY, MAY 2, 2006 Mr. FILNER. Mr. Speaker, the ``Tax Cut for the Rest of Us'' Act of 2006 (H.R. 5257) transforms the standard income tax deduction into a ``refundable'' standard tax credit. Doing so will not only simplify the tax code, but put [Page: E689] GPO's PDF more money into the pockets of poor Americans. For 25 years, refundable tax credits--such as the Earned Income Tax Credit and the ``additional child tax credit''--have proven to be simple, effective ways to help the poor. The logical next step is to transform the standard deduction and personal exemptions into a refundable standard tax credit (STC) of $2,000 for each adult and $1,000 for each child. The STC will provide all the poor with a small but badly needed tax credit,
[Futurework] Test
Testing ___ Futurework mailing list Futurework@fes.uwaterloo.ca http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
[Futurework] Service sector unions fwd
Continuation of a trend toward unionizing service employees New_Unionism Description: Mac BinHex archive ___ Futurework mailing list Futurework@fes.uwaterloo.ca http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
[Futurework] Fwd: Caledon Institute recommending basic income (but devil in the details!)
In today's news: EI and welfare need radical revamp, group says Norma Greenaway, CanWest News Service; Ottawa Citizen Published: Monday, July 03, 2006 OTTAWA -- The cornerstones of Canada's system for providing income protection Employment Insurance and welfare have failed and should be replaced by a more effective and comprehensive plan, says a report advocating a new package of adult benefits. The authors admit the proposed package, described as a radical revamping of the current system, would cost more than the $24 billion spent annually on EI and welfare. However, they say it would be a more labour-market-oriented option for Canadians who are temporarily out of work, and also a more effective safety net for disabled Canadians who might be unable to work. It's a total revamp of our entire security system aimed at adults of working age, Michael Mendelson, one of the authors, said in an interview. There has been a lack of a comprehensive vision of what income security needs to be in a modern globalized economy. The report, published by the Caledon Institute of Social Policy, proposes the broad outlines of a three-tier income-security system that, it acknowledges, is a work in progress and still missing a price tag. It might require more money to implement the architecture we are talking about, Mendelson said. But we think there would be more payback per dollar spent. Tier one would replace EI, which is limited to people who have contributed to the plan and who have a significant connection to the workforce, with a temporary income program. Unlike EI, the new program would be a non-contributory benefit funded out of general federal revenues. The idea is to provide income security to people who are temporarily unemployed and actively seeking work, but who are now excluded for one reason or another from collecting EI, and who may have no recourse other than to go on welfare. Tier two, dubbed employment preparation, would be financed by the provinces and is aimed at people who lack enough skills to find a job and maintain it. Flat-rate payments would replace the current welfare system, and focus on longer-term training if necessary. The employment-preparation payments might continue for several years for some recipients, but they would not be expected to provide permanent income support. The third tier is billed as basic income, an income-tested safety net for people who cannot reasonably be expected to earn an adequate income from employment because of severe and prolonged disability. There would be no time limits on the benefit, financed out of federal revenues. The report says the cornerstone of the new system is a well-funded National Child Benefit. Under the plan, the current federal payment of almost $3,000 per child a year would have to increase to $5,000 a year. Mendelson said ensuring that children are covered frees the system to provide a highly simplified benefit schedule that is oriented towards an adult benefit similarly to a wage. You don't get a wage adjusted to the number of children you have, he noted. Treating people like adults, we think, is one of the fundamental cornerstones of the reform. Mendelson says the draft plan should appeal to federal and provincial governments across the political spectrum. For the left, it's providing better income security, he said. And for the right, it's saying people need to get jobs and we need to enable them to get jobs. He suggested concerns about labour shortages, especially as the baby boomers age and retire, should spur governments to seriously consider ditching the current system of EI and welfare. Mendelson also said the plan, which would require the federal government to fund two of the tiers, would partially address the fiscal imbalance between the revenue-raising powers of the federal and provincial governments. Ottawa Citizen http://www.canada.com/topics/news/national/story.html?id=306b0ecb-df3a-491b-99d7-e1231fc3bd71k=10214p=2 ___ Futurework mailing list Futurework@fes.uwaterloo.ca http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
[Futurework] the Guaranteed Livable Income concept
Attached is a stimulating (as in making you think) list of ideas that a young Canadian woman proposes as an answer to criticisms of what she and her group call the Guaranteed Livable Income. She's one of a new generation of Basic Income advocates. Give a look. Sally Date: Tue, 04 Jul 2006 11:45:52 -0700 From: Cindy L'Hirondelle [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Fwd: Re: [PAR-L] Guaranteed Livable Income - Response PART III] To: Lee Lakeman [EMAIL PROTECTED], Tamara [EMAIL PROTECTED], Suzanne Jay [EMAIL PROTECTED], Lucille Harper [EMAIL PROTECTED], Stephanie Lovatt [EMAIL PROTECTED], Stephanie Lovatt [EMAIL PROTECTED], Aletheia Caldwell [EMAIL PROTECTED], MJ [EMAIL PROTECTED], Barbara Anello [EMAIL PROTECTED], Ann Livingston [EMAIL PROTECTED], Bruce Ferguson [EMAIL PROTECTED], Cheryl Suzack [EMAIL PROTECTED], Daisy Kler [EMAIL PROTECTED], Debie O'Connel [EMAIL PROTECTED], Elsie Dean [EMAIL PROTECTED], Mary Billy [EMAIL PROTECTED], FAPO [EMAIL PROTECTED], Geneva Hagen [EMAIL PROTECTED], Gerry Masuda [EMAIL PROTECTED], gfayb [EMAIL PROTECTED], Joan Russow [EMAIL PROTECTED], Judy Lightwater [EMAIL PROTECTED], Karin Hass [EMAIL PROTECTED], Kelly Cook [EMAIL PROTECTED], Lise Wrigley [EMAIL PROTECTED], Lori Nairne [EMAIL PROTECTED], Margaretta D'Arcy [EMAIL PROTECTED], Maraiba Christu [EMAIL PROTECTED], meshum prey [EMAIL PROTECTED], mfair [EMAIL PROTECTED], Phoebe Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED], Rose Henry [EMAIL PROTECTED], Sally Lerner [EMAIL PROTECTED], Samantha McGavin [EMAIL PROTECTED], Sharon Lee Robertson [EMAIL PROTECTED], Sharon Yandle [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], Veronica Walsh [EMAIL PROTECTED], Wendy Mishkin [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Accept-Language: en-us, en X-Miltered: at demeter with ID 44AAB7B5.001 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV version 0.88.2, clamav-milter version 0.88.2 on localhost X-Virus-Status: Clean X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.6 (2005-12-07) on fes.uwaterloo.ca X-Spam-Level: ** X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.0 required=5.0 tests=DNS_FROM_RFC_ABUSE, DNS_FROM_RFC_POST,FORGED_RCVD_HELO,GUARANTEED_STUFF autolearn=disabled version=3.0.6 Status: O X-UID: 11 X-Keywords: Hello everyone, I am attempting to salvage my attempt to go on the record to defend the economics of Guaranteed Livable Income. Last week (June 27) there was a criticism and denouncement of GLI on the PAR-L email list* and an assertion that the real solution to women's oppression is self-esteem and skills and and that women should get their life together and that life is what you make of it and that extremes like GLI are hurting women even more, people can get jobs planting flowers to summarize very briefly. My first response did not get posted for being too long. So I split it up into 3 emails as Part I, II, and III and sent them all at the same time. Part I and Part II got posted to the list. However, this final email, Part III, did not get posted. I don't know why. Maybe it will get posted sometime this week. So to make up for the lack of circulation of PART III: Ten Points that must be refuted before proposing jobs as a solution to poverty, I am sending it to you. Feel free to forward to your contacts. *For those of you who don't know what PAR-L is, it is a list of 1460 feminists from across Canada. Here is there website: http://www.unb.ca/PAR-L/list.htm Cindy L'Hirondelle Original Message Subject:Re: [PAR-L] Guaranteed Livable Income - Response PART III Date: Sun, 02 Jul 2006 12:47:17 -0700 From: Cindy L'Hirondelle [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Policy Action Research List/Liste politique action recherche [EMAIL PROTECTED] References: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Responding to critique of Guaranteed Livable Income: Email to the PAR-L list June 27, 2006 PART III: Ten Points that must be refuted before proposing jobs as a solution to poverty Just how do people who advocate jobs as a solution to poverty intend to address these following problems which include: massive poverty, exploitation of half the world's population, massive waste and degradation of nature, and the continued denial of mass murder, theft of indigenous lands and slavery as being the roots of economic growth and development? The longer these problems go unaddressed, the longer billions of people live and die in poverty. If there is something wrong with a GLI proposal, people must show how Jobism (http://www.livableincome.org/jobism.htm) would address the following problems: 1) THE NAIRU (The Non-Accelerating Inflationary Rate of Unemployment): When the economy heats up, as it is now, interest rates are raised. Why? The more rigid wages and salaries are, the more unemployment is necessary to convince
Re: [Futurework] Wal-Mart Seeks a Just-in-time workforce
Talk about being jerked around!! This was predictable, of course, but still disgusting. How to fight this? any ideas?? Sally Wal-Mart Seeks New Flexibility In Worker Shifts 3 January 2007 javascript:void(0)The Wall Street Journal A1 The nation's biggest private employer is about to revamp the way it schedules its work force, in a move that could shake up many employees' lives. Early this year, Wal-Mart Stores Inc., using a new computerized scheduling system, will start moving many of its 1.3 million workers from predictable shifts to a system based on the number of customers in stores at any given time. The move promises greater productivity and customer satisfaction for the huge retailer but could be a major headache for employees. The change is made possible by a software system that can crunch an array of data, part of a shift toward computerized management tools that can help pare costs and boost companies' bottom lines. But it also could demand greater flexibility and availability from workers in place of reliable work shifts -- and predictable paychecks. Wal-Mart began implementing the new system for some workers, including cashiers and accounting-office personnel, last year. As the world's largest retailer, the Bentonville, Ark., company often sets the standard for others, and many chains already are heading in the same direction. Others that have rolled out advanced scheduling systems in the past year or are currently doing so include Payless ShoeSource Inc., RadioShack Corp. and Mervyns LLC. Payless expects to have its system in 300 of 4,000 stores by the end of January. The system, designed by Kronos Inc., tracks individual store sales, transactions, units sold and customer traffic in 15-minute increments over seven weeks, and compares data to the prior year's, before scheduling workers. Payless hopes to optimize our schedules to better anticipate when customers will be in our stores so that we can better engage them, says Larry Leibach, the shoe retailer's director of project management. A company using these fine-tuned programs might start the day with a few employees on hand at many stores, bring in a bunch more during busy midday hours, and gradually pare down through the day before bulking up for the evening rush. Staffing is the latest arena in which companies are trying to wring costs and attain new efficiencies. The latest so-called scheduling-optimization systems can integrate data ranging from the number of in-store customers at certain hours to the average time it takes to sell a television or unload a truck, and help predict how many workers will be needed at any given hour. Companies also hope the scheduling systems will cut litigation by helping them comply with federal wage-and-hour laws, and variations at the state level on everything from the timing and frequency of breaks to how many hours minors can be scheduled. Moreover, retailers say tighter scheduling lets them better serve customers by shortening checkout lines. There's been a new push for labor optimization, says Nikki Baird of Forrester Research Inc. You want to have the flexibility to more closely match . . . shifts to when the demand is there. But while the new systems are expected to benefit both retailers and customers, some experts say they can saddle workers with unpredictable schedules. In some cases, they may be asked to be on call to meet customer surges, or sent home because of a lull, resulting in less pay. The new systems also alert managers when a worker is approaching full-time status or overtime, which would require higher wages and benefits, so they can scale back that person's schedule. That means workers may not know when or if they will need a babysitter or whether they will work enough hours to pay that month's bills. Rather than work three eight-hour days, someone might now be plugged into six four-hour days, mornings one week and evenings the next. Some analysts say the new systems will result in more irregular part-time work. The whole point is workers were a fixed cost, now they're a variable cost. Is it good for workers? Probably not, says Kenneth Dalto, a management consultant in Farmington Hills, Mich. Unions have criticized Wal-Mart for its scheduling changes, saying the company is forcing people to be available to work more hours each week but to sacrifice a more regular schedule. Paul Blank, campaign director for WakeUpWalMart.com, funded by the United Food and Commercial Workers union, says the new scheduling system has devastating implications for employees. What the computer is trying to optimize is the most number of part-time and least number of full-time workers at the lowest labor costs, with no regard for the effect that it has on workers' lives, he says. Wal-Mart spokeswoman Sarah Clark says the system isn't intended to schedule fewer workers, and hasn't where it has been implemented so
