Tag justice | VenusPlusX

For Labor Day: Income Inequality Dampens Economic Growth for Rich and Poor Alike

In tribute to American workers, over half of whom earn less than $15 per hour but deserve so much more, we are reprinting our coverage on income equality. Where the minimum wage is $15 the local economy is boosted, reason alone to join the movement to rectify income equality.

The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office showed that after-tax average income ballooned 15.1% fro the top 1% of earners, but grew by less than 1% for the bottom 90% of earners. (TIME magazine, August 5, 2014)

reway2007
Flickr/creative commons

Correcting income inequality is not just a social and economic justice issue. When we talk about income inequality we have to be careful to distinguish it from income equality. Angry right-wing pundits seize on the term, income equality, to scare people with images of anarchy and culture wars.

Rather we are talking about righting a wrong, income inequality, by demanding equal opportunity, especially educational opportunity.

The dollar ratio between managers and workers compensation has increased ten-fold in favor of a few upon the backs of the many (more than 2-:1, two decades ago, to over 200:1, today). That gap in earnings has more and more been based on a widening education gap, which in turn further fuels the economic decline of the middle class and those already in poverty.

How many private homes, yachts, planes, cars, and vacation can you buy, after all? The very rich tend to stockpile their money as just another expensive commodity they can look at in self-admiration, just like Scrooge McDuck.

The overall economy worsens daily, as 90% of us spend, are often forced to spend, most of our income, thereby seeding the economy, while the top 1-9% sits on their excess wealth, again, earned from the sweat of others. How many private homes, yachts, planes, cars, and vacation can you buy, after all?

There is a report out this week from Standard & Poor’s (S&P) that newly re-arms social and economic justice advocates. S&P is a respected Wall Street ratings entity that helps investors and top earners to become more wealthy through non-partisan presentations of financial facts and predictions. Now it has delivered a hard truth: unequal wealth distribution hurts the overall economy, actually creating recessions, inhibiting investments, and keeping us in harmful boom-and-bust scenarios.

The report cites the education gap as “a main reason for the growing income divide.”

With wages of a college graduate double that of a high school graduate, increasing educational attainment is an effective way to bring income inequality back to healthy levels.”

If we added another year of education to the American workforce from 2014 to 2019, in line with education levels increasing at the rate of educational achievement seen from 1960 to 1965, U.S. potential GDP would likely be $525 billion, or 2.4% higher in five years, than in the baseline. If education levels were increasing at the rate they were 15 years ago, the level of potential GDP would be 1%, or $185 billion higher in five years.

This education gap is a main reason for the growing income divide, and it affects both wages and net worth. From a wage perspective, occupations that typically require postsecondary education generally paid much higher median wages ($57,770 in 2012)–more than double those occupations that typically require a high school diploma or less ($27,670 in 2012).

But you first must have the opportunity to pay for higher education and that’s harder and harder to do as you go down the economic scale. If you care about social and economic justice or just care about a thriving economy or if you are a human capable of logical thinking, you know that major changes that increase access to a college education, without saddling people with decades of student debt, should be a matter of immediate importance.

#####

Check back tomorrow for a starting list of wealthy and/or powerful people who already understand the problem, and can be tapped to help activists bring this movement further into the mainstream.

Also see: United for a Fair Economy (UFE) 2011 Annual Report

And, for those who like your info on video, here is Lawrence O’Donnell on MSNBC’s The Last Word, summing up many of S&P’s conclusions . . .

Supreme Women Don’t Fail Us Now (again)

It was painful last week to hear the unanimous decision of the Supreme Court in McCullen v Coakley, siding with abortion protesters’ free speech right to engage women face-to face in the public square and against those advocating for clinics’ privacy and public safety in consideration of the violence, bombings, and cold-blooded murder that beset them long before there was anything akin to a buffer zone. The case ended the a 35-foot buffer zone in Massachusetts, didn’t rule on a handful of other states that had smaller buffer zones, and, the reasoning of each justice varied wildly.

Photo by Paul Weaver
Flickr/creative commons

Abortion has been legal in this country for 40 years (Roe v Wade , 1973), but discrimination against women has been rising at a fast pace due to the machinations of the explosive theocratic fundamentalist’s discrimination politics that are strangling government, and, it seems, the once-hallowed Supreme Court. Because it would be impossible to reverse Roe v Wade in the courts, the Court is giving these abortion protesters free reign to take it out on women they don’t know.

Why can the Supreme Court itself establish such a wide, no-free-speech buffer around its building (hundreds of square feet, for “decorum and public safety”), and Westboro Baptist Church haters now cannot cross a large buffer zone surrounding veterans funerals, but abortion clinics’ bombs, maiming, and death somehow are not worthy?

Slate’s Dahlia Lithwick puts it this way . .

While the decision is not monumentally awful in ways some progressives most feared, and certainly affords the state substantial latitude in its future attempts to protect women seeking abortions from harassment, more than anything it seems to reflect a continued pattern of “free speech for me but not for thee” or, at least, “free speech for people who think like me,” that pervades recent First Amendment decisions at the court. . .

. . . Right now, the commentary is pretty predictably split between those who believe that the rights of “peaceful sidewalk counselors” were vindicated, and those who believe those counselors are actually pro-life bullies. The court opts for the gentle counseling characterization, without acknowledging that it was the extreme conduct of the latter group that led to passage of the law, and that, realistically, in the absence of the buffer zone, both types of protesters will be greatly emboldened. I guess from here on in, you won’t know whether you are being intimidated or “gently counseled” until after it’s happened.

This is outright discrimination politics interfering with what should have been a privacy and public safety issue. These are not sweet grandmas trying to talk gently to urge women not to go through with the abortion, these are hellions bent on intimidation based solely on their own personal view of abortion although abortion is something that is entirely legal in this country.

Andrew Gouveia wrote a heart-wrenching op-ed last week in Time magazine, and other horror stories are making the rounds as most women stand in shock that there was no dissent, even from our fellow women on the Court. What were they thinking? I guess we’ll have to wait for their memoirs.

It may be fanciful to think these same women Justices have struck a deal to create a majority tomorrow, Monday, in rejecting Hobby Lobby’s efforts to make corporations exempt from providing health insurance that covers contraceptives (Burwell v. Hobby Lobby) just like some religious entities right now. Under the Affordable Care Act, employers must cover free contraception for women in employee health plans. It is possible, the Court may rule to restrict the exemption to only tightly held private corporations but this would still create a very slippery slope, and set a bad precedent for women’s rights. In their March deliberations, the Justices themselves wondered out loud whether this exemption would let these same companies to disallow coverage for other things such as blood transfusion because their religious beliefs disallow them. And what about protections for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender employees?

The possibility of a deal in the works to protect reproductive health for women, might make sense for a court already smeared by some of their bad decisions. It is just a strand of hope against the possibility of another savage and bloody run against human rights.

I’m going to sleep tonight with that strand of hope still alive, that this Supreme Court, especially the women Justices, will find its way to stand up for the law, in this case the Affordable Care Act’s provisions, and the rights of women to control their own health.

However, we have to ask again, what are they thinking?

For more on what’s at stake tomorrow, click here.

Also see: When Will We Move to Impeach Certain Supreme Court Justices, Part 1 and Part 2

And, if you are curious as to why VenusPlusX thinks this is important, read A Manifesto for The New Age of Sexual Freedom, and catch our unique mix of posts and videos 24/7 that will get us all to that better future we deserve, sooner rather than later.

in Events / Grassroots / Key Issues / News of Note / Op-Ed / Public Information by Alison Gardner 29 Jun 2014 0 comments

Re-envisioning the future: A personal call to action

VenusPlusX re-envisions the future as A New Age of Sexual Freedom because that is a state of being the heralds the end of racism (at its root sexual oppression) and the end of nationalism for the purposes of war (at its root racism)and other forms of inhumane exploitation. In connection with our recent relaunch, a manifesto for this new age was offered up for comment and critique. It included a working formula to bring about peace, and some of the obstacles in our way. Using this tried and true, non-violent formula (systematically replacing coercive systems with humane voluntary associations), we can bring about universal solidarity (world peace) and justice.

We purposely frame the conversation about peace and justice in terms of Sexual Freedom because, in part, it corresponds to the end of racism, sexism, nationalism, etc., and also because it makes us more visible as emissaries along the way towards this better future. We work in the present not for this future but as this future, now in this moment, the here and now of making things better for the largest number of people, starting now. When we take action, any action, based on application of this formula, it serves as a guide to enhancing productivity and a confidence in our purpose because in this way we are able to stay fully conscious and balanced in choosing the next steps that would be appropriate.

Of course, I apply this formula for peace to the equality rights movement, both nationally and globally, and it turns out to be a personal call to action.

If we are truly relentless in trying to free our movement of its own coercive systems, we have to take a frank look at how we are ourselves obstacles to our goals, and show a ready willingness to escape the status quo. If we look at our movement in terms of what’s good now that can be preserved, what should be left behind as a coercive system within our movement, and what new voluntary associations can we make to more fully realize our joint goals in the shortest amount of time, two problems to work on right now quickly emerge.

First, while it’s a given that we support organizations whose mission we agree with, we must ask ourselves why we have what is almost comically referred to as “Gay, Inc.”? Nurturing and training the leaders of the future is by itself a noble enterprise, and we certainly need some cadre of people to insure compliance with better lawmaking, but should not these 700 organizations in the United States alone, all with more or less overlapping agendas, have as its number one goal be instead planned obsolescence?

Haven’t we already deduced that coalitions are more effective and worthy of greater donor support than more and more separate and often competing organizations? Why do we hold so dearly to this model when so much more progress is possible by merging most of these organizations into just a few that reflect higher goals shared by more people?

Let’s stop ignoring the fact that those who would enslave us to their unjust ideologies just love that we have so many organizations, are so disjointed, we even brand ourselves with letters, L, G, B, T, Q, I, etc., to display our disjointedness.

An apt analogy is that national borders and barriers would instantly become extinct if suddenly earth had visitors from another planet. Friendly or unfriendly aliens, we would immediately put down our nationalistic impulses in favor a world united in responding to such an “invasion.” Likewise, the equality rights movement has to strategize and develop our agendas in a transparent way that encourages rather than discourages the coalescing of organizations for a mutual purpose, folding these hundreds of organizations into just a few with a clearly stated and complementary agenda. It seems needless to say this would be a power block in today’s politics.

Second, by tapping into this peace formula to root out our movement’s own coercive systems, we have to ask why our goal to end discrimination is tarnished because of the disunity our alphabet soup floats on? We go to conferences led by respected national organizations and find sexism, racism, and homophobia and especially transphobia as obiquitous as the cocktails. When are we going to get our act together? Why don’t we get rid of the bullies in our midst that are the progenitors of homophobia and transphobia once and for all?

In order to end the need for a Gay, Inc., to protect us, to instead arrive together at a time and place where everyone is free from discrimination, racism, and social injustice, we have to today become the thing we want by starting to reflect that as fact with the brightest light we can muster. If we are incessantly competing for the attention of donors and the media, if we can’t end homophobia and transphobia among our own ranks, if we cant demonstrate to the rest of the world how to do that, it defeats our integrity as a movement, and, sadly, it means that lots of donations have been sought and spent for spinning wheels.

But there is even a more important reason to consolidate and to institute zero tolerance of homophobia and transphopia in our own ranks (and to continue to examine our movement in terms replacing our own coercive systems in our movement with more humane and focused voluntary associations). When we reflect in real time and in unison our jointly-held, hoped-for future, where discrimination is no longer legal, and education and advocacy are complete, we arrive at a clarity of purpose wherein lies the only rational basis for deciding what to do next. Then, there will be no stopping us.

Simply, if you can see the future, you can know what to do next, and not be an obstacle yourself on the road to The New Age of Sexual Freedom.

in Campaigns / Grassroots / Key Issues / Op-Ed / Public Information by Alison Gardner 06 May 2014 0 comments